Paul fought the circumcision, Messianic Judaism.

[bugkiller]

how come you underline law and Prophets, but you don't show what paul was talking about, in the law and the Prophets, meaning the OT?


Acts 24:14 But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets, 15 having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust.


You ignore context, and what he was talking about, so go ahead, underline it, make it red, but the facts stand, paul was using the OT about the resurrection, not law promotion. You quote 24:14, BUT YOU LEAVE OUT 24:15! 15 shows what he was referring to, in the OT.


No, Paul did not steal, or commit adultery, either do I we get that already, but you are ignoring alot in Acts.

Not only that but 15 is part of the same sentence as 14. Just doesn't fit his game.

bugkiller

 

[Frogster]

I must have had two threads open at once and saved to the wrong thread.

I can understand that you would not want Acts 17 here.

excuse me, but you know just what I mean, you keep pasting these verses below, over and over again, it is spamming, if it continues I will have to report it.




"Acts 21
24 take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law

Acts 24:
14But this I confess to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets


Acts 25
8 while he answered for himself, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended in anything at all.”


Acts 26
22 Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses said would come— 23 that the Christ would suffer, that He would be the first to rise from the dead, and would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles.”

Acts 28
17 And it came to pass after three days that Paul called the leaders of the Jews together. So when they had come together, he said to them: “Men and brethren, though I have done nothing against our people or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans,... I have called for you, to see you and speak with you, because for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain.”
...
23 So when they had appointed him a day, many came to him at his lodging, to whom he explained and solemnly testified of the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus from both the Law of Moses and the Prophets, from morning till evening"

 

[bugkiller]

Was Acts 23 about the law. or the resurrection?

6 Now when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, “Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. It is with respect to the hope and the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial.”



8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor angel, nor spirit, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all.

Maybe he doesn't like the resurrection either.

bugkiller

 

[Frogster]

Not only that but 15 is part of the same sentence as 14. Just doesn't fit his game.

bugkiller

yes, just like quoting 1/2 of 1 cor 7:19, and here he leaves out what Paul was talking about, the resurrection, in the OT, and it was not the law. It is not right for him to quote half a verse, or to leave out the next verse which clearly defines the context, the context which proves him wrong.

 

[Frogster]

Maybe he doesn't like the resurrection either.

bugkiller

yes, and I never got an answer to my question about Acts 23, or Phil 3...same ole..same ole...

 

[bugkiller]

MoreCoffee asks about Acts 21 and specifically 21:25 to which we have this Bible answer.

Originally Posted by BobRyan

The post that asks us not to talk about Paul's own practice or how it fit in with the Messianic Jews - will often stick to "Let's just talk about gentiles instead" -- and avoid entirely the actual testimony of Paul regarding his own practice

Such as we find here in Acts 21 - in the actual Bible testimony Paul gives in Acts 21-28

Acts 21
20 And when they heard it they began glorifying God; and they said to him, “You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed, and they are all zealous for the Law; 21 and they have been told about you, that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs.

(Many here would argue - "yeah... that is EXACTLY what Paul was doing!" - Paul goes out of his way to disprove it.



22 What, then, is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come.
23 Therefore do this that we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow;
24 take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law..

And those who want to just focus on Acts 21:25 - find that there gentiles are not commandment to "Love God with all their heart" or to "love your neigbhor as yourself" nor even "thou shalt not murder" ... none of that is in Acts 21:25.

Rather what we have there is this restriction from Lev 17 and eating meat with blood in it.

25 But concerning the Gentiles who have believed, we wrote, having decided that they should abstain from meat sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication.”
​

After that point - I don't find any post following that addresses this point.



In the case of the two above - they are from Lev 19:18 and Deut 6:5 -- quoted by Christ, and Paul and james 2 in Lev 19 form -- but not in Acts 21:25 or in Acts 15... because those two are not trying to downsize/resize scripture at all - they allow for all of it.




The question raised in Acts 21 is - what is Paul's own practice and what is he teaching Jewish Christians.

As we saw here -


20 And when they heard it they began glorifying God; and they said to him, “You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed, and they are all zealous for the Law; 21 and they have been told about you, that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs.


And as we saw here

23 Therefore do this that we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow;
24 take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law..




That is the question for Acts 15:1 -- it is not the question here --


, “You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed, and they are all zealous for the Law; 21 and they have been told about you, that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs.


For in Acts 21 it is Paul's own practice AND his teaching to CHRISTIAN Jews that is being scrutinized.

Sort of like the title of this thread.

As noted earlier - the point remains.

in Christ,

Bob

It appears to me you favor the false accusation against Paul. You badly need to get rid of him.

bugkiller

 

[BobRyan]

you asked about Acts 17 - not about Acts 21 - 28.

excuse me, but you know just what I mean, you keep pasting these verses below, over and over again, it is spamming, if it continues I will have to report it.




"Acts 21
24 take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law

Acts 24:
14But this I confess to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets


Acts 25
8 while he answered for himself, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended in anything at all.”


Acts 26
22 Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses said would come— 23 that the Christ would suffer, that He would be the first to rise from the dead, and would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles.”

Acts 28
17 And it came to pass after three days that Paul called the leaders of the Jews together. So when they had come together, he said to them: “Men and brethren, though I have done nothing against our people or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans,... I have called for you, to see you and speak with you, because for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain.”
...
23 So when they had appointed him a day, many came to him at his lodging, to whom he explained and solemnly testified of the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus from both the Law of Moses and the Prophets, from morning till evening"

If your complaint is that you do not want Acts 21-28 on this thread about Paul's own practice and his own statements to Messianic Jews in Acts 21 -- then the argument you make is "with the text".

I was wondering why no one was answering the point raised by these texts -- apparently all view them as "irrefutable".

And the only option left "apparently" is to try and have them removed.

How "Instructive" for the unbiased objective reader.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[bugkiller]

yes, and I never got an answer to my question about Acts 23, or Phil 3...same ole..same ole...

You have my best wish of good fortune on that. Please don't hold your breath.

bugkiller

 

[Frogster]

You have my best wish of good fortune on that. Please don't hold your breath.

bugkiller

there were about 5 unanswered questions/points, all i got was the same paste, that I rebutted over and over again.

 

[listed]

[FONT=&quot]Acts 21
[FONT=&quot]24 take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law

[FONT=&quot]Acts 24:[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
14But this I confess to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets


Acts 25
8 while he answered for himself, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended in anything at all.”

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [FONT=&quot]Acts 26[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]22 Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses said would come— 23 that the Christ would suffer, that He would be the first to rise from the dead, and would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles.”[/FONT]

Acts 28
17 And it came to pass after three days that Paul called the leaders of the Jews together. So when they had come together, he said to them: “Men and brethren, though I have done nothing against our people or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans,... I have called for you, to see you and speak with you, because for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain.”
...
23 So when they had appointed him a day, many came to him at his lodging, to whom he explained and solemnly testified of the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus from both the Law of Moses and the Prophets, from morning till evening[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]




My sole purpose is to show what the Bible says is the content of Paul's practice and teaching - where HE himself gives his own teaching and explains his own position before both gentiles and Jews.

Those who imagine that his testimony is against his letters to the churches because his letters are bent by some to oppose what he claims he is doing and teaching - are using a form of logic that I am not familiar with.

in Christ,

Bob

No sir, your sole purpose is to intimidate other into believing the Christian is obligated to keep the law and specifically the Sabbath for salvation. Paul does not teach this when he says we are delivered from the law and encourages us to be led by the Spirit and not the law. If 1 is saved by faith, how can 1 maintain salvation by that which can not provide salvation?

 

[listed]

you asked about Acts 17 - not about Acts 21 - 28.





If your complaint is that you do not want Acts 21-28 on this thread about Paul's own practice and his own statements to Messianic Jews in Acts 21 -- then the argument you make is "with the text".

I was wondering why no one was answering the point raised by these texts -- apparently all view them as "irrefutable".

And the only option left "apparently" is to try and have them removed.

How "Instructive" for the unbiased objective reader.

in Christ,

Bob

Remove what? The Ten Commandments? Who is doing this? Why would they need to do it? This has all been addressed to you in this section of the forum.

 

[Frogster]

you asked about Acts 17 - not about Acts 21 - 28.





If your complaint is that you do not want Acts 21-28 on this thread about Paul's own practice and his own statements to Messianic Jews in Acts 21 -- then the argument you make is "with the text".

I was wondering why no one was answering the point raised by these texts -- apparently all view them as "irrefutable".

And the only option left "apparently" is to try and have them removed.

How "Instructive" for the unbiased objective reader.

in Christ,

Bob

but they have been refuted by me over and over, i don't want spamming, debate is great, but to just keep on posting the same verses ignoring the context, as you highlight to make it seem like something they are not, that, that is what I want removed from my thread.

 

[MoreCoffee]

but they have been refuted by me over and over, i don't want spamming, debate is great, but to just keep on posting the same verses ignoring the context, as you highlight to make it seem like something they are not, that, that is what I want removed from my thread.

Continual repetition (by quoting the same post again and again) may be a technique for effectively closing down a debate ... I have wondered why it is employed so tenaciously.

 

[Frogster]

Continual repetition (by quoting the same post again and again) may be a technique for effectively closing down a debate ... I have wondered why it is employed so tenaciously.

exactly, yo are wise...

it ruins the forum too, it downgrades the threads.

 

[MoreCoffee]

exactly, yo are wise...

it ruins the forum too, it downgrades the threads.

A number of threads have been derailed by the technique of massive repetition of a post or two.

 

[listed]

A number of threads have been derailed by the technique of massive repetition of a post or two.

It is trying to run off all who do not agree with you. Then they have unfettered control for promotion of their deception.

 

[bugkiller]

A number of threads have been derailed by the technique of massive repetition of a post or two.

You just might have something there.

bugkiller

 

[Frogster]

You just might have something there.

bugkiller

yup, it is so obvious..

 

[Meowzltov]

To say that Paul was against circumcision is as inaccurate as to say he was for it. The truth is that it depended on whether the person in question was a gentile or a jew. The council of Jerusalem clearly decided that gentile believers did not need to become circumcised and take on the covenant, and so Paul writes proudly that he did not circumcise Titus, a gentile. Timothy, however, was not a gentile. He was the son of a gentile father and a Jewish mother. So, since Timothy was a Jew, Paul circumcised him.

 

[MoreCoffee]

To say that Paul was against circumcision is as inaccurate as to say he was for it. The truth is that it depended on whether the person in question was a gentile or a jew. The council of Jerusalem clearly decided that gentile believers did not need to become circumcised and take on the covenant, and so Paul writes proudly that he did not circumcise Titus, a gentile. Timothy, however, was not a gentile. He was the son of a gentile father and a Jewish mother. So, since Timothy was a Jew, Paul circumcised him.

Well, saint Paul did write these words: Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. (Galatians 5:2) So I reckon he was against circumcision as a religious observance. I doubt he'd object to it for medical reasons or even for cultural reasons but once it becomes a religious requirement he is against it.