RichardBurger
Member
A Study/focus on Acts 21:20-21:
20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, "You see, brother (Paul), how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law;
***verse 20: The "BELIEVERS" in Jesus "WERE ZEALOUS FOR THE LAW." That can only mean they still believed in keeping the Law.
21 "but they (the Jewish believers) 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.
***verse 21, Point 1: The above is NOT talking about Jewish unbelievers. That would be an assumption. The words "but they" in Acts 21, verse 21 is still talking about the Jewish believers in verse 20. I believe, since it is in the same context, it was the believing Jews that were being talked about.
***verse 21, Point 2: It can easily be seen that what was upsetting the Jewish "believers" is that Paul was teaching the Jews (out in the Gentile world) that they do not have to be circumcised or follow the Law of Moses. Please notice that this is not the same problem as in Acts 15 about what the Gentiles had to do.
***verse 21, Point 3: The only conclusion I can make, is that James and the Elders in Jerusalem "WERE NOT" teaching the same gospel of God's grace that Paul was teaching. If they were, they, James and the Elders, would have been accused of teaching the same thing Paul was teaching and it would be upsetting those same Jews.
***Did Paul really teach that the Jews should forsake the Law of Moses? YES HE DID!!!
Gal 5:6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love. NKJV
***My comment: Have you really considered the implications of what the Jewish believers were being taught by James and the elders? ---- If the Jewish believers got upset by Paul teaching """Jews""" (out in the Gentile world) that they did not have to be circumcised or follow the Law of Moses, then what “â€Âwereâ€Â†James and the Elders teaching the Jews in Jerusalem?
***My comment: For those that refuse to open their minds and see the truth as shown in Acts 21, and continue to support the idea that James and the Elders were teaching the same gospel Paul was teaching, I say this; If James and the elders were teaching the same thing that Paul was teaching, the believing Jews in Jerusalem certainly didn’t know about it because they weren’t upset at them. This is so obvious that everyone should be able to see it.
Paul's gospel of God's grace excluded the Law, but, obviously, James and the elders were not teaching this to the Jews in Jerusalem.
The fact remains that if the Jewish believers were being taught the same gospel that Paul was teaching the Jewish BELIEVERS would have known they did not have to be circumcised or follow the Jewish Law.
But we see that James and the elders were not upsetting the believing Jews by teaching salvation by faith, without the works of the Law, therefore I must conclude that the message James and the Elders were teaching was not the same as Paul's. If it were, they would have been subject to the Jew's displeasure as well.
The Plot to Appease the believing Jews:
We also see that the plot to have Paul participate in Jewish rituals was not allowed to be completed by God since it all came to naught. God was not going to let Paul go back under the Law and be a hypocrite.
Acts 21:26-27
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.
27 And when the seven days were “â€Ââ€Âalmost ended,â€Â†the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him,
(NKJ) --------------- almost ended is not is not the same as ended.
Since the Jews rejected the gospel of the Kingdom in which Jesus was to sit on the throne of David, why would anyone want to say we are to be saved under that same gospel? None of the Jewish covenants were made to the Gentiles.
Peter and Paul both preached Jesus. However, Peter preached Jesus after His prophetic revelation, and Paul preached Jesus according to His mystery revelation. Both preached Jesus crucified.
----- However, Peter preached it as a curse, and something to be repented of (Acts 3:13-19)
----- But Paul gloried in the cross (Gal.6:14).
Both Peter and Paul preached Christ resurrected. Both preached salvation by faith, but Peter preached faith plus (+) works ("and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him") (Acts 10:34); James 2:21,22. ------ But Paul preached FAITH ALONE. --- Peter preached "repent and be baptized" (Acts 2:38), where as Paul preached, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shall be saved..." (Acts 16:29).
Peter in the Gospels preached "the kingdom at hand," whereas Paul preached "the gospel of the grace of God," according to the revelation of the mystery "which was kept secret since the world began. Peter's preaching was circumcision - Law, Paul's preaching was un-circumcision - grace (no law); two opposing doctrines, and both commissioned by Jesus. Galatians 2:7 "But contrariwise, when they (the disciples) saw that the gospel of the un-circumcision (grace) was committed unto me as the gospel of the circumcision (law) was unto Peter."
The twelve were commissioned "...to go to all the world..." (Mark 16:15), however in Galatians 2:9 they agreed with Paul that they would stay with the circumcision. Why, when their commission was "to all the world"?
To those that study the scriptures from a dispensational viewpoint, there is a difference in the gospel of the Kingdom, as taught by Jesus and the 12, and what Paul taught. ----
The gospel of the kingdom did not rescind the Law of Moses. It fulfilled it. However the Jews, to whom the covenant was made, rejected Jesus and His gospel of the kingdom. They rejected Him as their king along with His Jewish church.
Some call this the "two gospel" idea. But it is a fact that in Acts 21:20-21 we see James (the brother of Jesus) and the elders, in Jerusalem, are still teaching the gospel of the kingdom, which included the Law of Moses. They are not teaching the gospel of God's grace as Paul taught it. As a matter of fact in James 2:24, James is still saying that we are JUSTIFIED by our works as well as our faith. He is not saying the same thing Paul said; that we are justified (saved) by faith without works.
I write this as food for thought.
20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, "You see, brother (Paul), how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law;
***verse 20: The "BELIEVERS" in Jesus "WERE ZEALOUS FOR THE LAW." That can only mean they still believed in keeping the Law.
21 "but they (the Jewish believers) 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.
***verse 21, Point 1: The above is NOT talking about Jewish unbelievers. That would be an assumption. The words "but they" in Acts 21, verse 21 is still talking about the Jewish believers in verse 20. I believe, since it is in the same context, it was the believing Jews that were being talked about.
***verse 21, Point 2: It can easily be seen that what was upsetting the Jewish "believers" is that Paul was teaching the Jews (out in the Gentile world) that they do not have to be circumcised or follow the Law of Moses. Please notice that this is not the same problem as in Acts 15 about what the Gentiles had to do.
***verse 21, Point 3: The only conclusion I can make, is that James and the Elders in Jerusalem "WERE NOT" teaching the same gospel of God's grace that Paul was teaching. If they were, they, James and the Elders, would have been accused of teaching the same thing Paul was teaching and it would be upsetting those same Jews.
***Did Paul really teach that the Jews should forsake the Law of Moses? YES HE DID!!!
Gal 5:6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love. NKJV
***My comment: Have you really considered the implications of what the Jewish believers were being taught by James and the elders? ---- If the Jewish believers got upset by Paul teaching """Jews""" (out in the Gentile world) that they did not have to be circumcised or follow the Law of Moses, then what “â€Âwereâ€Â†James and the Elders teaching the Jews in Jerusalem?
***My comment: For those that refuse to open their minds and see the truth as shown in Acts 21, and continue to support the idea that James and the Elders were teaching the same gospel Paul was teaching, I say this; If James and the elders were teaching the same thing that Paul was teaching, the believing Jews in Jerusalem certainly didn’t know about it because they weren’t upset at them. This is so obvious that everyone should be able to see it.
Paul's gospel of God's grace excluded the Law, but, obviously, James and the elders were not teaching this to the Jews in Jerusalem.
The fact remains that if the Jewish believers were being taught the same gospel that Paul was teaching the Jewish BELIEVERS would have known they did not have to be circumcised or follow the Jewish Law.
But we see that James and the elders were not upsetting the believing Jews by teaching salvation by faith, without the works of the Law, therefore I must conclude that the message James and the Elders were teaching was not the same as Paul's. If it were, they would have been subject to the Jew's displeasure as well.
The Plot to Appease the believing Jews:
We also see that the plot to have Paul participate in Jewish rituals was not allowed to be completed by God since it all came to naught. God was not going to let Paul go back under the Law and be a hypocrite.
Acts 21:26-27
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.
27 And when the seven days were “â€Ââ€Âalmost ended,â€Â†the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him,
(NKJ) --------------- almost ended is not is not the same as ended.
Since the Jews rejected the gospel of the Kingdom in which Jesus was to sit on the throne of David, why would anyone want to say we are to be saved under that same gospel? None of the Jewish covenants were made to the Gentiles.
Peter and Paul both preached Jesus. However, Peter preached Jesus after His prophetic revelation, and Paul preached Jesus according to His mystery revelation. Both preached Jesus crucified.
----- However, Peter preached it as a curse, and something to be repented of (Acts 3:13-19)
----- But Paul gloried in the cross (Gal.6:14).
Both Peter and Paul preached Christ resurrected. Both preached salvation by faith, but Peter preached faith plus (+) works ("and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him") (Acts 10:34); James 2:21,22. ------ But Paul preached FAITH ALONE. --- Peter preached "repent and be baptized" (Acts 2:38), where as Paul preached, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shall be saved..." (Acts 16:29).
Peter in the Gospels preached "the kingdom at hand," whereas Paul preached "the gospel of the grace of God," according to the revelation of the mystery "which was kept secret since the world began. Peter's preaching was circumcision - Law, Paul's preaching was un-circumcision - grace (no law); two opposing doctrines, and both commissioned by Jesus. Galatians 2:7 "But contrariwise, when they (the disciples) saw that the gospel of the un-circumcision (grace) was committed unto me as the gospel of the circumcision (law) was unto Peter."
The twelve were commissioned "...to go to all the world..." (Mark 16:15), however in Galatians 2:9 they agreed with Paul that they would stay with the circumcision. Why, when their commission was "to all the world"?
To those that study the scriptures from a dispensational viewpoint, there is a difference in the gospel of the Kingdom, as taught by Jesus and the 12, and what Paul taught. ----
The gospel of the kingdom did not rescind the Law of Moses. It fulfilled it. However the Jews, to whom the covenant was made, rejected Jesus and His gospel of the kingdom. They rejected Him as their king along with His Jewish church.
Some call this the "two gospel" idea. But it is a fact that in Acts 21:20-21 we see James (the brother of Jesus) and the elders, in Jerusalem, are still teaching the gospel of the kingdom, which included the Law of Moses. They are not teaching the gospel of God's grace as Paul taught it. As a matter of fact in James 2:24, James is still saying that we are JUSTIFIED by our works as well as our faith. He is not saying the same thing Paul said; that we are justified (saved) by faith without works.
I write this as food for thought.
