Christian History in 15 minutes

prodromos · Jun 10, 2026

All Becomes New said:
I get it, you hate Jews

I have some very good friends who are Jews.

All Becomes New said:
so you imagine the Apostles completely turned their backs on their Jewish identity.

What do you think Paul meant by the following:

To those outside the law I became as one outside the law—not being without law toward God but under the law of Christ—that I might win those outside the law.

David Lamb · Jun 10, 2026

All Becomes New said:
Yes. Part of the Nazarite vow is that you cut your hair and offer a sacrifice when it is fulfilled.

So are you suggesting that Paul offered his hair as a sacrifice?

All Becomes New · Jun 10, 2026

prodromos said:
I asked you the following:

Would you like me to give you OTHER quotes that demonstrate Chrysostom was antisemitic? Are all of them taken out of context?

You want to say "hate doesn't really mean hate," But this denies the context in which the words were written. Why would he include "all the more" if it was just that he simply did not prefer the Jews? In fact, even that is backwards, as God DOES prefer the Jews. So the argument does not get off the ground in the first place.

Now, you would say something about Christians becoming Jews or something. But there has got to be a better way of shepherding your people than to slander the synagogues and such. It is literally the oldest conspiracy theory in the world that the Jews are evil or whatever. It has a deep history in Christianity, and Christians have historically treated the Jews very badly. Would you excuse this behavior, or would you own it?

All Becomes New · Jun 10, 2026

prodromos said:
What do you think Paul meant by the following:

To those outside the law I became as one outside the law—not being without law toward God but under the law of Christ—that I might win those outside the law.

I think it's the same thing as when he said, "I became all things to all people so that I might win some." Nothing about discontinuing keeping Jewish customs. Read Romans 14. It does not mean that Messianic Jews cannot identify with being Jewish. If you think it does, that means you have a skewed view of Christianity and have essentially tried to steal Jewish followers of Jesus from their heritage.

All Becomes New · Jun 10, 2026

David Lamb said:
So are you suggesting that Paul offered his hair as a sacrifice?

I'm suggesting that he cut his hair in keeping with the Nazarite Vow. Do you disagree that he kept the Nazarite vow? What other vow would it be where he cut his hair as a vow?

What is the Nazirite/Nazarite vow? | GotQuestions.org

What is the Nazirite/Nazarite vow? What is the origin and purpose of the Nazirite vow?

www.gotquestions.org

jas3 · Jun 10, 2026

All Becomes New said:
It's plain. Paul offered a sacrifice in the temple after taking a nazarite vow.

Setting aside the fact that the verse says nothing about making a sacrifice, even if it explicitly said what you claim it does, that's a far cry from saying Paul continued to observe Jewish rituals for the rest of his life, and it's not evidence that any of the other apostles did, either.
I find it unlikely that the men who were accused even when our Lord was with them of not observing ritual washings and the Sabbath, and who taught that there are no unclean meats, and that if you accept circumcision Christ is of no benefit to you, and (over and over) that we are not under the Law, believed themselves to be exceptions to what they taught.

timothyu · Jun 10, 2026

All Becomes New said:
Yes. Part of the Nazarite vow is that you cut your hair and offer a sacrifice when it is fulfilled.

So he converted from Pharisee to Nazarite Jew?

All Becomes New · Jun 11, 2026

jas3 said:
Setting aside the fact that the verse says nothing about making a sacrifice, even if it explicitly said what you claim it does, that's a far cry from saying Paul continued to observe Jewish rituals for the rest of his life, and it's not evidence that any of the other apostles did, either.
I find it unlikely that the men who were accused even when our Lord was with them of not observing ritual washings and the Sabbath, and who taught that there are no unclean meats, and that if you accept circumcision Christ is of no benefit to you, and (over and over) that we are not under the Law, believed themselves to be exceptions to what they taught.

If a nazarite vow is not an Israelite custom, then what is it?

When Paul rebukes Peter for only eating with Jews, are we to think that the only problem Peter had was eating with Jews and he wasn't participating in Israelite customs?

No place in the bible says that Jews can't or shouldn't participate in Israelite customs. Not a single reference to that. The only verses you guys have about that are an INTERPRETATION of what the new covenant means. Not something that the Bible actually says.

timothyu said:
So he converted from Pharisee to Nazarite Jew?

No? What makes you think that? Do you not know what a Nazarite vow is? I literally gave a link to it.

timothyu · Jun 11, 2026

All Becomes New said:
No? What makes you think that?

Would not taking a vow break with the Pharisee rules?

All Becomes New · Jun 11, 2026

timothyu said:
Would not taking a vow break with the Pharisee rules?

Not sure, TBH. What I know is that taking a Nazarite Vow is in the Torah. So if the Pharisees were against it, it is in contrast to what the Word of God says.

Paul's just out here being Biblical, I guess, but the Nazarite Vow is literally in the Torah, so it is an Israelite custom.

*SHRUG*

timothyu · Jun 11, 2026

All Becomes New said:
*SHRUG*

In typical rabbi tradition, one group called it a sin, the other holy. So it always goes.

jas3 · Jun 11, 2026

All Becomes New said:
If a nazarite vow is not an Israelite custom, then what is it?

Did I say it wasn't? I don't think you understood me. The problem for your argument is that even if the verse literally said everything you claimed it did, one instance of Paul observing a vow doesn't equate to the apostles all continuing to observe Jewish customs.

All Becomes New said:
When Paul rebukes Peter for only eating with Jews, are we to think that the only problem Peter had was eating with Jews and he wasn't participating in Israelite customs?

Peter who had a vision telling him pork was OK to eat? Yes, I think we can safely assume he didn't observe the Mosaic Law in general.

All Becomes New · Jun 11, 2026

jas3 said:
Peter who had a vision telling him pork was OK to eat? Yes, I think we can safely assume he didn't observe the Mosaic Law in general.

Uh, that's your INTERPRETATION of the vision, not the POINT of the vision. The point of the vision is that Gentiles can now be included in the covenant Jesus made with Israel. That is what we read directly after the vision. The vision literally came to pass when Peter was invited to minister to Gentiles. That's the whole point of the vision. Besides that would say NOTHING about whether we should celebrate the Jewish feasts and Passover instead of a made up Easter, which has no precedent in the Bible, but is, in fact, a later Gentile tradition.

Why is it that for centuries after Christ left this earth, Jewish followers of Jesus were still eating Kosher? Why is it that many Messianic Jews keep kosher today?

timothyu · Jun 11, 2026

All Becomes New said:
The point of the vision is that Gentiles can now be included in the covenant Jesus made with Israel.

Yes they were now free to leave the nations (the world) controlled by the elohim (powers and principalities) without fear of retribution, and join the one true nation (not just people) of God.

prodromos · Jun 11, 2026

All Becomes New said:
Uh, that's your INTERPRETATION of the vision, not the POINT of the vision.

It is in keeping with Mark 7:18-19

All Becomes New · Jun 11, 2026

prodromos said:
It is in keeping with Mark 7:18-19

As if the interpretation of this verse is super clear and there is no controversy about the interpretation of this verse...

prodromos · Jun 11, 2026

All Becomes New said:
As if the interpretation of this verse is super clear and there is no controversy about the interpretation of this verse...

The evangelist Mark states it plainly. It is only controversial for those who don't want to accept it.

All Becomes New · Jun 11, 2026

prodromos said:
The evangelist Mark states it plainly. It is only controversial for those who don't want to accept it.

Well, you have a minority position, so, whatever.

All Becomes New · Jun 11, 2026

Sorry, @prodromos, I should not have said your perspective is a minority view.

I will only say that scholarship today is largely changing for this verse, and your view is no longer "consensus," and there is serious debate about this topic, especially considering Williams’ prize-winning 2024 NTS article.

jas3 · Jun 12, 2026

All Becomes New said:
Why is it that for centuries after Christ left this earth, Jewish followers of Jesus were still eating Kosher?

Where did you hear that they were?

All Becomes New said:
Why is it that many Messianic Jews keep kosher today?

Because they're deeply mistaken about many things. One might as well ask why some Protestants historically and even today practice polygamy.

Christian History in 15 minutes

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Slave to Christ

Slave to Christ

Slave to Christ

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Slave to Christ

Well-Known Member

Slave to Christ

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Slave to Christ

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Slave to Christ

Senior Veteran

Slave to Christ

Slave to Christ

Well-Known Member

Similar threads