Christians of Sup Forums: how do you explain the apparent contradictions between the message of Jesus and the message of Paul?
Why does Jesus appear as a particularist reformer preaching to the people of Israel, as opposed to Paul who preaches a universal message to the Gentiles?
Other urls found in this thread:
biblegateway.com
biblegateway.com
youtu.be
youtube.com
christogenea.org
christogenea.org
christogenea.org
christogenea.org
christogenea.org
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
wait the Christian Bible is full of contradictions?!?
really makes your wheat chaffe
Paul was more cropped hair with a goatee.
Jesus preached to the Jews, who rejected him. The Church then turned to the gentiles. It's best explained by the parable of Luke 14:
Luk 14:16 Then said he unto him, A certain man made a great supper, and bade many:
Luk 14:17 And sent his servant at supper time to say to them that were bidden, Come; for all things are now ready.
Luk 14:18 And they all with one consent began to make excuse. The first said unto him, I have bought a piece of ground, and I must needs go and see it: I pray thee have me excused.
Luk 14:19 And another said, I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I go to prove them: I pray thee have me excused.
Luk 14:20 And another said, I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come.
Luk 14:21 So that servant came, and shewed his lord these things. Then the master of the house being angry said to his servant, Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in hither the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind.
Luk 14:22And the servant said, Lord, it is done as thou hast commanded, and yet there is room.
Luk 14:23 And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled.
Luk 14:24 For I say unto you, That none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper.
2 Peter 3:15-16
"Consider also that our Lord’s patience brings salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom God gave him. 16He writes this way in all his letters, speaking in them about such matters. Some parts of his letters are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction."
get lost mudslime scum, stop taking the Holy Texts out of context!!!
Jesus preached to all people but gave Israel the first shot. They turned him down so the gentiles got their chance. Gentile converts were not expected to hold the same expectations as the people of Israel so much of the law didn't apply to them.
So it all boiled down to Jew vs Jew Worshiper? Kek!
Thank you for your reply, but I also wanted to know why the message seemed to change so drastically between the mission of Jesus and that of Paul.
It seems that they placed emphasis on different things, for example, Jesus defending the law of Moses and emphasizing good works, whereas Paul waived mosaic law and emphasized faith above all.
paul
>how do you explain the apparent contradictions between the message of Jesus and the message of Paul?
By not being fucking retarded.
>Jesus fulfilled the law
Let's look at the rest of the passage, shall we?
biblegateway.com
Look what Jesus is telling his listeners: he's telling them to not exchange an eye for an eye but to turn the other cheek. He's saying that not (only) the very act of committing adultery, but merely looking at another's spouse with lustful eyes is sin. Is Jesus contradicting Jesus in the exact same fucking Sermon? Of course not, that'd be retarded. Like you.
Now let's actually look at the Law Jesus is talking about.
biblegateway.com
Intereting! Moses told his followers that a new prophet would arise who would overturn Deuteronomy and come with a New Law (a New Covenant, if you will)? I wonder if Jesus referred to this when claiming he was fulfilling the law rather than abolishing it...
christians are supposed to keep the law
the law applies for all eternity
but merely you can do anything u want in the new testament and """get away with it""""
if you teach sinning and breaking even one commandment ur doing wrong
u will be called least in the kingdom
no contradiction
also theres a thing called dispensationalism
matthew talks a lot to the jews living during the tribulation period
the sheeps and the goats judgment is not for christians
its for people on earth during that time of jacobs trouble
he says FLEE INTO THE WILDERNESS ALL YE IN JUDEA FOR THEN SHALL BE GREAT TRIBULATION OF THE LIKES THIS WORLD HAS NEVER SEEN
not talking to christians of course because we wont be here for that
It's only an apparent contradiction caused by unfamiliarity with the texts. Christ always to have the Gospel spread among the gentiles, but would wait until after he had been murdered by the betrayal of the Jews.
Matthew 21
33 Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country:
34And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it.
35And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.
36Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise.
37But last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.
38But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.
39And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him.
40When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen?
41They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.
42Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
43Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
44And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
45And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.
46But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet
the gospel of john is for the gentiles
matthew is appealing to jews more
but theres no contradiction
just a more mainlined message and easy believism because faith is all you need
but jews wouldnt understand that because they kept the law all their life
so they need more to understand from that backround
becaue they know the law is still a good thing
At the end of Matthew's Gospel (after the Resurrection):
18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
>but would wait until after he had been murdered by the betrayal of the Jews.
Luke was a gentile though. Christ probably did intend the greater spread of Christianity among gentiles to take place later, but he didn't exactly chase gentiles out of his initial following.
All the OT talks about Christ and Christianity vs Israel. First Christian knew it and the anti judaizers won. The word kills the spirit.
People have had difficulty with Paul since the time he lived. Some take Paul's "faith not works" too far, just as they did in his day.
When Paul says:
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
He means " it is by faith that you have entered into salvation and not because of anything you may have done before".
The misinterpretation of that has led to the heresy of "once saved always saved", and also the notion that one can willfully sin and never be held accountable for it. It simply isn't true.
We say "we are dead to the law", meaning the law of epaphs of flour and sacrifices in the temple, washing of hands as ritual purity, etc. But those negatives, thou shall not kill, etc., and also the positives, do unto others....we are still bound by.
The funny thing is that, when you get into it, the Catholic and mainline Protestant interpretations of this are barely different.
Catholocism believes in salvation through works and faith, because faith leads to good works.
Mainline Protestantism believes salvation through faith alone, and that faith merely expresses itself through works.
The nuance is incredibly subtle and pedantic, to the point where discussing it is barely worthwhile.
we will keep the old testament laws forever and ever in heaven
Ezekiel 37:24
And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them.
Matthew 24:35
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
it is once saved always saved bro
were not bound by the law
christians are supposed to keep the law for rewards and basically just to do the right thing
but u can be a serial killer and go to heaven
When Jesus died you didn't need to follow them. Jesus taught faith alone salvation(John 3:14-18/36) but that you should follow the commandments but he knows no one will.
Read yoir Bible you retard.
ya p much what he said
you put it in a lot simpler words than i could lelelelelle
he said "good sir what must i DO"
but jesus said keep the commandments
but then he walked away sad because it was impossible to do everything
it wasnt actually saying u can keep the commandments to enter into life
No
"saved through faith" well it looks like you don't have to do any works. "gift of God" you don't work for gifts you just accept them otherwise it isn't a gift. "not of works" well that's pretty clear you don't need to do works. "lest anyman should boast" just like the guys in
Matthew 7:21-23
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.(see John 6:38-40 for the Father's will)
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
It looks like those people were boastimg and relying on their works "done many wonderful works" AND they had faith "in thy name". But Jesus still told them to fuck off.
Looks like relying on your works like orthodox and catholics do has you NOT enter Heaven
also
John 3
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
Can someone answer; does water baptism count for jews but not for gentiles?
The difference isn't subtle at all and what you mention is hardly the only schism between the schisms. A rock is not a mountain even though a mountain is made of rock. A child would be able to tell you this.
>and what you mention is hardly the only schism between the schisms
I never said that, I merely said that in practice the Catholics and Mainline Protestants believe more or less the same in regards to the grace-works debate, and the debate is more about terminology than about actual, tangible results or doctrine.
That's not why christians do not need to follow the Law. The penalty for disobeying the Law was death, and Jesus sacrificed himself. Jesus brings a new law.
its actually the same exact law
god never changes
law following has nothing to do with going to heaven though
That part was added centuries later
It only counts for gentiles (christians) the only jew who did baptism was john the baptist
Don't forget Matthew 23:1-3
Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice.
But remember, Paul has as many pro-Law verses as those interpreted anti. He was never preaching against the Law. He only said it wasn't robotic adherence to the Law that saved anyone. Faith saves, but James reminds us that a saving faith requires works..and that is walking in obedience to the Law.
For those confused about Paul or who assume they know what he taught, see 2 Peter 3:15-17.
And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability.
What do we see in this passage?
1) In all Paul's letters he mentions that the patience of our Lord is salvation. Not "don't do the Law."
2) Even Peter says Paul is hard to understand. If you read Paul and think it's clear what he's saying, you are contradicting an Apostle who says otherwise.
3) People twist Paul to say what he does not say. Who are these people? The ignorant...the untaught. In what? The first part of the Bible...i.e. The Torah.
4) These people ignorant of the Law twist Paul to commit an error. Which error? The error of LAWless. Without the Law. Which Law? Definitely not concerned with Caesar's law. It's without God's Law because they in error have said it's abolished. To what end? Their DESTRUCTION.
Come back to the Torah. Messiah walked in Torah and he said to walk after him. He showed us the proper Way.
You need to read up on what a mikveh is. Baptism was not a new thing.
Jesus: Gnostic
Paul: Demiurge worshipper
Begone, ebionite heretic
>saving faith requires works.
nope
Romans 4:5
But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
god merely wants you to be a good obedient christian
doesnt mean you have to be
dead faith christians go str8 to heaven
It's talking about two different laws
Jesus is an SJW infiltrator, paul is a 'free' SJW. Jesus is the gay acceptance movement whereas paul is the gay pride movement.
But john the baptist washed sins with his baptism , mikveh has nothing to do with washing souls its just purification
god didnt put away the feast days and festivals either
those are significant supernatural eternal holidays in heaven
theres going to be passover and rosh hashana and sabbath keeping and everything in the millenial kingdom
Jesus. Dead. Paul. Dead.
Jesus is live!
Pray! Faggot infidel!!!
I thought this was one of those Chad memes.
I was disappointed
If you reject Paul you are not fully under the Grace of God.
Jesus came down to fulfill the Jewish role of Messiah. Since He the Jews rejected Him, those quotes do not apply
A lot of people who reject Paul combine heresies like gnosticism, buddhism and hinduism, beliefs in UFOs and spirits, new age garbage with their own brand of "christianity" and wind up really delusional and suffering from psychological torment aka winding up out of God's Grace
There's a lot to it and I'm not sure if this is a serious post or a shitpost, but I'll go ahead and reply anyway.
>apparent contradictions
You are right in saying that there seem to be contradictions among things that Jesus says in the Gospels and things that Paul says in his letters.
However, there are some points we need to address before going any further
>All of Paul's letters predate the Gospels, and Paul himself never knew Jesus
Paul wrote all of his letters in the 50s CE, and the first Gospel, Mark, was not written until c. 70 CE. It is possible it was written earlier, but it is generally dated no earlier than 70 CE.
>All of the Gospels were written by different Christian groups with different goals
Through critically reading Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John, and comparing the texts, we can pick up certain themes that appear in one text that are more or less pronounced in the others, or totally absent from other texts. Because we have Mark--which is usually thought to be the earliest Gospel--we can see what pieces the authors of Matthew and Luke changed from Mark in writing their own texts. So, Mark, Matthew, and Luke share many similarities, but general key differences. There is not a single, clear picture of Jesus presented throughout the Bible, but a number of different depictions of Jesus depending upon the author(s) of the Gospel / Epistle / etc.
cont?
So then, is water baptism necessary for salvation?
Those aren't contradictions because the Jews rejected the choice of believing Jesus as their messiah. Read the whole New Testament carefully
Our tradition says Paul was (((ourguy))) and secretly a Pharisee agent, who wanted the early Nazarines to make a complete break with Judaism and preach to Goyim only, so that Judaism gets rid of the Nazarine cult and Jews aren't effected by it anymore.
t. Talmudic scholar
No it is not needed its just a ritual nothing supernatural will happen in 2017
Well, that escalated quickly...
Obedient to what? Just whatever sounds good to you each day? Or to the Father's eternal commandments? His righteous standards do not change. What you really worship is a god of your own imagination whose commandments are whatever you feel like obeying. The sin that you like you excuse and keep hold of telling yourself that God is fine with it. This is deception. What you are really saying is that the Creator of all things should be happy to have you at all.
Listen to the rebuke of the wise if you wish to not find yourself utterly horrified when judgment comes.
No
you only need faith
John 3:36
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
>I also wanted to know why the message seemed to change so drastically between the mission of Jesus and that of Paul.
Because Jesus preached before his death and resurrection and Paul preached after.
The "all is accomplished" line in Matthew 5:18 is a reference to the resurrection.
Alright. It's just as someone seeking answers, people say you need, and people say you don't, both have strong arguments because the Bible has some verses that point at it and verses that point just at faith. Wonder if baptism includes that faith. Or that the people don't know whether they talk about baptism of the spirit or water baptism.
This, is the precise answer to OP's question:
Paul was a pagan hunter of Christians before his conversion. He did not know Jesus personally but knew His apostles including James the Just. James was the brother of Jesus and the first Archbishop of Christendom. Paul's activity proves historically that Jesus' Divine lordship was recognized from the very beginning including to members of Jesus own biological family. He quarrelled with the Apostles- over details of practice of the religion to non-Jewish converts. Paul established Christianity as a faith outside Judaic practices to apply universally to the pagan world and fufilled the parable of the Christ (also repeated in Matt 22) The only discrepancies are that prior to Paul, Christianity as it was was wholly Judaic and after his missions became available to all men. St Paul is the first apostles to the gentiles. Jesus entire preaching ministry was for Jews alone and was rejected. Within a generation, in 70AD the Jewish Temple was razed to it's foundations and Jews scattered, not returning to the Temple Mount until the 1940s. And the message of the Christ given to all of you also for your salvation, to accept or reject at your own will, and for the same reasons
To get saved you dont , but baptism is kinda tricky in paul's days the baptism was a ritual and you would receive the holy ghost after that , today i have not seen this holy ghost active anymore
>Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. 3And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. 4Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. 5When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. 7And all the men were about twelve.
Paul wasn't pagan, he was a classical rabbinical Jew who hunted down hippie-Nazarenes for most of his adult life. And if you believe his extremely-sudden "conversion" I've got a nice bridge in Somalia to sell you. Paul was our agent and the greatest instrument of turning Christianity from a Jewish cult which posed danger to classical Judaism to a completely goyish conundrum contrived of both Greeko-Roman and Semitic elements, both completely and utterly taken out of context. What we got is our religion intact, and goyim becoming our subordinates by accepting our holy scriptures as veritas et virtus.
I'm not finished. The bigger point is that what appear to be contradictions--maybe they are, maybe they aren't--are totally expected based on the timeline of the writing and the different social and historical contexts for the authors.
In Mark, Jesus is presented as a Jewish apocalypticist and reformer. The context for Mark is the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE and the coming destruction of the Jews by the Romans. The destruction doesn't actually occur in Mark, even though it is prophesied, and this is why lots of people believe Mark was written after the destruction of the temple (or perhaps by a very prescient writer). One way of reading Mark is a way of providing consolation to the Jews who have just had / will have their temple destroyed. As Dale Martin says in his podcasts, "Things are going to get a lot worse [for the Jews in Mark] before they get better."
Matthew, written after Mark, builds on Mark but stresses Jesus's Jewishness and Jewish roots. I don't think I'll go down a rabbit hole of what Matthew thinks about Gentiles. But Matthew in general is much more pro-Jewish law--Jesus is a reformer, but the law still applies.
Luke, like Matthew, builds on Mark, but adds its own twists, specifically, Jesus looking beyond the Jews for his message is a frequent theme.
John I won't talk about because it's really, really different.
So, if you have all these different Gospels written at a minimum 12 years after Paul's last letter of Romans, the question doesn't make sense. Of course there are going to be differences between these things. They were all written by different people with very different backgrounds.
With respect to Paul, the reason Paul depicts Jesus the way he does is because he clearly sees Jesus as extending Yahweh to the Gentiles, but in a way that is different than how the Jews relate to Yahweh.
Mark is more concerned with explaining why the Jews have suffered / will suffer under the Romans,
contd.
>What we got is our religion intact,
Yet non of you fucks uses the old testament sacrificial lamb , you jewed your self to hell because that was the only ritual to forgive sins
So, is Christianity bullshit? What do I do to avoid the firey pit of eternal torture?
Don't read the Bible yourself. You most definitely cannot understand it and end up with heresy.
Listen what learned priests are speaking to you and behave as they tell. Salvation is only in living church, not digging up dead texts.
Which is why I am a norse pagan. Christianity is a repackaged Talmud.
Jews gonna Jews
Is Satan behind this thread?
To adress the image, starting with Matthew 19:17, read the context to which commandments Christ is referring to:
>17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”
>18 “Which ones?” he inquired. Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony,
>19 honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’”
Matthew 5:17-18 is obvious, the Law is not destroyed. Now lets' go to Paul, Ephesians 2:15 doesn't say that Jesus destroyed the Law, it says:
>by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations
Romans 10:4 says:
>Christ is the culmination of the law
not "end of the Law", and Romans 3:20 is obvious enough.
If you want to understand it more, it's best to read the whole book of Galatians.
>Why, then, was the law given at all? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator.
And read with a proper and open state of mind, not while thinking "let's see how wrong this is", but place the thought that Christ is God in your head and read the text with that thought.
Read the bible and you will discover that there is no eternal torture
same difference goy, just remember to go to church and love everyone who is also chr*stian alright?
>But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
Revelation 21:8 AKJV
Sure sounds pretty miserable to me.
John 4:21
>"Woman," Jesus replied, "believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem.
You are a fucking idiot OP.
Yup but no eternal torture it would be like you never existed the atheist death.
>14And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
you live or you die
Matthew is concerned mostly with adding Jewish authenticity to Jesus's story and making Jesus's teachings more specifically focused on the Jews (though the end of Matthew leaves this a bit ambiguous), while Luke is about Jesus looking to help Gentiles (not necessarily at the exclusion of Jews).
In some ways, the theme of Luke seems like it could be compatible with Paul's letters (which were, mind us all, at least 20 years prior to Luke), but I don't know the full extent of scholarship on the authors of Luke-Acts and what they knew about Paul.
TL;DR
>it's not really possible to answer your question because it requires making a lot of assumptions
>"There is no need for consistency" is a totally valid response because we can't know all the things the Gospel authors knew about Paul, and we can't know if Paul knew the Gospel authors.
Marketing reasons. Basically you can't sell a religion to the poor masses of the Roman Empire if you're going to require them to follow all the tedious Jew laws, and especially if you're going to require them to be good.
Then explain this .
Jesus was always clear that He intended for the gospel to be spread around the world. Here's another one:
John 3:16
>For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
Muslims need to stop with the Paul vs Jesus BS. It's clear they have no idea what they're talking about but just repeat what their Imams say to them ad nauseum.
obedient to his commands
ur forgiven by grace no matter what and u cant lose ur salvation
now the question is do you want to live a life of sin or do the right thing
just because you can choose to do whatever u want doesnt mean you should/ youre supposed to / or that god wants you to
If death and the grave were cast into the lake of fire, how would anyone die though? I think it's clear that the lake of fire (eternal torment) is reserved for people who truly deserve it. We've seen some truly sick shit from people in this world who have caused pain, death and misery wherever they go. To let them just die and not experience the pain they dished onto others when they were alive defeats the purpose of justice.
So you're not gonna answer the OP's points?
WEW
>Quite the jew tactics there Jonathan
John 6:37-40
All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. 38For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. 39And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. 40And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Pauldidst say the law was abokished, in that verse he said "ordinaces" are abolished, the word ordinance in Greek is just another way of saying written law, he then goes on to explain that the Torah is now written on our hearts.
Also Paul said in Romans I quote
>Do we abolish the law good for I'd we establish the law.
>Do we abolish the law, good forbid we establish the law
also god did not abolish unclean foods
unclean food are still unclean
Acts 10:28
And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
nothing in the law has perished
now u can choose to eat unclean foods but thats not the best idea ever
>I am fully convinced that there is nothing that is unclean in of itself
Paul said that in either Romans or Corinthians, also Paul said explicitly eating the meat of idols is not forbidden, even though it is the most unclean kind of food you can possibly eat in the torah
>virgin jesus and chad paul
talking about not causing stumbling blocks
if ur brother sees you eating sacrificed foods to idols he might be like WTF UR SATANIC AF
and it might cause his faith to be weakened and get confused because he thoughtt you were a man of god
context
Romans 14:13-17
13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.
14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of:
17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.
_
it doesnt say unclean foods are no longer unclean
there are no contradiction , only a carnal minded man with no revelation of the word spoken would think such.
Idol neat is the most unkosher meat in Judaism there is literally nothing more toxic to a Jew, because Daniel did not take idols meat and everyone else did and they allgot sick untodeath. Paul also said nothing is unclean in of it self you are blatentlu disregarding Torah
Can't lose salvation?
2 Peter 2:20-22
vercomes a person, to that he is enslaved. For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them. What the true proverb says has happened to them: “The dog returns to its own vomit, and the sow, after washing herself, returns to wallow in the mire.”
Hebrews 10:26-31
For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
Notice the present tense of "dies". Certainly not past tense.
Ezekiel 18:24
But when a righteous person turns away from his righteousness and does injustice and does the same abominations that the wicked person does, shall he live? None of the righteous deeds that he has done shall be remembered; for the treachery of which he is guilty and the sin he has committed, for them he shall die.
Brother, you are in very grave error. There has been a grand delusion placed on people so that they think they are saved, but they are not. Repentance requires knowing what you are repenting of and turning from it.
youre still supposed to avoid it ... but thats talking about when youre ministering to the gentiles who are eating these these things youre allowed to sit down and eat with them whatever theyre eating so u dont look bad. thats the only time you would eat something sacrificed to an idol
Acts 15:29
That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
Acts 21:25
As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.
see those first 2 are talking about jews who reject jesus christ
the last one is just talking about being stoned to death under the old testament
people who have been stoned to death have probably been saved people who went to heaven
youtube.com
Watch them all. Paul and Yeshua (Jesus) were on the same page entirely. Peter warned that there would be ignorant and unstable people who would twist Paul's words to lawlessness.
"Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability."
- 2 Peter 3:14-17
Paul devoted three entire letters, 1 Corithians,2 Corinthians, and romans to explain how
>nothing is unclean in of itself
He made it very clear that bacon can now be eatern as well as Popoe Peter who also made it clear in his vision in acts.
>you're supposed to avoid it
Actually no You can eat it as long as it dose not harm you, Pauls only reason for banning anything here is if it is not "edifying" Which is explained in detail across the whole letter of Romans you are justr blatently ignoring
>nothing is unclean in of itself
You're damned Achmed and going to hell
...
...
Simple. Jesus warned us there would be people like Saul/Paul. Saul is a serpent who rode on the coat tails of Jesus and pretended to be an "apostle" when he just wanted the glory for himself. He wrote half the new testament include the Book of Luke (or one of his students did).
Discard everything that Saul/Paul/Lucifer wrote.
Paul is the most mistranslated apostle in the bible.
>[Debunking Churchianity/Catholicism]
christogenea.org
>[Race Mixing is the Unforgivable Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit]
Essay: christogenea.org
Audio sermon: christogenea.org
>[Debunking Universalism]
christogenea.org
>[Eight Witnesses Against Universalism]
christogenea.org
...
god trying to spread the message to the gentiles and made it so that its not the main issue
he never made unclean foods clean
that vision doesnt mean what you think it means in context
Acts 10:19
While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.
Acts 10:28
And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
>learns what it meant finally
>bacon can now be eaten
YOU CAN but its not a clean food you would be doing a disservice to yourself
god made these animals as bottom feeders
you wouldnt eat a rat would you
now why would you eat something god says is not food
...
Paul was talking about eating food in the market that had been sacrificed to idols, if you do not believe in idols. Paul never advocated eating something now defined as food in God's Law. That would violate Deut. 4:2 and make it sin.
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
If you truly seek the truth about this matter, educate yourself.
>it is not a clean food it's always bad for you
Except the entire two cahpters Paul explained how eating these things never always result in illness but can be edifying in their own right, and also said in either Timothy or Titus
>all things are permissible to eat if eaten with thankfullness