|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,927 Year: 4,184/9,624 Month: 1,055/974 Week: 14/368 Day: 14/11 Hour: 2/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Christian Laws | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Richh Member (Idle past 3769 days) Posts: 94 From: Long Island, New York Joined: |
quote: from John 10:10 I would say that this quote by John 10:10 shows something similar to what you are saying about following the spirit of the law. Christians have 'graduated' from following the law to following the Spirit. We don't just have the law, we have the Lawgiver Himself leading. Such a blessed Leader (the Comforter - Paraclete in Greek) will never lead us to do something contrary to the spirit of the law, that is, contrary to the intention of the Lawgiver. It is the desires of the flesh that lead us to do that - and that continually. The desires of the flesh issue in the deeds of the flesh. The first two verses in the section above are Gal. 5:16,17 "But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. 17 For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please." The issue, the result, of being led by the Spirit is the fulfilling of the requirement of the law (see below). The requirement of the Law fulfilled in us as we walk by the Spirit. Rom 8:2-4 "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. 3 For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit." So, if the issue of being led by the Spirit of God is the fulfillment of the requirement of the Law, it is not exactly right to say that Christians have no laws. I still think the question is how can a fallen man live in a way that is pleasing to a holy, righteous, loving God. I think these verses give a clue as to the way.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3488 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:And still you list nothing. What makes Paul an authority? "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
purpledawn writes: What makes Paul an authority? The resurrected Jesus revealed himself to Paul and commissioned him to be an attendant and a witness of the things he had seen and would yet see. As an evidence of the authority given to Paul, he was given visions and powerful words. The first vision given to Paul, was seeing the disciple Ananias come in and restore his sight. When the vision became reality, Paul was baptized & received holy spirit. His authority came directly from Jesus and God.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3488 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:And again, no verses to support your position. Have you learned nothing in all these discussions? Supporting evidence, common courtesy, anything?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4960 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
purpledawn writes: . And again, no verses to support your position. Have you learned nothing in all these discussions? Supporting evidence, common courtesy, anything? i was assuming you would know the account i was refering to
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
And still you list nothing. What makes Paul an authority? Rich's post was very good. This point he makes has been basically made before in this thread. Now as the the question of Paul's authority. What makes Paul an authority is the complaint raised by the church raised up from his ministry, the church in Corinth. In the letter of Second Corinthians God has preserved for us Paul's being forced to address this challenge. The Corinthians, ever suspicious that this little man was putting himself out to be more than he ought, forced Paul to speak as a fool and expound on his apostolic calling. I would only say here that Peter, James, and John recognized the grace given to this newcomer and extended the right hand of fellowship to him as a coworker in the apostolic work (Gal. 2:7-10). And this seems to have occured after more than a decade of Paul's preparation by God.
"But from those who were reputed to be something - whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not accept man's person; for to me those who were of repute added nothing. But on the contrary, seeing that I had been ebntrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcision, even as Peter [with the gospel] to the circumcision, (For He who operated in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcision operated also in me for the Gentiles), And perceiving the grace given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and to Barnabas the right hand of fellowship that we [should go] to the Gentiles, and they, to the circumcision." (Galatians 2:6-9) We also see that before this the Holy Spirit, had explicitly separated Paul and Barnabas out for "the work" - apostolic work of raising up local churches.
"Now there were in Antioch, in the local church, prophets and teachers: Barnabas and Simeon, who is called Niger, and Lucius the Cyrenian, and Manaen, the foster brother of Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. And as they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, Set apart for Me now Barnabus and Saul for the work to which I have called them. Then, when they had fasted and prayed and laid their hands on [them], they sent them away. They then, having been sent out by the Holy Spirit. (Acts 13:1-4) This was probably the beginning of Paul's apostolic ministry. He was previously a faithful functioning teacher and gospel preacher. However, in His early conversion, Christ had made it known to Paul that he was to be a chosen vessel for the apostolic work. Christ telling a reluctant Ananias to go baptize this former persecutor: "But the Lord said to him, Go, for this man is a chosen vessel to Me, to bear My name before both the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel: For I will show him how many things he must suffer on behalf of My name." (Acts 9:15,16) We also see the Apostle Peter recommend Paul's wisdom and refer to his letters as Scripture. So his letters were circulating around the churches and were held in the highest regard by the original apostles:
" ... even as our brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote to you, As in all [his] letters, speaking in them concerning these things, in which some things are hard to understand, which the unlearned and unstable twist, as also the rest of Scriptures, to their own destruction." ( 2 Peter 3:15b,16) Luke speaks of "extraordinary miracles" done by Paul in the same manner in which they issued from Peter: "And God did works of power of no ordinary kind through the hands of Paul ..." (Acts 19:11) " .... they (Paul and Barnabas) spent a considerable amount of time speaking with boldness in the Lord, who testified to the word of His grace by granting signs and wonders to be done through their hands." (Acts 14:3) Paul with Barnabas was highly recommended by the council of apostles and elders in Jerusalem and sent with letters to strengthen the Gentiles in the local churches. In such a letter they wrote:
"It seemed good to us, having become of one accord, to choose men to send to you together with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." (Acts 15:25,26) Paul's apostleship is clear. And it is no accident that of the 27 New Testament books about 13 were authored by this servant of Christ. Like the Corinthians, some still may quarrel over this point, questioning Paul's apostolic ministry. Such complaints sometimes come from people who might question any apostle of Christ's right to lay before us authoritatively the teaching of Jesus. But Jesus said that He would send some apostles and that to receive them was to receive Him which was in turn to receive the One Who sent Jesus, the Father:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, He who receives whomever I shall send receives Me, and he who receives Me receives Him who sent Me." (John 13:20) Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3488 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
Paul says he has authority and a later unknown writer says he has authority.
Paul doesn't really have any more authority to make legal laws or speak for God than any other person today.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
Paul says he has authority and a later unknown writer says he has authority. Paul doesn't really have any more authority to make legal laws or speak for God than any other person today. Obviously you reject Christ's pronouncement upon the Apostle Paul that he was a chosen vessel. But it is no surprise because perhaps you do not recognize Christ has having any authority either. This is not a matter of having to verify the spiritual authority of an apostle. This is the matter of someone not wanting to receive that service.
"But even if I am being poured out as a drink offering upon the sacrifuce and service of your faith, I rejoice, and I rejoice together with you alll." (Phil. 2:17) I regard Paul's authority as his slave service to the church. Paul is my slave. The authority bestowed upon the apostles is their authority to be poured out as a drink offering and slave away for the church. If he is not an apostle of Christ to you, purpledawn, he certainly is an apostle to me. If you do not receive his pouring out of his labors for the Christians as a slave, I receive it. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3488 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:Passing on the good news is very different from making legal laws. quote:Nope this is about Christian laws, stick with the topic. Paul did not have the authority to add or change legal laws. Show me otherwise. quote:I never said he wasn't an apostle. I would think by now you would know better than to try and shame me. I question dogma, not God. It isn't wrong to question dogma. Either show me that Paul had the authority to add or change legal laws or keep silent. Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given. Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given. "Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
Passing on the good news is very different from making legal laws. The original question that I addressed was: "What makes Paul an authority?" Those are your words to Rich. I discussed with you the apostolic authority of Paul. So are you shifting the goal post around or what? quote:
Nope this is about Christian laws, stick with the topic. Paul did not have the authority to add or change legal laws. Show me otherwise. Paul had the authority to teach whatever he taught in the New Testament based on his apostleship. All his letters and whatever is contained therein flow from his authority as an apostle of Christ. I am not proving Paul changed laws or Paul didn't change laws. I am addressing your question "What made Paul an authority?" ... your words, not mine. Perhaps you needed to phrase it more particularly. But "What makes Paul an authority?" has been address.
I never said he wasn't an apostle. I would think by now you would know better than to try and shame me. I question dogma, not God. It isn't wrong to question dogma. Either show me that Paul had the authority to add or change legal laws or keep silent. That's tough talk. Should I be kind of quivering in my shoes or what? The question that I read was "What makes Paul an authority?" Okay, I'll humor you. One thing Paul discussed which I don't think Christ is recorded to have discussed is circumcisism. Paul taught that it was not a requirement of eternal redemption. I don't think I can recall Jesus specifically teaching that. He could have and it was not recorded. But nonetheless, Paul did change to the legal emphasis on circumcisism. His authority to do so stems from him being Christ's apostle. And if you don't question God - The Word was with God and the Word was God and the Word became flesh. So God in Christ pronounced that Paul was a chosen vessel, therefore being especially chosen as he was, God invested his apostle with the necessary authority. And if you have a problem with what I just said, then I repeat - You probably do not consider that Christ has authority either.
"Truly, truly, I say to you, He who receives whomever I shall send receives Me, and he who receives Me receives Him who sent Me." (John 13:20) I'd be happy to hear that you do believe in the incarnation of the Logos Who was God as the man Jesus of Nazareth. Come right out and declare your belief that Jesus Christ is God incarnate. Or come right out and deny it. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3488 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:To respond to that question you would need to know what I was referring to. Authority to what or for what? Read Message 300. I'm still talking about Christian laws or lack there of. quote:Supposedly one of the original apostles said the Gentiles didn't need to be circumcised to follow the Way. By the same unknown author of Acts, chapter 15 I believe. Neither they nor Paul absolved natural Jews of circumcision as far as I know. As I understand it, there were two types of converts to Judaism.
There are two kinds of proselyte: 1. Ger tzedek (righteous proselytes, proselytes of righteousness, religious proselyte, devout proselyte)2. Ger toshav (resident proselyte, proselytes of the gate, limited proselyte, half-proselyte) A righteous proselyte was a Gentile who had converted to Judaism, was bound to all the doctrines and precepts of the Jewish economy, and was considered a full member of the Jewish people. They were to be circumcised and immersed in a mikvah should they wish to eat of the Passover sacrifice. A gate proselyte was a "resident alien" who lived in the Land of Israel and followed some of the customs. They were not required to be circumcised nor to comply with the whole of the Torah.They were bound only to conform to the so-called seven precepts of Noah, the Noahide Laws: do not worship idols, do not blaspheme God's name, do not murder, do not commit immoral sexual acts, do not steal, do not tear the limb from a living animal, and do not fail to establish courts of justice. Besides these laws, however, they were also required to abstain from work on the Sabbath, and to refrain from the use of leavened bread during the time of the Passover. Paul didn't change a law.
Paul of Tarsus and Judaism
According to Acts, Paul began working along the traditional Jewish line of proselytizing in the various synagogues where the proselytes of the gate [a biblical term, for example see Exodus 20:10] and the Jews met; and only because he failed to win the Jews to his views, encountering strong opposition and persecution from them, did he turn to the Gentile world after he had agreed at a convention with the apostles at Jerusalem to admit the Gentiles into the Church only as proselytes of the gate, that is, after their acceptance of the Noachian laws (Acts 15:1—31). [12]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
See you've done the same thing that many Christians do. You've stated that ones behavior does not make one justified, righteous, or whatever catch phrase ones group prefers; but in the same breath say that God will not condone unrighteous, unholy, unloving behavior. Nonsense. One is not justified unto eternal life through works of the law. It should be obvious that if God did not care how the justified Christian lived ever after being justified by faith, there would not be so many exhortations how to live (by the grace of Christ), in the New Testament. Actually, Paul writes "As you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him." The disciples began by faith and were eternally redeemed and eternally justified. For their daily live's tranasformation they should continue in faith. That is trusting that the indwelling Christ can permeate their new life causing them to walk righteously. Those exhortations to live righteously after being redeemed would included both exhortations of Jesus and of the letter writing apostles. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
As expected, total evasion of the issue of whether you regard Christ as having authority either, let alone His apostles, including Paul.
You wrote above that your point is that Paul did not change laws. Okay. I have little problem with that. Paul said that Christ was the END of the law. There is no need to tamper with it. There is the need to be joined to Christ. That is Paul's central message. Downplaying the need for circumcism, whether changing the law or playing down the law, was done by Paul. Some may regard that as changing. Some may not. The point I make is that Christ is Paul's total focus, for Christ is the end of the law. It is like someone giving a person 100 million dollars and that person is still anxious that he can save on his own a few quarters of change. In terms of eternal redemption, Christ has been given by God to the believers. He is MORE than enough. He is the end of the law unto rightouesness to everyone who believes. God has exhausted righteousness on behalf of the sinner in Christ, in terms of his being justified before God forever. After being justified there is the need for transformation into Christ's image. That is because justification is not an end in itself. Conformity to the image of Christ is the intended issue that must follow after justification. Essentially, the Christians eternal redemption is settled forever. His reward is related to how much He allowed the sanctification process to conform him to the image of Christ. Eternal redemption is a Gift.In addition to the Gift there is the reward of cooperating with the indwelling Spirit of Christ to conform one to the image of Christ. One is a matter of a righteous position. The other is a matter of a righteous disposition. One is a matter of a righteous standing. The other is a matter of a righteous walking. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
Supposedly one of the original apostles said the Gentiles didn't need to be circumcised to follow the Way. By the same unknown author of Acts, chapter 15 I believe. Neither they nor Paul absolved natural Jews of circumcision as far as I know You seemed not to have read the book of Galatians. "Behold, I Paul say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. And I testify again to every man who becomes circimcised that he is a deptor to do the whole law. You have been brought to nought, [separated] from Christ, you who are being justified by law; you have fallen from grace. For we by the Spirit out of faith eagerly await the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails anything nor uncircumcision, but faith [avails], operating through love." (Galatians 5:2-6) "For neither is circumcisism anything nor uncircumcisism, but a new creation is what matters. And as many as walk by this rule, peace be upon them and mercy, even upon the Israel of God." (Gal. 6:15,16) This Paul downplaying circumcism to the Galatian disciples. Those are of faith in Christ are Abraham's seed. Those who walk in Christ are the "Israel of God" There is no need to be circumcised to be the bonafide descendent of Abraham now. For Paul writes "Know then that they who are of faith, these are the sons of Abraham" (Gal. 2:7) The author of Acts is Luke. The need to be circumcised to be saved was contrary to justification by faith which Christ taught, and Peter the first gospel preacher also taught in obediance to Christ, standing with the other 11 apostles. In Galatians, Paul said the Jews seeking to be justified by circumcism would not be profited by Christ and had fallen from grace. Read Galatians. And it might help not to decide that it too is by an "unknown author". I understand it is popular to do so among skeptics of the New Testament.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
Paul's clarity in writing about the need to forsake the Jewish rituals did intensify after his experiene with trying to placate the Jewish Christians in the Jerusalem.
James boasted that the believers were all zealous to keep the law of Moses. James advized Paul to do something to nullify their suspicion that Paul was teaching against the customs of Moses. Paul went along with James. James still had one foot in the Old Covenant and one foot in the New Covenant. Paul took James's advice. But God seems not to have honored this political move. The entire affair blew up in Paul's face. They dragged him out of the temple, locked the door, and would have stoned him. Paul appeased no one by pretending to still be a teacher of the Mosaic law keeping. The early church in Jerusalem had not grasped yet how radical a turn God had made in the new covenant. This shows the transition of the people of God from the old way into the new way. After this experience Paul was stronger and wrote his strongest letters saying that the old covenant was over. At this point Paul may have realized that of all the apostles he seemed to be the clearest what God had done in establishing a new covenenat. I could be wrong about that. However, it seems clear that after his Jerusalem disaster he became very much more resolute never to try to water down the gospel of Justification in Christ by faith. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024