James Vs Paul In Acts 15 And 21

One of the most continuous subjects on forums is James vs. Paul. This writing is on this subject.

James vs Paul in Acts 15 and 21:

When rationalizing, and using conjecture, and assumption to prove a point one way or the other you will never be able to see the truth. A rationalization, conjecture and assumption that James is saying the same thing Paul is saying, is no proof at all.

ABOUT THE GENTILES:

Acts 15:1-2
1 And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved."
2 Therefore, when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem, to the apostles and elders, about this question.
(NKJ)

NOTE: The Jews were telling the Gentiles that they had to keep the Law of Moses. This being said, then the Jews who were telling Paul the Gentiles had to keep the Law of Moses, must have been those that believed Jesus to be the Messiah.

James said in Acts 15:19-20
19 "Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God,
20 "but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood.
(NKJ)

James and the elders said in Acts 15:25-29
25 it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul,
26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth.
28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things:
29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.
(NKJ)

Clearly it can be seen that James is saying that the Gentiles do not have to follow the Law of Moses. But that does not mean that ""James is saying"" that the Jews did not have to follow the Law of Moses. To think so is to make a conjecture and assumptions and to miss the truth.

What we see in the scriptures is that there was a gospel for the Jews, ""with the Law"" and a gospel for the Gentiles "without the Law." This is proven in that James says the Gentiles do not have to follow the Law of Moses but James wanted Paul to follow it. Obviously his saying that did not exempt the Jews from having to follow the Law of Moses and that is clearly seen in Acts 21 below.

************ More proof from the scriptures.

Acts 21:20-22
20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, "You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law;

(note that the believing Jews were zealous for the Law)

21 "but they 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.
22 "What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come.
(NKJ)

Since we have seen that James clearly understood that the Gentiles did not have to keep the Law it is just as clear that James was NOT saying the Jews didn't have to. James expected the Jews to keep the Law and the proof is in what James and the Elders told Paul to do.

Acts 21:24-25
24 "Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law.

25 "But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should observe no such thing, except that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality."
(NKJ)

Acts 21:26-30
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 almost ended, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him,

28 crying out, "Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the law, and this place; and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place."

29 (For they had previously seen Trophimus the Ephesian with him in the city, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.)
30 And all the city was disturbed; and the people ran together, seized Paul, and dragged him out of the temple; and immediately the doors were shut.
31 Now as they were seeking to kill him, news came to the commander of the garrison that all Jerusalem was in an uproar.
(NKJ)

It is a fact that if James and the elders were teaching the same gospel of faith without works as Paul was teaching, they would have been persecuted just as they were persecuting Paul.

Conclusion: Clearly the scriptures show that James was not teaching the same gospel as Paul was teaching. ---- Paul's gospel clearly states, that no one will be saved by the works of the Law. Obviously, James was teaching Law or the Jews would have been upset by them as well. ---- To ignore these events is to never be able to see what James was teaching to the Jews and Paul to the Gentiles """AND"""" it wasn't the same thing.

Lately some have tried to get around what is being said in this writing by indicating that James and Paul were not using the same definition of the word “works”. When called to define the works James is talking about they can’t seem to say how they differ from the works of the Law of Moses.

Selene said:

I agree.. The Law of circumcision is a Mosaic law. The rest of the Apostles agreed with St. Paul that the law of circumcision has nothing to do with salvation. This is why St. James and the rest of the Apostles agreed that it's okay for the Gentiles not be to circumcised because circumcision has nothing to do with salvation. They understood that God made no distinction between the Jews and the Gentiles because faith and the grace of God is what matters as St. Peter said when he addressed everyone in the assembly.

Acts 15:7-11 ........ Peter rose up and said to them: "Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, we shall be saved in the same manner as they."

As Scripture shows, St. Peter also preached a Gospel of Grace just like St. Paul, and this Gospel of Grace was preached by all the Apostles to all Jews and Gentiles. The teachings of Christ remains the same. It is not divided among people because Christ favors unity. There is only one faith and even St. Paul believed in one faith (Ephesians 4:5), which is the same faith expressed by the other Apostles.

Click to expand...

Well that conclusions would mean the the believing Jews were mad at James and the elders too, wouldn't it. And yet that is not what the scriptures in Acts 21 say.

Selene said:

My brother, why would they be mad? In the first place, the first Christians were the Jews themselves. St. Peter, who was a believing Jew, did say that it is through the grace of Jesus Christ that they will be saved in the same manner as the Gentiles (Acts 15:11). This is recorded in the Bible. Surely, you are not saying that the Bible is wrong?

Acts 21 is a discussion about circumcision. St. Peter and the Apostles knew that circumcision has nothing to do with salvation, and that is shown earlier in Acts 15:11.

In Christ,
Selene

Click to expand...

I think I explained this very well but for you let me try to do it all over again.

If you say that James and the elders were teaching what Paul was teaching; "that the Jews did not have to keep the Jewish Law" then would not the believing Jews have been mad at them just as they were with Paul? Now I can't make that any clearer.

Don't try and mis-direct this by saying it was just about being circumcised. It was about what Paul was teaching the Jews and "as the scripture says" they were mad because Paul was teaching the Jews Acts 21:21
21 but they 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.
NKJV

Selene said:

My brother, St. Paul NEVER said that the Jews did not have to keep the Jewish law." He said that the Gentiles did not have to keep the Jewish law. And all the Apostles agreed. The Gentiles did not have to keep the Jewish law. As for the Jews who believe in Jesus Christ, they can circumcise if they want and still believe in Jesus as the Son of God. After all, there are some Christians today who also circumcise their male infants, not because of any Jewish law, but because of health reasons.

Click to expand...

You seem to be stuck on just one part of the Jewish law, circumsion. There are many more, think 10 commandments.

I am sorry Selene but I can't believe your statement above. IMHO it is not true. Show me where Paul said that the Jews had to keep the law of Moses. This whole thread is about Paul teaching the Jews "" that they ""DID NOT"" have to keep the law of Moses"" And then you say that Paul said they did.

You seem to switch back and forward between have to and want to.

Romans 10:1-4
10 Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they may be saved.
2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge.
3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God.
4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.
NKJV

Look, I am not going to keep replying to you about this. If you don't see it then so be it.

You keep saying "my brother." If you are wraped up in a works theology based on James then I am not your brother. I do not lay burdens on others and that is what all the religious people who use James as their source are doing.

Selene said:

Hello Richard,

If St. Paul preached a different gospel, then perhaps you can explain why St. Paul had Timothy who was a Gentile circumcised.

Acts 16:1-3 Then he came to Derbe and Lystra. And behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a certain Jewish woman who believed, but his father was Greek. He was well spoken of by the brethren who were at Lystra and Iconium. Paul wanted to have him go on with him. And he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in that region, for they all knew that his father was Greek.

As you can see from Scripture, St. Paul had Timothy circumcised. So, if St. Paul does not believe nor preach the law of circumcision, then why did he allow Timothy to be circumcised?

In Christ,
Selene

Click to expand...

The scripture you quoted tells the WHY.

Selene said:

My brother, it never mattered whether a person is circumcised or not. That is the entire message in all of St. Paul's letters.

Galatians 5:6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love.

As you can see in the above Scripture, it does not matter if a person was circumcised like the Jew or uncircumcised like the pagan. To be circumcised or not has nothing to do with salvation.

In Christ,
Selene

Click to expand...

I never said it mattered under the gospel of grace and Paul's message was about the gospel of grace. But it seemed to matter to the believing Jews. James and the Elders.

All this is foolishness and is a distraction from the orginal post on this thread.

Selene said:

Hello Richard,

How is it foolishness when one speaks about the Bible? It is never foolish to speak about the Bible. Also, it is not a distraction because you originally speak about two different gospels. As I said in my previous post. There is only one Good News. The Gospel was brought to the Jews first and then to the Gentiles. The Gospel to the Jews and to the Gentiles are the same. Read Acts 21 very carefully. Nowhere in there does it say that Paul was telling the Jews to abandon the law. or not to circumcise.

Acts 21: 18-19 The next day Paul went with us to visit James, and all the elders were present. After greeting them he gave a detailed account of all that God had done among the pagans through his ministry.

Here we have St. Paul visiting St. James and the elders. The following verses tell what St. Paul said to St. James and the elders. Read carefully what St. Paul is saying:

Acts 21:20-21...."But you see, brother,' they said 'how thousands of Jews have now become believers, all of them staunch upholders of the Law, and they have heard that you insturct all Jews living among the pagans to break away from Moses, authorising them not to circumcise their children or to follow the customary practices.

Behold, St. Paul here is not saying that it was he who told the Jews to break away from Moses and the law. He was saying that the Jews HEARD that St. James and the elders were the one telling the Jews to break away from the law. Now, read carefully what St. Paul suggest what St. James and the elders to do.

Acts 22-25 What is to be done? ..........So do as we suggest. We have four men here who are under a vow; take these men along and be purified with them and pay all the expenses connected with the shaving of their heads. This will let everyone know there is no truth in the reports they have heard about you and that you still regularly observe the Law. The pagans who have become believers, aw we wrote when we told them our decisions, must abstain from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from fornication.

So, now we learn the truth by reading the entire story in the Bible and not just parts of it. None of the Apostles including St. Paul said to the Jewish people "not to circumcise their children." These were false reports that were heard. None of the Apostles ever said it because circumcision does not matter. It never led to salvation. All the Apostles including St. Paul does not observe the law, but St. Paul suggested to St. James and the elders to purify themselves ONLY to prove that what the Jews heard about them were false rumors.

In Christ,
Selene

Click to expand...

You need to practice what you preach.

Galatians 5:3-6
3 And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law.
4 You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.
5 For we through the Spirit eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.
6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love.
NKJV

The above is the message Paul was teaching both the Gentiles and the Jews and it does say that circumcision is not necessary for either of them.

So there! LOL