Jesus tells you the answer to this question in Matt. 23:1-4. As I pointed out in earlier post, the Apostles also understood that the Gentiles would grow in the knowledge of God by hearing the Holy Scriptures
that Paul taught both Jew and Gentile were trustworthy
I agree the Gentiles would hear the Scriptures, and that often would be in synagogues since they were read there, until the point in a given region they were put out of the synagogue.
"for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.". Why else would the Gentiles be in the Temple in Jerusalem in Acts 21? Why is Paul bringing Gentiles into the Temple in the first place, if not to hear Moses?
Acts 21:27-29
27 Now when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him, 28 crying out, “Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the law, and this place; and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place.” 29 (For they had previously seen Trophimus the Ephesian with him in the city, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.) (NKJV)
The text doesn't say he brought them in.
It is believing "all" of Paul teaching that caused me to "prove" the popular religious philosophy promoted by religions that existed in the world God placed me in, that in Acts 15 the Pharisees and religious leaders of Jerusalem were trying to persuade people to obey God's Commandments, but the Apostles turned the Gentiles away from God's Commandments, accept the 4 mentioned.
That philosophy can only stand if you take a sentence or two from the chapter, separate them from the rest of the Bible, then create doctrine by them alone.
Now let me ask you a question if it is allowed. According to your understanding, "Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?", is this Yoke here the Laws of God, or the commandments and religious traditions of man?
Acts 15:5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.” 6 Now the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter. 7 And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: “Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, 9 and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? 11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.” (NKJV)
In context Peter appears to be indicating the Pharisee contingent is speaking of justification by law, and he notes that God already accepted the Gentiles, giving them the Spirit, and purified their hearts by faith. The Jewish believers too are saved by faith.
He is not saying that the law could not be kept:
Deu 30:11 “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 14 But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it. 15 “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil. 16 If you obey the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you today, by loving the LORD your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it. 17 But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them, 18 I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish. You shall not live long in the land that you are going over the Jordan to enter and possess.
How so? Is it a LAW of God that a man must make a "Vow"? Will you answer my questions?
Deuteronomy 23:21-23
21 “When you make a vow to the LORD your God, you shall not delay to pay it; for the LORD your God will surely require it of you, and it would be sin to you. 22 But if you abstain from vowing, it shall not be sin to you. 23 That which has gone from your lips you shall keep and perform, for you voluntarily vowed to the LORD your God what you have promised with your mouth. (NKJV)
In context this is a Nazarite vow, and likely purification for the men who started a vow and then were defiled.
Here is what I am seeing. The religious philosophy of this world that exists in the world God placed me in, and the Pharisees, which were the mainstream religion of the world God placed Paul in, are accusing Paul of "teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place"., and that Paul "teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs."
But Paul defended himself as to this accusation.
Well before he defended himself the Jerusalem church defended him on this point:
Acts 21:20-24
20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; 21 but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. 22 What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come. 23 Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. 24 Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law. (NKJV)
The Jewish believers in Jerusalem did not think these accusations against Paul were true, and believed he also kept the law.
So no, I do not take issue with James or Paul.
Good.
You are not understanding my post, I know Paul was led by God, and no, my post doesn't suggest that Paul was led astray.
Good.
I don't believe the implications of modern religious philosophy you have adopted and are now promoting, that God treats people according to the DNA they were born with, and if a man isn't born with Jewish DNA, then the only limitations he is to place on his Free will is "that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood."
Acts 21:25
25 But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing, except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.” (NKJV)
James and the church in Jerusalem, who you said you have no issue with, are the ones who said this, referring back to the same decision of the council years earlier.
And I come to this understanding, by considering all of Paul's teaching, and all of Jesus' teaching and everything written in the Law and Prophets, as opposed to selecting this sentence, separating it from the rest of the Bible, then creating doctrines based on these words alone.
Not just those, but the ones from the whole church, that seemed good to the Holy Spirit.
Acts 15:28-29
28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. (NKJV)
I advocate that we don't adopt the religious views of any "voice" other than God's,
Ok, then I will go with what I read in the Scriptures, including what was of the Holy Spirit for the Gentiles.
We are warned over and over and over and over and over and over about the "other voices" in the world God placed us in. Voices who professes to know God and even quotes some of God's Word to justify disobedience to God.
Kind of like you are doing by saying that not being required to be circumcised and keep the law of Moses means they are actually to keep the law of Moses, but just work up to it?
Even though years later James still stuck by what the council decided?
If you have no objection to Paul or James in Acts 21, you have no reason to change what was said.
