Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So, how do you think that he endorsed Paul’s mission to the Gentiles, when it was clearly Peter who it says was chosen by the Holy Spirit that “by my mouth shall the nations hear the gospel and believe”....
Hang on.... Well, I won't post it all here but anyone can read it in Acts 15. And the answer is that it isn't made clear. As you say, Peter says that God chose him to take the gospel to the nations. Thus it looks like he had the mission to the gentiles. But he goes on to support Paul, and James rules that they shouldn't bother the gentiles and should allow Paul to carry on with a few minor rules (James' letter).
The matter isn't gone into in detail, but Peter pretty much drops out of it and it is Paul who actually carries on the mission to the gentiles. So Acts doesn't explain how the mission got transferred, it simply ignores the matter.
The way it looks to me is that Luke is following Paul's letters. Paul carries on his own mission, is called to Rome where he is allowed to missionise the gentiles (with that letter with a few rules), and Peter (aside from being lectured by Paul) has nothing to do with it. If he had delings with the gentiles it was those in the Middle east and there is no indication that he has a mission to the gentiles outside of Antioch. That was entirely Paul's idea and there was no question of transferring the mission to Paul - Peter has no actual mission to any gentiles that you needed a boat to reach.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 03-11-2019 at 04:16 PM..
In Matt's place I'd rather have picked up on 'Well, there's also proof'. Because that is really what the caller means by Faith. Believing something that is validated by evidence. The evidence is not actually good evidence, but they believe that it is. True, if the evidence is shown to be unsound or invalid, they may revert to Faith, but what they really mean is that the evidence is valid no matter how invalid it is shown to be.
I have not come across a believer who did not try to justify their beliefs with Evidence of some kind and used faith to assert that their view of the evidence was the correct one, no matter what Science (and this is the problem religion has with science - as exemplified in Raff's Law) can demonstrate.
Hang on.... Well, I won't post it all here but anyone can read it in Acts 15. And the answer is that it isn't made clear. As you say, Peter says that God chose him to take the gospel to the nations. Thus it looks like he had the mission to the gentiles. But he goes on to support Paul, and James rules that they shouldn't bother the gentiles and should allow Paul to carry on with a few minor rules (James' letter).
The matter isn't gone into in detail, but Peter pretty much drops out of it and it is Paul who actually carries on the mission to the gentiles. So Acts doesn't explain how the mission got transferred, it simply ignores the matter.
The way it looks to me is that Luke is following Paul's letters. Paul carries on his own mission, is called to Rome where he is allowed to missionise the gentiles (with that letter with a few rules), and Peter (aside from being lectured by Paul) has nothing to do with it. If he had delings with the gentiles it was those in the Middle east and there is no indication that he has a mission to the gentiles outside of Antioch. That was entirely Paul's idea and there was no question of transferring the mission to Paul - Peter has no actual mission to any gentiles that you needed a boat to reach.
From reading the Jerusalem account, I see Paul as a minuscule evangelist that, along with Barnabas, needed two more mature elders of the church in Jerusalem to escort them to Antioch with the letter that essentially says that the gentile need not convert to Judaism to become a member of the Christian movement and lists the rules they should abide by, which seem to be the Nochide Laws, then all of a sudden Paul seems to be this hugely well known Apostle to the Gentiles...Could it be that Paul proclaimed himself the Apostle to the Gentiles?...Making himself the 13th Apostle?...How does he go from being an evangelist to an Apostle?...It doesn’t look like anyone at the council revered him as such, I mean, this guy supposedly had an experience and saw and spoke with Jesus, You’d think that that would be a big thing talked about at this council, but not a mention of it...
In Matt's place I'd rather have picked up on 'Well, there's also proof'. Because that is really what the caller means by Faith. Believing something that is validated by evidence. The evidence is not actually good evidence, but they believe that it is. True, if the evidence is shown to be unsound or invalid, they may revert to Faith, but what they really mean is that the evidence is valid no matter how invalid it is shown to be.
I have not come across a believer who did not try to justify their beliefs with Evidence of some kind and used faith to assert that their view of the evidence was the correct one, no matter what Science (and this is the problem religion has with science - as exemplified in Raff's Law) can demonstrate.
Did you see the video with the caller “aggressive Christian” Jerikia?...He didn’t even know his bible as well as those guys did, and they were atheists...The guy embarrassed himself and his religion...He brought up prophecy of Isaiah 53 and the Isaiah 53 of the Christian OT is not the same Isaiah 53 of the Tanakh...Then hectried to claim his god to be the true god because of his faith to which the hosts said is like a coin toss...
From reading the Jerusalem account, I see Paul as a minuscule evangelist that, along with Barnabas, needed two more mature elders of the church in Jerusalem to escort them to Antioch with the letter that essentially says that the gentile need not convert to Judaism to become a member of the Christian movement and lists the rules they should abide by, which seem to be the Nochide Laws, then all of a sudden Paul seems to be this hugely well known Apostle to the Gentiles...Could it be that Paul proclaimed himself the Apostle to the Gentiles?...Making himself the 13th Apostle?...How does he go from being an evangelist to an Apostle?...It doesn’t look like anyone at the council revered him as such, I mean, this guy supposedly had an experience and saw and spoke with Jesus, You’d think that that would be a big thing talked about at this council, but not a mention of it...
Yes. I've heard (maybe from you) this idea that Peter was the contact with 'associate Jews' who were obliged only a smaller number of Rules. It would explain a difference in the two missions. Paul's view was that his 'Gospel' meant that Gentiles could be as 'saved' as Jews were without having to follow any Mosaic laws at all., Indeed, for them, the Law was best avoided.
And, certainly Paul proclaimed himself 'apostle to the gentiles' and indeed to Jews, because he saw his Gospel as applying to the Jews as well. And, as you say Paul (and Barnabas) relatee the 'signs and wonders' amongst the gentiles, and no mention of Paul's visions.
That's in Acts. Paul himself only refers in Corinthians 1 and 2 to a vision of Jesus and (IICor) a chat where Jesus instructs paul in his gospel - for all that Paul argues it all out in Romans and never once claims that it's a gospel handed down by Jesus.
Paul in Galatians 8 says that (in the context of the 'Council' he had been entrusted with the mission to the Gentiles as Peter had been entrusted with the mission to the 'circumcised', which hardly reflects the Gospel teaching that Jesus had told the apostles to teach the gospel to all nations. That would suggest that Paul's letters weren't known at that time and it was assumed that the gospel had been carried to to other nations by the apostles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965
Did you see the video with the caller “aggressive Christian” Jerikia?...He didn’t even know his bible as well as those guys did, and they were atheists...The guy embarrassed himself and his religion...He brought up prophecy of Isaiah 53 and the Isaiah 53 of the Christian OT is not the same Isaiah 53 of the Tanakh...Then he tried to claim his god to be the true god because of his faith to which the hosts said is like a coin toss...
Yes. That's sounds familiar. remarkably the callers tend to come to bits quickly on the Bible (which Matt knows backwards) and revert to 'Faith'. Which as they say is not a valid way of telling what's right and what's wrong. It's only a way of maintaining belief without decent evidence. Or in spite of it.
The tougher callers are the ones who try to use 'Philosophy' to make their case. Which is why mat genned himself up on philosophy, so that he could (as he does) show where they are wrong.
If Christianity is true, why do Christians tell so many lies to keep it afloat?
You do realize that just saying something doesn't make it true, right? Opinions are not facts. Times change, but truth does not.
My comment here isn't intended as hateful, argumentative, to debate or anything other than actually answering your question truthfully.
If Christianity wasn't true, why does it bother so many atheists and other non-believers so much? (These folks flood the Christianity forum daily.) Why do they get so angry and rage? Why do they sue people in other states that they don't even live in to have crosses, bibles, scriptures, memorials, businesses, etc., removed or shut down? If it's not true, then there's nothing to worry about. Right?
And why do they deny the evidence when presented to them? Christianity has been evidenced time and time again through science, documented history, archeology, nature and more. Why do so many angry non-believers lie about that?
I'll answer the question for you: Because they know it's true and they resent it. They're rebelling against the authority of God and being accountable to Him for their actions. They want the freedom to live however they want to without any consequences whatsoever. Plain and simple, and biblically, it's pride and rebellion - the original sins of Satan.
You do realize that just saying something doesn't make it true, right? Opinions are not facts. Times change, but truth does not.
My comment here isn't intended as hateful, argumentative, to debate or anything other than actually answering your question truthfully.
If Christianity wasn't true, why does it bother so many atheists and other non-believers so much? (These folks flood the Christianity forum daily.) Why do they get so angry and rage? Why do they sue people in other states that they don't even live in to have crosses, bibles, scriptures, memorials, businesses, etc., removed or shut down? If it's not true, then there's nothing to worry about. Right?
And why do they deny the evidence when presented to them? Christianity has been evidenced time and time again through science, documented history, archeology, nature and more. Why do so many angry non-believers lie about that?
I'll answer the question for you: Because they know it's true and they resent it. They're rebelling against the authority of God and being accountable to Him for their actions. They want the freedom to live however they want to without any consequences whatsoever. Plain and simple, and biblically, it's pride and rebellion - the original sins of Satan.
I hope you hang around but am quite certain you will not.
You do realize that just saying something doesn't make it true, right? Opinions are not facts. Times change, but truth does not.
My comment here isn't intended as hateful, argumentative, to debate or anything other than actually answering your question truthfully.
If Christianity wasn't true, why does it bother so many atheists and other non-believers so much? (These folks flood the Christianity forum daily.) Why do they get so angry and rage? Why do they sue people in other states that they don't even live in to have crosses, bibles, scriptures, memorials, businesses, etc., removed or shut down? If it's not true, then there's nothing to worry about. Right?
And why do they deny the evidence when presented to them? Christianity has been evidenced time and time again through science, documented history, archeology, nature and more. Why do so many angry non-believers lie about that?
I'll answer the question for you: Because they know it's true and they resent it. They're rebelling against the authority of God and being accountable to Him for their actions. They want the freedom to live however they want to without any consequences whatsoever. Plain and simple, and biblically, it's pride and rebellion - the original sins of Satan.
You do realize that just saying something doesn't make it true, right? Opinions are not facts. Times change, but truth does not.
My comment here isn't intended as hateful, argumentative, to debate or anything other than actually answering your question truthfully.
If Christianity wasn't true, why does it bother so many atheists and other non-believers so much? (These folks flood the Christianity forum daily.) Why do they get so angry and rage? Why do they sue people in other states that they don't even live in to have crosses, bibles, scriptures, memorials, businesses, etc., removed or shut down? If it's not true, then there's nothing to worry about. Right?
And why do they deny the evidence when presented to them? Christianity has been evidenced time and time again through science, documented history, archeology, nature and more. Why do so many angry non-believers lie about that?
I'll answer the question for you: Because they know it's true and they resent it. They're rebelling against the authority of God and being accountable to Him for their actions. They want the freedom to live however they want to without any consequences whatsoever. Plain and simple, and biblically, it's pride and rebellion - the original sins of Satan.
They flood it because they desire something from humans, not any God(s).
You do realize that just saying something doesn't make it true, right? Opinions are not facts. Times change, but truth does not.
My comment here isn't intended as hateful, argumentative, to debate or anything other than actually answering your question truthfully.
If Christianity wasn't true, why does it bother so many atheists and other non-believers so much? (These folks flood the Christianity forum daily.) Why do they get so angry and rage? Why do they sue people in other states that they don't even live in to have crosses, bibles, scriptures, memorials, businesses, etc., removed or shut down? If it's not true, then there's nothing to worry about. Right?
And why do they deny the evidence when presented to them? Christianity has been evidenced time and time again through science, documented history, archeology, nature and more. Why do so many angry non-believers lie about that?
I'll answer the question for you: Because they know it's true and they resent it. They're rebelling against the authority of God and being accountable to Him for their actions. They want the freedom to live however they want to without any consequences whatsoever. Plain and simple, and biblically, it's pride and rebellion - the original sins of Satan.
Go for it Raffs. I'll leave him to you. Or a Shirina would do very well here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gabfest
They flood it because they desire something from humans, not any God(s).
Do we 'flood' Christianity Forum? I haven't been there in ages.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutDude
I hope you hang around but am quite certain you will not.
I hope he hangs around long enough to start a discussion of 'Why atheists do not accept the evidence for Christianity'. We haven't had a discussion like that for a while. It's all been 'philosophical reasons why nobody can trust scientifically validated evidence' and 'various reasons why we would love atheists to shut up and go away'.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 03-12-2019 at 09:29 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Opinions are not facts. Times change, but truth does not.
Go for it Raffs. I'll leave him to you. Or a Shirina would do very well here.
