embed
/
christianity2.0
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Wiki Activity

Update 9

embed 2023-09-29 07:02:53 +00:00
parent f127c250e1
commit 0d22f92b2b
37 changed files with 3175 additions and 705 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
ClementineHomilees.md

@ -12,11 +12,11 @@ Parent: [[EbioniteCanon]]
### JWO Wiki
* [[JesusWordsOnly]]
* * [[JWO_12_06_EvidenceofPeter_sTestimonyAgainstPaulinaTrial_0068]]
* * [[JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]
* * [[JWO_12_08_TheValidityoftheChargesofPeterinHomily17_0070]]
* * [[JWO_12_09_DidPaulAdmitHeRejectedtheTeachingsofPeter__0071]]
* * [[JWO_21_03_BibliographicalReferences_0115]]
* * [[JWO/JWO_12_06_EvidenceofPeter_sTestimonyAgainstPaulinaTrial_0068]]
* * [[JWO/JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]
* * [[JWO/JWO_12_08_TheValidityoftheChargesofPeterinHomily17_0070]]
* * [[JWO/JWO_12_09_DidPaulAdmitHeRejectedtheTeachingsofPeter__0071]]
* * [[JWO/JWO_21_03_BibliographicalReferences_0115]]
* [[PaulApostleOfTheHeretics]]
* [[PaulineEpistlesDetering]]
* [[RecentCanonAdditions]]

12
ConstantinianChurch.md

@ -24,12 +24,12 @@ of the Shema Israel was forbidden as being anti-Trinitarian, yet it is said
### JWO Links
* [[JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]
* [[JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]
* [[JWO_12_03_TheReliabilityofTheEbionitesDespitetheOne-SidedChargesAgainstThem_0065]]
* [[JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]
* [[JWO_16_07_ProtestantsAgreeFor1400YearsNoOneHadTheCorrectSalvationFormula_0097]]
* [[JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112]]
* [[JWO/JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]
* [[JWO/JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]
* [[JWO/JWO_12_03_TheReliabilityofTheEbionitesDespitetheOne-SidedChargesAgainstThem_0065]]
* [[JWO/JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]
* [[JWO/JWO_16_07_ProtestantsAgreeFor1400YearsNoOneHadTheCorrectSalvationFormula_0097]]
* [[JWO/JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112]]
### JWO Videos

2
DidMarcionWritePaulsLetters.md

@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ Parent: [[Home]]
## Did Marcion Write the "Pauline" Letters
### Proxy baptism for the dead ( 1 Cor. 15:29 )
### Proxy baptism for the dead (1Cor. 15:29)
See 4.4 in [[PaulineEpistlesDetering]]:

7
Home.md

@ -55,7 +55,9 @@ Wiki pages, and then index the scripture references from the book and the videos
* [[JwoRefs]] Scripture References in JWO Book
* [[JwoSite]] JWO Website Scripture References
* [[JwoWebSitePages]] JWO Website Pages
* [[JWO_23_01_Pdfs]] JWO Website Pdfs (Broken)
* [[JWO/JWO_23_01_Pdfs]] JWO Website Pdfs (Broken)
### OSIS Bible Commentary
We are working on a commentary in OSIS bible format that can create
Sword and ESword modules that can be used alongside any bible with
@ -63,6 +65,9 @@ bible reading software. We favour that as an approach rather than trying
to emit a definitive bible translation of the bible, as the base bibles vary greatly,
and we still need to refer to the KJV for versification.
### Wiki Software
* [[WikiSoftware]]
---

9
JWO/JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011.md

@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ Paul also wipes out all the food laws and festival days. (See also, 1
Tim. 4:4, 'all food is clean.') Paul clearly is teaching against any
obedience to the Law of Moses per se.
"I am the Lord. I change not." Mai. 3:6
"I am the Lord. I change not." (Mai. 3:6)
3. Martin Luther, "How Christians Should Regard Moses," Luther s Works:
Word and Sacrament
@ -131,12 +131,13 @@ abolished. Id.
[i.e., Moses] says to you, diligently do, but according to their
reforms [i.e., additions] and their precedents [i.e., examples used to
justify conduct], do not do because they talk but they do not do
[Torah]." Hebrew Matt. 23:2-3, as Jewish scholar Nehemiah Gordon
[Torah]." Hebrew (Matt. 23:2-3), as Jewish scholar Nehemiah Gordon
translates in Hebrew Yeshua.
*In the Greek Matthew, it says 'all that they say, do."
4. In the ellipsis of this quote, Luther claims the following passages also abolish the sabbath: Matt. 12:1-12; John 5:16; 7:22-23; 9:14-16.
4. In the ellipsis of this quote, Luther claims the following passages
also abolish the sabbath: (Matt. 12:1-12); John 5:16; 7:22-23; 9:14-16.
Luther does not realize this, but if Jesus abolished the Sabbath,
Jesus would be an apostate and false prophet under (Deut. 13:5). So
@ -152,7 +153,7 @@ they should permit Jesus to heal on Sabbath); (John 9:14-16) (Jesus
healing on sabbath); (John 5:16) (Jesus told a man to pick up his mat,
interpreted by Jewish leaders to be a work, but Jesus disapproves this
understanding, saying there is no command against doing good on the
Sabbath). Cfr. Jer. 17:21-24 ("be careful to not carry a load on
Sabbath). Cfr. (Jer. 17:21-24) ("be careful to not carry a load on
Sabbath.") See also, "Sabbath" Anchor Bible Dictionary (ed. David N. Freedman)
Vol. 5 at 855-56 (Jesus misunderstood as disaffirming Sabbath, but
rather reaffirmed it universally for all men in (Mark 2:27). Jesus'

6
JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015.md

@ -164,14 +164,14 @@ them for wanting to be subject to
gate doesn't go to heaven. It says 'Heaven' but it ends up in hell."
J. MacArthur, Hard to Believe { 2003) at 12,14
17. Comment on Gal. 4:9, from New American Bible
17. Comment on (Gal. 4:9), from New American Bible
![Picture #32](images/img_0032.png)
a Law that did not come from God. Hence they want to be in "bondage over again" to the weak and beggarly "celestial
beings." 18
TABLE 3. Who Are "no gods" and "elements" in Gal. 4:8, 9? Angels Galatians' intended
TABLE 3. Who Are "no gods" and "elements" in (Gal. 4:8), 9? Angels Galatians' intended
keeping of Law given How do we know Paul Galatians' intended Moses is "bondage intends No Gods &
@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ Those who are "no "Elements" are
### Does Paul Imply The Angels Lacked God's Authority in Issuing the Law?
(Moses) in the bush." (See (Exod. 3:2).) But it is incorrect to say that Hebrew Scripture indicate the Law was given by angels. Such a view contradicts Exodus chapter 20, and specifically Ex. 25:16, 21-22. This passage says God Himself gave the Law.
(Moses) in the bush." (See (Exod. 3:2).) But it is incorrect to say that Hebrew Scripture indicate the Law was given by angels. Such a view contradicts Exodus chapter 20, and specifically (Ex. 25:16), 21-22. This passage says God Himself gave the Law.
Paul's claim also directly contradicts Jesus. Our Lord said that "in
the bush,... God spake unto him." ((Mark 12:26); Luke 20:37.)

2
JWO/JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020.md

@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ goddess Eastre. As a result, English-speaking Christians have lost
memory of what festival they are attempting to celebrate while
Christians of all denominations and faiths in non-English speaking
countries keep Passover under its proper name. For more discussion,
see Appendix C: The Easter Error [[JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112]].
see Appendix C: The Easter Error [[JWO/JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112]].
29. Yet, bear in mind, Jesus as Prophet can add a command to the Law of Moses.

2
JWO/JWO_06_02_PaulsAntinomianismonIdolMeatIssueversusJesus_0026.md

@ -136,4 +136,4 @@ affixes the same label of liar to someone the Ephesians put on trial
for claiming to be an apostle and found he was not one. (See the
chapter entitled "Did Jesus Applaud the Ephesians for Exposing Paul as
a False Apostle?"
[[JWO_10_01_DidJesusApplaudtheEphesiansforExposingPaulasaFalseApostle__0045]]).
[[JWO/JWO_10_01_DidJesusApplaudtheEphesiansforExposingPaulasaFalseApostle__0045]]).

2
JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028.md

@ -368,7 +368,7 @@ remarrying with impunity. Whether the Greek or Hebrew text is correct,
Jesus was reinvigorating the Law of Moses, and as Campenhausen
explains, Jesus "reaffirmed" it. (For more on the fact that Matthew
was originally written in Hebrew and then translated into Greek, see
[[JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]].
[[JWO/JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]].
Regardless, what remains the problem is that under either text
tradition, Paul permits the very act of fornication/adultery that

424
JWO/JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036.md

@ -16,49 +16,90 @@ Key features of the Book of Revelation are that:
* Only one church of the seven churches mentioned was one that Paul visited (according to the Bible): the church at Ephesus.
* Jesus is the actual speaker grace is mentioned only twice in Revelation. The word is used as part of greetings and farewells. (Rev. 1:4; 22:21). Grace is never mentioned as part of salvation statements. Nor are faith and believing ever mentioned as saving doctrines anywhere
* Jesus is the actual speaker grace is mentioned only twice in
Revelation. The word is used as part of greetings and
farewells. (Rev. 1:4; 22:21). Grace is never mentioned as part of
salvation statements. Nor are faith and believing ever mentioned as
saving doctrines anywhere
![Picture #44](images/img_0044.png)
Revelation must be non-canonical. (See page 370.) Calvin did a commentary on every book in the New Testament other than the Book of Revelation. The Calvinist Westminster Confession of 1647 initially excluded the Book of Revelation
Revelation must be non-canonical. (See page 370.) Calvin did a
commentary on every book in the New Testament other than the Book of
Revelation. The Calvinist Westminster Confession of 1647 initially
excluded the Book of Revelation from inspired canon. 1
from inspired canon. 1
Other Paulunists openly recognize the problem and boldly decry the
Book of Revelation. These Paulunists do so apparently unaware that
Revelation can truly be linked to Apostle John based on the witness of
his friend Papias. Thinking they can prove it is non-apostolic, they
let down their guard on the Book of Revelation. They boldly proclaim
the Jesus presented in the book of Revelation is heretical because
this Jesus contradicts Paul on salvation issues.
Other Paulunists openly recognize the problem and boldly decry the Book of Revelation. These Paulunists do so apparently unaware that Revelation can truly be linked to Apostle John based on the witness of his friend Papias. Thinking they can prove it is non-apostolic, they let down their guard on the Book of Revelation. They boldly proclaim the Jesus presented in the book of Revelation is heretical because this Jesus contradicts Paul on salvation issues.
In an article entitled Why the Book of Revelation is Heresy,
Dr. Weakly-a Methodist Minister with a Masters in Theology-unwittingly
lays out a case against Paul while he thinks he is debunking the Book
of Revelation as heresy. We read:
In an article entitled Why the Book of Revelation is Heresy, Dr. Weakly-a Methodist Minister with a Masters in Theology-unwittingly lays out a case against Paul while he thinks he is debunking the Book of Revelation as heresy. We read:
Would Jesus vomit you and me out of the Kingdom of heaven for being only luke warm?
Would Jesus vomit you and me out of the Kingdom of heaven for being only luke warm?
Would Jesus change salvation by faith back to salvation by works?
Would Jesus change salvation by faith back to salvation by works?
k k k k
Pergamum (2: 12) is in Satan's territory. It held fast and did not deny Jesus during persecutions. But [John of] Patmos' Jesus rebukes them for eating food sacrificed to idols (2: 14). Here Patmos' Jesus contrasts with Paul who said this is permitted (1Cor. 8).
Pergamum (2: 12) is in Satan's territory. It held fast and did not
deny Jesus during persecutions. But [John of] Patmos' Jesus
rebukes them for eating food sacrificed to idols (2: 14). Here
Patmos' Jesus contrasts with Paul who said this is permitted (1Cor. 8).
1. See "Reformation Doubts About the Canonicity of Revelation" on page 9 of my article The Authenticity of the Book of Revelation Contradicting [[Paul's]] Gospel, Jesus, Patmos' salvation is by works and not by faith.
1. See "Reformation Doubts About the Canonicity of Revelation" on page
9 of my article The Authenticity of the Book of Revelation Contradicting
[Paul's] Gospel, Jesus, Patmos' salvation is by works and not by faith.
Philadelphia (3:7) has done everything right according to Patmos' Jesus. They have endured patiently. If they will just keep on enduring, they will receive their reward. Reward here is based on enduring rather than believing. It is these who endure that Patmos' Jesus will save. Those who cannot handle persecutions are outside the blessings. [[Patmos']] Jesus is entirely different [from Pauline doctrine]. * * * *
Philadelphia (3:7) has done everything right according to Patmos' Jesus.
They have endured patiently. If they will just keep on enduring, they
will receive their reward. Reward here is based on enduring rather
than believing. It is these who endure that Patmos' Jesus will save.
Those who cannot handle persecutions are outside the
blessings. [[Patmos']] Jesus is entirely different [from Pauline
doctrine]. * * * *
Laodice (3: 14) is neither hot nor cold so Patmos Jesus will vomit the lukewarm Christians out of his mouth expel them from the body of Christ (3: 15,16)....Patmos' Jesus qualifies who he will bless by their works, their endurance being the measure by which they are judged worthy to be saved and remain saved.
Laodice (3: 14) is neither hot nor cold so Patmos Jesus will vomit the
lukewarm Christians out of his mouth expel them from the body of
Christ (3: 15,16)....Patmos' Jesus qualifies who he will bless by
their works, their endurance being the measure by which they are
judged worthy to be saved and remain saved.
Works are the basis salvation for Patmos' Jesus. That doctrine is specifically stated in Revelation's twentieth chapter (20: 12,13).
Works are the basis salvation for Patmos' Jesus. That doctrine is
specifically stated in Revelation's twentieth chapter (20: 12,13).
k k k k
John Patmos' Jesus salvation by works takes away this 'blessed assurance. ' and viciously punishing.
John Patmos' Jesus salvation by works takes away this 'blessed
assurance. ' and viciously punishing.
His is not the loving Abba Heavenly Father of Apostle John's Jesus.
'Revelation' continues the ancient argument about 'works' (James' Letter) versus 'faith' alone (Paul) that is explained in Paul's letters, ((Rom. 10), esp. 10:4). 2
'Revelation' continues the ancient argument about 'works' (James'
Letter) versus 'faith' alone (Paul) that is explained in Paul's
letters, ((Rom. 10), esp. 10:4). 2
These are excellent points. Dr. Weakley agrees Paul pennits eating meat sacrificed to idols. However, he also agrees Jesus in Revelation prohibits it. Paul says salvation is by faith (alone), without works, but Dr. Weakley say Jesus in Revelation repeatedly contradicts this.
These are excellent points. Dr. Weakley agrees Paul pennits eating
meat sacrificed to idols. However, he also agrees Jesus in Revelation
prohibits it. Paul says salvation is by faith (alone), without works,
but Dr. Weakley say Jesus in Revelation repeatedly contradicts this.
Thus, we have a flat contradiction of Paul by Jesus after Paul's writings were published and well-known. These passages in Revelation contradict Paul's salvation formula that excludes works. The message of Revelation is that instead of us being judged by faith, we are judged and justified by works. As one commentator writes:
Thus, we have a flat contradiction of Paul by Jesus after Paul's
writings were published and well-known. These passages in Revelation
contradict Paul's salvation formula that excludes works. The message
of Revelation is that instead of us being judged by faith, we are
judged and justified by works. As one commentator writes:
Jesus says in the book of Revelation also that we are justified by our works.
It reads: 'Behold, I come quickly, and my reward is with me, to give every man according to his WORK shall be.' (Rev. 22:) 12.
It reads: 'Behold, I come quickly, and my reward is with me, to give
every man according to his WORK shall be.' (Rev. 22:) 12.
And death and hell delivered up the dead that were in them, and they were judge every man according to their WORKS.' (Rev. 20:) 12.
@ -74,140 +115,361 @@ There is never any assurance given in Revelation that without works you are seen
### Faith and Works in Revelation
Jesus in Revelation aims a dagger right at Paul's teaching on faith and works. Jesus is going to strike hard again and again. In Revelation, salvation is under constant threat for members of seven churches. Jesus gives several warnings on how to overcome, and how not to be blotted out from the book of life. In the salvation message in Revelation dating to 90 A.D., grace is never mentioned although it was Paul's banner slogan from 45-62 A.D. Faith in the sense of a mental assent is likewise ignored. Jesus does so despite faith being the lynch-pin of the salvation doctrine from Paul 25-45 years earlier. (Eph. 2:8-9; Rom. 10:9; Rom. 4:4). Rather, in Jesus' Book of Revelation, faithfulness is promised the crown of life: "Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a
crown of life." (Rev. 2:10). 4
Jesus in Revelation aims a dagger right at Paul's teaching on faith
and works. Jesus is going to strike hard again and again. In
Revelation, salvation is under constant threat for members of seven
churches. Jesus gives several warnings on how to overcome, and how not
to be blotted out from the book of life. In the salvation message in
Revelation dating to 90 A.D., grace is never mentioned although it was
Paul's banner slogan from 45-62 A.D. Faith in the sense of a mental
assent is likewise ignored. Jesus does so despite faith being the
lynch-pin of the salvation doctrine from Paul 25-45 years
earlier. (Eph. 2:8-9; (Rom. 10:9); (Rom. 4:4)). Rather, in Jesus' Book
of Revelation, faithfulness is promised the crown of life: "Be thou
faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life." (Rev. 2:10). 4
3. Judgment According to Our Works I will give unto every one of you according to your works." (Rev. 2:23.)
Jesus promises again later that on Judgment day "every man" is "judged...according to their works."
Jesus promises again later that on Judgment day "every man" is
"judged...according to their works."
(Rev. 20:13). 5 Cf. Matt. 12:36-37 ("every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.")
(Rev. 20:13). 5 Cf. (Matt. 12:36-37) ("every idle word that men shall
speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by
thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.")
"We are saved by faith, but we will be judged by our works! The final Judgment will be based on our works of obedience."
"We are saved by faith, but we will be judged by our works! The final
Judgment will be based on our works of obedience."
Pastor Reimar Schultz (on Rev. 20:13)
Pastor Reimar Schultz (on (Rev. 20:13))
4. Paulunists are loathe to admit this is synonymous with eternal life. The only other reference to the "crown of life" in the New Testament is in James. "Blessed is the man that endureth temptation; for when he hath been approved, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord promised to them that love him.'' ((Jas. 1:12).) This verse stands in contrast to Luke 8:13 where the seed "believes for a while" but in "time of temptation" falls away and is lost. This seed does not endure in obedience. Thus, James is holding up the fate of the fourth seed against the second seed. The crown of life must be eternal life. Gill and Henry claim James means eternal happiness, not life, while Jamieson admits James means eternal life by the term crown of life.
4. Paulunists are loathe to admit this is synonymous with eternal
life. The only other reference to the "crown of life" in the New
Testament is in James. "Blessed is the man that endureth temptation;
for when he hath been approved, he shall receive the crown of life,
which the Lord promised to them that love him.'' ((Jas. 1:12).) This
verse stands in contrast to Luke 8:13 where the seed "believes for a
while" but in "time of temptation" falls away and is lost. This seed
does not endure in obedience. Thus, James is holding up the fate of
the fourth seed against the second seed. The crown of life must be
eternal life. Gill and Henry claim James means eternal happiness, not
life, while Jamieson admits James means eternal life by the term crown
of life.
5. In Rev. 20:11-15, the final
5. In (Rev. 20:11-15), the final
![Picture #45](images/img_0045.png)
Then Jesus emphasizes to members of particular churches that holding fast is the way to avoid being blotted out of the book of life. Contrary to the Paulunist spin of these passages, Jesus is addressing individuals on their personal salvation within a church. Jesus is not measuring the value of the corporate body's activity. For a church can neither be written in nor blotted out as a body from the book of life.
Then Jesus emphasizes to members of particular churches that holding
fast is the way to avoid being blotted out of the book of
life. Contrary to the Paulunist spin of these passages, Jesus is
addressing individuals on their personal salvation within a
church. Jesus is not measuring the value of the corporate body's
activity. For a church can neither be written in nor blotted out as a
body from the book of life.
(3) Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and holdfast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief...(5) He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels. (Rev.
(3) Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and holdfast,
and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as
a thief...(5) He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white
raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but
I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels. (Rev. 3:3-5) KJV.
3:3-5, KJV.)
To those who will not hold fast the word and do not repent, Jesus has
a warning. To the Christians at Laodicea, Jesus writes;
To those who will not hold fast the word and do not repent, Jesus has a warning. To the Christians at Laodicea, Jesus writes;
(15) I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would
thou wert cold or hot.
(15) I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
(16) So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot,
I will spue thee out of my mouth. ? He who has ears to hear, let him hear.
(16) So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. ? He who has ears to hear, let him hear.
Yet, Paul hinged everything on his doctrine of salvation on faith
alone without works. ((Eph. 2:8-9); (Rom. 4:4). This was his entire
gospel. Every word quoted from Revelation's different message is
cringed at by Paulunists because they know if they lose this battle
then they lose everything. Their domination over Jesus Christ with
Paul as their most revered apostle will be exposed. They have banked
everything on Paul's doctrine. Now it is time for Jesus to speak!
Yet, Paul hinged everything on his doctrine of salvation on faith alone without works. ((Eph. 2:8-9); (Rom. 4:4). This was his entire gospel. Every word quoted from Revelation's different message is cringed at by Paulunists because they know if they lose this battle then they lose everything. Their domination over Jesus Christ with Paul as their most revered apostle will be exposed. They have banked everything on Paul's doctrine. Now it is time for Jesus to speak!
To do this, we must start with the Parable of the Ten Virgins, for
Jesus definitely alludes to it in Revelation as the means to rebuff
Paul. Thus, to understand Revelation fully, we need to go back to
Jesus' earthly preaching.
To do this, we must start with the Parable of the Ten Virgins, for Jesus definitely alludes to it in Revelation as the means to rebuff Paul. Thus, to understand Revelation fully, we need to go back to Jesus' earthly preaching.
### Parable of the Ten Virgins and (Rev. 3:1-3)
Parable of the Ten Virgins and (Rev. 3:1-3)
In (Matt. 25:1) et seq., They postponed getting the extra oil too long. The door was shut. When the second five heard the groom arriving, they turned back from their shopping trip. These five tried knocking on the door for entry. However, they found they were excluded from the banquet. They suffer weeping and gnashing of teeth outside. Jesus then says this should teach us "you will not know the day nor hour." So the lesson is we must always be ready for our Lord's return. We cannot rest on our good intentions to someday get the oil we need. Instead, God will absolutely require sufficient oil burning when that time comes.
In (Matt. 25:1) et seq., They postponed getting the extra oil too
long. The door was shut. When the second five heard the groom
arriving, they turned back from their shopping trip. These five tried
knocking on the door for entry. However, they found they were excluded
from the banquet. They suffer weeping and gnashing of teeth
outside. Jesus then says this should teach us "you will not know the
day nor hour." So the lesson is we must always be ready for our Lord's
return. We cannot rest on our good intentions to someday get the oil
we need. Instead, God will absolutely require sufficient oil burning
when that time comes.
To whom is this parable directed? A Christian or a non-Christian?
Oil in Scripture typically represents the Holy Spirit.
A virgin in Scripture usually symbolizes a blameless person. A saved person. The term virgin is never used elsewhere to describe the lost. It also makes no sense to refer to a lost person as a virgin.
A virgin in Scripture usually symbolizes a blameless person. A saved
person. The term virgin is never used elsewhere to describe the
lost. It also makes no sense to refer to a lost person as a virgin.
Jesus closes this parable saying we must be ready and watch for when He returns because you know not the day nor hour of His return. (Matt. 25:13.)
Jesus closes this parable saying we must be ready and watch for when
He returns because you know not the day nor hour of His
return. (Matt. 25:13.)
Could Jesus' parable be a warning to a non-Christian to be watching and ready for when Jesus returns? That makes no sense. First, a non-Christian having oil makes no sense. Second, the label virgin entirely lacks the Holy Spirit. Something does not make sense in the NIV version.
Could Jesus' parable be a warning to a non-Christian to be watching
and ready for when Jesus returns? That makes no sense. First, a
non-Christian having oil makes no sense. Second, the label virgin
entirely lacks the Holy Spirit. Something does not make sense in the
NIV version.
It turns out the NIV is a mistranslation. The original Greek does not say they did not bring any oil, nor they brought no oil with them. The original Greek simply says the five foolish virgins did "not bring oil." By contrast, the wise virgins brought "extra oil in jars." Yet, the Greek also clearly reflects the unwise virgins had oil for a time burning in their lamps. Even the Calvinist The Expositor s Bible Commentary points out the Greek says their "lamps were going out," implying a flickering out process as the oil burned away. It notes the Greek is the "present tense" of the verb " are going
It turns out the NIV is a mistranslation. The original Greek does not
say they did not bring any oil, nor they brought no oil with them. The
original Greek simply says the five foolish virgins did "not bring
oil." By contrast, the wise virgins brought "extra oil in jars." Yet,
the Greek also clearly reflects the unwise virgins had oil for a time
burning in their lamps. Even the Calvinist The Expositor s Bible
Commentary points out the Greek says their "lamps were going out,"
implying a flickering out process as the oil burned away. It notes the
Greek is the "present tense" of the verb " are going out," and not as
the KJV has it: 'are gone out.' 6 Something in their lamps is burning,
but is going out. They had oil in their lamps, but they did not carry
extra oil with them like the wise had done.
out," and not as the KJV has it: 'are gone out.' 6 Something in their lamps is burning, but is going out. They had oil in their lamps, but they did not carry extra oil with them like the wise had done.
Thus, most commentators acknowledge the foolish virgins must have initially had oil in their lamps, but unlike the wise, they did not bring extra oil in separate jars. Otherwise, there is no way of explaining how the five foolish virgins had lamps that were burning for a while. They complain later that their "lamps are being quenched," implying they were burning but going out. The Amplified Bible realizes this and translates the passage to say the five foolish ones did not bring "extra oil in jars."
Thus, most commentators acknowledge the foolish virgins must have
initially had oil in their lamps, but unlike the wise, they did not
bring extra oil in separate jars. Otherwise, there is no way of
explaining how the five foolish virgins had lamps that were burning
for a while. They complain later that their "lamps are being
quenched," implying they were burning but going out. The Amplified
Bible realizes this and translates the passage to say the five foolish
ones did not bring "extra oil in jars."
So there are several clear indicators that the five foolish virgins were Christians.
What is happening with them? While they are pure virgins, they also have very little oil in their lamps and the light is about to flicker out in them. When the oil is
What is happening with them? While they are pure virgins, they also
have very little oil in their lamps and the light is about to flicker
out in them. When the oil is
6. The Expositor s Bible Commentary (1989), supra, oil burning focuses on some work. The line between foolish and wise is drawn between two kinds of initially justified and innocent persons (i.e., virgins). If a Christian can be foolish and later become lost, then some kind of personal irresponsibility becomes relevant to salvation. Paul's contrary message would be exposed if any kind of spiritual interpretation is applied to a Christian from this parable.
6. The Expositor s Bible Commentary (1989), supra, oil burning focuses
on some work. The line between foolish and wise is drawn between two
kinds of initially justified and innocent persons (i.e., virgins). If
a Christian can be foolish and later become lost, then some kind of
personal irresponsibility becomes relevant to salvation. Paul's
contrary message would be exposed if any kind of spiritual
interpretation is applied to a Christian from this parable.
Thus, the Paulunist simply denies the Parable of the Ten Virgins has any parabolic meaning. This approach is clearly set forth in the Calvinist The Expositor s Bible Commentary (1989):
Thus, the Paulunist simply denies the Parable of the Ten Virgins has
any parabolic meaning. This approach is clearly set forth in the
Calvinist The Expositor s Bible Commentary (1989):
There is no point in seeing hidden meanings in the oil...
The oil cannot easily apply to...the Holy Spirit. It is merely an element in the narrative showing that the foolish virgins were unprepared for the delay...
The oil cannot easily apply to...the Holy Spirit. It is merely an
element in the narrative showing that the foolish virgins were
unprepared for the delay...
The point is not these girls' virginity, but simply that ten...maidens oil or the word virgin. They try to recast the virgins as simply maidens. The reason is that The Expositor s Bible Commentary states it is aware that otherwise a condition exists upon the virgin being accepted in the kingdom: "there must be behavior acceptable to the master, the discharge of allotted responsibilities." Id., Vol. VIII at 512.
The point is not these girls' virginity, but simply that ten...maidens
oil or the word virgin. They try to recast the virgins as simply
maidens. The reason is that The Expositor s Bible Commentary states it
is aware that otherwise a condition exists upon the virgin being
accepted in the kingdom: "there must be behavior acceptable to the
master, the discharge of allotted responsibilities." Id., Vol. VIII at 512.
If we accepted the obvious that the virgin represents a Christian, and the oil represents the Holy Spirit, we would have a dilemma. The Paulunist would have to accept that Jesus expressly taught that a Christian will not go to Heaven absent "behavior acceptable to the master, the discharge of allotted responsibilities." Jesus would contradict Paul. Rather than ever question their paradigm thinking that assumes Paul is an inspired writer, these Paulunists would prefer taking the outrageous step of saying Jesus had no parabolic intent in a parable. This, of course, leaves the parable utterly meaningless. This is frankly shocking.
If we accepted the obvious that the virgin represents a Christian, and
the oil represents the Holy Spirit, we would have a dilemma. The
Paulunist would have to accept that Jesus expressly taught that a
Christian will not go to Heaven absent "behavior acceptable to the
master, the discharge of allotted responsibilities." Jesus would
contradict Paul. Rather than ever question their paradigm thinking
that assumes Paul is an inspired writer, these Paulunists would prefer
taking the outrageous step of saying Jesus had no parabolic intent in
a parable. This, of course, leaves the parable utterly
meaningless. This is frankly shocking.
In fact, it is deplorable that a Bible commentary would insist that there is no "need" to see "hidden meaning" to the significant objects of this parable such as the oil and the virgins. A parable precisely calls an aware Christian to meditate on a symbolic meaning. We could respect the commentary if it suggested other symbolic meanings. However, to suggest that we should not try to imagine there is any symbolic meaning is shocking. Yet, it helps us see the lengths to which reputable Paulunists must go to resist letting their paradigm viewpoint be challenged by the words of Jesus. The Paulunist is forever jumping into foxholes to dodge Jesus' challenges to his system of thinking.
In fact, it is deplorable that a Bible commentary would insist that
there is no "need" to see "hidden meaning" to the significant objects
of this parable such as the oil and the virgins. A parable precisely
calls an aware Christian to meditate on a symbolic meaning. We could
respect the commentary if it suggested other symbolic
meanings. However, to suggest that we should not try to imagine there
is any symbolic meaning is shocking. Yet, it helps us see the lengths
to which reputable Paulunists must go to resist letting their paradigm
viewpoint be challenged by the words of Jesus. The Paulunist is
forever jumping into foxholes to dodge Jesus' challenges to his system
of thinking.
The solution in this parable is easy: oil is the Holy Spirit and the word virgins means cleansed and washed Christians.
Now let's explore the meaning behind the fact five had their dead. Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die,
Now let's explore the meaning behind the fact five had their
dead. Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die,
(2) for I have not found your deeds complete in the sight of God. (3) Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; obey it and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come. (ASV)
(2) for I have not found your deeds complete in the sight of God.
(3) Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; obey it and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come. (ASV)
These three verses exactly parallel the Parable of the Ten Virgins:
* The lamps of five virgins are about to flicker out and die due to lack of oil. The Sardisians likewise have something in them "about to die."
* The lamps of five virgins are about to flicker out and die due to
lack of oil. The Sardisians likewise have something in them "about to die."
* The foolish virgins failed to watch and be ready. The lesson Jesus draws is that "Watch, for you will not know the day nor hour" (Matt. 25:13). This is likewise the precise lesson to the Sardisians. "I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come." (Rev. 3:3.)
* The foolish virgins failed to watch and be ready. The lesson Jesus
draws is that "Watch, for you will not know the day nor hour"
(Matt. 25:13). This is likewise the precise lesson to the
Sardisians. "I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what
time I will come." (Rev. 3:3.)
It is obvious in both situations that the Spirit is present, but in both cases the Spirit is going out. In the Book of Revelation, this is explained. What is bringing about the Sardisians' spiritual death is their works were not complete in God's sight. In fact, Jesus says they have a reputation for being alive, but they are See Matt. 13:42 ("and shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth").
It is obvious in both situations that the Spirit is present, but in
both cases the Spirit is going out. In the Book of Revelation, this is
explained. What is bringing about the Sardisians' spiritual death is
their works were not complete in God's sight. In fact, Jesus says they
have a reputation for being alive, but they are See Matt. 13:42 ("and
shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be the weeping
and the gnashing of teeth").
So (Rev. 3:1-3) sounds a lot like a dead faith without completed works does not save. Where have we ever read that before?
Jesus' Confirmation of James' Doctrines and Rejection of Paul's
### Jesus' Confirmation of James' Doctrines and Rejection of Paul's
Where else does the Bible say a Christian without deeds has a faith that is dead and such faith cannot save? Yes, the often resisted (Jas. 2:14-25) passage. (Jas. 2:17) reads: "Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone." James asks rhetorically "can such faith save?" which calls for a negative answer. Thus, faith without works, James says,
Where else does the Bible say a Christian without deeds has a faith
that is dead and such faith cannot save? Yes, the often resisted
(Jas. 2:14-25) passage. (Jas. 2:17) reads: "Even so faith, if it hath
not works, is dead, being alone." James asks rhetorically "can such
faith save?" which calls for a negative answer. Thus, faith without
works, James says, cannot save.
7
7. Greek scholars admit that James' meaning is that faith without
completed works cannot save, i.e., works are not merely a forensic
proof of your already saved condition. James means works (besides
faith) are indispensable for you to be saved. See page 261 obey it and
repent ." A non-Christian does not have anything to remember. They
never have been a Christian. Nor does a non-Christian receive a spark
which then is later dying out in them. Non-Christians are not judged
for incomplete works, but sin. Only a Christian can be in view in
Jesus' words in (Rev. 3:3).
cannot save.
Thus, because the Parable of the Ten Virgins parallels the warning of
(Rev. 3:3), we know the foolish virgins are Christians like those
warned in (Rev. 3:1-3).
7. Greek scholars admit that James' meaning is that faith without completed works cannot save, i.e., works are not merely a forensic proof of your already saved condition. James means works (besides faith) are indispensable for you to be saved. See page 261 obey it and repent ." A non-Christian does not have anything to remember. They never have been a Christian. Nor does a non-Christian receive a spark which then is later dying out in them. Non-Christians are not judged for incomplete works, but sin. Only a Christian can be in view in Jesus' words in (Rev. 3:3).
Thus, because the Parable of the Ten Virgins parallels the warning of (Rev. 3:3), we know the foolish virgins are Christians like those warned in (Rev. 3:1-3).
Accordingly, Jesus is teaching in the Parable of the Ten Virgins that faith without works is dead. You are spiritually dying and about to have the Spirit quenched. How do we know this? Because Jesus gives a precisely parallel message in (Rev. 3:1-3) that duplicates the Ten Virgins Parable in declarative statements. While in the parable we are not sure what it means to have the spirit flickering out, (Rev. 3:3) tells us precisely: the Sardisians are lacking completed works.
Accordingly, Jesus is teaching in the Parable of the Ten Virgins that
faith without works is dead. You are spiritually dying and about to
have the Spirit quenched. How do we know this? Because Jesus gives a
precisely parallel message in (Rev. 3:1-3) that duplicates the Ten
Virgins Parable in declarative statements. While in the parable we are
not sure what it means to have the spirit flickering out, (Rev. 3:3)
tells us precisely: the Sardisians are lacking completed works.
Incidentally, the Sardisians' spiritual condition identically matches the third seed in the Parable of the Sower. This seed has thorns choke them. Jesus says they did not telesphourin. (Luke 8:14). This means the third seed fails to produce to the end, or fails to bring its fruit to completion. (For more discussion, see "What The Parable of the Sower Confirms About Faith in John's Gospel" on page 171.)
Finally, those statements in (Rev. 3:1-3) about not completing your works contain one more piece of crucial information. It says that despite their reputation for being alive they are dead. faith alone...cannot save. If you do not add works of charity which James mentions, your faith is dead. The Spirit is about to leave you. Quicken what little remains. If not, you will suffer spiritual death and be sent to a place of weeping and gnashing, being left outside. Jesus tells us this is the fiery furnace-hell itself. (Matt. 13:42). Jesus' warning is to repent and obey, and bring the works assigned to you to "completion."
Finally, those statements in (Rev. 3:1-3) about not completing your
works contain one more piece of crucial information. It says that
despite their reputation for being alive they are dead. faith
alone...cannot save. If you do not add works of charity which James
mentions, your faith is dead. The Spirit is about to leave
you. Quicken what little remains. If not, you will suffer spiritual
death and be sent to a place of weeping and gnashing, being left
outside. Jesus tells us this is the fiery furnace-hell
itself. (Matt. 13:42). Jesus' warning is to repent and obey, and bring
the works assigned to you to "completion."
Why? Because Jesus can come as a thief anytime, and you will find yourself, once a pure virgin with the oil of the Holy Spirit burning, so dead and the spirit so lacking (flickering out) that it will be too late when Jesus returns. You will find yourself left outside weeping and gnashing your teeth. This is precisely the meaning of the warning of the Parable of the Ten Virgins. Jesus makes works absolutely vital to add to faith so we are ready when He returns.
What kind of works? They might primarily or exclusively be works of charity if James' illustration is a definitive application of (Rev. 3:1-3). We shall later see that Jesus confirms it at least means works of charity in his Parable of the Sheep and the Goats. We will discuss that parable in the next section.
What kind of works? They might primarily or exclusively be works of
charity if James' illustration is a definitive application of
(Rev. 3:1-3). We shall later see that Jesus confirms it at least means
works of charity in his Parable of the Sheep and the Goats. We will
discuss that parable in the next section.
So we see that Jesus is approving James' position. (Rev. 3:1-3) mentions "incomplete works" and "dead." Jesus is stepping into the debate between James and Paul. Jesus is coming down on the side of James. Jesus did this elsewhere in (Rev. 2:14) on the issue of meat sacrificed to idols. Jesus does it again here. This time Jesus is resolving the faith-alone versus faith-plus-works debate.
So we see that Jesus is approving James' position. (Rev. 3:1-3)
mentions "incomplete works" and "dead." Jesus is stepping into the
debate between James and Paul. Jesus is coming down on the side of
James. Jesus did this elsewhere in (Rev. 2:14) on the issue of meat
sacrificed to idols. Jesus does it again here. This time Jesus is
resolving the faith-alone versus faith-plus-works debate.
No one wants to see this. Almost everyone prefers thinking that "incomplete works" (Rev. 3:2) has something to do with corporate worship interpretations. The parallel between Revelation and James chapter 2 and Jesus' Parable of the Ten Virgins likewise proves Revelation speaks to individuals in churches. The Book of Revelation is not simply addressing churches who happen to have individuals.
No one wants to see this. Almost everyone prefers thinking that
"incomplete works" (Rev. 3:2) has something to do with corporate
worship interpretations. The parallel between Revelation and James
chapter 2 and Jesus' Parable of the Ten Virgins likewise proves
Revelation speaks to individuals in churches. The Book of Revelation
is not simply addressing churches who happen to have individuals.
To understand the works that Jesus is referring to in (Rev. 3:1-3) that one must complete, we need to look at one more parable of Jesus. It is a parable often overlooked and ignored but focuses on works of charity. As you read this, ask yourself are such works optional for salvation as Jesus tells the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats.
To understand the works that Jesus is referring to in (Rev. 3:1-3)
that one must complete, we need to look at one more parable of
Jesus. It is a parable often overlooked and ignored but focuses on
works of charity. As you read this, ask yourself are such works
optional for salvation as Jesus tells the Parable of the Sheep and the
Goats.
### The Parable of the Sheep and The Goats Proves Faith Alone Does Not Save
Jesus tells a parable known as the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats. ((Matt. 25:30-46).) Jesus says that one group who calls Him Lord serves Jesus' brothers in need with food and clothing. This group goes to heaven. Another group who calls Him Lord but who fails to do likewise are sent to hell.
Jesus tells a parable known as the Parable of the Sheep and the
Goats. ((Matt. 25:30-46).) Jesus says that one group who calls Him
Lord serves Jesus' brothers in need with food and clothing. This group
goes to heaven. Another group who calls Him Lord but who fails to do
likewise are sent to hell.
Jesus is commanding charity to his brothers on threat of going to hell if you do not do it. Jesus is promising eternal life to those who do it. Faith that is alone does not save.
Jesus is commanding charity to his brothers on threat of going to hell
if you do not do it. Jesus is promising eternal life to those who do
it. Faith that is alone does not save.
As we shall see below, Jesus' statement that charity is crucial for salvation is exactly repeated by his brother James. We read in James' Epistle chapter two a discussion of precisely these same works eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels." (25:41.)
As we shall see below, Jesus' statement that charity is crucial for
salvation is exactly repeated by his brother James. We read in James'
Epistle chapter two a discussion of precisely these same works eternal
fire prepared for the devil and his angels." (25:41.)
Why the different ends? Is it because one believed and the other did not? Or rather is it because among those who knew the Lord some served Him by clothing, feeding and visiting the "brothers" of the King while others did not?
Or another way of asking this is to inquire why do the sheep inherit the kingdom. Is it because they are believers who are saved despite failing to do works of charity? Was their faith alone enough? One has works of charity and one doesn V. That is the dividing line in being finally saved, as told in this parable. Both the sheep and goats call him Lord, so both had faith. One was dead
Or another way of asking this is to inquire why do the sheep inherit
the kingdom. Is it because they are believers who are saved despite
failing to do works of charity? Was their faith alone enough? One has
works of charity and one doesn V. That is the dividing line in being
finally saved, as told in this parable. Both the sheep and goats call
him Lord, so both had faith. One was dead and one was alive.
o
If, instead, you reject this interpretation, and believe only the
sheep had faith, then you have the incongruous lesson that Jesus is
warning people already lost (the goats) that they better do works of
charity for His brothers or face hell.
and one was alive.
If, instead, you reject this interpretation, and believe only the sheep had faith, then you have the incongruous lesson that Jesus is warning people already lost (the goats) that they better do works of charity for His brothers or face hell.
8. On the significance that both groups call Jesus Lord , Paulunists deny it any significance. In doing so, they merely engage in ad hoc denial that the lost were at one time Christians. They cite no adequate proof for this reading. The Expositor's Bible Commentary -an evangelical text-states: "There is no significance in the fact that the goats address him as Lord... for at this point there is no exception whatever to confessing Jesus as Lord." (Vol. 8, at 522.) What does this mean? The argument appears to be that this event occurs on judgment day when according to their interpretation of Paul everyone must confess Jesus as Lord. However, Paul never said this. It is a pure myth he did so, by amalgamating two disparate verses together. The first is (Phil. 2:11). Paul says God exalted Jesus so that "every tongue should confess Jesus is the Lord." Nothing is said about this actually occurring universally at the judgment seat. The second is (Rom. 14:11-12) where Paul says God will examine each person at the judgment seat. There "every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess to God. So that every one of us shall give account of himself to God." There confession of sins, not of Jesus, is in view. Some amalgamate the two verses to mean "every tongue shall confess Jesus is Lord" when "every tongue shall confess" at the judgment seat. Yet, the two verses cannot be combined without violence to the original context of each verse. Thus, the Expositor 's is relying upon a commonly heard amalgamation of two distinct verses. This common axiom says every tongue must confess Jesus as Lord at the judgment seat. However, in relying upon this, the Expositor s is relying on a myth. There is no basis to suppose non-Christians are going to confess Jesus on judgment day. The truth is Jesus in the parable wants us to know not only that the sheep and the goats are both believers but also that mere belief docs alone. Jesus clearly says this is the dividing line between the two groups. Jesus would be making salvation depend only on works (of charity). Thus, it follows that Jesus wants us to understand the goats were already Christians (i.e., had accepted him as Lord and Savior) but they failed to serve Him by works of charity to his followers. The formula is faith and works (of charity). This charitable service then becomes the dividing line in terms of who is and who is not ultimately saved among people who have faith in Jesus.
8. On the significance that both groups call Jesus Lord , Paulunists
deny it any significance. In doing so, they merely engage in ad hoc
denial that the lost were at one time Christians. They cite no
adequate proof for this reading. The Expositor's Bible Commentary -an
evangelical text-states: "There is no significance in the fact that
the goats address him as Lord... for at this point there is no
exception whatever to confessing Jesus as Lord." (Vol. 8, at 522.)
What does this mean? The argument appears to be that this event occurs
on judgment day when according to their interpretation of Paul
everyone must confess Jesus as Lord. However, Paul never said this. It
is a pure myth he did so, by amalgamating two disparate verses
together. The first is (Phil. 2:11). Paul says God exalted Jesus so
that "every tongue should confess Jesus is the Lord." Nothing is said
about this actually occurring universally at the judgment seat. The
second is (Rom. 14:11-12) where Paul says God will examine each person
at the judgment seat. There "every knee shall bow and every tongue
shall confess to God. So that every one of us shall give account of
himself to God." There confession of sins, not of Jesus, is in
view. Some amalgamate the two verses to mean "every tongue shall
confess Jesus is Lord" when "every tongue shall confess" at the
judgment seat. Yet, the two verses cannot be combined without violence
to the original context of each verse. Thus, the Expositor 's is
relying upon a commonly heard amalgamation of two distinct
verses. This common axiom says every tongue must confess Jesus as Lord
at the judgment seat. However, in relying upon this, the Expositor s
is relying on a myth. There is no basis to suppose non-Christians are
going to confess Jesus on judgment day. The truth is Jesus in the
parable wants us to know not only that the sheep and the goats are
both believers but also that mere belief docs alone. Jesus clearly
says this is the dividing line between the two groups. Jesus would be
making salvation depend only on works (of charity). Thus, it follows
that Jesus wants us to understand the goats were already Christians
(i.e., had accepted him as Lord and Savior) but they failed to serve
Him by works of charity to his followers. The formula is faith and
works (of charity). This charitable service then becomes the dividing
line in terms of who is and who is not ultimately saved among people
who have faith in Jesus.

2
JWO/JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063.md

@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ accusations merely serve as ad hominem which do not resolve the claims
of Paul's truthfulness about his heritage, as we shall see.
1. For the quote, see "The Ebionite Charge Against Paul" on page 306.
[[JWO_12_04_TheEbioniteChargeAgainstPaul_0066]]
[[JWO/JWO_12_04_TheEbioniteChargeAgainstPaul_0066]]
Regardless, we are obliged to re-weigh the facts. First, Eusebius in

2
JWO/JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072.md

@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ precursor heresy that John is attacking. Marcion's doctrines are
well-known. Marcion taught salvation by faith alone, the Law of Moses
was abrogated, and he insisted Paul alone had the true Gospel, to the
exclusion of the twelve apostles. (See Appendix B: How the Canon Was
Formed 3.8 [[JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112]].)
Formed 3.8 [[JWO/JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112]].)
Marcion was not denying Jesus came and looked like a man. Rather,
Marcion was claiming that Jesus' flesh could not be human in our

20
JWO/JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073.md

@ -131,16 +131,16 @@ discussed in "Paul's Admission of Parting Ways With the Apostles" on page 334.
In fact, in the early Christian church, this entire verse of
(Gen. 49:27) was read to be a prophecy about Paul. However, the second
part was then spun favorably to Paul. An early church writer,
Hippolytus (200s A.D.), said Paul fulfilled Genesis 49:27 because Paul
Hippolytus (200s A.D.), said Paul fulfilled (Gen. 49:27) because Paul
started as a murderer of Christians, fulfilling the first part of
Genesis 49:27. The second part about 'dividing the spoil' was
interpreted by Hippolytus to mean Paul made Christian followers
predominantly among Gentiles. However, this was read
positively. Hippolytus believed Paul divided the spoil in a manner God
intended. However, dividing the spoil means plundered. It does not
have a positive connotation. This spin by Hippolytus on dividing the
spoil as a good deed was wishful thinking. God instead was sending a
prophecy of the evil that would be done by this Benjamite, not the good.
predominantly among Gentiles. However, this was read positively.
Hippolytus believed Paul divided the spoil in a manner God intended.
However, dividing the spoil means plundered. It does not have a
positive connotation. This spin by Hippolytus on dividing the spoil as
a good deed was wishful thinking. God instead was sending a prophecy
of the evil that would be done by this Benjamite, not the good.
Here is the quote from the early church writer Hippolytus (estimated
to be 205 A.D.) wherein he saw God prophesying of Paul in (Gen. 49:27:)
@ -155,13 +155,11 @@ These writings from the early church demonstrates two things: (a)
early Christians were more familiar than ourselves with the Shiloh
Messianic prophecy in (Gen. 49:1012); and (b) if one knew the Shiloh
prophecy, one could not avoid seeing in close proximity the prophecy
of a Benjamite wolf ((Gen. 49:27)) whereupon one would realize it is
of a Benjamite wolf (Gen. 49:27) whereupon one would realize it is
unmistakably talking about Paul. As Hippolytus says, "this thoroughly fits Paul."
3. Notice incidentally that the positive spin was manufactured by
Hippolytus changing the verse's meaning from divide the spoils to
apportion the food.
Hippolytus changing the verse's meaning from divide the spoils to apportion the food.
What do modem Pauline Christian commentators do with the Benjamite
wolf prophecy? While some admit (Gen. 49:27) is about Paul, and spin

2
JWO/JWO_15_06_ABetterExplanationWhytheGospelAccountsCameSecond_0082.md

@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ a-nomia. If they are workers who seek to negate the Mosaic Law, flee
from them, Jesus warned.
(For a full discussion on this passage, see the chapter
[[JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]])
[[JWO/JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]])
Thus, the sequence that Lewis is citing as proof of Paul's primacy is
actually proof of the opposite. It is more likely explained by the

2
JWO/JWO_15_12_TheConsequencesofDispensationalIdeas_0088.md

@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ only Paul had the message of Jesus. He rejected the salvation message
of the twelve apostles. Marcion claimed their gospels were at odds
with Paul. He circulated a gospel narrative that had much in common
with Luke, but was much shorter. (See Appendix B: How the Canon Was
Formed [[JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112]].)
Formed [[JWO/JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112]].)
It has taken almost nineteen-hundred years, but everything has come
full circle back to Marcion's doctrine and his truncated gospel

2
JWO/JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091.md

@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ written solely for Jews. In a sense, he was simultaneously
Dispensational and His claim that Paul alone had the correct gospel
dispensation allowed Marcion to shuffle aside any of the apostles'
writings as unimportant if they did not match Paul's gospel.
( [[JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112]] at page ix.)
( [[JWO/JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112]] at page ix.)
We have seen previously that Paul indeed taught:

2
JWO/JWO_17_04_WhatAboutJohn3_16__0101.md

@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ been translated to sound Pauline. In the original Greek, it means
something not only quite different, but also actually the opposite of
how it reads in the KJV and NIV. It should read: "He who continues to
believe/trust should have eternal life." This is the true meaning of
the underlying Greek verbs. (See [[JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]])
the underlying Greek verbs. (See [[JWO/JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]])
Faithfulness, not one moment of faith, is what should save.
Therefore, we have a choice to make. We can explain salvation based on

40
JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105.md

@ -122,7 +122,21 @@ Gentile ministry, as Paul claimed, is ridiculous.) 5
4. See "Who is the Benjamite Wolf in Prophecy?" on page 347 et seq
5. See page 350 et seq. This division in Paul's exclusive favor is dubious at best. At the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15, Peter stood up and spoke. Paul was at his feet. Peter declared He, not Paul, was the Apostle to the Gentiles by God's decree : "God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe." (Acts 15:7 ASV.) Also, in the post-council era with Paul alive the Apostle Thomas was preaching the gospel in India. This is supported by Ephraem Syrus, Ambrose, Paulinus, and Jerome. ("St. Thomas The Apostle," Catholic Encyclopedia.) At Mylapore, not far from Madras, "tradition has it that it was here that St. Thomas laid down his life [in 72 A.D. which] is locally very strong." Id. If what Paul is saying were true, didn't Thomas transgress the Jewish-Gentile pact with Paul? But why would the twelve leave to one person (Paul) this important mission to reach the Gentiles? It begs all credulity to believe Paul.
5. See page 350 et seq. This division in Paul's exclusive favor is dubious
at best. At the Jerusalem Council in (Acts 15:0), Peter stood up and
spoke. Paul was at his feet. Peter declared He, not Paul, was the
Apostle to the Gentiles by God's decree: "God made choice among us,
that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and
believe." (Acts 15:7 ASV.) Also, in the post-council era with Paul
alive the Apostle Thomas was preaching the gospel in India. This is
supported by Ephraem Syrus, Ambrose, Paulinus, and Jerome.
("St. Thomas The Apostle," Catholic Encyclopedia.) At Mylapore, not
far from Madras, "tradition has it that it was here that St. Thomas
laid down his life [in 72 A.D. which] is locally very strong." Id. If
what Paul is saying were true, didn't Thomas transgress the
Jewish-Gentile pact with Paul? But why would the twelve leave to one
person (Paul) this important mission to reach the Gentiles? It begs
all credulity to believe Paul.
Thus, even the early church writer and Roman church leader Hippolytus
(170-235 A.D.) observed around 205 A.D. that the Benjamite "ravening
@ -148,13 +162,19 @@ in precisely the words Jesus warned a false prophet would use, while
6. See page 351.
7. Matt. 7:15-23, viz., v. 22; 24:11, 24; (Mark 13:22-23). See page 59 et seq. See also, Luke 21:8 ('time is at hand') discussed at page 366. See, Rev. 2: 20 (false claimant to prophecy teaches us to eat meat sacrificed to idols.)
7. Matt. 7:15-23, viz., v. 22; 24:11, 24; (Mark 13:22-23). See page 59
et seq. See also, Luke 21:8 ('time is at hand') discussed at page
366. See, Rev. 2: 20 (false claimant to prophecy teaches us to eat
meat sacrificed to idols.)
8. See "Why Anomia Means Negator of Mosaic Law" on page 60 et seq.
9. See Chapter Five.
10.See page 76 et seq. Paul never even endorses a one-in-seven principle. Even so, God condemns keeping a mandated festival on a day different than God's appointed time. Jeroboam kept feast of tabernacles on a "day of his [own] choosing (invention)." ((1Kgs. 12:33).)
10. See page 76 et seq. Paul never even endorses a one-in-seven
principle. Even so, God condemns keeping a mandated festival on a day
different than God's appointed time. Jeroboam kept feast of
tabernacles on a "day of his [own] choosing (invention)." (1Kgs. 12:33).
All Paul fit Jesus' depiction of a false prophet in (Rev. 2:20) who
teaches it was permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols.
@ -165,8 +185,7 @@ about the "signs and wonders" prophet who would seek to "seduce the
elect." 14 For Paul said twice that "signs and wonders" prove his
validity. ((Rom. 15:19) "in the power of signs and wonders... I
preached the gospel"; (2Cor. 12:12) "Truly the signs of an apostle were
wrought among you in all patience, by signs and wonders and mighty
works.")
wrought among you in all patience, by signs and wonders and mighty works.")
Consequently, the coincidence of descriptions between the Benjamite
Ravening Wolf of Genesis and the false prophet 'ravening wolf' Jesus
@ -189,11 +208,14 @@ the words clean and unclean. Thus, Jesus did not abrogate these
rules. He just put them on a different level than other commands. See
Footnote 10, page 359.
12.See "Another Prophecy Aimed At Paul?" on page 366.
12. See "Another Prophecy Aimed At Paul?" on page 366.
13.See "Paul Contradicts Jesus About Idol Meat" on page 117 et seq.
13. See "Paul Contradicts Jesus About Idol Meat" on page 117 et seq.
14.Matt. 7:22 (miracles and prophecy); 24: 24 ("false prophets [have] signs and wonders." Jesus warns again of false prophets in (Mark 13:22). He says they "shall show signs and wonders to seduce, if possible, even the elect." For further discussion, see page 59.
14. (Matt. 7:22) (miracles and prophecy); 24: 24 ("false prophets
[have] signs and wonders." Jesus warns again of false prophets in
(Mark 13:22). He says they "shall show signs and wonders to seduce, if
possible, even the elect." For further discussion, see page 59.
First, Jesus told us that anyone who teaches us not to follow the
"least command (in the Law of Moses)" would be "least in the kingdom
@ -215,7 +237,7 @@ emphasizing the duty to tithe to the neglect of the weightier matters
of the Law of Moses. Matt. 23:23. This also included Jesus faulting
the Pharisees for teaching one did no wrong engaging in adulterous
lust as long as one did not follow through and commit the act of
adultery. (Matt. 5:2s.) 16
adultery. (Matt. 5:2.) 16
Paul did not share any concern to correct the Pharisees' shallow
doctrines on the Law. Paul never shared Jesus' concern that the

2
JWO/JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106.md

@ -270,7 +270,7 @@ mattered.
24. This is the literal Greek, reflecting correctly each present
participle as a continuous tense. For an explanation, see Appendix A.
[[JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]]
[[JWO/JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]]
### Jesus' Warning Of Treating An Apostle On Par With Him

14
JWO/JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112.md

@ -220,19 +220,16 @@ too in 125 A.D. knew of the Hebrew Matthew which later became the
Greek Matthew. As the Catholic Encyclopedia relates,
"Irenseus... wrote about A.D. 125 [and] he speaks of Hebrew...
Sayings of Christ, composed by St. Matthew, which there
is reason to believe formed the basis of the canonical Gospel of
that name." 12
Sayings of Christ, composed by St. Matthew, which there is reason
to believe formed the basis of the canonical Gospel of that name." 12
The Hebrew Matthew was also said to have been brought to India by the
Apostle Bartholomew. Pantaenus, visiting India late in the second
century, reported that "he found on his own arrival anticipated by
some... to whom Bartholomew, one of the apostles, had preached, and
had left them the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew." (Eusebius quoted by
H.J. Schonfield. The History of Jewish Christianity (London:
Duckworth, 1936) at 66.) 13
H.J. Schonfield. The History of Jewish Christianity
(London: Duckworth, 1936) at 66.) 13
11. Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. iii. 39; Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Bk III,
ch. 1; Jerome, Lives of Illustrious Men, ch. Ill; Jerome, Commentary
@ -258,8 +255,7 @@ Hebrew Matthew is indeed the more authentic version. Whether by
fortuity or God's design, it was preserved and we can all enjoy it now
in Mr. Howard's scholarly book.
12.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm (accessed 8/27/05).
12. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm (accessed 8/27/05).
13. Thomas is typically regarded as the main apostle to the people of India.
The traditional date of Thomas'martyrdom is 72 A.D. in Mylapore,

23
JWO/JWO_30_PaulorJamesChurch.md

@ -67,8 +67,9 @@ conversion. Scholars put the Jerusalem Council at 48-49 A.D.5
Other Apostles Long Time Abroad. Meanwhile, Apostle Thomas was spreading
Christianity to Gentiles in India. This is mentioned in many ancient Christian
texts, including by Ephraem Syrus, Ambrose, Paulinus, and Jerome. ("St. Thomas
The Apostle," Catholic Encyclopedia.) At Mylapore, not far from Madras,
texts, including by Ephraem Syrus, Ambrose, Paulinus, and Jerome.
["St. Thomas The Apostle," Catholic Encyclopedia.(https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14658b.htm)
At Mylapore, not far from Madras,
"tradition has it that it was here that St. Thomas laid down his life
[in 72 A.D. which] is locally very strong." Id. (See "India" on page 6.)
@ -164,7 +165,6 @@ Peter's exact words were:
had 66 local congregations functioning underneath its authority.
**Italy.** Peter then sent many emissaries from Antioch to evangelize Italy.
First, Peter in what can only be approximated as 42 A.D. (but which was obviously
after 45 A.D.) founded a Church at Rome.7
@ -194,13 +194,14 @@ their home upon his arrival in Corinth. (Acts 18:1.)14
**India.** Meanwhile, in 46 A.D., Apostle Thomas was preaching Christianity to
Gentiles in India, converting 3,000 Brahman in his first major sermon. Apostle
Thomas' mission to India is mentioned in many ancient Christian texts, including
by Ephraem Syrus, Ambrose, Paulinus, and Jerome. ("St. Thomas The Apostle,"
Catholic Encyclopedia.) At Mylapore, not far from Madras, "tradition has it that
it was here that St. Thomas laid down his life [in 72 A.D. which] is locally very
strong."15 According to the apocryphal Acts of Thomas, the other eleven apostles
were each allotted other nations to evangelize. India fell to Thomas.16 The
legends of Apostle Thomas' arrival line up chronologically with events in India
that date to 46 A.D.17
by Ephraem Syrus, Ambrose, Paulinus, and Jerome.
["St. Thomas The Apostle" Catholic Encyclopedia.](https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14658b.htm).
At Mylapore, not far from Madras, "tradition has it that it was here
that St. Thomas laid down his life [in 72 A.D. which] is locally very
strong."15 According to the apocryphal Acts of Thomas, the other
eleven apostles were each allotted other nations to evangelize. India
fell to Thomas.16 The legends of Apostle Thomas' arrival line up
chronologically with events in India that date to 46 A.D.17
**Spain.** It should then not suprise us that Apostle James, the son of Zebedee and
brother of Apostle John, is traditionally viewed as the first evangelist to Spain
@ -774,5 +775,5 @@ misunderstanding of what his decision on circumcision meant.
#### Further Studies
[[JWO_31_HowtheApostlesDied]]
[[JWO/JWO_31_HowtheApostlesDied]]

25
JWO/JWO_31_HowtheApostlesDied.md

@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
Parent: [[JWO_30_PaulorJamesChurch]]
Parent: [[JWO/JWO_30_PaulorJamesChurch]]
## What Happened to the 12 Apostles
@ -6,13 +6,13 @@ Ichthus has an article entitled "what happened to the 12 Apostles"
Sources on what happened to Jesus' disciples:
Hippolytus of Rome:
**Hippolytus of Rome:**
* Birth unknown, died around 236 AD
* See his entry in the Catholic Encyclopedia: click here
* Here is a page on the Internet containing his writings: click here
Eusebius:
**Eusebius:**
* Was the Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, known as the "Father of Church History" because he wrote about the church history.
* Lived around 260-341 AD
@ -87,8 +87,7 @@ Yep... James' head was cut...
**John, brother of James and son of Zebedee:**
John was one of the few disciples that did not die a cruel death, but of "old
age".
John was one of the few disciples that did not die a cruel death, but of "old age".
Eusebius discusses the reason that John wrote his Gospel:
@ -132,7 +131,8 @@ Eusebius, quoting Papias of Hierapolis (c. 110 A.D.), records a
tradition that the Gospel of Mark preserved the Gospel as preached by Peter:
"Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately
whatsoever he remembered.... he accompanied Peter..." ---- (Book 3, Chapter 39)
whatsoever he remembered.... he accompanied Peter..."
---- (Book 3, Chapter 39)
Irenaeus (c. 180 A.D.) records a similar tradition, and mentions that
Peter and Paul founded the Church in Rome:
@ -141,8 +141,8 @@ Peter and Paul founded the Church in Rome:
own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and
laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure, Mark,
the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in
writing what had been preached by Peter..." ---- (Irenaeus,
"Against Heresies", Book 3, Chapter 1)
writing what had been preached by Peter..."
---- (Irenaeus, "Against Heresies", Book 3, Chapter 1)
Eusebius records that Peter was put to death under Nero in Rome:
@ -152,8 +152,7 @@ Eusebius records that Peter was put to death under Nero in Rome:
preserved in the cemeteries of that place even to the present day.
---- (Book 2, Chapter 25)
(Paul was a Roman citizen can cannot be crucified but got an "easier" death
sentence)
(Paul was a Roman citizen can cannot be crucified but got an "easier" death sentence.)
Hippolytus confirmed the fact that Peter was crucified by Nero in Rome:
@ -180,9 +179,9 @@ According to Hippolytus, Simon the Zealot was the second Bishop of Jerusalem:
**Thaddaeus/Judas son of James:**
According to Mat 10:3 (KJV): Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the
publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was
Thaddaeus.... Thaddaeus is also known as Lebbaeus.
According to Mat 10:3 (KJV): Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and
Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose
surname was Thaddaeus.... Thaddaeus is also known as Lebbaeus.
Hippolytus records:

291
JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020.md Normal file

@ -0,0 +1,291 @@
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
## Martin Luther Defends Paul s Attribution of the Law to Angels and Its Abolished Nature
If you believe I have stretched things, I am in good company in
concluding Paul taught: (1) the Law originated with the angels; (2)
God did not intend to bless Jews with the Law; and (3) we are free to
treat the Law as simply from Moses and disregard it entirely. Martin
Luther goes so far as to say these are valid reasons why Christians do
not have to obey the Law. I thus enjoy the very best of company in
understanding Paul's words. The only problem is my companion so
thoroughly rejects Moses that he does not see how what he is saying
makes himself an apostate, tripped up by Paul's
teachings. (Thankfully, Luther later repented. See page 106.)
In a sermon entitled How Christians Should Regard Moses given August
27, 1525, Martin Luther simply assumes Paul's words are authoritative
on who truly spoke at Sinai. While Moses said it was God, and
Scripture calls this person God, Luther says it really meant angels
because Paul says this is who truly gave the Law. Listen how a man
caught in a contradiction reasons this out. Luther says:
Now the words which are here written [in the Law of Moses] were spoken
through an angel. This is not to say that only one angel was there,
for there was a great multitude there serving God and preaching to the
people of Israel at Mount Sinai. The angel, however, who spoke here
and did the talking, spoke just as if God himself were speaking and
saying, "I am your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt,"
etc. [Exod. 20:1], as if Peter or Paul were speaking in God's stead
and saying, "I am your God," etc. In his letter to the Galatians [3:19],
Paul says that the law was ordained by angels.
21. Martin Luther, "How Christians Should Regard Moses," Luther's Works: Word and Sacrament I (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1960)
Vol. 35 at 161-174.
That is, angels were assigned, in God's behalf, to give the law of
God- and Moses, as an intermediary, received it from the angels. I say
this so that you might know who gave the law. He did this to them,
however, because he wanted thereby to compel, burden, and press the Jews.
Luther is distancing God from the Law of Moses, just as Paul had
done. It was delivered by angels, not God personally. Luther is
ignoring that Jesus Himself said that God was
the direct deliverer of the Law from the burning bush. Having planted
a false seed to distance God from the Law, Luther next begins talking
as if God did not give the Law. Because Jesus is God, Luther's next
remark has all the earmarks of someone who has not thought through the
implications of his statement:
We would rather not preach again for the rest of our life than to
let Moses return and to let Christ be torn out of our hearts. We
will not have Moses as ruler or lawgiver any longer.
But it is not Moses who gave the Law. Nor did angels. It was Jesus who
is the "I AM" who gave the Law. (Ex. 3:14, "tell them I AM sent you";
John 8:58, "before Abraham was, I AM") Rewrite this and you can see
how incongruous Luther's statement now appears:
We would rather not preach again for the rest of our life than to
let [Jesus's words to Moses] return and to let Christ [preached by
Paul] be torn out of our hearts. We will not have [I AM who is
Jesus who gave the Law] as ruler or lawgiver any longer.
Martin Luther then announces proudly his total rejection of the Law.
22. (Mark 12:26); Luke 20:37.
So, then, we will neither observe nor accept Moses. Moses is
dead. His rule ended when Christ came. He is of no further
service.... [[E]]ven the Ten Commandments do not pertain to us.
If this is true, then why did Jesus teach to the contrary that whoever
taught the smallest commandment of the Law should no longer be
followed would be least in the kingdom of heaven? (Matt. 5:19).
### Luther Was Sometimes On the Right Track In This Sermon
In fairness to Luther, at other times in the same sermon, Luther's
answer on whether the Law applies to us is to examine whether the
passage is addressed to Jews alone. This is the only correct
limitation. For example, if a command is solely to Jews, such as the
law of circumcision (Gen. 17:11); (Lev. 12:3), (Josh. 5:2), then it
obviously does not apply to Gentiles. In the Jerusalem council in Acts
chapter 15, James ruled this command does not apply to Gentiles. (Acts
15:19). James said this not because the Law was abrogated in its
entirety, but rather because the circumcision command was limited to
Jews whom James later told Paul must still, as converts to Christ,
follow the circumcision command. (Acts 21:21,25).
23. However, if a Gentile chose to enter the Temple proper of Jerusalem, Ezekiel says even "strangers" must be circumcised. (Ez. 44:9).
24. The KJV atypically accepts one late textual corruption. This is in James' mouth in Acts 15:24. This makes it appear James said the Law does not apply at all to Gentiles. The KJV has it that James says some have tried "subverting your souls, saying. Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law. to whom we gave no such commandment." (Act 15:24). However, the ASV and NIV correctly omits "ye must be circumcised and keep the law," saying instead some tried "subverting your souls; to whom we gave no commandment." Why did the KJV add the above bolded words? The UBS' Greek New Testament (4th Ed) says this entire phrase first appears in the miniscule 1175 (pg. 476), which dates from the Tenth Century A.D. (pg. 17). The phrase "keep the Law" first appears in quotations of Acts 15:24 in the Apostolic Constitutions and in the writings of Amphilochius (pg. 467). Amphilochius died "after 394," and this copy of the Apostolic Constitutions is dated to "about 380" (pg. 31.) All the earlier texts omit both changes to Acts 15:24.
That James was following this principle is evident again when he
imposed on Gentiles prohibitions on eating certain animals with their
blood still in it (Acts 15:20).The Law of Moses said this food-rule
applied not only to Israelites but also to 'strangers' in the
land. ((Lev. 17:10),12 (food with blood).) James likewise adds that
Gentiles must refrain from fornication. James no doubt had the Hebrew
meaning of that word in mind, which meant adultery. Once again, we
find this command against adultery was stated in Leviticus to apply
not only to Jews, but also to "strangers that sojourn in Israel."
(Lev. 20:2, 10.) 26
Was James following Scripture in making this distinction? Yes,
indeed. The Law of Moses had an example that a command for a son of
Israel not to eat meat of an animal that died naturally did not apply
to non-Israelite sojourners who were permitted to each such
meat. (Deut. 14:21). Thus, this proves that commands to Israelites do
not automatically apply to the non-Israelite. James simply applied
this principle to interpret the scope of other commands in the Law of
Moses.
If you apply the Israel-sojourner distinction which James employed,
then of the Law of Moses which applies to non-Jews it would primarily
be the open-ended Ten Commandments as well as sojourner-specific
provisions in Leviticus chapters 19 and 20 and 24:13-24, and
(Exod. 12:19) (prohibition on leaven during feast of unleavened
bread)" which Jesus alludes to many times. These are commands that do
not introduce themselves as commands to only Israelites. If James'
approach is valid, then all the fuss about the Law as some terrible
burden is a non-starter. The burden on Gentiles is quite insignificant
if we follow the distinction in the Law of Moses itselfbetween "sons
of Israel" and "sojourners" as James was obviously doing. The alleged
burdensome nature of the Law on Gentiles was a red herring all along.
25. See page 138 et seq.
26. On why the idol-food command that James also gives was a deduction as applicable to both Jew and Gentile, see Footnote 1 on page 118.
James thus did not add to the Law. Instead, he refused to apply
Israel-only principles to Gentiles. He kept to the strict letter of
the Law. James says the reason to maintain this distinction of Jew
versus Gentile in the New Covenant is so that "we trouble not them
that from among the Gentiles turn to God." (Acts 15:19). His ruling
also complied with (Deut. 4:2).
So if James is right, when Jesus says "Whosoever therefore shall break
one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be
called least in the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 5:19), Jesus meant us to
understand as to Gentiles, that no obedience would be required as to
Israel-only commands (unless Jesus extended them). And if James is
right, when Jesus says whoever teaches you to obey the least command
in the Law would be the greatest in the kingdom, Jesus meant as to
Gentiles that if you taught them to obey open-ended commands and
commands directed at sojourners in the Law then you would be the
greatest in the kingdom. (Matt. 5:19). But if you go beyond this, and
add Israel-only commands on Gentiles which God (including Jesus) never
imposed on them, you are unduly burdening their entry into the kingdom
of God. You are violating (Deut. 4:2) by adding burdens nowhere in the
Law itself (unless a prophet, such as Jesus, added the command,
pursuant to Deut. 18:15).
27. Some argue that the Ten Commandments (Decalogue) are not
open-ended, implied from (Exod. 20:2) which says "I...brought you out
of the Land of Egypt." This is largely irrelevant. You can find
specific mention of most of the Ten Commandments imposed on
sojourners: blasphemy - using God's name in vain (Lev. 24:16; Num
15:30); murder (Lev. 24:17); Sabbath-breaking (Deut. 5:12-15;
Lev. 25:6; Exo 23:12); adultery (Lev. 20:2, 10), etc. Even if the
Decalogue as a whole does not apply, Bonhoeffer says Jesus extended
the Decalogue to all in the New Covenant when He spoke to the young
rich man. ((Matt. 19:16-26); (Mark 10:17-31); Luke 18:1826). See
Bonhoeffer. Cost of Discipleship (1937) at 72-84.
Did Jesus ever speak this way Himself? Yes, this is one of the obvious
applications of the principle behind the lessons about the old and new
cloth and the old and new wineskin. (Matt. 9:16-17). Combining the two
items in each case makes things worse, and fails to preserve the old
sideby-side with the new. The new cloth put on old clothing causes a
"worse rent." New wine in an old wineskin causes the wine to be
"spilled and the skins perish."
James similarly speaks that putting the Israel-only commands upon
Gentiles is "trouble" for those "turning to God." You cause more
problems that you solve by doing so. The new cloth is not of the same
inherent material as the old cloth, and lacks the same elasticity. It
cannot be stretched as far as the old. The Jew can be pushed further
in commands than a Gentile. It is inherent in their culture, as God
molded the Jews. The new wine in an old wineskin will swell up from
pressure trying to stay within the bounds of the old wineskin. The new
wine will spill out ( i.e ., become lost) if you try to make the new
fit the stiffness and boundaries of the old wineskin. Gentiles cannot
be pressed to follow the Israel-only provisions; the pressure will
force them out of the wineskin.
28. Passover dinner, which precedes the feast of unleavened bread, is
optional for the Sojourner. However, if he "will keep it," then the
Sojourner has to be circumcised. (Exod. 12:48; (Num. 9:14)). Thus,
Passover was an honor for a nonJew sojourner to celebrate. If he chose
to do so, he must be circumcised. As discussed in Appendix C, Jesus
contemplated His Jewish apostles would keep Passover, and amended the
Passover remembrances to include His anticipated work on the Cross. If
Gentile Christians observe Passover, it is an honor. When we do so, we
were to do the remembrances that Jesus outlined in the last
passover. This explains why the early apostolic church was anxious to
and did keep Passover; and this is why Passover is a feast worldwide
in all forms of Christianity (Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox)
except in English-speaking nations where it is known as Easter. Why
the different nomenclature? Because Catholicism could not root out the
English/Germanic preference to call that season by the name of the
goddess Eastre. As a result, English-speaking Christians have lost
memory of what festival they are attempting to celebrate while
Christians of all denominations and faiths in non-English speaking
countries keep Passover under its proper name. For more discussion,
see Appendix C: The Easter Error [[JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112]].
29. Yet, bear in mind, Jesus as Prophet can add a command to the Law of Moses.
Unfortunately, Luther in this sermon did not consistently maintain
this valid Israel-Sojoumer distinction. Luther ends the sennon by
throwing off of the Gentiles all the Old Law, even the sojourner
commands. He put the New beyond any testing for its validity against
the Law given Moses. Luther says:
The sectarian spirits want to saddle us with Moses and all the
commandments. We will just skip that. We will regard Moses as a
teacher, but we will not regard him as our lawgiver - unless he
agrees with both the New Testament and the natural law . 30
Here you see how one falls into apostasy. No longer do you accept the
Law given to Moses to define what is a false prophet. Thus, you have
accepted a set of new teachings that are beyond the reach of God's
prior revelation to test its validity. Luther thereby became in 1525
totally antinomian - making the validity of principles in the Mosaic
Law turn on the superior validity of what Luther regarded as New
Testament writings but only if also confirmed by natural law.
Please note, however, that later from 1532 to 1537 Luther reversed his
position on the Law. He denounced antinomianism in the Antinomian
Theses (1537). He said a Christian can spiritually die and become like
a non-Christian. To revive, they must examine themselves by the Ten
Commandments, and repent from sin. Luther's Catechisms of late
1531-1532 (which the Lutheran church uses to this day) state Jesus'
doctrine on salvation and the Law while ignoring Paul's doctrines
(except on how to treat government officials, wives, etc.) For this
reason, evangelicals condemn Luther's Catechisms. Miles Stanford said
the "Lutheran Church" turned into "legalism" by adopting an
"unscriptural application of 'the law as the rule of life' for the
believer." Likewise, Pastor Dwight Oswald regards Luther's Catechism
as making Luther so at odds with Paul's doctrines that even Luther
must be deemed lost and responsible for having led countless numbers
to perish in hell. Similarly, Calvinists at Calvin College skewer
Luther's 1531 edition of his catechism for departing from the faith he
previously taught so boldly. 34
30. Luther repeats this statement later in his 1525 sermon: "In the
first place I dismiss the commandments given to the people of
Israel. They neither urge nor compel me. They are dead and gone ,
except insofar as I gladly and willingly accept something from Moses,
as if I said, 'This is how Moses ruled, and it seems fine to me, so I
will follow him in this or that particular.'"
31. Martin Luther, Don't Tell Me That! From Martin Luther s Antinomian
Theses (Lutheran Press: 2004).
However, prior to this radical switch, Luther was willing to endorse
everything Paul said. Luther inspired by Paul said the angels gave the
Law; the Law was a curse on Jews; Jesus never intended the Law applies
to non-Jews who follow Him; and the Law is dead and we only follow
those aspects that coincide with reason ('natural law') if re-affirmed
in the New Testament. Accordingly, unless Luther in 1525 misread Paul,
Paul must be understood to have thrown off the entire Law by
denigrating its origin and purpose. I therefore enjoy the very best of
company in my reading Paul the same way.
But we can take heart from the fact that Luther later made a radical
separation from his own earlier antinomianism. Luther must have
finally seen the error of the doctrine Luther deduced from
Galatians. In fact, it appears no coincidence that Luther's switch
quickly followed his lecture on Galatians. For in that epistle, we
have Paul's most virulent anti-Law writings, with Paul's rationale
clearly exposed in (Gal. 4:22) ff. With such new conviction, Luther
had the courage to reform himself. That's the best explanation for why
we find Jesus' Words Only emerging in Luther's Catechisms. Luther made
one more radical revolution, once more willing to face the charge of
being a heretic. This time, however, it was for basing his core
doctrine on Jesus' words only.
32. Quoted in Bob Nyberg's Covenant Theology Versus Dispensationalism A Matter of Law Versus Grace, reprinted online at
http://4himnet.com/xobnyberg/dispensationalismOl.html.
33. See Pastor Dwight Oswald, "Martin Luther's Sacramental Gospel," Earnestly Contending For The Faith (Nov-Dee. 1997). See also, Lutheran Heresy at
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com.
34. Calvinists thereby find the 1531 Catechism defective spiritually. See Calvin College at
http://www.ccel.0rg/s/schaff/hcc7/htm/ii.v.xiv.htm.

100
JWO_05_13_HowActs24_14UnravelsPaulsAuthority_0022.md Normal file

@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
## How Acts 24:14 Unravels Paul's Authority
Finally, to prove Paul upheld the Law, Messianics cite to Luke's
quoting Paul in a tribunal (Acts 24:14). Paul tells Felix that he
"retains all my belief in all points of the Law." If Paul truly made
this statement, it has no weight. It cannot overcome Paul's view on
the Law's nullification. Those antiLaw views are absolutely clear-cut,
repeated in numerous letters with long picturesque explanations.
Rather, the quote of Paul in Acts 24:14 brings up the question of
Paul's honesty, not his consistency with the Law. If Luke is telling
the truth, then Paul perjured himself before Felix. To prevent the
casual Christian from seeing this, Acts 24:14 is usually translated as
vaguely as possible.
However, pro-Paul Greek commentaries know Paul's meaning. They try to
defend Paul's apparent lack of ethics. They insist Paul was not out to
trick Governor Felix. For example, Robertson in Word Pictures makes it
clear that Paul deflects the charge that he heretically seeks to
subvert the Law by asserting he believes in all of it:
Paul has not stretched the truth at all....He reasserts his faith
in all the Law....A curious heretic surely!
Robertson realizes that Paul disproves to Felix any heresy of seeking
to turn people from further obedience to the Law by affirming "his
faith in all the Law....," as Robertson rephrases it. Yet, Paul's
statement (if Luke is recording accurately) was a preposterous
falsehood. He did not believe in "all" points of the Law at
all. Robertson pretends this is not stretching the truth "at all." The
reality is there is absolutely no truth in Paul's statement. Paul did
not retain his "belief in all points of the Law," as he claimed to
Felix.
This account of Luke represents Paul making such an outrageous
falsehood that a growing segment of Paulunists (such as John Knox)
believe Luke was out to embarrass Paul in Acts ? 6
If we must believe Luke is a malicious liar in order to dismiss that
Acts 24:14 proves Paul is guilty of perjury, then this also undercuts
the reliability of all of the Book of Acts. If so, then where does
Paul's authority come from any more?
36. John Knox recently suggested Luke-Acts was written to bring Paul down and thereby counteract Marcion. (Knox, Marcion, supra, at 11439.) If so, then it was Paul's own friend Luke who saw problems with Paul and presented them in a fair neutral manner. On their friendship, see 2Cor. 8:18; (Col. 4:14); 2Tim. 4:11.
### How Acts 24:14 Unravels Paul's Authority
Luke alone in Acts preserves the accounts of Paul's vision of
Jesus. That is the sole source for what most agree is Paul's only
authority to be a teacher within the church. The visionexperience
nowhere appears in Paul s letters. If Luke is a liar in Acts 24:14,
why should we trust him in any of the three vision accounts which
alone provide some authority for Paul to be a 'witness' of Jesus?
As a result, the Paulunists are caught in a dilemma. If Paul actually
said this in Acts 24:14, he is a liar. If Paul did not say this, then
Luke is a liar. But then Paul's sole source of confirmation is
destroyed. Either way, Paul loses any validity.
Escapes from this dilemma have been offered, but when analyzed they
are unavailing. If Paul made this statement, he clearly was lying to
Felix.
37. The literal Greek means: "I worship the God of our Fathers,
continuing to believe [present participle active] in all things which
are according [kata] to the Law and in the prophets." The ASV follows
this translation. Some Paulunists emphasize the word according in the
verse. They argue Paul means to reject anything that is no longer in
agreement with the Law. Thus, Paul is read to mean that he only
affirms agreement with the part of the Law with which he can still
agree. (Given O. Blakely, A Commentary on Paul s Defense Before Felix
at
http://wotruth.com/pauldef.htm). This argument fails because Paul
believes in nothing from the Law except that it was pregnant with its
own abolition. Paul was still being deceptive. Paul was in effect
saying, he believes still in everything in the Law that is valid
today, but since this is nothing, the statement is empty
patronizing. Blakely commends Paul for his shrewd way of saying
this. Paul made it appear he was affirming all the Law was valid when
instead Paul meant to affirm its entirely fulfilled nature, and hence
its defunct nature. Whether a shrewd way of expressing this or not,
the literal words are still a falsehood in how Felix would understand
the statement in a court of Law.
Thus, Acts 24:14 cannot be cited to prove the truth of what Paul
asserted. Instead, it raises an unsolvable dilemma. Either Luke is
lying or Paul is lying. This means Acts 24:14 proves the impossibility
of accepting Paul's legitimacy whichever way you answer the
dilemma. If Luke is lying here, it undermines all of Acts, upon which
Paul's authority as a witness rests. If Paul is lying (and Luke is
telling the story truthfully), then Paul is disqualified ipso facto
because he is committing perjury. (Acts 24:14) proves to be a passage
that unravels Paul's authority any way you try to resolve it.
Bless the Messianics. They cited (Acts 24:14) to insist Paul was
upholding Torah. What they did is bring to everyone's attention a
verse whose very existence destroys viewing Paul as a legitimate
teacher.

78
JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024.md Normal file

@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
## Chapter 5 Conclusion
Paul is blunt in (Eph. 2:15),
(Col. 2:14),
(2Cor. 3:11-17),
(Rom. 7:13) et seq, and
(Gal. 3:19) et seq. The Law is abolished, done away with,
nailed to a tree, has faded away, and was only ordained by angels who
are no gods. If we were to cite Paul's condemnations of the Law in one
string, the point is self-evident that Paul abrogated the Law for
everyone. See 2Cor. 2:14 ("old covenant"); (Gal. 5:1) ("yoke of
bondage"); (Rom. 10:4) ("Christ is end of the law"); 2Cor. 3:7 ("law of
death"); (Gal. 5:1) ("entangles"); (Col. 2:14-17) ("a shadow"); (Rom. 3:27)
("law of works"); (Rom. 4:15) ("works wrath"); 2Cor. 3:9 (ministration
of condemnation); (Gal. 2:16) ("cannot justify"); (Gal. 3:21) (cannot give
life); (Col. 2:14) ("wiped out" exaleipsas); (Gal. 3:19), 4:8-9 ("given by
angels...who are no gods [and are] weak and beggarly celestial
beings/elements").
To save Paul from being a heretic, some claim Paul is talking against
false interpretations of the Law. But this ignores that Paul tears
away at the heart and soul of the Torah.
39. Martin Abegg, "Paul, 'Works of the Law,' and MMT," Biblical Archaeological Review> (November/December 1994) at 52-53.
He disputes it was given by God. He claims instead it was given by
angels. Paul says no one can judge you any longer for not keeping the
Sabbath. This is one of the Ten Commandments. Paul, as Luther said,
clearly abolished the Sabbath. All efforts to save Paul that do not
grapple with these difficult passages are simply attempts at
self-delusion.
Rather, Calvin was correct when he said "this Gospel [of Paul] does
not impose any commands, but rather reveals God's goodness, His mercy
and His benefits."
To Paul, faith was everything and a permanent guarantee of salvation. There was no code to break. There was supposedly no consequence of doing so for Abraham. We are Abraham's sons. We enjoy this same liberty, so Paul teaches.
Then how do we understand the Bible's promise that the time of the New Covenant would involve putting the "Torah" on our hearts? ((Jer. 31:31) et seq.) How do we understand God's promise that when His Servant (Messiah) comes, God "will magnify the Law (Torah), and make it honorable"? ((Isa. 42:21) ASV/KJV.)
You have no answer if you follow Paul. He says you no longer have to
observe all God's Law given Moses. You just choose to do what is
expedient. You do not worry about the letter of the Law. You can,
instead, follow your own conscience. Whatever it can bear is
permissible.
How are the contrary verses about the Law in the New Covenant Age then explained? It is seriously asserted by commentators that when Christ returns, the Law of Moses will be re-established. Thus, prior to Paul, there was Law. After Paul but before Christ comes again, there is no Law. When Christ returns, the Law of Moses is restored. (See Footnote 20 on page 393). So it is: Law-No Law-Law. God is schizophrenic! It is amazing what people can believe!
Consequently, one cannot escape a simple fact: Paul's validity as a teacher is 100% dependent on accepting his antinomian principles. Then what of (Deut. 13:5) which says someone with true signs and wonders must be ignored if he would seduce us from following the Law?
Paul even anticipated how to defend from this verse. Paul has shielded himself from this verse by ripping away all of the Law. He would not even acknowledge that we can measure him by (Deut. 13:5). This is part of the Law of Moses. Paul claims it was given by angels (Gal. 3:19). Paul says you are not to believe even an angel from heaven if it should contradict "my gospel" (Gal. 1:8). Hence, Paul would reject the test from Deuteronomy 13:5.
Yet, Paul has not escaped thereby. For Jesus in (Matt. 7:23)
reiterated (Deut. 13:1-5). In doing so, Jesus specifically warned of
false prophets to follow Him that would teach anomia. They would come
with true signs and wonders. However, they are false because they
taught anomia. As discussed earlier, they would be workers of
negation of the Law. This is a legitimate dictionary definition of
the word anomia in the world's best Greek lexicon-the LiddellScott
Lexicon. For a full discussion, see page 60 et seq.
Now Christians must ask themselves this question: do you really believe Jesus made all those warnings about false prophets who come with true signs and wonders yet who are workers of anomia (negation of Law) (Matt. 7:23) so we would disregard the protective principle of (Deut. 13:5)? So we would disregard even Jesus' words in (Matt. 7:23)?
You can only believe this if you are willing to disregard Jesus. You
can only believe this if you then disregard the Law of Moses was given
by God Himself. The Bible clearly says God delivered it personally in
Exodus chapters 19-20, 25. Jesus likewise says it was God in the bush
speaking to Moses. ((Mark 12:26); Luke 20:37.)
Or will you allow Paul to convince you that the Law was given by
angels (Gal. 3:19) and thus Paul's words are higher than of angels
(Gal. 1:8)? Will you be seduced to believe you are thus free to
disregard (Deut. 13:5)? And have you also somehow rationalized away
(Matt. 7:23), and its warnings of false prophets who bring anomia ?
Your eternal destiny may depend on how you analyze these simple questions.

218
JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025.md Normal file

@ -0,0 +1,218 @@
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
## Paul Contradicts Jesus About Idol Meat
### Introduction
Jesus in (Rev. 2:6), 14 takes on those persons teaching the Ephesians
that it was acceptable to eat meat sacrificed to idols. Among them
Jesus says were the Nicolaitans. The Nicolaitans were an actual
historical group. They taught Paul's doctrine of grace permitted them
to eat meat sacrificed to idols. Jesus commends the Ephesians for
refusing to listen to the Nicolaitans on the issue of eating meat
sacrificed to idols.
Yet the Nicolaitans were not merely deducing it was pennissible to eat
such meat from Paul's doctrine of grace. Paul, in fact, clearly
teaches three times that there is nothing wrong per se in eating meat
sacrificed to idols. ((Rom. 14:21); (1Cor. 8:4-13), and (1Cor. 10:19-29).
However, Jesus, as we will see, three times in Revelation says it is
flatly wrong. The Bible says when God commands something, we are not
free to "diminish" it by articulating our own exceptions. "What thing
soever I command you, that shall ye observe to do: thou shalt not add
thereto, nor diminish from it." 1
Paulunists claim that this prohibition on eating meat sacrificed to
idols (which was sold in meat markets) was not an absolute command. It
was flexible enough to fit Paul's approach. Paul taught idol meat was
perfectly acceptable unless someone else thought it was
wrong. Paulunists argue that the Jerusalem Council only meant to
prohibit eating such meat if it would undermine a weaker brother who
thought it was wrong, as Paul teaches.
1. (Exod. 34:13) says Jews were to tear down the altars of the
Gentiles rather than make a covenant ( i.e ., a peace treaty). In Exo
34:15-16, God says if you prefer making a covenant and allow their
pagan altars, you risk "one call thee [to eat with him] and thou eat
of his sacrifice." The command to destroy the pagan altars was so that
Jews would avoid eating meat sacrificed to idols even inadvertently at
a meal at a Gentile home. This altar-destruction command also had the
indirect affect of preventing a Gentile from eating idol meat. For
this apparent reason, James in Acts 15:20, 25 and 21:25 prohibits
Gentiles from eating idol meat. (On how James construed when the Law
applies to Gentiles, see page 102.) It is ludicrous to argue, as some
do, that God was concerned only that one knowingly ate such meat. If
true, the Bible could have just prohibited such food as it did with
other foods. However, idol meat cannot be identified by
appearance. Thus, merely prohibiting eating such meat would not be
enough if God was displeased by you eating it unknowingly. Hence, to
prevent unknowing eating of such meat, God commands the destruction of
pagan altars. Thus, Paul's allowance of eating such meat by not asking
questions is precisely what the Bible does not countenance. in
itself. It is also no less absolute a prohibition than the prohibition
on fornication. Had the Jerusalem Council ruling intended the
eating-idol-meat rule to be only a command to follow during social
intercourse, then the council used the wrong words to convey such an
interpretation.
In fact, the prohibition on eating meat sacrificed to idols was stated
three times in Acts. It was never once stated with an exception or
qualification. There is no hint that eating such meat was pennissible
in your private meals. In fact, when we later look at Jesus' words in
Revelation absolutely condemning such practice, Jesus is talking after
Paul's words are written down. Had Jesus intended to affirm Paul's
view that eating such meat is permissible, Jesus' absolute directives
against ever eating such meat were the wrong way to communicate
this. Jesus left no room to find hairsplitting exceptions.
This absolute prescription first appears at the Jerusalem Council in
Acts 15:20. Initially, James decided that "we write unto them, that
they abstain from the pollutions of idols...." (Acts 15:20). Second,
Luke then quotes James' letter to the Gentiles as saying one of the
"necessary things" is "you abstain from things sacrificed to idols."
(Acts 15:29). James reiterates this for a third and final time in Acts
chapter 21. James is reminding Paul what the ruling was at the
Jerusalem Council. He tells Paul that previously "we wrote giving
judgment that they [ i.e ., the Gentiles] should keep themselves from
things sacrificed to idols...." (Acts 21:25).
James restates the principle unequivocally. skandalon) before the
children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit
fornication." Jesus does not say the error was eating meat sacrificed
to idols only if you believed an idol was real. Nor did Jesus say it
was wrong only if the person involved thought eating such meat was
wrong. Jesus simply laid down a prohibition. Nothing more. Nothing
less. (Deut. 4:2) prohibits "diminishing" from God's true inspired
words by making up exceptions.
In this (Rev. 2:14) passage, the use of the word skandalon is
important. In (Matt. 13:41-43), Jesus warned that on judgement day all
those ensnared ( skandalizo-ed ) will be gathered by the angels and
sent to the "fiery furnace." Hence, Jesus was telling us in
(Rev. 2:14) that eating meat sacrificed to idols was a serious sin. He
called it a skandalon -a trap. It was a salvation-ending trap.
Jesus reiterates the prohibition on eating meat sacrificed to idols in
(Rev. 2:20). Jesus faults the church at Thyatira for listening to a
false Jezebel who "teaches my servants to commit fornication, and Word
Pictures confesses the Nicolaitans defended eating such meat based on
Paul's gospel:
These early Gnostics practiced licentiousness since they were not under law, but under grace. [Robertson's Word Pictures on (Rev. 2:14)). 3
"You have people there who hold to the teaching of Balaam, who
taught Balak to entice the Israelites to sin by eating meat
sacrificed to idols."
Jesus in (Rev. 2:14)
2. Later, we will examine whether Jesus was identifying Paul in Rev.2:2 as a false apostle. See "Did Jesus Applaud the Ephesians for Exposing Paul as a False Apostle?" on page 215 et seq.
3. Irenaeus around 180 A.D. wrote that Nicolas, their founder
"departed from sound doctrine, and was in the habit of inculcating
indifference of both life and food." (Refutation of All Heresies,
![Picture #34](images/img_0034.png)
Therefore, we see Jesus extols those who hate the Nicolaitan's grace
teaching which says Christians can eat meat sacrificed to idols. Jesus
then condemns twice those who teach a Christian may eat meat
sacrificed to idols. Jesus is just as absolute and unwavering on this
prohibition as James is in Acts. When Jesus says it, we are not free
to "diminish" it by making up exceptions. (Deut. 12:32).
Notice too how three times James in Acts repeats the point. Then three times Jesus repeats the point in the Book of Revelation. (Rev. 2:6, 14 (Ephesus); (Rev. 2:14-15) (Pergamum); (Rev. 2:20) (Thyatira)). In the New Testament, there is no command emphasized more frequently than the command against eating meat sacrificed to idols.
This three-times principle, incidentally, is not without its own
significance. For Paul says three times that it is permissible to eat
meat sacrificed to idols, as discussed next. God wanted us to know for
a fact He is responding to Paul.
"To the pure, all things are pure."
Paul in Titus 1:15
### Paul Permits Eating Meat Sacrificed To Idols
Paul clearly teaches three times that there is nothing wrong in itself
eating meat sacrificed to idols. ((Rom. 14:21); (1Cor. 8:4-13), and 1
Corinthians 10:19-29). The first time Paul addresses the question of
"eating meat sacrificed to idols," Paul answers: "But food will not
commend us to God; neither if we eat not...." (1Cor. 8:8). Paul then
explained it is only necessary to abstain from eating such meat if you
are around a "weaker" brother who thinks an idol is something. (1
Cor. 8:7, 8:10, 9:22). Then, and only then, must you abstain. The
reason is that then a brother might be emboldened to do something he
thinks is sinful. The brother is weak for believing eating meat
sacrificed to an idol is wrong. This is thus a sin for him to eat,
even though you know it is not sinful to eat meat sacrificed to
idols. Thus, even though you know better than your weaker brother that
it is no sin to do so, it is better to abstain in his presence than
cause him to sin against his weak conscience and be "destroyed."
(1Cor. 8:11). 4
"The first sin committed by man was not murder or adultery or
stealing; it was eating something they were told not to eat."
Gordon Tessler, Ph.D. The Genesis Diet
![Picture #35](images/img_0035.png)
![Picture #36](images/img_0036.png)
Paul is essentially laying down a principle on how to be considerate
of others who think it is wrong to eat meat sacrificed to idols. At
the same time, Paul insists as a matter of principle, there is nothing
wrong eating such meat. If you were instead the weaker brother, and
read Paul's epistles on this topic, you certainly would walk away
knowing Paul teaches it is permissible to eat meat sacrificed to
idols. You would even think your weak-mindedness on this issue should
be abandoned. You should no longer burden your conscience on your
brother who refrains due to your overly sensitive conscience. With
Paul's instructions in hand, you would certainly know that it is
pennissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols. You can now get over your
undue and ill-founded concern about eating such meat.
4. Paul is thought to teach you should not take communion if one was
eating idol meat at a pagan service. In 1Cor. 10:20-21, Paul says you
cannot be partaker of the Lord's table and the "table of devils." This
was thus not a flat prohibition on eating idol meat. Most commentators
reconcile Paul to Paul by saying Paul means you cannot go to a pagan
sacrifice and eat the meat during a pagan service and still partake of
communion. There is still thus nothing inherently wrong in eating such
meat. In the context in which Paul says this, Paul also repeats his
famous axiom, "all things are lawful, but not all things are
expedient." (1Cor. 10:23). Then Paul says when you buy food or eat a
stranger's home, "ask no question for sake of your conscience."
(1Cor. 10:25,27). Thus, Paul says it is best you not know what you are
eating. Don't let your conscience wrong. There are no excuses,
hairsplitting qualifications, situationalethics, or easy outs in
deciding whether to obey God. It is wrong and prohibited.
### Paul Clearly Teaches It is Permissible to Eat Idol Meat
Yet, Paul teaches it is pennissible to eat idol meat. This is
transparent enough that Pauline Christians admit Paul is saying meat
sacrificed to idols is clean and permissible. They make these
admissions apparently unaware that Jesus in Revelation reconfirmed the
prohibition on meat sacrificed to idols. 5 A Presbyterian pastor
unwittingly admits:
Paul says to his readers that even though there is no ontological
or theological basis for refusing to eat meat that has been
sacrificed to an idol, nevertheless out of consideration for
brothers and sisters in Christ for whom it
5. Kenneth Loy, Jr. in My Body His Temple: The Prophet Daniel's Guide
to Nutrition (Aroh Publishing: 2001) at 69 writes: " Idol Meat Is
Clean ((Rom. 14) and (1Cor. 8)): God had forbidden idol meat
originally because it caused the children of Israel to go 'whoring
after' the gods of other nations. ((Exod. 34:15-16)). Since the
Gentiles were now equal in the sight of God, this restriction was no
longer necessary. Jewish Christians even preferred idol meat since it
was usually less expensive in the market place. ...Paul stipulates
another reason why idol meat is permitted'. 6
This pastor unwittingly destroys Paul's validity for a person who
wants to obey Jesus Christ.

679
JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028.md Normal file

@ -0,0 +1,679 @@
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
## Why Does Jesus Mention Balaam in Revelation 2:14
### How Jesus' Reference to Balaam Applies to Paul
If we dig a little deeper into the eating of idol-meat issue, we find
Jesus mentions Balaam in (Rev. 2:14). 1 Jesus says the source of this
heretical idol meat doctrine is a "teaching of Balaam." Jesus says
Balaam taught one can eat meat sacrificed to idols, among other
things. Why is Jesus mentioning Balaam, a figure from the era of Moses?
Evidently because Balaam is a figure who resembles the one who in the
New Testament era teaches eating meat sacrificed to idols is permissible.
What do we know about Balaam that would help us identify who was the
Balaam-type figure in the New Testament church?
The Biblical story of Balaam in the book of Numbers does not reveal
the precise nature of the teachings of Balaam. Jesus alone tells us
that Balaam taught the Israelites they could eat meat sacrificed to
idols and commit fornication. (Rev. 2:14). Thus, with these additional
facts, let's make a synopsis of the story of Balaam. Then we can see
whether anyone appears similar in the New Testament era.
* Balaam was a Prophet in the Hebrew Scriptures who was changed from
an enemy to a friend by an angelic vision on a Road.
1. (Rev. 2:14:) "But I have a few things against thee, because thou
hast there some that hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to
cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things
sacrificed to idols, and to commit fornication." (ASV)
* Balaam, after properly serving the Lord for a time, changed back
into being an enemy.
* This inspired prophet is deemed to be an enemy of God because he
taught it was permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols and to
commit fornication. This part of the story was omitted in Moses'
account. Jesus alone reveals this.
Who else is a prophet of God who was changed from an enemy to a friend
by an angelic-type vision on a Road, but then later taught it was
permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols? Who likewise taught an
act of fornication condemned by Jesus ( i.e ., remarriage after
divorce if certain circumstances were lacking) was perfectly
pennissible? (See page 138). Who likewise is interpreted by most
Paulunists as saying fornication is no longer strictly prohibited and
no longer leads to spiritual death but instead the propriety of
fornication is examined solely based on its expediency? On those key
points, we shall see in this chapter that Balaam identically matches Paul.
Jesus is putting a thin veil over the fact He is talking about
Paul. Jesus reveals His purpose by referring to Balaam in (Rev. 2:14).
By citing the example of Balaam, Jesus reminds us that a true prophet
who is turned from evil to good then could turn back and completely
apostasize. Jesus' citation to Balaam in this context destroys our
assumptions that Paul could never apostasize. By referencing Balaam,
Jesus is telling us, at the very least, that Paul could turn and
apostasize after his Road to Damascus experience. Paul could be just
like Balaam who did so after his Road to Moab experience.
### Is (Rev. 2:14) A Type of Parable?
Did Jesus mention the "teaching of Balaam" as a parable to identify
Paul? It appears (Rev. 2:14) is a type of parable. Jesus identifies
the false teaching as the "teaching of Balaam." Yet Balaam is dead.
Someone in the apostolic era is like Balaam. To know whom Jesus meant,
one has to find someone who matches Balaam's historically-known qualities.
Furthermore, we have a second reason to believe a parable is intended
in (Rev. 2:14). At the end of Revelation chapter 2, Jesus says: "He
that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the churches."
(Rev. 2:29). This is Jesus' standard catch-phrase when He wanted you
to know there are symbolic meanings in His words.
Let's next try to identify who was the Balaam-like figure in the New
Testament apostolic era by studying the life of the original Balaam.
### Balaam Was Changed to A True Prophet By A Vision on A Road
In the book of Numbers (written by Moses), Balaam begins as a
soothsayer intent on accepting money from Moab's King Balak. He was
offered payment to travel to Moab to curse Israel. As such, he begins
as an enemy of the true God.
God then appeared to Balaam and told him not to curse
Israel. ((Num. 22:5-12)). King Balak then called on Balaam again to
come to Moab. However, God appeared to Balaam and allowed him to go on
condition Balaam did only what the Lord told him to do. (Numbers
22:20). Apparently after starting on his trip, Balaam decided to still
curse Israel. On route to Moab, Balaam (on a donkey) and his two
companions are stopped on a road by an unseen angel of the Lord. (Some
commentators think Numbers 22:35 proves this was actually Jesus, the
"eternal" angel of His presence-Gill.) Then the famous incident takes
place where Balaam's donkey talks back to him. The donkey complains
that Balaam is goading him by smiting him with his staff: "What have I
done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?"
((Num. 22:28).) At first Balaam cannot see the angel which is blocking
the donkey. (Num. 22:25-27). Balaam is in a sense blinded. However,
then God "opened the eyes of Balaam" and he could see the
angel. (Num. 22:31-33).
Balaam then confesses to the angel that he sinned. ((Num. 22:34).) He
offers to go home. The angel tells Balaam to continue onto Moab, but
repeats the command that Balaam must only bless the
Israelites. (Num. 22:35). Then Balaam proceeded to Moab.
(Num. 22:36).
Next when Balaam arrived in Moab, he warned King Balak that he could
only do what the Lord allowed him to say. ((Num. 22:36-38).) Balaam's
famous oracles of blessings over Israel then followed. (Num. 23:1-29).
While giving the blessing, God through Moses says Balaam was directly
led by the Holy Spirit. Balaam simultaneously turned away from his
prior practice of using omens. Moses writes in (Num. 24:1-2)
(1) And when Balaam saw that it pleased Jehovah to bless Israel,
he went not, as at the other times, to meet with enchantments, but he
set his face toward the wilderness.
(2) And Balaam lifted up his eyes, and he saw Israel dwelling
according to their tribes; and the Spirit of God came upon him.
[Then Balaam blesses Israel.]
Thus Balaam had become a true prophet whom Moses reveals was having
true communications from Yahweh God. Balaam is indwelt by the Holy
Spirit and repeats precisely what God wants him to say. God wants us
to know through Moses that Balaam begins as a truly inspired prophet
of God Almighty. The last we see of Balaam in action, he is acting as
a good prophet. His words of blessings end up as part of standard
synagogue services to this very day, known as the Mah Tovu.
### How Balaam Fell: His Idol Meat and Fornication Teaching
Then something negative happens that Moses only cryptically
revealed. In (Num. 31:16), Moses writes: "Behold, these caused the
children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass
against Jehovah in the matter of Peor, and so the plague was among the
congregation of Jehovah." Balaam had counseled the Israelites that
they could sin in some unspecified manner. This cryptic statement is
the only explanation why later in Numbers 31:8 that the Israelites,
during their slaying of the Midianites, also kill Balaam.
Rabbinic tradition tries to fill in the missing information. It
attributed to Balaam the lapse of Israel into the immorality we find in
(Num. 25:1-9).
Jesus, however, gives us an inspired message on what was missing in
the Biblical account. Jesus says Balaam misled the Israelites by
teaching them they can eat meat sacrificed to idols and they can
commit fornication. Jesus is the only inspired source of this
infonnation. Jesus says:
But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there some
that hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to cast a
stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things
sacrificed to idols, and to commit fornication. (Rev. 2:14, ASV.)
The Rabbinic tradition in Judaism supports what Jesus said, but only
in general terms.
2. Morris Jastrow Jr., "Balaam," Encyclopedia of Judaism (online at
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=161&letter=B&search=balaam.)
If we look at (Num. 25:2), we will see the Israelites were invited to
the sacrifices to idols, and ate the idol meat. ((Num. 25:2),
"for they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods; and the
people did eat, and bowed down to their gods.")
### So Who is Balaam in the New Testament Era?
The prophet Balaam was a person whose life mirrors apostle Paul's life
to an extraordinary degree. Absent Jesus telling us that Balaam taught
it was permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols, we would never
have known how virtually identical are the two lives. Yet when Jesus
filled in the missing detail, it made the parallel between Balaam and
Paul become extraordinarily uncanny.
In particular, Balaam's Road to Moab experience has many striking
parallels to Paul's Road to Damascus experience. In fact, how it
affects both Paul and Balaam is identical. Balaam is on his road with
the wrong intent to curse God's people. This is true for Paul too,
aiming to imprison God's people. (Acts 22:5). Balaam is on the road
with two companions. Paul likewise has companions with him. (Acts 22:9.)
Next, Balaam is given a message by the angel that converts his way to
the true God. Gill even says this 'angel' is the "eternal angel"
(non-created) of the Lord's presence- Jesus-because of the unique
wording of (Num. 22:35). Likewise, Paul gets a message from Jesus that
converts his way to the true God. (Acts 22:8). Both Balaam and Paul
follow God/or a time. Both apostasize when they teach it is
permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols.
There is another odd parallel between Balaam and Paul. After Balaam
strikes his donkey to make him move, Balaam's donkey asks: "What have
I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times?"
((Num. 22:28).) The donkey in effect asks Why are you persecuting me ?
Balaam then learns that an angel of God was itself stopping the donkey
from moving. Balaam learns it is hard for the donkey to keep on
kicking (moving ahead) against the goads of God's angel. It is hard to
keep on kicking against divine goads.
Now compare this to Paul and his vision. Paul is likewise confronted
by Jesus with a similar question: "Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou
me?" (Acts 22:7). And most telling, Jesus adds in the "Hebrew" tongue:
"it is hard for thee to kick against the goad." (Acts 26:14.)
When Jesus spoke to Paul on the road in the Book of Acts, He was
speaking in a manner that would allow us to invoke the memory of the
story of Balaam. In Acts, Jesus laid the seeds for us to later
identify Paul as the apostolic era Balaam. To repeat, first Jesus asks
Paul why Paul is persecuting Jesus. The donkey asked Balaam the same
question. He asked why was Balaam persecuting him. Second, Jesus said
to Paul that it is hard for Paul to keep moving forward against God's
goads. Likewise, Balaam's donkey was up against the goads of God's
angel. Jesus' words in the vision experience with Paul were well
chosen to invoke a precise parallel to the story of Balaam. Thus, we
could never miss the point in (Rev. 2:14). We thereby could identify
the NT Balaam.
### What Does It all Mean?
Paulunists apparently sense a problem if Balaam's story were ever told
in detail. They always identify Balaam as merely a false teacher or
someone who prophesied for money. But this misses Jesus' point.
Balaam is precisely the example, unique in Hebrew Scriptures, of an
enemy converted by a vision on a road, turned into a true spokesperson
of God, but who later apostasues by saying it is pennissible to eat
meat sacrificed to idols. Balaam precisely matches Paul in an uncanny
way despite millennia separating them.
Thus, in Paul's vision experience, God laid the groundwork for a
comparison to events two millennia earlier. What an amazing God we
have! Jesus specifically made sure the encounter with Paul would have
all the earmarks of the Balaam encounter:
* It would be on a road.
* There would be a divine vision.
* Jesus would ask why is Paul persecuting Him.
* Jesus would let Paul know it is hard to go up against the goads of God.
* The experience would turn Paul around to be a true spokesperson of God for a time.
* Finally, Paul would fall like Balaam did by teaching it was
permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols.
Of course, to understand this, you have to have ears to hear. (Rev. 2:29.)
In other words, God set in motion what happened on the Road to Moab,
just as He did on the Road to Damascus. Paul apparently indeed had the
experience he claims. That's why Jesus could cite the teaching of
Balaam as repeating itself in the apostolic era. Yet, to cement the
similarity, Jesus had to give us a crucial new similarity between
Balaam and Paul. By disclosing Balaam's idol meat teaching, Jesus in
(Rev. 2:14) suddenly made appear an extraordinary parallel between
Paul and Balaam that otherwise remained hidden.
Just as Jesus said Elijah was John the Baptist, "if you are willing to
receive it" (Matt. 11:14), Jesus is saying the teaching of Balaam that
deceives Christians is the teaching of Paul, "if you are willing to
receive it."
### What About Permission to Commit Fornication?
Jesus in (Rev. 2:14) says the Balaam of the apostolic era also taught
Christians that it is permissible "to commit fornication."
In the Hebrew Scripture, the word fornication meant primarily
adultery. In English, it has evolved into almost exclusively the
meaning of unwed sexual intercourse. The reason for this change in
meaning is because Paul used the synonym for this word in (1Cor. 7:2)
apparently to mean unwed sexual intercourse. However, in the Hebrew,
fornication's meaning differs from our own usage.
Brown-Driver-Brigg s Hebrew Dictionary defines the contexts for
fornication (Hebrew zanah ) as:
lal) to be a harlot, act as a harlot.
Ia2) to commit adultery
la3) to be a cult prostitute
la4) to be unfaithful (to God)
Thus, fornication in Hebrew is synonymous with adultery. (Out of this
arises metaphorical meanings such as lal, la3 and la4 above.) In turn,
adultery was sex with another man's wife. (Lev. 20:10). There is no
concept within zanah of 'to have sex among unwed partners.' One can
also see in context of (Matt. 5:32) that the Greek word tox
fornication, as Jesus intended it, had to have the underlying Hebrew
meaning of only adultery. Jesus says you can only put your wife away
if she committed zanah, translated in Greek as fornication but which
must mean she committed adultery. Thus, because the word fornication
in Hebrew here did not mean sexual relations among unwed people which
meaning mismatches the context, we know Jesus' original spoken
language only meant adultery. This then was innocently translated as
fornication but is too broad in meaning.
3. The debate has raged whether the New Testament word porneia had the
primary meaning of unwed sexual intercourse, or the more limited
meaning of sexual intercourse with a cultic or commercial
prostitute. It seems clear that Paul's usage was intended to mean
unwed sexual intercourse. Jesus' usage in (Matt. 5:32) can only mean
adultery. The word has many broad meanings in Greek, but the
corresponding word in Hebrew {zanah) meant adultery' and
metaphorically prostitution.
So if we rely upon the primary Hebrew meaning of the word fornication
- adultery, let's ask whether Paul ever pennitted an act of adultery
which Jesus specifically prohibited? The answer is yes. It is a most
disturbing contradiction.
This involves Paul's statement on remarriage. Paul says a wife whose
"unbelieving [husband] leaves ( chorizo )" 4 her is "not under
bondage." (1Cor. 7:15). No divorce certificate was issued, yet she is
not under bondage to her departing husband. Almost every commentator
agrees the context means she is free to remarry without committing
adultery. (Calvin, Clarke, Gill, etc.) Yet, as Paul describes the
situation, the Christian woman was not abandoned because she committed
adultery. Nor had she received a certificate of divorce.
However, Jesus said in the Greek version of (Matt. 5:32) the husband
who unjustifiably leaves the wife "causes her to commit adultery" if
she remarries. In the Hebrew version of the same verse, Jesus says
instead that a husband who leaves a wife without giving a certificate
of divorce causes the wife, if she remarries, to commit adultery. 5
4. This was not the word used for divorce in the NT: apoluo. Chorizo
means to place room between, depart, or separate. (Strong's # 5563.)
5. There is an apparent corruption of the Greek version of Matthew in
this verse, in the Hebrew version, what Jesus is saying is when a man
leaves a wife without a bill of divorcement, and the woman remarries,
she commits adultery as does the one who marries her. In The Hebrew
Gospel of Matthew by Howard, (Matt. 5:32) reads in part: "And I say to
you that everyone who leaves his wife is to give her a bill of
divorce." Then it goes on to treat the violation of this principle as
the cause of adultery, both by the man leaving and the wife who
remarries another. The Hebrew appears more correct because
(Deut. 24:2) allows a woman who receives a certificate of divorce to
remarry. However, even if the Greek version of 5:32 were correct,
Jesus is merely saying that if the certificate were improperly
delivered to the wife, without her being guilty of an unseemly thing
as required by (Deut. 24:1), the divorce was invalid and the right of
remarriage under (Deut. 24:2) does not exist. This makes sense even if
Jesus never said it.
Whether you accept the Greek or Hebrew version of Matthew, Paul says
the Christian woman who both was unjustifiably abandoned and abandoned
without a divorce certificate does not commit adultery by
remarrying. However, Jesus says she absolutely does commit adultery
under either of those circumstances. Since adultery is synonymous with
fornication in Jesus' original vernacular, Paul permits the very act
of fornication which Jesus prohibits.
Incidentally, if the Greek text were correct, Jesus would be resolving
a dispute under the divorce Law on what unseemly thing was necessary
to justify a bill of divorce. 6 Yet, if the Hebrew version of
(Matt. 5:32) were correct, Jesus was re-invigorating the requirement
of using a bill of divorce, which apparently had fallen into
disuse. Men apparently were abandoning their wives and simply
remarrying with impunity. Whether the Greek or Hebrew text is correct,
Jesus was reinvigorating the Law of Moses, and as Campenhausen
explains, Jesus "reaffirmed" it. (For more on the fact that Matthew
was originally written in Hebrew and then translated into Greek, see
[[JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]].
Regardless, what remains the problem is that under either text
tradition, Paul permits the very act of fornication/adultery that
Jesus prohibits.
### What About Paul s Anti-Fornication Statements?
If we ignore the prior example, could Paul ever possibly be faulted
for permitting fornication? Didn't Paul oppose fornication, as he says
in (Gal. 5:19) that those who "practice fornication" shall not
"inherit the kingdom of God"? 8
6. The Bible required ''some unseemly thing" for divorce. (Deut. 24:1). Hillel thought any trivial reason qualified, while Shammai believed adultery alone justified divorce. ("Adultery," International Standard Bible Encyclopedia.) In the Greek version of (Matt. 5:32), Jesus would be siding with Shammai's view.
7. Hans van Campenhausen, The Formation of the Christian Bible
(J. A. Baker, trans.) (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1972) at 13.
Yes, (Rev. 2:14) still could apply to Paul. First, most Paulunist
commentators dispute Paul means to threaten Christians in
(Gal. 5:19). (Clarke, Barnes, Gill.) Because of Paul's other teachings
of eternal security, these commentators claim (Gal. 5:19) means only
unsaved persons who engage in fornication are threatened with
exclusion. Thus, they contend Galatians 5:19 is not a message to
Christians. Hence this verse does not prove what Paul taught
Christians about the consequences of fornication.
8. This is Paul's strongest anti-fornication statement. His other
negative statements are weaker. For example, Paul in 1Cor. 6:18 says
"Flee fornication...he that commits fornication sins against his own
body." This is not very strong because Paul did not say you sin
against God; you sin against yourself. This means it affects only
yourself, giving you room to permit it. Again Paul in 1Cor. 7:1 says
it is "good for a man not to touch a woman." In context, the concern
is it can lead to fornication. Yet, again, Paul is not strong. He does
not make the prohibition direct or threaten a serious loss. Again in
(1 Thess. 4:3) ASV, Paul says "the will of God" is that "you abstain
from fornication." Paul goes on to say that if you "reject this"
(i.e., 'annul this'), you "reject God who gives His Holy Spirit to
you." (1Thess. 4:8). This appears strong-to threaten loss of
salvation for fornication by a Christian. However, the Pauline
commentators explain the context does not justify this is talking
about fornication in its broad sense. The New American Standard
(Protestant-Lockman Foundation) commentary in the footnotes says that
the word translated "fornication" or "immorality" here really only
means "unlawful marriage." It explains "many [incorrectly] think that
this passage deals with a variety of moral regulations (fornication,
adultery...)." It then explains this passage deals in this context
instead with "a specific problem, namely marriage within degrees of
consanguinity...." (See reprint of this commentary at
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/lthessalonians/lthessalonians4.htm).
Furthermore, most Paulunists find Paul's doctrine of eternal security
trumps this verse. Because this verse threatens God will deny you for
the sin of "fornication" (as translated), this must be directed at a
nonbeliever. It does not say the person has received the Holy Spirit
yet. Otherwise, Paul would be contradicting himself that salvation
does not depend on what you do. ((Rom. 4:4).) Thus, this is read to be
a warning to a non-believer, not a believer. As a result, while 1
Thess. 4:3, 8 at first appears strongly against fornication,
Paulunists interpret it so it does not apply to anything but to a very
specific consanguinity issue or not to a Christian at all.
### What About Paul's Anti-Fornication Statements?
However, this view is unsatisfactory because clearly Paul's warning in
(Gal. 5:19) is intended for Christians. The Book of Galatians is
addressed to genuine believers (Gal 1:8-9). In Galatians 5:13, Paul
refers to those addressed in (Gal. 5:13-26) as brethren. Furthermore,
in (Gal. 6:1), Paul again refers to those being warned as brethren.
This has led other Paulunists to admit that Paul is warning Christians
in (Gal. 5:19-21). However, they still have a response that permits a
Christian to commit fornication without losing their inheritance in
heaven. They claim Paul means that fornicating Christians (a) only are
at risk if they practice fornication and (b) if so, they only risk
losing a reward (i.e., sharing ruling authority in heaven.)
They point to Paul's use of the term "practice" in (Gal. 5:21). They
insist Paul means that occasional fornication by a Christian is
permissible. 9 Paul's words are "they who practice such things [ e.g
., fornication] shall not inherit the kingdom of God." Paul's threat
does not intend to warn a Christian who engages in occasional
fornication that they should fear the loss of salvation. 10
John MacArthur is a major voice of modern evangelical
Christianity. His position reflects this.
9. James, by contrast, says a single act breaks all the law. ((Jas. 2:13).)
10. Paul's occasional-practice distinction is at variance to the Hebrew Scriptures. The Law says it only takes one act of adultery or murder to be deemed worthy of death. (Lev. 20:10, (Num. 35:16); (Ezek. 33:18).)
Some people wonder if that verse means a Christian can lose his
salvation if he has ever done any of those things. Although the
Authorized Version says 'they who do such things shall not inherit the
kingdom of God,' the Greek word for do is prasso, which means 'to
practice.' It is a verb that speaks of habitual practice rather than
occasional doing. Thus, the verse refers to those who habitually
practice such things as an expression of their characters. The word of
God bases its evaluation of a person's character not on his infrequent
actions, but on his habitual actions, for they demonstrate his true
character. The people who habitually perform the works of the flesh
will not inherit the Kingdom because they are not God's people.
Some Christians may do some of those things infrequently, but that
doesn't mean they will forfeit the full salvation of the Kingdom of
God. Rather they will receive divine discipline now and forfeit some
of their heavenly rewards. 11
MacArthur thus concedes Paul's threat in (Gal. 5:19) is only for a
person who practices fornication. MacArthur says a true Christian will
never practice this, and thus is never threatened actually with loss
of salvation. A true Christian at most will occasionally commit
fornication. The Christian who does so has an eternal destiny as safe
and secure as the Christian who resists all acts of fornication.
In the quote above, MacArthur then adds to Paul's words to make Paul
appear to say fornication is not entirely permissible for a
Christian. Paul does not ever say anything anywhere about Christian
fornicators receiving divine disciple. That is John MacArthur's
hopeful addition.
11.John MacArthur, Liberty in Christ, reprinted at
http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/sg 1669.htm .
Putting this unfounded addition to one side, what is still clear is
MacArthur admits Paul does not intend to alarm Christians who
"infrequently" commit fornication that they have anything serious to
concern themselves about. Paul's warning in (Gal. 5:19) does not apply
to warn a Christian who occasionally fornicates. Thus, MacArthur can
reassure such Christians that heaven awaits them despite committing
unrepentant occasional fornication. MacArthur says God would never
condemn you for occasional fornication, citing Paul's words in (Gal. 5:21).
Furthermore, Dillow insists that even if a Christian practices
fornication, Paul does not mean to threaten anything more than loss of
rewards. Dillow argues that (Gal. 5:19) and the comparable (1Cor. 6:9)
mean by threatening the loss of an inheritance of the kingdom to
threaten only a loss of rewards. The argument is a forced-one,
stretching over chapters 3-5 of Dillow, Reign of the Servant
Kings. Yet, if this is how Paulunists construe Paul to keep him
squared with his faith-alone doctrine, then I can rely upon Dillow to
conclude Paul never puts a serious threat over the Christian who
practices fornication. And when I combine MacArthur's distinction with
Dillow's views, I can say Paul never threatens at all a Christian who
occasionally commits fornication.
### Paul Is Boldly Claimed To Teach Fornication Is Permissible
Now that we see how Paulunists dismiss the threats in (Gal. 5:19-21),
it should come as no surprise that mainstream Christians declare Paul
says a Christian can commit fornication, not repent, and expect to be
saved. Galatians 5:19-21 never enters their analysis.
They argue strenuously that Paul permits fornication, apparently to
make their point more blatant about Paul's doctrine of grace. To prove
Paul permits fornication, they rely upon three independent proofs.
1. Paul's Says Fornication is Permissible But It Might Be Unprofitable
First, Paulunists say Paul declared the Law abolished, and that in its
place the new criteria is: "all things are lawful but not all things
are expedient" (1Cor. 6:12). Paul thereby implied it was permissible
you could commit fornication. The test is expediency; it is no longer
whether it is absolutely prohibited.
This reasoning is bluntly stated by Bob George. Mr. George is an
author of numerous mainstream theological books on eternal
security. Over the past several years, he has been a national radio
talk host whose daily topic is often eternal security. You have been
able to hear him on the radio in Los Angeles every week day. He
bluntly said in a 1993 broadcast that Paul says it is permissible to
commit fornication:
And as Paul said, All things are permissible, but not all things
are profitable.' So is committing fornication permissible? YES. Is
it profitable? No, it isn't. 12
George is not alone. John Mac Arthur, a giant of modem evangelical
Christianity, says the same thing. In addressing whether fornication
is permissible in the article quoted on page 143, Mac Arthur never
once cites any absolute prohibition on acts of fornication from the
Hebrew Scriptures. Instead, he quotes Paul's axiom "all things are
lawful...." Then MacArthur tries to prove fornication is not
expedient. Fornication hanns you, it enslaves you, etc. He tries to
squeeze out a negative answer using Paul's principle, "All things are
permissible, but not all things are profitable."
Thus, the starting point is that fornication is not wrong per se. You
have to look at its expediency, i. e. , its costs versus its
benefits. Then if the costs outweigh the benefits, it is wrong.
12. Bob George, People to People (Radio Talk Show), 11/16/93.
13. John MacArthur, Back to Basics: The Presentation of My Life: Sacrifice at
http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/1390.htm (last accessed 2005).
Thus, George and MacArthur reflect Paul's paradigm shift. The Law is
gone. In its place a new analysis is applied. Under it, fornication is
permissible but not necessarily profitable. A strong case can be made
about its unhealthy results, etc. Therefore George and MacArthur say
'don't do it.' This is an antinomian (anti-Law) shift away from simply
knowing that the Law says it is wrong. In its place, we now have a
cost-benefit analysis whether fornication works for you.
Under Paul's balancing test, we can see the result just as easily
could be that fornication is more beneficial for me. As long as the
guilt from violating the Law is erased, then I do no wrong if I think
"fornication" works for me. As long as I applied a cost-benefit
analysis of what is more expedient, and I reasonably justify it, it is
no sin. For example, if I love someone and commit "fornication" with
her, and it suits our mutual needs to ignore the legalities of the
situation, then in a very cogent way, I have justified fornication in
a manner that passes the cost-benefit analysis Paul offers. "All
things are lawful" and in this scenario it is more "expedient" to not
be hyper-technical about our behavior.
This example raises the dilemma the church faces today: it desperately
wants to give a cost-benefit analysis for this scenario to steer
people away from such fornication because Paul removed the ability to
cite the Law itself as reason enough. Consequently, the modern
Pauline-Christian analysis of right-and-wrong starts from "all things
are permissible," including fornication. Then by applying the costs
versus the benefits test, their analysis tries to steer people to an
outcome parallel to the Law.
Thus, clearly Paul's saying all things are pennissible includes
fornication. It is only to be abandoned if the costs outweigh the
benefits. However, there are going to be times where the benefits of
fornication will outweigh the costs.
That is why Paul is still the leading candidate to be the Balaam
figure of the New Testament era mentioned in (Rev. 2:14).
### Paul's Doctrine of Grace Means Fornication is Permissible
Other Paulunists defend that Paul teaches fornication is permissible
with no significant penalty for a Christian on another ground. This is
Paul's doctrine of grace. All your future acts of fornication are
already forgiven when you became a Christian, they insist. Such a sin
might cause the loss of rewards, but there is no loss of something you
cannot afford to lose. Luther defends this idea:
[[N]]o sin will separate us from the Lamb, even though we commit
fornication and murder a thousand times a day. 14
Zane Hodges, a leading evangelical writer, similarly says:
Paul does not say...his readers should question their salvation if
they become involved in sexual impurity . 15
Unless these mainstream writers are wrong, Paul is teaching a grace
that pennits sexual immorality with no serious loss. At least there is
no penalty.
14. Martin Luther, Luther Works, I Letters (American Ed.) Vol. 48 at 282.
15. Zane Hodges, Absolutely Free! (Dallas, TX: Redencion Viva, 1989) at 94.
What about loss of rewards? Paul never says expressly you lose a
reward for fornication. But assuming he did say this, if anyone loses
a reward that does not affect salvation, it is certainly not a
penalty. It is not even a set back. You simply do not move ahead. In
fact, you will have eternity to overcome the loss of initial
rewards. It is no problem at all. How many would not trade a few lost
rewards you can live without to take today the delectable pleasures of
fornication? In sum, Paul's grace doctrines are read to pennit
fornication with no serious consequence or penalties. This second
proof reconfirms that (Rev. 2:14) is Jesus' direct identification of
Paul as the one bringing the "teaching of Balaam."
### The Sexually Immoral Man in 1Cor. 5 Was Never Lost
As the third and final proof that Paul says fornication is
permissible, Paulunists actually cite (1Cor. 5:5). They insist this
passage proves that a sexually immoral Christian is never at risk of
losing salvation.
In that passage, Paul deals with a sexually immoral member of the
Corinthian church who lives with his father's wife, his
step-mother. If the father is alive, this is incest. Paul decrees:
"deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that
the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." (1Cor. 5:5.)
Dillow contends Paul ordered the man was to be expelled and then
killed. Paul's wording therefore proves that if the man were killed in
his unrepentant state that Paul meant this carnal Christian was still
saved. Dillow, whose book is now treated as required reading at many
evangelical seminaries, explains:
An extreme example of the 'consistently carnal Christian' seems to
be found in (1Cor. 5:5) .... Paul hands this carnal Christian over
to physical death, but he notes that he will be saved at the day
of the Lord Jesus. 16
16.Dillow, Reign of the Servant Kings (1993) at 321.
Thus, Dillow means that Paul wants the man killed immediately. (Paul's
conduct shows disregard for the civil rights protected in the Law of
the accused.) Dillow understands Paul's other words as assuring us
that the man's death in this situation means the man will enjoy
salvation despite his unrepentant and consistent sin. Thus, this verse
proves eternal security, Dillow claims.
Dillow is not an aberrant view of this passage. The mainstream idea of
once saved always saved boldly proclaims this passage teaches a
Christian is free to commit repetitive unrepentant fornication without
the slightest threat to their salvation.
The man who had 'his father's wife'-a terrible sin-didn't lose his
salvation thereby. (Dave Hunt.) 18

65
JWO_07_02_strongestverseintheBibleforoncesaved,alwayssavedandIwouldnotdisagree.(R.T._0029.md Normal file

@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
## Some have regarded (1Cor. 5:5) as the strongest verse in the Bible for once saved, always saved and I would not disagree.
Many commentators try to avoid what Dillow so gladly affirms. They
argue Paul did not mean the person should be killed. However, the
early church fathers correctly understood Paul's command was to kill
the man. Tertullian said Paul was invoking the Hebrew Scripture's
familiar "judicial process" whereby a "wicked person being put out of
their midst" was done by the "destruction of the flesh." (Tertullian,
Against Marcion. Book 5, ch. VII.) This is evident in Paul's language
about purging. It was taken directly from the death penalty laws in
the Mosaic Law, e.g., (Deut. 17:7), 21:21, 22:21. Furthermore, Paul uses
the language of a judicial officer rendering a verdict in 1 Cor.5:3,
which a death sentence would require. This incident reveals a flaw in
Paul's ideas that all the Law was abrogated, even its civil rights to
protect the accused. Under the Law, a hearing was necessary where two
eye witnesses tell the judge the persons were caught in the very
sexual act prohibited in the Law. No inference was permitted in
capital cases. (Deut. 17:7; cf John 8:4). Second, the witnesses in an
incest case with a stepmother had to confirm the father was alive at
the time of the act. Otherwise, as some Rabbis pointed out, the act
was not precisely prohibited by the Law. Then, in strict compliance
with the Law, Paul should have required the two witnesses to be the
first to throw stones. (Deut. 17:7; John 8:4 et seq.) Paul instead
presumptuously declares the death penalty over an accused without
hearing testimony and questioning the circumstances. Paul's abrogation
of the Law thus cut out barriers against precipitous actions by those
in authority. Paul took full-advantage of a freedom he gave himself
from the Law of Moses to ignore civil rights protected in the Law.
Kendall, Once Saved Always Saved (Chicago: Moody Press, 1985) at 156.)
In spite of the sin of fornication, Paul still regarded the person as
a saved man. (Gromacki, Salvation is Forever (Chicago: Moody Press, 1976) at 138.)
If Dillow and these writers are correct (and they are accepted as
correct by mainstream evangelical Christianity which Moody Press
typifies), then Paul taught a carnal sexually immoral and unrepentant
fornicating Christian has nothing significant to lose. Paul is
supposedly saying a Christian can commit even incest with his
step-mother and be saved all the while. Thus, of course, the same must
be true of "consistently unrepentant fornicating Christians."
### Recap: How Mainstream Christianity Proves Paul Teaches A Christian May Fornicate
Accordingly, mainstream Christianity offers several proofs that Paul
teaches it is permissible for a Christian to commit fornication
although it may not be expedient:
* The Law is abrogated.
* If one said fornication were strictly impermissible, that is not
only Legalism, but also it implies a works-salvation.
* Paul only warns loss of rewards in (Gal. 5:19) if a Christian
practices fornication. (Dillow.) Thus, no rewards nor salvation are
lost for occasional fornication; and
* Paul's language in (1Cor. 5:5) implies consistent acts of
unrepentant incest do not even threaten loss of salvation, so
practicing unrepentant fornication cannot possibly pose such a threat.
18. Dave Hunt, CIB Bulletin (Camarillo, CA: Christian Information Bureau) (June 1989) at 1.

390
JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033.md Normal file

@ -0,0 +1,390 @@
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
## Does Jesus Share Salvation Doctrine with Paul
### Introduction
Did Jesus and Paul have any doctrine in common on salvation? Some cite Luke 7:47 and others John 3:16. The Lucan passage is infrequently cited as compared to John 3:16. Luke's passage is viewed as potentially being consistent with Paul while John's passage is widely thought to be the same as Paul's gospel message. However, on close scrutiny, even these two passages of Jesus are indeed in conflict with Paul's salvation theology. Let's see why.
### Luke 7:47
Jesus encountered a woman who loved Him much, washing His feet with her tears. Jesus declares her sins forgiven. He tells us why in ways that when Paulunists look closely at the passage, they cringe. Can Jesus forgive someone because they love much, and not on faith alone? Nevertheless, we read in Luke 7:47:
Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.
(ASV].
The word-for-word translation of the literal Greek of the key phrase is: "released are her many sins because she
loved much." the consequence of her loving much, which is causing the tree to produce the root, and not the root the tree [i.e., it would contradict Paul's views]. I have considered ioe here as having the sense of aeioe, therefore;... we must suppose her love was the effect of her being pardoned, not the cause of it.
However, to arrive at Adam Clarke's solution, you have to suppose a completely different Greek word is used to erase the causation between her love and Jesus 'forgiveness of sins. Clarke confesses this by suggesting a different Greek word would convey the meaning that fits Pauline doctrine.
Moreover, on close examination, the Greek is clear. The Greek conjunction underlying ''for she loved much" is hoti. Strong's #3754 says it means "causatively because " or can mean that. In this context, all the translations into English realize it has a causative sense. They render it for. Its more concrete synonym in English is because. The word hoti means because here, especially due to its clear placement in the sentence. To repeat, the literal Greek is: "released are her many sins because she loved much." Only the meaning because makes sense. The alternative meaning that would render the second part unintelligible.
Other commentators are so fraught with dismay they simply assert Jesus cannot mean what He says in Luke 7:47. Based on the presupposition of Paul's validity, they assert her great love was the "proof, not the reason for her forgiveness." (Robertson's Word Pictures.)
1. A more literal translation would also render the introductory charin as "for this reason'' rather than use the vague term wherefore'. "For this reason I am saying to you released are her many sins because she loved [aorist tense understand the clear meaning of words. The Christian who is barraged by the drum-beat of salvation by faith alone no longer senses the contradiction by Paul of Jesus. Any person free from this barrage can easily read Jesus' words and see the linguistic impossibility that both Paul and Jesus are saying the same thing. Thus, this galvanizing thumping on Paul's salvation themes has glued in place an adherence to Pauline teachings that actually contradict Jesus. Any slight questioning of the paradigm leads to firm and loud accusation that one is returning to Rome. The poor soul who holds up Jesus' words against Paul's is to be branded a heretic. Thus, repetition and social pressure has nullified our sense of a loyalty to Christ that should trump our loyalty to Paul. For these Paulunists, questioning Paul's validity has become non-sense. They assume the scholars and theologians have worked out what they themselves take no time to study. Social conditioning thereby has made Paul's doctrine, not Jesus' teachings, something that must be protected at all costs\ It is like brainwashing. You can hear it over and over, like a mantra.
The commentators' approach to solving the dilemma of Luke 7:47 is just one more example of this mantra. The Pauline commentators vigorously utter the textually-unsupportable notion that Jesus does not mean the love she had was the "cause of her remission" of sins. This would be works in addition to faith, they admit. It just cannot be viewed that way, they insist. causative reasons her sins were forgiven. Jesus contradicts Paul. The only way to save Paul is to repetitiously insist Jesus' words do not mean what they literally mean.
As a result of this torture of Jesus' words, the Pauline interpretation of this passage is that Jesus meant she was forgiven for no particular reason other than faith. Of course, Jesus gave faith a role too in her salvation. "Thy faith has saved you." (Luke 7:50). However, seeing faith as the sole reason for her forgiveness is wilful self-delusion. One is squeezing out of the passage only the one part that sounds like Paul. You are ignoring the causative statement glaring back at you that contradicts Pauline doctrine: "Released are her many sins because (hoti) she loved much." (Luke 7:47.)
The Uniqueness of Luke 7:50 in the Synoptics
What is most interesting is that in all of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke), this is the only passage where Jesus goes on to say someone is saved by faith. Jesus next says to the woman (Luke 7:50):
And he said unto the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee ; go in peace.
Yet, to repeat, the Greek is unmistakable that her love mixed with faith were the causative elements in "forgiveness" and "salvation." Jesus says she was forgiven and saved because "she loved much" and had "faith." Faith alone did not save this young woman!
We have more to say below on the strange fact that this is the only time in the Synoptic Gospels that faith is mentioned as having any positive Synoptic Gospels. The special purpose of John's Gospel and why believing is so often mentioned awaits discussion below.
One Paulunist confesses the Synoptics are anti-Paul, but then provides an odd explanation:
Ever notice that the first three gospels (the synoptic gospels) never explicitly speak of salvation through faith in Christ (except for [the
non-canonical] (Mark 16:16)). 2 In fact in those gospels when Jesus is asked the question,
'What must I do to have eternal life?' he responds with the Law -a performance based concept of righteousness. [It is not] the gospel of grace which is a faith based righteousness, which is...found in Paul's writings [such] as in Romans. Why the difference?
I infer that the synoptic gospels were primarily to prepare people to hear the gospel of grace,
rather than actually presenting the gospel
message explicitly. 3
There is a much more likely reason the Synoptics are antagonistic to Paul's doctrines than the reason this Paulunist suggests. It is so self-evident that it is startling it is never considered: the Synoptics were written specifically to counter the message of Paul!
The fact nothing in them confirms Paul's gospel of grace is startling in its historical context. Paul's many letters certainly were in circulation for at least 10-20 years continu
2. For a discussion on the erroneous addition of (Mark 16:16), see page 29.
3. The Message: Attitudes of Faith prior to Matthew, Mark and Luke having been written. Standard dating of Mark is as early as 65 A.D. The Hebrew Matthew could be in the same vicinity. Luke was written between 64 and 85 A.D. 4 By comparison, Paul's letters date from the 40s through the 60s. Paul's writings were clearly in circulation for as much as twenty years when the Synoptics were written.
Yet, how strange that Matthew and Mark provide absolutely no confirmation of Paul's salvation-by-faith message! There is not a single passage in Matthew or Mark that links faith to salvation in a causal sense. This is true too of Luke, Paul's own companion. 5 The only half-exception is in Luke where the woman who bathes Jesus' feet in tears. Jesus says her "faith has saved her." However, as already noted, even there Luke's research led him to a passage that Jesus li nk s both her "great love" and "faith" to salvation and forgiveness, not faith alone. (See Luke 17:47-50, and discussion page 157 etseq.)
Thus, as surprising as this may sound, if you look only at the Synoptic Gospels ( i.e ., Matthew, Mark and Luke), Jesus actually never says that you obtain eternal life by faith alone. The only time faith is given a causal role, the
4. For a defense of early dating and discussion of standard dates, see John A.T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament had "faith." (Luke 7:47-50). Faith and love are mixed. They were the causative elements in her forgiveness and salvation, according to Jesus. Thus, rarely, if ever, does anyone look at the Synoptics for support of Paul's doctrine of salvation by faith, let alone his ideas of salvation by faith alone.
The Synoptics' Doctrine on Works Proves Its Agenda on Paul
What demonstrates beyond doubt that the Synoptics were designed to prove Paul as a false apostle is their strong emphasis on salvation by works beyond mere faith. As one author puts it, in the Synoptics, the "main path to salvation
that [[Jesus]] described is based on good works and attitudes." 6
In fact, in the Synoptics, the point is that mere faith without works is useless. There is no countervailing Pauline concept that if you once believed this somehow excuses or satisfies the requirement of repentance from sin, good works, and obedience to the Ten Commandments to enter "eternal life." For example:
* See (Matt. 25:31-46) (the sheep who do charity go to heaven; those goats who refuse go to hell).
* See (Matt. 19:17) and Luke 10:25-27 (Jesus' answer how to have eternal life starts with keeping the Law, quoting (Deut. 6:5) and (Lev. 19:18)).
* See (Matt. 5:20) (your righteousness must exceed the Pharisees to enter the kingdom of heaven which Jesus then defines as not cursing, lusting, etc.).
* See (Matt. 16:2) (Son of Man will come and "reward each according to his works").
* See (Mark 9:42-48) (better to cut off a body part causing you to sin and enter heaven maimed than to not repent of sin and go to hell whole).
6. SALVATION: According to the synoptic gospels cf. Matt.
13:42 the ensnared are thrown into the "fiery furnace" where there is weeping and gnashing).
* See (Matt. 13:3-23) and Luke 8:5-15 (those who "believe for a while" but in time of temptation fall away or who are choked and bring no fruit to completion are lost, but the one who in a good and noble heart brings forth fruit to completion in patient endurance is saved).
What About John's Gospel?
If we look at the context of John's very different recollections than those in the Synoptics, we will see the Apostle John had the same secondary objective as the Synoptics: to address the question of Paul.
### What About Faith in John s Gospel?
Luther once said that the "science of theology is nothing else but Grammar exercised on the words of the Holy
n
Spirit." Luther is correct that deciphering the Bible's meaning must start with the grammar of each particular verse. If you have the wrong grammatical construction, you do not have the intended meaning. Thus, for example, the correct meaning of John 3:16 is dependent on having the correct grammatical understanding of the verse.
If you look at John 3:16, when properly translated, it is not about salvation by faith. It is about endurance. It is about (Matt. 10:22:) "He who endures to the end shall be
7. Johann Brecht Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament (ed. A. Fausset) (trans. J. Bandinel, J. Bryce, W. Fletcher)(Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1866) at 1.44 (quoting Luther), as quoted in Alan J. Thompson, "The Pietist Critique of Inerrancy? J.A. Bengel's Gnomon as a Test Case," JETS pisteuo, meaning he who continues to believe/trust. The theme of John is that trust must endure for salvation to be realized, not that a one-time faith saves.
One can easily see this by reading Young's Literal Translation of John's Gospel. Young renders each Greek present active participle of believe as "is believing." (John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24; 6:35,40,47; 7:38; 11:25-26; 12:11,
37, 44, 46; 14:12; 17:20). 8 The form is believing is known as the English Present Continuous Tense of believe.
For an extensive explanation why Young's Literal reads this way, it is in Appendix A: Greek Issues. (A short synopsis will appear below.)
Thus, all these verses in John's Gospel have been mistranslated in the KJV and NIV to be talking about salvation caused by a one-time verbal or mental acknowledgment {believes) of Jesus as savior. This translation matched Paul's salvation formula in (Rom. 10:9). Paul used the Greek aorist tense for believes in Romans 10:9, which corresponds to a one-time faith. However, John's literal words in the continuous tense-the Greek present active tense -have nothing to do with a one-time action-the Greek aorist tense. The meaning of John 3:16 is in the true translation of the verb tense: continues to believe or trust. All who keep on trusting in
Jesus "should" be saved, says John 3:16. 9 It is about endurance in trust, not salvation by faith.
In fact, one could interpret John's gospel as being intentionally anti-Pauline.
For consider that when you compare John to the Synoptics ( i.e ., Matthew, Mark and Luke), Jesus never utters any statement in the Synoptics comparable to John about faith. Why was John summoning this message about pisteuo from
8. To verify the Greek verb's grammatical usage, download the
Interlinear Scripture Analyzer 10 The Synoptics had not enough impact
on the budding church to expose the stark difference between Paul and
Jesus. Some Christians were still persuaded that Paul had the true
gospel. Thus, John's gospel was the Holy Spirit's inspiration to John
to fix this, by showing Jesus' true doctrines on faith and believing.
In other words, John was remembering all the times Jesus used the word pistis or its relative pisteuo (the verb form, to believe or trust ) when linked somehow to eternal life. (Of course, Jesus spoke in Aramaic or Hebrew, but John was translating to Greek.) This way we could make a comparison between Jesus and how Paul uses the similar word in relation to salvation. No one has offered a more reasonable explanation why John reads so differently than the Synoptics. There was something pressuring John. It was the question of Paul.
Thus, John must have asked the Holy Spirit to call to his mind every instance Jesus mentioned faith as somehow causally related to salvation. This way we could examine Paul's teaching in this regard. This produced a Gospel with a very different set of recollections which were not as important to the original Gospel writers.
### How John's Gospel Addresses the Issue of Faith and Salvation
So how does John answer the key question whether a one-time faith or a
one-time confession saves as Paul teaches in (Rom. 10:9)? Does John
back Paul up? Or does John expose Paul as a false teacher?
10. See Paul or James ' Church: Wiio Was The Most Successful
Evangelist? faith/trust is mentioned as causally connected to eternal
life in the Gospel of John, it is in a verb form of the present active
in Greek. (See John 3:16, 5:24, 6:35, 37, 40, 47 etc.) Every time!
Thus, John's Gospel is repetitious on the issue of salvation. This is
for emphasis by John. He could not recall it once said any other
way. What does this imply?
A short synopsis follows which summarizes the discussion in Appendix A. Greek grammar makes John's point unmistakable.
### Synopsis of Appendix A on the Greek Present Active
First, unlike English, Greek has a specific verb tense for a one-time
action. It is kn own as the aorist tense. This can be rendered in
English by use of the English Simple Present Tense, e.g., "believes."
We can read "believes" in English to mean a one time expression of
faith. 11 English Simple Present Tense thus can correspond to the
aorist participle in Greek.
Paul in (Rom. 10:9) uses the aorist tense to signify salvation is by
one time events: "if ever ( ean ) you confess (<aorist active
subjunctive) by your mouth that Jesus is Lord and [if] you [ever]
believe ( aorist active subjunctive) that God raised Him from the
dead, you shall be saved." (This is my literal word-for-word
translation.) Thus, Paul is using the Greek aorist verb tense. He
means you are saved if you ever once confess and believe. No
continuity is implied in verse nine.
11. For this reason, Charles Stanley, the head of the Baptists, says
"believes" in John 3:16 (which is the KJV and NIV translation)
means a one-time faith. Stanley explains "believes"-the English
simple present tense of to believe -can mean a one-time event that
does not have to continue. From this, Stanley deduces a one-time
faith saves. (Charles Stanley, Eternal Security of the Believer
exact opposite meaning from the aorist tense is conveyed by the
Greek present indicative active or present participle active. In
Greek, these two forms of the present active tense mean the action
is continuing. It is best translated into English using "continues
to" or "keeps on" in front of the English gerund. For example, "he
who continues to believe" or "he who keeps on trusting" is the
better translation.
This distinction is confessed by leading Calvinists who are staunch
Paulunists. Dr. James White is a wellrespected Calvinist. He writes
about the verb tense in John 6:35-45 in his book Drawn by the Father:
A Summary of John 6:35-45 (Reformation Press: 1999) at pages 10-11:
Throughout this passage an important truth is presented that again might be missed by many English translations. When Jesus describes the one who comes to him and who believes in him [3:16, 5:24, 6:35, 37, 40, 47, etc.], he uses the present tense to describe this coming, believing, or, in other passages, hearing or seeing. The present tense refers to a continuous, on-going action. The Greek contrasts this kind of action against the aorist tense, which is a point action, a single action in time that is not on-going.... The wonderful promises that are provided by Christ are not for those who do not truly and continuously believe. The faith that saves is a living faith, a faith that always looks to Christ as Lord and Savior.
12.See Appendix A: Greek Issues for a full discussion. Young's Literal
Translation always renders the Greek present indicative active or the
present participle active with "is...ing" (the gerund form of the
verb). This is the English present continuous tense. It is a
satisfactory rendering. However, to catch the nuance of the Greek, the
NIV was correct to use "keeps on" or "continues to..." as it did so
often. However, only Youngs Literal i.e ., "believes") rather than the
English Continuous Present (, i.e ., "is believing" or "keeps on
believing"). The KJV thus conveyed a completely opposite meaning than
John intended. The KJV English translation corresponds to the Greek
aorist tense of (Rom. 10:9), not the Greek present active tense of
Apostle John. The KJV corresponds to a teaching of a onetime faith
should save rather than an ongoing trust doing so.
The KJV was either protecting Paul from the implication of John's
gospel or committed a gross blunder. The New International Version
(NIV) fixed the KJV translation of the Greek present active in over
seventeen instances by adding to the verb clause "keeps on" or
"continues to" each time. The only principal time the NIV would not
correct the translation of the Greek present active was when the Greek
word for believes was involved. The NIV left us still in the dark on
the most important doctrine of all: salvation. There is no defense for
this inconsistency.
The NIV thereby held back the true meaning of John 3:16 is keeps on or
continues to believe/trust. The NIV was unwilling to inform us that
John contradicts Paul. We are actually being misled by the NIV to
believe John was agreeing with Paul that a one-time faith saves! If
this were true, John in John 3:16 would have used the aorist tense
just as Paul does in (Rom. 10:9). It did not happen.
When the translation is repaired, other verses in John take on
diametrically different meanings as well. For example, another
Paulunist favorite is John 5:24. Instead of a onetime faith causing
you to have passed from death to life, it now depends on continuous
trust on your part. John 5:24 correctly translated reads:
13.See Appendix A: Greek Issues [present active indicative) the one who keeps on listening [present participle active) to my teaching and keeps on believing [present participle active) in the one who sent me [aorist active participle) keeps on having [present active indicative) eternal life and does not come [present middle deponent) into condemnation but has departed [perfect active indicative) out of death into life.
You can verify the verb tenses by downloading the free Interlinear Scripture Analyzer.
Thus, while Paul says a one-time ( aorist ) belief in certain facts saves you ((Rom. 10:9)) and now there is no condemnation (Romans 8:1), a contrary meaning arises from John 5:24. There is no condemnation for those who keep on listening to Jesus and who keep on trusting/believing in the Father. In other words, John is remembering words of Jesus at total odds with Paul. Yet, our KJV and NIV lead us to believe there is agreement between Paul and Jesus by using in John 5:24 hears and believes. These are in the English Simple Present form. They are not in the English Continuous Present. Both the KJV and NIV translations use a tense that corresponds to Paul's aorist tense in Romans 10:9, not John's actual present active tense. It is completely obvious when you peak under the covers and look at the verb tenses. Now anyone can do this by using the Interlinear Scripture Analyzer free for download. The emperor has no clothes any more.
If you are tempted to throw out John's Gospel now that you know its
intent is anti-Pauline, it is pointless to do so. You would also have
to get rid of Luke. For the verb pisteuo was used in the same manner
as John in Luke's account of the Parable of the Sower. Jesus in this
account uses believing in the identical manner as in John's
Gospel. For in Luke, Jesus identifies a believing negative manner. The
Parable of the Sower teaches that the failure to continue in faith or
trust leads to becoming lost. It never says faith that later fails
saves. In fact, the only person saved among the seeds is the one who
produces fruit to completion. Thus, in this parable Jesus addresses
faith and works in a way totally at odds with Paul. Now please note
this is not a parable that Paulunists can avoid by claiming its
meaning remains a mystery. Jesus explained its symbolic meaning in
excruciating detail.
Let's analyze with care the Parable of the Sower.
The first seed never believes because Satan snatches the word from his
heart before he can believe "and be saved." (Luke 8:12). Unlike the
first seed, the second seed ( i.e ., the seed on rocky soil) (Luke
8:6) "sprouted." Jesus explains this means the second seed "received
the word with joy" and "believes for a while." (Luke 8:13.)
In Luke 8:13, the Greek tense for "believes" is the present indicative
active of pisteuo. Jesus is saying the seed on rocky ground "keeps on
believing." Jesus then adds an adverb meaning "for a while." In this
context, the present indicative is indistinguishable from the present
participle active of pisteuo which is used unifonnly in John's Gospel. 14
14.The Greek word for believes in Luke 8:13 is pisteuosin. This is one
form of the present participle active when a masculine dative is
involved. Pisteuosin is also a present indicative active if the
subject is a third person plural. (Walcott-Hort online at
Perseus.com.) The subject pronoun in 8:13 is hoi, a masculine plural
noun. Thus, believes in Luke 8:13 is the present indicative active. By
comparison, believe in John 3:16 is pisteuon, which is the present
participle active because the subject is a masculine nominative. This
difference in believes between Luke 8:13 and John 3:16 is not
substantive. Both correspond to a continuous tense. See Appendix A:
(i.e., shriveled up). (Luke 8:6). Jesus explains this means it fell
into "temptation" (sinned) and "fell away." (Luke 8:13, aphistami.)
Why did it fall away? It shriveled up "because it lacked moisture."
(Luke 8:6). The Greek of this verb was present active as well, meaning
"it did not continue to have moisture." Jesus explains again why,
saying the seed "did not have root." (Luke 8:13). The verb, however,
is again present active in Greek ( ecousin ) and means "it did not
keep holding on to the Root."
Table captionTABLE 4. Parable of the Sower: Second Seed
| Second Seed Metaphor | Jesus' Explanation |
| sprouted | received the word with joy\\continued to believe for a while |
| did not continue to have moisture | did not keep holding to the root |
| withered away (shriveled up) | tempted, fell away |
Thus, Jesus is saying that someone who received the word with Joy,
"continued to believe for a while," and thus "sprouted," then fell
into temptation. This person ends up withered away (dead). Dead means
no life. No life means no eternal life. The reason is they "did not
keep holding to the Root" and so they "fell away." This was a lesson
about faith lacking endurance and being destroyed by sin
(temptation). Thus, it is a negative message about faith.
![Picture #37](images/img_0037.png)
![Picture #38](images/img_0038.png)
![Picture #39](images/img_0039.png)
you are opposite of the saints who "keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus." (Rev. 14:12). By falling into temptation you fail to "keep...the commandments...and faith of Jesus" and become lost.
There is no missing this point if you see the precise parallel to (Rev. 2:4-5).
There Jesus tells the Ephesians they have "left your first love," and
"art fallen," so "repent" and do your "first works."
Compare this then to the second seed in the Parable of the Sower. The
second seed had "joy" in the word at first, like the Ephesians had
"love at first." The second seed "sprouted" and thus had "first
works," just like the Ephesians. The second seed then sinned and "fell
away," just as the Ephesians "art fallen." The solution, as always, is
"repent," as Jesus told the Ephesians in (Rev. 2:4-5) and do your
"first works."
Now who is the only saved person in the Parable of the Sower? It is
the fourth seed, which is the only one who brings forth fruit
or...dare I use the synonym...works.
The fourth seed is the good and noble heart that is saved. To
understand the fourth seed, we must see the contrast to the third
seed. The KJV says the third seed "brings no fruit to perfection."
(Luke 8:14, KJV.) However, the translation is lacking. The third seed
is choked by thorns ( i.e ., the worries of this world) and so does
not telesphorousin. This Greek word combines teleos, which means end,
with phore, which means to produce, bring forth. Together, the two
words literally mean "to complete" or "bring to a finish." Telesphore
is often used with regard to fruit, pregnant women or
animals. (Robertson s Word Pictures.) Telesphorousin is the present
active fonn in Greek. So it means "did not keep on producing to the
end" or "did not continue to the finish." The idea of "bringing fruit
to perfection'' is incorrect. The word "fruit" is also not actually in
this verse. Completion, not perfection, is in view. They did not
telephorousin, i.e., i.e., incomplete. ( Cfr. KJV "works not
perfect"). Failure to complete your works leads to a loss of
salvation.
Knowing the flaws of the third seed opens our understanding of the
fourth seed's reason for being saved. The fourth seed, by contrast,
"fell into good ground, and grew, and brought forth fruit a
hundredfold." (Luke 8:8). Listen to Jesus' explanation of why this
person alone among the four is ultimately saved:
And that in the good ground, these are such as in an honest and good
heart, having heard the word, hold it fast, and bring forth fruit with
patience. (Luke 8:15 ASV).
The Greek verb for "hold it fast" is in the Greek present active
again. It means "keep on holding down." It is not hold "fast," but
hold "down." (. Robertson s Word Pictures.) This is a significant
point. As Jesus tells the parable, the devil swooped down and stole
the word from the first sewn seed, depriving it of salvation. By
continuing to hold down the word, the fourth seed is guarding
itself. It is doing everything possible to keep Satan from snatching
the word away. It is the same meaning behind John 8:51. He who has
"kept guard" over Jesus' word "should never [ever] taste death." (John
8:51, ASV.)
Finally, what does it mean that the only saved person in this parable
"brings forth fruit with patience." (Luke 8:15, ASV)? Salvation
depends on completing works to the end.
Luke 8:15 really means: "who keep carrying on producing fruit with
endurance." The Greek verb this time is karpos (carrying) combined
with phore (produce, bear) in the Greek present indicative. So it has
a continuous meaning. This is followed by hupomeno in Greek. In most
translations of this verse, hupomeno is rendered as patience. However,
almost everywhere else hupomeno appears in the NT it is translated as
endurance, which is the more likely intended meaning of Jesus. The
combination of karpos and Parable of the Sower: Fourth Seed
| Fourth Seed (The Saved) | Jesus' Explanation |
| good ground | noble and good heart |
| seed sewn | heard the word |
| grew | kept holding the word down (protecting it) |
| keeps on producing fruit a hun | keeps on carrying on producing |
| dredfold | fruit with endurance. Cfr.\\To hold onto Pauline 'faith alone' doctrine, one has to do many twists and turns with this parable. Jesus explained it, so you cannot say it is a parable hard to understand. Jesus already explained it! |
![Picture #40](images/img_0040.png)
{{images/img_0041.png|Picture #41}}
{{images/img_0042.png|Picture #42}}
{{images/img_0043.png|Picture #43]

61
JWO_08_03_Conclusion_0035.md Normal file

@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
## Does Jesus Share Salvation Doctrine with Paul?
### Conclusion
The Parable of the Sower is an amazing nugget of Jesus' doctrine. For
here is the whole true gospel of salvation from Jesus' lips. It is all
contained in a very unassuming Parable of the Sower. Jesus tells you
how to be saved and what is necessary to complete your
salvation. Jesus tells you also how to be lost even after you have
faith and accepted His word with joy and experience initial growth
("sprouted").
Accordingly, the Parable of the Sower puts an end to the salvation by
faith alone idea. It puts an end to the idea that producing fruit is
not essential. It shows the folly of thinking you can get to heaven
having believed and withered, or having grown significantly and then
having been choked, never bringing your works to completion.
Thus Jesus in this parable shows the error of Paul's starkly different
doctrine. If you read Paul, it is all over once the seed is
successfully sown , no matter what happens next. Paul's main salvation
verses at odds with this Parable of the Sower are well-known:
* (Rom. 3:28) ("man is justified by faith apart from observing the law").
* (Rom. 4:5) ("To the man who does not work, but trusts God who
justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness").
* (Gal. 5:4) ("You who are trying to be justified by law have been
alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace").
* (Rom. 7:6) ("Now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been
released from the law, so that we serve in a new way of the Spirit,
and not in the old way of the written code").
* (Gal. 2:16) ("A man is not justified by observing the law, but by
faith in Jesus Christ, because by observing the law no one will be
justified").
* (Eph. 2:8-9) ("For it is by grace that you have been saved, through faith, this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no one can boast.")
Paul has a different voice than our Lord Jesus. Paul's themes are alien to Jesus's message of salvation. They undercut, if not destroy, the message of Jesus. The true sheep of Jesus recognize His voice, and will not follow another. (John 10:27-29). Who are you following?
Thus, how many times must Jesus make the same points about repentance from sin and productivity at odds with Paul's different message before we will listen? If we think the Parable of the Sower is some distorted addition to Scripture, then think again. It appears in all three Synoptic gospels. (Matt. 13:3 et seq\ Luke 8:5 et seq\ (Mark 4:3) etseq.) There is no lineage of any early manuscript that ever omitted it. You have to deal with Jesus' Words alone versus Paul's different message.
The fact we cannot find Paul's gospel in Jesus' words brings us back to the fundamental questions presented in this book:
* When will we finally make a commitment to keeping Jesus' words only?
* What is our Biblical justification for adding Paul to Scripture?
* What fulfilled prophecy did Paul give?
* Even if Paul gave a valid prophecy, does Paul seek to seduce us from
following the Law and thus is disqualified from being added to
Scripture by virtue of the Law's strict disqualification rule in
(Deut. 4:2) and 13:1-5 and (Isa. 8:20)?

5
JesusWordsOnly.md

@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ Parent: [[Home]]
### Did Paul Negate the Laws Further Applicability?
# * [[JWO/JWO_05_01_DidPaulNegatetheLaws_0010]]
<!-- * [[JWO/JWO_05_01_DidPaulNegatetheLaws_0010]] -->
* [[JWO/JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_03_TheAbolishedLawWasAMinistryOfDeath_0012]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_04_RomansChapterSevenSaystheJewsAreReleasedFromtheLaw_0013]]
@ -179,9 +179,10 @@ Parent: [[Home]]
* [[JWO/JWO_30_PaulorJamesChurch]]
### JWO
* [[JwoRefs]]
* [[JwoRefs]] JWO Book Scripture References
* [[JwoSite]] JWO Website Scripture References
* [[JwoVids]] Commentary from YouTube videos
* [[JwoYouTube]] YouTube videos

832
JwoRefs.md

@ -2,422 +2,422 @@ Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
## Scripture References in JWO
(Gen. 12:2) [[JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:16) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:5) [[JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:5) [[JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:5) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO_11_06_JamesUsed‘Faith_intheSenseGenesisUsedtheWord_0054]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO_11_14_Conclusion_0062]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Gen. 17:1) [[JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Gen. 17:19) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gen. 17:7) [[JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Gen. 21:14) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gen. 25:26) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gen. 32:28) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gen. 3:15) [[JWO_05_10_PaulContradictsJesusToo_0019]]<br/>
(Gen. 49:1) [[JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Gen. 49:10) [[JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Gen. 49:27) [[JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Gen. 49:9) [[JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
(Gen.21:14) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Exod. 17:12) [[JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Exod. 20) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Exod. 20:2) [[JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Exod. 20:22) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Exod. 34:13) [[JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Exod. 3:2) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Lev. 12:3) [[JWO_05_12_WhatAboutPro-LawCommentsbyPaul__0021]]<br/>
(Lev. 15:2) [[JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Lev. 19:10) [[JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Lev. 19:18) [[JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Lev. 20:10) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Lev. 26:31) [[JWO_05_14_DidGodEverRespondToPaulsTeachingsontheLawsAbrogation__0023]]<br/>
(Num. 12:3) [[JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]<br/>
(Num. 22:28) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Num. 22:34) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Num. 22:35) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Num. 22:36) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Num. 24:17) [[JWO_03_02_PaulCouldStillBeABalaamWhoInitiallyHasTrueProphecy_0006]]<br/>
(Num. 24:17) [[JWO_03_03_Balaam_sStarProphecyofMessiah(1290B.C.)_0007]]<br/>
(Num. 24:9) [[JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
(Num. 25:2) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Num. 31:16) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Num. 35:16) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Deut. 12:32) [[JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:1-5) [[JWO_03_02_PaulCouldStillBeABalaamWhoInitiallyHasTrueProphecy_0006]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:1-5) [[JWO_03_04_Conclusion_0008]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:2) [[JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:3) [[JWO_02_02_Will__0004]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:3) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:5) [[JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:5) [[JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:5) [[JWO_05_10_PaulContradictsJesusToo_0019]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:5) [[JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Deut. 14:21) [[JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Deut. 18:2022) [[JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]<br/>
(Deut. 18:22) [[JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]<br/>
(Deut. 24:1) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Deut. 24:2) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Deut. 30:11) [[JWO_11_04_WhatAboutJustificationByWorksintheHebrewScriptures__0052]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO_02_02_Will__0004]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO_03_04_Conclusion_0008]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO_11_04_WhatAboutJustificationByWorksintheHebrewScriptures__0052]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Deut. 5:12-15; [[JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Deut. 6:25) [[JWO_11_04_WhatAboutJustificationByWorksintheHebrewScriptures__0052]]<br/>
(Deut. 6:25) [[JWO_11_05_WhatAboutJustificationByFaithintheHebrewScriptures__0053]]<br/>
(Deut. 6:25) [[JWO_15_08_DispensationalStrategyToAvoidJesus_0084]]<br/>
(Deut. 6:25) [[JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(Deut. 6:5) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Deut. 9:23) [[JWO_11_06_JamesUsed‘Faith_intheSenseGenesisUsedtheWord_0054]]<br/>
(Josh. 5:2) [[JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Judg. 19:14) [[JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Ps. 106:30-31) [[JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Prov. 16:5) [[JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]<br/>
(Isa. 25:8) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Isa. 27:9) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Isa. 29:14) [[JWO_08_02_LutherCouldNotComeUpWithAGlossToSolvetheParableoftheSower_0034]]<br/>
(Isa. 42:21) [[JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Isa. 42:21) [[JWO_10_03_LukeEvenTellsUsWhatWereTheChargesofHeresyAgainstPaul_0047]]<br/>
(Isa. 42:21) [[JWO_15_11_IrreconcilableDifferencesinPaulsNewCovenantTheology_0087]]<br/>
(Isa. 42:21) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Isa. 58:11) [[JWO_09_04_WhyIsCharitySoCentralinGodsWord__0039]]<br/>
(Isa. 59:21) [[JWO_15_11_IrreconcilableDifferencesinPaulsNewCovenantTheology_0087]]<br/>
(Isa. 6:8) [[JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(Isa. 7:14) [[JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]<br/>
(Isa. 8:19) [[JWO_03_03_Balaam_sStarProphecyofMessiah(1290B.C.)_0007]]<br/>
(Isa. 8:20) [[JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]<br/>
(Isa. 8:20) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Isa. 8:20) [[JWO_08_03_Conclusion_0035]]<br/>
(Isa. 8:20) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Isaiah 58:9) [[JWO_09_04_WhyIsCharitySoCentralinGodsWord__0039]]<br/>
(Jer. 23:6) [[JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]<br/>
(Jer. 28:2) [[JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]<br/>
(Jer. 31:31) [[JWO_10_03_LukeEvenTellsUsWhatWereTheChargesofHeresyAgainstPaul_0047]]<br/>
(Jer. 31:31) [[JWO_15_08_DispensationalStrategyToAvoidJesus_0084]]<br/>
(Jer. 31:31) [[JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]<br/>
(Jer. 31:31) [[JWO_15_11_IrreconcilableDifferencesinPaulsNewCovenantTheology_0087]]<br/>
(Jer. 31:31) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Ezek. 22:26) [[JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Ezek. 22:27) [[JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Ezek. 22:28) [[JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Ezek. 22:29) [[JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Ezek. 33:12) [[JWO_11_05_WhatAboutJustificationByFaithintheHebrewScriptures__0053]]<br/>
(Ezek. 44:9) [[JWO_05_14_DidGodEverRespondToPaulsTeachingsontheLawsAbrogation__0023]]<br/>
(Dan. 4:27) [[JWO_09_04_WhyIsCharitySoCentralinGodsWord__0039]]<br/>
(Mic. 5:2) [[JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]<br/>
(Hab. 2:4) [[JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Hab. 2:4) [[JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]<br/>
(Hab. 2:4) [[JWO_12_02_DoTheDeadSeaScrollsDepictATrialofPaid__0064]]<br/>
(Hab. 2:4) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 10:16) [[JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Matt. 10:22) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 10:22) [[JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]]<br/>
(Matt. 10:28) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 11:11) [[JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(Matt. 11:14) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Matt. 12:25) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 13:42) [[JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Matt. 13:42) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 16:19) [[JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Matt. 16:19) [[JWO_18_03_UnwarrantedCatholicTraditionExpandedApostolic‘Binding_Authority_0107]]<br/>
(Matt. 18:15) [[JWO_12_09_DidPaulAdmitHeRejectedtheTeachingsofPeter__0071]]<br/>
(Matt. 23:38) [[JWO_11_10_James3_17_IsItaResponsetoBeingtheVictimofPaulsHypocrisy__0058]]<br/>
(Matt. 24:35) [[JWO_15_08_DispensationalStrategyToAvoidJesus_0084]]<br/>
(Matt. 24:35) [[JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]<br/>
(Matt. 25:1) [[JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Matt. 25:32) [[JWO_15_06_ABetterExplanationWhytheGospelAccountsCameSecond_0082]]<br/>
(Matt. 25:32) [[JWO_17_07_JesusPaul_0104]]<br/>
(Matt. 25:34) [[JWO_09_05_PaulinistInterpretationoftheParableoftheSheepandGoats_0040]]<br/>
(Matt. 28:20) [[JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(Matt. 2:1) [[JWO_03_03_Balaam_sStarProphecyofMessiah(1290B.C.)_0007]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:1) [[JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:17) [[JWO_05_14_DidGodEverRespondToPaulsTeachingsontheLawsAbrogation__0023]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:18) [[JWO_03_02_PaulCouldStillBeABalaamWhoInitiallyHasTrueProphecy_0006]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:18) [[JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:18) [[JWO_05_14_DidGodEverRespondToPaulsTeachingsontheLawsAbrogation__0023]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:18) [[JWO_15_11_IrreconcilableDifferencesinPaulsNewCovenantTheology_0087]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:19) [[JWO_05_10_PaulContradictsJesusToo_0019]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:19) [[JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:20) [[JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:22) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:29) [[JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:3) [[JWO_15_03_EliminationofJesus_MessageoftheSermonontheMount_0079]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:32) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Matt. 6:24) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:13) [[JWO_17_01_DoesItMatterIfWeRelyOnlyUponJesus__0098]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:15) [[JWO_06_03_Conclusion_0027]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:15) [[JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:19) [[JWO_11_09_JamesCritiqueofPaulsIdeaThatTheLawArousesSin_0057]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:19) [[JWO_15_02_EliminationofSynopticsinModernGospelMessage_0078]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:19) [[JWO_17_07_JesusPaul_0104]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:19) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:22) [[JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:22) [[JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:23) [[JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:23) [[JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:23) [[JWO_06_03_Conclusion_0027]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:23) [[JWO_09_05_PaulinistInterpretationoftheParableoftheSheepandGoats_0040]]<br/>
(Mark 12:26) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Mark 12:26) [[JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Mark 12:26) [[JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Mark 13:22) [[JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Mark 13:22) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Mark 16:16) [[JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Mark 16:16) [[JWO_17_01_DoesItMatterIfWeRelyOnlyUponJesus__0098]]<br/>
(Mark 16:8) [[JWO_02_02_Will__0004]]<br/>
(Mark 2:27) [[JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Mark 4:3) [[JWO_08_03_Conclusion_0035]]<br/>
(Mark 8:38) [[JWO_15_13_DispensationalistAdmitsJesus_WordsAreNoLongerRelevantBecauseofPaul_0089]]<br/>
(Mark 9:42) [[JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Mark 9:42) [[JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]<br/>
(Mark 9:42-48) [[JWO_17_02_PaulsDifferentMessage_0099]]<br/>
(Luke 12:8) [[JWO_17_01_DoesItMatterIfWeRelyOnlyUponJesus__0098]]<br/>
(Luke 16:31) [[JWO_05_09_JesusHimselfCondemnsPaulsUnderminingofMoses_Inspiration_0018]]<br/>
(Luke 19:9) [[JWO_17_05_JesusPaul_0102]]<br/>
(Luke 4:43) [[JWO_15_02_EliminationofSynopticsinModernGospelMessage_0078]]<br/>
(Luke 4:43) [[JWO_15_05_EvenC.S.LewisIsInThePrimarily-PaulCamp_0081]]<br/>
(Luke 7:47) [[JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Luke 7:50) [[JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Luke 8:12) [[JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Luke 8:13) [[JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Luke 8:13) [[JWO_09_08_TheSalvationMessageofRevelationIsStraightFromtheParableoftheSower_0043]]<br/>
(Luke 8:13) [[JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Luke 8:13) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Luke 8:13) [[JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]]<br/>
(Luke 8:15) [[JWO_09_08_TheSalvationMessageofRevelationIsStraightFromtheParableoftheSower_0043]]<br/>
(Luke 8:15) [[JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091]]<br/>
(Luke 8:6) [[JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Luke 8:8) [[JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(John [[JWO_17_06_JesusPaul_0103]]<br/>
(John 10:1) [[JWO_18_06_FinalThoughts_0110]]<br/>
(John 10:12) [[JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(John 10:28) [[JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]]<br/>
(John 11:26) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(John 12:42) [[JWO_15_04_TheMisleadingSuggestionbyEmphasizingJohnsGospelAccount_0080]]<br/>
(John 13:16) [[JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(John 14:26) [[JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(John 14:26) [[JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(John 14:7) [[JWO_17_01_DoesItMatterIfWeRelyOnlyUponJesus__0098]]<br/>
(John 3:16) [[JWO_15_04_TheMisleadingSuggestionbyEmphasizingJohnsGospelAccount_0080]]<br/>
(John 3:16) [[JWO_15_05_EvenC.S.LewisIsInThePrimarily-PaulCamp_0081]]<br/>
(John 3:16) [[JWO_16_03_ThePatristicEraChurchAlsoRejectedPaulsPredestinationDoctrine_0093]]<br/>
(John 3:16) [[JWO_17_04_WhatAboutJohn3_16__0101]]<br/>
(John 3:16) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(John 3:16) [[JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]]<br/>
(John 5:46) [[JWO_05_09_JesusHimselfCondemnsPaulsUnderminingofMoses_Inspiration_0018]]<br/>
(John 8:51) [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(John 8:58) [[JWO_03_02_PaulCouldStillBeABalaamWhoInitiallyHasTrueProphecy_0006]]<br/>
(Acts 15:19) [[JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Acts 15:20) [[JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Acts 15:20) [[JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Acts 15:29) [[JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Acts 15:7) [[JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Acts 17:11) [[JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]<br/>
(Acts 17:11) [[JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Acts 19:8) [[JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Acts 1:1) [[JWO_18_04_ApostolicDecisionsWereBindingInHeavenOnlyWhenReachedJointly_0108]]<br/>
(Acts 1:25) [[JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Acts 20:35) [[JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(Acts 21:21) [[JWO_11_10_James3_17_IsItaResponsetoBeingtheVictimofPaulsHypocrisy__0058]]<br/>
(Acts 21:25) [[JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Acts 22:10) [[JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
(Acts 22:28) [[JWO_12_05_HowPlausibleIsTheEbioniteChargeAgainstPaul__0067]]<br/>
(Acts 22:5) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Acts 22:7) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Acts 22:8) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Acts 22:9) [[JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
(Acts 24:14) [[JWO_05_12_WhatAboutPro-LawCommentsbyPaul__0021]]<br/>
(Acts 24:14) [[JWO_05_13_HowActs24_14UnravelsPaulsAuthority_0022]]<br/>
(Acts 24:18) [[JWO_05_14_DidGodEverRespondToPaulsTeachingsontheLawsAbrogation__0023]]<br/>
(Acts 2:38) [[JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(Acts 9:7) [[JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
(Rom 2:13) [[JWO_11_11_James3_17onVariances(Inconsistencies)_0059]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:11) [[JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:13) [[JWO_17_07_JesusPaul_0104]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:4) [[JWO_06_02_PaulsAntinomianismonIdolMeatIssueversusJesus_0026]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO_05_08_JudeFindsPaulsIdeasHeretical_0017]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO_11_06_JamesUsed‘Faith_intheSenseGenesisUsedtheWord_0054]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO_11_08_JamesRidiculesAFaithBasedonMereMentalAssent_0056]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO_15_01_DoesJesusEndupMarginalizedToMakeRoomForPaul__0077]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO_15_02_EliminationofSynopticsinModernGospelMessage_0078]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO_15_05_EvenC.S.LewisIsInThePrimarily-PaulCamp_0081]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO_17_02_PaulsDifferentMessage_0099]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO_17_03_Don_tPaulandJesusAgreeonConfessionwiththeMouth__0100]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO_17_05_JesusPaul_0102]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO_17_07_JesusPaul_0104]]<br/>
(Rom. 11:1) [[JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Rom. 11:6) [[JWO_11_04_WhatAboutJustificationByWorksintheHebrewScriptures__0052]]<br/>
(Rom. 13:1) [[JWO_05_07_DoesPaulImplyTheAngelsLackedGodsAuthorityinIssuingtheLaw__0016]]<br/>
(Rom. 14:22) [[JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Rom. 14:5) [[JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Rom. 15:19) [[JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Rom. 15:19) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Rom. 16:11) [[JWO_12_05_HowPlausibleIsTheEbioniteChargeAgainstPaul__0067]]<br/>
(Rom. 1:17) [[JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Rom. 3:23) [[JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Rom. 3:23) [[JWO_05_12_WhatAboutPro-LawCommentsbyPaul__0021]]<br/>
(Rom. 3:31) [[JWO_05_12_WhatAboutPro-LawCommentsbyPaul__0021]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:2) [[JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:2) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:3) [[JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:3) [[JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO_11_05_WhatAboutJustificationByFaithintheHebrewScriptures__0053]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO_15_12_TheConsequencesofDispensationalIdeas_0088]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO_17_02_PaulsDifferentMessage_0099]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO_17_05_JesusPaul_0102]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO_17_06_JesusPaul_0103]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:5) [[JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:6) [[JWO_11_05_WhatAboutJustificationByFaithintheHebrewScriptures__0053]]<br/>
(Rom. 5:10) [[JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:1) [[JWO_05_04_RomansChapterSevenSaystheJewsAreReleasedFromtheLaw_0013]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:1) [[JWO_10_03_LukeEvenTellsUsWhatWereTheChargesofHeresyAgainstPaul_0047]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:13) [[JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:13) [[JWO_11_09_JamesCritiqueofPaulsIdeaThatTheLawArousesSin_0057]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:2) [[JWO_05_04_RomansChapterSevenSaystheJewsAreReleasedFromtheLaw_0013]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:2) [[JWO_11_10_James3_17_IsItaResponsetoBeingtheVictimofPaulsHypocrisy__0058]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:21) [[JWO_05_12_WhatAboutPro-LawCommentsbyPaul__0021]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:24) [[JWO_11_04_WhatAboutJustificationByWorksintheHebrewScriptures__0052]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:1) [[JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:1) [[JWO_06_02_PaulsAntinomianismonIdolMeatIssueversusJesus_0026]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:1) [[JWO_16_02_PatristicEra(125-325A.D.)RejectedPaulsSalvationDoctrine_0092]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:1) [[JWO_17_06_JesusPaul_0103]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:3) [[JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:3) [[JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:39) [[JWO_16_02_PatristicEra(125-325A.D.)RejectedPaulsSalvationDoctrine_0092]]<br/>
(Romans 8:1) [[JWO_05_08_JudeFindsPaulsIdeasHeretical_0017]]<br/>
(Romans 8:1) [[JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Gal. 1:8) [[JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Gal. 1:8) [[JWO_11_12_JamesFaultsOverbearingRebukes_0060]]<br/>
(Gal. 1:8) [[JWO_17_07_JesusPaul_0104]]<br/>
(Gal. 1:8) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:1) [[JWO_12_09_DidPaulAdmitHeRejectedtheTeachingsofPeter__0071]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:16) [[JWO_11_11_James3_17onVariances(Inconsistencies)_0059]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:6) [[JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:9) [[JWO_12_09_DidPaulAdmitHeRejectedtheTeachingsofPeter__0071]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:9) [[JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:9) [[JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:9) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:9-10) [[JWO_12_02_DoTheDeadSeaScrollsDepictATrialofPaid__0064]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:1) [[JWO_11_12_JamesFaultsOverbearingRebukes_0060]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:11) [[JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:17) [[JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:19) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:19) [[JWO_05_07_DoesPaulImplyTheAngelsLackedGodsAuthorityinIssuingtheLaw__0016]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:19) [[JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:6) [[JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:22) [[JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:22) [[JWO_15_10_TheCircularReasoningInvolvedinDispensationalism_0086]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:22) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:28) [[JWO_10_03_LukeEvenTellsUsWhatWereTheChargesofHeresyAgainstPaul_0047]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:8) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:8) [[JWO_05_07_DoesPaulImplyTheAngelsLackedGodsAuthorityinIssuingtheLaw__0016]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:8) [[JWO_05_08_JudeFindsPaulsIdeasHeretical_0017]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:8) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:9) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:9) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Gal. 5:19) [[JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Gal. 5:19) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Gal. 5:19) [[JWO_07_02_strongestverseintheBibleforoncesaved,alwayssavedandIwouldnotdisagree.(R.T._0029]]<br/>
(Gal. 5:19) [[JWO_07_03_WhyPaulMustBeTheFigureWhoPermittedFornication_0030]]<br/>
(Gal. 5:21) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Gal. 5:4) [[JWO_11_11_James3_17onVariances(Inconsistencies)_0059]]<br/>
(Gal. 6:1) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Gal.3:6) [[JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Eph. 1:1) [[JWO_10_01_DidJesusApplaudtheEphesiansforExposingPaulasaFalseApostle__0045]]<br/>
(Eph. 2:15) [[JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Eph. 2:15) [[JWO_05_04_RomansChapterSevenSaystheJewsAreReleasedFromtheLaw_0013]]<br/>
(Eph. 2:15) [[JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Eph. 2:15) [[JWO_11_10_James3_17_IsItaResponsetoBeingtheVictimofPaulsHypocrisy__0058]]<br/>
(Eph. 2:15) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Eph. 2:8-9) [[JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091]]<br/>
(Phil. 2:7) [[JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Phil. 3:5) [[JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]<br/>
(Phil. 3:5) [[JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Col. 2:14) [[JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Col. 2:14) [[JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Col. 2:16) [[JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Col. 2:9) [[JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Titus 1:12) [[JWO_11_11_James3_17onVariances(Inconsistencies)_0059]]<br/>
(Titus 1:12) [[JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Heb. 2:2) [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Jas. 1:12) [[JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Jas. 1:12) [[JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Jas. 1:26) [[JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]<br/>
(Jas. 1:3) [[JWO_02_02_Will__0004]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:13) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:14) [[JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:14) [[JWO_15_04_TheMisleadingSuggestionbyEmphasizingJohnsGospelAccount_0080]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:17) [[JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:17) [[JWO_09_05_PaulinistInterpretationoftheParableoftheSheepandGoats_0040]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:17) [[JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:19) [[JWO_11_08_JamesRidiculesAFaithBasedonMereMentalAssent_0056]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:21) [[JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:24) [[JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:24) [[JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:4) [[JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Jas. 3:1) [[JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Jas. 3:10) [[JWO_11_12_JamesFaultsOverbearingRebukes_0060]]<br/>
(Jas. 3:16) [[JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]<br/>
(Jas. 3:17) [[JWO_11_10_James3_17_IsItaResponsetoBeingtheVictimofPaulsHypocrisy__0058]]<br/>
(Jas. 3:17) [[JWO_11_11_James3_17onVariances(Inconsistencies)_0059]]<br/>
(Jas. 3:17) [[JWO_11_12_JamesFaultsOverbearingRebukes_0060]]<br/>
(Jas. 4:16) [[JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]<br/>
(Jas. 4:6) [[JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]<br/>
(Rev. 14:12) [[JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Rev. 19:13) [[JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Rev. 21:14) [[JWO_10_01_DidJesusApplaudtheEphesiansforExposingPaulasaFalseApostle__0045]]<br/>
(Rev. 22:19) [[JWO_15_01_DoesJesusEndupMarginalizedToMakeRoomForPaul__0077]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:10) [[JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO_03_03_Balaam_sStarProphecyofMessiah(1290B.C.)_0007]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO_03_04_Conclusion_0008]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO_07_03_WhyPaulMustBeTheFigureWhoPermittedFornication_0030]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO_07_04_RecapitulationofTheMeaningofRevelation2_14_0031]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO_07_05_Conclusion_0032]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:15) [[JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO_06_02_PaulsAntinomianismonIdolMeatIssueversusJesus_0026]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO_0_01_Jesus_WordsOnlyorWasPaultheApostleJesusCondemnsinRevelation2_2_0001]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO_10_01_DidJesusApplaudtheEphesiansforExposingPaulasaFalseApostle__0045]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO_10_02_TertulliansPointsAboutPaul_0046]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO_10_04_Conclusion_0048]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO_11_14_Conclusion_0062]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO_12_02_DoTheDeadSeaScrollsDepictATrialofPaid__0064]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO_12_08_TheValidityoftheChargesofPeterinHomily17_0070]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:20) [[JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:20) [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:29) [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:4) [[JWO_09_08_TheSalvationMessageofRevelationIsStraightFromtheParableoftheSower_0043]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:6) [[JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Rev. 3:1-3) [[JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Rev. 3:2) [[JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Rev. 3:3) [[JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Rev. 3:8) [[JWO_09_08_TheSalvationMessageofRevelationIsStraightFromtheParableoftheSower_0043]]<br/>
(Rev. 3:9) [[JWO_12_02_DoTheDeadSeaScrollsDepictATrialofPaid__0064]]<br/>
(Rev. 5:3) [[JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
(Gen. 12:2) [[JWO/JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:16) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:5) [[JWO/JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:5) [[JWO/JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:5) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO/JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO/JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO/JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO/JWO_11_06_JamesUsed‘Faith_intheSenseGenesisUsedtheWord_0054]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO/JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO/JWO_11_14_Conclusion_0062]]<br/>
(Gen. 15:6) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Gen. 17:1) [[JWO/JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Gen. 17:19) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gen. 17:7) [[JWO/JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Gen. 21:14) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gen. 25:26) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gen. 32:28) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gen. 3:15) [[JWO/JWO_05_10_PaulContradictsJesusToo_0019]]<br/>
(Gen. 49:1) [[JWO/JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Gen. 49:10) [[JWO/JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Gen. 49:27) [[JWO/JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Gen. 49:9) [[JWO/JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
(Gen.21:14) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Exod. 17:12) [[JWO/JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Exod. 20) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Exod. 20:2) [[JWO/JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Exod. 20:22) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Exod. 34:13) [[JWO/JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Exod. 3:2) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Lev. 12:3) [[JWO/JWO_05_12_WhatAboutPro-LawCommentsbyPaul__0021]]<br/>
(Lev. 15:2) [[JWO/JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Lev. 19:10) [[JWO/JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Lev. 19:18) [[JWO/JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Lev. 20:10) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Lev. 26:31) [[JWO/JWO_05_14_DidGodEverRespondToPaulsTeachingsontheLawsAbrogation__0023]]<br/>
(Num. 12:3) [[JWO/JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]<br/>
(Num. 22:28) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Num. 22:34) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Num. 22:35) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Num. 22:36) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Num. 24:17) [[JWO/JWO_03_02_PaulCouldStillBeABalaamWhoInitiallyHasTrueProphecy_0006]]<br/>
(Num. 24:17) [[JWO/JWO_03_03_Balaam_sStarProphecyofMessiah(1290B.C.)_0007]]<br/>
(Num. 24:9) [[JWO/JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
(Num. 25:2) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Num. 31:16) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Num. 35:16) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Deut. 12:32) [[JWO/JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:1-5) [[JWO/JWO_03_02_PaulCouldStillBeABalaamWhoInitiallyHasTrueProphecy_0006]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:1-5) [[JWO/JWO_03_04_Conclusion_0008]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:2) [[JWO/JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:3) [[JWO/JWO_02_02_Will__0004]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:3) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:5) [[JWO/JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:5) [[JWO/JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:5) [[JWO/JWO_05_10_PaulContradictsJesusToo_0019]]<br/>
(Deut. 13:5) [[JWO/JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Deut. 14:21) [[JWO/JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Deut. 18:2022) [[JWO/JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]<br/>
(Deut. 18:22) [[JWO/JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]<br/>
(Deut. 24:1) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Deut. 24:2) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Deut. 30:11) [[JWO/JWO_11_04_WhatAboutJustificationByWorksintheHebrewScriptures__0052]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO/JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO/JWO_02_02_Will__0004]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO/JWO_03_04_Conclusion_0008]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO/JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO/JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO/JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO/JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO/JWO_11_04_WhatAboutJustificationByWorksintheHebrewScriptures__0052]]<br/>
(Deut. 4:2) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Deut. 5:12-15; [[JWO/JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Deut. 6:25) [[JWO/JWO_11_04_WhatAboutJustificationByWorksintheHebrewScriptures__0052]]<br/>
(Deut. 6:25) [[JWO/JWO_11_05_WhatAboutJustificationByFaithintheHebrewScriptures__0053]]<br/>
(Deut. 6:25) [[JWO/JWO_15_08_DispensationalStrategyToAvoidJesus_0084]]<br/>
(Deut. 6:25) [[JWO/JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(Deut. 6:5) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Deut. 9:23) [[JWO/JWO_11_06_JamesUsed‘Faith_intheSenseGenesisUsedtheWord_0054]]<br/>
(Josh. 5:2) [[JWO/JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Judg. 19:14) [[JWO/JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Ps. 106:30-31) [[JWO/JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Prov. 16:5) [[JWO/JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]<br/>
(Isa. 25:8) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Isa. 27:9) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Isa. 29:14) [[JWO/JWO_08_02_LutherCouldNotComeUpWithAGlossToSolvetheParableoftheSower_0034]]<br/>
(Isa. 42:21) [[JWO/JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Isa. 42:21) [[JWO/JWO_10_03_LukeEvenTellsUsWhatWereTheChargesofHeresyAgainstPaul_0047]]<br/>
(Isa. 42:21) [[JWO/JWO_15_11_IrreconcilableDifferencesinPaulsNewCovenantTheology_0087]]<br/>
(Isa. 42:21) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Isa. 58:11) [[JWO/JWO_09_04_WhyIsCharitySoCentralinGodsWord__0039]]<br/>
(Isa. 59:21) [[JWO/JWO_15_11_IrreconcilableDifferencesinPaulsNewCovenantTheology_0087]]<br/>
(Isa. 6:8) [[JWO/JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(Isa. 7:14) [[JWO/JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]<br/>
(Isa. 8:19) [[JWO/JWO_03_03_Balaam_sStarProphecyofMessiah(1290B.C.)_0007]]<br/>
(Isa. 8:20) [[JWO/JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]<br/>
(Isa. 8:20) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Isa. 8:20) [[JWO/JWO_08_03_Conclusion_0035]]<br/>
(Isa. 8:20) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Isaiah 58:9) [[JWO/JWO_09_04_WhyIsCharitySoCentralinGodsWord__0039]]<br/>
(Jer. 23:6) [[JWO/JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]<br/>
(Jer. 28:2) [[JWO/JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]<br/>
(Jer. 31:31) [[JWO/JWO_10_03_LukeEvenTellsUsWhatWereTheChargesofHeresyAgainstPaul_0047]]<br/>
(Jer. 31:31) [[JWO/JWO_15_08_DispensationalStrategyToAvoidJesus_0084]]<br/>
(Jer. 31:31) [[JWO/JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]<br/>
(Jer. 31:31) [[JWO/JWO_15_11_IrreconcilableDifferencesinPaulsNewCovenantTheology_0087]]<br/>
(Jer. 31:31) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Ezek. 22:26) [[JWO/JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Ezek. 22:27) [[JWO/JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Ezek. 22:28) [[JWO/JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Ezek. 22:29) [[JWO/JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Ezek. 33:12) [[JWO/JWO_11_05_WhatAboutJustificationByFaithintheHebrewScriptures__0053]]<br/>
(Ezek. 44:9) [[JWO/JWO_05_14_DidGodEverRespondToPaulsTeachingsontheLawsAbrogation__0023]]<br/>
(Dan. 4:27) [[JWO/JWO_09_04_WhyIsCharitySoCentralinGodsWord__0039]]<br/>
(Mic. 5:2) [[JWO/JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]<br/>
(Hab. 2:4) [[JWO/JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Hab. 2:4) [[JWO/JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]<br/>
(Hab. 2:4) [[JWO/JWO_12_02_DoTheDeadSeaScrollsDepictATrialofPaid__0064]]<br/>
(Hab. 2:4) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 10:16) [[JWO/JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Matt. 10:22) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 10:22) [[JWO/JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]]<br/>
(Matt. 10:28) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 11:11) [[JWO/JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(Matt. 11:14) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Matt. 12:25) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 13:42) [[JWO/JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Matt. 13:42) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 16:19) [[JWO/JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Matt. 16:19) [[JWO/JWO_18_03_UnwarrantedCatholicTraditionExpandedApostolic‘Binding_Authority_0107]]<br/>
(Matt. 18:15) [[JWO/JWO_12_09_DidPaulAdmitHeRejectedtheTeachingsofPeter__0071]]<br/>
(Matt. 23:38) [[JWO/JWO_11_10_James3_17_IsItaResponsetoBeingtheVictimofPaulsHypocrisy__0058]]<br/>
(Matt. 24:35) [[JWO/JWO_15_08_DispensationalStrategyToAvoidJesus_0084]]<br/>
(Matt. 24:35) [[JWO/JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]<br/>
(Matt. 25:1) [[JWO/JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Matt. 25:32) [[JWO/JWO_15_06_ABetterExplanationWhytheGospelAccountsCameSecond_0082]]<br/>
(Matt. 25:32) [[JWO/JWO_17_07_JesusPaul_0104]]<br/>
(Matt. 25:34) [[JWO/JWO_09_05_PaulinistInterpretationoftheParableoftheSheepandGoats_0040]]<br/>
(Matt. 28:20) [[JWO/JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(Matt. 2:1) [[JWO/JWO_03_03_Balaam_sStarProphecyofMessiah(1290B.C.)_0007]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:1) [[JWO/JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:17) [[JWO/JWO_05_14_DidGodEverRespondToPaulsTeachingsontheLawsAbrogation__0023]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:18) [[JWO/JWO_03_02_PaulCouldStillBeABalaamWhoInitiallyHasTrueProphecy_0006]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:18) [[JWO/JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:18) [[JWO/JWO_05_14_DidGodEverRespondToPaulsTeachingsontheLawsAbrogation__0023]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:18) [[JWO/JWO_15_11_IrreconcilableDifferencesinPaulsNewCovenantTheology_0087]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:19) [[JWO/JWO_05_10_PaulContradictsJesusToo_0019]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:19) [[JWO/JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:20) [[JWO/JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:22) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:29) [[JWO/JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:3) [[JWO/JWO_15_03_EliminationofJesus_MessageoftheSermonontheMount_0079]]<br/>
(Matt. 5:32) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Matt. 6:24) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:13) [[JWO/JWO_17_01_DoesItMatterIfWeRelyOnlyUponJesus__0098]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:15) [[JWO/JWO_06_03_Conclusion_0027]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:15) [[JWO/JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:19) [[JWO/JWO_11_09_JamesCritiqueofPaulsIdeaThatTheLawArousesSin_0057]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:19) [[JWO/JWO_15_02_EliminationofSynopticsinModernGospelMessage_0078]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:19) [[JWO/JWO_17_07_JesusPaul_0104]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:19) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:22) [[JWO/JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:22) [[JWO/JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:23) [[JWO/JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:23) [[JWO/JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:23) [[JWO/JWO_06_03_Conclusion_0027]]<br/>
(Matt. 7:23) [[JWO/JWO_09_05_PaulinistInterpretationoftheParableoftheSheepandGoats_0040]]<br/>
(Mark 12:26) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Mark 12:26) [[JWO/JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Mark 12:26) [[JWO/JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Mark 13:22) [[JWO/JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Mark 13:22) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Mark 16:16) [[JWO/JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Mark 16:16) [[JWO/JWO_17_01_DoesItMatterIfWeRelyOnlyUponJesus__0098]]<br/>
(Mark 16:8) [[JWO/JWO_02_02_Will__0004]]<br/>
(Mark 2:27) [[JWO/JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Mark 4:3) [[JWO/JWO_08_03_Conclusion_0035]]<br/>
(Mark 8:38) [[JWO/JWO_15_13_DispensationalistAdmitsJesus_WordsAreNoLongerRelevantBecauseofPaul_0089]]<br/>
(Mark 9:42) [[JWO/JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Mark 9:42) [[JWO/JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]<br/>
(Mark 9:42-48) [[JWO/JWO_17_02_PaulsDifferentMessage_0099]]<br/>
(Luke 12:8) [[JWO/JWO_17_01_DoesItMatterIfWeRelyOnlyUponJesus__0098]]<br/>
(Luke 16:31) [[JWO/JWO_05_09_JesusHimselfCondemnsPaulsUnderminingofMoses_Inspiration_0018]]<br/>
(Luke 19:9) [[JWO/JWO_17_05_JesusPaul_0102]]<br/>
(Luke 4:43) [[JWO/JWO_15_02_EliminationofSynopticsinModernGospelMessage_0078]]<br/>
(Luke 4:43) [[JWO/JWO_15_05_EvenC.S.LewisIsInThePrimarily-PaulCamp_0081]]<br/>
(Luke 7:47) [[JWO/JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Luke 7:50) [[JWO/JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Luke 8:12) [[JWO/JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Luke 8:13) [[JWO/JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Luke 8:13) [[JWO/JWO_09_08_TheSalvationMessageofRevelationIsStraightFromtheParableoftheSower_0043]]<br/>
(Luke 8:13) [[JWO/JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Luke 8:13) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(Luke 8:13) [[JWO/JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]]<br/>
(Luke 8:15) [[JWO/JWO_09_08_TheSalvationMessageofRevelationIsStraightFromtheParableoftheSower_0043]]<br/>
(Luke 8:15) [[JWO/JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091]]<br/>
(Luke 8:6) [[JWO/JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Luke 8:8) [[JWO/JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(John [[JWO/JWO_17_06_JesusPaul_0103]]<br/>
(John 10:1) [[JWO/JWO_18_06_FinalThoughts_0110]]<br/>
(John 10:12) [[JWO/JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(John 10:28) [[JWO/JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]]<br/>
(John 11:26) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(John 12:42) [[JWO/JWO_15_04_TheMisleadingSuggestionbyEmphasizingJohnsGospelAccount_0080]]<br/>
(John 13:16) [[JWO/JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(John 14:26) [[JWO/JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(John 14:26) [[JWO/JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(John 14:7) [[JWO/JWO_17_01_DoesItMatterIfWeRelyOnlyUponJesus__0098]]<br/>
(John 3:16) [[JWO/JWO_15_04_TheMisleadingSuggestionbyEmphasizingJohnsGospelAccount_0080]]<br/>
(John 3:16) [[JWO/JWO_15_05_EvenC.S.LewisIsInThePrimarily-PaulCamp_0081]]<br/>
(John 3:16) [[JWO/JWO_16_03_ThePatristicEraChurchAlsoRejectedPaulsPredestinationDoctrine_0093]]<br/>
(John 3:16) [[JWO/JWO_17_04_WhatAboutJohn3_16__0101]]<br/>
(John 3:16) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(John 3:16) [[JWO/JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]]<br/>
(John 5:46) [[JWO/JWO_05_09_JesusHimselfCondemnsPaulsUnderminingofMoses_Inspiration_0018]]<br/>
(John 8:51) [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]<br/>
(John 8:58) [[JWO/JWO_03_02_PaulCouldStillBeABalaamWhoInitiallyHasTrueProphecy_0006]]<br/>
(Acts 15:19) [[JWO/JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Acts 15:20) [[JWO/JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Acts 15:20) [[JWO/JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Acts 15:29) [[JWO/JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Acts 15:7) [[JWO/JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Acts 17:11) [[JWO/JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]<br/>
(Acts 17:11) [[JWO/JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Acts 19:8) [[JWO/JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Acts 1:1) [[JWO/JWO_18_04_ApostolicDecisionsWereBindingInHeavenOnlyWhenReachedJointly_0108]]<br/>
(Acts 1:25) [[JWO/JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Acts 20:35) [[JWO/JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(Acts 21:21) [[JWO/JWO_11_10_James3_17_IsItaResponsetoBeingtheVictimofPaulsHypocrisy__0058]]<br/>
(Acts 21:25) [[JWO/JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Acts 22:10) [[JWO/JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
(Acts 22:28) [[JWO/JWO_12_05_HowPlausibleIsTheEbioniteChargeAgainstPaul__0067]]<br/>
(Acts 22:5) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Acts 22:7) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Acts 22:8) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Acts 22:9) [[JWO/JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
(Acts 24:14) [[JWO/JWO_05_12_WhatAboutPro-LawCommentsbyPaul__0021]]<br/>
(Acts 24:14) [[JWO/JWO_05_13_HowActs24_14UnravelsPaulsAuthority_0022]]<br/>
(Acts 24:18) [[JWO/JWO_05_14_DidGodEverRespondToPaulsTeachingsontheLawsAbrogation__0023]]<br/>
(Acts 2:38) [[JWO/JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]<br/>
(Acts 9:7) [[JWO/JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
(Rom 2:13) [[JWO/JWO_11_11_James3_17onVariances(Inconsistencies)_0059]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:11) [[JWO/JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:13) [[JWO/JWO_17_07_JesusPaul_0104]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:4) [[JWO/JWO_06_02_PaulsAntinomianismonIdolMeatIssueversusJesus_0026]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO/JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO/JWO_05_08_JudeFindsPaulsIdeasHeretical_0017]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO/JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO/JWO_11_06_JamesUsed‘Faith_intheSenseGenesisUsedtheWord_0054]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO/JWO_11_08_JamesRidiculesAFaithBasedonMereMentalAssent_0056]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO/JWO_15_01_DoesJesusEndupMarginalizedToMakeRoomForPaul__0077]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO/JWO_15_02_EliminationofSynopticsinModernGospelMessage_0078]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO/JWO_15_05_EvenC.S.LewisIsInThePrimarily-PaulCamp_0081]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO/JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO/JWO_17_02_PaulsDifferentMessage_0099]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO/JWO_17_03_Don_tPaulandJesusAgreeonConfessionwiththeMouth__0100]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO/JWO_17_05_JesusPaul_0102]]<br/>
(Rom. 10:9) [[JWO/JWO_17_07_JesusPaul_0104]]<br/>
(Rom. 11:1) [[JWO/JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Rom. 11:6) [[JWO/JWO_11_04_WhatAboutJustificationByWorksintheHebrewScriptures__0052]]<br/>
(Rom. 13:1) [[JWO/JWO_05_07_DoesPaulImplyTheAngelsLackedGodsAuthorityinIssuingtheLaw__0016]]<br/>
(Rom. 14:22) [[JWO/JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Rom. 14:5) [[JWO/JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Rom. 15:19) [[JWO/JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Rom. 15:19) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Rom. 16:11) [[JWO/JWO_12_05_HowPlausibleIsTheEbioniteChargeAgainstPaul__0067]]<br/>
(Rom. 1:17) [[JWO/JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Rom. 3:23) [[JWO/JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Rom. 3:23) [[JWO/JWO_05_12_WhatAboutPro-LawCommentsbyPaul__0021]]<br/>
(Rom. 3:31) [[JWO/JWO_05_12_WhatAboutPro-LawCommentsbyPaul__0021]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:2) [[JWO/JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:2) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:3) [[JWO/JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:3) [[JWO/JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO/JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO/JWO_11_05_WhatAboutJustificationByFaithintheHebrewScriptures__0053]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO/JWO_15_12_TheConsequencesofDispensationalIdeas_0088]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO/JWO_17_02_PaulsDifferentMessage_0099]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO/JWO_17_05_JesusPaul_0102]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:4) [[JWO/JWO_17_06_JesusPaul_0103]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:5) [[JWO/JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Rom. 4:6) [[JWO/JWO_11_05_WhatAboutJustificationByFaithintheHebrewScriptures__0053]]<br/>
(Rom. 5:10) [[JWO/JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:1) [[JWO/JWO_05_04_RomansChapterSevenSaystheJewsAreReleasedFromtheLaw_0013]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:1) [[JWO/JWO_10_03_LukeEvenTellsUsWhatWereTheChargesofHeresyAgainstPaul_0047]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:13) [[JWO/JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:13) [[JWO/JWO_11_09_JamesCritiqueofPaulsIdeaThatTheLawArousesSin_0057]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:2) [[JWO/JWO_05_04_RomansChapterSevenSaystheJewsAreReleasedFromtheLaw_0013]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:2) [[JWO/JWO_11_10_James3_17_IsItaResponsetoBeingtheVictimofPaulsHypocrisy__0058]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:21) [[JWO/JWO_05_12_WhatAboutPro-LawCommentsbyPaul__0021]]<br/>
(Rom. 7:24) [[JWO/JWO_11_04_WhatAboutJustificationByWorksintheHebrewScriptures__0052]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:1) [[JWO/JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:1) [[JWO/JWO_06_02_PaulsAntinomianismonIdolMeatIssueversusJesus_0026]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:1) [[JWO/JWO_16_02_PatristicEra(125-325A.D.)RejectedPaulsSalvationDoctrine_0092]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:1) [[JWO/JWO_17_06_JesusPaul_0103]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:3) [[JWO/JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:3) [[JWO/JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091]]<br/>
(Rom. 8:39) [[JWO/JWO_16_02_PatristicEra(125-325A.D.)RejectedPaulsSalvationDoctrine_0092]]<br/>
(Romans 8:1) [[JWO/JWO_05_08_JudeFindsPaulsIdeasHeretical_0017]]<br/>
(Romans 8:1) [[JWO/JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Gal. 1:8) [[JWO/JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Gal. 1:8) [[JWO/JWO_11_12_JamesFaultsOverbearingRebukes_0060]]<br/>
(Gal. 1:8) [[JWO/JWO_17_07_JesusPaul_0104]]<br/>
(Gal. 1:8) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:1) [[JWO/JWO_12_09_DidPaulAdmitHeRejectedtheTeachingsofPeter__0071]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:16) [[JWO/JWO_11_11_James3_17onVariances(Inconsistencies)_0059]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:6) [[JWO/JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:9) [[JWO/JWO_12_09_DidPaulAdmitHeRejectedtheTeachingsofPeter__0071]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:9) [[JWO/JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:9) [[JWO/JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:9) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Gal. 2:9-10) [[JWO/JWO_12_02_DoTheDeadSeaScrollsDepictATrialofPaid__0064]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:1) [[JWO/JWO_11_12_JamesFaultsOverbearingRebukes_0060]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:11) [[JWO/JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:17) [[JWO/JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:19) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:19) [[JWO/JWO_05_07_DoesPaulImplyTheAngelsLackedGodsAuthorityinIssuingtheLaw__0016]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:19) [[JWO/JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Gal. 3:6) [[JWO/JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:22) [[JWO/JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:22) [[JWO/JWO_15_10_TheCircularReasoningInvolvedinDispensationalism_0086]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:22) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:28) [[JWO/JWO_10_03_LukeEvenTellsUsWhatWereTheChargesofHeresyAgainstPaul_0047]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:8) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:8) [[JWO/JWO_05_07_DoesPaulImplyTheAngelsLackedGodsAuthorityinIssuingtheLaw__0016]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:8) [[JWO/JWO_05_08_JudeFindsPaulsIdeasHeretical_0017]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:8) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:9) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Gal. 4:9) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Gal. 5:19) [[JWO/JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]<br/>
(Gal. 5:19) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Gal. 5:19) [[JWO/JWO_07_02_strongestverseintheBibleforoncesaved,alwayssavedandIwouldnotdisagree.(R.T._0029]]<br/>
(Gal. 5:19) [[JWO/JWO_07_03_WhyPaulMustBeTheFigureWhoPermittedFornication_0030]]<br/>
(Gal. 5:21) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Gal. 5:4) [[JWO/JWO_11_11_James3_17onVariances(Inconsistencies)_0059]]<br/>
(Gal. 6:1) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Gal.3:6) [[JWO/JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]<br/>
(Eph. 1:1) [[JWO/JWO_10_01_DidJesusApplaudtheEphesiansforExposingPaulasaFalseApostle__0045]]<br/>
(Eph. 2:15) [[JWO/JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Eph. 2:15) [[JWO/JWO_05_04_RomansChapterSevenSaystheJewsAreReleasedFromtheLaw_0013]]<br/>
(Eph. 2:15) [[JWO/JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Eph. 2:15) [[JWO/JWO_11_10_James3_17_IsItaResponsetoBeingtheVictimofPaulsHypocrisy__0058]]<br/>
(Eph. 2:15) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Eph. 2:8-9) [[JWO/JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091]]<br/>
(Phil. 2:7) [[JWO/JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Phil. 3:5) [[JWO/JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]<br/>
(Phil. 3:5) [[JWO/JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Col. 2:14) [[JWO/JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Col. 2:14) [[JWO/JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]<br/>
(Col. 2:16) [[JWO/JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]<br/>
(Col. 2:9) [[JWO/JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Titus 1:12) [[JWO/JWO_11_11_James3_17onVariances(Inconsistencies)_0059]]<br/>
(Titus 1:12) [[JWO/JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]<br/>
(Heb. 2:2) [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]<br/>
(Jas. 1:12) [[JWO/JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Jas. 1:12) [[JWO/JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]<br/>
(Jas. 1:26) [[JWO/JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]<br/>
(Jas. 1:3) [[JWO/JWO_02_02_Will__0004]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:13) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:14) [[JWO/JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:14) [[JWO/JWO_15_04_TheMisleadingSuggestionbyEmphasizingJohnsGospelAccount_0080]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:17) [[JWO/JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:17) [[JWO/JWO_09_05_PaulinistInterpretationoftheParableoftheSheepandGoats_0040]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:17) [[JWO/JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:19) [[JWO/JWO_11_08_JamesRidiculesAFaithBasedonMereMentalAssent_0056]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:21) [[JWO/JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:24) [[JWO/JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:24) [[JWO/JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]<br/>
(Jas. 2:4) [[JWO/JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Jas. 3:1) [[JWO/JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]<br/>
(Jas. 3:10) [[JWO/JWO_11_12_JamesFaultsOverbearingRebukes_0060]]<br/>
(Jas. 3:16) [[JWO/JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]<br/>
(Jas. 3:17) [[JWO/JWO_11_10_James3_17_IsItaResponsetoBeingtheVictimofPaulsHypocrisy__0058]]<br/>
(Jas. 3:17) [[JWO/JWO_11_11_James3_17onVariances(Inconsistencies)_0059]]<br/>
(Jas. 3:17) [[JWO/JWO_11_12_JamesFaultsOverbearingRebukes_0060]]<br/>
(Jas. 4:16) [[JWO/JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]<br/>
(Jas. 4:6) [[JWO/JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]<br/>
(Rev. 14:12) [[JWO/JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]<br/>
(Rev. 19:13) [[JWO/JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]<br/>
(Rev. 21:14) [[JWO/JWO_10_01_DidJesusApplaudtheEphesiansforExposingPaulasaFalseApostle__0045]]<br/>
(Rev. 22:19) [[JWO/JWO_15_01_DoesJesusEndupMarginalizedToMakeRoomForPaul__0077]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:10) [[JWO/JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO/JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO/JWO_03_03_Balaam_sStarProphecyofMessiah(1290B.C.)_0007]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO/JWO_03_04_Conclusion_0008]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO/JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO/JWO_07_03_WhyPaulMustBeTheFigureWhoPermittedFornication_0030]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO/JWO_07_04_RecapitulationofTheMeaningofRevelation2_14_0031]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO/JWO_07_05_Conclusion_0032]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:14) [[JWO/JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:15) [[JWO/JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO/JWO_06_02_PaulsAntinomianismonIdolMeatIssueversusJesus_0026]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO/JWO_0_01_Jesus_WordsOnlyorWasPaultheApostleJesusCondemnsinRevelation2_2_0001]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO/JWO_10_01_DidJesusApplaudtheEphesiansforExposingPaulasaFalseApostle__0045]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO/JWO_10_02_TertulliansPointsAboutPaul_0046]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO/JWO_10_04_Conclusion_0048]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO/JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO/JWO_11_14_Conclusion_0062]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO/JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO/JWO_12_02_DoTheDeadSeaScrollsDepictATrialofPaid__0064]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO/JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO/JWO_12_08_TheValidityoftheChargesofPeterinHomily17_0070]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:2) [[JWO/JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:20) [[JWO/JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:20) [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:29) [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:4) [[JWO/JWO_09_08_TheSalvationMessageofRevelationIsStraightFromtheParableoftheSower_0043]]<br/>
(Rev. 2:6) [[JWO/JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]<br/>
(Rev. 3:1-3) [[JWO/JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Rev. 3:2) [[JWO/JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Rev. 3:3) [[JWO/JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]<br/>
(Rev. 3:8) [[JWO/JWO_09_08_TheSalvationMessageofRevelationIsStraightFromtheParableoftheSower_0043]]<br/>
(Rev. 3:9) [[JWO/JWO_12_02_DoTheDeadSeaScrollsDepictATrialofPaid__0064]]<br/>
(Rev. 5:3) [[JWO/JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]<br/>
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]

172
KingJamesIRulesOfTranslation.md Normal file

@ -0,0 +1,172 @@
## King James I Rules Of Translation
The Authorized Version of the King James Bible was not a new translation,
and was done according to rules drawn up by King James,
including how some specific (and crucial) words were to be (mis)translated.
The rules of "translation" were sent to the "translators" by the then
Bishop of London, and a copy of the original has been preserved in Lambeth Palace.
https://petergoeman.com/15-rules-of-translation-for-the-king-james-version-kjv/index.html
July 13, 2019 / king james version translation
When King James commissioned the King James Version, he approved 15
principles of translation which were instituted by Richard Bancroft,
the bishop of London in 1604. These translation principles are as follows:
### 15 Rules of Translation for the King James (KJV)
1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops
Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the Truth of the
original will permit.
2. The names of the Prophets, and the Holy Writers, with the other
Names of the Text, to be retained, as nigh as may be, accordingly
as they were vulgarly used.
3. The Old Ecclesiastical Words to be kept, viz. the Word Church not
to be translated Congregation et. cetera.
4. When a Word hath divers Significations, that to be kept which hath
been most commonly used by the most of the Ancient Fathers, being
agreeable to the Propriety of the Place, and the Analogy of the Faith.
5. The Division of the Chapters to be altered, either not at all, or
as little as may be, if Necessity so require.
6. No Marginal Notes at all to be affixed, but only for the
explanation of the Hebrew or Greek Words, which cannot without some
circumlocution, so briefly and fitly be expressed in the Text.
7. Such Quotations of Places to be marginally set down as shall serve
for the fit Reference of one Scripture to another.
8. Every particular Man of each Company, to take the same Chapter or
Chapters, and having translated or amended them severally by
himself, where he thinketh good, all to meet together, confer what
they have done, and agree for their Parts what shall stand.
9. As any one Company hath dispatched any one Book in this Manner they
shall send it to the rest, to be considered of seriously and
judiciously, for His Majesty is very careful in this Point.
10. If any Company, upon the Review of the Book so sent, doubt or
differ upon any Place, to send them Word thereof; note the Place,
and withal send the Reasons, to which if they consent not, the
Difference to be compounded at the general Meeting, which is to be
of the chief Persons of each Company, at the end of the Work.
11. When any Place of special Obscurity is doubted of, Letters to be
directed by Authority, to send to any Learned Man in the Land, for
his Judgement of such a Place.
12. Letters to be sent from every Bishop to the rest of his Clergy,
admonishing them of this Translation in hand; and to move and
charge as many skilful in the Tongues; and having taken pains in
that kind, to send his particular Observations to the Company,
either at Westminster, Cambridge, or Oxford.
13. The Directors in each Company, to be the Deans of Westminster, and
Chester for that Place; and the King’s Professors in the Hebrew or
Greek in either University.
14. These translations to be used when they agree better with the Text
than the Bishops Bible: Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Coverdale’s,
Whitchurch’s, Geneva.
15. Besides the said Directors before mentioned, three or four of the
most Ancient and Grave Divines, in either of the Universities, not
employed in Translating, to be assigned by the vice-Chancellor,
upon Conference with the rest of the Heads, to be Overseers of the
Translations as well Hebrew as Greek, for the better observation of
the 4th Rule above specified.
### PeterGoeman.com Commentary
* Translation rules 1, 6, and 14 are interesting. Rule #1 mandated that
their translation use the Bishop’s Bible as a base text whenever
possible. This was likely because the Bishop’s translation was the
official Bible of the Church. However, Tyndale’s translation ended up
being far more influential, accounting for 4/5 (80%) of the KJV New
Testament.
* Rule #6 mandated no study notes in the margins of the new translation.
The Geneva Bible (which was the most popular English translation of the
time) had many marginal notations, some of which King James read as
challenges to his royal authority. This was the main motivation for a
new translation. Thus, the KJV translation was limited from study notes.
* Translation rule #14 gives further evidence for the fact that the
intention was for the KJV translation to be more of a revision of
existing English translations than a new translation. The translators
utilized the existing English texts where possible.
* Against those who claim the KJV translation is inspired, I have written
about how [the KJV is not without error](https://petergoeman.com/errors-in-king-james-version-kjv/).
Here we also note that the KJV itself was not a revolutionary translation.
Rather, it was largely a compilation of already-existing translations.
If you are interesting in my other posts about the KJV, visit
[Seven Posts about the King James Version](https://petergoeman.com/posts-about-the-king-james-version-and-bible-translations/)
### Our Commentary
#### The King James Bible is a revision of Tyndale
Rules 1 and 14 make the King James Bible a revision, largely in the
family of Tyndale Bibles, with the additions from the Geneva bible.
Almost all of the Tyndale family are explicitly refered to; in
chronological order (still to be checked for the exact order) they are:
1. Tyndale’s 1524 1534,
2. Coverdale’s,
4. Matthew’s 1537,
3. The Great Bible 1539,
5. The Bishops Bible 1568, 1572, 1602,
Tyndale's bible had a couple of versions but was incomplete in the OT,
and was completed after his execution by Coverdale
(with Archbishop Cramer's support), to give Coverdale's bible. But Coverdale
read neither Greek nor Hebrew and may have worked from English or German translations,
notably of the Vulgate. Tyndale worked from Erasmus' 2nd. edition,
before the latter's 3rd edition corruption(s).
Matthew’s bible was the completion of Tyndale's work by John Rogers (with
Coverdale's help), as John Rogers had visited Tyndale in prison while he waited
2 years to be burned at the stake, and brought back Tyndale's latest corrrections
and translations into the Matthew's. Rogers also added footnotes that were
Sola Scriptura/Protestant in nature, and ruffled some catholics when the bible
came out - this may be another reason why James prohibited commentary footnotes.
Archbishop Cramer somehow managed to get Henry VIII's licence to publish the bible,
but it was called Matthew's as the possession of a Tyndale bible was
still punishable by death (and torture) at the time. John Rogers was a preacher
in London, and was the first person Bloody Mary burned at the stake.
The Great Bible was just a large format version of the Tyndale-Coverdale-Cramer
version, and by Henry's command, to be placed in all Church of England churches.
The Bishop's bible was a revision of the Great Bible, in an attempt to
remedy the OT translation from the Vulgate rooted in the
Tyndale-Coverdale-Cramer version, and began to replace Tyndale's
translation of certain words, like charity. It was appointed to be
read in the Churches.
The Geneva bible was done from Erasmus' 3rd edition, and contains a large
number of footnotes. It was the bible of the Calvanists and the Puritans
and was used by the Scottish Presbyterians. King James I was brought up
as a Scottish Presbyterian, but the Geneva bible footnotes were
incendiarily anti-ecclesiastical and anti-Royalist; hence another
reason why James prohibited commentary footnotes.
#### The King James Bible is a copyright violation Tyndale's!
If modern copyright laws were then in place, the heirs of Tyndale could have
rightly sued the King James Bible as a copyright violation because
the rule 3 is a travesty of Tyndale's work. Whilst running and hiding and
fleeing the agents of a sadistic English Lord Chancellor who wanted him
burned at the stake, he still had time to
[write a book](https://archive.org/details/ananswertosirth00unkngoog/)
back at the sadist defending his translation of eklesia as "Congregation"
not "the Word Church". The book explains in detail his reasons for the
critical choices of translation he made of the "et. cetera" words:

119
MarkdownCheatSheet.md Normal file

@ -0,0 +1,119 @@
# Markdown Cheat Sheet
Thanks for visiting [The Markdown Guide](https://www.markdownguide.org)!
This Markdown cheat sheet provides a quick overview of all the Markdown syntax elements. It can’t cover every edge case, so if you need more information about any of these elements, refer to the reference guides for [basic syntax](https://www.markdownguide.org/basic-syntax/) and [extended syntax](https://www.markdownguide.org/extended-syntax/).
## Basic Syntax
These are the elements outlined in John Gruber’s original design document. All Markdown applications support these elements.
### Heading
# H1
## H2
### H3
### Bold
**bold text**
### Italic
*italicized text*
### Blockquote
> blockquote
### Ordered List
1. First item
2. Second item
3. Third item
### Unordered List
- First item
- Second item
- Third item
### Code
`code`
### Horizontal Rule
---
### Link
[Markdown Guide](https://www.markdownguide.org)
### Image
![alt text](https://www.markdownguide.org/assets/images/tux.png)
## Extended Syntax
These elements extend the basic syntax by adding additional features. Not all Markdown applications support these elements.
### Table
| Syntax | Description |
| ----------- | ----------- |
| Header | Title |
| Paragraph | Text |
### Fenced Code Block
```
{
"firstName": "John",
"lastName": "Smith",
"age": 25
}
```
### Footnote
Here's a sentence with a footnote. [^1]
[^1]: This is the footnote.
### Heading ID
### My Great Heading {#custom-id}
### Definition List
term
: definition
### Strikethrough
~~The world is flat.~~
### Task List
- [x] Write the press release
- [ ] Update the website
- [ ] Contact the media
### Emoji
That is so funny! :joy:
(See also [Copying and Pasting Emoji](https://www.markdownguide.org/extended-syntax/#copying-and-pasting-emoji))
### Highlight
I need to highlight these ==very important words==.
### Subscript
H~2~O
### Superscript
X^2^

4
TheDidache.md

@ -12,8 +12,8 @@ are [also] known as The Lord's teaching to the heathen by the Twelve Apostles.
### JWO Videos
* **1Cor. 9:7 **: Paul conflicts with Matt. 10:8-9 and the Didache [2tdSsbo2AjU](https://youtube.com/watch?v=2tdSsbo2AjU).mp4
* **1Tim. 5:17**: Paul conflicts with Matt. 10:8-9 and the Didache [2tdSsbo2AjU](https://youtube.com/watch?v=2tdSsbo2AjU).mp4
* **1Cor. 9:7 **: Paul conflicts with (Matt. 10:8-9) and the Didache [2tdSsbo2AjU](https://youtube.com/watch?v=2tdSsbo2AjU).mp4
* **1Tim. 5:17**: Paul conflicts with (Matt. 10:8-9) and the Didache [2tdSsbo2AjU](https://youtube.com/watch?v=2tdSsbo2AjU).mp4
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]

242
TitleIndex.md

@ -20,127 +20,127 @@ Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
* [[GospelOfThomas]]
* [[GospelOfThomas1]]
* [[GospelOfThomasST]]
* [[JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]
* [[JWO_02_01_DoesPaul_sLongAcceptanceinNTProveGod_s_0003]]
* [[JWO_02_02_Will__0004]]
* [[JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]
* [[JWO_03_02_PaulCouldStillBeABalaamWhoInitiallyHasTrueProphecy_0006]]
* [[JWO_03_03_Balaam_sStarProphecyofMessiah(1290B.C.)_0007]]
* [[JWO_03_04_Conclusion_0008]]
* [[JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]
* [[JWO_05_01_DidPaulNegatetheLaws_0010]]
* [[JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]
* [[JWO_05_03_TheAbolishedLawWasAMinistryOfDeath_0012]]
* [[JWO_05_04_RomansChapterSevenSaystheJewsAreReleasedFromtheLaw_0013]]
* [[JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]
* [[JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]
* [[JWO_05_07_DoesPaulImplyTheAngelsLackedGodsAuthorityinIssuingtheLaw__0016]]
* [[JWO_05_08_JudeFindsPaulsIdeasHeretical_0017]]
* [[JWO_05_09_JesusHimselfCondemnsPaulsUnderminingofMoses_Inspiration_0018]]
* [[JWO_05_10_PaulContradictsJesusToo_0019]]
* [[JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]
* [[JWO_05_12_WhatAboutPro-LawCommentsbyPaul__0021]]
* [[JWO_05_13_HowActs24_14UnravelsPaulsAuthority_0022]]
* [[JWO_05_14_DidGodEverRespondToPaulsTeachingsontheLawsAbrogation__0023]]
* [[JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]
* [[JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]
* [[JWO_06_02_PaulsAntinomianismonIdolMeatIssueversusJesus_0026]]
* [[JWO_06_03_Conclusion_0027]]
* [[JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]
* [[JWO_07_02_strongestverseintheBibleforoncesaved,alwayssavedandIwouldnotdisagree.(R.T._0029]]
* [[JWO_07_03_WhyPaulMustBeTheFigureWhoPermittedFornication_0030]]
* [[JWO_07_04_RecapitulationofTheMeaningofRevelation2_14_0031]]
* [[JWO_07_05_Conclusion_0032]]
* [[JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]
* [[JWO_08_02_LutherCouldNotComeUpWithAGlossToSolvetheParableoftheSower_0034]]
* [[JWO_08_03_Conclusion_0035]]
* [[JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]
* [[JWO_09_02_ComparisonoftheParableoftheSheep&amp;_0037]]
* [[JWO_09_02_ComparisonoftheParableoftheSheep_0037]]
* [[JWO_09_03_GoatstoJamesChapter2_0038]]
* [[JWO_09_04_WhyIsCharitySoCentralinGodsWord__0039]]
* [[JWO_09_05_PaulinistInterpretationoftheParableoftheSheepandGoats_0040]]
* [[JWO_09_06_TheMeaningoftheParableoftheSheep&amp;_0041]]
* [[JWO_09_06_TheMeaningoftheParableoftheSheep_0041]]
* [[JWO_09_07_TheGoats_0042]]
* [[JWO_09_08_TheSalvationMessageofRevelationIsStraightFromtheParableoftheSower_0043]]
* [[JWO_09_09_Conclusion_0044]]
* [[JWO_0_01_Jesus_WordsOnlyorWasPaultheApostleJesusCondemnsinRevelation2_2_0001]]
* [[JWO_10_01_DidJesusApplaudtheEphesiansforExposingPaulasaFalseApostle__0045]]
* [[JWO_10_02_TertulliansPointsAboutPaul_0046]]
* [[JWO_10_03_LukeEvenTellsUsWhatWereTheChargesofHeresyAgainstPaul_0047]]
* [[JWO_10_04_Conclusion_0048]]
* [[JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]
* [[JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]
* [[JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]
* [[JWO_11_04_WhatAboutJustificationByWorksintheHebrewScriptures__0052]]
* [[JWO_11_05_WhatAboutJustificationByFaithintheHebrewScriptures__0053]]
* [[JWO_11_06_JamesUsed‘Faith_intheSenseGenesisUsedtheWord_0054]]
* [[JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]
* [[JWO_11_08_JamesRidiculesAFaithBasedonMereMentalAssent_0056]]
* [[JWO_11_09_JamesCritiqueofPaulsIdeaThatTheLawArousesSin_0057]]
* [[JWO_11_10_James3_17_IsItaResponsetoBeingtheVictimofPaulsHypocrisy__0058]]
* [[JWO_11_11_James3_17onVariances(Inconsistencies)_0059]]
* [[JWO_11_12_JamesFaultsOverbearingRebukes_0060]]
* [[JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]
* [[JWO_11_14_Conclusion_0062]]
* [[JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]
* [[JWO_12_02_DoTheDeadSeaScrollsDepictATrialofPaid__0064]]
* [[JWO_12_03_TheReliabilityofTheEbionitesDespitetheOne-SidedChargesAgainstThem_0065]]
* [[JWO_12_04_TheEbioniteChargeAgainstPaul_0066]]
* [[JWO_12_05_HowPlausibleIsTheEbioniteChargeAgainstPaul__0067]]
* [[JWO_12_06_EvidenceofPeter_sTestimonyAgainstPaulinaTrial_0068]]
* [[JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]
* [[JWO_12_08_TheValidityoftheChargesofPeterinHomily17_0070]]
* [[JWO_12_09_DidPaulAdmitHeRejectedtheTeachingsofPeter__0071]]
* [[JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]
* [[JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]
* [[JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]
* [[JWO_14_03_Conclusion_0075]]
* [[JWO_14_04_AnotherProphecyAimedAtPaul__0076]]
* [[JWO_15_01_DoesJesusEndupMarginalizedToMakeRoomForPaul__0077]]
* [[JWO_15_02_EliminationofSynopticsinModernGospelMessage_0078]]
* [[JWO_15_03_EliminationofJesus_MessageoftheSermonontheMount_0079]]
* [[JWO_15_04_TheMisleadingSuggestionbyEmphasizingJohnsGospelAccount_0080]]
* [[JWO_15_05_EvenC.S.LewisIsInThePrimarily-PaulCamp_0081]]
* [[JWO_15_06_ABetterExplanationWhytheGospelAccountsCameSecond_0082]]
* [[JWO_15_07_CircularLogictoObscureJesus_Words_0083]]
* [[JWO_15_08_DispensationalStrategyToAvoidJesus_0084]]
* [[JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]
* [[JWO_15_10_TheCircularReasoningInvolvedinDispensationalism_0086]]
* [[JWO_15_11_IrreconcilableDifferencesinPaulsNewCovenantTheology_0087]]
* [[JWO_15_12_TheConsequencesofDispensationalIdeas_0088]]
* [[JWO_15_13_DispensationalistAdmitsJesus_WordsAreNoLongerRelevantBecauseofPaul_0089]]
* [[JWO_15_14_Conclusion_0090]]
* [[JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091]]
* [[JWO_16_02_PatristicEra(125-325A.D.)RejectedPaulsSalvationDoctrine_0092]]
* [[JWO_16_03_ThePatristicEraChurchAlsoRejectedPaulsPredestinationDoctrine_0093]]
* [[JWO_16_04_ThePatristicEraAlsoBlastedPaulsDoctrineonEatingIdolMeat_0094]]
* [[JWO_16_05_WhatExplainsAlmostTwoMillenniaofIgnoringPaul_sTeachings__0095]]
* [[JWO_16_06_TheEasternOrthodoxChurchandPaul_0096]]
* [[JWO_16_07_ProtestantsAgreeFor1400YearsNoOneHadTheCorrectSalvationFormula_0097]]
* [[JWO_17_01_DoesItMatterIfWeRelyOnlyUponJesus__0098]]
* [[JWO_17_02_PaulsDifferentMessage_0099]]
* [[JWO_17_03_Don_tPaulandJesusAgreeonConfessionwiththeMouth__0100]]
* [[JWO_17_04_WhatAboutJohn3_16__0101]]
* [[JWO_17_05_JesusPaul_0102]]
* [[JWO_17_06_JesusPaul_0103]]
* [[JWO_17_07_JesusPaul_0104]]
* [[JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]
* [[JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]
* [[JWO_18_03_UnwarrantedCatholicTraditionExpandedApostolic‘Binding_Authority_0107]]
* [[JWO_18_04_ApostolicDecisionsWereBindingInHeavenOnlyWhenReachedJointly_0108]]
* [[JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]
* [[JWO_18_06_FinalThoughts_0110]]
* [[JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]]
* [[JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112]]
* [[JWO_21_01_BibliographicalReferences_0113]]
* [[JWO_21_02_BibliographicalReferences_0114]]
* [[JWO_21_03_BibliographicalReferences_0115]]
* [[JWO_22_01_Topics_0116]]
* [[JWO_23_01_Pdfs]]
* [[JWO_30_PaulorJamesChurch]]
* [[JWO_31_HowtheApostlesDied]]
* [[JWO/JWO_01_01_Introduction_0002]]
* [[JWO/JWO_02_01_DoesPaul_sLongAcceptanceinNTProveGod_s_0003]]
* [[JWO/JWO_02_02_Will__0004]]
* [[JWO/JWO_03_01_MustWeApplyTheBiblesTestsForaTrueProphettoPaul__0005]]
* [[JWO/JWO_03_02_PaulCouldStillBeABalaamWhoInitiallyHasTrueProphecy_0006]]
* [[JWO/JWO_03_03_Balaam_sStarProphecyofMessiah(1290B.C.)_0007]]
* [[JWO/JWO_03_04_Conclusion_0008]]
* [[JWO/JWO_04_01_DidJesusWarnofFalseProphetsWhoWouldNegatetheLaw__0009]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_01_DidPaulNegatetheLaws_0010]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_02_FurtherApplicability__0011]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_03_TheAbolishedLawWasAMinistryOfDeath_0012]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_04_RomansChapterSevenSaystheJewsAreReleasedFromtheLaw_0013]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_05_TheNewMoralityInItsPlace_0014]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_06_DenigrationoftheLawasGivenbytheAngels_0015]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_07_DoesPaulImplyTheAngelsLackedGodsAuthorityinIssuingtheLaw__0016]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_08_JudeFindsPaulsIdeasHeretical_0017]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_09_JesusHimselfCondemnsPaulsUnderminingofMoses_Inspiration_0018]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_10_PaulContradictsJesusToo_0019]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_11_MartinLutherDefendsPaulsAttributionoftheLawtoAngelsandItsAbolishedNature_0020]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_12_WhatAboutPro-LawCommentsbyPaul__0021]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_13_HowActs24_14UnravelsPaulsAuthority_0022]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_14_DidGodEverRespondToPaulsTeachingsontheLawsAbrogation__0023]]
* [[JWO/JWO_05_15_Conclusion_0024]]
* [[JWO/JWO_06_01_PaulContradictsJesusAboutIdolMeat_0025]]
* [[JWO/JWO_06_02_PaulsAntinomianismonIdolMeatIssueversusJesus_0026]]
* [[JWO/JWO_06_03_Conclusion_0027]]
* [[JWO/JWO_07_01_WhyDoesJesusMentionBalaaminRevelation2_14__0028]]
* [[JWO/JWO_07_02_strongestverseintheBibleforoncesaved,alwayssavedandIwouldnotdisagree.(R.T._0029]]
* [[JWO/JWO_07_03_WhyPaulMustBeTheFigureWhoPermittedFornication_0030]]
* [[JWO/JWO_07_04_RecapitulationofTheMeaningofRevelation2_14_0031]]
* [[JWO/JWO_07_05_Conclusion_0032]]
* [[JWO/JWO_08_01_DoesJesusShareSalvationDoctrinewithPaul__0033]]
* [[JWO/JWO_08_02_LutherCouldNotComeUpWithAGlossToSolvetheParableoftheSower_0034]]
* [[JWO/JWO_08_03_Conclusion_0035]]
* [[JWO/JWO_09_01_IsJesus_SalvationDoctrineinRevelationARebuttaltoPaul__0036]]
* [[JWO/JWO_09_02_ComparisonoftheParableoftheSheep&amp;_0037]]
* [[JWO/JWO_09_02_ComparisonoftheParableoftheSheep_0037]]
* [[JWO/JWO_09_03_GoatstoJamesChapter2_0038]]
* [[JWO/JWO_09_04_WhyIsCharitySoCentralinGodsWord__0039]]
* [[JWO/JWO_09_05_PaulinistInterpretationoftheParableoftheSheepandGoats_0040]]
* [[JWO/JWO_09_06_TheMeaningoftheParableoftheSheep&amp;_0041]]
* [[JWO/JWO_09_06_TheMeaningoftheParableoftheSheep_0041]]
* [[JWO/JWO_09_07_TheGoats_0042]]
* [[JWO/JWO_09_08_TheSalvationMessageofRevelationIsStraightFromtheParableoftheSower_0043]]
* [[JWO/JWO_09_09_Conclusion_0044]]
* [[JWO/JWO_0_01_Jesus_WordsOnlyorWasPaultheApostleJesusCondemnsinRevelation2_2_0001]]
* [[JWO/JWO_10_01_DidJesusApplaudtheEphesiansforExposingPaulasaFalseApostle__0045]]
* [[JWO/JWO_10_02_TertulliansPointsAboutPaul_0046]]
* [[JWO/JWO_10_03_LukeEvenTellsUsWhatWereTheChargesofHeresyAgainstPaul_0047]]
* [[JWO/JWO_10_04_Conclusion_0048]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_01_WasJamesWritingHisEpistleForATrialofPaul__0049]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_02_JustificationinAbrahamsLife_JamesandPaulatOdds_0050]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_03_JamesLikewiseSeesPaulsErroronAbrahamsJustification_0051]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_04_WhatAboutJustificationByWorksintheHebrewScriptures__0052]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_05_WhatAboutJustificationByFaithintheHebrewScriptures__0053]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_06_JamesUsed‘Faith_intheSenseGenesisUsedtheWord_0054]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_07_James_ReproofthatFaithWithoutEnduranceSaves(James1_12)_0055]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_08_JamesRidiculesAFaithBasedonMereMentalAssent_0056]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_09_JamesCritiqueofPaulsIdeaThatTheLawArousesSin_0057]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_10_James3_17_IsItaResponsetoBeingtheVictimofPaulsHypocrisy__0058]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_11_James3_17onVariances(Inconsistencies)_0059]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_12_JamesFaultsOverbearingRebukes_0060]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_13_AreJamessRemarksonBoastingAimedforPaul__0061]]
* [[JWO/JWO_11_14_Conclusion_0062]]
* [[JWO/JWO_12_01_TheEbioniteRecordsontheTrialofPaul_0063]]
* [[JWO/JWO_12_02_DoTheDeadSeaScrollsDepictATrialofPaid__0064]]
* [[JWO/JWO_12_03_TheReliabilityofTheEbionitesDespitetheOne-SidedChargesAgainstThem_0065]]
* [[JWO/JWO_12_04_TheEbioniteChargeAgainstPaul_0066]]
* [[JWO/JWO_12_05_HowPlausibleIsTheEbioniteChargeAgainstPaul__0067]]
* [[JWO/JWO_12_06_EvidenceofPeter_sTestimonyAgainstPaulinaTrial_0068]]
* [[JWO/JWO_12_07_HowActsMirrorstheClementineHomilies_0069]]
* [[JWO/JWO_12_08_TheValidityoftheChargesofPeterinHomily17_0070]]
* [[JWO/JWO_12_09_DidPaulAdmitHeRejectedtheTeachingsofPeter__0071]]
* [[JWO/JWO_13_01_DidJohnsEpistlesIdentifyPaulAsAFalseProphet__0072]]
* [[JWO/JWO_14_01_WhoistheBenjamiteWolfinProphecy__0073]]
* [[JWO/JWO_14_02_EzekielsWarningAbouttheRaveningWolves_0074]]
* [[JWO/JWO_14_03_Conclusion_0075]]
* [[JWO/JWO_14_04_AnotherProphecyAimedAtPaul__0076]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_01_DoesJesusEndupMarginalizedToMakeRoomForPaul__0077]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_02_EliminationofSynopticsinModernGospelMessage_0078]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_03_EliminationofJesus_MessageoftheSermonontheMount_0079]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_04_TheMisleadingSuggestionbyEmphasizingJohnsGospelAccount_0080]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_05_EvenC.S.LewisIsInThePrimarily-PaulCamp_0081]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_06_ABetterExplanationWhytheGospelAccountsCameSecond_0082]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_07_CircularLogictoObscureJesus_Words_0083]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_08_DispensationalStrategyToAvoidJesus_0084]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_09_HistoricalBackgroundofDispensationalism_0085]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_10_TheCircularReasoningInvolvedinDispensationalism_0086]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_11_IrreconcilableDifferencesinPaulsNewCovenantTheology_0087]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_12_TheConsequencesofDispensationalIdeas_0088]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_13_DispensationalistAdmitsJesus_WordsAreNoLongerRelevantBecauseofPaul_0089]]
* [[JWO/JWO_15_14_Conclusion_0090]]
* [[JWO/JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091]]
* [[JWO/JWO_16_02_PatristicEra(125-325A.D.)RejectedPaulsSalvationDoctrine_0092]]
* [[JWO/JWO_16_03_ThePatristicEraChurchAlsoRejectedPaulsPredestinationDoctrine_0093]]
* [[JWO/JWO_16_04_ThePatristicEraAlsoBlastedPaulsDoctrineonEatingIdolMeat_0094]]
* [[JWO/JWO_16_05_WhatExplainsAlmostTwoMillenniaofIgnoringPaul_sTeachings__0095]]
* [[JWO/JWO_16_06_TheEasternOrthodoxChurchandPaul_0096]]
* [[JWO/JWO_16_07_ProtestantsAgreeFor1400YearsNoOneHadTheCorrectSalvationFormula_0097]]
* [[JWO/JWO_17_01_DoesItMatterIfWeRelyOnlyUponJesus__0098]]
* [[JWO/JWO_17_02_PaulsDifferentMessage_0099]]
* [[JWO/JWO_17_03_Don_tPaulandJesusAgreeonConfessionwiththeMouth__0100]]
* [[JWO/JWO_17_04_WhatAboutJohn3_16__0101]]
* [[JWO/JWO_17_05_JesusPaul_0102]]
* [[JWO/JWO_17_06_JesusPaul_0103]]
* [[JWO/JWO_17_07_JesusPaul_0104]]
* [[JWO/JWO_18_01_Conclusion_PreachAndTeachFromJesus_WordsOnly_0105]]
* [[JWO/JWO_18_02_Jesus_OurSoleTeacher_0106]]
* [[JWO/JWO_18_03_UnwarrantedCatholicTraditionExpandedApostolic‘Binding_Authority_0107]]
* [[JWO/JWO_18_04_ApostolicDecisionsWereBindingInHeavenOnlyWhenReachedJointly_0108]]
* [[JWO/JWO_18_05_ViolatingJWOByHavingASecondMaster_0109]]
* [[JWO/JWO_18_06_FinalThoughts_0110]]
* [[JWO/JWO_19_01_GreekIssues_0111]]
* [[JWO/JWO_20_01_HowTheCanonWasFormed_0112]]
* [[JWO/JWO_21_01_BibliographicalReferences_0113]]
* [[JWO/JWO_21_02_BibliographicalReferences_0114]]
* [[JWO/JWO_21_03_BibliographicalReferences_0115]]
* [[JWO/JWO_22_01_Topics_0116]]
* [[JWO/JWO_23_01_Pdfs]]
* [[JWO/JWO_30_PaulorJamesChurch]]
* [[JWO/JWO_31_HowtheApostlesDied]]
* [[JesusWordsOnly]]
* [[JwoHebrewMatthew]]
* [[JwoRefs]]

12
WikiSoftware.md Normal file

@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
Parent: [[Home]]
## Wiki Software
This wiki is written for a Wiki hosted on a gitea instance, which makes it
easy to check out the whole Wiki, edit the pages in an editor, and then
check it back in in a controlled fashion.
Gitea uses Markdown as a Wiki syntax.
* [[MarkdownCheatSheet]]