Danoh said:
Israel was temporarily concluded in uncircumcision at Acts 7:51, per Matt. 12:30-32; Rom. 2: 25; 9-11. After Romans 11:25-29, the Law is then back as an issue.
Juelrei's reply: It was not temporary, Paul stated in Acts 7:51 "You are doing just as your fathers did." Implying the historical record in the Old Testament of the Jews who went astray at any occasion.
Paul has continued then to use the old testament laws and his Pharisaical teachings concerning any appropriate occasion.
In Rom.11:28-29 it is regarding God's mercy in spite of their unbelief concerning Jesus being the Messiah.
In Rom.11:25 the partial hardening will continue until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.
Danoh said:
Later in your post you add relate your decision to disregard a point because I did not post references - make up your mind, lol
Juelrei's reply: I allow myself leway in choosing what and how I respond. It's not a matter of restricting myself to one mode of communication or making up my mind. Sorry if you find it difficult to keep up.
Danoh said:
There is a gap of time at verse 19, you have, as many do, have read right past...
Juelrei's reply: On the contrary, I read it. However I intended to keep my responses in closest application to the previous posting topic.. and again, considering how long my posting window remains open.
Danoh continued:
It reads like this:
19. And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.
20. And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.
But between this "And when he had received meat, he was strengthened." and this "Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus." there is this, from Galatians 1:
15. But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, 16. To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:
17. Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. He went into Arabia and then returned to preach at Acts 9:20
Juelrei's reply: this point was covered in the previous posting. Can we move on?
Danoh said:
"over Peter rebuking him"? Where did Peter ever rebuke Paul?
Juelrei's reply: this is a pointless distraction from the main post points. Disregarded.
Danoh said:
No, Paul asserts as much throughout Romans thru Philemon
Juelrei's reply: please do take the time to give specific references in order to make a point instead of generalizing entire multiple epistles. As stated in my earlier post, I disregard such as this.
Danoh said:
No, what he states is that they added nothing to him, but when they perceived what had been given him, etc.
Juelrei's reply: by strict quote of the verse, he said that he did not consult with flesh and blood. You may rephrase if you like, but it's not an occasion for you to say "no" concerning my paraphrase of "anyone" instead of "flesh and blood". One would think that you are straining at gnats because you have no more significant thing to say.
Danoh said:
Not the Paul of Scripture as to your assertion that the law serves the purpose of correcting sin -
Juelrei's reply: In keeping to the law by adherents, it corrects sin by preventing sin, Prov.3:1; Ps.119:11.. the ten commandments.
When that doesn't work, God sends in prophets to give correction concerning sin, Jer.2:19 and many other similar verses.
Danoh said:
.. not in this age - in fact the Law, asserts Paul in Romans 5; Romans 7; 1 Corinthians 15, etc., is unable to correct sin in that, one that was not, its intent, two, it was weak through the flesh.
Juelrei's reply:
one that was not, its intent, two
I could not follow your thinking in that line.
This age is no different than the age of the old testament. Their sins are the sins of this age.
As those scripture references you give, would no doubt point out.
However, the law also does it's job to show actions to
be sin, proof being the justification of punishment from God against unrepentant sinners when there is no one to pray God's mercy upon them.
Danoh said:
Not at all - for what Paul preached - his God-given "my gospel" had been "hid in God" Rom. 16:25; 1 Cor. 2:7; Eph. 3; Col. 1, etc.
Juelrei's reply: things hidden in God are the mysteries which upon request in prayer God reveals, Rom.16:25; 1Cor.2:7; Eph.1:9, 3:3,9; Col.1:26.
Danoh said:
Where is that in Luke's narrative - I've been putting in many hours in Scripture over twenty years now and have yet to read that anywhere in Genesis thru Revelation. And you I don't hold over reliance on external sources much.
Juelrei's reply: why would you say that it is in Luke's narrative? The apostle himself mentioned it in one of his epistles. At this off the cuff posting I don't recall where, sorry. But it has to do, I think, when he mentioned baptizing Stephen's family.
I've been studying the Bible for 35 years, my father taught Bible classes in the Methodist church I attended before getting married.
Danoh said:
That sure doesn't sound like an Acts 17:11 attitude, but, okay.
Juelrei's reply: I think that I've demonstrated that I examine the scriptures.. at this venue however, the time constraints don't allow for the time it would take to find what you loosely refer to, whereas I am a "cite the chapter and verse" Bible student, or at least give enough information on the verse to allow the person to think "oh yes, I recognize the verse you are talking about".
Forgive me if your loose referencing does not jar my recollection and so I designate it a skipover in order to move on to the next point.
Danoh said:
What I am asserting is that, given the tone, setting, etc., of the Circumcision Epistles - Hebrews thru Revelation, it appears they were written around the time of the persecution that began in Acts 8, thus, 8:2's same sense as James 1:1, for example.
Acts 8:
1. And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.
James 1:
1. James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
Juelrei's reply: I appreciate you taking the time to give chapter and verse to make your point.
Danoh said:
No, they knew the person who wrote it.
Hebrews 2:
3. How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
Juelrei's reply: it does not say who "we" or "us" is but this could well mean the apostle Paul, since he was temporarily among Peter and, was it James? for a short time at the beginning of his conversion journey.
The verse Hb.2:3 refers back to Jn.17:20 "that they would believe on me through their word."
Surely Paul and they discussed the ministry of Jesus.
Aside from the distinct road to Damascus experience, God sent Ananias to minister to him that he may receive his sight back, Mrk.16:20 "the Lord worked with and
confirmed the Word by the signs that followed."
Danoh said:
Your reply is disappointing as it does not match the ability to exegete passages well that you have demonstrated in other posts.
Juelrei's reply: I've never claimed that I could exegete passages. If you have considered that any other posts by me have demonstrated that ability, then I can only say that obviously it comes and goes. I am not trying to impress anyone, only attempting to communicate.
Danoh said:
At the same time, as I study from the Mid-Acts Hermeneutic - see the book mentioned below,
Juelrei's reply: I admit that I don't study from such things, books on how to interpret I mean. I discuss from my own off the cuff method.
Danoh said:
we are not going to see eye to eye on many things.
Juelrei's reply: that is not a surprising statement. I realized it from the first.
I take it that this ends our discussion? Okay, it's been pleasant.
Thanks for the "things that differ" I might read through it in my leisure time to see if anything differs from my own views.