Was St. Paul a liar and deceiver?

[dyanaprajna2011]

Hi dyanaprajna2011, there is no circular reasoning if one's mind has been opened to see what Moses wrote. Here are a few of Yeshua's statements that apply to your 30 years of not having your mind opened to what was written:

Luk 16:31
(31) And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Luk 24:25-27
(25) Then he said unto them,O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
(26) Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
(27) And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Luk 24:44-46
(44) And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
(45) Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
(46) And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:

Wouldn't you want to "see" what Moses wrote? Paul saw it and BELIEVED, he was not foolish. KB

I've read Moses, I've read Jesus, and I've read Paul. I'm not sure what you're quoting has anything at all to do with my OP, but I'll take a stab at it.

Jesus was talked about in the OT, got it. Jesus came and did what was talked about of him in the OT, got it. Now, that's the only thing you've quoted. My issue was that Jesus taught his followers to follow the law of Moses, whereas Paul said not to. So, what does the verses you quoted have to do with that? Nothing that I can tell; all they say is that Jesus came and fulfilled OT prophecy concerning the Messiah, nothing more.

So, if you want to explain how these verses apply to my concern, then go ahead and explain. If not, then please answer my question.

 

[Ken Brown]

I've read Moses, I've read Jesus, and I've read Paul. I'm not sure what you're quoting has anything at all to do with my OP, but I'll take a stab at it.

Jesus was talked about in the OT, got it. Jesus came and did what was talked about of him in the OT, got it. Now, that's the only thing you've quoted. My issue was that Jesus taught his followers to follow the law of Moses, whereas Paul said not to. So, what does the verses you quoted have to do with that? Nothing that I can tell; all they say is that Jesus came and fulfilled OT prophecy concerning the Messiah, nothing more.

So, if you want to explain how these verses apply to my concern, then go ahead and explain. If not, then please answer my question.

Hi dyanaprajna2011, they apply much in every way. You see, Moses commanded that sinners were to sacrifice for their sin, and understanding how Yeshua fulfills the role of what we were to sacrifice, Paul's teachings comply with what Moses said we should do. See, the Jew (for the most part) in Paul's day could not "see" where Moses WROTE of Yeshua, and stumbled over the Rock of Offense. Paul's understanding and teaching about Yeshua is totally misunderstood by LAWLESS men who twist and distort him. Paul saw where Moses wrote that Eternal Life had to be added to Yeshua's dead body, on the third day, after all of us sinners caused Him to suffer, die and then be buried. Most do not "see" where Moses wrote this, and this is WHY Paul is so far ahead of those who claim he is a liar and deceiver. Do you follow this? KB

 

[Falvlun]

Falvlun, I actually agree with your sentiment. But what I'm addressing is those people who think that Paul was perfect in everything he wrote, and was divinely inspired and could not lie or deceive, and that what he wrote came from the mind of god. I do realize that he was just a person, imperfect, and prone to error in judgement, but there are those who don't think this is the case.

Hmm. Well, all Christians must acknowledge that Paul was imperfect, seeing as "all fall short of the glory of God" and no one was perfect except for Jesus.

Many do believe that his writings, that were included in the Bible, were perfect, infallible, words of God. But I don't think any of the examples you gave showed something that was necessarily wrong.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Hi dyanaprajna2011, they apply much in every way. You see, Moses commanded that sinners were to sacrifice for their sin, and understanding how Yeshua fulfills the role of what we were to sacrifice, Paul's teachings comply with what Moses said we should do. See, the Jew (for the most part) in Paul's day could not "see" where Moses WROTE of Yeshua, and stumbled over the Rock of Offense. Paul's understanding and teaching about Yeshua is totally misunderstood by LAWLESS men who twist and distort him. Paul saw where Moses wrote that Eternal Life had to be added to Yeshua's dead body, on the third day, after all of us sinners caused Him to suffer, die and then be buried. Most do not "see" where Moses wrote this, and this is WHY Paul is so far ahead of those who claim he is a liar and deceiver. Do you follow this? KB

Ok, let me try this again, and I'm going to try to speak as simple as possible. What does any of this have to do with the question of why Jesus taught us to follow the law, where as Paul said we didn't have to? Why did Jesus and Paul disagree about so much?

Now, if you're addressing my original OP, then this still has nothing to do with it. Paul admitted to deception to gain converts, and this isn't even getting into where he said how useless philosophy and science are, as well as how he was the one who added pagan concepts to Christianity. We can address those later.

 

[Ken Brown]

Ok, let me try this again, and I'm going to try to speak as simple as possible. What does any of this have to do with the question of why Jesus taught us to follow the law, where as Paul said we didn't have to? Why did Jesus and Paul disagree about so much?

Now, if you're addressing my original OP, then this still has nothing to do with it. Paul admitted to deception to gain converts, and this isn't even getting into where he said how useless philosophy and science are, as well as how he was the one who added pagan concepts to Christianity. We can address those later.

Hi dyanaprajna2011, Yeshua and Paul did NOT disagree. Paul said "we establish the Law," and "but the doers of the Law are righteous." Where you get into trouble is you are like all the other traditional christians who think just because Paul claimed that the Law is Spiritual and there is a Spiritual WAY of doing the Law (that's by faith and not works), that Paul is bashing the Law. He is not, he is just letting you know that there is a sure way in which you can KEEP the Law, that most know little or nothing about.

You see, the Law said that for you to be separated from your sin, and be cleansed from the defilement of death, that you had to have the Ashes of the Red Heifer sprinkled upon you the third and seventh days. Then you had to be washed, and then you were clean. Paul saw how Yeshua was the Spiritual Red Heifer, and how He was taken outside the camp, and killed. And in this process, a burning of the Red Heifer had to take place. This burning was Yeshua's suffering. And cast into the midst of that suffering was cedar wood, hyssop, and scarlet. All three of those ingredients were present at the suffering of Yeshua. Then a clean man had to gather up the Ashes of the Red Heifer (Joseph of Arimathea) and place them in a clean place outside the camp (Joseph's tomb that was hewn out of solid rock nearby where He suffered). Then also Moses said that any "open" vessel would be unclean. So a stone was rolled over the entrance to the vessel of the Tomb. Then, for the UNCLEAN, LIVING WATER is to be ADDED to the Ashes in the Vessel. Do you see that dyanaprajna2011? In all your 30 years of studying and reading commentaries, not one time did you ever "see" that Numbers 19:17 is THE Scripture that DEMANDS that Eternal Life be ADDED to the dead body of Yeshua, did you? You have no idea what you are up against. Stop spreading lies and trying to deceive people about Paul. KB

 

[Rise]

Can you show me the exact scriptures where you think Jesus and Paul disagree?

Paul did not admit to any deception for anything. I already showed you why that was false earlier in the thread.

 

[DanielR]

Can I ask a probably really stupid question, but would Paul have died in martyrdom if he was a deceiver?? I'm serious with this lol ^^

 

[Shibolet]

Can you show me the exact scriptures where you think Jesus and Paul disagree?

Paul did not admit to any deception for anything. I already showed you why that was false earlier in the thread.

First, compare Mat. 5:17-19 with Ephe. 2:15. While Jesus said that he had not come to abolish the Law, Paul said that the Law was abolished on the cross. Paul gives us the impression that Jesus did not know what he was talking about.

Second, if you read Luke 16:13, Jesus said that no one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other or be attentive to one and despise the other. Now, if you read Romans 7:25, Paul said that with his mind, he would serve the Law of God and with his flesh, the law of sin. As you see, Paul proved to be the exception to the rule claimed by Jesus.

Third, if you read Luke 16:29,31, to escape hell, one must listen to Moses. Then, if you read Acts 21:18,21, when Paul paid a visit to James, this reported to him that he had been informed that Paul was teaching the Jews in the Diaspora to abandon Moses, to stop circumcising their children and to quit with the Jewish customs.

There are many more. But for the time being, you have three to prepare a refutation if you can.

 

[Falvlun]

Can I ask a probably really stupid question, but would Paul have died in martyrdom if he was a deceiver?? I'm serious with this lol ^^

What do you mean?

Do you mean "Why would people consider Paul a martyr if he deceived people"?
If so, well, people don't know everything so perhaps they were wrong in calling him a martyr, or maybe they decided that everything else he did canceled out some less great parts about his personality.

or, Do you mean "Why would Paul allow himself to be a martyr for a deception?"
And the answer to that, is, Paul probably believed all of this stuff. We don't know what the deception in that verse refers to, but it sounds like it was just something to get more people to believe. He wanted people to believe the central message, and that's what he would have died for.

 

[Pegg]

Ok, let me try this again, and I'm going to try to speak as simple as possible. What does any of this have to do with the question of why Jesus taught us to follow the law, where as Paul said we didn't have to? Why did Jesus and Paul disagree about so much?

Paul promoted the righteous standards of the mosiac law...he was very clear that anyone who did not live by the moral standards of God (as expressed in the law) would not inherit Gods kingdom. So he certainly wasnt promoting the end of the laws of God.

But what he was absolving christians from was the covenant between God and Isreal. That covenant is the 'whole' of the Mosaic law. It included obedience to the priesthood, sacrificing of animals for forgiveness of sins, observance of jewish festivals ....these are the things that Paul said chrisitans didnt have to follow.

Now, if you're addressing my original OP, then this still has nothing to do with it. Paul admitted to deception to gain converts,

not all english translations are the same.... if you compare them, you'll see that not all translators believe that the verse in question means Paul is admitting that he was being deceptive... the context of the verse doesnt even fit with that.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Hi dyanaprajna2011, Yeshua and Paul did NOT disagree. Paul said "we establish the Law," and "but the doers of the Law are righteous." Where you get into trouble is you are like all the other traditional christians who think just because Paul claimed that the Law is Spiritual and there is a Spiritual WAY of doing the Law (that's by faith and not works), that Paul is bashing the Law. He is not, he is just letting you know that there is a sure way in which you can KEEP the Law, that most know little or nothing about.

You see, the Law said that for you to be separated from your sin, and be cleansed from the defilement of death, that you had to have the Ashes of the Red Heifer sprinkled upon you the third and seventh days. Then you had to be washed, and then you were clean. Paul saw how Yeshua was the Spiritual Red Heifer, and how He was taken outside the camp, and killed. And in this process, a burning of the Red Heifer had to take place. This burning was Yeshua's suffering. And cast into the midst of that suffering was cedar wood, hyssop, and scarlet. All three of those ingredients were present at the suffering of Yeshua. Then a clean man had to gather up the Ashes of the Red Heifer (Joseph of Arimathea) and place them in a clean place outside the camp (Joseph's tomb that was hewn out of solid rock nearby where He suffered). Then also Moses said that any "open" vessel would be unclean. So a stone was rolled over the entrance to the vessel of the Tomb. Then, for the UNCLEAN, LIVING WATER is to be ADDED to the Ashes in the Vessel. Do you see that dyanaprajna2011? In all your 30 years of studying and reading commentaries, not one time did you ever "see" that Numbers 19:17 is THE Scripture that DEMANDS that Eternal Life be ADDED to the dead body of Yeshua, did you? You have no idea what you are up against. Stop spreading lies and trying to deceive people about Paul. KB

So, when Jesus taught people to follow the law, and Paul taught people that the law was no longer in effect, therefore, you no longer had to follow it, they were actually saying the same things?

For the record, I don't spread lies, I look at the text and teachings objectively, as I have nothing to lose or gain by it. If you can't handle the facts as they are, that's not my problem. I don't look at these things through the lens of faith, but of reason.

You have no idea what you are up against.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Can I ask a probably really stupid question, but would Paul have died in martyrdom if he was a deceiver?? I'm serious with this lol ^^

All we have are legends that Paul died a martyr. There's no real way to know for sure if it's true or not.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Paul promoted the righteous standards of the mosiac law...he was very clear that anyone who did not live by the moral standards of God (as expressed in the law) would not inherit Gods kingdom. So he certainly wasnt promoting the end of the laws of God.

But what he was absolving christians from was the covenant between God and Isreal. That covenant is the 'whole' of the Mosaic law. It included obedience to the priesthood, sacrificing of animals for forgiveness of sins, observance of jewish festivals ....these are the things that Paul said chrisitans didnt have to follow.

This is where the problem lies. Did Paul promote the moral teachings of the law? Probably; I don't really see much in his writings that would suggest otherwise. My problem is that, in dealing with the "whole Mosaic law", Paul denied such things as the priesthood, the dietary laws, the ceremonies, etc., while we see Jesus promoting such things. This is where the discretion comes in, and one that, as far as I can see, is not easily absolved.

not all english translations are the same.... if you compare them, you'll see that not all translators believe that the verse in question means Paul is admitting that he was being deceptive... the context of the verse doesnt even fit with that.

Yes, I read all the different versions you posted, and, in the English, one can certainly make that claim. The problem is, the Greek does not suggest this to be the case, and follows with the KJV rendering of the verse.

 

[Desert Snake]

This is where the problem lies. Did Paul promote the moral teachings of the law? Probably; I don't really see much in his writings that would suggest otherwise. My problem is that, in dealing with the "whole Mosaic law", Paul denied such things as the priesthood, the dietary laws, the ceremonies, etc., while we see Jesus promoting such things. This is where the discretion comes in, and one that, as far as I can see, is not easily absolved.



Yes, I read all the different versions you posted, and, in the English, one can certainly make that claim. The problem is, the Greek does not suggest this to be the case, and follows with the KJV rendering of the verse.

O.k., great, so is it your opinion that all real Christians should be completely Torah True?

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

O.k., great, so is it your opinion that all real Christians should be completely Torah True?

I can't say that for sure, and it really doesn't affect me either way. I was simply arguing the point that Paul and Jesus taught different things that were sometimes contrary and contradictory to each other.

 

[Ken Brown]

So, when Jesus taught people to follow the law, and Paul taught people that the law was no longer in effect, therefore, you no longer had to follow it, they were actually saying the same things?

For the record, I don't spread lies, I look at the text and teachings objectively, as I have nothing to lose or gain by it. If you can't handle the facts as they are, that's not my problem. I don't look at these things through the lens of faith, but of reason.

Hi dyanaprajna2011, Yeshua told His Body that they could remit or retain sin, and they could bind or loose. The Body of Messiah did loose the doing of the Law upon the Gentiles, but did bind it upon Jewish Believers, and the Apostle Paul did conform to that binding on Jewish Believers by paying for the expenses of 4 others and entering into a sacrificial ritual. KB

 

[Shermana]

No one's arguing that Paul didn't uphold the Law, we're arguing about whether it was right for him to preach to gentiles that they didn't have to obey the Law while claiming to be grafts to the Tree of Israel.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

Hi dyanaprajna2011, Yeshua told His Body that they could remit or retain sin, and they could bind or loose. The Body of Messiah did loose the doing of the Law upon the Gentiles, but did bind it upon Jewish Believers, and the Apostle Paul did conform to that binding on Jewish Believers by paying for the expenses of 4 others and entering into a sacrificial ritual. KB

Jesus said anyone who teaches one to not follow the law is cursed. This applies to both Jewish and gentile believers. Paul said the law was just a shadow of things to come, and that there is no difference between Jew and gentile. So, what's good for one, should be just as good for the other. According to your Bible, god does not change, so why did Paul do otherwise? If the law was just a shadow, why do the Jewish believers need to keep following it? If the law is good, as Paul says, then why say gentile believers were no longer under it? Jesus taught salvation by faith and works, Paul by faith alone. Why is one good for one, but not the other? Why all the discretion and disorder? Does the Bible not say god is not a god of disorder, but of peace?

I'm not bearing false witness; your best bet is to stop with the name calling, it does no one any good, and I have not done the same to you. I'm simply giving what's there, and asking the questions believers refuse to, as it may be detrimental to their faith, or worse, show that their faith is based on something less than a solid foundation, to use biblical language. Is the name calling because you're afraid I'm right? Like I said, I have nothing to lose or gain either way. I've done the homework, I've done the research, I've had no spiritual experience after 30 years as a Christian; I have no desire to go back, nor to take away the faith of Christians. All I'm doing is to get Christians to think about what they believe and why, instead of blindly following what they're told to believe, without even the least thought as to why. If you can't handle me questioning, then maybe you should not answer my posts.

 

[Desert Snake]

Jesus said anyone who teaches one to not follow the law is cursed. This applies to both Jewish and gentile believers.

I'm not bearing false witness; your best bet is to stop with the name calling, it does no one any good, and I have not done the same to you. I'm simply giving what's there, and asking the questions believers refuse to, as it may be detrimental to their faith, or worse, show that their faith is based on something less than a solid foundation, to use biblical language. Is the name calling because you're afraid I'm right? Like I said, I have nothing to lose or gain either way. I've done the homework, I've done the research, I've had no spiritual experience after 30 years as a Christian;

I'm not going to follow the entire OT law. Where does that leave me?

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

I'm not going to follow the entire OT law. Where does that leave me?

Following your own conscious.