New Testament - can someone help please

[2ndpillar]

In the first century it meant the Hebrew scriptures, but for the followers of Christ, it meant all the holy writings...the whole Bible....including all that the apostles wrote after Christ's departure.

Paul was an apostle, taught personally by Jesus like the 12, only post resurrection.....and because his writings form a major part of the NT, they are part of "all scripture". If you believe that God inspired scripture, then you must also believe that his spirit can preserve and protect its authentic content. You haven't thought this through very well, have you?

If Paul was a false prophet, then all Christians who believe his writings are on the road to death. You think God would allow that? God's word is "GOD'S word, so it must be available to all, otherwise he is not being fair to any genuine truth seeker.

Who authorized you or anyone else to accuse Paul of such a thing? If he was accepted by the 12, then God was misleading them too. Is God stupid? A deceiver? Deliberately allowing a false prophet to mislead his worshipers?

Really?

Paul was a self professed apostle, who was a Pharisee, whose message was one of hypocrisy(Romans 7:25), which falls into the category of "beware of the leaven of the Pharisees" (Mt 16:6). His gospel of grace was antithetical to the gospel of the kingdom, and in fact Paul nailed that gospel to his pagan symbol of the cross. As for Paul's word being the wide path to "destruction" (death), look to Matthew 7:13. Paul is the premier false prophet in sheep's clothing (Mt 7:15), whose fruit is rotten (Mt 7:17). It is the "many" who are on the wide path to "destruction", not the few. Those who "dwell on the earth" (Revelation 13:14) are deceived, and already carry the mark of the beast, who was the Roman emperor Constantine, who instituted the Roman church in the year 325 AD at his convened Council of Nicaea. The two horns like a lamb would be the "worthless shepherd" (Zechariah 11:17), Peter and Paul of Zechariah 11:10. As for the bible, the authors of the NT are in doubt, as well as the time of the writings. If the writings do not conform to the Law and the testimonies (OT), they are without dawn/light (Isaiah 8:20). Paul as the tare sown among the wheat was allowed and guarded from destruction by Yeshua in Matthew 13:29-30. The disciples were ordered to leave Paul alone until the "end of the age" (Matthew 13:39). Well we are at the "end of the age" and things are coming to a head. One either comes out of her/daughter of Babylon (Revelation 18:4), or they suffer of her "plagues".

 

[Deeje]

Paul was a self professed apostle, who was a Pharisee, whose message was one of hypocrisy(Romans 7:25), which falls into the category of "beware of the leaven of the Pharisees" (Mt 16:6). His gospel of grace was antithetical to the gospel of the kingdom, and in fact Paul nailed that gospel to his pagan symbol of the cross. As for Paul's word being the wide path to "destruction" (death), look to Matthew 7:13. Paul is the premier false prophet in sheep's clothing (Mt 7:15), whose fruit is rotten (Mt 7:17). It is the "many" who are on the wide path to "destruction", not the few. Those who "dwell on the earth" (Revelation 13:14) are deceived, and already carry the mark of the beast, who was the Roman emperor Constantine, who instituted the Roman church in the year 325 AD at his convened Council of Nicaea. The two horns like a lamb would be the "worthless shepherd" (Zechariah 11:17), Peter and Paul of Zechariah 11:10. As for the bible, the authors of the NT are in doubt, as well as the time of the writings. If the writings do not conform to the Law and the testimonies (OT), they are without dawn/light (Isaiah 8:20). Paul as the tare sown among the wheat was allowed and guarded from destruction by Yeshua in Matthew 13:29-30. The disciples were ordered to leave Paul alone until the "end of the age" (Matthew 13:39). Well we are at the "end of the age" and things are coming to a head. One either comes out of her/daughter of Babylon (Revelation 18:4), or they suffer of her "plagues".

This is your opinion on Paul and you are welcome to it....it is not one I can agree with because I believe that the Bible is the word of God...not men. I don't think Paul's words (that make up the bulk of Christian scripture) can be dismissed out of hand on those grounds.
If Paul was a phony, his words would not be part of scripture. God would have exposed Paul to the apostles who were endowed with holy spirit when Saul was converted. They did not denounce him at all but embraced him as their brother. Those on the wide path to destruction are those who follow Christendom's teachings instead of the Bible.

I believe that the "tares" sown by the devil are the false Christians spawned by an apostate church after the death of the apostles. The birth of Christendom began with Roman Catholicism and eventually grew to embrace all of "Christianity" in the same way that apostasy overtook Judaism. It infected all of God's people who followed the teachings of the Pharisees instead of the teachings of Jesus in the first century. History is repeating.

 

[2ndpillar]

This is your opinion on Paul and you are welcome to it....it is not one I can agree with because I believe that the Bible is the word of God...not men. I don't think Paul's words (that make up the bulk of Christian scripture) can be dismissed out of hand on those grounds.

If Paul was a phony, his words would not be part of scripture. God would have exposed Paul to the apostles who were endowed with holy spirit when Saul was converted. They did not denounce him at all but embraced him as their brother. Those on the wide path to destruction are those who follow Christendom's teachings instead of the Bible.


I believe that the "tares" sown by the devil are the false Christians spawned by an apostate church after the death of the apostles. The birth of Christendom began with Roman Catholicism and eventually grew to embrace all of "Christianity" in the same way that apostasy overtook Judaism. It infected all of God's people who followed the teachings of the Pharisees instead of the teachings of Jesus in the first century. History is repeating.

Yeshua explicitly forbade the disciples to uproot the tares (Matthew 13:29), of which Paul was the foremost “enemy” (Matthew 13:25) sowing the tare seed. As for the unknown writer of 2 Peter, calling Paul his brother, they were probably spiritual brothers indeed, but not of the good kind, and 2 Peter can’t be blamed on the poor Simon bar Jonas, for he was most likely dead when 2 Peter was written.

Yeshua came to “fulfill” the law and the testimony (Matthew 5:17), and not to “abolish the Law”. Paul’s message was that you are “released from the Law” (Romans 7:6), and that you “surely shall not die” by not keeping God’s commandments (Genesis 3:3) & (1 Corinthians 15:51-53), which is the message of the “serpent”.

You have been duped by the Serpent, who gave his authority to the beast /Rome (Revelation 13:4). After the nations are crushed, and Israel has been “doubly repaid for their iniquity” (Jeremiah 16:18), you will apparently confess, “Our fathers have inherited nothing but falsehood” (Jeremiah 16:19). First you will have to survive the fire, smoke, and brimstone of Revelation 9:18, which kills “a third of mankind”.

 

[Deeje]

Yeshua explicitly forbade the disciples to uproot the tares (Matthew 13:29), of which Paul was the foremost “enemy” (Matthew 13:25) sowing the tare seed. As for the unknown writer of 2 Peter, calling Paul his brother, they were probably spiritual brothers indeed, but not of the good kind, and 2 Peter can’t be blamed on the poor Simon bar Jonas, for he was most likely dead when 2 Peter was written.

Yeshua came to “fulfill” the law and the testimony (Matthew 5:17), and not to “abolish the Law”. Paul’s message was that you are “released from the Law” (Romans 7:6), and that you “surely shall not die” by not keeping God’s commandments (Genesis 3:3) & (1 Corinthians 15:51-53), which is the message of the “serpent”.

You have been duped by the Serpent, who gave his authority to the beast /Rome (Revelation 13:4). After the nations are crushed, and Israel has been “doubly repaid for their iniquity” (Jeremiah 16:18), you will apparently confess, “Our fathers have inherited nothing but falsehood” (Jeremiah 16:19). First you will have to survive the fire, smoke, and brimstone of Revelation 9:18, which kills “a third of mankind”.

Do you have a global brotherhood who share your views? Or is this a conclusion that you have come to on your own?

 

[2ndpillar]

Do you have a global brotherhood who share your views? Or is this a conclusion that you have come to on your own?

Did John the Baptist need a "global brotherhood" to preach "repentance" and the "kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 3:2)? Truth is truth, and a lie is a lie. Those of the light go to the light and those of the darkness go to the darkness. One must escape from the lies of the "daughter of Babylon" (Zechariah 2:7). If you were clear of "her", you would not bear her "plagues" (Revelation 18:4)

 

[Deeje]

Did John the Baptist need a "global brotherhood" to preach "repentance" and the "kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 3:2)?

Do you see your role in the same category as John the Baptist's. Wasn't he sent ahead of Jesus to "prepare the way" for Jesus' ministry?
He was Jewish...so yes, he did have a brotherhood to which he belonged, and yes, Jews were dispersed over a wide geographical area. When Peter was sent to Cornelius, it opened up even wider territory for preaching among the Gentiles.

What about Jesus? Was he not also Jewish? What was his parting instruction to his disciples?......

"Go, therefore, and make disciples of people 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 the things I have commanded you. And look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.” (Matthew 28:19-20)

The witness was to be given to "people of all nations" and in prophesy Jesus said that...."And this good news of the Kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come."

So it is not the responsibility of one person in isolation to accomplish the global witness work. (Proverbs 18:1) Nor can we be out of contact with the body of Christ.

In the Revelation, Jesus addresses the "congregations", not separate individuals.

Who are "the elect" in your understanding? Are they isolated individuals like yourself? How do these ones meet for worship, praise and spiritual instruction as God's people have always done? Just as God has a heavenly organised body of servants, so he has always had an organised body of believers on earth. These all had to have one set of beliefs in common, all worshiping one God, and practicing one faith.

Truth is truth, and a lie is a lie. Those of the light go to the light and those of the darkness go to the darkness. One must escape from the lies of the "daughter of Babylon" (Zechariah 2:7). If you were clear of "her", you would not bear her "plagues" (Revelation 18:4)

'Getting out of Babylon the great' is necessary, but you have to understand that there has to be somewhere to go...that is what Jesus created. He created the place for Jews to go when Christians separated from apostate Judaism. The Christians were an organised body with those appointed by Jesus to lead and teach them. I don't believe that there can be Christians alone, without connection to the body. Your example of John the Baptist IMO, is hardly applicable unless God also ordained you before birth to fulfill a prophetic commission.

 

[2ndpillar]

Do you see your role in the same category as John the Baptist's. Wasn't he sent ahead of Jesus to "prepare the way" for Jesus' ministry?
He was Jewish...so yes, he did have a brotherhood to which he belonged, and yes, Jews were dispersed over a wide geographical area. When Peter was sent to Cornelius, it opened up even wider territory for preaching among the Gentiles.

What about Jesus? Was he not also Jewish? What was his parting instruction to his disciples?......

"Go, therefore, and make disciples of people 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 the things I have commanded you. And look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.” (Matthew 28:19-20)

The witness was to be given to "people of all nations" and in prophesy Jesus said that...."And this good news of the Kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come."

So it is not the responsibility of one person in isolation to accomplish the global witness work. (Proverbs 18:1) Nor can we be out of contact with the body of Christ.

In the Revelation, Jesus addresses the "congregations", not separate individuals.

Who are "the elect" in your understanding? Are they isolated individuals like yourself? How do these ones meet for worship, praise and spiritual instruction as God's people have always done? Just as God has a heavenly organised body of servants, so he has always had an organised body of believers on earth. These all had to have one set of beliefs in common, all worshiping one God, and practicing one faith.



'Getting out of Babylon the great' is necessary, but you have to understand that there has to be somewhere to go...that is what Jesus created. He created the place for Jews to go when Christians separated from apostate Judaism. The Christians were an organised body with those appointed by Jesus to lead and teach them. I don't believe that there can be Christians alone, without connection to the body. Your example of John the Baptist IMO, is hardly applicable unless God also ordained you before birth to fulfill a prophetic commission.

1 John 2:27 versus Isaiah 56:11, and the "shepherds who have no understanding", by which you rely. "They have all turned to their own way".

 

[2ndpillar]

What motivating factors were there to write down and bring together an accepted, true version of what took place in New Testament times?

There is a generally accepted version of the NT, and it was originally formulated by the questionable Athanasius, the Roman bishop of Alexandria, in the year 367 AD.

As for the NT being the “word” of God, simply read Luke 1:1-3, whereas Luke says he witnessed nothing, and was acting as a scribe and writing down the stories told to him by others. That would be considered hearsay, and not even admissible in a civil court. See Matthew 18:16 & Deuteronomy 19:15. No one knows who Luke was, but he is often assumed to be an associate of the false prophet Paul, who called himself the Pharisee of Pharisees.

What you have in the NT is a compilation which includes the inclusion of the writings of the scribes and the Pharisees. The “scribes” are listed in the OT as the “lying scribes”, and Yeshua warned about the leaven of the Pharisees, which is described as hypocrisy. Paul was the epitome of hypocrisy. Look at his writings, especially Romans 7:25.

Building one’s church upon the sandy foundation of the writings of Paul and his associates, is like building their house on sand (Matthew 7:26).

 

[Hawkins]

What motivating factors were there to write down and bring together an accepted, true version of what took place in New Testament times?

Whenever God has an active job to do on earth, He thus needs human eye-witnesses to testify. He needs valid human accounts of testimonies about His deeds on earth. His activities are thus very much covenant related. It means that whenever a covenant is to be granted, He thus has an active job to do on earth and thus the prophets as witnesses will be active.

OT is basically a series a covenants granted to the lineage of humans from Noah through the Jews. NT is a final covenant. It is called "final" for a reason. It is final because law has been removed with grace maximized. It means that there won't be a more gracious covenant. This is so because the trend of human behavior is that they keep moving further and further away from God. If there is only one covenant is available, later humans won't be able to pass the judgment in accordance to this covenant. That's why a covenant needs to be updated to grant more grace consecutively, till the last one (the New Covenant) with grace maximized (i.e., with law minimized). This is what Romans 5:20-21 said about.

Romans 5:20-21
The law was brought in so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more,
so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.


The next time when God has an active job is to put this world to an end. That's why there will be the so-called end time prophets by then.

That said. The Canon of NT needs to be well put up because it is the only covenant which requires you to choose with a consent. You thus need to understand the salvation message it conveys for you to make a choice. All humans are born with an older covenant, and to choose to be covered by the New Covenant with consent.

 

[kjw47]

What motivating factors were there to write down and bring together an accepted, true version of what took place in New Testament times?

Facts and the teachings of Jesus prove Catholicism translating is filled with error--carried over into every trinity based translation on the planet. Makes it impossible for a mortal to accomplish this-John 4:22-24-- satan beat 99% living now, centuries ago.

 

[Muffled]

This is the question New Testament expert and leading Scholar of the Greek Manuscripts, Professor Bart Ehrman asked himself during his 30 years of study.

Bottom line is, what you have today is far removed from the original 'inspired' words of ALLAH swt.

I believe that is nonsense, nothing more than some Muslim's mythology.

 

[Muffled]

Was that idea in my comments metis? Or was I simply demonstrating a common failing among all religions who claim to worship the God of Abraham? Are any of them "spotless, unblemished and in peace"? In what ways are they not in this condition as bodies of believers and why? You already know the answer to that. They fail to live up to the teachings of their own deity. Any who are shedding blood are not at peace with God.

Individually we are all sinners, so if we are not contributing to the 'unblemished and peaceful' condition of the entire body by our own conduct, then we will account to our judge for our own shortcomings....just as individuals did in Israel.

Every religious "body" is made up of individual believers who all contribute to its spiritual condition. So what excuse can we offer to God for any failure on our part? We have God's law and he expects us to keep it. How many people are truly obedient to God today? Why does Jesus say that "few" will be saved? (Matthew 7:13-14) isn't the answer obvious?

I believe I am spotless and unblemished by the blood of Jesus. I believe I am in peace with fruit of the Spirit.

 

[Muffled]

Facts and the teachings of Jesus prove Catholicism translating is filled with error--carried over into every trinity based translation on the planet. Makes it impossible for a mortal to accomplish this-John 4:22-24-- satan beat 99% living now, centuries ago.

I believe JW's are so full of it. At least the Catholics were honest in their translation and that can't be said for the JW's. And if you ask me jerking the text around to one's own opinion smacks of the lies of the devil.

 

[metis]

Facts and the teachings of Jesus prove Catholicism translating is filled with error--carried over into every trinity based translation on the planet.

As usual, you really don't know what you're talking about.

The trinitarian concept is just that-- a concept based on interpretation, and we well know that this was the original concept of the relationship between God, Jesus, and the H.S. at a time when the apostles were still alive. No human nor angel was ever viewed the way Jesus was in the scriptures, plus wasn't the H.S. supposedly Jesus' true father? Was any human ever viewed a such in Judaism or in the church? any angel?

Even though the trinitarian concept was present from the get-go, apparently it wasn't well defined at all, so we know that there were discussions and disagreements as to exactly how that relationship supposedly was. We know that there were these disagreements because of the existence of the Ebionites, who saw Jesus vis-a-vis the Law in somewhat different terms.

To use the trinitarian concept as some sort of litmus test as to whom is really a "true Christian" is both dumb and bigoted. It was and is a concept but certainly not the only one, but it is and was "mainstream".

 

[kjw47]

I believe JW's are so full of it. At least the Catholics were honest in their translation and that can't be said for the JW's. And if you ask me jerking the text around to one's own opinion smacks of the lies of the devil.

Truth became abundant here in these last days( Daniel 12:4) only by correction.

 

[kjw47]

As usual, you really don't know what you're talking about.

The trinitarian concept is just that-- a concept based on interpretation, and we well know that this was the original concept of the relationship between God, Jesus, and the H.S. at a time when the apostles were still alive. No human nor angel was ever viewed the way Jesus was in the scriptures, plus wasn't the H.S. supposedly Jesus' true father? Was any human ever viewed a such in Judaism or in the church? any angel?

Even though the trinitarian concept was present from the get-go, apparently it wasn't well defined at all, so we know that there were discussions and disagreements as to exactly how that relationship supposedly was. We know that there were these disagreements because of the existence of the Ebionites, who saw Jesus vis-a-vis the Law in somewhat different terms.

To use the trinitarian concept as some sort of litmus test as to whom is really a "true Christian" is both dumb and bigoted. It was and is a concept but certainly not the only one, but it is and was "mainstream".

Facts prove 0 trinity exists' Fact-- From Moses on up until this very day, in EVERY synagogue and temple, taught served and worship a single being God named-YHWH(Jehovah)-- Fact--The God taught to Jesus his first 30 years attending those synagogues and temples--Never did he refute that God--He teaches it--John 17:3, Rev 3:12. I haven't met a Trinitarian yet that will believe Jesus over opposite teachings. Paul teaches that God--1Cor 8:6, 2Cor 1:3, 1Cor 15:24-28--Peter-1Peter 1:3--John at Rev 1:6-- one if not the most taught truth in the nt. Jesus has a God-his Father.

 

[metis]

Facts prove 0 trinity exists'

You should actually try and read the Bible as it is, plus you avoided my points. No surprise.

 

[kjw47]

You should actually try and read the Bible as it is, plus you avoided my points. No surprise.

Jesus compared these last days to Noah' day--He said--the world took no note. I show you fact--you throw it away as worthless. I have read through many different bibles. Every trinity translation has Gods personal name removed in nearly 6800 spots in the OT alone--Every spot-GOD--LORD all capitols is placed instead. that makes them altered right there. Arent Christians supposed to be like Jesus???? YES. He promised to keep making Gods name known.( John 17:26) His God and Father-John 20:17-YHWH(Jehovah)

 

[Muslim-UK]

You should actually try and read the Bible as it is, plus you avoided my points. No surprise.

Trinity is explained as 3 distinct separate who together form One God, the 3 are co equal and have co existed for ever. Can you show where this is found in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation?

 

[metis]

Trinity is explained as 3 distinct separate who together form One God, the 3 are co equal and have co existed for ever. Can you show where this is found in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation?

Read my post #114 as it's explained there.