Paul's early ministry ? Acts 21:21 ?

dan p · Mar 14, 2011

Hi to all and there are many that believe , that the 12 disciples and Paul oreached the same message ?

Nothing , is farther from the truth , as Eph 2 and Gal 2 have been pointed out by Paul , the Law was set aside and the timeline is Acts 28:28 .

I have to point out , first , that the context is Jewish and in verse 20 , James points to the THOUSANDS of Jews who are zealous of the Law

Then in verse 21 , James says to Paul , that they are INFORMED of thee that thou teachest all the Jews among the Gentiles ;

#1 , to FORSAKE Moses

#2 , that they ought NOT to Circumcisied their children

#3 , Neither to walk after the Jewish customs .

This tells me that Paul is preaching a different message , Acts 20:24 .
And what Paul is preaching is NOT the sames message as the 12 disciples .

This also means that Paul is not preaching the Law of Moses or Baptism .

dan p

angellous_evangellous · Mar 14, 2011

Dan -

I think that the apostles and Paul preached roughly the same thing - at least at the beginning. When the apostles finally went their own way - and Paul of course left first - each developed their own pet theologies that were roughly compatible with one another (at least to them).

The earliest Christian "catechisms" included extensive teaching in the law, prophets, and writings because Paul, the Gospels, the Pastorals, Revelation, and the rest of the NT constantly refer to them. As we read on into the non-canonical Christian writings, the apostolic fathers and the patristics, they constantly refer to the OT as well.

We have to remember in the scope of things that Paul came first - his writings, that is. Then the Gospels, other epistles, and the Apocalypse.

I read the rest of the NT as an affirmation of Paul - in the Gospels, especially Luke. Some scholars disagree, but I haven't been convinced otherwise. It is an imperfect affirmation, but the Gospels do shield Paul's Gospel from the kind of interpretation that Marcion and other "heretics" presented to the church.

faithofabraham · Mar 16, 2011

dan p said:
Hi to all and there are many that believe , that the 12 disciples and Paul oreached the same message ?

Nothing , is farther from the truth , as Eph 2 and Gal 2 have been pointed out by Paul , the Law was set aside and the timeline is Acts 28:28 .

I have to point out , first , that the context is Jewish and in verse 20 , James points to the THOUSANDS of Jews who are zealous of the Law

Then in verse 21 , James says to Paul , that they are INFORMED of thee that thou teachest all the Jews among the Gentiles ;

#1 , to FORSAKE Moses

#2 , that they ought NOT to Circumcisied their children

#3 , Neither to walk after the Jewish customs .

This tells me that Paul is preaching a different message , Acts 20:24 .
And what Paul is preaching is NOT the sames message as the 12 disciples .

This also means that Paul is not preaching the Law of Moses or Baptism .

dan p

maybe im missing a part of what youre trying to say, but in acts 10 Peter is given the knowledge that Jew and Gentile alike are to preached to and he goes and baptizes a bunch of gentiles. I think that at first the 11 disiples(plus 1 voted in) didnt realize that with Jesus' death the old law was dead. it took them some time just like they seemed to be slow to get Jesus' message when he was with them.

FOA

Reverend Rick · Mar 16, 2011

Paul never met Jesus in real life, and I am unsure of Luke meeting anyone including Paul.

Other than their self proclaimed status, what qualified these two men to even be in the cannon?

dan p · Mar 16, 2011

faithofabraham said:
maybe im missing a part of what youre trying to say, but in acts 10 Peter is given the knowledge that Jew and Gentile alike are to preached to and he goes and baptizes a bunch of gentiles. I think that at first the 11 disiples(plus 1 voted in) didnt realize that with Jesus' death the old law was dead. it took them some time just like they seemed to be slow to get Jesus' message when he was with them.

FOA

Hi faithofabraham , and Acts 10 has nothing to do with Paul as Cornelius was still water baptized .

Paul is the only that says , that the Law was set aside and not the 12 disciples .

And in Acts 1:3-9 shows that they are not novices , dan p

faithofabraham · Mar 16, 2011

dan p said:
Hi faithofabraham , and Acts 10 has nothing to do with Paul as Cornelius was still water baptized .

Paul is the only that says , that the Law was set aside and not the 12 disciples .

And in Acts 1:3-9 shows that they are not novices , dan p

actually Acts 10,specifically 28,34,47 shows God giving Peter(1 of the 12 disciples) a vision and commandment that he is now supposed to think that what before was unclean is now clean, ie one of the old laws.

and Acts 10 has nothing to do with Paul as Cornelius was still water baptized .

the chapter clearly ends by stating that Jews and Gentiles alike were baptized with the Holy Ghost. if not water or Holy Ghost what other baptism to you speak of?

FOA

dmgdnooc · Mar 16, 2011

Yeah what A_E said.
　
And in Acts 21.24 James instructs Paul to demonstrate. by a public act of worship, that the charges against Paul were false.
Paul agreed to do so and took the appropriate steps but was waylaid by an unreasoning emotion driven mob and more false charges were made against him, and he had to be rescued from their violence by a squad of soldiers.
Then from the stairs of Antonia, taking care to address them in Hebrew, he spoke to them his own personal testimony.
They listened until he said the word 'Gentiles'.
He didn't get the chance to deny the false accusations, and explain what he was teaching the Gentiles, but was cut off by a riot that ensued and taken into the fortress lest they kill him for saying the word 'Gentiles'.
　
But he was there with the express aim of denying the charges laid against him.
And later he did.

faithofabraham · Mar 16, 2011

Also dan p,
you might find it interesting that in Acts 16 Paul not only partakes in circumsizing he also partakes in the batism of a woman and her household. and then a man and his household were baptized. and then in Acts 19 again Paul asks men if they have been baptized and when they say of John, he answers they now will be baptized with the Holy Ghost. meaning these men had been baptized under John the baptist who preached the coming of Jesus and of repentance, but these men obviously had not been updated on the actual teachings of Jesus- verses 4,5.

FOA

dan p · Mar 16, 2011

faithofabraham said:
actually Acts 10,specifically 28,34,47 shows God giving Peter(1 of the 12 disciples) a vision and commandment that he is now supposed to think that what before was unclean is now clean, ie one of the old laws.

the chapter clearly ends by stating that Jews and Gentiles alike were baptized with the Holy Ghost. if not water or Holy Ghost what other baptism to you speak of?

FOA

Hi foa , and there 12 different kinds of Baptism and most are not water .

How would you explain 1 Cor 10:2 , where Paul by the Holy Spirit says , And were all BAPTIZED unto Moses in the Cloud and in the SEA .

Can you say that water is used here ??

If not, what will you use ??
dan p

Ronald · Mar 17, 2011

dan p seems you are missing one point, the circumcision is the land covenent, you do not qualify for any of the land of Israel.
Four points of the law are given to the gentiles who believe.
Sha'ul did not deviate from these teachings.
You, too, are to give up idols, refrain from animals stangled, unchaisity and blood. and then learn Torah, when you do, you then become law abiding, the ones appling to you.

angellous_evangellous · Mar 17, 2011

Reverend Rick said:
Paul never met Jesus in real life, and I am unsure of Luke meeting anyone including Paul.

Other than their self proclaimed status, what qualified these two men to even be in the cannon?

Paul founded many churches on his missionary journeys and wrote letters to them. These churches had some measure of contact with eachother - Rome / Corinth, Corinth / Jerusalem, etc. The churches were instructed to share letters. Then, the churches used Paul's letters in worship for decades until the canon was set.

Luke-Acts was specifically written as an affirmation of Paul, so the churches who had Paul's letters naturally accepted it. The other Gospels were used as well, and had much more influence in the places in which they originated.

When all was said and done, nothing qualified Paul to be in the canon. The church qualified him because of his early nature and the solid tradition of his writings in worship.

angellous_evangellous · Mar 17, 2011

Ronald said:
dan p seems you are missing one point, the circumcision is the land covenent, you do not qualify for any of the land of Israel.
Four points of the law are given to the gentiles who believe.
Sha'ul did not deviate from these teachings.
You, too, are to give up idols, refrain from animals stangled, unchaisity and blood. and then learn Torah, when you do, you then become law abiding, the ones appling to you.

He most certainly did, and he instructed others to do the same.

Paul completely ignored the stipulations given to him by the Jerusalem council. And when they sent people to him to investigate, he strongly chastised them and kicked them out of the community with a curse.

Ronald · Mar 17, 2011

angellous_evangellous said:
He most certainly did, and he instructed others to do the same.

Paul completely ignored the stipulations given to him by the Jerusalem council. And when they sent people to him to investigate, he strongly chastised them and kicked them out of the community with a curse.

Well I thought this must have been April 1, but no March 17, re-read all Sha'uls letters and do not find any deviation at all. :thud:
Seems someone is reading some commentaries by Christians who deviate his letters.
If I believed what Christian writers said about Sha'ul, I would call Sha'ul the biggest turncoat in the history of the world. I am quite happy to imitate Sha'ul as he imitates Messiah Yeshua.

angellous_evangellous · Mar 17, 2011

Ronald said:
Well I thought this must have been April 1, but no March 17, re-read all Sha'uls letters and do not find any deviation at all. :thud:
Seems someone is reading some commentaries by Christians who deviate his letters.
If I believed what Christian writers said about Sha'ul, I would call Sha'ul the biggest turncoat in the history of the world. I am quite happy to imitate Sha'ul as he imitates Messiah Yeshua.

You must have missed Galatians and 1 Corinthians, which ultimately leads to Romans.

angellous_evangellous · Mar 17, 2011

Ronald said:
Well I thought this must have been April 1, but no March 17, re-read all Sha'uls letters and do not find any deviation at all. :thud:
Seems someone is reading some commentaries by Christians who deviate his letters.

If I believed what Christian writers said about Sha'ul, I would call Sha'ul the biggest turncoat in the history of the world. I am quite happy to imitate Sha'ul as he imitates Messiah Yeshua.

Christian writers have nothing to say about Sha'ul. They do speak very slightly of a Saul who quickly became Paul, who knowing next to nothing about the historical Jesus merrily went on his own way among the Gentiles, all but ignoring Jerusalem except when it served his purposes.

There is no Messiah Yeshua, there is Jesus Christ.

Isn't it delightful how there's so much emphasis placed on the pseudo-intellectual, pseudo-spiritual power of transliteration? There's a reason why the NT is written in Greek and not Hebrew - it's a message to the Gentiles, not to the Jews - at least, not the ones who weren't Hellenized.

Ronald · Mar 18, 2011

angellous_evangellous said:
Christian writers have nothing to say about Sha'ul. They do speak very slightly of a Saul who quickly became Paul, who knowing next to nothing about the historical Jesus merrily went on his own way among the Gentiles, all but ignoring Jerusalem except when it served his purposes.

There is no Messiah Yeshua, there is Jesus Christ.

Isn't it delightful how there's so much emphasis placed on the pseudo-intellectual, pseudo-spiritual power of transliteration? There's a reason why the NT is written in Greek and not Hebrew - it's a message to the Gentiles, not to the Jews - at least, not the ones who weren't Hellenized.

Another Greek lover, explain why there are so many horible Greek sentances starting with an and, but, ect. ect.. Lovely Hebrew but god awlul Greek!
If any of what you say was true, I'd be a Atheist!
Please ignore me as I ignore you.

dan p · Mar 21, 2011

Ronald said:
Another Greek lover, explain why there are so many horible Greek sentances starting with an and, but, ect. ect.. Lovely Hebrew but god awlul Greek!
If any of what you say was true, I'd be a Atheist!
Please ignore me as I ignore you.

Hi Ronald and what most believers havd not studied is the Greek verb tense and all will be surprised what the Preacher is not telling his assembly .

Try Rom 1:1 and see the verb tense SEPARATED means and you will see , dan p

Ronald · Mar 21, 2011

The God of Abraham, Issac & Jaccob is perfect! Your Greek Jesus may have needs to change, although the bible says he does not.
To quote Yeshua "You are wrong, because you know neither the scriptures nor the power of God."
Luke the Greek Doctor, LOL, Begins his book "Inasmuch" But, And, And, This Greek Doctor writes as if he was a Hebrew Scholar! GO FIGURE!!! He had a Hebrew name, he was Hebrew. His writing proves his tougue. Nowhere in Koine Greek does one start a sentance with Inasmuch, But and And.
Shalom

dan p · Mar 22, 2011

Ronald said:
The God of Abraham, Issac & Jaccob is perfect! Your Greek Jesus may have needs to change, although the bible says he does not.
To quote Yeshua "You are wrong, because you know neither the scriptures nor the power of God."
Luke the Greek Doctor, LOL, Begins his book "Inasmuch" But, And, And, This Greek Doctor writes as if he was a Hebrew Scholar! GO FIGURE!!! He had a Hebrew name, he was Hebrew. His writing proves his tougue. Nowhere in Koine Greek does one start a sentance with Inasmuch, But and And.
Shalom

Hi Ronald , Gen 17:1 , When Abram got to be 99 years old , then JEHOVAH appeared to Abram and said to Him , I am God ALMIGHTLY . Walk before nme and prove your faultless. "

Rev 1:8 , " I am Alpha and the Omega , " says JEHOVAH God , " the One who is and who was and who is coming , the ALMIGHTLY .

Jesus Christ is JEHOVAH , DAN P

Ronald · Mar 22, 2011

That DOGma is old, old concrete is very hard to break.
Only thing you get for believing that DOGma is you get to call yourself a christian.
SSSSoooooo, wrong.

Gag a maggot!

Paul's early ministry ? Acts 21:21 ?

Member

angellous_evangellous

Guest

Member

Frubal Whore

Member

Member

Active Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

angellous_evangellous

Guest

angellous_evangellous

Guest

Well-Known Member

angellous_evangellous

Guest

angellous_evangellous

Guest

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member