A
AdrianP
Guest
In Christianity does not matter what you’ve done before, matters to change the hearth . Sins can be washed through confession.
You and your postmortem apparitions! You should bring this talk to another section of this Catholic Forum. Here, in the Non-Catholic section, you are dealing with people more complex minded. You can even cause an embarrassment to yourself.The thing is Paul sacked the error and become christian because Jesus appeared to him and you can see God directing him and he did well not following Sanhedrin error and following God remember Jews in connection with God become Christians, actually St Paul appeared many times after his death confirming he did a good decision.
Dear Ben,**Only God lives forever. Anyone else who has been born will eventually die. **
Paul simply denied the charges. But he had been arrested because he was teaching the Jews to abandon Moses, to stop circumcising their children, and to denounce the Jewish customs. On the top of all this, he was in the Temple camouflaged as an observer of the Law when he had no vow to fulfill. Being arrested and brought before the Sanhedring, he was asked why he had been arrested and he lied saying that it was because of his hope in the resurrection. The man was a liar. Of course, he had to deny the charges. (Acts 21:21-24, 27-29; 23:6.Acts 24:5-18
5"We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect 6and even tried to desecrate the temple; so we seized him. 7 But the commander, Lysias, came and with the use of much force snatched him from our hands 8 and ordered his accusers to come before you.9The Jews joined in the accusation, asserting that these things were true. 10When the governor motioned for him to speak, Paul replied: "I know that for a number of years you have been a judge over this nation; so I gladly make my defense. 11You can easily verify that no more than twelve days ago I went up to Jerusalem to worship. **12My accusers did not find me arguing with anyone at the temple, or stirring up a crowd in the synagogues or anywhere else in the city. 13And they cannot prove to you the charges they are now making against me. 14However, I admit that I worship the God of our fathers as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect. I believe everything that agrees with the Law and that is written in the Prophets, 15and I have the same hope in God as these men, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked. 16So I strive always to keep my conscience clear before God and man. **
17"After an absence of several years, I came to Jerusalem to bring my people gifts for the poor and to present offerings. 18I was ceremonially clean when they found me in the temple courts doing this. There was no crowd with me, nor was I involved in any disturbance
Hello Ben and God Bless,
Please read the scripture which you referred to and continue to the following verses. I do not see how Paul was stirring up problems when it is clear that he was being falsely accused by ‘these jews’ just like Jesus was. Paul defended himself and humbled himeself before the court and God.
Please stop using the NT scriptures to make your point when you don’t believe them to be true. If you do use them then make sure to use it in its full context so as to get the ‘true picture’. God will help you understand the truth Ben; I pray for it.
I do not answer a post just for the purpose to elongate a thread. I answer what makes sense and I feel that theres is something to learn from. There are too many reptetitions and empty talking, which only cause wasting of time.You’ve been selectively answering whatever you feel you can, consistently ignoring the challenges you cannot answer. You are exceedingly rude to us, believing that anybody who believes something you don’t is completely deluded and unable to use reason.
Well, if you’d like to block out any possibility that you’re wrong so you can be more sure of your own beliefs, don’t let me stop you.
So, you and Adrian are contradicting yourselves.Dear Ben,
Adrian put out this scripture to show you that the those who eat of the bread of life shall live forever in the afterlife; we call it everlasting life. Of course everyone born will eventually die.
Ben what are you doing? You are giving advice to christians about leaving it to jews to interpret jewish writing and yet you continually use our jewish/christian writings to propogate your erroneous ideas. Dear friend you are not listening to me when I tell you to leave the NT alone. I was more than willing to debate with you when you made an appeal to me now you are telling us who Jesus is and what is his message was. To be a christian is to accept Jesus as Lord and Messiah(CHRIST). Who knows Him better than we who accept Him. Here is your quote to Kathleen:I am not talking about Christianity but Judaism. Jewish writings that Christians interpret literally. They should leave them alone, and just ask what they need to know. Just as Isaiah says in Isaiah 2:2,3. Why? Because the address to get instructions about God’s Word is Zion, the Jewish People.
He was not lying, dear Ben…your forefathers did.Paul simply denied the charges. But he had been arrested because he was teaching the Jews to abandon Moses, to stop circumcising their children, and to denounce the Jewish customs. On the top of all this, he was in the Temple camouflaged as an observer of the Law when he had no vow to fulfill. Being arrested and brought before the Sanhedring, he was asked why he had been arrested and he lied saying that it was because of his hope in the resurrection. The man was a liar. Of course, he had to deny the charges. (Acts 21:21-24, 27-29; 23:6.
John 6:58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: **he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. **"So, you and Adrian are contradicting yourselves.
Tradition tells us that Mary too was a descendant of David. According to Numbers 36:6-12, an only daughter had to marry within her own family so as to secure the right of inheritance. [Matt 1:2-19]The husband of Mary… The Evangelist gives us rather the pedigree of St. Joseph, than that of the blessed Virgin, to conform to the custom of the Hebrews, who in their genealogies took no notice of women; but as they were near akin, the pedigree of the one showeth that of the other.After St. Justin (Adv. Tryph. 100) and St. Ignatius (Letter to the Ephesians 18), the Fathers generally agree in maintaining Mary’s Davidic descent, whether they knew this from an oral tradition or inferred it from Scripture, e.g. Romans 1:3; 2 Timothy 2:8. St. John Damascene (De fid. Orth., IV, 14) states that Mary’s great-grandfather, Panther, was a brother of Mathat; her grandfather, Barpanther, was Heli’s cousin; and her father, Joachim, was a cousin of Joseph, Heli’s levirate son. Here Mathat has been substituted for Melchi, since the text used by St. John Damascene, Julius Africanus, St. Irenæus, St. Ambrose, and St. Gregory of Nazianzus omitted the two generations separating Heli from Melchi. At any rate, tradition presents the Blessed Virgin as descending from David through Nathan.As I said, there is nothing in the NT closer than Luke 1:5,36 to relate Mary to a Tribe. So, we have got to do with what we have.
My apologies… the last line in quote #289 should read that he was honorable.Paul earnestly sought to reconcile himself with the jewish community because of the lies spread about him. He was instructed to fulfill this through this jewish purification. He was anything but honorable.
Ben what are you doing? You are giving advice to christians about leaving it to jews to interpret jewish writing and yet you continually use our jewish/christian writings to propogate your erroneous ideas. Dear friend you are not listening to me when I tell you to leave the NT alone.
**Humble Maid, I read the text again and I am sorry but I did not find where it says that Paul had a vow to fulfill. He was told to join fou other Jews who had a vow to fulfill, so thatHe was not lying, dear Ben…your forefathers did.
Here are the scriptures you quoted, Acts 21:24:
24 Take these and sanctify thyself with them: and bestow on them, that they may shave their heads. And all will know that the things which they have heard of these are false: but that thou thyself also walkest keeping the law. Keeping the law… The law, though now no longer obligatory, was for a time observed by the Christian Jews: to bury, as it were, the synagogue with honour. 25 But, as touching the Gentiles that believe, we have written, decreeing that they should only refrain themselves from that which has been offered to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication.
Your forefathers falsely accused Paul of renouncing Moses’ Law when in fact he was merely teaching that the gentiles are not obliged to adhere to all the laws of Moses(which many jews found burdensome); James and the elders referred to the laws by which gentiles must adhere to and that is quoted in verse 25.
Paul earnestly sought to reconcile himself with the jewish community because of the lies spread about him. He was instructed to fulfill this through this jewish purification. He was anything but honorable.
**What is the difference between what you say and what Paul decided in Ephesians 2:15, when he contradicted Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:17-19? Jesus said I did not come to abolish. Paul said, that’s not true; everything was abolished on the cross. Who was on the cross? Jesus. So, who is lying Jesus or Paul? Please, do not discard my question. It does make a lot of sense.**You don’t seem interested to telling us much about the context, otherwise you’d see the contradiction is only apparent, just like in many passages in the Tanakh (Lapell)
First of all, you cannot prove the resurrection because there was no eyewitness to it. The cornerstone for the NT was set down by Paul. The NT must include Gentiles; and Jesus had an aversion to Gentiles. He even forbade his disciples to take the good news of salvation to the Gentiles. (Mat. 10:5)
Too hypothetical.
**Are you sure you could? So, mind you that the converts of the Apostles of Jesus would become staunch defenders of the Law. The Old Covenant that Jesus did not change. Read Acts 21:20. **
When Jesus said that nothing of the Law had changed, and everything was confirmed down to the letter, he said that as long as there is heaven and earth, everyone of us must do the same as he did. He was talking about the Old Covenant. Heaven and earth are still here. So, must we do as he did.
I am sorry, but I can’t find any other way to see Paul contradicting Jesus’ words by abolishing what Jesus had not abolished. What you are trying to do is to let us know that Paul was the one who decided that what Jesus did not do in life, he did in death. I wonder how Jesus’ Apostles did not see that way. And if God blessed what Paul did, why did He keep the Apostles in the dark?
Do you know that a few Scholars have classified Replacement Theology as a kind of Antisemitism? And they are not all Jewish, mind you.
Everyone else from another religious denomination different from yours, also puts his or her trust in Him. As you can see, that’s not enough. You could be wrong as much as anyone else.
**I can think of someone who can. Remember what is written in Isaiah 2:2,3? It says in there that if you lack understanding in the Word of God, the address is Zion, the Jewish People. Why? Because the Word of God was given to Israel only and to no other people on earth. That’s in Psalm 147:19,20. **