Paul couldn't keep the Law AND live for God - it was one or the other

[musterion]

Even your own quote states that Paul died through the law, that is, by way of the law. Therefore the law served its purpose in putting him to death, (the flesh and "old man"). The modern mainstream perceptions and teachings of Paul are therefore misinformation founded on incorrect readings of what Paul is teaching. You cannot be brought out from "under the law" if you were never "under the law" to begin with; and the law is our "schoolmaster" to bring us to Messiah. If you have not been brought through the law, like as if an immersion, then you are not "crucified with Messiah". Paul even says, Are you ignorant that all we who were immersed into Messiah Yeshua were immersed into his death? (Romans 6:3). The immersion of death is through the law so that you may be brought up from death on the other side and "become" another; and when you finally die you will see that the law is no more physical and carnal but, indeed, Spirit, supernal, and spiritual, (Romans 7:14).

The Law's job was to show sin as sin, thereby pointing to our need for Christ. No law - not even God's - has claim on those who are dead. God declares believers as having died with Christ. So once a person is His, the Law has no more place in his NEW life, which is Christ.

 

[Ben Masada]

Even your own quote states that Paul died through the law, that is, by way of the law. Therefore the law served its purpose in putting him to death, (the flesh and "old man"). The modern mainstream perceptions and teachings of Paul are therefore misinformation founded on incorrect readings of what Paul is teaching. You cannot be brought out from "under the law" if you were never "under the law" to begin with; and the law is our "schoolmaster" to bring us to Messiah. If you have not been brought through the law, like as if an immersion, then you are not "crucified with Messiah". Paul even says, Are you ignorant that all we who were immersed into Messiah Yeshua were immersed into his death? (Romans 6:3). The immersion of death is through the law so that you may be brought up from death on the other side and "become" another; and when you finally die you will see that the law is no more physical and carnal but, indeed, Spirit, supernal, and spiritual, (Romans 7:14).

Daqq, this is anthropomorphism of the Law. The Law is not a living being to put another to death or to do whatever is done by the living. What put Paul to death was himself, not the Law. If one commits a crime punishable with death, he or she will be the one to cause his or her death, not the Law. For instance, if Jesus had not allowed his disciples to acclaim him king of the Jews in a Roman province which was Jerusalem at the time, he would have never been condemned to the cross by the Romans. Pilate himself was clear enough to explain to the whole world why Jesus was crucified by nailing that plate with Jesus' verdict of INRI on the top of his cross.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

We ARE perfect because of Christ's work on the cross !!!!


Colossians 1:27-28 KJV -

Eye suspect that I need to find another church or do some serious bible study. Eye thank you.

 

[jamie]

I'm here. I don't understand why there could be a new covenant, when most churches talk about the "old" one.

The Sinaitic covenant was replaced by a new covenant because of a change in priesthood.

Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. (Hebrews 7:11-12)​

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

No I don't.

Eye am leaning things in your post and with the help of the people here. You pointed out some interesting scripture. Eye wish you didn't have that surgical stick issue. Eye could have learned a ton from you.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

The Sinaitic covenant was replaced by a new covenant because of a change in priesthood.

Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. (Hebrews 7:11-12)​

That Malchizedek guy had something to do with Abraham, if I'm remembering right.

 

[jamie]

That Malchizedek guy had something to do with Abraham, if I'm remembering right.

Yes. What denomination congregation do you assemble with?

 

[Ben Masada]

That Malchizedek guy had something to do with Abraham, if I'm remembering right.

Okay Evil.Eye, if you wanna know who was that Melchizedek guy and what he had to do with Abraham, read this:

The Truth About Melchizedek

Here is a column which I consider will crack under the building of Christianity. Who was Melchizedek? This man was a pagan Canaanite king, who happened to be the king of Salem, ancient name for Jerusalem.

Abram had just returned from a battle with five kings, and, on his way to Beersheba, he paused in Jerusalem for a repast. He and his men were tired and weary of the military campaign. Melchizedek, afraid perhaps that Abram would take on him too and conquer Jerusalem out of his hands, immediately brought forth bread and wine to him and his troops. For Abram, it was a relieve. He didn't have to fight another king.

Now, please, I must remind you that I am reading from the originals in Hebrew and not from the Gentile adulterated version of the KJV. Why would Melchizedek prefer to feed Abram and his army instead of fighting him? Because he, Abram, and not Melchizedek was the priest of God most High, whose seed would be of a nation of priests and kings. (Exodus 19:6; Isaiah 61:6)

Then, as Melchizedek served the food and drink, he blessed Abram. Please focus on how he blessed Abram. "Blessed be Abram of God Most High." It means that Melchizedek would recognize that Abram was the one Priest of God the Most High. Creator of the universe." Then, for all the bread and wine, and that blessing of recognition of who Abram really was, Abram shared with him a tenth of the spoils taken from the kings in battle.

Now, let us check Psalm 110:4, which in the KJV says, "The Lord has sworn and will not repent, you are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek." This is a Christian gloss plagiarized by Paul and grossly forged by the Church in the 4th Century under the excuse of pious forgery.

Here is what Psalm 110:4 says in the originals in Hebrew: "The Lord has sworn and will not relent, you are a priest forever; a rightful king by My decree." As you can see, it has nothing to do with king Melchizedek, king of Salem, but rather to David in the type level of interpretation, which points to the archetype level of Israel, the seed of Abraham as a nation of priests and kings.(Exodus 19:6; Isaiah 61:6) Obviously, only the High Priest of the Most High would produce a generation of priests and kings through Israel.

 

[daqq]

The Law's job was to show sin as sin, thereby pointing to our need for Christ. No law - not even God's - has claim on those who are dead. God declares believers as having died with Christ. So once a person is His, the Law has no more place in his NEW life, which is Christ.

According to Paul the Torah is used lawfully to put to death sin in our own members.
Romans 7:12-25.

Daqq, this is anthropomorphism of the Law. The Law is not a living being to put another to death or to do whatever is done by the living. What put Paul to death was himself, not the Law. If one commits a crime punishable with death, he or she will be the one to cause his or her death, not the Law. For instance, if Jesus had not allowed his disciples to acclaim him king of the Jews in a Roman province which was Jerusalem at the time, he would have never been condemned to the cross by the Romans. Pilate himself was clear enough to explain to the whole world why Jesus was crucified by nailing that plate with Jesus' verdict of INRI on the top of his cross.

How is it an anthropomorphism of the Torah? Paul very clearly says that he serves both forms of the law, that is, the Torah of Elohim, which is Horeb, of the mind, and of above; and he also says that when it comes to the flesh he serves Torah of sin, which is Sinai and of below, which is lawfully employed so as to put to death the evil in our own "members" of our own "households". Every man has his "house" with his own "members" which Paul clearly admonishes his readers to MORTIFY, (put to death). MORTIFY therefore your members which are upon the Land. MORTIFY the deeds of the body. These things refer back to the parables, allegories, idioms, and sayings of the Master Teacher Yeshua whose Testimony is the foundation of the doctrines and teachings of Paul who, again, clearly states in the following passage that he serves both Torah of Elohim, (with the mind), and Torah of sin, (and death), when it comes to the flesh:

Romans 7:24-25 KJV
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.

The statement from v.25b is an ellipsis, "I serve" is first written and then emphatically implied:

With the mind I myself serve the Torah of Elohim, (Horeb), but with the flesh (I serve) the Torah of sin, (Sinai).

It is not an anthropomorphism but rather your failure to understand the Torah and its usage.
The same goes for musterion who ignores the words of Paul when they refute the paradigm.

 

[Ben Masada]

According to Paul the Torah is used lawfully to put to death sin in our own members.
Romans 7:12-25.




How is it an anthropomorphism of the Torah? Paul very clearly says that he serves both forms of the law, that is, the Torah of Elohim, which is Horeb, of the mind, and of above; and he also says that when it comes to the flesh he serves Torah of sin, which is Sinai and of below, which is lawfully employed so as to put to death the evil in our own "members" of our own "households". Every man has his "house" with his own "members" which Paul clearly admonishes his readers to MORTIFY, (put to death). MORTIFY therefore your members which are upon the Land. MORTIFY the deeds of the body. These things refer back to the parables, allegories, idioms, and sayings of the Master Teacher Yeshua whose Testimony is the foundation of the doctrines and teachings of Paul who, again, clearly states in the following passage that he serves both Torah of Elohim, (with the mind), and Torah of sin, (and death), when it comes to the flesh:

Romans 7:24-25 KJV
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.

The statement from v.25b is an ellipsis, "I serve" is first written and then emphatically implied:

With the mind I myself serve the Torah of Elohim, (Horeb), but with the flesh (I serve) the Torah of sin, (Sinai).

It is not an anthropomorphism but rather your failure to understand the Torah and its usage.
The same goes for musterion who ignores the words of Paul when they refute the paradigm.

Nice try but, what Paul meant with Romans 7:25 was, since he could not get rid of his sinful addiction, he would release himself from the Law while upholding it in his mind but serving sin in his flesh. Read Romans 7:6, 25. There is no other way to interpret this text if you read how amoral was the life of a Hellenist man in a Greek city in the First Century. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, chapter on the NT, Paul was the son of a well-to-do Hellenist couple from Tarsus in Cilicia, the first region to become Roman when Rome conquered the Middle East.

 

[daqq]

Nice try but, what Paul meant with Romans 7:25 was, since he could not get rid of his sinful addiction, he would release himself from the Law while upholding it in his mind but serving sin in his flesh. Read Romans 7:6, 25. There is no other way to interpret this text if you read how amoral was the life of a Hellenist man in a Greek city in the First Century. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, chapter on the NT, Paul was the son of a well-to-do Hellenist couple from Tarsus in Cilicia, the first region to become Roman when Rome conquered the Middle East.

That is flat out ridiculous. And you believe the Catholic Encyclopedia? (LOL). Do you also suppose that Paul wrote a magnificently worded theological treatise in Koine Greek to "Galatians" living in the badlands of Galatia in Asia Minor which was nothing more than a warring tribal heathen upstart territory full of Celts that only spoke Latin at that time? :rotfl:

The historical, physical, literal, and carnal minded paradigm is a church fantasy; and those who adhere to it walk not according to the Spirit as Paul clearly warns and admonishes all of his readers to do.

 

[beameup]

What really happened on the Road to Damascus, when Paul fell as a result of an attack of epilepsy and he said later when preaching his gospel is that he had heard the voice of Jesus; a voice he had never heard before. So, what happened was all according to his own story which deserved no credit. I take that as a prelude to his gospel that Jesus had resurrected. (II Timothy 2:8)

No, no, no :nono:
According to YOUR "standard line" everything is "just a dream". :rotfl:

 

[jamie]

No, no, no :nono:
According to YOUR "standard line" everything is "just a dream". :rotfl:

I think Ben had a vision that life is just a dream.

Edgar Poe asked, "Is all that we see or seem but a dream within a dream?"

Clement Moore described children with visions of sugar plums in their heads.

 

[beameup]

I think Ben had a vision that life is just a dream.

Edgar Poe asked, "Is all that we see or seem but a dream within a dream?"

Clement Moore described children with visions of sugar plums in their heads.

This is interesting as he claims that he only believes in what he can touch, taste, see, or smell.
So, with that "Jewish logic" he can basically dismiss the entire Tanakh as "fable" and God as "imaginary".
Which leaves poor Ben with nothing, zero, zip, nada...

 

[Zeke]

That is flat out ridiculous. And you believe the Catholic Encyclopedia? (LOL). Do you also suppose that Paul wrote a magnificently worded theological treatise in Koine Greek to "Galatians" living in the badlands of Galatia in Asia Minor which was nothing more than a warring tribal heathen upstart territory full of Celts that only spoke Latin at that time? :rotfl:

The historical, physical, literal, and carnal minded paradigm is a church fantasy; and those who adhere to it walk not according to the Spirit as Paul clearly warns and admonishes all of his readers to do.

That's a hard paradigm to escape from, it is so ingrained in the memory that facts won't even break its magical spell until the carnal 1Kings 19:11 starts to listen to the still small voice 1Kings 19:12 that teaches from 1Cor 13 the more excellent way instead of the sitcom doctrine of mid axe Matt 15:6 that thrives on cultural sarcasm instead of substance.

 

[Ben Masada]

No, no, no :nono:
According to YOUR "standard line" everything is "just a dream". :rotfl:

I didn't say Paul dreamed. I said he had an attack of epilepsy and fell from his horse. Hence an extra name for epilepsy as the "fall disease." During those few minutes of convulsive seizures the patient is guided by his or her paranoid into thoughts of a changing of life. The patient also hears voices but does not see any thing but reflections of rays of sun light. Till then Paul used to persecute the members of the New Way aka the Sect of the Nazarenes. Hence, he had an idea to change his method of persecution and tried to join the Sect, probably to do the job from inside. That's when he applied to join the Sect and was rejected by the Apostles of Jesus on the pretext that he could not even be a disciple. (Acts 9:26)

 

[musterion]

You still here?

 

[Ben Masada]

That is flat out ridiculous. And you believe the Catholic Encyclopedia? (LOL). Do you also suppose that Paul wrote a magnificently worded theological treatise in Koine Greek to "Galatians" living in the badlands of Galatia in Asia Minor which was nothing more than a warring tribal heathen upstart territory full of Celts that only spoke Latin at that time? :rotfl:

The historical, physical, literal, and carnal minded paradigm is a church fantasy; and those who adhere to it walk not according to the Spirit as Paul clearly warns and admonishes all of his readers to do.

What Paul meant by "walking according to the spirit" was to walk by faith and not by sight if you read II Cor. 5:7. Since sight means understanding, it is only obvious that, to walk by faith was to walk in the dark aka without the power of understanding. When Paul juxtaposed walking by faith as opposite to walking by sight, he meant for his followers to live by faith and leave the understanding with him. In other words, he was building a religion of members without Freewill and ability to think by themselves.

 

[Danoh]

What Paul meant by "walking according to the spirit" was to walk by faith and not by sight if you read II Cor. 5:7. Since sight means understanding, it is only obvious that, to walk by faith was to walk in the dark aka without the power of understanding. When Paul juxtaposed walking by faith as opposite to walking by sight, he meant for his followers to live by faith and leave the understanding with him. In other words, he was building a religion of members without Freewill and ability to think by themselves.

While you are at it; throw passages such as these away...

Psalms 27:11 Teach me thy way, O LORD, and lead me in a plain path, because of mine enemies. 27:12 Deliver me not over unto the will of mine enemies: for false witnesses are risen up against me, and such as breathe out cruelty. 27:13 I had fainted, unless I had believed to see the goodness of the LORD in the land of the living. 27:14 Wait on the LORD: be of good courage, and he shall strengthen thine heart: wait, I say, on the LORD.

Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 11:2 For by it the elders obtained a good report. 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

 

[daqq]

What Paul meant by "walking according to the spirit" was to walk by faith and not by sight if you read II Cor. 5:7. Since sight means understanding, it is only obvious that, to walk by faith was to walk in the dark aka without the power of understanding. When Paul juxtaposed walking by faith as opposite to walking by sight, he meant for his followers to live by faith and leave the understanding with him. In other words, he was building a religion of members without Freewill and ability to think by themselves.

That is not what Paul says but rather your interpretation of what you want him to say:

Romans 8:5-12 ASV
5 For they that are after the flesh mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
6 For the mind of the flesh is death; but the mind of the Spirit is life and peace:
7 because the mind of the flesh is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can it be:
8 and they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 But ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you. But if any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, [Meshiah] he is none of his.
10 And if Christ [Meshiah] is in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the spirit is life because of righteousness.
11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus [the man] from the dead dwelleth in you, he that raised up Christ Jesus [Yeshua the Anointed one] from the dead shall give life also to your mortal bodies through his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

The only way to have the Spirit of Messiah in you is to consume his Testimony, (which is the Seed of the Word as in the Parable of the Sower). Testimony is Spirit: the words that the man Yeshua speaks are Spirit and they are Life. Therefore if one does not have and hold the Testimony of Yeshua in uprightness then the same cannot have the Spirit of Messiah dwelling inside, and is not one of his. The "new covenant" Spirit is the Testimony of Yeshua which expounds Torah and Prophets to the full. Therefore without the Testimony of Yeshua one neither understands the Torah, nor the Prophets, nor the Writings. This is also why Paul says elsewhere that he and his have the mind of Messiah, and why it is utterly critical that you cut off your own head and put on the mind of Messiah by way of his Testimony Doctrine. Chop, chop! Get to hacking, plucking, and cutting off, and do the will of Elohim. :chuckle: