Self appointed Apostle Paul Vs Yashu'a teaching

[Shermana]

If you took more time reading the bible then making up words game you might understand the bible more .

The problem is that we have some verses that may in fact be interpolated and weren't part of original doctrine, which are used to enforce the idea that gentile Christians are not subject to the Jewish Law.

We see in Justin Martyr's writings that the Nazarene Jews were split into a few camps, one of them thought gentiles didn't have to obey the Law, the other thought that gentiles had to obey the same Jewish law that Jewish Christians were supposed to. (And Jewish Christians, according to Acts, were in fact supposed to be obedient to the Law).

This nonetheless gives a situation where Jewish Christians are held to some higher, holier standard, whereas Gentiles aren't. What kind of implications arise from that?

We see the Tubingen school at first reviving the idea that the Council of Jerusalem episode was interpolated in the 19th century (And their arguments were never really refuted, just swept under the rug), and we see many scholars who take this view as well. We know that Galatians 2 clashes with Acts 15, something even FF Bruce (king of the Conservative Christian scholars) acknowledges and tries to reconcile by saying that Galatians 2 might be referring to a different event than in Acts 15. We see that the Clementine Literature may in fact have seen Jewish Christian groups use the word "Simon Magus" as code word Paul, who shares a nearly identical description to Paul's story, as an enemy and false infiltrator of the faith.

To me, I think the scholars who say that the Council of Jerusalem never happened and that this episode, along with 21:25 (which interupts the flow of the passage) were not part of the original, have it right.

We also may see in the Book of John's Revelation some possible reaction against Pauline teaching, as well in the Book of James with its emphatic stating over 5 times in a row the futility of faith without works. John's revelation says there are 12 apostles. Did one of them die and Paul fill their place? Who is the false teacher of Ephesus? Did Paul say eating idol-sacrificed meat was okay, while Revelation says such teachers who say this will be thrown out?

The idea that Christians don't have to obey the Law basically undermines the entire point of the Jewish Messiah's very Jewish teachings.

He said anyone who breaks and teaches to break the least of the commandments shall be called the least in the Kingdom.

Apparently Christians don't mind being called the least.

And that's just the start. We have a whole series of passages that get caught up in "context wars", like Luke 16:17-31, which most likely is saying that those who ignore the Laws of Moses are guaranteed to spend some time in the fiery inferno, while others say its about rejecting the Prophetic indications of the Messiah, which kind of doesn't make sense as it stems from Luke 16:17's saying that Heaven and Earth will collapse before the Law is undone.

I don't really see the point in obeying the Jewish Messiah and calling him lord if one doesn't feel obligated to obey what he teaches, or they feel they can twist and cherry pick what he says into something that's completely devoid of its Jewish message.

 

[Ibraahiym]

The problem is that we have some verses that may in fact be interpolated and weren't part of original doctrine, which are used to enforce the idea that gentile Christians are not subject to the Jewish Law.

We see in Justin Martyr's writings that the Nazarene Jews were split into a few camps, one of them thought gentiles didn't have to obey the Law, the other thought that gentiles had to obey the same Jewish law that Jewish Christians were supposed to. (And Jewish Christians, according to Acts, were in fact supposed to be obedient to the Law).

This nonetheless gives a situation where Jewish Christians are held to some higher, holier standard, whereas Gentiles aren't. What kind of implications arise from that?

We see the Tubingen school at first reviving the idea that the Council of Jerusalem episode was interpolated in the 19th century (And their arguments were never really refuted, just swept under the rug), and we see many scholars who take this view as well. We know that Galatians 2 clashes with Acts 15, something even FF Bruce (king of the Conservative Christian scholars) acknowledges and tries to reconcile by saying that Galatians 2 might be referring to a different event than in Acts 15. We see that the Clementine Literature may in fact have seen Jewish Christian groups use the word "Simon Magus" as code word Paul, who shares a nearly identical description to Paul's story, as an enemy and false infiltrator of the faith.

To me, I think the scholars who say that the Council of Jerusalem never happened and that this episode, along with 21:25 (which interupts the flow of the passage) were not part of the original, have it right.

We also may see in the Book of John's Revelation some possible reaction against Pauline teaching, as well in the Book of James with its emphatic stating over 5 times in a row the futility of faith without works. John's revelation says there are 12 apostles. Did one of them die and Paul fill their place? Who is the false teacher of Ephesus? Did Paul say eating idol-sacrificed meat was okay, while Revelation says such teachers who say this will be thrown out?

The idea that Christians don't have to obey the Law basically undermines the entire point of the Jewish Messiah's very Jewish teachings.

He said anyone who breaks and teaches to break the least of the commandments shall be called the least in the Kingdom.

Apparently Christians don't mind being called the least.

And that's just the start. We have a whole series of passages that get caught up in "context wars", like Luke 16:17-31, which most likely is saying that those who ignore the Laws of Moses are guaranteed to spend some time in the fiery inferno, while others say its about rejecting the Prophetic indications of the Messiah, which kind of doesn't make sense as it stems from Luke 16:17's saying that Heaven and Earth will collapse before the Law is undone.

I don't really see the point in obeying the Jewish Messiah and calling him lord if one doesn't feel obligated to obey what he teaches, or they feel they can twist and cherry pick what he says into something that's completely devoid of its Jewish message.

The Problem with (Some Christian's ) is they want the scriptures to follow them and they don't want to follow the scriptures . Bottom line here I see the scriptures like this either you follow the scriptures or you don't their no In Between .

Matthew 5 ; 17 - 18 , Where It States ; Think not that I am come to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.

18For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled.

Also I have been noticeing (Some people of religion ) are posting more ( Hadiyth's ) meaning words of Men / Woman and not of Scriptures / Chapter and Verses cliaming it the words of God when it's not . Testimony are not Scriptures . They're created / made to make other think they're closer to God then most people . Can we get back to the post plzzzzz

 

[Ibraahiym]

Saul , Shaool , Paul, ( Never ) was a Disciple of Yashu'a , Isa , Jesus ! How do I know ? According to Saul , Shaool , Paul , Yashu'a , Isa , Jesus chose him as his instrument for carrying his teaching to The Gentiles who were not of the House of Israel . ( Acts 9 ; 15 - 16 ) . Saul , Shaool , Paul acclaimed vision is the only evidence Saul , Shaool , Paul could produce for his bid for the leadership of The New Church Saul , Shaool , Paul , would raise , No wonder the jews were highly skeptical about the whole claim and would not listen to him . Let's take a look in The Bible where Saul , Shaool , Paul contradicts himself three times . This is the behavior of a liar . A liar have to repeat his lie Two or more Times with each version differing from the next until he ultimately prove himself a Liar . He eventually reveals the truth he was trying to hide all along .

Contradiction One ; ~ Act 9 - 4 - 7 , And I Quote ; And he fell down on that planet earth and heard a voice saying to him , Saul why did you persceute me and he said who are you master ; And the master said I am Yashu'a whom you persecuted it is hard for you to kick against the point . And he trembling and astonished said the master what will you have me to do ? And the master said to him arise and go into the city and it shall be told to you what you must do . And the men who journeyed with him stood speechless hearing a voice but seen no man .

In the above quote , Saul , Shaool , Paul says that ( He Alone Fell To The Ground ( Earth ) and then he proceeds to say that the men who journeyed with him stood speechless , Hearing a voice , ( But Seeing No Man ) . We see in Acts 22 ; 7 - 9 that Saul , Shaool , Paul was about to be killed by the people of the city of caesarea for preaching to the jews amongst the gentiles that they should forsake Moses and not circumcise their children or follow their custom . Saul , Shaool , Paul was saved by the soldiers and centurions who took him to the castle unto the chief priest and there Saul , Shaool , Paul says ...

Contradiction Two ; ~ Acts 22 ; 7 - 9 , And I Quote ; And I fell onto the ground and heard a voice saying to me Saul Saul why are you persecuting me ? And I answer who are you Master and he said to me , I'am Jesus of Nazareth whom you persecute . And they that were with me saw surely the force of light , . And were afraid but did not hear the voice of him that spoke to me .

Now , In this quote Paul says ( He Alone Fell To The Ground ) . He proceeds to say that the men who were with him , ( Saw The Light ) , But heard not the voice of him who spoke . But he had just said in Acts 9 ; 4 - 7 . '' ( Those who journeyed with him , Heard a voice . But saw not a man ) !

We now go to Acts 26 ; 13 - 14 , To find the third contradiction . At this point , Paul is defending himself before King Agrippa ;

Contradiction Three ; Acts 26 ; 13-14 , And I Quote ; At midday O ruler I saw in the way a force of light from the sky above the brightness of the halo shining around me and them which were traveling with me . And when we were all falled down on that part of the planet earth I heard a voice speaking to me and saying in a Hebrew Dialect Saul , Saul , Why did you persceute me ? It's hard for you to kick against the sticks .

After we listen to Paul's Contradictions , It make it very difficult to Believe that Paul ever had a vision . Paul is a liar and his own words confirm it !! Romans 3 ; 7 .

Having the behavior of A Liar , As usual , Paul continued to prove himself A Liar . In none of the other quotes had he said that Jesus ( Spoke To Him In The Hebrew Tongue ! However , In the following quote , ( Acts 26 ; 16 ) , Paul says that Jesus appeared to him to make him a Minister . Is this why Paul though he was supposed to be a disciple .

Acts 26 ; 14 - 16 , And I Quote ; And when we were all fallen down on that part of the planet earth I heard a voice speaking to me and and saying in a Hebrew Dialect Saul Saul why did you persecute me ? It's hard for you to kick against the sticks . And I said who are you master and he said I am Jesus whom you persceute , But rise and stand up upon your feet for I have appeared to you for this purpose to make you a servant and a witnessboth of these things which you have seen and of those things which I will make appear for you .

After we listen to Paul's Contradictions , It make it very difficult to Believe that Paul ever had a vision . Paul is a liar and his own words confirm it !! Romans 3 ; 7 .

Having the behavior of A Liar , As usual , Paul continued to prove himself A Liar . In none of the other quotes had he said that Jesus ( Spoke To Him In The Hebrew Tongue ! However , In the following quote , ( Acts 26 ; 16 ) , Paul says that Jesus appeared to him to make him a Minister . Is this why Paul though he was supposed to be a disciple .

Acts 26 ; 14 - 16 , And I Quote ; And when we were all fallen down on that part of the planet earth I heard a voice speaking to me and and saying in a Hebrew Dialect Saul Saul why did you persecute me ? It's hard for you to kick against the sticks . And I said who are you master and he said I am Jesus whom you persceute , But rise and stand up upon your feet for I have appeared to you for this purpose to make you a servant and a witnessboth of these things which you have seen and of those things which I will make appear for you .

Let's look at the word Minister in Aramic ( Hebrew ) , Since Paul said Jesus spoke to him in Aramic ( Hebrew ); And in Greek , Since it's the language Luke wrote in .

In Greek - - - Minister , [ Huperetes ] An under -Oarsman , I.E. ( Gen ) subordinate ( Assistant , sexton , constable ) ; - - Minister , Officer , Servant ; From the prim . Root [ Hupol ] Meaning under of place [ Beneath ] . Or with verbs [ The agency or means , Through ]; Of inferior position or condition , And speacially covertly or moderately .

 

[Ibraahiym]

In Hebrew - - - Minister , [ Sharath ] A prim . Root ; To attend as a menial or worshipper ; Figurative ; To contribute to ; Minister ( Unto ) , ( Do ) Serve , Wait on .

In Arabic - - - Minister [ Khaadim ] Meaning a servant , A waiter ( See 26 ; 16 Of Acts , For the word ) .

Paul took this word to mean '' Disciple '' - How ??? He was fluent in the Aramic ( Hebrew ) language ( Acts 21 ; 40 ; 22 ; 2 ) . So there's no way he could have mistaken the two words He Did It On Purpose !!

The word Minister does not refer to '' Apostle '' Nor '' Disciple '' Paul was ( Not Apostle or Disciple according to the definition of the words !!!

In Arabic , Hebrew , And Greek , All share the same definition for Disciple , As a Student '

Arabic { Tilmeeth } - Literally , Meaning young Student .

Hebrew { Limmuwd or Limmud } Meaning , Instructed , Disciple , learned from the root [ Lamad ] < aramic > Meaning '' To Goad , To teach ''

Greek [ Manthetes ] Meaning , Learner ( Pupil , Dsiciple ) from [ Manthano ] or Matheo ] Meaning to learn ( In any way ) .

The same three languages also share the same definitions for the Apostle

Arabic [ Rasool ] Meaning '' One sent messenger ''

Hebrew [ Basar ] A Prim . Root ; '' To Be Fresh , Announce ( Glad News ) ; Messenger ''

Greek , [ Apostolos ] '' Ambassador messenger , Envoy , One who represent the sender '' .

As you can see there is definitely a distinction between the two words in all Three Language .

 

[outhouse]

You don't have a real answer so now you think by picking out certain parts of the post will change the whole post , Not happening !!!

The only thing not happening here, is you being able to back what you write.

 

[fallingblood]

OK, I want to be fair here and I really hope you convince me because I would like to be convinced. The people who tell Luke most likely got it second or third hand from Paul himself. If Paul is the only one standing there who else can originate the story?

I believe Paul kept the law or at least made every attempt to, but my point is, we have to take Paul's word on that. Luke cannot make the account any more credible, so saying scriptures back this up is saying Paul and his followers back him up parroting what Paul himself told them.

Just like Paul said Jesus appeared to James to back his story, but James makes no mention of this and we have the writings of James.

Am I the only one who thinks this is strange. If my dead brother appeared to me and I wrote scripture, it might be worth mentioning.

Luke writes all this stuff to back up Paul, but there is no first hand references except once again, Paul himself.

I agree with much of what you said. The one thing that I see though is that Paul did have a lot of close followers. Even more, Paul was also quite well known to the likes of Peter, James, John, and the rest of the Jerusalem group. In addition, Paul also had traveling partners, who would have had their own view of the situation.

So there would have been others who could have originated the stories. Part of the story as well is probably fabricated by Luke himself. But as you said, there is a reliance on what Paul said. This becomes more troublesome for some as Paul is considered scripture, and there has been quite a bit written in his name or interpolated into his letters. However, I see Paul as quite trustworthy.

 

[Ibraahiym]

In Hebrew - - - Minister , [ Sharath ] A prim . Root ; To attend as a menial or worshipper ; Figurative ; To contribute to ; Minister ( Unto ) , ( Do ) Serve , Wait on .

In Arabic - - - Minister [ Khaadim ] Meaning a servant , A waiter ( See 26 ; 16 Of Acts , For the word ) .

Paul took this word to mean '' Disciple '' - How ??? He was fluent in the Aramic ( Hebrew ) language ( Acts 21 ; 40 ; 22 ; 2 ) . So there's no way he could have mistaken the two words He Did It On Purpose !!

The word Minister does not refer to '' Apostle '' Nor '' Disciple '' Paul was ( Not Apostle or Disciple according to the definition of the words !!!

In Arabic , Hebrew , And Greek , All share the same definition for Disciple , As a Student '

Arabic { Tilmeeth } - Literally , Meaning young Student .

Hebrew { Limmuwd or Limmud } Meaning , Instructed , Disciple , learned from the root [ Lamad ] < aramic > Meaning '' To Goad , To teach ''

Greek [ Manthetes ] Meaning , Learner ( Pupil , Dsiciple ) from [ Manthano ] or Matheo ] Meaning to learn ( In any way ) .

The same three languages also share the same definitions for the Apostle

Arabic [ Rasool ] Meaning '' One sent messenger ''

Hebrew [ Basar ] A Prim . Root ; '' To Be Fresh , Announce ( Glad News ) ; Messenger ''

Greek , [ Apostolos ] '' Ambassador messenger , Envoy , One who represent the sender '' .

As you can see there is definitely a distinction between the two words in all Three Language .

Most people are under the impression that they are following a God incarnated in human form , Know as Jesus Christ . When in actuality , They are following the teachings of a man name Paul , Whom Yashu'a ( Never came in contact with ) , Let alone was Paul amongst his Disciples . As you can see there is definatly a distinction between the two words in all three language . Basically a disciple is a Student and an Apostle is a messenger .

How did Yashu'a ( Jesus ) meet his disciples and who were they , Well , It all started when Andrew , Simon Peter's brother found his brother Simon and told him , We have found a messiah which is being interpreted as Christ . Then he took Simon to Yashu'a . Yashu'a looked at him and said '' Your name is Simon , Son of John , But you will be called Cephas , '' The next day Yashu'a decided to go to Galilee . He found Philip and said to him ; '' Come with me '' , For this Philip was from Bethsaida , The town where Andrew and Peter lived . Philip found Nathaniel and told him we have found the one who Thutmose ( Moses ) wrote about in the Scriprure of the Law and whom the prophets also wrote about .

He is Yashu'a , The adopted Son of Joseph of Nazareth . ''Can anything good come from Nazareth ? '' Nathaniel asked . '' Come and see '' , Answered Philip . When Yashu'a ( Jesus ) saw Nathaniel coming up to him he said about him ; Here is a real Israelite , There is nothing false in him . Nathaniel asked him , ''How do you know me ? Yashu'a answered , ''I saw you when you were under the fig tree before Philip called you . Rabboni answered Nathaniel , '' You are the Ibn , A Neteru . You are the ruler of all Israel .

 

[Ibraahiym]

Yashu'a said , ''Do you have faith just because I told you I saw you when you were under the fig tree ? You will see much greater things than this . And he said to them , I am telling you the truth . ''You will see Heaven open and the Neteru going up and coming down , on the Walad , Son of a human being . That human being Mary , Thus he was called '' The Ibn , Son of El Eluh and the Walad , Son of a human being , '' Yashu'a had Twelve Disciples in all . The following list below shows you the names of Yashu'a Disciples and who they were ;

1 . Cephas - Which is another name for Simon Peter , Who was one of the 12 Disciples of Yashu'a ( John 1 ; 42 ) .

2 . Andrew - A follower of John the baptist ( John 1 ; 35 - 40 ) Who was one of the 12 Disciples of Yashu'a

3 . James - Who was one of the 12 Disciples of Yashu'a .

4 . John - Who was one of the 12 Disciples of Yashu'a .

5 . James - Who was one of the 12 Disciples of Yashu'a .

6 . Jude - Who was one of the 12 Disciples of Yashu'a , He was also a secret disciple .

7 . Philip - A native of Bethsaida , The city of Andrew and Peter . He was among The Galiean peasants who flocked to hear the preaching of John The Baptist .

8 . Bartholomew - Who is commonly known as Nathanael was an Israelite who was a disciple of The Messiah Yashu'a and the brother of Philip . He was also Who was one of the 12 Disciples of Yashu'a . His real name was Amos and as for Bartholomew , Son of Hali's , His home was in Cana of Galilee . He too died of a horrible death. He was flogged to death .

9 . Matthew was one of the 12 Disciples of Yashu'a .Matthew
whose name was Levi , Was a tax collector publican from capernaum . He was the offspring of Alaphaeus . Matthew displayed courage and loyality when Yashu'a proposed to return to Judea in spite of Judahites hostility . He was martyed by a lance a long shaft with a sharp pointed or steel hea in Ethiopia .

10 .Thomas - Who was one of the 12 Disciples of Yashu'a .( Jesus ) , Was also known as Didymus meaning '' Twin '' In Greek and Judas . It is believed that his twin was Lydia . Some Theologians Falsely say he was the twin brother of The Yashu'a ( Jesus ) . Thomas who was popularly known as Didymus wss the son of Simon . Thomas was claimed by Syrian Christian as the founder of their church . While Thomas was in prayer he was Martyred shot by a shower of arrows .

11 . Simon - was one of the 12 Disciples of Yashu'a .( Jesus ) . He was also a Canaanite from canan or Zealote and was the son of Daniel . Simon was from Galilee . He was an Isrealite who resided in the land of Canaan . He died a horrible death by way of Crucifixtion .

12 . Judas - Who was one of the 12 Disciples of Yashu'a .( Jesus ) was said to be a mercenary . He was also the one who Betrayed Yashu'a ( Jesus ) . Judas the son of Simon Iscariot was best know as the betrayer . His real name was Yahuda Iscariot from Kerioth of Judea . Judas life came to an ultimate end when he was beat beyond recognition crucified and thrown off of a cliff at Calvary in Jerusalem . The whole point was to destroy all those who knew about the real Jesus , Rabbi Yashu'a , And bring a New Jesus , Who was Simon Bar Jesus , The one that Paul followed .

 

[fallingblood]

You don't want to follow the scriptures ,You want the scriptures to follow you ! Your what the scriptures call A Paulites , One who adhere to the teaching of Paul and not the teaching of Yashu'a .

Is the Bible scripture? If so, then what I am saying rests on "scripture." More so, I am hardly a Paulite. In fact, your comment is extremely ignorant as I have never stated what I personally believe or follow. Please don't make personal comments about me, when you clearly don't know me.

Now before you come with that Anti-jew games excuse do some research ok

I assure you that I have done the research. I myself am a Jew (not religiously anymore), and I am a religious student (I'm finishing up my B.A. in Religious Studies now, was recently ordained, and will begin my Masters next fall). Again, please do not make personal comments unless you are informed.

The point that Jew is not synonymous to Israelite or Yahuwdiy - arabic - as you have been led to believe . First you must know that the letter '' J '' did not exist in English , Latin or Greek until 1565 A.D. The modern English '' J '' , was created by Peter Galatin in the year 1565 A.D. Before that , the letter '' G '' took the place of the letter '' J '' so the word '' Jew '' which was created in 1514 A.D. was spelled '' Gew '' and was short for Greeks . There was no '' J '' sound so there could not have been a word '' Jew '' as the Euro - Jews try to make you believe .

I know Greek as well as Latin (to a lesser extent). The term "Gew" was not short for Greeks. "Gew" is not a Greek word at all. In fact, "Gew" has generally been used as a racial slur.

If you read the "scriptures" the term Jew (or the Hebrew equivalent) is used in 2 Kings. Being able to read Greek, I can assure you that there is a Greek word for Jew. If you don't believe me, you can look at nearly any Greek lexicon.

Really, all that you are showing is that an English word did not develop until much later. This makes sense as Hebrew, Greek, and Latin all precede English. Thus, it only makes sense that an English word had to be created and it only makes sense that this English word would not appear in Greek texts, as Greek texts use Greek.

The Torah never spoke of these Euro-Jews . The Euro -Jews took the name Judah , who was the fourth son of Yaqov , Ya'aqub , Jacob ( Israel ) , and made up a new nationality . They took the first part of the title Judah and cut off the last pronuciation '' Ju -dah '' and then labeled themselves '' Jews '' or '' Jewish '' , Judahites , Jew is not a Hebrew word ! Their language is Yiddish ( a dialect which is a mixture of German and Heebrew ) . not Hebrew .

Of course the Torah never spoke of European Jews. Europe wasn't settled by Jews yet. There were new Jews in Europe. More so, Europe is not important to the story in Europe.

Jews did take the name of Judah (or more specifically, the term Jew is short for Judah). That is because they were of the nation of Judah. It is like people from the United States of America being called Americans. They simply shorten the name. More so, not all European Jews speak Yiddish. Many do in fact speak Hebrew, or German, or English, etc. Language does not define what nationality one is though.

The word Jew did not exist until 1514 A.D. When you see it in the Koran you are being deceived . When you see it in the Holy Bible you are being deceived . Find out what the word Jew means in the Scriptures . In most cases it refers to Yehudaw , Yahudah , Judah . They call themselves Jews because they didn't have a place in the 12 tribes of Israel , so they call themselves Jews , Jewish and they speak Yiddish . These Eiro-Jews are trying to authenticate their existence by tying in to the peoples and cultures that actually existed , such as the Tribe of Judah . And books referring to the past saying Jew or Jewish , Know that was not the word that was there .

Judah has a place in the 12 tribes. As Jew is a shorten form of Judah, then obviously they did have a place in the 12 tribes. More so, not all Jews live in Europe, nor speak Yiddish. I live in the United States, and in fact, there are many Jews who live here. There are many who also live in Israel, as well as many other areas.

More so, historically, Jews have not always lived in Europe, and many often haven't. So really, you're view here is basically borderline racist, if not racist.

The Euro-Jews of today are descendants of the Canaanites as they are the decendants of Jebus
, the third son of Kena'an , Kana'an , Canaan . The word Jebusite means '' dryness '' ,

Genesis 10 ; 16 -17 , Revealed In The Year 1512 B.C.E. Where It States ; And The ( Jebusite ) , And The Amorite , And The Girgasite .Verse 17 And The ( Hivite ) , And The Arkite , And The Simite . < King James Version ( Hebrew -Greek ) Key Word Study Bible >

The Jebusites first ruled the Hurriantribe ( the Hivites ) and they joined together during the Jebusite reign . According to the Holy Bible , Jebusites inhabited Jerusalem , rhen were displaced by the incoming Israelites , who were leaving from their bondage in Mitsrayim , Misraayim , Mizraim ( Egypt ) . The Jebusites mixed with the Israelites from Egypt . This took place during the year 100 B.C.E. Today they are called Jews ( Occupying Jerusalem and living in America , Germany , Poland , Hungary , Romania , Australia , Bulgaria , and Yugoslavia .

This is all just nonsense. I really can't put it in nicer terms, and honestly, I'm trying to be civil here, even though what you are saying is extremely offensive. You provide no evidence, and your previous comments have shown that you are not familiar with the languages you are talking about, nor the history of Jews. You try to lump all Jews together, which is a horrible mistake, and then you basically make up things that just aren't true, as I showed.

Not to mention, this in no way shows what I said to be false. Christians are not Jews. They were not given the Law. Christians, for the most part, are now Gentiles. They don't practice Judaism, and are not commanded to follow the Jewish laws. This is not a word game, it is simple common sense. The Law was given to the Jews. Gentiles (including Christians) were never commanded to follow such. Scripture makes this very clear (Paul makes this very clear as well).

 

[Ibraahiym]

What make you think I care who you are and what your believe , You post noting but makeup story-line's , Cliaming they are god words , You know nothing when it come to scriptures , As of yet you have not proven anything I post to be wrong , Excuses / Story-line are not scriptures , Your post are like the Sunday morning minister on T.V. 98% of words build around two verses . If your looking some one to agree with I'm not the one beside you know nothing , And this is not Attack nor Insult You don't know any things when come to scriptures . Paul is the devil according to is own book

Roman 7 ; 14 - 24 , Where It States For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under sin.


15For that which I do, I know not. For what I would do, that do I not; but what I hate, that I do.

16If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law, that it is good.

17Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

18For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing; for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good, I find not.

19For the good that I would do, I do not; but the evil which I would not do, that I do.

20Now if I do that which I would not do, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

21I find then a law that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.

22For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man.

23But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

grow-up and try acting like an Adult , I know it hard for you ...

 

[outhouse]

Paul is the devil according to is own book

.

Paul may be self appointing, but your interpretation has shown itself to be lacking.


Your not following any decent scholarship, just sort of a hostile attack of others views.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Genesis completed in ( 1512 B.C.E. ) , Exodus completed in ( 1512 B.C.E. ) , Leviticus completed in ( 1512 B.C.E. ) , Numbers completed in ( 1473 B.C.E. ) , Deuteronomy completed in ( 1473 B.C.E. ) ..

Little early don't you think. Modern scholarship places it at 6th century BCE during the Babylonian exile. The most common traditional date is 1250 BCE.

 

[Ibraahiym]

Paul may be self appointing, but your interpretation has shown itself to be lacking.


Your not following any decent scholarship, just sort of a hostile attack of others views.

Wrong they're Paulites , He went against the teaching of Yashu'a and they are covering up for Paul him ..

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Most people are under the impression that they are following a God incarnated in human form , Know as Jesus Christ . When in actuality , They are following the teachings of a man name Paul , Whom Yashu'a ( Never came in contact with ) , Let alone was Paul amongst his Disciples . As you can see there is definatly a distinction between the two words in all three language . Basically a disciple is a Student and an Apostle is a messenger .

Little to sure about Paul are you not. Even the name Yashu'a you can't be 100% sure he went by the name. You act if your speculation is the Gospel truth.

 

[Pegg]

So now your going to tell me your doctrine have not change (Many Times ) over the Years , And JW's haven't written their own Bible Translation'ss . And your not taught away to convert people ? Ok , Can we get back to the subject of the post plzzz ?

our understanding of the bible has changed in some details over the years yes, but whats that got to do with converting people???

And if a church does change its 'doctrine' (we dont really call it doctrine, but thats ok for now) isnt it obliged to do so when certain ideas prove to be wrong? I would be very happy knowing my church was willing to change its views when those views are wrong.

 

[Shermana]

Little to sure about Paul are you not. Even the name Yashu'a you can't be 100% sure he went by the name. You act if your speculation is the Gospel truth.

I completely agree with him, the vast majority of Christians incorporate mostly Paul (and even then, just a tiny bit of what Paul says, ignoring the vast swaths of his specific teachings and instructions, to make it as convenient and works-free as possible), and a little bit if any of Jesus's teachings, mostly centering around a few verses of Paul regarding Jesus's role as the Guilt Offering, most of them not even in full context.

 

[Shermana]

our understanding of the bible has changed in some details over the years yes, but whats that got to do with converting people???

And if a church does change its 'doctrine' (we dont really call it doctrine, but thats ok for now) isnt it obliged to do so when certain ideas prove to be wrong? I would be very happy knowing my church was willing to change its views when those views are wrong.

And how do you determine if those views are proven wrong exactly?

 

[Pegg]

And how do you determine if those views are proven wrong exactly?

sometimes it might be when an expectation does not come to fruition. For example, many people believed the myan calander was predicting the end of the world in 2012... that expectation went unrealized and people came to understand that the reasoning behind it was obviously wrong.


Sometimes it might be a result of some discovery which sheds light on the meaning of a particular ancient word...then when you compare the original meaning of the word to one of your beliefs, you might realise that the belief doesnt conform to the meaning of the word used by the writer...so you would want to change your idea to suit that new understanding.

i think anyone who is serious about their religion and their God would be willing to adjust their views if the evidence was forthcoming.

 

[outhouse]

i think anyone who is serious about their religion and their God would be willing to adjust their views if the evidence was forthcoming.

More often then not, when evidence is solid as rock, when placed in front of theology, it gets trampled on due to faith.

Faith often overrides evidence.

Evolution is a example.

 

[Shermana]

sometimes it might be when an expectation does not come to fruition. For example, many people believed the myan calander was predicting the end of the world in 2012... that expectation went unrealized and people came to understand that the reasoning behind it was obviously wrong.


Sometimes it might be a result of some discovery which sheds light on the meaning of a particular ancient word...then when you compare the original meaning of the word to one of your beliefs, you might realise that the belief doesnt conform to the meaning of the word used by the writer...so you would want to change your idea to suit that new understanding.

i think anyone who is serious about their religion and their God would be willing to adjust their views if the evidence was forthcoming.

Okay, so who determines whether the meaning of such words doesn't conform to their beliefs? How could one determine for example, that the Jews at the time of the Bible's writing did in fact mean the equivalent of "Hades" by "Sheol" at that it was NOT just "Hellenization" but an essentially similar idea of a real place for real "Spirits of the dead"? At what point do we determine that there's no evidence that the ancient Israelites didn't believe there were NOT souls? At what point do we determine that "Spirit" can mean both "life" itself as well as an actual entity inside that lives on as its used in Psalms and other writings? How do we determine that when Jesus spoke of hell and hellfire and the Spirit which can be destroyed there, that he was being completely literal and using concepts that were accepted as real by the Ancient Jews?

How do we determine for example that the evidence clearly implies that Jesus was teaching nothing less than full obedience to the Mosaic Law and that when he said "Til Heaven and Earth collapse" he actually meant it literally?

How do we determine that the evidence indicates that the Ebionites were most likely among the closest to the original Followers of the Disiciples of Jesus?

How would we determine that the evidence indicates that Paul was not an authentic apostle and that those who disputed him may not have been wrong? What evidence indicates that Paul's writings are legitimate? What evidence indicates that the Tubingen school was wrong about Paul? Or wrong about the idea that the Council of Jerusalem was interpolated (which several other scholars agree with)? What evidence indicates that the disputed Deutero-Pauline letters are authentic and that the arguments against them are wrong?

What evidence makes it necessary to view Paul as an authentic apostle?

How do we determine that the people who rejected the NT Apocrypha were right? How do we determine that the people who suppressed the Gospel of Mary and the Acts of Peter were wrong? By our own interpretation of Theology?

These are examples of things of which the "evidence" is disputable.

I most certainly agree that people should adjust their views to the evidence though.

The question is, what is the evidence and what do we do with multiple interpretations of the same evidence?