>>18048071
Matthew 5:18
>For I assure you: Until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or one stroke of a letter will pass from the law until all things are accomplished.

This is Jesus saying, "Don't forget to follow the laws of the Tanach as they're still essential up until the literal apocalypse happens." Pauline Christianity absolutely contradicts this by pretending those obligations no longer exist.

File: matt2434.png (125 KB, 1022x621)

125 KB PNG

>>18048086
To expand on this, most Pauline Christians cope by pretending the "Heaven and Earth" passing away part is metaphorical but this doesn't make sense when Jesus goes on to explicitly describe an apocalypse where that happens later on in Matthew. The only way Pauline cope holds is if that Apocalypse is also purely metaphorical, which would be news to Jesus and his followers lol

The Gospels also differ in character. John's Gospel makes Jesus into Dionysus.

Either this is all a game of higher powers, or Jesus is a deified man. The story of the Massacre of the Innocents is a very common trope; the Greeks knew about it, or the son of a god who tragically dies and is resurrected. And what can I say? John's severed head—this symbolism is again connected to the cult of Dionysus. Pontius Pilate name meaning sea and spear; monsters like the Ugaritic Mot, who appeared after the death of Yam, wielded a spear and killed Baal Haddad (who was also identified with Dionysus, Tammuz, Adonis, etc.). Strange shit.

>>18048086
>>18048093
Pauline epistles are older than the gospels though.

>>18048086
>Don't forget to follow the laws of the Tanach
actually it's Jesus saying
>not the smallest letter or one stroke of a letter will pass from the law

You gotta get better at reading, man.

>>18048071
>2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. 5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. 6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. - Galatians 5
>20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: 21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. 22 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come. 23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; 24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. 25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication. 26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them. - Acts 21
He lies under the Nazarite vow by pretending that he wasn't teaching Jews not to keep the law when he himself a Pharisee thinks he is not under the law. Don't forget Galatians 3:28 too

File: 1738471104987212.png (43 KB, 455x782)

43 KB PNG

>>18048115
No he literally instructs you to follow the law of the Jews, he is not saying that it simply exists.

>>18048116
The consistent teaching of the New Testament is that man is saved by faith alone, and not by works, BUT the "law is good."
If you didn't catch onto this then it's no wonder you're so confused.
Paul takes a Nazarite vow because he thinks it's "good." He doesn't think it'll grant him salvation.
The Galatians were being taught by some false teachers that you HAD to be circumcised to BE SAVED. Which Paul disagreed with. He still clearly thought it "was good," at least for ethnic Jews, but it still didn't SAVE ethnic Jews.

>>18048071
Just jews seething about not being able to place any law upon the body of God which is not sacrilege.

Jews are like Golem trying to claim mastery over the one ring, but it answers only to one and that is the Lord which they reject.

File: 1730509430553861.png (62 KB, 465x941)

62 KB PNG

>>18048125
That's just Paul's idea of salvation. Belief is a requirement but it is not enough.
>Paul takes a Nazarite vow because he thinks it's "good." He doesn't think it'll grant him salvation.
When did I say he believed that? The point is this guy lies to the disciples and the crowd
>He still clearly thought it "was good," at least for ethnic Jews
And yet he was teaching them not to do it because it's not needed anymore with the arrival of Christ. Hence the contradiction OP was looking for.

>>18048115
If the law remains then it must be upheld, otherwise what's the point of the law persisting until the literal apocalypse happens? Your view of the text is self-defeating.

>>18048110
>Pauline epistles are older than the gospels though.
That's true, but we likely see two different traditions in the gospels. The Jesus we see in Mark and Matthew (two of the older gospels) was one of an apocalyptic eschatologist - keep the laws, be baptized and ask for for forgiveness. This was to the best of our knowledge what the historical Jesus actually taught. But when you enter the passion narrative section you see Paul's influence on the story enter the picture. If you read the gospels very carefully you can see that there are a few things going on at once and they on a basic level contradict themselves, and people really didn't see this until the 19th and 20's centuries when scholars started really thinking about it.

One of the most interesting things about the gospels is that Luke (Paul's fanboy) doesn't have the doctrine of atonement, which is wild.

>>18048071
Acts 9:4 "Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?” -Jesus


This b8 is just getting lower and lower effort by the hour, isn't it?

>>18048393
Why did he call a random appearance Lord?

Paul often expands theological ideas in ways Jesus never explicitly articulated in the Gospels. This can make it seem like he’s changing rules.

>>18048688
>Paul often expands theological ideas in ways Jesus never explicitly articulated in the Gospels.
Jesus taught works and Paul taught faith. These are in conflict.

>>18048086
The Mosaic law only applies to people of blood descent from the 12 tribes of Israel who came out of Egypt, because that is whom received the Mosaic covenant.

The new covenant of Jesus is not like the old one, in part because it is open to all nations. Not just one.
There is no reason why those who were never held to the terms of the old covenant should be expected to keep it, especially when you consider the Israelites themselves broke it.
God never punished the Gentiles for not following his law, he did punish Israel because that is the nation he made a covenant with and they were unfaithful repeatedly to the terms he expected of them despite his sending prophets to warn them.

Because Jesus Christ gave his apostles the power to bind and loose (this is legal and spiritual authority), they were free to loose gentile converts from the circumcision of flesh (since they had baptism and the circumcision of the heart) and the ban on certain foods and simultaneously bind them to other aspects of the law, for example sexual morality and the ban on drinking blood that had been since the covenant of Noah. And because Jews and Greeks form one body in Christ, that means this loosing may apply equally to each, meaning ethnic Jews who belong to the church may legally enjoy the cornucopia of foods revealed to Peter in his vision.


31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

>>18048708
>works and faith
>These are in conflict.

only if your definition of faith is arbitrarily limited to belief alone
a wife is not faithful to her husband because she believes in him
she is faithful when she performs her marital duties and remains true, as is her husband's *obligation* even if what is expected of a husband and wife constitute separate tasks and responsibilities
suffice to say faith and works are *not* in conflict at all, as certain schismatics would have you believe

Would you say that God is faithless simply because belief is not something he has to have? No, he is faithful because he keeps his promises.
Faith and works are intrinsically united. Because faithfulness to say, a contract, necessarily involves some work on your part. As part of a fiduciary responsibility.
Fidelity. The root of this word is latin, and it means faith.

>>18048724
>only if your definition of faith is arbitrarily limited to belief alone
That was Paul's central argument. The law is not important, Christ's death and resurrection are.

>>18048709
This argument means that Jesus only came for Jews since he was very explicit about keeping the laws. And you are wrong, circumcision for example was meant for more than just the Israelites
>“A foreigner residing among you who wants to celebrate the LORD’s Passover must have all the males in his household circumcised; then he may take part like one born in the land. No uncircumcised male may eat it. - Exodus 12:48
Even in Abraham's household this applied, it's very clear that it is required for participation in the faith

>>18048397
Deranged desert fever and heat stroke due to coming from a long line of inbred rabbis. How should I know?

Paul was a liar, thief and a traitor in every way. How would you feel if some random Jew you never met took it up himself to tell your life story and spread it to the rest of the world? See, it's batshit crazy just on the face of it. No need to go any further.

>>18048125
But Paul here is clearly telling them that if they do the circumcision they won't be saved.

>>18048746
And this is a law given to one nation specifically.

Not all nations. Unlike the new covenant, which is open to all nations.
Jesus will sit in judgement over all nations, not just those who are circumcised. And the state of their foreskin isn't going to matter. Stop listening to Judaizers.


8 The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed.

9 For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it.

10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.

11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.

12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

13 And Jesus said unto the centurion, Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee. And his servant was healed in the selfsame hour.


>many shall come from the east and west
this refers to the gentile nations
>the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness
referring to unfaithful Jews, of whom the circumcision of flesh will not save them


43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

...

45 And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.


this "nation" Jesus refers to are the gentiles

File: 1747474363542449.png (54 KB, 470x810)

54 KB PNG

>>18048831
>And this is a law given to one nation specifically.
It's a law given to foreigners too, those that are NOT the progeny of Abraham. There is no way out of it. And anyway you people claim to be the new Israel and if so you must keep the commandments.
>And the state of their foreskin isn't going to matter. Stop listening to Judaizers.
It is if you don't want to be cut off from the eternal covenant. You're telling me to stop listening to Jesus. He calls people like you the least in the kingdom off Heaven

File: 1727776954304203.jpg (34 KB, 535x462)

34 KB JPG

Give me one genuine contradiction that can't be refuted that came from Paul. I've never seen it.

>>18048842
Jesus literally fulfilled the requirements of the covenant with his sacrifice. It's why we don't have to snip our foreskins off.

>>18048853
new covenant still have the law but with some law add from jesus. he doesn't say abolish the laws.

File: 1731758879395347.png (14 KB, 573x394)

14 KB PNG

>>18048853
Heaven and Earth still exist so no that never happened.

>>18048860
The commandments should always be adhered to, but as far as Mosaic Law in circumcision and festivals, we don't have to.
>>18048862
>New International Version
Come on, man

>>18048853
What requirements? The only requirement the law has was to obey it.

>>18048746
>Even in Abraham's household this applied
Of course, Abraham circumcised his household because God told him to do it as the first condition of the covenant he made with him. The second and hidden condition used to test his faith (that God did tempt Abraham) being, the offering of his firstborn son.

Which of these do you think was more important to God?


8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:

9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

>>18048842
>It's a law given to foreigners too
no, it's a law given to Israelites who entertain foreigners in their lands, and governs how they treat these sojourners and neighbors
one of several
in this case, that they will not offer passover to foreigners who ask to eat it unless they first be circumcised

God didn't give this law to foreigners, he gave it to Israel specifically because that was the nation he was making a specific covenant with
moreover, he didn't give this law to other people descended from Abraham either, just one branch of that family tree which comes from Jacob
now, the church itself is Israel and the children of faith are Abraham's children
and the church is open to men of all nations

>He calls people like you the least in the kingdom off Heaven
you mean like John the Baptist
would that I be in such good company

you would do well to be less self exultant
gentiles are the younger brother of the church, and God routinely favors the younger brother in the Old Testament

>>18048866
How are they wrong? https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Luke 16%3A17

>>18048871
Look up Mosaic Law, my guy. We're talking Festival of Booths type of shit.
>>18048875
Because it was the surety of the promise of abolishing the law, not that the law would never be gone. Re-read it again. Does it categorically say "The law will never go away"?

>>18048866
yeah you cannot wash your hand. If you see the women not your wife and you have sex you go to hell. If belive in paul you can have salvation but jesus still keep the law you need to obey.

>>18048876
It gave you what must happen for it to be abolished, it's the end of times

>>18048882
No, dummy, there's no such thing as "You do le bad thing and you're doomed", but it's heavily advised you don't do sin. Sin begets sin and it trickles down to people you care about. Sin is more complex than we think.
>>18048885
Which was his sacrifice, like I said and Paul says.

>>18048892
no bro. Jesus said that in teaching he talk. At least he can using the word "can". he actually say that. He give two laws. 1. Love god with all your sould and mind 2. Love neighbour. So you need to do that. How can you love jesus if you cannot do that laws he give?

>>18048892
the prolem for paul is this shit. He say jew doesn't need circumcised to have salvation but jesus say keeping the laws.
Consequences of Circumcision for Salvation: He writes, “Now I, Paul, say to you, that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you” (Galatians 5:2). This means that practicing circumcision as a means of gaining salvation nullifies the sacrifice of Christ on the cross and the freedom in Him.

>>18048871
you obey the law because it appeases God's wrath, that his presence might continue to dwell in the Tabernacle among the people
Jesus' propitiatory sacrifice appeased God's wrath for all time, not only for the sins of the Jews but for those of the whole world

let me ask you if you are such a stickler for the law and demand the gentiles keep circumcision, how are you supposed to keep the *whole* law and not just a part of it
given the fact that the physical Temple in Jerusalem hasn't existed for almost two thousand years, there is no way for a Judaizer to legally make the sacrifices *demanded* in the law
a demand with just as much force as circumcision, I might add
since a violation of even ONE statute constitutes a violation of the ENTIRE law, per the words of Jesus himself

to put it bluntly, it's not possible because that place doesn't exist
this is a dilemma for the Judaizer
thankfully Jesus himself, his body is your Temple now
and his body is the church
think of it as if the terms of service were updated, idk

>>18048862
Christ is building a new heavens, and a new earth.

>>18048925
>Christ is building a new heavens, and a new earth.
cope bro. You don't see that. It means only the doom day happen he can build that shit. No thing happen when he die. Stop coping. bro. Roman or jew or greek don't see any happen. Only he is rising.

>>18048930
Really. Because in the parable of Lazarus Jesus describes a rich man and poor man dying, and shows that the rich man suffers and is thirsty because he had good things in life, while the poor man is comforted because he received bad things in life.

In fact, this rich man explicitly desires intercession, and begs for an angel go tell his family not to make the mistakes he did lest they suffer just like he does.

>>18048951
yeah, but i think you need to circumcised too. Because genitals is the new jew. So must circumcised. Becasue jesus choose new nation. So you must circucmcised like original jew do.

>>18048907
My ESL brother, I appreciate you trying to discuss this, but I can't understand anything what you're saying. Not being rude, it's just how it is.
>>18048908
Alright, seems like the same ESL guy, but what you have to understand that Paul says circumcision and Jewish exclusivity (the 12 tribes) has been ABOLISHED with Christ being sacrificed and then coming to be risen again. Paul is saying that circumcision is no longer needed and that there's no longer any difference between Jews and Gentiles.

>>18048957
*Gentile

>>18048959
i know but jesus say keeps the laws. and he just fullfilled. I say jesus not paul. I just point out that paul is lying for his jew brothers. Jesus just creat new testament about salvation for all humanity not jew. Not say change the laws.

>>18048959
>My ESL brother, I appreciate you trying to discuss this, but I can't understand anything what you're saying. Not being rude, it's just how it is.

jesus say don't wash your hand and if you see the female with the lust you are going to hell. And also say keeps the law with the most factor. 1. Love god with all your sould and body and mind 2. love neighbour. So you need to keep the law when he teaching in israel. If you don't keep the law. You don't love your god and betray jesus.

>>18048966
That wasn't the law I'm talking about

>>18048892
>Which was his sacrifice, like I said and Paul says.
Great but where does Jesus say this?

>>18048957
>genitals
kekles, le fruedain slip par excellance

Circumcision of the flesh does not avail you.
It's simply an outward sign. An unfaithful generation asks for a sign.
Circumcision of the heart does matter.

>>18048966
>if you see the female with the lust you are going to hell
That's not really what it means.

Happening to see a beautiful woman and feeling a certain way about her as a result is not a sin. If you literally can't control yourself, just look away, you'll be fine. No need to guilt trip yourself over something that naturally happens.
Leering at her however, giving into your desire and fueling it deliberately by eyefucking her continually so long as she is in sight, really taking in her curves, etc *that* is a sin with as much spiritual significance as adultery.
Even if it wouldn't necessarily tear a family apart and so is *temporally* less significant, it separates you from God in the same way.

>>18048925
>Christ is building a new heavens, and a new earth.
So? These ones still exists so the law is in effect.

>>18048999
yeah but that is the law jesus want to fullfill. And you need to keep. He just change the law but not abolish. He even if you mistake the smallest error in the law you are the smallest in heaven.

>>18049006
bro at least jesus can say that as metaphor or he can say can. He just say actually. No bro not everything is not good and you can using your opinion to cope. He -jesus say that love your fucking god with all your body sould and mind.

>>18049006
kekles, le fruedain slip par excellance

Circumcision of the flesh does not avail you.
It's simply an outward sign. An unfaithful generation asks for a sign.
Circumcision of the heart does matter.

but that is paul. Jesus doesn't say that. That is the main point. And no circumstance is not just about love god but actually god say that to jew about circumcised as the mark about covenant. Not some shit love is enough or not enough.

>>18049018
*circumcised.

>>18049007
for those Jews who haven't accepted Christ, sure
and if they sin in the law, they are judged by the law, and the letter of the law is death
the death penalty is given in the law of Moses, for many things

but the *spirit* of the law gives life
none of that law has passed away, it still applies to them even if they reject the new covenant mentioned in Jeremiah which comes to fruition in Christ

as for the timeless saints of old and those still yet to come who live in Christ, and Christ in them, and so are literally building the new heavens and earth with him as we speak
different equation, because they have that law written in their hearts which is their inheritance of the Logos, our conscience
and, as Paul wrote


6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:

7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:

8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,

9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;

10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

>>18048874
>God didn't give this law to foreigners, he gave it to Israel specifically because that was the nation he was making a specific covenant with
The text plainly states that this is a law for foreigners. Whether Israelites followed it too is irrelevant
>moreover, he didn't give this law to other people descended from Abraham either
Okay and? He gave it to those that are not descended from him at all. You know what made them qualify? Obedience to God

>>18049036
>for those Jews who haven't accepted Christ, sure
Jesus doesn't make that distinction. He might have been sent to the Jews first but nowhere does he say the law is now invalid for everyone that follows him

>>18049036
he say that to all the people in the world say that with literally meaning. Not some shit metaphor like you think like god is building my mind or my sould or some shit. If he thinks like that, he can say god is not abolish law unless your heaven and earth is destroyed in your body or some shit. Stop coping.

>>18049000
He says it, but Paul clarifies it. You'll find a lot of Bible verses aren't clarified until later.

>>18049075
If he said it then you would post a verse. Paul's clarifications are unsanctioned abrogations

>>18049084
I've asked it earlier, but where exactly do you find Paul contradicting Jesus's words? I'm open to debate.

>>18049088
he say jew don't fucking circumcised because love is enough but circumcised is just a mark.
Consequences of Circumcision for Salvation: He writes, “Now I, Paul, say to you, that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you” (Galatians 5:2). This means that practicing circumcision as a means of gaining salvation nullifies the sacrifice of Christ on the cross and the freedom in Him.

File: 1683512509413002.jpg (18 KB, 506x533)

18 KB JPG

>>18049095
Debate from anybody from this ESL. I can't respond to things I have NO clue about what they're to say.

>>18049099
*Else

>>18049088
I posted it right here >>18048116 but check out the other posts ITT made by others. He says Jews don't have to keep the laws anymore despite lying to the disciples that he doesn't teach that

>>18049099
no you are coping. You know what i mean. Paul say that circumcised for jew is not benefit. and accept the law is that you are leving jesus christ
1It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
2Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 4You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. 5For through the Spirit we eagerly await by faith the righteousness for which we hope. 6For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

>>18049037
No, it doesn't say that.

It's a law that governs Israelite conduct when entertaining foreigners, namely that if they share the passover with foreigners who are uncircumcised then the Israelite is in violation of the law.
This foreigner would have absolutely no idea this law even exists unless an Israelite informs him of it, because this law was given to the Israelites for themselves to follow and not given to the gentiles.

That's why God punishes Israel for breaking his law, and not the gentile nations when they eat pork or shrimp. It was given to a single nation.

>Whether Israelites followed it too is irrelevant
No, no it is not irrelevant at all.

>>18049138
>No, it doesn't say that.
I am pretty sure it does. It literally says the same law applies to both natives and foreigners. Meaning both natives and foreigners have received that specific law
>This foreigner would have absolutely no idea this law even exists unless an Israelite informs him of it
Yes and? The Israelite would have no idea about these laws without Moses/Abraham/etc.
>"Nations will come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your dawn." Isaiah 60:3
They were meant to guide the nations
>That's why God punishes Israel for breaking his law, and not the gentile nations when they eat pork or shrimp. It was given to a single nation.
Are you kidding me? in the bible all sorts of nations were punished for not listening to God. Even the entire planet at one point. However I am specifically talking about circumcision since that is what Paul rejected so please stick to the topic

>>18049060
>nowhere does he say the law is now invalid for everyone that follows him

He gave his apostles the power to bind and loose. Do you know what that means?
The law is not invalidated, the sexual mores and prohibition on drinking blood for example was retained by the council of Jerusalem.


7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;

9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.


You hear that? Jesus purified the *hearts* of the uncircumcised, making them no different than the Judaizers. Meaning the rulings of the council may be applied equally to Jew and Greek alike. If you want to circumcise, and keep kosher food stuffs, that is your right. Nobody is going to force you to eat bacon.
Just do not account it for righteousness, and don't treat other Christians differently and refuse to eat with them simply because they are uncut and like pork loin. Because it is according to the will of Christ, who invested such authority with his apostles.


17 That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.

18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.

19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:

20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

File: 1744919148573029.png (170 KB, 1851x834)

170 KB PNG

>>18049152
>He gave his apostles the power to bind and loose. Do you know what that means?
Paul was not an apostle despite what he likes to claim about himself.
>The law is not invalidated, the sexual mores and prohibition on drinking blood for example was retained by the council of Jerusalem.
Christians literally believe they are drinking human blood every Sunday. Also you are making an arbitrary distinction between the laws.
>Meaning the rulings of the council may be applied equally to Jew and Greek alike
They ruled that Jews have to keep the law... This is a contradictory position
>Just do not account it for righteousness, and don't treat other Christians differently and refuse to eat with them simply because they are uncut and like pork loin.
The main problem with Christians according to your own laws that you believe are not invalidated somehow, is that it literally doesn't let them live. Everything else is secondary to that really. If you want to worship Jesus, eat pork and walk around with a cheesy dick just throw away the old testament.

>>18049151
>The Israelite would have no idea about these laws without Moses/Abraham/etc.
This law was never given to Abraham. Abraham never celebrated a passover, because the passover was instituted long after the Children of Israel went into Egypt. God didn't punish Abraham for not observing the passover, because it would be many generations before the feast would be instituted.

The law God gave to Noah applies to all the sons of Noah, the law God gave to Abraham applies to all the sons of Abraham, and the law God gave to Moses applies to all the sons of the 12 tribes.
But the law that God gave to Abraham does not apply to all the sons of Noah, and neither does the law God gave to Moses apply to all the sons of Abraham.

This law was given specifically to Israel because that's the nation God made a specific covenant with. It is not meant for all the nations, just one. And moreover, it was actually modified after the idolatry of the Golden Bull and the breaking of the tablets of the covenant.
Originally, God stipulated that the whole nation would be a nation of priests. But afterwards, he restricted the priesthood to only the sons of Aaron and the Levites.

Think about it like how a parent raises a child. When they break your rules and stay out too late, do you let it slide or take away the rule they violated?
No, you give them more and harsher rules until they learn better. And once they have met your expectations and matured, no longer needing correction, you relax the rules since they have proven themselves. Give them a later curfew so they can play responsibly with friends.
This was accomplished by Jesus Christ and his church.

>nations were punished for not listening to God
Give me one example of God punishing a foreign nation for worshiping idols, in the same way that he punished the northern kingdom of Israel. The way he punished Solomon, and many other Israelites who transgressed the law he had given them.

When did he smite the Persians, for example?

>>18049152
>11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.
we belive not jesus teach so peter is wrong. Jesus say keeps the laws. and no, i don't say gentile keeps the law i say jew. But Paul say to jew don't keep the laws.

File: 1732156204297104.png (86 KB, 465x1263)

86 KB PNG

>>18049190
>This law was never given to Abraham.
You completely misunderstand the law in question. It's about those foreigners who basically want to join the faith. Only a believer would want to celebrate that in the first place. The law of Abraham makes it clear it applies even to foreign men that are with them and the law of Moses keeps the exact same law. The fact in that instance it mentioned passover is irrelevant.
>Think about it like how a parent raises a child. When they break your rules and stay out too late, do you let it slide or take away the rule they violated?
Dude you literally believe the rules were taken away. Nothing suggests they matured, in fact Jesus constantly says otherwise
>Give me one example of God punishing a foreign nation for worshiping idols
Sure, here is where towns that were given to them (meaning they were foreign) are punished for their idolatry with military action

>>18049181
>Paul was not an apostle despite what he likes to claim about himself.
He was recognized as such by Peter and Barnabas, and by the church. I don't care what Judaizers protest even a little bit.

>Christians literally believe they are drinking human blood every Sunday.
Yeah, that's why Jesus' words that if you don't drink his blood and eat his flesh you do not have life in you were so transgressive, and why so many of his disciples stopped following him then. Only to come back into the fold later ofc.


63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.


Do you think the council of Jerusalem was unaware of this old prohibition? Far from it.
That was entirely deliberate on his part. God is constantly testing the faith of his people in the bible.

>hasidicuniversity.org
lmao
cool way to discredit yourself
you should know that the talmud has no legal authority to Christians
and that only the gullible or mislead would ever think otherwise

File: 1754092117719350.png (421 KB, 1259x1726)

421 KB PNG

>>18049215
All fabrications you know that right? There are early works where there is no such agreement from Peter for example
>why so many of his disciples stopped following him then
Because they misunderstood him like you are? Christians are the ones who insist that cannibalism is now okay despite what the law says. So you developed theology that actually believes it is literal vampirism
>you should know that the talmud has no legal authority to Christians
Jesus told you to listen to the Pharisees, their teachings are recorded in the talmud. So again you are just wrong.

>>18049209
God commanded that the Israelites destroy the idols of these places because he was giving them the land and he did not want *them*, the people he was so jealous of, to worship them.

God didn't give the land to the Israelites because the people were worshiping idols, otherwise he would have simply given them Egypt. He gave them the land because that was his promise to Moses, and to Abraham before that.

Every instance of punishment for idolatry in your selected passage applies to Israelites who are enticing other Israelites into idolatry. That incurs the death penalty.

>that troublemakers have arisen among you
>among you

At no point do the Israelites start murdering random travelers who pass through their lands simply because they are idol worshipers. Rather, they are commanded to provide hospitality to strangers traveling through, because they were also once strangers in a strange land, The death penalty for idolatry is reserved for Israel, and is why God scattered the 10 tribes by giving them to Assyria.
The Assyrians were idol worshipers, when does God punish them for idolatry? Rather, he uses the Assyrians to punish those among his people who lusted after strange gods.

>>18049233
>part of the Pseudo-Clementine literature
oh cool

Can I start quoting from the Epistle of Barnabas now?
Cause in my headcanon it's kind of edifying.
But I doubt you would accept it as valid, for some reason.

Now, can you cite any church fathers at all who quoted from this so-called "Epistle of Peter to James"?

File: 1741984021752333.png (20 KB, 573x429)

20 KB PNG

>>18049247
>otherwise he would have simply given them Egypt.
That's actually the real headcanon. The fact is they were idolatrous nations who got invaded and replaced with the chosen. A land also being promised does not mean that the natives are not being punished with replacement but that's not even what I am talking about.
>At no point do the Israelites start murdering random travelers who pass through their lands simply because they are idol worshipers
When did I say they did that? Even though it is commanded but not mistreating them is also commanded. As for your "among you" rebuttal that's just because they were foreigners living amongst them. Where the fuck do you think they got the "gods you have not known" from? Obviously those people who are now being punished collectively. The rules of war in the bible make it very clear that you can impose your rule on surrounding cities outside of the ones where genocide was commanded. There are voluntary and obligatory conquests you know? You are mixing them up

>>18049268
What kind of standard of evidence is this? Of course the church fathers (that were pretty much all Pauline) would only use material that makes Paul look good. This is not an internal critique I am not granting the authenticity of your canon. If I did then your later invented recognition wouldn't even be contested. However even with the material that made its way into your tradition you can clearly see problems between Paul and the disciples like for example here https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Corinthians%2011&version=NIV where he mocks their authority when he calls them "super apostles"

yeah, that's what I thought
meanwhile, there are plenty of surviving quotes from the Epistle of Barnabas by the early church

>>18049330
It's VERY telling that you decided to cut out the very next verse from your cherrypicked quote about a law that applies to Israelites concerning the conduct of Israelites.
What this means is that if an Israelite is found to be sacrificing to idols, he is to be put to death.

21 Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

The stranger in this case refers to a gentile traveler passing through land belonging to the Israelites. All of these gentiles would be idolators FYI, and they are not to be killed. They were bid to give them food, water, and rest before sending them on their way.


16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.

17 For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:

18 He doth execute the judgment of the fatherless and widow, and loveth the stranger, in giving him food and raiment.

19 Love ye therefore the stranger: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

20 Thou shalt fear the LORD thy God; him shalt thou serve, and to him shalt thou cleave, and swear by his name.

>>18049373
>yeah, that's what I thought
Thought what? Give me one reason I should give a fuck about the later copes you people invented to hide the blatant conflict
>It's VERY telling that you decided to cut out the very next verse
Bro what the fuck are you on about I literally mentioned it in my reply "but not mistreating them is also commanded"
>All of these gentiles would be idolators FYI
Yes they would but the punishment only comes on them if they preach to Israelites. Again you don't know the difference between the voluntary and mandatory wars.
>10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. 15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.
It's very possible for a city to be taken into their nation that was not completely massacred.

>>18048071
Correct. This has been a thing for decades, at least. A subset of the God-hating rodent population thinks that attacking Paul is a more credible way to attack God’s word, essentially because he doesn’t have the same cache as Jesus. People outside of Jews and reddit atheists view Jesus in a positive light, so direct attacks against his character don’t work. That’s also why the Antichrist will claim to be Jesus when he arrives.

9 And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not wholly reap the corners of thy field, neither shalt thou gather the gleanings of thy harvest.

10 And thou shalt not glean thy vineyard, neither shalt thou gather every grape of thy vineyard; thou shalt leave them for the poor and stranger: I am the LORD your God.

...

33 And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him.

34 But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

...

26 Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse;

27 A blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I command you this day:

28 And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which ye have not known.


>>18049390
You have not demonstrated that the curse, for not obeying the commandments of the LORD given to the Moses, applies in to those gentile nations who never received them and likely never even knew of them.

In fact, the opposite case is demonstrated by the body of scripture; God uses the nations as a means of chastising Israel. And moreover the promise that the blessing of the nations through Israel would not occur in the way they had imagined, but rather through the person and faith of Jesus Christ.

Look, the promised land is on a well worn trade route between Egypt, Mesopotamia, Anatolia, and for that matter the sea lanes used by Phoenicians.
There would be a great many travelers passing through the lands given to the 12 tribes to their profit, and the vast majority of them would in fact be idolators.
They do not incur the death penalty simply for existing within the bounds of that land, in fact the law commands hospitality for weary gentile travelers, because the death penalty of the law given to Israel applies to Israel.

File: 1732440781662755.jpg (499 KB, 1495x1195)

499 KB JPG

>>18049422
Yes they work, inform a random person that biblical Jesus was racist and they wouldn't want anything to do with him. The thing is christians have a very good psyop and most people who claim to follow his faith don't even know what he said.
>>18049427
>You have not demonstrated that the curse, for not obeying the commandments of the LORD given to the Moses, applies in to those gentile nations who never received them and likely never even knew of them.
That wasn't what you asked me. You asked me where are these foreigners being punished for their idolatrous ways and I showed you where. This is an entirely separate discussion about what counts as sin, what role intention plays, etc
>God uses the nations as a means of chastising Israel.
He does that too yes but this is irrelevant.
>They do not incur the death penalty simply for existing within the bounds of that land
Yep because they are seen as foreigners/subjugated slaves. Those that were however seen as natives are fully wiped out without even needing a trigger. In both cases their idolatrous religion is the cause they were massacred

>>18048129
>Just jews seething about not being able to place any law upon the body of God which is not sacrilege.
>Jews are like Golem trying to claim mastery over the one ring, but it answers only to one and that is the Lord which they reject.

/thread

>>18049460
>I showed you where
no you didn't
you gave a passage where Israelites are condemned to death for idolatry, and where idols were destroyed *in a land that God was already going to give to the 12 tribes*

he didn't give them the land because the people there were idolators, that's beside the point
where in the bible does God punish Persia or Assyria for idolatry, or for eating pork, or for wearing mixed fibers, adultery, etc
that's not to say God positively affirms or idolatry or adultery among the gentiles, the punishments prescribed for Israel for these acts are not given to the gentiles as well
the Israelites were a nation set apart

Egypt was not punished for idolatry, they were punished for killing the Israelite firstborns and inflicting them with heavy labor such that their groans went up to heaven and God remembered Abraham; in a word it's because they were not hospitable to these foreigners living among them (!!!) and treated them as slaves
God's ten plagues correspond to certain Egyptian deities because it's a deliberate demonstration of his own superiority and power over their respective domains, meant to strengthen the faith of the Israelites in him

important point is that despite all these things, the Israelites STILL didn't believe, and when the scouts returned from Canaan and suggested they avoid the place God sent these unfaithful Israelites to wander in the desert 40 years until that unfaithful generation which had already received so many signs, passed through water, ate the manna of heaven, died
their children who hadn't seen these things would inherit

TWICE God tests Moses, saying he would destroy Israel and make Moses a great nation like he did with Abraham to fulfill his purposes instead on Sinai, and again when these ten scouts say it's hopeless for the Israelites to try and enter the promised land due to the strength of the gentiles living there
both times, Moses proves his faithfulness to his people and stays God's righteous anger

File: 1735112010365622.png (34 KB, 573x654)

34 KB PNG

>>18049505
>he didn't give them the land because the people there were idolators
Just like those nations were used against the chosen so were the chosen used against them. The bible makes it clear in pic rel for this particular nation. You might cry that it was not explicit enough but you are coping. I showed you what happens with those that live with them that were not from the cities that were completely eradicated (mandatory wars). They were those that fell under their rule and treated as foreigners. Natives that lived within the promised land are a completely separate topic.

>>18049526
>Just like those nations were used against the chosen so were the chosen used against them.

It sounds to me like you think Israel is just like every other nation to God. Since he uses them in the same way, as a cudgel.
Rather than a blessing to the nations, your idea of Israel is that of a curse to the nations.

Israel itself really didn't do a whole lot of punishing. Mostly they just spent their entire history simply defending their borders and slowly allowing idolatry to creep in until God had enough.
God himself worked the miracles in Egypt, God himself sent Cyrus to deliver the captives in Babylon. The Israelites themselves didn't have very much to do with that at all.

>Jeremiah 50
Ah, but the punishment on Babylon did not come from Israel. But from the Persians.

41 Behold, a people shall come from the north, and a great nation, and many kings shall be raised up from the coasts of the earth.

42 They shall hold the bow and the lance: they are cruel, and will not shew mercy: their voice shall roar like the sea, and they shall ride upon horses, every one put in array, like a man to the battle, against thee, O daughter of Babylon.


Anyways, the following is the true reason why Babylon faced this punishment. You've left out the beginning of this section


33 Thus saith the LORD of hosts; The children of Israel and the children of Judah were oppressed together: and all that took them captives held them fast; they refused to let them go.

34 Their Redeemer is strong; the LORD of hosts is his name: he shall throughly plead their cause, that he may give rest to the land, and disquiet the inhabitants of Babylon.


Anyways, as I cross reference this passage with the LXX I noticed a funny discrepancy here.
cont ...

>>18049575
... a sword upon their warriors and upon the mixed people in the midst of her; and they shall be as women: a sword upon the treasures, and they shall be scattered upon her water, and they shall be ashamed: for it is a land of graven images; and in the islands, where they boasted. Therefore shall idols dwell in the islands, and the young of monsters shall dwell in it: it shall not be inhabited any more for ever.


Here we read that their treasure will be scattered on the waters, and they will be ashamed. The treasures here are their idols.
The reason they will be ashamed is because they take great pride in their idols, which will be scattered on the waters and be left desolate.
This is not the *reason* why God punishes Babylon, it is one of the consequences. Namely, they will be ashamed because their idols are scattered.

The reason God punishes Babylon is because the Babylonians echo Pharaoh, do not release their captives and oppress them.

File: 1752287921394598.png (21 KB, 573x449)

21 KB PNG

>>18049575
>Since he uses them in the same way, as a cudgel.
Well that's exactly what it is, they are squatting on land that is soaked in blood you know? You can be a blessing and a curse at the same time. Don't you people believe that Jesus and the law are curses?
>but the punishment on Babylon did not come from Israel
Well in this particular instance they were still the mechanism by which punishment was triggered though not the cudgel itself. But those verse there says specifically that drought and destruction will come because of their carved images and idols that's the main point I am making. This translation makes it explicit. Sure they were also punished for touching a hair on the chosen but again indirectly they do serve as a curse to everyone around them

Keep spamming verses without any argument and context, you well poisoning cunt.

>>18048110
This isn't necessarily true though. Galatians 1 warns the Galatian churches to beware of believing in other gospels. How could Paul mention the existence of Gospels, allbeit most likely Gnostic Gospels, if his epistles are older than the Gospels?
>CAPTCHA: GAYW4

>>18050201
what has made you so upset pagan?

>>18050211
"Gospel" just means the good news, and the "Other Gospels" are those preaching that one needs to follow the Torah.

File: 1729065203602553.jpg (113 KB, 615x1115)

113 KB JPG

>>18050222
>those preaching that one needs to follow the Torah.
oh like Jesus?

>>18050228
The author of Matthew has Jesus say this, likely in response to Mark which is Pauline, personally I belive next to nothing can actually be known about what Jesus really preached.

>>18050228
which means in 75% of the time he does not. 75 > 25.....Jesus wins again!

>>18048071
>genitally mutilated midrashic fictional jewish messiah of the tribal spirit of global finance from the Levant
vs
>genitally mutilated pharisaic mohel jew rabbi of the tribal spirit of global finance from Eastern Turkey
No thanks, I dislike usury and intend to keep my foreskin

>>18049233
You're such a weasel, Jew
You will appeal to Christ's authority to somehow justify the talmud, which contains evils specifically against Christ, but reject His authority in directing Christians to consume His body and blood?
You can't have it all weasel

You are a snake, a viper, a child of your father

>>18049460
Literally a content of their character moment

>>18048135
Notice how not a single Pauline Christian ITT has responded to this point (as it defeats their entire existential worldview).

>>18050759
>p-please don't show the inconsistencies in my religion!
Both the talmud and your scripture evolved, when Jesus was around the parts against him were not there you absolute moron. That does not mean he did not affirm the religion of the Pharisees. Since he gave them that authority Rabbinical Judaism is also given that authority since they are just modern day Pharisees

>>18050759
Jews take pride at being the "snake in the grass". It's actually in their Jew book and everything.

That's the psychopathy of the Jew. Everything that descent people know is good, the Jew thinks is "bad" and vise versa. It's literally just that predictable and meme tier. SAD.

File: b16.png (399 KB, 1001x286)

399 KB PNG

>>18048101
>The story of the Massacre of the Innocents is a very common trope
Even Pope Benedict XVI wrote about this in his Infancy Narratives book.
>Pontius Pilate name meaning sea and spear...
Mind blown.

>>18050187
>they are squatting on land that is soaked in blood
Blood cries out from the earth, Cain's guilt.
Also, squatters don't properly own the land. They are trespassers, who happen to enjoy legal protection. Hilarious, to identify Israel as a nation of squatters given current state.
The biblical Israel was given ownership of the land by God, not Britain.

>exactly what it is
They are supposed to be a nation set apart; that is to say, not like the other nations.
When the Israelite refugees passed through the land of Amalek, Amelek tried to destroy them.
Why they are told repeatedly to assist wayfarers, grant them meat and shelter.

Saying Israel is supposed to be just like other nations, just more brutal, is unbiblical and it really makes you think. Maybe you don't really know anything about the true Israel.

>you people
>be a blessing and a curse at the same time
Priceless.
That you cannot distinguish between blessing and curse betrays your complete debasement.

The bible is mostly about how the nation of Israel is mostly comprised of shitheads who continually keep fucking things up for themselves even when they are given all the gold in Egypt on a silver platter and witness a sea part for them, only continue existing because God uses them for a higher purpose, keeps pulling them out of the fire he puts them in to demonstrate that even when if they are unfaithful to him (despite repeated warnings) that he keeps his promises.

>drought and destruction ... because of their idols
Not in the LXX (best version), which reads that Babylon will come to shame because of their pride in idols, when these are scattered and left desolate.

>translation
I do not care which patent bait you decide to use.

>they were also punished for touching a hair on the chosen
No, God deliberately gave southern Israel over to Babylon.
It is because Babylon repeated the folly of Egypt that they were punished.
If Babylon had released them, there would have been no punishment.

To put it another way, why biblical Israel is said to be a nation set apart.

God is deeply jealous of Israel, which is why he punishes them when they go after idols and the strange gods in contravention of his commandments.
It's like how a husband acts when his wife is unfaithful, or when his children disobey him.

Why would God be jealous in the same way, when other nations raise up idols?
When did he ever give these other nations this covenant if that were his intent?
Simply put, he didn't offer a new covenant to all the nations divided by the confusion of tongues at Babel until the promise of the old covenant was fulfilled in the person of his only begotten son Jesus Christ.

This is why biblical Israel is a nation set apart; because God is jealous of them in a way he simply is not for other nations, and punishes them when they breach the terms of the covenant he made with them and their offspring specifically.

I know your insinuation.
That talmudic Noahide laws promulgated by certain rabbis are scripturally valid, that God commanded all nations to forego idolatry when he made the covenant with Noah.

And talmudic rabbis will themselves proudly state, outside these Noahide laws goyim are in no ways bound to the law of Moses. That law belongs to Israel alone. Problem is, that specific command does not exist in the bible.

Not with Noah, or Abraham. It is a blessing given only to the children of Israel, a curse upon them if they do not obey.
The commands God gave to Noah in the covenant he made with all flesh entail two things; that neither he nor his sons commit murder (because of the sin of Cain) and that neither he nor his sons drink blood or eat of living flesh (for which he excoriated the Nephilim with the deluge).

Nowhere in the text concerning Noah is found any mention of idolatry, because idolatry simply didn't exist yet.
In the days of Abraham even, God does not expressly forbid him from idolatry. In fact, his son's wife makes away with the idols of his father in law.

You wish it were true that God has forbidden the nations which he did not make the covenant of Moses with from idolatry.
Because it would reinforce your claim to dominion over their lands, lands which were never promised and which dominion was conditional on faithfulness to the commandments of his covenant.
Which covenant ye brake: therefore rather than the blessing (if ye obey), and the turning over of these lands which they could have marched against, they receive rather a curse (if ye will not obey). Because of this unfaithfulness, Christ himself says the Kingdom of Heaven is taken away from them and given to a nation bearing fruit of repentance.

God did not give judgement over the nations to the Pharisees, but rather Jesus Christ Redeemer; who fulfilled the promise by God's will in his blood.
In so far as the apostles have forbidden the faithful from idolatry, this applies to all nations.

bump

>>18051299

Mat. 23:5 "But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,"

Then He went and whipped the "Rabbinical Jews" bloody in their own temple with their own god powerless to stop it.