Jesus kept the Law

The charge leveled against Paul by CHRISTIAN Jews is that he is telling Jews (not simply Gentiles) to forsake Moses - to stop
"Being Jews" - to stop walking according to the customs/laws God gave to Moses. Notice that they do not accuse him of teaching THEM this error - NOR do they indicate that James or any of the other Apostles IN Jerusalem have taught them to "forsake Moses". This is key. Their only "concern" is "rumors" that Paul in ADDITION to his ministry to Gentiles has been telling those Jews who live OUT from Jerusalem AMONG the Gentiles - to "forsake Moses".

Many Christians today (who teach a 2-Gospel system) argue that these Christian Jews attacking Paul - are "Exactly RIGHT!". That Paul's ministry WAS to show that the laws given to Moses were abolished. That Christ nailed His LAW to the cross for ALL mankind. That nothing of the LAW given to Moses was applicable to ANYONE and this was the NEW Gospel available after the Cross. BOTH Jew and Gentil should consider it ABOLISHED, and those bad ol' Judaizers that did NOT consider it abolished were not really saved. IN this 2-Gospel system Grace and New Covenant Gospel replacing the Old Covenant method of Salvation in place for 4000 years prior to the cross. Christians argue that this is FOUNDATIONAL to the NT Gospel message and Paul has no choice but to fearlessly APPROVE of that kind of Gospel rather than deny it.

Now lets see if Paul agrees with that view of the Gospel.

Notice the "recommendation" is to explicitly follow the Num 6:1-11 oath SHOWING in the eyes of all that Paul not only taught conformity to the OT text of scripture (God's Word) - but HE HIMSELF PRACTICED it. The saints in Jerusalem argued that this would be public VISIBLE PROOF that the charges made against Paul were false.

Many Christians today argue that the charges against Paul were TRUE to the last detail. IN their 2-Gospel Model New Covenant Gospel is the REPLACEMENT of the Mosaic law - it would be nothing short of heresy to publically engage in following the laws of Moses with the explicit PURPORSE of PROVING that NO SUCH replacement was being taught in the GOSPEL message just proclaimed and praised in Jerusalem by Paul's report.

Furthermore it would be hard to argue that Paul abandoned the Gospel for "fear" of threat/injury etc - since he CAME to Jerusalem ALREADY prepared to die for his faith - (see vs 13)

IF Christians today following a 2-Gospel model (in contradiction to Paul's teaching in Gal 1:6-11) were correct then the "Test" is to be found in Paul's response. IF their Model is correct the consistent "confirming" response of Paul is "WHY OF COURSE that is what I am doing! That IS the very Gospel message I am now preaching as a replacement for the laws of Moses! Why should I do anything to PROVE that such is NOT the case? Rather I came here ready to DIE rather than abolish the NT Gospel - or to back down in the least.".

Instead of that - Paul sees NO problem with the Scriptures of the NT saints (which were the OT texts) being fully obeyed EVEN with Jews choosing to follow the OT feasts/oaths/customs - and the FULL Gospel. He w9illingly submits and AGREES to the PROOF that the charges are FALSE. In later chapters he consistently and repeatedly INSISTS that the charges are false. Charges that many 2-Gospel Christians today STILL maintain are TRUE.

Recall that in Acts 15 the decision was passed that in the case of GENTILES - they should not be required to become Jews after accepting Christ. But nothing was said about turning Jews away from scripture - the OT, NOR EVEN about ceasing the customs/feasts/rituals of the OT for Jews.

Here the situation is clearly explained - that which the Gentiles were opted out of having to perform (in the Acts 15 council quoted above) - the Jews were STILL doing. Notice that the Gentiles were still asked to observe strictly Mosaic restrictions on the preparation of meat (Gen 9:4, Lev 3:17, 7:26-27)

Paul was not to attack/detract/disuade Jewish believers from following all that the scriptures described in relation to circumcision/oaths/feastivals etc. (Note this does not address the idea that Paul would ENFORCE the laws of circumcision as though INSISTING on them for other Jews).

Interestingly - Paul DOES insist on circumcision for another Jew immediately following the Acts 15 council. See Acts 16 where Paul Himself insists on Timothy conforming to the Mosaid code. This he does to remove all cause of stumbling for Jews becomming Christians. He did not view these OT laws relating to members of the Jewish nation as OPPOSED to the Gospel - or else he would be condemning Timothy to hell.

Paul follows through on the Numbers 6:1-11 vow - even paying the expenses of thos who joined him (vs 24) "sponsoring them".

Now the charges of the Christian Jews are seen to be influenced by even non-Christian Jews - The charges are the same regarding the LAW of God - but added to this we see charges about the Hebrew people. "This is the man who preaches to all men everywhere against our people and the Law"

The interesting thing is how many times Paul goes on to RETELL this event - and each time HE denies the charges that Christians STILL make against him today regarding these laws/customs of Moses. Well might some Christians elect to "not follow the details" in the remaining chapters.

Acts 23:4-9
Acts 24:14-18
Acts 25:8-11
Acts 26:20-23
Acts 28:17

The first thing that is amazing is that non-Christian Jews came into agreement
with Paul NOT just over the subject of the resurrection - but regarding all
the charges made against him. They found NOTHING wrong in his teaching
regarding Jews (and of course the non-Christian Jews cared little to nothing
about his teaching to Gentiles).

Paul asserts that NOTHING of the charges brought against him - had any validity. He denied teaching against the LAW and Prophets of OT scripture. And even the Pharisees conclude that they find no fault with him!

He even BRINGS UP his own conformity to the Num 6:1-11 vow.

Paul's defense get's even stronger over time and more explicit. He continues to
affirm that NOTHING of what he has done or taught is in any way contrary to the Law Moses being practiced by the non-Christi an Jews that accuse him.

Here Paul denies the charges against him – but these are the very charges that many Christians today unwittingly echo against Paul in favor of the argument of the rebellious Jews.

This is one of Paul's most blatant statements going BEYOND the LAW of
Moses and stating that NOTHING done or taught is even against the "customs
of our Fathers".

So how can this be? How can the Gospel of the NT be so "friendly" toward EVEN
the "Customs of our Fathers"?

Romans 14 makes it clear regarding those who elect to observe EVERY holy
feastival - holy day listed in Lev 23 after the cross - THEY are approved by God
JUST as much as those who elect to observe one of the days but not the others.

In this case NO ASSIGNMENT is made regarding WEAK or STRONG faith in terms of "days". BUT if we follow the same rule as diet above - then we might assume that in the same way the FIRST case is the STRONG faith case and the SECOND case is the WEAK. In that case the one who observs ONE feast day ABOVE the others is the one STRONG in faith - and the one who observes ALL the feast days is the one weak in faith.

Here we see that no condemnation is tolerated by Paul toward ANY of the practices listed in Romans 14. So WHATEVER you choose to think of these practices - NONE are to be condemned.

 

Are you saying Jesus broke God's laws? If so, please give an example.</font>[/QUOTE]Does anyone read an entire line before pouncing on what they want to believe a person is posting?
</font>[/QUOTE]Actually, SMM, I read your post 2 or 3 times -- I did not pounce. But apparently I misunderstood.

I apologize!

 

Well...

Marcia...

*IF* I were a Phd in English and Semantics I *might* have a reason to be miffed...

I seem to be easily misread.

God Bless,

SMM