View Single Post
  #99  
Old 07-27-2009, 05:02 AM
PaulB's Avatar
PaulB PaulB is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: The Northwest of England
Posts: 158
Default Pam

Quote:
Originally Posted by custer View Post
Hey!

As far as Jesus and Paul...Paul is NOT speaking "in accordance with" Jesus! Paul directly contradicts what Jesus said - comparing I Corinthians 7:10-11 and 27-28 with Matthew 19:9. This apparent contradiction can only be explained by "rightly dividing the word of truth." (II Tim. 2:15) Jesus deals with Jews that are under the law, kingdom and millenial doctrine, and such - he's not talking to "church age" Christians. Paul DOES speak directly TO US - see Romans 11:13 and 15:16; Gal. 2:2 and 2:8; Col. 1:21-29; I Tim.2:7; II Tim. 1:11...(Gentiles being defined as "Uncircumcision" in Eph.2:11)

Paul also contradicts Jesus concerning salvation: When asked how to get eternal life, Jesus told the man in Matthew 19:16-17 that he should "keep the commandments;" Paul says in Galatians 3:21, "...if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law." And again, in Titus 3:5, "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us,..." And Ephesians 2:8-9, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Jesus' statement ("keep the commandments") has WORKS necessary for salvation AS OPPOSED TO PAUL who makes it clear that our salvation does NOT involve works! (Works AFTER salvation/because of salvation are a different story!)

All this to say that there's just no getting around the fact that Paul says that if a man marries AFTER HE IS LOOSED (divorced,) HE HAS NOT SINNED (I Cor. 7:27-28!) What else can we do with that passage? Somebody told me that Paul was saying we should be more concerned with the furtherance of the gospel (or something to that effect,) BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THE BIBLE PLAINLY SAYS!

Pam
www.custerfamilyfarm.com
Hi Pam! I donít think that we are going to agree on anything in Scripture in the light of what you have just presented to me, as your rule of hermeneutics is like a Semitic form of preterism. When you start applying a rule of interpretation like that then thatís when you are forced into a position where you have to start pitching Paulís teachings against those of His own Lord and Saviour. Iím sorry but that is just plain old heresy and not a right division of the word!

PaulB