Paul vs "the law" (can humans earn righteousness?)

[ether-ore]

Worst argument ever. To suggest "good works" are somehow different from the Law of Moses is patently absurd and only shows how little you have studied the actual law of Moses. There is no mention of "ceremonial law" in the text, nor was this ever even a distinction in the Law like this. It is one comprehensive law structure. You can't create a fake label for parts of it and label it "ceremonial" in order to salvage Paul's convoluted logic.

I think it is a matter of interpretation with reference to what works we are talking about. With the reference of Romans 3:20; that chapter begins in verse 1 with "What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?" So, the work we are talking about is circumcision. In terms of salvation, Paul is saying that the Mosaic law of circumcision does not give the Jew any advantage over the gentile whom the Lord revealed to Peter that He (God) had made clean (referencing Peter's vision as recorded in Acts chapter 10).

Again we're on the subject of circumcision. This whole chapter concerns itself with the issue of circumcision and an (apparent) disagreement between Paul and Peter over the requirement for the Mosaic work of circumcision.

 

[Simplelogic]

Obedience is not spontaneous, either. Righteousness is not a choice; it is an inheritance. Power apart from God, to choose, doesn't exist beyond localized, imperfect perception.

If the opposite were true, there would be grounds to boast, because there would be a localized accomplishment (a choice), apart from God's power and knowledge. It's nonsensical.

Only Paul teaches this type of logic. Never mind the fact that it is an important part of the Law for man to know his place and humble himself! If people kept all the Law they wouldn't be boasting anyway.

"He has shown you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God." Micah 6:8

Notice also what it says about the man who gave us the Law.

Now the man Moses was very humble, more than all men who were on the face of the earth. Numbers 12:3

God has never been in the business of making it impossible for man to boast. He just makes it not worth the while for those who do. The irony is, in the real world, Paul's doctrine is the source of far more pride and boasting than any other doctrine! One only need look at Paul himself and notice how he lifted himself above the very apostles who followed Yeshua (2Corinthians 11:5, Galatians 2:6,9), and how he even lifted himself above Moses by belittling him in 2Corithians 3:11-13. Anyone who believes that God actually destined before creation some vessels for honor and some for dishonor (Romans 9:20-23), and also believes he just happens to be one who is destined for honor, cannot avoid thinking way too highly of themselves, because they actually have grounds on which to boast!

 

[Simplelogic]

I think it is a matter of interpretation with reference to what works we are talking about. With the reference of Romans 3:20; that chapter begins in verse 1 with "What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?" So, the work we are talking about is circumcision. In terms of salvation, Paul is saying that the Mosaic law of circumcision does not give the Jew any advantage over the gentile whom the Lord revealed to Peter that He (God) had made clean (referencing Peter's vision as recorded in Acts chapter 10).

Again we're on the subject of circumcision. This whole chapter concerns itself with the issue of circumcision and an (apparent) disagreement between Paul and Peter over the requirement for the Mosaic work of circumcision.

The Torah is comprehensive. Its not a pick and choose law with different dividing sections in it. Also, James 2 is all about the law of Moses and the context clearly shows this.

BTW…even circumcision is still a valid part of the law which must be adhered to for all who wish to fully enter the covenant. Its not, nor was it ever, a requirement for personal salvation.

 

[BenTheBeliever]

We can't earn anything. The law is dead. We are living in the time of Grace. All you have to do is let him in to your heart and you'll begin to change. You'll begin to change cause you want to change. It is by Grace we are saved. Not by law, but by grace.

 

[ether-ore]

The Torah is comprehensive. Its not a pick and choose law with different dividing sections in it. Also, James 2 is all about the law of Moses and the context clearly shows this.

BTW…even circumcision is still a valid part of the law which must be adhered to for all who wish to fully enter the covenant. Its not, nor was it ever, a requirement for personal salvation.

Agreed, Under the Mosaic paradigm it was not pick and choose, From a Christian perspective however, the outward performances are considered superseded by the atonement of Jesus Christ. The references Paul was making with regard to circumcision came about as a consequence there being a particular controversy as to whether circumcision was still required. It was determined that it was not because Christ's atonement had cleansed all men and made the covenant available to all and not just those who outwardly had manifested the covenant by circumcision. The covenant is now made with a circumcised (or cleansed) heart through repentance.

I'm afraid I disagree with you on what James is saying in his second chapter. All outward performances of the law (animal sacrifices, circumcision... etc.) were superseded by the atonement of Jesus Christ. Other laws are very much still in force, and James is warning against the idea that since Christ atoned for our sins, it is not an excuse to do whatever you want. The things James listed and warned against are: partiality, evil thoughts, despising the poor, oppressing the poor, bringing the poor to court for failure to pay, blasphemy, not loving one's neighbor, respecting the status of persons, adultery, and not showing mercy. Laws against these items, and more, are still in force. James was saying that if you sin against one of these things, you have not broken a law, you have broken the whole law. Disciplining one's self against things and many other things takes work. This work is the repentance process. The work of repentance enables the grace of Jesus Christ on behalf of that individual and gains salvation for his soul.

 

[Hawkins]

Paul on obedience/righteousness​

"I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly." Galatians 2:21

"...for by the works of the Law no flesh shall be justified." Galatians 2:16

Law of Moses on obedience/righteousness

"Then it will be righteousness for us, if we are careful to observe all these commandments before the Lord our God, as He has commanded us." Deuteronomy 6:25

27Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive. 28Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die. Ezekiel 18: 27-28

Which concept does your religion agree with more?

Romans 2:16 says that the gentiles are not judged by the same set of law given to the Jews. Although the gentiles don't have the law (Mosaic Law), they will still be judged by law but another set of Law which is written in their hearts.

To be more precise, God needs only one set of Law to be used on the Judgment Day which is reserved for the unsaved. The saved will be saved though God's Grace displayed in the various covenants.

Basically, the gentiles will be saved by God's Grace through Christ if they are deemed qualified by their efforts in observing the Law written in their hearts. The Jews will be saved by God's Grace through Jesus Christ if they are deemed qualified by their efforts in observing the Law given by Moses. The rest will be deemed unqualified by the covenants granted and thus will be judged by God's universal set of Law which Adam broke in Eden. The above applies to all mankind along the history of humanity.

The best of the best, of course is to accept the New Covenant brought us by Jesus Himself.

 

[Muffled]

I beleive Chistianity agrees with Paul.

 

[Nakosis]

Ok then. Let me clarify. I'm not here to convince you who was speaking for God and who wasn't . The fact is the EVERY other prophet or teacher in the Torah/Tanakh taught the opposite about God then what Paul taught. Even Jesus taught the opposite of what Paul taught. So whether you believe that the "OT" prophets spoke directly from God is irrelevant to my point. The fact remains that Paul's teachings/doctrines about the law can't be found anywhere else in the Bible. He is the odd man out.

Fine for me. For some reason folks assume he has some authority other than being a church leader.

 

[ether-ore]

Simplelogic made a valid point concerning the Torah when he said "The Torah is comprehensive. Its not a pick and choose law with different dividing sections in it." Likewise with all of scripture. I think what most Christians don't seem to understand is that all of scripture, both Old and New Testaments, have to be alluding to the same thing or there is a problem. As it says in Luke 11:17: "... Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth." Luke is not divided against Isaiah or Matthew against Moses, and Paul is not preaching another gospel different from James. One has to understand that God's revelations to all of His Apostles and Prophets over the millennia constitute a cohesive whole. If it is otherwise, then atheism gains the point. We have to come to understand the commonality that exists in scripture. In understanding Paul, one has to understand that he tailors his epistles to the needs of his audience. James is more at speaking to the church as a whole, in his day (and ours).

The same thing goes for LDS scripture. It must necessarily preach the same gospel. So the commonality must be found inclusive of LDS scripture, in order for a correct understanding of the gospel as a whole. All sources must inform other sources. This must be true not only within the individual books but across the whole library as well. The question must be asked: how does the source I am reading modify what I believe about another source I hold dear. I believe if you cannot do that, then you might need to consider that you might be mistaken in your beliefs.

 

[Simplelogic]

Simplelogic made a valid point concerning the Torah when he said "The Torah is comprehensive. Its not a pick and choose law with different dividing sections in it." Likewise with all of scripture. I think what most Christians don't seem to understand is that all of scripture, both Old and New Testaments, have to be alluding to the same thing or there is a problem. As it says in Luke 11:17: "... Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth." Luke is not divided against Isaiah or Matthew against Moses, and Paul is not preaching another gospel different from James. One has to understand that God's revelations to all of His Apostles and Prophets over the millennia constitute a cohesive whole. If it is otherwise, then atheism gains the point. We have to come to understand the commonality that exists in scripture. In understanding Paul, one has to understand that he tailors his epistles to the needs of his audience. James is more at speaking to the church as a whole, in his day (and ours).

The same thing goes for LDS scripture. It must necessarily preach the same gospel. So the commonality must be found inclusive of LDS scripture, in order for a correct understanding of the gospel as a whole. All sources must inform other sources. This must be true not only within the individual books but across the whole library as well. The question must be asked: how does the source I am reading modify what I believe about another source I hold dear. I believe if you cannot do that, then you might need to consider that you might be mistaken in your beliefs.

Except Paul is not one of the 12 apostles and there is no mandate from Jesus to follow any other person after him. Therefor if ONLY Paul contradicts Jesus and the rest of the prophets then we know Paul is to be disregarded. There is no reason for why the 27 NT books were chosen by Athanasius in Egypt (hundreds of years after Jesus I might add). All scripture must be measured by two criteria.

1. It can't add to or take away from the Torah
2. A prophet must make a legitimate prophecy to be considered valid before God.

Paul fails both of these tests. Jesus passes both of these tests.

 

[Simplelogic]

Romans 2:16 says that the gentiles are not judged by the same set of law given to the Jews. Although the gentiles don't have the law (Mosaic Law), they will still be judged by law but another set of Law which is written in their hearts.

To be more precise, God needs only one set of Law to be used on the Judgment Day which is reserved for the unsaved. The saved will be saved though God's Grace displayed in the various covenants.

Basically, the gentiles will be saved by God's Grace through Christ if they are deemed qualified by their efforts in observing the Law written in their hearts. The Jews will be saved by God's Grace through Jesus Christ if they are deemed qualified by their efforts in observing the Law given by Moses. The rest will be deemed unqualified by the covenants granted and thus will be judged by God's universal set of Law which Adam broke in Eden. The above applies to all mankind along the history of humanity.

The best of the best, of course is to accept the New Covenant brought us by Jesus Himself.

The new covenant is the law of Moses written on our hearts. Not a different law.

31Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: 32Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: 33But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law (lit Torah) in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. Jeremiah 31: 31-34

Torah means the first 5 books of the Bible or the law of Moses. Any new covenant teaching that contradicts this contradicts Jeremiah the prophet.

 

[Simplelogic]

Jesus's View on the Law. Jesus emphasized the validity of the Law up through the passing away of Heaven and Earth, thus confirming its inspiration and ongoing validity. In Matthew 5:17-19 we read:

(17) Think not that I came to destroy the Law [of Moses] or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. (18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the Law, till all things be accomplished [i.e., all things predicted appear on the stage of history]. (19) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (ASV)

Compare Luke 16:17 similarly says at a different time than the Sermon on the Mount -- meaning Jesus repeated the same point twice:

"It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law. (Luke 16:16-17 NIV.)

Thus, Jesus can never be accused of seducing any Christian from following the Law. Jesus cannot be a false prophet under Deuteronomy 13:5 (false prophet is anyone who has miracles and wonders but seduces you from following the Law). Jesus said the Law remained valid until the Heavens and Earth pass away. This passing of heaven and earth occurs at the end of the Millennium. This is 1000 years after Christ's Second Coming, according to the Book of Revelation.

Paul's View on the Law. Paul says the opposite.

Paul is blunt in Ephesians 2:15, Colossians 2:14, 2 Cor. 3:11-17, Romans 7:1-3 et seq, and Galatians 3:19 et seq. The Law is "abolished," "done away with," "nailed to a tree," "has faded away,' and was "only ordained by angels...who are no gods." If we were to cite Paul's condemnations of the Law in one string, the point is self-evident that Paul abrogated the Law for everyone. See Eph. 2:15 ("setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations"); Col. 2:14 ("having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out that way, nailing it to the cross;") 2 Cor. 3:14 ("old covenant"); Gal. 5:1 ("yoke of bondage"); Rom. 10:4 ("Christ is the end of the law"); 2 Cor. 3:7("law of death"); Gal. 5:1 ("entangles"); Col. 2:14-17 ("a shadow"); Rom. 3:27 ("law of works"); Rom. 4:15 ("works wrath"); 2 Cor. 3:9 (ministration of condemnation); Gal. 2:16 ("cannot justify"); Gal. 3:21 (cannot give life); Col. 2:14 ("wiped out" exaleipsas); Gal. 3:19, 4:8-9 ("given by angels...who are no gods [and are] weak and beggarly celestial beings/elements").

Finally, in Romans 7:1-6, Paul claims when Jesus died, the husband died and this dissolved the Law's bonds between the husband (God of Sinai) and wife (God's people). This henceforth made the "law dead to us." (Romans 7:4.) This death-of-God-the-husband released the Jews, Paul contends, and when Christ resurrected the bonds of marriage with the old God were not renewed. (The implication, we contend, was Paul meant a new God emerges or otherwise if the same husband-God resurrected, why wasn't the bond to the Law renewed? Paulinists come near to admitting this is the only logical meaning while even confessing they are uncomfortable with the passage's 'seemingly' polytheistic explanation... Uggh. On our thorough analysis of Romans 7:1-6, see our webpage discussion.)
http://jesuswordsonly.com/recommendedreading/175-pauls-contradictions-of-jesus.html

 

[ether-ore]

Except Paul is not one of the 12 apostles and there is no mandate from Jesus to follow any other person after him. Therefor if ONLY Paul contradicts Jesus and the rest of the prophets then we know Paul is to be disregarded. There is no reason for why the 27 NT books were chosen by Athanasius in Egypt (hundreds of years after Jesus I might add). All scripture must be measured by two criteria.

1. It can't add to or take away from the Torah
2. A prophet must make a legitimate prophecy to be considered valid before God.

Paul fails both of these tests. Jesus passes both of these tests.

I believe Paul was an Apostle and one of the twelve. He was not of the original twelve and he wasn't the one who replaced Judas Iscariot. The LDS perspective is that the First Presidency was organized with Peter as the Prophet and James and John as his counselors. This action created three vacancies in the Quorum of the Twelve. Paul and Barnabas were indeed called to fill two of those positions. I'm afraid I can't think of off hand who the third one was. Paul's specific calling was to preach to the gentiles which is why there is so much emphasis on his writings.

I happen to believe there was a considerable amount of written material left out of the Bible. Not only that, much has been altered, and not just the New Testament.

The test you mention may work for someone of the Jewish faith, but it will not suffice for a Christian. This is not to say that what you said is wrong. I'm saying it is not sufficient.

And I still maintain that Paul passes because it is dependent on interpretation. Of course, my being LDS, I claim to have more information from which to work and interpret. Christians and Jews alike do not accept the concept of modern revelation much less the revealed material itself. I believe God speaks today just as He always has.

 

[Simplelogic]

I believe Paul was an Apostle and one of the twelve. He was not of the original twelve and he wasn't the one who replaced Judas Iscariot. The LDS perspective is that the First Presidency was organized with Peter as the Prophet and James and John as his counselors. This action created three vacancies in the Quorum of the Twelve. Paul and Barnabas were indeed called to fill two of those positions. I'm afraid I can't think of off hand who the third one was. Paul's specific calling was to preach to the gentiles which is why there is so much emphasis on his writings.

I happen to believe there was a considerable amount of written material left out of the Bible. Not only that, much has been altered, and not just the New Testament.

The test you mention may work for someone of the Jewish faith, but it will not suffice for a Christian. This is not to say that what you said is wrong. I'm saying it is not sufficient.

And I still maintain that Paul passes because it is dependent on interpretation. Of course, my being LDS, I claim to have more information from which to work and interpret. Christians and Jews alike do not accept the concept of modern revelation much less the revealed material itself. I believe God speaks today just as He always has.

Peter was commissioned to preach to the Gentiles. Only Paul claims this exclusive override of the Peter's calling and anointing:

After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, "Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. Acts 15: 7

Deut 13 is the litmus test which all true prophets and teachers must be tested by. Signs and wonders are NOT sufficient evidence that a man is confirmed by God as anything. The requirement is whether or not the person keeps the law of Moses. Yeshua said the same thing:

21“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.22“Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23“And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’ Matt 7: 21-23 (Lawless = anomia which means "negator of the law".)

Therefor Yeshua was confirming the basic principal in Deut 13 and proving the concept still exists. I believe all Christians should strongly consider Yeshua's words regardless of whether it conflicts with the later doctrines of Paul. You suggested that I am speaking from a "Jewish" perspective and I am, but this only serves to distract from the theological dilemma at hand. Is the entire Bible infallible like Christians claim? I certainly don't believe so but almost all Christians believe in this way of thinking. Shouldn't that mean that Christians should consider the Deut 13 warning which prohibits us from following miracle workers who teach against God's laws? Shouldn't we also agree with the law of Moses which says we can't "add or subtract" commands from it…ever. Is not all scripture " inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness" as even Paul says? Suggesting that Paul passes the test because of "interpretation" is not a valid answer in my opinion. God laid down very clear requirements for validating teachers and prophets/miracle workers and Paul clearly fails the test.

 

[ether-ore]

Peter was commissioned to preach to the Gentiles. Only Paul claims this exclusive override of the Peter's calling and anointing:

After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, "Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. Acts 15: 7

Deut 13 is the litmus test which all true prophets and teachers must be tested by. Signs and wonders are NOT sufficient evidence that a man is confirmed by God as anything. The requirement is whether or not the person keeps the law of Moses. Yeshua said the same thing:

21“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.22“Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23“And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’ Matt 7: 21-23 (Lawless = anomia which means "negator of the law".)

Therefor Yeshua was confirming the basic principal in Deut 13 and proving the concept still exists. I believe all Christians should strongly consider Yeshua's words regardless of whether it conflicts with the later doctrines of Paul. You suggested that I am speaking from a "Jewish" perspective and I am, but this only serves to distract from the theological dilemma at hand. Is the entire Bible infallible like Christians claim? I certainly don't believe so but almost all Christians believe in this way of thinking. Shouldn't that mean that Christians should consider the Deut 13 warning which prohibits us from following miracle workers who teach against God's laws? Shouldn't we also agree with the law of Moses which says we can't "add or subtract" commands from it…ever. Is not all scripture " inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness" as even Paul says? Suggesting that Paul passes the test because of "interpretation" is not a valid answer in my opinion. God laid down very clear requirements for validating teachers and prophets/miracle workers and Paul clearly fails the test.

Just FYI, Peter was the head of the church in his day and it was he that received to commission from Jesus Christ to feed His sheep (John 21:16). How this was to be accomplished was up to Peter. That was Peter's assignment. So Peter delegated to Paul to go to the gentiles and the record shows that this is what Paul did. So what I said does not conflict with what you quoted from Acts 15:7.

Now, regarding Deuteronomy 13, I consider Joseph Smith to be a true prophet on the grounds that he does pass that test. I think the point of your quoting Deuteronomy in the first place was to suggest that Joseph Smith is not a true prophet. Very well. we all have our opinions.

Regarding adding or taking away from scripture: Much scripture was added since Deuteronomy, even within the Torah to say nothing of the Old Testament prophets that followed. Then (for Christians) came the addition of the New Testament wherein the same admonishment not to add or take away from was enjoined. This all has reference to man not adding to or taking away from scripture. It says nothing about God not being able to add to His revelations.

I accept that God still speaks through prophets today just as He has in the past. Nevertheless, your own prophetic shouting of the Lord's future words of "Depart from me" will indeed occur and we shall see to whom He addresses that edict.

 

[Simplelogic]

Just FYI, Peter was the head of the church in his day and it was he that received to commission from Jesus Christ to feed His sheep (John 21:16). How this was to be accomplished was up to Peter. That was Peter's assignment. So Peter delegated to Paul to go to the gentiles and the record shows that this is what Paul did. So what I said does not conflict with what you quoted from Acts 15:7.

Now, regarding Deuteronomy 13, I consider Joseph Smith to be a true prophet on the grounds that he does pass that test. I think the point of your quoting Deuteronomy in the first place was to suggest that Joseph Smith is not a true prophet. Very well. we all have our opinions.

Regarding adding or taking away from scripture: Much scripture was added since Deuteronomy, even within the Torah to say nothing of the Old Testament prophets that followed. Then (for Christians) came the addition of the New Testament wherein the same admonishment not to add or take away from was enjoined. This all has reference to man not adding to or taking away from scripture. It says nothing about God not being able to add to His revelations.

I accept that God still speaks through prophets today just as He has in the past. Nevertheless, your own prophetic shouting of the Lord's future words of "Depart from me" will indeed occur and we shall see to whom He addresses that edict.

Paul declares that he was commissioned. Peter and James never say this. Actually, none of the twelve apostles ever refer to Paul as an apostle. Nor does Yeshua ever call Paul an apostle…even in Paul's own vision accounts!!

Re Joseph Smith:

Your logic is backwards here. You seem to be rejecting Deut 13 because it obviously exposes not only Paul but Joseph Smith. Its the other way around my friend. It is the Torah and the ancient prophets who have told us how to test and validate prophets. Not the other way around.

The Torah has never changed. It was one comprehensive law structure given God's people which all the rest of the prophets believed in down to the very letter. God continued to give new revelations to prophets but He never changed ANY of His commandments. Yeshua confirms this concept in the new testament and says that "even the least of the commands" will exist until "heaven and earth pass away". There is no example of any prophet in the Tanakh EVER suggesting one of the previous laws was abrogated in any way. Yeshua clearly dismissed any claims that the any Torah commands had been abrogated either. Nor did any of the twelve apostles teach that they were abrogated in any way. Once again, Paul stands alone. Unless you want to add other false prophets to the list like Joseph Smith and Muhammad.

Here is short list of Torah commands which Christians/Mormons believe are "abrogated" because of Paul:

Sabbath- (changed to sunday)
Feast days- (changed to pagan holidays)
Kosher laws- abrogated
Tzit tzti (tassels)- abrogated
Animal sacrifices- Abrogated
Levitical order- abrogated
Nidah laws (blood purity)- abrogated
Circumcision- abrogated and replaced by "spiritual circumcision".

Yet each one of these commands will be going on in the millennial kingdom!! Yes, the prophets tell us that ALL of these commands will be reinstated after the return of the messiah. So we have a dilemma. Either Paul is right and they are abrogated or the prophets and Yeshua are right and they will return to the earth. We can't have it both ways. Somebody is wrong here.

 

[Simplelogic]

We can't earn anything. The law is dead. We are living in the time of Grace. All you have to do is let him in to your heart and you'll begin to change. You'll begin to change cause you want to change. It is by Grace we are saved. Not by law, but by grace.

Did Jesus teach this or Paul?

 

[Simplelogic]

Now, regarding Deuteronomy 13, I consider Joseph Smith to be a true prophet on the grounds that he does pass that test. I think the point of your quoting Deuteronomy in the first place was to suggest that Joseph Smith is not a true prophet. Very well. we all have our opinions.

Just want to clarify my earlier post. I thought you were saying that Deut 13 was wrong when you are infact saying that Joseph Smith is in alignment with this passage. Sorry for the confusion and dismiss my earlier comments about this.

However I have a huge issue with suggesting that Joseph Smith passes the Deut 13 test. Joseph Smith added many commandments to the Torah and took many of them away. Thus failing the test which is a pretty simple one. Would like an explanation for why you believe Joseph Smith passed the test.

 

[ether-ore]

Just want to clarify my earlier post. I thought you were saying that Deut 13 was wrong when you are infact saying that Joseph Smith is in alignment with this passage. Sorry for the confusion and dismiss my earlier comments about this.

However I have a huge issue with suggesting that Joseph Smith passes the Deut 13 test. Joseph Smith added many commandments to the Torah and took many of them away. Thus failing the test which is a pretty simple one. Would like an explanation for why you believe Joseph Smith passed the test.

For Christians, tradition has changed. With reference to a Sunday sabbath, that would be because that was the day when Christ was resurrected. Of the rest, only two stand out as significant for me. You already gave the right reason concerning circumcision so I needn't comment further. Concerning the Levitical Priesthood: It does still exist in the LDS church. There are two priesthoods. The Melchizedek or higher priesthood (which Moses held; he being the High Priest) and the lower or Aaronic priesthood named of course after Aaron; (Aaron holding the office of priest).

Within the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the hierarchical order looks like this
Melchizedek Priesthood: High Priest
Seventy
Elder
Aaronic Priesthood: Priest
Levitical Priesthood: Teacher
Deacon
This order of things was restored by Joseph Smith. The Levitical Priesthood is a subset of the Aaronic Priesthood. Animal sacrifices over which the Levites officiated have been done away with after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Aaronic Priesthood (along with the Levitical Priesthood) now administers the sacrament which is in remembrance of Jesus Christ. The animal sacrifices (Christians believe) were symbolic of the last great sacrifice of Jesus Christ and since the performance of that, animal sacrifices were no longer necessary.
Concerning why I believe Joseph Smith was a prophet: For me, it is primarily that an unlearned man wrote the Book of Mormon in two months. As I read the Book of Mormon, I am struck by its truthfulness. The spirit whispers to me that it is true. Besides, I have a hard time believing that an unchangeable God would cease to reveal things to His children. There is no reason that God should not reveal Himself today as He has in times passed. Joseph Smith has also been the instrument in God's hands (just as Moses was) in revealing to His people the higher order of things but which the children of Israel rejected in Sinai.
Through Joseph Smith God restored the power to seal on earth and in heaven which is the same power given to Peter and which was lost. This power pertains to the higher priesthood and enables families to be sealed to each other under God's law forever. Also this higher law enables salvation to come to those who died without the law if they will but accept it. Things revealed to Joseph Smith by God give me a convincing panoramic understanding of where we came form, why we are here in mortality and what will happen to us after this life is over, depending on the choices we make here.

Finally, here is a page you might be interested in reading. It has to do with Deuteronomy 13:
http://en.fairmormon.org/Biblical_K...onsidering_Joseph_Smith/Abuse_of_a_Bible_test

 

[Simplelogic]

For Christians, tradition has changed. With reference to a Sunday sabbath, that would be because that was the day when Christ was resurrected. Of the rest, only two stand out as significant for me. You already gave the right reason concerning circumcision so I needn't comment further. Concerning the Levitical Priesthood: It does still exist in the LDS church. There are two priesthoods. The Melchizedek or higher priesthood (which Moses held; he being the High Priest) and the lower or Aaronic priesthood named of course after Aaron; (Aaron holding the office of priest).

Within the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the hierarchical order looks like this
Melchizedek Priesthood: High Priest
Seventy
Elder
Aaronic Priesthood: Priest
Levitical Priesthood: Teacher
Deacon
This order of things was restored by Joseph Smith. The Levitical Priesthood is a subset of the Aaronic Priesthood. Animal sacrifices over which the Levites officiated have been done away with after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Aaronic Priesthood (along with the Levitical Priesthood) now administers the sacrament which is in remembrance of Jesus Christ. The animal sacrifices (Christians believe) were symbolic of the last great sacrifice of Jesus Christ and since the performance of that, animal sacrifices were no longer necessary.
Concerning why I believe Joseph Smith was a prophet: For me, it is primarily that an unlearned man wrote the Book of Mormon in two months. As I read the Book of Mormon, I am struck by its truthfulness. The spirit whispers to me that it is true. Besides, I have a hard time believing that an unchangeable God would cease to reveal things to His children. There is no reason that God should not reveal Himself today as He has in times passed. Joseph Smith has also been the instrument in God's hands (just as Moses was) in revealing to His people the higher order of things but which the children of Israel rejected in Sinai.
Through Joseph Smith God restored the power to seal on earth and in heaven which is the same power given to Peter and which was lost. This power pertains to the higher priesthood and enables families to be sealed to each other under God's law forever. Also this higher law enables salvation to come to those who died without the law if they will but accept it. Things revealed to Joseph Smith by God give me a convincing panoramic understanding of where we came form, why we are here in mortality and what will happen to us after this life is over, depending on the choices we make here.

Finally, here is a page you might be interested in reading. It has to do with Deuteronomy 13:
http://en.fairmormon.org/Biblical_K...onsidering_Joseph_Smith/Abuse_of_a_Bible_test

Keeping the Sunday Sabbath and calling random men "levites" does not validate Joseph Smith or the Mormon religion. We are prohibited from adding or subtracting from the commandments that God gave Moses. This means that if God told our forefathers to hallow the 7th day (not the first), thats exactly what we must do. To openly change this command is a rejection of the God of Israel and the covenant He made with us. Not sure how you can see this at all in a positive way.

I have many Mormon friends and each one of them has said the same thing. They say that a spirit has confirmed to them the authenticity and this is the "rubber stamp" of its validity. Its almost as if Mormons are taught to say this in order to defend their prophet. Regardless if that is what you are doing or not it should be apparent that there are many spiritual beings that have the ability to communicate with humans. Some good and some not so good. Just because you believe you heard something does not mean it was the voice of the God of Israel. However I do believe that Moses DID hear from the God of Israel. And He says not to follow prophets who take away from the commandments (the ones communicated to Moses from God Himself). Also the God of Israel commands us to test prophets by these standards to see if His people truly love Him. Look at what God says:

1“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, 2and the sign or the wonder comes true, concerning which he spoke to you, saying, ‘Let us go after other gods (whom you have not known) and let us serve them,’ 3you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams; for the LORD your God is testing you to find out if you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4“You shall follow the LORD your God and fear Him; and you shall keep His commandments, listen to His voice, serve Him, and cling to Him. 5“But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has counseled rebellion against the LORD your God who brought you from the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of slavery, to seduce you from the way in which the LORD your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from among you. Deut 13: 1-5

This is a very serious warning my friend. I would double check to make sure your prophet has not transgressed the Torah. Remember we have no right to add or take away any of the commands:

Do not add a thing to what I command you nor subtract from it, so that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I am delivering to you. Deut 4: 2

"So be careful to obey all the commands I give you. You must not add anything to them or subtract anything from them. Deut 12: 32

Paul, Joseph Smith and Muhammed have all added to God's commandments and taken other commands away. Each one of these men claim an exclusive revelation through a vision experience. Yet none of them represent the God of Israel who does not change. God's Torah is perfect and in no need of correction.

The law (lit Torah) of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. Psalm 19: 7