If Paul was against the law and taught others not to keep it, how do we explain his acts (helping 4 men with ending their Nazarite vow) in this chapter?
I know of two answers to this question.
Most Christian believers answer it with this passage:
1 Corinthians 9:20
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;
1 Corinthians 9:21
To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to Elohim, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
Let's see if this a true answer, and if it is a true answer, whether or not Paul is legit or a fraud and a hypocrite.
Now if he only kept the law to win Jews over to salvation and forsook it around gentiles, as this scripture supposedly means, then this is not a good answer for the content of the 21st chapter of Acts.
Why? Firstly, the Jews in that chapter Paul was doing this for were already believers:
Acts 21:20
And when they [the elders] 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:
Secondly, many of the Jews are mentioned to live among the gentiles:
Acts 21:21
And they are informed of 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.
Now how could he play these hypocritical roles many say he plays in 1 Corinthians 9:20-21 if the Jews he supposedly was keeping the law for were among the gentiles?
It would be impossible. If they were among the gentiles, he cannot keep the law for them and yet not keep the law for the gentiles because he'd be around both of them at the same time and this would cause confusion.
Thirdly, he wasn't merely doing this to make it look like he obeyed the law. He was disproving a lie. If he really did teach against the law, he would certainly have been a deceitful hypocrite if he was only doing this to please Jews because he would have publicly made an impression about himself that wasn't true.
Fourth, the gentiles are not commanded to walk after the customs (at least so early in faith while learning in the synagogues on the sabbath - Acts 15:21) and they had already delivered a letter (15th chapter of Acts) to relate that very thing.
There would be no need for Paul to have tried to play two roles if it was already established that gentiles weren't supposed to do Jewish customs anyway and that Jews were to continue in them.
Of course, the second way to answer the first question above is that Paul really did teach the law.
The question now becomes what does 1 Corinthians 9:20-21 mean and if there is to be no difference between believers (Acts 15:9; Galatians 3:28; Romans 10:12; Colossians 3:11), why is one group promoted to continue in the law and the other commanded to have nothing to do with it (seemingly)?
:-D
I know of two answers to this question.
Most Christian believers answer it with this passage:
1 Corinthians 9:20
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;
1 Corinthians 9:21
To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to Elohim, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
Let's see if this a true answer, and if it is a true answer, whether or not Paul is legit or a fraud and a hypocrite.
Now if he only kept the law to win Jews over to salvation and forsook it around gentiles, as this scripture supposedly means, then this is not a good answer for the content of the 21st chapter of Acts.
Why? Firstly, the Jews in that chapter Paul was doing this for were already believers:
Acts 21:20
And when they [the elders] 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:
Secondly, many of the Jews are mentioned to live among the gentiles:
Acts 21:21
And they are informed of 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.
Now how could he play these hypocritical roles many say he plays in 1 Corinthians 9:20-21 if the Jews he supposedly was keeping the law for were among the gentiles?
It would be impossible. If they were among the gentiles, he cannot keep the law for them and yet not keep the law for the gentiles because he'd be around both of them at the same time and this would cause confusion.
Thirdly, he wasn't merely doing this to make it look like he obeyed the law. He was disproving a lie. If he really did teach against the law, he would certainly have been a deceitful hypocrite if he was only doing this to please Jews because he would have publicly made an impression about himself that wasn't true.
Fourth, the gentiles are not commanded to walk after the customs (at least so early in faith while learning in the synagogues on the sabbath - Acts 15:21) and they had already delivered a letter (15th chapter of Acts) to relate that very thing.
There would be no need for Paul to have tried to play two roles if it was already established that gentiles weren't supposed to do Jewish customs anyway and that Jews were to continue in them.
Of course, the second way to answer the first question above is that Paul really did teach the law.
The question now becomes what does 1 Corinthians 9:20-21 mean and if there is to be no difference between believers (Acts 15:9; Galatians 3:28; Romans 10:12; Colossians 3:11), why is one group promoted to continue in the law and the other commanded to have nothing to do with it (seemingly)?
:-D