Did Paul invent or hijack Christianity?

Recently, a friend emailed me with a very common claim, namely, that, “Paul hijacked Christianity with no personal connection with Jesus and filled his letters with personal opinions.” This could be rephrased in the more common claim: Paul invented Christianity.

This claim is especially common among Muslim apologists who use it in an attempt to explain why the Qur’an simultaneously affirms Jesus as a true prophet while also contradicting the Bible at every major point. However, since my friend is not a Muslim and is not coming at the issue from that angle, I will just deal with the question more broadly.

My friend alleges that some of the “personal opinions” of Paul that were interjected into the New Testament include: “slaves obey your masters; women not to have leadership roles in churches; homosexuality is a sin (though there is Old Testament authority for this last, Paul doesn’t seem to base his opinion on it).”

“None of [of the above] were said by Jesus and would perhaps be foreign to his teaching,” he wrote. “I think Paul has created a lot of mischief in Christianity, simply because he wrote a lot and his letters have survived.”

Paul, in fact, did have a personal connection to Jesus. This is revealed in the famous “Damascus road” accounts in Acts 9:3-9, Acts 22:6–11 and Acts 26:12–18. Paul refers back to this experience elsewhere in his letters, though it is only laid with this level of detail in Acts, written by Paul’s traveling companion Luke.

The only way one can maintain that Paul had no connection to Jesus is to rule out the conversion experience of Paul a priori based on a presupposition. Of course, I can argue that such a presupposition is untenable, but that would take an entire post to itself. For the sake of brevity, I would just point out that it is illogical to employ such reasoning. It would go something like, “It didn’t happen because it couldn’t happen because it can’t happen therefore it didn’t happen therefore Paul had no personal connection to Jesus.”

Yes, Paul does interject his personal opinions into his writing! However, when he does, he clearly delineates what he is saying as his personal opinion as an Apostle.

For instance, in dealing with the issue of marriage in 1 Corinthians 7, Paul clearly distinguishes between his own statements and the Lord’s.

In 1 Corinthians 7:10, Paul says, “To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord)…” and in 1 Corinthians 7:12, Paul says, “To the rest I say, (I, not the Lord)…” This example shows that Paul was not in the business of putting words in the mouth of Jesus. Paul had no problem showing when he was giving his own charge and when it was a statement made by the Lord Jesus, as it was in this case (Matthew 5:32).

Yet it is important to note that other Apostles recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture from the earliest days of Christianity, as seen the case of Peter (2 Peter 3:15–16).

Out of the three examples, two are directly from the Mosaic Law. Obviously the Mosaic Law couldn’t have stated that women should not preach in the church because the Church did not yet exist and wouldn’t for over 1,000 years.

The claim that there is only Old Testament authority for the last of the examples is false. The same goes for the claim that Paul does not base his statements on the Law.

It is abundantly clear that Paul actually does derive his statements on homosexual activity from the Law.

For instance, in 1 Timothy 1, Paul mentions homosexuality in the context of the type of people the Law was laid down for (1 Timothy 1:9-11). This short list indicts all people, just as Paul does elsewhere (Romans 3:23), showing that all people require the forgiveness that can only be found through faith in Jesus Christ.

When Paul deals with it elsewhere, he mentions it in the context of other activities explicitly prohibited by the Law (1 Corinthians 6:9-11), again going back to the idea that the Lord Jesus Christ sets apart (sanctifies) His people and justifies them.

As for the command for slaves to obey their masters, this is regularly claimed to be objectionable by critics. By way of introduction, is important to distinguish between what we have in our mind about the institution of slavery as Americans and the institution of slavery as it existed in Paul’s day. After all, Paul explicitly listed “enslaverers” (or man-stealers) in the same list mentioned above (1 Tim 1:10). Since the entire institution of slavery in the United States was built upon the kidnapping of people, it is clearly radically different from what Paul spoke of. Furthermore, the stealing of a man was punishable by death under the Mosaic Law (Exodus 21:16). The practice of slavery in America would never have existed if the Bible was actually being followed.

Paul also exhorted his readers to buy their freedom if they could (1 Corinthians 7:21) and instructing the master of a runaway slave to treat him as “no longer as a bondservant but more than a bondservant, as a beloved brother” (Philemon 11). Paul grounded his statements in the defense of “the name of God and the teaching.” Paul said that bondservants should “regard their masters as worthy of all honor,” not just for the sake of doing so, but so there might be no chance to slander the name of God and the gospel.

Ultimately, the claim made by my friend requires more fleshing out on his end and some evidence on his part in order to be more fully dealt with.

This is another common claim. First off, one must ask if this statement implies that Jesus would simply have to repeat everything Paul said and vice-versa or else they would remain foreign.

The fact is that there is nothing contradictory between Paul’s writings and Jesus’ teaching. One must wonder why Luke – a traveling companion of Paul and the author of Luke-Acts – would have no problem writing the gospel that bears his name if he perceived such a contradiction. Furthermore, one must wonder why this apparent conflict was lost on the earliest Christians, including the Apostle Peter, who viewed Paul’s letters as Scripture (see above).

In affirming the Law (Matthew 5:17), Jesus affirmed all that Paul that was clearly grounded in the Law. Furthermore, if there was a real contradiction between Paul’s writings and the teachings of Jesus, Paul would have been rejected, instead of accepted as he has always been.

The Christian community existed before Paul became a Christian, as is clearly seen by the fact that he was persecuting Christians (Acts 8:1,3), and he even met with the leaders of the early church. They did not reject Paul, but instead affirmed what he had been teaching (Galatians 2:2,9). This makes it even clearer that Paul could not have invented or hijacked Christianity.

As for the claim that Paul has had such a large impact “simply because he wrote a lot and his letters have survived,” all one has to do is look at the other early Christian writings that survived in order to see that is not a valid metric.

We have seen that the claim that “Paul hijacked Christianity” is without evidence. While I have taken the burden of proof upon myself in responding to this claim, in reality the burden of proof would be on the one making the claim in the first place. No such evidence has been presented and no substantive evidence can be presented since Paul did not invent Christianity or hijack Christianity or anything similar to it. Instead, Paul was an Apostle of Jesus Christ commissioned to spread the gospel, something that he clearly did by establishing churches and penning many letters under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that we can still read today.

When one reads the gospels and the other writings contained in the New Testament, the message is cohesive and clear: all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Ro 3:23), God demands complete perfection (Mt 5:48) and all we have earned through our sin is death (Ro 6:23) and hell. Yet God offers the free gift of eternal life to all who repent and believe (Mk 1:15, Ro 10:9–11) in Jesus Christ, who died as a propitiation (Ro 3:25, Heb 2:17, 1 Jn 4:10) for all who would ever believe in Him (Jn 6:44) and rose from the grave three days later, forever defeating sin and death. Those who believe in Him can know (1 John 5:13) that they have passed from death to life (Jn 5:24) and will not be condemned (Jn 3:18), but will be given eternal life by Jesus Christ (Jn 6:39-40). Paul and Jesus in no way contradict each other on what the gospel is, in fact the four gospels and Paul’s letters (along with the rest of the New Testament) form one beautiful, cohesive truth.

We are to be justified by faith.

We already are justified by faith.

Romans 5:1-2 Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

But what is Faith? Faith is the strength to continue in righteousness to the end.

Wrong again.

Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

What is righteousness? Righteousness is obedience to God's commandments.

And wrong yet again.

Romans 4:1-25 What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.”

Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? For we say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness. How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised. He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well, and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. For if it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void. For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression. That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his offspring—not only to the adherent of the law but also to the one who shares the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, as it is written, “I have made you the father of many nations”—in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist. In hope he believed against hope, that he should become the father of many nations, as he had been told, “So shall your offspring be.” He did not weaken in faith when he considered his own body, which was as good as dead (since he was about a hundred years old), or when he considered the barrenness of Sarah's womb. No unbelief made him waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God, fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised. That is why his faith was “counted to him as righteousness.” But the words “it was counted to him” were not written for his sake alone, but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.

Galatians 2:21 I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.

>> “We already are justified by faith.” <<

.
Only you say that. Peter explicitly says that it is the ‘end’ of our faith (there’s that word end again).

Matthew 24:13

“But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.”

Abraham, unlike you, BELIEVED God. That means that he believed what God commanded him to do.

Satan’s and your kind of simple belief that he exists just won’t cut it.

“faith is the assurance of things hoped for”

Now if it is hoped for, then you don’t have it yet, do you.

You constantly confuse obedience with works. You will not get “extra credit” on a makeup exam; there is no makeup exam, as Matthew 7 so clearly shows.

You should avoid reading Paul’s complex expositories, as you have demonstrated that you do not understand him.

Were you way correct, there would be no need for Mathew’s chapter 7, and Matthew’s chapter 24 would be a lie.

If your belief doesn’t fit all the scriptures, it fits none of them. God’s word is one word, not a Smorgasbord.
.

There is no scripture that says otherwise, as I have proven three times in this thread.

All you've managed to prove is that you don't even bother to read your own verses. As one of your "scripture proofs" consists of declaring that the law is fulfilled through love. And the others do not even say anything about righteousness being defined as "circumcision and the law of Moses." You are just conflating two things together, and hoping that "love" consists of returning to what Peter calls "a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear" (Acts 15:10).

Now you claimed that, nevertheless, the Apostles wanted us under this unbearable yoke, and I asked you to defend your assertions. You have not done so. Will you do so now? I am challenging you to please provide justification for your claims that the scripture "specifically" says that Christians are to "hear Moses in the synagogue," and that the reason why the "yoke" is condemned so thoroughly was because they were still too "young" of Christians.

Yet, if you are to be believed, Christians were commanded to be circumcised and live under the Law in Matthew 7 or Matthew 24. And yet, the Apostles specifically say that:

Act 15:24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:

Now if "no such commandment" was given, how is that possible if the commandment was given by Christ? Who came first? Christ? Or the Apostles? And why is there no command to "be circumcised and to follow the law of moses" ever given in the entirety of scripture, if what the Pharisees claimed was true, that one must be "circumcised according to the law of Moses" to be saved?

Answer these questions, or are you afraid? Will you rather accuse me of "telling lies" or being of Satan than to take the time to honestly answer these questions?

And this is not the only text, as you well know.

On circumcision:

1Co_7:18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.

If circumcision is required of the Law of Moses, which we must still follow, why does Paul command that we are not circumcised? And also, in other places, equates circumcision with uncircumcision as being totally equal conditions? Will you answer?

On dietary laws:

"For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer." (1Ti 4:4-5)

If these foods are eternally unclean, why does prayer and thanksgiving sanctify them and make them clean?

On feast days and other holy days:

"One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks." (Rom 14:5-6)

If Paul justifies the observance of each day as "all the same," whether it is a special day or no, why then do you demand that we follow Jewish customs which Christ makes no special requirement of us to follow?

Will you answer these, or will you keep trolling with your insults and red herrings?

I am challenging you to please provide justification for your claims that the scripture "specifically" says that Christians are to "hear Moses in the synagogue," and that the reason why the "yoke" is condemned so thoroughly was because they were still too "young" of Christians.

2 Corinthians 3:4-18 Such is the confidence that we have through Christ toward God. Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God, who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses' face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end, will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory? For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory. Indeed, in this case, what once had glory has come to have no glory at all, because of the glory that surpasses it. For if what was being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.

Since we have such a hope, we are very bold, not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face so that the Israelites might not gaze at the outcome of what was being brought to an end. But their minds were hardened. For to this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away. Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their hearts. But when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed. Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit.

Galatians 3:1-14 O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified. Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? Did you suffer so many things in vain—if indeed it was in vain? Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith—just as Abraham “believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”?

Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.

For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”—so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.

the Hebrew Roots folks are under a curse because they are relying on the Law. They have a veil covering their hearts.

Why anyone would want to return to the bondage of the Law instead of the freedom of being in Christ, is beyond me. Why they would want to trust in their own righteousness instead of that righteousness of Christ that is imputed to the believer, is even more amazing.

And yet there are people out there who think their own effort scan and will please God, the one who works in us to will and to do according to His good pleasure.

We already are justified by faith.

Indeed, on Christ's account.

For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. (Romans 3:23-26)

And which faith effects obedience towards its Object who fulfilled the Lord, and thus is the "end of righteousness,

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them. But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise.. (Romans 10:4-6)

But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. (Romans 10:8-10) And to believe is to confess in word and deed, and which justifies/vindicates one as having faith:

Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God. For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake. And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost: (1 Thessalonians 1:4-6)

And as saving faith follows the Lord who perfectly kept the Law in its intent, thus faith in its out-working works toward doing the same:

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Romans 8:3-4)

We thus are to hear Moses, but we obey the Law by following Christ who showed us how, and do so under the New Coventant which He instituted with His own sinless shed blood.

But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second...Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. (Hebrews 8:9) (Hebrews 8:6,7,9)

Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. (Hebrews 9:10)

But Judaizers reject the covenantatal distinctions in which the typological laws are abrogated,

Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. (Colossians 2:14-17)

But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain. (Galatians 4:9-11)

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. (Galatians 5:1-4)

Thus, contrary to Judaizers who contended,

A Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved, (Acts 15:1)

Peter states,

And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. (Acts 15:7-9)

Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. (Acts 15:10-11)

And note that this refers to God purifying the hearts of Cornelius and company by faith,

To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. (Acts 10:43)

And which "washing of regeneration" (Titus 3:5) was before baptism, but which faith confessed the Lord in baptism,

Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? (Acts 10:47)

And which example of justification by faith Peter uses as the template for being saved by grace, contrary to Rome, and interprets Acts 2:38, that it is the faith such as will be expressed in baptism and following Christ that appropriates justification, being counted for righteousness, not their own personal holiness. Which error results in souls usually suffering in "purgatory" till they become good enough (and atone for sins) to enter glory.

[metmom:] We already are justified by faith.

Indeed, on Christ's account.

True enough - Whether justification has occurred in the promise or awaits the 'thing hoped for', or as it were, the realization of that justification, when the roles are called and the books are opened, and the promise delivered has no real impact upon the argument at hand, because the argument at hand is not about justification.

And which faith effects obedience towards its Object who fulfilled the Lord, and thus is the "end of righteousness,

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them. But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise.. (Romans 10:4-6)

Here we have an argument about the word 'end' - I would say 'height, pinnacle', the ultimate example... That which should be emulated, which is the duty of a disciple.

And as saving faith follows the Lord who perfectly kept the Law in its intent, thus faith in its out-working works toward doing the same:

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Romans 8:3-4)

Think about that. The outworking of faith works toward 'perfectly keeping Torah'... Hence it seems, the 'outward sign' that we might see in ourselves, would be an alignment with Torah - Not keeping it perfectly, but working toward that end. The inward spirit desires Torah. And I would argue against your use of 'in it's intent'. Yeshua kept the Law perfectly and entirely.

We thus are to hear Moses, but we obey the Law by following Christ who showed us how, and do so under the New Coventant which He instituted with His own sinless shed blood.

Right. Yeshua, the 'pinnacle' of Torah, is to be followed, as a disciple follows a Rabbi. His example shows us how to keep Torah. How does 'hearing Moses and obeying the Law' by following Yeshua result in *not* keeping Torah and *not* hearing Moses?

But Judaizers reject the covenantatal distinctions in which the typological laws are abrogated,

But the Torah cannot be added to or taken from. How then can any part be abrogated?

Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. (Colossians 2:14-17)

Context:

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

AND:

Col 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
Col 2:21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
Col 2:22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?

This is talking about Torah? RATHER, the Body is of Messiah, and Messiah kept Torah.

But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain. (Galatians 4:9-11)

TORAH is 'weak and beggarly'? Maybe one should wonder whose days, months, times, and years they were keeping. After all, this man Paul is seen hurrying off to Jerusalem to keep Tabernacles and Passover (which involves a blood sacrifice, btw), and is seen cutting his hair in front to the temple (in completion of a Nazarite vow). Wouldn't his words be rather disingenuous if his actions deny them?

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. (Galatians 5:1-4)

I am circumcised, as are many, many christian men. So that event (wholly beyond my control, btw) means I will not profit in Messiah? Rather, 'whosoever of you are justified by the law'... Ahhh, there it is. Justification. No one here is claiming justification by keeping Torah.

Thus, contrary to Judaizers who contended,

Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved, (Acts 15:1)

Again, no one here is claiming that keeping Torah is salvific.

Peter states,

Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. (Acts 15:10-11)

Since Torah does not claim circumcision will save you, perhaps the yoke you point to is not Torah. It would do you well to understand what the 'yoke of a disciple' is. It was worn at all times by a disciple of a Rabbi, and it's tails contained the takanot of his master - these tails often had to be rolled up because of all the sayings which were there ensconced. The heaviness of the yoke was considered an indication of the wisdom of the Rabbi, though it was often very hard for the disciple to bear all day. Note that these sayings are takanot... Additions or changes to Torah, endorsed by the elders. Yeshua says 'My yoke is light' because there is nothing other than Torah therein... He didn't change Torah.

Again with the justification - ANY quote having to do with justification or salvation is summarily rejected - No one here is claiming justification or salvation in keeping Torah.

Falsehood 1:

“As one of your “scripture proofs” consists of declaring that the law is fulfilled through love”

.
Nothing in any scripture says that the Law is “fulfilled”

Yeshua stated that the Law is CONTAINED in the two love commandments. He did not say that that absolves anyone of obedience to his commandments.

Falsehood 2:

“Now you claimed that, nevertheless, the Apostles wanted us under this unbearable yoke”

The Law is not the “unbearable yoke,” the unbearable yoke is the man made law of the Pharisees, which Yeshua completely denounced.

1John 5:

[1] Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.
[2] By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
[3] For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

Falsehood 3:

“Yet, if you are to be believed, Christians were commanded to be circumcised”

Nowhere have I ever posted such a statement; it is the product of your own lack of understanding of the scriptures. You, like many here fail to understand that the Greek translations conflate Yehova’s law with the Pharisee's false man made law, and an understanding based upon study of all of scripture is necessary to sort the two out. This is the basis of all misunderstanding of The Law, and our obligation to obedience. Obedience is not "works" and whenever the word works rears its ugly head one is to understand that it is not a reference to Torah in any way.

The reference to “Law” in Acts 15:24 is the Pharisee's false law that was hung on the cross. Had you read and understood John's and Peter's first epistles, you would know that Yehova’s Law is absolutely necessary for our very necessary righteousness.

This answers all of your “questions” if you will take the time to read the word without your ignorant bias.

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.