Beg to differ, Sacrifices continued until the Temple was destroyed. It was not abolished. The place where it was to occur disappeared and the people were kicked out of the land by the Romans after murdering in the thousands.
If sacrifices ended at the cross, how do you explain Paul in the temple in Acts?
oh come on..Just read this on Paul and the temple. Did Paul go to temple for 17 years?! Nope!
Besides, they were being warned in hebrews as they hit the 40 year mark, it was coming to an end..Hint.."40 years"...cough cough..sound familiar like the
wilderness cough cough.......
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Pro law people love to shout out happily…
Paul went to the Temple and took the ritual!
Lol…they forget that he did not go to Jerusalem for 14 years as per Gal 2:1, which says “again”, presumably after the Peter visit of Gal 1:18, 3 years after Paul’s conversion, and it was for just 15 days, no temple time there, so really 17 years total, Acts 9 leaves no temple information either.
So no feasts, no cleansing, no practicing Judaism for 17 years.
Acts 21. Paul goes to Jerusalem with his heart wide open, even bringing money he collected from the Gentiles, to show good will and unity. Paul arrives in Jerusalem, only to hear from James that the thousands there, many law following believers, thought Paul taught apostasy in verse 21, the Greek for “forsake” Moses, same word used in Thessalonians about the “Antichrist”, serious accusation. Did Paul preach it was ok to commit adultery or steal? No. Did Paul preach apostasy? No. In Romans 3:8 Paul said they lied about his teaching making like Paul said “do evil, so good will come”. He said their condemnation will be deserved. This confirms that James knew what many thought, incorrectly of course, concerning what Paul taught. And Paul knew it too (Rom 3:8), hence answered sin questions are seen in Romans 6. Do we continue in sin Paul asked, then said no! James and Paul both knew what the masses thought.
James, understandably fearing the thousands said, "do what we tell you", to Paul. Did Paul have to? No, but the language sounds strong, James saying do what we tell you, not an order, but an emphatic emphasis, a tone, stress, a very concerned James, can not be denied in those words. So Paul, who said in 1 Corinthians 9, that he did certain things to further the gospel, become as a Jew or Gentile etc, along with 2 Corinthians 4, while saying he commended himself to others, he then commended himself to James in Acts 21. Keep in mind, after James wanted Paul to take the ritual, James reminded Paul how he helped Paul earlier at the council meeting in Acts 15. So now it was Paul’s turn to reciprocate with James. Fine, both helped each other.
So yes, Paul did the ritual, no big deal really, so what!? In a transitional stressful time, in an unfolding history of the apostleship of Paul and the church, along with the integration of Jew and Gentile populations, and all of the other things going on then, Paul did not want to freak out James, he took the vow. So what? It was the way for thousands of years anyway, it is not like he worshipped an idol or pagan God or something. Besides, that whole temple was going down soon anyway. People get so carried away with Acts 21, for no reason, other than to think they “got Paul”!
I say, good for Paul! He can't win anyway, if he didn't take the vow, people today, would find fault with that too. They would say….
"Evil Paul, would not show love to James"
"Proud Paul!"
"Big shot apostle!"
When he takes the vow, they cry hypocrite, or try to make like after 17 years, he suddenly lived as a Jew again.
