deepundergroundpoetry.com
Acts 15 - a One Time Thing or An Ongoing Process??
The apostle Paul and the Early Church Fathers put aside
certain parts of the Law of Moses on the basis that they were a stumbling block to Gentiles coming to the Lord.
The account of this revolutionary change is given in Acts 15.
Are the particular parts of the Law that were put aside back in Paul's day all that would ever need to be put aside ??
Or are we to BUILD on the precedent of Acts 15 by continuing the process
of putting more of the Torah aside?
How much is enuff?
Here's what i am talking about??
(1)Genesis chapter 1 - taking a "6 days" creation account literally has become a "stumbling block"
today much like circumcision was back in the first century.
We can put the literal aside and interpret the "days" of Genesis One as eons based on Paul's use of "aionos" in Hebrews 11.3 ( in the Greek).
We can interpret the creation events by the Big Bang Theory and its extension.
(2)Genesis 2-3 - taking Adam and Eve literally today has become a "stumbling block" which keeps science-oriented people from even considering the claims of Christ.
If we put the literal aside, we can still retain the Fall of Man Gen.2-3 as interpreted via Romans 1.20-32.
(3)Noah's Flood - a global flood is a "stumbling block" because it makes God out to be an ogre, more of a devil than a God !!
If we put the literal aside, the story can still be interpreted as an exaggerated account of the historical Black Sea Flood of 5,500 BC.
But if all three items are to be put aside now -- why didn't Paul and James, etc, do it way back in the first Christian century ??
The obvious answer is that the old is to be done away with ONLY when the replacement has arrived.
Genesis One couldn't be put aside with in the first century, for the Big Bang Theory hadn't been formed yet.
And a 6 days Creation Week wasn't a "stumbling block" to evangelism back then like it definitely is today.
Genesis 2-3 could have been interpreted by Romans 1.20-32 but the Church wasn't ready.
Finally, Noah's Flood couldn't be demythologized in the first century,
for the technology hadn't been developed which resulted in the discovery of the submerged coastline at the bottom of the Black Sea.
And which enabled the dating of the Black Sea Flood to 5,500 BC.
certain parts of the Law of Moses on the basis that they were a stumbling block to Gentiles coming to the Lord.
The account of this revolutionary change is given in Acts 15.
Are the particular parts of the Law that were put aside back in Paul's day all that would ever need to be put aside ??
Or are we to BUILD on the precedent of Acts 15 by continuing the process
of putting more of the Torah aside?
How much is enuff?
Here's what i am talking about??
(1)Genesis chapter 1 - taking a "6 days" creation account literally has become a "stumbling block"
today much like circumcision was back in the first century.
We can put the literal aside and interpret the "days" of Genesis One as eons based on Paul's use of "aionos" in Hebrews 11.3 ( in the Greek).
We can interpret the creation events by the Big Bang Theory and its extension.
(2)Genesis 2-3 - taking Adam and Eve literally today has become a "stumbling block" which keeps science-oriented people from even considering the claims of Christ.
If we put the literal aside, we can still retain the Fall of Man Gen.2-3 as interpreted via Romans 1.20-32.
(3)Noah's Flood - a global flood is a "stumbling block" because it makes God out to be an ogre, more of a devil than a God !!
If we put the literal aside, the story can still be interpreted as an exaggerated account of the historical Black Sea Flood of 5,500 BC.
But if all three items are to be put aside now -- why didn't Paul and James, etc, do it way back in the first Christian century ??
The obvious answer is that the old is to be done away with ONLY when the replacement has arrived.
Genesis One couldn't be put aside with in the first century, for the Big Bang Theory hadn't been formed yet.
And a 6 days Creation Week wasn't a "stumbling block" to evangelism back then like it definitely is today.
Genesis 2-3 could have been interpreted by Romans 1.20-32 but the Church wasn't ready.
Finally, Noah's Flood couldn't be demythologized in the first century,
for the technology hadn't been developed which resulted in the discovery of the submerged coastline at the bottom of the Black Sea.
And which enabled the dating of the Black Sea Flood to 5,500 BC.
Published 19th Jan 2018
| Edited 6th Oct 2018
All writing remains the property of the author. Don't use it for any purpose without their permission.
likes 0
reading list entries 0
comments 4
reads 491
Commenting Preference:
The author encourages honest critique.
26th Jan 2018 2:48am
The only laws from the Old Testament that continue to be relevant are the laws of God, the Ten Commandments. Moses' Laws and Levitical Laws were guidelines for that time and culture. Historical events of the Bible do not become irrelevant simply because science attempts to explain them away. The Bible is truth. It does not mislead.
Thanx for your interest.
You say, "the Bible is truth." That is a common misconception. For the New Testament separates itself from "the Law of Moses."
For it says "the Law was given by Moses, BUT..Truth came by Jesus Christ" (John 1.17). Here we see that John the Apostle is making an effort to put down the Law of Moses, first 5 books of the Old Testament. But people close their eyes to his words.
For they are like a mother bear caring for her cubs. Protective - even to the point of irrationality.
The New Testament says the Jew-de-izers gave Paul the apostle a hard time. But there is no book about the Judaizers that i know of, giving their side, their p.o.v.
I am sure they saw themselves as good God-fearing folks. They were still wrong - for HOLDING ONTO THE TORAH TOO TIGHTLY. You are a "holder" also, i find (??)
You say, "the Bible is truth." That is a common misconception. For the New Testament separates itself from "the Law of Moses."
For it says "the Law was given by Moses, BUT..Truth came by Jesus Christ" (John 1.17). Here we see that John the Apostle is making an effort to put down the Law of Moses, first 5 books of the Old Testament. But people close their eyes to his words.
For they are like a mother bear caring for her cubs. Protective - even to the point of irrationality.
The New Testament says the Jew-de-izers gave Paul the apostle a hard time. But there is no book about the Judaizers that i know of, giving their side, their p.o.v.
I am sure they saw themselves as good God-fearing folks. They were still wrong - for HOLDING ONTO THE TORAH TOO TIGHTLY. You are a "holder" also, i find (??)
29th Jan 2018 6:38pm
The Bible is truth. The Old Testament and The New Testament are interconnected. The Old Testament, The Mosaic Law had and still has a true purpose. Before the sacrifice of Christ for the redemption of all sins, it provided a way to atone for one's sins through offerings and sacrifices. Before the Church of Jesus Christ was established, it provided a way for community worship and a plan for spiritual health. It also reveals the holy character of God, it reveals the sinfulness of humans. “So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. And because you belong to him, the power of the life-giving Spirit has freed you from the power of sin that leads to death. The law of Moses was unable to save us because of the weakness of our sinful nature. So God did what the law could not do. He sent his own Son in a body like the bodies we sinners have. And in that body God declared an end to sin’s control over us by giving his Son as a sacrifice for our sins. He did this so that the just requirement of the law would be fully satisfied for us, who no longer follow our sinful nature but instead follow the Spirit.” -Romans 8:1-4 NLT
21st Sep 2018 1:20pm
You completely miss the point i am making.Namely that Acts 15.19 is there for our INSTRUCTION.We are to learn from it, imitate it. When parts of the Torah become stumbling blocks, we are DUTY-BOUND to do what the early Church Fathers did - put evangelism ABOVE a slave-like veneration of the Bible - that borders on idolatry. And so we are to put the literal interp aside. We don't dump the Bible, we just view it differently. Why can't you Bible adoring fundies see that??
How can you preach a literal 6 days creation week when you know it turns people's stomachs !!! Preaching a nonliteral Creation Week where days stand for eons and the events fit the Big Bang and its aftermath does NO HARM to Genesis.But the added benefit of more successful evangelism is the main advantage to this approach.
How can you preach a literal 6 days creation week when you know it turns people's stomachs !!! Preaching a nonliteral Creation Week where days stand for eons and the events fit the Big Bang and its aftermath does NO HARM to Genesis.But the added benefit of more successful evangelism is the main advantage to this approach.
