Who gave the Ten Commandments to Moses

Who gave the Ten Commandments to Moses

Created by Barnsweb on Aug 11, 2013

169 votes

Click on an option to vote

God

Angels

Peter

Paul

Adam

Abraham

John

Yeshua

Satan

other -

Mike Peterson

Jackson, MS

#142 Aug 25, 2013
Mousey wrote:
For you Catholics I better elaborate. "Biblical support or denial of Paul is weak I believe in both cases." This is not an oxymoron, Paul does in place witness in a way that strongly supports his case as a Christian by the substance of his testimony. On the other hand there are certainly contradictions with other parts of the bible and he has no apostolic support and no other apostles recognize him a apostle.
AP: Who cares what any Protester thinks about his/her interpretation of the Bible?

Only themselves.

There is only 1 Truth and it is not yours for sure.
Barnsweb

Canton, OH

#143 Aug 25, 2013
Yes. Look in all the NT for these:

1. Did any of the Twelve affirm Paul was also an 'apostle'?

2. Who else, other than Paul, said he was an apostle?

3. To what Church, other than Ephesus did Paul claim to be an apostle?

4. Pauls' letters to individuals contain his claim, but those are letters from him and provide what feedback that affirms his apostleship was accepted as he gave it?

5. How is it that Ephesus is in Asia, and the capitol thereof, is the area where Paul told Timothy that everyone had abandoned him? He evidently was accepted to talk in Synagogues at one point, but by the end he was basically cast out of the area and never went back. I wonder why. Do you?

6. Has anyone here also read Bonnhoffers' book, "The Cost of Discipleship" where he makes a number of claims about the 'cheap grace gospel' taught in his day and how it contradicts the gospel of great cost as taught by Jesus Christ?
Barnsweb

Canton, OH

#144 Aug 25, 2013
Even in Acts, who actually said Paul was an apostle?

Can it be established at the Scripture records that two or more witnesses prove Paul is truly and apostle? Seems that Luke, who wrote Acts, not providing this evidence speaks much from silence...or did I miss it?
Dave P

Morehead, KY

#145 Aug 25, 2013
Barnsweb wrote:
Guess you'd have to read the book and get the full background presented. Just taking the Scripture to see one is pretty easy though, and that point would have to do with the topic of eating meat sacrificed to idols. Jesus provides the detail in Revelation that the gone bad prophet Balaam erred by leading people astray to eat meat sacrificed to idols. God said idols are demons. So there was the commandment to tear down all the idol alters - likely because it would prevent Israel from eating meat sacrificed on them to demons.
At the Jerusalem Decree to the Gentiles, of just a few things actually recorded is the prohibition to eat meat sacrificed to idols. The record says Paul was there, doesn't it?
Then how is it that Paul wrote it was OK to eat meat sacrificed to idols when it was prohibited? How is it that those who followed the Decree were considered by Paul to be those whose faith was weak? Paul certainly did teach it was OK to eat is, as he said idols are nothing anyway. But God had declared that those worshipping idols are worshipping demons.
Did Paul teach differently than what God and the Apostles and Jesus Christ declared? Yes< or no?
If no, please state some reason why Paul is to be believed on this topic alone.
14 Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to wise men; judge for yourselves what I say. 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 17 For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.

18 Observe Israel after the flesh: Are not those who eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? 19 What am I saying then? That an idol is anything, or what is offered to idols is anything? 20 Rather, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to demons and not to God, and I do not want you to have fellowship with demons. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the Lord’s table and of the table of demons. 22 Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than He?
All to the Glory of God

23 All things are lawful for me,[a] but not all things are helpful; all things are lawful for me,[b] but not all things edify. 24 Let no one seek his own, but each one the other’s well-being.

25 Eat whatever is sold in the meat market, asking no questions for conscience’ sake; 26 for “the earth is the Lord’s, and all its fullness.”[c]

27 If any of those who do not believe invites you to dinner, and you desire to go, eat whatever is set before you, asking no question for conscience’ sake. 28 But if anyone says to you,“This was offered to idols,” do not eat it for the sake of the one who told you, and for conscience’ sake;[d] for “the earth is the Lord’s, and all its fullness.”[e] 29 “Conscience,” I say, not your own, but that of the other. For why is my liberty judged by another man’s conscience? 30 But if I partake with thanks, why am I evil spoken of for the food over which I give thanks?

31 Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.

Seems like at the end of the day, Paul told them to stay away from idolatry. Did you forget the rest of the story again BW? Or twisting scriptures to your own destruction?
Dave P

Plummers Landing, KY

#146 Aug 25, 2013
Barnsweb wrote:
Yes. Look in all the NT for these:
1. Did any of the Twelve affirm Paul was also an 'apostle'?
2. Who else, other than Paul, said he was an apostle?
3. To what Church, other than Ephesus did Paul claim to be an apostle?
4. Pauls' letters to individuals contain his claim, but those are letters from him and provide what feedback that affirms his apostleship was accepted as he gave it?
5. How is it that Ephesus is in Asia, and the capitol thereof, is the area where Paul told Timothy that everyone had abandoned him? He evidently was accepted to talk in Synagogues at one point, but by the end he was basically cast out of the area and never went back. I wonder why. Do you?
6. Has anyone here also read Bonnhoffers' book, "The Cost of Discipleship" where he makes a number of claims about the 'cheap grace gospel' taught in his day and how it contradicts the gospel of great cost as taught by Jesus Christ?
1. Peter affirmed he was "our beloved brother Paul".
2. Jesus. Apostle means "one sent forth; a delegated authority or representative". He was certainly that.
3. Rome, Corinth, the churches of Galatia, Colosse and Crete.
4. We have no feedback from anyone Paul, Peter, James, Jude or John wrote to. No return letters for any.
5. No proof BELIEVERS ran Paul out of Ephesus. He never went back. Why? How about being under arrest in Rome and executed?
6. "Cheap grace" is false evangelical doctrine and always has been. In context Paul teaches no such thing. You should know better.
Dave P

Plummers Landing, KY

#147 Aug 25, 2013
15 And after those days we packed and went up to Jerusalem. 16 Also some of the disciples from Caesarea went with us and brought with them a certain Mnason of Cyprus, an early disciple, with whom we were to lodge.

17 And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. 18 On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. 19 When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. 20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him,“You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; 21 but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. 22 What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will[a] hear that you have come. 23 Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. 24 Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law. 25 But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing,[b] except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.”

Acts 21:15-25. Is this after James had written his letter of charges about Paul? LOL. Or had Luke become a liar by then, since he was present at this time? The elders even called him brother. Did he fool them that badly, or did the Spirit forget to inform them Paul was a liar?
William

Seymour, TN

#148 Aug 25, 2013
You can't use any of Paul's epistles, 2 Peter, and anything past Acts 8. Luke's 24 chapters are also suspect because Luke was a friend of Paul's.

Welcome to Messianic Judaism, Jesus-only style.
Barnsweb

Canton, OH

#149 Aug 25, 2013
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
14 Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to wise men; judge for yourselves what I say. 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 17 For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.
18 Observe Israel after the flesh: Are not those who eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? 19 What am I saying then? That an idol is anything, or what is offered to idols is anything? 20 Rather, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to demons and not to God, and I do not want you to have fellowship with demons. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the Lord’s table and of the table of demons. 22 Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than He?
All to the Glory of God
23 All things are lawful for me,[a] but not all things are helpful; all things are lawful for me,[b] but not all things edify. 24 Let no one seek his own, but each one the other’s well-being.
25 Eat whatever is sold in the meat market, asking no questions for conscience’ sake; 26 for “the earth is the Lord’s, and all its fullness.”[c]
27 If any of those who do not believe invites you to dinner, and you desire to go, eat whatever is set before you, asking no question for conscience’ sake. 28 But if anyone says to you,“This was offered to idols,” do not eat it for the sake of the one who told you, and for conscience’ sake;[d] for “the earth is the Lord’s, and all its fullness.”[e] 29 “Conscience,” I say, not your own, but that of the other. For why is my liberty judged by another man’s conscience? 30 But if I partake with thanks, why am I evil spoken of for the food over which I give thanks?
31 Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.
Seems like at the end of the day, Paul told them to stay away from idolatry. Did you forget the rest of the story again BW? Or twisting scriptures to your own destruction?
No, I'm not twisting them, but Paul did, as your example shows. It was a prohibition without exception, not to be avoided by just not asking questions. And in another place he told otherwise, somuch as to say idols aren't anything anyway. Had he taken the word of God carefully and seriously he never would have made things an issue of personal conscience, but would have stayed with the commandments and doctrine of God given through Moses and Jesus Christ. Paul 'became all things to all men that perchance he could win some to Christ'- or better said, to his gospel, which is not the gospel taught by Jesus Christ. Had Paul not wrote otherwise that we have record of, one might think he taught the truth of God - but he certainly didn't teach the same things to different peoples. Do you need me to cite the passages that show what Paul taught in your reference is not really what he believed and taught to others? I'll be happy to do so, but I somehow think you are aware of those passages. Just let me know if you'd like me to site them...
Anonymous Proxy

Morehead, KY

#151 Aug 25, 2013
The only name recognition Paul has among church members that associated with Jesus in the bible is 2 Peter. He is not acknowledged as an apostle in 2 Peter. This is not as strong a case as one would like to see among scholars as to be the writings of Peter. It was one of the last books to be included in the canon and questioned by some but still made it into the bible. This is a middle of the road link as you can find pro and con about the 2 Peter author.

https://bible.org/seriespage/second-peter-int...

I think everyone would like to see a much stronger support of Paul and his position in the early church especially since he wrote so much of the new testament. Unfortunately the bible does not show much support for Paul among the apostles that were chosen by Jesus, it is strange.
Anonymous Proxy

Chicago, IL

#152 Aug 25, 2013
Even without the internal evidence of the bible all the early churches included Paul's writings in their bibles. The Catholic, Orthodox, Coptic, different Aramaic bibles, the majority of codexes, etc. No one seems to dispute his writings in a big way. I just have to accept them based upon the history of our church fathers. The Orthodox, Aramaic, and Coptic churches have remained faithful to their beginnings, more so that the Catholic church and include Paul. That does speak in favor of Paul but the bible is absent in strong support for him.
Anonymous Proxy

Chicago, IL

#153 Aug 25, 2013
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I'm not twisting them, but Paul did, as your example shows. It was a prohibition without exception, not to be avoided by just not asking questions. And in another place he told otherwise, somuch as to say idols aren't anything anyway. Had he taken the word of God carefully and seriously he never would have made things an issue of personal conscience, but would have stayed with the commandments and doctrine of God given through Moses and Jesus Christ. Paul 'became all things to all men that perchance he could win some to Christ'- or better said, to his gospel, which is not the gospel taught by Jesus Christ. Had Paul not wrote otherwise that we have record of, one might think he taught the truth of God - but he certainly didn't teach the same things to different peoples. Do you need me to cite the passages that show what Paul taught in your reference is not really what he believed and taught to others? I'll be happy to do so, but I somehow think you are aware of those passages. Just let me know if you'd like me to site them...
I agree that the idol meat issue does seem to be a contradiction. Before throwing Paul out what do you think of his writings being included in all the bibles of the different churches. They seemed to be some of the earliest books included in the canons even all churches did not have the exact same bible. There are some slight differences in bibles of Orthodox and Catholic for example but all include Paul.
Dave P

Lexington, KY

#154 Aug 25, 2013
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I'm not twisting them, but Paul did, as your example shows. It was a prohibition without exception, not to be avoided by just not asking questions. And in another place he told otherwise, somuch as to say idols aren't anything anyway. Had he taken the word of God carefully and seriously he never would have made things an issue of personal conscience, but would have stayed with the commandments and doctrine of God given through Moses and Jesus Christ. Paul 'became all things to all men that perchance he could win some to Christ'- or better said, to his gospel, which is not the gospel taught by Jesus Christ. Had Paul not wrote otherwise that we have record of, one might think he taught the truth of God - but he certainly didn't teach the same things to different peoples. Do you need me to cite the passages that show what Paul taught in your reference is not really what he believed and taught to others? I'll be happy to do so, but I somehow think you are aware of those passages. Just let me know if you'd like me to site them...
1. Have you also forgotten of the prophets and psalms that echo the idea that idols are indeed mute and useless? Or do you also think that statue of Buddha in the Chinese restaurant has some powers?

2. Are you getting good at playing dodgeball?

3. Have you ever heard of context? You don't seem to be good at reading in context.

I checked out the "Jesus' words only" book. Same hypothesis and imaginary ideas you've been sharing here. Those guys are leading you far astray.
Anonymous Proxy

Manassas, VA

#155 Aug 25, 2013
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I'm not twisting them, but Paul did, as your example shows. It was a prohibition without exception, not to be avoided by just not asking questions. And in another place he told otherwise, somuch as to say idols aren't anything anyway. Had he taken the word of God carefully and seriously he never would have made things an issue of personal conscience, but would have stayed with the commandments and doctrine of God given through Moses and Jesus Christ. Paul 'became all things to all men that perchance he could win some to Christ'- or better said, to his gospel, which is not the gospel taught by Jesus Christ. Had Paul not wrote otherwise that we have record of, one might think he taught the truth of God - but he certainly didn't teach the same things to different peoples. Do you need me to cite the passages that show what Paul taught in your reference is not really what he believed and taught to others? I'll be happy to do so, but I somehow think you are aware of those passages. Just let me know if you'd like me to site them...
There seems to be contradictions in the verses of Paul alone whether it be translation or whatever. He seems to say you are not to have fellowship with demons and you cannot partake of the Lord’s table and of the table of demons. Then he seems to say it is okay if you don't know it for sure it does not bother your conscience, but to not eat if it offends a weaker ones conscience. So why is it okay to eat sacrificed meat to idols whether or not it bothers you if yo are not to fellowship with demons. That seems to be a contradiction to me in the same general vicinity of Paul's writings. At least I do not understand it.
Dave P

Morehead, KY

#156 Aug 25, 2013
Reading and thinking exercises:

The announcement of the Jerusalem council was given specifically to the churches, the gentiles in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia. Rome and Corinth,, the "idol-food" passages Paul writes, didn't receive the results because first and foremost, they didn't exist yet. And, the major cause of the problem was brethren from Jerusalem going to Antioch, Syria and Cilicia and teaching the necessity of circumcision and keeping Moses's law.

Also of interest- the letter the council wrote says this: "You must be circumcised and keep the law- TO WHOM WE GAVE NO SUCH COMMANDMENT".

Romans 14 mentions nothing about food offered to idols, or idolatry period. A better argument can be made that the returning Jewish influence in the Roman church was the driving issue in Romans 14.

1 Corinthians does deal with food offered to idols, and as shown Paul does tell them to abstain from idolatry in Corinth.
Dave P

Morehead, KY

#157 Aug 25, 2013
As for Paul's statements in 1 Cor. 10:25-33, simply put, he is dealing with the idea that food in the meat market may or may not have been offered to idols. Who knew? In that case, ask no questions and eat it. If you find out for sure it was, don't eat it.

The issue isn't that hard, and there is no contradiction.
Anonymous Proxy

Manassas, VA

#158 Aug 25, 2013
One last thought. It could be possible that an apostle could just be wrong about something. Where we have a obvious contradiction that could be the case. Peter displayed a wrong and was rebuked for the situation of eating with Gentiles and withdrawing for appearance sake. For the council at Jerusalem to have to settle an issue there must have been some disagreement among them(circumcision ). I believe we should not eat meat sacrificed to idols as the apostles first decided concerning the Gentiles. I will not eat at a Chinese restaurant that has a statue of Buddha. Besides the false God part I just don't care for a fat man sitting around in a diaper.
Bobby

Fort Worth, TX

#159 Aug 25, 2013
I was wondering what motive Paul had, if indeed he was a false apostle. What I mean is, why would he knowingly teach a false doctrine and then willingly give his life for it as a martyr?

In my mind God used him as possibly the best orator in the entire bible. He gave up a high position of power as a Jewish pharisee willingly for a life that produced death. Why???

Pharisees believed in monotheism and the resurrection of the dead. Not bad when compared with the Sadducees. Even Peter was a Pharisee.
Anonymous Proxy

Manassas, VA

#160 Aug 25, 2013
Dave P wrote:
As for Paul's statements in 1 Cor. 10:25-33, simply put, he is dealing with the idea that food in the meat market may or may not have been offered to idols. Who knew? In that case, ask no questions and eat it. If you find out for sure it was, don't eat it.
The issue isn't that hard, and there is no contradiction.
Lol, that is not what those verses say.
Dave P

Morehead, KY

#161 Aug 25, 2013
Anonymous Proxy wrote:
<quoted text>Lol, that is not what those verses say.
Read the section. Verse 25 mentions the meat market or shambles; verse 27-28 deals with a dinner and whether or not the food was offered to idols or not. Don't know? Don't ask? Offered to idols? Don't eat. End of story.
Dave P

Morehead, KY

#162 Aug 25, 2013
Bobby wrote:
I was wondering what motive Paul had, if indeed he was a false apostle. What I mean is, why would he knowingly teach a false doctrine and then willingly give his life for it as a martyr?
In my mind God used him as possibly the best orator in the entire bible. He gave up a high position of power as a Jewish pharisee willingly for a life that produced death. Why???
Pharisees believed in monotheism and the resurrection of the dead. Not bad when compared with the Sadducees. Even Peter was a Pharisee.
Obviouosly for the riches and glamour he received. All jokes aside, that would be quite foolish of him.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bassett Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Speak Out Bassett Virginia !!!! (Jul '15) Apr 18 Bill 6
My girl Apr 18 Bill 3
i want to be Christian.can i ? (May '15) Apr 16 123abc 8
Why They Left: Listening to Those Who Have Left... (May '12) Apr 8 James A Farmer 45
How many of the 10 commandments have you broken? (Feb '12) Mar '17 sam i am 145
Need help finding friend Mar '17 J Collins 1
the church of Christ insider discussion boards (Aug '10) Mar '17 Democrappy ... 12

Bassett Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Bassett Mortgages