Paul returned to the Church of Jerusalem

[smyrna]

[SIZE=12pt]I’m sure many have read this from scripture over the years and opted not to pursue because it did not fit a pattern already established.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Paul returned to the Church of Jerusalem to report of How God had worked wonders among the Gentiles. James the son of Mary, the mother of Jesus had become the church leader. Instead of being overjoyed with this good news, they seemed offended. He told Paul not to be too quick to mention this to the members of the Church but to purify himself in Jewish custom and to give the appearance that he was obedient to the Law[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt] Acts 21:17-25[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]17[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] When we arrived at Jerusalem, the brothers and sisters received us warmly. 18 The next day Paul and the rest of us went to see James, and all the elders were present. 19 Paul greeted them and reported in detail what God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]20[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] When they heard this, they praised God. Then they said to Paul: “You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law. 21 They have been informed that you teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn away from Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or live according to our customs. 22 What shall we do? They will certainly hear that you have come, 23 so do what we tell you. There are four men with us who have made a vow. 24 Take these men, join in their purification rites and pay their expenses, so that they can have their heads shaved. Then everyone will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the law. 25 As for the Gentile believers, we have written to them our decision that they should abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality.” [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]A mystery Christians have fail to see is that the Original Church continued to follow the Law of Moses They were never called Christians they were called followers of the Way.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Acts 22:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]Then Paul said: 3 “I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city. I studied under Gamaliel and was thoroughly trained in the law of our ancestors. I was just as zealous for God as any of you are today. 4[/SIZE] I persecuted the followers of this Way to their death, arresting both men and women and throwing them into prison, 5 as the high priest and all the Council can themselves testify.
[SIZE=12pt]Acts 24:14http://classic.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+24:14&version=NIV[/SIZE]
However, I admit that I worship the God of our ancestors as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect.

[SIZE=12pt]If the believers in the Church of Jerusalem believed in the Christ are they Christians or are they Jews because they follow the Law.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Jesus said no one can come to the Father except by Me; But will they will they be Judged according to the law?[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]The questions are, why have Bible scholars/Christian fathers not included this part of the New Testament Christians teaching. Either they missed this or at some point determined these passages do not fit the pattern which was already established or both.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]However I believe is by God’s design that this remains a mystery till now.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]If we are understanding scripture correctly, how will Christians fit this Portion of the Bible into our Christian foundational beliefs?[/SIZE]

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

This was already addressed at the Council at Jerusalem in which James ruled that gentiles were not obligated to be circumcised, and thus come under the bond of the old covenant in which they would have been required to keep the law of Moses. To state otherwise is to go against apostolic authority. If the Jewish believers at that time wanted to follow the law of Moses, that was their business. But they certainly were no different than gentile believers and were not required to do so even though they were circumcised, because they were justified from their faith.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

James was not the son of Mary.

 

[day]

This was already addressed at the Council at Jerusalem in which James ruled that gentiles were not obligated to be circumcised, and thus come under the bond of the old covenant in which they would have been required to keep the law of Moses. To state otherwise is to go against apostolic authority. If the Jewish believers at that time wanted to follow the law of Moses, that was their business. But they certainly were no different than gentile believers and were not required to do so even though they were circumcised, because they were justified from their faith.

It was after that Council that Paul had Timothy circumcised, and went to the Temple with the four men completing their Nazarite vows. The Way was a Jewish sect so in Jerusalem all the Jewish cultural practices were still being observed. In the Diaspora the majority of believers were not quite as observant and many believers were Gentiles. It seems like Paul was being a Jew to Jews and a Jewish Gentile to Gentiles.

I recently read a relatively good book on this time in the Church. It is "The Reluctant Parting" by Julie Galambush. I don't care for the "critical view" of Scripture, but the book does give one a feeling for the complex issues being addressed.

James was not the son of Mary.

Not even close to the topic being discussed.

 

[Suhar]

James was not the son of Mary.

There goes the Catholic again. Mary is no co-redeemer.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

It was after that Council that Paul had Timothy circumcised, and went to the Temple with the four men completing their Nazarite vows. The Way was a Jewish sect so in Jerusalem all the Jewish cultural practices were still being observed. In the Diaspora the majority of believers were not quite as observant and many believers were Gentiles. It seems like Paul was being a Jew to Jews and a Jewish Gentile to Gentiles.

I recently read a relatively good book on this time in the Church. It is "The Reluctant Parting" by Julie Galambush. I don't care for the "critical view" of Scripture, but the book does give one a feeling for the complex issues being addressed.

The only reason Paul had Timothy circumcised was to remove any opportunity for the Judeans to accuse them of wrongdoing. Paul was a Jew to the Jews and a gentile to the gentiles; distinctions without a difference leveraged for the the glory of GOD.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

Not even close to the topic being discussed.

It was made part of the topic by the OP. The author has a chip on his/her shoulder and wanted to create that conflict. I didn't open that door.

 

[day]

It was made part of the topic by the OP. The author has a chip on his/her shoulder and wanted to create that conflict. I didn't open that door.

In other words - a troll. Responding only encourages the practice.

DON'T FEED THE TROLL!

 

[Selene]

James was not the son of Mary.

I agree that Jesus and James were not brothers. However, James was the son of the OTHER Mary.......the Mary of Clophas, and this biblical verse below proves it.

Mark 15:40 There were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome;

There were at least three women named Mary who saw Jesus die at the cross. "Mary" must have been a very popular name in those days. Jesus' mother was at the foot of the cross while the other women stood afar off. Those other women who stood afar off were Mary Magdalene and another woman named Mary (whom the Bible identifies as the mother of James the less). Jesus and James were not brothers, but most likely cousins.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

I agree that Jesus and James were not brothers. However, James was the son of the OTHER Mary.......the Mary of Clophas, and this biblical verse below proves it.

Mark 15:40 There were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome;

There were at least three women named Mary who saw Jesus die at the cross. "Mary" must have been a very popular name in those days. Jesus' mother was at the foot of the cross while the other women stood afar off. Those other women who stood afar off were Mary Magdalene and another woman named Mary (whom the Bible identifies as the mother of James the less). Jesus and James were not brothers, but most likely cousins.

Agreed. The name Mary was actually Miriam, and the name of the sister of Moses was VERY popular.