Saul's Revelation of Jesus Christ.

[mikesw]

Wow!

Do you know where he made his assertion about this "vision"?

He said that at the beginning of the original post

Now, I don't know about you but as a born-again Christian the thing Saul experienced on the road to Damascus in Acts 9 is the same experience that happened to me with a light and a voice from heaven speaking to me. Now, I cannot say if the light was witnessed by others in fellowship (Church), nor will I tell you what the voice said to me because it is between me and the Lord, but it played out the same way as with what happened with Annanias when in prayer when the Lord spoke to him and told him some things about Saul that confirmed to Saul that what the voice told him was true. Saul adds more information about his experience in Acts 22.

Paul said even if he preached another gospel than what he first preached in Galatia, let him be accursed. Elsewhere Paul mentions in 2 Cor 11:14 " And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light."

 

[Fred]

Now, I don't know about you but as a born-again Christian the thing Saul experienced on the road to Damascus in Acts 9 is the same experience that happened to me with a light and a voice from heaven speaking to me. Now, I cannot say if the light was witnessed by others in fellowship (Church), nor will I tell you what the voice said to me because it is between me and the Lord, but it played out the same way as with what happened with Annanias when in prayer when the Lord spoke to him and told him some things about Saul that confirmed to Saul that what the voice told him was true. Saul adds more information about his experience in Acts 22.

What a delusional and satanic load of nonsense and madness.

 

[mikesw]

What a delusional and satanic load of nonsense and madness.

the discussion definitely does not pertain to what scriptures say. it has to match with the secret information his voice told him.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Acts 9:27 refutes your heresy. By the way, so does Acts 23:11.

Thanks for making that easy for me.

If you believe that the Lord left heaven and came to earth a second time then you have to refer to His final coming in Revelation nineteen as the Twenty-ninth Coming of Jesus Christ. Or more.
Gentiles really have some inconsistent and false doctrine they believe in. And if it's false then you've erected a false idol of God and THAT is what you worship.

 

[mikesw]

If you believe that the Lord left heaven and came to earth a second time then you have to refer to His final coming in Revelation nineteen as the Twenty-ninth Coming of Jesus Christ. Or more.
Gentiles really have some inconsistent and false doctrine they believe in. And if it's false then you've erected a false idol of God and THAT is what you worship.

Your argument is illogical and does not reflect the nature and ability of Christ. You also have lost all creds since you deny the trustworthiness of the full New Testament. Plus, it does not help that you abuse the use of Paul's less used Jewish name; it makes it seem you do not pay attention to scripture very well.
If you were arguing from typical background knowledge (esp. NT writings) to add a well-formed change of perspective, you would do much better than what you present so far (regarding what I have seen of your posts).

 

[jeremiah1five]

That is quite an ignorant statement. First, you don't believe what Paul says and thus could say whatever you feel like about him.
It is obvious that Paul accepted Christ Jesus and suffered for the gospel. Paul is part of the remnant. You then claim that Pharisees were priests which is in no ways suggested in scripture. They were a political group and they pretended to be great spiritual examples but Jesus proved them to be frauds, especially since they were a party that was promoting the death of Jesus. So was God staying married to a people who killed his son?
The whole judgment on the people and the reason for Christianity was that the covenant with the earthly Israel people was being completed.

You should at least know the actual details of the religion you are following since you deny all that Christ has done.

I don't deny. I accept. I accept this truth clear as day.

4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. Gal. 4:3–5.

Case closed. That was the purpose of the Passover meal with His disciples. The Mosaic Law called for sacrifice to atone for the sins of the children of Israel. Nothing changed, except instead of a yearly sacrifice God sent His Son to die in place of the animal sacrifice to redeem those under the Law as commanded by the Law.
Jesus said He didn't come to destroy the Law. Any change in the Law after the fact would destroy the Law, but God didn't change the Law. His Son fulfilled it and by that sacrifice saved and redeemed and delivered Israel from sin and death.

 

[mikesw]

I don't deny. I accept. I accept this truth clear as day.

4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. Gal. 4:3–5.

Case closed. That was the purpose of the Passover meal with His disciples. The Mosaic Law called for sacrifice to atone for the sins of the children of Israel. Nothing changed, except instead of a yearly sacrifice God sent His Son to die in place of the animal sacrifice to redeem those under the Law as commanded by the Law.
Jesus said He didn't come to destroy the Law. Any change in the Law after the fact would destroy the Law, but God didn't change the Law. His Son fulfilled it and by that sacrifice saved and redeemed and delivered Israel from sin and death.

So you make another misrepresentation of Paul and state that your opinion has proven something.
As a clue for you, look at the change from 3rd person "them that were" to 1st person of "we might received" in Gal 4:5. Paul does not even include himself or the Galatians as those under the law. Also, you might be interested in more scripture to reject. Paul speaks past tense of "them" being under the law. Go figure. You have to claim higher authority than Paul to deny what he said. Then you have to convince us that you have higher authority than the New Testament. That should be an easy argument for you to make.

 

[jeremiah1five]

So you make another misrepresentation of Paul and state that your opinion has proven something.
As a clue for you, look at the change from 3rd person "them that were" to 1st person of "we might received" in Gal 4:5. Paul does not even include himself or the Galatians as those under the law. Also, you might be interested in more scripture to reject. Paul speaks past tense of "them" being under the law. Go figure. You have to claim higher authority than Paul to deny what he said. Then you have to convince us that you have higher authority than the New Testament. That should be an easy argument for you to make.

You're nitpicking and finding something by which to reject the passage in Galatians 4. Christians, that is TRUE Christians do not have the luxury of doing that, to look for ways to explain out a verse because it contradicts what you believe. That shows me you're not honest with Scripture and therefore not honest with God and His Christ. Proverbs 30:6 comes into play here.
Saul clearly says Christ came to redeem those under the Law which means the children of Israel. God gave Moses His Law for the children of Israel because they needed it if they were going to continue to be part of the Abrahamic Covenant, a covenant that was made with Abraham and his seed. And when his seed fulfilled prophecy of going into a land that is not theirs (Egypt) God delivered that covenant people who were in the millions after 430 years and brought them out to the desert. But you know that.
Under the Law the high priest did two things: pray for the people of God in covenant and offer sacrifices for the people of God in covenant. The high priest never left the Promised Land to go to Gentiles and pray for or offer sacrifices for them. Thus, for thousands of years non-Hebrew Gentiles were unatoned and lived and died without any consideration towards their eternal resting place other than to deliver them all to "hell."

Then we have the Law written in stone implying it cannot be changed without destroying the stone it was written on. Jesus made the same declaration, that He didn't come to change the Law but to fulfill it and to obey every precept that was written in the Law of Moses. Fulfilling the Law does not mean end of the Law because Israel was still instructed and commanded to read and study the Law for instruction in righteousness so that we may be complete and thoroughly furnished unto all good works and living. So, those under the Law (Israel) as born-again followers of Christ now use the Law for their instruction in right-wise living.

Jesus Christ as High Priest did two things: He prayed for the people of God and offered Himself as sacrifice for their sin. He did not change the Law to include non-Hebrew Gentiles. Scripture cannot be broken. It can be twisted and disregarded which is what many here do when Scripture contradicts their false theology, but it cannot be broken because God's Word is unbreakable. Nothing's changed. People still reject the Word every time it contradicts their pet theories. Then we have people who are here that are not true believers. They are fake. They can be seen when Scripture contradicts what they believe instead of allowing Scripture to dictate what they are supposed to believe. In my time on forums like this I have not found or interacted with anyone that says to me, "You're right. I never knew that Scripture existed," or "Thanks for that. Now I understand more fully what we're talking about." To me people who claim Christ and reject His Word actually reject Christ Himself and their profession to Christ is a lie.

So, if the animal sacrifice was used by God to atone for the sins of Israel for one year setting up the day when God's own Son would offer Himself as the eternal and perfect sacrifice for Israel's sins forever and finally doing it, all this talk about Christ also atoning for the sins of those not in covenant is just lies, a great delusion, one that I used to believe in until the Lord opened my eyes to understand that as a God of covenant He will do all He's promised and all He has promised has been promised to Israel. So, all this talk about non-Hebrew Gentiles being in the Abrahamic, Mosaic, or New Covenants is lies. There is no Scripture teaching this lie. And no true prophet or apostle will ever say a thing that is not found in the Law, Psalms, and Prophets - Hebrew Scripture, the only Scripture that is worthy of obedience because it is the Word of God to Israel, God is their God, it is their covenant, and God has saved them to the uttermost. If there is any passage in the New Covenant writings that contradict what is written in the Hebrew Scripture, then that person who said it is a false prophet or apostle. And I do not at this time believe anything written in the New Covenant contradicts the Old Covenant. Nothing. It all comes down to interpretation, and any interpretation that contradicts the Old Covenant writings is a fake and should be rejected. So, for now enjoy the Times of the Gentiles for very soon that time will end and even now is fast coming to a close and God will turn His full attention back to Israel and fulfill all remaining covenant obligations and prophecy. Christ ascended from the Mount of Olives. He's returning a SECOND TIME to Israel and is bringing something back with Him and that is Israel's salvation for everyone who is in covenant, and they are identified as Abraham and his seed and non-Hebrew Gentiles do not come from Abraham's seed. The animal sacrifice was never given to Gentiles and since Scripture - nor covenant - can be broken, neither was the human sacrifice (Christ) given to Gentiles either.
Masel Tov.

 

[Fred]

You're nitpicking and finding something by which to reject the passage in Galatians 4. Christians, that is TRUE Christians do not have the luxury of doing that, to look for ways to explain out a verse because it contradicts what you believe. That shows me you're not honest with Scripture and therefore not honest with God and His Christ. Proverbs 30:6 comes into play here.
Saul clearly says Christ came to redeem those under the Law which means the children of Israel. God gave Moses His Law for the children of Israel because they needed it if they were going to continue to be part of the Abrahamic Covenant, a covenant that was made with Abraham and his seed. And when his seed fulfilled prophecy of going into a land that is not theirs (Egypt) God delivered that covenant people who were in the millions after 430 years and brought them out to the desert. But you know that.
Under the Law the high priest did two things: pray for the people of God in covenant and offer sacrifices for the people of God in covenant. The high priest never left the Promised Land to go to Gentiles and pray for or offer sacrifices for them. Thus, for thousands of years non-Hebrew Gentiles were unatoned and lived and died without any consideration towards their eternal resting place other than to deliver them all to "hell."

Then we have the Law written in stone implying it cannot be changed without destroying the stone it was written on. Jesus made the same declaration, that He didn't come to change the Law but to fulfill it and to obey every precept that was written in the Law of Moses. Fulfilling the Law does not mean end of the Law because Israel was still instructed and commanded to read and study the Law for instruction in righteousness so that we may be complete and thoroughly furnished unto all good works and living. So, those under the Law (Israel) as born-again followers of Christ now use the Law for their instruction in right-wise living.

Jesus Christ as High Priest did two things: He prayed for the people of God and offered Himself as sacrifice for their sin. He did not change the Law to include non-Hebrew Gentiles. Scripture cannot be broken. It can be twisted and disregarded which is what many here do when Scripture contradicts their false theology, but it cannot be broken because God's Word is unbreakable. Nothing's changed. People still reject the Word every time it contradicts their pet theories. Then we have people who are here that are not true believers. They are fake. They can be seen when Scripture contradicts what they believe instead of allowing Scripture to dictate what they are supposed to believe. In my time on forums like this I have not found or interacted with anyone that says to me, "You're right. I never knew that Scripture existed," or "Thanks for that. Now I understand more fully what we're talking about." To me people who claim Christ and reject His Word actually reject Christ Himself and their profession to Christ is a lie.

So, if the animal sacrifice was used by God to atone for the sins of Israel for one year setting up the day when God's own Son would offer Himself as the eternal and perfect sacrifice for Israel's sins forever and finally doing it, all this talk about Christ also atoning for the sins of those not in covenant is just lies, a great delusion, one that I used to believe in until the Lord opened my eyes to understand that as a God of covenant He will do all He's promised and all He has promised has been promised to Israel. So, all this talk about non-Hebrew Gentiles being in the Abrahamic, Mosaic, or New Covenants is lies. There is no Scripture teaching this lie. And no true prophet or apostle will ever say a thing that is not found in the Law, Psalms, and Prophets - Hebrew Scripture, the only Scripture that is worthy of obedience because it is the Word of God to Israel, God is their God, it is their covenant, and God has saved them to the uttermost. If there is any passage in the New Covenant writings that contradict what is written in the Hebrew Scripture, then that person who said it is a false prophet or apostle. And I do not at this time believe anything written in the New Covenant contradicts the Old Covenant. Nothing. It all comes down to interpretation, and any interpretation that contradicts the Old Covenant writings is a fake and should be rejected. So, for now enjoy the Times of the Gentiles for very soon that time will end and even now is fast coming to a close and God will turn His full attention back to Israel and fulfill all remaining covenant obligations and prophecy. Christ ascended from the Mount of Olives. He's returning a SECOND TIME to Israel and is bringing something back with Him and that is Israel's salvation for everyone who is in covenant, and they are identified as Abraham and his seed and non-Hebrew Gentiles do not come from Abraham's seed. The animal sacrifice was never given to Gentiles and since Scripture - nor covenant - can be broken, neither was the human sacrifice (Christ) given to Gentiles either.
Masel Tov.

Your mouth one day will be stopped.

 

[Complete]

Subject Heading:- 'Paul's Revelation of Jesus Christ.'
@jeremiah1five

'And I said, "Who art Thou, Lord?"
And He said, "I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
But rise, and stand upon thy feet:
for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose,
to make thee a minister and a witness
both of these things which thou hast seen,
and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;
Delivering thee from the people,
and from the Gentiles,
unto whom now I send thee,
To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light,
and from the power of Satan unto God,
that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance
among them which are sanctified by faith that is in Me."'
(Acts 26:15-18)

'But I certify you, brethren,
that the gospel which was preached of me
is not after man.
For I neither received it of man,
neither was I taught it,
but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.'
(Gal 1:11-12)

* 'It is written'

Praise God!

 

[jeremiah1five]

Your mouth one day will be stopped.

Not even.
It's your infection of false Gentile theology. I know because I used to believe in that crap.
Ultimately, we must all see the same Jesus (1 Jn. 3:1-2), we must all say the same thing as God.
If your doctrine was in compliance with the Scripture, there would be no issue. But because of your diseased mind holding to false Gentile heresy on many points, especially where your theology is unmoored from true, biblical Christianity which is Hebrew in origin we'd see the same Jesus. But because you don't know what Moses said neither do you understand what Jesus said for Moses spoke about Him.

46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words? Jn 5:46–47.

And THAT, incidentally, is where your errors lie.

 

[mikesw]

You're nitpicking and finding something by which to reject the passage in Galatians 4. Christians, that is TRUE Christians do not have the luxury of doing that, to look for ways to explain out a verse because it contradicts what you believe. That shows me you're not honest with Scripture and therefore not honest with God and His Christ. Proverbs 30:6 comes into play here.
Saul clearly says Christ came to redeem those under the Law which means the children of Israel. God gave Moses His Law for the children of Israel because they needed it if they were going to continue to be part of the Abrahamic Covenant, a covenant that was made with Abraham and his seed. And when his seed fulfilled prophecy of going into a land that is not theirs (Egypt) God delivered that covenant people who were in the millions after 430 years and brought them out to the desert. But you know that.
Under the Law the high priest did two things: pray for the people of God in covenant and offer sacrifices for the people of God in covenant. The high priest never left the Promised Land to go to Gentiles and pray for or offer sacrifices for them. Thus, for thousands of years non-Hebrew Gentiles were unatoned and lived and died without any consideration towards their eternal resting place other than to deliver them all to "hell."

Then we have the Law written in stone implying it cannot be changed without destroying the stone it was written on. Jesus made the same declaration, that He didn't come to change the Law but to fulfill it and to obey every precept that was written in the Law of Moses. Fulfilling the Law does not mean end of the Law because Israel was still instructed and commanded to read and study the Law for instruction in righteousness so that we may be complete and thoroughly furnished unto all good works and living. So, those under the Law (Israel) as born-again followers of Christ now use the Law for their instruction in right-wise living.
. . .
He's returning a SECOND TIME to Israel and is bringing something back with Him and that is Israel's salvation for everyone who is in covenant, and they are identified as Abraham and his seed and non-Hebrew Gentiles do not come from Abraham's seed. The animal sacrifice was never given to Gentiles and since Scripture - nor covenant - can be broken, neither was the human sacrifice (Christ) given to Gentiles either.
Masel Tov.

What you call nitpicking is what sound people can exegesis. You have to look carefully at what a passage says or you are just making it say what you expect it to say.
You do have a tiny bit right. Jesus was sent because of the sin of Israel. However, Christ's work was not limited to that. Like we see with Gen 22, Christ is the offspring through whom the nations of the globe are blessed. To skip that means that Christ died for one generation and that scripture no longer has any relevance. This then undoes all you are saying. Therefore you make your own doctrine unfounded and therefore not worth sharing here.

 

[mikesw]

Not even.
It's your infection of false Gentile theology. I know because I used to believe in that crap.
Ultimately, we must all see the same Jesus (1 Jn. 3:1-2), we must all say the same thing as God.
If your doctrine was in compliance with the Scripture, there would be no issue. But because of your diseased mind holding to false Gentile heresy on many points, especially where your theology is unmoored from true, biblical Christianity which is Hebrew in origin we'd see the same Jesus. But because you don't know what Moses said neither do you understand what Jesus said for Moses spoke about Him.

46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words? Jn 5:46–47.

And THAT, incidentally, is where your errors lie.

For the astute reader of this thread, this poster has completely failed to recognize to whom Jesus spoke. Maybe Fred will correct me, but I sincerely do not think Jesus was speaking to Fred. (Fred, are you 2000 years old already?) Jesus was speaking to Pharisees who should have acknowledged both the era of judgment they faced as well as the identity of Jesus as the promised one. This again demonstrates that the poster does not understand the passage quoted here.
I would not normally seek to be so harsh, but this person needs to be much more cautious in the analysis of scripture.

 

[jeremiah1five]

What you call nitpicking is what sound people can exegesis. You have to look carefully at what a passage says or you are just making it say what you expect it to say.
You do have a tiny bit right. Jesus was sent because of the sin of Israel. However, Christ's work was not limited to that. Like we see with Gen 22, Christ is the offspring through whom the nations of the globe are blessed. To skip that means that Christ died for one generation and that scripture no longer has any relevance. This then undoes all you are saying. Therefore you make your own doctrine unfounded and therefore not worth sharing here.

You get too spiritually minded that you're no earthly good.

Two things: God made no covenant with Gentiles in the history before Christ's arrival.

The other thing is: God made covenant with Abram the Hebrew and with his seed.

One group has no covenant, the other group does. Jesus Himself said He didn't come to destroy the Law and it's true. He can't. No one can destroy God's Law. But He did fulfill it, NOT end it. So, what is the New Covenant? The kingdom of God does not come by observation but is IN YOU. What else is IN YOU? His Law, the one He promised through Jeremiah to put in the inward parts of the children of Israel - NOT Gentiles, for Gentiles are NOT the House of Israel nor of Judah. Gentiles are NOT the seed of Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob. Gentiles got nothing coming to them of God but destruction. Who does God bring against Israel right before the King of the Jews (Christ) returns? The nations. The Gentiles. The non-Hebrew.
You need to ask God to open your eyes. You don't have much time.

 

[jeremiah1five]

For the astute reader of this thread, this poster has completely failed to recognize to whom Jesus spoke. Maybe Fred will correct me, but I sincerely do not think Jesus was speaking to Fred. (Fred, are you 2000 years old already?) Jesus was speaking to Pharisees who should have acknowledged both the era of judgment they faced as well as the identity of Jesus as the promised one. This again demonstrates that the poster does not understand the passage quoted here.
I would not normally seek to be so harsh, but this person needs to be much more cautious in the analysis of scripture.

Regardless. The truth remains. If you don't know and understand the Old Covenant Scripture that shows Christ being prepared for the people, then you will not understand the New Covenant Scripture that prepares a people for Christ.

 

[mikesw]

Regardless. The truth remains. If you don't know and understand the Old Covenant Scripture that shows Christ being prepared for the people, then you will not understand the New Covenant Scripture that prepares a people for Christ.

I can note that for the 90% you get wrong, there is a bit of truth that Christ came for the sins of the Israel tribes. Reading the OT shows several major things. The first is that the Israel people kept sinning. They were ultimately judged for their sin (Rom 4:15 with the law comes wrath) and their judgment was even seen in Deut 32. Only a remnant were preserved. If you just look at OT, it could read as just a story of the Israel and its demise. However there are passages showing that non-Hebrew gentiles would also benefit. Paul shows that the benefits to gentiles are more readily known by way of mystery -- where a mystery in Paul's terms is some additional insight that completes the picture in the OT. You obviously fail to recognize the mysteries that God's apostles shared. That means your message is darkness and useless for humanity. It is not just a matter of debate since you are denying scripture and claim your vision gives higher authority than Paul.

 

[mikesw]

get too sp ally min ed that yo re no e hly ood.

Two in o made no ove ant with iles in the hi efor ri s arrival.

The other thing is: G adveant with m the brew an witseed.

One grou as noovennt, the o er group doe Jesus Himself sai t come to destroy th aw and it's true. He c 't. No one can dest aw. Bu did f ill it, T end it. So, what is t e venant? The kdo of ddo not come obser tion but is IN hat e e is IN YOU is Law, the one promised rough J em ah to p in th inw rd rts of the chil en of ra el - NOen iles, for tilesa eNOT t ouse ael no ud h entiles e O th seed of raha aac, Jac ntile ot n g comin hem of G struction. doe bring ainst ael before the g of s ( retur ns? The nat ns. e G iles. e n ebrew.
You ne o a to en y ey ou do av uch me.

I edited your text to make more sense. I'm glad I could clarify it for you

 

[jeremiah1five]

I can note that for the 90% you get wrong, there is a bit of truth that Christ came for the sins of the Israel tribes. Reading the OT shows several major things. The first is that the Israel people kept sinning. They were ultimately judged for their sin (Rom 4:15 with the law comes wrath) and their judgment was even seen in Deut 32. Only a remnant were preserved. If you just look at OT, it could read as just a story of the Israel and its demise. However there are passages showing that non-Hebrew gentiles would also benefit. Paul shows that the benefits to gentiles are more readily known by way of mystery -- where a mystery in Paul's terms is some additional insight that completes the picture in the OT. You obviously fail to recognize the mysteries that God's apostles shared. That means your message is darkness and useless for humanity. It is not just a matter of debate since you are denying scripture and claim your vision gives higher authority than Paul.

The bottom line is salvation is of the LORD and salvation is of the Jews. God keeps His promises to Abraham and to his seed, the children of Israel. At the Marriage Supper Israel is there through covenant. Gentiles are there by invitation (Matt. 22.)
The Abrahamic Covenant is "everlasting." This means eternal.

7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. Gen. 17:7.

God sent His Son to die for the sins of His covenant people Israel. And they all will be saved. From Abraham to the last Jew born. God has everlasting covenant with Abraham and his seed. God will keep all His promises He made to this people.

 

[jeremiah1five]

I edited your text to make more sense. I'm glad I could clarify it for you

rank u ery uch.