It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did Paul Invent Christianity?

page: 84
19
<< 81  82  83    85  86  87 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2016 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: SethTsaddik

false interpretations are your work. We simply read the scriptures as they are written and let them speak for themselves.

I put the verses out there and they speak for themselves you are wrong and they are right.

Oh and remember once you take it out of context it is no longer a literal interpretation. It is called a private interpretation. Anyone who reads the whole context can tell what Paul is speaking of, the struggle of sin nature in man, and the separate issue that the Law verifies sin in in man.

something you have yet to do to keep things in their context.

You claim something like "the holy Spirit told Paul not to go to Asia" but he did so he is a liar.

But just because he was told at one time not to go does not mean later he was allowed to. It is obvious from scriptures that it was allowed later.

It wasn't the time for him to go at one point and then later he was allowed to go.

You act as if once he is told he cant that's it he can never go. But God has freedom like you and me to do as he pleases.

No the one being lazy is you. It is a whole lot easier to take something and divorce it from the context immediate and other wise and create a fantasy and claim it is literal when in fact it is just the opposite.

So here it is in the complete chapter and its sectional context. So simple a sixth grader could understand it.

Ro 7:1 ¶ Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?
2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
7 ¶ What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
14 ¶ For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.


Oh refreshing to know that sin no longer has rule over me because I am dead to sin and alive to Christ by my faith on him and his work on his cross.
edit on 15-12-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 15 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: SethTsaddik
a reply to: ChesterJohn

He is talking about himself and only himself, not all men and what they go through. He uses the word, I, not we, and means I, not all men.


He is preaching/teaching often when one teaches they will use personal pronouns and themselves as examples but all of us know exactly what Paul was saying and how by the context.

You are the lazy one. You have failed to list out and ask the seven questions that are necessary to studying the Bible. Who, what, why, when, where, which, and how. You never listed out and answered these questions you read a section took it out of context because of bias against Paul (or you took it from someone else). I have seen this same claim on some private webpages and Jesus Only Messianic Jew sites, who all hate Paul and do nothing but study the bible in the way you do. out of context, twisting of scriptures, wrongly combining scriptures and coming to wrong conclusions.

Instead of pretextual study try deductive study asking the seven questions. It took me a year to go over the four gospels, Acts and the letters of Paul listing out these Questions and the teachings of Jesus and found Paul expands on everyone of them except some of the Kingdom teachings for Israel in the kingdom, and Sabbath observance. I have three notebooks of study.

You have nothing but parroted nonsense.
edit on 15-12-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2016 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I really don't need an explanation of what I just explained, Chester.

Also, the whole "out of context" go to argument is beyond stale. It was ineffective to begin with because I never strayed from context.

It's just rhetoric. Meaningless and not even true. Not even close to true.

I know how to read, know what he was saying, and explained it not to solicit alternate pseudo interpretations, just to explain it.

"He meant this, he meant that."

So YOU say. Forgive me if I have no desire to hear you wax apologetic but I know what he said, meant.

It's why I made the comment, Chester.

Paul is of the evil one.

You don't know what context means.
edit on 15-12-2016 by SethTsaddik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2016 @ 06:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Matrixsurvivor
a reply to: ChesterJohn





Sometimes love is just stating the truth.


So, it's basically your truth according to what you believe...verses our truth according to what we believe.
I'm curious though....how can you prove what you believe is more truthful or the truth, compared to us believing Paul is a false apostle?
Can you prove it? Using just the Bible? Besides, you keep saying that the verses need to be kept in their "context". So, how about you show everyone reading this thread how we aren't using things in "context" as you are.
It shouldn't be too difficult. Especially if you are right and we are wrong. Just show us how we are wrong.


(instead of saying the same rhetoric, again and again).


I don't think he knows anything other than rhetoric and direct quoting when it comes to debate.

Logic certainly is not a part of the regiment.

Preserved word, out of context, your wrong the Bible's right.

It's mind numbing to the point I just ignore most of his comments as they are hardly ever worth replying to and when they are it's only because he made a provable factual error, and I can't resist correcting a 'know it all.'

For instance, he argued that Paul expanded the teachings of Christ or whatever verb, he claims that Paul taught the same things Jesus did.

Which is false, the teachings of Paul are in opposition to the teachings of Jesus, who Paul never knew.

Which explains why. You can't learn something from a man you never met.

Jesus teaches his disciples in person, and was dead by the time Paul ''converted.". Paul is no prophet, never spoke to Jesus never mind God.

So isn't a Prophet.



posted on Dec, 15 2016 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Matrixsurvivor
a reply to: ChesterJohn






Ever try to quit something but every time you try you failed and did that which you were not wanting to do?


There are plenty of people who can quit doing something, they set their mind to...OR, START doing something, they set their mind to.




Basically he is saying that the law brings the knowledge of sin.



NO....basically Paul blames the law for all his ineptness. The guy was really good at actually pointing the finger BACK at GOD for his own failures (or...the law, if you want to get nit picky). And a "round and round" he goes...trying to excuse himself (by blaming it on some phantom "sin nature" that Jesus NEVER, EVER, taught. As a matter of fact, Jesus told many who he healed, forgave, or interacted with...to STOP SINNING UNLESS SOMETHING WORSE HAPPENS TO YOU.
That was BEFORE He was "crucified for the sins of the world"....that was BEFORE "His blood was shed"....and that was BEFORE, (according to Paul), Jesus "set us free from the law".


Exactly. He literally blamed the law for CAUSING sin (not knowledge of sin, like Chester thinks, and which is clearly not the spirit of the text or literal wording).

But that there was no sin until the law, the commandment not to covet is why he covets, not why he knows of covetousness, but actually covets.

His rationalizations are weak.



posted on Dec, 15 2016 @ 07:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: SethTsaddik

false interpretations are your work.


What "false interpretations?" Be specific, because if I did that you can quote it, if you don't it's just a false accusation, which it is.

I didn't so much interpret as plainly state the meaning of the passages IN CONTEXT.



We simply read the scriptures as they are written and let them speak for themselves.

I put the verses out there and they speak for themselves you are wrong and they are right.

Oh and remember once you take it out of context it is no longer a literal interpretation. It is called a private interpretation. Anyone who reads the whole context can tell what Paul is speaking of, the struggle of sin nature in man, and the separate issue that the Law verifies sin in in man.


Again, what did I take "out of context."

I see accusations without evidence.



something you have yet to do to keep things in their context.

You claim something like "the holy Spirit told Paul not to go to Asia" but he did so he is a liar.

But just because he was told at one time not to go does not mean later he was allowed to. It is obvious from scriptures that it was allowed later.

It wasn't the time for him to go at one point and then later he was allowed to go.

You act as if once he is told he cant that's it he can never go. But God has freedom like you and me to do as he pleases.

No the one being lazy is you. It is a whole lot easier to take something and divorce it from the context immediate and other wise and create a fantasy and claim it is literal when in fact it is just the opposite.

So here it is in the complete chapter and its sectional context. So simple a sixth grader could understand it.

Ro 7:1 ¶ Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?
2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
7 ¶ What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
14 ¶ For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.


Oh refreshing to know that sin no longer has rule over me because I am dead to sin and alive to Christ by my faith on him and his work on his cross.


Yawn.



posted on Dec, 15 2016 @ 07:55 PM
link   
Akragon

Come on set me free digger!

Watch me fly!

Coomba98



posted on Dec, 15 2016 @ 10:50 PM
link   
The Epistle of James sums up the problem with Paul in a paragraph.

3:13

Who is wise in understanding among you? Show by your good life that your works are done with gentleness born of wisdom. But if you have bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not be boastful and false to the truth.----

Paul is clearly bitter in his writings and envious of the ''super apostles" who he feels he is not the least bit inferior to. His ambition was selfish as his ''my gospel" that comes from "no man" was his and the apostles "added nothing" to him or it.

15Such wisdom does not come down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, devilish.16 For where there is envy and selfish ambition, there will also be disorder and wickedness of every kind.----

This is stunningly prophetic, as it sounds exactly like what the next 2,000 years of Pauline Christianity did to the world and in it, even still does.

17 But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield, full of Mercy and good fruits, without a trace of partiality or hypocrisy.


Hypocrisy? Check, for Paul and the church. More than a trace of it too.

Mercy? Not so much. Paul wished his foes would castrate themselves over the non issue of circumcision, gave someone to Satan, whatever that means, and was quick to curse the apostles who preached another Gospel (the true Gospel).

I definitely think the Epistle of James is an anti Pauline polemic, he is the vain or senseless man of 2:20 of "faith without works is dead" fame.

That could only be Paul.



posted on Dec, 15 2016 @ 10:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: coomba98
Akragon

Come on set me free digger!

Watch me fly!

Coomba98


Do you need permission?

Are you not free?

Chickens don't fly.


And you are already free, you just don't have anything good to say because you don't know anything. Akgragon telling you basically to stfu is your excuse.

I only write this in the hope that you will get mad, so I can go back to ignoring every message of yours and you can get even more mad.

Cuz you some kind of special brand of fool.


But nobody needs to give you permission to participate in a thread if you're a member, so unless you are just looking to be the psycho freak you were when told to stfu by OP:

You don't need permission, and asking is...dumb.
edit on 15-12-2016 by SethTsaddik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2016 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Apologies wrong thread post.
edit on 15-12-2016 by coomba98 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2016 @ 06:36 AM
link   
a reply to: SethTsaddik

What do you think by your circle semantics that you can fain ignorance to all that you are claiming about Paul in Romans Chapter Seven?

Only a snake withers as much as you.

Are you that ignorant that you truly believe he is blaming the law for his sin. He is not saying that at all, he says that sin is already in him and that it was the law that shows it is true.

you are the great twister you confuse and destroy the spirit of God's word as an earthly twister destroys cities.

Time to go back to school and learn to read plain English. Do a sentence structure if nothing else, you draw a line and then branch the subject, nouns, adjectives and verbs and so forth. Maybe then you can see where you went wrong in your interpretations.

I have never seen such ignorance of plain English in my life except in your conclusions.

Truly it is out of context just like a liberal CNN Newscaster Claiming the Russians threw the election for Trump.

Come back when you learn how to read the Bible you claim to have so much knowledge of.


edit on 16-12-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2016 @ 06:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: SethTsaddik
originally posted by: coomba98

stfu



Do you really think that a follower of Jesus Christ would use such language even in abbreviated form, as you do?

Truly you are not a follower of Jesus Christ nor a Believer in him or the Bible. So why even discuss it?


edit on 16-12-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2016 @ 08:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: coomba98
Apologies wrong thread post.


Apology accepted.



posted on Dec, 16 2016 @ 08:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn

originally posted by: SethTsaddik
originally posted by: coomba98

stfu



Do you really think that a follower of Jesus Christ would use such language even in abbreviated form, as you do?

Truly you are not a follower of Jesus Christ nor a Believer in him or the Bible. So why even discuss it?



What I think is you are being judgemental over what is not even a sin, abbreviations of common expressions are not sin's.

And regardless you are the last person who should be judging the words of others.

Don't make me collect every insult and false accusation you have made in this thread Chester, because I will, and I have plenty to work with.

Which will make the phrase stfu seem like manna by comparison.



posted on Dec, 16 2016 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: SethTsaddik

Do you not agree that once someone says they are a follower of Jesus shold they not strive to sin no more and that would mean in verbal/texting conversational sin as well.

You will know them by their fruit for a good tree beareth not evil fruit. Using the same verse you judged Paul with

Show once were I used any foul language or abbreviation thereof, except when quoting, you, Matrxsurvivor or Molocchino.



posted on Dec, 16 2016 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I don't think I agree with you on anything, Chester.



posted on Dec, 16 2016 @ 09:00 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Did you just judge me for using an abbreviated curse AND call me ignorant?

Being far from ignorant,that statement is a LIE.

And designed to insult.

Hypocrisy, the fruits of Pauline Christianity, represented properly by ChesterJohn.

Paul would be proud of your hypocrisy!
edit on 16-12-2016 by SethTsaddik because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2016 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: SethTsaddik

no the word of God has judged you and your words judge you. Ignorance comes from ignoring certain rules of the language of English, improper interpretation comes from incorrectly identifying subject verbs ad nouns and then twisting the word of God and make it say something else.

But if you want to talk insults in every reply to me on every post you have insulted me for about 40 pages now. So who is really the hypocrite here? Jesus would be so very proud to have you as his follower.



posted on Dec, 16 2016 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Whatever you say Chester, you know all.

I am a Muslim, my Holy Book is the Qur'an, the Bible has no bearing on my life or the destination of my soul.

Sorry, but I don't allow books to judge me, they are for wisdom and learning, the New Testament is entertainment to me.

I am a Gospel of Thomas guy myself. The wise sayings of Jesus.



posted on Dec, 16 2016 @ 03:18 PM
link   
a reply to: SethTsaddik

Then your only purpose in this thread it to defame the Bible, mislead and destroy the Truth of the Holy Bible. and in so doing convert people to Islam

you should go to the Muslim only thread.

It is no wonder you know nothing of the Preserved word of God and how to study it.

Now it come full circle and Coomba96 was correct you are Gnosisisfaith, Padawan 1




edit on 16-12-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 81  82  83    85  86  87 >>

log in

join