Posted on 02/24/2014 2:10:01 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Tarsians?
Adultery was pretty big to Jesus. Met a lot of Christians who have re-married.
My guess is these folks are the ones who don't like what Paul has to say about sexual sins. They don't like being told that what they want to do is sinful, so they'll just pretend it's not.
Bingo!
Because a human brings them closer to God?
And don’t forget, the United States could never have been founded without Jesus’ influence.
This from an OT believer.
Ah the Hebrew Bible is His-story, from the 'beginning' Genesis 1:1 to tracing the lineage from which He would be born, and all the named peoples they came in contact with down through the generations. Psalms 22 is but one point in authenticity. Why Christ is named right there in Genesis 2:9 symbolically called the 'tree of life'.
Seems interesting that some do the very thing they accuse others of doing/being.
That doesn't make any sense...Jesus never wrote anything...Everything in the red letters in the Gospels are 2nd hand information just as is the writing of Paul...
The Gospels are no more authoritative than the epistles...
Well done article to have on hand! Thank you.
Perhaps it is because we recognize that Jesus IS the promised Messiah? We can look at the three HUNDRED plus prophecies given in the Hebrew Bible and discover that they were fulfilled by the historical Jesus (with the exception of those few future ones yet to be).
Do you actually think that Christians just invented their religion based upon nothing? Jesus of Nazareth was a REAL person, he rose from the dead after his brutal crucifixion - witnessed by hundreds of people, he performed miracles and his teachings were based on the SPIRIT of the Law of Moses and the purpose of the Almighty in the affairs of His creation. He came to earth and dwelt among us, lived a sinless life and died on a cruel cross as the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. His resurrection was the ultimate proof that He was who He claimed to be.
Not everyone will believe and receive this truth - that was also foretold - and Jesus would be rejected by His own people - another one of those prophecies. But one day every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.
I was thinking the same thing! Do the initials J.A. ring a bell?
What people who think this way forget it that the Holy Spirit is who inspired/breathed/carried along the writers of sacred Scripture and it was not any one person's own imaginings that got written down. Paul's epistles are every bit Scripture as the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John as well as Moses, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Daniel, etc. God's word is God's word.
Amen! Exactly.
The Gospels are no more authoritative than the epistles...
While both are fabulous, I give a bit more credibility to the scriptures that were heard directly as Jesus was teaching during His time in a physical body on earth. Those words are the red letter words.
Paul did not meet Jesus while He was alive. Everything Paul received was through his connection with Jesus by going within, by reading the Gospels, or by speaking with people who heard Jesus first hand. Thus Paul’s writings do not include read letter words. While Paul’s writings were divinely inspired, I am not sure he was always a pure channel of Jesus’ thoughts as often Paul’s personal bias from formerly being a Pharisee came through. However, he also had great insights from Jesus that Jesus had not shared while in the physical body. Remember Jesus originally thought that His ministry was only for the Jews and His realization changed during His life.
Paul spent 3 years learning from the Risen Lord...
Paul mentions some of his own relatives in Romans 16: Andronikos, Iounias, Herodion. The first two were Christians before he was, and were his fellow-prisoners. There is some uncertainty about the second name--a few manuscripts read "Ioulian" which would be the accusative of Julia. I suppose it could be either a man's name (Iounias = Junias) or a woman's name (Junia).
It would be interesting to know Paul's full Roman name--it might give a clue as to when his family acquired Roman citizenship. If his nomen was Junius, then it could mean an ancestor was rewarded with Roman citizenship by Marcus Junius Brutus, the tyrannicide, but that would be sheer speculation. If his nomen was Julius, the family could have been citizenship by Julius Caesar or by Augustus.
Paul referenced the Old Testament much more often than the teachings of Jesus. If anything, he should be accused of trying to keep early Christians close to Judaism.
I’d be interested on your take after reading the work referenced at #8.
As every cult has claimed about its leader. And this one was executed by Heaven for blasphemy.
And don’t forget, the United States could never have been founded without Jesus’ influence.
So?
The United States is neither the chosen nation nor the Mashiach.
Often when you are learning from the Risen Lord it is difficult to hear. It is very difficult to be in a physical body and stay connected at the level of the Risen Lord.
Jesus is there all the time for us equally. All it takes is one stumble and you are off the station and can’t hear the music. It’s a constant struggle to stay tuned in. (the concept of rapture is merely being raised up to the level of connection)
When we are not tuned in, our personal bias and unresolved conflicts get injected into the message. That has happened to Paul. That does not take away from his greatness or the wonderful wisdom he conveyed to us through his letters.
But why do you grant the "new testament" the authority to authoritatively declare that J*sus was the fulfillment of those prophecies?
Why does no one ever answer my question?
Psalms 22 is but one point in authenticity.
Chrstianity claims Psalm 22 refers to J*sus. Why do you accept chrstianity's claim at face value? The claim is not actually in the text of the TaNa"KH but imported from outside.
Why Christ is named right there in Genesis 2:9 symbolically called the 'tree of life'.
ARG! How do you know the Tree of Life is J*sus? Genesis doesn't say it's J*sus--the "new testament" does. Why do you accept the "new testament" and its interpretation of the Hebrew Bible from the very outset? You don't even subject it to proof; you accept it as a given! Can't you see how fallacious that is?
By the way . . . it’s not the “old testament.” As long as you insist on calling it that you have a problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.