Acts 21-28 Paul is a Messianic Jew and declares his views under oath

[Berean777]

The way that Paul rolled is through his many disguises, that is......

When I was with the Jews, I lived like a Jew to bring the Jews to Christ. When I was with those who follow the Jewish law, I too lived under that law. Even though I am not subject to the law, I did this so I could bring to Christ those who are under the law. (1 Corinthians 9:20)

Paul clearly is conveying that he did not believe that he was bound by the old testament law, so he did emulate his fellow non Christian Jews, in order to gain their confidence and to gain their audience.

So the question that needs to be answered is......

Did Paul observe the Torah laws on the grounds of believing that they were constituent components to his salvation?

Obviously, Paul didn't believe that doing such practices were necessary for his salvation and in this regard he didn't perform those ritualistic acts on the grounds of faith.

How easy is it to truly appreciate why Paul did what he did, when using the central focal context, instead of trying to credit old testament practices as a necessity to one's salvation.

Paul completely turned his back on what he knew and did as a Pharisee, as his faith was solely built up on Jesus Christ's righteousness and not what he could do outwardly to be seen to fit in within the Jewish crowd. So he did so as an under cover agent for Jesus, in order to win Jews back to Christ, for this is the only motive in play.

 

[BobRyan]

The way that Paul rolled is through his many disguises,

That is one of the many lies the Jews told about Paul claiming that he was lying under oath while on trial.

Christians have a completely different view of Paul.

Come join us.

 

[BobRyan]

Show those versus that clearly have Paul making an oath.

(the case for Sabbath breaking needs to employ less bible-denying and less calling Paul a liar)


I thought you would never ask --

Try reading these quotes before declaring Paul to be a liar..

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
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


======================================
Since you refuse to read the Bible chapters in your extreme defense of Sabbath breaking - I will read one of them for you --

Acts 25
6 And when he had remained among them more than ten days, he went down to Caesarea. And the next day, sitting on the judgment seat, he commanded Paul to be brought. 7 When he had come, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood about and laid many serious complaints against Paul, which they could not prove, 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.”

9 But Festus, wanting to do the Jews a favor, answered Paul and said, “Are you willing to go up to Jerusalem and there be judged before me concerning these things?”

10 So Paul said, “I stand at Caesar’s judgment seat, where I ought to be judged. To the Jews I have done no wrong, as you very well know. 11 For if I am an offender, or have committed anything deserving of death, I do not object to dying; but if there is nothing in these things of which these men accuse me, no one can deliver me to them. I appeal to Caesar.”

========================

consider taking the pro-Bible side for a few minutes and experience the difference.

 

[ToBeLoved]

The way that Paul rolled is through his many disguises, that is......

When I was with the Jews, I lived like a Jew to bring the Jews to Christ. When I was with those who follow the Jewish law, I too lived under that law. Even though I am not subject to the law, I did this so I could bring to Christ those who are under the law. (1 Corinthians 9:20)

Paul clearly is conveying that he did not believe that he was bound by the old testament law, so he did emulate his fellow non Christian Jews, in order to gain their confidence and to gain their audience.

So the question that needs to be answered is......

Did Paul observe the Torah laws on the grounds of believing that they were constituent components to his salvation?

Obviously, Paul didn't believe that doing such practices were necessary for his salvation and in this regard he didn't perform those ritualistic acts on the grounds of faith.

How easy is it to truly appreciate why Paul did what he did, when using the central focal context, instead of trying to credit old testament practices as a necessity to one's salvation.

Paul completely turned his back on what he knew and did as a Pharisee, as his faith was solely built up on Jesus Christ's righteousness and not what he could do outwardly to be seen to fit in within the Jewish crowd. So he did so as an under cover agent for Jesus, in order to win Jews back to Christ, for this is the only motive in play.

Why did Jesus choose Paul as an Apostle if Paul is such a person who is unGodly? Paul was a Pharisee before Christ. Why does he not then have the right to discuss the Law with Pharisee's? How is it a disguise to proclaim to know the Law when you are formerly a Pharisee?

 

[bugkiller]

That is one of the many lies the Jews told about Paul claiming that he was lying under oath while on trial.

Christians have a completely different view of Paul.

Come join us.

The Bible does not lie.

No thinks to your invitation which proves what you really are trying to do here.

bugkiller

 

[ToBeLoved]

The Bible does not lie.

No thinks to your invitation which proves what you really are trying to do here.

bugkiller

What are your verses for Paul lying under oath while on trial? I want to see them.

 

[BobRyan]

What are your verses for Paul lying under oath while on trial? I want to see them.

If the path that opposers of Christianity take - which is to argue that Christians are liars ... that Christians lie under oath - is to be the chosen and blessed solution of those who reject the Bible Sabbath - then there is a certain "by their fruits you shall know them" doctrine in the bible that tells us - that is not the path we want to follow.

If we charge the Apostles and/or the Bible with "lying" every time they say something that goes against our man-made tradition -well then what non-Christian Jew could not have used such a faulty method in the days of Christ and of Paul to totally reject Christianity when confronted by the Christian Bible-based arguments in favor of Christianity?

There is NO END to where such a method can lead - in true Jim-Jones fashion.

 

[BobRyan]

for those who love man-made-tradition and not the Word of God -- I offer you this --

Matt 19
16 Now behold, one came and said to Him, “Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?”
17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”
18 He said to Him, “Which ones?”
Jesus said,
“‘You shall not murder,’
‘You shall not commit adultery,’
‘You shall not steal,’
‘You shall not bear false witness,’
19 ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and,
‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ ”


Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the Commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

 

[Berean777]

That is one of the many lies the Jews told about Paul claiming that he was lying under oath while on trial.

Christians have a completely different view of Paul.

Come join us.

The Jews didn't lie in that matter, rather they testified to what they saw Paul do. Unless you are discrediting these eye witnesses in favour of Christians who weren't even there. This would be like saying all Jews lie. Therefore their testimony stands up in a court of law. We therefore have to be rationale in this matter and not dogmatic.

I am with you brother. I have to side with the eye witness account, after all in Acts 22 Paul doesn't refute these allegations in his defense, he acknowledges that he was compelled to do what ever he can, in order to save his fellow Jews. Paul's defense in Acts 22 was that the hoped outcome justified the means.

 

[Berean777]

Why did Jesus choose Paul as an Apostle if Paul is such a person who is unGodly? Paul was a Pharisee before Christ. Why does he not then have the right to discuss the Law with Pharisee's? How is it a disguise to proclaim to know the Law when you are formerly a Pharisee?

Paul used his well known status as a Pharisee, who took orders from the church hierarchy, in order for Jews to take him seriously. Acts 22 lays out his defense as being a Pharisee who has been authorised by the hierarchy's letters. However we know that Paul had turned his back on this hierarchy in order to follow Christ. So in Acts 22 he outlines what happened to him on the road to Damascus.

Paul's actions to conceal his true intentions from fellow Jews is not grounds for ungodliness.

He has the right to discuss the law with other Pharisees, but his line is that the laws could not save.

It is a disguise to proclaim to known and to observe the Torah law if Paul acted the part, but didn't believe that the rituals that were part of the law were salvatory. The Jews believed that what they were doing saved them but Paul obviously didn't, hence it was a concealed disguise in that sense.

 

[BobRyan]

The Jews didn't lie in that matter, rather they testified to what they saw Paul do. Unless you are discrediting these eye witnesses in favour of Christians who weren't even there..

So then we have Paul saying that he is not a liar --- but the non-Christian Jews claim he is a liar.

hmmm... who SHALL we believe?

You say that Paul is a liar -- how much of what Paul said and wrote is a lie?? Just curious.

 

[Berean777]

So then we have Paul saying that he is not a liar --- but the non-Christian Jews claim he is a liar.

hmmm... who SHALL we believe?

You say that Paul is a liar -- how much of what Paul said and wrote is a lie?? Just curious.

Please show us the verse so that we can read and understand it in context.

 

[Berean777]

So then we have Paul saying that he is not a liar --- but the non-Christian Jews claim he is a liar.

hmmm... who SHALL we believe?

You say that Paul is a liar -- how much of what Paul said and wrote is a lie?? Just curious.

Jesus said.......

For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

What you are saying is that the Jews who observed the Torah Law could not be trusted and taken on their word, because as you say, that they are liars.

Notice Paul in relation to their accussations against him infiltrating the temple, having a different agenda, does not defend himself by calling them liars. Please read Acts 22 in context. The book of Acts are sequential events that need to be read in this manner.

It would be hypocritical to say that the Torah laws were or are applicable to the liars that observed and followed them?

I have made my case clear.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Paul used his well known status as a Pharisee, who took orders from the church hierarchy, in order for Jews to take him seriously. Acts 22 lays out his defense as being a Pharisee who has been authorised by the hierarchy's letters. However we know that Paul had turned his back on this hierarchy in order to follow Christ. So in Acts 22 he outlines what happened to him on the road to Damascus.

Paul's actions to conceal his true intentions from fellow Jews is not grounds for ungodliness.

He has the right to discuss the law with other Pharisees, but his line is that the laws could not save.

It is a disguise to proclaim to known and to observe the Torah law if Paul acted the part, but didn't believe that the rituals that were part of the law were salvatory. The Jews believed that what they were doing saved them but Paul obviously didn't, hence it was a concealed disguise in that sense.

But Paul did not say that the Torah law could save, did he? How did he misrepresent if he told them about Christ, which he did. He argued that observance of the Torah could not save.

I'm not seeing how getting an audience because he was a former Pharisee is misrepresenting. He was a former Pharisee. And he never said Torah saved, he said the complete opposite.

I do not believe that Jesus would have chosen Paul if he saw Paul as unrighteous. Can you show different in the BIble?

 

[ToBeLoved]

Jesus said.......

For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

What you are saying is that the Jews who observed the Torah Law could not be trusted and taken on their word, because as you say, that they are liars.

Notice Paul in relation to their accussations against him infiltrating the temple, having a different agenda, does not defend himself by calling them liars. Please read Acts 22 in context. The book of Acts are sequential events that need to be read in this manner.

It would be hypocritical to say that the Torah laws were or are applicable to the liars that observed and followed them?

I have made my case clear.

No undue disrespect, but you can see what Jesus said about the Pharisee's and to the Pharisee's in Matthew 23. It was harsh. So how righteous would anyone have to be to surpass that?

 

[Berean777]

But Paul did not say that the Torah law could save, did he? How did he misrepresent if he told them about Christ, which he did. He argued that observance of the Torah could not save.

I'm not seeing how getting an audience because he was a former Pharisee is misrepresenting. He was a former Pharisee. And he never said Torah saved, he said the complete opposite.

I do not believe that Jesus would have chosen Paul if he saw Paul as unrighteous. Can you show different in the BIble?

He went in the temple whilst disguising himself outwardly, that is shaved head and all, as a Torah observing Jew, whilst when he was inside as you rightfully said, he would say that only Jesus could save, which he did. This was perceived by the Jews as a concealed act of infiltrating the temple whilst having ulterior motives, which we both agree that Paul did. So in this regard Paul's appearance as a Torah law observer and follower was just a cover, in order for him to access the worshippers within the temple.

You need to understand that to access the temple, that was surrounded by walls, you would have to be a Torah observing Jew, because no one else could enter in, else it was believed by the Jews that it would defile the temple. Te verse below is self explanatory......

They had previously seen Trophimus the Ephesian in the city with Paul and assumed that Paul had brought him into the temple. (Acts 21:29)

Your statement below is a great misunderstanding of what I'm trying to convey here....you stated......

I do not believe that Jesus would have chosen Paul if he saw Paul as unrighteous.


Jesus had chosen Paul because he turned and gave his heart to Jesus and in doing so, he would want to save as many of his people as he could, however in doing so, he needed to access the Torah observers within the temple. Paul couldn't present himself as a follower of Jesus to enter into side the temple, so he had to disguise himself as a Torah observer and follower, which he was not (1 Corinthians 9:20). So the shaving of his head and the taking of the oath before two witnesses was not on grounds that he has one foot in Judaism and the other in Christainity, rather he faked it, so that he could gain entrance to the temple. The Jews from Asia found him and flushed him out of the temple as recorded in Acts 22.

Now Paul faking not the oath and shaving his head has nothing to do with being unrighteousness, rather it was that he was so focussed on preaching Christ that the venue to do this discretely was within the temple to learnered and zealous Torah abiding Jews.

 

[Berean777]

No undue disrespect, but you can see what Jesus said about the Pharisee's and to the Pharisee's in Matthew 23. It was harsh. So how righteous would anyone have to be to surpass that?

Again the statement that Jesus presented was from a legal aptitude point of view, but one that shows one to be legitimate from the heart, rather than an outward appeal of the Pharisees. So Jesus is implying that as the Pharisees present themselves from a legal outward attire as righteous, you must endeavour the same, but from an intrinsic heart attire and not one that is only outward to be seen as being righteous.

The Torah observers must have therefore seen Paul preach Jesus within the temple, for them to expose him as an imposter with a false pretence of acting to be one of them, when he was obviously not one of the present tense as a follower of Jesus. So Paul didn't respect the Jewish ritualistic oath that he took, because he would enter the temple having ulterior motives to conver his people to Christ. In this respect the Pharisees and Torah observers when seeing this could not be lying, but are telling the truth as they see it outwardly, for as Jesus highlighted this was their strength, that is to be righteous like the Pharisees.

@BobRyan stated that they were lying but this claim would be hypocritical as to imply that the Torah was observed by liars who could not tell the difference between truth and a lie.

 

[Berean777]

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

Paul believed that the Law and the Prophets was fulfilled in Christ Jesus. Paul isn't implying that is an observer and or follower of the Torah Laws.

What is the charge that the Pharisees laid upon Paul before governor Felix?

We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirring up riots among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the Nazarene sect 6and even tried to desecrate the temple; so we seized him.

How did Paul reply to this charge?

12My accusers did not find me arguing with anyone at the temple, or stirring up a crowd in the synagogues or anywhere else in the city. 13And they cannot prove to you the charges they are now making against me. 14However, I admit that I worship the God of our ancestors as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect. I believe everything that is in accordance with the Law and that is written in the Prophets,

Notice the only thing that Paul admits to worship, now please listen carefully......

The only thing that Paul admits to worship, is the God of the Old Covenant fathers, whereby the Pharisees called a sect.

So who is the God of their fathers?

Jesus Christ.

Paul admits he is a follower of the WAY.....

NOW WHO IS THE WAY?

Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and the life and by following Jesus, Paul is declaring that he is in full compliance with the Law and the Prophets. This implies that Paul was claiming that by preaching Christ Jesus (the way) in the temple, is by no way breaking the oath, or defiling the temple or is a ringleader to overthrow politically the Pharisical authority.

 

[BobRyan]

Show those versus that clearly have Paul making an oath.

(the case for Sabbath breaking needs to employ less bible-denying and less calling Paul a liar)


I thought you would never ask --

Try reading these quotes before declaring Paul to be a liar..

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
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


======================================
Since you refuse to read the Bible chapters in your extreme defense of Sabbath breaking - I will read one of them for you --

Acts 25
6 And when he had remained among them more than ten days, he went down to Caesarea. And the next day, sitting on the judgment seat, he commanded Paul to be brought. 7 When he had come, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood about and laid many serious complaints against Paul, which they could not prove, 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.”

9 But Festus, wanting to do the Jews a favor, answered Paul and said, “Are you willing to go up to Jerusalem and there be judged before me concerning these things?”

10 So Paul said, “I stand at Caesar’s judgment seat, where I ought to be judged. To the Jews I have done no wrong, as you very well know. 11 For if I am an offender, or have committed anything deserving of death, I do not object to dying; but if there is nothing in these things of which these men accuse me, no one can deliver me to them. I appeal to Caesar.”

========================

consider taking the pro-Bible side for a few minutes and experience the difference.

Paul believed that the Law and the Prophets was fulfilled in Christ

Paul did NOT believe the LAW was "abolished in Christ" but rather "ESTABLISHED in Christ".

"Do we then make void the LAW of God by faith? God forbid!! On the contrary we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31

A point handed to you over a dozen times by now - so your solution to "ignore it" only brings up new opportunities to remind the reader of the text.

Many thanks.

Paul isn't implying that is an observer and or follower of the Torah Laws.

Until you actually read the Bible.

Eph 6:2 "honor your father and mother which is the FIRST COMMANDMENT with a PROMISE" in that still-valid unit of TEN - upheld by Paul and by James in James 2.

A point handed to you over a dozen times by now - so your solution to "ignore it" only brings up new opportunities to remind the reader of the text.

Many thanks.

 

[ToBeLoved]

If the path that opposers of Christianity take - which is to argue that Christians are liars ... that Christians lie under oath - is to be the chosen and blessed solution of those who reject the Bible Sabbath - then there is a certain "by their fruits you shall know them" doctrine in the bible that tells us - that is not the path we want to follow.

If we charge the Apostles and/or the Bible with "lying" every time they say something that goes against our man-made tradition -well then what non-Christian Jew could not have used such a faulty method in the days of Christ and of Paul to totally reject Christianity when confronted by the Christian Bible-based arguments in favor of Christianity?

There is NO END to where such a method can lead - in true Jim-Jones fashion.

I agree with what you said except for the 'Bible Sabbath'. There is not sabbath in the New Testament that Gentiles are under. Although most of us keep it anyway, but we are not under law.