• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Circumcision

Why must we be circumcised?

  • To be saved.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • To keep the law.

    Votes: 14 100.0%

  • Total voters
    14

daq

Messianic
Jan 26, 2012
5,128
1,155
Devarim 11:21
Visit site
✟177,558.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Okay given your views towards the KJV, you prefer that the phrase did not exist.

Do the others here also think like that?

That I can understand why they are disagreeing as well

I'm not intending to answer for HARK, but since you asked him about what "the others" here think about it, I will answer for myself, (since I also was the one who just brought it up). The overwhelming majority of new translations read from the Nestle-Aland, and this is not because of theological bias or doctrine, but because the overwhelming majority of scholarship now sees and knows full well that the western text type is older, and therefore closer to the original source, and more reliable, and that is after years and years and years of more ancient texts having been discovered, and more and more continual textual criticism over all those years.
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
13,065
1,399
sg
✟272,522.00
Country
Singapore
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm not intending to answer for HARK, but since you asked him about what "the others" here think about it, I will answer for myself, (since I also was the one who just brought it up). The overwhelming majority of new translations read from the Nestle-Aland, and this is not because of theological bias or doctrine, but because the overwhelming majority of scholarship now sees and knows full well that the western text type is older, and therefore closer to the original source, and more reliable, and that is after years and years and years of more ancient texts having been discovered, and more and more continual textual criticism over all those years.

I see, if it all boils down to disagreement about the KJV translation of acts 21:25, then we can agree to disagree about that cordially.

Thanks for sharing
 
Upvote 0

HARK!

שמע
Christian Forums Staff
Supervisor
Site Supporter
Oct 29, 2017
64,504
10,680
US
✟1,558,588.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
I see, if it all boils down to disagreement about the KJV translation of acts 21:25
As I have demonstrated throughout this thread; there is far more to it than that.

It all boils down to anyone who speaks against the word of the most high should be rejected.

Yahshua calls us to repentance; and I don't believe for a second that James contradicted Yahshua on any point.

(CLV) Mt 5:18
For verily, I am saying to you, Till heaven and earth should be passing by, one iota or one serif may by no means be passing by from the law till all should be occurring.

(CLV) Mt 5:19
"Whosoever, then, should be annulling one of the least of these precepts, and should be teaching men thus, the least in the kingdom of the heavens shall he be called. Yet whoever should be doing and teaching them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of the heavens.

(CLV) Mt 5:20
For I am saying to you that, if ever your righteousness (keeping the law) should not be superabounding more than that of the scribes and Pharisees, by no means may you be entering into the kingdom of the heavens.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
30,307
13,962
73
✟423,303.00
Faith
Non-Denom
As I have demonstrated throughout this thread; there is far more to it than that.

It all boils down to anyone who speaks against the word of the most high should be rejected.

Yahshua calls us to repentance; and I don't believe for a second that James contradicted Yahshua on any point.

(CLV) Mt 5:18
For verily, I am saying to you, Till heaven and earth should be passing by, one iota or one serif may by no means be passing by from the law till all should be occurring.

(CLV) Mt 5:19
"Whosoever, then, should be annulling one of the least of these precepts, and should be teaching men thus, the least in the kingdom of the heavens shall he be called. Yet whoever should be doing and teaching them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of the heavens.

(CLV) Mt 5:20
For I am saying to you that, if ever your righteousness (keeping the law) should not be superabounding more than that of the scribes and Pharisees, by no means may you be entering into the kingdom of the heavens.
Therein lay the basis for the first council of the Church as recorded in Acts 15. What, if anything, do Gentiles need to obey of God's multiple commandments? Even a core rite such as circumcision was up for discussion. What was the outcome? Gentiles are not required to undergo circumcision. That is a huge thing.

I suggest that you, as well as all other individuals, cannot obey many, if not most, of God's eternal commandments which He gave to His covenant people, Israel. The clever way around this obstacle has been the substitution of good deeds in lieu of physical sacrifices in the Temple in Jerusalem. Do you think this is acceptable in the eyes of God?
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
13,065
1,399
sg
✟272,522.00
Country
Singapore
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
As I have demonstrated throughout this thread; there is far more to it than that.

It all boils down to anyone who speaks against the word of the most high should be rejected.

Yahshua calls us to repentance; and I don't believe for a second that James contradicted Yahshua on any point.

(CLV) Mt 5:18
For verily, I am saying to you, Till heaven and earth should be passing by, one iota or one serif may by no means be passing by from the law till all should be occurring.

(CLV) Mt 5:19
"Whosoever, then, should be annulling one of the least of these precepts, and should be teaching men thus, the least in the kingdom of the heavens shall he be called. Yet whoever should be doing and teaching them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of the heavens.

(CLV) Mt 5:20
For I am saying to you that, if ever your righteousness (keeping the law) should not be superabounding more than that of the scribes and Pharisees, by no means may you be entering into the kingdom of the heavens.

To understand why James added that phrase in, without contradicting, it will be good to remember Matthew 10:5 and Matthew 15:24.

Gentiles were not allowed to be saved as gentiles then.

What happened to Cornelius and how Paul was given signs and wonders to show among the gentiles, was a significant change to the kingdom program.

That is why acts 15 was a very significant event. It tells the 12 that, years after pentecost, a change has happened.
 
Upvote 0

Studyman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 18, 2020
2,484
703
66
Michigan
✟480,704.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I never said anything about Paul teaching against the Law, if you read my post properly.

Now come on sir. Your entire adopted religious philosophy is founded on the teaching that Paul and the Apostles taught against the Torah. That is the reason why we disagree. At first you tried to use Acts 15 to promote this adopted philosophy. That proved unsuccessful when an honest examination of the chapter ensued. Now you are trying to use Acts 21 to promote the same thing. It seems disingenuous to now deny what the core of your religious philosophy is founded on.

What I am advocating again, is an honest examination of what is actually written, to determine if James or Paul or any of the Apostles God Chose through Messiah, taught against the Torah, as you promote.


I am merely saying James himself said in Acts 21:25 that the gentile believers are to do no such thing, meaning they do not have to keep the Law, unlike the circumcised believers, which is my point 2 that I have given to you.

Here is the actual text, in the KJV.

First, I'll post the Prophesy.

Acts 21: 11 And when he was come unto us, he took Paul's girdle, and bound his own hands and feet, and said, Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.

12 And when we heard these things, both we, and they of that place, besought him not to go up to Jerusalem.

13 Then Paul answered, What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart? for I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus. 14 And when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, The will of the Lord be done. 15And after those days we took up our carriages, and went up to Jerusalem.

Why would men bind Paul and deliver him unto the Gentiles? What did Paul do?

17 And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. 18 And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. 19 And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry.

20 And when they (Brethren) heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:

21 And "they" are informed of thee, (BY who?) that thou 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.

Who was saying this? Who was Accusing Paul of these things? When is Paul ever recording teaching any of these things he is being accused of? What I am advocating for here, as in all of my posts, is simply an honest examination of what the Scriptures actually say in search of Biblical Truth. You could join me in this venture, by engaging in an honest way with me, if you want. I am simply hoping you will.

Let's continue.

22 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come.

23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them;

24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know "that those things", whereof they were informed concerning thee, ( that thou 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) "are nothing"; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, "and keepest the law."

The Brethren, who received Paul and James are telling them that the Jews are informing everyone that Paul is teaching Jews "to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs."

But the Apostles and Brethren wants Paul to "Do this" concerning 4 men who had taken a Vow, which God's Law doesn't command "ANY" man to take. But to take them anyway, to show everyone that the lies, ("slander" according to Romans 3) are "Nothing". That Paul and James were not teaching Jews or Gentiles "to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs." Paul and the Apostles taught no such thing, as James said.

25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, ( to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.) save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication. They would hear and learn about God from His chosen vessel, Moses, just as Paul and James did.

Did this attempt to prove that the things Paul was being accused of were a falsehood, work? NO, the Prophesy happened anyway.

26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.

27 And when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews which were of Asia, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him,

28 Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that 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.

An accusation that the Brethren in Jerusalem knew and promoted to others was "NOTHING". It's right there in your own Bible, I hope you will show me where you think I missed something, or that I am misinterpreting what is being written.

And if you continue you will find Paul ended up in front of a Gentile Ruler, as Prophesied, and here is his own defense.

Acts 24: 10 Then Paul, after that the governor had beckoned unto him to speak, answered, Forasmuch as I know that thou hast been of many years a judge unto this nation, I do the more cheerfully answer for myself:

11 Because that thou mayest understand, that there are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship.

12 And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city:

13 Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.

14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

I believe him given the whole of his testimony, why don't you?



So I know what this world's religions teach that the Apostles taught Gentiles "to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.". And I know you have adopted this religious philosophy, as I also did in my youth, as this philosophy has existed for many years, long before God placed you or I in it. But when a man turns to the God of the Bible, and reads for himself what is actually written, it becomes clear, as you can most certainly see, that your accusations against James and Paul and the Apostles, like the Jews of Paul's Time, that they taught against the Torah, is a deception, a Falsehood. At least according to Acts 15, and Acts 21 that you used.

And, as has also been proven so far in Scriptures regarding the Apostles, " Neither can you prove the things whereof you now accuse them".

I am open to Biblical "proof" sir, but so far the proof you have provided supports that Paul and James promoted the Torah, not that they taught against it.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: Yahudim
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
30,307
13,962
73
✟423,303.00
Faith
Non-Denom
To understand why James added that phrase in, without contradicting, it will be good to remember Matthew 10:5 and Matthew 15:24.

Gentiles were not allowed to be saved as gentiles then.

What happened to Cornelius and how Paul was given signs and wonders to show among the gentiles, was a significant change to the kingdom program.

That is why acts 15 was a very significant event. It tells the 12 that, years after pentecost, a change has happened.
Quite so. Acts 15 is really pivotal in defining Christianity as being a New Covenant and not a tweaked version of the Old Covenant.
 
Upvote 0

Studyman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 18, 2020
2,484
703
66
Michigan
✟480,704.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Okay given your views towards the KJV, you prefer that the phrase did not exist.

Do the others here also think like that?

That I can understand why they are disagreeing as well

I can see the phrase being perfectly aligned with the rest of the Chapter as I pointed out. Paul is being accused of teaching against the Torah, or as the KJV translates it, "to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs."

James is saying "As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded "that they observe no such thing", save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication."

There is no instruction from James or the Apostles to "forsake Moses". They have concluded and have written that the Gentiles observe no such thing. They only wrote that the Gentiles should " keep themselves from things offered to idols, (Law of Moses) and from blood, (Law of Moses) and from strangled, (Law of Moses) and from fornication." (Law of Moses)

But are these the only things different between the Old man the Gentile was, and the New man the Gentile would become? Of course not. That is why they also wrote "For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day."

I posted once, but you didn't acknowledge, what Yeshua said to the Multitudes and to his Disciples in Matt. 23. I have a hard time understanding why religious men, who profess to know God, refuse to acknowledge and/or discuss the Christ's Own Words. But perhaps it is my inability to communicate properly that is the issue. So I will post HIS Words again and ask you to comment.

Matt. 23: 1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, 2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

In obeying the Christ here, would the Multitudes and the Disciples not learn to "abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood"? And is it not true that they would also learn other "instructs in Righteousness" that are equally important for the "New Man" to know?

So the question is, What is the difference between what the Apostles told the gentile converts in Acts 15, and what the Messiah told the masses, and His Disciples to do in Matt. 23?

And given what is written, how could a man honestly interpret either party of teaching men "to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs."?

I look forward to your answer.
 
Upvote 0

Yahudim

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic
Site Supporter
Sep 30, 2004
3,993
622
Deep in the Heart of Texas
✟182,948.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Quite so. Acts 15 is really pivotal in defining Christianity as being a New Covenant and not a tweaked version of the Old Covenant.
Greetings in His Name,

Perhaps you might re-read the last three posts authored by @Studyman a little more carefully, as he just proved with the KJV that Acts 15, taken in context, proves the exact opposite of your claim.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
30,307
13,962
73
✟423,303.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Greetings in His Name,

Perhaps you might re-read the last three posts authored by @Studyman a little more carefully, as he just proved with the KJV that Acts 15, taken in context, proves the exact opposite of your claim.
The problem here goes beyond Acts 15 to the various letters in the New Testament, especially the letter to the Hebrews and the Pauline epistles. These controvert any notion that Gentile believers were to receive additional instruction in order to become more obedient to the Law. In fact, Galatians is specifically focused on that issue. Peter had been swayed to the Law-keeping side of the argument. What did Paul do? Commend him? Indeed not. He soundly rebuked him.
 
Upvote 0

Studyman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 18, 2020
2,484
703
66
Michigan
✟480,704.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Shalom My Brother In Him,

Perhaps a small bit of context concerning the source of circumcision might be in order. After all, context is the only way to discern a 'prooftext' from a 'pretext', short of direct intervention by Adonai.

Think of the following as a key to understanding the interrelationships of elements in a matrix. The reason I bring it up is that 'circumcision' is one of those aforementioned elements as you will soon see.

Suppose we take the Days of Creation and use that sequence as primary elements needed to construct a matrix. In this case, only the first three sets are required. It would appear as follows;
  1. Creative declaration
  2. Covenants
  3. Terms
  4. Sign of Covenant
Day 1Day 2Day 3
Light/DarknessWater Above/Water BelowWater/Land->Seed Plants
AdamNoahAbraham
LifeSaved from destructionBlessings on Descendants and the Nations
Gates of the GardenRainbowCircumcision

When Adonai separated Light from Darkness, these elements are clarified in Torah. Light & Darkness are repeatedly associated with life & death, good & evil, blessings & curses, etc., throughout scripture. Even His instruction is characterized as a 'lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path'.

His covenant with Adam is explained as follows;

We may understand the Sign of the Covenant as passing though the gates of the Garden of Life into a life ending in Death.

The second Covenant He made with Noah. Here He is bringing the Waters above and Waters below back together to flood the entire surface of the planet. At the end of Noah's ordeal, He makes a covenant promise that He will never again destroy the earth by Flood. In this covenant, Noah must obey His instruction in order to survive. But this covenant does not require Noah to do anything further to receive the blessings associated with this promise.

The Sign He gives is a Rainbow. Any physicist will tell you that a rainbow is formed by the refraction of the various frequencies of visible Light through the Waters above. Starting to catch on?

The third covenant He makes is with Abram. It has to do with Abram's seed. He changed Abram's name to Abraham to reflect His as yet to be fulfilled Promise to multiply his offspring exceedingly. Now do you see it? The Third Day, He separated the water from the land to produce Seed bearing plants

Pay carful attention here: The mark or sign of this covenant is the circumcision. Please notice (forgive me if this is a little graphic) that Abraham's Seed must pass through the Sign of the circumcision in order for the Covenant promise to be fulfilled.

In conclusion, anyone would have to go a long way to convince me that the Sign of the Covenant of Blessings to the Nations is now somehow irrelevant - To the Nations!

Shalom Shalom (that is 'Perfect Peace')

Thank you so much for the study. I like how you compared the signs and the days of creation, and put together your reasoning to preserve, or perhaps better stated "To Glorify" God in His Instruction. I came to the same conclusion, that Circumcision is not irrelevant, albeit by different reasonings, which would be inevitable given that we all have different "Crosses" (Lifes experiences) to bear. I can find nothing amiss in your understanding and find myself agreeing with pretty much all of it. Although I never looked at it this way, it is certainly a perspective that Glorifies God, in my view.


I would share some of my perspective, not that I am anybody, or that it even matters, but in fellowship. Please therefore, bear with me a little as I share my hope.

It is written that God created man after His own image. Adam was created with the ability to reproduce, obviously. Was he created "Circumcised" or uncircumcised? A lot of things changed the day Adam listened to the woman, and not His Father. But we only know for sure what is written, and God chose not to answer my question directly.

I know there are volumes and volumes of Words God spoke to His creation that we are not privy to. Like with Noah, we are only shown a glimpse, and just a very few Words that God spoke to Noah. And almost nothing of the words spoken when God and Noah walked together. Obviously God informed Noah of what animals were clean and what animals were unclean, but we are not privy to the conversation. Was it Noah's father who told him? Was it passed down from Adam after the fall? Amalek knew Adultery was a crime against the God of Abraham, worthy of death, but we are not privy to the discussions where he was shown this. Noah's sons knew of the evils of "Looking upon the nakedness of their father", but we are also not privy to that discussion.

So I choose not to assume that Abraham was the first to receive the sign of Circumcision, rather, I can say I can't know given the limitations of what the Scriptutres Say. Or that Israel was the first to be shown what is clean for food and what is not, given that there is evidence this knowledge was known long before them.

I see the sign of the rainbow in like fashion. I did a word study years ago on the word "Water". It was a long and exhaustive study which was fascinating. Basically, from my small mind, I found that "water" simply means "influence" in most cases. When a man is submerged in water, there is no surface of man that is not influenced in some way. It touches all of the outside of man. And this "influence" floods this earth.

"And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die."

But unto righteous Noah, God said; But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, (That God designed, and Noah built) thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee.

And when the Flood was over for Noah, he was given the sign of the rainbow.

For me, it seems this happens to this day. We are surrounded by sinful influence, it's in everything, all parts of ourselves are affected by the unclean influence which floods the earth. And God has designed a "way" in which we can weather the Storm, as we wait ap[on the promise of a world in which Righteousness, dwells. I think Yeshua speaks to this.

Matt. 7: 24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them (Like Noah), I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

At any rate, we both have come to the same conclusion, from study of the same Scriptures. I think this is because we place our trust in the Scriptures, and not all the "other voices" in the garden God placed us in. And it has been my experience so far, that no two people walk the same, "on the narrow path" that leads to Life. Some have longer strides, some make deeper footprints. Some are wounded, and limp. But they all come to the same place because they are all on the same path.

The strong help the weak, the older help the younger, all in their obedience to the Lord's Christ, "but seek ye first the Kingdom of God, and HIS Righteousness". Noah, Abraham, David, Rehab, Zacharias, Simeon, Anna, the Wise men, Paul, James, Peter, and the other examples of True Faith in the Holy scriptures. All walking the same path Yeshua walked, all fighting the same battle, standing against the storms with the Armor of God to protect them from the wiles of the devil.

I am always fascinated by how the Scriptures are structured in such a way, that they are profitable for "Every man" regardless of the cross he is given to bear. Regardless of the world God placed him in. I am blessed to have found several men who have also studied and have come to the same conclusions about Circumcision and the Torah etc. But they all found their own way there, through belief in God's Instruction "AND" His Son who prepared the Way, as did Noah and Abraham. And I am both humbled and grateful to have found them.

Great post Brother, I am encouraged by your study.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yahudim
Upvote 0

Studyman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 18, 2020
2,484
703
66
Michigan
✟480,704.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The problem here goes beyond Acts 15 to the various letters in the New Testament, especially the letter to the Hebrews and the Pauline epistles. These controvert any notion that Gentile believers were to receive additional instruction in order to become more obedient to the Law. In fact, Galatians is specifically focused on that issue. Peter had been swayed to the Law-keeping side of the argument. What did Paul do? Commend him? Indeed not. He soundly rebuked him.

I would offer that we should post the verses you mentioned, and examine them to see if Peter had turned away from teaching "against God's instruction", as you imply, and was suddenly interested in obedience to God that he said in Acts 5:32, would yield him the Holy Spirit. And Paul, seeing Peter suddenly honor God with obedience, rebuked Peter to his face because Peter had turned to God in obedience?

I know this isn't what Acts 15 or 21 teaches, which happened before the letters to the Galatians, and I'm not sure the implication of your philosophy is promoted by Gal. 2 either. But to find the truth, it seems prudent to actually examine what is written.

Gal. 2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

12 For before that certain came from James, "he did eat with the Gentiles": but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. 13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.

Who was the Circumcision? Were they not the Pharisees? And whose LAW did the Pharisees promote? Are you saying that the Pharisees were on the "Law Keeping side"?

What did Jesus say about them.

Mark 7: 9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Matt. 15: 7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. (Not God)

Matt. 23: 23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

John 7: 19 Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?

So according to the Jesus of the Bible, the Pharisees were disobedient to God, yes? Paul defines them in Titus 1: 16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.

So whose Law was it against to eat with Gentiles? Was Paul rebuking Peter because he was eating with the Gentiles? Or because when the Jews came, he stopped eating with the Gentiles?

This would be an important question to answer before going forward.

I look forward to your answer and am eager to continue in the examination of this chapter.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: HARK!
Upvote 0

HARK!

שמע
Christian Forums Staff
Supervisor
Site Supporter
Oct 29, 2017
64,504
10,680
US
✟1,558,588.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Therein lay the basis for the first council of the Church as recorded in Acts 15. What, if anything, do Gentiles need to obey of God's multiple commandments? Even a core rite such as circumcision was up for discussion. What was the outcome? Gentiles are not required to undergo circumcision. That is a huge thing.

I suggest that you, as well as all other individuals, cannot obey many, if not most, of God's eternal commandments which He gave to His covenant people, Israel. The clever way around this obstacle has been the substitution of good deeds in lieu of physical sacrifices in the Temple in Jerusalem. Do you think this is acceptable in the eyes of God?
If you had read through the thread; you would have seen post #462.

It's good to hear a matter out before answering.
 
Upvote 0

HARK!

שמע
Christian Forums Staff
Supervisor
Site Supporter
Oct 29, 2017
64,504
10,680
US
✟1,558,588.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
To understand why James added that phrase in, without contradicting, it will be good to remember Matthew 10:5 and Matthew 15:24.

Gentiles were not allowed to be saved as gentiles then.

What happened to Cornelius and how Paul was given signs and wonders to show among the gentiles, was a significant change to the kingdom program.

That is why acts 15 was a very significant event. It tells the 12 that, years after pentecost, a change has happened.
Maybe after you understand post #462; you can come back and present a response that's actually relevant to the post you just quoted.
 
Upvote 0

HARK!

שמע
Christian Forums Staff
Supervisor
Site Supporter
Oct 29, 2017
64,504
10,680
US
✟1,558,588.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Quite so. Acts 15 is really pivotal in defining Christianity as being a New Covenant and not a tweaked version of the Old Covenant.
First off, it's the Renewed Covenant. Second, the tweak is that YHWH will write his eternal Torah on our hearts in his Renewed Covenant.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Yahudim
Upvote 0

HARK!

שמע
Christian Forums Staff
Supervisor
Site Supporter
Oct 29, 2017
64,504
10,680
US
✟1,558,588.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
The problem here goes beyond Acts 15 to the various letters in the New Testament, especially the letter to the Hebrews
Yes indeed!

(CLV) Hb 8:10
"For this is the covenant which I shall be covenanting with the house of Israel after those days," the Lord is saying: "Imparting My laws to their comprehension, On their hearts, also, shall I be inscribing them, And I shall be to them for a God, And they/ shall be to Me for a people.
and the Pauline epistles.

Paul shaved his head and made sacrifices to prove that the rumor that he was teaching apostasy from the Torah, and against circumcision, was all just a big misunderstanding.

It was a scary story; but at least it had a happy ending.

I love a happy ending, when all can come together in love and obedience to the eternal word of YHWH.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yahudim
Upvote 0

daq

Messianic
Jan 26, 2012
5,128
1,155
Devarim 11:21
Visit site
✟177,558.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
To understand why James added that phrase in, without contradicting, it will be good to remember Matthew 10:5 and Matthew 15:24.

Gentiles were not allowed to be saved as gentiles then.

What happened to Cornelius and how Paul was given signs and wonders to show among the gentiles, was a significant change to the kingdom program.

That is why acts 15 was a very significant event. It tells the 12 that, years after pentecost, a change has happened.

It is indeed a contradiction and it even contradicts the very thing which is about to happen in the passage.

Acts 21:23-27 ASV
23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men that have a vow on them;
24 these take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges for them, that they may shave their heads: and all shall know that there is no truth in the things whereof they have been informed concerning thee; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, keeping the law.
25 But as touching the Gentiles that have believed, we wrote, giving judgment that they should keep themselves from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what is strangled, and from fornication.
26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them went into the temple, declaring the fulfilment of the days of purification, until the offering was offered for every one of them.
27 And when the seven days were almost completed, the Jews from Asia, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the multitude and laid hands on him,

These things concern the vow of the Nazir, (plural Nazarim, a.k.a. Nazarenes). Study the background text very carefully, there is only one reason why these four men would need to undergo the seven days of purification: it's a new beginning, (the Torah is spiritual, Rom 7:14a). Paul himself has already undergone this process, but herein he is put in charge over these four men to show them the Way, and thus it is not important for himself that he does not complete the whole process with them, as we see in the passage.

There are no two ways about it: these four men were defiled by the dead and had to start over, (a new beginning).
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
13,065
1,399
sg
✟272,522.00
Country
Singapore
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It is indeed a contradiction and it even contradicts the very thing which is about to happen in the passage.

Acts 21:23-27 ASV
23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men that have a vow on them;
24 these take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges for them, that they may shave their heads: and all shall know that there is no truth in the things whereof they have been informed concerning thee; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, keeping the law.
25 But as touching the Gentiles that have believed, we wrote, giving judgment that they should keep themselves from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what is strangled, and from fornication.
26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them went into the temple, declaring the fulfilment of the days of purification, until the offering was offered for every one of them.
27 And when the seven days were almost completed, the Jews from Asia, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the multitude and laid hands on him,

These things concern the vow of the Nazir, (plural Nazarim, a.k.a. Nazarenes). Study the background text very carefully, there is only one reason why these four men would need to undergo the seven days of purification: it's a new beginning, (the Torah is spiritual, Rom 7:14a). Paul himself has already undergone this process, but herein he is put in charge over these four men to show them the Way, and thus it is not important for himself that he does not complete the whole process with them, as we see in the passage.

There are no two ways about it: these four men were defiled by the dead and had to start over, (a new beginning).

Yes, you are referring to the circumcised believers there.

It has nothing to do with gentile believers, so I have no idea why you mentioned this as a response to my post.
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
13,065
1,399
sg
✟272,522.00
Country
Singapore
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Maybe after you understand post #462; you can come back and present a response that's actually relevant to the post you just quoted.

We disagree with how you interpreted Ephesians 2:11-12, you remember?

So, naturally, you will disagree with my post there.

But disagreement does not mean its irrelevant, unless you only want responses that agree with yours.
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
13,065
1,399
sg
✟272,522.00
Country
Singapore
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Quite so. Acts 15 is really pivotal in defining Christianity as being a New Covenant and not a tweaked version of the Old Covenant.

I would disagree with that, as the New Covenant, like the old, is only made with the nation of Israel.

But yes, I understand much of Christianity view themselves as some form of "spiritual Israel or true Israel", that is how they consider the NC as for them too.
 
Upvote 0