-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Problem of Paul for All Faiths/Outlooks
- Thread starter Simplelogic
- Start date
I base it on the posts you have made thus far, and the material you frequently link to.
As for "exclusive salvation doctrines", I have no clue why you bring it up.
Well there is my favorite passage in Romans 7 I became a Christian after reading Romans 7 because it was then that i understood the Atonement of the Messiah Jesus and righteousness in spirit that is apart from the most determined attempts of fallible men as righteousness by doing the law. It is beautiful the Way of salvation. And Just.
Romans 7
1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. 5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. 6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
7 ¶What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. 8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me. 12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. 15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. 16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. 17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. 18 For 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. 19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. 20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. 21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. 22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: 23 But 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.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? 25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
See how we can be righteous in spirit while being sinners in the flesh?
Simplelogic
Well-Known Member
Because I have no need to "convert" you or anyone else to my faith. And I openly refuted Christians or Messianic Jews who try to convert Jews to their Torah abolishing religions.
I'm not seeing the connection between the two.
I don't know if you're mixing up different discussions you're involved in, or just reacting to something I don't see.
You're free to believe what you wish, and to merge whatever works for you from where ever you find it.
What I have an issue with is when it's presented as Judaism or when misinformation (such as in the article you linked to) is used to make it seem that way. As I stated earlier, Paul isn't the reason Jews reject Christianity or Jesus.
Simplelogic
Well-Known Member
Then please. Tell me what part of Yeshua's teachings are a blasphemy to Jews in your opinion?
Well, we can start with his claim of being king, messiah, and prophet.
Then we can move into his denial of the Oral Law, his command that Jews "follow" him, and that he was a conduit between Jews and God.
I'm not going to sit here and argue verses with you, or get into what you personally believe; as I said, you're free to follow what ever you wish. But claiming that all Jesus taught was in line with Judaism is wrong, even without Paul muddying up the water.
Simplelogic
Well-Known Member
Not against the Torah to claim to be a King,messiah or prophet.
Yeshua never claimed to be a an exclusive conduit to God.
Not against the Torah to reject the oral traditions either.
The Torah tells us that when The Prothet comes we all must shema. It is the message of Yeshua that MUST be followed. Not christian salvation concepts. You are still reading Paul into Jesus and you don't even know it.
You can believe whatever you want as well. But I will challenge your false assumptions of Yeshua if you continue to put your thoughts out there.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
The problem really is, we can't make an assumption that Paul was nefariously going against circumcision and dietary laws etc. Jeshua Himself speaks of these things, so if we are to hold any validity to the Bible we have to assume some correct teachings are in it.
You seem to be really stuck on this "Christian salvation concept", even though it hasn't been part of our conversation.
As for the rest, it is against Torah to ignore its oral component.
It is against Torah to claim to be the messiah or a prophet and attempt to lead Jews away from Torah.
And my New Testament might be a bit rusty, but I'm pretty sure John and Mathew both speak of Jesus as the way to God (you'll have to dismiss much than just Paul in order to get rid of that one).
While we are commanded to follow God's prophets, the age of prophecy for us ended with Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi at the end of the Babylonian exile.
Last edited:
Simplelogic
Well-Known Member
Why not. Paul didn't know Yeshua and was certainly not one of his apostles. Paul taught that eating idol meat was OK as long as you don't offend anyone. The Torah, Yeshua and James all say it is wrong in any circumstance. Yeshua warned of false miracle workers who will teach "law negation"....often translated lawlessness. Yeshua didn't say these miracle workers would deny the whole Torah. He said they would negate or take away from it. Didn't Paul do exactly this?
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Great, now you've got the Epistles contradicting the Epistles, this is exactly the problem with ascribing a nefarious purpose to Pauls writings. We don't really know which is legit from cross-reference within the NT, we have to look at tradition and I also believe practicality, as Jesus is said to have had non-Jewish followers. This means they would have had different rules anyway, imo.
Simplelogic
Well-Known Member
I see your logic but I believe it can be explained fairly reasonably.
Tradition is difficult because the Jewish people didn't have very much say over the Christian canon. I believe that YHVH tasked the Jewish people with maintaining and preserving His word. He also placed two criteria for adding scripture to scripture. A prophet must provide a valid (unpredictable) prophecy which comes to pass. He also must NOT add to or subtract from the commands YHVH gave Moses.
-Paul never made a valid prophecy. His letters have no precedence for addition into the scriptures.
-Paul very clearly taught against the law given to Moses. This is an indisputable fact which can easily be proven from Paul's own mouth.
I also believe that Gen 49 prophecies about the coming of Paul (the Benjamite wolf).
Lastly, I believe I can prove that Yeshua himself commended the Ephesian church for rejecting Paul and Timothy.
Simplelogic
Well-Known Member
Would you be willing to provide Torah verses to back the following claims:
-That it is against the Torah to ignore the oral component
-That the age of the prophets stopped with the Babylonian exile
Neither John nor Matthew speak the concept you are alluding to. Namely Yeshua being the exclusive way to the Father. They speak of a Torah observant Messiah who urges repentance to Torah alone. They also echo the Torah's demand to Shema when the Prophet comes. These verses are easy to understand when Paul's logic isn't lamented into the text.
I've already told you I'm not going to argue verses with you; it's not how we read Torah.
You can twist individual statements to means almost anything when you pluck them out of the context in which they were made; they lose all meaning when you do. Books need to be read as a whole if you wish to understand what they say.
For the validity of the Oral Law, you can read Shemot and Devarim.
For the end of the prophetic age, read Yoma and Sanhedrin.
One of the key themes of Matthew is that Jesus alone decides the law and is endowed with divine authority to decide who passes to God, and John speaks to Jesus being the object of worship. He also quotes Jesus as saying he is the way to God.
This isn't "Paul's" logic; it is the basis for Christianity and just a few of the reasons why Jews reject both Jesus and Christianity.
Simplelogic
Well-Known Member
You are wrong about Matthew. We will never know because you refuse
So you are willing to make unfounded statements about the gospels but you are not willing to cite the verses??? You are wrong about both of your claims regarding Matthew and John. But we will never know because you don't want to cite your case.
I have read Exodus and Deut many times and there is nothing to substantiate adherence to oral traditions. There is verse which say the exact opposite however. But you don't want to look at verses….so.
It is Paul's logic that Christianity has read into Yeshua's words. If one simply reads the gospels they will find a Torah observant Jew who demanded strict observance to the Torah while condemning oral traditions which diminish the written Torah.
Let me know when you are done parroting your establishments talking points and want to seek out the matter for yourself.
So you are willing to make unfounded statements about the gospels but you are not willing to cite the verses??? You are wrong about both of your claims regarding Matthew and John. But we will never know because you don't want to cite your case.
I have read Exodus and Deut many times and there is nothing to substantiate adherence to oral traditions. There is verse which say the exact opposite however. But you don't want to look at verses….so.
It is Paul's logic that Christianity has read into Yeshua's words. If one simply reads the gospels they will find a Torah observant Jew who demanded strict observance to the Torah while condemning oral traditions which diminish the written Torah.
Let me know when you are done parroting your establishments talking points and want to seek out the matter for yourself.
If your argument relies on cherry-picking verses, striping them of context, and claiming that your way of seeing it is the only way, then you've failed before you've started.
Each book is a complete work unto itself. Each is the author's retelling of his story. To tease it apart into single sentences, or even fragments of sentences, is to remove any coherency from it. You have to read it as entire work in order to identify the themes and ideas that are there.
As I stated in my first post in this thread:
Even if you strip Paul from the Christian Bible, you are still left with the theme of a Jesus who is the messiah/prophet/divine entity/way to God that runs through the rest of the gospels. Couple that with his rejection of the Oral Law, and you have someone that Jews will most certainly "have a problem" with.
And if you then say that all of those instances are nothing more than "Paul's logic", then you are left with gaping holes and you cast serious doubt on the rest of their "testimony". Yes, Paul did offer a different direction to the budding new religion, and his words don't always agree with the others. But there is also a lot of commonality between then, and the nature of Jesus is something they shared.
There's a reason the Jews of his time didn't embrace him and take up his teachings (and they would have been Jews who would have heard his message straight from his mouth, without the influence of anyone else's interpretation). While many of the lessons attributed to him are from Torah and are fully in line with Jewish tradition, there is also much that was wrong. One could always argue that Jesus was just a radical Jew who presented very unorthodox beliefs, but then he is just just a man with unorthodox beliefs, and we have many rabbis and sages that were far more enlightening concerning God's law for us. And we don't worship them either.
While I applaud your effort to work through your Bible and find what you believe to be the truth, I certainly don't envy the position you've taken. Your views are quite radical, in both Christianity and Judaism, and even many of the people who follow the same bent as you disagree with your stance. You actually remind me of another poster we once had (he hasn't posted in quite some time now); his ideas and passion were quite similar to yours, and I think you two could have had some great conversations.
I came to that point some time ago. It's when I stripped off the blinders, took stock of my beliefs, and read the Torah without the lenses of Christianity.
Simplelogic
Well-Known Member
How can you accuse me of "cherry picking" if we aren't even discussing any verses?? Thank you for the lesson on contextual reading. Are you prepared to read the gospels in context with me?
THERE IS NO MENTION OF YESHUA'S DIVINITY IN THE GOSPELS. This would be blasphemous it was taught in the gospels but it was not. This concept, like many others, were laminated onto Yeshua because of Paul. Yes, you still don't know the difference between Yeshua and Paul. You also are unaware that Yeshua completely rejected Paul and everything he taught. I can prove this to you if you are willing to look.
Many Jews of Yeshua's time DID embrace him. Though they rejected Paul's gentile movement. James (Yeshua's brother) was one of the most respected (Torah observant) Jews of the first century. Many first century Pharisees believed that the destruction of the Temple was linked to the murder of James. Let me know if you want to search any of this out.
I realize that mainstream Christianity and Judaism reject my views. They are both an inch deep and a mile wide. I promise you brother, Yeshua is not who the church has made him out to be…and he is certainly not what Judaism has made him out to be.
I applaud you in your rejection of Christianity. It takes a lot for any man to change his mind on faith issues that are taught from a young age. But I would also challenge you to look deeper into the pitfalls of mainstream Judaism. There are many concepts that have been adopted that completely go against the Torah.
THERE IS NO MENTION OF YESHUA'S DIVINITY IN THE GOSPELS. This would be blasphemous it was taught in the gospels but it was not. This concept, like many others, were laminated onto Yeshua because of Paul. Yes, you still don't know the difference between Yeshua and Paul. You also are unaware that Yeshua completely rejected Paul and everything he taught. I can prove this to you if you are willing to look.
Many Jews of Yeshua's time DID embrace him. Though they rejected Paul's gentile movement. James (Yeshua's brother) was one of the most respected (Torah observant) Jews of the first century. Many first century Pharisees believed that the destruction of the Temple was linked to the murder of James. Let me know if you want to search any of this out.
I realize that mainstream Christianity and Judaism reject my views. They are both an inch deep and a mile wide. I promise you brother, Yeshua is not who the church has made him out to be…and he is certainly not what Judaism has made him out to be.
I applaud you in your rejection of Christianity. It takes a lot for any man to change his mind on faith issues that are taught from a young age. But I would also challenge you to look deeper into the pitfalls of mainstream Judaism. There are many concepts that have been adopted that completely go against the Torah.
Last edited:
Levite
Higher and Higher
^^^ This. So much.