HIZIKYAH'S TOPIC: DID PAUL SIN [DESPITE BEING T DESIGNATED HUMAN EXAMPLE IN THE NT]?

[Hizikyah]

My response:

Paul is one of many "examples"..but there is only 1 who we must obey!

People quote Paul so often, because he is the most understood and can easily be made to say whatever suits one's fancy. The words of Messiah...take My yoke upon you and learn of Me...is laid by the wayside too often, for idolizing Paul.

2 Thessalonians 2:7, "For the mystery of iniquity is already working, but the One restraining him will continue to restrain him, until he is made to appear in the midst. And then that lawless one will be revealed, whom Yahshua will remove with the breath of His mouth, and make powerless with the appearance of His coming-- Whose coming is according to the energy of Satan..."

 

[gb9]

Re: HIZIKYAH'S TOPIC: DID PAUL SIN [DESPITE BEING T DESIGNATED HUMAN EXAMPLE IN THE

I just remembered this today: I few years ago a enjoyed listening to a pastor out of Atlanta ga. ( u.s.) all of sudden he started talking about how we needed to discern what Christ told Paul to say and what Paul said out of his own heart and mind, to pick up Christ fact's and Paul's opinions. then the pastor announced he was gay. so BEWARE boys: this door of pick and choose swings both ways.

 

[Hizikyah]

I just remembered this today: I few years ago a enjoyed listening to a pastor out of Atlanta ga. ( u.s.) all of sudden he started talking about how we needed to discern what Christ told Paul to say and what Paul said out of his own heart and mind, to pick up Christ fact's and Paul's opinions. then the pastor announced he was gay. so BEWARE boys: this door of pick and choose swings both ways.

So your pretty desperate huh?

lol so anyone who says Scripture must be diligently confirmed is gay? So were the bereans gay?

Hindu's says there is a "god" and a "trinity" doesn't either make it true or false....

lol

Nothing like false witness through Pavlovian training by way of false negative correlation....

 

[Karraster]

The topic of Jesus vs Paul is to me a nauseating topic when some obtuse soul tries to make Paul the bogey man, and not exactly what this thread is about. For we know that Paul sinned, which fact has nothing to do with the prophetic nature of his epistles or oral prophesies. But as a matter of fact, the general canard seems to be that some consider statements put on the lips of the earthly Jesus in the gospels to be superior to the prophesies of Paul. But we don't have the exact words of Christ in the gospels -- what is in Revelation may be. But it appears that the gospels give the gist in Greek of what Christ spoke in Aramaic, only in rare cases an exact quotation.

But all of this is irrelevant to the use of scripture. What we have is God's Word in Hebrew, OT Aramaic, & Greek. The Lord gives us the gist of Christ's words. The gospels are humanly written not by Christ, just as Paul's epistles are not humanly written by Christ either. What the prophets Matthew, Mark, Luke, & John produced was God's word, no more & no less that what prophet Paul produced.

The sayings of the earthly Jesus in the gospels, moreover, are mostly under the Law of Moses -- that is to say, the Law was still in effect, but also the context of those sayings is the Kingdom proclamation: Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand. The law is no longer in effect, neither is the Davidic Kingdom at hand. Christ gave specific rules for the Kingdom announcement: missionaries were restricted in what baggage they could carry. Matthew 10 gives rules that I doubt any missionary today would follow. Also Christ Himself made a change in His dispensational teaching when He commanded to buy a sword later.

Thus I put it to you that the scripture of primary importance to the Church starts at Acts 2 with the new dispensation of the Church. The epistles of the NT are scripture of primary importance to the Church in the Church age, more so that the Law of Moses or the teachings of Jesus on earth. Paul's writings are the teachings of the risen Lord Jesus to the Church.

This has nothing to do with the question of Paul's sinning. I find very little actual sin recorded as done by Paul. And it is notable that Paul is the only person (aside from Christ) who is said to be an example for us to copy. Paul was the recipient of incredible grace from God. Evidently Paul was even taken to Heaven and shown things he was forbidden to reveal to us (possibly in vision). When I read the dedication of Paul & the incredible sufferings he went through to bring us the gospel, I realize I am unworthy to tie the shoe laces of such a great man of God. And Paul was a handicapped man who had suffering from a thorn in the flesh.

Paul I know, and Jesus I know, but who are you?

Well Mr Atwood, so nice of you to grace us with your presence. I started to make a thread from one of your many posts on cc, but couldn't decide which one would be the most controversial. From your example I see I do not need your opinion on this matter.

Yes, I quite agree it is a nauseating topic. Excruciating came to mind, but nauseating will suffice. Maybe we could compromise and say "painful". However I cannot agree that the point is making Paul the "boogie man", rather it is an examination of one's own heart. What is really the question here since "liberty" is often mentioned, may I address that briefly? Liberty simply means we are free to choose. The choice is good or evil.

Or maybe "what is the most minimal level of obedience must I maintain to be saved?" Isn't that really what the issue is?

As to the general canard as you say, "that some consider statements put on the lips of the earthly Jesus in the gospels to be superior to the prophesies of Paul. But we don't have the exact words of Christ in the gospels -- what is in Revelation may be. But it appears that the gospels give the gist in Greek of what Christ spoke in Aramaic, only in rare cases an exact quotation."

..yes I would hope that is the general consensus that the Words of Messiah are above all! I fail to see the logic in thinking Messiah's Words are not recorded exactly and Paul's words are, but then we do have liberty, do we not?

This has me puzzled though and I quote you:
" When I read the dedication of Paul & the incredible sufferings he went through to bring us the gospel, I realize I am unworthy to tie the shoe laces of such a great man of God. And Paul was a handicapped man who had suffering from a thorn in the flesh.

...??That reminds me of what John said of Messiah, what any who worships Him should think, and John was beheaded as well as Paul, all of the prophets killed in a grisly manner, yet we have 1 Messiah and He is the only One we must hear and obey. He is the One who will judge all.

 

[thecreationtutor]

Re: HIZIKYAH'S TOPIC: DID PAUL SIN [DESPITE BEING T DESIGNATED HUMAN EXAMPLE IN THE

someone should read the book of Hebrews

 

[Karraster]

Re: HIZIKYAH'S TOPIC: DID PAUL SIN [DESPITE BEING T DESIGNATED HUMAN EXAMPLE IN THE

Paul worship anyone?

 

[Hizikyah]

someone should read the book of Hebrews

I agree.

Hebrews 7:11-12, "Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law."

3331. metathesisStrong's Concordance

metathesis: a change, removal​

Original Word: μετάθεσις, εως, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: metathesis
Phonetic Spelling: (met-ath'-es-is)
Short Definition:change, transformation, removal
Definition: (a) change, transformation, (b) removal.

Greek Word Study (Transliteration-Pronunciation Etymology & Grammar)


1) transfer: from one place to another 2) to change 2a) of things instituted or established
—Thayer's (New Testament Greek-English Lexicon)

From G3346; transposition, that is, transferral (to heaven), disestablishment (of a law):—change, removing, translation.

Psalm 89:26-37, "He will call out to Me; You are my Father, O Yahweh! You are the Rock of my salvation! And I will make Him My firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth. My mercy I will keep for Him forever and My covenant will stand fast with Him. And I will establish his Seed forever, and his throne will be as the days of heaven. Should his children forsake My Law, and refuse to walk in My judgments; Should they profane My statutes, and fail to keep My commandments; Then I will punish their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with lashes from the whip. Nevertheless, My lovingkindness I will not utterly withdraw from him, nor will I ever betray My faithfulness. My covenant I will not break, nor will I change what that has gone out of My lips. Once for all, I have vowed by My holiness--I cannot lie, and I say to David: His Seed will endure forever, and his throne will endure before Me like the sun. His throne will be established forever like the moon: the faithful witness in the sky."

 

[Hizikyah]

Context is key.

I agree.

Hebrews 7:11-12, "Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law."

3331. metathesisStrong's Concordance

metathesis: a change, removal​

Original Word: μετάθεσις, εως, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: metathesis
Phonetic Spelling: (met-ath'-es-is)
Short Definition:change, transformation, removal
Definition: (a) change, transformation, (b) removal.

Greek Word Study (Transliteration-Pronunciation Etymology & Grammar)


1) transfer: from one place to another 2) to change 2a) of things instituted or established
—Thayer's (New Testament Greek-English Lexicon)

From G3346; transposition, that is, transferral (to heaven), disestablishment (of a law):—change, removing, translation.

Psalm 89:26-37, "He will call out to Me; You are my Father, O Yahweh! You are the Rock of my salvation! And I will make Him My firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth. My mercy I will keep for Him forever and My covenant will stand fast with Him. And I will establish his Seed forever, and his throne will be as the days of heaven. Should his children forsake My Law, and refuse to walk in My judgments; Should they profane My statutes, and fail to keep My commandments; Then I will punish their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with lashes from the whip. Nevertheless, My lovingkindness I will not utterly withdraw from him, nor will I ever betray My faithfulness. My covenant I will not break, nor will I change what that has gone out of My lips. Once for all, I have vowed by My holiness--I cannot lie, and I say to David: His Seed will endure forever, and his throne will endure before Me like the sun. His throne will be established forever like the moon: the faithful witness in the sky."

 

[gb9]

Re: HIZIKYAH'S TOPIC: DID PAUL SIN [DESPITE BEING T DESIGNATED HUMAN EXAMPLE IN THE

hey hizikyah why don't you simplify this, come on here once a day, post you are 100% right, all who do agree are wrong, then log off til tomorrow. because that is what you do. you get verses, actually personal stories, like the one I gave you, which I heard with my own ears, nothing. you are so set that you are right that it would take the Lord himself to change your mind.

 

[Karraster]

Re: HIZIKYAH'S TOPIC: DID PAUL SIN [DESPITE BEING T DESIGNATED HUMAN EXAMPLE IN THE

...so Messiah magnified the Father. Does anyone doubt?

Who do we say Paul magnifies? Is it not the Christ? Messiah YaHshua?

So were is the error in magnifying Paul? hmm...let me count the ways...

 

[john832]

The sayings of the earthly Jesus in the gospels, moreover, are mostly under the Law of Moses -- that is to say, the Law was still in effect, but also the context of those sayings is the Kingdom proclamation: Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand. The law is no longer in effect, neither is the Davidic Kingdom at hand. Christ gave specific rules for the Kingdom announcement: missionaries were restricted in what baggage they could carry. Matthew 10 gives rules that I doubt any missionary today would follow. Also Christ Himself made a change in His dispensational teaching when He commanded to buy a sword later.

This ought to be the first tip off. He plainly ignores this...

Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

And obviously doesn't believe this...

Joh 18:6 As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground.

Note: he is in italics, means it was not in the original. What this verse says is this...

Joh 18:6 As soon then as he had said unto them, I am, they went backward, and fell to the ground.

Precisely why they went backward and fell to the ground. The KNEW who I AM was.

But just in case that wasn't clear, try this...

Joh 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

He is the One who spoke the Law to Moses. The I AM.

Thus I put it to you that the scripture of primary importance to the Church starts at Acts 2 with the new dispensation of the Church. The epistles of the NT are scripture of primary importance to the Church in the Church age, more so that the Law of Moses or the teachings of Jesus on earth. Paul's writings are the teachings of the risen Lord Jesus to the Church.

Very interesting but Paul said this...

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Seems to me that if you thought that someone was the Leader of a church and that you wanted to follow Him, you would read what He said and did in His lifetime, but Atwood assures us the gospels are not for us.

You have got to be kidding me.

This has nothing to do with the question of Paul's sinning. I find very little actual sin recorded as done by Paul. And it is notable that Paul is the only person (aside from Christ) who is said to be an example for us to copy.

Really? Paul said this...

1Co 11:1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

Yes, follow Paul AS HE FOLLOWS CHRIST.

Oh by the way, Paul said to look to Israel of the past...

1Co 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Paul was the recipient of incredible grace from God. Evidently Paul was even taken to Heaven and shown things he was forbidden to reveal to us (possibly in vision). When I read the dedication of Paul & the incredible sufferings he went through to bring us the gospel, I realize I am unworthy to tie the shoe laces of such a great man of God.

I save that kind of admiration and worship for someone else...

Joh 1:27 He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose.

And Paul was a handicapped man who had suffering from a thorn in the flesh.

Paul I know, and Jesus I know, but who are you?

Seems you don't really know Paul and you tell us not to worry about the life and times of Jesus Christ for they are irrelevant. I think I'll continue to follow Paul AS HE FOLLOWED CHRIST.

 

[Karraster]

Yep, I'm learning a lot today..

Ya, know, the Word has many lessons and examples, some are good and say be like this, whereas some are bad and we don't want to be like that..it had a bad result.

There are so many "sects" within "Christianity" it boggles the mind!! Some worship Mary, and now I see some worship Paul. What else is out there I don't want to know.

 

[Hizikyah]

hey hizikyah why don't you simplify this, come on here once a day, post you are 100% right, all who do agree are wrong, then log off til tomorrow. because that is what you do. you get verses, actually personal stories, like the one I gave you, which I heard with my own ears, nothing. you are so set that you are right that it would take the Lord himself to change your mind.

Now Im going to level with you here, know my tone is even yet I speak openly.

You have a view of me that I have no control over, you say things that you can not possibly know. For if you knew what I say here as well as you project, you would actually know that I have learned 2 things in the past 2 days, and given credit to supremely Yah, but also to the human who was the vessel, and I did not hide it, I spoke it on the boards, for I thank the man that can show me a truth of Yah... He provided Scriptural truth,and I said yes that is the way. Isolating Scripture to error is not the way.

One issue I have is most people who disagree with me will not touch what Messiah says in the "gospels or in Revelation" how can I take that one as seriously seeking truth? Now and I don't mean to speak down on any, his intent was well, as we talked in a PM, and he showed me He is sincere, but a brother here said I am wrong about 2 Peter concerning Paul, however Paul is the only one named and is the main one being talked about in that passage, yet I am considered "wrong" because I wont say "no Paul is not the topic of:"

2 peter 3:15-17, "And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability."

actually personal stories, like the one I gave you, which I heard with my own ears, nothing. you are so set that you are right that it would take the Lord himself to change your mind.

Also, how is a "personal story" going to trump Scripture?

The catholic church has lots of personal stories, I will be partake of none of them....

I can got to any human on earth and get a personal story, so I trash the word of Yah?

Unless Im misunderstanding your point, I think you need to rethink that stance of personal stories...

 

[ChristIsGod]

Re: Say what???

Unless I have said I was mistaken, I stand by what I say.

Was Paul in error when he:

From page 1:

“Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him.” (Acts16:3)

"Christ will be of no advantage to you. I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole Law” (Gal5:2).

And if you say he did it to please the Jews... YOU ARE ILLUSTRATING HIS ERROR...

How can we have it both ways?

Either circumcision was right or wrong.

Its not it wrong unless were doin it to please some men....

But Im evil for asking this question.

There is only One who never errored.

and this :

1 Corinthians 4:15-16, "For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father (3962. patér) in Christ Jesus through the gospel. I urge you, then, be imitators of me."

Matthew 23:9, "And call no man your father (3962. patér) on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven."

How is this explained away....

Feel free to not answer those questions and pile on...

I dont get it, Yahweh says, for He will send One Hiim you must obey.... I say hey lets listen to the perfect teachings of the One sent, everyone freaks out and says you must ignore everything He spoke and only what He said through Paul is valid.... when Paul was a man that made mistakes, does have some amazing amazing truth is his writings but he is not the Messiah, there is only one Messiah.

When I stand before Yah... nvm...

Emphasis in quote, mine --- Paul's "error" was that he lived by what he wrote.... "he became all things to all men - that he could save some". Timothy's mother was a Jewess but his father was a Greek. Timothy was left to tend to the church at Ephesus. Paul did get Timothy circumcised for the very reason that you deny. Paul knew what he was doing and why. He knew what Timothy's ministry would be. He knew in order to "REACH" the Jews or the Judaisers, that Timothy would need to not have that man made stumbling block for those type to Turn off their ears to him, as he hung out with Paul who was definitely a Jew of all Jews.
Paul said that circumcision was fine for the Jews [or whomever] as long as their hearts were circumcised as well. Paul was saying that circumcision alone in order to be justified by God was not in the New Covenant to the Gentiles and that if they trusted in circumcision that they'd have to also trust is the whole of the Law of Moses and no longer be the Gentile Believers whom he was an Apostle to. Doh! I get sarcastic so that maybe you'll listen for a change.


Now - YOU Said ---- "listen to the perfect teachings of the One sent" and I have to laugh at this because according to your beliefs - if we don't use the Hebrew Names for Theos or for The Christ, than we're off as well.

WHY then to do you bank your life on Apostles that wrote ONLY IN GREEK?

WHY did Theos time the coming of the Son of man to be WHEN the GREEK was the International language??????

The Reason Is - in case you don't know is - because it was the most EXACT languages in history as far as their Grammar, etc..

NOW - IF you "listen to the perfect teaching of the One sent" .... by whom do you get these teachings?????

You are getting those which you deem as perfect from those that wrote His Words in GREEK.

The whole N.T. is in GREEK .... yet you say that we have to go back to using the Hebrew Names, etc only.

So if that's True .... WHY ON EARTH DID JOHN AND WHOMEVER ELSE YOU TRUST NOT USE HEBREW NAMES FOR GOD AND CHRIST INSTEAD OF GREEK?????

Also - I did not call you evil for questioning JUST why Paul had Timothy circumcised but for your over-all bashing of the Apostle to the Gentiles who TWICE went to the Jerusalem Council -- James, Peter and Co to get what they felt that should be mandatory for the Gentiles that Paul was 'called to' bring the Gospel to - besides being called to ROME to preach before kings - and why would JESUS send an X-Pharisee to the GENTILES ... because he was the best of the best to explain the NEW covenant compared to the OLD covenant to ALL - both Jew and Gentile because HE [GOD] new that they'd be harrassed by the Judaisers and only PAUL could do that sort of APOLOGETICS

Quote you: "when Paul was a man that made mistakes, does have some amazing amazing truth is his writings but he is not the Messiah, there is only one Messiah."

According to you and those like you ONLY. Paul made NO MISTAKES in his writings of SCRIPTURE but yet you trust others that wrote in GREEK.

Poppy-cosh ---- You gave a ton of reasons why you don't like Paul and I knew those reasons since I've been on the internet in 2002 and dealt with others that suddenly became JEWISH or HEBREW speaking and you have the SAME reasons as they did/do for throwing out Paul.

I do not go along with OSAS and gave my reasons why along with you - side-by-side - and with the others in that debate .... but to throw out Paul and say that MANY of his Letters were disposable borders on or many be blasphemy.

ALL WRITERS OF THE NEW COVENANT WROTE IN GREEK --- MOST OF THEM JEWS, YET DIDN'T WRITE IN HEBREW - with only maybe one exception -- some think that Matthew wrote in Hebrew and had it re-written into the GREEK that THEOS/GOD wanted HIS BOOK written in.

It's GOD'S fault that we don't speak HEBREW Names and such - and not Paul's etc. and many have left the N.T. COMPLETELY AND BECAME JUST JEWS BECAUSE OF THIS and I fear for you that you will also as well as anyone else on this site that are mixing the two Covenants together ... though I believe with all of my heart that our Bible, as we call it, is ONE BOOK and not TWO.

It's you that fits into Peter's statement about Paul's teachings - as he wrote that in GREEK. GOD planned before the foundation of the world to be a "Greek-Freak" so - so are we. "In the fulness of times ....." HE factored into that time of when He'd send the Son ALSO when the Greek was the International language and most exact language --- so go ahead with reverting the whole of the N.T. to the language that GOD didn't choose for His Son first Coming and lift yourself above ALL of the Apostles and other writers of GOD'S WORD just so you can be a tad higher than the rest of us poor slobs that don't have YOUR supreme revelation about how GOD SHOULD HAVE HAD IT WRITTEN ... in Hebrew and without PAUL.

That's why this borders on blasphemy against The Word of GOD made flesh Who IS GOD and by Who's Spirit the O.T. Prophets wrote about His Own Coming and what He would do while in the flesh and after ... and wrote it in GREEK after He Came and then Ascended.

Silly self-contradictory reply you gave me - in Every way!

 

[Karraster]

I just remembered this today: I few years ago a enjoyed listening to a pastor out of Atlanta ga. ( u.s.) all of sudden he started talking about how we needed to discern what Christ told Paul to say and what Paul said out of his own heart and mind, to pick up Christ fact's and Paul's opinions. then the pastor announced he was gay. so BEWARE boys: this door of pick and choose swings both ways.

hey hizikyah why don't you simplify this, come on here once a day, post you are 100% right, all who do agree are wrong, then log off til tomorrow. because that is what you do. you get verses, actually personal stories, like the one I gave you, which I heard with my own ears, nothing. you are so set that you are right that it would take the Lord himself to change your mind.

You want a story about gays? How 'bout racism? Aren't those the 2 most chosen topics to sabotage any message you do not agree with? Disappointed here, I really wish you guys would get some new material.

 

[ChristIsGod]

Yep, I'm learning a lot today..

Ya, know, the Word has many lessons and examples, some are good and say be like this, whereas some are bad and we don't want to be like that..it had a bad result.

There are so many "sects" within "Christianity" it boggles the mind!! Some worship Mary, and now I see some worship Paul. What else is out there I don't want to know.

WE DON'T WORSHIP PAUL - HE IS JUST ONE OF THE WRITERS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT THAT ARE EQUAL TO THE OTHERS FOR AUTHORITATIVELY WRITING THE WORD OF GOD THAT WE CALL THE NEW COVENANT.


Paul only differed in that he was especially elected by Messiah-Himself-Personally, to be a witness to the Gentiles and kings, etc..

If we ignore what Messiah Himself Personally said about Paul - we've missed HIS WORDS.


[Not yelling at you - just can't go into colors and other forms of Emphasis today and sometimes caps save time - which I have little of today.]

 

[Karraster]

Oh wait...just now see a sister uses "language" and Names as well to side-track the issue. The truth should change a person. Let there be crying and whaling, denial and anger..but then let the truth change you. We are to conform to the Son of Almighty. Paul is one of many writers used by which we are supposed to find Him.

 

[Hizikyah]

Re: Say what???

Emphasis in quote, mine --- Paul's "error" was that he lived by what he wrote.... "he became all things to all men - that he could save some". Timothy's mother was a Jewess but his father was a Greek. Timothy was left to tend to the church at Ephesus. Paul did get Timothy circumcised for the very reason that you deny. Paul knew what he was doing and why. He knew what Timothy's ministry would be. He knew in order to "REACH" the Jews or the Judaisers, that Timothy would need to not have that man made stumbling block for those type to Turn off their ears to him, as he hung out with Paul who was definitely a Jew of all Jews.
Paul said that circumcision was fine for the Jews [or whomever] as long as their hearts were circumcised as well. Paul was saying that circumcision alone in order to be justified by God was not in the New Covenant to the Gentiles and that if they trusted in circumcision that they'd have to also trust is the whole of the Law of Moses and no longer be the Gentile Believers whom he was an Apostle to. Doh! I get sarcastic so that maybe you'll listen for a change.

No this is the fist time on this thread that I have seen that anyone addressed the circumcision issue.

SO I can;t say I know what Paul was thinking besides what is written, and it says:

Acts 16 - "Paul came also to Derbe and to Lystra. A disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek. He was well spoken of by the brothers at Lystra and Iconium. Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. "

One are we not supposed to please the Most High rather then men? What I mean by this is the path NEVER changes based on who it is being presented to, for there is only one path.

And since we know Paul got him circumcised because: "for they all knew that his father was a Greek" Is this not a uneven measure? Would he had got Timothy circumcised if they were preaching in a greek village? So why a different path for different people. (Scripture is clear there is only one way)

If Paul was going to preach to pharisees would it be right or a sin to obey pharisees law as to not upset them?

What example did Messiah leave concerning this issue?

Mark 7:5-9, "Then the Pharisees and scribes asked Him; Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashed hands? He answered, and said to them: Well has Isayah prophesied of you hypocrites--as it is written: This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. But in vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrine the commandments of men. For laying aside the Law of Yahweh, you hold the tradition of men! Then He said to them: How well you reject the Law of Yahweh, so that you may keep your own tradition!"

New International Version Mt 23:2-3
"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach."

King James Bible Mt 23:2-3
"Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not."

Shem Tob's Hebrew Mattithyah
Mattithyah 23:2-3, "The Pharisees and Sages sit upon the seat of Mosheh. Therefore, all that he (Mosheh) says to you, diligently do, but according to thier takanot (reforms) and thier ma'asim (precedents) do not do, because they talk (Torah) but they do not do."

So according to the Messiah there is no excuse to do as they do.

So I do not see how I am wrong in questioning this, for the Messiah;s words are clear are they not?

Acts 5:29, "Then Kepha and the other apostles answered, and said; We must obey Yahweh rather than men."

 

[ChristIsGod]

I did not say Paul's words alone, I said:



As he is the only one mentioned by name, if you can quote where another Scripture writer;s name is mentioned I promise I will repent from that statement.

yes it says people twist all Scripture, however only one person is mentioned by name, and is the main focus of that passage... It is clearly written.

Paul was mentioned by PETER who PAUL had to STRAIGHTEN OUT over JUDAISISM and so PETER now calls him "our Beloved Brother" and says that Paul needing to bring in the NEW Covenant from the OLD is THE MOST MISUNDERSTOOD and Paul's words MOST TWISTED because of the two EXTREMES that we see in the NEW COVENANT BOOK about those who said, "Since grace abounds - we should be able to sin now and be OSAS" [paraphrase of Paul's words] and he had to constantly contend with those that wanted to bring them back under the 613 Laws.

THAT'S why Peter singles out Paul ...................................................

which has already been explained to you by a number of the members here but you and whomever else would rather say that we "worship Paul" and that Paul was full of errors in his commissioned writing of his letters which Peter calls "Scripture".

 

[Karraster]

I find it interesting that those who think the Law is done away have this canned response. It seems they believe that if they deny the Law, it does not apply to them.

to those who turn away their ears..it does make sense. (see strong delusion)