Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sadly, Vizio you and others fall for the Church's line on Paul, his views on the Law and his adaption of those views so that they can align with both his and Jesus' teachings. In fact, if you were to study more closely Paul's teachings on the law and compare them with the gospels instead of just swallowing whole what the Church has taught you from the cradle you'd see that the Church's teachings on the law have been a gradual evolutionary process in adapting Paul's teachings on the Torah to Christian theology. But again, sadly, you close your mind shut like a trap door to any possibility you might be interpreting it all wrong.
Example:
Paul was a Gnostic, and as a Gnostic
In a nutshell, Paul had his own ideas of how the law and righteousness should work together. The problem was that both were at terrible odds with each other. So Paul had to adapt the law to his views so that both could work in harmony, even though they were disharmonious, cacophonous at times.
For a thorough analysis of how Paul jimmiej'ed the law to conform to his own ideas of how it should work I encourage readers to read the analysis below for an excellent succinct summary of Paul's methods of twisting the law to suit his own ends. I know you won't read it, Vizio, but this is for those who are genuinely interesting in knowing what Paul's secret mission really was---something the Church has kept hidden from their audiences for centuries:
Depends on the meanings of the Hebrew words....What you're talking about seems consensual as opposed to the others where the hearing of her pleas of help was or was not heard....
While you probably know what position I hold, this webpage seems to be poorly written and argued which makes me suspect it...
True, the examples weren't as good as they should have been. That was the first link in the google search. Had I searched more thoroughly I could have found better ones. But a simple search of "Apostle Paul's conflicting views between grace and the law" yield a goldmine of good/excellent articles if one is interested in investigating the controversy. But 99.9999% of Christians are not interested. They're more interested in just swallowing whatever their pastors heave at them from the pulpits.
Quote:
Controversy has arisen regarding Jesus versus Paul as scholars debate the different emphases and messages of Jesus and Paul.
Jesus preached the kingdom of heaven. Paul did not.
Paul preached justification by faith alone.Jesus did not. What are we to make of this? Can the two be reconciled? The answer depends on what is meant by reconciliation.
Let us be clear from the outset. The messages of Jesus and Paul were fundamentally different. Reconciliation of their messages cannot be done by harmonization.
Which is partly why Paul said "If an angel from heaven tells you different from what I say let that angel be cursed". Paul wasn't about to let even a messenger from God derail what he was trying to teach. In many respects that makes Paul an agent of the devil, doesn't it? I plan to do a thread on this soon.
One thing you can be certain about Christianity: if you're looking for a straightforward answer to your question it's NOT to be found when discussing Christian theology.
Last edited by thrillobyte; 11-02-2015 at 10:29 AM..
The history background of the Jews practice is that they were slaves back then. Raping is a rare sin. They are all properties of the Egyptians. They usually hide their daughter from the outside world. Only under rare circumstance that a daughter is left alone in the wild for a man to encounter her alone. If the girl ever yelled, it's a rape. If she's not, it's likely a deed with consent. Either way, they can't sentence the offender as he's a property to his master. You can't judge and sentence a person who is a slave of an Egyptian.
The Jews thus developed a set of rules to deal with the rare situation where a girl is raped or having sex with consent. Primarily it's the family's responsibility to hide their daughter from potential offenders. In most situations it's not because the girl isn't well protected and accompanied by her family member, it is the girt who has sex with a boy with consent. The situation is thus culturally dealt with between the 2 families.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
