Why is St. Paul scripture?


#1

Hello,
So why is St. Paul’s letters and the other epistles considered canonical scripture and given authority? They are theologians not prophets and not the direct word of God or Jesus. Why does Paul get in the New Testament and St. Augustine, for example, doesn’t.
I can see some reasons why possibley are

  1. He was the first major Christian theologian at a time when church was still being defined.
    But this doesn’t mean he’s right, he just got his opinions in first.
  2. He claimed to have met Christ on the road to Damascus. Yet plenty of other theologians and mystics have also spoken directly to God/Christ and they aren’t apostles or scripture.
  3. He verified his beliefs with the other apostles, I think he says this in acts or his letters somewhere I forget. But do we have evidence from the other apostles that they 100% endorsed him? Could he have just been zealous and persuasive enough (clearly he was) to win them over even if he wasn’t necessarily correct? Didn’t Peter disagree with a Paul and only by Paul’s account in Acts change his mind?
  4. Paul helped form most of the gentile churches and after the new Christians got kicked out of the synagogues the whole church did a sharp turn away from Judaism. The temple being destroyed and Christians being persecuted for not supporting the revolt further diminished the role of Jewish Christians. But this was all abandoning the Judaism of Jesus.
  5. The church councils that made Paul Cannon because they were the inheritors of his teachings and lineage, they were from the churches he founded.

I actually like some or most of the epistles, I just struggle how they don’t always seem to match what Jesus taught and Paul clearly takes Christianity in a different direction than Christ.

What do you all think?
-Fred


#2

I don’t see how St. Paul contradicts the Gospels. There is more trouble reconciling some Gospel accounts than Paul with them. Why do you think we need Mark or Luke btw?


#3

Paul was more than a theologian or prophet. He was an Apostle, chosen by Christ himself and inspired by the Holy Spirit. The other Apostles accepted Paul as one of them.


#4

Yes and it goes to the question as to WHO determines what is Scripture and what Church developed the Canon of Scripture.

Well, I’m Catholic so you can guess which Church I believe that is. That however is beyond the scope of the question at hand.

Good question OP

G_d bless,
Mary.


#5

The direct question, why St. Paul and not St. Augustine: eyewitness testimony.

Apostolic witness is given precedence.


#6

What has led you to the conclusion that St. Paul was not a prophet?

What are some examples of the epistles not matching what Jesus taught?


#7

Thanks for asking me this. I reread Hebrews and Romans which was really helpful. What Paul ACTUALLY says about the Law is much more nuanced than frequently interpreted. The intrepration of Paul I don’t like is that the old convenants purpose was to set us up to fail and now that Christ has forgiven our sins there is no need for any of it, or the Torah really it was just the set up for Jesus. Judaism is completely obsolete.
Out of Hebrews and Romans, I only found one verse that seems to actually say this:
Hebrews 8:13 “By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.”
But… in context, Paul is talking about the sacrificial system, not the individual commandments for moral living or prayer and how Jesus removes the need for continued animal sacrifice.

Hebrews 4 he affirms the sabbath
Romans has a beautiful part about how gentiles, not under the law, may in their following commandments gain the blessing of the law. Basically by being observant you enter in the convenant of the law, not by external circumcision.
He says the Law is not of legalism but of love and faith.
That’s the teachings of Jesus on the law I think!

Very cool, thanks for pushing me to have another look. It’s really the evangelical and main line Protestant reading of Paul I don’t like. Which takes effort for me to seperare fro his actual words because that’s the intrepration I had grown up with and is the most prevalent. It’s a lot of cheap grace, being born again by one altar call type stuff. Not a daily sanctification through prayer and observance of the commandments.

But even I agree with Paul and like him, what makes him scripture? Jesus appears to a lot of people throughout history and gives them wonderful messages. Why is St. Francis not scripture? Why I can I disagree with Francis and be okay, but I disagree with Paul and I’m a heretic?

I still think that Paul teaches a different message than Jesus. He puts much more emphasis on Jesus as divine and as the atonement for our sins and justification thru faith. Jesus puts more emphasis on his being the messiah and the fulfillment of the Law and a teacher of the Law and exhorter for compassion and against hyprocracy. The gospel of John focuses more
on salvation and healing thru Christ than justification. These two views aren’t contradictory though. But definitely different emphasis.

Someone mentioned the role and authority of the church in selecting the Cannon. I don’t think that’s off topic at all. You all can feel free to bring that into the discussion.


#8

Hi, Fred!

…as you come from a different perspective my response may seem harsher than how I intend it to be… with this in mind, I will attempt to be exceedingly generous and completely non-judgmental…

So why is St. Paul’s letters and the other epistles considered canonical scripture and given authority? They are theologians not prophets and not the direct word of God or Jesus. Why does Paul get in the New Testament and St. Augustine, for example, doesn’t.

…well… we have to understand what “prophet” means… does it mean those who, Inspired by the Holy Spirit, Wrote the books which are included in the Old Testament as the “Major and Minor prophets” or does it means those who, Inspired by the Holy Spirit convey Yahweh God’s Message to the world?

If we were to limit ourselves to the first understanding then you would be absolutely right.

Yet, if we allow the Holy Spirit to direct us, we would find that the first definition falls quite short… as God’s prophets are both those who are designated Writers and designated promulgators of the Word.

While it is true that lineage of the pre-Messianic (Old Covenant) prophets ended with John the Baptist, there’s a new generation of prophets ushered in by Jesus Christ Himself (New Covenant):

[FONT=“Garamond”][size=]16 ‘Up to the time of John it was the Law and the Prophets;

since then, the kingdom of God has been preached, and by violence everyone is getting in. (St. Luke 16:16)

10 The one who rose higher than all the heavens to fill all things is none other than the one who descended. 11 And to some, his gift was that they should be **apostles; to some, prophets; to some, evangelists; to some, pastors and teachers; **12 so that the saints together make a unity in the work of service, building up the body of Christ… 15 If we live by the truth and in love, we shall grow in all ways into Christ, who is the head 16 by whom the whole body is fitted and joined together, every joint adding its own strength, for each separate part to work according to its function. So the body grows until it has built itself up, in love. (Ephesians 4:10-16)

I can see some reasons why possibley are

  1. He was the first major Christian theologian at a time when church was still being defined.
    But this doesn’t mean he’s right, he just got his opinions in first.

…here you’re not only going against Scriptures (Ephesians 4) but you are singling out the wrong target:

15 Think of our Lord’s patience as your opportunity to be saved: our brother Paul, who is so dear to us, told you this when he wrote to you with the wisdom that is his special gift. 16 He always writes like this when he deals with this sort of subject, and this makes some points in his letter hard to understand; these are the points that uneducated and unbalanced people distort, in the same way **as they distort the rest of scripture **

– a fatal thing for them to do. 17 You have been warned about this, my friends; be careful not to get carried away by the errors of unprincipled people, from the firm ground that you are standing on. (2 St. Peter 3:15-17)
St. Peter, Inspired by the Holy Spirit, responds to false teachings and heresy and clarifies that the Epistles and the Gospels are the Word of God.

  1. He claimed to have met Christ on the road to Damascus. Yet plenty of other theologians and mystics have also spoken directly to God/Christ and they aren’t apostles or scripture.

You are meshing God’s Revelation for the world with private revelations to the individuals.

  1. He verified his beliefs with the other apostles, I think he says this in acts or his letters somewhere I forget. But do we have evidence from the other apostles that they 100% endorsed him? Could he have just been zealous and persuasive enough (clearly he was) to win them over even if he wasn’t necessarily correct? Didn’t Peter disagree with a Paul and only by Paul’s account in Acts change his mind?

…remember, it is not about man alone but man with and in God (St. John 15:1-10; 14:14-23; 16:12-15)… and as far as Authority, here’s what Scriptures tell us:

…12 This silenced the entire assembly, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul describing the signs and wonders God had worked through them among the pagans…

14 Simeon has described how God first arranged to enlist a people for his name out of the pagans. 15 This is entirely in harmony with the words of the prophets, since the scriptures say: 16 After that I shall return and rebuild the fallen House of David; I shall rebuild it from its ruins and restore it. 17 Then the rest of mankind,all the pagans who are consecrated to my name, will look for the Lord, says the Lord who made this 18 known so long ago…

15:22 Then the apostles and elders decided to choose delegates to send to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; the whole church concurred with this. They chose Judas known as Barsabbas and Silas, both leading men in the brotherhood…

25 and so we have decided unanimously to elect delegates and to send them to you with Barnabas and Paul, men we highly respect 26 who have dedicated their lives to the name of our Lord Jesus Christ…

32 Judas and Silas, being themselves prophets, spoke for a long time, encouraging and strengthening the brothers…

(Acts 15:1-35)
…due to the limits on the text I had to condense passages or simply cite some (for you to study); I must also continue on the next post…

Maran atha!

Angel

[/size][/FONT]


#9

Hi, Fred!

Part II

  1. Paul helped form most of the gentile churches and after the new Christians got kicked out of the synagogues the whole church did a sharp turn away from Judaism. The temple being destroyed and Christians being persecuted for not supporting the revolt further diminished the role of Jewish Christians. But this was all abandoning the Judaism of Jesus.

…actually not!

Here’s where you’ve got it completely wrong:

[FONT=“Garamond”][size=]19 ‘I see you are a prophet, sir’ said the woman. 20 ‘Our fathers worshipped on this mountain*c], while you say that Jerusalem is the place where one ought to worship.’ 21 Jesus said: ‘Believe me, woman, the hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know: for salvation comes from the Jews. 23 But the hour will come – in fact it is here already – when true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth: that is the kind of worshipper the Father wants. 24 God is spirit, and those who worship must worship in spirit and truth.’ 25 The woman said to him, ‘I know that Messiah – that is, Christ – is coming; and when he comes he will tell us everything’. 26 ‘I who am speaking to you,’ said Jesus ‘I am he.’

(St. John 4:19-26)

1 ‘I have told you all this that your faith may not be shaken. 2 They will expel you from the synagogues, and indeed the hour is coming when anyone who kills you will think he is doing a holy duty for God. 3 They will do these things because they have never known either the Father or myself. 4 But I have told you all this, so that when the time for it comes you may remember that I told you. (St. John 16:1-4)

9 ‘Then they will hand you over to be tortured and put to death; and you will be hated by all the nations on account of my name. 10 And then many will fall away; men will betray one another and hate one another. 11 Many false prophets will arise; they will deceive many, 12 and with the increase of lawlessness, love in most men will grow cold; 13 but the man who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 ‘This Good News of the kingdom will be proclaimed to the whole world*a] as a witness to all the nations. And then the end will come. (St. Mattew 24:9-14)
The persecution of the Church is a direct consequence of the persecution of the Messiah:

18 ‘If the world hates you, remember that it hated me before you. 19 If you belonged to the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you do not belong to the world, because my choice withdrew you from the world, therefore the world hates you. 20 Remember the words I said to you: A servant is not greater than his master. If they persecuted me, they will persecute you too; if they kept my word, they will keep yours as well. 21 But it will be on my account that they will do all this, because they do not know the one who sent me. 22 If I had not come, if I had not spoken to them, they would have been blameless; but as it is they have no excuse for their sin. 23 Anyone who hates me hates my Father. 24 If I had not performed such works among them as no one else has ever done, they would be blameless; but as it is, they have seen all this, and still they hate both me and my Father. 25 But all this was only to fulfil the words written in their Law: They hated me for no reason.

(St. John 15:18-25)
…and the propagation of the Faith does not come out as a result the destruction of the Temple nor of Christian’s rejection or abandonment of Christ’s Command; rather, it comes as a Obedience to Christ’s Great Commission:

16 Meanwhile the eleven disciples set out for Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had arranged to meet them. 17 When they saw him they fell down before him, though some hesitated. 18 Jesus came up and spoke to them. He said, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go, therefore, make disciples of all the nations; baptise them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teach them to observe all the commands I gave you. And know that I am with you always; yes, to the end of time.’

(St. Matthew 28:16-20)

21 and he said to them again, ‘Peace be with you. ‘As the Father sent me, so am I sending you.’ 22 After saying this he breathed on them and said: ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 For those whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven; for those whose sins you retain, they are retained.’ (St. John 20:21-23)

  1. The church councils that made Paul Cannon because they were the inheritors of his teachings and lineage, they were from the churches he founded.

…this is totally devoid of historicity; if you read up on the institution of the Canon you will find that it was determined by three Councils–those included were already part of the Church Liturgy; some of the excluded well still considered to have sound doctrinal value; while others were found to be suspect or outright heretical…

…to be continued!

Maran atha!

Angel

[/size][/FONT]


#10

Angel,

So you said
“well… we have to understand what “prophet” means… does it mean those who, Inspired by the Holy Spirit, Wrote the books which are included in the Old Testament as the “Major and Minor prophets” or does it means those who, Inspired by the Holy Spirit convey Yahweh God’s Message to the world?”
(Easier to quote manually than the quote feature)

You’re absolutely right there is a difference. Spirtual writers throughout time have been inspired by God and informed by their personal experiences of God and written tons of stuff. Some of it deeply insightful, some of it misguided. But then there is the message of God to His people thru His appointed messengers. That’s scripture. You’re arguing that Paul and the other epistles are not just inspired but also God’s message to us.

Before I go into why I’m starting to see that you might be right and I may be in error. Let me say something of my intention. I sometimes wonder if I should have a disclaimer that I’m not a troll or looking for a fight. I am legitimately seeking God’s truth and for me it’s a process. I find it really helpful to post up my latest thoughts and let someone else point out the flaws and then I’ll revise and repeat. Kinda of Hegelian. Just explaining how I can post a bunch of negative stuff about Paul and then change my mind with a second, closer look.

Okay, so I really like what you said about God’s message. Two parrels in Judaism and Islam that are helpful to me, but not to be taken too strictly. In Islam, there is the recognition of prophets throughout history that have given God’s message and that essentially it is the same message each time. But it is has been misinterpreted or corrupted each time. To me, Paul belongs in scripture if he really is preaching the same core message as Jesus and as the partriarchs and prophets. After rereading Romans and Hebrews, I’m willing to admit I may have been mistaken and it really is the same message. I need to keep reading and studying all the epistles with cross referencing the gospels and OT though. But I think it’s probably the same message and that even on the surface the commonalities far outweigh differences.

The second parrel is in the Jewish critiques of why Jesus isn’t the messiah. The Rabbis say that you judge any prophet by how thier message agrees or denies the Torah. If they deny any teachings of the Torah then they are a false prophet. They say Jesus is a false because he violates the commandments (sabbath, washing hands, drinking blood, etc). But if you look at Jesus’ teachings he is only violating these on the surface and his real intention is to clarify and fulfill the commandments. What good is following the sabbath if you refuse to heal people on Saturday? Doing good to others takes precedent.

So Paul belongs in scripture if he is giving God’s message (not his own) to the people AND if that message doesn’t not contradict the previous revelations/messages. So yeah I think you’re right, but I need to reread more of it.


#11

Hi, Fred!

Part III

I actually like some or most of the epistles, I just struggle how they don’t always seem to match what Jesus taught and Paul clearly takes Christianity in a different direction than Christ.

What do you all think?
-Fred

…part of the problem you seem to have is that you ignore God’s Own Divine Intervention (as in Inspiration and Guidance) which makes your Swiss cheese more holes than matter:

[FONT=“Garamond”][size=]12 I still have many things to say to you but they would be too much for you now. 13 But when the Spirit of truth comes he will lead you to the complete truth, since he will not be speaking as from himself but will say only what he has learnt; and he will tell you of the things to come. 14 He will glorify me, since all he tells you will be taken from what is mine. 15 Everything the Father has is mine; that is why I said: All he tells you will be taken from what is mine.

(St. John 16:12-15)
The Unfolding of the Truth is not St. Paul’s doing, it is Christ’s Own doing through the Holy Spirit!

Maran atha!

Angel

[/size][/FONT]


#12

Hi, Fred!

…I’m kind of bulldoggish (don’t notice much more than my target); so I did not notice that you are new to the forum… Welcome!

…the fact that you are seeking the Truth is what is important not the mechanism on how you get there… so I’m fully supportive and welcoming of your comments and queries!

:extrahappy::extrahappy::extrahappy:

…my happiness is because we both get to search through Scriptures to find the GOAL!

…and because your quest gives impetus to my Faith and my resolve to study the Word of God!

…in your comparison we find two distinct paths:

  • Islam’s views/principles are sound till it comes to entering behind the veil… if refuses to accept Yahweh God’s Revelation (Isaac vs. Ishmael; Jesus vs. Mohamad…)

  • Judaism’s views/principles are sound till it rejects what is behind the veil… it rejects Yahweh God’s Revelation (I AM; Coming to the Temple; a New People; the Promise Coming to all–both of Abraham’s descendants: those of the Faith and those of the blood)

While it is true that there is some currency in the status quo; from the onset of the Old Testament Writings we find that there is Divergence as Yahweh God Reveals His Promise (the Salvific Plan) and Israel’s reluctance to Fellowship according to His Will.

…let’s open this thought up…

Genesis 3:15:

[FONT=“Garamond”][size=]15 I will make you enemies of each other: you and the woman, your offspring and her offspring. It will crush your head and you will strike its heel’.

…Scriptures (God’s Revelation) are the best teasers ever created… they introduce themes of drama and suspense… and keeps us at that cliffhanger only to release us into the next and the next and the next… it’s like the ultimate roller coaster ride… each high brings us to the brink of tasting our hearts and each low brings us to tasting our spleen… yet, if we allow God to Guide us… we can see a direct lineation from the Promise (Prophetical) to the Promise (Prophecy Actualized)… the parts that seemed blurred or contrived are man’s inability to Follow God’s Design and Lead–if we allow the Holy Spirit to Guide us… He will Lead us to the Truth, every single time!

…so Genesis 3:15 is not an empty proclamation or a filler (adorning or attention shifting mechanism); it’s fulfillment, after curves, fast, and sliders, is found in the Church through Apocalypse [Revelation] 12:17 and St. John 19:26-27.

…I hope this helps you understand why, though both religious bodies seek the Truth and yet fall short of it, there could be some seemingly discrepancies about God’s Revelation and what man understands as he embarks on his quest for Truth and Faith.

Maran atha!

Angel

[/size][/FONT]


#13

Angel,

Thanks. It’s interesting that you picked the woman the serpent out all the countless old testament/New Testamen parallels. It’s a cool one though.
Jesus at the last supper threw me for a major loop at first, since he is commanding drinking blood. But there are so many Torah references in everything he says and does during communion. A catholic forum would probably be a great place to ask for a good commentary of that.

I’m not that new to the forum, but thanks. I’ve been around for a while mainly during my Zen Buddhist phase and talking to some of the amazing mystics on this forum. I spent a long time flirting/flip flopping on theism, making me a very poor Buddhist haha. But then I started studying Judaism and the prayers. I found the God I was looking for in my meditations was looking for me! The more I study Torah though the closer I get back to the church though. Jesus is my favorite Rabbi. I accept now that Jesus is the messiah and I am drawn to Jesus’ Judaism. But you all have helped me see that what Paul actually said wasn’t abolishing Judaism and wasn’t taking away from observance but like Jesus was criticizing legalism and the ritual sacrificial system. Rather observance should always regard compassion and love as higher commandments than ritual or purity. And observance should never be used to exclude or marginalize. But Paul encourages observance of the commandments and so does Jesus. They come to fulfill and clarify the law, not abolish it.


#14

Because of the witness/testimony/authority of the Church.

They are theologians

Correct.

not prophets

Incorrect. They are both prophets. The word “prophet” means “one who speaks God’s word”. ANYONE who teaches the word of God is a prophet. So, they are prophets in that sense. However, all baptized Christians are priests, prophets and kings. So, since they are both baptized Christians, they are prophets in that sense, as well.

and not the direct word of God or Jesus.

I don’t know what you mean by that.

Why does Paul get in the New Testament and St. Augustine, for example, doesn’t.

  1. Because St. Paul is an Apostle of Christ. But St. Augustine is only an Apostle of the Church.

Apostle means “envoy, ambassador or messenger”. St. Paul was directly chosen by Jesus Christ to be the Apostle to the Gentiles.

St. Augustine was baptized a Christian in the 4th century. He was then appointed by the Church as a Priest and Bishop. Thus, he was an Apostle of Christ, through the Church.

I can see some reasons why possibley are

  1. He was the first major Christian theologian at a time when church was still being defined.
    But this doesn’t mean he’s right, he just got his opinions in first.

As we understand it,
He was one the first major Christian theologians. After the 12 Apostles, he was also selected by Christ and taught the Gospel, so that he could teach the world.

The Church was defined by Jesus Christ before the appointment of St. Paul.

St. Paul’s writings in the Bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit and thus, are without error.

  1. He claimed to have met Christ on the road to Damascus.

We believe that he did.

Yet plenty of other theologians and mystics have also spoken directly to God/Christ and they aren’t apostles or scripture.

True. But they aren’t members of the original Apostolic Church. These are the men who walked and talked with Christ at the birth of the Church. From that point on, the Church appointed the rest of the Apostles. So, these theologians and mystics, most of which are probably designated as Saints and Doctors, have been recognized as such, by the Church.

  1. He verified his beliefs with the other apostles, I think he says this in acts or his letters somewhere I forget. But do we have evidence from the other apostles that they 100% endorsed him? Could he have just been zealous and persuasive enough (clearly he was) to win them over even if he wasn’t necessarily correct? Didn’t Peter disagree with a Paul and only by Paul’s account in Acts change his mind?

The Catholic Church was there. And the Catholic Church confirms that St. Paul is one of the Apostles of Christ.

  1. Paul helped form most of the gentile churches and after the new Christians got kicked out of the synagogues the whole church did a sharp turn away from Judaism. The temple being destroyed and Christians being persecuted for not supporting the revolt further diminished the role of Jewish Christians. But this was all abandoning the Judaism of Jesus.

Not true. Catholicism, properly understood, is a fulfillment of Judaism.

  1. The church councils that made Paul Cannon because they were the inheritors of his teachings and lineage, they were from the churches he founded.

Not true. There is only one Church. It is the Catholic Church. It is the Catholic Church, in ecumenical Council, which confirmed the inspiration of St. Paul’s letters.

I actually like some or most of the epistles, I just struggle how they don’t always seem to match what Jesus taught

They match Jesus’ Teachings in every way.

and Paul clearly takes Christianity in a different direction than Christ.

St. Paul’s Christianity is the Christianity of Jesus Christ. There is no difference.

What do you all think?

You might want to study more about the Catholic Church.


#15

I cannot overstate how much I love this post. :clapping:


#16

Hi, Fred!

…yeah, it goes to the Holy Spirit–I don’t plan things out but allow His Guidance to Unfold; this time it took me to that particular passage… this true Holy War takes effect right at the onset of Creation… when we read Genesis we find that on the first day (period/stage) God Created Light… angels are Creatures of Light… when we fast forward to Jesus He tells us that Satan, the Ancient Serpent, was a murderer from the Beginning… when we go to St. John’s vision of the Holy War (Apocalypse 12) we find that in deed Lucifer attempts against the Divine Throne, convinces one third of the angels to follow him, is removed from Heaven, and flung onto the earth where the Holy War is brought to humanity… so between Genesis and Apocalypse [Revelation] there seems to be no direct correlation… unless we take into effect all of the prophecies as they were meant to Bring God’s Revelation to man…

This is why it is so important to study all of the Sacred Writings… and, more so, to allow the Holy Spirit to Unfold God’s Salvific Plan.

I can understand your confusion with the Lord’s Supper… the Old Covenant is quite adamant about not eating the animal with its blood and not drinking the blood or cooking the animal in it… since it is the life-force of the animal…

…so while it may seem anti-Covenant and even a cannibalistic practice, we must engage what is being offered in the New Covenant… Jesus’ Body and Blood nourishing man’s Spiritual Being… because His Body/Flesh is Real Food and His Blood is Real Drink… now, consider Jesus’ Command that we eat (chew/gnaw) His Flesh/Body and drink His Blood… clearly this is an act that Jews could not even consider partaking because it went against one of Judaism’s main principles… yet, this is not new… there are several passages in the Old Testament Scriptures where it is stressed that, because of Israel’s disobedience and rejection of Yahweh God, things would get so bad for them that there’ll be nothing to eat… and that they would devour their own (including children).

…but here’s the best connection:

[FONT=“Garamond”][size=]14 as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, 15 so that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.

(St. John 3:14-15)
Israel was commanded to not create graven images… yet, because of their disobedience, when Yahweh God curse them with the plague of serpents, they were forced to look upon an image of the creature that tormented and killed them in order to be “saved.”

Jesus not only uses the image of the raised serpent but He also forces all to consume that which is found to be unclean, disordered and unappetizing… why?

What actually saved the Israelites in the desert, the image which they would look upon or the Obedience to Yahweh God’s Command?

God Commands us to Trust Him and place Him Above all; Jesus, the God that Saves, Commands that, if we Love Him, we must Obey His Commandment… one of them is to forgo all understanding about flesh and blood and take Him on His Word: ‘I Am the Bread from Heaven, whoever eats Me will have Life!’

…and yes, the fulfillment of the Law (the Bringing the Law to its Perfection) can only be done by God (St. John 1:1-14; St. Matthew 9:13a; 22:37-40).

Maran atha!

Angel

[/size][/FONT]


#17

Thanks to everyone’s help. I have the beginnings of a coherent theology coming together. You may disagree it’s coherent, but so far I like it. rejecting Paul as scripture doesn’t work and he says some really cool stuff about the Law.

I started a new thread specifically in response to you De Maria, I really want to hear more about it:
forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=14736253#post14736253


#18

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.