Evidence for God from Science

jlay wrote:

cheezerrox wrote:If you want to live under that, then so be it. But I can promise that you are no more in grace by keeping a day than those who don't. If you disagree, then please define how you are using the word 'obligated.' In fact, I would even contend based on the context of what you just said, that you are in essence refusing such grace for yourself, and wrongly passing judgment on others.

I understand you can't promise any more grace for me or anyone by keeping a day than those who don't, but I'm also not seeking that. People often seem to think that those of us who keep Shabbat/Torah are trying to earn something, which may be true for certain individuals, but it's definitely not the purpose for keeping these things for most of us. I'm neither seeking "extra" grace or passing judgement on others. You surely disagree with me and others about certain things, but I wouldn't consider your disagreement passing judgement.

Gentiles should have faith in God, and should follow the teachings of the one He hand picked to teach them. Paul. Who said, do not let others judge you about a Sabbath. Yet, you judge yourself as better than me, or more than me because of your sabbath keeping.
The commands to love your neighbor and love God are reflected in the law. You won't hear me say otherwise.
Should we obey God? yes. And the best way is to do this is to first understand what economy we are operating in today. I would say that you do not.

Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, but not the only teacher for them. I don't really know how you can think that. So in this understanding, does Paul still apply for Jewish believers, or not? And if he does, then why don't the teachings of the apostles who weren't specifically meant to preach to the Gentiles not count for Gentile believers? And the meaning of that passage from Colossians is debatable, although I would still say that no believer should judge another about anything as long as they're living in a way that magnifies the Messiah. You claim again that I'm judging you, and that I see myself as better than you, specifically for my keeping of the Sabbath. That's simply untrue, and I apologize if I've given that impression. But, the distinction needs to be made between disagreeing and judging.

You have a different view on this. I see G-d's commandments as always being binding, as long as it's possible to observe them. You see there being different requirements for different people at different times. We disagree, and that's that. We're both saved and sanctified, and Spirit-indwelled.

This all being said, I can't say I agree with all of what K says.

Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, but not the only teacher for them. I don't really know how you can think that.

It really depends on what you mean by 'teaching.' All scripture is there to teach us. You'll never hear me say otherwise. But Paul has revelation that follows what came earlier. None of you here are saying we should follow the law. You are saying we should follow what you deem to be certain parts of it, based on your interpretations. Progressive revelation is important.

Romans 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office.
Acts 9:15 But the Lord said to Ananias, "Go! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel.
Gal. 1:6

So in this understanding, does Paul still apply for Jewish believers, or not?

Today, there is no 'Jewish' believer, per se. There are believers. Paul's message is the only message Christ is working through today. Perhaps you didn't notice, but the Jews did not fulfill their commission. And just as stated above, Paul would ultimately carry HIS Gospel to all. (Romans 2:16) to Gentile and Jew alike. This is exactly what Paul went to exhaustively lengths to spell out in Romans. Jews do not any longer have any special privelege that gets them to God quicker. It is why he was rejected by Jews continually (Read Acts) stoned, beaten and run out of towns. It is why he had to rebuke Peter. God is not currently working through Israel in any capacity, not until the the number of the gentiles is complete. Gal. 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Niether means neither. Yet, we keep hearing that being or acting "Jewish" has some extra quality. Some special provision. Paul was called distinctly from the other Apostles, with a special revelation (mystery). Otherwise why would we have a Paul? What is the point? Did Jesus simply forget something while on the earth? No. God had/has a plan for Israel. Of course they corporately rejected this plan. God already had sovereignly selected Paul and this 'mystery/secret" plan. (Eph.3:3-5) It is DIFFERENT, yet zionism lumps them together and confuses the whole matter.

Is it really that hard to understand the distinctions the scripture makes? Law, circumcision, versus grace, no repsector of persons.
The Law respresents that economy and dispensation in how God was dealing with man in the earth at a given time. Otherwise you are only left with confusion and contradiction. Grace is either grace or not.

I see G-d's commandments as always being binding, as long as it's possible to observe them.

Friend, you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Do you KNOW what BINDING means? On one hand you say we don't have to keep the Sabbath, and I'm OK, you're OK. But then you will say the commandments (which you mean the Hebrew Law) are binding. If we are BOUND to keep the law, then salvation is not through grace. It is a contradiction.

So tell me, if the Sanhedrin and temple were restored tomorrow, should we go to stoning Sabbath breakers? Yes or no?

jlay wrote: Jews do not any longer have any special privelege that gets them to God quicker. It is why he was rejected by Jews continually (Read Acts) stoned, beaten and run out of towns. It is why he had to rebuke Peter. God is not currently working through Israel in any capacity, not until the the number of the gentiles is complete. Gal. 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Niether means neither. Yet, we keep hearing that being or acting "Jewish" has some extra quality. Some special provision.

We know from scripture that God is not respecter of persons Ephesians 6:9.... However, God is also a God of roles... He has given the Jews "special" roles and a place in the world based on the covenants which are irrevocable. Please see Romans 11:28-29. But mind you it comes with a blessing and a curse.. Some of these blessings are the following..

1. Preservation - God has promised to preserve Israel nationally to the end of time (Genesis 17:7-8).

2. Oracles of God - God has committed his word to the Jew (Romans 3:1-2).

3. Believing Remnant During Church Age - Another blessing God has promised to Israel is that there would always be a believing Jewish remnant in every age (Rom. 11:5).

4. Of Whom, As Concerning the Flesh, Christ Came. The crowning glory of Israel is that when God became a man, He became a Jew.

5. The Reciprocal Blessing - When God called Abraham, He told him, "I will ble-ss them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee" (Gen. 12:3).

6. Promise of Restoration to the Land - One of the great national promises to Israel is that the Jewish people would be returned to their original land. This promise is repeated over and over again throughout the Scriptures (Amos 9:15).

A really good article can be found on this here:

http://www.lamblion.com/articles/articles_jews5.php

Also regarding Galatians.. Males don't stop being males and females don't stop being females.. Likewise Jews don't stop being Jews but become ONE in Christ...

Galatians 3:28

28 aThere is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Also regarding Galatians.. Males don't stop being males and females don't stop being females.. Likewise Jews don't stop being Jews but become ONE in Christ...

That is gross misinterpretation, Paul is saying that being a Jew is no more better than being a Palestinian or Iranian or African or Indian, just like being a male is no more awesome than being a female or being a master is no more greater than being a slave because in Christ these titles amount to nothing. This is the new covenant. The special role of the Jews was for the Old covenant. Now they only have a restoration promise and that too is spiritual, end of story.

neo-x wrote:That is gross misinterpretation, Paul is saying that being a Jew is no more better than being a Palestinian or Iranian or African or Indian, just like being a male is no more awesome than being a female or being a master is no more greater than being a slave because in Christ these titles amount to nothing. This is the new covenant. The special role of the Jews was for the Old covenant. Now they only have a restoration promise and that too is spiritual, end of story.

That isn't true at all... The apostle Paul says that they do have a role to play out today and are still elected. It has not ended with the old testament. In fact it will be amplified in the NT.


Romans 11:28-29

28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, 29 for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.

The apostle Paul says that they do have a role to play out today and are still elected. It has not ended with the old testament. In fact it will be amplified in the NT.

Exactly, elected to be saved in Christ, Rom 11:30-31
Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, 31 so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy as a result of God’s mercy to you.

The restoration promise is intact, I already acknowledged it, but that's about it.

neo-x wrote:

The apostle Paul says that they do have a role to play out today and are still elected. It has not ended with the old testament. In fact it will be amplified in the NT.

Exactly, elected to be saved in Christ, Rom 11:30-31
Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, 31 so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy as a result of God’s mercy to you.

The restoration promise is intact, I already acknowledged it, but that's about it.

And we have become disobedient too when we go against G-d's laws as well.... And we can still sin in Christ too.. So I wouldn't exactly claim the higher ground here...

And we have become disobedient too when we go against G-d's laws as well.... And we can still sin in Christ too.. So I wouldn't exactly claim the higher ground here...

neither am I claiming to have the higher ground, but in fact saying that the Jews do not have any higher ground because of their heritage. In Christ that means nothing.

Gman wrote:Also regarding Galatians.. Males don't stop being males and females don't stop being females.. Likewise Jews don't stop being Jews but become ONE in Christ...

Galatians 3:28

28 aThere is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

I've heard this response before and it just doesn't hold water, because that is not at all what anyone is arguing. That is starting with a position and then trying to make the scripture fit your position.

That isn't true at all... The apostle Paul says that they do have a role to play out today and are still elected.

Where does it say, "today" they are still elected? The Jew today is saved in the same manner as anyone else. There is NO difference. Grace through faith. The law availWhich is exactly what Paul is saying. Yet you are saying that there is. And this doesn't mean that God will not later do something with Israel. We are talking about now. You are saying that now, today, there is a difference and that Jews are saved differntly than Gentiles, when Paul clearly teaches that this is not the case anymore. (Galatians 5:6)

So, you say we should follow the Law. yet Paul says, (Galatians 5:3) Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. Picking and choosing which parts (which is exactly what you are doing) is exactly what Paul was rebuking the Galatians for. It is a little yeast that works through the whole dough.

Gman wrote:We know from scripture that God is not respecter of persons Ephesians 6:9.... However, God is also a God of roles... He has given the Jews "special" roles and a place in the world based on the covenants which are irrevocable. Please see Romans 11:28-29. But mind you it comes with a blessing and a curse.. Some of these blessings are the following..

Yes, and the revelation of Eph. 6:9 is progressive, thus the Jew is not in that "special" role now. It is interrupted in lew of the mystery program, new revelation. But you are saying in the same breath, "God is no respector, except for the Jews." That is a contradiction.

jlay wrote:It really depends on what you mean by 'teaching.' All scripture is there to teach us. You'll never hear me say otherwise. But Paul has revelation that follows what came earlier. None of you here are saying we should follow the law. You are saying we should follow what you deem to be certain parts of it, based on your interpretations. Progressive revelation is important.

Romans 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office.
Acts 9:15 But the Lord said to Ananias, "Go! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel.
Gal. 1:6

By teaching, I mean as far as conduct specifically. I may be misunderstanding you, but if I'm not, then what you're saying is that Paul is the only one who's teaching on conduct still applies for us today. And I just don't find any support for that in Scripture. Paul's revelation follows what came earlier, but the letters of John, Peter, and the book of Revelation follow him, so to say that Paul has the last word can't be right, at least chronologically.

And again, the assertion that I and any other Messianic don't really say we should keep ALL Torah, just the parts we like. And again I'll say, that's simply not true. There are things that CANNOT be done, some only for the time being. Some people only advocate parts of it, such as those who believe ONLY Shabbat still applies, but I believe that's error. It's either all or none.

Also, do you notice that in Acts 9:15, which you quoted, it says before the Gentiles and their kings AND before the people of Israel?

Today, there is no 'Jewish' believer, per se. There are believers. Paul's message is the only message Christ is working through today. Perhaps you didn't notice, but the Jews did not fulfill their commission. And just as stated above, Paul would ultimately carry HIS Gospel to all. (Romans 2:16) to Gentile and Jew alike. This is exactly what Paul went to exhaustively lengths to spell out in Romans. Jews do not any longer have any special privelege that gets them to God quicker. It is why he was rejected by Jews continually (Read Acts) stoned, beaten and run out of towns. It is why he had to rebuke Peter. God is not currently working through Israel in any capacity, not until the the number of the gentiles is complete. Gal. 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Niether means neither. Yet, we keep hearing that being or acting "Jewish" has some extra quality. Some special provision. Paul was called distinctly from the other Apostles, with a special revelation (mystery). Otherwise why would we have a Paul? What is the point? Did Jesus simply forget something while on the earth? No. God had/has a plan for Israel. Of course they corporately rejected this plan. God already had sovereignly selected Paul and this 'mystery/secret" plan. (Eph.3:3-5) It is DIFFERENT, yet zionism lumps them together and confuses the whole matter.

I agree, there's no distinction between Jews or Gentiles in the Messiah, when it comes to salvation, commandments, or anything. I was only asking because you said Gentiles should follow the teachings of the one hand picked for them, Paul, but I'm glad we can agree on this. But, we disagree about Paul's message being the only one the Messiah's working through today. I don't know where you got that idea from. Yes, the Jews didn't fulfill their commission, and they have a hardening of heart collectively in this current age. Jews don't have dibs on G-d, and they certainly are seen as better in G-d's eyes. I don't hear anyone saying being or acting Jewish has some extra quality, except for people who attack Messianism and claim that they want to make Gentiles Jewish, but that's an incorrect understanding of Messianic theology. Paul had a special, specific role, no doubt, but his ministry wasn't meant to be the only one relevant for today, or to do away with Torah for some new system of what G-d now deems to be right and wrong, or to be ONLY for Gentiles, while he was still the APOSTLE of the Gentiles (he still followed the principle of to the Jew first, and then to the Greek). These things aren't found in his letters, or in the rest of Scripture.

[quote[Is it really that hard to understand the distinctions the scripture makes? Law, circumcision, versus grace, no repsector of persons.
The Law respresents that economy and dispensation in how God was dealing with man in the earth at a given time. Otherwise you are only left with confusion and contradiction. Grace is either grace or not.[/quote]
The distinctions aren't hard to understand, it's just that you see things being polarized whereas I and others do not. How does the Torah still being the standard by which believers are supposed to live make grace not grace anymore? What does a change in commandments (as you still agree there are commandments) do that makes G-d's grace different?

Friend, you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Do you KNOW what BINDING means? On one hand you say we don't have to keep the Sabbath, and I'm OK, you're OK. But then you will say the commandments (which you mean the Hebrew Law) are binding. If we are BOUND to keep the law, then salvation is not through grace. It is a contradiction.

So tell me, if the Sanhedrin and temple were restored tomorrow, should we go to stoning Sabbath breakers? Yes or no?

I understand how it may seem as a contradiction, but I do mean both things that I've said. I do believe G-d's commandments are binding; we're supposed to follow them. But, you trust in the Messiah, as does the rest of the church; that makes you and them saved, justified, and set apart to G-d as holy. You cannot be partially saved, justified, or sanctified. Just because we differ in our interpretations and what we believe we should follow, that can't change G-d's salvation which is through faith in the Messiah's death and resurrection, even if I'm right and you're wrong, or if you're right and I'm wrong. As believers, you'd say we're obligated to keep the law of Christ, yes? Does that mean salvation is not through grace?

And if the Sanhedrin and Temple were restored tomorrow, they would be made up of and built by unsaved people. They wouldn't be believers in the Messiah, and therefore wouldn't be Torah-true, even if they follow every jot and tittle of the strictest laws of Orthodox Judaism, because the Torah tells us to believe in G-d and to await the Messiah Who is to come, and without putting faith in Jesus, you're not accepting G-d. Also, Hebrews 8:6 states that the New Covenant has been made "Law," or Torah (in the original Greek), so one cannot be Torah true without being under the New Covenant, which one does through trust in the Messiah.

But, this doesn't matter anyway, because there is now no condemnation for those in the Messiah (Romans 8:1). All of our sins have been forgiven, so to execute someone for sin is not justified anymore.

You are saying that now, today, there is a difference and that Jews are saved differntly than Gentiles

Brother, you've made this accusation at both Gman and me more than once now. Can you please show where we've said this?

Gman wrote: And we have become disobedient too when we go against G-d's laws as well.... And we can still sin in Christ too...

G, Christ clearly stated that if we love him we will perform in a specific manner. Every bit of what I have read agrees with your post. We can't simply just have faith... we must be active participants in making ourselves better and more holy. God knows our hearts and he will know the difference between those who are doing their best and making errors vs. those who feel that faith is all thats required.
It is properly understood that we cannot perform any works that will save us because works don't have the power to save. Salvation can only come as a gift... But, the giver of the gift wants us to be like him... to be holy.
I consider an analogy to this understanding in this respect;
I have 2 children and I ask them both to do certain things like chores or the like for a reward and one tries his best to do them all but fails but hopes that he will be rewarded for giving his best effort, the other looks at the list and just says I can't do them all so i'm not even going to try but since I am his son he will give me the reward anyway.
Which child should recieve a reward? the one who had faith and failed or the one who didn't try and simply had faith?

John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
Joh 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
Mat 12:50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

If we don't try to perform as instructed then we essentially are telling Christ and the father that we don't love them. We can only be part of a holy family if we work to be holy too. If we choose to commit acts that God has defined as a sin then by our actions we deny the love we profess with our lips. Why would God give the gift of eternal life to anyone who doesn't try their best to be like Christ;

Mat 10:24 The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord.
Mat 10:25 It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant as his lord.
Romans 8:29 For God knew his people in advance, and he chose them to become like his Son, so that his Son would be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.
John 14:12 “I tell you the truth, anyone who believes in me will do the same works I have done, and even greater works, because I am going to be with the Father.

We have been instructed to present ourselves as holy. You can't be holy and continue to sin by performing actions that God has deemed a sin. Obeying God is our "reasonable service" to him.

Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

James clearly understood what the royal law was and what it meant to anyone who asserted a belief in Christ;

Jas 2:8 If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:
Jas 2:9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.
Jas 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
Jas 2:11 For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.
Jas 2:12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.
Jas 2:13 For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment.
Jas 2:14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?

Faith cannot save if you don't obey the royal law

Jas 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
Jas 2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
Jas 2:22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
Jas 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
Jas 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

And what are the works...

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

jlay wrote:K, Your perception is wrong, and I can't even begin to see how you arrived at such a conclusion. So, not sure how I can correct when you haven't explained how you arrived at that conclusion.

Then you agree that a person can still sin after coming to believe in Christ and after coming to believe they are saved right?

Is it not a book intended for the people of God after Christs time on earth? I don't see revelation being a Jewish only book.

jlay wrote:All scripture is useful.. (2 Tim. 3:16) That isn't the question. The question is for whom and when is it applicable.

Then is it your assertion here that revelation or that particular verse is not applicable to gentiles?

From my understanding The kingdom of God was preached to both Jew and Gentile.

jlay wrote:Sure, the KOG is pretty broad term in what it encompasses. But, JTB and Jesus preached the Kingdom in a way during their earthly ministries that was exclusively Jewish.

So which parts of the bible can we throw away since it doesn't apply to gentiles? I would like to have just the parts that apply to me so we can assume that the old testament can go and revelation can go and the first half of the new testament can go. This is going to be a very thin Bible for the gentiles.

My understanding is that you do your best to obey the decalogue that Christ magnified and have the faith that Christ will be the acceptable sacrifice to the father for when we do sin by breaking the fathers commandments.

jlay wrote:If our best meant a darn thing, Jesus would need not died.

If we could be perfect all the time then no he would not need to have died. However by not trying at all what good does his sacrifice accomplish?
The devils believe Christ is the son of God and they don't try to obey either... so will their belief save them?

jlay wrote:Exodus reveals the time. And the deca is revelaed by God's voice to Israel BEFORE the stones were given. And Israel agreed to the covenant before the stones were given. This negates the rest of your post.
Deut. 5 recounts the giving of the law. And Deut. 4:44,45 says, "This is the law Moses set before the Israelites. These are the stipulations, decrees and laws Moses gave them when they came out of Egypt." And in Deut. 5:4, "The Lord spoke to you face to face out of the fire on the mountain."

I will review this.

He is clearly speaking to people who have been raised to the level of saints here and he makes sure they understand that they keep on performing in a proper manner otherwise you will lose your salvation.

jlay wrote:Paul is making no such case in Ephesians.

So you feel that they can go against what Paul says and their salvation would not be in jeopardy?

So you feel that they can go against what Paul says and their salvation would not be in jeopardy?

K,
I'm not going against what Paul says. You my friend are conflating terms. Paul does use the word 'saved' and salvation. He certainly doesn't use it in this context.

Then you agree that a person can still sin after coming to believe in Christ and after coming to believe they are saved right?

Absolutely.

Then is it your assertion here that revelation or that particular verse is not applicable to gentiles?

Correct. But, the point of this verse, Rev. 14:12, isn't proposing a legal requirement in the first place.

So which parts of the bible can we throw away since it doesn't apply to gentiles? I would like to have just the parts that apply to me so we can assume that the old testament can go and revelation can go and the first half of the new testament can go. This is going to be a very thin Bible for the gentiles.

Why don't you quit asking loaded questions? We don't throw away any scripture. But I seriously doubt you randomly flip open the Bible and then blindly start doing what you read. For example, sacrifices, etc. It is a matter of progressive revelation. Did the revelation that came to Moses supercede the revelation to Abraham? Yes.

If we could be perfect all the time then no he would not need to have died. However by not trying at all what good does his sacrifice accomplish?
The devils believe Christ is the son of God and they don't try to obey either... so will their belief save them?

There are many things we are told we SHOULD do as Gentiles. Ephesians 4-6 may break this down the best. And there is one thing we must obey. That we are saved by faith in Christ and that works contribute nothing.

The devils believe Christ is the son of God and they don't try to obey either... so will their belief save them?

The Gospel is not offered to Satan or his angles. The Gospel is offered to men,and they are incapable of believing unto salvation. And yes, beleivers SHOULD act according to what they believe. However, as we've already determined they don't. Some do better than others. But it is when the ones who do better, Lord that over the others (which seems to be what you are doing) and claim that they are the only ones truly saved, then it is self-righteous muck, and a false Gospel.

G, Christ clearly stated that if we love him we will perform in a specific manner. Every bit of what I have read agrees with your post. We can't simply just have faith...

Then there is no two ways about it. One of us is preaching a false Gospel. How are you performing?

cheezerrox wrote:Also, do you notice that in Acts 9:15, which you quoted, it says before the Gentiles and their kings AND before the people of Israel?

Absolutely. If you had totally read my post, I covered that.

By teaching, I mean as far as conduct specifically. I may be misunderstanding you, but if I'm not, then what you're saying is that Paul is the only one who's teaching on conduct still applies for us today.

What doesn't Paul cover regarding conduct? He even applies loving your neighbor. Gal. 5:14. The difference in Isreal's plan they were bound to keep the Law.

Paul's revelation follows what came earlier, but the letters of John, Peter, and the book of Revelation follow him, so to say that Paul has the last word can't be right, at least chronologically.

Agreed. It is not an issue of chronology, but when one program ceased. The The Bible addresses this. In fact 2 Peter 3:15-16 says, "Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction."
I think it is evern very interesting to hear how Peter starts his first epistle versus his 2nd.
Paul preacing HIS Gospel was an obvious area of controversy amongst the early church in Jerusalem. Paul has to come and defend what he is preaching and to whom he is preaching it. Paul comments on this in Galatians 2:7,8 saying, "On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles, just as Peter had been to the Jews." Thus, still a distinction of sorts. This plays out all through the book of Acts, which covers a good bit of time. In fact the early church prior to Paul was Judiazing. There was no Gentile message. A person MUST become a proselyte, being circumsized and adopting all Jewish customs. After Paul this all changed.

Anyway, it is certainly a great topic and one I look forward to discussing more. Got to run for now.

All of our sins have been forgiven, so to execute someone for sin is not justified anymore.

What? So, you are saying that if believing Jews restored the temple and priesthood tomorrow that there are aspects of the Law they should not do?