Mr. Logic

Pauline schism? Most Scholars are as dumb as a rock on this subject.
They say that James sounds more like Jesus than Paul. Well, hello, because James taught keep the law alright, just as Jesus did, but Jesus told Jews under the law of MOses to keep that law. James was teaching Keep the Law even after the New Law of grace was given.
Jesus taught that a man is what he thinks not what he does, and Paul taught the same, that is why works are not the thing to focus on.

The Church Age Began at Pentecost and not before!
Thanks

Chili

Because John was from the netherworld instead of the world to which Jesus died. John was born from the ancient celestial waters to which the disciples of Jesus' age needed be raised that they may be one in the Upper Room. The point is that it would be a contradiction to be raised and return to your own vomit.

Mr. Logic

There certainly is a huge diff. btw James the Religionist, giving his "theology" and Paul speaking what the Spirit led him to speak (even though some times he gives his opinion, which he wasn't sent to do).
The errors of Paul and Peter are excellent proof that the scriptures can be trusted. They don't sweep these under the rug. Example: both Paul and Peter water bapt. Converts. Both saw the error of this and were weaned out of their old Religious habits, and stopped putting old wine in new bottles.
Won't go into details on this since it's a diff. subject, but James just keeps
pushing the same old rhetoric, not understanding that the law of Moses wasn't given as a reward for building the Golden Calf <s>

Those who will not do right need the law laid down to them, that is why Abraham didn't need it.
BTW, Pharoah makes a GREAT POINT! Did you know that Mother Theresa once stated that the reason that Christ died was to give us his Mother?

The truth about gal.2 flow in context blows the whistle on many Scholars. It proves that they don't do independant research and come up with these same answers. It is passed on teachings, and if in error, stay in error!

I have just started to give the evidence against James. His "Devil's believe" statement is really off. Here he has a diff. definition of believe. When Paul uses the word "believe" he means to HAVE FAITH, but Not James. He doesn't even understand the diff. in trusting/having faith in God and knowing that God exists. I know that the pope exists, so is my problem that I don't do what he wants and join the RCC?
I don't have faith in the Pope or believe for a second that he is infallible!

James even thinks that profession of faith is having faith!
He points out that it isn't enough to CONFESS faith, but that you have to act on it! Ask on what, a profession? One needs to HAVE FAITH. When one has faith THEY WILL ACT ON IT. It's a given.
So James is saying if you aren't showing the fruits, go around acting like a good tree, and things will be fine, because he then will believe that you have faith!
Example: If you tell me that a ceiling lamp is about to fall on my head, do I have to move (do the works of belief)? Most would say yes, but Paul taught NO!!!! I DON'T HAVE TO, for I SIMPLY WILL, if I have faith. If I didn't move than I didn't have faith if you had the ability to.

No one can give a reason why someone wouldn't move if they could and believed that the ceiling lamp would fall on them.
So James is the kind of Guy that would stand there and tell you, "you have to move, don't you see how important it is to move"! If someone doesn't move while confessing that they know that the ceiling lamp is about to fall on them, then they are all talk, and don't believe anyway.

Most Bible Teachers are trying to teach fish to swim! It's that silly!
Thanks for the great posts!

Chili

I'll second that except that Jesus died instead of Christ for whom Mary was the celestial sea that Jesus walked on and died for at Glogotha so it will be the Alpha of Jesus the now fully Christ. Notice that this sea was gone in Rev.21:1 because it was under the care of Christ.

seven8s

That’d be dust, correct? New moon. ‘Gone’? Nope an illusion. She’s, backkkkkkkk. He said she said, ‘from magic you came and to magic you will return’.

From magic you came and to magic you will return, that or be bitter. None of which has anything to do ‘necessarily’ with religion (?), except that it existed and first told the story?

You know how I love that sparkly stuff............. :wave:

BALDUCCI

You mean until Paul announced that circumcision was no longer necessary to join his club. Why give it such a gracious title when it was really nothig more than a marketing device ?

Chili

Nice post seven8s. Graciously the woman must be recognized to carry Jesus and gratefully the richess gathered along the road-dust of the sun must be recognized to give substance to the woman. She's the only one that counts in the end and the rest is illusion no matter how bright the sun may seem or how sparkly the moon shimmers our favorite spot. :wave:

Chili

Circumcision represented censorship without the knowledge of natural law before Christ which was abolished because we could be followers of Jesus and drink of the cup he drank. What this amounts to is that there is a difference between giving credence to prophetic messages and just following a leader into heaven.

BALDUCCI

I find that very obscure and opaque. What does that mean in everyday English ?

Chris Weimer

A quick hint - Chili is known for his obscure and opaque, sometimes meaningless gibberish. He has said before that he posts for his own pleasure. It's probably best to have him on ignore.