Open Letter to Paul

Hi there Saul,

How did 2000 years treat you?

Regards from your religion, she is today the world’s greatest religion, (long story how that came to be). While you were absent she spawned way out of control; I doubt you’d recognize her. She was hangin’ around some bad dudes, and she more-less married into family Pagan. I saw a picture last week of a man bowing to a bronze statue and worshiping the man it represented, while uttering your verses! I know, it’s nuts. [BTW you had a baby, named Mormon.] 

Anyhow, I had a miserable time. Your followers tried to convince us, relentlessly, that you’re Moses 2.0, we didn’t buy it. They got frustrated, so they transformed our families and communities into oceans of blood and mountains of ashes, they tortured us to unbearable extents, and then chased the few survivors into the sea. And we still didn’t buy it.

But that’s not what I was going to write to you. A friend of mine asked, “Why do Jews feel so much rage at St Paul? “, so I decided to ask you. Why do we hate you? Let me help you answer that.

Up until you came around, being a Jew meant to put faith in God alone, and follow His Commandments; circumcise your child, keep Sabbath, eat Kosher, keep Purity Laws etc. We had the bible that was carefully passed down from father to son to grandchild, for hundreds of generations; the tradition that survived the culture winds and forceful decrees; and we had each other- a nation united by its commitment to God’s Word (yes, we were split regarding the details of executing it, but we all wanted to keep it).

Then, you came around. You did away with the Law. You told us it’s too hard to keep. You took the tablets Moses brought down from heaven, you shattered them, and used the shards to sooth your wounds. You revived your dying religion by killing the faith of your fathers. You legitimized wrongdoings of potential converts, by obliterating the Righteous Laws of God. You validated your twisted beliefs, blurred dreams and weird visions, by nullifying and destroying Moses, the prophets and all that they gave us.

For us Jews, your campaign never took off. But your followers abandoned the principles you dared not to touch, and alas, your religion is responsible for more idolatry than any other in history. That, Paul, is your horrendous legacy.

Mozer



Categories: Christianity, Judaism

Tags: , , , ,

100 replies

  1. So I’m just curious. Paul wasn’t an apostle ordained by Jesus Christ?

    Like

    • nope. Not of the Jesus of the Gospels.

      Liked by 3 people

    • So The Word of God in your eyes is flawed? Paul was told by Jesus to be an apostle to the gentiles.

      Like

    • Rational

      Paul’s encounter with the divine echoes mohammed’s – you can’t rationally deny Paul’s commission without also denying mohammed’s. That would be the logical fallacy of special pleading.

      The difference is that Paul knew that he had encountered god because when you encounter god, there is absolutely no way you can mistake that for anything else. Mohammed on the other hand, thought that he had been visited by a demon – no one mistakes god for a demon because god is not like anything else.

      If Mohammed thought that he had encountered a demon, then he probably had. Paul knew without any shadow of a doubt that he had encountered god because god cannot be mistaken for an evil entity.

      Like

    • Not the fallacy of special pleading. Muhammad ﷺ brought an evidentiary miracle along with his claim of prophethood. This evidentiary miracle is something that is required to establish one’s divine authority (i.e. proof of prophethood).

      Paul on the other hand, who may or may not have even had that hallucination you people are always banging on about (there’s no way to be sure he didn’t just make the entire thing up), was accompanied by… nothing save some letters he wrote full of his aberrant opinions.

      Nice fallacy fallacy.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Bill W,i think you have been misinformed,God wasn’t the one who came to muhammad(pbuh) in the cave of hira(first encounter),it was the angel gabriel.
      One of the main difference between paul and muhammad(pbuh) is that paul destroyed the religion of jesus,whereas Muhammad(pbuh) restored the religion of jesus. Both of them succeeded in this life,only one will succeed in the next.

      Surah 21:107-109
      And We have not sent you, [O Muhammad], except as a mercy to the worlds.
      Say, “It is only revealed to me that your god is but one God; so will you be Muslims [in submission to Him]?”
      But if they turn away, then say, “I have announced to [all of] you equally. And I know not whether near or far is that which you are promised.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Hashim

      My point stands. God’s visitation cannot be mistaken, and the visitation of his emissaries cannot be mistaken. Mohammed thought he had been accosted by a demon – god’s emissaries cannot be mistaken.

      Also, can name any New Testament scholars who claim that jesus taught islam?

      Like

    • My point stands as well.Muhammad(pbuh) was visited by the angel,who only came with the revelation,then went away.Though later revealed to be gabriel.Muhammad(pbuh) knew he was in front of God during the night journey,so there goes your point.Now the question is,who actually got a revelation from God,paul or muhammad(pbuh).Well,one destroyed the religion that jesus and all the others preached,and the other(muhammad) restored the religion of all the previous prophets,brought back true monotheism.(btw gabriel has been scaring people in the bible as well,just in case you bring that up as a point[daniel 8:17,luke 1:11])

      Can you define what you mean by Islam?

      Liked by 2 people

    • Hashim

      We have no reason to believe that the being that mohammed encountered was not a demon. The only possible way that a supernatural being can be mistaken for a demon would be if it actually was a demon. No emissary of god could possible be the cause of such confusion.

      Thus, Paul’s encounter with god is unmistakable, mohammed’s encounter was likely with a demon.

      By “Islam” I mean the five pillars in the least – the idea that jesus taught the 5 pillars is a fantasy.

      Like

    • We have no reason to believe that Paul was visited by Jesus, in fact nowhere does Paul even refer to this event in any of his writings. Why wouldn’t he have referred to one of the strongest proofs of his being an Apostle? Considering there were no shortage of critics which he calls the ‘super Apostles’.

      Besides which why does Muhammads initial reaction worry you?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Patrice

      Are you a troll? Did you really just claim that Paul doesn’t refer to his encounter with jesus in his letters?

      This should help….
      https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+15%3A3-8&version=NIV

      3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas,[b] and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

      and here….
      https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+9%3A1-2&version=NIV

      9 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not the result of my work in the Lord? 2 Even though I may not be an apostle to others, surely I am to you! For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.

      Re. Mohammed. He mistook an emissary of god for a demon. That is just not possible.

      Like

    • Why was my reply to Patrice deleted?

      Like

    • Bill W

      You said;
      Re. Mohammed. He mistook an emissary of god for a demon. That is just not possible.

      I say;
      Jesus was tempted by the devil for so many days you remember? The Devil knows who God is. But the devil knows Jesus is not God so he tempted him. It is just not possible for the devil to tempt God but the devil tempted Jesus and therefore Jesus Christ is not God but tempted by the devil.

      Thanks.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Bill W.Paul made a claim,muhammad(pbuh) made a claim.Both claimed to have been visited by a representative of God.Muhammad(pbuh) didn’t know who visited him during the first encounter because gabriel only came with the revelation(which is all he usually comes with) and went away.He was later told that it’s gabriel. Thing is,we have to assess the claims of both paul and muhammad(pbuh),and as i said before,paul destroyed the religion of jesus,muhammad(pbuh) restored it.Paul said not to keep the laws,muhammad(pbuh) said to keep the laws.Which one seems like it is from satan/a demon?It’s quite obvious.

      Regarding jesus teaching ‘Islam’.No muslim will ever tell you jesus taught the 5 pillars of islam etc.Rather he taught Islam(submission to One God),that’s what a muslim means when he says jesus was a muslim(ie submitted his will to God).Paul didn’t teach that,he taught what the devil taught him.Paul also didn’t do a very good job in conveying the message,he left out the most important part from his letters.You guessed it,’the trinity’.Unless he didn’t believe in it himself *wink wink*

      The verses you quoted prove nothing,just because paul says something doesn’t make it true.I’ll quote some verses from the Quran as well,in case you want them.

      Say, “Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel – it is [none but] he who has brought the Qur’an down upon your heart, [O Muhammad], by permission of Allah , confirming that which was before it and as guidance and good tidings for the believers.”[surah 2:97]

      Say, [O Muhammad], “The Pure Spirit has brought it down from your Lord in truth to make firm those who believe and as guidance and good tidings to the Muslims.”[surah 16:102]

      And indeed, the Qur’an is the revelation of the Lord of the worlds.
      The Trustworthy Spirit has brought it down [Surah 26:192-193]

      Paul also didn’t do a very good job in conveying the message,he left out the most important part from his letters.You guessed it,’the trinity’.Unless he didn’t believe in it himself *wink wink*

      Like

    • btw is there an option to edit or remove your own comment?

      Like

    • Bill W

      Thanks for your reply. You say that because Mohammad intially believed himself to be possessed means that he cannot be a Prophet however you still haven’t answered my question as to why this brief incident means that he is disqualified.

      Jacob wrestled with God and is still a Prophet, St Mary was afraid when Gabriel approached her initially and she accepted him only after he had told her who he was. Muhammad reacted not out of a deliberate rejection but instead out of fear. When it was made clear to him what had happened to him was from God, he immediately accepted it.

      Liked by 2 people

    • “We have no reason to believe that the being that mohammed encountered was not a demon. The only possible way that a supernatural being can be mistaken for a demon would be if it actually was a demon. No emissary of god could possible be the cause of such confusion.”

      maybe satan had the power to raise jesus up?

      quote:

      1) God could exist and God Himself raised Jesus from the dead as a test of the Jewish peoples’ fidelity and discipleship and later God “terminated” Jesus.

      2) God could exist and God’s agent, satan raised Jesus from the dead as a test of the Jewish peoples’ fidelity and discipleship.

      3) God could exist and Satan exists as depicted in Christian theology – God’s enemy. And, Satan raised Jesus from the dead as an act of rebellion to separate The Children of Israel from God.

      quote:

      Mark 13:22, Matthew 24:24, and 2 Thessalonians 2:9 say something very similar to Deuteronomy. Satan is powerful enough to produce all the counterfeit miracles Jesus would need to appear to complete his mission. Jesus wouldn’t even have to know it was Satan’s doing. So maybe we should treat Jesus with the same skepticism that Deuteronomy and other passages warn us about, lest we be deceived by a false messiah? Like
      maybe when Jesus predicts the end of the world, and it doesn’t happen, we don’t try to wiggle out of it with unlikely definitions of words and ignoring the supporting verses.

      quote:

      jesus: So jesus called them over to him and began to speak to them in parables: “How can Satan drive out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand.

      jesus does what satan does:
      49 “I came to bring fire to the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! 51 Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division! 52 From now on five in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three; 53 they will be divided:

      father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”

      jesus: And if Satan opposes himself and is divided, he cannot stand; his end has come.

      crucifixion of jesus: 33 When it was noon, darkness came over the whole land[h] until three in the
      afternoon. 34 At three o’clock Jesus cried out with a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”[i]35 When some of the bystanders heard it, they said, “Listen, he is calling for Elijah.” 36 And someone ran, filled a sponge with sour wine, put it on a stick, and gave it to him to drink, saying, “Wait, let us see whether Elijah will come to take him down.” 37 Then Jesus gave a loud cry and breathed his last.

      jesus: In fact, no one can enter a strong man’s house without first tying him up. Then he can plunder the strong man’s house. crucifixion: the romans tied up jesus to a cross. tie tʌɪ/ verb 1. attach or fasten with string or similar cord. “Gabriel tied up his horse” synonyms: bind, tie up, tether, hitch, strap, truss, fetter, rope, chain, make fast,moor, lash, attach, fasten, fix, secure, join, connect, link, couple “they tied Max to a chair” 2. restrict or limit (someone) to a particular situation or place.

      if you read hector avalos’ book “bad jesus” in it he says that the purpose clause in the division verb is something that jesus himself will do. a close parallel is in mt 5:17. both have purpose clauses

      verse* and don’t forget that according to christian theology death or satan = invisible spirit which defeated the invisible spirit of jesus (or where they really just playing exchange?), then the evil pnuema pops out and enters a pagan roman who says that jesus was “son of ….”

      if only someone reminded jesus of his “satan cast of satan” when he was drilled to the cross. don’t you think that would’ve pissed jesus off more?

      phone megas

      when mark USES “PHONE” he informs his readers about what was said in “phone”. example: jc cried OUT with a “PHONE MEGAS” , “my god, my god, why have u forsaken me” AND “there came a VOICE/”phone” out of the CLOUD …this is the son of me .. the beloved” . the interesting THING is that , on other occassions, he doesn’t have his items speak in a loud “phone”
      example:
      And when the unclean spirit [pneuma] had torn him, and cried out with a loud voice [phone-megas], he came out of him. (Mark 1:26)

      And cried with a loud voice [phone-megas] . . . and the unclean spirits [pneuma] went out . . . (Mark 5:7-13)

      NOTICE that the loud voice is not with words? the UNCLEAN ones just cry out with a LOUD VOICE/PHONE MEGAS . when jc DEPARTEd with a loud VOICE , he departed without WORDS. This is easy to understand. EARLIER in the account , mark qualified his “phone” WITH the WORDS ,”why have u forsaken me” ,but when his jc is ABOUT TO die he has him UTTER a loud cry/voice .MARK HAD NO REASON TO put words in jc’s mouth because when jc WAS @ deaths door, he had his “phone” qualified with LOUD WORDS in the 9th hour .

      when mark has spirits and jesus depart, he does not have them talking/speaking in a loud voice.
      This seems to be the case on how he has used “phone ” and “phone” qualified with “megas”

      lukes has jesus departing with LOUD words. marks use of “phone megas” doesn’t seem to support lukes version.

      end quote

      Like

    • “3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, ”

      4 that he was buried,

      that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

      5 and that he appeared to Cephas,[b] and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.”

      are the marian apparitions from god?

      quote:

      The Marian visions reported there have been better documented than any in history. Reports were audio-recorded and written down almost immediately after the first events. Audio-visual documentation overall is abundant.

      Like

    • quote:
      God’s visitation cannot be mistaken, and the visitation of his emissaries cannot be mistaken.

      did god make appearance in the form of mary?

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marian_apparition

      there are masses of people experiencing these visions

      pauls 500 are unknown

      paul does not tell us that he saw a flesh and bone jesus

      matthew tells us that “some doubted”

      how can you DOUBT when “god’s visitation cannot be mistaken”

      ?

      catholics justify their idolatry because they believe “god’s visitation cannot be mistaken…”

      they use the same excuses.

      Like

    • Intellect

      The attempt to tempt jesus in the desert merely emphasizes jesus’ absolute purity and sinlessness – qualities only possessed by divinity.

      Like

    • Abu

      Your point is post in the incoherence of its delivery. What exactly are you banging on about? The quran records no miracles of mohammed. For “miracles” you have to refer to historically dubious stories written long after he died.

      You still have the problem of mohammed thinking that one of god’s emissaries was demonic – that is not a feature of prophethood. Can you show me which biblical verse recounts angels or god’s visitations being mistaken for demons?

      Like

    • quote:
      The attempt to tempt jesus in the desert merely emphasizes jesus’ absolute purity and sinlessness – qualities only possessed by divinity.

      if jesus already had thoughts in his MIND then he already sinned in his heart

      that satan was TEMPTING jesus means jesus was temptable and satan had power to get into jesus’ mind.

      you don’t know anything about jesus’ “sinlessness”

      all you know is that he being fully human and fully god had thoughts of sexual acts all the time

      your “absolute purity” is bs because the text says jesus “was TEMPTED”

      so satan HAd power to tempt your god

      get into his mind

      and give him thoughts which would have already made jesus a SINNER

      Like

    • Satan I rebuke you, Jesus was sinless and he’s coming to judge the world. I beseech you to take Jesus as your Lord and Savior before it’s too late. Jesus is the only way to Salvation.

      Like

    • quote:
      The quran records no miracles of mohammed.

      john the baptist was the greatest man alive, yet he is reported to have done no miracles

      what kind of pathetic criterion do you have?

      majority of jesus’ “miracles” are unknown

      the biggest miracle , no christian is able to produce a flesh and bone jesus since his alleged resurrection

      paul had visions in which he does not even see a flesh and bone jesus

      Like

    • Hashim

      The Apostle Paul knew who had visited him because Jesus announced himself. Mohammed was left in the dark in terror for who knows how many days because whatever being had visited him seemed to be a demon. Throughout the bible, god’s and his angel’s visitations leave no doubt about who they are.

      As for Mohammed restoring the religion of jesus, why doesn’t the quran or any of the hadith mention that there was this all-powerful human being – named Paul – who had the ability to subvert God’s message? Where is Paul’s name mentioned in the quran and where does it say he subverted allah’s message?

      Like

    • heathcliff

      “if jesus already had thoughts in his MIND then he already sinned in his heart”

      So the quran is false? According to allah, jesus was sinless. Are you an atheist?

      Like


    • The Apostle Paul knew who had visited him because Jesus announced himself.”

      lol, even satan can announce himself

      what kind of pathetic criteria is this to prove the truth of something?

      notice that paul’ vision or apparition he doesn’t know

      quote:
      He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” 5“Who are you, lord?”

      who are you? shouldn’t he have known who it was ?

      this refutes your bs

      quote:

      The difference is that Paul knew that he had encountered god because when you encounter god, there is absolutely no way you can mistake that for anything else.

      end quote

      you don’t need to ask god who he is when you know that you encountered god.

      Like

    • “if jesus already had thoughts in his MIND then he already sinned in his heart”

      So the quran is false? According to allah, jesus was sinless. Are you an atheist?

      jesus was sinless?

      Job 25:4- How then can man be in the right before God? How can he who is born of woman be pure?

      quote:

      Galatians 4:4- But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law.

      how can jesus be pure?

      it doesn’t matter what i am, what matters is your christian evil and disgusting double standards needs to be exposed .

      Like

    • Patrice

      Where did I say mohammed can’t be a prophet because he thought he had encountered a demon? He was certainly a prophet, the question is, of what?

      Your points about biblical encounters only throws mohammed’s encounter into more doubt. Terror at encountering divinity is not a problem, but nowhere in the bible does it say that prophets or anyone else who had visitations thought they had seen demons. In every biblical case, the divine entity reveals itself. Not so with mohammed in the cave – a relative had to tell him.

      Nothing about mohammed’s encounter in the cave resembles biblical accounts.

      Like

    • quote:
      Terror at encountering divinity is not a problem, but nowhere in the bible does it say that prophets or anyone else who had visitations thought they had seen demons.

      what?

      what did mozer say?

      quote:

      first of all Joshua doubted the angel of the Lord to be an enemy fighter “Now when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went up to him and asked, “Are you for us or for our enemies?” “Neither,” he replied, “but as commander of the army of the LORD I have now come.” (Joshua 5:13-14)

      this murders your initial lie

      quote:
      The difference is that Paul knew that he had encountered god because when you encounter god, there is absolutely no way you can mistake that for anything else.

      so you must now add in DOUBT + FEAR

      Liked by 1 person

    • HAshim

      “Regarding jesus teaching ‘Islam’.No muslim will ever tell you jesus taught the 5 pillars of islam etc.Rather he taught Islam(submission to One God),that’s what a muslim means when he says jesus was a muslim(ie submitted his will to God).”

      That is a classic fallacy of equivocation. Even pagans sometimes submit to only one god o their pantheon, are they muslims too?

      Like

    • quote:
      Satan I rebuke you, Jesus was sinless and he’s coming to judge the world. I beseech you to take Jesus as your Lord and Savior before it’s too late. Jesus is the only way to Salvation.

      end quote

      satan defeated jesus and till this day christians die.

      what does that tell you? satan didn’t die but jesus did, so isn’t satan your lord ?

      Like

    • mr H

      It’s funny how you quote biblical passages that don’t support your wild claims. That quote clearly shows the lord announcing himself – whatever mohammed encountered did not act like any of the beings described in the bible who visited humans and he certainly did not announce himself.

      Like

    • quote:

      That quote clearly shows the lord announcing himself – whatever mohammed encountered did not act like any of the beings described in the bible who visited humans and he certainly did not announce himself.

      end quote

      when the jews encountered their god, they saw no FORM/image/picture

      jewish MASS revelation :

      quote:

      Deuteronomy 4 reminds us that we are to worship God only as He appeared to us at Sinai and that we are to never, ever, ever, ever associate Him with any physical form (by the way, I’m paraphrasing). Jesus did not appear to us at Sinai and he has a physical form; ergo, worship of him is forbidden.
      Deuteronomy 13 teaches us that if a prophet produces a miracle and then introduces a new type of worship, he is a false prophet. Jesus introduced a type of worship unknown to our fathers; ergo, his miracles are meaningless and he is a false prophet.

      end quote

      do you atleast admit then that Muhammad encountered a being who said do not make IMAGES of God or take flesh and bone as God?

      is Muhammad , according to the JEWISH view, in agreement with deut 13?

      Like

    • mr h

      You just quoted a biblical verse in which joshua very clearly saw a form and image of god. Don’t you read what you have written?

      Like

    • “That quote clearly shows the lord announcing himself ”

      why do you need to ask god “who are you…” when you know it is god?

      lol

      Like

    • “You just quoted a biblical verse in which joshua very clearly saw a form and image of god. Don’t you read what you have written?”

      yes, these are the contradictions in your “holy” bible, but the point about DEUT 4 still stands.

      where is the image , person, flesh , idol of god in deut 4?

      Like

    • hey bill, did satan get into the mind of jesus?

      i mean think about it, how else could he have tempted him if he didn’t get into the mind of jesus?

      Like

    • mr ha

      “is Muhammad , according to the JEWISH view, in agreement with deut 13?”

      That is something of a dumb question. First of all mohammed had no miracles, secondly, none of the 5 pillars of islam are biblical, except, perhaps concerning charity. Jews are not called to make a hajj and circle an, admittedly, pagan temple seen times.

      Do you seriously believe that jews and muslims have the same worship practices? All of these practices are unknown to jews and their ancestors.

      A plural monotheistic jewish god, on the other hand, has been established by several scholars as a common and accepted concept for the ancient Israelites all derived from explicit examples in the Old Testament. The jews of jesus’ time had no problem with a pluralistic god – strict monotheism came later after rabbinic judaism became the dominant sect.

      Sadly, the oral law of the rabbis is unbiblical.

      Like

    • “Sadly, the oral law of the rabbis is unbiblical.” Jesus disagrees. “Do as they say but not as they do…” he’s talking about the pharisees/ the rabbis…

      Like

    • mr h

      Where does it say that jesus was tempted to sin? That is a figment of your imagniation.

      Like

    • “A plural monotheistic jewish god, on the other hand, has been established by several scholars as a common and accepted concept for the ancient Israelites all derived from explicit examples in the Old Testament. The jews of jesus’ time had no problem with a pluralistic god – strict monotheism came later after rabbinic judaism became the dominant sect.”

      as for jewish practices

      can you show where does the torah say that the jews would one day eat and drink yhwh metaphorically?

      as for pl mono
      can you show where in deut 4 WHO was speaking from the fire ?

      how many ? 3 ?

      quote:

      You saw no form of any kind the day the Lord spoke to you at Horeb out of the fire. Therefore watch yourselves very carefully, 16 so that you do not become corrupt and make for yourselves an idol, an image of any shape, whether formed like a man or a woman, 17 or like any animal on earth or any bird that flies in the air, 18 or like any creature that moves along the ground or any fish in the waters below. 19 And when you look up to the sky and see the sun, the moon and the stars—all the heavenly array—do not be enticed into bowing down to them and worshiping things the Lord your God has apportioned to all the nations under heaven. 20 But as for you, the Lord took you and brought you out of the iron-smelting furnace, out of Egypt, to be the people of his inheritance, as you now are.

      Like

    • “Where does it say that jesus was tempted to sin? That is a figment of your imagniation.”

      are you dumb or something?
      if i tempt someone to fly , i would be a fool because humans can’t flap their arms and fly.

      if i tempt someone to walk across the road, i possibly could be successful

      when jesus was in the wilderness satan got into his mind and made jesus have all sorts of sinful thoughts which jesus could not avoid.

      this is not figment of imagination this is human nature and according to your beliefs god became “fully human”

      quote:
      12 At once the Spirit brought him into the desert, 13 where he was tempted by Satan for 40 days. He was there with the wild animals, and the angels took care of him.

      quote:
      12 And the Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. 13 He was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels waited on him.

      define tempt

      have an urge or inclination to do something.

      it is very possible jesus already had sinful thoughts

      remember, you believe he was “fully human”

      if satan was UNSUCCESSFUL every time he opened his mouth, then the whole story makes no sense.

      how can you TEMPT the untemptable?

      Like

    • mr h

      “can you show where does the torah say that the jews would one day eat and drink yhwh metaphorically?”

      Christians are called to drink wine and eat bread in remembrance of and thanks to our lord and saviour jesus in accordance with our belief that jesus was a new revelation. By definition, our practices will be different, although foundational belief in a plural god is as jewish as a menora.

      Islamic worship is completely alien – none of the practices of islam are found in the bible.

      Like

    • mr h

      “quote:
      12 At once the Spirit brought him into the desert, 13 where he was tempted by Satan for 40 days. He was there with the wild animals, and the angels took care of him.

      quote:
      12 And the Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. 13 He was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels waited on him.

      define tempt”

      You are silly.

      To prove your claim, you have to show where it says that jesus gave into temptation. Can you do that, or are you just a hate-filled, wannabe, internet jihadi?

      I don’t feel like explaining basic English grammar to you, suffice to say that you don’t understand basic English.

      I’ll put it this way. If I say “I tempted your sister to eat a bacon sandwich”, that also means that she “was tempted” by me, but does it mean that she felt or “was” tempted to actually eat it? Take some time with that – you of all people will need it.

      Like

    • quote:
      Christians are called to drink wine and eat bread in remembrance of and thanks to our lord and saviour jesus in accordance with our belief that jesus was a new revelation. By definition, our practices will be different, although foundational belief in a plural god is as jewish as a menora.

      what is the source for drinking and eating a god?
      where did it come from?
      which other religions were practising eating and drinking gods?
      how much do you know about roman and greek religions and how much commonality they have with your pagan religion?
      so you do a ritual practice of eating and drinking a god , so i guess you have thought of meat and blood, right?

      where did this practice really emerge from?

      Like

    • “To prove your claim, you have to show where it says that jesus gave into temptation. Can you do that, or are you just a hate-filled, wannabe, internet jihadi?”

      jesus tells his desiples to watch what comes out of their mouth, yet he calls a woman and her daughter dogs

      now jesus did not watch what came out of his mouth.


      I’ll put it this way. If I say “I tempted your sister to eat a bacon sandwich”, that also means that she “was tempted” by me, but does it mean that she felt or “was” tempted to actually eat it? Take some time with that – you of all people will need it”

      are you deliberately trying to be dumb or a you born dumb ?

      do you have sinful thoughts in your mind?
      do you have human nature?
      if satan was tempting jesus and jesus tells you one can sin in his heart, then jesus definately sinned in his heart.

      if your sister looked nice and i saw her and i had thoughts about her in my mind, did i sin even when i had the ONE thought?

      now do you see the point or are you dumb?

      satan got into the mind of jesus and jesus was probably having sinful human thoughts like lust etc etc

      that the story acknowledges that jesus was TEMPTABLE means that the WRITERS knew jesus could SIN

      Like

    • quote:
      God cannot be tempted by evil

      quote:
      12 And the Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. 13 He was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels waited on him.

      but here god was being tempted by EVIL

      this means that there is a possibility that the writer knew that jesus COULD sin

      lol

      jesus being 100 % human probably had gay or straight sexual thoughts all the time and he probably lusted , otherwise it makes no sense to say “god cannot be tempted by evil”

      when mark clearly says god was tempted by evil

      Like

    • quote:
      I don’t feel like explaining basic English grammar to you, suffice to say that you don’t understand basic English.

      I’ll put it this way. If I say “I tempted your sister to eat a bacon sandwich”, that also means that she “was tempted” by me, but does it mean that she felt or “was” tempted to actually eat it? Take some time with that – you of all people will need it.

      remind me where i said that temptation = you did sin x

      ??

      i gave you evidence that

      1. your god was fully human
      2. was tempted
      3. if satan gets into your mind then it is very POSSIBLE that jesus SINNED in his heart and mind

      james says god cannot be TEMPTED

      that mark says jesus was TEMPTED for 40 days means that he could possibly sin in his heart and his mind.

      what i think was that chronologically jesus had all those sins in his mind and his actions and then john the baptist dunked him to cleanse him from all his sins

      so i think the real story was the jesus was polluted with sin and then he got baptised by john

      this makes better sense to me.

      Like

    • white american terrorist pig wrote :

      Christians are called to drink wine and eat bread in remembrance of and thanks to our lord and saviour jesus in accordance with our belief that jesus was a new revelation.

      end quote

      when the jews were rescue by yhwh, what did the jews practice?

      your “new revelation” is very pagan and foreign and greek and roman.

      WHEN the jews were SAVED by yhwh, what did they PRACTICE?

      Like

    • Bill W

      Here is a quote from one of your earlier comments – “No emissary of god could possible be the cause of such confusion.” Just in case you may have forgotten. I would also refer you to what Mozer has said about Joshua mistaking an Angel for an enemy soldier:

      “Now when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went up to him and asked, “Are you for us or for our enemies?”

      “Neither,” he replied, “but as commander of the army of the Lord I have now come.” Then Joshua fell facedown to the ground in reverence, and asked him, “What message does my Lord have for his servant?” – Joshua 5:13-14

      The parallel between Joshua and Mohammad is almost identical. The reality is that this could not have been a demon because as you well know Jesus tells us:

      “If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.” – Mark 3:24

      Why would a demon herald a religion which teaches people that there is only one God and the purpose of life is to worship him alone, abandon idolatry and practice good morals. The same message as Jesus and Moses? I hope this demon got the sack for such incompetance 😉

      Liked by 2 people

    • Patrice you are a fair minded person . you see right through the double standards and hypocrisy.
      .

      Liked by 1 person

    • hey hill billy

      can you address this

      are you dumb or something?
      if i tempt someone to fly , i would be a fool because humans can’t flap their arms and fly.

      if i tempt someone to walk across the road, i possibly could be successful

      why would satan tempt jesus if satan knew he couldn’t be tempted to sin?

      Like

    • Bill W

      December 30, 2016 • 1:38 pm

      Intellect
      The attempt to tempt jesus in the desert merely emphasizes jesus’ absolute purity and sinlessness – qualities only possessed by divinity.

      I say;
      No one can tempt God or attempt to tempt God. Demon/Satan/devil knows God because God cursed him/Satan and sacked him from heaven.

      How can satan tempt God whom he knows has power over him? Satan is not fool to tempt God whom he knows has power over him. Satan only tempt human beings or beings that are not God. Satan can not tempt God or try to tempt God. It is a big sin punishable by fire to think Jesus a man who was tempted by satan is God.

      Satan/devil/demon knows God and cannot go near God and how can he tempt or try to tempt God? Only the figment of Christians imagination. It is too bad for Christians to keep worshiping a man, a creature Jesus Christ who was tempted by satan. Satan is not fool and will not waste his time trying to tempt God.

      Satan knows God and he cannot go near God so satan cannot tempt God. Anyone who satan tempted or tried to tempt is not God.

      Apostle Paul was terrified when a voice spoke to him in his vision. If our prophet is terrified when he saw the Angel in his raw form which any human will be made him according to you unacceptable and based on your criteria apostle Paul will be more unacceptable because the voice he heard in vision terrified him and he fell. It is only a bad demon that will terrify and cause apostle Paul to fall and apostle Paul asking who is he.

      Apostle Paul was later told it was Jesus. Mohammed was also later told it was angel Gabriel. They both initially did not know who visited them and both were terrified and both were later told what they saw.

      Instead of this cheap arguments, lets ascertain the truth based on what both men said that is compatible with Jesus. Paul of Tarsus sayings is incompatible with Jesus sayings while Prophet Mohammed sayings is compatible with Jesus sayings. Bill, you did tried to change to topic from theology to Israel politics when you were totally on the robes on the other thread. Typical of Christians.

      Thanks.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Patrice

      I don’t agree that Joshua was confounded like mohammed was confounded and he certainly did not believe that he had seen a demon. The two stories have no resemblance to each other whatsoever. Joshua is clear within moments that he is in the presence of god. Mohammed? Not so much. Mohammed thinking he had encountered a demon is without precedent.

      “Why would a demon herald a religion which teaches people that there is only one God and the purpose of life is to worship him alone, abandon idolatry and practice good morals. The same message as Jesus and Moses? I hope this demon got the sack for such incompetance”

      This is unconvincing. It was not unusual in the ancient world or cities and city states to worship only one god out of the pantheon of gods that were available. So in and of itself, calling mohammed to worship a solitary entity and abandon others results in a circumstance not too different from the norm for the ancient world.

      As I said to mr h, the form and manner of worship that mohammed introduced is unbiblical.

      Like

    • quote:
      13 Once when Joshua was by Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing before him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went to him and said to him, “Are you one of us, or one of our adversaries?” 14 He replied, “Neither; but as commander of the army of the Lord I have now come.” And Joshua fell on his face to the earth and worshiped, and he said to him, “What do you command your servant, my lord?”

      hey hill billy

      Daniel 8:16. And I heard the voice of a man in the midst of the Ulai, and he called and said, “Gabriel, enable this one to understand the vision.”

      Daniel 8:17. And he came beside the palace where I was standing, and when he came, I became frightened, AND I FELL UPON MY FACE. Then he said to me, “Understand, son of man, that the vision refers to the time of the end.”

      the only difference is they don’t go BLIND

      and it doesn’t seem none of them thought that the “commander of the army….”
      was god himself

      you created the bs lie “presence of the lord”
      didn’t you?

      your human mind is so much impregnated with worshipping an image/form/human that you thought josh thought

      since you worship forms and images

      you worship:

      man
      angels
      fire
      clouds
      unrecognised gardener
      gabriEL

      what kind of a polytheist are you ?

      Like

    • mr h

      Why the insults?

      Like

    • you think you are an english teacher mate.

      you also said
      quote:
      Can you do that, or are you just a hate-filled, wannabe, internet jihadi?

      hate filled? jihadi?

      Like

    • I am really willing to convert to Christianity, if my concerns can be addressed.

      Attributes Jesus Lacks

      God is not lacking anything. By definition, God cannot lack one single thing and still be God. Yet, the Scriptures reveal there are many things which Jesus lacks.

      Omniscience

      Trinitarians actually have the audacity to claim Jesus was omniscient despite the utterly plain facts the Bible tells us that he increased in wisdom and he himself declared only his Father knew the day and hour of his return. One must ask why they would appeal to such dishonest measures.

      And Jesus was increasing in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men. (Luke 2:52).

      But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only. (Matthew 24:36).

      Omnipotence

      Trinitarians actually have the audacity to claim Jesus was omnipotent despite the utterly plain fact the Bible tells us that he lives by the power of God and that only God possess immortality within himself and he needed God to save him from death. God the Father lives by the power of his own inherent immortality. However, Jesus lives by the power of his Father’s immortality.

      For indeed He was crucified because of weakness, yet He lives out of the power of God (2 Corinthians 13:4).

      I charge you in the sight of God who gives life to all, and of Christ Jesus, who testified the good confession before Pontius Pilate, that you keep the commandment spotless and irreproachable until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, which in his own time he will show the Blessed and only Sovereign Power, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see. To Him be honor and eternal might! Amen (1 Timothy 6:14-16).

      He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety. (Hebrews 5:7).

      His Existence is Dependent on the Father

      God is not a begotten being. The Son of God is a begotten being. It matters not how anyone defines the word “begotten.” The fact will still remain that Jesus is begotten and God the Father is not. God the Father is unbegotten. He is sourced in nobody else. His existence is dependent on no other identity. On the other hand, Jesus is begotten. He is sourced in the Father. His existence is dependent on the Father. God’s existence is dependent on no one.

      He was not the Creator

      The Bible never once indicates Jesus created the universe. It does however indicate he is the Word of God and that God created the universe by means of his Word. Every occurrence that mentions Jesus in conjunction with creation says that God created “through” or “by means of” his Word. God is the Creator by definition. Jesus was the Word of God, that is, the means by which God had created. If you are not the Creator you are not God.

      He has a Lord and God

      God does not have a Lord or God over him. By definition God cannot have any authority above him or he wouldn’t be God. The Scriptures plainly show that Jesus has a Lord and God and still has a Lord and God. God has no authority above him. He is the top authority and power of all that exists. This is not true of Jesus. The Son of God is subject to his Father and always will be. Jesus has a God, his Father.

      Liked by 1 person

    • The Bible declares the Word created all, the Word is Jesus Christ.

      Like

    • A I I’ll convert with you when we have good answers. We’ve been in the waiting 2000 years. Something tells me we still gonna wait

      Like

    • Bill W

      The reason why Joshua is ‘clear within moments’ is because the Angel tells him who he is, however when Gabriel first appears to Prophet Muhammad, no such announcement exists. The comparison Joshua and Muhammad is that when they knew who had appeared to them was they accepted what was revealed to them was from God, this is the most important point rather than the particulars of how long it took and what they thought beforehand is irrelevant. To put it simply is there any indication from Joshua, Jacob, and St Mary that they would have caught on by themselves? I doubt it.

      On to your second point, Prophet Muhammad did not worship one God over others but instead preached that there is only one God, there are no other gods. With regards to his message lacking originality, well that is kind of the point of what Islam teaches. The message of Muhammad is the same as the previous messengers. The extraordinary fact is that this came about in a culture where worshipping idols was the norm for centuries and within a short period of time was able to completely change not only that society but have that message spread all over the world. A merchant, illiterate was able to change the world. Hardly unusual.

      Finally what about Muhammads way of worship would you say is unbiblical as in opposed to biblical teaching?

      Like

    • Bill W

      You said;
      This is unconvincing. It was not unusual in the ancient world or cities and city states to worship only one god out of the pantheon of gods that were available. So in and of itself, calling mohammed to worship a solitary entity and abandon others results in a circumstance not too different from the norm for the ancient world.
      As I said to mr h, the form and manner of worship that mohammed introduced is unbiblical.

      I say;
      Prophet Mohammed God said He is the God of Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed, Moses and He is One, Only and Alone and Jesus said;

      “And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent,” (John 17:3).

      May be Mr. Bill W, you are new to this blog or you are refusing the truth because we have refuted fellows like yourself that, prophet Mohammed God is God of Abraham who is one and He is not the solitary entity and abandon to others as you ignorantly, deliberately and callously lied.

      The worship of the God of Abraham is updated under different prophets but the central core remains like worshiping one God of Abraham who is not plural and bowing down to Him and falling down on one’s face just like Jesus did and Muslims are now doing. Jesus never sang and danced in Churches like how Christians are doing. Singing and dancing to worship has its roots from idols and evil spirits who are invoked by sounds. example is this;

      Thanks.

      Like

    • Stop preaching.

      Like

  2. Great post.

    Christians today follow Paul as their Lord and Saviour. They have abandoned key teachings of Jesus who did not come to abolish the Old Testament Laws.

    I personally believe as many Muslims do, Paul infiltrated Jesus’s movement to destroy it from within. He openly admits to deception and lies in order to gain followers. Since he openly admits to this, why do Christians follow a man that orders lies and deception?:

    “Though I am free and belong to no one, I HAVE MADE MYSELF A SLAVE TO EVERYONE, TO WIN AS MANY AS POSSIBLE. 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 people so that by all possible means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.” – 1 Corinthians 9:19-23

    Since he lied and deceived others, how can you place your salvation on a man who never met Jesus and went against every commandment of the Old Testament? How can you trust a man who openly confesses that he deceived people in order to win them over to his camp? Since he deceived and lied to others, How sure are you that the Christianity you’re following from Paul is not based on lies and deception?

    Ab early Church father says that Paul lied on occasions:
    “Clement of Alexandria while praising the Christian who would not lie even in the face of torture or death MAKES AN EXCEPTIONFOR ‘THERAPEUTIC’ LIES, ALLUDING TO ST. PAUL’S DISSIMULATIONS IN ACTS 16:3 AND 1 CORINTHIANS 9:20 (Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, 7.9.53).” (Responding to Terrorism: Political Philosophical and Legal Perspectives By Robert Imre, Professor T. Brian Mooney, Benjamin Clarke page 76)

    Loyal D. Rue who is a Professor of religion and Philosophy at Luther college, he writes:
    “In the CHRISTIAN TRADITION THERE IS VERY EARLY PRECEDENT FOR THE USE OF DECEPTIVE MEANS FOR EVANGELISTIC PURPOSES. ST. PAUL HIMSELF MAKES A REMARKABLE ADMISSION OF HIS CHAMELEON-LIKE BEHAVIOUR IN THE WINNING CONVERTS. Like the consummate used-car salesman, Paul pretends to share the concerns of his immediate audience in order to manipulate them into submitting to his Gospel: “Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 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 people so that by all possible means I might save some.” [1] (By the Grace of Guile: The Role of Deception in Natural History and Human Affairs [Copyright 1994] by Loyal D. Rue page 243-244)

    More evidence in the following article (link):

    https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/11/28/1-corinthians-9-apostle-pauls-missionary-deception-taqiyya/

    Liked by 5 people

    • Paul did not use or approve of deception or lies. 1 Cor. 9:19-23 is just saying show respect for other people’s cultures and don’t throw your freedom in their faces. (for example, freedom to eat pork, or drink wine – don’t do that in front of others who are offended by those things.)

      When we go to a Muslim’s home or culture (or other eastern cultures), we take off our shoes at the door; don’t eat pork, don’t drink alcohol or serve pork or wine to people who have problems with these things.

      All Paul is saying is show respect to other people – Jews who are under the law, or others not under the law.

      There is NOTHING about approving of deception with people.

      Paul clearly teaches that deception is wrong:

      “but we have renounced the things hidden because of shame, not walking in craftiness or adulterating the word of God, but by the manifestation of truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.”
      2 Corinthians 4:2

      Like

    • Ken, quick question.

      Do you think those comments from Paul *could* be interpreted by certain Christians as a sanction to be less than 100% honest in evangelism? Do you think those comments could be the basis of the contextualisation movement ( in specifically thinking about the higher end of the spectrum of contextualisation methodology – the stuff you don’t agree with in that movement)?

      Like

  3. Great post. Did Paul lie? I will like to hear Ken and other christian comment on this?

    http://jesuswordsonly.com/books/427-did-paul-ever-deliberately-lie.html

    Liked by 1 person

    • Paul is not saying his letters or books (Scripture, teaching) are lies. He is saying all men, including him, are sinners and unrighteous – see verses 3, 4, and 5 – Romans 3:3, 4, and 5 tell us what he means in Romans 3:7.

      Paul’s “my lie” (Romans 3:7) means his sinfulness and unrighteousness before he became a Christian and was converted by God’s grace.

      verse 8 shows the accusation that many humans make (Jews, Muslims, and other humans, who mis-understand the point about the law and the gospel) – “why not do evil that good may come?” – “as some slanderously charge us with teaching. Many Muslims think this also – “you Christians get forgiveness/ salvation / justification – fire insurance from hell and live like the devil (go on sinning deliberately) Romans 6:1-7 proves this is not what Paul is teaching.

      “May it never be!!”

      Similar to the Muslim expression, “Estaqfr’allah !” (” I seek the forgiveness of God” – for such a thought)

      Like

    • @Ken: Well there are so many discrepancies in Paul’s teaching and so it is so difficult to take him on his claims

      * He uses guile and trickery to win coverts in how words

      * He has

      * He lies to Sanhedrin. You haven’t explained how you resolve this issue. tektonic folks seem to be struggling.

      *He tells two ( or may be three) conflicting story of his conversion.

      *He doesn’t to care to learn from or be among the real disciples who were still alive

      *In is writings there is hardly any teaching Of Jesus ( the teaching that Jesus preached while he was earth).

      *How did he get all the knowledge in one experience? Did he have some kind of “braindump” (this is a technical word in among techies) in one experience?

      *Why did he go away for 14 years to Arabia without taking any of real disciples of Jesus with him. Since Jesus had appointed Peter as next leader of his disciples, it is unbelievable that anyone can talk about his religion without seeking authority from Peter.

      *He teaches his own Gospel and says that even if angel of heaven preach a different gospel then that should be reject? Why would anyone reject a Gospel from Angel of Heaven for God’s sake and why would Paul take such a “preemptive” posture.

      *I teaches that Law is more more in effect , yet Jesus taught that is the only way to righteousness and salvation.

      *Lastly Jesus never said to his disciples about sending Paul on his behalf. Why wouldn’t he do that?

      The more one reads about Paul the more it becomes clear that he wasn’t an honest guy and there is absolutely no rational or scriptural reason to believe him. It was most likely a delusion that Paul experienced [that is if we can trust his words] and destroyed the religion of Jesus by guile and craftiness as he himself admitted.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Mozer

    I think that this idea that “Jews” hate Paul is a bit of an exaggeration that only stereotypes Jewish people – I’m surprised that any jewish person would accept a representation of jews that is one-dimensional given the dangerous rise in anti-semitism throughout Europe, across leftist US college campuses, and, of course, throughout the muslim world.

    This interesting article shows Jewish attitudes in Israel towards Christianity to be far more diverse than anti-Semites would have us believe…..

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2009/05/israel-survey-of-jewish-israelis-atittitudes-towards-christians.html

    Interestingly, attitudes towards Israeli Christians seem tied into ethnicity – many Israeli Christians are Arabs.

    Like

    • Bill W

      You have completely lost the theological debate and you are trying to inject politics into it. It is unfair as Christians used to do it hear to distract attention to the topic at hand. Muslims lived with Jews for centuries without hating them and Mozer and any Jew knows about this. We discussed this issue here thoroughly and you can scroll to the post and you will find countless of discussions about Jews, Muslims and Christians.

      For your information, blaming Israel policy is not equal to anti semitism as you want us to believe. There are Jews around the world including Israel that are very strong against Israel barbaric policy supported by evangelical Christians like you who believed you God said so. Do you call these practicing Jews who hate Israel policies as anti Jews? or anti semite? I do not think you will do that. So stop saying some Muslims who hate Israel policies are anti semites.

      In addition Muslims received Jews throughout history and Muslims chartered ships to go and bring persecuted Jews from the Christian world to Islamic majority countries. Christian USA refused Jewish ship entry into the USA and pathetically the ship was returned to Europe and the Jews were persecuted by Christians there and some of them ended up in holocaust.

      That is a pure hate of Jews and anti semitism and not the hate of Israel barbaric policies supported by evangelical Christians.

      Mozer is a zionist and he might not agree with some Israel policies. Do you call that anti Semitism?

      Thanks.

      Like

    • Intellect

      The theological debate is moot as far as Judaism is concerned. Without the temple and the holy of holies significant parts of the mosaic law cannot be followed. That isn’t Paul’s fault.

      Like

    • Bill W

      Some religious Jews believed God will restore their Temple for them and not by force and persecution of inhabitant Palestinians who had Jews, Muslims and Christians among them. Until the barbaric evangelical Christians and some wicked heartless zionist massacre of Palestinians, Palestine has its own Jews, Christians and Muslims living peacefully.

      Perhaps, God could have restored the Jewish Temple peacefully. Now, Israel cannot destroy the Mosque with all the wicked Christian support.

      Thanks.

      Like

    • What anti semitism anything to do with muslims and arabs? Arabs are semitic people. This shows your ignorant.

      And by the way the post is about IDOLATRY which was introduced by Saul aka Paul in the name of the religion *of* Jesus. The very thing God hates

      Liked by 3 people

    • Bill W

      When Israel was bombing Gaza and children in a UN compound, a lot of Jews in Israel came out to condemn that barbaric policy of Israel supported by evangelical Christians. Do you call the Israelis anti semite? or anti Jews? All over the world you will see Jews upon Jews demonstrating against these few hard core zionist supported by evangelical Christians like you. Do you call all these Jews anti Jews? or anti Semite. Gradually, God is exposing the lies of Christians who sow the seed of hatred to divide humanity and by so doing they think they can spread their religion. Christian religion is not doing well in the war thorn areas they conceived.

      Thanks.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Why would God punish the Jews for NOT KEEPING THE LAW, if he knew that it COULD NOT BE KEPT in the first place? Also, why did God order repeatedly to keep the law, if the whole point was to not keep it in the end? How can his laws be eternal, if they are meant to be ”nailed to the cross”? If the Torah and the Tanakh are PERFECT, why the Gospel and the update? If the whole point of the law is that it can not be kept and we need a divine sacrifice who is also the messiah, why did God not mention it even one in the OT? EVEN ONCE? If God is a Trinity, why not spit it out in the OT? Or even the NT? Why play ”Where is Wally Games”?

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Up until you came around, being a Jew meant to put faith in God alone, and follow His Commandments; circumcise your child, keep Sabbath, eat Kosher, keep Purity Laws etc.

    And keep the sacrificial laws of Leviticus and the temple. Why did God allow the Romans to destroy the temple in 70 AD? If the Pharisees and chief priests and high priests and elders of Israel were correct ( vs. Jesus and the Jewish disciples’, including Saul of Tarsus), then why did God, in His sovereignty, allow the Romans to destroy the temple and kill many Jews and scatter them all over the world? (70 AD and 135 AD, Bar Kochba rebellion, etc.) ??

    Then, you came around. You did away with the Law.

    Not true; Paul the apostle clearly taught the law is good and righteous and holy (Romans 7:12) and that the law is good if one uses it properly ( 1 Timothy 1:8-11) and the law, used properly, is “in accordance with the gospel”. The law was never meant to be a method of salvation or giving life; rather it serves as a school master to show us God’s standard of right and wrong, to give order to society; and to show us that we cannot keep it perfectly, which no one has been able to; except for Jesus, the Son of God.

    You told us it’s too hard to keep.

    That is true; it is impossible to be completely perfectly righteous.
    Jesus Al Masih, in Matthew 5:21-30 proves this, for everyone has had evil thoughts and motives – committed lust in his/ her heart and had sinful anger or hatred in their hearts. This is consistent with the OT teaching about the sinful heart – Genesis 6:5 and Jeremiah 17:9 and Jeremiah 13:23 and Jeremiah 18:12.

    Only the Messiah Jesus is perfect and you have to have His righteousness applied to your account, by faith alone in Him and His atoning death and resurrection, which proved everything He said and did was true and that He was the eternal Son, the eternal Word, who became human. (John 1:1-5; 1:14; Philippians 2:5-8)

    Romans 3:21-26

    Mark 10:45

    Mozer,
    Please interact with what Genesis 6:5; Jeremiah 17:9, 13:23; 18:12; Psalm 51:4-5; and 1 Kings 8:46 teaches about sin; and context of temple sacrifices (I Kings 8:62) teach.

    Like

    • I’m curious about something.Paul wrote so much stuff,why didn’t he write something about the trinity?it would’ve only used 1 or 2 lines on the page,all he had to do was write,’the father,son,holy spirit are 1 being in 3 persons,co-equal and co-eternal”.Not too hard is it?

      Like

    • quote:
      If the Pharisees and chief priests and high priests and elders of Israel were correct ( vs. Jesus and the Jewish disciples’, including Saul of Tarsus), then why did God, in His sovereignty, allow the Romans to destroy the temple and kill many Jews and scatter them all over the world? (70 AD and 135 AD, Bar Kochba rebellion, etc.) ??
      end quote

      what is the torahs reason for why the temple would be destroyed?

      what is the MAIN reason?

      Like

  6. Mozer talking to the apostle Paul:

    You took the tablets Moses brought down from heaven, you shattered them, . . .

    How can you say that when the apostle clearly said, “the law is good, holy, and righteous” (Romans 7:12) ?

    and “the law is good if one uses it properly” – I Timothy 1:8-11

    Like

  7. Paul wrote so much stuff,why didn’t he write something about the trinity?it would’ve only used 1 or 2 lines on the page,all he had to do was write,’the father,son,holy spirit are 1 being in 3 persons,co-equal and co-eternal”.Not too hard is it?

    The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.
    2 Corinthians 13:14

    grace of the Lord Jesus Christ = the Son
    the love of God = the Father
    the fellowship of the Holy Spirit = the Holy Spirit

    Jesus said,
    “. . . baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit” Matthew 28:19

    The doctrine of the Trinity is theologically derived from many verses that teach:
    1. God is One. There is only One God. (Mark 12:29)
    2. The Deity of Christ. (John 1:1-5; 1:14; Philippians 2:5-8; Hebrews 1:3, 6, 8, 10-12; Colossians 1:15-20)
    3. The Deity of the Holy Spirit. (Acts 5:3-5; John 14, 15, 16)
    4. the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit speak and relate to each other as persons.

    Everything does not have to be in one verse. You are demanding that; which is wrong.

    Like

  8. first of all Joshua doubted the angel of the Lord to be an enemy fighter “Now when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went up to him and asked, “Are you for us or for our enemies?” “Neither,” he replied, “but as commander of the army of the LORD I have now come.” (Joshua 5:13-14)
    Secondly, God has warned us about Paul you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul.It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him.” (Deuteronomy 13) To the best of my knowledge Muhammad didn’t tell Jews to abandon the Torah,
    Regarding the destruction of the temple and sin. Is it tempting to smoke? yes. is it hard not to? for millions of people. is it hard to stop? for some harder than others. is it impossibly hard? no, with will everyone can stop.
    is it tempting to violate the will of God. yes. is it hard to keep the commandments? sometimes. is it too hard to handle? never. We followed our temptations and we were punished. Just like Moses predicted would happen, and exactly what God warned us will happen. Our prophets rebuked us and we listened to them and sometimes ignored them.
    Paul took the lazy path. He’s like the parent who refuses to challenge hi child for smoking, so he says “smoking is inevitable. it’s probably not dangerous.”

    Liked by 2 people

    • Mozer

      Just out of curiosity considering you seem to know quite a bit regarding Christian beliefs and Islam as well. Knowing what most historians say about Jesus as well as Muslims (and some Christians, Unitarians for example)

      Would the Jewish position regarding Jesus be more accepting? Say as a Prophet and teacher of the Torah?

      Like

    • if he doesn’t go against the Torah we would have no problem with him… we have nothing against the name jesus…

      Liked by 2 people

    • Mozer,
      What does Genesis 6:5 teach?

      Like

    • It is much more and much deeper than just tempting ; it says that the heart of humans is totally evil all the time:

      “every intention of the thoughts of the imaginations of the heart of man is only evil continuously. ”
      Genesis 6:5
      וַיַּרְא יְהוָה כִּי רַבָּה רָעַת הָאָדָם בָּאָרֶץ וְכָל־יֵצֶר מַחְשְׁבֹת לִבֹּו רַק רַע כָּל־הַיֹּֽום׃

      “Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.”

      Like

    • and your point? that god is bi-polar and said what the heck let me just give them 1000 commandments….

      Liked by 3 people

    • //Mozer,
      What does Genesis 6:5 teach?//

      Old missionary proof-text.

      The text does not say human is inherently evil. Yetzer ra יֵצֶר רַע‎ in Gen 6:5 literally “an adverse inclination”. The yetzer ra is not solely associated to what one would “normally” consider as sin or evil. Anything that we do for ourselves (“self preservation,” as opposed to Godly call) is “driven” by this inclination. This includes “normal” activities such as working for a living, building a shelter, seeking a mate, procreation, etc. As well as there is an “adverse inclination” man also has a “favourable inclination”, the yetzer tov; יֵצֶר טוב.

      So it is wrong to believe that God actively makes evil, satan does.

      I have yet seen any jewish sources who understand this inclination as a state of being (that man is inherently evil and sinner), but they view them as one of two competing tendencies (good and bad). Judaism maintains that man has moral freedom. Thus both favourable and adverse inclinations are logically necessary if man is to have free will granted by God.

      So it remain so “There is no evidence from the Tanakh that humanity is innately sinner by nature.” Man has the ability to resist and master sin ( chatta’ah חַטָּאָה ⇒ Gen 4:7) Man is a free moral agent.

      Liked by 1 person

    • quote:

      It is much more and much deeper than just tempting ; it says that the heart of humans is totally evil all the time:

      “every intention of the thoughts of the imaginations of the heart of man is only evil continuously. ”
      Genesis 6:5
      וַיַּרְא יְהוָה כִּי רַבָּה רָעַת הָאָדָם בָּאָרֶץ וְכָל־יֵצֶר מַחְשְׁבֹת לִבֹּו רַק רַע כָּל־הַיֹּֽום׃

      “Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.”

      end quote

      but god said one can love him without jesus and one uses his heart
      you refer to a text in which people were going to be killed off.
      what has that god to do with moses who said one can use the heart to love god?

      Like

  9. Ken, quick question.

    Do you think those comments from Paul *could* be interpreted by certain Christians as a sanction to be less than 100% honest in evangelism? Do you think those comments could be the basis of the contextualisation movement ( in specifically thinking about the higher end of the spectrum of contextualisation methodology – the stuff you don’t agree with in that movement)?

    Yes, I disagree with them – I disagree with the higher levels of contextualization that we have discussed here before.

    Those are the verses (1 Cor. 9:19-23) used by the over-contextualization movement; but they are wrongly applied; and they (those Evangelical missionaries) don’t think they are being dishonest or deceptive.

    Muslims perceive their methods as deceptive, from their perspective, but those missionaries do not honestly see themselves as being deceptive. They avoid terms like the Trinity, the Son of God, the Father, totally with Muslims, because even when we explain them (as even here, even after I explain things over and over), we are still accused of tri-theism, paganism, idolatry, Shirk, abolishing the law completely, thinking God had sex with Mary, etc.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. explicit man eating

    quote:
    “Truly, truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh and drink the blood of the son of man, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and i will raise him up at the last day. 55For my flesh is real food, and my blood is real drink

    end quote

    WHEN THE JEWS WERE RESCUED BY EL , HOW DID THEY CELEBRATE or remember the saving ?

    now contrast to what jesus wants one to do in the gospel of john

    ones attention is clearly fixated on FINITE created FLESH AND BLOOD

    we see the eating of gods in pagan religions

    WHEN did judaism do such celebratory acts ?

    those christians who say “pagan practices”

    why don’t you look @ your own glass house?

    Like

  11. To those who regard Jesus as God and Paul as an Apostle of Truth,

    Pauline epistles are regarded as scriptures of God by the Christian world, which is why one finds them in the New Testament. Paul is always mentioned with the prefix ”Apostle” to designate and highlight his alleged inspiration by God and his ”Apostleship”, a form of prophethood. The OT, particularly the Torah, have certain criteria for establishing who is a False Prophet. Paul passes the criteria with flying colours. No individual in human history is so glaringly obviously Lucifer in human form as Paul.

    Before we get into that, let us analyse the following:

    The Torah has a fundamental principle, which is central to the entire Tanakh:

    “Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it.” [Deuteronomy 12:32]

    One must neither MODIFY nor ADD nor SUBTRACT to the TORAH/SCRIPTURES. One must do exactly as God ordered.

    Now bearing that in mind, let me elaborate further, with reference to Paul by quoting a modern day Gamliel:

    The Following is a quotation of the esteemed Rabbi, debunking several myths simultaneously.

    ”The term “original sin” is unknown to the Jewish Scriptures, and the Church’s teachings on this doctrine are antithetical to the core principles of the Torah and its prophets. Moreover, your comment that your Christian denomination teaches that water baptism is essential for the removal of sin may rattle the sensitivities of more Christians than anything I am going to say. Nevertheless, you have raised a number of important issues that must be addressed.

    Before answering your question, however, I will explain the Christian doctrine on original sin for those unfamiliar with this creed of the Church. According to Church teachings, as a result of the first sin committed by our first parents in the Garden of Eden, there were catastrophic spiritual consequences for the human race. Most importantly, Christendom holds that these devastating effects extend far beyond the curses of painful childbirth and laborious farming conditions outlined in the third chapter of Genesis.

    This well-known Church doctrine posits that when Adam and Eve rebelled against God and ate from the forbidden Tree of Knowledge, all of their descendants became infected with the stain of their transgression.

    Moreover, as a consequence of this first iniquity, man is hopelessly lost in a state of sin in which he has been held captive since this fall. As a result, he is powerless to follow the path of obedience and righteousness by his own free will.

    Rather, missionaries contend, because all are born with an innate and uncontrollable lust for sin, man can do nothing to merit his own salvation. In essence, man is totally depraved, and true free will is far beyond his grasp. “Totally depraved” may seem to be a harsh way for a Christian doctrine to depict mankind’s dire condition, yet this is precisely the term used by the Church to describe man’s desperate, sinful predicament. It is only through faith in Jesus, Christendom concludes, that hopeless man can be saved.

    You stated in your question that the doctrine of original sin teaches that “all human beings are born with an innate tendency to disobey God.” While this statement is superficially correct, it fails to convey the far-reaching scope of this Church doctrine. Although Christianity does teach that the entire human race is born with an evil inclination, this tenet encompasses a far more extreme position than the one that you briefly outlined.

    In fact, missionaries insist that as a result of the fall in the Garden of Eden, man’s unquenchable desire for sin is virtually ungovernable. In Christian terms, man is not inclined toward sin but more accurately is a slave to sin. As a result, the Church concludes, short of converting to Christianity, humanity can do nothing to save itself from hell.

    Bear in mind, there is good reason for the Church’s uncompromising stand on this cherished doctrine. The founders of Christianity understood that if man, through his devotion and obedience to God, can save himself from eternal damnation, the Church would very little to offer their parishioners. Moreover, if righteousness can be achieved through submission to the commandments outlined in the Torah, what possible benefit could Jesus’ death provide for mankind? Such selfprobing thoughts, however, were unimaginable to those who shaped Christian theology.

    Despite the zealous position missionaries take as they defend this creed, the Christian doctrine of original sin is profoundly hostile to the central teachings of the Jewish Scriptures. The Torah loudly condemns the alien teaching that man is unable to freely choose good over evil, life over death. This is not a hidden or ambiguous message in the Jewish Scriptures. On the contrary, it is proclaimed in Moses’ famed teachings to the children of Israel.

    In fact, in an extraordinary sermon delivered by Moses in the last days of his life, the prophet stands before the entire nation and condemns the notion that man’s condition is utterly hopeless. Throughout this uplifting exhortation, Moses declared that it is man alone who can and must merit his own salvation. Moreover, as he unhesitatingly speaks in the name of God, the lawgiver excoriates the notion that obedience to the Almighty is “too difficult or far off.” According, he declared to the children of Israel that righteousness has been placed within their reach. The thirtieth chapter of Deuteronomy discusses this matter extensively, and its verses read as though the Torah is bracing the Jewish people for the Christian doctrines that would confront them in the centuries to come. As the last Book of the Pentateuch draws to a close, Moses admonishes his young nation not to question their capacity to remain faithful to the mitzvoth of the Torah:

    …if you will hearken to the voice of the Lord your God, to keep His commandments and His statutes which are written in this Book of the Law; if you turn unto the Lord thy God with all your heart and with all your soul; for this commandment which I command you this day is not too hard for you neither is it too far off. It is not in heaven, that you should say, “Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us, and make us hear it, that we may do it?” Neither is it beyond the sea that you should say: “Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it that we may do it?” The word is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it.

    (Deuteronomy 30:10-14)
    The Jewish people have drawn great comfort and encouragement from this uplifting promise. For the Church, however, Moses’ unwavering message creates a theological disaster. How could the authors of the New Testament reasonably insist that man’s dire condition was hopeless if the Torah unambiguously declared that man possessed an extraordinary ability to remain faithful to God? How could the Church fathers possibly contend that the mitzvoth in the Torah couldn’t save the Jewish people when the Creator proclaimed otherwise? How could missionaries conceivably maintain that the commandments of the Torah are too difficult when the Torah declares that they are “not far off,” “not too hard,” and “you may do it”?

    This staggering problem did not escape the attention of Paul. Bear in mind, the author of Romans and Galatians constructed his most consequential doctrines on the premise that man is utterly depraved, and therefore incapable of saving himself through his own obedience to God. In chapter after chapter, he directs his largely gentile audiences toward the cross and away from Sinai, as he repeatedly insists that man is utterly lost without Jesus.

    Yet, how could Paul harmonize this wayward theology with the Jewish Scriptures in which his teachings were not only unknown, but thoroughly condemned? Even with the nimble skills that Paul possessed, welding together the Church’s young doctrine of original sin with diametrically opposed teachings of the Jewish Scriptures would not be a simple task.

    Employing unparalleled literary manipulation, however, Paul manages to conceal this vexing theological problem with a swipe of his well-worn eraser. In fact, Paul’s innovative approach to biblical tampering was so stunning that it would set the standard of scriptural revisionism for future New Testament authors.

    A classic example of this biblical revisionism can be found in Romans 10:8 where Paul proclaims that he is quoting directly from Scripture as he records the words of Deuteronomy 30:14. Yet as he approaches the last portion of this verse, he carefully stops short of the Torah’s vital conclusion and expunges the remaining segment of this crucial verse. In Romans Paul writes,

    But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith which we preach).

    (Romans 10:8)
    Predictably, the last words of Deuteronomy 30:14, “that you may do it,” were meticulously deleted by Paul. Bear in mind that he had good reason for removing this clause – the powerful message conveyed in these closing words rendered all that Paul was preaching as heresy.

    This startling misquote in the Book of Romans stands out as a remarkable illustration of Paul’s ability to shape Scriptures in order to create the illusion that his theological message conformed to the principles of the Torah. By removing the final segment of this verse, Paul succeeded in convincing his unlettered gentile readers that his Christian teachings were supported by the principles of the Hebrew Bible.

    Compare

    Deuteronomy 30:14

    But the word is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it.

    Romans 10:8

    But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith which we preach)

    The question that immediately comes to mind is: How can Paul deliberately remove a vital clause from Moses’ message and still expect to gain a following among the Jewish people? While considering this question, we can begin to understand why Paul attained great success among his gentile audiences and utterly failed among the Jews who were unimpressed with his contrived message.

    Although both Paul and Matthew quoted extensively from the Jewish Scriptures, it is for this reason that they achieved a dramatically different result. Paul was largely a minister to gentile audiences who were completely ignorant of the Jewish Scriptures (the only Bible in existence at the time). As a result, they did not possess the skills necessary to discern between genuine Judaism and Bible tampering. These illiterate masses were understandably vulnerable, and as a result, unflinchingly consumed everything that Paul wrote. In fact, throughout the New Testament it was exclusively the Jewish apostates to Christianity who challenged Paul’s authority, never the gentile community. Matthew, on the other hand, directed all of his evangelism and Bible quotes to Jewish audiences.

    Jewish people, however, were well aware that Matthew manipulated their Bible. As a result, the first Gospel completely failed to reach its intended Jewish readers. It required little more than a perfunctory reading of the first few chapters in the Book of Matthew for Jewish people to conclude that there was no prophecy in Isaiah that foretold a virgin birth. Likewise, the Jewish people were doubly unimpressed with Matthew’s claim that the messiah was to be a resident of Nazareth, when no such prophecy existed. The people of Israel grasped that Matthew willfully corrupted their sacred Scriptures. Consequently, the author of the first Gospel failed in his effort to convert his targeted Jewish audiences to Christianity.

    Ironically, therefore, no individual in history who was more responsible for the strong resistance of the Jewish people to the Christian message than the author of the Book of Matthew. In contrast, the person most responsible for the Church’s unparalleled success among the gentiles was unquestionably the apostle Paul. Not surprisingly, throughout the biblical narrative, gentiles were unable to discern between spiritual chaff and wheat, truth and heresy. Accordingly, the Jews were repeatedly warned never to emulate them. Tragically, some of our people missed this crucial message.

    Paul, however, should have been tipped off that his teachings on original sin were misguided, and his broad-brushed characterization of humanity was without merit. In fact, the Jewish Scriptures repeatedly praised numerous men of God for their unwavering righteousness.

    For example, the Bible declared that men like Calev1 and King Josiah2 were faithful throughout their extraordinary lives. Moreover, because of their devotion to their Creator, Abraham and Daniel were the objects of the Almighty’s warm affection as He tenderly referred to Abraham as “My friend,”3 and Daniel, “beloved.”4 These extraordinary men of God did not merit these remarkable superlatives because they believed in Jesus or depended on a blood atonement. Rather, Scripture testified to their faithfulness because of their devotion to God and unyielding obedience to His Torah.

    Job’s unique loyalty to God stands as a stunning enigma to Christian theology as well. Here was a man who was severely tested by Satan and endured unimaginable personal tragedies, yet despite these afflictions, Job remains the model of the righteous servant of God. While in Christian theology Job’s personal spiritual triumph is a theological impossibility, in Jewish terms it stands out as the embodiment of God’s salvation program for mankind. Job didn’t rely on Jesus to save him and he certainly did not turn to the cross for his redemption; rather, it was his obedience to God that made his life a paradigm for all humanity.

    Paul’s unfounded doctrine of original sin sullies the exemplary legacies of these and many other great men of God. Moreover, Christians must ponder whether it is an insult to the Creator to label all of God’s human creation depraved.

    Quite unwittingly, Luke committed a striking theological blunder that severely undermined Paul’s teachings on original sin. In the first chapter of The Book of Luke, the evangelist sought to portray Elizabeth, who is the cousin of Mary, and her husband Zechariah, as the virtuous parents of John the Baptist. Yet in his zeal to characterize the baptizer’s mother and father as saints, Luke writes,

    “Both of them

    [Zechariah and Elizabeth][/Zechariah] were upright in the sight of God, observing all the Lord’s commandments and regulations blamelessly.”

    (Luke 1:6)
    The question that comes to mind is how can missionaries possibly harmonize Paul’s claim that every person born into the world is a slave to sin, when Luke insists that Elizabeth and Zechariah were to be regarded as “blameless”? This is a stunning gaffe for Luke to make when it was he who eagerly promoted Paul in his Book of Acts. Luke’s assertion that this couple observed “all the Lord’s commandments” radically contradicts Paul’s central teaching that no one is capable of keeping the mitzvoth of the Torah. After all, according to Christian theology, Luke’s claim that Zachariah and Elizabeth were sinless, is untenable. There can be no doubt that in an effort to portray the parents of John the Baptist as saintly – in a similar manner that their cousin Mary was portrayed in the same Gospel – Luke abandoned Christian theology and forged his story to cast Zachariah and Elizabeth as sinless as well.

    Paul never lived to read the Book of Luke, yet throughout his epistles Paul sidesteps any statement in the Jewish Scriptures that could undermine his teaching on original sin. For example, immediately after the sin of Adam and Eve is narrated, the Torah declares that man can master his passionate lust for sin. God turns to Cain and warns him,

    If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? If, though, you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you shall master over it.

    (Genesis 4:6-7)
    For the architects of Christian theology, including Paul, Augustine, Luther, and Calvin, this declaration of man’s ability to restrain and govern his lust for sin is nothing short of heresy. Moreover, the fact that the Torah places the comforting promise immediately following the sin in the Garden of Eden is profoundly troubling for the Church. How5 can depraved humanity control its iniquity when the Book of Romans repeatedly insists that man can do nothing to release himself from sin’s powerful grip? Yet notice that there is nothing in the Eden narrative that could be construed as support for Paul’s teaching on humanity’s dire condition. On the contrary, in just these two inspiring verses, the Torah dispels forever the Church’s teachings on original sin.

    There is one final point to be addressed in a passing statement you raised in your question. I was somewhat puzzled by your comment that your brand of Christianity teaches that “water baptism is required for the removal of this sin.” It is not uncommon for Christians to relate some personal tidbit about their religious beliefs somewhere in the course of their question. What was so surprising about your comment, however, is that your Church has simply replaced one commandment with another. On the one hand, your Church teaches that the commandments explicitly ordained by the Torah are to be abandoned by believing Christians. Yet in the very same breath, your Church then introduces this brand new commandment declaring that its parishioners must undergo a water baptism to be saved. It would seem more logical that if you were going to observe commandments, you ought to consider devoting your loyalty to those mitzvoth ordained by God, rather than those introduced by your pastor and deacons.

    The notion that man is saved by emersion in water, or forgiven through human blood is unknown to the Jewish Scriptures. The Almighty does, however, clearly lay out His sovereign plan for His covenant people when he declares, “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil.” (Deuteronomy 30:15) What is this “life” and “good” of which the Torah speaks? Missionaries insist that the Jewish nation must convert to Christianity and believe in a crucified messiah in order to be saved. The Torah, however, disagrees. Throughout the Hebrew Bible the Almighty unambiguously declares that the children of Israel are to draw near to Him with intense love and faithfully keep His commandments. This is the desire of the Creator. Moses beseeches the children of Israel,

    I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commands, decrees, and laws; then you will live and increase, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.

    (Deuteronomy 30:16)
    Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, remained intensely loyal to God’s commandments and, as a result, the Torah regards our first patriarch as the paradigm of faithfulness.

    I will make your descendants multiply as the stars of heaven; I will give to your descendants all these lands, and in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.

    (Genesis 26:4-5)
    The Almighty did not give us desires that we cannot govern or commandments that we could not keep. The Torah was not delivered to angels or animals. It was given to the children of Israel long after our first ancestors transgressed in the Garden of Eden.

    Why would God command His people to observe a Torah that He knew we could not keep, promise us that we can full the mitzvos, and then punish us for not being obedient to commandments that we couldn’t keep in the first place? Would any loving parent raise his child that way? With warmth, the prophets of Israel beseech those who lost their way to turn back to the Merciful One.

    In Jewish terms, sin is not a person, it’s an event, and that event happened yesterday. Yesterday ended last night, and today is a new day.

    Best wishes for a happy Purim.

    Very sincerely yours,

    Rabbi Tovia Singer” End Quote

    Paul deliberately misquoted the scripture, in violation of the Torah, to spin an entirely contrary position to the Torah, thereby fully proving his false prophethood, even to those who are destined for hell. The source for the Rabbi’s article is here https://outreachjudaism.org/original-sin/

    There are many other proofs that Paul is Lucifer in the FLesh. But for now lets just use this to get started!

    HERE IS FULL PROOF. PAUL IS ABSOLUTELY IN HELL. RIGHT NOW. CHRISTIANS MUST JUMP THE SHIP, AND LISTEN TO THE TANAKH.

    Like

  12. A extensive study of the evidence proving Paul (Saul of Tarsus) to be a ravenous wolf and apostle of Satan.

    Like

  13. Brilliant piece of writing I have to say.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. KEN TEMPLE

    My God & Jesus’ God: The Inescapable Trinitarian Dilemma

    Jesus was a Jew born under the Law. As a Jew he was obligated to keep the Law. He was required to abide by the words, “YHWH our God, YHWH is one.” He was required to abide by the words said about YHWH his God, “there is no other but HE” just as Jesus and the Jewish scribe agreed at Mark 12:28-34. They agree the words, “the LORD is one” mean “there is no other but HE. While Trinitarians like to claim this single “HE” is the Triune God, it is impossible for this “HE” to be any other than the Father alone since Jesus is talking about HIS God, HIS Yahweh, and the God of the Jewish man Jesus was not a Trinity but his Father alone.

    Trinitarians insist that you worship a different God if you do not have a three-person-God as they do. Therefore, by their own admission, they have a different God than Jesus did and Jesus’ God was a different God than their God. Jesus’ God was not a Trinity, a Triune being, a three-person-God. His God was a one-person-being, his Father alone. Will Trinitarians then confess that their God is a different God than Jesus’ God?

    Oddly enough, they implicitly do confess their God is a different God than Jesus’ God. My God, for example, is exactly the same as Jesus’ God. His God was the Father alone and my God is the Father alone. But since my God is not their three person God, Trinitarians insist that necessarily means I have a different God than they do.

    But if I have a different God than Trinitarians do, then so did/does Jesus my Lord. My God is his Father alone and his God was, and is, his Father alone. They are identical.

    What then does this tell you about the men who desire to persecute those who do not serve their God but rather serve the exact same God as Jesus?

    Why would you want to have a different God than Jesus?

    I ascend to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.
    – Jesus my Lord

    Jesus has made us to be kings and priests to His God and Father.
    -John

    You turned to the God from idols to serve a Living and true God, and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, that is Jesus, who rescues us from the wrath to come.
    – Paul
    Jesus has made his disciples to be kings and priests to who? To his God and Father. That’s the God Jesus’ disciples serve, the Lord’s God, his Father alone, Jesus’ God and Father.

    Jesus served his Father alone as his only true God. He instructs his disciples that his God is their God. Yet Trinitarians claim that serving the Father alone is to have a “different God.” And indeed, they will even claim that to have a different God than the Trinity means you cannot be a Christian and you will not be saved.

    But Jesus had a different God than the Trinity. His God was not the Trinity but was the Father alone. Have Trinitarians then condemned Jesus for having a different God?

    Liked by 1 person

  15. @Ken: Well there are so many discrepancies in Paul’s teaching thats why it is so difficult to take him on his claims

    * He uses guile and trickery to win coverts in how words

    * He lies to Sanhedrin. You haven’t explained how you resolve this issue. tektonic folks seem to be struggling by inserting their own meaning to it.

    http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nelsons01.php

    *He tells two ( or may be three) conflicting story of his conversion.

    http://www.tektonics.org/lp/paulthree.php

    *He doesn’t to care to learn from or be among the real disciples who were still alive

    http://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/christianity/2004/04/christianity-without-paul.aspx

    *In is writings there is hardly any teaching Of Jesus ( the teaching that Jesus preached while he was earth).

    *How did he get all the knowledge in one experience? Did he have some kind of “braindump” (this is a technical word in among techies) in one experience?

    *Why did he go away for 14 years to Arabia without taking any of real disciples of Jesus with him. Since Jesus had appointed Peter as next leader of his disciples, it is unbelievable that anyone can talk about his religion without seeking authority from Peter.

    *He teaches his own Gospel and says that even if angel of heaven preach a different gospel then that should be reject? Why would anyone reject a Gospel from Angel of Heaven for God’s sake? and why would Paul take such a “preemptive” posture.

    *Paul teaches that Law is no more in effect , yet Jesus taught that is the only way to righteousness and salvation.

    *Lastly Jesus never said to his disciples about sending Paul on his behalf. Why wouldn’t he do that?

    The more one reads about Paul the more it becomes clear that he wasn’t an honest guy and there is absolutely no rational or scriptural reason to believe him. It was most likely a delusion that Paul experienced [that is if we can trust his words] and destroyed the religion of Jesus by guile and craftiness as he himself admitted.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: