Whoa!
So a few eyebrows were raised with my latest post. That was fun. I'm thankful to all of those who participated. Good thoughts and comments by most of you. Some interesting questions were raised. In fact only one real question the authority of Paul. Which brings me to a preview of what I want to blog about next. Have you guys heard about the view that puts Paul at odds with the rest of the New Testament? Not that Paul was false but that he was the only one preaching the true gospel and that the rest of the writers were confused about the gospel?
The general idea is this: James, Peter, and John were always trying to insert Judaism into Christianity. Their epistles are regarded as to Jewish. What do you guys know and think about this? Let me know what you guys think and we'll see if we can get another small fire started!
The general idea is this: James, Peter, and John were always trying to insert Judaism into Christianity. Their epistles are regarded as to Jewish. What do you guys know and think about this? Let me know what you guys think and we'll see if we can get another small fire started!
posted by RJ-77 at 9:55 AM
14 Comments:
I refuse to comment further until I am linked...that is unless you find my content objectionable...starting...now.
Sorry Ando but I don't know how to set you up as a link. I was with Writebol and JCrew when I set mine up so they were sure to add themselves to my page. I swear, they're swimming in my wake!
P.S. I'll add you asap.
Cool thanks.
I have nothing to comment.
Wait, yes I do....
Just off the top of my head and without really thinking about it, I wouldn't say that Paul and the other epistles are "out of step", but I would say that it would make sense for those of Peter, James, et. al. to be more Jewish in tone. Paul was, afterall, sent to the Gentiles. So, I don't think at odds is correct, but certainly his could be said to be less Jewish.
They all articulated the gospel. James talks about how a believer behaves and Peter encourages the folks he wrote to stand up for their faith. Paul did all those things as well. They complement one another quite nicely.
JCrew,
Well said. I agree, they all articulate the gospel but emphasize different aspects. Good thought.
Where's my link? What? I'm not commenting enough? Your not winning friends or influencing people right now
Ok, ok, sheesh. My word I'm starting to think we're all girlfriends here!
Okay, now we can continue.
Here goes.
Ando stole my thunder, because I can't comment from home, but I agree.
My logic goes like this.
1. God gave the Jews the Law
2. Christ didn't come to abolish the law, but fullfil it
3. The Counsel in Acts voted that the Gentiles have less rules than the Jews
4. Paul preaches less rules to the Gentiles
5. James Peter and John preach more rules to the Jews
6. No contritictions
Kludge,
Did Jesus fulfill the law for Jews too?
Everyone always makes the point that the law is irrelevant. I don't think that is entirely true. There are a number of things that changed with the new conventant. but I think the Jews were called to held to a different standard than the Gentiles. I suppose with my reasoning I have to believe they still are.
This might be more than I've accually reasoned out in my head... Forgive me if its not sound theology
looking back I just pulled a BR answer.."Let me answer that by asking you this..."
Kludge,
I never said the law was irrelevant. The question is, 'What is the law for?' regardless if you're a Jew or a Gentile. I think I'm going to blog about your specific question and see what happens. It is a good topic!
Galatians tells us that the law was given to be our tutor to show us our need for grace. The Jerusalem Council did more than just say Gentiles have fewer laws. It demonstarted that salvation was totally separate from the law. Jews who are saved today are a part of the church. There are no separate rules for Jews and Gentiles. (BTW if you link to me I'll link to you)
Post a Comment
<< Home