jesusjnr2020:
Someone who thinks he can know better than Jesus who paid the price for man's salvation about what a man must do to have eternal life.

That's expected of a livingAntichrist!

if you could work for your salvation Jesus would not have shed his blood.

petra1:

Is Paul an Apostle of Christ?

According to what we read, paul was an apostle of Jesus Christ, so was Judas Iscariot.
The point is Jesus Christ, the Truth of God(His teachings and commandments), is the one you are called to put your trust in and obey, not Paul, Peter or Judas.

livingchrist:
if you could work for your salvation Jesus would not have shed his blood.

According to Jesus Christ Himself, during His conversation with Nicodemus, there is work to be done in order to obtain salvation. In John 3 vs 1 -21, Jesus Christ explained that in order to enter into the Kingdom of God( Heaven has 2 domains - Heaven and Hell), you have to be born again and be saved(salvation).

BORN-AGAIN
* Change your heart and life to following God's commandments
* Be baptized in water to show that you have changed your heart and life - Matthew 3 vs 7 - 11
* Be born of Spirit(note that Spirit here does not entail Spirit of God)

SALVATION
* Believe in Jesus Christ, the New Covenant who is Law in the Kingdom of God
* Eat the body and drink the blood of Jesus Christ to gain eternal life - John 6 vs 31- 40 - the token obtained of salvation from the condemnation of sin(Death)

All the above works(rules/laws/terms) listed are works that are to be satisfied in order to enter into the Kingdom of God through the narrow gate which leads to true life. All those who do not meet the requirement enter into the Kingdom of God through the broad gate instead - Matthew 7 vs 13 vs 14

Sure, no man, of his own can save his/her self, and tha is why God gave us Jesus Christ so that through Him we can be saved. And as you can see above, that Salvation demands obedience(works) in order for it to be obtained from Jesus Christ, the one who offers it to you.

jesusjnr2020:
What you should understand is that whether Paul is true or false, it's absolutely of no significance in this case, as there are many true apostles but just one Master.

Even many true apostles were sent to the gentiles, so it's not just Paul as you erroneously think. What all of them have in common is one Master, and the obligation to obey His instructions, which is to teach all men to observe all His commandments as that of this thread which you oppose. So whenever they do the otherwise, it should be clear that the teachings of the Master would prevail over theirs for there's just one Master but many apostles.

Your are being dishonest but I will let it pass.

Kobojunkie:
According to what we read, paul was an apostle of Jesus Christ, so was Judas Iscariot.
The point is Jesus Christ, the Truth of God(His teachings and commandments), is the one you are called to put your trust in and obey, not Paul, Peter or Judas.

There's no need for us to beat about the bush .

Peter is an apostle of christ . I'm sure you won't have any issue answering. But because your stand and the stand of your friend contradict the teaching of the epistle of Paul. It's difficult to give a straight answer.
If you say Paul was a false apostles fine. You have every right to reject his doctrine. But if you acknowledge that he is an apostle of God to the church then you have no reason to have a stand against his teaching.

That's why it seem you couldn't give a straight answer

livingchrist:
if you could work for your salvation Jesus would not have shed his blood.

So if man's works couldn't gain him salvation, but the works of Jesus could, you really think that Jesus who now had possession of man's salvation having bought it with the price of His blood, does not have the right to say that man could get it from Him by his works?

Shame on you!

petra1:

There's no need for us to beat about the bush .

Peter is an apostle of christ . I'm sure you won't have any issue answering. But because your stand and the stand of your friend contradict the teaching of the epistle of Paul. It's difficult to give a straight answer.
If you say Paul was a false apostles fine. You have every right to reject his doctrine. But if you acknowledge that he is an apostle of God to the church then you have no reason to have a stand against his teaching.

That's why it seem you couldn't give a straight answer

You make no sense in this at all. And this is a major problem I have come to observe among those of you who have chosen to make a god out of the man Paul. I have also come to note that you in particular are allergic to straight answers as you reject them offering you silly reasons like the one you attempt here each time.

When Peter, also listed an apostle of Jesus Christ, denied Jesus Christ 3 times, was Peter right in doing so simply on the grounds that he was an apostle of Jesus Christ?

When Peter refused to preach to the gentiles, this after Jesus Christ has given all His followers the mandate to go out into the world and preach His Gospel to whosoever will listen, was Peter right in doing so?

When John commented on how he was a "spiritual father" to some believers- those in Jesus Christ's flock - was John right in doing so?

Just in case you are not aware, the obvious answer to the 3 previous questions about the acts of Peter and John is NO, and this because their conduct, all three of those times, were against standards set by Jesus Christ, our only Master and commander.

These men you call apostles are ordinary men- flesh and blood like you and I- none holier than the other. These men are dead and buried in their graves waiting for their works to be judged when Jesus Christ returns.. Yes, Peter and Paul and all of the other apostles are still in their graves, awaiting final judgement.

Jesus Christ is the Word of God, the only one who is now in Heaven, the one by whose Word, your works, and the works of Peter, Paul, John, and every other man out there,will be judged. Jesus Christ is the Truth of God whom you are called on to Trust and obey - recall that God says, in Jeremiah 17 vs 5 that cursed is a man who puts his trust in another man.

So, do you believe the Law of God, Jesus Christ, or do you continue to make idols/gods out of mere men, even those who are dead and buried in their graves, waiting to raised and judged like any other man by, Jesus Christ, the one whose Truth you continue to vehemently reject?.

petra1:


Your are being dishonest but I will let it pass.

Being dishonest because I'm following Christ's instructions and teaching men to observe what He commanded us?

It's a real shame that you can't see how greatly you err, that when Jesus the Master, Lord and Savior says a thing about how man could attain eternal life, just because Paul His disciple says something else, you would say that the saying of Jesus who paid the price for man's sin was under the law.

If it were about tithing now, you would forget the law exists. That prove who your real master is.

It's obviously not Christ, so it's clear who's being dishonest here and disobedient to the Truth.

jesusjnr2020:
Being dishonest because I'm following Christ's instructions and teaching men to observe what He commanded us?

Christ and Paul don't have a problem . The problem here is your comprehension of the bible.

If you want to to follow christ instructions, here is it: if you will take it.

Message of christ to the jews in his earthly ministry was not the same after his death.

Remember salvation was based on works in the old testament. And the new testament was yet to commence. Or ratified.

The church was not born yet at this time

Everything about the church is based on the work of the Holy Spirit.

Jesus could not tell them about the details of the church because. They were not yet born again . They hadn't received eternal life yet.

Jn 16:12 — Jn 16:13 (KJV)
12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

I'm going somewhere oh. But let me pause first in case you want to ask a question

petra1:


There's no need for us to beat about the bush .

Peter is an apostle of christ . I'm sure you won't have any issue answering. But because your stand and the stand of your friend contradict the teaching of the epistle of Paul. It's difficult to give a straight answer.
If you say Paul was a false apostles fine. You have every right to reject his doctrine. But if you acknowledge that he is an apostle of God to the church then you have no reason to have a stand against his teaching.

That's why it seem you couldn't give a straight answer

Now you know why I kept emphasizing the fact that there are many apostles/brethren but just one Master who is Christ!

You think that just being a true apostle of Christ means his teachings should be placed above the teachings of Christ, right?

Wrong! Because he's just one of many apostles but there's just one Master, therefore Paul's teachings as that of every other apostle must be subject to the teachings of Christ.

If you place his teachings above that of Christ as you'd done, that Jesus would say something and you'd negate it because of what Paul says, then Christ is not your Master but Paul!

A man cannot serve two masters.

petra1:


Christ and Paul don't have a problem . The problem here is your comprehension of the bible.

If you want to to follow christ instructions, here is it: if you will take it.

Message of christ to the jews in his earthly ministry was not the same after his death.

Remember salvation was based on works in the old testament. And the new testament was yet to commence. Or ratified.

The church was not born yet at this time

Everything about the church is based on the work of the Holy Spirit.

Jesus could not tell them about the details of the church because. They were not yet born again . They hadn't received eternal life yet.

Jn 16:12 — Jn 16:13 (KJV)
12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

I'm going somewhere oh. But let me pause first in case you want to ask a question

If you think Jesus doesn't have a problem when the instructions He gave to His disciples to teach all men to observe all things whatsoever He commanded them were being disobeyed, then you think in error because there's nothing that troubles Jesus more than that.

It's really unfortunate that because of how much you place the teachings of Paul above that of Christ, you believe that there was any such thing as Christ's teachings to Jews. There's nothing as such, that's why Jesus would instruct His disciples to teach all men on Earth, not just the Jews, to observe His teachings.

So your excuse of the church not being there at the time is completely baseless, because Christ's church was built upon His teachings, and even Paul who you believe more than Christ was not there when it started. He was a beneficiary of that church built with teachings of Christ.

As for the Spirit of Truth who would guide us into all Truth, which Jesus said He'd send to the church, when He came upon the church Paul wasn't even there, so Paul is no different from those of us who weren't there at first with the church in that respect. Because the same Spirit of God is still here, the only difference between us and Paul, is that he met the disciples who Jesus used to begin the church.

Except you believe as many do, that Paul was the Holy Spirit, then His guiding us into all Truth began and ended with Paul.

But if not, and the Holy Spirit is still here today, then He's still guiding us into all Truth.

Bottom line, what you did with the teachings of Christ because of what Paul said is inexcusable, because even the verse you quoted says that the Spirit of God would not speak of Himself, but what Jesus sends Him to teach, and Jesus wouldn't contradict His own teachings.

So your understanding of the Word of God is really horrible. I pity for anyone who has to learn from you.

Thanks though for accepting the fact that Christ's Gospel of Grace teaches that salvation could be attained by works of righteousness, and that some teachings of Paul as that which you quoted contradict those of Christ. It was that glaring that you'd make the blunder of calling the teaching of Jesus, the Law.

That is, Jesus the Grace of God is now a teacher of the law, lol! Just imagine that? Not John the Baptist whom Jesus said the law and prophets ended with, but that of Christ Himself! Yet you can still see the gravity of your blunder.

That shows how lost and far you are from the Truth.

petra1:
There are false apostles also.

Kindly be honorable enough to the truth Is Paul apostle of Christ.

Was Paul called by christ

Was Paul sent with message to the Gentiles. I expect a YES or NO

I love and liked this easy, simple, harmless and innocent questions.
It is a shame you didnt get a direct, emphatic and straightforward YES or NO reply (i.e. avoiding giving a binary answer is what you got)

petra1:
Christ and Paul don't have a problem . The problem here is your comprehension of the bible.

If you want to to follow christ instructions, here is it: if you will take it.

Message of christ to the jews in his earthly ministry was not the same after his death.

Remember salvation was based on works in the old testament. And the new testament was yet to commence. Or ratified.

The church was not born yet at this time

Everything about the church is based on the work of the Holy Spirit.

Jesus could not tell them about the details of the church because. They were not yet born again . They hadn't received eternal life yet.

Jn 16:12 — Jn 16:13 (KJV)
12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

I'm going somewhere oh. But let me pause first in case you want to ask a question

The question(s) for you then:
1. Is or was Nicodemus born again?
2. If your answer is yes, then when was Nicodemus born again?
3. and how do you know Nicodemus was born again?

jesusjnr2020:
If you think Jesus doesn't have a problem when the instructions He gave to His disciples to teach all men to observe all things whatsoever He commanded them were being disobeyed, then you think in error because there's nothing that troubles Jesus more than that.

It's really unfortunate that because of how much you place the teachings of Paul above that of Christ, you believe that there was any such thing as Christ's teachings to Jews. There's nothing as such, that's why Jesus would instruct His disciples to teach all men on Earth, not just the Jews, to observe His teachings.

So your excuse of the church not being there at the time is completely baseless, because Christ's church was built upon His teachings, and even Paul who you believe more than Christ was not there when it started. He was a beneficiary of that church built with teachings of Christ.

As for the Spirit of Truth who would guide us into all Truth, which Jesus said He'd send to the church, when He came upon the church Paul wasn't even there, so Paul is no different from those of us who weren't there at first with the church in that respect. Because the same Spirit of God is still here, the only difference between us and Paul, is that he met the disciples who Jesus used to begin the church.

Except you believe as many do, that Paul was the Holy Spirit, then His guiding us into all Truth began and ended with Paul.

But if not, and the Holy Spirit is still here today, then He's still guiding us into all Truth.

Bottom line, what you did with the teachings of Christ because of what Paul said is inexcusable, because even the verse you quoted says that the Spirit of God would not speak of Himself, but what Jesus sends Him to teach, and Jesus wouldn't contradict His own teachings.

So your understanding of the Word of God is really horrible. I pity for anyone who has to learn from you.

Thanks though for accepting the fact that Christ's Gospel of Grace teaches that salvation could be attained by works of righteousness, and that some teachings of Paul as that which you quoted contradict those of Christ. It was that glaring that you'd make the blunder of calling the teaching of Jesus, the Law.

That is, Jesus the Grace of God is now a teacher of the law, lol! Just imagine that? Not John the Baptist whom Jesus said the law and prophets ended with, but that of Christ Himself! Yet you can still see the gravity of your blunder.

That shows how lost and far you are from the Truth.

The long epistle is waste of data. Let's take it small small.

I told you that Jesus doesn't have issue with Paul. You are the only one who have issue because of your comprehension or interpretation.

If Paul is a man of God . Then the problem is you!. And if you think Paul was not of God You need to be clear about your stand .

Worship of God has always been dynamic . Things changed over the years . At one time he accepted the blood of bulls. The pharisees were mad at Jesus for standing against the law of God! But the problem was their comprehension .

So back to our discussion . Do you think Paul was contrary to christ . Let's make the response direct and straight to gte point

BassReeves:
I love and liked this easy, simple, harmless and innocent questions.
It is a shame you didnt get a direct, emphatic and straightforward YES or NO reply (i.e. avoiding giving a binary answer is what you got)

Abi . Kindly help tell them God's word is based on principles NOT politics

The question(s) for you then:
1. Is or was Nicodemus born again?
2. If your answer is yes, then when was Nicodemus born again?
3. and how do you know Nicodemus was born again?

He got born again along with other disciples when they received the holy spirit

petra1:


The long epistle is waste of data. Let's take it small small.

I told you that Jesus doesn't have issue with Paul. You are the only one who have issue because of your comprehension or interpretation.

If Paul is a man of God . Then the problem is you!. And if you think Paul was not of God You need to be clear about your stand .

Worship of God has always been dynamic . Things changed over the years . At one time he accepted the blood of bulls. The pharisees were mad at Jesus for standing against the law of God! But the problem was their comprehension .

So back to our discussion . Do you think Paul was contrary to christ . Let's make the response direct and straight to gte point

Jesus said we shouldn't cast our pearls before the swine because they would make a waste of it, so I wouldn't be surprised if speaking the Truth (Words of Jesus) means a waste of data to you.

If up til now you still can't see the glaring blunder you made that the teachings of Jesus which He instructed men to teach all men to observe was under the law, then you may never be able to comprehend the Truth.

Moreover if you think Paul being a man of God, apostle or prophet, should make his words to supersede that of Christ, then you're not of Christ and do not really know Him!

As for your question, you've already answered it by yourself when you said Christ's teaching was under the Law, because of Paul's teachings, so you can go back to your first post to get the answer for yourself.

I rest my case.

petra1:
Abi . Kindly help tell them God's word is based on principles politics
He got born again along with other disciples when they received the holy spirit

1. Hmm. Oooookaaaaaaay, so what exactly does 'born again' mean.?
1b. How exactly is the expression 'born again' rendered in the original text or nuance.?
2. What comes first between 'born again' and 'receive the holy spirit'?
3. Or does 'born again' and 'receive the holy spirit' happen at the same instant?

petra1:
Abi . Kindly help tell them God's word is based on principles politics

God's Word is based on "Principles Politics"? Where did God tell you this?

For an example, can you explain what "principles politics" any of the Old Testament laws of God, as given by God through Moses, was based on?

Kobojunkie:
God's Word is based on "Principles Politics"?

It's Typo error . Corrected . . Kindly delete

BassReeves:
1. Hmm. Oooookaaaaaaay, so what exactly does 'born again' mean.?
1b. How exactly is the expression 'born again' rendered in the original text or nuance.?
2. What comes first between 'born again' and 'receive the holy spirit'?
3. Or does 'born again' and 'receive the holy spirit' happen at the same instant?

It means to receive new life .

Man is a Spirit, he has a soul , he functions in a body on earth . So man is Spirit soul and body. But the real person is the spirit. That's the person who gets recreated or rebirth. The moment he receives eternal life by receiving christ through the holy spirit

petra1:
Abi . Kindly help tell them God's word is based on principles NOT politics

Where did God tell you this?

For an example, can you explain what "principles" any of the Old Testament laws of God, as given by God through Moses, was based on?

I am trying to get an idea of what you mean when you use the word principles here.

UNDER THE OLD COVENANT, EVERY JEW WAS A CHILD OF GOD VIA AFFILIATION WITH FATHER ABRAHAM HENCE SON OF ABRAHAM OR DAUGHTER OF ABRAHAM.
IN OTHER WORDS, DOING DEEDS OF FAITH OR WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS BECOMES A NECESSITY!
UNDER THE NEW COVENANT, THE REBIRTH OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT IS A MUST. ANY WORKS THAT SHORT-CIRCUIT THIS REQUIREMENT ARE ACTS OF SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS!

petra1:
It means to receive new life .

Man is a Spirit, he has a soul , he functions in a body on earth . So man is Spirit soul and body. But the real person is the spirit. That's the person who gets recreated or rebirth. The moment he receives eternal life by receiving christ through the holy spirit

Please give you responses back in same numbered format, style and manner the 4 questions were asked, then I follow up with more questions if deemed necessary. Thanks in advance, as I repeat them again

1. Hmm. Oooookaaaaaaay, so what exactly does 'born again' mean.?
1b. How exactly is the expression 'born again' rendered in the original text or nuance.?
2. What comes first between 'born again' and 'receive the holy spirit'?
3. Or does 'born again' and 'receive the holy spirit' happen at the same instant?

petra1:
Abi . Kindly help tell them God's word is based on principles NOT politics
He got born again along with other disciples when they received the holy spirit

Kobojunkie:
[s]Where did God tell you this?
For an example, can you explain what "principles" any of the Old Testament laws of God, as given by God through Moses, was based on? [/s]

@Kobojunkie
1. Did God tell you about the principles of gravity?
1b. Where did God tell you anything about the principles of gravity?
2. Do you Kobojunkie, obey the principles of gravity or dont obey the principles of gravity ?
3. Can you explain what the principles of gravity, any of the Old Testament laws of God, as given by God through Moses, are based on?

Hundredfold4lif:

UNDER THE OLD COVENANT, EVERY JEW WAS A CHILD OF GOD VIA AFFILIATION WITH FATHER ABRAHAM HENCE SON OF ABRAHAM OR DAUGHTER OF ABRAHAM.
IN OTHER WORDS, DOING DEEDS OF FAITH OR WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS BECOMES A NECESSITY!
UNDER THE NEW COVENANT, THE REBIRTH OF THE HUMAN SPIRIT IS A MUST. ANY WORKS THAT SHORT-CIRCUIT THIS REQUIREMENT ARE ACTS OF SELF-RIGHTEOUSNESS!

I don't understand. How can works be used to "short-circuit" the command given by Jesus Christ stipulating that one must be born of spirit to enter into the Kingdom of God?

Can works also be used in to "short-circuit" the command given, by Jesus Christ, stipulating that one must also be born of water in order to enter into the Kingdom of God?

BassReeves:


1. Hmm. Oooookaaaaaaay, so what exactly does 'born again' mean.?

I don't know how elaborate you want me to go. But being born again is man receiving a rebirth in his spirit . Eternal life. Also by professing the Lordship of Jesus.

1b. How exactly is the expression 'born again' rendered in the original text or nuance.?

You may have to teach us that .

2. What comes first between 'born again' and 'receive the holy spirit'?

Being born again first .

3. Or does 'born again' and 'receive the holy spirit' happen at the same instant?

But there could be spectacular exceptional experience just like the house of Cornelius. They seem to received the two experiences same hour .

jesusjnr2020:
So if man's works couldn't gain him salvation, but the works of Jesus could, you really think that Jesus who now had possession of man's salvation having bought it with the price of His blood, does not have the right to say that man could get it from Him by his works?

Shame on you!

Shame on you, son of belia, the demon Allah is really learing you to your doom.

livingchrist:

Shame on you, son of belia, the demon Allah is really learing you to your doom.

Lol! The bolded must really love the teachings of Jesus which you who claim to be livingchrist detest.

What an irony!