Alla and Mark Fulton about Paul
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-11-2015, 02:07 AM (This post was last modified: 06-11-2015 02:17 AM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Alla and Mark Fulton about Paul
(05-11-2015 08:03 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(05-11-2015 07:25 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  "The law" Paul was referring to was the Jewish law, as laid down in the Torah. It was not what you decide it was.
Of course, Paul was talking about Jewish Law which is will of God according to the scripture.
Still, Paul did not say that Jewish Law has to be replaced with faith in Christ.
Paul was saying that no Jew can be justified by Jewish law. Why? Because every Jew breaks God's law. How many times did Jews brake Jewish Law? Many times. They can not be justified.
Only those who obey Jewish law perfectly can be justified by Jewish Law. There are no this kind of people.
This is what Paul was teaching.
But why can Jews be justified by faith in Christ? You don't know the answer to this questions. You have no idea why Paul said this.
(it was rhetorical question and totally of topic. Smile )

Only those who obey Jewish law perfectly can be justified by Jewish Law.

Says who?

And what do you mean by "justified?"
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
06-11-2015, 02:40 AM
RE: Alla and Mark Fulton about Paul
(05-11-2015 07:22 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(05-11-2015 06:49 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Alla,

Tonechaser has kindly pointed out the following commentaries. You really should read them, as they make it clear that Paul is referring to secular authorities.

http://biblehub.com/commentaries/romans/13-4.htm

http://biblehub.com/sermons/romans/13-4.htm
I didn't ask you to show me how some people understand Paul's words. I didn't ask you about private interpretations.

I want to see where Paul called Roman government or any secular government "higher power" or "servants of God".


Paul repeatedly reminds slaves to be obedient to their masters...


Ephesians 6:5-8 King James Version (KJV)

"5 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;

6 Not with eye service, as men pleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart;

7 With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men:

8 Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free."


Colossians 3:22-25 King James Version (KJV)

"22 Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eye service, as men pleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God;

23 And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men;

24 Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.

25 But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons."


1 Timothy 6:1-2 King James Version (KJV)

"6 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.

2 And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort."


Titus 2:9-11 King James Version (KJV)

"9 Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again;

10 Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.

11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men"


Alla, which bit of all this don't you understand?

Paul was working for the establishment.

Here endeth the lesson.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
[+] 2 users Like Mark Fulton's post
06-11-2015, 03:24 PM
RE: Alla and Mark Fulton about Paul
(05-11-2015 09:44 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  "I didn't ask you to show me how some people understand Paul's words."
Bad luck, princess, that's how we talk about things around here.
That is fine with me how people talk about things around here. Smile
(05-11-2015 09:44 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
Alla Wrote:I want to see where Paul called Roman government or any secular government "higher power" or "servants of God".
Romans 13, as discussed, and agreed upon by the scholars.
Yes, scholars-shmolars.
So, according to the Bible Paul did not say that Roman or any secular government is power from God(of God).

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
06-11-2015, 03:31 PM (This post was last modified: 06-11-2015 03:35 PM by Alla.)
RE: Alla and Mark Fulton about Paul

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
06-11-2015, 03:43 PM (This post was last modified: 06-11-2015 03:48 PM by Alla.)
RE: Alla and Mark Fulton about Paul
(06-11-2015 02:07 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
Alla Wrote:Only those who obey Jewish law perfectly can be justified by Jewish Law.
Says who?
Another Apostle of Jesus Christ James. James 2: 10 for whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
Alla: if someone is guilty of all, this someone can not have favor with God. He is not justified by law.
(06-11-2015 02:07 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  And what do you mean by "justified?"
What do I mean?! According to the Bible Paul said this, not me. I only quote what Paul said, not scholars.

P.S. So what did Paul mean? Ask Paul Big Grin

or ask scholars-shmolars. Smartass May be they understand what Paul meant. Tongue

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
06-11-2015, 04:14 PM
RE: Alla and Mark Fulton about Paul
MARK
Paul repeatedly reminds slaves to be obedient to their masters...
Ephesians 6:5-8 King James Version (KJV)
"5 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;
6 Not with eye service, as men pleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart;
7 With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men:
8 Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free."


ALLA:
Yes. Paul did say this.
Did he say that those masters have power from God? No. But another Apostle of Jesus Christ Peter explains why saints of God have to be obedient to their masters:

15 it is will of God that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men
16 as free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as servants of God
18 servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the forward
19 for this is thankworthy, if a man with conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully
21 ..because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps


Neither Paul nor Peter say that those masters were ordained of God/have power of God. But they say followers of Christ should endure every trial exactly the way Christ endured His trials .

P.S. God doesn't send us here to Earth to endure trials. He sends us here to endure trials well. This is the point. To endure well and gain experience.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
06-11-2015, 04:16 PM
RE: Alla and Mark Fulton about Paul
(06-11-2015 03:43 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(06-11-2015 02:07 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Says who?
Another Apostle of Jesus Christ James. James 2: 10 for whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
Alla: if someone is guilty of all, this someone can not have favor with God. He is not justified by law.
(06-11-2015 02:07 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  And what do you mean by "justified?"
What do I mean?! According to the Bible Paul said this, not me. I only quote what Paul said, not scholars.

P.S. So what did Paul mean? Ask Paul Big Grin

or ask scholars-shmolars. Smartass May be they understand what Paul meant. Tongue

"Another Apostle of Jesus Christ James. James 2: 10 for whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
Alla: if someone is guilty of all, this someone can not have favor with God. He is not justified by law."


Allah, you bring up a very good point.

James may well have been the brother of Jesus. He was a devout Jew, and fundamentally opposed to Paul. This is ironic, because Paul was the primary creator of Christian theology.

I'm not sure whether you are really genuinely interested in history or not. If you are, I think you'll find the following very fascinating. Please take the trouble to read it and don't just significance of what it means. Apologies to anyone else has read all this before... just skip over it... I'm just trying to help my Mormon friends get her head around some facts....

James, Jesus’ Brother

I am indebted to Professor James D. Tabor for providing many of the following insights in his book The Jesus Dynasty.

Josephus and other historians mention at least a dozen Jewish leaders from the first century CE who were hailed as Messiahs but killed by the Romans or in sectarian fights with their countrymen.86 Each time, the movements they inspired faded into nothing after the demise of their leader. The movement Yeshua belonged to (the Nazarenes) was different, because it definitely did not fade away until centuries later.

( http://www.livius.org/men-mh/messiah/messiah00.html - overview )

To take over the Nazarene leadership after Yeshua’s death was a risky proposition. Both previous leaders, John the Baptist and Yeshua, had been executed. They needed a new charismatic commander. James, Yeshua’s brother, was just the man.

Yeshua had been a potential legitimate king and Messiah because he was of the royal bloodline of David. James too was of this bloodline, and of the same flesh and blood as Yeshua through at least one common parent, their mother. It is possible that James was the

“disciple Jesus loved,” (John 13:23 and 19:23–25 NJB)

not named because Gentile authors wanted to minimize his importance.

Paul, who wrote in the 50’s CE, stated that he went to Jerusalem to

“...meet Peter and James, the brother of the Lord” (Gal. 1:19, NJB.)

This hinted at the important status of James and is a strong clue that there once was a living Jesus, although the modern reader should bear in mind the possibility that this could be an interpolation.

Later in Galatians, Paul wrote:

“So James, Peter, and John, these leaders, these pillars...” (Gal. 2:9, NJB.)

That James was in charge is convincingly confirmed by the following quote from Paul:

“When Cephas came to Antioch, however, I opposed him to his face, since he was manifestly in the wrong. His custom had been to eat with the pagans, but after certain friends of James arrived he stopped doing this and kept away from them altogether for fear of the group that insisted on circumcision” (Gal. 2:11–12, NJB.)

Paul makes clear that Peter (Cephas) was careful to be seen doing what James wanted.

The book of Acts also portrays James as the leader of the disciples.

Eusebius of Caesarea (260-340 CE,) the most important early Christian historian of all,88 wrote that:

“James, whom men of old had surnamed ‘Just’ for his excellence of virtue, is recorded to have been the first elected to the throne of the Oversight of the Church in Jerusalem” (Church History 2.1.2.)

Saint Jerome, a prolific commentator and translator of early Christian material, quoted Hegesippus’ (a first century writer) account of James from the fifth book of his lost “Commentaries:”

“After the apostles, James the brother of the Lord named the Just was made head of the Church at Jerusalem. Many indeed are called James. This one was holy from his mother’s womb. He drank neither wine nor strong drink, ate no flesh, never shaved or anointed himself with ointment or bathed. He alone had the privilege of entering the Holy of Holies, since indeed he did not use woolen vestments but linen and went alone into the temple and prayed on behalf of the people, insomuch that his knees were reputed to have acquired the hardness of camels’ knees.” (De Viris Illustribi.)

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusebius_of_Caesarea)

The “Holy of Holies” was a term referring to the inner sanctuary of the temple in Jerusalem. Since it was unlawful for anyone but the high priest of the temple to enter it, and then only once a year. This suggests that James was considered a more legitimate, and perhaps a de facto high priest in opposition to the one appointed by Rome.

Josephus also described James as a pious Jew who was well respected, and observed all the obligations of Judaism.

James obviously managed to achieve a high status among his own people. He was described in terms that emphasized his association with the temple and Judaism. His vegetarianism, unshaven state and wearing of linen were all Essene traits.

James was clearly a leading Jewish figure in Jerusalem until his death in 62 CE, yet he is barely mentioned in the Bible or in the annals of Church history. The Gospel writers and Church historians have deliberately diminished James’ importance for obvious reasons; James was too Jewish, and his beliefs were diametrically opposed to Paul’s proto-Christian theology.James was not a Christian.

James’ existence as Jesus’ successor discredits the untrue Catholic idea that the leadership of the movement was transferred to Peter.

Consider the Jewish community led by James in the two decades after Jesus’ death. The traditional story about this group is in the book of Acts, (discussed in chapter 17) in which they are portrayed as Christians. This may well be a deliberate misrepresentation.

The loss of two leaders in close succession, John the Baptist and then Yeshua, must have devastated them. Matthew and John have the disciples going back to Galilee, yet Acts and Luke have the risen Jesus telling them not to leave Jerusalem. What is clear is that over the next few decades the Nazarenes settled in Jerusalem.

There is no doubt that for the Nazarenes, Jerusalem was a dangerous place. Yeshua had been crucified there. The Sadducees and a garrison of Roman troops were an ever present threat. Yet James and the Nazarenes were willing to take the risk of living in Jerusalem, and they obviously established quite a presence there in the thirty odd years after Yeshua’s death.

It can be surmised that they (the Nazarenes) settled in Jerusalem because they were still dreaming about the kingdom of God, centered in the capital of the Jewish world. They were willing to live in Jerusalem, right under the noses of the Romans and the Sadducees, because they still had big plans to change the political status quo.

The author of Acts explains that this kingdom was still a general expectation when, in the first chapter, the resurrected Jesus appears:

“Now having met together, they asked him, ‘Lord, has the time come? Are you going to restore the kingdom of Israel?’ He replied, ‘It is not for you to know times or dates that the Father has decided by his own authority, but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you, and then you will be my witnesses not only in Jerusalem but throughout Judea and Samaria, and indeed to the ends of the earth’” (Acts 1:9–12, NJB.)

The author was writing seventy-plus years after Yeshua’s death. At this late time the second coming of Jesus still had not happened, so the author was advising his readers they had better not hold their

( http://historical-jesus.info/appc.html )

breath waiting. This was in marked contrast to what Paul wrote in the early 50’s CE:

“Brothers this is what I mean: our time is growing short. Those who have wives should live as though they had none, and those who mourn should live as though they had nothing to mourn for; those who are enjoying life should live as though there were nothing to laugh about; those whose life is buying things should live as though they had nothing of their own; and those who have to deal with the world should not become engrossed in it. I say this because the world as we know it is passing away” (1 Cor. 7:29–31, NJB.)

The Nazarenes called themselves “saints” or “followers of the way” or “the faithful” or “disciples” or “the poor” or the “children of light.” They saw themselves as preparing “the way” for the return of Yahweh as described in Isaiah:

“The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God” (Isa. 40:3, KJV.)

The Nazarenes in Jerusalem saw themselves as God’s chosen peo- ple, and they were true believers in the power and glory of Israel. They had a broad base of support among Jews throughout Judea and much of the Roman Empire. All other Essenes and zealots throughout Judea would have regarded them favorably, as would many Pharisees and common Jews.

The Roman world, however, considered any member of the Nazarenes
“a pest” who “stirs up trouble among Jews the world over,” (see Acts 24:5) with good reason, as they were xenophobic and occasionally militant.

The Nazarenes were fundamentally opposed to Paul’s doctrine, (the basis of Christianity ) did not accept Paul as an apostle, and quite rightly considered Paul an annoying heretic allied to the Gentile world

So Yeshua’s family and friends were, therefore, strongly opposed to what became Christianity. It is very likely that the Nazarenes promoted Judaism, slowly building up numbers in preparation for the coming of the kingdom of God.

Some early church fathers claimed that the Nazarenes wrote an early Hebrew version of Yeshua’s exploits, one from which Jesus’ genealogy in Matthew is derived.90 That would definitely have made an interesting read, but not surprisingly, no copy has survived.

Some Nazarenes were sent out as missionaries to other cities. The author Douglas Lockhart believes that by the time James died in 62 CE, the Nazarenes had boosted their numbers to about eight thousand by recruiting Jews. Peter went to Antioch (as described in Galatians 2.) These missionaries may have even got as far as Rome.

Many historians, particularly those favorably biased towards the “traditional” story put forward in Acts, do not accept that James and Yeshua’s original disciples were not Christians. The writers of the Catholic Encyclopedia, for example, have made a deliberate choice not to discuss the Nazarenes, not even once, despite the fact that they are mentioned in the Bible and by many Church Fathers. The encyclopedia’s authors would have some difficult explaining to do if Catholics around the world started learning about James and the Nazarenes.

( http://www.ccel.org/ccel/alexander_a/can...iii.v.html )

Continued next post....

References:
Tabor, J. 2006 “The Jesus Dynasty.” Harper Collins. London.
Eisenman, Robert H. “James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls”
This Voskuilen and Rose Mary Sheldon “Operation Messiah”
http://www.thenazareneway.com/james_the_..._jesus.htm
http://jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/siljampe.htm
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/james.html
http://www.philipharland.com/Blog/2009/0...odcast-37– jewish-followers-of-jesus-part-1–ebionites/
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
06-11-2015, 04:25 PM
RE: Alla and Mark Fulton about Paul
James’ Letter (The Epistle of James)

Many Christians are not aware that Yeshua’s brother may have his very own letter in the Bible. Yet it is there, tucked inconspicuously under the thirteen letters attributed to Paul.

The Catholic encyclopedia claims there is no doubt who the author was:

“Internal evidence (contents of the Epistle, its style, address, date, and place of composition) points unmistakably to James, the Lord’s brother, the Bishop of Jerusalem, as the author; he exactly, and he alone, fulfils the conditions required in the writer of the Epistle.”

Yet it is surprising that the authors acknowledge James was Jesus’ brother here, when that fact is denied elsewhere in the same publication by calling James Jesus’ cousin.

The authors call James a bishop, thereby implying James was a Christian, which he most definitely was not. There has never been a Jewish bishop. Christian bishops did not exist anywhere until (at earliest) the 90’s CE, thirty years after James died.

No one can be sure Yeshua’s brother wrote or dictated James’ letter, but even if he did not, the letter is from an early Jewish source, so one possibly close to Yeshua. Many scholars date the letter to about 60 CE, although the Catholic encyclopedia states

“about A.D. 47.”

The letter is addressed to the twelve Jewish tribes of the dispersion, so was to be distributed outside Jerusalem. It has a mildly authoritarian tone, as one would expect from a leader. The author does not mention the word “Church.” The communities he wrote to (outside Jerusalem) worshipped in synagogues, not Churches:

“Now suppose a man comes into your synagogue...” (James 2:2, NJB.)

James says nothing about his (now) famous brother’s exploits. James does not mention Yeshua’s divinity, miracles, sacrificial death or resurrection. If James thought his brother, or his close associate, was a miracle working Son of God, and he knew Yeshua had risen from the dead, there would not be much else worth talking about! All your letters would be laced with excited expletives about supernatural events. James’ letter is not, because James did not believe baloney about Yeshua.

James was a pious Jew. A central theme of his letter is that it is important to obey “the Law.”

“You see, if a man keeps the whole of the Law, except for one small point at which he fails, he is still guilty of breaking it all” (James 2:10 JB.)

“But the man who looks steadily at the perfect law of freedom and makes that his habit - not listening and then forgetting, but actively putting it into practice - will be happy in all that he does” (James 1:25 JB.)

James was referring to the Jewish Law, which the Jerusalem Bible admits in a footnote. This is the opposite of Paul’s proposition that salvation is better secured by releasing oneself from obedience to the Law, an admission also admitted in another footnote in the Jerusalem Bible.

James wrote that faith was pointless without good works:

“Take the case, my brothers, of someone who has never done a sin- gle good act but claims that he has faith. Will that faith save him? If one of the brothers or one of the sisters is in need of clothes and has not enough food to live on, and one of you says to them, ‘I wish you well; keep yourself warm and eat plenty’, without giving them these bare necessities of life, then what good is that? Faith is like that: if good works do not go with it, it is quite dead” (James 2:14–17, NJB.)

( http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/james.html )

James emphasized the importance of action:

“If there are any wise or learned men among you, let them show it by their good lives, with humility and wisdom in their actions” (James 3:13, NJB.)

It can be argued that James had heard Paul’s opinionated preaching about faith, and rejected it outright as nonsense.

Consider the following:

“Remember this, my dear brothers, be quick to listen but slow to speak and slow to rouse your temper, God’s righteousness is never served by man’s anger.” (James 1:19–20, NJB.)

James was cut from a different cloth to the self righteous, often angry Paul, a man who appears to have rarely listened to others.

James wrote

“Above all, my brothers, do not swear by heaven or by earth, or use any oaths at all. If you mean ‘yes,’ you must say ‘yes;’ if you mean ‘no,’ say ‘no’. Otherwise you make yourselves liable to judgment” (James 5:12, NJB.)

This is refreshingly real, although a Christian might hope to hear something a little more profound from the brother of the Son of God!

James believed in the truth of Jewish Scripture. He did not tolerate hypocrisy. He had some socialist ideals, which one would expect from a pious Essene. Yeshua, being from the same family and the same religion, probably had similar beliefs.

There is nothing in James’ letter to suggest an anti-Roman stance, but the letter may have been edited. It is also possible James knew that if any anti-Roman literature found its way into the government’s hands he would suffer the same fate as John and Yeshua, and never write another letter again.

James’ letter only just made it into the canon. In the fourth century, its status was disputed. Augustine and Jerome accepted it very reluctantly, so probably others could not ignore the connection with Yeshua.

Martin Luther thought the letter had little doctrinal value because it so blatantly contradicted Paul’s teachings. Paul was Luther’s hero. Luther called James’ letter “an Epistle of straw.”340 Luther clearly had a very limited understanding of the real history. Modern readers have the benefit of another 500 years of scholarship.

References:

Tabor, J. 2006 “The Jesus Dynasty”. Harper Collins. London.
Eisenman, Robert H. “James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls”
http://www.thenazareneway.com/james_the_..._jesus.htm http://jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/siljampe.htm http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/james.html
http://tquid.sharpens.org/Luther_ canon.htm
http://www.philipharland.com/Blog/2009/01/15/podcast- 37–jewish-followers-of-jesus-part-1–ebionites/
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
06-11-2015, 04:42 PM
RE: Alla and Mark Fulton about Paul
Thank you for the information. I have read your post but I will read links later. I need more time.

MARK:
James may well have been the brother of Jesus. He was a devout Jew, and fundamentally opposed to Paul.
ALLA:
when you say that James fundamentally opposed to Paul, what do you mean? could you please name those [b]fundamental[/b[] things.

MARK:
The book of Acts also portrays James as the leader of the disciples.
ALLA:
yes, James was one of the leaders of the Church of Christ in the 1st century(according to the Bible)
But Christ didn't give to James what He gave to Peter
Christ gave to Peter keys of the kingdom of heaven. (Matt. 16: 19) (according to the Bible)

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
06-11-2015, 04:54 PM
RE: Alla and Mark Fulton about Paul
(06-11-2015 03:24 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(05-11-2015 09:44 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  "I didn't ask you to show me how some people understand Paul's words."
Bad luck, princess, that's how we talk about things around here.
That is fine with me how people talk about things around here. Smile
(05-11-2015 09:44 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Romans 13, as discussed, and agreed upon by the scholars.
Yes, scholars-shmolars.
So, according to the Bible Paul did not say that Roman or any secular government is power from God(of God).


So, according to the Bible Paul did not say that Roman or any secular government is power from God(of God).

Alla, I'm not sure why you keep saying this.

Also, you are plainly wrong. I will highlight the relevant parts of the quotes for you

"5 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;

6 Not with eye service, as men pleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart;

"22 Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eye service, as men pleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God;

23 And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men;

6 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.

"9 Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again;

10 Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.

“Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted,"

How can you possibly claim "Paul did not say that Roman or any secular government is power from God(of God)" ?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
[+] 2 users Like Mark Fulton's post
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: