Where are the scriptures?

[RichardBurger]

Where are the scriptures?

Many believe that Paul’s gospel of grace, that Paul says was hidden in God, was the same gospel that Jesus and the 12 Apostles preached. -- But where are the scriptures that support this idea?

1. Show where Jesus and the 12 said that people are not under the Law of Moses.

2., Show where Jesus and the 12 said that circumcision is no longer needed.

3. Show where Jesus and the 12 said that if you try to be justified by the works of the Law you have fallen from grace.

4. Jesus baptized with the Holy Spirit and it was prophesied. Where did Jesus say that the Holy Spirit baptized anyone into Jesus the Christ.

4 ideas that I don’t see as being supported by scriptures.

If you see scriptural proof please post those scriptures.

Again, I do not accept long sermons with assumptions and rationalizations. Only scriptures.

 

[tim_from_pa]

Where are the scriptures?

Many believe that Paul’s gospel of grace, that Paul says was hidden in God, was the same gospel that Jesus and the 12 Apostles preached. -- But where are the scriptures that support this idea?

1. Show where Jesus and the 12 said that people are not under the Law of Moses.

2., Show where Jesus and the 12 said that circumcision is no longer needed.

3. Show where Jesus and the 12 said that if you try to be justified by the works of the Law you have fallen from grace.

4. Jesus baptized with the Holy Spirit and it was prophesied. Where did Jesus say that the Holy Spirit baptized anyone into Jesus the Christ.

4 ideas that I don’t see as being supported by scriptures.

If you see scriptural proof please post those scriptures.

Again, I do not accept long sermons with assumptions and rationalizations. Only scriptures.

I'll give you 3 scriptures since your point seems to be something to do with the authority of Paul. If Paul is "in" so-to-speak, then we can rely on what he said:

God Called Paul: Acts 9:5

Peter acknowledged Paul: 2 Peter 3:16

And only one gospel (faith): Ephesians 4:5

 

[RichardBurger]

I'll give you 3 scriptures since your point seems to be something to do with the authority of Paul. If Paul is "in" so-to-speak, then we can rely on what he said:

God Called Paul: Acts 9:5

Peter acknowledged Paul: 2 Peter 3:16

And only one gospel (faith): Ephesians 4:5

It had nothing to do with Paul's authority.

In the OP, "Many believe that Paul’s gospel of grace, that Paul says was hidden in God, was the same gospel that Jesus and the 12 Apostles preached. -- But where are the scriptures that support this idea?

Do you have any scriptures that shows where Jesus and the 12 were teaching the same thing Paul was? A simple question.

 

[tim_from_pa]

It had nothing to do with Paul's authority.

In the OP, "Many believe that Paul’s gospel of grace, that Paul says was hidden in God, was the same gospel that Jesus and the 12 Apostles preached. -- But where are the scriptures that support this idea?

Do you have any scriptures that shows where Jesus and the 12 were teaching the same thing Paul was? A simple question.

OK, maybe I misunderstood. Let's try again:

Points 1-3 deal with law-keeping, so I propose Acts 15 in which the council of apostles agreed in effect that law-keeping and circumcision was not a mandate to be saved. Point number 3 is self-evident by the fact that all the apostles taught you were saved by grace through faith. If a person tries to attain righteousness by the works of the law, it in effect goes contrary to what the council and apostles said beings that works is not faith. The council's issue was probably more related to the idea that if one had faith, should they still keep the law in which Paul explained in his epistles. Otherwise, I'm not really sure what you are getting at regarding point #3.

Point #4: I'm not sure I understand this point, either. I always taught we are baptized by the Holy Spirit given by Christ. We receive the Spirit of God when we have faith in Christ, so I don't know of any verse that says we are baptized by the Holy Spirit into Christ, nor did Paul directly say that that I am aware of. I have a feeling this #4 is semantics. (Originally I misread this and thought you asked about Christ being baptized by the Holy Spirit.)

One last point---- keep in mind the audience of Paul as he was appointed to the Gentiles. The others were appointed to the circumcision and would have approached more what they taught from a Judaic end. Thus things may sound a tad different, but I see no contradiction.

 

[veteran]

OK, maybe I misunderstood. Let's try again:

Points 1-3 deal with law-keeping, so I propose Acts 15 in which the council of apostles agreed in effect that law-keeping and circumcision was not a mandate to be saved. Point number 3 is self-evident by the fact that all the apostles taught you were saved by grace through faith. If a person tries to attain righteousness by the works of the law, it in effect goes contrary to what the council and apostles said beings that works is not faith. The council's issue was probably more related to the idea that if one had faith, should they still keep the law in which Paul explained in his epistles. Otherwise, I'm not really sure what you are getting at regarding point #3.

Point #4: I'm not sure I understand this point, either. I always taught we are baptized by the Holy Spirit given by Christ. We receive the Spirit of God when we have faith in Christ, so I don't know of any verse that says we are baptized by the Holy Spirit into Christ, nor did Paul directly say that that I am aware of. I have a feeling this #4 is semantics. (Originally I misread this and thought you asked about Christ being baptized by the Holy Spirit.)

One last point---- keep in mind the audience of Paul as he was appointed to the Gentiles. The others were appointed to the circumcision and would have approached more what they taught from a Judaic end. Thus things may sound a tad different, but I see no contradiction.

But a direct contradiction is what the doctrine of men Richard is on has created. It's the idea that Christ's grace was NOT preached to the Jews, but by Paul only to the Gentiles, AND, that there is one Gospel for Israel, and a whole other Gospel just for Gentiles. In reality, Christ and His Apostles preached the same Gospel Apostle Paul did and visa versa. The only real differences were different customs between Israelites and Gentiles, and those still different customs still exist today between believing Jews and Gentiles that make up Christ's Church as one Body. When Christ returns, those differences will no longer exist, as we all will follow the same thing.

The whole "mystery" Message Paul speaks of, is how God sent His Plan of Salvation through Christ Jesus also to the Gentiles, and that many of them would believe. That was first written back in the OT prophets, I think you know, even as Peter reveals. But those on the doctrine Richard has, want us to think that OT prophecy never existed, but that it only originated with Apostle Paul, even though our Lord Jesus, Philip, and Peter, and probably all Christ's Apostles preached The Gospel to Gentiles prior to Paul. God sent Peter to the Gentiles with Cornelius in Acts 10, while Apostle Paul had barely yet been converted to Christ.

 

[goodshepard55]

Well actually Jesus and the 12 preached the Kingdom of God..not the death and resurrection of Christ..that came after His death....

 

[tim_from_pa]

But a direct contradiction is what the doctrine of men Richard is on has created. It's the idea that Christ's grace was NOT preached to the Jews, but by Paul only to the Gentiles, AND, that there is one Gospel for Israel, and a whole other Gospel just for Gentiles. In reality, Christ and His Apostles preached the same Gospel Apostle Paul did and visa versa. The only real differences were different customs between Israelites and Gentiles, and those still different customs still exist today between believing Jews and Gentiles that make up Christ's Church as one Body. When Christ returns, those differences will no longer exist, as we all will follow the same thing.

The whole "mystery" Message Paul speaks of, is how God sent His Plan of Salvation through Christ Jesus also to the Gentiles, and that many of them would believe. That was first written back in the OT prophets, I think you know, even as Peter reveals. But those on the doctrine Richard has, want us to think that OT prophecy never existed, but that it only originated with Apostle Paul, even though our Lord Jesus, Philip, and Peter, and probably all Christ's Apostles preached The Gospel to Gentiles prior to Paul. God sent Peter to the Gentiles with Cornelius in Acts 10, while Apostle Paul had barely yet been converted to Christ.

Yes Veteran, we are on the same page here, and basically entails my last comment about the audience reflects your statement about the customs.

I had a feeling this may be to "guide" me a certain way to admitting something to back up some sort of theology.

Paul made it very clear that even though some things were revealed to him, that those things still had a basis in the OT.

 

[Rach1370]

Where are the scriptures?

Many believe that Paul’s gospel of grace, that Paul says was hidden in God, was the same gospel that Jesus and the 12 Apostles preached. -- But where are the scriptures that support this idea?

1. Show where Jesus and the 12 said that people are not under the Law of Moses.

2., Show where Jesus and the 12 said that circumcision is no longer needed.

3. Show where Jesus and the 12 said that if you try to be justified by the works of the Law you have fallen from grace.

4. Jesus baptized with the Holy Spirit and it was prophesied. Where did Jesus say that the Holy Spirit baptized anyone into Jesus the Christ.

4 ideas that I don’t see as being supported by scriptures.

If you see scriptural proof please post those scriptures.

Again, I do not accept long sermons with assumptions and rationalizations. Only scriptures.

I'm a little confused. Are you saying that the message Paul preached is completely different from what Jesus taught and therefore is unscriptual?
For example, clearly Paul teaches the Gentiles that they do not need to be circumcised to be saved...are you saying that since Jesus did not teach this that it is incorrect?
By necessity there would be differences...as a general rule Jesus was dealing only with Jews, with what they had been raised to believe, and Paul was specifically sent to the Gentiles. Cultural differences aside, Paul most certainly taught 'the good news'. I believe the big thing with those 'cultural differences', was the wall that the Jews had put up....if one was not circumcised and followed 'the law', then one could not be a child of God. So Paul addressed these issues in a big way...which clearly he had authority to do.
But apart from that how is 'the good news' that Paul taught, any different to what Jesus and His disciples taught? Didn't Jesus say "I am the way, and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." Jesus taught that He was to be killed, He taught that He was the fulfilment of all the OT prophecies. Those prophecies by the way, included the 'perfect sacrifice' that He would become, the one that would 'take away the sins of the world'. Jesus taught this, and Paul backed it up. The differences in understanding between the Jews, who were under the law but had no true understanding of it, and were using it to sin, and Gentiles, who had no idea of God and His workings, necessitated a difference in teaching, but the message is true...one of grace and love under the sacrifice of Christ.

 

[FHII]

I'm a little confused. Are you saying that the message Paul preached is completely different from what Jesus taught and therefore is unscriptual?
For example, clearly Paul teaches the Gentiles that they do not need to be circumcised to be saved...are you saying that since Jesus did not teach this that it is incorrect?
By necessity there would be differences...as a general rule Jesus was dealing only with Jews, with what they had been raised to believe, and Paul was specifically sent to the Gentiles. Cultural differences aside, Paul most certainly taught 'the good news'. I believe the big thing with those 'cultural differences', was the wall that the Jews had put up....if one was not circumcised and followed 'the law', then one could not be a child of God. So Paul addressed these issues in a big way...which clearly he had authority to do.
But apart from that how is 'the good news' that Paul taught, any different to what Jesus and His disciples taught? Didn't Jesus say "I am the way, and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." Jesus taught that He was to be killed, He taught that He was the fulfilment of all the OT prophecies. Those prophecies by the way, included the 'perfect sacrifice' that He would become, the one that would 'take away the sins of the world'. Jesus taught this, and Paul backed it up. The differences in understanding between the Jews, who were under the law but had no true understanding of it, and were using it to sin, and Gentiles, who had no idea of God and His workings, necessitated a difference in teaching, but the message is true...one of grace and love under the sacrifice of Christ.

Well, I like Rach's questions but I'd settle for just one answered.... Richard, do you even believe that Paul's teaching was the Truth?

 

[veteran]

Well, it's good that others are finally coming to realize the seriousness of the false doctrine of a dual Gospel which those like Richard are on. He's not the only one here found with that false doctrine.

That two Gospels idea is an offshoot of John Darby's Dispensationalism idea. But Darby didn't start it; others that followed his dispensationalist ideas later developed it, in the early 1900's. It was developed as an attempt to give credibility to the Pre-tribulational secret rapture doctrine.

The Pre-trib Bible scholars aren't stupid. They well knew a lot of their believers who read The Bible for themselves would harbor questions of how is it that God's Word shows saints still on the earth suffering the great tribulation in the last days. They also had to account for God's promises to Israel that they would one day be gathered to Him.

So it wasn't just the "mystery" idea Paul preached that caused them to create the dual Gospel idea. It was their need also to show God's promises to Israel as a separate foundation from Christ's Church, so that Christ's Church could be lifted off the earth prior to the great tribulation, while those of Israel remain and are saved later at Christ's return with His Church.

Yet Apostle Paul preached that God's promises to Israel were opened up to believing Gentiles on Christ Jesus, and both believing Israelites and believing Gentiles were to become Christ's Church. You'll discover those on the false dual Gospel doctrine don't like it when that idea is brought up from Paul's Epistles (like in Ephesians 2). Likewise with the idea of spiritual Israel that Paul also taught in his Epistles. They MUST keep those promises to Israel apart from Christ's Church at all costs to try and keep their sand castle of the Pre-trib secret rapture theory afloat.

This is why those on the dual Gospel idea keep trying to label the Gospel Paul preached as the 'Gospel of Grace', when Paul never even used that term for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Gospel of Jesus Christ has always... been about God's saving Grace and is not a sole idea that only Paul taught.

Another problem with their doctrine is how they treat all of Israel (including unbelieving Israelites) as being joined to Christ at His return, when God's Word gives a specific that ONLY the believers of Israel will be gathered to Christ. In that, they go against even Paul whose teachings they adore more than that of our Lord Jesus Himself. Paul was specific that unbelieving Israel is cut off, and that they MUST believe on Christ Jesus to be graffed back in again (Romans 11).

Isa 10:21-23
21 The remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the mighty God.
22 For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, yet a remnant of them shall return: the consumption decreed shall overflow with righteousness.
23 For the Lord GOD of hosts shall make a consumption, even determined, in the midst of all the land.
(KJV)

That returning "remnant" just so happens to be the believing Israelite remnant, not the unbelievers of Israel. During Christ's future Millennium reign is when many of the unbelievers of Israel will be turned back to Him. Only that believing "remnant" will be gathered to Christ when He comes after the tribulation, along with the believing Gentiles, i.e., Christ's Church. That's why the gathering to Christ in Matt.24 and Mark 13 is about His gathering of ALL believers at one time, just like Apostle Paul also taught in his Epistles.

 

[RichardBurger]

Well, I like Rach's questions but I'd settle for just one answered.... Richard, do you even believe that Paul's teaching was the Truth?

Where do you all get the idea I am saying what Paul taught is un-scriptural? I didn't say anything like that.

So far no one has offered any scriptual proof that Jesus and the 12 ever said we are no longer under the Law of Moses. And this is the subject of the OP.

By the way veteran, I am not the subject of this thread.

Only THE GOSPEL MESSAGE OF GOD's GRACE GIVEN TO PAUL said we are no longer under the Law of Moses. Prove me wrong!!!! (by using the scriptures not a bunch of jaw-boneing)

 

[Rach1370]

Richard, the point here is that it's not a case of 'being under the law' or 'not being under the law'. How you worded that question is not going to get a straight answer, no matter how many times you ask for just a yes or no.

Jesus came to fulfil the law (Matt 5:17). Not do away with it, or bring it back stronger then ever etc. The law was leading up to the work of Jesus. This puts a whole new view on both the law and what Jesus taught...therefore, no straight or simple answer.

So on one hand you have Jesus, who is specifically speaking to the Jews, who were so religiously ingrained with those laws, that they had began to make some of their own. They hardened their hearts to the spirit of the law and made it all about 'do's and don'ts'....about who was superior, who could follow the law better, which would make them more Godly. You want scriptures for that...try reading anything between Jesus and the Pharisees. (Luke 5:17-26, 30-32; 6:1-5, 6-11; 7:36-50; 11:37-52; 12:1-3; 13:10-17) It goes on and on...clearly Jesus is making a point against the Pharisees, who follow every jot of the law, but totally neglect the spirit of it.

Then you have Paul, who is preaching to Gentiles. These people have no clue as to the 'laws' of the Jews...all they probably know about it is that it excludes them from following their God. They are 'unclean and uncircumcised'. You have to understand, one of the ways Paul argued something is that he took the point he was trying to disprove, and said completely the opposite...such as:

[4] though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more: [5] circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; [6] as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless. [7] But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. [8] Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ [9] and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith—
(Philippians 3:4-9 ESV)

So Paul, who followed that law just as the Pharisees did, to the very dot, says it's useless. Not the law per se, but that there was little point following like they did, if they completely ignored the spirit and missed the point entirely. The law was fulfilled in Jesus, therefore everything is now found within Christ Himself...redemption, forgiveness, cleanliness and righteousness. To continue follow the law, every little bit of it, is to do so for our own sake, because it makes us feel righteous in ourselves. This cannot be...righteousness only comes from Jesus.

So you see, it is the same message, but because of the different audiences and because quite obviously one was preached before Jesus' death and the other after...there are indeed differences; but the core message remains....Jesus. It's all about Him.

 

[jiggyfly]

Where are the scriptures?

Many believe that Paul’s gospel of grace, that Paul says was hidden in God, was the same gospel that Jesus and the 12 Apostles preached. -- But where are the scriptures that support this idea?

1. Show where Jesus and the 12 said that people are not under the Law of Moses.

2., Show where Jesus and the 12 said that circumcision is no longer needed.







Again, I do not accept long sermons with assumptions and rationalizations. Only scriptures.

Acts15:1-30

 

[RichardBurger]

Richard, the point here is that it's not a case of 'being under the law' or 'not being under the law'. How you worded that question is not going to get a straight answer, no matter how many times you ask for just a yes or no.

Jesus came to fulfil the law (Matt 5:17). Not do away with it, or bring it back stronger then ever etc. The law was leading up to the work of Jesus. This puts a whole new view on both the law and what Jesus taught...therefore, no straight or simple answer.

So on one hand you have Jesus, who is specifically speaking to the Jews, who were so religiously ingrained with those laws, that they had began to make some of their own. They hardened their hearts to the spirit of the law and made it all about 'do's and don'ts'....about who was superior, who could follow the law better, which would make them more Godly. You want scriptures for that...try reading anything between Jesus and the Pharisees. (Luke 5:17-26, 30-32; 6:1-5, 6-11; 7:36-50; 11:37-52; 12:1-3; 13:10-17) It goes on and on...clearly Jesus is making a point against the Pharisees, who follow every jot of the law, but totally neglect the spirit of it.

Then you have Paul, who is preaching to Gentiles. These people have no clue as to the 'laws' of the Jews...all they probably know about it is that it excludes them from following their God. They are 'unclean and uncircumcised'. You have to understand, one of the ways Paul argued something is that he took the point he was trying to disprove, and said completely the opposite...such as:

[4] though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more: [5] circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; [6] as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless. [7] But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. [8] Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ [9] and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith—
(Philippians 3:4-9 ESV)

So Paul, who followed that law just as the Pharisees did, to the very dot, says it's useless. Not the law per se, but that there was little point following like they did, if they completely ignored the spirit and missed the point entirely. The law was fulfilled in Jesus, therefore everything is now found within Christ Himself...redemption, forgiveness, cleanliness and righteousness. To continue follow the law, every little bit of it, is to do so for our own sake, because it makes us feel righteous in ourselves. This cannot be...righteousness only comes from Jesus.

So you see, it is the same message, but because of the different audiences and because quite obviously one was preached before Jesus' death and the other after...there are indeed differences; but the core message remains....Jesus. It's all about Him.

Sorry but you have not given one single scripture that says Jesus and the 12 abolished the Law of Moses. However, there are many written by Paul that says the Law of Moses no longer applies in this age of God's grace.

You made the claim that Paul followed the Law. Have you ever read this scripture?

Philippians 3:4-11
4 though I also might have confidence in the flesh. If anyone else thinks he may have confidence in the flesh, I more so:
5 circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee;
6 concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
7 But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ.
8 Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ
9 and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;
10 that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death,
11 if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.
NKJV

In case you can't follow Paul's thoughts then here is a clue. He counted all of his Jewish religious teachings and practices as RUBBISH.

 

[FHII]

Where do you all get the idea I am saying what Paul taught is un-scriptural? I didn't say anything like that.

So far no one has offered any scriptual proof that Jesus and the 12 ever said we are no longer under the Law of Moses. And this is the subject of the OP.

By the way veteran, I am not the subject of this thread.

Only THE GOSPEL MESSAGE OF GOD's GRACE GIVEN TO PAUL said we are no longer under the Law of Moses. Prove me wrong!!!! (by using the scriptures not a bunch of jaw-boneing)

Richard, You never answered my question. You want yes or no answers to your questions, but you don't answer my questions in that fashion. My question again is did Paul speak the Truth? It's that type of yes or know question that you have been asking us to provide for you all along so you can preach a sermon, but telling us we can't rprovide explanations for our answers.

I'd like two things from you.

1. Do you believe what Paul taught is truth? It's a simple yes or no question, much like what you ask us to answer.

2. So you believe grace covers all sins?



YOu answer these two questions in a yes or no fashion and don't do a sermon, which you do not allow form us, you hypocrie!.... Then and only then will I answer your quesrtions yes or know.

 

[Rach1370]

Sorry but you have not given one single scripture that says Jesus and the 12 abolished the Law of Moses. However, there are many written by Paul that says the Law of Moses no longer applies in this age of God's grace.

You made the claim that Paul followed the Law. Have you ever read this scripture?

In case you can't follow Paul's thoughts then here is a clue. He counted all of his Jewish religious teachings and practices as RUBBISH.

Whoa...you totally missed my point, and half of my post apparently....try reading it again, hmm, before jumping on me?
The things ^^^^ that you just said I said...I totally didn't say!!
So, yeah, try reading it again.

 

[RichardBurger]

Whoa...you totally missed my point, and half of my post apparently....try reading it again, hmm, before jumping on me?
The things ^^^^ that you just said I said...I totally didn't say!!
So, yeah, try reading it again.

Sorry about that. It was the conclusion that I disagreed with. It is NOT the same message.

You said,"So you see, it is the same message, but because of the different audiences and because quite obviously one was preached before Jesus' death and the other after...there are indeed differences; but the core message remains....Jesus. It's all about Him.

How can you say it is the "same message" and then, in the same sentence, say "one was preached before Jesus' death and the other after." To me you are saying there are two messages, not the same. And I agree with that. The new message of grace was HIDDEN IN GOD AND REVEALED TO PAUL. That is what the writings of Paul told us.

The first message was that Jesus was here to setup the promised prophesied kingdom under law. The Jews rejected their promised kingdom. Paul's message of salvtion through faith alone was totally new and NOWHERE in the O.T. or the writings of the 12 are there scriptures that say we are no longer under the Law of Moses. That is what this thread is all about. Show me scriptures in the O.T. and the writings of the 12 that say the people are not under the Law of Moses. If you can't then why are you writing on this thread? --- THE SCRIPTURES PLEASE!!!!

 

[RichardBurger]

Richard, You never answered my question. You want yes or no answers to your questions, but you don't answer my questions in that fashion. My question again is did Paul speak the Truth? It's that type of yes or know question that you have been asking us to provide for you all along so you can preach a sermon, but telling us we can't rprovide explanations for our answers.

I'd like two things from you.

1. Do you believe what Paul taught is truth? It's a simple yes or no question, much like what you ask us to answer.

2. So you believe grace covers all sins?



YOu answer these two questions in a yes or no fashion and don't do a sermon, which you do not allow form us, you hypocrie!.... Then and only then will I answer your quesrtions yes or know.

You are confused. On this thread I have not asked for a yesy or no answer. That was on the thread "Three Questions."

If you read any of my posts you already know that my answeres to your questions are 1. yes, 2. yes

Now that I have answered your questions how about doing what the OP asked. ---"SHOW ME, IN THE O.T. AND THE WRITINGS OF THE 12, SCRIPTURES THAT SAY WE ARE NO LONGER UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES.

Only Paul message of God's grace, the message that was hidden in God, tells us we are no longer under the Law. If I am wrong then prove it by scriptures. otherwise why are you on this thread?

 

[FHII]

You are confused. On this thread I have not asked for a yesy or no answer. That was on the thread "Three Questions."

If you read any of my posts you already know that my answeres to your questions are 1. yes, 2. yes

Now that I have answered your questions how about doing what the OP asked. ---"SHOW ME, IN THE O.T. AND THE WRITINGS OF THE 12, SCRIPTURES THAT SAY WE ARE NO LONGER UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES.

Only Paul message of God's grace, the message that was hidden in God, tells us we are no longer under the Law. If I am wrong then prove it by scriptures. otherwise why are you on this thread?

The only thing I am confused about is what your overall point is. Furthermore, your overall tone of "Please don't give me a sermon, just answer the questions" is here in both this thread and the "three questions" thread.

When you say you believe that Paul is preaching the truth, I believe you and I figured you did. That being the case, why do you believe it is separate from Jesus'? If you believe Paul speaks the truth, and Paul said he was Christ's ambassador, then the conclusion should be that Jesus told him to preach grace and thus, yes it came from Jesus. It is the same gospel in that Paul was continuing Jesus' message in his due time.

I actually agree with you on a few things. Yes, ok... the words neve came out of Jesus' mouth before he resurrected... They came out of Paul's writings and preaching. Sure, different mode of delivery, but still Jesus Christ's gospel.


Did the OT prophets say we weren't under the Law of Moses? No, but there was still prophecy that grace through faith would come and be extended to the gentiles. For example Romans 1:2 says that it was promised by the prophets in the Holy scriptures. Isaiah had plenty to say about God accepting the gentiles at a later date. you can check chapters 42, 49, 54 and 60 for starters.

 

[jiggyfly]

Sorry but you have not given one single scripture that says Jesus and the 12 abolished the Law of Moses. However, there are many written by Paul that says the Law of Moses no longer applies in this age of God's grace.

I gave you some scripture Richard did you read them?