To understand Pauline theology one must see that Paul saw and presented the law as the sin since sin was now ‘imputed’ when the law came (Romans 5:13, 1^st Corinthians 15:56). Paul saw the law (which originally came to show and tell man sin) as the condemnation of man. And so to him, the law “created sin” or created one a sinner (from the guilt of sin) (Romans 3:10-19) than it came to address or stop sin since to him the laws did not perfect one (Hebrews 7:19).

            NB; when I say guilt of sin; for example having to go through a ‘verification process’ because someone had once defrauded the company. And so this verification process (law) now treats you as a fraud even if you are not a fraudulent person. Or having to go through the security-check bank door, because the bank was robbed before or even because the bank wants to avoid the case of robbery. And so to them, your righteousness does not matter. But this very act of having to go through the security-check door could give you the feeling of being (treated) a thief or robber. And so to Paul, because the law came because of the sinner, if the gentile lived under the law, he will also be a sinner even if he is righteous. And that was why he fought had to see that the gentile did not become a Jew, yet he should be righteous. Because living under the law now meant you are a sinner. You could imagine the law telling you “thou shalt not steal etc.” – even when you are not guilty of these sins. I have discussed the problem of getting through the guilt of sin here; https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/11/02/did-paul-later-become-the-anti-christ/.

            He was focused about saving man from the condemnation of the law whereas he was supposed to ask man to obey the law, less ‘the sin’ sin occurs (As Christ Jesus in Luke 18:18-20). He saw salvation as in living without the law than he saw salvation as in obedience and perfecting the law and love.

            But is his doctrine and assertion true? Why then did God destroy Noah’s world (Genesis Six and Seven) seeing there was not given to them the law at the time? If men died in their sin without the law, and the law was now revealed to the Jews and then the ‘standard punishment’ of sin – which is death then revealed if one disobeys the law, why is Paul not seeing to perfect the law, Why is he trying to overturn this punishment? Should Paul and the ‘believers’ in GOD not appreciate the law which has come to show them sin, less he lives in the sin of the law and also perish?

            Paul was asked to preach repentance to the gentiles (Acts 26:18). Now how can you preach repentance from sin without the law? It has to be a law otherwise it is not sin, but rather, Paul has gone to free men from the law than to continue from where the law or Christ has stopped.

                    QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS REGARDING THE PAULINE THEOLOGY.

            How can the blood of Jesus Christ perfect us (in regard to sin) (Hebrews 10:14), yet it is said “Jesus lived a perfect life”? Did Jesus Christ die before he lived?

            How can the gentile be saved ‘by not being a Jew’, by (the blood of) Christ before he even know Jesus Christ and becomes a Christian? Did Jesus Christ die before he lived – to the gentile?

            And so if I am already ‘saved’ by not being a Jew, can i do anything and still see GOD? If the Jew lived under the ‘written law’ as “do not steal”, and yet I (gentile) am not under the law, am I then permitted to steal? Otherwise what is ‘Paul’s redemption from the law? Otherwise, how and why is the blood taking away the law which has come to show man sin, to take away sin and to confirm judgment?

            If Jesus Christ lived a perfect life in accordance with the will of GOD, is the gentile looking for the life of Christ Jesus to perfect him or his blood (Hebrews 10:14)? Is the new covenant in the life of Jesus Christ or in the blood of Jesus Christ?

            How can the Christ who manifested to the Jews as their salvation, now be said to be opposed to Judaism i.e. the law (through his blood ‘taking away the law’)? How possible that the Jew – as the Jewish followers of Christ (whom Christ manifested to), now be anti-Christ’s,(seeing they live under the law whereas Christ blood ‘took away the laws’)?

            If the law is being taken away (by the blood of Jesus Christ) i.e. if the law is not condemning the gentile, how can the gentile understand grace? How can the gentile understand the substitutionary atonement of Christ (to those denominations who believe it) without the law?

            Christ and religion; was Jesus Christ redemption to the human being (as he was to the Jewish Christians) or was he a religion; was he “the way”, or was he another way (as Paul has suggested)? Can a Muslim be a Christian, can a Jew be a Christian, and can any culture or personality be a Christ?

            “…if of works, then grace is not grace (Romans 11:6)”; certainly, if one is doing the works, then you cannot offer him grace because he is not ‘a debtor’ (yet). This grace comes when one is not doing the works. And so faith and grace to Paul is believing the blood which took these laws (which demanded works) away. But if Christ had redeemed us from these carnal ordinances (Hebrews 9), then why does Paul still talk about grace? Why does he still present this carnal ordinances as ‘laws’, hence ‘the grace’?     

Now the question is; how can Paul offer a grace and faith and a consequent salvation from ‘carnal ordinances and washings of which Christ saw as ‘traditions of men’?                     

MAIN CONTENT

                                                BEING THE IMAGE OF GOD

            Being made in the image of GOD (Gen 1:27), Sin is creating the wrong image of GOD; sin is falsifying the image of GOD. Being made in GOD’S image, our being alive is about affirming GOD’S existence and telling the story of who GOD is, to ourselves, to the lost world and to creation. And so not being who GOD is in any given time or scenario is sin.

            Sin separated us from GOD, because men started to covet GOD’S earth, steal and kill and so they told lies about who GOD is. We were created to be a manifestation of GOD or who GOD is to people. Now for example, playing loud music and ‘disturbing’ your neighbor is not who GOD is (to your neighbor). HE is love, and love is considerate. And that is where GOD sends a law (as the case of the commandments), to tell one “not to ‘hurt’, because that is not who HE IS. Now it is sin – not to me, but to GOD because you are falsifying who GOD is. It is wrong or right to me, but it is sin or good to GOD, because GOD is the law which enable us live together, peacefully – of which sin is rejecting GOD (when we fail to obey the law) or denying GOD (when we are in this act of sin) or this law which was supposed to be our guidance to peaceful living.

Now, what is the image of GOD that we are redeemed from ‘sin’ in the blood? If sin is stealing, how can we be redeemed from sealing in the blood or even from the law that asks us not to steal? We are reconciled to GOD by HIS image which is HIS WORD – The law and Christ, and not the ‘blood’. Has anyone proved newness in the blood? Is it the blood which gives The Spirit or The Word (as in John 6:63)? Is it the blood which gives conviction or the word? Is it the blood which shows sin or The Word? Is it the blood which is GOD’S image or the word? Is Christ the word of GOD or blood of GOD? And so how can one think salvation is not from the law? How can one think the law which is redemption of man into GOD’S image is a threat to man’s ‘salvation in the blood’?

            The law is the very image of GOD to us, who is redeeming lost man. And so the redemption of the law is from GOD HIMSELF, and so how can Paul see the law as condemning us and not saving us? Why should he fault the law for condemning one but not fault the sinner for the bad act?

            We were created in the image of GOD, and so as long as GOD exists, HIS life (which is the law) will always be a law upon us if we go against that law. And so teaching men that they are now free from the law and the law is no more sin, is teaching men that there is no longer GOD.

            Paul is now the author of Christianity, seeing he has separated the gentiles from the LAWS which to him are a strength of sin (1^st Corinthians 15:56). And so he has now created his image in Christianity as the god from now authoring the ‘the moral conducts’ to people without stating them as laws. Paul was now freeing men from a convicting conscience of knowing they will offend GOD and are offending GOD if they break the law – (knowing that the law no longer condemns them, yet they are to live righteously – from his words) seeing how he placed the law as an old covenant (Hebrews 8:13), and that Christ is mediating a better covenant (Hebrews 8:6), and did not see the law as complementing or fulfilling love but has giving his own frame to what love is (1^st Corinthians 13:4-8).

            It is a law, not because GOD chose to burden us, but because he loves those whom we will offend in the process of breaking the law. Paul spoke of the law without practical regard for them (as in Romans 7). Now should you be allowed to continue to kill or covet other people’s goods? Surely GOD also loves them and that is why it is a law. If you then prove unable to obey the law such that you are unable to live peaceably with the people around you, that is where you talk of judgment and death to the man who lives his life offending people.

            How is the law connected to GOD? Because we were made in GOD’S image, which means we are able to live with GOD’S character – which is the law. And so to break the law is to deny the existence of GOD, which then leads to harm to our fellows. And so obedience to the law shows us acknowledging GOD, and then interpreting this character between us for peaceful and a loving living. Hey people, GOD is our life, and GOD is the law!

                                                REDUCING STRENGHT OF THE LAW.

            For where the law gave an option for one to choose between life and death, to choose between GOD and sin, Paul has now distorted this options which is greatly (as evident today among Christians) causing men to sin and ere without convictions and repentance. And where the law clearly stated the person of GOD as ‘hating’ the act with a command ‘not to do’ a thing, yet Paul had changed the tone and judgment of the law to not being serious – for where the law says ‘thou shalt not steal’, then Paul came with a tone of ‘don’t take what belongs to someone else’ as though there was not a consequence for it. And so the words of Paul – who was now trying to replicate the law without it being the law has become admonitions and encouragements and no longer the law. But you cannot admonish men to keep the law; for why was it called the law in the first place? Is it not to show us sin and that we are no longer in GOD’S image? Is one supposed to appreciate the law for correcting him into GOD’S image or reject it because it ‘showed sin’?

            One no longer feels that conviction when he breaks the law, seeing that he has been saved already, for if Paul where to stress the law, then it meant obedience to the law contributed to salvation, which to him was against his salvation by grace and through the blood of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 2:8-9), seeing how he sees the law as an old covenant (Hebrews 8) and as the ‘cause’ of sin (1^st Corinthians 15:56).

                                                            CONSCIENCE

            Only a law can form a conscience. A conscience does not create perfectly GOD’S LAWS, rather the conscience is formed from GODS words. It has to be a law for there to be repentance and conviction, for one can dismiss the law (as the case today is) by virtue of being his own god (since there is no longer a law) who has his own word of conviction.

            For if conscience created a law, surely there won’t have been sin and the law in the first place. And then if conscience gave man the law, then we were still under the law. And if conscience gave man the law, then all creation would have been alike. Lastly, if conscience alone gave man the law, then Christianity today would not be struggling with what morality is.

                                                REJECTING FAULT OF SIN

            Paul’s doctrine does not accept the fault of sin; “For this corruptible must put on incorruption” (1^st Corinthians 15:53).

            He did not see the need nor did he have the desire to overcome his temptations (Romans 7) as Christ (John 4:1-11, Revelation 3:21). To Paul, sin is the fault of the flesh, seeing he did not accept that there is the self which causes for these sins. He did not see immortality as a reward for having overcome, he saw sin as natural to the flesh.

To him, one will be given perfection and not that one will ‘walk his way’ to perfection, especially seeing that he has made it clear that perfection was not a possibility in flesh (Romans 7).

            Paul, who ought to preach to the sinner to shun sin and live by the law and be saved, but has gone to tell sinners their sins are upon Jesus Christ and the law is no longer a measure of salvation and knowledge of sin.

            In truth, salvation is by the law because of the sinner who is in disobedience to the laws. In truth, righteousness is of the law seeing that the ways of the sinners are not the righteousness of GOD. In truth, life is the law because it is who GOD is and GOD is his word and that is how we are sealed.

It is THE WORD or LAW who gives judgement. It is THE WORD which firms judgement, either as good or bad. Thou can feel a thing be wrong or right and give your judgement, yet it GOD who gives the ‘final say’ or ‘final’ judgement. And so THE WORD or LAW is knowledge of judgement unto us.

Now, the laws of GOD are for us. If GOD is giving a law or conduct, it is for us to benefit and not GOD. If GOD says “thou shalt not steal”, surely the law is for us and not as though we are stealing from GOD. And so Paul talking about leaving the law in Romans 7 is just anti-Christ. The problem is, Paul presented the laws of GOD as for GOD, but it looks as though he did not really understand their aim. Of course the law has to dominate one’s life (Romans 7:1). Should GOD then permit us to kill or steal or covet then? Does GOD not love those whom you will offend? And that is why there is judgement, because GOD equally loves those who you will offend when you break GOD’S commandments. And so if you prove unable to live with people, that is what judgement or the final death is for; that you be put aside from the world of people. And so the law has to and must dominate one’s life, because if one man disobeys the law, more law breaking might come to be as a result of vengeance and other subsequent disobedience. And so yes, the law must dominate one’s life, because man has proven he cannot love his brother or neighbour if the law does not instruct him on what love is. And that is the Ten Commandments, telling us love does not kill, or steal or covets. And so the commandments are equally an oral law to love also.

Now the problem is with how Paul has placed the Ten Commandments in a bad light (that they came from the sins of men Romans 3:10-19, and that it is the strength of sin 1^st Corinthians 15:56). Love is part of the redemption to the commandments and not in contradiction to the commandments. A lack of love is what brought about the law and Mosaic laws, seeing that men were not hurting and afflicting each other. And so the difference is, while the law love expected us to live without the thought of hurting one another, and we failed, that which we were supposed to have manifested in love (which is not kill and not steal and not covet etc.), has now come in ‘law’. The law, love recognises our godliness so as to live peaceably with one another, but a failure to live through this godliness is what has brought about ‘the law’ which does not recognise one’s godliness. And so were we have proved it difficult to have affection one to another and fulfil the law, we can still obey the laws and be saved. The risk is, the commandments are not the perfect reflection of the fruit of love and so one might still not be showing love when he is perfecting the commandments, hence why we need to love each other and avoid any kind of evil towards one another.

And so basically, love is a redemption from the law, yet fulfilment of the commandments (seeing that the laws are not the perfect representation of love). And so we will find that love is an addition to the commandment (giving man back the godliness which is lost with the law). Love is part of the redemption in additions to the law and not a contradiction to it. For if one fails to love, is the result not (also) with killing or stealing? And so in addition to Paul’s understanding of the fruits of love in 1^st Corinthians 13:4-8, the commandments are and addition to it (Love).

Love is a law, and it is that act of lack of love which is the law or commandments because love is a law. Shame Paul has gone on to create an impression of love as not of the law (Galatians 5:22-23), when the law is very well reflective of the fruit of loving people.

                                    PAUL’S PROBLEM WITH ‘the law’.

            In 1^st Corinthians 15:56; ^“The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. ⁵⁷ But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ”. And Romans 5:13; ^“ (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law…”

            We see that to Paul, talking about ‘the law’ meant that one is talking about sin and when one talks about sin, then comes judgement and death. And so to him, doing away with ‘the law’, so as it not being sin, yet one should uphold it, but where one fails, then there is the grace for him in the blood of Jesus who has “taken away the law or condemnation of the law”. But if the law is GOD’S Character which of which makes it a law to the sinner, yet Paul is trying to reduce the ‘strength’ of the law, then he is only trying to take away GOD’S image from the law and from religion. One has to know he has offended GOD when he breaks the law, but that was what Paul was trying to do away with – this presence of GOD in the law. Especially seeing how he sees the law as not GOD’S righteousness (Romans 3:21-26). The law is never about us though it is for us hence why we must present the laws and ways of GOD to people as their salvation or condemnation set by GOD. If we present GOD’S ways to people as not laws, then they become choices, and so people find repentance or obedience as optional and not a necessity, and where there is not a perfect obedience to GOD’S LAWS, other humans or creations suffer these consequences, hence why it is a law.

                        PROBLEM OF INCLUSUION OF THE GENTILES.

The problems with Paul’s doctrine is that he has never stated what the new covenant Christ is mediating is and so the inclusion of the gentile into GOD’S covenant is the problem. Paul did not see the inclusion of the gentile as into the laws of GOD, but as from the laws of GOD – in the blood of Jesus which annulled these laws. And so the gentile inclusion is in believing this blood which has now covered the laws which stood against them while they were gentiles, and thus being saved. Now are my now free to act against the law? If ones acts as against the law, is it not sin then? If one is still expected to live the righteousness of the law else he will not see GOD (Galatians 5:19-21), then what is Paul’s ‘salvation’ from the law?

But how is he now including people in a covenant that is old and void (Hebrews 8:13)? If Paul saw the law as for sinners (1^st Timothy 1:9-10), and that the law is fulfilled as in the law of love, How am I saved when I still need to manifest the law? If the law is fulfilled in the law of love, then what is Paul’s business with the law?

If Paul was not trying to justify his sins by the blood of Jesus, if he believed the law was for the sinner i.e. if he was in perfect obedience to it, trying to create Christianity from “salvation in the blood from the law is wrong”. That though Paul might not be needing the law, yet others who might sin or be tempted to sin in the way of the law will need the law, Children growing up will need the law, ‘strangers’ coming into Judaism will need the law. The Ten Commandments are just an aspect of love, and Paul may be faltering in another way. One needs to perfect love in other to say there should not be the commandments, and this person has to perfect the commandments without knowing them. That Paul hath benefited of the Commandments, yet now no longer sees them as of importance, and has given the gentiles who need this law this mentality. Today’s Christianity is all about Paul and his self and not Jesus Christ who though was the law, yet lived his life for the weak of whom the law is made for.

Paul did not see love as redemption to the human being, but rather saw it as opposing the laws (because of where he has placed the laws as made for sinners (1^st Timothy 1:9) and as strength for sin (1^st Corinthians 15:56)). And so he hath gone on to create a new religion where it is redemption to those who are under religion (as Judaism, because the laws of Judaism did no perfect orally what love yet love can give more laws and perfection than what Judaism has is). Christ who would have manifested HIMSELF as love in religions and cultures and traditions is now seen as a religion. What was for all has now become for the some who believe Paul’s own understanding of Christ and love. And so basically, Paul is salvation to ‘Christians’ (Paulinists).

And so if one talks about the law in Christianity, then there is then no Christianity, seeing Paul saw Christ or the blood of Christ as covering the law which was the strength of sin, seeing to him that one had to put the cross of Christ to effect (Galatians 2:21), And so if one spoke about the law, then it was still Judaism and then there was no redemption.

And so we see the spirit of Paul in Christians who never refer to their wrongs as breaking GOD’S law, who see obedience to GOD’S laws as of no necessity, who are in confusion on what their problems are and how to solve them, but because they have and are not referred to the laws of GOD, they don’t know how to address them, who while they are supposed to be together from the unity of GOD’S laws, are now in separations on what they think is right or wrong or what is meant to be obeyed and what is not, You see a religion where men cheat and offend each other without convictions, you see people who have the word love but do not know how and when to implement it seeing that Paul has now presented Judaism who live under the laws as anti-Christ (because Christ has come and has covered their law by his blood). And so inventing laws from lack of love to Paul is still going to refer to sin, and then death. Seeing that Paul has ‘reduced’ the strength and authority of the law and has freed men from some, you find it is as though ‘there is no GOD nor HIS presence’ and reverence in Christianity.

            As the law says “thou shalt not kill”, and you are not a killer or are certain you will never kill, then you understand that the law is for the weak who has the tendency to do so. But bringing down an entire religion because you ‘think’ the law put on one the guilt of sin of the sinner (Romans 3:19) is wrong even because there are still weak people and unborn people who will grow to make use of the law. And so this was the basic sense of Jesus Christ that distinguished him i.e. knowing that even in the religion, even amidst the laws, one can still love and be free from the guilt of laws (which as I have explained here https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/11/02/did-paul-later-become-the-anti-christ/ under the topic; THE ANSWER TO THE PROBLEM OF GUILT FROM THE LAW, which might cause one to think he lives under the guilt of sin which brought about the law), knowing that most of the Judaisic Laws were to address a lack of love, and so he taught his disciples that in other to avoid any type of sin which might not be written in the law, in other to be free from any guilt of sin of the law, they should just love each other. And so what is all this that Paul went on doing about the law and the blood in the name of Jesus Christ?

            Let’s imagine that we are saved if we can now tattoo ourselves or raise false reports and yet believe in the blood of Jesus which covered and annulled this laws and the blood which is mediating a ‘better’ covenant for us, Yet the Jew who does not tattoo himself or raise false reports is now condemned because he does not believe in the blood of Jesus which covered these laws?

            Secondly was the life and word of Jesus as in Matthew chapter 5-7 not a continuation of ‘Judaisic’ laws or oral laws of love?

            Thirdly, can one ‘do not steal’, or ‘do not kill’, like going close to what is not yours with the intention of stealing it, then turning back from it or going close to stabbing someone then turning back from the act? Is it not just basic thinking that the laws of GOD are there to stress what love is and to avoid men committing this acts? If we see (for example) Mark 7:21 and 22, we see that Jesus had included even things which were not in the commandments along with things which were in the commandments. But that is because if we also love people, we will not think evil of them, even though this is not in the commandments, yet it is under the law of love. The sins of the lack of love are extended to our generation, like selling harmful foods and products to people. And so Paul saying that the blood of Jesus had covered the laws which stood against us is wrong, because these laws were Oral laws to love except if his understanding of love means hugging people and greeting them and kissing them, and that’s all.

                                                            TRADITIONS

            The only problem Jesus Christ had with the Jews was that they exalted their traditions as the laws ‘of’ GOD also. And that was the rift he had with them as in Mark 7. Traditions are not a bad thing, exalting them as sin or righteousness is the problem. Jesus basically came and redeemed as his followers, from the compulsory obedience to them as a means of salvation or doing GOD’S will. And so why is Paul now talking about the blood of Jesus as what covered these carnal ordinances when Jesus clearly saw them as traditions of men (which was optional and not a must as the Jews placed them).

            The problem is Paul started his “Christianity” from the Jewish laws, but Jesus did not even see some of these “laws” as laws. And so this has affected how a disciple of Christ may see Christ and how a Paulinist will see Christ. A Christ disciple or follower of Christ will be saved by believing in the life of Christ without any blood. But a Paulinist thinks he is saved by believing the blood of Jesus Christ as his redemption from these Judaisic laws. A follower of Christ sees his redemption from the Judaisic traditions from the life of Jesus Christ, while a Paulinist will see his redemption from these traditions as from the blood of Jesus. And so what Jesus did not see as a law – hence the redemption of the followers of Christ, Paul has created them as laws on the gentiles so as to justify his sanctuary service. And here is the problem; while salvation to Christ and to Christ’s followers will be in works and obedience to the law (seeing Christ did not see the traditions as ‘anything’, Paul (who saw these traditions as laws), has now created the displacement of them (in the blood of Jesus), as salvation to the gentile. The problem was, Paul did not pay attention to the disciples of Christ while he ought to, so as to understand what Christ is, but went on about his own Christianity and in the end, created a religion from Christ (as in 1^st Corinthians 14:34-36, 1^st Corinthians 11:2-16), whereas Christ was redemption to those under religion (https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/09/28/controversy-over-the-word-lamb-between-judaism-and-christianity-and-how-it-has-affected-islam/).

            I can tell one that part of the life of Christ was “fulfilling the righteousness of the law”, even though it was no longer a law. And so obedience to the Judaisic laws as a Jew is not sin and not being under a curse. Likewise a Christian can equally choose to fulfill the righteousness of the law if he wishes to. It is the life of Christ which determined what were laws and necessary to salvation (such as the laws of GOD (Luke 18:18-25)) and what were not (from the same conversation in Luke 18:18-25) and not his blood.

            And as with circumcision as seen in Matthew 7:22-23, in Jesus’ response to them about him breaking the Sabbath from healing a man, we see that he did not see the circumcision law as an active law on the Jews, he saw circumcision as a tradition, even though it was God’s (Christ’s), covenant with Abraham. And so why is Paul now telling men that it is the blood of Christ which has set them free from these laws whereas Christ had set himself and his disciples free from these carnal ordinances and traditions because they were traditions and were not a law on the latter generations of the Jews?

            And so that is how the gentile is free from these carnal ordinances and traditions; by believing ‘in the life of Christ’ which set him free from them and not in the blood of Jesus Christ (which is Paulinity and not Christianity). Paul is the author of salvation in the blood and not Jesus Christ. Christ had redeemed men from these traditions as laws and spoke of salvation as in doing GOD’S will (Matthew 7:21, Luke 19:1-9), but Paul who later became the anti-Christ from his misrepresentation of Christ- Christ (even his life and words) being the way to salvation, saying salvation is in the blood of Jesus from the laws of Judaism when Jesus came to perfect and complement them.

            Jesus lived his life fighting for the exaltation of GOD’S laws as in Mark 7, yet all of a sudden, there are no laws through Jesus Christ (His blood).

            Jesus came to continue the redemption and salvation of man as in Luke 18:18-25, Yet Paul now says that there is not a law because the law is a strength of sin, thus judgment, then death. Of course the laws are of GOD, yet for us, and if one shows incapable of living with people such that he lives his life hurting people, then surely he cannot be the problem in heaven, and so his is the judgment and death.

            Jesus Christ was not only perfect in regard keeping the laws ‘of’ GOD, but was sinless in regard his relationship with GOD. What we need to believe to be saved is the life and thoughts of Jesus Christ who was sinless, and not the ideas and philosophies of Paul. Christ was a ‘reformer’ to some part of Judaism, but Paul was totally against Judaism ‘because the blood of Jesus Christ annulled the laws’, and because Judaism was a ‘curse’ if one broke a command and because the law is the strength of sin and many other false inventions.

            We can imagine Paul who was sent to preach the repentance of sin to the gentiles; but if you don’t present the laws of GOD to them, can there be repentance? He presented the laws of GOD as admonitions to them, and that the law was against them, and so we see the reckless Christianity that there is today – people who offend and sin without convictions.

            In John 13:34-35, we see that Christ had basically reduced salvation to love and excluded the traditions of carnal ordinances the Jews were into.  And so what is the blood of Jesus now doing as ‘salvation’ from the ordinances which stood against us (Colossians 2:14)? Christ ‘reformed Judaism’ to his followers without any blood, but Paul is doing it with the blood (and calling it salvation whereas Christ had taught his apostles that salvation was in his words, which is how HE lives in us and takes away sin John 8:51, 12:50). And that is where the problem now is, seeing that Paul has shut out the influences of the apostles whom Christ sent to preach to the gentile world after Jerusalem (without any language of blood or salvation in the blood). Paul has dominated and misled men with his false teachings and doctrines.

            How does a redemption from these carnal ordinances and diverse washing even speak ‘salvation’ (Hebrew 9)? How can one be saved from not keeping traditions of men? The redemption was to the Jew first, who were told these carnal ordinances were acts of GOD. The fact is, these carnal ordinances were never GOD’S will for man, and that is basically what Jesus was saying in Mark 7. And so saying one is ‘saved’ from not obeying them is just anti-Christ, seeing that Christ ‘did not see them as anything’. Salvation is in goods works, even witnessing the life of Christ which was love, for HE came to testify against us who were no longer witnessing HIM, yet to redeem us with HIS life.

            Now we see the politics of Paul; If through Christ’s death there is no longer a law or the law has been weakened such that it is not a sin yet we ought to uphold it, what sin is Christ dying for? What covenant is Christ mediating, since the covenant of the letter is old? The writings of Paul are of a man who is trying to be complete before the gentiles; combining his own work and that that of Christ from the apostles, and that is where the confusions come in, because as I have discussed, Christ did not come to fulfill the sacrificial system but to destroy it (Page 10 starting from MISUNDERSTANDINGS BETWEEN PAUL AND THE APOSTLES), and also, it was the life of Christ which was the reformation of Judaism and not the blood, and also, he differed in understanding to what took place under the temple, i.e. is it the law that is being annulled when one sins (which makes it look as though it permitted the sin), or is the blood covering the law created when we do the sinful act, for example, the law says “do not steal”, and so when one steals, he basically over-writes the law “do not steal”, with “steal”, which is the sin which is covered or displaced.

            And so in discovering that his concept of Christ taking away sin, which means to annul the law, he had further gone up to instruct men in the manner of the laws so that they obey them. But this problem came because Paul attempted doing something which was already done in Christ Jesus without any blood.

                                    JESUS AS HAVING NO FORM.

Jesus Christ is the word of GOD as love, and so we are the body to the word; he is the word and we are the manifestation of it or the religion of it. The Spirit of GOD who lives in us now uses this word to interpret love in us to others and thus create ‘an oral’ law for the law love. And so we will see that forgiveness, forbearance charity are all ‘oral laws’ to love. And so basically, we are the Oral laws to the word love. And so as in Exodus 23:1-7, we see the Oral laws to love where people have failed to love. As I have explained if we love people, we will not offend them but when there is not this love, then the law comes in so that we can do those things we ought to have done if we loved people. And so there is nothing wrong with Judaism or the law. If you don’t have need for the laws of Judaism, then that’s because the law is for the weak who might ere. And so you don’t have any business or right to change or annul these laws since they are not for you.

Jesus’ commandment to his disciples were to love each other (John 13:34). But to love each other, we first need the bodily manifestations or oral law to what love is (as Paul did in 1^st Corinthians 13:4-8), and these are basically what some aspects of Judaism are about – To shed light to us on ways which we can love people. One can be a Jew and be a Christian still, Just as one can belong to any race and religion and still be a Christian because Christ was love.

A law is of necessity so that two people can be able to successfully live together, the word love only recognise our godliness as those who will not steal and kill etc. but when we show incapabilities to love, then the law comes to create or achieve this peace without recognising our godliness, and so the law and the word aim to achieve one goal, which is create peace and equality for all. And so if one lives through these laws, he will be saved, but the problem is, the laws were not the perfection of love and that is what Christ came to do – to perfect this love in him.

                                    RELIGION AND CHRIST.

            (Example) As seen in John 4:23; “But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him”.

            Christ had no form or humanity to be religious, but it doesn’t mean he is against religion, but were religion which affect how much we ‘love’ everyone, then it becomes a problem to him. Now as from the verse, we see that before our worship or prayer must be complete and acceptable before GOD, it must be in sincerity. And so this is CHRIST as the word of GOD, it is left to us to in which ever way or posture or direction worship GOD, but what makes our worship complete before GOD is that it has to be intentional and sincere. And so to some, they might prefer to kneel while praying, some might prefer to stand while praying, some might sit with their heads bowed down, this is left for the believer, but GOD is not moved by our postures when we worship, but is moved by our hearts. And so from here we see that religion is man and not Jesus Christ. And this is where the gentiles are now ‘included’ in the covenant of Christ Jesus. That though they don’t have a wall or a direction, their prayers or worship when channeled to GOD in sincerity of heart is being heard by GOD also. And so this verse equally exposes idolatry; if any material tends to occupy our hearts when we say we pray or worship GOD, or if any material is a necessity otherwise we cannot worship GOD, then it is idolatry.

            Religion is like the ‘dresscode’ for a wedding, knowing that it will not add to the success or even joy of the marriage or ceremony. And so to Christ Jesus, he is not against our ‘dresscode’, but he does not wear it because it is not a success to a marriage. And so to him, a marriage can be successful with the dresscode or without it. Christ does not stop religion, but where religion will cause for self and will displace the word love in us in that we no longer are able to recognize other people as ourselves, then it becomes a problem to GOD because all creation were created to be unified under love. And so Christ is not against our traditions also, but being the word of GOD, if this traditions tend to gain more influence over GOD’S WORD, then HE testifies against them (as in Mark 7:1-23). If as Islam have created a religion and called it a religion of truth whereas they are many diverse ways of worshipping GOD, and so we see that they have exalted their traditions and ways above GOD’S laws such that they don’t consider worship to be in “Spirit and in truth”, but a certain way. Like I have said, man (through his traditions) cannot be the creator of truth (when he exalts them to the place of GOD’S commandments). His traditions and ways are his convictions and should not be a measure of salvation to him or anyone, seeing everyone can equally have a tradition from his conviction or godliness also.

            Now, Christ is the word of GOD who has been manifested to us in various words due to our sins. And he is love because we loved not, and he is holy, because we are not in holiness, and he is innocence, because he was in complete innocence before GOD – in obedience to GOD’S WORDS, he was life, because he was against anything which was against life and he was rest because he was not a slave to materialism or any invention (such as traditions), which are not GOD’S righteousness.

            The word of GOD is the knowledge of GOD which connects us with GOD. The word does not affect our Godliness, but we are gods from the word. Love for example, it does not tells us how to love – We love people in our own various ways, or life; it does not tell us what to eat or how to live, but we must be respectful of every life and our own life also. And so a religion or culture may decide how they want to do their things but it must be from the minds of Christ who was love and innocence and life and rest and holiness.

            And so we ought only be appreciating each other, even our godliness manifested from our different convictions to serve GOD, and not seeing each others as not serving GOD in the ‘right’ way.

                                                CHRIST AS INNOCENCE

 I have written on this here; (https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/09/28/controversy-over-the-word-lamb-between-judaism-and-christianity-and-how-it-has-affected-islam/). Islam, just like Paulism have gone on creating or generating oral laws without laws of GOD. Oral laws are the bodily definition of the laws of GOD. A human definition of an oral law might most times not be the divine interpretation of the law. So Christ through innocence makes this laws of GOD void through the word innocence, but that is because the oral laws man has created to define this laws of GOD were not GOD’S will for man and ended up a burden on man or they created a righteousness which was not the righteousness of the law testified in THE SPIRIT as by HIM.

            All religions are Christ (because we are his body), but Christ is none of them. Everyone has his own way of showing reverence to GOD but it must be through the mindset of innocence, i.e. Making sure we are not measuring GOD or giving GOD as HE IS (as is Islam) or thinking this traditions we have created are the ways of GOD (as is Islam again). GOD is not a man!

            So saying men ought not cover their heads and women ought cover their heads does not make our worship complete because worship is perfected and true when done in Spirit and truth, and if you look at it, women covering their heads does not create this word or worship, likewise men not covering their heads does not create this worship in people. It is a shame Paul has ‘come’ as being sent by Christ but has yet given men himself as this Christ. Christ has no form or body, we are his body and we are the religion, he is only the word which inspires this “religion” from each one of us or from a group of people.

            But the understanding is this; to the mind of Christ as innocence, it doesn’t matter if one puts on a head cover or not, that ought be his conviction, but his worship is completed if done in sincerity.

PAUL PRESENTING AN IMPRACTICEABLE AND UNREALISTIC DOCTRINE ROMANS 6.

The crucifixion of sin is an unrealistic and unpracticeable doctrine. It might be symbolic, but is not a reality. There is still sin in the world and one needs to overcome that through the life of Jesus Christ and through obedience to the words of GOD and through THE SPIRIT. A sinner today can turn obedient to GOD through Christ, Just as a devout Christian Can equally become against GOD. Trying to preach a gospel as though there is no longer sin and influence of sin in the world is just wrong. One and everyone still has to “fight and overcome” his temptations through the Commandments and the words of GOD in Christ Jesus and through THE SPIRIT.

                                    DENYING REALITY OF SIN

            The major issue of Paul’s doctrine is the denial of the reality of sin. As in Ephesians 2:8-10; For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: ⁹ Not of works, lest any man should boast. ¹⁰ For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

            Here, we see that Paul saw good works as natural to the human being, hence why it ‘should not be salvation’. But this doctrine is all theory. We have a reality of evil and wicked works before us. If we were all into the goods works, would there even have been sin for Christ to have come into the world? The reality is the commandments and laws and Christ came to complete and perfect man’s redemption from sin. The reality is there are sinners in the world as they were from the time of Adam. In reality, Paul was not perfect in works before he met Christ (even after his encounter). And so playing down the reality of sin and need for good works to justify his salvation in the blood is wrong. We are in a sinful word which needs the commandments of GOD and Christ! Our children need this commandments of GOD and words of Christ. The reality of salvation by the law and of works was not set before GOD created the world. It was and is set because there are still disobedient people unto GOD. These people continually exalt and glorify the commandments and show need for them. Paul’s writings are theoretical and dangerous in terms of practical living. Saying that there is no longer a law because the law is strength of sin and the law condemns, whereas the law creates awareness and conviction not to sin. We would have been in a better world if the law was exalted as foundation for the creation of any institution. Not because it would condemn us but because it would have created an awareness and ‘fear’ not to sin. Saying the law is a strength of sin whereas he was not in disobedience to the law, which then means one can steal and should not be condemned by the law. This is not the word of GOD! Paul’s work is not the word or work of GOD, and has contributed to this reckless Christianity. Paul did not lead men to Christ to be saved. He attempted saving men himself by defining who Christ was- Not as a Messiah who saves men when they obey HIM, but as a Messiah who saves men while in their sins.

            There is grace! If one sins, there is that grace for him to repent. This grace is the evidence of our existence – For us to come and repair and amend our wrongs and perfect love for GOD and love for each other. But if he repeats the same act and over and over again, then such a person has despised GOD. It is not sin again but rebellion. And there is no grace for rebellion.

                                                PAUL’S GRACE AND THE LAW

            If the law had to be covered with the blood such that there is no longer a law or such that the law is not sin? How is the salvation then grace? Of course the law had to condemn you so that we understand and worship GOD for this grace of salvation which we could not perfect the law, but if Paul is advocating a separation from the law (Romans 7:1-6), how then can one understand this grace? If everyone is now having to reform the laws of GOD and be his own laws, then how is it grace, seeing that one is now perfect (in his own sight) from having decided what laws are laws of GOD?

            Paul’s doctrine is not only anti-Christ but anti-GOD.  He did not even see the sin which brought about the law as the sin, he rather saw the law which called this acts as sin as the sin (1^st Corinthians 15:56, Romans 5:13). This is unbelievable! that this thought came out from him is just unbelievable!

                                                            REDEMPTION

            Paul’s doctrine of redemption in the blood is not a reality. For as long as you are alive and live and interact and possess, the words of CHRIST are speaking and talking to you. The only reality of Paul’s doctrine is if one is dead and if one is active in sin and rebellion.

            Talking about redemption, one has to talk about sin first. And if (as) sin is killing a fellow man, then we understand redemption to be the law which fills man with ‘good’ so as not to kill. Redemption is redeeming the human being back into ‘good character’ and good works which Jesus Christ clearly stated as salvation (Luke 10:25-37, 16:19-31, Luke 18:18-25,).

            Now, what was the life of Christ under the law? Did Jesus not ‘see’ the laws? What did HE think about them? How was Christ still perfect from the laws? Was Paul supposed to seek to be like Jesus Christ or was he supposed to author Christ?

            Redemption from sin is man coming back from his evil ways, which is why the law and that is the work of the law – redemption. And so saying now that redemption is from the law in the blood, and so what now is sin?

            For example, sin is what brought about the eating of the other creation for food. And so redemption to man from this sin, will be man obeying the law or word which says killing any life is sin, but going now by Paul’s ‘redemption’, it now means, even the sins which the law had permitted but sought to restrict is now permissible through the blood of Jesus Christ (1^st Timothy 4:1-5, Romans 14:14, ). This now makes it difficult for the continuous redemption of man into the intended perfect state (https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/05/11/undersanding-that-all-rebelled-including-man/).

SALVATION

            Redemption is the restoration of man into the perfect state. Seeing that Christ was perfect in his relationship with GOD and is our redeemer, salvation is the seal that one is a Christ – Christ being the foundation and character of the new earth.

            Salvation is not the work of a man. No man can author salvation; a sinner cannot author his salvation. It is the work of GOD HIMSELF, through HIS SPIRIT. Being saved is the confirmation and seal of one as a Christ.

            Paul cannot (had no right) author salvation and grace. Paul cannot give salvation or grace. If Paul is authoring salvation (as not being a Jew) already, then where is this grace to be applied? If Paul is authoring grace, what makes us sinners if not the law (which he attempted to annul)? When is grace given? When one has tried and failed or before one even starts the journey of Christianity?

            But not even the ‘perfect Jew’ was saved yet, because the Judaisic laws were not the perfect representation of who GOD was. For example, can one lie because it was not written in the commandments, think that lying is not a sin and that he was still perfect. And so that was Christ as salvation to the Jews, because Christ (who was the knowledge or word of GOD), was able to perfect them were the laws were not ‘reaching’ as in Luke 18:18-25, Luke 19:1-9. And so Paul now saying that Salvation was a redemption from the laws or Judaism whereas CHRIST came to complement and perfect Judaism was just a false representation of Jesus Christ.

                                    MISUNDERSTANDINGS BETWEEN PAUL AND THE APOSTLES.

            And so we now see the cause of the problem; Paul hath gone on to interpret Christ the Lamb as a fulfillment of the old sacrificial system, as a shadow of things to come (which was his word). But then the very life of Christ was to do away with the sacrificial practice;

            First, considering the sacrificial system was Jewish, and under it, one’s sins were put on the Lamb and the priest was in charge of the ritual of forgiveness. Yet the manifestation of Christ to them even in displacing this system is that Christ has put upon everyone the guilt of his sin (considering that their sins were put on a Lamb), and has put upon them the guilt of Judgment. Christ lived his life for the sake of preparing men against GOD’S great day of Judgment (John 9:39, 5:29)

            Secondly, under the sacrificial system, men did not have power over the word or law – if one sinned the law. The sinner was to offer a sacrifice for sin (and in some cases, was stoned), but Christ came and gave man power over the word, i.e. Christians today have the charge to forgive each other their trespasses – as the result of the broken law. And so Christ have given men godliness over the law or word (of which was HIM), and has now made everyone who believes in Him a priest.

            Thirdly, the blood of animals was what blotted out sin, But yet we see Jesus ask men to seek forgiveness from GOD and infact, a failure to forgive meant one will not be forgiven (Matthew 6:14-15). And so CHRIST was leading men to the recognizing the true source of their pardon – which was GOD.

            GOD is who has always been gracious to man and not even the sacrificial system (Isaiah 43:25). The law is GOD’S person among us. The law is GOD HIMSELF. And so the law is greater than the blood of the animal and the animal itself. And so it was impossible that the blood of animals blot out the law when one sinned, for that is to say the sacrificial system was in denial of GOD – when it blots out the law i.e. when we sinned.                    

                                                            PAUL

            And so we see that the life and words of Christ hath nullified the sacrificial system. But Paul believed that the way sins were forgiven in the old sacrificial system was by the blood covering or annulling the law, hence why he preached that there was now not a law for anyone who is accepting Christ, seeing that to him Christ was the lamb which has come to take away sin (the law) ‘once and for all’ (Hebrews 9).

            For to Paul, the lamb covered or blotted the law when one sinned, and that was forgiveness to HIM. But the truth is that when one sins against the law, he writes down a new law. So if the law says, “thou shall not steal”, and if one then steals, he then writes the law, “steal”, and this is the sin that is blotted out and not the law.

            And so under Paul’s teaching, there is no longer a law seeing that Christ was the lamb who now blots out the law. But he failed to see that when one (for example) stole, yet he still came back another time to offer sacrifices for the same sin of theft, which now means that the law was never blotted or annulled. The law is our character when (for example) it says, “do not steal”. Stealing (for example) now means one has re-written his own law – which is what was taken away under the sacrificial system and not the law itself. And so Paul’s misunderstanding of what took place under the sacrificial system has greatly mislead men from how they see the laws of GOD and Judaism.

                                    PAUL AS MISREPRESENTING CHRIST.

            And so Jesus Christ saying His words will be the measure of Judgment (To Jews under the law), such as their sins are now upon them. Yet Paul now teaching that all our sins were upon Christ, even resurrecting the old sacrificial system – hence no Judgment (Hebrews 6:2), because he (Paul) has now sought to make the cross of Christ with effect, and has now made the teachings of Christ on Judgment (who came to make man guilty of sin) who opposed the same sacrificial institution and Azazelism of no effect. For Christ’s entire life was all but bringing man to repentance against GOD’S great day.

            Infact what makes you a Christian is GOD’S LAWS, seeing that the Jews glorified the oral law more than the LAWS OF GOD.

            And if Christ is blotting out the law, then for who then? And so to the righteous, who lives as the law and under the law, why is the law being blotted out for him also?

                                                            IN SUMMARY

            In summary, to Paul sin existed before the law came, but they were not commanded to offer sacrifices. Sacrifices came just when the laws of GOD were revealed. And so to him, the law brought about sin and it’s condemnation which led to sacrifices. And so Jesus Christ coming to be the final sacrifices or Jesus Christ as the lamb of GOD coming to take away sin meant there was no longer a law (to condemn us) (Romans 5:13).

            But the problem started as Paul saw as laws what Christ saw as not laws i.e. (carnal ordinances and washings set as laws). Paul then  these as salvation and freedom to the gentile while Jesus Christ saw these as a burden on the Jews. Paul still saw these carnal ordinances as an inclusion (with he commandments) to what perfects one (Hence why he said it was the blood which now perfects him), but Christ did not see them as a sign of perfection. To Paul, these carnal ordinances gong by the law were sin, hence why Christ’s blood  to redeem those who died and did not perfect it, but to Christ, these people were never sinning even while they did not perfect it, and so nothing stood against them. But if Christ who saw these carnal ordinances as laws made by men was going to be the judge, why would he judge anyone on the last day for not perfecting worship? It is the life of Christ which should show us that these people who did not perfect this carnal ordinances were now saved and are not under condemnation not his blood, and it is the life of Christ which has now included the gentile into GOD’S covenant in Christ seeing that Christ was the perfection and image of GOD.

            Also, Paul saw Judaism and it’s laws as perfection whereas Christ saw it as needing to be perfect (redemption from the laws of men of traditions as acts of GOD).

            So it now looks that Paul is showing greater knowledge over Christ seeing that he started his religion from the whole of Judaism, (which involved the Commandments of GOD and Mosaic laws and carnal laws, but Christ started his “Judaism” from the Commandments of GOD only and perfected love more than Moses’ own laws of love) but that is because he did not pay attention to the life and words of Christ, seeing that he interpreted Jesus Christ as only a lamb which affected how he saw Christ as redeeming men from this ordinances by his blood and not his life which of course now made him (Paul) the high priest or redeemer of both the Jews and gentiles (from carnal ordinances and diverse washings).

            Paul’s doctrine does not acknowledge the freedom of the Jewish Christians (which Christ had set free from these carnal ordinances as traditions of men), for if he had, his freedom and salvation from these ordinances in the blood of Jesus won’t have been a subject in his doctrines. Judaism and Christianity to both Jews and Christians was supposed to start from Christ and his apostles i.e. from the commandments and not from the ‘old Judaism’ which had carnal ordinances to it’s laws of GOD. And so Paul was actually supposed to be a Christian and under Christ and not be the author of Jewish Christianity. I say Jewish Christianity or Jewish Pauline Christianity because he applied the Jewish sacrificial system ‘perfectly’ to Christ. One calls the apostles and followers of Christ as Christians or at most Christian Jews (to those who are of Jewish origin or those who accept Christ and still Observe the Jewish traditions) because their fate was entirely decided by Jesus Christ, seeing they were in perfect obedience and submission to Christ and his life. What was right and wrong was laid by Christ. They were dead to Christ, and so they are Christians, their ‘self’ identity matters only a little. And so basically, to one who believes in the life of Christ as his salvation and redemption, he is a Christian or Christian-with his identity. But to one who believes in the blood of Jesus as his salvation, then he is Jewish Pauline Christian.

                                                PAUL AND JOHN

            Galatians 2:21; “I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain”.

            And this as I have discussed, is one of the major problems between Paul and the apostles and Judaism. The sinner, for example, is who makes righteousness of the law seeing his stealing is not GOD’S righteousness. And so it is the sinner who makes obedience to the law as salvation and not the man who is already in obedience to the law. Jesus came to call sinners to repentance and not save righteous men (Luke 5:32). The truth is, we are all sinners, but in terms of recognizing the law as the Ten Commandments, there are ‘perfect men’. And so you might not be in need of the Ten Commandments because you don’t have their sin, but you might be a sinner is some other way, and so ‘forcing’ oneself into a salvation by the blood because you were in perfect obedience to the law is what has caused about Paul decreasing the power and importance of the law and not putting into recognition that there might be sinners who will need the law. This is all a work around self, and not in recognition of ‘the weak’, whom Jesus lived for. Paul who needed to save sinners as an apostles of Christ ended up putting himself as the sinner (even while he was in obedience to Christ and the Jewish laws) so that he can be saved also (by the blood).

            The law is made for the weak who might easily sin. If Paul knew he was in perfect obedience from these laws, then he should have easily ‘passed by’ these laws so that the needy will make use of them, rather than bring down an entire religion or the laws of GOD because he was obedient to these laws. The problem is, the stated laws are ‘deceiving’ because they are not the perfect mirror of what love is. And so to someone who fights, he might be deceived into thinking that he is sinless because he is not breaking any of the Ten Commandments of GOD. Because to Paul, it was as though he had now graduated from Judaism, whereas Judaism (and the world) is a religion under love. He persecuted the church which was sin against GOD, because Christ was GOD’S sent. And so in no way should he think that he was a perfect man because he obeyed the written laws of the Jews, such that he now needed the blood to save him and not the laws. The law is LOVE, the other laws as the Ten Commandments or Mosaic laws and even the words of Jesus was to stress what love is according to the sin of that generation.

            1^st Corinthians 1:17: “For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect”.

            And so we see that Paul was trying to ‘make practical’ the sacrifice of Jesus. And so in doing so, the law has to suffer seeing that Paul saw himself as now perfect from keeping the Judaisic laws and as he saw the law or perfection as threat to grace. And so he hath gone on to transfer the ‘works of the law’ unto the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, in that the blood is what perfects us (Hebrews 10:14), and the blood is our righteousness (Romans 3:21). The law is what perfects us, and the law is LOVE and not the Commandments who are only an aspect or a definition to what love is. And going by his writings as in 1^st Corinthians 14:34-35, Paul needed this love that made everything equal. And so making void one aspect of the law because you are in obedience to it, yet you are failing in another is wrong.

                                    CHRIST TO EARLY APOSTLES VS CHRIST TO PAUL.

            To the early apostles and James, Christianity was being as Christ Jesus – seeing he was human, of whom we ought follow his example. For example, If Christ nature was against owning slaves or workers, for one to be a Christian, he also had to free his slaves or adopt them as equal to him. But to Paul, You can still have slaves and treat them nicely, but they don’t have to be equal with you, seeing the law has blotted the law of slavery. And so while the apostles presented Christ as the ‘face’ of Christianity, Paul presented the self as the face of Christianity (seeing he saw Christ as the lamb of the sacrificial system whose blood covered the law). And so we see that Paul has now really halted man’s redemption to perfection which was being as Christ Jesus. And so to them, you cannot come into Christianity and remain in your old state and say you have been saved, seeing to them that Christ was an example. And so to a lot of those who say they are Christians, they are still not as Christ and are still needing to be as Christ, and are under the judgment from the life of Christ (whose life is the law, from having perfected love). And so Christ displaced the Judaisic laws because they were not the perfection of what love was (such as owning slaves and freeing them on Sabbath years, recompense etc.). For Christ is now GOD’S law even to the Jew. Because his life perfected love and gives us details of that which the love did not stress out. His life gives us dimensions to what sin is, and obedience to them is how we are saved.

            And so to the disciples, obedience to the law (Commandments of GOD) is what takes away sin, or Christ living in us (who was perfection of the commandments and love) is how sin gets taken away. But to Paul, sin gets taken away when the law which says what sin is displaced. To them, the law has come to show sin, but to Paul, the law created the sin (Romans 5:13). Sin is defined by the life of Christ in Christianity, but Paul presented Judaism and the law as the sin to and in Christianity.

                                                WASHED IN THE BLOOD.

            John who wrote about the ‘lamb of GOD’ (from John he Baptist), and was also a disciple of Christ, who fully knew ‘taking away of sin’ was not in the manner as Paul thought i.e. the law being annulled or covered with the blood of the Lamb, seeing that John has explained to us how sin gets taken away (1^st John 3:4-6); which is when Christ lives in us, even as HE was sinless. Now it is left for us to understand John’s interpretations for the “lamb of GOD” as in Revelation 1:5 and 7:14 respectively.

⁵ And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

¹⁴ And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

            It is important to note that it is impossible for the writer of Revelation to be contradictory; that Christ died for us as sinners and thus redeemed us, and yet is going to judge us for our sins.

            And so from the verses of revelation, we see that the “blood washing us from sin” is a present tense and a testimony to the man who Christ now lives in (and is thus perfect) and as such the blood of Jesus now washes him from his sin, and not a future tense to a man who is still active in sin and is saved.

            Paul’s work is all confusion. If we are being dead to sin from Christ crucifying sin and we are now righteous men through baptism in Christ (Romans 6), what sin and covenant is Christ mediating? What is the new covenant that Christ is mediating? For if one then repents through the baptism and now upholds the law, then the grace (the blood) was for repentance and not salvation as a sinner, such that the grace of being saved without the law is void, seeing that man who was a sinner is now in line with the law. But as I have said, he had tried to include both his own understanding of the sacrificial system (Hebrews 9-10) with his own logic (Romans 6), then the work of the apostles (1^st Corinthians 6:9-10), and that is where we find the problem because Christ came to displace the sacrificial system.

            Paul did not see Jesus Christ as a high priest mediating sins since to him Christ came to take away the law or strength of the law (1^st Corinthians 15:56) – being the last sacrifice. Seeing to him that if one spoke about the law after Christ, then it was (as) Judaism still and not Christianity, and then salvation will now be in works. And to him, they had to not make the cross of Christ in vain Galatians 2:21, 1^st Corinthians 1:17. And so making the cross of use, meant invoking the sacrificial system upon Christ, which means that since the sacrifices came while there came the law, if Christ is taking away sins then there meant there ought not be the law.

                                    THE LIFE OF CHRIST AS THE LAW OF SALVATION.    

            If the life of Jesus was not a law, we cannot say that sin is being taken away when he lives in us. If it is not a law, if redemption is not a law, the world will remain this evil, and so how is the new earth going to be? As this? If the life of Christ is not a law, who will Christ Judge and what measure will he use to judge seeing that he made the Old Testament laws void and thus saved man?

            Can Christ give a word (which he is) as in his words in the gospel, and we say Christ is our redemption and that Christ lives in us yet we are not manifesting this character or word and yet we say we are saved by that same Christ? Then woe unto these liars!

                                    IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO BE A CHRISTIAN AND BE PAULINE.

            Paul did not see Jesus Christ mediating sins. For if still mediating sins, then there is still the law, then there ought not to have been a change in priesthood and change of law (Hebrews 7:12, Hebrews 8:4).

            Paul’s doctrine does not acknowledge the substitutionary atonement of Christ (as most Christians believe) from Leviticus 16:8-10; it does not see Christ dying for our sins. It sees Christ (the blood of the lamb) as taking away the law that condemned us. And so if Christ (the blood of Christ Jesus) is annulling the laws which condemned us, how can one then understand the substitutionary atonement of Christ Jesus (without the law to condemn us)? If Christ is dying for your sins, under what covenant or laws, seeing that there is a change in law and priesthood (7:12, 8:4)?

            Paul’s doctrine presents us that Christ is not a mediator for the sins of the law. Of which it then means that either one is free from obeying these laws and is saved or if one does the sin of these laws, then there is no grace for him.

            But Paul’s doctrine (his innovation about the need for change in law because of the change in priesthood (Hebrews 7:12)) is false, seeing that the human state is still same. His desires and needs and characteristics are not changed. If the human state was changing, does it then mean that GOD is changing also? But there cannot be a change in covenant, and the covenant of the Ten Commandments is not old because GOD is and the human state has not changed (i.e. Stealing, killing, coveting, etc. are a ‘natural’ tendency to the human being).

            Now, the problem was, part of the covenant condoned sin such as owning of slaves as in Exodus 21:1-6, and of vengeance as in Exodus 21:23-25. Now, like I had explained here; https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/11/02/did-paul-later-become-the-anti-christ/(early part), Christ lived above the law of owning slaves i.e. he perfected love for brother which contributed to him being perfect. For if Christ had to obey the covenant, then that means he ‘had to’ own a slave to free him at the seventh year. Seeing also that the law did not take away sin, but has sought to curtail how it might wax evil.

            Secondly as in Matthew 5:38-48, Vengeance equally takes one above the law. If the law, “do not kill” was sin because GOD is love, vengeance (in killing) also takes you above the law love and the law do not kill.

            Also as I had explained here; https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/10/23/differences-between-words-from-god-and-words-of-god-and-acts-from-god-and-acts-of-god/ (early part), these laws came because of the self in which these people had. As in our constitutions, it is not possible to impose a forgiveness law, because some people will not accept it. ) yet, one is free to forgive (which Christ did and which is what a Christianity is all about)). And so GOD gave these laws based on the self (of vengeance) in which these people had. But it was not a law that any man who was hurt must avenge. Vengeance was for those who seek vengeance, and this vengeance had to be limited less someone demand the ‘head of the man because the head of his goat was taken’.

            And so basically, that was just it. Paul basically attempted to ‘forcefully’ convert all Jews into Christians when said the blood of Jesus has wiped out the entire law. Christ (as I have explained) only lived above some of these laws, and that is what Christianity is about. The new covenant to the gentile was now Jesus Christ (starting from the Ten Commandments, his words and his life) and not Judaism anymore (because some of the Mosaic laws did not perfect love). Paul had no business with the Judaisic laws if he now was a Christian. What he ought to have been doing is converting these Jews into accepting Christ and not trying to ‘abolish their law to make them all Christians’.

            Christ lived above some of the Judaisic laws, of which that is what being a ‘Christian’ is about. Trying to give Christ to the gentiles as freedom to doing the things of the Mosaic laws was not Christ Jesus. But one must understand that freedom to doing the things of the Mosaic laws was what Paul saw as salvation, and so it was impossible for him to still presents ‘the person’ of Christ as what salvation is, then he would be presenting Christ as a law – of which Paul saw the law as condemnation and not salvation (Romans 5:13). It was now as though they were free to own slaves forever, and to show vengeance etc.

            Christ is a law on his right, and so you cannot ask men to be free from the restrictions of the Judaisic laws and to still be Christians. It is impossible to be as Christ which is to not have slaves and to now be free from the laws of Judaism, which is to now have a slave (Colossians 3:22-4, Titus 2:9-10). Paul saw salvation not in Christ but in the ‘blood of Christ which freed them from the Mosaic laws’. And so to him, ‘nothing now mattered’. If he had to tell slave owners to free their slaves, then it meant salvation was now equally of works, which he taught against.

            Now, Christianity is just like a change in character to a Jew; Drinking was wrong, yet the law said one should not drink more than a bottle of alcohol ‘so that he does lose his mind so as to commit evil’. And so Christ came and did not drink ‘at all’. And so Christianity to a Jewish follower of Christ meant ‘now stopping drinking’. And so what is Paul’s own argument with the blood of Jesus blotting out the laws that were against us? Is it then possible for one to not drink (Christ), yet be able to at the same time drink more than a bottle of alcohol (now Pauline)? And this was Paul’s mistake; seeing he did not present Christ as the new and perfect law and image and face of Christianity. He tried to present Christ as ‘freedom’ from the Mosaic law in fulfilling the sacrificial Jewish institution.

            Christ was the redemption to the rich or powerful as love, in other that they recognize GOD’S love for everyone, even their slaves. That they come to see through GOD’S eyes, which entails seeing even their slaves as equal to them, and to adopt them as equal. Shame Paul has presented this redemptive gospel to the righteous (and not the sinner who is not obeying the laws of GOD as the Ten Commandments) and to the slave (and not to their masters).

                                                PAULINE CONCEPT/WAY

            How then does one become perfect without the law? Paul then presents his concept of finding righteous as the law but without the law in Romans 6, which suggest that Seeing Christ has conquered and ‘crucified sin’, we ought walk in his manner in our new baptism, which as I have said, means Christ is not a mediator of sin (for if Christ is mediating sin, then that means it is still Judaism and not Christianity seeing there is still a law, seeing Paul has presented Judaism as the law. Because to Paul, the “written law” was what brought about sin and then sacrifices, and so seeing that Christ was the last sacrifice meant there was no longer a “written law” (Hebrews 10:16-18)).

            Now the problem to Pauline’s doctrine was where he Justified Christ as a figure of things to come (Hebrews 9:9). And so if the blood is what is perfecting us (Hebrews 10:14), if there is no longer a law to condemn us (which to Paul now means the written law is now inside us, which then means we are in obedience to it), now what is Christ mediating for? Paul did not see the ‘new covenant’ as a ‘sin or law’ covenant seeing the law is now inside us. Hence why he put the mediation of Christ in a positive and good light and not in terms of sins (Hebrews 8:3-4, 10:18-23).

                                                ADDRESSING MISCONCEPTIONS OF PAUL.

            Now addressing the misconceptions of Paul, first, the law is not there to condemn one (For then should one be allowed to sin?), the law is there for us to know GOD, to prevent sin (For was everyone asked to make sacrifices without breaking the law?). Also, the law is there to condemn sinners and not righteous men. For if you were not found breaking the law, then it means the law is already “written inside you”. Also, it does not matter if the law is inside or outside one, transgressing the law is sin. Did everyone walk with a paper containing the laws as his heart? Definitely transgressing the law is something that starts from ‘the inside’ (Mark 7:21). Is it possible for one to sin outwardly, or to sin against a written law and not first transgress the law inside him? The written law was supposed to be a replica of what is in our hearts so that we will not transgress as the law, and so transgressing the law first occurs when we despise the law inside us. And so it does not matter whether it is a written law or it is a heart-law, sin is sin. Sin is determined by GOD’S character and not by whether it is a written law or heart-law.

                                                            NEW COVENANT.

            Now the new covenant is a new way of living. The new covenant is the manifestation of GOD HIMSELF in HIS WORD. Like I said earlier, the old covenant – as the slave laws and vengeance laws did not take away sin; they only restricted sin. The new covenant, which was in Christ meant a new law and new way of living which took away sin. Which then means there would not be the ‘permission’ to own slaves or show vengeance, etc. And this was LOVE. The perfection of love was the new covenant. LOVE being the true revelation of GOD to us. For if GOD had permitted slavery in the old covenant, the new law meant there won’t be slavery anymore – as the sign of GOD’S love to everyone. This new law as revealed to us in the life of Christ meant everyone was equal and same before GOD’S own eyes. And this is the completion and perfection of GOD’S redemption of man into the perfect Adam, in preparing us for living in the new earth.

            Now, a covenant is a deal of life. It is what man must do to be saved – As in Noah’s construction of an ark, or as in Adam and Eve’s ‘need’ to obey GOD and continue to live. Christ is the new covenant through whom GOD will select the new earthers in. It is important to GOD that those who will make it to the new earth are people who love each other, and see each other as equal. It is important to GOD that in a billion years in the new earth, there is no case of poverty or hunger or greed or selfishness, or bias or any evil. For the old covenant allowed the self, but this new covenant is completely selfless. The law of the new covenant states; You invest your life into your brother; satisfaction is not in how you are filled up, but in how your neighbor is satisfied. The covenant says, THE EARTH IS THE LORD’S, every living thing has an equal right to it. The law says that both the man and woman are equal – in love. There is no boundary or limit or description to this love.

            HOW PAUL’S VIEW OF JUDAISM WAS IN CONTRAST TO CHRIST’S OWN VIEW OF JUDAISM.

            The problem is Paul tried to present Christ as opposite of Judaism i.e. (the law versus the blood), yet from a Judaisic point of view. And so now, he leaves the gentiles ‘without a sin a sin to be plead for’, even while Christ is a mediator and high priest. He gave them a covenant without a law, and thus made nothing about Christ as sin; The blood of Christ covered the law that was against them and they are now saved, yet Christ is a mediator, yet there is no law and no sin.

            Another problem was how he saw Judaism as perfection from the laws. If he was a disciple, he would have known all his life under the law was vanity (Philippians 3:6). If he accepted that his life under the law was not really perfect with the washings and carnal ordinances, he cannot then still say the blood of Christ have now perfected him (the blood as representing the carnal ordinances and washings). For what is now the blood of Jesus? A law?

            The thing is, while Paul saw Judaism as perfection, Jesus saw Judaism as imperfection. Jesus Christ was the completion of Judaism and the Judaisic laws and the new covenant. If Paul had seen Christ as completing Judaism, he would have understood he was not perfect yet – to speak about being saved (in the blood) from not doing the carnal ordinances and washings. He would have understood that the life of Christ was his salvation and perfection.

            For to him, the blood displaced the law, yet the blood still did the work of the law. And so if one sins, is he now sinning against the law or against the blood of Jesus? The blood covering the law is Paul’s idea of taking away sin, and to Christ and the disciples, obedience to the law is how sin gets taken away. Now if one sins, has he sinned against Paul (blood as the law and righteousness of GOD) or GOD (in Christ and the commandments)?

And so Paul created a doctrine of perfection and imperfection; we are not supposed to be sinners in Christ, and that Christ is not mediating for sins because there is now no law, yet that Christ is mediating. He created a perfectionist theory from an imperfection institution;

• The blood of Jesus was no longer blotting out sins, but was to now give us perfection as the law.
• Christ is no longer mediating sins but that he is mediating Hebrews 8 and 9.

            The problem was, Paul ‘saved’ gentiles from the old covenant which was in fault. If the old covenant permitted owning slaves for a period of time, and one is now saved from having to be able to own a slave longer, Yet Christ did not keep a slave in perfection of love (a lot of other reformations). And so we see that if one will continue to own slaves, then it meant he was not a Christian, and if one is to free or adopt his slaves as equal to him, then it means he is not free in the manner Paul suggested. Paul failed to see Christ and his life as the perfection of the Jewish covenant (in the commandments) and as the new covenant in (the perfection of) love. Which then means, if an old Jew will be saved from keeping the old covenant, yet, the Jews from the time of Christ and the gentiles cannot be saved from not keeping or being free from the old covenant, because Christ had now ‘dressed it’ and is now the new covenant. And so they are saved in Christ and not saved from the Jewish covenant.

            Paul has massively halted man’s redemption in Christ from his misrepresentation of Christ as freedom from the old covenant, and not the new covenant – seeing he used an old (in-fault) covenant with the blood of Jesus to free and perfect and save his followers without presenting Christ as the new law, so that man’s redemption in Christ could continue and be perfected. For in Christ, the bar of salvation is now high.

            You are free in Christ Jesus (from the Mosaic laws) to be for Christ (his teachings) and not ‘saved’ from not keeping Mosaic law.

                        HOW DOES ONE GET’S SAVED BEFORE HE ‘BECOMES’ A CHRISTIAN?         (EXPOSING THE PAULINE THEOLOGY).                                       

            How does the gentile gets ‘saved’ by (the blood of) Jesus Christ (from the law) before being a Christian? Did Christ die before he lived? You tell a gentile he has been saved by Jesus Christ – before he even knows Jesus Christ; You tell a thief he has been saved (by the blood of Jesus Christ, from the Mosaic Law), before he gets to know his savior. The ‘salvation’ that was based on choice, was now ‘given’ to everyone. Paul basically saved everyone who believed what he wrote. He was basically the Messiah to the gentiles (and wanted to be to the Jews). And that’s why we see this reckless ‘todays’ Christianity, who are still very far and are continuing to drift far from the life of Christ Jesus, but are saved (by not being Jews, even though they are morally worse than Jews).

            Grace comes after a journey – after one has tried and failed. But Paul has presented a grace before the journey began (and even (in a lot of ways) from the journey, seeing one is already saved by just believing the blood of Jesus Christ).

            The problem is, Paul presented the old covenant as perfection (Philippians 3:6), hence why he saw grace as the blood of Jesus – perfecting him. If he had seen Christ as completion of the covenant, he would not have presented a grace in the blood or a ‘salvation’ in the blood from the law. He presented Christ as the sacrificial lamb to the Mosaic laws, but Christ did not see himself even doing all the requirements of the Mosaic law.

            Paul was only needing to concede that his life (some aspects) under Judaism was vanity – seeing that the oral laws (of men) and traditions contributed to the religion (which was what Christ saw and which started the ministry of Christ, and which is what the disciples and followers of Christ did). But for whatever reason he still needed to justify it as perfect or as part of the law, which is why he concluded salvation was from the law.

                                                WHO AND WHAT IS CHRISTIANITY    

            Paul has now presented Christianity as an idea and self-defined than he presented Christ as the example and teacher – which involves being as Christ and being for Christ. He was careful not to present Christ as a ‘necessity’ or ‘law’ which will mean Christ died in vain (if there was still a ‘necessity or law’. But then what is Christianity if one would still end up being governed by other laws (as in a constitution), Whereas Christ is self-governing? What is Christianity if there is still not a law to it?

            If you are redeeming and saving people from a covenant that Christ is partly faulty, then you make the things Jesus Christ did as optional and not binding. And when Jesus is saying HE is the way to GOD((John 14:6) which means Christ is a law on all who believe in GOD and seek salvation), Paul has presented that way as the blood of Jesus Christ and not the life (and words) of Jesus Christ, as salvation.

                                    THE CONSEQUENCE OF PAULINE THEOLOGY

            Pauline theology now leaves us with two big questions; what is sin and who defines what sin is? Since he did not see Christ (the life of Christ) as the law which takes away sin but saw sin as the Mosaic law (and the Commandments) which curtails sin, which means perfection was now in doing the sin with a conscience that the blood of Jesus Christ has annulled the laws. Which now takes us to a point where we still need laws (constitution) to govern us.

It is a law, not to the one who is in obedience to the law, but to the sinner who needs to now be in obedience to the law and be saved. The life and love of Christ is what defines sin, and it is a law to the sinner (people who own slaves), and to the man who is in obedience to it; less the man who is in obedience to it, seek to go back to owning slaves or workers, because GOD loves everyone equally.

                                                LOVING PEOPLE AND THE LAW.

            Loving people is not only about having a relationship with them, but as the law put it, it is loving people as we love ourselves. It is caring for people in the same manner we care for ourselves and would want to be cared for. Now the problems remains; If one has not loved himself or if one cannot take care of himself, how can he care and love others? Love has many dimensions. Peaceful living can come from loving each other. Sharing also is part of loving, compassions also.

            Love has many enemies and opposites. Hatred is just a side of it, but it’s greatest enemy and opposite is the self.

            It’s difficult to actually just develop perfect love for people. We are not even done loving ourselves yet;

            We can imagine the amount of people who are crying to GOD daily of various illnesses because of the foods we ourselves are creating and consuming. And so how can we now love other people?

            If we put ourselves into addictive habits or places which we often get hurt and affected, how can we love others? What life do we then give to others around us?

            And so we see that in other to love others we first have to love and care for ourselves. Love as a word could be very misleading because it could imply only a good relationship with people. But with inspiration of GOD’S SPIRIT and my experiences, I will talk to us about other ways we can love people and ourselves also.

            But first, before we love people, we first have to be free from self. For example, I know that at some point in time, I saw English language as what was ‘right’. Something had happened to me and THE LORD once telling me that I was the reason why I would not make the new earth. i.e. My needs and desires were going to affect how much I recognized or had compassion on poor people on the street; My desires were going to stop me from being the Christian I say I am. I had just started to be a born again, and so I saw that the entire cause of my past troubles were because I was focused on myself, and because I had false needs which I went on trying to achieve and got into trouble. And so that was when I immediately saw that English language was only a language and that we as a country would have been more developed regionally without the stress of creating a English Language education structure. That I had just come to my senses on that English Language was only another man’s language really changed how much I was open and more acceptable of people of tribes. I saw the possibility of developing every Local government without necessarily the stress of English language and how we can still be a country by sharing our resources and skills. Why should we ‘force’ ourselves into being a country (English Language) when we can live like a continent, I thought? I thought Peace is consensual, everyone has to be respected and acknowledged in other that there be peace.

            This was one of the first times I had thought outside myself. If GOD had not helped me see that how much I thought of everything I did as what was the right thing, I would not have been able to ‘consider other people’.

            Also, I was the type who could just finish a much quantity of food. And so the conviction was from the word holiness which is (also) “being true to self”. And so that was where I knew eating more than I should was sin. In summary, this really helped me in how much I could give to other people. For example, I was the type who could just finish four oranges at a time. But then after this conviction, I thought; why not take ‘as the body will need’. And so when I decided reduce the quantity to two, I saw that I now had ‘enough’ to give to other people.

            Politicians and many others tell lies but not really because they ‘hate’ people, but for many of their satanic reasons. We can imagine how many people have been misled because of false information which have resulted in death. Yet not because these creators of false information hate these people, but because they have gone on to advance false information for their self, and yet GOD is concerned about these people who are being misled because he loves them, as we have shown incapable of ‘thinking far’ in respect to loving people.

            And that why GOD gives a law as in Exodus 23:1, which helps us see that he loves those whom we might be against. Naturally, when we love people, we don’t lie or think of hurting them, but when we fail in this love for self-reasons, the law comes so that what ought be achieved when we love people is ‘exposed’ so that we still manifest the image of GOD.

            You can imagine a 50 workers on a farm who earn a life from this work, but suddenly the owner goes on to buy tractor and other machinery for his work. And so decides that he only now needs 5 people to work for him. And so we can imagine the number of people who will be affected. Not just the workers but their families and others who are benefitting from them. We cannot thin GOD will be happy with such decisions.

            And so we must be careful into thinking love is about having good relationships with people. We can through GOD, love people who we have never seen or met. For example;

MY EXPERIENCES

            I really can’t say what happened, but I found myself in a position where I was supposed to bring back our water drawer back home. But THE SPIRIT troubled me into leaving it at the in consideration that people might come and make use of it. It was difficult for me especially because I had just spent money fixing it as a result of people doing damage to it.  And so we see that though it was not in me to think this far in regards people, yet GOD who also thinks of everyone was able to use me so as to meet the needs of people who I might not know. It’s always important to note that while we always think of ourselves and our families and relations, GOD thinks of everyone, and so we can sometimes find it difficult to reason the laws of GOD, but we can always find satisfaction that other humans are benefitting of this gestures.

            I was a sugar consumer till the law of life was revealed to me and the question of if a man can look after himself (https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/05/11/understanding-the-spirit-and-christ-as-the-garden/). My mum still sells sugar but I don’t. I can hardly say I ‘love’ those who I turn back when they come to me to purchase this sugar, but my obedience to this law of life is what is helping me avoid any judgment that results from either directly or indirectly harming the life of people or of GOD’S creation.

            Being a football fan who got into the difficult side and good side of losing and winning. Seated one day, THE LORD visited me and right behind me, pointed forward and behold, a view (it’s difficult to give words to the view), and I saw men falling down from the image in the view. THE LORD came to draw my attention to the lives which are and have been lost as a result of the rivalry of the sport. Also the racial abuses, the insults and corruption and many other evils (but especially the loss of lives and pains of loosing of which especially wives suffer when their spouses lose football matches) the sport have generated. This was a concern of THE LORD. And so he came to ask me to leave the sport and bear witness of these evils against it’s destruction and judgment to those who have made it possible. Now, these footballer and the organizer did not intend the sport to be this fierce and emotional (even though this fierceness and emotion is what makes the sport ‘interesting’), yet we see that somehow, this rivalry ends up deeply affecting people – Taking the place of GOD in the lives of people. And so as I have said, where we might be limited in thinking about people, the laws of GOD can help us because HE LOVES EVERYBODY.

            These become laws. Not because it is about us, but because GOD loves everyone and every life. He owns the land and our lives and all creation. That is why they are laws, and failure to them means we are unable to live with people, of which GOD will conclude us not fit for the new earth (Judgment).

JUDAISM

            Now, as I had said earlier, it is not easy to just develop a perfect love for people as ‘we love ourselves’. Sometimes we may need GOD’S LAWS to open us up to start considering other people. For example the Judaisic laws of Pe’ah (Leviticus 19:9,10, Leviticus 23:22, Deuteronomy 14:28-29, 24:19,21 26:12-13). GOD did not just give this law to burden the Jews, but in giving the Jews these laws, he showed that he loved and cared for everybody, and not the Jews only. They necessarily will not know these strangers but their obedience to these laws will care for these other people. One should not think that because he does not have piece of farm and as such cannot help strangers, we can take pass our transport fares to pay for others we meet in the taxi, we can decide to freely pick people to their destinations when we can and are comfortable, and many other ways. But we need GOD’S SPIRIT creating this knowledge of love to us so that we can care and better care for people we know and people we do not know. And so we see that where we might be limited on how to love, the Laws of GOD can give us this means of caring for other people without necessarily having a relationship with them.

            Everything is love. It may not be love to us, but it is love as who GOD is. We must be willing and ready to work and listen to GOD to first of all, even start loving ourselves, then care and love other people.

            And so we see that we need GOD in other to love people, without necessarily having a feeling or relationship with them. We need GOD telling us what to do and not what to which might affect other people elsewhere, like polluting the water or stream near you because of your own cleaning activities whereas someone might need this flowing water to drink.

            The world and everything we do is built around love. Not because we can love people and everyone, but because GOD loves everyone. And so we need GOD to help us avoid hurting people directly or indirectly as a result of our selves. GOD loves everyone in the world, and that is why he is concerned about everything each one of us does.

            We can’t ‘just love’ people as Paul stated. Love is the word of GOD; it is GOD’S own state. To us as humans, we will need an ‘oral law’ or bodily manifestation to love. Which could mean forgiveness, sharing, etc. by the way, the laws came because we could not love people. We need laws and words of GOD to do so, and Judaism helps in how much we care for “everyone”, without necessarily having a relationship with them. We shouldn’t be deceived that we don’t need GOD or his laws as Paul has thought that ‘we are now free’ from Judaism. The only way one is free from a law is if he upholds the law through love. And when we don’t, then these laws come. Judaism (it’s laws) is another way to love and care for everyone – also the poor and people you don’t know (strangers).

            If our actions which we do out of self and greed and selfishness, will hurt other people, GOD will certainly make laws prohibiting this actions because HE loves these other people too. And if we fail to heed this laws, then we have shown GOD that we are not worthy of life and a place with people, hence judgment and death. Sin is not what is taking us to hell. If we repent, GOD forgives us, but a lack of repentance means we will defile our new home again, of which THE SPIRIT said unto me to tell the world that GOD will not suffer the consequence of sin twice. And so every grace is here on earth for us to repent, if we don’t repent here on earth, and accept these laws as out character, there won’t be this repentance in heaven (i.e. if the person will repent, seeing he did not repent here on earth).

            The law of THE LORD which came to me was; THE EARTH IS THE LORD’S, AND EVERYONE HAS AN EQUAL RIGH TO IT.

            Everything on the earth ought be shared equally to everyone. GOD will judge the world and every form of greed, selfishness and policy and ownership which caused for poverty and hunger and which led to other kinds of sins as theft, coveting etc. because the earth is his and he had the right to make the laws (which was for everyone). And so I warn this evil generation, who are a threat to the perfection of the new earth with their vain lifestyle and false needs and false educations and false economies which has caused for poverty and evil acquisitions of net worth. We have chosen materialism than the lives of those whom you love GOD; we justify hunger and poverty by shoes and bags and cars. We are not worthy to be part of the new earth, and anyone who has had a hand in the evil economy and education and influences of this satanic generation, surely he cannot live with the new earthers. Woe unto this generation! Your end is with the earth! The people of authority which ought ensure for a fair earth are responsible for the burning and destruction of foods, to “sustain the economy”. This is an evil and foolish generation! Who have allowed prostitution and fashion and selling of harmful foods to be part of an economy, but will not feed the poor. We are a disgrace to your existence GOD. But surely ours is the loss!

            The stranger and poor has a right to the earth’s profit, not because of us, but because THE EARTH IS GOD’S and GOD LOVES EVERYONE.

WHAT IS SALVATION TO THIS GENERATION?           

            And so I warn this evil generation; how can you be saved from old covenants of your ancestors whereas the reality of sin to your generation is different? How can a man teach that there is no GOD and expects to be saved from the keeping of the Ten Commandments? That a people who have now coveted GOD’S earth and creation and make all manners of evil laws (in failure to acknowledge GOD), and a people who do all manner of evil upon the creation GOD had given us to look after. Surely this never happened in old times, hence why there was no law to them. But this evil generation thinks it is saved from the laws of a ‘more moral’ generation whereas it’s generation is far evil. Woe unto the Jew and the Christian and the Muslim and the inhabitants of the earth, who have been guilty of a lack of love for GOD and man through their evil ways of destroying the earth through it’s evil works and destroying the lives of the creation and humans whom we ought love. Woe unto this people! THE EARTH IS THE LORD’S!!!

To understand salvation and judgment as revealed to me; https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/05/12/understanding-time-generation-and-judgement/

            And so the summary of why one cannot be Jewish and be Pauline/Christian is as; The Jew was allowed to own slaves for a while (6 years), but Paul saw the gentile free from the Sabbath law i.e. one can now have a slave for ‘as long’, but the law of Christ Jesus expects ‘his followers’ to be the slaves or servants of each other.

CHRIST is the answer to the world’s problems, yet the threat to the world’s ‘economy’. CHRIST’S love and life is the threat even to the pastors and heads of the church. HIS love is the perfect love which was a law of equality for all. The world and he church have still not known and accepted Christ yet. But know ye that his life is the law and judge of the world.

FOR A FURTHER UNDERSTANDING OF PAULISM AND CHRISTIANITY; https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/11/02/did-paul-later-become-the-anti-christ/

Now, it is like the commandment which states children to honor their parents. Now for example, supposing part of the law explained that it is the son who should allow the father go through the door first in any setting. And so it was the leaders’ responsibility to understand, clarify and interpret the law. Now, as the law hath saith that it is the son who ought allow the father go through the door first, then there arose the need for the leaders of these people to further clarify the law, even to understand if the term father can refer to an elder also, i.e. an elderly man lacking child, or only a man with a child or any grown up at the given time.

      And so another need to further clarify the law arose, and some saith the father does not only have to be at the door for the son to allow him go through first, if the father is even some distance away and yet his intention is to go through the door, meanwhile the son is at the door about to go through, then he ought declare his intention to the child so that the child can wait for him to go through – in obedience to the law. And so these people adopted and defined a father as any elder and the son as any younger. And this was the Oral law.

       And this was part of the righteousness GOD promised the Jews (Isaiah 56:1) (Read https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/10/23/differences-between-words-from-god-and-words-of-god-and-acts-from-god-and-acts-of-god/) and so this righteousness came as having no form also (Isaiah 53:2).

      Now while Christ came, because he hath ‘no form’, and so he lived not under the law seeing that a father can also allow the son go through the door first – in love. And so HE taught men that the son ought allow the father go through the door first, likewise the father can allow the son go through the door also – For the state of the son was love (knowing that love hath do form, boundary and limit). And this was Christ to Judaism.

      For if he had to obey the law, then the law will create him a man of self and pride and culture, and if he had to obey the law, then there wouldn’t have been the need for his coming. And so Christ ‘disobeyed’ that law, yet in innocence. Yet HE did not ‘disobey’ it, but rather testified of GOD’S real self to them. For GOD at the beginning of the law, gave that law for the purpose of law and order, and also because the people he gave the law were a people of ‘culture’ and self, hence why HE did not manifest HIS SELF i.e. HIS freedom to them. And so when Christ came unto another people or the children of the first people, he saith to them; you are free from the law, even that a father can now allow the son to go through the door before him, for what GOD hates is disorderliness, and that was the purpose of the law, yet the law is not GOD because any man can go in through the door first. And so that was freedom to the children of this first people and to the gentiles.

      And so while CHRIST displaced the law, yet he did not displace it because the law or order has to be there; either the father goes in first, or he allows the son go in first, but they both cannot struggle past into the door. And so while Christ came and as though made the first law void, yet there is still the law and a law, because either way, it is still one at a time. And so this was Christ to the Jews, whose definition of the Oral law still could not mirror out the original or law because the law came to address the intention of self and disorderliness. And so to the people who have not these self of culture and pride, then they can now live freely (in Christ), yet with responsibility, yet without the law, yet as the law. For the interpretation of the law of the leaders of the first people soon became aggressive and a burden to the people.

      And so Christ came to be that Oral law, even that there is no longer that law of “elderliness”, for the important thing to GOD is the order. And so Christ hath made the law void, yet in Christ there is still a law, because to the father who is ‘in love’, he will let the child go in first, likewise the son out of respect will also allow for the father to go in first. And so Christ did not make us lawless, for either way, it is still one at a time. For while we do not obey the law as it is, yet we still obey the law of ‘order’ or law of ‘one at a time’. Yet Christ did not make the law void because the son still ought let the father go in first, even though the father also is now under the law (in Christ, even love) to also allow the child go in first. And so while we may not obey the law as it is, yet we still uphold the law under the word ‘love’ which is upon each of us.

      And so now under Christ, no more is the law a credit to salvational righteousness. For if as the law came, the son and the father daily obeyed the law, and GOD counted it to them as salvational righteousness, Yet under Christ who is the new covenant that law is still valid, but no more a ‘saving’ righteousness. And so this is where the gentile is now part of GOD’S family. For if only the law was righteousness, then the gentile had to obey the law. But now, the way of the gentile which was that the father also allowed the son go pass the door has now been validated by Christ Jesus as also a character of God – in innocence, and as righteousness also.

      Or when the law says a child should honor his father and mother, and so it was left for the leaders to describe how one ought honor his father and mother. And so they said that a child should not address his mother by name. But for example, I have seen my sister call my mother with the short form of her name “Maggi” (Real name is Margaret), and my mum only chuckles. Now that was Christ to us as innocence, both to my sister and my mother. And so while my sister had broken the law, yet it was ‘in disrespect’, yet she did not break the law, but the Oral law, and also my mother is not under the law nor is she a woman of culture or self or pride, and so she saw it not as disobedience. And this is Christ to the gentiles, this is the freedom of Christ to the gentile and Jew. And so while Christ hath made the law void through innocence, yet there is still that law if she goes and call my mother by her name out of disrespect for her. The two incidence are the same because she called my mother by her name, yet there is a self in which she was for the two occasions; One is in innocence and the other in guilt of disrespect. And that is Christ to us as the lamb of God, even as a man in innocence (https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/09/28/controversy-over-the-word-lamb-between-judaism-and-christianity-and-how-it-has-affected-islam/).

      For the oral Laws in trying to mirror out the law, only end up being a burden to the man and freedom of the man, and it put the guilt of sin on people who are ‘innocent’, and then man becomes enslaved to his own laws in thinking to doing GOD’S will. The oral laws end up becoming against GOD’S law seeing that man is now inventing his own laws from his acts.

      And so while there is the law, the real and true oral law is GOD’S SPIRIT, which will help keep us in innocence, wherewith we will continue in our godliness without the burden of the oral law, which now becomes religion.

                                                IS THE ORAL LAW GOD’S WORD?

            For example, the law says a man should not look as a woman and a woman should not look as a man. But to understand the law, the leaders had to define what a man was and what a woman was not. And so they defined a man to be he who lived in trousers, and the woman to be her who lives in a long gown. But has a long gown or trousers created or defined a man or woman? What is really a man and what is really a woman? If I find that I am more comfortable in gowns, should I not wear them? And if a woman feels more comfortable in a trouser, then should she not wear it? Has it become then a sin for a man to wear a long gown and a woman to wear a trouser? Is the oral law GOD’S WORD? And so we will find that the Oral law has still not establish one a man or woman but has only put burdens on men and women.

            And this was Christ to the Jews – To save them from the burden of the laws of men – which are the Oral laws.

            And so under the oral law, because it is a man who defines the law, there can be much differences and interpretations to the law. If a people (as in Africa) will accept wearing trouser as a man and wearing a blouse as a woman, a people as the Arabs will not accept their gown wearing as being feminism. Just as if we are to say a woman is the one who ought cover her hair, the Arabs will not accept this because they also see head covering as a sign of decency. And so in the end, the Oral law is all void seeing that men decide or create the law.

            Any ‘Oral law’ must convict of sin, and thus ‘uphold’ the law. But the man’s Oral law is allover creating and inventing sin. The fact that one needs the Oral law to understand the law is clearly stating that real law is the Oral law. But if men are now the authors of the law, are they subject to GOD or are they subject to their own laws?

            The Oral law is a fight against GOD’S SPIRIT and against GOD seeing that THE SPIRIT cannot inspire conviction through THE WORD anymore, because man’s law is now the law.

            The Oral law does the work of the Holy Spirit, seeing how the Oral law is what gives witness to the law; seeing that they both cannot work on the law together, for where the act is not sin, yet the Oral law of the man has made it sin.

            And so to the Jew, he understands the law through the Oral law, But to the Messianic Jew or Christian, he understand the law through THE SPIRIT; it is THE SPIRIT which whispers the law to him. And so the difference between them is the Oral law and THE SPIRIT. THE LAW is a LAW on every believer in GOD.

                                    DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ORAL LAW AND THE SPIRIT.

            When we start to create the Oral law by our acts, we are now saying we are the God and not GOD – seeing that we are now the creators of righteousness; seeing we are now the creators of truths; seeing that we are now authors of our salvation

            The oral law is the interpretation of the law, whereas it is GOD’S SPIRIT which ought give us witness and interpretation to the law – in line with who GOD is. The oral law which is now a man-made law is now creating sin and not even the law itself.

            The Oral law then displaces the word of GOD. The people will no longer be obeying GOD but obeying men and what men think; Man becomes the author of righteousness and not the law. Also, GOD is not a man and so when the man starts defining the oral law humanly, we are now creating GOD as a man.

            And so as THE SPIRIT has inspired me, the law was there to address the intention of one. Nothing defines or creates a man or woman, but when one wears what has been defined as a man or woman even to look and identify with them, then that is what sin is.

                                    CHRIST MAKING THE ORAL VOID THROUGH GOD’S SPIRIT.

            And so in reality, CHRIST even through innocence has made the Oral law void, seeing that it ends up displacing the law, Seeing that it ends up glorifying man more than GOD, seeing that it ends up putting man’s laws as what is the way to salvation and not GOD’S LAWS (Mark 7:7-8). Christ displaced the Oral laws seeing that it burdened men, whereas the oral laws were not who GOD was.

            And when we read mark 7:10-13, we see that the leaders’ interpretation of the law, ended up conflicting with the work of GOD in THE SPIRIT, seeing that it was men who defined the law. Just as the Sabbath; Their law demands that no one works on the Sabbath, but you could imagine that their definition of the law ended up not permitting GOD’S own work of Christ saving men (John 5:16-17, 7:22-24) and so we see that it was now their own man-laws that is now the judge and not GOD’S LAWS which was to be interpreted by GOD’S SPIRIT.

            For if these are in the habit of creating laws from GOD’S LAW, how do they know if their laws are in line with GOD’S intentions?

            And Christ is our perfect example, who was the Oral law through THE SPIRIT, yet was killed as a result of the Oral law of the leaders’ that CHRIST ‘blasphemed’ i.e. made HIMSELF equal with GOD when HE said HE was GOD’S son (John 5:17-18, 10:30-38, 19:7). And so we see this battle between Men’s Oral law and THE SPIRIT’S Oral law. That were GOD does not find fault through THE SPIRIT, men say it is a fault, and where it is a fault to GOD, men say it is not a fault, and only in some places do men and THE SPIRIT give one testimony of the law.

            It doesn’t matter if the Oral law is civil and not for one person. Being accurate about Judgment matters. Giving judgment in line with GOD’S person matters, otherwise people will continue to suffer because of what man thinks and not what GOD thinks.

Jesus suffered and was killed for saying that HE was GOD’S son, but yet Sonship was a type of relationship with GOD. The laws of GOD, for example, “do not steal”, is a word of GOD. And what does the word of GOD do to us;

            First, when we obey them, because we obey them, we become sons of GOD. Second, because they are who GOD is, even that HE does not steal, and so when we obey them and we take responsibility of that word, we become gods, for they are who HE is that HE has given us.

            And thirdly, when we obey them and they dwell in us, we also become friends of GOD for we share in HIS reason and character.

            For if my father says to me; son, I hate lies because they are misleading. And when I take responsibility for these words, even because they are true, yet it is the knowledge of who my father is, then I become equal with him. Also, because I obey this words even when I don’t lie and also take responsibility for this words when I teach men not to lie, then I am his son. Yet HE remains my father, though I am like HIM, even because I have learnt from HIM. (John 5:19-24, 7:16-17, 12:49-50).

            And so Christ suffered because of the ‘concept of perfection’, or logical perfection of man, which is the oral law. It is true that GOD has no wife to claim you are GOD’S son; and this is where I feel religion suffers, seeing that it is no flexible to adapt to other ‘sinless’ scenarios.

                                                THE ORAL LAW AND THE SPIRIT.

            For example, THE LAW says one should not commit idolatry, but the leaders defined idolatry to mean bowing down to anything as GOD. Yes, this is right, but THE SPIRIT today has inspired idolatry to mean anything which takes the place of GOD in one’s life, be it shoes or clothes and materialism, seeing also that possession of these things will cause us not to give unto the needy because they were expensive, which now means that we are breaking the law of love and giving. And so we see where GOD can inspire ‘oral laws’ from HIS SPIRIT whereas the oral laws of men cannot meet that standard, and will only mislead one into thinking obedience man’s oral law now means he is without sin.

            Or when the law says a man should respect and fear GOD, and so the leaders went to define the law according to the works of man, and so they defined the fear and honor of GOD as covering one’s head. But has covering one’s head really created a respect for GOD? is the fear of GOD not in the heart and in how man trembles in obedience to GOD through his laws?

            The law demands that children obey their parents. But I have found where a lot of people have asked me to break the Sabbath because ‘the law’ says children should obey their parents. And so trying to define the law by man’s-oral law is always going to be a difficulty and sometimes impossible, except where the oral law is also a law of GOD, and where it is THE SPIRIT which is giving the witnessing of that law.

            And so we continue to see how GOD’S own work and intention can be hindered through man’s own definition of THE LAW in the oral law. And that was Christ to the Jews, that they live under THE SPIRIT which was to give them this true manifestations of the law.

            Because of every good the Oral law does, THE SPIRIT of GOD does also. Of course even the inspirations of THE SPIRIT can end up as Oral laws seeing that they are now a law on other people, but yet, it is better to get the oral law from GOD’S SPIRIT and conviction that to end up causing people burdens and harm from your own trials and logics.

                                                PERFECTION AND BEING SINLESS.     

            There is a difference between perfection and being sinless. Yes, perfect obedience to GOD’S will can be called perfection but there is a perfection that religion has sought to establish, and that is where CHRIST suffered from; HE suffered from not mirroring the perfection of religion.   

            Now, perfection under religion can refer to carnal washings, ritual killings, religious attires, man’s perceptions etc.

            Religious Perfection in a lot of ways does not mirror sin. You can be perfect religiously but still be in sin and not know. Religious perfection has to do with   You can talk about being holy from the ‘ritually right’ way to slaughter an animal, but I can say that slaughtering or taking life is sin.

            Religious perfection is about a structural or one-way of doing things which one believes to be right. But in most cases, we find that our rights are not GOD’S right. It’s like when my dad would make us all tidy our cups immediately after use without piling them to clean them later. He was a ‘perfectionist’, but perfection is all man’s way and thought of doing things. In the end, you find out that there is nothing wrong with one piling either clothes or cups to wash them at his convenient time. And this is where religion is created; that time when one starts to adopt his way of doing things as the right way, and then sees other peoples own ways as wrong.

            And that is life to us, tolerance and forbearance, submission and understanding of each other. There is nothing like the right or perfect way of doing things. You can say one can be better at doing things, but the notion of perfection is impossible, seeing that man himself is not GOD nor knows anything to actually author or walk in line with ‘perfection’.

            In summary, perfection is man and man’s perfection is what creates religion, yet one can be said to be perfect in obeying GOD’S laws.

HE is here, HIS eyes fully upon us!!! Blessed are they which trust and are firm in THE LORD’S wisdom.

For all these must come to happen. Yea, evil happens, but are these not the by-product of man’s rebellious institutions and works? Yea, we suffer for the very things we have created and are creating. We are reaping the consequence of our trust in man. But woe unto those whom they come from! Yet I say that this evils are good for man. They are evil events, but they are good for man.

For if one does not first go, it is difficult that he stays where he is; He will live in doubt.

All this must come to be in other for GOD to establish his government.

There is need that man come to see the limitations of his inventions and institutions and all his works. And from this limitations will GOD be glorified. And on that day, when GOD sets his government and lifestyle upon the earth, none will raise a voice or attempt to rebel from it, for now man has learned from his past works. I say; GOD will be glorified in all these!!!

That the first man goes, but comes back and testifies and repents that man’s work are evil and vanity. And the second man goes, but I tell thee, he loses both his body and soul along the journey, and his is the condemnation. But the wise have GOD’S WORD which stills them where they are. Be wise! Obey GOD!!!  https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/07/26/understanding-the-sin-in-voting-and-politics-from-theocracy/

THE LORD watches with tears, enough to destroy the world. But HIS love for man has demanded HIM patient, that man comes to repent from his works. Repent! For GOD’S kingdom is here.

https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/07/09/understanding-the-military-and-its-witnessing-of-christ-and-its-end-time-purpose/

https://christmyword.home.blog/2020/05/12/understanding-solutions-and-testifying-against-the-world/