"youve got mail"

[RedTent]

and see we could speculate as to why they chose to leave it or many other things out of the letter to the gentiles,but whether we agree with it or not in the letter it says "it seemed good both to the Holy Ghost and to us" so who are we do argue with the Holy ghost or the apostles,elders and brethren? I think that we are so accustomed to debating in every other thread that we assume we are to in every thread,,as for me I cannot add to or take away from what was written in the letter.

A lot of what went on at that time IS taken away, so only a portion of what is taught is taught here, and that distorts all. You need to know the problem that there was at the time. This is like not knowing anything about the circumstances Martin Luther King was addressing and living in, just quoting some of what he said.

This was in a world where there were many Christians, most of them Torah Observant Jews. Diet, circumcision, the bathing, the whole shebang, and fully children of the king, they had taken Christ as their savior. They lived peacefully with those Jews who didn't accept Christ, went to the same synagogue. The gentile Christians who didn't want to do the physical things they did were in the minority. And the Observant Christians didn't want the non observant gentile Christians in their synagogue to learn of the true God. Read the entire story!!

Paul wanted them in the synagogue and wanted them there without having to do the diet or cutting of flesh.

The Jews took Paul to court (read the book of Acts!!!) and convicted him of teaching against Moses by teaching this, it was a death penalty. The Christian court led by James the Great, brother of Christ, ruled that Paul wasn't teaching against Moses (men today still say he does) but going to synagogue was so important that gentiles better do enough to get them accepted there, Moses was taught there.

You have posted what they were to do to get to synagogue, but you are leaving out all the other parts of the story, even the verse just following what they were to do to get there. It makes the message of those verses all distorted.

 

[john832]

Actually if you want you can disregard everything in the Old Covenant unless its reiterated in the new. So if its not restated rest easy!

Hmmm, this is not restated...

Lev 18:23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.

 

[iamsoandso]

A lot of what went on at that time IS taken away, so only a portion of what is taught is taught here, and that distorts all. You need to know the problem that there was at the time. This is like not knowing anything about the circumstances Martin Luther King was addressing and living in, just quoting some of what he said.

This was in a world where there were many Christians, most of them Torah Observant Jews. Diet, circumcision, the bathing, the whole shebang, and fully children of the king, they had taken Christ as their savior. They lived peacefully with those Jews who didn't accept Christ, went to the same synagogue. The gentile Christians who didn't want to do the physical things they did were in the minority. And the Observant Christians didn't want the non observant gentile Christians in their synagogue to learn of the true God. Read the entire story!!

Paul wanted them in the synagogue and wanted them there without having to do the diet or cutting of flesh.

The Jews took Paul to court (read the book of Acts!!!) and convicted him of teaching against Moses by teaching this, it was a death penalty. The Christian court led by James the Great, brother of Christ, ruled that Paul wasn't teaching against Moses (men today still say he does) but going to synagogue was so important that gentiles better do enough to get them accepted there, Moses was taught there.

You have posted what they were to do to get to synagogue, but you are leaving out all the other parts of the story, even the verse just following what they were to do to get there. It makes the message of those verses all distorted.

the letter in the O.P. was written (long before) Galatians,Ephesians,Corinthians,Romans,ect.(following the chronological order in acts) it was given just before the parting of Barnabas and Paul(over mark),,then Luke was converted and traveled along with Paul. So all of the things mentioned in the letters of Paul were written after the letter of the gentiles by the apostles,elders,brethren.

 

[RedTent]

the letter in the O.P. was written (long before) Galatians,Ephesians,Corinthians,Romans,ect.(following the chronological order in acts) it was given just before the parting of Barnabas and Paul(over mark),,then Luke was converted and traveled along with Paul. So all of the things mentioned in the letters of Paul were written after the letter of the gentiles by the apostles,elders,brethren.

Are you saying that the timing of this letter, speaking of the same things we are told all about in Acts, is not directly related to what we are told of what was going on at the time? I don't think that can be. I think what we are told in Acts about the same problem, and the root of what was done about it in Acts is necessary to understand the OP scriptures.

 

[chubbena]

which epistle/letter do you think was written first the letter from the apostles,elders and brethren or the others?

Is this an IQ test? This is possibly the very first letter written before any epistle recorded in the "NT" was distributed. Thus my earlier question - where would this letter be read? What do you think?

Note: guess I was away for way too long and the epistles are discussed...

 

[iamsoandso]

Are you saying that the timing of this letter, speaking of the same things we are told all about in Acts, is not directly related to what we are told of what was going on at the time? I don't think that can be. I think what we are told in Acts about the same problem, and the root of what was done about it in Acts is necessary to understand the OP scriptures.

the books Luke wrote to Theophilus(gospel and acts) begin with the birth of John the baptist and Jesus(or at least 9 months before) and cover a span of history from about ad1(debate over the birth of Christ I know) but at the end of acts Paul is living in his own hired house in peace(acts 28;30-31). So then if he was killed in (ad67?) this is some years before that(but how many?) so then if he died in ad67 and we subtract the years he was in captivity in Rome (this is the first link I came across,but somewhere between ad59-63) is where acts ends?,,, Historical Background To Paul's Prison Epistles

 

[iamsoandso]

Is this an IQ test? This is possibly the very first letter written before any epistle recorded in the "NT" was distributed. Thus my earlier question - where would this letter be read? What do you think?

Note: guess I was away for way too long and the epistles are discussed...

yes thats my point I think it is probably the first of the letters written,,unless we count Matthew it could have been already written,,,

 

[chubbena]

this all that the letter said,the thing we are compelled to do is think that it it should end,,,,"well but,,ect." but it doesn't and then we have to see that Luke who traveled with Paul is who Quoted it to Theophilus so seeing Paul taught Luke Paul also then agreed with it's content.

Would the content of this letter contradict to what Paul believed and wrote?

 

[RedTent]

Actually if you want you can disregard everything in the Old Covenant unless its reiterated in the new. So if its not restated rest easy!

A covenant is a legal document with the Lord. So you are saying that a legal document such as one we make on earth and can't be disregarded, can be disregarded if it is with the Lord? That would make trusting in the Lord quite frightening.

 

[iamsoandso]

Is this an IQ test? This is possibly the very first letter written before any epistle recorded in the "NT" was distributed. Thus my earlier question - where would this letter be read? What do you think?

Note: guess I was away for way too long and the epistles are discussed...

and I missed the 2nd part "where" It was written to Antioch,Syria,and Cilicia so Antioch,all the region of modern day Syria,and all of modern day Turkey.

 

[chubbena]

yes thats my point I think it is probably the first of the letters written,,unless we count Matthew it could have been already written,,,

...and I think there's a good reason why it's not collected in the "NT" epistles.

 

[chubbena]

and I missed the 2nd part "where" It was written to Antioch,Syria,and Cilicia so Antioch,all the region of modern day Syria,and all of modern day Turkey.

No I mean where in those cities. At home? At church? Or what I think is at the synagogues on the Sabbaths?

 

[chubbena]

the books Luke wrote to Theophilus(gospel and acts) begin with the birth of John the baptist and Jesus(or at least 9 months before) and cover a span of history from about ad1(debate over the birth of Christ I know) but at the end of acts Paul is living in his own hired house in peace(acts 28;30-31). So then if he was killed in (ad67?) this is some years before that(but how many?) so then if he died in ad67 and we subtract the years he was in captivity in Rome (this is the first link I came across,but somewhere between ad59-63) is where acts ends?,,, Historical Background To Paul's Prison Epistles

You are driving me nuts! (read interesting)
Please elaborate.

 

[iamsoandso]

Would the content of this letter contradict to what Paul believed and wrote?

and you see I am Hebrew by blood so I look at this letter maybe from a different angle than others,,and again there is neither Jew nor Gentile. I have always been Christian by faith,but as you can see as the debates continue i would see it sitting in one chair and looking at the other and considering if i should get up and sit in the other. This letter was written to the Gentiles,,,not the Jew.

 

[RedTent]

the books Luke wrote to Theophilus(gospel and acts) begin with the birth of John the baptist and Jesus(or at least 9 months before) and cover a span of history from about ad1(debate over the birth of Christ I know) but at the end of acts Paul is living in his own hired house in peace(acts 28;30-31). So then if he was killed in (ad67?) this is some years before that(but how many?) so then if he died in ad67 and we subtract the years he was in captivity in Rome (this is the first link I came across,but somewhere between ad59-63) is where acts ends?,,, Historical Background To Paul's Prison Epistles

I don't understand your point, I am sorry. Paul was condemned to death but was acquitted early in his career, I understood he lived on and died in Rome in 68AD. I also don't understand how the timing of these happenings affect the bible truths the happenings are pointing out.

 

[iamsoandso]

No I mean where in those cities. At home? At church? Or what I think is at the synagogues on the Sabbaths?

How many synagogs were left standing by the Romans after the revolts(66ad-135)?,,,And why would a Jew(who denied Christ) let them read that letter aloud in their Gods synagog? At some point we need remember that they(the Jews) said to Christ he was "Beelzebub"(lord that flits,meaning the devil),,and so hence his apostles being the angels who fell who followed satin(why would they let this letter be read aloud in their synagog)?,,,

 

[RedTent]

and you see I am Hebrew by blood so I look at this letter maybe from a different angle than others,,and again there is neither Jew nor Gentile. I have always been Christian by faith,but as you can see as the debates continue i would see it sitting in one chair and looking at the other and considering if i should get up and sit in the other. This letter was written to the Gentiles,,,not the Jew.

I am bewildered by your viewpoint. The letter made a difference that it was gentiles and Jews only because of what the Jews were teaching, not naming them as Jews for any other reason.

As a Jew, you are given special blessings by the Lord because your race is picked to lead us, as a Christian you are given Christ and all Christ can mean to you. I shouldn't think being Jewish would lead you to think of scripture any different from the gentile. God gives the same message to us all. How does it make it different?

 

[chubbena]

and you see I am Hebrew by blood so I look at this letter maybe from a different angle than others,,and again there is neither Jew nor Gentile. I have always been Christian by faith,but as you can see as the debates continue i would see it sitting in one chair and looking at the other and considering if i should get up and sit in the other. This letter was written to the Gentiles,,,not the Jew.

It's very interesting to know (in a positive way of course)!
But this letter was indeed written for Jews who also believed Christ - so they would not force circumcision on the gentiles.

 

[iamsoandso]

I am bewildered by your viewpoint. The letter made a difference that it was gentiles and Jews only because of what the Jews were teaching, not naming them as Jews for any other reason.

As a Jew, you are given special blessings by the Lord because your race is picked to lead us, as a Christian you are given Christ and all Christ can mean to you. I shouldn't think being Jewish would lead you to think of scripture any different from the gentile. God gives the same message to us all. How does it make it different?

which is my point,my skin has nothing to do with it,being circumcised in the heart you are no less Jew than I.

 

[chubbena]

How many synagogs were left standing by the Romans after the revolts(66ad-135)?,,,And why would a Jew(who denied Christ) let them read that letter aloud in their Gods synagog? At some point we need remember that they(the Jews) said to Christ he was "Beelzebub"(lord that flits,meaning the devil),,and so hence his apostles being the angels who fell who followed satin(why would they let this letter be read aloud in their synagog)?,,,

This letter was passed on from city to city amongst Christians in earlier times wasn't it?
The faith was considered a sect in the Jewish religion at the beginning like Paul said in his defend before Felix in Acts 24, wasn't it?
Synagogues were like CC here which all Jews (and believing gentiles) would go and debate on religious matters, weren't they?