An examination of the Pauline Epistles. Are they Scripture? (By David)
To carry over the discussion on the thread, “What does the future hold…,” We were discussing the Pauline Epistles and in a lesser degree all of the Apostolic Writings. Are they Scripture? Are they the “Word of Eloheim” What weight should we assign them in our walk with Messiah? It is understood that this is very controversial and could get heated. Let’s not allow that to happen. To insure that it doesn’t, I, as the author of the thread reserve the right to delete all or part of any comment that is insulting to others in any way. If Scot does not agree with this “right” or practice, let him say so up front and I will allow him the right (which is his anyway) to govern the content himself.
02 February 2010
429 Comments
Leave a Reply
Latest Blog Comments
David,
There is nothing in the emails that “those...
By April
Thank you Sister Teresa,
It was silly. You didn't...
By David (Editor)- April, Lisa, scotty,
I believe the adversary is trying...
By David (Editor) - Lisa,
Post the words of the emails, you have...
By April 
I have never called anyone a liar or...
By scotty-taylor
Gman, that's wonderful that Abba was so faithful...
By Lisa (Editor)
Recently Active Sheeple
Comments
Haha… I just realized I wrote “historical writings of historians”! Thanks Captain Obvious! I’m a loser! Whatevs…
Harvest,
Thank you for your kindness to me.
Before I forget it, I did want to ask you about your knowledge of the Ebionites.
Are you aware that any history of the Ebionites that we have is because the Church Fathers gave it to us? Don’t you find that a little suspect?
Also, are you aware that that history says they denied the virgin birth? What little we have concerning them appears to be one group who were at odds with the Pauline Christians as they called them. The same group that we are at odds with today.
What research I have done into the Ebionites left me with the conclusion that we have no true record of what they believed. Much that is reported about them I agree and identify with. The negative points seem to be the same things that traditional Christianity labels us with today. How much can be believed? My conclusion is very little. I doubt they rejected Paul but would agree that they probably rejected the Paul of the Christian churches from Rome. What sources we have are biased and unreliable. But, if the sources are true, then I will still have to reject them as a source of truth concerning Paul because they also deny the miraculous birth of Messiah in favor of an adoptive Sonship.
I appreciate all that went into this discussion. I am grateful to Yah for the freedom to question anything and everything, and I am also grateful for someone to give the opposing views. I have never questioned Paul’s writings before and, although I’m not jumping ship from thinking he’s inspired by the Spirit, I have been challenged to look more closely at what he wrote. I am also being challenged to really look at the “red-letter” words of Yeshua to think about what He said before I look at anyone else in regards to how His words line up with Torah. Praise You, Father, for protecting us when we question and enter new territory.
Rodney,
Thanks for your interpretation of the exegesis, eisigesis and hermeneutics. It’s so good to have someone take the trouble to state what they are here.
Harvest,
I will address what I believe to be careless as such. This is more than careless. I am not questioning your intellect AT ALL. I am questioning the spirit behind it as others have also done. Most of your points have already been addressed either by myself on the phone or someone else in a previous post.
The book is rubbish and easy to refute. We have already been through this.
The reason why David & Rodney are more patient with you is because they have not already discussed it three times with you.
The points…#1 being dealt with firmly above.
2) There is no source other than Paul to confirm this distribution of duties among the apostles. We must assume that what Luke wrote, he received from Paul. There is no record of any confirmation by Peter or any of the Twelve.
ANSWER: You can’t nullify an argument out of a lack of affirmation or silence. There is no recipe for wine in the New Testament but that doesn’t mean they did not have wine.
3) Peter and the others of the Twelve did not confine their mission to the Jews (the circumcision).
ANSWER: Who said they did? Does turning your focus to the Gentiles mandate forsaking Jews, NO? Neither did Paul as is clear in his writings. Scot Dryer being called to go into the prisons to teach youthful offenders does no exclude going abroad or staying at home and teaching my family. See # 2…you did the same thing again.
4) The first opening of the gospel to the Gentiles was made, not through Paul, but by the Holy Spirit working through Peter, as even Luke recounts in Acts when relating the story of the conversion of the centurion, Cornelius. If the calling of the Twelve confined their ministry to the Jews, why was Peter chosen to call this first Gentile?
ANSWER: That is not correct either, the TaNakh is littered with “righteous Gentiles” who are grafted in by the drawing of the Holy Spirit…Ruth, Elijah….
5) According to Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus had already, long before Paul’s conversion, commissioned the twelve (eleven, after Judas’ betrayal and prior to the ascension of Matthias) to go to the Gentiles. He said to them, Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and Lo! I am with you always to the close of the age (Matthew 28:19,20).
->>>>>>>>>>>>Question: What is your point with #5?
6. It requires a great stretch of credulity for us, in the Twenty-first Century, to agree that the Prophet Isaiah in Chapter 49 was speaking beforehand of Paul of Tarsus. It does not require a stretch to suspect that the man from Tarsus could see himself prophesied, exalted and identified in the words of the great Prophet, if he was possessed of an highly inflated sense of his own significance. Furthermore, had Paul been the one indicated by the prophet, could we believe that Jesus would not have sought him out in order to confirm and strengthen his mission to the Gentiles, just as he confirmed the Twelve? Paul was only slightly younger than Jesus, and as he said in his defense before the council (Acts 22): I was brought up in this city (Jerusalem), so that Jesus need not have gone far afield to find him.
7) Perhaps Luke, in writing The Acts, had forgotten that in his Gospel he has Simeon applying the Isaiah 49:6 prophecy to Jesus. If it applies to Jesus, can it also apply to Paul?
#6 & #7 really could be combined to one question or supposed “ace in the hole” which is really just a hole…
ANSWER: Yes, IT CAN and as a matter of fact HAS TO apply to both Y’shua…Paul and us for that matter. Wheat produces wheat…Messiah, Messiah in Paul & Messiah in us…all similar callings that DO NOT conflict with one another.
Harvest,
I am FULLY persuaded that any argument you could put forward can be thouroughly answered it is not the questioning that I am having trouble with. It is why you are questioning. These responses are very brief and there was really no need for scripture to deal with them because most of them were drawn out of “something not being there.” If you would like we can go into any of them in detail but remember. Paul stating I am “called to the gentiles” does NOT exclude ministering to Jews or the other way around. Over the course of 2-3 decades I am sure his focus shifted notably over time and that is clearly reflected in his writings.
What was your contention regarding “fathers” and Paul? I can’t find it though I remember seeing it…
Scot’
It is in his 11:11 post above.
Hi David,
Thanks…tired…will not be on much tonight.
Sorry for the terrible punctuation in my long post above. Sleepy…
Harvest,
I have watched these posts for a while now and I really struggle with any spirit that could call into question the Word of God. I believe you have good intentions but I cannot fathom feeling comfortable calling into question the majority of the teaching in the New Testament. That takes some chuzpah!
No where near the chuzpah it takes to deny the very Word of Messiah and teach that Torah is done away with.
David,
Its a matter of persepctive David. I dont believe that Torah has been “done away with”. But by denying Paul’s epistles they would lose 100% of their value. I believe that Torah is scripture and am infact preaching from Exodus right now. So……thats actually a false dichotomy. Sure we disagree but thats not a fair representation.
Chris,
For us to be able to TRULY have an answer for the hope that is within us, we have to question everything and search the Scriptures as a Berean.
That means examining all the Scriptures and reconcile the NT with the OT. If our interpretation of a verse doesn’t line up with what other verses clearly says, then we have to question our interpretation – as well as the folks who teach us.
Scripture doesn’t contradict itself.
Mark,
I just dont believe that your interpretation lines up friend. Thats where we are at. We simply disagree.
Scot,
Thanks for the answers I really do appreciate them… I know we spoke about this but it was very brief and I was trying to remember all the arguments and put them into 3 or 4 sentences, you would really have to read the full chapter to fully get the “real” argument… I’m horrible at paraphrasing (completely obvious I know!
). All that to say that the spirit behind my questioning is really to see if Paul is lining up with Messiah, I have heard excellent cases on both sides and I will pray and continue to seek. Don’t take offense I respect your opinion and wisdom very much and it is helping me as I have not made a decision yet regarding his epistles.
I’ve talked to the guy who wrote the book, and his heart IS in the right place… he seeks to follow Yeshua above everyone else. His arguments are quite solid… please read just one chapter so we can discuss it in depth on the phone when you have some time.
Chris,
I thought you were watching! I was wondering where you were!
Glad to hear from you. I know it does take some nerve to challenge the (super apostle) of the Christian faith… I just want to make sure he lines up with YHWH and His Son. There are plenty of contradictions (or changes of heart) clearly seen in his writings over the years… so while I would agree that he may have been on the right track, I really wouldn’t call it inspired and/or infallible. Yeshua’s Words, teachings, and parables are infallible… Paul was just a man who did his best, in my humble opinion, and if he and Yeshua both say something different I’m siding with Yeshua on it. (eg: the importance of the Law and it’s spiritual, as well as physical implications)
Miryam,
Thanks for your kindness even in my questioning. I’m glad that this discussion has brought the “red letters” into the light more! Praise YHWH! That’s the main issue right there! As long as we focus on those we’ll be alright Paul or not!
To all,
I’m so grateful for you guys for not judging me for questioning these things, but for being patient and understanding! Praise God, for brothers and sisters like you.
Also what’s chuzpah? Sounds like some sort of gooey pastry… I’ll take some! Haha!
Harvest I looked up Chutzpah and heres some definitions
Audacity, extrordinary boldness, Gall or to be insolent.
Its a hebrew way to say, You got guts.
Thanks Ivan!
I’ll have another then!
Shalom Mark,
You wrote: “That means examining all the Scriptures and reconcile the NT with the OT. If our interpretation of a verse doesn’t line up with what other verses clearly says, then we have to question our interpretation – as well as the folks who teach us.”
That is precisely what Paul praised the Bereans for doing…searching the scriptures making sure that what Paul said lined up with them.
I agree…scripture does not contradict itself.
Harvest…
I’ve heard it said that if you don’t have questions, then you’re not studying. But, I do caution you to question those who wrote the book(s) you’re reading, too. Sometimes those authors sound as if they have it all figured out, but they are leading you with their ‘answers’. So, be careful.
And, when doctrine is clearly harmonious throughout torah there comes a time when we become accountable to act in faith(obedience) and not stumble with ” questionings ” , ” contentions ” ect. that are revealed in torah.
Yes…and faith is substance and evidence, not just ‘believing’. To believe means to act.
Harvest,
Did you see Rodney’s last post in the “Apologetic Defense for the Mosiac Law” thread?
Harvest,
The author of the book is NOT extracting from the word properly. If a cursory five minute glance at the seven points above is not enough to determine that, I don’t know what is. Are there any other issues or would you like to talk about any of the ones above in depth…is so, post it below. If possible, be a little more clear as to what the point of the question is if you can. The floor is open.
Oh, I forgot to say that the author seems to stare at the tree and in doing so he loses site of the forest. In many instances in your posts above the author or you try to make sweeping statements binding Paul to lifelong commitment. I see similar means of operation in the lunar sabbath folks. They will look at a verse that says”
“He appointed the moon for seasons(moed): the sun knoweth his going down.” – Psalms 104:19
The Lunar Sabbath keeper reads that and says:
“EVERY SEASON\SET TIME IS DETERMINED BY THE MOON. SINCE THE SABBATH IS THE FIRST OF THE SET TIMES…IT MUST BE SET BY THE MOON.”
If that is the case, then the verse before it must mean that because “the high hill is for the goat” EVERY HIGH HILL MUST HAVE A GOAT AS A RESULT.
Foolishness of course…
Harvest,
I sentence you to a week at Chris’ house. What specifically is your contention with Paul’s writings…lets look at ONE AT A TIME, please.
Harvest, you wrote, “I’m beginning to think that the 12 never accepted Paul as being an authority”
This is not true. They did accept Paul, even though he did not learn the gospel from them.
For a really thorough treatment of Galatians and Paul/Sha’ul’s background and claim to authority, in addition to Avi’s book on Galatians that David mentioned above, Skip Moen has just release a 23 part (!) audio teaching series on Galatians – basically a word by word, verse by verse exegetical analysis of the whole of Galatians (and I do mean thorough!). It is about 20 hours’ worth – the first almost 2 hours are spent just on the first 2 verses!
It is available as 23 m4b audio book files here:
http://skipmoen.com/products/galatians/
Note: You can give a donation if you choose to but you do not have to if you choose not to. If you do donate you’ll be automatically subscribed to his Daily Word mailing list as well. Your choice.
Disclaimer: I am not involved with Dr Moen in any official capacity, other than being a subscriber to his mailing list and a member of the online community (and occassional contributor on his blog).
I’ve been listening to this teaching for the last couple of days, though, and it has really assisted my understanding not just of Galatians, but of Paul in general. I recommend it for anyone interested in gaining a greater understanding of Galatians in particular and Paul’s relationship to the Jerusalem church and other apostles (not what you might think from some of what has been discussed here).
Sorry if this is perceived as an advert – it isn’t meant that way, rather as a pointer to some really helpful and worthwhile teaching.
Blessings, all!
Woah! Thanks guys!
Scot,
Haha! A week at Chris’s house, too funny! I should have mentioned that none of the points above where taken from the book I talked to you about. That was just from some website that I found the other day. The book is much more thorough in it’s dismantling of Paul’s doctrinal errors.
I’ll be more pointed with my questioning and will try to hone it down to doctrinal errors that have been brought to my attention rather than broad sweeping statements about him.
Rodney,
Thanks man! I’ll definitely check out that teaching. Oddly enough though Galatians is the one book that I don’t really have too many issues with. I’m always down for good teaching though… that’s why I keep Scot around!
Shelemiyah,
I’m not sure if I saw Rodney’s last post I’ll go check it out.
I agree with your points… that’s really why I wanted you guys to go check out the link (not to change your opinion) but rather so you could see why and where I’m coming from. His main thesis was to cast off all other teachings if they don’t line up with Yeshua’s teaching and return to the Torah with a new spiritual understanding under the direction of the Holy Spirit. Sounds safe enough to me! 
Alright, let me get the book and grab one of the points of contention that jumped out at me.
Did Yeshua Applaud the Ephesians for Exposing Paul as a False Apostle?
Rev 2:2 I know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars
Take note that in Revelation, Yeshua did NOT say the same thing to any of the other six churches whom He addressed. Yeshua made this remark to the only church among the seven whom we know Paul visited: the Ephesian church. Among the 7 churches it was the only one that we know Paul told that he was an apostle:
Eph 1:1 From Paul, chosen by God to be an apostle of Yeshua the Messiah…
If Paul were the object of Yeshua’s remarks in Rev 2:2 it then makes sense that only the church at Ephesus would be commended for trying someone who told the Ephesians that he was an apostle.
Was Paul not an apostle, thus bringing Revelation 2:2 directly to bear on Paul? Indeed there is no evidence of Paul being an apostle except from Paul’s own mouth. It is clear from Acts that the Apostles themselves understood their number was set at 12, but that this did not include Paul. Long before Revelation 2:2 was written, we know from Acts 1:21 that the 12 apostle Matthias was chosen to replace Judas. The aposltes’ criteria fro the replacement was that it had to be someone who was with the others from the beginning of Yeshua’s ministry.
In this Luke reveals therefore that the eleven had a criteria that would likewise exclude adding Paul as an apostle.
Yeshua in the Book of Revelation reveals 12 is the number of apostles for all time. THe verse of Revelation 21:14 follows the mention of the twelve gates of the New Jerusalem. Each gate has a name of the twelve tribes of Israel on it.
Rev 21:14 The city was built on 12 foundation stones. On each of the stones was written the name of one of the Lamb’s 12 apostles.
There is a clear correspondence of one apostle for each of the 12 tribes, gates, and foundation stones. The number each time is only 12! It implies there are not supposed to be more than 12 apostles. You cannot have thirteen or fourteen apostles judging the twelve tribes. Yeshua made this clear during His earthly ministry as well. Yeshua said the role of the twelve apostles was to “sit upon twelve thrones, judging the 12 tribes of Israel (Matt 19:28)
This flies in the face of all the arguments that I’ve ever heard about it being a trivial number… and anyone can hold the title of apostle… this is clearly unscriptural and untrue as we can see from the verses above.
Thus, the identity of the person who said he was an apostle to the Ephesians in Revelation 2:2 but who could not be an apostle is proven from the Scriptures themselves. Honest Pauline scholars have conceded this underlying problem to Paul’s validity. his claim to apostleship is uncorroborated and thus Yeshua says Paul’s claim “is not true.”
John 5:31 If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.
As a result it is obvious the person spoken of in Revelation 2:2 is Paul because the NT gives us a record of:
• Only one person told the Ephesians he was an apostle who was in fact not one of the 12 apostles.
• A complete record of the twelve apostles in Acts excludes Paul
• In Acts, Paul was never recognized as an apostle by the twelve, and
• IN Acts, Paul never claims to be an aposlte of Yeshua the Messiah and thus no record exists of an authoritative acceptance by the twelve of Paul as such an apostle.
Paul and Luke mention a Heresy Trial of Paul at Ephesus.
Is there any evidence in the Scriptures that the Ephesians determined Paul was not an apostle?
Yes.Paul and Luke both mention that Pual was subject to a heresy trial at Ephesus, a city in Asia (Western Turkey). Paul likewise mentions that all the churches of Asia thereafter came to reject Paul. We are often puzzled by these verses and we pass over them. However, in light of Revelation 2:2, God has given us this evidence so we can apply Revelation 2:2.
Ephesus was a province of Asia, it was a Roman province along the west coast of modern Turkey, near Greece. Ephesus had a population of 250,000.
In second Timothy, Paul talks of a trial he endured in a Christian congregation. Paul says he put up “his first defense” among them. However, Paul says, “all forsook me.” (2 Tim. 4:14-17) In an exact parallel, Paul identifies in the same epistle that this trial took place in Asia – where Ephesus was the capital. Paul writes that all the Christians of Asia defected from him. What else other than a heresy trial at Asia’s leading church of Ephesus can explain this action? In 2 Timothy 1:15 Paul writes:
This thou knowest, that all that are in Asia turned away from me; of whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes.
Asia is primarily two major cities: Ephesus and Smyrna. It is not that hard to believe such a defection took place. Luke in Acts chapter 19 records the even leading ot what Paul mentioned in 2 Timothy 1:15 and 4:14-17. Luke records that the budding church of Ephesus decided at one point to have nothing further to do with Paul. In fact, Luke appears to be implying a heresy trial of Paul took place at Ephesus in Asia.
Here is what Luke records in Acts 19:1, 8-9:
Paul… came to Ephesus… and he entered into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, reasoning and persuading as to the things concerning the kingdom of God. But when some were hardened and disobedient, speaking evil of the Way before the multitude, he departed from them (ie. the Ephesians)
Thus, in Luke’s account Paul no longer went to the budding church at Ephesus where he had been “persuading” them for three months. He clearly encountered opposition from some influential members. This event would be a muted way that a friend like Luke would record a heresy trail.
Paul in 2 Corinthians again recalls this defection among Christians of Asia. He says it felt like he was under the “sentence of death.”
2 Cor 1:8-9
For we do not want you to be ignorant, brethren, of our trouble which came to us in Asia: that we were burdened beyond measure, above strength, so that we despaired even of life. Yes, we had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves but in God who raises the dead.
Hence, Paul alludes to an affliction in Asia – in which Ephesus was the leading city – which felt like an experience of a death-sentence. The fact Paul was not killed is proof he is speaking figuratively. A church heresy verdict in Asia would perfectly fit Paul’s meaning. If Paul were the one Yeshua has in mind in Rev 2:2, such a verdict would be like sentence of death. It would be a crushing blow to Paul’s evangelism.
Likewise, the pre Roman Catholic church (Tertullian) recognized that Paul was to be treated as edifying SO LONG as he didn’t contradict Yeshua or the 12. Tertullians points against Paul from 207AD:
• Yeshua never made Paul an apostle from the records that we can read
• Pauls claim to apostleship solely relies upon Paul’s veracity.
• If Paul were at rue apostle, he is till an inferior apostle becasue Paul in Acts 15 submitted his doctrine to the 12.
• If Paul later varied from the twelve, we must regard the twelve as more authoritative than Paul because he came later.
• Paul’s claim of being selected as an apostle later by Yeshua seems implausible. That story asks us to believe Yeshua had not planned things adequately with the twelve.
• Lastly, Yeshua warned us of false prophets who would come doing miracles in His name and signs and wonders, and Paul perfectly matches that prophesied type of prophet.
Finally on this point, the early church leaders from 125-325AD universally reject almost all of Paul’s unique doctrines, e.g., salvation by faith alone, total depravity, predestination, man lacks free-will, docetism, etc.
Next will be proof that James’ epistle was written in the format for a trial and directly rebukes some of the things written and taught by Paul… but I have to get some work done. I look forward to continuing this discussion.
Chris,
You said “I don’t believe the Torah has been “done away with.”
OK, then let me rephrase it. Why do you destroy it? If you refuse any part you refuse it all. If you think that you can take the Word of Eloheim and chop it up to suit your own desires then you are rejecting it by practice, Come back when you keep Sabbath and we will fellowship.
BTW, Pretense of Righteousness by preaching on Exodus while violating it is a hypocritical act. Can’t you see that you are doing the same thing you are accusing Harvest of? He is doing it with Paul and you with Moses. The difference is, Harvest is questioning Paul in support of Torah and Messiah while you disobey Moses due to an unwillingness to obey. You are supporting traditions of men while Harvest is trying to learn to obey.
Later neighbor!
David,
I am not onewho destroys Torah, I just see it through the lens of the NT. In addtion my friend you do not keep all of Torah either. Some of it cannot be kept, by your definition you destroy the Torah brother.
Harvest,
Have you checked out the meaning of the word “apostle?” It’s that context thing again. It is to be an ambassador of the Gospel, a sent one, a messanger. The word is not meant to be exclusive of anyone other than the twelve selected ones.
In Antioch, the Ruach HaKodesh said, separate unto me Sha’ul and Barnabba for the work to which I have called them” (paraphrase mine)
This is clearly an example of being sent forth by YHVH! This allows both Barnabba and Sha’ul to use the title Apostle but it does not make them part of the twelve.
If the Ruach sends me to do a work, regardless of how small, I have been made an Apostle. It is Semantics. You need to learn to research word meanings and look at context Harvest. Don’t be a lazy talmid. I am not saying you are but just don’t be. You have a computer. That is all you need. It is the easiest time in history for His people to research.
The Revelation text is speaking of people who say they have been sent by Eloheim and have not. Like many Christian preachers, teachers and theologians. Those who say “The Lord gave me a Word for you! Send me a thousand dollars seed money and I will tell you what it is!” These are false apostles.
Before you get lamblasted David, it is only fair that false apostles are’nt exclusive to christianity but do indeed come in all religous forms, having a message from GOOOOOWWWD.
Good post, how have you been resting, are you getting good sleep? standing with you for full recovery
I think that Yeshua provides adequate evidence that the word “apostle” cannot apply to anyone in the sense that it merely means messenter. It is clear that it is a specific office and that there can only be 12 judges and they are the 12 whom he selected (plus Matthais) as revealed in the book of Acts and Revelation.
Paul calls these 12 judges (supposed pillars) and says that they added nothing to him. It is clear that he was exalting himself above those who Yeshua gave the clear office of judges, pillars, and capstones in the New Jerusalem to…
example, angel means messenger, therefore technically I am an angel if I spread YHWH’s message…
However, if I said Michael and Gabriel who are supposed to be arch angels are nothing to me. I am superior to them who are called mighty angels, I am talking like a fool, but you have lead me to do this!
This is the same thing Paul does when he says that he is an Apostle. He clearly states that his message was not given to him by men, and therefore the 12 added nothing to him and he doesn’t need their approval or authority. This is contradictory to what Yeshua said of the 12, and no matter how we try to downplay Paul’s claim to “apostleship” his words speak for themselves.
If anyone today tried to convince any of us that they were to be regarded as greater apostles then the 12 that Yeshua hand-picked (save Matthais). We would laugh in their face because of what Yeshua said regarding the 12 who will sit as judges over the 12 tribes, if they claimed to be above them who will sit with Messiah as judges over us, than they would be contradicting the teaching of Messiah and in effect calling Him a liar! This is the same thing that Paul is doing… he is not greater then the 12 yet he claims to be and in effect nullifies the testimony and words of Messiah.
James rebukes him personally in his epistle. I’ll stand with James over Paul any day… let’s not talk about that yet, we still need to discuss the previous points of contention in much greater detail before moving on.
Also, how can Paul be sent forth from YHWH if He preaches that the law has been abrogated? I know, I know… sometimes he praises it and sometimes he wipes his mouth with it. It’s that chameleon syndrome coming through again.
Paul states that Abraham was justified by faith and it was credited to him as righteousness, but James had other things to say about that… it seems as though he was aware of what Paul’s true message was but for some reason we feel like we have a better understanding of what Paul REALLY meant 2,000 years later. Kind of far out don’t ya think?
I’m telling you guys, by keeping Paul in the camp your fighting an uphill battle. What leg would any of these denominationalists (no offense Chris) have to stand on if not for Paul’s writings? NONE! Bind him up and teach Yeshua, the Law and the prophets… problem solved.
It seems simple enough… let’s continue on in the points above though regarding the heresy trial in Ephesus, before we move on to James’ epistle.
Also, let it be known that I’m not saying to judge Paul (that is not our job), I’m speaking metaphorically about his writings being not used in the assemblies. They are not and should not ever be considered Holy Scriptures.
In fact, the early assemblies (pre-RCC) only included them to be used as edifying SO LONG as they weren’t being used to contradict Yeshua and the Tenakh. There is historical proof of this in Tertullian’s writings…
Harvest,
If you can’t accept clear exegesis then I am waisting my time. I will resort to prayer. It is too difficult to sit here and type with my arm in a sling to have context ignored and definitions denied.
Blessings Harvest!
Thanks for the prayers David.
I don’t believe it’s as clear as you would like to believe though… also you didn’t even really mention any of the points made in any of my previous posts, all you did was question the meaning of the word “apostle”. Let’s shift the focus away from that as it’s actually quite irrelevant to the case presented. Let’s focus for a moment on the heresy trial mentioned above.
Also, the early church understood this and that’s where the points where taken from. Tertullian had many more resources regarding the events that happened just 200 years prior to these events than we do now over 2000 later! Remember, the further we get from the source the darker everything becomes (not the other way around.) Look at the sad state of things in this present day, if you need evidence of this statement.
Also, I think that if you read Paul’s epistles to a child they would walk away thinking the same thing that the current christian denominations teach. Isn’t this telling? Scot always says to Chris, “let’s read the passage to your 4 year old and see what they think… “the same applies here.
If it’s not clear enough for a child to understand than it’s not inspired by YHWH’s Spirit. We don’t need to do exegetical pretzels to come into the truth of the Word of YHWH… it is what it is. With or without Paul’s (possibly unintended) confusion…
Harvest,
The current condition of the Christian Churches are directly related to the teachings of men like Tertullian. And the further still we get away without correction of the false doctrines and lies of men like Tertullian the worse yet they will become if Yeshua tarries, which I doubt.
If you are so taken with the likes of Tertullian then allow me to quote him for you”
What of the Torah?
“We do not now deal with the Law any further than to remark that the apostle here teaches clearly how it has been abolished, by passing from shadow to substance. That is, it has passed from figurative types to the reality, which is Christ” (c. 207,W),3.471. Do you believe this Harvest?
What about the Sabbath,
“Just as the abolition of fleshly circumcision and of the old Law is demonstrated as having been consummated at its specific times, so also the observance of the Sabbath is demonstrated to have been temporary.” (c 197, W). 3,155.
Would it be unfair to call him an anti-semite,
“Let the Jews recognize their own fate, a fate which was constantly fortold as destined to occur after the advent of Christ. This fate was on account of the impiety with which they despised and slew Him…Thereafter, God’s grace desisted among them, And the clouds were commanded not to rain a shower upon the vineyard of Sorek, the clouds being celestial benefit.” (c 197, W) 3,171.
If you wish to rely upon the church fathers so called to support your argument you will have to continue it with Chris. I have no patience with it.
If I read the English translations of Paul to a child after they have been manipulated over 1700 years of editing by those with a bias against all things Jewish then yes you are right. But, If I dig in and learn the truth and teach the truth to a child if he has an ounce of intelligence he will see the lie that has been perpetuated upon men for these 2000 years. If you show a child the true meaning of a word and that child then rejects it in favor of his own desire to destroy the character of an Apostle of Messiah then that child is a fool. That is where I begin to see that though one claims to only want to learn, that claim is bogus when he rejects clear exegesis. That is where my patience ends.
Again, you actually addressed nothing in my argument except to smear Tertullian, who as far as I know fought against Marcion because of his hatred for Jew’s and the Torah (not that it matters what he believes anyway because his writings aren’t scripture either but only to be used as edifying just like Paul so long as they don’t conflict with Messiah.)
“Marcion sets up unequal gods.” Tertullian writes, “The one a judge, fierce and warlike, the other mild and peaceable, solely kind and supremely good” Is this also not exactly what many followers of Jesus Christ do? They shun the “Old Testament God” because He is too stern and fierce. They focus instead upon the “New Testament God,” who, in their minds, does not expect obedience to His laws. They can’t comprehend YHVH-Jesus Christ, shouting “depart from me, I never knew you, into the flames you foul workers of iniquity!”
Tertullian opposes Marcion’s misuse of Paul’s writings by pointing out the “Jewishness†of Paul’s faith, and then asking, “What had (Paul) still to do with Jewish custom, if he was the destroyer of Judaism?â€13
Tertuilian also refers to Romans 7:7, to combat Marcion’s hatred of the Torah: “What shall we say then? That the law is sin? God fordid.â€Shame on you, Marcion. God forbid: the apostle expresses abhorrence of complaint against the Torah…Yet he adds even more: “The Torah is holy, and its commandment is just, and good.†As Tertullian points out later, “you cannot make a promoter of the Torah into an opponent of it.â€
Anyway, I only referenced them to say that if anyone goes against the teachings of Messiah they should not be used, otherwise they should be used for edification on NOT scripture that is Spirit breathed. Can you use the teachings of Messiah to go against Messiah? No! Then that is scripture, it’s clear to the point and has NEVER been manipulated to say anything different. Wonder why? Maybe because it’s scripture???
And since when were we against bringing in outside sources to validate historical claims? Must have missed that rule, what, with everyone else doing all the time.
Furthermore, (forgive me if this sounds crass) you’re going to have to do better than arguing the use of the word “apostle” and smearing a church father who I could care less about if you want to seriously refute any of the points of contention listed above. If you’re patience is worn out thank you for your time. I will continue to pray about this but if you expected to just slide in and change my mind in two or three blog posts then you misjudged just how seriously and just how long I have been looking at this issue brother.
Ok, this is clearly not edifying for anyone. It’s obviously just extracting feelings of bitterness and frustration from some. I’ll do some more study on my own regarding the issue. Thanks for everyone that helped contribute. I will check out the teachings and books you guys referenced.
See you all in another thread!
Harvest,
I am sorry you disapprove of my answers. If you knew how difficult it is for me to type what I do you would understand. For me to respond to all your points It would take pages.
I did not trash Tertullian. Turtullian trashed Turtllian. I only quoted him. I am not trying to single handedly change your mind. I thought this was for participation by many.
I am not bitter or frustrated. Yes, I get impatient when you reject the clear definitions of words. Just because Paul says he is an Apostle does not mean that he claims a position as one of the twelve. His remarks about being a “I believe your words was a “super apostle” he was addressing others who were claiming apostleship and misleading the assemblies, not the twelve.
As for smearing the church fathers, if that is what you wish to call it then fine. I will smear false doctrine every time I see it. Whether if be from church fathers, Chris, you or anyone else. Including myself If I allow myself to be led astray.
I hope you find the truth.
David,
I know it’s hard for you to type. I just wish that you used your energy to actually give me some insight on the thesis presented above and not a couple little details which weren’t really pertinent to the questions or verses posted.
Again, if you choose to substitute the word “apostle” for “messenger” by all means go ahead. It isn’t the crux of the point so it really isn’t worth discussing in my opinion.
I must also ask, which false doctrine are you referring to? I’m not presenting anything new or making amendments to any salvational doctrines. We’re discussing Paul and what he said in his epistles, I don’t think that I or anyone else including you built your doctrine around Paul so I’m not sure how you could be lead astray by any of what we’re discussing.
If Paul was a false apostle a mainstream Christian would have to re-evaluate their doctrine… it doesn’t affect you as a Torah observant follower of Messiah. Please correct me if I’m in error.
Actually David,
Don’t worry about answering the post above. If you wish to continue this we can do so when you’re better. Perhaps privately so that no one trips up over the information… I certainly don’t want to be responsible for spreading false teachings, or putting a stumbling block in anyone’s path.
Harvest,
When you basically copy and paste from other peoples sites it is IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to keep up…it gets lost. One issue at a time…
The last two weren’t copied and pasted… they were from the book but I tried to paraphrase and cut out the extraneous stuff…
Are they scripture? Well it all depends on how you define the word scripture. Are they literary works penned on paper? Yup. However, are they “holy” or spoken by Yah? From what I can tell they are not. That doesn’t mean they aren’t good for us.
Sorry I’ve been gone SOOOO long. I moved to house with no internet. It’s been tough.