Acts 15:21 is often misused and misunderstood. A no spin zone thread!

Acts 15:21 for from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.”



People try to Act like Acts 15:21, meant that Gentile converts to Christianity, were to go to the synagogues, to learn the law. That is incorrect, big time!



Why would Paul want the disciples in the synagogues, where Judaism was taught, after going to Jerusalem to fight off Judaism? Would that make sense?


Why would Paul want his converts near the Jews in the synagogues who plotted against Paul, Acts 20:19, and would try to Judaize the church, while antagonizing Paul by that act, the very thing Paul did not want? Why put the disciples in hostile territory? Since the Jews plotted against Paul, why wouldn’t they seek to get his children? What a perfect trap, have Paul’s disciples in a synagogue, on the turf of Paul’s opponents. Why would Paul want that?!

Why would he want them near the persecutory zealots, who gathered in the synagogues, and forced circumcision, the very thing Paul fought in Acts 15, and in Galatia? Talk about a bad environment.



Why on the way to the meeting in Acts 15, did Paul and crew stop at churches, not synagogues to see Christians, and likewise after the meeting he went to churches, not synagogues to see Christians? Why did the church, send them? Christians were not in the synagogues, they were in churches, especially by 49 AD.


Why were Paul and crew glad that the council said, no circumcision, which would have bound the church to Sabbath, food laws, and feasts? "Gal 5:3, if circumcised, keep the whole law". To keep Passover one had to be Jewish, said the law.


Exodus 12:43-48 And the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, “This is the statute of the Passover: no foreigner shall eat of it, 44 but every slave that is bought for money may eat of it after you have circumcised him. 45 No foreigner or hired servant may eat of it. 46 It shall be eaten in one house; you shall not take any of the flesh outside the house, and you shall not break any of its bones. 47 All the congregation of Israel shall keep it. 48 If a stranger shall sojourn with you and would keep the Passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised. Then he may come near and keep it; he shall be as a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person shall eat of it.


So the council was saying, no feasts, food stuff, or Sabbath for the churches. It even says Sabbath in 15:21, so if the council wanted Sabbath and the whole law for the churches, they would have said they have to be circumcised. Did they want them to keep feasts? No, because they did not follow the law quoted above and have the church get circumcised.


Gee, what would those in the zealot filled, Paul’s opponent filled, proselytizer filled, synagogues think of that? “Oh yes, welcome aboard uncircumcised ones”! lol…



The synagogue leaders opened up Paul's back whipping him on 5 different occasions, 39 (40 minus one) times, as per 2 Cor 11. They would not want Paul’s Jesus praising gentiles in their synagogues, they did not like Paul, look how they tried to tear him apart in Acts 21 at the temple, the synagogues were where the unsaved Jews were, Paul's opponents and enemies, it was 49 AD.


2 Corinthians 11:24 Five times I received at the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one.


One more point, to an unsaved Jewish person, being a Christian was basically saying, the Jews killed the Messiah, and they were wrong. So how would a Christian fit in a Jewish synagogue? They would just be a testimony against the Jews. Oh my, how uncomfortable!

All James was saying in Acts 15:21, don't freak out the Jewish Christians, all they knew for centuries was the law, this was a transitional period. Jew and Greek were becoming one body, so there would be tensions.


Case closed!

Thanks, froggy.

Soyeong said:

Paul was fighting off the circumcision group, not Judaism. The covenant was made with Jews and Gentiles are grafted in.



Again, the Jews who were trying to kill him does not mean that all Jews were trying to kill him. The were trying to get gentiles to follow both the written and oral law in order to be saved, which is what Paul didn't want, but Paul did not reject the law of God. Similarly, not all Jews were trying to kill Jesus.



The word used refers to an assembly, not the building.



Galatians 5:4 makes it clear that he is talking about justification. They would be required to keep the whole law if they were going to be justified by it. The laws says that to keep passover one had to be circumcised, not be Jewish.



This shows that Paul submitted to their authority, in accordance with how he encourages gentiles to do in Romans 13.



Jesus laid down his own life and died because of me and everyone else. Blaming the Jews for killing the Messiah didn't start up until later when Christianity had begun separating itself from its Jewish roots.



I thought you said this was a no spin zone? The "For" in verse 21 connects it with the previous thought about what Gentiles were doing. The idea in verses 19:21 is not to make it too difficult for new converts by teaching them to follow all of the laws up front and Paul excused that by saying they would continue to learn how to keep them every Sabbath.

Click to expand...

Red above, excuse me, but the circumcision promoted judaism, what else would they do? Paul did not want hos church around that, so you're reply does not do much.

Soyeong said:

Paul was fighting off the circumcision group, not Judaism. The covenant was made with Jews and Gentiles are grafted in.



Again, the Jews who were trying to kill him does not mean that all Jews were trying to kill him. The were trying to get gentiles to follow both the written and oral law in order to be saved, which is what Paul didn't want, but Paul did not reject the law of God. Similarly, not all Jews were trying to kill Jesus.



The word used refers to an assembly, not the building.



Galatians 5:4 makes it clear that he is talking about justification. They would be required to keep the whole law if they were going to be justified by it. The laws says that to keep passover one had to be circumcised, not be Jewish.



This shows that Paul submitted to their authority, in accordance with how he encourages gentiles to do in Romans 13.



Jesus laid down his own life and died because of me and everyone else. Blaming the Jews for killing the Messiah didn't start up until later when Christianity had begun separating itself from its Jewish roots.



I thought you said this was a no spin zone? The "For" in verse 21 connects it with the previous thought about what Gentiles were doing. The idea in verses 19:21 is not to make it too difficult for new converts by teaching them to follow all of the laws up front and Paul excused that by saying they would continue to learn how to keep them every Sabbath.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but the jews who were trying to kill him, were in the synagogues too, take a peep in Acts for proof. "Jews from Asia", etc. They were in the synagogues, and were looking to get Paul. The point is, I prove that the synagogues are NOT where Paul would want his church. You do not at all prove they do.


Acts 17:17 Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. 2 And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ.” 4 And some of them were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a great many of the devout Greeks and not a few of the leading women. 5 But the Jews were jealous, and taking some wicked men of the rabble, they formed a mob, set the city in an uproar, and attacked the house of Jason, seeking to bring them out to the crowd.



Same as the temple...

Acts 21;27 When the seven days were almost completed, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him,

Soyeong said:

Paul was fighting off the circumcision group, not Judaism. The covenant was made with Jews and Gentiles are grafted in.



Again, the Jews who were trying to kill him does not mean that all Jews were trying to kill him. The were trying to get gentiles to follow both the written and oral law in order to be saved, which is what Paul didn't want, but Paul did not reject the law of God. Similarly, not all Jews were trying to kill Jesus.



The word used refers to an assembly, not the building.



Galatians 5:4 makes it clear that he is talking about justification. They would be required to keep the whole law if they were going to be justified by it. The laws says that to keep passover one had to be circumcised, not be Jewish.



This shows that Paul submitted to their authority, in accordance with how he encourages gentiles to do in Romans 13.



Jesus laid down his own life and died because of me and everyone else. Blaming the Jews for killing the Messiah didn't start up until later when Christianity had begun separating itself from its Jewish roots.



I thought you said this was a no spin zone? The "For" in verse 21 connects it with the previous thought about what Gentiles were doing. The idea in verses 19:21 is not to make it too difficult for new converts by teaching them to follow all of the laws up front and Paul excused that by saying they would continue to learn how to keep them every Sabbath.

Click to expand...

Everyone already knows, they met from house to house...we know they did not have churches with steeples. But the Christians were not in synagogues, were they?

Acts 20:20 how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you in public and from house to house.

Soyeong said:

Paul was fighting off the circumcision group, not Judaism. The covenant was made with Jews and Gentiles are grafted in.



Again, the Jews who were trying to kill him does not mean that all Jews were trying to kill him. The were trying to get gentiles to follow both the written and oral law in order to be saved, which is what Paul didn't want, but Paul did not reject the law of God. Similarly, not all Jews were trying to kill Jesus.



The word used refers to an assembly, not the building.



Galatians 5:4 makes it clear that he is talking about justification. They would be required to keep the whole law if they were going to be justified by it. The laws says that to keep passover one had to be circumcised, not be Jewish.



This shows that Paul submitted to their authority, in accordance with how he encourages gentiles to do in Romans 13.



Jesus laid down his own life and died because of me and everyone else. Blaming the Jews for killing the Messiah didn't start up until later when Christianity had begun separating itself from its Jewish roots.



I thought you said this was a no spin zone? The "For" in verse 21 connects it with the previous thought about what Gentiles were doing. The idea in verses 19:21 is not to make it too difficult for new converts by teaching them to follow all of the laws up front and Paul excused that by saying they would continue to learn how to keep them every Sabbath.

Click to expand...

You forget, that the whole point was to also have them live as Jews, that was the issue, you must see past just the justification issue, as I have shown you before.They would now have to be under law, Paul said no, and so did the council, so there is more than just trying to get them just by law, as per the Judaizers. They would have to know LIVE as Jews, if circumcised, that is a fact. So Paul said no Judaism for the churches.


Circumcise and what??? Plain as day, they would have to now live under law, circumcision was not just keep the law for one day..lol


Acts 15:5 But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses.”

Soyeong said:

Paul was fighting off the circumcision group, not Judaism. The covenant was made with Jews and Gentiles are grafted in.



Again, the Jews who were trying to kill him does not mean that all Jews were trying to kill him. The were trying to get gentiles to follow both the written and oral law in order to be saved, which is what Paul didn't want, but Paul did not reject the law of God. Similarly, not all Jews were trying to kill Jesus.



The word used refers to an assembly, not the building.



Galatians 5:4 makes it clear that he is talking about justification. They would be required to keep the whole law if they were going to be justified by it. The laws says that to keep passover one had to be circumcised, not be Jewish.



This shows that Paul submitted to their authority, in accordance with how he encourages gentiles to do in Romans 13.



Jesus laid down his own life and died because of me and everyone else. Blaming the Jews for killing the Messiah didn't start up until later when Christianity had begun separating itself from its Jewish roots.



I thought you said this was a no spin zone? The "For" in verse 21 connects it with the previous thought about what Gentiles were doing. The idea in verses 19:21 is not to make it too difficult for new converts by teaching them to follow all of the laws up front and Paul excused that by saying they would continue to learn how to keep them every Sabbath.

Click to expand...

oh my, I have no idea what to say to this!!!!

It was called grab Paul, and beat him. Why did Paul sometimes escape, as did the Lord, those who wanted to hurt them?

Oh my! You forget Paul rebuked the synagogue people, not exactly under their authority there!

Soyeong said:

Paul was fighting off the circumcision group, not Judaism. The covenant was made with Jews and Gentiles are grafted in.



Again, the Jews who were trying to kill him does not mean that all Jews were trying to kill him. The were trying to get gentiles to follow both the written and oral law in order to be saved, which is what Paul didn't want, but Paul did not reject the law of God. Similarly, not all Jews were trying to kill Jesus.



The word used refers to an assembly, not the building.



Galatians 5:4 makes it clear that he is talking about justification. They would be required to keep the whole law if they were going to be justified by it. The laws says that to keep passover one had to be circumcised, not be Jewish.



This shows that Paul submitted to their authority, in accordance with how he encourages gentiles to do in Romans 13.



Jesus laid down his own life and died because of me and everyone else. Blaming the Jews for killing the Messiah didn't start up until later when Christianity had begun separating itself from its Jewish roots.



I thought you said this was a no spin zone? The "For" in verse 21 connects it with the previous thought about what Gentiles were doing. The idea in verses 19:21 is not to make it too difficult for new converts by teaching them to follow all of the laws up front and Paul excused that by saying they would continue to learn how to keep them every Sabbath.

Click to expand...

Peter, Paul, and Stephen blamed the Jews, it is in the NT. I can prove it.

Matt 27:25, "his blood be on us" said the people.

” 25 And all the people answered, “His blood be on us and on our children!”

"He came to his own, and they knew him not", said John.

Soyeong said:

Paul was fighting off the circumcision group, not Judaism. The covenant was made with Jews and Gentiles are grafted in.



Again, the Jews who were trying to kill him does not mean that all Jews were trying to kill him. The were trying to get gentiles to follow both the written and oral law in order to be saved, which is what Paul didn't want, but Paul did not reject the law of God. Similarly, not all Jews were trying to kill Jesus.



The word used refers to an assembly, not the building.



Galatians 5:4 makes it clear that he is talking about justification. They would be required to keep the whole law if they were going to be justified by it. The laws says that to keep passover one had to be circumcised, not be Jewish.



This shows that Paul submitted to their authority, in accordance with how he encourages gentiles to do in Romans 13.



Jesus laid down his own life and died because of me and everyone else. Blaming the Jews for killing the Messiah didn't start up until later when Christianity had begun separating itself from its Jewish roots.



I thought you said this was a no spin zone? The "For" in verse 21 connects it with the previous thought about what Gentiles were doing. The idea in verses 19:21 is not to make it too difficult for new converts by teaching them to follow all of the laws up front and Paul excused that by saying they would continue to learn how to keep them every Sabbath.

Click to expand...

You speculate about that. I proved clearly that the synagogues were no place for the Christians historically, and just by reason, that is the thread. Show me one part here where you give sound reason, to contradict my whole premise. The synagogues were not for Christians, you did not refute my facts, you just tried to say things that really were not about proving me wrong, about he synagogues.

Mark 13:9
“But be on your guard. For they will deliver you over to councils, and you will be beaten in synagogues, and you will stand before governors and kings for my sake, to bear witness before them.

There were demons in the synagogues.

Mark 1:39 And he went throughout all Galilee, preaching in their synagogues and casting out demons.

Flog you in the synagogues..oh my!

Matthew 10:17
Beware of men, for they will deliver you over to courts and flog you in their synagogues,


Sound like a real nice crowd huh?


John 16:2
They will put you out of the synagogues. Indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God.

Soyeong said:

It's nice that you call your speculation proof while denouncing what happened historically as speculation. No spin zone, no siree! All throughout Acts they are meeting the temple or in synagogues.

Click to expand...

UNsaved were there UNTIL PAUL! Show me one post from you, where you have taken down my argument, about Paul would not want his converts in the synagogues, as per the topic, common sense, and historical climate of my OP...Just 1...

This is what happens on threads, I raise an important fact, then suddenly instead of debating the OP issue, we are on to all of these other distractionary issues. Please refute the OP premise abut the synagogues, and how Paul would not want his converts in that environment..

Soyeong said:

They promoted a perverted form of Judaism, which not all Jews agreed with. Paul never stopped going to synagogues on the Sabbath and neither did other Christians.

Click to expand...

Paul preached and rebuked the UNsaved, they were not saved when Paul came, that is a fact, , now please prove the red above. I await...

The theme, and point is that the synagogues were not for the Christians, that is the topic. No drifting away from that, please..

Soyeong said:

The point is that you're just making stuff up to fit your theology. You can check any source about Christian worship in the 1st century and it'll tell you that they continued to meet at the temple and in synagogues.

http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2010/06/christian-worship-in-the-first-century/

http://www.acts17-11.com/dialogs_synagogues.html

http://www.liturgica.com/html/litEChLitWEC.jsp

I found these in less than a minute, so I could go on, but you've never been persuaded by evidence when your speculation is in the way.

Click to expand...

Oh please, there are so many biased sites out there, I won't waste my time.

Give me text, and disprove all of the common sense I posted. You want to post links, instead of talking about what makes sense.

Besides, who does not know that at first, some of the early the Jewish Christians did not go to the Synagogues? But that did not last long.

Acts 8, there were persecutions against the Jewish Christians, synagogues were no longer safe, and wow, by Acts 12, it pleased the Jews to try to kill Peter. Read 12, it is there, and they were glad James was killed too.

So do you really think, that by 49 AD, years later, at the time of the council meeting, that there were Christians in synagogues? Let alone Gentile Christians!?

Please...

Even as early as the Acts 8-9, the priests approved of persecuting the Christians. History is amazing, if we just think it through a bit. You want me to believe that by 49 everything was nice and cozy? Show me please. All I posted stands, because it fits. To have letters from the priests shows that it was already an acceptable mindset by the majority, even as early as then.




Acts 26:12 “In this connection I journeyed to Damascus with the authority and commission of the chief priests

These synagogue Jews followed Paul to get him.

They were at the Thessalonica synagogue causing trouble for Paul getting a mob against him, then they followed Paul to Berea.


Acts 17:13 But when the Jews from Thessalonica learned that the word of God was proclaimed by Paul at Berea also, they came there too, agitating and stirring up the crowds


Do you really think that the synagogues would welcome Jesus praising gentiles in their synagogues? A Christian bore witness, that the unsaved Jews were wrong, so no way would they be welcome in the zealot filled synagogues.

Soyeong said:

The point is that you're just making stuff up to fit your theology. You can check any source about Christian worship in the 1st century and it'll tell you that they continued to meet at the temple and in synagogues.

http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2010/06/christian-worship-in-the-first-century/

http://www.acts17-11.com/dialogs_synagogues.html

http://www.liturgica.com/html/litEChLitWEC.jsp

I found these in less than a minute, so I could go on, but you've never been persuaded by evidence when your speculation is in the way.

Click to expand...

Ok, now we know some Jews got saved at the synagogues, great! But look at those who reviled Paul in the verse below. Why would those Jews, now welcome converts to Christianity in their synagogue? Since they reviled Paul in the synagogue, why would they not revile other Christians also? They did not convert, so they would still be in the synagogue in "revile mode". No? There ya go....I post alot of common sense, and text, thanks! frog.


Acts 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and tried to persuade Jews and Greeks. 5 When Silas and Timothy arrived from Macedonia, Paul was occupied with the word, testifying to the Jews that the Christ was Jesus. 6 And when they opposed and reviled him, he shook out his garments and said to them, “Your blood be on your own heads! I am innocent. From now on I will go to the Gentiles.”