PAUL WOULDN'T GO AND BAPTIZE ALL NATIONS

[DougE]

Okay, correction. I follow Jesus according to the entirety of Scripture and not just the Gospels.
Correct me if I'm wrong, that Paul also followed Jesus.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator
Nick
\o/

So you follow Jesus in its entirety which means it includes Matthew Mark Luke and John

So are you under the law or not?
Jesus said to keep the law
Jesus told Paul we arent under the law, but grace
Which one do you follow?

 

[Christ4Ever]

So you follow Jesus in its entirety which means it includes Matthew Mark Luke and John

So are you under the law or not?
Jesus said to keep the law
Jesus told Paul we arent under the law, but grace
Which one do you follow?

Both, or you didn't understand Jesus, or Paul for that matter who received it from Jesus.

With the Love of Jesus.
Moderator
\o/

 

[DougE]

Both, or you didn't understand Jesus, or Paul for that matter who received it from Jesus.

With the Love of Jesus.
Moderator
\o/

No need to pursue this just saying you cant be under the law and not under the law at the same time. In this case you cant follow Christ according to his earthly ministry to Israel and according to Paul simultaneously.
Follow Christ as you wish
Think there is just one church as you wish
Anything I can say is futile

 

[Christ4Ever]

No need to pursue this just saying you cant be under the law and not under the law at the same time. In this case you cant follow Christ according to his earthly ministry to Israel and according to Paul simultaneously.
Follow Christ as you wish
Think there is just one church as you wish
Anything I can say is futile

Not what I was saying, and you know it. So, for you it can't be both law, and grace, can it?
Through Christ Jesus, you’ve been freed from the consequences of the Law. Without Him, God’s grace is truly absent from your life, and the Law still holds its full power over you. It doesn't absolve you from the need to be Holy and Obedient. (Added)
Yes, anything you say against that is futile.

My own personal observation is this: Sadly, what you are doing, is cutting pieces of a book to make another book/story to go by; all the while stating because the 1st part does not have what is in the 2nd book/story, you come up with a different conclusion for each one. If you had kept it as a whole, you would see there is no problem, and it flows gently and accurately in the telling.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator
Nick
\o/