Evidence for God from Science

Paul’s gospel must be accepted, it must be believed today, and you can be sure that confusion concerning that gospel through the use of a counterfeit gospel; a gospel that looks so much like Paul’s gospel that you’d not know the difference, if you didn’t clearly know Paul’s gospel, will be Satan’s focus in this age of grace.

One of Satan’s purpose in this age of grace is to confuse Paul’s gospel with a gospel so nearly to it, and there are many people out there today saying all you have to do is to believe in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ and you’re saved. They believe this in almost every church across the board that Christ died, was buried and rose again, but what do they believe was accomplished by that death, burial and resurrection?

In their minds, they were separating themselves for God by their sin, and Paul is saying that God has already reconciled you where your sins are concerned. God is reconciled where the sins of the world are concerned, because he imputed those sins to Christ, that all who would believe what he imputed to Christ, that that resolved the sin issue forever, and are now joined to his son and have his righteousness freely counted to them, or imputed to their account.

Paul called it the ministry of reconciliation, Christ fulfilled the law for us, so we are identified with the righteousness of Christ the moment we take God at his word, obedient to the faith, concerning what Christ accomplished on our behalf. Today our service comes not out of apprehension to any of those things; our service today comes based solely on our appreciation for what Christ has already done.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dcdkkkgEcE

The subject of reconciliation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOkizenjTD8

You mean its not up to my performance?

Liberating.

Paul and Jesus agree 100% However some will say Paul was a false prophet. I accept Paul the 14th Apostle to be the one for the Gentiles.

1stjohn0666 wrote:Paul and Jesus agree 100% However some will say Paul was a false prophet. I accept Paul the 14th Apostle to be the one for the Gentiles.

There is not a 13th or 14th apostle. Judas abdicated his office. Matthias replaced him. There are 12. Did you ever read anything in the Bible about any of the other 12 being replaced? No. And those offices have do to with a very exclusive Jewish message. To sit on the 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes. (Matt. 19:18)

To say Jesus and Paul agree is really not saying much. Especially considering that what they taught, if taken in the context, contradicts. Your basic position is one I held for years. I'd get red faced and argue that there are no contradictions in the Bible, but the reality is that this is simply a catch phrase Christians use to make themselves feel better.

I'll give you a couple of text and you tell me if there isn't a contradiction.
Paul: "For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him." Romans 10:12
Jesus: "But he answered and said, I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Matt. 15:24

Nothing personal but those two things contradict.

Here's another.

Peter: "Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began." (Acts 3:21)
Paul: Now to him who is able to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began. (Romans 16:25)
Let's see, one says their message was spoken since the world began. The other says his message was kept secret since the world began. Same thing?

And another,
Paul: "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." Gal. 2:16
James: "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."
Sure, no contradiction there.

In fact Paul said there was more than one Gospel. The word Gospel simply means good news. Paul refers to this message as "My Gospel." He says, "I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ." (Gal. 1:12) If Paul is in agreement with the 12, then why did he need revelation?
Paul's Gospel caused a big ole controversy within the church at Jerusalem. The reason is that the message Jesus gave Paul was not the same as the message Jesus commissioned for the 12. Otherwise what sense does the ministry of Paul make? Was his role to usurp the 12? No. There are apparent contradictions because there are supposed to be. And when people try to mix the two they make a mess of the scripture. Paul warned about this. He said, "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!" This warning had to specifically do with Jewish believers stating that Gentiles must become Jewish converts. The church at Galatia was in danger of Judaizers. Jesus earthly ministry was 100% about the covenant promises to Israel, and restoring the earthly Kingdom. At least that is what the disciples believed after being taught by the risen Jesus for 40 days. (Acts 1:6) Although Jesus earthly ministry was Jewish, His death was universal. And God knowing Israel would reject this plan, had a secret plan to take affect when Israel's apostasy was settled. (Stoning of Stephen) This required a new apostle to administer this office.

Both of these are built on the same foundation. (1 Cor. 3:11)
There is no other foundation but Jesus Christ. But Jesus specifically hand-picked Paul and gave him revelation to teach us how to be saved, and how to know we are citizens of Heaven. Today, people want to dip into Israel's plan, throw everything in a pot, stir, pick the parts they like, and then with all conviction say, "There are no contradictions." They know deep down that just isn't the case. God has given us a method for resolving all these contradictions, and Paul instructed Timothy on this matter. "Study to show yourself approved to God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." (2 Timothy 2:15) The Greek word here doesn't mean handle. It means to straightly cut. That is to make divisions. Any translation that interprets this in error is probably one to stay away from for the most part.
http://biblos.com/2_timothy/2-15.htm

The issue that some have with Paul was never his gospel of grace, faith and love, it was what seems to some, his overly legalistic views of certain things and, according to others, his gross misunderstanding of Judaisim.

PaulSacramento wrote:The issue that some have with Paul was never his gospel of grace, faith and love, it was what seems to some, his overly legalistic views of certain things and, according to others, his gross misunderstanding of Judaism.

I do not think the Apostle Paul had a gross misunderstanding on first century Pharisaic Judaism. 1'st Century Judaism was far different than it is today - an extreme difference. Paul was speaking about 1'st century Pharisaic Judaism as he mentions in Philippians 3:4, 5, 6, 8...
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:The issue that some have with Paul was never his gospel of grace, faith and love, it was what seems to some, his overly legalistic views of certain things and, according to others, his gross misunderstanding of Judaism.

I do not think the Apostle Paul had a gross misunderstanding on first century Pharisaic Judaism. 1'st Century Judaism was far different than it is today - an extreme difference. Paul was speaking about 1'st century Pharisaic Judaism as he mentions in Philippians 3:4, 5, 6, 8...
-
-
-

I agree, I was just pointing out that SOME say that.

jlay wrote:

1stjohn0666 wrote:Paul and Jesus agree 100% However some will say Paul was a false prophet. I accept Paul the 14th Apostle to be the one for the Gentiles.

There is not a 13th or 14th apostle. Judas abdicated his office. Matthias replaced him. There are 12. Did you ever read anything in the Bible about any of the other 12 being replaced? No. And those offices have do to with a very exclusive Jewish message. To sit on the 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes. (Matt. 19:18)

To say Jesus and Paul agree is really not saying much. Especially considering that what they taught, if taken in the context, contradicts. Your basic position is one I held for years. I'd get red faced and argue that there are no contradictions in the Bible, but the reality is that this is simply a catch phrase Christians use to make themselves feel better.

I'll give you a couple of text and you tell me if there isn't a contradiction.
Paul: "For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him." Romans 10:12
Jesus: "But he answered and said, I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Matt. 15:24

Nothing personal but those two things contradict.

Here's another.

Peter: "Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began." (Acts 3:21)
Paul: Now to him who is able to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began. (Romans 16:25)
Let's see, one says their message was spoken since the world began. The other says his message was kept secret since the world began. Same thing?

And another,
Paul: "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." Gal. 2:16
James: "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."
Sure, no contradiction there.

In fact Paul said there was more than one Gospel. The word Gospel simply means good news. Paul refers to this message as "My Gospel." He says, "I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ." (Gal. 1:12) If Paul is in agreement with the 12, then why did he need revelation?
Paul's Gospel caused a big ole controversy within the church at Jerusalem. The reason is that the message Jesus gave Paul was not the same as the message Jesus commissioned for the 12. Otherwise what sense does the ministry of Paul make? Was his role to usurp the 12? No. There are apparent contradictions because there are supposed to be. And when people try to mix the two they make a mess of the scripture. Paul warned about this. He said, "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!" This warning had to specifically do with Jewish believers stating that Gentiles must become Jewish converts. The church at Galatia was in danger of Judaizers. Jesus earthly ministry was 100% about the covenant promises to Israel, and restoring the earthly Kingdom. At least that is what the disciples believed after being taught by the risen Jesus for 40 days. (Acts 1:6) Although Jesus earthly ministry was Jewish, His death was universal. And God knowing Israel would reject this plan, had a secret plan to take affect when Israel's apostasy was settled. (Stoning of Stephen) This required a new apostle to administer this office.

Both of these are built on the same foundation. (1 Cor. 3:11)
There is no other foundation but Jesus Christ. But Jesus specifically hand-picked Paul and gave him revelation to teach us how to be saved, and how to know we are citizens of Heaven. Today, people want to dip into Israel's plan, throw everything in a pot, stir, pick the parts they like, and then with all conviction say, "There are no contradictions." They know deep down that just isn't the case. God has given us a method for resolving all these contradictions, and Paul instructed Timothy on this matter. "Study to show yourself approved to God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." (2 Timothy 2:15) The Greek word here doesn't mean handle. It means to straightly cut. That is to make divisions. Any translation that interprets this in error is probably one to stay away from for the most part.
http://biblos.com/2_timothy/2-15.htm

orthotomeo is the Greek word you see, but I am fluent with Greek!! It can also mean to "teach right" Thus making the English translation correct. If you go back to your bilos.com/2_..etc page and do some more research, you will see that I am in fact correct!!

The texts you place side by side can give the impression that Paul was a "false prophet" ... I disagree. When I count the individuals that were Apostles in scripture, I count at least 14 "different" people.

Concerning the office of apostle, Christian can and do disagree on. That is okay, as it is not an essential doctrine and in my opinion one not clearly understood by Christians either. Most often, apostles are declared by man and not by God so that this office has become so thoroughly misunderstood that no one would recognize a true apostle at all. For example, the Apostles were servants, not lords, to the church at large. Most so called individuals that claim to be apostles act more like lords than servants so this office is obscure to most today.

One thing to realize is that the apostles did not hold the same view of many today that the office of apostle ceased in the first century. The eleven chose Matthias in Acts 1:26. In reality, Jesus himself chose Saul (Paul) in Acts 9:4, 15 which disproves the theorem that only those that walked with Jesus could hold the office of Apostle based upon the Acts 1:21 rule assumption held by several denominations today. Acts 1:21 context shows a work of man in progress, in selecting by cast lots, whom they think that the Lord would desire or not desire.

Therefore please note that the Lord himself chose Barnabas and Paul in Acts 13:2 for a task, so it behooves us to take seriously that the office of the Apostle has not ceased today, and that, apostles are still chosen directly by the Lord, and lastly, based upon the principle found in Heb 13:8 – Jesus does not change.

So then this brings us to who is an apostle today? I contend that we don’t know, nor do we know how to even recognize a true apostle chosen by God because we don’t know what one is like or what one does. This is due mainly to misguided folks who claim such positions who never were such because they chose themselves for ‘head-trip’ control reasons.

I am sure, if we look around we can discover a few in the pages of history who did remarkable things to further revive and restore the gospel message in dramatic lasting ways, and such person’s do not boast that they were ever apostles as they don’t need too, they appear from history, more as servants and spectacles midst controversy to redirect a wayward church, restore solid gospel truths, dramatically alter the course of generations. I am sure, they all had their personal faults but God chose them, not man, for His task. In my opinion, one such soul would be Martian Luther (edit - Martin Luther 1483 – 1546). There are others and they are few and far between the next group to carry on.

If any of you, reading this, would like to speculate on, from a historical perspective, who such persons were, please feel free to chime in.
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:
In my opinion, one such soul would be Martian Luther.

Martian Luther? Was he really from Mars?

Furthermore, was this "Martian" Luther any relation to Marvin the Martian?

B. W. wrote:
If any of you, reading this, would like to speculate on, from a historical perspective, who such persons were, please feel free to chime in.

Sticking with the theme, I think perhaps the best apostle may have been St. Thomas of Uranus.

And, lest we forget "Martian" Luther King Jr. and his "I have a dream" speech:

“I have a dream that my four little Martian children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin(green) but by the content of their character.

RickD wrote:

B. W. wrote:
In my opinion, one such soul would be Martian Luther.

Martian Luther? Was he really from Mars?

Furthermore, was this "Martian" Luther any relation to Marvin the Martian?

B. W. wrote:
If any of you, reading this, would like to speculate on, from a historical perspective, who such persons were, please feel free to chime in.

Sticking with the theme, I think perhaps the best apostle may have been St. Thomas of Uranus.

And, lest we forget "Martian" Luther King Jr. and his "I have a dream" speech:

“I have a dream that my four little Martian children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin(green) but by the content of their character.

Hey yose mak'n fun of my tie-poes agian yose Floridah Hillbillie?

MARTIAN LUTHER

Sorry about that - I meant Martin Luther who began the Protestant Reformation

Not the Martian - of MARS ATTACKS !! Yak Yak Yak...

At times my right hand truly does not know what the left hand is doing...

It is important to understand that just because Christ choose some one does NOT mean that they speak for Christ ALL the time or that their view is always correct.
The arguments over circumcision and the gentiles is a prime example.
We MUST test everything that is taught and written.
There are times that Paul makes clear HE is expressing his opinion ( ( say and not the Lord...) and times when it makes it clear that he is transmitting what CHrist has told him ( Not I but the Lord...) YET there are other times that we don't know for sure and add to that the issues that Paul isn't always as clear as he thinks he is and that, as Peter mentioned, he said things in a difficult enough way that critiques were able to twist his words, it is important to always take the WHOLE of the Gospel and not just on Apostles view from one select passage.

An argument could be made that there are no apostles today, simply because one requirement of an apostle by biblical definition, is that an apostle has to be a direct witness to Christ's life or resurrection.

Just a quick note that Paul did in fact consider and call himself an apostle (Romans 11:13).

RickD wrote:An argument could be made that there are no apostles today, simply because one requirement of an apostle by biblical definition, is that an apostle has to be a direct witness to Christ's life or resurrection.

How was Paul a direct witness to the resurrection of Christ?

Byblos wrote:Just a quick note that Paul did in fact consider and call himself an apostle (Romans 11:13).

What is the purpose of an Apostle and what defines that office?
-
-
-