Paul spins a tale to gullible gentiles so they will accept his gospel

14639833_1008388015937871_1912047279409883529_n

Advertisements


Categories: Bible, Christianity

11 replies

  1. Kind of reminds of me of the manipulation that Trumps’s spokespeople Sean Spicer and Conway do in creating alternative facts

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Many islamophobes are following his example,by doing the same thing to our scripture.

    Like

  3. Paul Williams here is more evidence, that you should highlight and bring to the table of Richard Zetter, to explain what is going on. His ”alternative facts” must be strongly rebuked for deception, as his clan accuses the Muslims of, on a regular basis.

    Paul Misinterpreting verses-A Singular Example Smashing All of Nabeel Quershi’s Lies.

    What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something of which to boast, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” [Romans 4:1-3]

    Just as Abraham “Believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” [Galatians 3:6]

    As seen above, Abraham’s supposed justification by faith is Paul’s killer argument for justification by faith apart from the works of the Law. Here is the referenced Old Testament verse:

    Then He brought him outside and said, “Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them.” And He said to him, “So shall your descendants be.” And he believed in the Lord, and he accounted it to him for righteousness. [Genesis 15:5-6]

    Notice the difference, in the Old Testament it says, “and he accounted it to him”, as opposed to Paul’s, “and it was accounted to him”. Paul’s quote rearranged the phrase and left out the pronoun “he”. You may be thinking, what’s the difference, aren’t they still saying the same thing? The difference is subtle, and yet has profound implications. To explain the difference, one has to ask the question, to whom is this pronoun “he” referring?

    In the Hebrew text there aren’t any indicators in the word itself as to whom the pronoun refers. In the Old Testament passage above there are seven pronouns and Abraham isn’t even named once, the only indication that the subject is Abraham is given in earlier verses. The Hebrew language, much like English, leaves it to the readers to figure out to whom the pronouns refer from the context in which they are used. The first key to understanding the identity of the person this pronoun refers to comes from the fact that the sentence this phrase is found in begins by changing the subject of the sentence from God to Abraham:

    …And He (God) said to him, “So shall your descendants be.” >> And he (Abraham) believed in the Lord…

    Obviously this passage is not suggesting that the Lord believed in Himself. Therefore, at this point the subject has changed and begins to refer to Abraham: “and he (Abraham) believed in the Lord”. Would it not be prudent to assume that the subject of the first clause of the sentence, Abraham, follows through as the subject of the second clause as well? This is logical, not only in Hebrew but also English language syntax.

    Therefore, the correct interpretation of Genesis 15:6 should be: “And he (Abraham) credited it to Him (God) for righteousness.” which means that Abraham praised God for His righteousness in giving him the promise. It simply cannot be interpreted as “and it was accounted to him (Abraham)”, which incorrectly implies that God credited Abraham with righteousness for believing (i.e. justification by faith which is the theology that Paul promotes).

    There are tons more!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  4. The last “he” of 15 v 6 and the “he” of 15 v 7 must be the same person. As the first “he” of 15 v 7 can only be Jehovah the last “he” of 15 v 6 is also Jehovah. This disproves your theory and proves to the contrary.

    Like

  5. Muslims calling others pagan?

    Priceless. 😂

    Like

  6. Yes, because Jews don’t commit ‘shirk’, polytheism.

    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: