Poll question: True or false?

[Ktoyou]

That's a lot of typos sorry.

I heard that one before.

 

[turbosixx]

Well the problem with this idea is that the book of James is not the only source we have to know what James was teaching.

Acts 21:17 And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. 18 On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. 19 When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. 20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; 21 but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. 22 What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come. 23 Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. 24 Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law.​

That verse 21 is a killer for your idea that James is talking about something other than the works of the Law of Moses. It's pretty clear that James is doing damage control here among his Jewish followers, attempting to quell this rumor about Paul telling Jews to forsake Moses and circumcision. Indeed, the issue of circumcision was the big theological debate in the first century and it turns out that the resolution to that debate is the very same resolution to every one of the modern theological debates I mentioned in my previous post. In fact, this doctrinal debate of circumcision, that most Christians don't even realize ever happened, is so central to the story of the Bible that if you don't understand how it was resolved, you don't understand the New Testament at all. It is THE key to understanding the whole thing. Without it, its like attempting to understand act 3 of Hamlet without having seen act 2. It can't be done.

Acts 15: 1And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 Therefore, when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem, to the apostles and elders, about this question.

5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.” 6 Now the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter.​

So why in the world should there be such a dispute in the first place? I mean these are the Apostles that we're talking about here. If anyone had their doctrine correct it had to be them! Why didn't they just reject these people outright? Where is the need for them to get all together and consider the matter?

Well the reason they had a dispute is because the notion that circumcision was not required was an entirely new idea. No one, and I mean absolutely no one, including Jesus Himself, had ever taught anything other than that circumcision was completely necessary. Jesus even placed circumcision above the Ten Commandments!

John 7: 23 If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, so that the law of Moses should not be broken, are you angry with Me because I made a man completely well on the Sabbath?​

In fact, Jesus not only upheld the Law He taught others to do the same over and over again and then AFTER HIS RESURRECTION, He told the twelve to teach others to do the same.

Matthew 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you;​

Paul was the first and is the ONLY biblical author to teach anyone that they aught not get circumcised.

Galatians 5:2 Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing.​

In fact, not being circumcision and not following the Law of Moses (essentially the same thing - the former being a physical symbol of the latter) form the foundation of Paul's entire ministry and message! And this message continued to create problems for the twelve and their converts even after the Jerusalem council.

Galatians 2:11 Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; 12 for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision.​

That's another killer verse for your idea that James was not talking about the Law of Moses. This verse happens to be only a few sentences before some of the verses you quoted to make the case that Paul was talking about something different that Paul was. It's clear that he was not.

SO, what's the bottom line here? What was the resolution that the twelve came to? If only we had a way of knowing what was said at the council meeting! Oh wait! I'm pretty sure we do!

Acts 15: 7 And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: “Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, 9 and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? 11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.”

13 And after they had become silent, James answered, saying, “Men and brethren, listen to me: 14 Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name. 15 And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written:

16
‘After this I will return
And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down;
I will rebuild its ruins,
And I will set it up;
17
So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,
Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name,
Says the Lord who does all these things.’​

18 “Known to God from eternity are all His works. 19 Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, 20 but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood. 21 For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath.”​

And Paul's report from the same meeting we find recorded also...

Galatians 2:1 Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and also took Titus with me. 2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to those who were of reputation, lest by any means I might run, or had run, in vain. 3 Yet not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. 4 And this occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage), 5 to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.

6 But from those who seemed to be something—whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man—for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. 7 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter 8 (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), 9 and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. 10 They desired only that we should remember the poor, the very thing which I also was eager to do.​

Okay, that's more than enough for now. I'll let you digest that and we'll see where we are. Thanks for taking the time to read such a long post.

Resting in Him,
Clete


P.S. Thank you Bob Enyart!!!!

I agree with most everything you posted but I have a perspective you might consider. Circumcision and the law were very much an issue. It shouldn’t be surprising since circumcision had been practiced for around 2,000 years and defined them as the people of God. The law of Moses given to them 430 years later and not the Gentiles helped to distinguish them even more from the Gentiles. It’s easy for us to wonder why there was a dispute from our very distant perspective because we have it all laid out.

You asked, “Why didn’t the apostles just reject these people outright? I think that is the root of helping us to understand what’s going on. Yes, the law of Moses was out and the law of Christ was in but what was the best way to educate the masses. In order to be effective in preaching the gospel the apostles had to consider the “baggage” of their audience. Not only the apostles in Jerusalem but Paul himself.
1 Cor. 9:19 For though I am free from all men I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win the more; 20 and to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law;
An example of Paul doing just that is when he circumcised Timothy so the preaching of the gospel to Jews would not be hindered.
Acts 16:3 Paul wanted to have him go on with him. And he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in that region, for they all knew that his father was Greek.

Yes, at times Paul boldly preached against the Law of Moses because it could not save but he picked his battles as when he stood his ground with the circumcision of Titus.
Acts 13:39 and by Him everyone who believes is justified from all things from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Paul understood that those who do not fully understand the gospel (weak in faith) and still did things of the law are not to be judged by man.
Romans 14:1 Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. 2 For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. 3 Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him. 4 Who are you to judge another’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand. 5 One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks.

Neither the book of James nor the verses you provided prove that James taught the practice of circumcision and adherence to the law of Moses. The judgment of the council supports that conclusion because Paul had no objection to the resolution and even proclaimed it as he went along.
Acts 16:4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered to them the decrees to keep, which were determined by the apostles and elders at Jerusalem.

There is no evidence that the apostles, in the heart of Jewish territory, taught anything other than the gospel. Even Paul when in Jerusalem did not outright reject any observance of the law but for the greater good appeared to be under law. We can’t view the handling of the weak in faith as preaching something other than the gospel.

 

[OCTOBER23]

The Hebrews did NOT have FAITH in God.

The Hebrews did NOT have Works either

WORKS ARE OBEYING GOD .

 

[turbosixx]

In fact, Jesus not only upheld the Law He taught others to do the same over and over again and then AFTER HIS RESURRECTION, He told the twelve to teach others to do the same.

Yes, Jesus kept and instructed others to uphold the law. The reason he did so was because the lived and died under that law of Moses. I’m going to disagree with you in that he taught the law of Moses. Jesus taught some of his law while he lived

Heb. 1:1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son,
Lets’ look at what he says. First he gives them the law of Moses then he gives them his law.
Matt. 5: 27 “You have heard (LoM) that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say (Christ’s Law) to you that looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Jesus is taking the law from written to that of the heart.

Jesus while living gave a glimpse into his commands but there was much more that the apostles would receive after his ascension.
John 16:12 “I still have many things to say to you but you cannot bear them now. 13 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.


After his D, B &R Jesus tells the apostles to preach the gospel, not the law of Moses.
Mark 16:15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved but he who does not believe will be condemned.

 

[Clete]

turbosixx,

Thank you for your responses. I respect what you said and I especially respect that you haven't come at me with mere personal opinion. I've had zero opportunity to say "saying it doesn't make it so" with you because you've had the decency to actually make an argument. And I dare say that you've made better arguments than ANY pastor of any church that I've ever heard comment on this topic, (although I was taken aback a bit by your suggestion that Jesus did not teach the Law of Moses. You need to rethink that one.)

Having said all that I can see that I am not making progress toward the goal of causing you to see that which is necessary to make this paradigm level shift in your perspective. And that certainly is NOT your fault. It's like I said before; forums of this nature just do not lend themselves well to this kind of discussion. This is material much better suited to books and 6 hour long seminars where lots of pain staking detail can be gone over and progressed through in a systematic way.

My last two or three posts were my best effort in condensing at least three if not four whole chapters of a book that I have on my desk right now. It is, without question, the book that has had the biggest impact on my life - bar none. People often want to throw the Bible itself in there as the obvious exception to a comment like that and from a certain perspective that's true of me as well but really, it is the understanding that this book has given me that has made the Bible's impact in my life possible. Before reading this, the Bible was a jumbled mess of glaring contradictions that any third grader could see. Not that those contradictions kept me from believing the Bible was God's word but merely that I was one of those people that was tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine because I didn't know how to make the bible make sense myself. I was at the mercy of 'experts' (i.e. preachers). I've come to understand now that many, if not most of those so called experts didn't have a clue what the heck they were talking about and the ones who got things mostly right did so by accident.

So why am I going on and on about this particular book? Well its because I don't think anything else I say here is going to be fruitful, that's why. In fact, I think if I don't shut up quickly, I'll end up spoiling whatever fruit has already come from my comments thus far. And so I'd like to end this most pleasant conversation by all but begging you to get a copy of The Plot by Bob Enyart and read it! You won't be sorry you did. Even if you aren't convinced of anything by it, at the very least you'll have a very much better understandiing of what several of us around here believe and why we believe it.

Thank you so much for one of those most enjoyable exchanges I've had on TOL in years and years!

God bless you!

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[turbosixx]

turbosixx,

Thank you for your responses. I respect what you said and I especially respect that you haven't come at me with mere personal opinion. I've had zero opportunity to say "saying it doesn't make it so" with you because you've had the decency to actually make an argument. And I dare say that you've made better arguments than ANY pastor of any church that I've ever heard comment on this topic, (although I was taken aback a bit by your suggestion that Jesus did not teach the Law of Moses. You need to rethink that one.)

Having said all that I can see that I am not making progress toward the goal of causing you to see that which is necessary to make this paradigm level shift in your perspective. And that certainly is NOT your fault. It's like I said before; forums of this nature just do not lend themselves well to this kind of discussion. This is material much better suited to books and 6 hour long seminars where lots of pain staking detail can be gone over and progressed through in a systematic way.

My last two or three posts were my best effort in condensing at least three if not four whole chapters of a book that I have on my desk right now. It is, without question, the book that has had the biggest impact on my life - bar none. People often want to throw the Bible itself in there as the obvious exception to a comment like that and from a certain perspective that's true of me as well but really, it is the understanding that this book has given me that has made the Bible's impact in my life possible. Before reading this, the Bible was a jumbled mess of glaring contradictions that any third grader could see. Not that those contradictions kept me from believing the Bible was God's word but merely that I was one of those people that was tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine because I didn't know how to make the bible make sense myself. I was at the mercy of 'experts' (i.e. preachers). I've come to understand now that many, if not most of those so called experts didn't have a clue what the heck they were talking about and the ones who got things mostly right did so by accident.

So why am I going on and on about this particular book? Well its because I don't think anything else I say here is going to be fruitful, that's why. In fact, I think if I don't shut up quickly, I'll end up spoiling whatever fruit has already come from my comments thus far. And so I'd like to end this most pleasant conversation by all but begging you to get a copy of The Plot by Bob Enyart and read it! You won't be sorry you did. Even if you aren't convinced of anything by it, at the very least you'll have a very much better understandiing of what several of us around here believe and why we believe it.

Thank you so much for one of those most enjoyable exchanges I've had on TOL in years and years!

God bless you!

Resting in Him,
Clete

Thanks for the kind comments. I have enjoyed the challenging of ideas as well and your use of scripture. I will consider reading the book, but the last time someone on here gave me a book to read I found it full of holes right out the box. I don’t really like to read books by men other than commentaries and even then I take them very lightly. I find that scripture is sufficient to answer any question concerning the gospel.

16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

I know everyone thinks their truth is based on scripture but what I find is they are adding or taking away to prove their points. They are usually reading into the bible instead of reading the bible.

Anyway, I am honestly trying my best to understand truth. Paul lived his entire life with a clear conscience but was at one time persecuting Christ’s church. Understanding truth doesn’t happen by accident.

God bless and I will be watching your posts.

 

[Clete]

Thanks for the kind comments. I have enjoyed the challenging of ideas as well and your use of scripture. I will consider reading the book, but the last time someone on here gave me a book to read I found it full of holes right out the box. I don’t really like to read books by men other than commentaries and even then I take them very lightly. I find that scripture is sufficient to answer any question concerning the gospel.

16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

I know everyone thinks their truth is based on scripture but what I find is they are adding or taking away to prove their points. They are usually reading into the bible instead of reading the bible.

Anyway, I am honestly trying my best to understand truth. Paul lived his entire life with a clear conscience but was at one time persecuting Christ’s church. Understanding truth doesn’t happen by accident.

God bless and I will be watching your posts.

I can tell you and I think a lot alike. I completely agree with you about the vast majority of theology books. They're all a dime a dozen as far as I'm concerned. You know what they're going to say before they say it in most cases.

Read the reviews of this book on Amazon. I'm tellin' ya! (A little Oklahoma lingo there for ya) this one's different!

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[elohiym]

I can see you haven't changed a bit. :nono:

I can see you can't refute my argument. :thumb:

 

[elohiym]

Amen sister. He even produces the works.

Ephesians 2:10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

He doesn't believe for you.

Jesus called believing work (Jn 6:29).

Try and get the point.

 

[elohiym]

Many of you agreed with this false statement: "We're made right with God without any work of our own."

Now explain why you think God failed to make everyone in the world right with Him.

 

[Dan Emanuel]

...Jesus called believing work (Jn 6:29)....

And Paul didn't (Galatians 3:2-3 KJV). He opposed the two, faith on 1 side, and work on the other.

The difference between what Jesus said and what Paul said is that Christian faith itself is not only a state of mind, but a state of doing; namely, the doing of the Christian faith, which begin's with the Churches' seven sacrament's, and extend's to the outer reach's of love/charity and Christian living. This is the work Jesus was talking about, and this is not the work that Paul was talking about; Paul was talking about the work's of the Old Covenant.


DJ

1.0
​

 

[aikido7]

We can only enter into trust with the divine. We cannot control it. Jesus put an emphasis on faith and today's believers do not yet know that the word in Jesus's day is translated as trust not "belief."

God is not a vending machine.

 

[Clete]

Let the proof texting begin!

elohiym, and those who agree with him are only allowed to use books of the bible not written by the Apostle Paul.

Everyone else - Pauline books only.

Ready?

GO!

 

[elohiym]

You want to have a discussion, Clete?

 

[elohiym]

And Paul didn't (Galatians 3:2-3 KJV). He opposed the two, faith on 1 side, and work on the other.

Paul writes positively about works. Do I need to quote him?

Do you agree there are works that are good and works that are filthy rags?

The difference between what Jesus said and what Paul said is that Christian faith itself is not only a state of mind, but a state of doing; namely, the doing of the Christian faith, which begin's with the Churches' seven sacrament's, and extend's to the outer reach's of love/charity and Christian living. This is the work Jesus was talking about, and this is not the work that Paul was talking about; Paul was talking about the work's of the Old Covenant.

I'm glad we agree that Jesus was talking about the work of believing the gospel, and glad we agree that Paul was talking about works of the Old Covenant, e.g. Lev 15:30.

 

[elohiym]

Many of you agreed with this false statement: "We're made right with God without any work of our own."

Now explain why you think God failed to make everyone in the world right with Him.

No explanation will be forthcoming.

 

[glorydaz]

Many of you agreed with this false statement: "We're made right with God without any work of our own."

Now explain why you think God failed to make everyone in the world right with Him.

God didn't fail. He did His part and now beseeches man (by the preaching of the Gospel) to believe (Be ye reconciled to HIM).

2 Corinthians 5:19-21
To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

We can't just decide to believe or work really hard to make ourselves right with God. We must be convinced....persuaded of the Truth of the Gospel of Salvation. So preach it instead of spreading all this nonsense you continue to try to foist off on those who don't believe. The rest of us know better than to pay attention to what you say.

 

[turbosixx]

Many of you agreed with this false statement: "We're made right with God without any work of our own."

Now explain why you think God failed to make everyone in the world right with Him.

I'm glad to see someone else who understands that we have to have works of our own.
:thumb:

 

[elohiym]

God didn't fail. He did His part and now beseeches man (by the preaching of the Gospel) to believe (Be ye reconciled to HIM). "

Now you are equivocating and claiming that God only does His part, which logically means someone else must do part, and you've described that part as a verb--believe. :chuckle:

We can't just decide to believe or work really hard to make ourselves right with God.

Strawman. I haven't argued that.

So preach it instead of spreading all this nonsense you continue to try to foist off on those who don't believe.

It's not nonsense to quote Jesus and point out that He called believing a work.... the verb you used in describing the part you think you have to do because God already did His part. Your responses have been nonsense for the most part.

The rest of us know better than to pay attention to what you say.

I've only shared what Jesus said. You tried to twist his words, Paul's words, and argued a strawman.