Christianity is NOT Derived From Judaism

[The Gospel of Christ]

The Torah is the way (1 Kings 2:1-3), the truth (Psalm 119:142), and the life (Deuteronomy 32:46-47), and the way to know the Father (Exodus 33:13), and the Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact likeness of His character (Hebrews 1:3), which he embodied through his works by setting a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, so he is the way, the truth, and the life, and the way to know the Father (John 14:6-11). In 1 John 2:6, those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked, so only those who are following his example of embodying God's character traits by walking in obedience to the Torah are in Christ. In Psalm 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Torah, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith in Christ alone. The same God who gave the Torah to Moses also sent Jesus as the promised seed to bless us by turning us from our wickedness in disobedience to it, so there is no disagreement.

Do you believe in the existence of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who has the character traits that the Torah was given in order to teach us how to embody and in the existence of the Son, who has the same character traits? If so, then your goal should be to be more like God through embodying His character traits in obedience to the Torah.

No, no… lol.. You’re doing it again.. you're taking titles that belong to Christ the King, and routing them back through Torah.

Christ didn’t say, “I embody the way.” He said, “I AM the way.”

Christ didn’t say, “Torah is the truth and I represent it.” He said, “I AM the truth.”

Christ didn’t say, “Torah gives life and I demonstrate it.” He said, “I AM the life.”

You're still reading Christ through Moses instead of Moses through Christ. Every time the New Testament gives Christ the highest possible title, you immediately translate it back into “Torah obedience.” That 's exactly the inversion I just pointed out up above.

to your question..

Yes, I believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and in His Son. That's precisely why I refuse to reduce the Son to a walking Torah commentary and side note. The Son is greater than the servant, the substance greater than the shadow, and the covenant in Christ greater than the one that Hebrews calls obsolete.

 

[Soyeong]

No, no… lol.. You’re doing it again.. you're taking titles that belong to Christ the King, and routing them back through Torah.

Christ didn’t say, “I embody the way.” He said, “I AM the way.”

Christ didn’t say, “Torah is the truth and I represent it.” He said, “I AM the truth.”

Christ didn’t say, “Torah gives life and I demonstrate it.” He said, “I AM the life.”

You're still reading Christ through Moses instead of Moses through Christ. Every time the New Testament gives Christ the highest possible title, you immediately translate it back into “Torah obedience.” That 's exactly the inversion I just pointed out.

The Torah is God's Word and Jesus is God's Word made flesh, so everything that is true about the Torah is also true about Jesus insofar as he is the embodiment of it. Jesus saying that he the way, the truth, and the life, and the way to know the Father is in accordance with following his example of embody God's Word, not in contrast with it. In John 14:6-11, Jesus said that if we don't believe him, then believe his works, so again, he was speaking in accordance with his example, not in contrast with it. In Luke 10:25-28, Jesus affirmed that the way to inherit eternal life is by obeying the greatest two commandments of the Torah, so Jesus saying that he is the life is not denying this, but is in accordance with following his example of embodying them. It is the same God who gave the Law to Moses who sent Jesus, so you are trying to create a contrast where there is none.

to your question..

Yes, I believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and in His Son. That's precisely why I refuse to reduce the Son to a walking Torah commentary and side note. The Son is greater than the servant, the substance greater than the shadow, and the covenant in Christ greater than the one that Hebrews calls obsolete.

Everything in the Torah foreshadows Christ insofar as he the embodiment of it, which does not reduce him in any way.

God's character traits are eternal, so everything that God's covenants teach us about how to know Him through embodying His character traits is eternally and cumulatively valid. For example, God's righteousness is eternal (Psalm 119:142), therefore all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalm 119:160). New covenants do not nullify the promises of covenants that have already been ratified, so God's covenants are eternal and cumulatively valid. The Mosaic Covenant is eternal (Exodus 31:16, Leviticus 24:8), so the only way that it can be made obsolete by the New Covenant is if it is cumulative with it. One thing can only make another thing obsolete to the extent that it has cumulative functionality, so a computer makes a typewriter obsolete but does not make a plow obsolete, which means that if the New Covenant were not cumulative with the Mosaic Covenant, then it could not make it obsolete. So the New Covenant still involves following the Torah (Hebrews 8:10) plus it is cumulatively based on better promises and has a superior mediator (Hebrews 8:6). It is not the case that the New Covenant is made with a different god with a different set of character traits and a different set of laws for how to embody those traits, but rather it is made with the same God with the same character traits and therefore the same eternal and cumulatively valid instructions for how to know Him through embodying His character traits.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

The Torah is God's Word and Jesus is God's Word made flesh, so everything that is true about the Torah is also true about Jesus insofar as he is the embodiment of it. Jesus saying that he the way, the truth, and the life, and the way to know the Father is in accordance with following his example of embody God's Word, not in contrast with it. In John 14:6-11, Jesus said that if we don't believe him, then believe his works, so again, he was speaking in accordance with his example, not in contrast with it. In Luke 10:25-28, Jesus affirmed that the way to inherit eternal life is by obeying the greatest two commandments of the Torah, so Jesus saying that he is the life is not denying this, but is in accordance with following his example of embodying them. It is the same God who gave the Law to Moses who sent Jesus, so you are trying to create a contrast where there is none.


Everything in the Torah foreshadows Christ insofar as he the embodiment of it, which does not reduce him in any way.

God's character traits are eternal, so everything that God's covenants teach us about how to know Him through embodying His character traits is eternally and cumulatively valid. For example, God's righteousness is eternal (Psalm 119:142), therefore all of God's righteous laws are eternal (Psalm 119:160). New covenants do not nullify the promises of covenants that have already been ratified, so God's covenants are eternal and cumulatively valid. The Mosaic Covenant is eternal (Exodus 31:16, Leviticus 24:8), so the only way that it can be made obsolete by the New Covenant is if it is cumulative with it. One thing can only make another thing obsolete to the extent that it has cumulative functionality, so a computer makes a typewriter obsolete but does not make a plow obsolete, which means that if the New Covenant were not cumulative with the Mosaic Covenant, then it could not make it obsolete. So the New Covenant still involves following the Torah (Hebrews 8:10) plus it is cumulatively based on better promises and has a superior mediator (Hebrews 8:6). It is not the case that the New Covenant is made with a different god with a different set of character traits and a different set of laws for how to embody those traits, but rather it is made with the same God with the same character traits and therefore the same eternal and cumulatively valid instructions for how to know Him through embodying His character traits.

You just proved my point again.

I said every time Scripture gives Christ the highest title, you route it back through Torah.

Your response was literally:

“Everything that is true about the Torah is also true about Jesus.”

That's the inversion.

John doesn't say “the Torah became flesh.” He says “the Word became flesh” and identifies Him as the Son - John 1:1, 14, 18.

And Hebrews never says the Mosaic covenant became “cumulatively obsolete.” That came from your typewriter analogy, not the text.
Hebrews simply says the first covenant is obsolete - Hebrews 8:13.

obsolete
/ˈɒbsəliːt/

adj. — superseded, retired, covenantally decommissioned, stripped of governing authority, and relegated to the archives by the arrival of that which fulfills and surpasses it; no longer the operative order, no longer the controlling covenant.

Or, if you’d like to go hardcore Gothic... placed behind ecclesiastical glass, and forbidden from climbing back onto the throne now occupied by the Son.

You keep saying "Christ is greater", then immediately define Christ through Moses again.

Moses was the servant.

Christ is the Son over the house - Hebrews 3:5–6

The servant does not define the Son.

 

[Soyeong]

You just proved my point again.

I said every time Scripture gives Christ the highest title, you route it back through Torah.

Your response was literally:

“Everything that is true about the Torah is also true about Jesus.”

That's the inversion.

John doesn't say “the Torah became flesh.” He says “the Word became flesh” and identifies Him as the Son - John 1:1, 14, 18.

And Hebrews never says the Mosaic covenant became “cumulatively obsolete.” That came from your typewriter analogy, not the text.
Hebrews simply says the first covenant is obsolete - Hebrews 8:13.

obsolete
/ˈɒbsəliːt/

adj. — superseded, retired, covenantally decommissioned, stripped of governing authority, and relegated to the archives by the arrival of that which fulfills and surpasses it; no longer the operative order, no longer the controlling covenant.

Or, if you’d like to go hardcore Gothic... placed behind ecclesiastical glass, and forbidden from climbing back onto the throne now occupied by the Son.

Now where were we...

You keep saying "Christ is greater", then immediately define Christ through Moses again.

Moses was the servant.

Christ is the Son over the house - Hebrews 3:5–6

The servant does not define the Son.

God's Word is in complete accordance with God's Word made flesh, so there is no competition for the highest title or a subordinate status. In Deuteronomy 5:31-33 Moses wrote down everything that God spoke to Him without departing from it, so the Torah is the Word of God, which means that your point that it says the Word was made flesh rather than the Torah was made flesh is irrelevant. That is not an inversion. Jesus set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, so he embodied the Torah and is the Torah made flesh.

I didn't say that the text says that the Mosaic Covenant became cumulatively obsolete, but rather I spoke in regard to what it means to make something obsolete. If there were any extent to which a typewriter had a function that a computer didn't have, then the computer would not make it obsolete to that extent. In Hebrews 8:10, the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts, so there is no justification for interpreting Hebrews 8:13 in a way that contradicts 8:10.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

You’ve simply repeated the exact inversion I just identified again, so there’s nothing further for me to untangle tonight.. John 1:14 does not say “the Torah became flesh.” It says “the Word became flesh.” You keep collapsing those categories because your system requires it.

I have no more time this evening to entertain antichristic theology.

 

[Soyeong]

You’ve simply repeated the exact inversion I just identified again, so there’s nothing further for me to untangle tonight.. John 1:14 does not say “the Torah became flesh.” It says “the Word became flesh.” You keep collapsing those categories because your system requires it.

I have no more time this evening to entertain antichristic theology.

There is no invasion. The Torah is the Word of God, so you don't have any grounds for interpreting the Word became flesh as referring to the Torah and it is plainly evident that he is the embodiment of the Torah by setting a sinless example of how to walk in obedience to it. It what it means, not something that my system needs to collapse. Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Torah by word and by example, so he he the man of lawfulness, which is in contrast with the antichrist, who is the man of lawlessness (2 Thessalonians 2:3, so it is the opposition to following the Torah that is supporting antichristic theology. Have a good evening.

 

[Jack]

NOBODY here obeys Torah but some love to preach it!

 

[Lambano]

Marcion lives!

 

[Jack]

There is no invasion. The Torah is the Word of God, so you don't have any grounds for interpreting the Word became flesh as referring to the Torah and it is plainly evident that he is the embodiment of the Torah by setting a sinless example of how to walk in obedience to it. It what it means, not something that my system needs to collapse. Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Torah by word and by example, so he he the man of lawfulness, which is in contrast with the antichrist, who is the man of lawlessness (2 Thessalonians 2:3, so it is the opposition to following the Torah that is supporting antichristic theology. Have a good evening.

Do you obey Torah? Do you execute sinners as Torah COMMANDS? Or do you just pick the parts you like?

 

[Wick Stick]

Marcion lives!

Not quite to that level. The OP has identified the false-Judaism that has existed alongside the true practice of the faithful since forever. It's a legitimate problem.

He seems to be having a baby-and-bathwater problem solving it.

 

[Lizbeth]

Judaism as a religion Apostle Paul called "the Jew's religion". It is not... the basis of Christianity.

Judaism is the religion that came into existence in the era of the Jew's captivity to Babylon. That is where the original paleo-Hebrew characters of the Hebrew alphabet became corrupted into block letters of today. It is when the Jews started using Aramaic as their main language instead of Hebrew (except in some religious functions). It is where the Jew's Babylonian Talmud sage text was compiled, which they follow as their Judaism tradition, yet Lord Jesus rebuked.

Matt 15:1-3
15 Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,
2 "Why do Thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread."
3 But He answered and said unto them, "Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?"
KJV

The Jews pretended to follow God's law, and they were adamant in trying to enforce God's law upon others, but they themselves did not follow it. They followed the traditions of their Babylonian Talmud sage philosophical writings instead, even as it is to this day.

Jesus also said this about them...

Matt 15:7-9
7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
8 "This people draweth nigh unto Me with their mouth, and honoureth Me with their lips; but their heart is far from Me."
9 But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
KJV

Lord Jesus also said about them...

Matt 23:1-7
23 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to His disciples,
2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
5 But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
6 And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
KJV

Christianity did NOT... come from that! And that is what the religion of Judaism is and was about even at the time of Jesus' 1st coming to die on the cross. The enemy ("tares") had crept in before and during their Babylon captivity, and distorted the true old covenant worship of God. Christianity instead is based on the Old Testament prophets and witness of Christ's Apostles and the witness by Lord Jesus Himself before and after He was crucified, having appeared to His disciples after His resurrection and chose Apostle Paul to preach The Gospel to the Gentiles, and to kings, and to the children of Israel, and gave us His Book of Revelation through His servant John.

Except that the bible does say, and we can see it also, that salvation is of the Jews. But it is from true biblical Judaism, not that evil concoction called the Talmud.

 

[Lizbeth]

Some treat Christianity as if Jesus had come to start a separate religion, but he came as the Jewish Messiah of Judaism in fulfillment of Jewish prophecy and he set a perfect example for us to follow of how to practice Judaism by walking in sinless obedience to the Torah. In Acts 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to faith in Jesus who were all zealous for the Torah, which is in accordance with Titus 2:14, where Jesus gave himself to redeem us form all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so Jews coming to faith in Jesus were not ceasing to practice Judaism but were becoming zealous for it. This means that there was a period of time between the resurrection of Jesus and the incision of Gentiles in Acts 10 that is estimated to be around 7-15 years during which all Christians were Torah observant Jews and that Christianity at its origin was the sect of Judaism that recognized Jesus as the Messiah. In Acts 24:14, Paul testified that according to The Way, which they call a sect, he continued to worship the God of their fathers, believing everything laid down by the Torah and written in the Prophets, and the religion of which The Way is a sect is Judaism. While Jesus criticized some Pharisees with the heart behind some of the traditions they were following, that does not mean that he taught separate religion.

Paul said to the Judaizers why do you try and place a burden on the Gentiles that neither we nor our fathers could bear? The early Gentile believers were not Torah observant. And the bible says those ordinances were nailed to the cross with Jesus. Not the moral/ethical principles, but Jewish ordinances pertaining to feast days and temple worship.

 

[amigo de christo]

Marcion lives!

What on earth or who on earth is marcion .

 

[amigo de christo]

Except that the bible does say and, we can see it also, that salvation is of the Jews. But it is from true biblical Judaism, not that evil concoction called the Talmud.

and what do you think that means sister . that salvation is of the jews . starts with a J .
That is the lineage according to the f lesh that he came of dear sister .
And as we know the prophets , ev en abraham , even torah POINTS TO HIM .
Any prophet , any torah that dont do so , WELL IT AINT A TRUE PROPHET nor IS IT OF T ORAH .
probably that wicked talmud that so many christains even think to be a book of GOD . ONLY IT AINT .
the kabala is bad news . the jews simply ADDED books , JUST like many christains have done so .
AND THEM BOOKS were of MEN , NOT GOD . they contradict what is in the Actual b ook known as THE BIBLE .

 

[lforrest]

Abraham met Jesus.
Their sacrifices pointed to Jesus.
The furnishings of the temple pointed to Jesus.
Two of their leaders mirrored aspects of Christ.
Their struggles as a people mirrored the struggles of Christians.

Disregarding Chronological order wouldn't that make Judaism as it was, a Christian religion? The present day rejection of Jesus has left it empty, so it can't be considered as it was in the time of ignorance.

 

[Davy]

Except that the bible does say, and we can see it also, that salvation is of the Jews. But it is from true biblical Judaism, not that evil concoction called the Talmud.

The title of 'Jew' didn't even come into usage until the return of a remnant of the "house of Judah" from the Babylon captivity, this per the Jewish historian Josephus who lived around 100 A.D.


Per Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews, Book XI, Chapter 5, Section 7:

So the Jews prepared for the work: that is the name they are called by from the day that they came up from Babylon, which is taken from the tribe of Judah, which came first to these places, and thence both they and the country gained that appellation.​

That was after the small remnant of the "house of Judah" returned from their 70 years Babylon captivity per Ezra and Nehemiah. The prophet Nehemiah was who said the above quote to the Jews in Babylon pleading for them to return to Jerusalem. I assume you are aware of God having split old Israel into two separate kingdoms before the Jews went captive to Babylon, right?

The Jews were called the "house of Judah" at that split, and was made up of only the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi (See 1 Kings 11 through 2 Kings 17, and 2 Chronicles 11). Like Josephus said, that title 'Jew' was derived from the sole tribe of Judah. And a foreigner living in Judea was known as a 'Judean'. None of the northern ten tribes of Israel were known as Jews.

And once God had scattered the northern ten tribe "house of Israel" by the kings of Assyria about 120 years prior to the Jew's Babylon captivity, the Jews of the southern "house of Judah" were the only Israelites left in the holy land. So they naturally became the only ones known as Israel by the nations. Yet Josephus said in his day that the ten scattered tribes of Israel were still beyond Euphrates, and were a great number of people, too many to be counted.

So the Jews back then knew the ten tribes still existed, but were scattered out of the holy land to among the Gentiles. Today, quite a few orthodox Jews following Judaism claim that the ten lost tribes of Israel no longer exist. God's Word about their future gathering shows they do still exist, but living as Gentiles among Gentiles, thinking they are Gentiles. Thus the Jews like to claim they only represent God's Israel, which they actually only represent a small portion of the children of Israel. The majority of the children of Israel existed with the northern ten tribes, and still do.

This leads to the question of just what ideas made the Jews of the southern kingdom "house of Judah" fall away from God in Jeremiah's day for God to bring Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, upon them, and take them captive to Babylon? God's Word says they fell into the same abominations that God had first scattered the ten northern tribes for. But really the Jews were worse, for they even sacrificed their children in the fire unto Molech worship (see Jeremiah 32). Thus the corruption among the Jews happened before God actually sent the king of Babylon upon them. The creeping in among the Jews of God's enemies happened way before that even, back to the time of Judges. That is how Judaism's commandments of men got started, through oral tradition first seeded by the crept in unawares of Jude 4.

 

[Soyeong]

Paul said to the Judaizers why do you try and place a burden on the Gentiles that neither we nor our fathers could bear? The early Gentile believers were not Torah observant.

In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Torah was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel of the Kingdom/Grace, which means that the early Gentile believers who believed the Gospel were Torah observant. Jesus also set a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Torah and as his followers we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:6), so Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers how to practice Judaism by word and by example and there would be no sense in early Gentile followers of Christ wanting nothing to do with following the religion that Jesus taught to follow. Paul's problem with the Judaizers was not that they were teaching Gentiles how to follow Christ but that they were wanting to require Gentiles to become circumcised in order to become saved.

In Romans 10:5-10, Paul referred to Deuteronomy 30 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard to the righteousness that is by faith proclaiming that the Torah is not too difficult for us to obey and that obedience to it brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! So if Acts 15:10 had been referring to the Torah instead of salvation by circumcision, then they would have been denying what Paul said is the word of faith that we proclaim, they would have been in direct disagreement with God's Word, and they would have been ruling that Gentiles should choose death and a curse instead of life and a blessing. Likewise, the Psalms express an extremely positive view of obeying the Torah, such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved it and delighted in obeying it, so if we consider the Psalms to be Scripture and to therefore express a correct view of obeying the Torah, then we will also delight in getting to obey it as Paul did (Romans 7:22), which is compatible with viewing it as being a heavy burden that no one can bear.

And the bible says those ordinances were nailed to the cross with Jesus.

There is a difference between these two statements

1.) You shall not commit murder.
2.) This person has been found guilty of committing murder.

The first is an example of a law that is for our own good while the second is an example of a handwritten ordinance that was nailed to someone's cross in order to announce the charge that was against them. In Matthew 27:37, they nailed a handwritten ordinance to Christ's cross that announced the charge that was against him, which fits perfectly with the concept of a handwritten ordinance that listed the charges that were against us being nailed to Christ's cross and with him dying in our place to pay the penalty for our sins, but has nothing to do with nailing any laws to the cross.

The reason why Jesus went to the cross was not in order to free us to become workers of lawlessness but just the opposite. In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to believe in the Gospel that Jesus spent his ministry teaching and accomplished through the cross is by repenting and becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Torah (Acts 21:20) while the way to reject everything that he accomplished would be by returning to the lawlessness that he gave himself to redeem us from.

Not the moral/ethical principles, but Jewish ordinances pertaining to feast days and temple worship.

Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to embody God's character traits, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws. Legislators give laws in accordance with their understanding of what ought to be done, so to claim that some of God's laws are not moral laws is to claim that God made a moral error about what ought to be done when He gave those laws and is therefore to claim to have greater moral knowledge than God. In 1 Corinthians 5:6-8, Paul spoke in regard to how Passover foreshadowed Christ by drawing the connection of him being our Passover lamb, however, instead of concluding that we no longer need to celebrate Passover, he concluded by saying that we should therefore continue to celebrate it. The only way that we should cease to celebrate Passover or any of the other laws in the Torah for that matter would be if what they teach us about God's eternal nature would to cease to be true.

 

[Lambano]

What on earth or who on earth is marcion .

Marcion of Sinope. Dude back in the second century who sought to disassociate Christianity from everything Jewish and anything having to do with Judaism. He taught that the god of the Old Testament who created the world was not God the Father of Jesus Christ but instead was something called a "demiurge".

The premise of Marcionism is that the ministry of Jesus is incompatible with the actions of God in the Old Testament. Focusing on the Pauline traditions, Marcion felt that all other conceptions of the Gospel, and especially any association with Israelite religion, was opposed to, and a backsliding from, the truth.​

I see this same attitude here, this same desire to disassociate Christianity from its historical roots in Judaism. Perhaps even denying that Christianity chose to appropriate the Hebrew scriptures from which Jesus and Paul taught as part of our own heritage (Marcion's canon did not include any of the Old Testament), and denying that we worship the God described therein.

 

[amigo de christo]

Marcion of Sinope. Dude back in the second century who sought to disassociate Christianity from everything Jewish and anything having to do with Judaism. He taught that the god of the Old Testament who created the world was not God the Father of Jesus Christ but instead was something called a "demiurge".

The premise of Marcionism is that the ministry of Jesus is incompatible with the actions of God in the Old Testament. Focusing on the Pauline traditions, Marcion felt that all other conceptions of the Gospel, and especially any association with Israelite religion, was opposed to, and a backsliding from, the truth.​

I see this same attitude here, this same desire to disassociate Christianity from its historical roots in Judaism. Perhaps even denying that Christianity chose to appropriate the Hebrew scriptures that Jesus and Paul taught from as part of our own heritage (Marcion's canon did not include any of the Old Testament), and denying that we worship the God described therein.

that be a problem indeed my friend .
However let us realize one thing , paul himself NEVER once taught or beleived this pauline stuff .
Here is T RUTH .
The GOD of the old testament IS THE SAME GOD of the new one .
Even peter , even paul when writing to the churches
made mention of the HOLY SCRIPS . What many now call old test .
JESUS did not come to trangress but to fullfill .
And The LOVE of GOD shed upon the hearts of those who b elieve on JESUS
would not use grace as a means to transgress .
For GOD never has been or ever will be , thus HIS CHRIST never has been or ever will be
An acceptor of sins , or of lies . Jesus did not come
so man could b e free TO SIN but rather they are made free FROM SIN , FROM death and HE who has
the power of death .
In other w ords , THE GOD , HIS CHRIST , HIS SPIRIT would never call evil good and good evil .
IT would never accept any sin , NOR UNBELEIF IN CHRIST JESUS .

 

[Lambano]

However let us realize one thing , paul himself NEVER once taught or beleived this pauline stuff .

I may have to quote you on that.