PDA

View Full Version : Discussion Can We Follow Paul?



Firstfruits
Apr 17th 2009, 08:34 AM
Please read Pauls testimony and then answer, if possible, the questions that follow.

Philppians 3:4-17
4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.
15 Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.
16 Nevertheless, whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing.
17 Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.

If we had that which Paul had and gave up in order to follow Christ, would we do the same?

Can we follow Paul?

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Apr 17th 2009, 06:33 PM
If we are not following Pauls example are we following Christ?

1 Cor 11:1 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=46&CHAP=11&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=1) Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Teke
Apr 17th 2009, 06:51 PM
If we are not following Pauls example are we following Christ?

1 Cor 11:1 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=46&CHAP=11&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=1) Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Amen! :saint:
I like the translation that puts it this way. "Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ."

The salvation of all is greater than the rights of the individual. (1 Cor. 10:33)

A right is never inalienable if it alienates us from others.

Bernie
Apr 17th 2009, 07:02 PM
If we had that which Paul had and gave up in order to follow Christ, would we do the same?

Can we follow Paul?
Good questions. I doubt many would argue in saying that following Paul in this example is actually following Christ. Not sure what you mean by "if we had that which Paul had and gave up"... I think if we apprehended Christ in the way Paul did, we would likely follow Him. As it is, Paul was given tremendous light--at tremendous cost, physical, spiritual and mental--in order to exhort those less illuminated to run the race. In the end, the biggest question is, if I fail the race, is there Anyone who will pick me up and carry me across the finish line. I believe there is...

"If we are faithless, He remains faithful; for He cannot deny Himself." (2Tim 2:13)
The big question, of course, is to whom is the Lord committed to be faithful?

Firstfruits
Apr 17th 2009, 07:03 PM
Amen! :saint:
I like the translation that puts it this way. "Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ."

The salvation of all is greater than the rights of the individual. (1 Cor. 10:33)

A right is never inalienable if it alienates us from others.

Thanks Teke,

With regards to what Paul gave up to follow Christ what therefore are we to be following?

7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

God bless you!

Firstfruits

keck553
Apr 17th 2009, 07:04 PM
I follow Yeshua, not a man. End of statement.

9Marksfan
Apr 17th 2009, 07:09 PM
"If we are faithless, He remains faithful; for He cannot deny Himself." (2Tim 2:13)
The big question, of course, is to whom is the Lord committed to be faithful?

To Himself - His character, His promises AND His threats. I'm not sure this verse is really the big comfort that we think it is - in its immediate context, it means, "if we're faithless, watch out - God never makes an idle threat - if we deny Him, He'll deny us!"

apothanein kerdos
Apr 17th 2009, 07:10 PM
I follow Yeshua, not a man. End of statement.


Well...if you consider Paul's writings to be inspired, then we got a problem.

Paul is saying to follow him as he follows Christ. Paul is laying down a precept; when you see someone who is following Christ, mold yourself in the way they follow Christ. It is because they provide a real life example of what it is to be a disciple (unfortunately, we don't have the luxury of literally watching Christ).

Firstfruits
Apr 17th 2009, 07:16 PM
Good questions. I doubt many would argue in saying that following Paul in this example is actually following Christ. Not sure what you mean by "if we had that which Paul had and gave up"... I think if we apprehended Christ in the way Paul did, we would likely follow Him. As it is, Paul was given tremendous light--at tremendous cost, physical, spiritual and mental--in order to exhort those less illuminated to run the race. In the end, the biggest question is, if I fail the race, is there Anyone who will pick me up and carry me across the finish line. I believe there is...

"If we are faithless, He remains faithful; for He cannot deny Himself." (2Tim 2:13)
The big question, of course, is to whom is the Lord committed to be faithful?

With regards to what Paul had and what he gave up for Christ is contained in the following:

4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

God bless you!

Firstfruits

manichunter
Apr 17th 2009, 07:18 PM
I say yes and no.

I was not going to comment, but what the tarnation, who cares right.

In a personal mentor and mentoree situation, I could see somethings as beneficial in a sense for things like study habits and presentations towards others.

However, it can be a dangerous thing, if done with the wrong motivations.

If one is not caution, then many could make the same boast as Paul, then we would have what people call cults in most situations.

Paul was the original mentor of most of the Churches he wrote letters to. He acted the part of undershepherd, hence it was his responsibility to set an example and train these congregations. This types of relationships would be the only cases in which one could say practice my example until it becomes your own. Of course personal choice was never removed from the pupil and this is by no means a command, but a testimony.

Now this mentoring person is to never supplant God as the Lord towards the pupil, but act the role as a bigger and wiser sibling with God being the Big Daddy. The pupil is to never lose site of God being the Lord, with the mentor being simply an instrument that reveals the means of how God wants to mature and sanctify his people. The mentor simply becomes one who is just a few steps ahead on a common path and their purpose is to comfort and support their younger siblings behind them.

So, yes one could follow their personal Paul's. Just as Elisha followed Elijah and Mark followed Barnabas as pupils, but God remained Lord of them all.

Firstfruits
Apr 17th 2009, 07:34 PM
I say yes and no.

I was not going to comment, but what the tarnation, who cares right.

In a personal mentor and mentoree situation, I could see somethings as beneficial in a sense for things like study habits and presentations towards others.

However, it can be a dangerous thing, if done with the wrong motivations.

If one is not caution, then many could make the same boast as Paul, then we would have what people call cults in most situations.

Paul was the original mentor of most of the Churches he wrote letters to. He acted the part of undershepherd, hence it was his responsibility to set an example and train these congregations. This types of relationships would be the only cases in which one could say practice my example until it becomes your own. Of course personal choice was never removed from the pupil and this is by no means a command, but a testimony.

Now this mentoring person is to never supplant God as the Lord towards the pupil, but act the role as a bigger and wiser sibling with God being the Big Daddy. The pupil is to never lose site of God being the Lord, with the mentor being simply an instrument that reveals the means of how God wants to mature and sanctify his people. The mentor simply becomes one who is just a few steps ahead on a common path and their purpose is to comfort and support their younger siblings behind them.

So, yes one could follow their personal Paul's. Just as Elisha followed Elijah and Mark followed Barnabas as pupils, but God remained Lord of them all.

With the understanding that Christ has given Paul his Gospel, if we therefore do not follow Paul then who can we follow?

1 Cor 11:1 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=46&CHAP=11&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=1) Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

If not Paul then who?

Firstfruits

keck553
Apr 17th 2009, 07:43 PM
Well...if you consider Paul's writings to be inspired, then we got a problem.

Paul is saying to follow him as he follows Christ. Paul is laying down a precept; when you see someone who is following Christ, mold yourself in the way they follow Christ. It is because they provide a real life example of what it is to be a disciple (unfortunately, we don't have the luxury of literally watching Christ).

In that context, I don't disagree. When I see the light of Christ in someone, I am drawn to it. But to become Paul's disciple? No.

Teke
Apr 17th 2009, 07:45 PM
Thanks Teke,

With regards to what Paul gave up to follow Christ what therefore are we to be following?

7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

God bless you!

Firstfruits

We follow Christ in our faith.(v9) Faith is the name of the relationship which gives us full participation in the life of Christ, and in His resurrection (v10).

A faith which obeys Christ is the very content and meaning of life, and it is for this that we suffer "the loss of all things" (v8) and deny ourselves. Everything about us must be subordinate to Christ and His Kingdom. (see also Matt. 6:19-34, 24:36-25:46)

manichunter
Apr 17th 2009, 07:45 PM
With the understanding that Christ has given Paul his Gospel, if we therefore do not follow Paul then who can we follow?

1 Cor 11:1 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=46&CHAP=11&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=1) Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

If not Paul then who?

Firstfruits

I said who in my post. Paul life can be studied as means of application, but something would be missing that is critical in every mentor and pupil relationship. The fact of personal witness between both. The senses are suppose to be involved as well. As far as Paul and me, my senses will never bear witness to his spiritual application. Half the reasons why peopel debate over Paul now and remain divided over his lectures.

So, as I said before. I will only follow Paul in manner of his conduct by the instruction of the Holy Spirit who stands in proxy as witness.

There has to be a degree of intimacy between a mentor and his pupil as well.

I have been in system that supports this and teaches this, hence I see the value in the relationships throughout the Bible between mentor and pupil. No one was meant to be a lone wolf or not have a human support system that facilutated the opportunity for training in both knowlegde and character.

keck553
Apr 17th 2009, 07:46 PM
With the understanding that Christ has given Paul his Gospel, if we therefore do not follow Paul then who can we follow?

1 Cor 11:1 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=46&CHAP=11&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=1) Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

If not Paul then who?

Firstfruits

Joh 10:27
(27)"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me;


Where does God say to follow Paul?

manichunter
Apr 17th 2009, 07:51 PM
In that context, I don't disagree. When I see the light of Christ in someone, I am drawn to it. But to become Paul's disciple? No.

I agree. We should find our mentor in our own age, living and breathing now. Paul can be referred to, but he is not alive to interact with us, as to after living guidance.


I strongly support and teach the mentoring system. I by no mean call any of my students or congregation members, my disciples. They belong to Jesus, they are His disciples. As a pastor and seminary instructor, am a undershepherd and big brother charged with being an example to those placed in my environment of influence.

My pastor is my current mentor, who is charged with oversight for my soul, to which I keep him very busy. :pp

manichunter
Apr 17th 2009, 07:55 PM
With the understanding that Christ has given Paul his Gospel, if we therefore do not follow Paul then who can we follow?

1 Cor 11:1 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=46&CHAP=11&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=1) Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

If not Paul then who?

Firstfruits

Yeah, like Keck is suggesting..........

I mean this as a joke, but in all seriousness.

You should update you mentor profile, it is about two thousands years out of date. LOL :rofl:

Okay, I was playing.'


Anyway, I am sure you have a mentor who is charged with being your older sibling in your immediate surroundings.

There is nothing wrong with seeing and understanding how Paul follow Christ, but there is great power seeing people overcome and prosper right before your eyes. :o

John146
Apr 17th 2009, 08:19 PM
In that context, I don't disagree. When I see the light of Christ in someone, I am drawn to it. But to become Paul's disciple? No.That's not really what anyone is saying we should do (become Paul's disciple). Since Paul imitated Christ in his life (do you agree?) we would also be imitating Christ by imitating Paul. Make sense? That doesn't mean we'd be a disciple of Paul. It would just mean we are learning from him the proper way to be a disciple of Christ.

keck553
Apr 17th 2009, 08:22 PM
Paul's got some opinionated extra-biblical issues (which he clearly identifies) that no way I would 'follow'.

For one thing, it's really strange for a Jew in Paul's day not to have a wife. And what is this all about?

1Co 7:25-35
(25) Now concerning virgins I have no command of the Lord, but I give an opinion as one who by the mercy of the Lord is trustworthy.
(26) I think then that this is good in view of the present distress, that it is good for a man to remain as he is.
(27) Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be released. Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife.
(28) But if you marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Yet such will have trouble in this life, and I am trying to spare you.
(29) But this I say, brethren, the time has been shortened, so that from now on those who have wives should be as though they had none;
(30) and those who weep, as though they did not weep; and those who rejoice, as though they did not rejoice; and those who buy, as though they did not possess;
(31) and those who use the world, as though they did not make full use of it; for the form of this world is passing away.
(32) But I want you to be free from concern. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord;
(33) but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife,
(34) and his interests are divided. The woman who is unmarried, and the virgin, is concerned about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how she may please her husband.
(35) This I say for your own benefit; not to put a restraint upon you, but to promote what is appropriate and to secure undistracted devotion to the Lord.

A husband and wife in the union of marriage is the most important and sacred ordinances created by God, and creates a dynamic where the Holy Spirit could flourish (where two or more are gathered)

Yet, entire cults sprung from Paul's "opinion". Yeah, I will follow the light of Messiah in Paul, but as far as Paul's character, opinions and personal chioces outside of God's commands? No. I will not deify Paul anymore than David or Moses. We're all sinners.

manichunter
Apr 17th 2009, 08:24 PM
We all would be better off finding a Paul for our today learn from.

Teke
Apr 17th 2009, 08:39 PM
We all would be better off founding a Paul for our today.

Such persons exist, they're just not hanging out on every corner. They are off following Christ leaving the world behind them. So you likely won't see them in the world, but in God's church.
One is greatly blessed to meet such a person, if only once in their whole lifetime.

apothanein kerdos
Apr 17th 2009, 08:53 PM
Paul's got some opinionated extra-biblical issues (which he clearly identifies) that no way I would 'follow'.

For one thing, it's really strange for a Jew in Paul's day not to have a wife. And what is this all about?

1Co 7:25-35
(25) Now concerning virgins I have no command of the Lord, but I give an opinion as one who by the mercy of the Lord is trustworthy.
(26) I think then that this is good in view of the present distress, that it is good for a man to remain as he is.
(27) Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be released. Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife.
(28) But if you marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Yet such will have trouble in this life, and I am trying to spare you.
(29) But this I say, brethren, the time has been shortened, so that from now on those who have wives should be as though they had none;
(30) and those who weep, as though they did not weep; and those who rejoice, as though they did not rejoice; and those who buy, as though they did not possess;
(31) and those who use the world, as though they did not make full use of it; for the form of this world is passing away.
(32) But I want you to be free from concern. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord;
(33) but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife,
(34) and his interests are divided. The woman who is unmarried, and the virgin, is concerned about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how she may please her husband.
(35) This I say for your own benefit; not to put a restraint upon you, but to promote what is appropriate and to secure undistracted devotion to the Lord.

A husband and wife in the union of marriage is the most important and sacred ordinances created by God, and creates a dynamic where the Holy Spirit could flourish (where two or more are gathered)

Yet, entire cults sprung from Paul's "opinion". Yeah, I will follow the light of Messiah in Paul, but as far as Paul's character, opinions and personal chioces outside of God's commands? No. I will not deify Paul anymore than David or Moses. We're all sinners.


The "opinion" simply means that it's not a declaration, just that it's wise to follow his opinion. And he's right - it's extremely wise, especially during times of persecution.

manichunter
Apr 17th 2009, 08:58 PM
Such persons exist, they're just not hanging out on every corner. They are off following Christ leaving the world behind them. So you likely won't see them in the world, but in God's church.
One is greatly blessed to meet such a person, if only once in their whole lifetime.

Well they might not just be hanging around on the corner, who knows, but they are around. I know one personaly, who use to hang on corners doing evangelical work. He now travels abroad doing ministry.

You are wise to think so.........

keck553
Apr 17th 2009, 09:01 PM
AK - Wise to not marry in times of persecution? Paul doesn't claim to be a prophet with a new or additional word from God; he is merely interpreting and clarifying. That being the case, if this is Godly wisdom, it should be in the Tanach, as all Paul's teachings that are attributed to the will and desire of God are. Do you know of anywhere in the Tanach where God says it's wise not to marry under the pressure of persecution? I don't know if it is, maybe someone does? If it's merely Paul's opinion, it's no better or worse than the opinions of the sages.

Please don't lose patience with me, I'm trying to think this through. I'm not sure on this one; it's been a struggle for me to understand it.

John146
Apr 17th 2009, 09:12 PM
Wise to not marry in times of persecution? Paul doesn't claim to be a prophet with a word from God; he is merely interpreting and clarifying. That being the case, if this is Godly wisdom, it should be in the Tanach, as all Paul's teachings that are attributed to the will and desire of God. Do you know of anywhere in the Tanach where God says it's wise not to marry under the pressure of persecution? I don't know if it is, maybe someone does? If it's merely Paul's opinion, it's no better or worse than the opinions of the sages.What?! You don't think of Paul any more than you do the sages? In that case are you sure that you even believe anything he said was inspired by the Holy Spirit? He said he was giving his opinion or judgment as someone who was trustworthy. Do you think he was not trustworthy? His words were inspired by the Holy Spirit even though he made it clear that he wasn't giving a commandment from God.

He was giving good advice that he knew would not apply to everyone. It is the truth that one who is not married can focus easier only on the Lord instead of also focusing on his/her spouse and children and everything else that goes with having a spouse and/or a family. But it depends on the person and situation. That's why Paul said it wasn't a commandment. That doesn't mean it wasn't good advice for those to whom the advice would apply to.

Jesus spoke on this issue as well.

Matthew 19
9And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
10His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.
11But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.
12For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

So, Paul was giving good advice which I believe was intended for those "to whom it was given", which wasn't everyone.

Teke
Apr 17th 2009, 09:23 PM
Well they might not just be hanging around on the corner, who knows, but they are around. I know one personaly, who use to hang on corners doing evangelical work. He now travels abroad doing ministry.

You are wise to think so.........

I have only ever met one. And he was not an evangelist. Usually only those of the church see them. But I'm sure he, as do we, pray for the salvation of all by the calling of God.

Come to think of it, there is another somewhat like him. In my church, he is what we call a fool for Christ. He is a Christian Jew. He has stirred up some of his brethren in New York. They've tried to have him arrested just for being around. He really annoys the heck out of them. But he chooses to zero in on his fellow Jews for the most part. His name is Nathaniel, and he maintains a controversial blog online. He is one of them, you gotta love em, kinda guys. :lol: It's all for Christ.

We will all be celebrating Pascha tomorrow night (early day Jewish time). :pp
As we all proclaim,
Christ is Risen!
Truly He is Risen!

Teke
Apr 17th 2009, 09:32 PM
So, Paul was giving good advice which I believe was intended for those "to whom it was given", which wasn't everyone.

Yeah, not all of us can leave everything and follow Christ completely. :cry:
If so, it would sure be a whole lot bigger than the first "Exodus".

keck553
Apr 17th 2009, 09:35 PM
What?! You don't think of Paul any more than you do the sages? In that case are you sure that you even believe anything he said was inspired by the Holy Spirit?

You may want to read my post again. You're making assumptions that don't exist.


He said he was giving his opinion or judgment as someone who was trustworthy. Do you think he was not trustworthy? His words were inspired by the Holy Spirit even though he made it clear that he wasn't giving a commandment from God.

David was also inspired by the Holy Spirit. That didn't make him perfect in his opnions.


He was giving good advice that he knew would not apply to everyone. It is the truth that one who is not married can focus easier only on the Lord instead of also focusing on his/her spouse and children and everything else that goes with having a spouse and/or a family. But it depends on the person and situation. That's why Paul said it wasn't a commandment. That doesn't mean it wasn't good advice for those to whom the advice would apply to.

I disagree 100% with this statement. Paul isn't teaching anything that is new. All but his opinions can be verified in what was in that day considered to be only Scripture available - the Tanach. His opinion is just that, and Paul makes it clear for that exact reason.


Jesus spoke on this issue as well.

Matthew 19
9And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
10His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.
11But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.
12For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

This is totally out of context to what we are discussing.

manichunter
Apr 17th 2009, 09:37 PM
I have only ever met one. And he was not an evangelist. Usually only those of the church see them. But I'm sure he, as do we, pray for the salvation of all by the calling of God.

Come to think of it, there is another somewhat like him. In my church, he is what we call a fool for Christ. He is a Christian Jew. He has stirred up some of his brethren in New York. They've tried to have him arrested just for being around. He really annoys the heck out of them. But he chooses to zero in on his fellow Jews for the most part. His name is Nathaniel, and he maintains a controversial blog online. He is one of them, you gotta love em, kinda guys. :lol: It's all for Christ.

We will all be celebrating Pascha tomorrow night (early day Jewish time). :pp
As we all proclaim,
Christ is Risen!
Truly He is Risen!

give me his blog info sister, let me look into it out of interest........

keck553
Apr 17th 2009, 09:39 PM
Yeah, not all of us can leave everything and follow Christ completely. :cry:
If so, it would sure be a whole lot bigger than the first "Exodus".

God says "be fruitful and multiply" 59 times in the bible. Please tell me when He changed His mind to "don't marry so you can follow Christ 100%"?

Marriage is an image of Christ and the church. Tell me how separating that dynamic fulfills God's will.

keck553
Apr 17th 2009, 09:40 PM
We will all be celebrating Pascha tomorrow night (early day Jewish time). :pp
As we all proclaim,
Christ is Risen!
Truly He is Risen!

Praise the LORD! Have a blessed and wonderful Pascha!

9Marksfan
Apr 17th 2009, 11:47 PM
David was also inspired by the Holy Spirit. That didn't make him perfect in his opnions.

David's FEELINGS may not represent timeless biblical truth, but Paul's advice and instructions are in a different category altogether - when he says "I, not the LORD", he is meaning that he is giving a new command that could not be found already in the LORD's teachings or in the OT.


I disagree 100% with this statement. Paul isn't teaching anything that is new. All but his opinions can be verified in what was in that day considered to be only Scripture available - the Tanach. His opinion is just that, and Paul makes it clear for that exact reason.

This is really dangerous - are you suggesting that Paul's opinions in 1 Cor 7 are not binding Scripture and is somehow subject to you judgement? If so, consider carefully this verse:-

Now concerning virgins: I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give judgment as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy. 1 Cor 7:25 NKJV

Are you saying that Paul is wrong? That God had NOT made him trustworthy?

Also consider this one:-

If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord. 1 Cor 14:37 NKJV

apothanein kerdos
Apr 18th 2009, 12:04 AM
AK - Wise to not marry in times of persecution? Paul doesn't claim to be a prophet with a new or additional word from God; he is merely interpreting and clarifying. That being the case, if this is Godly wisdom, it should be in the Tanach, as all Paul's teachings that are attributed to the will and desire of God are. Do you know of anywhere in the Tanach where God says it's wise not to marry under the pressure of persecution? I don't know if it is, maybe someone does? If it's merely Paul's opinion, it's no better or worse than the opinions of the sages.

Please don't lose patience with me, I'm trying to think this through. I'm not sure on this one; it's been a struggle for me to understand it.


That's elevating the Old Testament to great heights. Considering that Peter said Paul's writings were inspired, I think you may want to back off on that claim. :)

Paul's "opinion" is still inspired. As I said, it's not a command, but it is inspired advice.

During that time, it was far more difficult for married members to do the Lord's work because they couldn't just up and leave with their families like we can today. Likewise, as today, it was harder for married members to continue to admit to being a Christ follower while watching their loved ones suffer because of it. "Deny Christ or we'll chop off your wife's hand." "Deny Christ or we'll violate your daughter."

This makes it quite difficult.

Also, one thing to consider back then is that, for whatever reason, being chaste actually served as evidence of Christ's work in a person's life. Not that those who were married lacked the evidence, but the Romans were astonished that young people would voluntarily choose to remain chaste. It served as a witness for that time because of the sexual nature of the Roman culture.

So we can't just offhandedly dismiss this. Though it is not a command from the Lord, it is still inspired in that it's solid advice.

chad
Apr 18th 2009, 12:12 AM
We shoud follow Christ Jesus, not Paul.


1 Corinthian 1:10-17 (NIV)

10I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.

11My brothers, some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you.

12What I mean is this: One of you says, "I follow Paul"; another, "I follow Apollos"; another, "I follow Cephas[a (http://bibleforums.org/l%20fen-NIV-28360a)]"; still another, "I follow Christ."

13Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into[b (http://bibleforums.org/l%20fen-NIV-28361b)] the name of Paul?

14I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius,

15 so no one can say that you were baptized into my name.

16(Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don't remember if I baptized anyone else.)

17For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospelónot with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

Bernie
Apr 18th 2009, 12:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie
"If we are faithless, He remains faithful; for He cannot deny Himself." (2Tim 2:13)
The big question, of course, is to whom is the Lord committed to be faithful?

To Himself - His character, His promises AND His threats. I'm not sure this verse is really the big comfort that we think it is - in its immediate context, it means, "if we're faithless, watch out - God never makes an idle threat - if we deny Him, He'll deny us!"

I feel pretty confident that Paul's intention in this passage was to illustrate not the Lord's desire to crush and punish, but to heal and restore. The nature of Jesus is to heal what we cannot heal ourselves, as re: "A bruised reed He will not break, And a dimly burning wick He will not extinguish; He will faithfully bring forth justice." (Isa 42:3) It's hard to think of the Lord as making "threats". Exhortations, yes, but I wonder if the idea of a holy"threat" might not be more in the hearing of the hearer than in the intention of the speaker.

Overall, I agree with apoth. that we should listen for the Father's truth in Pauls or any of His inspired writers' messages.

Alaska
Apr 18th 2009, 01:13 AM
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

For example no longer justifying actions allowed by the OT that are forbidden by the NT.

Like swearing or divorce or revenge or the other things seen in Matthew 5 that are not allowable under the NT.
"No man is justified by the law" yet modern preachers will use obsolete OT laws, like those allowing divorce, to justify doing those things that are not of the faith in Christ.
Christ is the end of the law for righteousness but he is the beginning of faith for righteousness, which faith is expressed and clarified in the NT.

To say no man is justified by heeding and being in line with what the NT requires by the grace of God and the help of the Holy Spirit, is simply blaspheming God.

Vhayes
Apr 18th 2009, 03:13 AM
hi First Fruits -

I'll try to give you my answer(s) to the best of my ability.

If we had that which Paul had and gave up in order to follow Christ, would we do the same?We know a couple of things about Paul. That he was a Jew of Jews - a man who was looked up to by his religion. We know he was very learned and very pious. We know he was a Roman citizen. I would think the education (at least the level of the education) and the fact that he was a Roman citizen would mean he came from a wealthy family. That's pure speculation on my part however, but to me, it makes sense.

What did Paul give up?
He lost his standing in the Jewish community.
He lost his religion or at least his strict adherence to a set of rules and regs. Look at what he says here:
Philippians 3
9 - And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law
I believe Paul was one of those who was so caught up in the "doing" that he had lost total sight of the Promise and the faith that saved. Hence the reason he persecuted the Christians - he thought it would gain him major "God Bucks". Most folks who are caught up in the "doing" of religion (even Christianity) have lost sight of the Promise as well. They become so focused on what they have to "do" that it becomes their identity. Paul literally lost "who" he was.

I think he counted his education as loss as well. Yes, he did indeed use that education and we can all be thankful for that. I think what he is saying is he would gladly have foregone the education if there would have had to have been a choice between it and meeting Christ.

We never hear of Paul's family. One would think he had to have a father and mother somewhere - perhaps brothers and sisters, but we never hear of them. I think he lost his family and perhaps his family's wealth as well when he found Jesus. If he was advancing so well in Judaism and then WHAM - it all stops and he begins following Christ, my guess is his family was angry and embarrassed in the community. My guess is they disowned him.

Yet - he counted all that which he lost as dung. Nothing in comparison to what he gained. Which leads into your next question:



Can we follow Paul?I'd like to say, "Sure, First Fruits. No problem - I'll follow Jesus anywhere." And while I think I would, I'm not so sure that I would be able to count all that I had left behind as dung. I think I would be more like the Israelites in the desert and say, "Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? For there is no food and no water, and we loathe this miserable food." As a matter of fact, i think we say pretty much that everyday of our lives when we fail to trust in God's provision.

I am thankful that God will not test us beyond what we are able to endure - without that caveat, I do not know that I could "follow" Paul and the example he set for us.

Sorry for the length of this - I don't like long posts but I felt your question merited a detailed answer.

V

My heart's Desire
Apr 18th 2009, 05:00 AM
Looks to me like Paul gave up "Religion" to have the REAL Life. :) In other words, I pretty much agree with Vhayes here. As far as family, I've heard it said that he was a Pharisee and they had to be married to be one, (not sure if that is true) but if it is he more than likely did lose his wife. Also, when we become a Christian we are a new creation. Perhaps Paul is speaking of counting the things that belonged to the "old man" or old creation as dung as opposed to the new creation in Christ which he had become.

Firstfruits
Apr 18th 2009, 11:58 AM
hi First Fruits -

I'll try to give you my answer(s) to the best of my ability.
We know a couple of things about Paul. That he was a Jew of Jews - a man who was looked up to by his religion. We know he was very learned and very pious. We know he was a Roman citizen. I would think the education (at least the level of the education) and the fact that he was a Roman citizen would mean he came from a wealthy family. That's pure speculation on my part however, but to me, it makes sense.

What did Paul give up?
He lost his standing in the Jewish community.
He lost his religion or at least his strict adherence to a set of rules and regs. Look at what he says here:
Philippians 3
9 - And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law
I believe Paul was one of those who was so caught up in the "doing" that he had lost total sight of the Promise and the faith that saved. Hence the reason he persecuted the Christians - he thought it would gain him major "God Bucks". Most folks who are caught up in the "doing" of religion (even Christianity) have lost sight of the Promise as well. They become so focused on what they have to "do" that it becomes their identity. Paul literally lost "who" he was.

I think he counted his education as loss as well. Yes, he did indeed use that education and we can all be thankful for that. I think what he is saying is he would gladly have foregone the education if there would have had to have been a choice between it and meeting Christ.

We never hear of Paul's family. One would think he had to have a father and mother somewhere - perhaps brothers and sisters, but we never hear of them. I think he lost his family and perhaps his family's wealth as well when he found Jesus. If he was advancing so well in Judaism and then WHAM - it all stops and he begins following Christ, my guess is his family was angry and embarrassed in the community. My guess is they disowned him.

Yet - he counted all that which he lost as dung. Nothing in comparison to what he gained. Which leads into your next question:

I'd like to say, "Sure, First Fruits. No problem - I'll follow Jesus anywhere." And while I think I would, I'm not so sure that I would be able to count all that I had left behind as dung. I think I would be more like the Israelites in the desert and say, "Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? For there is no food and no water, and we loathe this miserable food." As a matter of fact, i think we say pretty much that everyday of our lives when we fail to trust in God's provision.

I am thankful that God will not test us beyond what we are able to endure - without that caveat, I do not know that I could "follow" Paul and the example he set for us.

Sorry for the length of this - I don't like long posts but I felt your question merited a detailed answer.

V

Thanks V,

Your answer is much appreciated, whatever the length.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Apr 18th 2009, 12:07 PM
Looks to me like Paul gave up "Religion" to have the REAL Life. :) In other words, I pretty much agree with Vhayes here. As far as family, I've heard it said that he was a Pharisee and they had to be married to be one, (not sure if that is true) but if it is he more than likely did lose his wife. Also, when we become a Christian we are a new creation. Perhaps Paul is speaking of counting the things that belonged to the "old man" or old creation as dung as opposed to the new creation in Christ which he had become.

I agree with what you say, as with V's answer to the question. It seems though that Paul being our example is not palatable to all.

This posses a serious problem with the fact that the gospel of Christ that was given to Paul is that by which we shall be judged. How then can we abide in the gospel but not be able to follow the example of Paul whom God has trusted with his word?

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Apr 18th 2009, 12:17 PM
Knowing the things that Paul left behind in order to follow Christ, can we say we are reaching for those things which are before and not still holding on to the things that are past?

13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,

God bless!

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Apr 18th 2009, 12:26 PM
I would like to thank all that have taken part here, and to what I have read it has mainly stayed on track.

Let us not forget Paul's testimony and his example that he has said we ought to follow. Paul's teachings are not Paul's but Christs so if we cannot follow Paul whom Christ has sent then who is it that we are not following?

Mt 10:40 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=40) He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

Jn 13:20 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=13&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=20) Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Teke
Apr 18th 2009, 02:27 PM
God says "be fruitful and multiply" 59 times in the bible. Please tell me when He changed His mind to "don't marry so you can follow Christ 100%"?

Marriage is an image of Christ and the church. Tell me how separating that dynamic fulfills God's will.

I haven't claimed anything was changed. In fact the church incorporated the two concepts (which in itself is somewhat of a marriage also). I am one who is a full supporter of monasticism. If anyone desires to do so, they should certainly be able to. Monasticism actually developed more in Christianity because of persecution. Early monastics, were those who fled persecution and secluded themselves in the deserts, known as the desert fathers. In many ways they are like the prophets. ie. living in caves, the desert

John the Baptist, and other prophets are their role models. Personally I can't see the church without them. As Jesus Himself was much like them and is also the The Prophet/Teacher of prophets. :)

Alaska
Apr 18th 2009, 04:02 PM
If it's merely Paul's opinion, it's no better or worse than the opinions of the sages.



The apostles have a higher standing than Moses.

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

Firstfruits
Apr 19th 2009, 10:10 AM
The apostles have a higher standing than Moses.

For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

Just to add to your what you have stated.

Heb 3:1 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=1) Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;
Heb 3:2 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=2) Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all his house.
Heb 3:3 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=3) For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house.
Heb 3:5 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=5) And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after;
Heb 3:6 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=6) But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Apr 20th 2009, 06:47 AM
Knowing that before Paul came to Christ he was perfect in the law and in order to follow Christ he gave it all up. Are we believers with Paul if we believe as Paul has taught by example in regards to the following scriptures?

4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

Rom 10:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

Does it matter if we do not believe?

God bless!

Firstfruits

9Marksfan
Apr 20th 2009, 11:36 AM
I feel pretty confident that Paul's intention in this passage was to illustrate not the Lord's desire to crush and punish, but to heal and restore.

It's not crushing and punishing - it's dealing with treachery and unbelief.


The nature of Jesus is to heal what we cannot heal ourselves, as re: "A bruised reed He will not break, And a dimly burning wick He will not extinguish; He will faithfully bring forth justice." (Isa 42:3)

Absolutely - but a bruised reed is still standing (only just) and a burning wick is still burning (though only just) - Paul is talking about people who professed faith at ONE time but end up being faithLESS.


It's hard to think of the Lord as making "threats".

You really are reading your Bible very selectively - I think you are in danger of building a false image of Jesus in your mind. See below.


Exhortations, yes, but I wonder if the idea of a holy "threat" might not be more in the hearing of the hearer than in the intention of the speaker.

Well what about these verses?

For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels. Mk 8:38 NKJV

when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, when He comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who believe, 2 Thess 1:7b-10a NKJV

Afterward Jesus found him in the temple, and said to him, “See, you have been made well. Sin no more, lest a worse thing come upon you.” Jn 5:14 NKJV

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’ Matt 7:21-23 NKJV

Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place—unless you repent. Rev 2:5 NKJV

Repent, or else I will come to you quickly and will fight against them with the sword of My mouth. Rev 2:16 NKJV

Indeed I will cast her into a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of their deeds. I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your works. Rev 2:22-23 NKJV

Remember therefore how you have received and heard; hold fast and repent. Therefore if you will not watch, I will come upon you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you. Rev 3:3 NKJV

So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth. Rev 3:16 NKJV

How many are there, do you think, in our CHURCHES, who do not KNOW God and do not OBEY the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ? What do you think He will do to THEM if they don't repent? We ALL ought to make sure we're NOT among them!

...if we deny Him,
He also will deny us. 2 Tim 2:12b NKJV

But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven. Matt 10:33 NKJV

And what does denying mean here? Like Peter, it means saying we don't know Christ - or behaving like we don't (Tit 1:16) - if we don't repent like Peter repented, then Jesus will deny He knows us on the last day (Matt 7:23) - and you know where we'll end up...

Firstfruits
Apr 20th 2009, 03:20 PM
With regards to what Paul gave up in order to follow Christ, would that therefore make him a new creature?

Phil 3:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=50&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
Phil 3:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=50&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.

2 Cor 5:17 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=47&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=17) Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

God bless!

Firstfruits

keck553
Apr 20th 2009, 03:56 PM
David's FEELINGS may not represent timeless biblical truth, but Paul's advice and instructions are in a different category altogether - when he says "I, not the LORD", he is meaning that he is giving a new command that could not be found already in the LORD's teachings or in the OT.

When Paul gives his opinion, I take it as that. I wonder how 'dangerous' it is to throw God's commands in the trash heap, yet blindly follow someone's opinion. God gave His commands already. He didn't "forget" one or two. Every commandment Jesus expounded on is found embedded in the commands He gave through Moses. Every one of them.



This is really dangerous - are you suggesting that Paul's opinions in 1 Cor 7 are not binding Scripture and is somehow subject to you judgement? If so, consider carefully this verse:-

Now concerning virgins: I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give judgment as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy. 1 Cor 7:25 NKJV

Are you saying that Paul is wrong? That God had NOT made him trustworthy?

I trust Pauls testimony and witness. Paul never claimed, not once to have added any commands to what already existed (Torah). Not once did Paul say "God has a new command for you..." Not once. I am not compelled or bound in any way to obey man made rulings and opinions. I obey God above all else. Danger? Please leave that issue between me and God.


Also consider this one:-

If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord. 1 Cor 14:37 NKJV[/quote]

You're using this phrase of context. Paul was teaching Torah mitzvot in chapter 14 and using it to teach against false doctrine that was creeping in, Gnosticism and other Judaic sects along with the pagan habits and rituals still brought in to the congregation by new beleivers.

I realize Paul was a Pharisee and at one time believed that the traditions of the elders exceeded God's commands, but after Damacus, he spent the rest of his life holding God's commands above men's traditions and rules.

keck553
Apr 20th 2009, 04:12 PM
Paul's "opinion" is still inspired. As I said, it's not a command, but it is inspired advice.

During that time, it was far more difficult for married members to do the Lord's work because they couldn't just up and leave with their families like we can today. Likewise, as today, it was harder for married members to continue to admit to being a Christ follower while watching their loved ones suffer because of it. "Deny Christ or we'll chop off your wife's hand." "Deny Christ or we'll violate your daughter."

This makes it quite difficult.

Also, one thing to consider back then is that, for whatever reason, being chaste actually served as evidence of Christ's work in a person's life. Not that those who were married lacked the evidence, but the Romans were astonished that young people would voluntarily choose to remain chaste. It served as a witness for that time because of the sexual nature of the Roman culture.

So we can't just offhandedly dismiss this. Though it is not a command from the Lord, it is still inspired in that it's solid advice.

Ok. What you said here makes sense to me. Some of it sounds like man made doctrine, therefore in the 'common' (vs. Holy) category, but but at least sensable. I still would choose how God told us to be a witness, but I suppose adding a fence to it is OK. Hey, the Pharisees took that to great extent, so I suppose it's not out of character for Paul. Like I said earlier, I am exploring this and thinking it through. Thanks.

Teke
Apr 20th 2009, 07:25 PM
I trust Pauls testimony and witness. Paul never claimed, not once to have added any commands to what already existed (Torah). Not once did Paul say "God has a new command for you..." Not once. I am not compelled or bound in any way to obey man made rulings and opinions. I obey God above all else. Danger? Please leave that issue between me and God.


I realize Paul was a Pharisee and at one time believed that the traditions of the elders exceeded God's commands, but after Damacus, he spent the rest of his life holding God's commands above men's traditions and rules.

Keck, you throw the words, "man made" around a lot. I think you should think about that a bit more. God gave man the authority to do just that, when he gave mankind the whole world as his dominion.

So when you say you are not "bound" by any "man made rulings". Are you saying you are boundlessly unruly?
Because mankind is held within the boundaries God has set for him. Mankind is not infinite as God is.

In the NT epistles are quotes by the Apostles ("man") stating for Christians to follow the rules/guidance AND traditions given by Jesus and the Apostles to the Church.

While you can set whatever bonds on yourself you choose to, that doesn't mean that is what the Apostles taught.

9Marksfan
Apr 20th 2009, 07:31 PM
With regards to what Paul gave up in order to follow Christ, would that therefore make him a new creature?

Phil 3:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=50&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
Phil 3:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=50&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.

2 Cor 5:17 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=47&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=17) Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

God bless!

Firstfruits

There is nothing that we can DO to make ourselves new creatures - it is exclusively the sovereign work of God (as with the original creation of the Universe) - but we LIVE OUT the implications of our new creatureliness by fulfilling Phil 3:14.

Walstib
Apr 20th 2009, 07:43 PM
.... our new creatureliness

:lol: Another new word I learned here.

keck553
Apr 20th 2009, 08:48 PM
Keck, you throw the words, "man made" around a lot. I think you should think about that a bit more. God gave man the authority to do just that, when he gave mankind the whole world as his dominion.

God gave man dominance over the animals and told man to subdue the earth, not EACH OTHER. Big difference. If you want to follow men, you might as well convert to Judaism and follow the talmud.


So when you say you are not "bound" by any "man made rulings". Are you saying you are boundlessly unruly?
Because mankind is held within the boundaries God has set for him. Mankind is not infinite as God is.

Obviously I follow civil and criminal law. That's not the subject here. We're talking about what Paul says is his "opinon". I certainly am not bound to follow his "opinion".


In the NT epistles are quotes by the Apostles ("man") stating for Christians to follow the rules/guidance AND traditions given by Jesus and the Apostles to the Church.

This is a Pharisee arguement. Name one man made "tradition" Yeshua commands us to keep above God's commands. Just one.


While you can set whatever bonds on yourself you choose to, that doesn't mean that is what the Apostles taught.

Tell me what human traditions Yeshua's emmisaries taught for others to keep. Please list them.

Thanks!

9Marksfan
Apr 20th 2009, 08:53 PM
:lol: Another new word I learned here.

It's a term I've heard a number of preachers use - OK, so it's maybe not in Webster's yet, but I like it - and it makes sense!

Btw, speaking of new words, two I see here a lot are "prideful" and "humbleness" - do they have different meanings from "proud" and "humility"?!?

9Marksfan
Apr 20th 2009, 09:06 PM
When Paul gives his opinion, I take it as that. I wonder how 'dangerous' it is to throw God's commands in the trash heap, yet blindly follow someone's opinion.

Are you suggesting I am throwing God's commands in the trash heap? Are you suggesting Paul is? Why are you saying that I (and others here) are blindly following someone's opinion. I ask again, had God made Paul trustworthy or not?


God gave His commands already. He didn't "forget" one or two. Every commandment Jesus expounded on is found embedded in the commands He gave through Moses. Every one of them.

I agree - so are you saying we don't need the NT?


I trust Paul's testimony and witness. Paul never claimed, not once to have added any commands to what already existed (Torah). Not once did Paul say "God has a new command for you..." Not once. I am not compelled or bound in any way to obey man made rulings and opinions.

So are you saying that Paul's words were not divinely inspired and that the NT is of lesser authority than the OT?


I obey God above all else.

Do you believe that every word of the NT is divinely inspired and the word of God? If not, then is ANY of it? How do you determine authority?


Danger? Please leave that issue between me and God.


I'm sorry, but none of us knows how many people read these posts - we need to exercise great caution in what we post - you seem to be belittling the authority of Paul's writings and seem to be suggesting that they contradict other parts of Scripture. That IS dangerous - for you and others - this is a public Forum and each of us is accountable for what we post. Please keep that in mind. The words little ones, millstone and sea come to mind....


You're using this phrase of context. Paul was teaching Torah mitzvot in chapter 14 and using it to teach against false doctrine that was creeping in, Gnosticism and other Judaic sects along with the pagan habits and rituals still brought in to the congregation by new beleivers.

Hmm - where is the command to cover one's head in the OT?


I realize Paul was a Pharisee and at one time believed that the traditions of the elders exceeded God's commands, but after Damacus, he spent the rest of his life holding God's commands above men's traditions and rules.

And that's why he wrote all those letters with fuller - and sometimes new - commands not found in Torah. He knew he had apostolic authority to write in the way we did - and we are all indebted to him for having obeyed the LORD in this way and given us the full revelation of God's truth, which we would not have had otherwise.

Teke
Apr 20th 2009, 09:36 PM
God gave man dominance over the animals and told man to subdue the earth, not EACH OTHER. Big difference. If you want to follow men, you might as well convert to Judaism and follow the talmud.


Obviously I follow civil and criminal law. That's not the subject here. We're talking about what Paul says is his "opinon". I certainly am not bound to follow his "opinion".


This is a Pharisee arguement. Name one man made "tradition" Yeshua commands us to keep above God's commands. Just one.


Tell me what human traditions Yeshua's emmisaries taught for others to keep. Please list them.

Thanks!

Keck, Christians are bound by bonds of love. And lest you forget, I am a Trinitarian Christian. Jesus was a man also (not negating His divinity here), and we follow His example and teachings.

Your dialectic approach is in contradiction to Trinity theology.

God created man, ergo mankind was given such ability by God.
Good thing for you too, or you wouldn't know what you know except from others.

So while you don't have to literally go following men around, you do need their help. And, God in the Person of Jesus has commanded us to love "one another".

keck553
Apr 20th 2009, 10:14 PM
Keck, Christians are bound by bonds of love. And lest you forget, I am a Trinitarian Christian. Jesus was a man also (not negating His divinity here), and we follow His example and teachings.

Jesus is God. Paul is not God. Jesus does the will of the Father, not change it. He is fully God and fully man. No one else in the universe can make that claim.


Your dialectic approach is in contradiction to Trinity theology.

I could accuse you of de-deifying Jesus, but I won't. I could say that your allusion that because He was a man, that we should follow other men is Talmudic and legalistic. Jesus is fully God.


God created man, ergo mankind was given such ability by God.
Good thing for you too, or you wouldn't know what you know except from others.

Sorry, I missed your point here....


So while you don't have to literally go following men around, you do need their help. And, God in the Person of Jesus has commanded us to love "one another".

What does 'love one another' have to do with this? I'm supposed to follow someone's traditions and rules because I'm commanded to love them? How many people's ideas should I follow? What if they oppose each other? Should a follow a Mullah because of the command to 'love one another'? You're confusing me. God tells us how to 'love one another'. It's all in your Bible. No one else has the authority or the wisdom. How could they?

And of course I need others' help, for ministering, teaching, learning and fellowshipping. I've seen Christ in you Teke, in fact I've been humbled by Him in you. That has nothing to do with being religiously bound to any man made traditions.

Firstfruits
Apr 21st 2009, 08:30 AM
There is nothing that we can DO to make ourselves new creatures - it is exclusively the sovereign work of God (as with the original creation of the Universe) - but we LIVE OUT the implications of our new creatureliness by fulfilling Phil 3:14.

Thanks 9Marksfan,

That is agreed.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Teke
Apr 21st 2009, 02:19 PM
What does 'love one another' have to do with this?

The whole NT is on the subject. The gospel focus is on "one another".


I'm supposed to follow someone's traditions and rules because I'm commanded to love them?

Did you not do as much for your parents as a child.


How many people's ideas should I follow? What if they oppose each other? Should a follow a Mullah because of the command to 'love one another'? You're confusing me. God tells us how to 'love one another'. It's all in your Bible. No one else has the authority or the wisdom. How could they?

You are not required to follow peoples ideas. You are required to be obedient. And to quietly with fear and trembling work out your own salvation.
Yes, God tells us how to love one another, and to even love our enemies. God's grace and illumination is upon all, whether good or bad. He has it all in His power.

The bible is a book. It doesn't have all the answers for you, just one, Jesus Christ. The bible is part of the tradition of the church, and it's main use is to focus on Christ. You are not alone with only a book, you have the church, filled with the Holy Spirit, to help you.


And of course I need others' help, for ministering, teaching, learning and fellowshipping. I've seen Christ in you Teke, in fact I've been humbled by Him in you. That has nothing to do with being religiously bound to any man made traditions.

Then glory in Christ. You will be bound by something in this world, the choice is yours. However, I would not lightly reject the Church which Jesus established over something else. God will lead you into all truth if your heart is open for Him to do so. :hug:

I see the love of our Lord in you Keck. But remember our battle is not of flesh and blood, but of spiritual wickedness in high places. Humanity is not your enemy, it is a victim of that which seeks to corrupt what God has created for good.

Pray for the mercy of God on all as Jesus did. Because as Jesus said, we know not what we do. As we hang nailed on a cross as He was, that is all we can do. Mankind will continue in their free will to produce the fruit of their heart.

Firstfruits
Apr 21st 2009, 02:52 PM
Are the things Paul says in the following just a tradition and not for an example for us to follow?

4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

Rom 10:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. :bible:

Is Christ not the end of the law for everyone that believeth?

Is Paul to be believed?

Is Pauls example to be followed?

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Teke
Apr 21st 2009, 03:12 PM
Following an example is how tradition starts.

Emanate
Apr 21st 2009, 03:26 PM
Rom 10:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. :bible:

Is Christ not the end of the law for everyone that believeth?


No, Messiah is end of the law for righteousness for everyone that believeth. Messiah revealed the true righteousness of the law, thus justifiying us that believe.

You see how dropped the meaning by deleting the key phrase?

Firstfruits
Apr 21st 2009, 03:26 PM
Following an example is how tradition starts.

The only thing here is that the gospel Paul has was given to him by Christ, that same gospel is how we shall be judged. If we therefore cannot follow Paul as he followed Christ then we have a problem.

Mt 10:40 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=40) He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

Jn 13:20 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=13&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=20) Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

Did Jesus send Paul?

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Emanate
Apr 21st 2009, 03:27 PM
By 'follow Paul' does that mean following various isloated passages of Saul's writings, or do his actions have any say in the matter?

Firstfruits
Apr 21st 2009, 03:37 PM
No, Messiah is end of the law for righteousness for everyone that believeth. Messiah revealed the true righteousness of the law, thus justifiying us that believe.

You see how dropped the meaning by deleting the key phrase?

Paul was blamless in the law yet Paul gave it up in order to follow Christ, when Paul was called the law became as rubbish.

6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Teke
Apr 21st 2009, 03:40 PM
The only thing here is that the gospel Paul has was given to him by Christ, that same gospel is how we shall be judged. If we therefore cannot follow Paul as he followed Christ then we have a problem.

Mt 10:40 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=40) He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

Jn 13:20 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=13&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=20) Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

Did Jesus send Paul?

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Indeed Jesus sent Paul, as well as the other holy Apostles.

2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
All of tradition is not written, some is passed on by word of mouth.

2Th 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

You'll get no arguement from me on following Apostolic teaching and examples, IOW tradition. :saint:

Teke
Apr 21st 2009, 03:51 PM
No, Messiah is end of the law for righteousness for everyone that believeth. Messiah revealed the true righteousness of the law, thus justifiying us that believe.

You see how dropped the meaning by deleting the key phrase?

Romans 10:4 clarifies that Christ puts an end to the law as a way for people to gain righteousness without Him (see v5). Thus, He terminates the old covenant wihout nullifying its law as useless. Because His righteousness is superior to that of the law, He fulfills the law.
So, "everyone who believes" in Christ participates in His incomparable righteousness.

NOTE! His righteousness is not comparable to the law. Sorry if that ruffles some feathers, but Jesus isn't righteous because of the law. There is no comparison.

Firstfruits
Apr 21st 2009, 03:51 PM
Indeed Jesus sent Paul, as well as the other holy Apostles.

2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
All of tradition is not written, some is passed on by word of mouth.

2Th 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

You'll get no arguement from me on following Apostolic teaching and examples, IOW tradition. :saint:

Thanks Teke,

God bless you!

Firstfruits

My heart's Desire
Apr 21st 2009, 05:12 PM
Why couldn't we follow Paul as he followed Christ. Most of the N.T letters are Paul's.

Firstfruits
Apr 21st 2009, 05:43 PM
Why couldn't we follow Paul as he followed Christ. Most of the N.T letters are Paul's.

It is not easy for those who hold the law in respect, and that it should not be any less, it is undoubtedly Gods law, however Paul even though he was blameless in the law, he gave it all up for Christ. Not a decision taken lightly.

4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

Who deserves more honour, Moses or Christ?

Heb 3:3 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=3) For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house.

This does not seem to be so.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Emanate
Apr 21st 2009, 06:08 PM
Romans 10:4 clarifies that Christ puts an end to the law as a way for people to gain righteousness without Him (see v5).


You cannot find one scriptural example of anyone who was made righteouss by the law. the Law was never about gaining righteousness. How could Messiah end something that never was. Sure, Messiah is the goal of righteousness, but he did not end something that did not exist.

Emanate
Apr 21st 2009, 06:12 PM
Paul was blamless in the law yet Paul gave it up in order to follow Christ, when Paul was called the law became as rubbish.

6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

God bless you!

Firstfruits


Right, Saul was blameless in the Jewish Law, yet he did not attain righteousness until Messiah. correct?

keck553
Apr 21st 2009, 06:15 PM
I'll try to give you my answer(s) to the best of my ability.
We know a couple of things about Paul. That he was a Jew of Jews - a man who was looked up to by his religion. We know he was very learned and very pious. We know he was a Roman citizen. I would think the education (at least the level of the education) and the fact that he was a Roman citizen would mean he came from a wealthy family. That's pure speculation on my part however, but to me, it makes sense.

All of the above, except I'm not so sure of his family's weath. His dad was undoubtably also a tent maker. I'm not sure how prosperous this trade was, but I do know that most travelled with the caravans as labor-ready craftsmen. It kind of makes sense just to the point that Paul seemed really familiar with the various religious traditions of the Gentiles in all of the Roman Empire. I have a little problem with him having been stuck in Tarsus, which was a cultural backwater as far as Jews are concerned. For Paul to have been a disciple of Gameleil, he would have had to have been the brightest of the brightest, the best of the best in oral and written Torah halachah at a very young age.

As a side note, did you know that one could not be in the Sanhedron unless he was married? I guess they figured you needed relationship experience and a leader of your house before you could lead Israel. Interesting.

Also, concerning marriage, don't you agree that man+woman is more in God's image than just one? Considerinig God took something out of a man to make a woman make the image incomplete, don't you think? Although I will concede that some callings of God do not agree with marriage, such as dangerous missionary work. When a couple marry, they should not separate for very long.


What did Paul give up?
He lost his standing in the Jewish community.
He lost his religion or at least his strict adherence to a set of rules and regs. Look at what he says here:
Philippians 3
9 - And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law
I believe Paul was one of those who was so caught up in the "doing" that he had lost total sight of the Promise and the faith that saved. Hence the reason he persecuted the Christians - he thought it would gain him major "God Bucks". Most folks who are caught up in the "doing" of religion (even Christianity) have lost sight of the Promise as well. They become so focused on what they have to "do" that it becomes their identity. Paul literally lost "who" he was.

You know when God calls, a servent doesn't really dwell on what they give up. By no means am I comparing myself to Paul, God help me that I can attain 1% of his faith and commitment, but many of us have left congregations that held much promise for our personal edification and success in the community at the simple call of God. What Paul did was a shining example of what it means to leave your peers in pursuit of Godly truth. He deserves much respect and admiration. As far as 'doing', your religious training may have tainted your world view. I can only speak for myself that obeyiing God is a love reponse to His salvation, to His lovingkindness, not a call to win His favor. Please keep that in mind.[/quote]



I think he counted his education as loss as well. Yes, he did indeed use that education and we can all be thankful for that. I think what he is saying is he would gladly have foregone the education if there would have had to have been a choice between it and meeting Christ.

Yeah, he said as much. Last night at Bible study, I prayed my faith would exceed my knowledge. Perhaps I should brace myself? LOL


We never hear of Paul's family. One would think he had to have a father and mother somewhere - perhaps brothers and sisters, but we never hear of them. I think he lost his family and perhaps his family's wealth as well when he found Jesus. If he was advancing so well in Judaism and then WHAM - it all stops and he begins following Christ, my guess is his family was angry and embarrassed in the community. My guess is they disowned him.

Who knows? Judaism, mormonism, even Christians deal with this. When I left my congregation a couple years ago, they were banned from even mentioning my name. It's a human disposition that crosses all lines of religion.

You know, I was studing the eating vegetables verses, I'm sure you are familiar with them. It wasn't only Judaism that disowned their family members. When a Gentile came to Christ, his pagan family also disowned him. Now think about this. A Jew comes to dine with a Gentile, knowing that the other members of his household still probably sacrifice animals to pagan Gods. Their safe 'bet' at the table was to stick to vegetables, yes? Somehow this simple truth gets pretty perverted to man's dietary desires, but that is the truth of the matter. Makes sense when you know the reality behind the verse[/quote]



Yet - he counted all that which he lost as dung. Nothing in comparison to what he gained. Which leads into your next question:

Well yeah. What good is knowledge without a relationship with God?


I'd like to say, "Sure, First Fruits. No problem - I'll follow Jesus anywhere." And while I think I would, I'm not so sure that I would be able to count all that I had left behind as dung. I think I would be more like the Israelites in the desert and say, "Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? For there is no food and no water, and we loathe this miserable food." As a matter of fact, i think we say pretty much that everyday of our lives when we fail to trust in God's provision.

Once you have abundant faith and a relationship with God, why stagnate? God wants us to grow and become more in the image of His Son. Sound learning and teaching of His ways are essential in that growing process.


I am thankful that God will not test us beyond what we are able to endure - without that caveat, I do not know that I could "follow" Paul and the example he set for us.

God tests me beyond what I can endure all the time. That's why I come to Him. If I could endure a test, why would I need Him?


Sorry for the length of this - I don't like long posts but I felt your question merited a detailed answer.

I always appreciate your posts. They come straight from your heart with no malice. God bless you.

Firstfruits
Apr 21st 2009, 06:37 PM
Right, Saul was blameless in the Jewish Law, yet he did not attain righteousness until Messiah. correct?

Yes, after he had given up the law and all that he had to follow Christ.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Teke
Apr 21st 2009, 06:43 PM
You cannot find one scriptural example of anyone who was made righteouss by the law. the Law was never about gaining righteousness. How could Messiah end something that never was. Sure, Messiah is the goal of righteousness, but he did not end something that did not exist.

I agree. Just pointing out that Romans 10:5 says that, "Moses wrote about the righteousness which is of the law".

Verse 6 contrasts that with, "But the righteousness of faith speaks in this way...."

Apparently there were quite a few self righteous people that needed clarification.

keck553
Apr 21st 2009, 06:45 PM
Right, Saul was blameless in the Jewish Law, yet he did not attain righteousness until Messiah. correct?

As I see it (and correct me if I am wrong)

1. Oral Torah is "Jewish Law"
2. Written Torah is God's laws
3. God's law was NEVER, EVER in the tiniest way a path to salvation. The Hebrews were already saved from Egypt. Torah is a response to God, not an admission ticket.

Faith and trust in Messiah is the only path to eternal life. Period. The rest is reponse for salvation. God defines the response as love. "If you love Me, you'll keep my commandments."

Pretty simple if you ask me.

keck553
Apr 21st 2009, 06:47 PM
Yes, after he had given up the law and all that he had to follow Christ.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

What law FF? Show me.

Emanate
Apr 21st 2009, 08:18 PM
Yes, after he had given up the law and all that he had to follow Christ.

Saul "gave up" the law? is Acts not a fair explanation of Saul's walk?

keck553
Apr 21st 2009, 08:24 PM
Saul "gave up" the law? is Acts not a fair explanation of Saul's walk?

Acts seems rather well documented to me.

Firstfruits
Apr 22nd 2009, 06:28 AM
What law FF? Show me.

This is what Paul says he had and what he gave up in order to follow Christ.

4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Apr 22nd 2009, 06:32 AM
Saul "gave up" the law? is Acts not a fair explanation of Saul's walk?

Paul gave up all that he had to follow Christ.

13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,

What things has Paul said he has given up that are behind?

God bless you!

Firstfruits

9Marksfan
Apr 22nd 2009, 09:00 AM
I've just started reading 1 Thessalonians in my QTs and I was struck by this verse:-

And you became followers of us and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Spirit, 1 Thess 1:6 NKJV

They "followed" Paul, Silas and Timothy in that their response to the word of God was in suffering, but with spiritual joy - indeed, suffering and joy marked the Lord Jesus' ministry as well, didn't they?

So it's not really about man-centredness or traditions at all - but about going the way of the cross - joyfully.

:OFFT: everyone!

Firstfruits
Apr 22nd 2009, 11:33 AM
I've just started reading 1 Thessalonians in my QTs and I was struck by this verse:-

And you became followers of us and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Spirit, 1 Thess 1:6 NKJV

They "followed" Paul, Silas and Timothy in that their response to the word of God was in suffering, but with spiritual joy - indeed, suffering and joy marked the Lord Jesus' ministry as well, didn't they?

So it's not really about man-centredness or traditions at all - but about going the way of the cross - joyfully.

:OFFT: everyone!

Thanks 9Marksfan,

1 Cor 11:1 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=46&CHAP=11&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=1) Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

keck553
Apr 22nd 2009, 03:34 PM
This is what Paul says he had and what he gave up in order to follow Christ.

4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,

God bless you!

Firstfruits




This has nothing to do with God's instructions. It has everything to do with Paul's worldly gains and trust in his image of God and his own perceived self-righteousness instead of giving up self and trusting God.

Firstfruits
Apr 22nd 2009, 03:39 PM
This has nothing to do with God's instructions. It has everything to do with Paul's worldly gains and trust in his image of God and his own perceived self-righteousness instead of giving up self and trusting God.

So if it said like the following, would that therefore be acceptable?

1 Jn 3:23 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=62&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=23) And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
1 Jn 3:24 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=62&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=24) And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.

Is this according to the gospel of Christ as received by Paul?

Firstfruits

keck553
Apr 22nd 2009, 05:37 PM
So if it said like the following, would that therefore be acceptable?

1 Jn 3:23 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=62&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=23) And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
1 Jn 3:24 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=62&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=24) And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.

Is this according to the gospel of Christ as received by Paul?

Firstfruits

It's a summary, yes. You seem to want to read it as His ONLY commandment. John says that if all of what Yeshua said could be recorded it would exceed all the books in the world. Think about that.

Firstfruits
Apr 22nd 2009, 05:54 PM
It's a summary, yes. You seem to want to read it as His ONLY commandment. John says that if all of what Yeshua said could be recorded it would exceed all the books in the world. Think about that.

According to the gospel it is complete, unless you which to follow Moses as well as Jesus, if so why can we not follow whom Christ has sent, since he is God?

The gospel is not the same as the law that God gave to Moses. It is scriptually impossible.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

keck553
Apr 22nd 2009, 06:03 PM
According to the gospel it is complete, unless you which to follow Moses as well as Jesus, if so why can we not follow whom Christ has sent, since he is God?

The gospel is not the same as the law that God gave to Moses. It is scriptually impossible.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

FF, I've never followed Moses, so I have no idea what you are talking about.

Since Christ is God, can we not follow HIs instructions? Did He not exist before the foundation of the world? Should we deny His Word given before He came as one of us? Is He not the Living Word of God? Should we deny that?

I assume you keep at least 160 of His instructions given through Moses. Why?

Emanate
Apr 22nd 2009, 06:09 PM
Paul gave up all that he had to follow Christ.

13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,

What things has Paul said he has given up that are behind?

God bless you!

Firstfruits


I am confused. If Saul "gave up the law to follow Christ", then why does acts record his continuance in the same law that he "gave up" to follow Messiah? Sabbath, Passover, the sacrifical system, loving his neighbor, correcting his neighbor, circumcision - all of these things are of the law yet he continued in them (and persuaded others to also continue in them). If he gave them up, why did he still do them?

keck553
Apr 22nd 2009, 06:13 PM
I am confused. If Saul "gave up the law to follow Christ", then why does acts record his continuance in the same law that he "gave up" to follow Messiah? Sabbath, Passover, the sacrifical system, loving his neighbor, correcting his neighbor, circumcision - all of these things are of the law yet he continued in them (and persuaded others to also continue in them). If he gave them up, why did he still do them?

Don't you know? Of course, Paul lied so as not to 'offend' the Jews. After all Torah is annulled, so we can now lie. :rolleyes:

Firstfruits
Apr 22nd 2009, 06:17 PM
FF, I've never followed Moses, so I have no idea what you are talking about.

Since Christ is God, can we not follow HIs instructions? Did He not exist before the foundation of the world? Should we deny His Word given before He came as one of us? Is He not the Living Word of God? Should we deny that?

I assume you keep at least 160 of His instructions given through Moses. Why?

According to scripture what has Christ commanded us to obey?

Mt 28:20 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=28&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=20) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Jn 15:10 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=10) If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

Jn 15:12 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=12) This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.

Lk 10:27 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=27) And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.

These are Christs Commandments, what do you think is missing according to what is written?

God bless you!

Firstfruits

keck553
Apr 22nd 2009, 06:21 PM
Um, do you not believe He is God? Do you think the Tanach and all of the instructions in it were inspired by some other god? Do you not believe Paul when he said ALL SCRIPTURE is profitable for training in righteousness? There was no written Gospel when Paul said this. So what Scripture is Paul referrinig to?

Emanate
Apr 22nd 2009, 06:22 PM
Lk 10:27 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=27) And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.



Uh Oh, you mean Messiah quoted from the law when he gave us his commands?

keck553
Apr 22nd 2009, 06:23 PM
Uh Oh, you mean Messiah quoted from the law when he gave us his commands?

I thought that was done away with? What's happening here?

Firstfruits
Apr 22nd 2009, 06:33 PM
Uh Oh, you mean Messiah quoted from the law when he gave us his commands?

Do you have a problem with what Christ has commanded knowing that God said we were to hear what ever Jesus said and what Jesus said was what the Father had given him.

If you can say that before the law was given through Moses, Abraham lived by Gods law then what more Jesus the Son of God.

Is love something that is sopposed to change or should love be love?

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Emanate
Apr 22nd 2009, 06:39 PM
Do you have a problem with what Christ has commanded knowing that God said we were to hear what ever Jesus said and what Jesus said was what the Father had given him.

If you can say that before the law was given through Moses, Abraham lived by Gods law then what more Jesus the Son of God.

Is love something that is sopposed to change or should love be love?

God bless you!

Firstfruits


Nevertheless, Messiah quoted the law when giving commands. Sometimes he even made the laws larger. The commands to "love God" and "love your neighbor" was the Rabbinic definition of the summary of the law centuries before Messiah. So if Messiah said the greatest commands were found in the law, and we are condemned by sin if we follow the law as Messiah stated, where does that leave us?

Firstfruits
Apr 22nd 2009, 06:45 PM
Nevertheless, Messiah quoted the law when giving commands. Sometimes he even made the laws larger. The commands to "love God" and "love your neighbor" was the Rabbinic definition of the summary of the law centuries before Messiah. So if Messiah said the greatest commands were found in the law, and we are condemned by sin if we follow the law as Messiah stated, where does that leave us?

He commanded us those things that he wanted us to teach others to obey, he did not command the disciples more than God required of them.

Unless you know of any scripture that Christ commanded his disciples that we do not obey then the gospel we have is all we need.

Firstfruits

Teke
Apr 22nd 2009, 07:35 PM
Nevertheless, Messiah quoted the law when giving commands.

You mean He related to soemthing they were familiar with. He is preaching to the Jews.


Sometimes he even made the laws larger. The commands to "love God" and "love your neighbor" was the Rabbinic definition of the summary of the law centuries before Messiah. So if Messiah said the greatest commands were found in the law, and we are condemned by sin if we follow the law as Messiah stated, where does that leave us?


If He seemed to make any "law" larger, then it would seem to have been necessary for His point to be made to His audience of the time.

What He didn't say, was, "Everyone must keep the law like the Jews do" or "as it is written".
There are any number of ways it could be said. As long as the understanding is imparted I don't see any problem. Because at the end of it all, we are going to be who God created us to be. And there is no law that will change that.

I don't see where we are condemned by sin if we follow the law, but the law will not forgive us as He does. Sin needs forgiveness, not lawful punishment. ie. do unto others

There are some pretty hard headed kids that will take a lickin and keep on tickin. Even lil children know how to handle this sort. They know when they will get into trouble and be punished, they just decide if it's worth it or not.
I just don't see that as what God wants for us. As we can easily manipulate such circumstances.

If anything, I see Jesus appealling to the conscience of those He spoke to. As crafty as we can be with our minds, we can't escape our own conscience on matters that cut to the wick of our hearts. Such a state leaves us naked as Adam and Eve were. There is no covering, such as laws to justify our actions. There is no where else to lay any blame except with ourself.

That is where we are left. With no place to turn except to Him.

keck553
Apr 22nd 2009, 07:50 PM
That's not what Paul said.

2Ti 3:15-17
(15) and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
(16) All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
(17) so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.


In Paul's day, the only Scripture was the Tanach. Do you believe Paul?

Emanate
Apr 22nd 2009, 08:35 PM
What He didn't say, was, "Everyone must keep the law like the Jews do" or "as it is written".
There are any number of ways it could be said. As long as the understanding is imparted I don't see any problem. Because at the end of it all, we are going to be who God created us to be. And there is no law that will change that.


Luke 10:25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
27And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
28And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

Teke
Apr 22nd 2009, 09:50 PM
Luke 10:25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
27And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
28And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

Indeed, "how readest thou?" (IOW how do YOU read what is written) says it all. :)

Emanate
Apr 23rd 2009, 01:25 AM
Indeed, "how readest thou?" (IOW how do YOU read what is written) says it all. :)


Yet, he referred him to the Law to gain his answers. And the scribe's answer lined up 100% with Messiah's answer. Law.

Teke
Apr 23rd 2009, 12:50 PM
Yet, he referred him to the Law to gain his answers. And the scribe's answer lined up 100% with Messiah's answer. Law.

The "scribe"? meaning the "lawyer". This is my point about what Jesus used to explain the gospel. When speaking with Jews He used their Torah. He guided them with their guidance/Torah.

This same approach was not used by the Apostles when they preached to others about the gospel. The whole point was to get across the meaning of the gospel in whatever means the hearers could understand.

The Apostle St Andrew when preaching to the Slavs of southern Russia, did not use the Torah. The people didn't even have a written language yet. The Russian three bar cross is associated with St Andrew, in that the he was the first to use the third bar to relate by symbolism, what the gospel meant. He slanted it when teaching of the passion of Christ to the people. To this day, this cross is distinct to Russian Christians.

You will find many uses of symbols, such as crosses, used to relate the gospel message. another example, the budding cross representive of Christ (the cross for Christ) and the Apsotles (the twelve rounded buds at the end of the 4 cross ends), the three bar cross also associated as a key, to forgiveness, I could go on and on about the subject.....

My point, is that it was not the law which led people to Christ, and it was not the law that the Apostles used to speak with everyone about Jesus. But whatever was useful out of necessity, did they use to spread the good news to the world.

And we know by history, that this was a successful approach, as we see Christianity all over the world. As the church was charged to preach Christ alone, not Christ plus the law.

So when I point out, 'how it's read', I mean is the understanding imparted to relate it to any person of any culture.

William
Jan 4th 2012, 02:43 AM
I think Christ plus anything is nothing. It's all about Jesus, Father and Spirit. Paul was used for the glory of God but when we have God, Jesus to follow we needn't follow anyone else.

Paul it seems to me was the vessel for the truth of God, why follow a vessel, follow the God which fills it.

God Bless.

Eyelog
Jan 6th 2012, 01:39 AM
I think Christ plus anything is nothing. It's all about Jesus, Father and Spirit. Paul was used for the glory of God but when we have God, Jesus to follow we needn't follow anyone else.

Paul it seems to me was the vessel for the truth of God, why follow a vessel, follow the God which fills it.

God Bless.

Paul saw himself as adding something to Christ's work, which we too are expected to do. First, in the same passage we get Paul's words:


10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.


Jesus Himself said:


John 14:12
New American Standard Bible (NASB)

12 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father.


What does that all mean? :)

Firstfruits
Jan 11th 2012, 01:25 PM
Paul said the following;

Acts 26:22 Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:
Acts 26:23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

Is the message of Paul not the same as the apostles, as Christ commanded them to teach?

Luke 24:45-47
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:
47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Firstfruits

Your Advert here


Hosted by Webnet77