Don't take it completely out of isolation.

Post #1,991

7/16/01 10:21:57 PM

As Freep as posted already and as tlarcher has already expounded, Paul clearly identifies himself as having Jewish ancestry. This passage is Paul discussing how he approached the various major groups. "I became like a Jew..." could also indicate him using his Judaistic training to help him connect with the Jews.

Wade.

"All around me are nothing but fakes
Come with me on the biggest fake of all!"

Post #1,992

by boxley

7/16/01 10:50:23 PM

not to steal Nicks arg but

either it is literal or not. His actions if he were a Jew belie G_d's commandments the 613 that Jews were expected to obey. The OT teaches that prophets much be watched, if they break the law, or lie or prophesy falsly G_d didnt send them. Joshua Ben Joseph fits the prophet "rule" clearly Paul(Saul) fails on several counts from my prospective. Since Gentiles are not part of the covenant feel free to follow Paul's road, for me I have enough on my eternal plate without denying G_d's express wishes.
After all something has to keep you gentiles in line :) As long as it isnt the line killing us. :)
OT when do you sleep?
thanx,
bill

can I have my ones and zeros back?

Post #2,009

by static

7/17/01 2:10:37 AM

Clearly you do not accept Paul's authority.

And I can see you've already had extensive discussions about that, so you'll have to excuse me if I seem ignorant of their content (well, I am, since I hadn't followed them).

However, you raise another interesting point: Why do you call Paul a prophet?

Wade.

"All around me are nothing but fakes
Come with me on the biggest fake of all!"

Post #2,034

by boxley

7/17/01 10:00:36 AM

I dont

since he fails the test of a "true" prophet. He is not consistant, he breaks mosaic law (only matters if he was a jew) Jesus was a prophet since he did miracles, did not advocate breaking the law and preached the things all prophets preach, live G_d's word do not just give the appearance of G_d's word. Now Paul(Saul) claims to interpret Jesus in an entirely different manner than the rest of the Aposles and faught with them about it and won. Christians say he was correct and the others were not. That is fine. Al I can say by the prophet rule laid down by G_d is that he is false. IMHO
thanx,
bill

can I have my ones and zeros back?

Post #2,141

by static

7/17/01 8:56:55 PM

But you didn't answer my question.

Who is calling Paul a "prophet"? I'm not. Nor does the Christian teaching I subscribe to: we call him an Apostle. So why the concern over his failing the "prophet test"?

Wade.

"All around me are nothing but fakes
Come with me on the biggest fake of all!"

Post #2,167

by boxley

7/17/01 11:14:21 PM

sorry missed the question

we have prophets that give us directions and a messiah that will signify (something or other) we dont have apostles that is a gentile thing devised since the NT. We had prophets(leaders) until Saul where we whined for a King like the other heathens. Since we are human we wanted a warrior leader liked the clowns around us. G_d was indulgent because he needed to teach us a lesson. We are held to a different standard. I dont know what "authority" Paul/Saul had as it was self imposed and followed in defiance of G_d's word but since it is mostly Gentiles that follow him. It really has no bearing to me so should not expound too much on it. G_ds plan for the Gentiles is not really addressed in the OT and between the Koran, NT and the other religions the aim is the same. Dont wear yer religion on yer sleeve but in yer heart. Big deeds always beat big words and give the other feller yer shirt if he needs it more than you but dont fsck with anyone.
Feerless brought up a subject that some Christians beleive G_d's covenant with the Jews was broken with the death of Jesus(and he noted that he wasnt one with them) G_d doesnt break his word or he wouldnt be G_d. The Christian notion of G_d will condemn all those who do not recognise as G_d Jesus forget a couple of things. The ten commandments for one.
There is one God (except for his son who called on the cross for his father but no one can see his face but him and some ghost is the same guy) cant go there. I know that there is an explanation from (Paul) of course that explains all that but 1 is one, no one knows his name and if he has a ghost the OT doenst mention it. I am glad that you are a beleiving gentile, that gives you a moral code of some kind to live by just like ash has one. The scary people are the animal folk who beleive nothing and have no internal fair play system or ethics.
thanx,
bill
thanx,
bill_

can I have my ones and zeros back?

Post #2,373

by orion

7/19/01 5:27:32 PM

More info for you on Paul

It comes from the [link|http://www.jewsforjesus.org/|Jews for Jesus] web site.

[link|http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/evidence/paul.htm|[link|http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/evidence/paul.htm|http://www.jewsforj...nce/paul.htm]] some evidence on Paul. Also [link|http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/objections/paul.htm|[link|http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/objections/paul.htm|http://www.jewsforj...ons/paul.htm]] some objections. I hope that it helps clear things up. Nobody has to read it if they do not want to.

[link|http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/qa/pauldeceive.htm|[link|http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/qa/pauldeceive.htm|http://www.jewsforj...ldeceive.htm]]:


 The New Testament passage in question that supposedly reveals
  Paul as a deceiver is First Corinthians 9:20-22:

  
    To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those
    under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself
    am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those
    not having the law I became like one not having the law (though
    I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as
    to win those not having the law. To the weak I became weak, to
    win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by
    all possible means I might save some.

  Far from being deceptive, Paul, when he wrote the passage
  from First Corinthians, was drawing on Jewish communications
  methods of his day. Like other Jewish leaders, Paul was simply
  being a good teacher and communicator. What Paul sets forth in
  First Corinthians is not a principle of deceit and expediency,
  but a principle of communication such as was taught and practiced
  by Hillel and others. Craig Keener, Professor
  of New Testament, Hood Theological Seminary, places First Corinthians
  9:20-22 firmly within a Jewish context.

  
    Some Jewish teachers, like Hillel, were similarly accommodationists,
    to win as many as possible to the truth.

    --The IVP Bible Background Commentary (Downers
    Grove IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), p. 472.

  Similarly, David Daube, a Jewish Professor
  of Law at University of California, Berkeley, wrote at length
  about Paul's principles as found in First Corinthians 9:20-22.
  The following is taken from a much longer chapter, "Missionary
  Maxims in Paul," which is found in Daube's book The New
  Testament and Rabbinic Judaism:

  
    [This idea is] taken over by Paul from Jewish teaching on
    the subject: the idea that you must adopt the customs and mood
    of the person you wish to win over....

    First, for the idea of accommodation. Let us start from a
    passage in I Corinthians [Daube quotes First Corinthians 9:20-22].

    This attitude had formed part of Jewish missionary practice
    long before Paul. Two Talmudic illustrations of Hillel's work
    are relevant: he accepted into the fold a gentile who refused
    to acknowledge the oral Law, and he accepted another who refused
    to acknowledge any Law beyond the most fundamental ethical principle
    [b. Shabbat 31a and Avot de-Rabbi Nathan 15]...At the decisive
    moment of conversion, he fell in with the notions of the applicant
    and declared himself satisfied with recognition of the written
    Law or a single, basic moral precept....

    Hillel, we might put it, was made all things to all men, that
    he might by all means save some.

    [Hillel had a saying] which may chiefly contemplate relations
    to outsiders [Tosefta Berachot 2.24]: "Do not appear naked,
    do not appear dressed, do not appear laughing, do not appear
    weeping -- as it is said, A time to weep and a time to laugh,
    a time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing [Ecclesiastes
    3:4f.]....

    In the treatises Derekh Eretz Rabba and Derekh Eretz Zuta,
    we meet with descendants of Hillel's maxim. The former contains
    this paragraph: "A man should not be joyful among the weeping,
    nor weep among the joyful, nor wake among the sleeping, nor sleep
    among the waking, nor stand among the sitting, nor sit among
    the standing--the principle of the matter is, A man should not
    make different his mind from that of his fellows and the sons
    of men." The passage from Derekh Eretz Zuta is substantially
    the same, with two exceptions: there is a further pair of warnings,
    "nor should he read Scripture among those reading Mishnah,
    nor Mishnah among those reading Scripture," while the summing
    up runs, "A man should not differ from the usage of the
    creatures."

    These paragraphs are evidence that Hillel's idea was taken
    up by others and lived on....

"I can see if I want anything done right around here, I'll have to do it myself!"

Moe Howard

Post #2,400

by static

7/19/01 9:30:50 PM

Interesting excerpts. Thanks.

"All around me are nothing but fakes
Come with me on the biggest fake of all!"

Post #2,438

by orion

7/20/01 10:40:30 AM

You are most welcome

it is better to show a debate already played out, than to play the same one out again. This was we can go over the old debate, and see what issues they didn't already cover. :)

"I can see if I want anything done right around here, I'll have to do it myself!"

Moe Howard

Welcome to IWETHEY!