Reconciling Paul

sandy whitelinger said:

I understand just fine and Paul explains himself completely in Romans without the benefit of James. Can you explain your position using Romans. Ken tried and failed.

Click to expand...

im sure i already did that.

sandy whitelinger said:

I asked this question within another thread and recieved no coherent answer. I'll try again with an exclusive thread.

Can you reconcile these three statements by Pul which seem to offer a contradiction?

"...The just shall live by faith." Romans 1:17b KJV

"For not the hearers of the law arejust before God, but the doers of the law shall bejustified." Romans 2:13

"Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." Romans 3:38 KJV

Click to expand...

Yes. in Romans 2:13 Paulis talking about those who are under the law instead of living by faith. Those who live under the law have to be justified by keeping the law. Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without the law: and as many as have sinned under the law shall be judged by the law;

Pegg said:

what justified Abraham? He lived before the mosaic law was given...so what did God see in him that he viewed as 'righteous'?

James may provide a clearer understanding of what Paul is saying:
James 2:22 You behold that [his] faith worked along with his works and by [his] works [his] faith was perfected,

Putting our faith into action requires works.....but here is the point Paul is making: its not works of the mosaic law (which were formalities) but rather, works which show a persons faith. Anyone can live by the mosaic law...but that law in itself is not what makes a person righteous. God wants to see 'faith' in the person...and they must show their faith in the way they live their life like Abraham did. Faith and works are necessary, just not works alone.

thats all Paul is saying.

Click to expand...

Abraham was justified by faith but Abraham did not receive the same grace from God as a Christian receives. Abraham's grace required him to work. A christian's grace does not require thebeliever to work..

Ken Brown said:

Hi sandy, it's not that people sinned/transgressed more when the Law entered. Paul said that sin is not imputed where there is no Law, and everyone was dying because of Adam's transgression, even when everyone was sinning. When the Law entered, sin did not increase, but what increased was that everyone now could be an imputed transgressor like Adam. Adam broke a command and became a transgressor, and with the entering of the Law, the transgression of Adam INCREASED (more sinners were now transgressors-their sin was now imputed). Now everyone can die for their own imputed sin instead of dying for Adam's. And when transgression is increased, Grace is increased all the more, because you now have more imputed sinners killing Messiah. Hope this helps to clarify. KB

Click to expand...

I don't see evidence to support this notion. Please explain with scripture.

Muffled said:

Yes. in Romans 2:13 Paulis talking about those who are under the law instead of living by faith. Those who live under the law have to be justified by keeping the law. Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without the law: and as many as have sinned under the law shall be judged by the law;

Click to expand...

This does not answer the contradiction. Paul clearly states that by the deeds of the Law shall no flesh be justified (Rom 3:20). So while the Law condemns those under the Law it justifies no one.

Pegg said:

im sure i already did that.

Click to expand...

I'm not aware of it. Perhaps you could point it out.

Ken Brown said:

Hi sandy, it would be great if you would share it with us. KB.

Click to expand...

Ok, and since you like word play, here ya go. The contradiction is resolved by the word “shall.” The just shall live by faith (1:17). The doers of the law shall be justified (2:13). By the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified (3:20). The auxiliary verb “shall” can imply simply a future promise or it can imply a promise that is dependent upon an action. The only unambiguous statement of the three is that the deeds of the Law shall justify no one; it is not linked to a fulfilled or unfulfilled action. There is no sensible variation of its meaning. Reconciling the other two statements with this then: (and one short sentence) man is justified by some other mea­ns than doing the law but the just will do the law and live by faith.

Ken Brown said:

Hi outhouse, the listed order of the Epistles has no bearing on my understanding of the Gospel which is According to the Scriptures. The Scriptures which the Gospel is according to is found mainly in the Torah. KB

Click to expand...

So you don't know such a simple answer, the basics?


Your also wrong about the Torah. The movement that would become Christianity was not a Jewish movement, it was only a movement by people who found the influence of the OT valuable. But not valuable enough to follow all of its laws.

If they had followed all of the laws they would have been Jewish, not Christians.

sandy whitelinger said:

Ok, and since you like word play, here ya go. The contradiction is resolved by the word “shall.” The just shall live by faith (1:17). The doers of the law shall be justified (2:13). By the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified (3:20). The auxiliary verb “shall” can imply simply a future promise or it can imply a promise that is dependent upon an action. The only unambiguous statement of the three is that the deeds of the Law shall justify no one; it is not linked to a fulfilled or unfulfilled action. There is no sensible variation of its meaning. Reconciling the other two statements with this then: (and one short sentence) man is justified by some other mea*ns than doing the law but the just will do the law and live by faith.

Click to expand...

Hi sandy, look, like I said before, you are not going to understand Paul until you understand how Adam was a "figure" of the coming One. Once you know that, you will change your answer. Now, I will give you a hint. Paul tells you how Adam is a figure of the coming One in the very next verse. KB

outhouse said:

So you don't know such a simple answer, the basics?

Your also wrong about the Torah. The movement that would become Christianity was not a Jewish movement, it was only a movement by people who found the influence of the OT valuable. But not valuable enough to follow all of its laws.

If they had followed all of the laws they would have been Jewish, not Christians.

Click to expand...

Hi outhouse, hopefully I can surprise you with what I know. No, I am not wrong about the Torah, Moses wrote of Yeshua's suffering, death, burial, and third day resurrection. Now, I will agree with you that the movement that became traditional chrisitianity has no knowledge of the One True Gospel which is According to the Scriptures. That knowledge was lost almost 1800 years ago with the destruction of the Body of Messiah, and the gospel that is taught by traditional christianity today, is built upon a strong delusion, not the Truth. So you might want to consider learning about the One True Gospel, which is according to the Scriptures (what Moses wrote). KB

outhouse said:

Yes and No. In general yes, but the definition of Judaism is one that has seriously evolved over time.

Before the temple fell, Judaism opened its arms to Hellenism. It accepted Proselytes of many different degrees.

We find many instances [according the Jewish encyclopedia] there were different adherence to the law based on nothing more then geographic location, as well as what culture lived there. In some cases, simply denouncing pagan deities was enough. I would assume these would be heavily Hellenistic communities.

It doesn't surprise me when we look at some of the different beliefs like the Sadducees, and yet considered fully Jewish.

The time of the living Jesus brought many definitions of Judaism, due to the multicultural communities that it reached in and out of the Diaspora.


This get's us back to Paul, a very Hellenistic Jew. I often wonder if he was a Sadducee or even possibly a God-Fearer or Gate-Proselyte or even a Righteous Proselyte. We may never know. But what we do know, I think you have shown a great grasp of the information we are left with.

We do know he did not adhere to the laws, when they didn't suit his needs. We know his needs and theology matched to a T a Proselyte of Judaism more so then a traditional born and raised Jew of Israel, like Jesus of Nazareth. Who for all purposes, was trying to keep his movement strictly in Judaism for his poor brothers.

Paul could not adhere to laws based on his actions alone, and he gave us great detail in his own words exactly how and why he deviated from the laws.

Click to expand...

I guess the follow up question is why? If we take at face value he was a strict adherent of the Law and intolerant of those who were lax in their observance or tried to reinterpret it. He then went and became exactly that.

I think there are clues to what motivated him, but we will never know with certainty.

Pappillion001 said:

I guess the follow up question is why? If we take at face value he was a strict adherent of the Law and intolerant of those who were lax in their observance or tried to reinterpret it. He then went and became exactly that.

I think there are clues to what motivated him, but we will never know with certainty.

Click to expand...

Yet was he a strict adherent? Nope. he deviated away from traditional Judaism to that of a Proselyte of Judaism.

Paul's Judaism has always been in question.


What I think we see is a man who was sort of a extremist for his own view, and one who is taken out of context, because we don't exactly see the original sources he was replying too in his epistles.

We also see later Hellenistic authors trying to soften his stance up a bit so that he didn't seem so radical.

Since Paul's movement wasn't really for Jews, there was no reason to adhere to laws.

Ken Brown said:

hopefully I can surprise you with what I know.

Click to expand...

That would be great.

Just so you know the reason they were placed in order the way we see them was size alone. No other reason.

They should have been placed in by date, it would make it easier for people to comprehend.


Out of curiosity, you know why GMatthew was first, early popularity.

No, I am not wrong about the Torah, Moses wrote of Yeshua's suffering, death, burial, and third day resurrection.

Click to expand...

False

Moses, did not write these early books, people do not describe their own deaths.

Most scholars claim Moses is a literary creation. Not only that Israelites FACTUALLY evolved from displaced Canaanites. The Exodus as written did not happen which is almost unanimous for all historians. Anthropologist have long given up the search.


If you did a little research you find the first five books, were compilations of collections written over hundreds of years by multiple unknown authors, then redacted over hundreds of years.

So you might want to consider learning about the One True Gospel, which is according to the Scriptures (what Moses wrote). KB

Click to expand...

False my friend


Book of Exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to current thinking, a first draft (the Yahwist) was probably written in the 6th century BCE during the Babylonian exile; this was supplemented and completed as a post-Exilic final edition (the Priestly source) at the very end of the 6th century or during the 5th century,[9] and further adjustments and minor revisions continued down to the end of the 4th century.

Please pay attention to this true statement

The book of Exodus is not historical narrative in any modern sense

outhouse said:

That would be great.

Just so you know the reason they were placed in order the way we see them was size alone. No other reason.

They should have been placed in by date, it would make it easier for people to comprehend.


Out of curiosity, you know why GMatthew was first, early popularity.

False

Moses, did not write these early books, people do not describe their own deaths.

Most scholars claim Moses is a literary creation. Not only that Israelites FACTUALLY evolved from displaced Canaanites. The Exodus as written did not happen which is almost unanimous for all historians. Anthropologist have long given up the search.


If you did a little research you find the first five books, were compilations of collections written over hundreds of years by multiple unknown authors, then redacted over hundreds of years.




False my friend


Book of Exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to current thinking, a first draft (the Yahwist) was probably written in the 6th century BCE during the Babylonian exile; this was supplemented and completed as a post-Exilic final edition (the Priestly source) at the very end of the 6th century or during the 5th century,[9] and further adjustments and minor revisions continued down to the end of the 4th century.

Please pay attention to this true statement

The book of Exodus is not historical narrative in any modern sense

Click to expand...

Hi outhouse, then why does the Messiah say Moses wrote of Him, and how is it that I can see where Moses wrote of Him, and His suffering, death, burial, and third day resurrection in great detail? KB

Ken Brown said:

Hi outhouse, then why does the Messiah say Moses wrote of Him, and how is it that I can see where Moses wrote of Him, and His suffering, death, burial, and third day resurrection in great detail? KB

Click to expand...

Which messiah? Jesus was a failed messiah in Judaism.

Jesus never penned a single word in the gospels.


Oh! you mean the unknown authors who never knew or met Jesus and were writing what was important to them at that time long after Jesus death?

outhouse said:

Which messiah? Jesus was a failed messiah in Judaism.

Jesus never penned a single word in the gospels.

Oh! you mean the unknown authors who never knew or met Jesus and were writing what was important to them at that time long after Jesus death?

Click to expand...

Hi outhouse, it depends on how you view things, and what you know. You see, if you understand the Scriptures, you can see the future, and know for a certainty what would/will come. The writers of the NT wrote on many occasions about the destruction of the One True Chruch and how deceivers would rise up and teach doctrines that were false, and not spare the flock. Most of the interpretations and doctrines that were used to destroy the Church, are the cornerstone beliefs of traditional christianity today. I will say this much, it appears the time of the Gentiles is nearing an end, and the True Believers in Yeshua will be Jews, as they will come back in and LISTEN to what Moses wrote.

Consider this, the Torah says that only by the mouth of two or three witnesses shall a matter be confirmed or for judgment to take place. The destroyed Witness of the 1st Temple- The Body of Yeshua courageously gave their testimony, and hopefully, the rising up 2nd Witness will do the same. I hope you will have ears to hear. KB

Ken Brown said:

Hi outhouse, it depends on how you view things, and what you know. You see, if you understand the Scriptures, you can see the future, and know for a certainty what would/will come. The writers of the NT wrote on many occasions about the destruction of the One True Chruch and how deceivers would rise up and teach doctrines that were false, and not spare the flock. Most of the interpretations and doctrines that were used to destroy the Church, are the cornerstone beliefs of traditional christianity today. I will say this much, it appears the time of the Gentiles is nearing an end, and the True Believers in Yeshua will be Jews, as they will come back in and LISTEN to what Moses wrote.

Consider this, the Torah says that only by the mouth of two or three witnesses shall a matter be confirmed or for judgment to take place. The destroyed Witness of the 1st Temple- The Body of Yeshua courageously gave their testimony, and hopefully, the rising up 2nd Witness will do the same. I hope you will have ears to hear. KB

Click to expand...

Your reply doesn't have much to do with history or NT theology.

It does have a personal op[inion backed only by faith, a belief the NT doesn't even back.

No one can see the future.

Anyone can guess though, and if one does, one will get lucky.

outhouse said:

Your reply doesn't have much to do with history or NT theology.

It does have a personal op[inion backed only by faith, a belief the NT doesn't even back.

No one can see the future.

Anyone can guess though, and if one does, one will get lucky.

Click to expand...

Hi outhouse, during Yeshua's ministry He predicted the future for His suffering, death, burial, and third day resurrection. He even predicted He would be crucified. I guess you feel He got lucky in His guesses? KB

Ken Brown said:

Hi Pappillion001, I think you are a very polite poster. Concerning the Gospel which is According to the Scriptures, Paul wrote that Yeshua died "for" our sin, was buried, and then risen on the 3rd day, all According to the Scriptures. Which Scriptures? Consider Yeshua's statements:

Jn 5:46 - 5:47
(46) For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. (47) But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

Lk 24:25 - 24:27
(25) Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: (26) Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? (27) And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Lk 24:44 - 24:47
(44) And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me. (45) Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, (46) And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: (47) And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Do you see that Pappillion001? Both Yeshua and Paul claim that the Gospel is According to the Scriptures, and you need to begin with Moses in expounding Yeshua's suffering, death, burial, and third day resurrection. But one thing that is necessary, one's MIND has to be "opened" to understand what is written. Has that happened to you? KB

Click to expand...

What Paul preaches is not always the same as what Jesus preached. There is nothing from Jesus to suggest the Law is to be disregarded and not kept (meaning as a whole, not in the sense people are free to steal and murder).

Paul repeatedly states the Law is no longer necessary. He goes so far as to say that to keep the Law will ensure God's wrathful judgment. He refers to it as being a source of sin in the world. None of the Apostles taught this or that what God stated was an abomination was now no longer.

God does say that circumcision is a sign of the everlasting covenant between God and Abraham and his descendants. Paul preaches that Gentiles are included in this covenant, but do not have to comply with the conditions set forth. God is specific that all males whether free or slaves or foreign will do this. Anyone that does not is cut off from his people.

6And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. 7And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. 8And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.

9And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations. 10This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. 11And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you. 12And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed. 13He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. 14And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.

He refers to the Law as a curse

10For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. 11But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. 12And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. 13Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: 14That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. Gal 3

Here he twists scripture to fit his intent

15Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. 16Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 17And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. 18For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
19Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. 20Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. 21Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. 22But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
23But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. 24Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. Gal 3


I don't want to make this a page long since there are a number of verses that convey the same meaning and I would prefer to try and stay at least close to the topic of the OP. Clearly Paul is teaching something contrary to scripture. Now that could be ok, except it would mean that God changes his mind or says things that he does not mean.

As for Abraham having faith, I honestly scratch my head with that because God tells him to go count the stars and when he does he thinks him righteous, meaning faithful to God and yet the very next words out of his mouth are to question God asking how will he know God will keep his promise. We should also keep in mind that God gave his blessing to Abraham when he went t osacrifice his son and said he did so not be cause of his faith but because of what he was going to do.

Ken Brown said:

Hi outhouse, during Yeshua's ministry He predicted the future for His suffering, death, burial, and third day resurrection. He even predicted He would be crucified. I guess you feel He got lucky in His guesses? KB

Click to expand...

Jesus predicted nothing.

Sources please, because I think you will find some unknown author wrote these verses your talking about. Someone who never knew or heard a word from Jesus himself. Someone who wrote decades after his death and was not even from the same culture.