Paul fought the circumcision, Messianic Judaism.

[Soyeong]

Those who reject the doctrine of the Holy Trinity are usually not called Christians except by themselves. And I can't think of any orthodox Nicene Creed compliant denomination, church, or independent group that rejects the letters of saint Paul that are included in the new testament.

Isaiah 43:10-13 You are my witnesses,” declares the Lord,
“and my servant whom I have chosen,
that you may know and believe me
and understand that I am he.
Before me no god was formed,
nor shall there be any after me.
11 I, I am the Lord,
and besides me there is no savior.
12 I declared and saved and proclaimed,
when there was no strange god among you;
and you are my witnesses,” declares the Lord, “and I am God.
13 Also henceforth I am he;
there is none who can deliver from my hand;
I work, and who can turn it back?”

I think the problem of people not accepting the Trinity is not very widespread outside of maybe Jehovah Witnesses. Only God is our savior and no mere man can save us.

 

[Soyeong]

Note how most all of the Law-centered groups draw their beliefs from what is not even doctrinal, but what is historical and transitional, the book of Acts. A book that merely bridges the gap between the Old and the New.

I've not personally run across any MJ's who deny the trinity or Paul's letters, so I don't think it is widespread, though my sample size is relatively small.

 

[Soyeong]

When we point to Acts 17:11 and the sola-scriptura model of scripture seen in action - "they studied the scriptures daily to SEE if those things spoken by the Apostle Paul -- were So" we often hear that sort of "complaint" from members of denominations that would prefer not to follow the sola-scriptura method of testing doctrine.

I think the GT section will show that point in triplicate.

Interesting how the anti-law groups would like to toss out Acts --- except when trying to get Acts 10 to be about rat sandwiches.

in Christ,

Bob

Amen.

 

[Steeno7]

I've not personally run across any MJ's who deny the trinity or Paul's letters, so I don't think it is widespread, though my sample size is relatively small.

Not my argument.

 

[Soyeong]

Not my argument.

It's too bad you're a mind reader and we're not.

 

[Steeno7]

It's too bad you're a mind reader and we're not.

Or even conscious, apparently.

 

[Frogster]

Messianic Judaism basically consists of Jews who believe that Jesus is their Messiah, which grew to include Gentiles after Peter's vision in Acts 10. Generally it is made up of Jews who haven't brought into the lie that they have to give up their Jewish identity in order to follow their Jewish Messiah and Gentiles who recognize the inherent Jewish foundation of Christianity.

As with all organizations of sufficient size, you'll find a variety of beliefs. There are also Christians who aren't MJ's who deny the Trinity and reject Paul's letters, so that is not unique to MJ. I know there are some who argue that the Hebraic concept of God was different than the Greek concept, but I haven't looked that much into it. From what I recall, they understood that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, but that the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father, which amounted to a big shrug. The Greek mindset wanted to define everything and came up with the formalized concept of the Trinity, but trying to wrap our mind around that can also amount to a big shrug, so I don't get hung up over it.

I will say that if any of the other books in the NT contradict Jesus' words, such as in Matthew 5:17-19, then Jesus trumps them, but it doesn't have to come to that when Paul is correctly understand.



There are some MJs that hold that only Jewish Christians are required to keep the Mosaic law, but my understanding is that Jews would have considered anyone who taught against keeping the law to be in violation of Deuteronomy 13 and would have rejected them out of hand, if not tried to stone them. Many of them who were on the fence about whether to believe that Jesus was their Messiah were looking at whether Gentiles were coming to worship God in an acceptable way in great numbers. In their view, that would be a fulfillment of prophecy and an indication that Paul's ministry was from God and that Jesus was the Messiah. However, Gentiles showed no regard for the faith of Israel, then it was not of God and what Paul was saying was a lie.

I will say that those Christians who don't at least study the Feasts are missing out on some rich teachings about the Messiah.



I have not run across any who have taught that keeping the law leads to salvation, but that's not to say that aren't some people who are confused on the matter. As I've said before, the law is God's instructions for how to practice righteousness and 1 John 3:10 says it is the children of God who practice righteousness. It is an ongoing part of sanctification as we are made to be more like Jesus in how he thought and acted.

did 70 AD mean they had to give up?

 

[Frogster]

Messianic Judaism basically consists of Jews who believe that Jesus is their Messiah, which grew to include Gentiles after Peter's vision in Acts 10. Generally it is made up of Jews who haven't brought into the lie that they have to give up their Jewish identity in order to follow their Jewish Messiah and Gentiles who recognize the inherent Jewish foundation of Christianity.

As with all organizations of sufficient size, you'll find a variety of beliefs. There are also Christians who aren't MJ's who deny the Trinity and reject Paul's letters, so that is not unique to MJ. I know there are some who argue that the Hebraic concept of God was different than the Greek concept, but I haven't looked that much into it. From what I recall, they understood that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, but that the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father, which amounted to a big shrug. The Greek mindset wanted to define everything and came up with the formalized concept of the Trinity, but trying to wrap our mind around that can also amount to a big shrug, so I don't get hung up over it.

I will say that if any of the other books in the NT contradict Jesus' words, such as in Matthew 5:17-19, then Jesus trumps them, but it doesn't have to come to that when Paul is correctly understand.



There are some MJs that hold that only Jewish Christians are required to keep the Mosaic law, but my understanding is that Jews would have considered anyone who taught against keeping the law to be in violation of Deuteronomy 13 and would have rejected them out of hand, if not tried to stone them. Many of them who were on the fence about whether to believe that Jesus was their Messiah were looking at whether Gentiles were coming to worship God in an acceptable way in great numbers. In their view, that would be a fulfillment of prophecy and an indication that Paul's ministry was from God and that Jesus was the Messiah. However, Gentiles showed no regard for the faith of Israel, then it was not of God and what Paul was saying was a lie.

I will say that those Christians who don't at least study the Feasts are missing out on some rich teachings about the Messiah.



I have not run across any who have taught that keeping the law leads to salvation, but that's not to say that aren't some people who are confused on the matter. As I've said before, the law is God's instructions for how to practice righteousness and 1 John 3:10 says it is the children of God who practice righteousness. It is an ongoing part of sanctification as we are made to be more like Jesus in how he thought and acted.

but lets be real, MJ people lead the way, with denying Paul as inspired text.

 

[Soyeong]

did 70 AD mean they had to give up?

Why would it?

 

[Frogster]

Messianic Judaism basically consists of Jews who believe that Jesus is their Messiah, which grew to include Gentiles after Peter's vision in Acts 10. Generally it is made up of Jews who haven't brought into the lie that they have to give up their Jewish identity in order to follow their Jewish Messiah and Gentiles who recognize the inherent Jewish foundation of Christianity.

As with all organizations of sufficient size, you'll find a variety of beliefs. There are also Christians who aren't MJ's who deny the Trinity and reject Paul's letters, so that is not unique to MJ. I know there are some who argue that the Hebraic concept of God was different than the Greek concept, but I haven't looked that much into it. From what I recall, they understood that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, but that the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father, which amounted to a big shrug. The Greek mindset wanted to define everything and came up with the formalized concept of the Trinity, but trying to wrap our mind around that can also amount to a big shrug, so I don't get hung up over it.

I will say that if any of the other books in the NT contradict Jesus' words, such as in Matthew 5:17-19, then Jesus trumps them, but it doesn't have to come to that when Paul is correctly understand.



There are some MJs that hold that only Jewish Christians are required to keep the Mosaic law, but my understanding is that Jews would have considered anyone who taught against keeping the law to be in violation of Deuteronomy 13 and would have rejected them out of hand, if not tried to stone them. Many of them who were on the fence about whether to believe that Jesus was their Messiah were looking at whether Gentiles were coming to worship God in an acceptable way in great numbers. In their view, that would be a fulfillment of prophecy and an indication that Paul's ministry was from God and that Jesus was the Messiah. However, Gentiles showed no regard for the faith of Israel, then it was not of God and what Paul was saying was a lie.

I will say that those Christians who don't at least study the Feasts are missing out on some rich teachings about the Messiah.



I have not run across any who have taught that keeping the law leads to salvation, but that's not to say that aren't some people who are confused on the matter. As I've said before, the law is God's instructions for how to practice righteousness and 1 John 3:10 says it is the children of God who practice righteousness. It is an ongoing part of sanctification as we are made to be more like Jesus in how he thought and acted.

lol, Paul is understood by the vast majority of not feast, non food law, non Sabbath people who know the Lord!

 

[Frogster]

Messianic Judaism basically consists of Jews who believe that Jesus is their Messiah, which grew to include Gentiles after Peter's vision in Acts 10. Generally it is made up of Jews who haven't brought into the lie that they have to give up their Jewish identity in order to follow their Jewish Messiah and Gentiles who recognize the inherent Jewish foundation of Christianity.

As with all organizations of sufficient size, you'll find a variety of beliefs. There are also Christians who aren't MJ's who deny the Trinity and reject Paul's letters, so that is not unique to MJ. I know there are some who argue that the Hebraic concept of God was different than the Greek concept, but I haven't looked that much into it. From what I recall, they understood that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, but that the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father, which amounted to a big shrug. The Greek mindset wanted to define everything and came up with the formalized concept of the Trinity, but trying to wrap our mind around that can also amount to a big shrug, so I don't get hung up over it.

I will say that if any of the other books in the NT contradict Jesus' words, such as in Matthew 5:17-19, then Jesus trumps them, but it doesn't have to come to that when Paul is correctly understand.



There are some MJs that hold that only Jewish Christians are required to keep the Mosaic law, but my understanding is that Jews would have considered anyone who taught against keeping the law to be in violation of Deuteronomy 13 and would have rejected them out of hand, if not tried to stone them. Many of them who were on the fence about whether to believe that Jesus was their Messiah were looking at whether Gentiles were coming to worship God in an acceptable way in great numbers. In their view, that would be a fulfillment of prophecy and an indication that Paul's ministry was from God and that Jesus was the Messiah. However, Gentiles showed no regard for the faith of Israel, then it was not of God and what Paul was saying was a lie.

I will say that those Christians who don't at least study the Feasts are missing out on some rich teachings about the Messiah.



I have not run across any who have taught that keeping the law leads to salvation, but that's not to say that aren't some people who are confused on the matter. As I've said before, the law is God's instructions for how to practice righteousness and 1 John 3:10 says it is the children of God who practice righteousness. It is an ongoing part of sanctification as we are made to be more like Jesus in how he thought and acted.

Behold the texteth!

beb 10:5 Consequently, when Christ[a] came into the world, he said,

“Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired,
but a body have you prepared for me;
6
in burnt offerings and sin offerings
you have taken no pleasure.
7
Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come to do your will, O God,
as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.’”

8 When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), 9 then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second

 

[Frogster]

Messianic Judaism basically consists of Jews who believe that Jesus is their Messiah, which grew to include Gentiles after Peter's vision in Acts 10. Generally it is made up of Jews who haven't brought into the lie that they have to give up their Jewish identity in order to follow their Jewish Messiah and Gentiles who recognize the inherent Jewish foundation of Christianity.

As with all organizations of sufficient size, you'll find a variety of beliefs. There are also Christians who aren't MJ's who deny the Trinity and reject Paul's letters, so that is not unique to MJ. I know there are some who argue that the Hebraic concept of God was different than the Greek concept, but I haven't looked that much into it. From what I recall, they understood that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, but that the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father, which amounted to a big shrug. The Greek mindset wanted to define everything and came up with the formalized concept of the Trinity, but trying to wrap our mind around that can also amount to a big shrug, so I don't get hung up over it.

I will say that if any of the other books in the NT contradict Jesus' words, such as in Matthew 5:17-19, then Jesus trumps them, but it doesn't have to come to that when Paul is correctly understand.



There are some MJs that hold that only Jewish Christians are required to keep the Mosaic law, but my understanding is that Jews would have considered anyone who taught against keeping the law to be in violation of Deuteronomy 13 and would have rejected them out of hand, if not tried to stone them. Many of them who were on the fence about whether to believe that Jesus was their Messiah were looking at whether Gentiles were coming to worship God in an acceptable way in great numbers. In their view, that would be a fulfillment of prophecy and an indication that Paul's ministry was from God and that Jesus was the Messiah. However, Gentiles showed no regard for the faith of Israel, then it was not of God and what Paul was saying was a lie.

I will say that those Christians who don't at least study the Feasts are missing out on some rich teachings about the Messiah.



I have not run across any who have taught that keeping the law leads to salvation, but that's not to say that aren't some people who are confused on the matter. As I've said before, the law is God's instructions for how to practice righteousness and 1 John 3:10 says it is the children of God who practice righteousness. It is an ongoing part of sanctification as we are made to be more like Jesus in how he thought and acted.

Then why was Acts 11, as per Galatians 2, about Jews who were living as gentiles in Antioch?

Why did Paul, Barnabas, etc, live under "lie?


But when I saw that they were not [l]straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, “If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?

 

[Soyeong]

but lets be real, MJ people lead the way, with denying Paul as inspired text.

If you want to be real, then back up that assertion with some evidence. I see no prevalence of denying Paul as inspired among MJ and I'm not even aware of another MJ is does. There are no doubt some who do deny Paul, you would need to show that there is even correlation and then show that MJ lead the way.

 

[Soyeong]

lol, Paul is understood by the vast majority of not feast, non food law, non Sabbath people who know the Lord!

Forgive me for holding a minority viewpoint. Thankfully MJ is rapidly growing as more Christians are starting to gain a better understanding of the Bible's cultural context.

 

[Soyeong]

Behold the texteth!

beb 10:5 Consequently, when Christ[a] came into the world, he said,

“Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired,
but a body have you prepared for me;
6
in burnt offerings and sin offerings
you have taken no pleasure.
7
Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come to do your will, O God,
as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.’”

8 When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), 9 then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second

It's quoting for Hosea, so tell me why do you think God commanded Moses and the Israelites to perform sacrifices when he didn't desire them?

 

[Soyeong]

Then why was Acts 11, as per Galatians 2, about Jews who were living as gentiles in Antioch?

Why did Paul, Barnabas, etc, live under "lie?


But when I saw that they were not [l]straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, “If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?

They were living in violation of the man-made laws that forbade Jews from associating with Gentiles (Acts 10:28).

 

[Frogster]

Mark 7:1-4 Now when the Pharisees gathered to him, with some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem, 2 they saw that some of his disciples ate with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. 3 (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands properly,[a] holding to the tradition of the elders, 4 and when they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other traditions that they observe, such as the washing of cups and pots and copper vessels and dining couches.[c])

The traditions of the elders is also called oral law, which consists of fences and rulings for how to keep the written law of the Torah. Jesus criticized the Pharisees for rejecting the commandments of God to establish their own traditions and I think Paul was doing the same thing in Acts 15. The Mishna is the codified oral law.

Mishna Chapter 1 Moshe received the Torah from Sinai and transmitted it to Yehoshua; Yehoshua to the Elders; the Elders to the Prophets; and the Prophets transmitted it to the Anshei Knesset HaGedolah (Members of the Great Assembly). They made three statements (taught three things): Be deliberate (patient and restrained) in judgment; establish a large cadre of disciples; and construct a boundary around the Torah.

So the Jews traced their traditions back to Moses and some considered them to be more important that the written law because you couldn't know how to correctly keep the written law without it. For instance, how can you keep the command not to work on the sabbath if what it means to work is not defined? So they would not have considered teaching the written law apart from their oral laws.

The commandment for all Gentiles to become circumcised is not found in the Torah, so what the circumcision group was wanting Gentiles to follow was a man-made oral law. I think what Paul was rejecting in Acts 15 as a heavy burden was their mountain of oral laws and the idea that the laws of Moses were required to be kept in order to be saved. Paul would never have referred to God's holy, righteous, and good law is being a heavy burden. God didn't give the law to Moses because He thought they could use a heavy burden either. Furthermore, God didn't think it was too difficult:

Deuteronomy 30:11 “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off.

And neither did Jesus:

Matthew 11:28-30 Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”

red, you started debating me on your saying it was "oral law", then recently you started saying written law, now why are you back on oral law again?

How could gentiles keep the law, but not the law?

Do you really think the pharisees by 49 Ad would even think that gentiles would keep oral law?

They were trying to judaize ,not t be persecuted, a per gal 6:12, that would have to be the law, no one could be persecuted for just keeping the oral law!

Not only that, but why would Paul and crew, go to Jerusalem, before Peter, James, and John, to argue that one is on a Christian by oral aw? No one would even take that argument seriously!

 

[Frogster]

Mark 7:1-4 Now when the Pharisees gathered to him, with some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem, 2 they saw that some of his disciples ate with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. 3 (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands properly,[a] holding to the tradition of the elders, 4 and when they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other traditions that they observe, such as the washing of cups and pots and copper vessels and dining couches.[c])

The traditions of the elders is also called oral law, which consists of fences and rulings for how to keep the written law of the Torah. Jesus criticized the Pharisees for rejecting the commandments of God to establish their own traditions and I think Paul was doing the same thing in Acts 15. The Mishna is the codified oral law.

Mishna Chapter 1 Moshe received the Torah from Sinai and transmitted it to Yehoshua; Yehoshua to the Elders; the Elders to the Prophets; and the Prophets transmitted it to the Anshei Knesset HaGedolah (Members of the Great Assembly). They made three statements (taught three things): Be deliberate (patient and restrained) in judgment; establish a large cadre of disciples; and construct a boundary around the Torah.

So the Jews traced their traditions back to Moses and some considered them to be more important that the written law because you couldn't know how to correctly keep the written law without it. For instance, how can you keep the command not to work on the sabbath if what it means to work is not defined? So they would not have considered teaching the written law apart from their oral laws.

The commandment for all Gentiles to become circumcised is not found in the Torah, so what the circumcision group was wanting Gentiles to follow was a man-made oral law. I think what Paul was rejecting in Acts 15 as a heavy burden was their mountain of oral laws and the idea that the laws of Moses were required to be kept in order to be saved. Paul would never have referred to God's holy, righteous, and good law is being a heavy burden. God didn't give the law to Moses because He thought they could use a heavy burden either. Furthermore, God didn't think it was too difficult:

Deuteronomy 30:11 “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off.

And neither did Jesus:

Matthew 11:28-30 Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”

paaaaleeease, there were no pharisees in the time of Moses! Peter said the fathers could not bear the law yoke, there were no pharisees way back then in the Time of Moses, Peter in Acts 15 was about the law, Paul called the law a yoke too in gal 5.

 

[Frogster]

Mark 7:1-4 Now when the Pharisees gathered to him, with some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem, 2 they saw that some of his disciples ate with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. 3 (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands properly,[a] holding to the tradition of the elders, 4 and when they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other traditions that they observe, such as the washing of cups and pots and copper vessels and dining couches.[c])

The traditions of the elders is also called oral law, which consists of fences and rulings for how to keep the written law of the Torah. Jesus criticized the Pharisees for rejecting the commandments of God to establish their own traditions and I think Paul was doing the same thing in Acts 15. The Mishna is the codified oral law.

Mishna Chapter 1 Moshe received the Torah from Sinai and transmitted it to Yehoshua; Yehoshua to the Elders; the Elders to the Prophets; and the Prophets transmitted it to the Anshei Knesset HaGedolah (Members of the Great Assembly). They made three statements (taught three things): Be deliberate (patient and restrained) in judgment; establish a large cadre of disciples; and construct a boundary around the Torah.

So the Jews traced their traditions back to Moses and some considered them to be more important that the written law because you couldn't know how to correctly keep the written law without it. For instance, how can you keep the command not to work on the sabbath if what it means to work is not defined? So they would not have considered teaching the written law apart from their oral laws.

The commandment for all Gentiles to become circumcised is not found in the Torah, so what the circumcision group was wanting Gentiles to follow was a man-made oral law. I think what Paul was rejecting in Acts 15 as a heavy burden was their mountain of oral laws and the idea that the laws of Moses were required to be kept in order to be saved. Paul would never have referred to God's holy, righteous, and good law is being a heavy burden. God didn't give the law to Moses because He thought they could use a heavy burden either. Furthermore, God didn't think it was too difficult:

Deuteronomy 30:11 “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off.

And neither did Jesus:

Matthew 11:28-30 Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”

NO! I posted who to keep the passover a gentile had to convert it is in Exodus~

They said be circumcised, to keep the law in Acts 15, Paul said circumcised, keep the law in Gal 5, so you are wrong.

 

[Frogster]

If you hold strictly that Gentiles were only required to follow these four laws, then that would exclude that commands of Jesus. However, if you hold that this was obviously not an exhaustive list, then I'd agree with you. It appears to me to be a specific list for a particular purpose, namely to give a minimum standard that Gentiles would need to keep in order to make a clean break from paganism and to have fellowship with Jews and community meals.

Acts 19 Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, 20 but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood. 21 For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.”

In Jewish literature, the Jews realized that they had a lot of laws and that they shouldn't be meticulous with new converts. If an employer were to hire a new employee, they wouldn't start by making sure they learned everything they would ever need to know about the job upfront, but rather they would teach them the basics with the understanding that they would continue to learn the rest on the job. Similarly, they didn't want to make it too difficult for new Gentile converts, so they started them off with just the basics with the understanding that they would continue to learn how to behave by hearing Moses taught about every Sabbath in the synagogues.

no way, you are wrong on Acts 15:21. please read my post form another debate.




Acts 15:21.

Yep..I can see it now, the Christian disciples going into the synagogues, saying praise the Lord, the council said we do not have to be circumcised, we do not have to keep the Torah, and Peter said the Torah was a yoke that he nor the fathers could bear, and James said not to burden us with the Torah! Guess what synagogue leaders, the gospel is about faith and grace said Peter, Jew and Greek saved the same way, God shows no partiality, like Paul said in Rom 10:12.

My oh my, I am sure they would be welcomed in the synagogues..yep..

That verse was not saying the church was to keep Sabbath at all, in fact 15:21 was part of a larger narrative, that shows the opposite.


Lets look at it with a proper text analysis, and interpretation, and reading the OT, from a NT vantage point.

Why would Paul want the believers in the synagogues, around the very environment he went to fight off in Jerusalem? They were glad to not have the Torah put on them, that which Peter called a yoke, and James said not to burden the church with the law.

They went to churches after the counsel meeting, not synagogues if you read 15, you will see that. They were glad about the decision, no circumcision, which meant no conversion to Judaism, and the law. The synagogue leaders, for the most part hated Paul, and whipped Paul, the Christians would not be tolerated in the synagogues, praising the messiah, that the Jews rejected, so your interp of Acts 15:21, does not at all fit the narrative.

Like Paul would want his converts getting Judaized in the synagogues? I do not think so!