Was St. Paul a liar and deceiver?

[Ken Brown]

I appreciate you displaying your utter disregard for the actual implications of the text. So I guess I gotta repost it for you yet again.

Regardless if verse 25 is interpolated, and it most likely is, it's still about him accusing Paul of a rumor of telling JEWISH christians to abandon Moses.

20When 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. 21They 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. 22What shall we do? They will certainly hear that you have come, 23so do what we tell you. There are four men with us who have made a vow. 24Take these men, join in their purification rites and pay their expenses, so that they can have their heads shaved. Then everybody will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the law. 25As 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.”

If you insist one more time that this has nothing to do with what I'm saying, I challenge you to a 1x1 with poll.

Also, you can accuse me 'misinterpreting the earlier verses also" all you want, but you have no substantiation. As usual.

So, go ahead Disciple, I guess Shermana is speaking with you. But I were you, I would point out to him that there had to be some logical reason for these rumors to have started about what Paul was teaching concerning Jews. I would tell Shermana that the ONLY reason these rumors started about what Paul was supposedly teaching "Jews" (to not follow Moses, the circumcising of children, and the Oral Law-the customs), is because Paul was following V.25 and what the council of Acts 15 determined for Gentiles...that they did not have to do as the Jews, just 4 necessary commands. It appears that what Paul was teaching Gentiles, was applied to Jews, and this was not the case, so Paul submitted to ritual purification (a sacrifice). But then, I suspect you probably know what you want to say to him already. KB

 

[Shermana]

Disciple,

21: 21They 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. 22What shall we do?

So how does that fit with "understood the conversion"?

Do you really not understand how that's an accusation of teaching Jews to "turn away from Moses?"

 

[Shermana]

So, go ahead Disciple, I guess Shermana is speaking with you. But I were you, I would point out to him that there had to be some logical reason for these rumors to have started about what Paul was teaching concerning Jews. I would tell Shermana that the ONLY reason these rumors started about what Paul was supposedly teaching "Jews" (to not follow Moses, the circumcising of children, and the Oral Law-the customs), is because Paul was following V.25 and what the council of Acts 15 determined for Gentiles...that they did not have to do as the Jews, just 4 necessary commands. It appears that what Paul was teaching Gentiles, was applied to Jews, and this was not the case, so Paul submitted to ritual purification (a sacrifice). But then, I suspect you probably know what you want to say to him already. KB

I appreciate that you actually understand that they are accusing Paul of teaching to not obey Moses (unlike someone else here) , but once again I should bring up that the issue of the Council of Jerusalem is considered to be fabricated and interpolated by many major scholars (even hardliner FF Bruce tries to downplay the discrepancy with Galatians 2 by saying its referring to a totally different, later episode), and subsequently verse 21:25, so we cannot say for a matter of fact as if those episodes are binding in terms of objective discussion.

How odd it would be for these rumors to circulate considering it was James himself and the same church that supposedly initiated this in the first place 6 chapters prior. Maybe they all had Alzheimers?

Even if the Council of Jerusalem is authentic, were there 3 commands or 4? The manuscripts can't seem to agree.

 

[Desert Snake]

21: 21They 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. 22What shall we do?

That's not an accusation, they are trying to figure out a method of converting.

Absolutely ridiculous, you've completely misinterpreted the verses

 

[Desert Snake]

Acts 21:20 it states they glorified the Lord
Acts 21:21 It explains how the council understood the conversion
Acts 21:22 They need to figure out a remedy for the conversion of gentiles
Acts 21:23 The council gives instructions
Acts 21:24 The council gives laws on purification of the converts
Acts 21:25 The council lists the necessary laws to be followed by Gentiles
Acts 21:26 The converts are converted, purification in the Temple
Acts 21:27 The Jews which were of Asia make the accusations

Nothing to do with an accusation at the council, the opposite in fact

^@KB

I already explained it, verse by verse, here it is. It doesn't get much simpler, there is no need for obfuscation.

 

[tumbleweed41]

MOD POST

Once again,
ALL posters are reminded of Rules 1 and 11

1. Personal comments about Members and Staff
Personal attacks, and/or name-calling are strictly prohibited on the forums. Speaking or referring to a member in the third person, ie "calling them out" will also be considered a personal attack. Critique each other's ideas all you want, but under no circumstances personally attack each other or the staff.

11. Subverting/Undermining the forum Mission
The purpose of the forum is to provide a civil, informative, respectful and welcoming environment where people of diverse beliefs can discuss, compare and debate. Posts while debating and discussing different beliefs must be done in the spirit of productivity. If a person's main goal is to undermine a set of beliefs by creating unproductive posts/threads/responses to others, etc, then they will be edited or removed and subject to moderation.
​

 

[Shermana]

That's not an accusation, they are trying to figure out a method of converting.

Uh huh.

I'd love to see your reason of why they made Paul take the vow.

I hope you realize that even Antinomian (Anti-Law) commentators overwhelmingly disagree with you.

Acts 21:20 Bible Commentary

You can just back out now.

 

[Desert Snake]

Do you really not understand how that's an accusation of teaching Jews to "turn away from Moses?"

You're arguments have been refuted to all logical extent, you haven't addressed the verses verse by verse, as I have, with explanation.

 

[Shermana]

You're arguments have been refuted to all logical extent, you haven't addressed the verses verse by verse, as I have, with explanation.

Where have you refuted me? That's a total lie. Not even Antinomian commentators agree with your interpretation. None of them! I don't think you could find a single site that remotely supports your interpretation. Even those opposed to my beliefs accept the same thing of what I'm saying about Acts 21. Your interpretation is so far off that it's not even funny, even Ken Brown agrees that it's about accusing Paul of a rumor to disobey Moses.

You have NOT addressed it verse by verse, you made some totally out of context summation of the verses, which I asked you to substantiate, that you refused to do. I specifically quoted the verse in question, and you repeated your insistence which flies in the face of what it actually says. All you have done is listed what you think it says which is not even close. You say it's about "Acknowledging the conversion", then when I ask you how, you refuse to substantiate. You refused to address what I asked about why they made Paul take the vow too!

I quoted the passage where it directly says they are accusing of Paul of teaching to break away from Moses, and this is your response?

I doubt anyone else reading would agree with you either.

If anything you're proving that anyone can make up any interpretation they want, with or without any adherence to context, whether it is backed by scholarly authority or not, and insist that the other person's interpretation is wrong.

Where is it against the rules to accuse someone of trolling? You clearly are not bothering to actually substantiate your claims beyond simply insisting on your own little strange, completely off-context interpretation (that NO ONE ELSE HOLDS) and telling me that I'm wrong, repeating that I'm 'misinterpreting" over and over instead of getting into the text. What's pathetic is when someone insists on dodging questions and insisting the person is wrong without substantiating their own view, and insisting they are right and the other is wrong when NO ONE ELSE BACKS THEIR VIEW. Not even those on your side of the argument have this interpretation of Acts 21.

What's against the rules is to consistently dodge and deny and dismiss people's points over and over without intent to debate on the debate board.

 

[Desert Snake]

Where have you refuted me? That's a total lie. Not even Antinomian commentators agree with your interpretation. None of them! I don't think you could find a single site that remotely supports your interpretation.

It's not an 'interpretation', it's straight reading from Scripture... no interpretation needed. Frankly it doesn't matter which commenters agree, there is no Scriptural evidence to support your view, it doesn't even make sense because the Council gives instructions on which laws the converts are to follow.
Your 'interpretation' is not supported by actual text.

 

[Desert Snake]

Your ONLY argument is that Acts 21:25 is an interpolation. Good luck proving that. Then, if you manage to prove that, you still have to explain your misinterpretation of the earlier Acts verses.

 

[Shermana]

You can go "nuh uh" til the cows come home, but as I showed, not even Antinomian commentators remotely agree with your interpretation, and that's probably you will absolutely refuse to show a single link or site that agrees with your view.

Now you can say that my reading goes against what the scripture says, even after I quote pretty much word for word that it says exactly what I'm saying:

Acts 21:21 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.

New Living Translation (©2007)
But the Jewish believers here in Jerusalem have been told that you are teaching all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn their backs on the laws of Moses. They've heard that you teach them not to circumcise their children or follow other Jewish customs.

Now I understand that you may willfully refuse each and every time to accept that this is basically saying Paul is being accused of a rumor of teaching Jewish Christians to "Turn away from Moses". As it says.

I understand that you may want to read whatever you want into it.

But we're in a debate board.

And my interpretation is backed even by scholars who disagree with my view.

You have NO ONE who backs your view.

So tell me again about who is reading "Straight from scripture", because straight from scripture says:

"you teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn away from Moses,"

Let me repeat that for you:

"you teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn away from Moses,"

If anything this is an excellent exercise in proving how those of the Pauline approach often interpret virtually any meaning they want and deny the Lawful-approach's interpretation as "unscriptural" even when it matches exactly what the text says word for word.

 

[Shermana]

Your ONLY argument is that Acts 21:25 is an interpolation. Good luck proving that. Then, if you manage to prove that, you still have to explain your misinterpretation of the earlier Acts verses.

What I've proven repeatedly is that many scholars consider Acts 15's Council of Jerusalem to be spurious and interpolated.

You can see here:

Encyclopædia Biblica: A Critical Dictionary of the Literary, Political and ... - Google Books

"In particular, the verse in question (21:25) has actually been taken to be an interpolation".

So there's plenty of evidence that my view is far from my own.

I'll make my own thread on this.

http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...ts-21-25-taken-interpolation.html#post3196151

 

[Desert Snake]

You can go "nuh uh" til the cows come home, but as I showed, not even Antinomian commentators remotely agree with your interpretation, and that's probably you will absolutely refuse to show a single link or site that agrees with your view.

Now you can say that my reading goes against what the scripture says, even after I quote pretty much word for word that it says exactly what I'm saying:

Acts 21:21 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.

New Living Translation (©2007)
But the Jewish believers here in Jerusalem have been told that you are teaching all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn their backs on the laws of Moses. They've heard that you teach them not to circumcise their children or follow other Jewish customs.

Now I understand that you may willfully refuse each and every time to accept that this is basically saying Paul is being accused of a rumor of teaching Jewish Christians to "Turn away from Moses". As it says.

Lol I don't deny that, that's the reason the Council figured out a way for the Gentiles to follow the laws.

( the Gentile version)

 

[Shermana]

Lol I don't deny that, that's the reason the Council figured out a way for the Gentiles to follow the laws.

( the Gentile version)

As you can see, the scholarly concensus according to the Encyclopedia Biblica, volume 1, says that 21:25 indeed "Has actually been taken to be an interpolation" and spurious, just like how other major scholars agree that the Council of Jerusalem episode is interpolated.

With that said, I don't see how that response in any way addresses what I said about accusing Paul of teaching Jewish Christians to "Turn away from Moses".

 

[Rise]

Before I get to the other things, let's pin down this Acts 21 issue because it really is a very easy one.


First off: It's not an interpolation just because someone somewhere thinks it might be.
On what basis is Acts 21:25 said to be an interpolation? Is there actually any merit to such a position?
I'd like to see a reference for the exact reasoning behind this accusation about the text, because I don't think it will hold up to scrutiny.


Second: Even if you remove that one verse, you still can't support your position from the rest of Acts 21. Look closely:


17 When we had come to Jerusalem, the brothers received us gladly. 18 On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. 19 After greeting them, he related one by one the things that God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. 20 And when they heard it, they glorified God.


They were pleased with what he had done with the gentiles!
And we all know from his numerous other letters that he never told the gentiles to observe the mosaic law.



“You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed. They are all zealous for the law, 21 and they have been told about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or walk according to our customs.


The issue of contention here is not that he was telling the gentiles to forsake Moses, but the issue is that people thought he was teaching the Jews to forsake Moses.



22 What then is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. 23 Do therefore what we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; 24 take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses, so that they may shave their heads. Thus all will know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself also live in observance of the law.


James says that these rumors about Paul were not true!
He instructs Paul to do something to prove to everyone that the rumors were not true.



So you've got a problem with this entire account in Acts 21, not just verse 25.
Because none of it supports the following positions:
-That Paul was teaching the jews to forsake Moses.
-That he was teaching the gentiles to observe Moses.
-That the elders rebuked Paul for what he was doing.



But as for the Gentiles who have believed, we have sent a letter with our judgment that they should abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled,[d] and from sexual immorality.” 26


Verse 25 fits right in with the rest of the account, though, when you realize that they took no issue with the gentiles not being taught to observe the mosaic regulations.

 

[Shermana]

Before I get to the other things, let's pin down this Acts 21 issue because it really is a very easy one.


First off: It's not an interpolation just because someone somewhere thinks it might be.
On what basis is Acts 21:25 said to be an interpolation? Is there actually any merit to such a position?
I'd like to see a reference for the exact reasoning behind this accusation about the text, because I don't think it will hold up to scrutiny.

Scroll up, it's the Encyclopedia Biblica Volume 1, Page 926, the details are on there. And I've listed the scholars who agree that the Council of Jerusalem episode is interpolated. It's not just one person somewhere, it's apparently the defacto independent (non-church-aligned) scholarly opinion on the matter.


Second: Even if you remove that one verse, you still can't support your position from the rest of Acts 21. Look closely:

17 When we had come to Jerusalem, the brothers received us gladly. 18 On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. 19 After greeting them, he related one by one the things that God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. 20 And when they heard it, they glorified God.


They were pleased with what he had done with the gentiles!
And we all know from his numerous other letters that he never told the gentiles to observe the mosaic law.

I have brought up James Scott Trimm who makes rather convincing arguments that Paul did not teach lawlessness to the gentiles whatsoever, it is rather the mangled misinterpretations of Paul's letters. There's also the "New perspective on Paul" which somewhat accounts for this.

If you want specific articles I can link them, but here's a book he wrote on the subject.

https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/understanding-paul/id443701576?mt=11

To be blunt, some of his articles make me reconsider for a moment my stance against Paul and make me think for a second that he was NOT a liar and a deceiver.

There's also the issue that many of Paul's epistles like Ephesians and the Pastorals are most likely straight up forgeries.

If we remove those suspected verses, it never says he did NOT tell them to obey Mosaic Law. You cannot say one way or the other. And the context would seemingly be that they were to be no different than the expectations of the Jewish Christians without those interpolated accounts.

“You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed. They are all zealous for the law, 21 and they have been told about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or walk according to our customs.


The issue of contention here is not that he was telling the gentiles to forsake Moses, but the issue is that people thought he was teaching the Jews to forsake Moses.

Which I addressed twice earlier, and asked what the implications would be for the Jews having a different gospel to follow than the gentiles, being held to stricter standards.

22 What then is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. 23 Do therefore what we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; 24 take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses, so that they may shave their heads. Thus all will know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself also live in observance of the law.


James says that these rumors about Paul were not true!
He instructs Paul to do something to prove to everyone that the rumors were not true.

And indeed, I addressed this by asking what the implications would be if Jews were to follow a different gospel, a stricter one.

So you've got a problem with this entire account in Acts 21, not just verse 25.
Because none of it supports the following positions:
-That Paul was teaching the jews to forsake Moses.
-That he was teaching the gentiles to observe Moses.
-That the elders rebuked Paul for what he was doing.

The problem is that you haven't been keeping up with how I addressed all this already, and that without those interpolations, nothing suggests that he was NOT teaching the Gentiles to observe Moses.

But as for the Gentiles who have believed, we have sent a letter with our judgment that they should abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled,[d] and from sexual immorality.” 26


Verse 25 fits right in with the rest of the account, though, when you realize that they took no issue with the gentiles not being taught to observe the mosaic regulations.

Verse 25 does not necessarily fit right in unless you presume already that the gentiles were held to a different standard, with the suspected interpolations in consideration.

 

[Ken Brown]

Before I get to the other things, let's pin down this Acts 21 issue because it really is a very easy one.


First off: It's not an interpolation just because someone somewhere thinks it might be.
On what basis is Acts 21:25 said to be an interpolation? Is there actually any merit to such a position?
I'd like to see a reference for the exact reasoning behind this accusation about the text, because I don't think it will hold up to scrutiny.


Second: Even if you remove that one verse, you still can't support your position from the rest of Acts 21. Look closely:


17 When we had come to Jerusalem, the brothers received us gladly. 18 On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. 19 After greeting them, he related one by one the things that God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. 20 And when they heard it, they glorified God.


They were pleased with what he had done with the gentiles!
And we all know from his numerous other letters that he never told the gentiles to observe the mosaic law.



“You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed. They are all zealous for the law, 21 and they have been told about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or walk according to our customs.


The issue of contention here is not that he was telling the gentiles to forsake Moses, but the issue is that people thought he was teaching the Jews to forsake Moses.



22 What then is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. 23 Do therefore what we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; 24 take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses, so that they may shave their heads. Thus all will know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself also live in observance of the law.


James says that these rumors about Paul were not true!
He instructs Paul to do something to prove to everyone that the rumors were not true.



So you've got a problem with this entire account in Acts 21, not just verse 25.
Because none of it supports the following positions:
-That Paul was teaching the jews to forsake Moses.
-That he was teaching the gentiles to observe Moses.
-That the elders rebuked Paul for what he was doing.



But as for the Gentiles who have believed, we have sent a letter with our judgment that they should abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled,[d] and from sexual immorality.” 26


Verse 25 fits right in with the rest of the account, though, when you realize that they took no issue with the gentiles not being taught to observe the mosaic regulations.

Hi Rise, very good explanation! I find it hard for others to not agree with what you have said. KB

 

[Shermana]

Hi Rise, very good explanation! I find it hard for others to not agree with what you have said. KB

Even if you ignore my counter reply and don't investigate the interpretations of Paul that preach nothing less than Mosaic adherence like that of James Scott Trimm, you're stuck with the position that Jewish Christians are for some reason held to a higher, stricter standard.

You also have those who do accept the Council's authority and 21:25's authenticity who say those 4 commands (3 in many manuscripts) are merely temporary introductions for freshly pagan converts.

And then you're stuck with the things Jesus clearly said about the Law, and how God himself said the Law is for "All generations", "perpetual", nothing about "for only 50 generations until the Messiah comes" but "Til the THOUSANDTH" generation. I highly doubt that "Thousandth" was a hyperbole for less than 50.

 

[Ken Brown]

Even if you ignore my counter reply and don't investigate the interpretations of Paul that preach nothing less than Mosaic adherence like that of James Scott Trimm, you're stuck with the position that Jewish Christians are for some reason held to a higher, stricter standard. Yes, I know.

You also have those who do accept the Council's authority and 21:25's authenticity who say those 4 commands (3 in many manuscripts) are merely temporary introductions for freshly pagan converts. See below.

And then you're stuck with the things Jesus clearly said about the Law, and how God himself said the Law is for "All generations", "perpetual", nothing about "for only 50 generations until the Messiah comes" but "Til the THOUSANDTH" generation. I highly doubt that "Thousandth" was a hyperbole for less than 50.

Hi Shermana, I have had the pleasure to converse with James Scott Trimm, and I truly believe that he lacks Spiritual understanding. He doesn't understand Paul very well, the Gospel which is According to the Scriptures, or the doctrine of Grace, so invoking him as an expert really doesn't hold much water with me.

I would like to repeat what I told you before. The Jewish Believers were bound or in strict adherence to the written LETTER of the Torah. They did this because they were Jews, and because of their faith in Messiah. When the ISSUE of whether or not the Gentiles ALSO had to be in strict compliance to what was written in the Torah, the Body of Messiah assembled, and made a decision (Acts 15). If you look at the testimony of Paul and Peter, they argue that the Gentiles were being converted, and the Holy Spirit was falling on them, even while they were not in strict compliance with the Torah (uncircumcised). The Torah required that even Gentiles were to FIRST be circumcised to eat the Passover (Exo 12:43-49), so how in the world could they be converted and receive the Spirit, unless they were FIRST circumcised? This sin of not being circumcised, was REMITTED, and not RETAINED as per Yeshua's instruction:

Joh 20:22-23
(22) And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:
(23) Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

Yeshua also stated they had to authority to BIND and LOOSEN:

Mat 16:19
(19) And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Mat 18:18
(18) Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

The Gentiles were given a dispensation. They were not BOUND to the letter of the Torah as the Jewish Believers were. And this is the ONLY reasonable explanation for the RUMORS concerning Paul about how he was teaching the Jews who lived among the Gentiles.

Let me ask you Shermana, why was the Torah added? Why did G-d add the Covenant of the Torah to the Covenants He made to the fathers? I think that if you properly understand WHY the Torah was added, it will clear up the OP concerning whether or not Paul is a liar and deceiver. KB