Judaisers

[Admin]

lm

[Admin]

JUDAIZERS

<< Galatians [Paul's Letter]>>

<< w14 9/15 p. 3 [Patience] >>

Epiphanius: "They [the Ebionites] declare that he [Paul] was a Greek . .. He went up to Jerusalem, they say, and when he had spent some time there, he was seized with a passion to marry the daughter of the High Priest. For this reason he became a proselyte and was circumcised. Then, when he failed to get the girl, he flew into a rage and wrote against circumcision and against the Sabbath and the Torah" - Epiphanius, Panarion, 30.16.6-9.

Irenaeus wrote of the Ebonites and the Gospel of the Ebionite but he did NOT included it in his catalogue of inspired writings. In his book against Heresies wrote the following:

2. Irenaeus: Those who are called Ebionites agree that the world was made by God; but their opinions with respect to the Lord are similar to those of Cerinthus and Carpocrates. They use the Gospel according to Matthew only, and repudiate the Apostle Paul, maintaining that he was an apostate from the law. As to the prophetical writings, they endeavour to expound them in a somewhat singular manner: they practise circumcision, persevere in the observance of those customs which are enjoined by the law, and are so Judaic in their style of life, that they even adore Jerusalem as if it were the house of God." - Ireneus, Against Heresies (Book I, Chapter 26)

The above echos Epiphanius who pointed out

Epiphanius "In the Gospel they have, called according to Matthew, but not wholly complete, [is]falsified and mutilated..." - Epiphanius, Panarion 30.13.2

Since the Ebionitian views radically diverged* from reliable first source and were condemned (or at the very least NOT included in the biblical canon) by early "church fathers" and referred to as corrupt by the very source of its content, what solid reason do we have for accepting it as accurate?


<< Did Jesus intend his followers to break away from the JEWISH religious system?
www.getphpbb.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=1757&mforum=jw#1757

INDEX: Paul's writings

[Admin]

llmkm

[Admin]

ANTI-PAUL OBJECTIONS

ACTS portrays Paul as maintaining absolute devotion to Torah**

This is inaccurate, Acts does nothing of the kind.

At no point does Paul express (quote) "absolute devotion to the Torah" (unquote). His ministry in Acts reflected a respect for the law of his Nation while preaching that following of the Mosaic law was not a requirement for ALL Christians. When he saw fit and when it would further his freedom to preach the good news, he observed laws and customs and (as in the case of his submitting to the instruction of the Jerusalem council) did so publically to avoid controversy. None of this represented "absolute devotion" and any freedom he allowed himself whether expressed in Acts or in personally in Galatians, do not represent a "contradition" to the above

ACTS 28:17
Acts reports that Paul "had done nothing contrary to the people or the customs of our forefathers"

Does the above statement represent Pauls "absolute devotion to the Torah"?

Not associating was gentiles was NOT a part of the Mosaic law and was not a 'custom of [their] forefathers' the early Hebrew Patriachs, it was a Rabbonic tradition and one neither Paul nor Peter were legally under obligation to observe (Gal 2:11-14).

ACTS CHAP 21, 22
The Ephesian riots as reported had nothing to do with Paul actually breaking any of the Mosaic laws, the account clearly shows it the troubles stemmed from false rumours started by those that were financially motivated because of a percieved threat to their commercial interests.

CONCLUSION Any claim that "These accounts are clearly contradictory" have not been substantiated by the passages provided. Having NOT established in the passages presented in Acts any suggestion of "absolute devotion to the Torah" the interpretation of 1 Corinthians 9:21 as a supposed contradiction to this, would constitute a response to what is essentially "a strawman argument".

<< [Letter to the Galatians ] >>

INDEX: Paul's writings