Paul and the Noble Lie

[Sensei Meela]

The search function doesn't seem to like the number 3 in my search term, but I know that (somewhere) is a discussion about Paul regarding Romans 3:7.

Here's the passage (http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=rom+3%3A5-8&NIV_version=yes&KJV_version=yes&language=english&x=9&y=3), in both NIV and KJV, for reference.

I put both versions in there because the post I seem to recall implied that Paul was writing about himself. It sorta looks that way in the KJV, but the NIV makes it rather clear he was 'assuming' a contenders position in order to refute it.

First question: do both versions say the same thing? And if not, isn't the NIV attempting to absolve Paul?

Second question (third, to be technical): even if Paul was not saying in Romans, 'Hey, if my lies win God more converts, is that so bad?' does he not make that position (what, I'm told, Plato referred to as a 'Noble Lie') rather explicit in Phil 1:18 and 1 Cor 9:20-22?

Or, in short, didn't Paul say that it's okay to lie in order to make a convert?

[sharon45]

Look at Romans 3:8, he explains further.

[sharon45]

If you want to find fault in paul that is very easily done, many passages to choose from, try just a little further down in Romans 19-20 and then on to 22 as examples of paul's outright lying.

[Sensei Meela]

Originally posted by sharon45
Look at Romans 3:8, he explains further. Right, well, that's why I put it in the link! ;) :D

Anyways, it still seems a bit like - 3:8 is a counterpoint to - 3:7 in the KJV; IOW, like he has written: 'Hey, I'm not saying (as is reported of me) we should do evil to bring God's good; I'm saying that lying to make converts is not evil!' The NIV makes it out that - 3:7 is saying (in anticipation of a critic) 'Hey, if lying men make God look good, why should we be condemned for making God look good?' which he then rewords in - 3:8, and refutes.

So which is it?

And (sorry to repeat myself) did or did not Paul advocate the Noble Lie?

[Yahzi]

Originally posted by Sensei Meela
'Hey, I'm not saying (as is reported of me) we should do evil to bring God's good; I'm saying that lying to make converts is not evil!'
So Paul and Long Winded Fool are the same guy?

Dang, I didn't know that.

:D :D :D

[Furyus George]

Originally posted by sharon45
If you want to find fault in paul that is very easily done, many passages to choose from, try just a little further down in Romans 19-20 and then on to 22 as examples of paul's outright lying.

Huh? Romans 3:19-20 and 22? Outright lying? Do you mind explaining this?

Furyus George, stumped

[sharon45]

Originally posted by Furyus George
Huh? Romans 3:19-20 and 22? Outright lying? Do you mind explaining this?

Furyus George, stumped I was just pointing these out, if you can't understand why it applies from really reading it through, I guess you will have to remain stumped.

I will give one hint to get you started though if you want: paul is most of the time trying to connect the OT god and law on through to his 'newly' created god and law for the NT.

[Sensei Meela]

Not to mention, that sharon was referring to chapters 19, 20 and 22; not to Romans chapter 3, verses 19, 20 and 22. I think.

[Rational BAC]

I think Paul was a bit of a con artist. Using his personal preferences to define and expand Christianity.

Was he really chosen by God to accomplish something or other?

I think so possibly anyway. He was chosen to expand Christianity exponentially by bringing in Gentiles by whatever means necessary to accomplish that.-----Lying if necessary.

Whether Christianity should have remained a small but correct Jewish cult without the work of St. Paul or whether it should have been allowed to expand to 2 billion Christian adherants today due to Paul is debateable.

Only God knows whether Paul made Christianity better and "universally" accessible or whether he screwed the whole thing up.

[ObiKenobi]

And I'd also like to point out to some theists, Iacchus in particular, that it was not Jesus who proclaimed that the 10 commandments and other parts of the OT were now null & void it was Paul who is most responsible in creating the "new convenant".

[Jayjay]

Originally posted by Sensei Meela
Anyways, it still seems a bit like - 3:8 is a counterpoint to - 3:7 in the KJV; IOW, like he has written: 'Hey, I'm not saying (as is reported of me) we should do evil to bring God's good; I'm saying that lying to make converts is not evil!'I don't really see how 3:8 could be construed as even implying that "lying to make converts is not evil". KJV may be a bit obscure on the subject, but in the end I think the most feasible interpretation is the NIV one.

[Furyus George]

Originally posted by sharon45
I was just pointing these out, if you can't understand why it applies from really reading it through, I guess you will have to remain stumped.

I will give one hint to get you started though if you want: paul is most of the time trying to connect the OT god and law on through to his 'newly' created god and law for the NT.

It wasn't the verses that had me stumped, Sharon. It is your unsubstantiated accusation that Paul lied in those verses.

I challenge you to show me where Paul is lying.

Furyus George, really read

[Sensei Meela]

Originally posted by Jayjay
I don't really see how 3:8 could be construed as even implying that "lying to make converts is not evil". KJV may be a bit obscure on the subject, but in the end I think the most feasible interpretation is the NIV one. Uh, you mean 3:7, right? For reference:

Romans 3 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=rom+3%3A5-8&NIV_version=yes&KJV_version=yes&language=english&x=13&y=13) (NIV)
5But if our unrighteousness brings out God's righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) 6Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? 7Someone might argue, "If my falsehood enhances God's truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?" 8Why not say--as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say--"Let us do evil that good may result"? Their condemnation is deserved.

Romans 3 (KJV)
5 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man)
6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?
7 For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?
8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.

So, no; I don't think the NIV is too unlcear. But it is less clear in the KJV. [Edited to add -- my opponent has tried to argue that Paul was not saying that our unrighteousness makes God more righteous...but that's not true, is it? Have I completely misread Paul -- who elsewhere said that God's grace increases with an increase in sin -- ??]

Even granting that Paul has condemned 'the Noble Lie' here, what to make of Phil 1:18 and 1 Cor 9:20-22?

For reference:
Philippians 1 (http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=Phil+1%3A15%2C+18%3B+1+Cor+9%3A20-22&NIV_version=yes&language=english&x=9&y=7)
15It is true that some preach Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill. ... 18But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice.

1 Corinthians 9
20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. 22To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.

It sure seems like Paul has no qualms about deceit and false motives when it brings people to God [deceit being a form of unrighteousness, and converts being a thing which brings God glory] and thus he doesn't follow his own advice (from Romans 3)...or am I totally wrong?

[Krosis]

I think this thread would go better in Biblical Criticism & History..

off we go..

-Krosis GRD moderator

[Sensei Meela]

Thanks for the recommendation, Krosis. I had originally intended it for BC&H but felt it wasn't necessarily a criticism or historical enough to merit putting it there.

[edited to add:]

Just to reiterate the main point I'm looking to discuss -- even granting that Paul has condemned 'the Noble Lie' in Rom 3, what to make of Phil 1:18 and 1 Cor 9:20-22?

[Sensei Meela]

Please, I must know!!

[Jayjay]

Originally posted by Sensei Meela
Uh, you mean 3:7, right? For reference:

[snip]No, I meant 3:8 as a counterpoint to 3:7, which sounds only plausible if 3:8 is what Paul really was saying, and 3:7 is the hypothetical where he is "speaking as a man". The contrary just doesn't make any sense; why would Paul first say that it's okay to lie, and immediately condemn it, if he really does want to say that it's okay after all? He may have been illogical at times, but not that illogical.


Even granting that Paul has condemned 'the Noble Lie' here, what to make of Phil 1:18 and 1 Cor 9:20-22?False motives is not the same as "noble lie", and adopting the habits of the ones you're trying to convert is not exactly deception, after all Paul doesn't really care about the laws either way and he was technically a Jew too, wasn't he?

I think you're chasing shadows... if Paul was a "noble liar", that would have been the first thing he'd lie about in his letters!

[sharon45]

In Phil. 1:18, I do not see this as a lie but it is somewhat a deception and it is very much like 1Cor 9. Paul feels as long as people even hear about a person name jesus, no matter that person's motives, that enough is to start 'the ball rolling' for them in time to really understand and be blessed by him(jesus).

With 1 Cor. 9:20-22, that is a deception also again, but more in the form as jesus was, jesus didn't bother much with those besides that were like how he passed himself as in his preaching, a poor simple man to talk with poor simple people. Since he knew he was neither, he knew he could 'rule' over them with his words of hope of a better life afterward. With statements like, "The first shall be last and the last shall be first", jesus was telling those poor people about exactly what they wanted to hear, there was in time, justice for the downtrodden. This process is used extensively in modern ways of converting people to christianity, with different forms being added all the time. That would be like those in the christian rock scene to 'kids' into extreme sports, christians try to reach as many as they can in the many different forms of people, by first being much like those they wish to convert for a more subtle approach to gain a person's trust. There are many christians that pose as Jews, learn Hebrew, follow the diet laws and such, but slowly hint to others among them about jesus. J4J was started by a christian, not a Jew.

[Sensei Meela]

Thank you for replying!
Originally posted by Jayjay
No, I meant 3:8 as a counterpoint to 3:7, which sounds only plausible if 3:8 is what Paul really was saying, and 3:7 is the hypothetical where he is "speaking as a man". The contrary just doesn't make any sense; why would Paul first say that it's okay to lie, and immediately condemn it, if he really does want to say that it's okay after all? He may have been illogical at times, but not that illogical.The "And not rather..." part is the tricky part; it could be interpreted as an extension of the previous line. Like, he could be saying (in 3:7-8) 'we can lie to increase Gods glory, but we shouldn't go around doing evil'. I don't think this is very teneble, and it is indeed rather illogical, so I move one.

adopting the habits of the ones you're trying to convert is not exactly deception, after all Paul doesn't really care about the laws either way and he was technically a Jew too, wasn't he?But was he "all things to all people" (foremost, was he a Gentile)? I'll agree that Paul may not have cared too much about such distinctions, and maybe 'deceptive' (while accurate) is too strong a word: 'beguiling' might be a better fit.
False motives is not the same as "noble lie"Perhaps...but if I may play Dictionary for a moment:

Pretense = false show; professed rather than real intention or purpose.
...compare to...
Beguile = to lead by deception; to engage the interest of by guile
...and...
Deceive = to be false, ensare
...and...
Lie = to create a false or misleading impression

In Phil., the preachers Paul refers to are certainly guilty of 'creating a false impression' of being men of God, in order that they may 'engage the interests' of the people, with 'professed rather than real intentions and purposes.'

I think you're chasing shadows...You're probably right.... if Paul was a "noble liar", that would have been the first thing he'd lie about in his letters! For some reason, this is funny to me, but I don't quite get it. Could you explain?

sharon45:
That's pretty much how I see those verses.

Thanks again for the responses!

[edit: Hello James, are you there?]

[Furyus George]

Originally posted by sharon45
In Phil. 1:18, I do not see this as a lie but it is somewhat a deception and it is very much like 1Cor 9. Paul feels as long as people even hear about a person name jesus, no matter that person's motives, that enough is to start 'the ball rolling' for them in time to really understand and be blessed by him(jesus).

How is this {Phil 1:9} deception? Paul is just glad Christ is being preached. Some were preaching out of "envy or rivalry" so their personal motives were not pure. Paul is saying that, hey, the word is getting out despite that the messengers may not have Christ's best interest at heart. Again, how is this deception?


With 1 Cor. 9:20-22, that is a deception also again...{snipped}

You are misinterpreting again, Sharon45. How is trying to fit in with a crowd deception? If you want to get a message to a bunch of bikers, ride a motorcycle. If you want to reach music fans, form a band. If you want to evangalize bowlers, set up a bowling team. How is this deception?

That would be like those in the christian rock scene to 'kids' into extreme sports, christians try to reach as many as they can in the many different forms of people, by first being much like those they wish to convert for a more subtle approach to gain a person's trust.

Trying to apeal to different groups is deception? I don't know you personally, but I can imagine you should stay away from marketing as a career choice.

There are many christians that pose as Jews, learn Hebrew, follow the diet laws and such, but slowly hint to others among them about jesus. J4J was started by a christian, not a Jew.

This is hilarious! As in previous posts, I ask that you back this up. By the way, logically, Jews for Jesus would be founded by a Christian! The group was founded by Moishe Rosen in 1970.

Furyus George, starting to recognize

[sharon45]

Furyus George,

You ask about why do I not back up what I cite, yet I have, just not enough to your personal satisfaction it would seem. I find that very curious from christians that mention "to back up 'claims'", yet, from their very own bible starting with, "In the beginning, when God created the universe..." all the way to, "May the grace of the Lord Jesus be with everyone", christians have ever to show really anything in the form of true evidence to back up any of these obvious brash claims.How is this {Phil 1:9} deception? Paul is just glad Christ is being preached. Some were preaching out of "envy or rivalry" so their personal motives were not pure. Paul is saying that, hey, the word is getting out despite that the messengers may not have Christ's best interest at heart. Again, how is this deception?Now, paul says it does not matter how the word is gotten across "whether from wrong or right motives." Even the pretenses of saying from Phil 1:15 onward, he has ever to back up one of his claims. Somehow he knows the inner thoughts and motives insides of others and even while he is inside prison. He has himself in such a grand position within Phil 1:16, he thinks god has given him the work of defending the gospels. How would he really know that, and how could he ever hope to show everyone else the proof of such a claim? All of these claims are not only grand indeed, but far out of reach to be truly presented as even evidence, all part of the deception of christianity: great promises without showing how this really could ever be met.You are misinterpreting again, Sharon45. How is trying to fit in with a crowd deception? If you want to get a message to a bunch of bikers, ride a motorcycle. If you want to reach music fans, form a band. If you want to evangalize bowlers, set up a bowling team. How is this deception?Just because you don't understand how this is deceptive, that means I am misinterpreting? No, you are claiming I am misinterpreting, you have yet to show where you feel this is. I have already shown why the passage is deceptive from stating paul learned it from the 'master', jesus himself.jesus didn't bother much with those besides that were like how he passed himself as in his preaching, a poor simple man to talk with poor simple people. Since he knew he was neither, he knew he could 'rule' over them with his words of hope of a better life afterward. With statements like, "The first shall be last and the last shall be first", jesus was telling those poor people about exactly what they wanted to hear, there was in time, justice for the downtrodden. This process is used extensively in modern ways of converting people to christianity, with different forms being added all the time.Afterall, jesus started the original deception acting as though he was sent from god on a mission to save everyone from (another one of his claims), hell. This is outright lying because he can't even produce a correct quote from the Tanach that even states such a place as hell, or anything about his 'mission' or any real evidence to show either, just his own say so. Paul ushers in around the same kind of outlandish claims of 'he is on a mission from god' and such. Both jesus and paul only have their word to 'back up' anything they claim, none have a hope to show anything in the way of true evidence to support these claims, so their claims have about as much validity as a claim I very well could make of holding both of them captive somewhere in a hidden prison cell. It is all put together on trust on faith, until properly proved, such impossible claims can only be seen as a way to deceive the more weak minded.

Paul states that while not actually being of a group he hopes to convert, he pretends to be like them in order to win them over. In 9:20-21 He puts it that he will act and live either like a Jew or a Gentile or order to win people over. He pretends to be under the law of Moses even though he states in the passage to be, in reality, under the law of christ, what else besides living in a pretense, but to deceive? One person can not exist as both a Jew and Gentile, but paul pretends to be either to win over converts. In 9:22, even though he is clearly not one of weak faith seen from his various writings, he tries to live like that and with those of weak faith to win them over, again, obviously deceptive, to be all things to all men, to in time, win them over.

Since you claim you see nothing wrong with those that pretend to be something that which they are not, to in time gain trust within a group, to lead them into a belief they see as right, and don't see that as deceptive; then you must not mind if an atheist or one of another religion, tries to join in with christians pretending to be as them, in order in time, to lead them away from christianity. Much like christians would think as anyone without christ is lost, so is it about the same with Jews when they have their members swayed away from Judaism, they think of them as dead or lost, it is a very heartbreaking experience.

If what a christian believes is right is being honestly shown and is not part of a deception of others so they can accept it also as being right, then it must be delt with in an all upfront honest manner, not pretending to be something that christian is not. People have to have the true free will to be able to truly decide for themselves, not have an illusion part of the motivating factor.This is hilarious! As in previous posts, I ask that you back this up. By the way, logically, Jews for Jesus would be founded by a Christian! The group was founded by Moishe Rosen in 1970.I don't wish to spend too much time on this because it doesn't completely have to do with the deception of paul but more the knowledge gained from that:In a book titled “Share the New Life with a Jew, “ Jews for Jesus founder Moishe Rosen, states, “ Don’t get sidetracked for the moment with discussions of the deity of Christ or the virgin birth…Important as these may be, correct theology is not what will save your friend.�The Patriot News, 11/10/89, ran an article on Jews for Jesus. Rosen admits that Jews for Jesus instructs its members to avoid contact with individuals who might present a different viewpoint. “Does a Ford dealer tell his customers to go talk to the Chevrolet dealer?� He says, “the idea that we should let our people talk to our detractors – come on!�Also, with groups being created like 'Jews for Allah', their plan is to even "surpass 'Jews for Jesus'".

Do a search of "Martin Rosen" and "jesus" together and anyone can find lots of info for themselves. "Martin", that was the founder's name of "Jews for Jesus, a deceptive proselytizing technique" before he changed it to be more like a Jew to win over converts. They count him as a baptist minister ordainded in 1957 and was assigned to serve the American Board of Missions (missionaries) to the Jews from many sources, and that allegedly he is a Jew by birth who converted to christianity in the mid 1950's and much more. Here are two pages talking about him, first from a book review and second from about a large recent missionary campaign.

http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/web/bookreviews/yeshuawaytosayjesus.htmlY'shua: The Jewish Way to Say Jesus, a book by the Rev. Martin Rosen, founder of the Jews for Jesus missionary organization, is an excellent example of the scripture-twisting and general misuse of source material that underlies missionary Christianity. Its author's selective use of rabbinic sources and B.C.E. (Before Common Era) and C.E. (Common Era) in chronologic dating is a facade behind which he presents the Jews for Jesus organization's ersatz Jewishness. Meant to be used in witnessing to Jewish people in a lucid, relaxed style, it aims to disarm the Jewish reader, attempting to impress him with the supposed Jewish character of this volume. Rosen's work is a thinly veiled attempt to spread the Christian message by the use of unethical manipulation of the basic principles of scholarship. Y'shua is a poorly researched rehashing of the familiar missionary distortions of the Bible and the New Testament. Comments will be confined to a sampling of the egregious errors endemic to this work.http://www.cjc.ca/template.php?Rec=61&action=opedThe Jewish community of Toronto will soon be subjected to a new attack by an old foe. From August 25 until September 14, missionaries from the Jews for Jesus organization will descend upon our city as part of their “Behold Your God� campaign. This five-year initiative, targeting cities worldwide with Jewish populations of 25,000 or more, will spend over $22 million (US) to convince Jews to embrace Jesus. The deceptive thrust of this shameless crusade will be to promote the absurd idea that converting to Christianity is the most Jewish thing one can do.It’s important to understand [b]what drives Jews for Jesus’ obsession with claiming that “it’s Jewish to believe in Jesus�. In truth, it is part of a shrewd marketing strategy that was developed at numerous missionary conferences decades ago that struggled with overcoming centuries of poor results evangelizing Jews. Their research revealed the existence of certain baseline axioms that are universally held even by the most assimilated Jews with virtually no religious education. In addition to the belief in one God, one of these truisms is that Jews do not believe that Jesus was the Messiah. In choosing their organization’s name and provocative tactics calculated to generate maximum exposure, Jews for Jesus has sought to square a theological circle. What was once an impossible oxymoron on par with “atheists for God� or “vegetarians for meat�; Jews for Jesus labours to legitimate through misleading rhetoric and mass marketingAnd from more of the Jewish perspective:We must stress that our purpose here is not to judge the merits of one religion over another. It is simply and respectfully to note that the theological positions of Judaism and Christianity are not congruent, and that attempts to cloud this issue are dishonest.And finally:Furyus George, starting to recognizeYet another pretense.

[Furyus George]

You ask about why do I not back up what I cite, yet I have, just not enough to your personal satisfaction it would seem. I find that very curious from christians that mention "to back up 'claims'", yet, from their very own bible starting with, "In the beginning, when God created the universe..." all the way to, "May the grace of the Lord Jesus be with everyone", christians have ever to show really anything in the form of true evidence to back up any of these obvious brash claims.

Here is the entire post you wrote earlier in this thread:

If you want to find fault in paul that is very easily done, many passages to choose from, try just a little further down in Romans 19-20 and then on to 22 as examples of paul's outright lying.

An unsubstantiated "brash claim" if I've ever seen one. As for "in the Beginning, God..." many scientists hypothesize that the universe is not eternal, with both time and space beginning with The Big Bang. Genesis 1:1 may be truer than you'd care to admit, but I digress.

Now, paul says it does not matter how the word is gotten across "whether from wrong or right motives."

Taken in context of the passage {Phil 15-18} Paul says that some preach "out of selfish ambition, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I'm in chains." Paul goes on to say "What does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached." He is saying that he doesn't care if those with wrong motives stir up trouble for him as long as Christ is preached. This is hardly an endorsement of deception.

Even the pretenses of saying from Phil 1:15 onward, he has ever to back up one of his claims. Somehow he knows the inner thoughts and motives insides of others and even while he is inside prison.

Seeing that Phillipians is a letter to believers in Phillipi, it isn't much of a stretch to believe that these same believers had informed him of those with wrong motives, either in letters of their own or personal visits.

He has himself in such a grand position within Phil 1:16, he thinks god has given him the work of defending the gospels. How would he really know that, and how could he ever hope to show everyone else the proof of such a claim?

Phil 1:16 ~ "The latter do so in love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel."

Where does it say in this verse that God gave him this task? And considering Paul's conversion, how can we know exactly what God put on Paul's heart? In a more modern colloquial, it could be said that Paul not only talked the talk, he walked the walk. Considering he killed Jesus' followers prior to his conversion, his own ministry and death are pretty solid proof to me that something happened to Paul.

All of these claims are not only grand indeed, but far out of reach to be truly presented as even evidence, all part of the deception of christianity: great promises without showing how this really could ever be met.Just because you don't understand how this is deceptive, that means I am misinterpreting? No, you are claiming I am misinterpreting, you have yet to show where you feel this is.

To you the verses { 1 Cor 9:19-23} may seem deceptive, but I dare say you won't find any biblical scholars to back you up. Paul says that "To the Jews I become like a Jew to win the Jews. To those under the law I become like one under the law..." etc. What he is saying is that he's not going to ask if he can repair a Jew's roof on the Sabbath so he can discuss Christ, because those under the law don't work on the Sabbath. He isn't going to invite a Jew over for pork bar-b-cue since Jews don't eat pork. I think a far better word to describe Paul in these verses is not deception, but empathetic.

I have already shown why the passage is deceptive from stating paul learned it from the 'master', jesus himself. Afterall, jesus started the original deception acting as though he was sent from god on a mission to save everyone from (another one of his claims), hell. This is outright lying because he can't even produce a correct quote from the Tanach that even states such a place as hell, or anything about his 'mission' or any real evidence to show either, just his own say so.

Seeing that there are over 30 prophesies about Jesus that came true in the last twenty-four hours prior to His crucifixtion, I'd say that indeed Christ was "sent from God on a mission." As for hell, try Daniel 12:2 for starters. Hell wasn't fully established as punishment until the NT, but the OT does not deny its existence, but rather leads up to it.

Paul states that while not actually being of a group he hopes to convert, he pretends to be like them in order to win them over. In 9:20-21 He puts it that he will act and live either like a Jew or a Gentile or order to win people over. He pretends to be under the law of Moses even though he states in the passage to be, in reality, under the law of christ, what else besides living in a pretense, but to deceive? One person can not exist as both a Jew and Gentile, but paul pretends to be either to win over converts. In 9:22, even though he is clearly not one of weak faith seen from his various writings, he tries to live like that and with those of weak faith to win them over, again, obviously deceptive, to be all things to all men, to in time, win them over.

I've dealt with this earlier. I'm compelled to add that Paul did not see "weak faith," he said "weak." Big difference. Again, empathy, not deception. If you choose to see it as deception, feel free, but you are incorrect.

I've snipped all the "Jews for Jesus" info you posted. None of it dealt with your claim: There are many christians that pose as Jews, learn Hebrew, follow the diet laws and such, but slowly hint to others among them about jesus." This is nonsense.

By the way, you insinuate that my closing signature is pretense, even though we've never met and you know nothing about me. At the same time, you belittle Paul for knowing someone's motives even though he was imprisoned. Interesting.

Furyus George, isn't deceiving anyone.

[Sensei Meela]

As for "in the Beginning, God..." many scientists hypothesize that the universe is not eternal, with both time and space beginning with The Big Bang. Genesis 1:1 may be truer than you'd care to admit, but I digress.This is a little misleading...many (most?) scientists think that 'the universe' is eternal, and it's presently recognizable space/time began at the big bang (shortly thereafter, but I am following you on your digression anyways, so let's return to the OP)...

Taken in context of the passage {Phil 15-18} Paul says that some preach "out of selfish ambition, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I'm in chains." Paul goes on to say "What does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached." He is saying that he doesn't care if those with wrong motives stir up trouble for him as long as Christ is preached. This is hardly an endorsement of deception.How might one who preaches the Good News of Christ be stirring up trouble for the self-proclaimed defender of the Gospel? It would seem to me that the 'trouble' they 'stir-up' would be from lies and misinformation, if for no other reason than that those who preach have lied about their status. And if Paul hasn't 'endorsed' or 'condoned' it here, he hasn't exactly rebuked them either -- save possibly the Romans passage where he 'justifies' the condemnation of a liar -- and he seems not to mind people lying about who they are in order to preach Christ, in deed (see also 1 Corinthians).

The short of it is: I read Paul saying he doesn't care who, why or how one preaches "God's truth" if it leads people to Him. He wants you to buy his story -- and it seems you have, for you assume it is "God's truth" that he's pitching, in the first place -- and so long as you've 'heard the pitch,' he rejoices!



Phil 1:16 ~ "The latter do so in love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel."

Where does it say in this verse that God gave him this task?Who else might have 'put him here'? It's implied. And considering Paul's conversion, how can we know exactly what God put on Paul's heart?Good question. And given the contradictory nature of his conversion accounts, can we even take it seriously as a real event? That's another sidetracking question, though, so let's not digress.


To you the verses { 1 Cor 9:19-23} may seem deceptive, but I dare say you won't find any biblical scholars to back you up. Paul says that "To the Jews I become like a Jew to win the Jews. To those under the law I become like one under the law..." etc. What he is saying is that he's not going to ask if he can repair a Jew's roof on the Sabbath so he can discuss Christ, because those under the law don't work on the Sabbath. He isn't going to invite a Jew over for pork bar-b-cue since Jews don't eat pork. I think a far better word to describe Paul in these verses is not deception, but empathetic.

Paul's "When in Rome, do as the Romans" approach is deceptive -- or at best beguiling -- and altogether inapporpriate for an honest man of God. Paul was clearly not "all things to all people," [foremost, a Gentile or a pagan...and even if he were, aren't Christians supposed to remain Christians at all times, renouncing all ties to their former 'selves' and becoming 'born again,' anyways?]. Saying he was 'sensitive to their beliefs' may be a bit of a stretch...

Seeing that there are over 30 prophesies about Jesus that came true in the last twenty-four hours prior to His crucifixtion, I'd say that indeed Christ was "sent from God on a mission."A dubious claim, indeed. We've been over 'prophecy' (sp. re: the messiah) on these boards plenty, so it doesn't warrant me restating, and neither is it entirely relevant.

[sharon45]

Here is the entire post you wrote earlier in this thread:

If you want to find fault in paul that is very easily done, many passages to choose from, try just a little further down in Romans 19-20 and then on to 22 as examples of paul's outright lying.

An unsubstantiated "brash claim" if I've ever seen one. As for "in the Beginning, God..." many scientists hypothesize that the universe is not eternal, with both time and space beginning with The Big Bang. Genesis 1:1 may be truer than you'd care to admit, but I digress.This has already been gone over enough so I don't need to again bother. You have yet to truly back up these impossible claims.Taken in context of the passage {Phil 15-18} Paul says that some preach "out of selfish ambition, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I'm in chains." Paul goes on to say "What does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached." He is saying that he doesn't care if those with wrong motives stir up trouble for him as long as Christ is preached. This is hardly an endorsement of deception.About the same as above, yet you again are just stating what you think this means instead of just plain reading what paul is writing.Seeing that Phillipians is a letter to believers in Phillipi, it isn't much of a stretch to believe that these same believers had informed him of those with wrong motives, either in letters of their own or personal visits.You are again just plain assuming this, it is not stated, even if it were, it would be still hear say, I could also claim anything I would like as well, means nothing.Phil 1:16 ~ "The latter do so in love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel."

Where does it say in this verse that God gave him this task? And considering Paul's conversion, how can we know exactly what God put on Paul's heart? In a more modern colloquial, it could be said that Paul not only talked the talk, he walked the walk. Considering he killed Jesus' followers prior to his conversion, his own ministry and death are pretty solid proof to me that something happened to Paul.The word "god" is in my version, so sorry then, I guess it looks much better to you that paul self-appointed himself "the defender of the gospels" without god's approval, or without knowing who appointed him, maybe the devil did? Either appointed by paul himself, god, or even the devil, it really doesn't matter, because there is nothing at all shown to back up any claim he or you could make in this matter as your second part once again just assumes. In my conjecture, I could easily know not to trust anyone with a history similar to paul's.To you the verses { 1 Cor 9:19-23} may seem deceptive, but I dare say you won't find any biblical scholars to back you up. Paul says that "To the Jews I become like a Jew to win the Jews. To those under the law I become like one under the law..." etc. What he is saying is that he's not going to ask if he can repair a Jew's roof on the Sabbath so he can discuss Christ, because those under the law don't work on the Sabbath. He isn't going to invite a Jew over for pork bar-b-cue since Jews don't eat pork. I think a far better word to describe Paul in these verses is not deception, but empathetic.In the first part, where would you have anything to back up this quite obvious brash claim once again? Besides, in with your second part, this has already been shown enough, I guess you will just have to assume and disagree as you've held onto so far instead of just actually reading paul's text. He says he will be as a Jew, not just try to respect a Jews laws, he says, he will become all things to all men, that isn't just in the order of respect as you assume. Respect would be a much better word not empathy, but still would be already very obvious, not exactly worth going on and on into such details about as he clearly does for a reason, one that seems to have escaped you.Seeing that there are over 30 prophesies about Jesus that came true in the last twenty-four hours prior to His crucifixtion, I'd say that indeed Christ was "sent from God on a mission." As for hell, try Daniel 12:2 for starters. Hell wasn't fully established as punishment until the NT, but the OT does not deny its existence, but rather leads up to it.Seeing as all from the whole 300+ christian prophecies, none really refer to the real coming Messiah being as the character of jesus and even some are contained within the book of Psalms which do not contain any prophecies at all let alone about the Messiah or jesus. And I said you can't find any reference to hell in the Tanach, you can find many in the various corruptions listed as the "OT", but that is really not anywhere near a correct source.I've dealt with this earlier. I'm compelled to add that Paul did not see "weak faith," he said "weak." Big difference. Again, empathy, not deception. If you choose to see it as deception, feel free, but you are incorrect.Again, sorry, "weak in faith" in listed in my version, instead with yours, it is left as a general term meaning which could mean weak in anything, strength, spirit, faith, mentality, etc. Mine has it listed in what would more closely fit in with paul's current subject. It still shows one of deception because he clearly wants to pass himself off as though he were weak to win over those who are again weak.I've snipped all the "Jews for Jesus" info you posted. None of it dealt with your claim: There are many christians that pose as Jews, learn Hebrew, follow the diet laws and such, but slowly hint to others among them about jesus." This is nonsense.I said it really wasn't related completely with the OP, but I did indeed show my case. You wanted other sources, I gave them, and it is very easy to do research on your own to find these things out without just listening to me. In my articles I had links to, they state a few times about how J4J is deceptive, you can find facts from Jewish sites and former members of J4J about this subject if you are really interested,(which so far, you show you are not).
By the way, you insinuate that my closing signature is pretense, even though we've never met and you know nothing about me. At the same time, you belittle Paul for knowing someone's motives even though he was imprisoned. Interesting.Because I have been doing this for about thirty years. I've talked with many claimed christians and most of what I see posted on this board has already been a thoroughly delt with subject. I don't claim to have to know you, my experience tells me enough, yet your statement instead implies that you think you know something extraabout me. Until you back up this statement, whether my assumption is correct or not, it remains still just a pretense just like your latest stated below.Furyus George, isn't deceiving anyone.

[Furyus George]

...snipped...In my conjecture,......snipped...

Exactly. Your conjecture.

Seeing as all from the whole 300+ christian prophecies, none really refer to the real coming Messiah being as the character of jesus and even some are contained within the book of Psalms which do not contain any prophecies at all let alone about the Messiah or jesus.

Yes, seeing as all. Sure. I like how you continue to make statements like this with such authority, yet if I say the sky is blue you scream "Pretense!"

And I said you can't find any reference to hell in the Tanach, you can find many in the various corruptions listed as the "OT", but that is really not anywhere near a correct source.

So in this case, the Tanach and the OT aren't similar? In many of your own posts, you refer to the "Tanach/OT." Why the inconsistency?

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?p=1509020#post1509020
"As told within the Tanach/OT a real prophet is the mediator between G-d and the Jewish people."

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?p=1508862#post1508862
"The subject of hell is used by christians as a very powerful tool, yes, but hell it is not a part of the Tanach/OT and that version of a god. Much of the NT can not be explain without trying first so, out of most of the confines of the Tanach/OT writings."

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?p=1508777#post1508777
"By the Tanach/OT, it is clearly stated over and over, there is only one true god. The New Covenant is stated in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and while christians think otherwise, this does not in anyway change facts from within the Tanach/OT of that Prophet. Jesus is stated in Deut. 13 as I and many others have many times pointed out, again thoroughly ignored by christians. The NT makes claims it can't in anyway back up as having a true connection with the Tanach/OT, so they have to remain as claims only until done so."

You wanted other sources, I gave them, and it is very easy to do research on your own to find these things out without just listening to me. In my articles I had links to, they state a few times about how J4J is deceptive, you can find facts from Jewish sites and former members of J4J about this subject if you are really interested,(which so far, you show you are not).

Here is your original claim, made earlier in this thread:
"There are many christians that pose as Jews, learn Hebrew, follow the diet laws and such, but slowly hint to others among them about jesus."

None of the quotes you provided had anything to do with your claim. As for visiting your links and proving your claims, nice try. Do your own work.

I don't claim to have to know you, my experience tells me enough, yet your statement instead implies that you think you know something extraabout me. Until you back up this statement, whether my assumption is correct or not, it remains still just a pretense just like your latest stated below.

Here is a statement you made earlier in this thread mocking Paul: "Somehow he knows the inner thoughts and motives insides of others and even while he is inside prison." Yet your experience allows you to reach conclusions about me. Why are the two situations different?

I do know something about you, and I didn't use my experience, I used NotePad and the search feature: you hate Christianity, and by extension, I can assume, me. Hatred is definitely an un-evolved emotion, eh?

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?p=1500611#post1500611
"Although I have an absolute hatred of christianity and a lot of the bible, it still does contain some parts of real wisdom and goodwill with characters having much positive thoughts and actions in their various stories."

Furyus George, prefers ostentatious

[sharon45]

Furyus George,

I will not give this much attention since by the responses, it is more shown that you want to argue, state fallacies, twist, play games, and use assumptions than to really debate. This I already knew from your first response, but entertained you anyway. I and others have made our points quite clear, yet with each response, you continue to ignore them and clearly as pointed out, paul's own writings themselves. Instead, you more and more, push this thread further away from the OP, so to give your responses much time, is really a bad idea getting worse.

As I said before, I use my experience, you can continue to use the search command as you like. I use Tanach/OT when it pertains to both at once as should have been clear enough. There is only one Tanach, yet many many versions of the OT. Hell is not listed in all versions of the OT. And that wasn't really counted as even a response to my answer about prophecy, more like yet another assumption.

You continue to assume as I have pointed out enough already, yes, I've made it more than enough clear that I hate christianity, but I hate no christian, just its mythical founder. Hatred is a real emotion, nothing primitive when used against those that already hate, kill, and oppress others, in other words, when used against beliefs and regimes like christianity. Hate is primitive when taken to contradiction of a person's ethics, another match for beliefs like christianity. Christianity hated me long before I had even heard of it or known what it was.

[sharon45]

I wanted to try to make a few comments on another passage I found that relates with this OP.

In 1 Corinthians 10:32-11:1, paul states to not cause trouble to either Jew or Gentile or to the church of god and try to please everyone so that he might save them, and with that he says imitate me as I imitate christ.

1. In order to preach and win over Jews, concerning Jewish belief and to Jews themselves, that is causing harm to them and their families and for them to stumble, because his beliefs go counter to those of Judaism, afterall, they are Jews not christians. In enough passages from the NT, jesus is shown to be an example of the warning in Deut. 13, he wants to divide people, he wants to separate Jews from what they were taught before, these are to be replaced by what he is teaching now.

2. Then in trying to please everyone, that is a deception, he does not in anyway have to agree with people, and if they are not a christian, that is already implied, yet, he will try as he can to please anyone in order to win them over to christ.

3. He states that in this manner he is imitating christ, but in the NT, jesus goes out of his way to speak with authority and give his own opinions as though they were from god himself. In many passages, that had close enough to riots starting from those that were angered by what he said, wanting him stoned. Jesus simply states his messages most of the time, he is not really showing much interest or concern with the audience's wellfare, his words are the new law, my way or the highway. Not exactly showing a person wishing only to please people in order for his message to get through. Jesus does not really pass himself off as "all things to all men" as paul wants to do in order to win over people. To imitate jesus in some ways is nothing impressive, since jesus was a human, almost everyone who has ever lived, imitated jesus in some way within their life without even having to know such a person existed.

That last point relates to the so-called 300+ prophecies pertaining to jesus. It's very easy to find passages out of the OT and try to fit/force/stage them into the NT's stories and beliefs. Of the many cited passages, they are really talking about such completely unrelated and also common things with many out of context. I am disappointed that christians have not really found thousands of prophecies in relation to jesus instead.

[Kilgore Trout]

Here is a perfect example of Paul's lies and deception.
Romans 3:10-14:

As it is written:
"There is no one righteous, not even one;
there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one."
"Their throats are open graves;
their tongues practice deceit."
"The poison of vipers is on their lips."
"Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness."
All of these are lines Paul took out of various psalms. They are referring to specific groups of people. They are saying things like "evil people are...", "my enemies are..." Romans 3:10-12 I'm not sure about. It's taken from Psalm 14...
1 The fool says in his heart,
"There is no God."
They are corrupt, their deeds are vile;
there is no one who does good.

2 The LORD looks down from heaven
on the sons of men
to see if there are any who understand,
any who seek God.
3 All have turned aside,
they have together become corrupt;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.

4 Will evildoers never learn-
those who devour my people as men eat bread
and who do not call on the LORD ?
5 There they are, overwhelmed with dread,
for God is present in the company of the righteous.
6 You evildoers frustrate the plans of the poor,
but the LORD is their refuge.

7 Oh, that salvation for Israel would come out of Zion!
When the LORD restores the fortunes of his people,
let Jacob rejoice and Israel be glad!

Note it starts out saying "the fool says..." It does say "all" have turned aside but then it says evildoers devour "my people". If EVERYONE is evil why does god still have "people"? So I think saying "all have turned aside" is another example of how the psalms use hyperbole.

Even if that part does fit, the rest doesn't. Paul is piecing these together like they all belong together and they don't. He is taking these out of context. It's like when a movie reviewer says something like "This is the best example of a movie that will bore you to death that I have ever seen" And then the ads for the movie say "This is the best...movie" That is lying and deception. Taking quotes from the OT out of context is a common deceptive tactic in the NT.



I've snipped all the "Jews for Jesus" info you posted. None of it dealt with your claim: There are many christians that pose as Jews, learn Hebrew, follow the diet laws and such, but slowly hint to others among them about jesus." This is nonsense.

Of course you snipped it. Sharon45 presented good evidence that Jews for jesus uses deceptive tactics so you want to just ignore it. Why would you want to confront something that proves christians use deceptive tactics? If you just ignore it, it might go away. This is a deceptive tactic on your own part. Even if Sharon45 gave you the exact evidence you are asking for, you wouldn't believe it anyway. Since Martin Rosen was a Baptist minister for 13 years or so before he started Jews for jesus, that shows that he was not currently a Jew when he founded it. That is very deceptive. When a Jew becomes a christian, they are no longer a Jew. Calling himself Moishe is just further deception. Why didn't he use that name when he was a Baptist?

Seeing that there are over 30 prophesies about Jesus that came true in the last twenty-four hours prior to His crucifixtion, I'd say that indeed Christ was "sent from God on a mission."

Those so-called prophesies are more deceptive tactics that christians use. For example, psalm 22 is just another psalm about a man in trouble, it is not a valid prophecy. Funny how jesus doesn't fullfill any of the valid messianic prophecies, because he's "going to do them when he comes back", but because he can actually quote from psalm 22 before he dies, and he rides a donkey into Jerusalem that's supposed to be an amazing fullfillment of prophecy! :notworthy Anybody who was beaten and crucified would "fullfill" the verifiable parts of Isaiah 53. All the parts about dying for our sins and things like that cannot be verified in our reality, so claiming he fullfilled those is begging the question. In other words you claim he is the messiah because he fullfills these prophecies, but the only reason why you think he fullfilled those prophecies is because you claim he is the messiah.

Jesus is a false prophet as defined in Deut 13 because he was teaching ideas contrary to the Torah, all your alleged prophecies are not going to make up for that.

[Furyus George]

Here is a perfect example of Paul's lies and deception.
Romans 3:10-14:

All of these are lines Paul took out of various psalms. They are referring to specific groups of people. They are saying things like "evil people are...", "my enemies are..." Romans 3:10-12 I'm not sure about. It's taken from Psalm 14...

Pual is quoting various Psalms, Isaiah and Ecclisiastes. Let's put things in context, though: He is writing a letter! He is making a point! Instead of starting at Romans 3:10, why not include verse nine as well?

What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin.

Then he writes as it is written:

Paul doesn't represent what he is quoting as though it came from one place. Shall I go over to the science forums and hold everyone to the same standard as you demand of Paul?

Note it starts out saying "the fool says..." It does say "all" have turned aside but then it says evildoers devour "my people". If EVERYONE is evil why does god still have "people"? So I think saying "all have turned aside" is another example of how the psalms use hyperbole.

Again, context. First of all, what is a Psalm? Simply put, is a prayer or song to God. Many, believer and non-believer alike, consider it poetry. David wrote the beginning of Psalm 14 from what he felt was God's perspective, and then finishes with words of encouragement for his oppressed people. Therefore, it is easily understood how "all" could be evil, and yet there still be some who are God's people. As for the fool, he is not referring to an atheist. He is referring to someone who pays lip service to God, yet "in his heart" says there is no God.

Even if that part does fit, the rest doesn't. Paul is piecing these together like they all belong together and they don't. He is taking these out of context. It's like when a movie reviewer says something like "This is the best example of a movie that will bore you to death that I have ever seen" And then the ads for the movie say "This is the best...movie" That is lying and deception. Taking quotes from the OT out of context is a common deceptive tactic in the NT.

No, they are not out of context. They are examples of sin. Do you really think that Paul meant those he was speaking of actually had poison from vipers on their lips? Do you think that their throats were actually open graves? Paul was trying to make a point. This is not lying and it is not deception.

Of course you snipped it. Sharon45 presented good evidence that Jews for jesus uses deceptive tactics so you want to just ignore it.

Sharon 45 did not present evidence to back up her claim that "many" Christians will dress like Jews, follow the food laws, etc. Lets say there are 10,000 Christians that do so, though I'd be willing to bet you'd be hard pressed to find 100. In any case, how many Christians are there worldwide, a billion? Two billion? 10,000 out of a billion is not "many." She just tosses it out, like much she writes, as though one only need go as far as the next street over to find a Christian "acting" like a Jew. I stand by my response: Nonsense.

When a Jew becomes a christian, they are no longer a Jew. Calling himself Moishe is just further deception. Why didn't he use that name when he was a Baptist?

One can most certainly be a Jew and a Christian. Heck, I know Jews who don't even believe in God.

All the parts about dying for our sins and things like that cannot be verified in our reality, so claiming he fullfilled those is begging the question. In other words you claim he is the messiah because he fullfills these prophecies, but the only reason why you think he fullfilled those prophecies is because you claim he is the messiah.

In our reality? My reality screams that Jesus is God. The verification is the life I've lived since becoming saved 14 years ago. And I don't mean to imply how holy I've been; if anything, I've been plenty wretched. The point is, I do believe Jesus fulfilled the prophecies, and He is central to my existence.

Jesus is a false prophet as defined in Deut 13 because he was teaching ideas contrary to the Torah, all your alleged prophecies are not going to make up for that.

It's interesting that 2000 plus years of Christianity have survived with Deuteronomy 13, yet you're able to decide that Christ is a false prophet. Christ claimed to be God, Deuteronomy 13 warns against anyone or anything that claims to be other than the "Lord your God." Really no problem here.

Furyus George, context is everything

[LP675]

Not to mention, that sharon was referring to chapters 19, 20 and 22; not to Romans chapter 3, verses 19, 20 and 22. I think.

Far out! I knew that devious chap at the Christian book store ripped me off! Romans in my bible only goes up to chapter 16! :D

LP

[Amaleq13]

Christ claimed to be God...

Could you specify the verse you have in mind?

Assuming Jesus did make such a claim, why shouldn't this make us question his sanity given that he appears to have been praying to himself so frequently?

[Furyus George]

Could you specify the verse you have in mind?

Assuming Jesus did make such a claim, why shouldn't this make us question his sanity given that he appears to have been praying to himself so frequently?

John 8:58
John 14:6-9;
John 18:36-38
Luke 22:70
Luke 7:41
Mark 14:62
Matthew 28:18
Mathew 26:64

Furyus George, why should it?

[Kilgore Trout]

Pual is quoting various Psalms, Isaiah and Ecclisiastes.

Paul doesn't represent what he is quoting as though it came from one place. Shall I go over to the science forums and hold everyone to the same standard as you demand of Paul?


Here's an example of how he is deceiving. Say you have three sentences as follows:

1... All people love movies.
2... French people love Jerry Lewis.
3... Germans love David Hasselhoff.

If you combine together in the same way paul did you will have: "All people love movies. They love Jerry Lewis. They love David Hasselhoff." Now you are making it seem like ALL people love Jerry Lewis and David Hasselhoff. You are changing the meaning of the original sentences.

Paul did the same thing. He took sentences like "evil people are vile" and "my enemies are liars" then he put them in a list whereby the only specific object was "all people." So now he has this: "All people have turned from god. They are vile. They are liars." Since the only object in this sentence is "All People," he is now saying "All people have turned from god. All people are vile. All people are liars."

Let's put things in context, though: He is writing a letter! He is making a point!

I Know he is making a point! He is saying ALL people are scum, and he is using deceptive tactics by misquoting the OT. And I know it's a letter. Christians are the ones who make the unproven assertion that it's the word of god. Where's your evidence for that one?
Sharon 45 did not present evidence to back up her claim that "many" Christians will dress like Jews, follow the food laws, etc. Lets say there are 10,000 Christians that do so, though I'd be willing to bet you'd be hard pressed to find 100. In any case, how many Christians are there worldwide, a billion? Two billion? 10,000 out of a billion is not "many." She just tosses it out, like much she writes, as though one only need go as far as the next street over to find a Christian "acting" like a Jew. I stand by my response: Nonsense.


Matthew 27:52-53
52The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus' resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

Where is the evidence of this assertion? It's not in any other part of the bible, or any historical texts. It says that many people were raised to life and appeared to many people. This event is a lot more amazing than jesus rising from the dead. There would have been millions of dead Jews by then, so to use your reasoning 1000 of them rising would not be "many." Jerusalem would have looked like "Dawn of the Dead." Since many people saw them, that would have meant that thousands of people would have witnessed this event where long dead people were walking around. Yet no one bothers to mention this great event except "matthew." So you need evidence of christians acting like Jews, yet you don't need further evidence of dead people walking around. There is "evidence" that Roman emperors were gods and performed miracles, but of course you think that's meaningless too. Only your god can do miracles.

In our reality? My reality screams that Jesus is God. The verification is the life I've lived since becoming saved 14 years ago. And I don't mean to imply how holy I've been; if anything, I've been plenty wretched. The point is, I do believe Jesus fulfilled the prophecies, and He is central to my existence.

For one thing this is another assertion that you are not backing up. It also just proves my point that you are using a circular argument when you talk about jesus fullfilling prophecies. He is god because he fullfilled them and the reason he fullfilled them is because he is god. Of course you're allowed to believe whatever you want, just don't tell us about your prophecies if you aren't going to back them up. It's meaningless telling me that jesus fullfilled some "prophecy" about dying for our sins, when I have no evidence that died "for our sins."

It's interesting that 2000 plus years of Christianity have survived with Deuteronomy 13, yet you're able to decide that Christ is a false prophet. Christ claimed to be God, Deuteronomy 13 warns against anyone or anything that claims to be other than the "Lord your God." Really no problem here.

Ahhh... The classic "Its been around 2000 years so it must be true" fallacy! Islam has been around for 1400 years saying jesus was just a prophet not a god, so that must be true. The Jews have known for 2000 years that jesus is a Deut 13 false prophet. You make it sound like I just made this up now or something. By claiming "2 billion people can't be wrong" you're saying that everybody else is wrong.

If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder of which he has spoken takes place, and he says, "Let us follow other gods" (gods you have not known) "and let us worship them," 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he preached rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery; he has tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you.


As I highlighted, it says "gods you have not known." The Jews did not not know jesus as god when the Torah was written, so he is a god they did not know. The jews did not know god as a trinity, they knew him as one god and that's it. By changing the way god is described you are making him into a new god. For example let's say a prophet claims to be sent by the god of the hebrews,the same god that led them out of Egypt. He announces that they are to think of him as a giant frog in the sky. He is a false prophet under Deut 13 because he is changing god's character. That is not what god is, so its a different god. The trinity is exactly like that. Another example that you should understand: If a prophet showed up today claiming to be sent by the christian god, performed miracles and announced that god was not a trinity, but had six parts instead of three, christians would recognize that he is a Deut 13 false prophet because he is changing the character of god.

Another part that fits jesus is that you are to keep the lord's commands. Jesus changed Torah laws, especially in matthew 5 and mark 7:14-19 where he has the audacity to state that all food are clean and he can't imagine why anyone would think otherwise. If a prophet came around today and said he was from the christian god, then said you are allowed to murder people, every christian would know he was a Deut 13 false prophet, yet when jesus changes laws that god claimed were very important in the Torah and christians don't care.

The last one is similar, "he has tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow." Christians clearly live differntly that what the Torah says to do, so it is obvious that jesus turned them away from the way the lord commmanded them to follow.

Spare me the garbage about jesus "fullfilling" the Torah, you cant "fullfill" the Torah laws any more than you can "fullfill" traffic laws. Also its a circular argument: The reason why he's not a Deut 13 is because he's god, and the reason why he's god is because he's not a Deut 13. Jesus always says you are supposed to have faith that he is the messiah, but the whole point of Deut 13 and 18 is that you are NOT supposed to have faith in prophets. They are supposed to be assumed guilty until proven innocent. The pharisees wanted to see a miracle for themselves, instead of relying on unreliable reports from the rumours of the crowds. Jesus was acting like they were heathens to actually want proof, but that was exactly what they were supposed to do. Christians always read the gospels with the idea "Jesus good, Pharisees bad" and they never think that maybe the reason they killed jesus is because they were supposed to because he was a Deut 13.

Actually, maybe not, because as another example of the crazy logic of christians, I've seen christians admit that the High priests had no choice but to kill jesus because it really was blasphemy to do what he did. God knew that jesus went against the rules he put in the Torah and since he wanted jesus to die anyway, it worked out fine. That's why a lot of people know that jesus was committing "suicide by cop."

[Amaleq13]

John 8:58

At face value, Jesus appears to be claiming pre-existence but not necessarily to be God.

John 14:6-9

Jesus appears to be identifying himself as the sole representative of God but "the Father" seems to be described as a separate entity.

John 18:36-38

Jesus identifies himself as a king of a kingdom "not of this world". I don't see where he claims to be God.

Luke 22:70

Jesus claims to be the Son of God not God.

Luke 7:41

"There was a certain creditor which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty." (KJV)

I don't see where Jesus is claiming to be God.

Mark 14:62

Jesus identifies himself as "the Christ" and, apparently, the "Son of Man". He does not claim to be God.

Matthew 28:18

Jesus claims to have been given authority over heaven and earth. That suggests the existence of a "giver" independent of Jesus.

Mathew 26:64

Jesus identifies himself with/as the "Son of Man".

Not only do the verses you offer fail to support your claim, several appear to argue against it.:)

Amaleq13:Assuming Jesus did make such a claim, why shouldn't this make us question his sanity given that he appears to have been praying to himself so frequently?

...why should it?

It does not seem rational to suggest that God would find it necessary to pray to God. The notion is most obviously bizarre when applied to the prayers offered prior the crucifixion:

"And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt." (Mt 26:39, KJV)

Jesus is begging himself to let himself escape being crucified but offering to obey himself no matter what he wants himself to do? :rolleyes:

[Furyus George]

Here's an example of how he is deceiving. Say you have three sentences as follows:

1... All people love movies.
2... French people love Jerry Lewis.
3... Germans love David Hasselhoff.

If you combine together in the same way paul did you will have: "All people love movies. They love Jerry Lewis. They love David Hasselhoff." Now you are making it seem like ALL people love Jerry Lewis and David Hasselhoff. You are changing the meaning of the original sentences.

Paul did the same thing. He took sentences like "evil people are vile" and "my enemies are liars" then he put them in a list whereby the only specific object was "all people." So now he has this: "All people have turned from god. They are vile. They are liars." Since the only object in this sentence is "All People," he is now saying "All people have turned from god. All people are vile. All people are liars."


I can see your point. However, context here again raises its ugly head. Who is Paul writing to? Jews. Jews would be very familiar with the verses he is using and would know that all men are considered sinners. That Paul chose to use some from Psalms and some from Isaiah, etc, would not be of consequence to the Jew of the day. They would immediately recognize the verses, and themselves.


Matthew 27:52-53 Where is the evidence of this assertion?...snipped...So you need evidence of christians acting like Jews, yet you don't need further evidence of dead people walking around.


You know, I've never really focused on the others who Matthew records as resurrected. The fact that they were with Christ, who has claimed power over death itself, is voucher enough for me.

As for evidence for Sharon45's assertion, yes, I wanted evidence. Why? Because her implication that many Christians deceive Jews by pretending to be Jews is utter, complete nonsense. Had I not challenged it, a reader might assume it was true.


For one thing this is another assertion that you are not backing up. It also just proves my point that you are using a circular argument when you talk about jesus fullfilling prophecies. He is god because he fullfilled them and the reason he fullfilled them is because he is god. Of course you're allowed to believe whatever you want, just don't tell us about your prophecies if you aren't going to back them up. It's meaningless telling me that jesus fullfilled some "prophecy" about dying for our sins, when I have no evidence that died "for our sins."


How did Jesus arrrange for His ancestry?
How did Jesus arrange His place of birth?
How did He arrange His execution?
Or soldiers gambling for his underwear?
Or His legs remaining unbroken?
Or the timing of His birth?


Ahhh... The classic "Its been around 2000 years so it must be true" fallacy!

More like the classic "I should have been more clear." My apologies. I am not a scholar. I am a truck driver. I do not know the Bible inside-out and upside-down, though I am working on it. My point is that I figured Christianity has survived for 2000 years with Deutoronomy 13 detractors. It can wait for awhile longer while I study areas that have more concern for me. Besides, from my standpoint, Christ claims to be the "Lord your God" that Deut 13 warns against turning away from with belief in other gods.


Another part that fits jesus is that you are to keep the lord's commands. Jesus changed Torah laws, especially in matthew 5 and mark 7:14-19 where he has the audacity to state that all food are clean and he can't imagine why anyone would think otherwise.


All at once now, everybody! C-O-N-T-E-X-T! Instead of clinging to Mark 7:14-19, why not read the entire seventh chapter. It's not long. Pay attention to quotation marks.


Furyus George, not so dull

[Furyus George]

John 8:58

At face value, Jesus appears to be claiming pre-existence but not necessarily to be God.

John 8:58 ~ "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

Note that the Jews immediately picked up rocks to stone Jesus in the next verse. Why? Look at Exodus 3:14 for the answer.

Exodus 3:14 ~ God said to Moses "I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: I am has sent me to you."

Jesus claimed to be the I Am. This is why they tried to stone him; Jesus claimed to be God.

I don't have time to address the other points you have made right now, though I will say I incorrectly listed Luke 7:41 when I should have written Luke 7:48.

Furyus George, will return

[Amaleq13]

John 8:58 ~ "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

Note that the Jews immediately picked up rocks to stone Jesus in the next verse. Why? Look at Exodus 3:14 for the answer.

Exodus 3:14 ~ God said to Moses "I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: I am has sent me to you."

Jesus claimed to be the I Am. This is why they tried to stone him; Jesus claimed to be God.

Of the examples you offered, this one is really the only one that could be argued to constitute a claim by Jesus to be God but, obvious questions of authenticity aside, I wonder if you know of any evidence supporting the depicted response by the Jews present? In other words, what evidence is there that claiming to be God (even in the rather oblique way depicted) earned one a stoning according to Jewish law rather than simply being considered obviously insane?

It is odd that this claim is so unique among the entire Gospels and that it clearly runs contrary to the majority of depictions in those texts where Jesus is clearly portrayed as considering God as a separate entity from himself (e.g. the Garden prayers). The fact that this claim is found only in the latest Gospel with the most developed theological view of Jesus (according to most scholars as well as the Catholic Study Bible) would seem to suggest this is a belief about Jesus that developed among the faithful rather than something Jesus claimed about himself.

[Net2004]

Paul states that while not actually being of a group he hopes to convert, he pretends to be like them in order to win them over. In 9:20-21 He puts it that he will act and live either like a Jew or a Gentile or order to win people over. He pretends to be under the law of Moses even though he states in the passage to be, in reality, under the law of christ, what else besides living in a pretense, but to deceive? One person can not exist as both a Jew and Gentile, but paul pretends to be either to win over converts. In 9:22, even though he is clearly not one of weak faith seen from his various writings, he tries to live like that and with those of weak faith to win them over, again, obviously deceptive, to be all things to all men, to in time, win them over.

Since you claim you see nothing wrong with those that pretend to be something that which they are not, to in time gain trust within a group, to lead them into a belief they see as right, and don't see that as deceptive; then you must not mind if an atheist or one of another religion, tries to join in with christians pretending to be as them, in order in time, to lead them away from christianity. Much like christians would think as anyone without christ is lost, so is it about the same with Jews when they have their members swayed away from Judaism, they think of them as dead or lost, it is a very heartbreaking experience.

Here is a reply to Sharon by a christian from another forum.Can anyone please comment on it

Grief!!!! Paul did not have to "pretend" to be a Jew; He was a Jew. He was born a Jew and raised a Jew. He studied Judaism under Gamaliel. As a Jew, Paul was understood the Jewish perspective on issues. He did not have to "pretend" or "deceive". Because he was a Jew, he was able to debate the Christian faith with Jews. He understood where they were coming from and could debate accordingly.

Although he was a Jew - born and bred - he was also raised in a Gentile world. In Tarsus to be exact. Just as he understood the Jewish mind so he also understood the Gentile mind. Again he did not have to "pretend" anything. Nor did he have to "deceive". When he addressed Gentiles he was able to use the thinking/mindset of Gentiles.


Clear examples can be found in the book of Acts.

Acts 13v13-40. Paul is in a synogogue. He is addressing Jews and those Gentiles who are familiar with the Jewish faith. In his address Paul uses the Scriptures to support his arguements. He is not "pretending" to be a Jew; he is a Jew.

Acts 17v16-30. Paul is in Athens. Presenting the Christian faith not to Jews but to Gentiles. These Gentiles are not synogogue attenders. They are not familiar with the Scriptures. They will not be swayed with with an arguement from the Scriptures - Paul knows this. So he argues "as a gentile" . He starts by using their own religion as an opening (v23); and later he even quotes their own poets (v28). In doing so Paul is not being deceptive (he is not "pretending" to be a pagan, nor is he "pretending" to be a Gentile) but he is simply trying to communicate to them in terms that they will understand.

[ghiangelo]

hmm lying to promote the faith...? yes Paul was doing that. by stressing that the end was extremely near and that the only path to salvation was Christ, as defined by him, Paul has effectively lied. and it works. it still works to this day. it is the classic 'righteous' lie for the promotion of faith.

during my time as a Jehovah's Witness this was used all the time and still is.

armaggedon stories are such good devices for evangelism and faith, even if they prove to be wrong.

[Al Kafirun]

I can't believe this thread! Its so funny. Poor old Sensei Meela.

Anyhoo, Paul = big ole pious liar. If you disagree then your conception of truth is highly perverted. A God worth his weight in salt shouldn't require 'noble' deception.

Is the unflattering interpretation of Romans 3:7 backed up in other passages? Yes.

Does the NIV try to absolve him through semantics? Yes. After all, its God's will.

[Kilgore Trout]

Here is a reply to Sharon by a christian from another forum.Can anyone please comment on it

Grief!!!! Paul did not have to "pretend" to be a Jew; He was a Jew. He was born a Jew and raised a Jew. He studied Judaism under Gamaliel. As a Jew, Paul was understood the Jewish perspective on issues. He did not have to "pretend" or "deceive". Because he was a Jew, he was able to debate the Christian faith with Jews. He understood where they were coming from and could debate accordingly.

Although he was a Jew - born and bred - he was also raised in a Gentile world. In Tarsus to be exact. Just as he understood the Jewish mind so he also understood the Gentile mind. Again he did not have to "pretend" anything. Nor did he have to "deceive". When he addressed Gentiles he was able to use the thinking/mindset of Gentiles. Here is a quote from paul...

1 Corinthians 19-22

19Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. 22To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.

I think this quote is pretty self-explanatory. It pretty well says it all. This makes it clear that he does pretend to be like people. You say he is a Jew, so he does not need to pretend to be a Jew. Well, he no longer thinks he is a Jew, because he is no longer under the law. That is why he says "To the Jews I became like a Jew." Also, all the stuff that he said about being a Jew, we have no way of verifying. It could all be a lie.

[Amaleq13]

How did Jesus arrrange for His ancestry?

He didn't. Two authors make two different attempts to create an ancestry they individually believed appropriate.

How did Jesus arrange His place of birth?

He didn't. Once again, two authors make two different attempts to fulfill what they considered to be a biblical messianic requirement. The efforts contradict and each, on its own, has sufficient problems to warrant concluding they are without any basis in reality. Luke fabricates an entirely unbelievable census process while Matthew produces an obvious midrash of the story of Moses' birth.

How did He arrange His execution?

Getting crucified by the Romans during a politically charged Jewish holiday would not have required divine powers. All you needed to do was draw a crowd and/or give the appearance of a potential threat to Roman rule.

Or soldiers gambling for his underwear?
Or His legs remaining unbroken?

Both of these are examples of Gospel authors taking what they believed to be biblical messianic requirements and turning them into a narrative.

Or the timing of His birth?

Do you refer to the "timing" of being born during Herod's reign (GMt) or the "timing" of being born while Quirinius conducted his census (GLk)? There is a 10 year difference so choose wisely. :D

[Al Kafirun]

Hyam Macoby is kind of a sloppy scholar but I've always been impressed by his theory that Paul was never a Jew let alone a Pharisee. Its impossible to offer anything conclusive, but that fact cuts both ways.