It's called being a cunt.

The fundamental issue is that theists think we don't believe due to a misunderstanding on our part. That if we just learned the correct way (correctness being in agreement with the person talking) to read and/or understand their texts that we'd join their numbers. What they fail to realize is that many of us are incredibly familiar with the source material and context, which is a large reason why we don't believe.

"You don't believe because you're too ignorant/arrogant to get it."

Uh, no. We don't believe because the stories make little sense when juxtaposed with 21st century reality.

(November 5, 2015 at 12:23 am)KevinM1 Wrote: The fundamental issue is that theists think we don't believe due to a misunderstanding on our part.  That if we just learned the correct way (correctness being in agreement with the person talking) to read and/or understand their texts that we'd join their numbers.  What they fail to realize is that many of us are incredibly familiar with the source material and context, which is a large reason why we don't believe.

"You don't believe because you're too ignorant/arrogant to get it."

Uh, no.  We don't believe because the stories make little sense when juxtaposed with 21st century reality.

Fact is I could theoretically bring heaps of Christian Protestants, evangelicals, and non-denominationals here to express their disagreement with Drich's bizarre (and heretical by their standards) interpretation of Romans.

Maybe that's why he made this thread? He wants our approval or something?

He shouldn't hold his breath.

And here's God right now to clear up all this confusion he can see us having...

Oh wait.

So...

What do you guys think about the historical Paul? Was there a real person (or perhaps more than one person) that the story is loosely based on? Or was he entirely a fictional construct?

My reaction to this thread still being alive;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLpfbcXTeo8

my reaction  to  this shit thread

(November 4, 2015 at 3:54 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: if " Everything Christ taught works with everything Paul taught and vise versa " then why do you say "we must reconcile all of the teachings between all the different teachers/books"

Because on the surface if one only looks at the English they see contradictions/or they only see one side of a principle.

Quote:if its clear that there is no contradiction and if truely everything that christ taught works with everything paul taught why the need for apologetics to explain to people how if you just try real hard and interpret in a certain way its not really a contradiction .

Again, no. Just because a contradiction is perceived does not mean one exists. Contradictions only exist if one is foolish enough to think that their translation in English was the original language the bible was written in. Because only then would your take in the English could be taken at face value.

The problem with ALL translations is their are words, Phrases and Idoims that do not directly translate, so the translator must decide to translate literally, or to give an interpretation or to mix and to what degree. Most bibles are strongly literal in their translations which does not account for the intended meaning of a passage in the original koine Greek. so we must go back to the original greek codacees that the bibles were translated from and look at the actual words used.

Quote:also 'if the Holy Spirit eliminates the middle men and puts God in direct contact with everyone' , where does jesus come in ?

The Holy Spirit could not come unless you were made clean from your sins. Jesus makes you clean so the Holy Spirit may dewell in you.

Quote:according to most christian theologians jesus , the son of God , not the Holy Spirit enables direct contact to God . i understand different denominations believe different things and everyone interprets differently but ive never heard of a christian who believes jesus is not the connection to God ...

Jesus is the WAY to God the Father as "I am the Way (to God) The Truth (of God) and (the source of eternal) Life, No one comes to the Father, But by me."

The Holy Spirit is the Endewellment of God, it is what Jesus died to Provide.

Quote:Jesus Says The Law Continues, But Paul Says No it doesnt...

Jesus's View on the Law:
Jesus emphasized the validity of the Law up through the passing away of Heaven and Earth, thus confirming its inspiration and ongoing validity. In Matthew 5:17-19 we read:(17) Think not that I came to destroy the Law [of Moses] or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. (18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the Law, till all things be accomplished [i.e., all things predicted appear on the stage of history]. (19) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (ASV)Compare Luke 16:17 similarly says at a different time than the Sermon on the Mount -- meaning Jesus repeated the same point twice: " It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law. (Luke 16:16-17 NIV.) and so Jesus can never be accused of seducing any Christian from following the Law (although paul can). Jesus cannot be a false prophet under Deuteronomy 13:5 (false prophet is anyone who has miracles and wonders but seduces you from following the Law). Jesus said the Law remained valid until the Heavens and Earth pass away. This passing of heaven and earth occurs at the end of the Millennium. This is 1000 years after Christ's Second Coming, according to the Book of Revelation.

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."
THAT ^  turns into 'jesus has done away with the Law and we are in a new covenant' ( jesus even spoke about false teachers who would say this very thing )

Paul's View on the Law :
Paul is blunt in Ephesians 2:15, Colossians 2:14, 2 Cor. 3:11-17, Romans 7:1-3 et seq, and Galatians 3:19 et seq. The Law is "abolished," "done away with," "nailed to a tree," "has faded away,' and was "only ordained by angels...who are no gods." If we were to cite Paul's condemnations of the Law in one string, the point is self-evident that Paul abrogated the Law for everyone. See Eph. 2:15 ("setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations"); Col. 2:14 ("having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out that way, nailing it to the cross;") 2 Cor. 3:14 ("old covenant"); Gal. 5:1 ("yoke of bondage"); Rom. 10:4 ("Christ is the end of the law" opposite of what jesus said ); 2 Cor. 3:7 ("law of death"); Gal. 5:1 ("entangles"); Col. 2:14-17 ("a shadow"); Rom. 3:27 ("law of works"); Rom. 4:15 ("works wrath"); 2 Cor. 3:9 (ministration of condemnation); Gal. 2:16 ("cannot justify"); Gal. 3:21 cannot give life  again opposite of what jesus says); Col. 2:14 ("wiped out" exaleipsas); Finally, in Romans 7:1-6, Paul claims when Jesus died, the husband died and this dissolved the Law's bonds between the husband (God of Sinai) and wife (God's people). This "made the law dead to us." (Romans 7:4.)

...So?

In What Jesus said, what does it mean to full fill? "I came to full fill the law." or have you not read that far? For this to be a contradiction you can only have read "I did not come to abolish the Law." So how does 'the word πληρόω plēróō, "Full fill" contradict or reconcile the teachings of Paul with Christ in your estimation?
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lex...4137&t=KJV

(November 5, 2015 at 3:27 am)RaphielDrake Wrote: My reaction to this thread still being alive;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLpfbcXTeo8

Oh no! Not Phil Collins!

My reaction to Phil Collins still being alive;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhMiYV04Q2k

(November 5, 2015 at 11:04 am)Drich Wrote:

(November 4, 2015 at 3:54 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: if " Everything Christ taught works with everything Paul taught and vise versa " then why do you say "we must reconcile all of the teachings between all the different teachers/books"

Because on the surface if one only looks at the English they see contradictions/or they only see one side of a principle.

Quote:if its clear that there is no contradiction and if truely everything that christ taught works with everything paul taught why the need for apologetics to explain to people how if you just try real hard and interpret in a certain way its not really a contradiction .

Again, no. Just because a contradiction is perceived does not mean one exists. Contradictions only exist if one is foolish enough to think that their translation in English was the original language the bible was written in. Because only then would your take in the English could be taken at face value.

The problem with ALL translations is their are words, Phrases and Idoims that do not directly translate, so the translator must decide to translate literally, or to give an interpretation or to mix and to what degree. Most bibles are strongly literal in their translations which does not account for the intended meaning of a passage in the original koine Greek. so we must go back to the original greek codacees that the bibles were translated from and look at the actual words used.

Quote:also 'if the Holy Spirit eliminates the middle men and puts God in direct contact with everyone' , where does jesus come in ?

The Holy Spirit could not come unless you were made clean from your sins. Jesus makes you clean so the Holy Spirit may dewell in you.

Quote:according to most christian theologians jesus , the son of God , not the Holy Spirit enables direct contact to God . i understand different denominations believe different things and everyone interprets differently but ive never heard of a christian who believes jesus is not the connection to God ...

Jesus is the WAY to God the Father as "I am the Way (to God) The Truth (of God) and (the source of eternal) Life, No one comes to the Father, But by me."

The Holy Spirit is the Endewellment of God, it is what Jesus died to Provide.

Quote:Jesus Says The Law Continues, But Paul Says No it doesnt...

Jesus's View on the Law:
Jesus emphasized the validity of the Law up through the passing away of Heaven and Earth, thus confirming its inspiration and ongoing validity. In Matthew 5:17-19 we read:(17) Think not that I came to destroy the Law [of Moses] or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. (18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the Law, till all things be accomplished [i.e., all things predicted appear on the stage of history]. (19) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (ASV)Compare Luke 16:17 similarly says at a different time than the Sermon on the Mount -- meaning Jesus repeated the same point twice: " It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law. (Luke 16:16-17 NIV.) and so Jesus can never be accused of seducing any Christian from following the Law (although paul can). Jesus cannot be a false prophet under Deuteronomy 13:5 (false prophet is anyone who has miracles and wonders but seduces you from following the Law). Jesus said the Law remained valid until the Heavens and Earth pass away. This passing of heaven and earth occurs at the end of the Millennium. This is 1000 years after Christ's Second Coming, according to the Book of Revelation.

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."
THAT ^  turns into 'jesus has done away with the Law and we are in a new covenant' ( jesus even spoke about false teachers who would say this very thing )

Paul's View on the Law :
Paul is blunt in Ephesians 2:15, Colossians 2:14, 2 Cor. 3:11-17, Romans 7:1-3 et seq, and Galatians 3:19 et seq. The Law is "abolished," "done away with," "nailed to a tree," "has faded away,' and was "only ordained by angels...who are no gods." If we were to cite Paul's condemnations of the Law in one string, the point is self-evident that Paul abrogated the Law for everyone. See Eph. 2:15 ("setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations"); Col. 2:14 ("having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out that way, nailing it to the cross;") 2 Cor. 3:14 ("old covenant"); Gal. 5:1 ("yoke of bondage"); Rom. 10:4 ("Christ is the end of the law" opposite of what jesus said ); 2 Cor. 3:7 ("law of death"); Gal. 5:1 ("entangles"); Col. 2:14-17 ("a shadow"); Rom. 3:27 ("law of works"); Rom. 4:15 ("works wrath"); 2 Cor. 3:9 (ministration of condemnation); Gal. 2:16 ("cannot justify"); Gal. 3:21 cannot give life  again opposite of what jesus says); Col. 2:14 ("wiped out" exaleipsas); Finally, in Romans 7:1-6, Paul claims when Jesus died, the husband died and this dissolved the Law's bonds between the husband (God of Sinai) and wife (God's people). This "made the law dead to us." (Romans 7:4.)

...So?

In What Jesus said, what does it mean to full fill? "I came to full fill the law." or have you not read that far? For this to be a contradiction you can only have read "I did not come to abolish the Law." So how does 'the word πληρόω plēróō, "Full fill" contradict or reconcile the teachings of Paul with Christ in your estimation?
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lex...4137&t=KJV

jesus came to fulfil the prophesy of messiah in Davids line , as he was related to David through his father joseph  mary was from the house of levi if his father was God and not joseph he couldnt have fulfilled the prophesy of being messiah ........look at my later posts jesus vs. paul what jesus said and what paul said that directly contradicted jesus . jesus said he did not come to do away with the law and paul said jesus did do away with the law in the new covenent . jesus said nothing about any "new covenent " jesus always preached repenting of sins to God turning away from sin and living according to the law .....not salvation through belief in him - paul preached salvation through faith in jesus. jesus didnt speak of salvation through faith in him .