|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: If the Bible is metaphorical then perhaps so is the God of the Bible | |||||||||||||
Bailey Member (Idle past 4399 days) Posts: 574 From: Earth Joined: |
Thanks for the exchange brutha jay ...
Hope all is well with you & the fam. Debating the Apostle Paul's strategic military moves for world domination is just not something I'm up to tonight. I hope not. Unless you're debating against it, as I would be.
Victory by means of absurdity. lol - Providing yardwork gets completed early enough tomorrow, I'll take a moment to hopefully straighten out the various misrepresentations which have been afforded to my position. For now, let's just say, I love uncle Paul and you more than I love myself. You're both family to me. One Love Edited by Bailey, : punct.
|
|||||||||||||
Bailey Member (Idle past 4399 days) Posts: 574 From: Earth Joined: |
Thank you for the exchange brutha jay.
Hope things are well with you ... brutha jay writes: weary writes:
The key phrase there is as they do the REST of Scripture. brutha jay writes: weary writes:
God used the man to write 13 or so books of the 27 New Testament books. I have noticed that you hang the majority of your interpretations on Paul's coat hook ... God did not consult with me for permission to do so. Neither did He ask for your advice. Since He places the members in the Body as it pleases Him, we should just say AMEN, and submit ourselves to God's sovereign arrangement. The Apostle Peter recommended Paul's wisdom (2 Peter 3:15,16). I don't know why you would not. lol - now, now ... I never said that I would not ol' friend. However, the doctrines and subsequent theologies which must continue to evolve from the remains of uncle Paul's letters have always been highly subjective and their volatility often remains unpredictable. Consider Kefa's very own words in the verse you quoted ... Some things in these letters are hard to understand ... Things the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they also do to the rest of the scriptures. So, uncle Paul's letters are frequently inclined to misinterpretation according to even the Apostle Kefa. There is the sense one may understand them more clearly with some extensive formal training in the original testament Yuhdaic traditions, such as the pretense they were written under. You don't avoid the rest of Scripture because ignorant and unstable people twist it do you? Apologies for the delay brutha jay. First of all - what good does downplaying the dangers associated with uncle Paul's writings serve, when it has been established directly as an issue within canonized scripture texts? Second of all, I am entertaining discussion with all the other Levites, aren't I - lol? Those who cherry pick any & all verses at their disposal to convince all others that Joshua's murder was a necessary Levitical animal sacrifice. No brutha jay - by the strength given me from the Father, I no longer avoid scripture because of ignorant and unstable people. Thank the Father.
brutha jay writes: weary writes:
Experience in the spiritual walk is a vital ingredient. So, uncle Paul's letters are frequently inclined to misinterpretation according to even the Apostle Kefa. There is the sense one may understand them more clearly with some extensive formal training in the original testament Yuhdaic traditions, such as the pretense they were written under. Yea - what does this mean tho? Please explain what you are trying to convey. Of course one is free to remain a subject to ignorance, supposing that Paul - the Pharisee of Pharisees - was, somehow, not a ToRaH observant practitioner within the Yuhdaic traditions. Perhaps understanding the customs of the Pharisees (the vital ingredient you speak of?) may shed some light on their spiritual walk ...
And while we are on the subject of possible misunderstandings, I sure have to think twice about who you are talking about because of your insistance in using Hebrew names. Kefa ??? Oh, that's Peter I guess. Excuse my naivete of Hebrew names here. Btw, uncle Paul was indeed a Pharisee - there is no getting around this solid fact, regardless of any disdain towards Hebraic roots one may harbor. While I am not Jewish, it is my conviction that uncle Paul was a lifelong ToRaH observant Jew of the sect of the Pharisees who accepted Joshua as Lord. Now, as an aside, the Hebrew word ToRaH appears many hundreds of times in the OT and is almost always translated into the English word ‘law’. However, this is a poor translation mainly because the comparison we entertain with the Western concepts of law. Many will probably visualize policeman, tickets, judges, courts, fines and jail sentences when they hear the word 'law'. The word 'ToRaH' implies none of these things. ToRaH is derived from the root word yarah which literally means ‘to flow as water’. Figuratively it means ‘to point out’, to teach, to inform, to instruct or perhaps to show. There is the sense that ToRaH could be best defined in English as ‘instruction’, and that is, the Father's instruction to humankind. Once one gets a grasp of this concept (that the first five books of the Bible are not meant to threaten us but rather to instruct us in righteous living - and that, according to the Prophet Yirmiyahu, the documents have indeed been tampered with) perhaps they can begin to relax a little bit. Now instead of seeing the Father as a policeman waiting for us to break one of His laws - or teachings, so that He can punish us, we have the picture of a loving Father instructing His children in how to live a life that will be both a blessing to us as children and an honor to our devoted Father. Now, back to uncle Paul - first, he belonged to one of the most strict sects within the Yuhdaic traditions.
quote: Listen to this - he did not say, 'I was a Pharisee', he said, 'I am a Pharisee ...'. Secondly, uncle Paul studied under the head of the Sanhedrin (the highest court in Yuhdea).
quote: So we see, Paul was most likely a member of the Sanhedrin, as evidenced by the following scripture, which fits perfectly the Yuhdaic practice of stoning ...
quote: Since it was the responsibility of the members of the Sanhedrin to witness public stonings, there seems to be very little reason to suppose that uncle Paul was not present, in an official capacity, at the stoning, while those who were witnesses against Stephen were required to cast the stones. Third, it was the habit of uncle Paul to attend synagogue every Sabbath.
quote: Fourth, uncle Paul upheld Yudaic circumcision.
quote: Paul observed the custom of the Jews, which was that all Jewish males had to be physically circumcised. This is the case as presented in scripture texts, despite the fact that he was the primary one who taught that Goyim - or gentiles, need not be circumcised in order to fellowship with those within the Yuhdaic traditions of the day who had accepted Joshua as the Anointed One. And so, as far as I'm concerned, there appears to be no contradiction here at all. Uncle Paul was a ToRaH observant Jew - a Pharisee studying under the Sanhedrin. If he had not circumcised Timothy, he would have stood in direct conflict both with the ToRaH and Yuhdaic tradition because Timothy, being a Jew, needed to observe the customs of the Jews. Timothy was not a Goyim. Fifth, if uncle Paul was a ToRaH observant practitioner within the Yuhdaic traditions he would definitely be keeping their festivals, which is what the following two scriptures plainly indicate ...
quote: This can go on and on, and we could perhaps discuss the vow he had taken which required him to cut his hair - or 'shorn his head', in Cenchrea, as he left Corinth on his way to Syria (Acts of the Apostles 18:18). You don't suppose that was a Nazarite vow, do you??
quote: Perhaps it was another vow aside from this, although one can be all but certain that uncle Paul was not swearing a Levitical Catholic vow - lol Much less, a vow within any of the innumerable off-shoots she has spawned (Levitical Protestantism, Levitical Mormonism, Levitical JW, etc.). Please, don't tease me anymore - if you have evidence to suggest that uncle Paul was not a ToRaH abiding Pharisee, present it accordingly. Otherwise, please explain why you are unable or unwilling to plainly concede that he most likely was? Then we can talk about 'the Apostle Paul's strategic military moves for world domination' - lol Looking forward to hearing from you brutha ... One Love Edited by Bailey, : sp. Edited by Bailey, : link scripture texts Edited by Bailey, : sp. Edited by Bailey, : metanonia I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker. If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice' They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself? Think for yourself. Mercy Trumps Judgement,Love Weary
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024