Acts 21

[mrs94]

Acts 21:17 And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. 18 On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. 19 When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. 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[c] 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. 25 But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing,[d] except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.” 26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them.


Any takers on why Paul refused to let people think he wasn't keeping the Mosaic Law?

 

[riverrat]

Paul was not perfect. Did he make a mistake by doing this?

 

[Interplanner]

He sure said a lot that would void this in other contexts. Perhaps he had also realized that this could get him before the right people in Rome, which is what happened. We can be sure that whatever he did that 'kept' Judaism, it was because he was already justified by Christ, not in order to gain that.

--Inter

 

[PROPHECYKID]

Acts 21:17 And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. 18 On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. 19 When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. 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[c] 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. 25 But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing,[d] except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.” 26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them.


Any takers on why Paul refused to let people think he wasn't keeping the Mosaic Law?

Because he was accused of teaching that the Mosaic law is not important to teach gentiles. While Paul say how Jesus had become the true sacrifice for us and the old sacrificial system under the law of Moses was no longer important, the jews did not believe this and was going to have him put in jail or killed for it. So he reluctantly did this as a way to appease them.

 

[mrs94]

Paul was not perfect. Did he make a mistake by doing this?

Wow. I see a lot of assuming going on in this thread. But, no scriptural evidence that Paul thought he made a mistake.

 

[mrs94]

He sure said a lot that would void this in other contexts. Perhaps he had also realized that this could get him before the right people in Rome, which is what happened. We can be sure that whatever he did that 'kept' Judaism, it was because he was already justified by Christ, not in order to gain that.

--Inter

I agree. No one is justified by the law but I'm sure you remember when Paul said that it (the law) wasn't made void.

 

[riverrat]

Originally Posted by riverrat

Paul was not perfect. Did he make a mistake by doing this?

mrs94 wrote:

​

Wow. I see a lot of assuming going on in this thread. But, no scriptural evidence that Paul thought he made a mistake.

I was asking if you thought Paul made a mistake, not if Paul thought that he had made a mistake.

 

[mrs94]

Originally Posted by riverrat


I was asking if you thought Paul made a mistake, not if Paul thought that he had made a mistake.

Ahh, I see. Sorry I misinterpreted you. No, I do not believe Paul made a mistake. I think scripture is clear that Paul followed the Torah his entire life. But, he understood righteousness never came through the law but only through Yeshua. Grace picks up where our flesh causes us to stumble.

I posted this more for the people that say Paul taught Yeshua did away with the law. If that were the case, then Paul would not have felt compelled to show people he still followed it.

 

[Barraco]

Ahh, I see. Sorry I misinterpreted you. No, I do not believe Paul made a mistake. I think scripture is clear that Paul followed the Torah his entire life. But, he understood righteousness never came through the law but only through Yeshua. Grace picks up where our flesh causes us to stumble.

I posted this more for the people that say Paul taught Yeshua did away with the law. If that were the case, then Paul would not have felt compelled to show people he still followed it.

I think Paul recognized that if any yielded to the compulsion to follow the Law, they were held to all aspects of the Law, including Paul's crowd. But not the Gentiles, which is why Paul preached against circumcision of Gentile believers.

"Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was put in place through angels by an intermediary." (Galatians 3:19 ESV)

The offspring were those that received the Gospel by faith: The Gentiles.

Paul was a part of the elect, a remnant of Israel who were chosen to follow Christ everywhere and through everything.

 

[mrs94]

I think Paul recognized that if any yielded to the compulsion to follow the Law, they were held to all aspects of the Law, including Paul's crowd. But not the Gentiles, which is why Paul preached against circumcision of Gentile believers.

"Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was put in place through angels by an intermediary." (Galatians 3:19 ESV)

The offspring were those that received the Gospel by faith: The Gentiles.

Paul was a part of the elect, a remnant of Israel who were chosen to follow Christ everywhere and through everything.

?What, then, do YOU think Paul's reasoning was for following the law?

 

[Barraco]

?What, then, do YOU think Paul's reasoning was for following the law?

To be honest, to get into the temple to preach. Apparently the religious leaders didn't like that very much.

 

[mrs94]

To be honest, to get into the temple to preach. Apparently the religious leaders didn't like that very much.

So, by your reasoning, wasn't he putting himself "under a curse", or do you think he was allowed to do this because he was Jewish?

 

[Barraco]

So, by your reasoning, wasn't he putting himself "under a curse", or do you think he was allowed to do this because he was Jewish?

Neither, IMO. I think he just followed the established guidance to enter the temple so that he could preach to the Jews specifically. He pretty much nixed his chances when he chose to preach inclusion to the Gentiles. He was just being insistent.

 

[mrs94]

Neither, IMO. I think he just followed the established guidance to enter the temple so that he could preach to the Jews specifically. He pretty much nixed his chances when he chose to preach inclusion to the Gentiles. He was just being insistent.

So, Paul used the Law to be able to preach in the Temple, and is not putting himself "under a curse"...yet, I, simply because I want to please my Father (not for salvation but just for obedience) am putting myself "under a curse" by observing Torah?

Please explain, logically, how that makes any sense.

 

[Barraco]

So, Paul used the Law to be able to preach in the Temple, and is not putting himself "under a curse"...yet, I, simply because I want to please my Father (not for salvation but just for obedience) am putting myself "under a curse" by observing Torah?

Please explain, logically, how that makes any sense.

In Singapore, if you spray painted a car, they would cane you. In America, if you spray paint a car, you'll be forced to pay the debt and maybe serve jail time. That's the difference.

In America you obey American laws or suffer American penalties. Same for Singapore. Same for Judea. Same for the kingdom of God.

The point being, Paul was under Judea's law, which happened to be the Mosaic Law. Even though their king was Idumean, the Romans ensured that the Mosaic Law still governed the way they lived life. That is why blasphemy was a capital offense there, rather than anywhere else in the world. Paul, Peter, and all the former Jews that lived there were legally bound to the Mosaic Law. But the Gentiles were not. And when Jerusalem was surrounded by armies in 66 CE, the disciples completely renounced their Jewishness; a way of legally changing statehood. In doing so, they stopped living under the Torah. There was no longer a priesthood to enforce it nor a temple to practice it. The synagogues were shut down out of fear of persecution. Judaism went into hiding.

Where was the Torah observation then? It was outlawed. That would explain why Christian history is mute in the mid-first century about Torah observation. It became increasingly clear that the Jews who were under the Old Covenant were bound to the curses. If you justify yourself by the Mosaic Law, you put yourself under the entire law, including the consequences for not following it.

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

1 Corinthians 9:19-22

King James Version (KJV)

19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.
20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

So, Paul used the Law to be able to preach in the Temple, and is not putting himself "under a curse"...yet, I, simply because I want to please my Father (not for salvation but just for obedience) am putting myself "under a curse" by observing Torah?

Please explain, logically, how that makes any sense.

It is the carnal mind that makes the natural law a curse, because the law is spiritual, but the mind of man is carnal.

Romans 7:14
For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

It is written, to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

 

[mrs94]

In Singapore, if you spray painted a car, they would cane you. In America, if you spray paint a car, you'll be forced to pay the debt and maybe serve jail time. That's the difference.

In America you obey American laws or suffer American penalties. Same for Singapore. Same for Judea. Same for the kingdom of God.

The point being, Paul was under Judea's law, which happened to be the Mosaic Law. Even though their king was Idumean, the Romans ensured that the Mosaic Law still governed the way they lived life. That is why blasphemy was a capital offense there, rather than anywhere else in the world. Paul, Peter, and all the former Jews that lived there were legally bound to the Mosaic Law. But the Gentiles were not. And when Jerusalem was surrounded by armies in 66 CE, the disciples completely renounced their Jewishness; a way of legally changing statehood. In doing so, they stopped living under the Torah. There was no longer a priesthood to enforce it nor a temple to practice it. The synagogues were shut down out of fear of persecution. Judaism went into hiding.

Where was the Torah observation then? It was outlawed. That would explain why Christian history is mute in the mid-first century about Torah observation. It became increasingly clear that the Jews who were under the Old Covenant were bound to the curses. If you justify yourself by the Mosaic Law, you put yourself under the entire law, including the consequences for not following it.

If I'm hearing you correctly, you are saying that Paul followed the Law because he lived in Judea and it was the law of the land. And, because I don't "have to", I am now putting myself under a curse? And, do you have a link to something supporting your assertation that the early disciples renounced the Jewishness?

That's an awful lot of mental hoops to jump through.

 

[mrs94]

It is the carnal mind that makes the natural law a curse, because the law is spiritual, but the mind of man is carnal.

Romans 7:14
For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

It is written, to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

Actually, I agree!

 

[bugkiller]

Acts 21:17 And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. 18 On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. 19 When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. 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[c] 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. 25 But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing,[d] except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.” 26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them.


Any takers on why Paul refused to let people think he wasn't keeping the Mosaic Law?

That is not what Paul said. For the superficial it passes as such. For those who take Paul in total context it does not. For instance one can not violate that which does not have jurisdiction.

bugkiller