There is NO "GRACE" Doctrine: Christ never taught it to his Apostles -- Paul made it up to sell to the Gentiles...CHA'CHING!!

“Grace did NOT COME IN until AFTER HIS DEATH and RESURRECTION.”

That’s not what the Apostle Paul says, Crabby. Abraham was given Grace through his faith in the Word, long before Messiah died and was resurrected.

Messiah’s Sacrifice paid the bill owed by us for transgressing of the Torah.

That which Paul said He left nailed to the stake, which Paul NEVER SAID was the Torah, or any part of it.

Yes, that.

Many of you attribute words to the Apostle’s pen which were NEVER written by him. Those who deny Paul say that Paul argued that the Torah was left nailed to the tree. But of course, that isn’t what he wrote.

Just as the Paul haters have it wrong, those like Pope Crabby who likewise misread the Apostle’s words, have arrived at a deformed and insufficient understanding.

Crabby Crabb wrote:

“The Whole Law was nailed to the cross – period.”

You’ll have to do better than that, Crabby. I take no man’s word for ANYTHING. And consider this:

In Deuteronomy 19:15, we read:

…at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.

Okay. That’s in the TORAH, you say. But here’s your problem Crabby… the Apostle Paul says the SAME THING. Now, leaving aside for a second the FACT that Paul here maintains that the TORAH is still in force; even if, as you say, that isn’t true, you still have to contend with this verse from Paul himself.

2 Corinthians 13:1

In the mouth of two or three witnesses SHALL EVERY WORD BE ESTABLISHED.

So. Where’s your SECOND WITNESS Your Eminence?

Apart from Messiah Himself, nothing was left nailed to the tree with the exception of what Paul SPECIFICALLY indicated. And he did NOT indicate the TORAH, either in whole or in part.

You are adding to the written Word, Eminence.

Sharon,

Why do I need second witness when I have made no claims? And again, there need no witness for Paul’s charge that ANY law or ANY part of a law was nailed to the tree, for one very simple reason:

Paul never once said that the Law, or even a portion of it, was left nailed to the tree.

Anyone who claims that he DID say that, has attributed words to the man that he never wrote, and have THEMSELVES become the false witness.

What need do I have of second witness for something which never happened?

Nice try, Crabby.

Once again, the verses you point to are not saying what you imagine they are saying. Are you relying on your friend King James when at other times you disdain his contribution? Why don’t you at least try being consistent, Your Grace.

Young’s Literal Translation

the enmity in his flesh, the law of the commands in ordinances having done away, that the two he might create in himself into one new man, making peace…

What exactly is being done away with here? Employ the rules of the Queen’s English, Eminence. Then, go and look at the verse in Greek. And before you tell me you have more important things to do, Crabby, I will answer you this: No. You have nothing more important to do. Your study of Scripture has been a failure. You are to blame for your own shortcomings.

Re-examine the verse.

There is no abolition of the Instruction of YHWH.

You must pay closer attention to the words as they are written, as they ACTUALLY exist, and stop pretending you know something when you know nothing.

This is shameful Crabby. I really should not have to do your homework for you. You get a ZERO for effort. Here is the verse as it appears, WITHOUT punctuation of any kind, from the word-for-word translation from the Greek.

Here’s the link:

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Greek_Index.htm

Here’s the verse:

The enmity in the flesh of Him the law of the precepts in decrees down un-act(ing) that the two He should be creating in self into one new man making peace.

And beyond that, I could come visit you and actually READ the words aloud, so that you have no further recourse to excuses of any kind.

There is no need for this to be as difficult as you are making it.

Your Eminence,

Enmity.

He abolished the enmity.

This is elementary linguistics.

But this point I will concede:

You are PERFECT Crabby.

You are a perfect mess.

And what was enmity you idiot?

Sharon,

This isn’t a matter of unsubstantiated claims at all. This is a matter of the entire Message of Salvation. Of what, exactly, are we availed by Messiah’s Sacrifice? Even if you reject all of the words written by Paul (though by so doing, you self-inflict a virtually insurmountable impediment to your progress), and by extension the associated Books and Gospel accounts from the New Testament, there still remains the Message of Salvation expounded in the remaining New Testament documents.

Getting back to the question – Messiah’s Sacrifice made forgiveness of Sin available to us. Messiah’s Sacrifice was a Blood Sacrifice for sin. Of this we can be certain, because we have it on record in the Gospel of John (which, if I am not mistaken, even you do not impugn) as well as the entirety of the Old Testament, which pointed to the ultimate Sacrifice for sin.

So what did Messiah leave nailed to the tree, if not the Bill of Attainder sworn out on our own heads as a result of our universal and brazen violation of each and every Statute and Ordinance of injunction and proscription ordained for us by YHWH in His Torah?

We owed a bill. And without payment of that bill, either in whole or in part, we would only have had our eventual termination to look forward to. But the bill was paid; at least enough of it was paid by Messiah to enable us to proceed to our own judgment with the hope of learning a fate for ourselves other than utter and permanent destruction.

Paul employed a literary device when he invoked an image of an actual document (a bill) left nailed to the tree by Messiah’s intercessory deed. Do you actually require me to provide you with confirming verses or passages which concur with this view, or are you willing to concede that Paul was employing figurative language while explaining the details of this entire situation?

“B.S., I do require a 2nd and 3rd witness in the form of Scripture [Paul, not even a credible 1st witness!!]…not your personal doctoral thesis for seminary school!”

You may pound sand madam. Perhaps when you learn to conduct yourself without being snippy and insulting, you will manage to have a meaningful conversation with another person about these most important of matters.

Frankly, dealing with one arrogant, insulting crab at a time is enough of a strain on my patience. Dealing with two at once is more than I feel obliged to attempt.

Until the day when you manage to conjure some courtesy, I hope you enjoy your lonely place in the shadows.