DOCSLIB.ORG

CHURCH HISTORY for DUMMIES Class #6: the Apostolic Fathers- Part 3

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CHURCH HISTORY for DUMMIES Class #6: the Apostolic Fathers- Part 3 CHURCH HISTORY for DUMMIES Class #6: The Apostolic Fathers- Part 3 The Ebionite Heresy I need to clarify and correct something before we begin. Last week, a question was asked about the Ebionites and their relationship to the Docetists. I answered that they were sometimes used interchangeably. I misspoke. The Ebionites are sometimes linked with the Judaizers, not the Docetists. So who were the Ebionites? They were a heretical group of Jewish people who were very much like the Judaizers, which is why they are often linked with them. It is speculated that the Ebionites arose in the first century, likely coming to prominence after the destruction of Jerusalem 7O A.D. but by the middle of the 400’s they were virtually extinct. Most of what we know of them comes from the writings of the early church fathers, the first being, Irenaeus. He was the first to use the term “Ebionites” in print, around 190 A.D. Their name most likely comes from the Hebrew word for “poor.” Hippolytus and Origen would both later refute them in their writings. The Ebionites viewed Jesus as a prophet but they denied His preexistence and therefore denied that He was God. The Ebionites denied the deity of Jesus. They were all for the humanity of Jesus, but not his deity. Eusebius, the first church historian, writing in 325 A.D. described the Ebionite heresy this way: “The adherents of what is known as the Ebionite heresy assert that Christ was the son of Joseph and Mary, and regard him as no more than a man.” They viewed Jesus as just a man. But they did believe that He kept the law perfectly, so they stressed obedience to the law in order to attain salvation. They also insisted on circumcision as a pre-requisite to salvation. So you can see why many believe that they were just another branch of the Judaizers. Anyway, I wanted to clarify that. And now you have one more heretical group to add to your files of heretics! Tonight we will finish up with the Apostolic Fathers. We’ll start with the Epistle of Barnabas. The Epistle of Barnabas (A.D. 130) The Epistle of Barnabas was written around 130 A.D. possibly even as late as 150. Again, sometimes these dates are speculation. The Epistle of Barnabas was originally given its title because some people thought that it was written by Paul’s friend, Barnabas, who we read about in the book of Acts. It soon became known that this letter was not written by that Barnabas, but the name stuck because, well, that’s how church history works. So they just couldn’t seem to shake the title The Epistle of Barnabas, even though it wasn’t written by anyone named Barnabas. You see, that’s just how history works. You can’t control what people say after you are dead. That’s just life, so get over it. In this letter, Barnabas is writing to Christians and reminding them of Christian virtues. He reminds them that there are 2 ways to live, what he calls: “the Way of Light” and “the Way of the Black One.” Here’s a sample: THE Way of Light is this: if any man desire to journey to the appointed place, let him be zealous in his works. Therefore the knowledge given to us of this kind that we may walk in it is as follows:— 2 Thou shalt love thy maker, thou shalt fear thy Creator, thou shalt glorify Him who redeemed thee from death, thou shalt be simple in heart, and rich in spirit; thou shalt not join thyself to those who walk in the way of death, thou shalt hate all that is not pleasing to God, thou shalt hate all hypocrisy; thou shalt not desert the commandments of the Lord.1 BUT the Way of the Black One is crooked and full of cursing, for it is the way of death eternal with punishment, and in it are the things that destroy their soul: idolatry, frowardness, arrogance of power, hypocrisy, double-heartedness, adultery, murder, robbery, pride…2 1 Clement I, P., Ignatius, S., Bishop of Antioch, Polycarp, S., Bishop of Smyrna, & Lake, K. (1912–1913). The Apostolic fathers. (K. Lake, Ed.) (Vol. 1, pp. 401–403). Cambridge MA; London: Harvard University Press. 2 Clement I, P., Ignatius, S., Bishop of Antioch, Polycarp, S., Bishop of Smyrna, & Lake, K. (1912–1913). The Apostolic fathers. (K. Lake, Ed.) (Vol. 1, p. 407). Cambridge MA; London: Harvard University Press. He goes on to list more of the Way of the Black One. But the important thing about The Epistle of Barnabas is this: It gives us an idea of how early Christians dealt with the “problem” of the Old Testament. That may sound strange to you, that the Old Testament was a problem, but imagine if the only copy of the Scriptures you had was the Old Testament. For the average Christian back then, you didn’t have a copy of any of the Gospels or Romans or Galatians or Hebrews or Philippians. All that you had to read during your quiet time as you drank your coffee was the Old Testament. This is how it was for believers in the 2nd century and even on up into the 3rd century. So as a pastor, as a Sunday school teacher, you are preaching to and teaching a Christian congregation, a Christian church with the Old Testament. So the problem was: How do you preach Jesus from the Old Testament? What are you going to say about Jesus and about following Jesus as a disciple out of the Old Testament? Sure, you could talk about how Israel roamed the wilderness for 40 years, but what are you going to say about Jesus? Sure, you can talk about Solomon’s Temple, but what are you going to say about Jesus of Nazareth? What are you going to say about Christ and Christianity without the help of Ephesians or the Gospel of John or Hebrews? What are you going to say about Jesus from the prophet Ezekiel? What are you going to tell your church about Jesus from 2nd Chronicles… or even the Song of Solomon? This is what pastors and teachers faced in the 2nd century. So The Epistle of Barnabas is an example how Christians dealt with the very Jewish Old Testament. Christians in the second century were dealing with the problem of how you communicate truth to Christians while using a very Jewish text. They read all the stories of the Old Testament, the poetry, the laws, etc and there they found Jesus. So what’s so wrong with that? We want to do that, right? We want to preach Jesus from the Old Testament, right? This is in line with Article 1 of Dallas Seminary’s doctrinal statement, where I attended seminary, which says this: We believe that all the Scriptures center about the Lord Jesus Christ in His person and work in His first and second coming, and hence that no portion, even of the Old Testament, is properly read, or understood, until it leads to Him. No portion of the Old Testament is properly read or understood until it leads to Jesus. So at the very foundation of Christianity is this understanding: the Old Testament is actually not a Jewish text, but a Christian text. Think about that. The Old Testament was written for the edification of Christians. Let me say that again: The Old Testament was written for the edification of Christians. Now, where do I get that? 1 Corinthians 10:6–11 Now these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did. Do not be idolaters as some of them were; as it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play.” We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day. We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did and were destroyed by serpents, nor grumble, as some of them did and were destroyed by the Destroyer. Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come. The Old Testament was written for Christians. The Old Testament was written for you. As Paul tells the Roman church in Romans 15- For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope. So, the Old Testament was actually written for Christians. And this is Barnabas’ understanding when he writes his letter. He writes this very long letter explaining how the Jewish Scriptures are full of Christianity. Barnabas is teaching the 2nd century church that they need to keep the Old Testament because the Old Testament is distinctively Christian. So how did Barnabas teach the Old Testament? Barnabas used the allegorical method of interpretation. Allegorical Interpretation The Epistle of Barnabas gives us insight into the “allegorical” method of Old Testament interpretation. What is the allegorical method of interpretation? It’s a method of interpreting the Bible that says that truth is communicated through a symbolic understanding of a passage’s literal meaning. For example, in the book of Ruth, it tells us of the custom of removing your sandal and giving it to another person when there was a transaction of land or redeeming someone or something: Ruth 4:7 Now this was the custom in former times in Israel concerning redeeming and exchanging: to confirm a transaction, the one drew off his sandal and gave it to the other, and this was the manner of attesting in Israel.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • God-Fearers: a Solution to the Ancient Problem of the Identity of the Sabians
    God-Fearers: A Solution to the Ancient Problem of the Identity of the Sabians (Times New Roman version) Contents: Premise (pp.1-3) – 1) The Etymological Model (pp.3-6) – 2) The Origins of the Name (pp.6-7) – 3) The Hebrew Root SHUBH (pp.8-9) – 4) Conversion (pp.9-10) – 5) Pagan Monotheism (p.11) – 6) The “Pious” Roman Emperors (pp.11-13) – 7)The Cult of the Most-High God. Titles and Onomastics (pp.13-15) – 8) Eusèbeia and Gnòsis (pp.15-16) – 9) Vincentius’ Tomb (16-18) – 10) Tertium Genus (pp.18-22) – 11) Sabians = “Adherents of the Prevailing Religion” (pp.22-23) – 12) Hypsistarii, Sebòmenoi/Phoboùmenoi tòn Theòn, Metuentes, Theosebèis, Massaliani, Sabbàtistai, Caelicolae, Hunafà’ (pp.23-26) – 13) The Sabians according to Earlier Islamic Sources (pp.26-29) – 14) The First Latin Translation of the Kuràn: Sabians = Christians? (pp.29-32) – 15) Harrànians’ Cult of the Most-High God (pp.32-36) – 16) A Strictly Etymological Proposal (pp.36- 38) – Conclusions (pp.38-41) – List of Abbreviations (pp.43-45) – Notes nrs.1-342 (pp.47-92). Premise The aim of the present work is to shed some light on a long-standing mistery, the identity of the Sabians. Five years ago, indeed, we published a short study just on the same subject 1 where we presented a theory that nobody else had ever advanced: the substantial equivalence of the Sabians with the loose religious group of the God- Fearers 2 (or, even better, God-Worshippers, i.e. devotees of the Most-High God 3), whose importance and wide 4 diffusion geographically and chronologically is now accepted 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Rereading Paul on Circumcision, Torah, and the Gentiles Asha K
    A Seal of Faith: Rereading Paul on Circumcision, Torah, and the Gentiles Asha K. Moorthy Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2014 © 2014 Asha K. Moorthy All rights reserved ABSTRACT A Seal of Faith: Rereading Paul on Circumcision, Torah, and the Gentiles Asha K. Moorthy It is generally held that the Apostle Paul dismissed the rite of circumcision for Gentiles. This dissertation, however, offers a different perspective. Through examination of relevant sources regarding the role of circumcision in conversion along with consideration of Philo of Alexandria’s depiction of Abraham as an exemplar of and for the proselyte, this project will suggest that Paul, in Rom 4:11‐ 12, uses the example of Abraham in order to explain the value of circumcision for Jews as well as for Gentiles. It will be argued, moreover, that Paul’s objections to circumcision, as found in Romans as well as in Galatians, Philippians, and 1 Corinthians, were not to the rite per se but rather to the notion that circumcision was necessary for entering the Abrahamic covenant, “becoming a Jew,” justification, salvation, spiritual transformation, protection or identity in Christ. A case will be made, moreover, that in Paul’s day there were two competing forms of circumcision and that Paul was opposed to the more radical procedure. Finally, divergences in Paul’s handling of the topic of circumcision in different letters will be explained through attention to particular audience concerns. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction 1 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Is Circumcision for Everyone?
    Is Circumcision for Everyone? by J.K. McKee A commonly quoted Scripture in the Messianic movement, in relation to Torah observance, has become Exodus 12:49: “The same law shall apply to the native as to the stranger who sojourns among you.” This Scripture is touted as meaning that all, both Jew and non-Jew, who follow the God of Israel, are applicable to torah echad or “one law.” This is used as a support to mean that all who follow the Holy One of Israel, are to follow the Torah or the Law of Moses. We most certainly agree with this conclusion and strongly believe that all Believers are to follow the “The same teaching” (CJB). However, if we place Exodus 12:49 in context, we will see that this specific instruction relates to Passover, and more specifically to the rite of circumcision: “But if a stranger sojourns with you, and celebrates the Passover to the L ORD , let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near to celebrate it; and he shall be like a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person may eat of it” (Exodus 12:48). The issue of circumcision is one of the most hotly debated and discussed in the Messianic community today, with extremes on both the Left and the Right. On the Left, you have Messianic liberals who believe that physical circumcision is unimportant by any means, and then on the Right there are some Messianic extremists who believe that physical circumcision is required for salvation. There has to be a fair-minded perspective of this issue that seeks to be Biblical, not looking for loopholes in regard to Torah observance, but at the same time recognizes that circumcision of the flesh is not a salvation issue .
    [Show full text]
  • The Doctrine of the Judaizers
    The Doctrine of the Judaizers Outline I. Definition and Description II. Vocabulary III. Documentation IV. Mosaic Law V. Circumcision VI. Jealousy I. Definition and Description A. The Judaizers were both regenerate and unregenerate Jews who taught strict adherence to the oral traditions of the Rabbis (Mk. 7), which are now, documented in the Mishna and the Talmud as well the 613 mandates found in the Mosaic Law (Acts 15:1-35). B. The 1st Church Council in Jerusalem that is recorded in Acts 15 was designed to resolve the problem of circumcision that the Judaizers were championing. C. The Judaizers claimed that circumcision was necessary for salvation, the Council disagreed and decided not to teach circumcision among the Gentiles. D. The Judaizers based their relationship with God upon their racial background and that in order to maintain that relationship one must strictly adhere to the many traditions and laws of the Pharisees. E. Biblical Christianity maintains that a relationship with God is achieved through faith alone in Christ alone and that once saved always saved. F. The legalism of the Judaizers is described in Scripture as “leaven” (Mt. 16:6, 11-12; Mk. 8:15; Lk. 12:1. Cf. 1 Co. 5:6-8; Gal. 5:9). G. It is also described as “hypocrisy” (Mt. 23:13, 23, 25, 27; Lk. 12:1). H. Legalism is hypocrisy (Lk. 12:1). I. Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary defines hypocrisy, “a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not possess; a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.
    [Show full text]
  • The Galatian Agitators' Theological Rationale for Circumcision
    GALATIAN AGITATORS 1 THE GALATIAN AGITATORS’ THEOLOGICAL RATIONALE FOR CIRCUMCISION Hung-Sik Choi* According to Paul, the agitators1 in Galatia were trying to compel Paul’s Galatian converts to get circumcised (6:12; cf. 5:2-3).2 Since the Galatians were convinced by the agitators’ persuasion (5:7), they intended to accept circumcision (5:2-3).3 As a matter of fact, it was *Dr. Hung-Sik Choi, Ph.D., recently completed his doctoral studies at the University of Durham, England under Professor James Dunn. He is currently adjunct professor at TTGST. 1Paul’s opponents in Galatia are traditionally called “judaizers,” but J. M. G. Barclay, Obeying the Truth: A Study of Paul’s Ethics in Galatians (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 36, n.1, and J. D. G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 10, appropriately criticize this label. The term “agitators” is Paul’s own language about his opponents in Galatia, found in Gal 1:7 and 5:10 (cf. 5:12). 2Although many aspects of the agitators’ gospel are unclear, there is little doubt that circumcision was an important component. There are two indications. It can be safely inferred from 5:2-3 that the Galatians intended to be circumcised because they were persuaded by the agitators’ demand of circumcision. In 6:12-13 it is apparent that the agitators in Galatia were teaching that the Galatians must be circumcised. They were trying to compel the Galatians to be circumcised (6:12). And also they wanted the Galatians to be circumcised so that they may boast about the circumcision of the Galatians (6:13).
    [Show full text]
  • Who Were Paul's Opponents in Galatia?
    Bibliotheca Sacra 147 (July 1990) 329-350. Copyright © 1990 by Dallas Theological Seminary. Cited with permission. Who Were Paul's Opponents in Galatia? Walt Russell Associate Professor of New Testament Biota University, La Mirada, California Why Is the Identity of Paul's Opponents an Issue? Paul's opponents in Galatia are central to the argument of Gala- tians because the epistle is essentially a response to their threat to the churches of Galatia. Therefore it is not surprising to see that the opponents are mentioned in every chapter (1:6-9; 2:4-5; 3:1; 4:17; 5:10, 12; 6:12-13). Conservative scholars have historically assumed that these foes were Judaizers and have interpreted the text in that light. However, in the last 70 years a persistent critique now gaining widespread acceptance says that the Judaizer identity is totally inadequate in explaining crucial verses like Galatians 5:13, "For you were called to freedom, brethren, only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another." While Paul was apparently addressing some sort of Judaistic aberration in Galatians 3-4, these critics argue, he was also overtly attacking an antinomian aberration in Galatians 5-6, and the Judais- tic identity cannot encompass this additional aberration. Therefore an increasing number of New Testament scholars are advocating a different identity for Paul's opponents in Galatia. Evangelicals should not blithely continue to assume the correctness of the Judaizer identity. They must see if their assumptions need revision and if this will aid in understanding the latter part of Galatians.
    [Show full text]
  • Judaizers and Gentilizers
    Judaizers and Gentilizers Eric Michael Teitelman Pastor•Teacher•Worship Leader Dear brothers and sisters in Christ Yeshua: It can be arguably said that the Apostle Paul might be one of the most misunderstood characters in the Bible. He is considered one of the chief builders of the early church and most significant purveyor of the gospel to the Gentiles. And yet, it was Christ’s apostle, Peter who is considered Rome’s first monarchical bishop. From him, and by one-man, apostolic succession (monarchical episcopacy) was presumed to continue through every church generation.i Paul and Peter were both martyred in Rome (Figure 1), and both have shrines built in their memory. The Vatican, a small state within a city, is centered around a massive Basilican church constructed above Peter’s shrine. Paul, on the other hand, is buried at the Basilica San Paulo Fuori le Mura, a formerly malaria infested plain that lay a mile beyond the walls of the city. Having been raised in the Rabbinic- Figure 1 - Paul's Journey to Rome 60 A.D. (Rose Publishing) Pharisaic tradition, some even claiming he had sat at the feet of Gamliel,ii Paul of Tarsus (Hebrew name Shaul or Saul) is considered one of the most scholarly men of his time. And, he inherited an additional privilege—Roman citizenship. This duality gave Paul a unique perspective and even association. Paul could enter the great halls of the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem, but he was also widely accepted among the Jewish communities scattered throughout the Roman Empire. Later, as Paul turned his ministry towards the Gentiles, he would be accused of being a heretic for turning the Jewish people away from the Law of Moses and turning the Hellenist Christians away from their Hebraic foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • Judaizers and Justification
    JUDAIZERS AND JUSTIFICATION Judaizers and Justification: Bridging the Gap Between Contemporary Pauline Studies and New Testament Theology MARK M. MATTISON Depending upon one’s point of view, the current state of Pauline studies is either exciting or alarming. Traditional interpretations of Paul’s letters are being called into question with increasing frequency as scholars diligently work to reconstruct Paul’s historical context. The fact that these studies undermine classical Protestant ideas of sin and salva- tion can be used either as the basis for discounting and attempting to refute the growing consensus or for rethinking and perhaps restructuring contemporary doctrines of soteriology. Whereas “evangelicals” feel challenged to respond with apologetics, less “orthodox” Christians, particularly those of the various Adventist traditions, may take advantage of these developments and rise to the task of providing a unique theological framework for these studies. The central issues in this debate are Paul’s view(s) of the law and the meaning of the controversy in which Paul was engaged. Paul strongly argued that we are “justified by faith in Christ [or “the faith of Christ”] and not by doing the works of the law” (Gal. 2:16b).1 Since the time of Martin Luther, this has been understood as an indictment of legalistic efforts to merit favor before God. In fact Judaism in general has come to be construed as the very antithesis of Christianity. Judaism is earthly, carnal, proud; Christianity is heavenly, spiritual, humble. It is a tragic 1Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture references are from the New Revised Standard Version. © 1996, A Journal from the Radical Reformation, Winter 1996, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Training in the Bible Andrew Stepp | Heretics: Judaizers
    Basic Training in the Bible Andrew Stepp | Heretics: Judaizers Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Heresy or heretic: “Someone who has compromised an essential doctrine and lost sight of who God really is, usually by oversimplification. Literally heresy means ‘choice’ – that is, a choice to deviate from traditional teaching in favor of one’s own insight.” The Situation (Acts 15:1-2) The Driving Question: Does someone have to become a __________ before they become a __________ ? Context: The Ethnic/Cultural “Cold Shoulder” ▪ Jonah – It’s not about the _________ !!! ▪ Acts 6:1 – The neglect of the Grecian Jewish widows ▪ Acts 10 – Peter and Cornelius ▪ Acts 11 – Peter’s Explanation in Jerusalem The balance of the Church begins to tip! ▪ Acts 11:19-24 – The Church in Antioch ▪ 13:46-49 – “I have made you a light for the Gentiles…” ▪ 14:1 – Reaching out to both Jews and Gentiles ▪ 14:27 – God had opened the door of faith to the Gentiles! On a Collision Course ▪ “Was their vision big enough to see the Gospel of Christ not as a reform movement within Judaism but as good news for the whole world, and the church of Christ not as a Jewish sect but as the international family of God?” – John Stott …Aaaaaaaaand Crash Acts 15:1-2; Gal. 2:11-13 The Response: The Jerusalem Council ▪ The Issue at hand – “Circumcision and the law were essential for observance.” ▪ Three key testimonies: Peter, Paul, and James, brother of Jesus. Key theological insights: Why is this important? Historically Theologically One Big Diverse Family (Rev.
    [Show full text]
  • St Paul and the Jews According to St John Chrysostom's Commentary On
    St Paul and the Jews According to St John Chrysostom’s Commentary on Romans 9-11 by Fr. Vasile Mihoc University in Sibiu, Romania St John Chrysostom is known not only as the greatest preacher in a Christian pulpit 1, and the most prominent doctor of the Orthodox Church, but also as the preacher of the eight sermons Adversus Judaeos . These discourses were delivered in Antioch in 387, when Chrysostom was a priest 2. In them Chrysostom accumulates against the Jews bitterness, sneers and jibes. Yet, it clearly appears that Chrysostom didn’t have personal relationships with the Jews, as, for example, was the case with Justin the Martyr, Jerome or Augustine. His attack aims stopping his flock’s tendency of sharing in the Jewish festivals, and this tendency says much about the relationships of the two communities in Antioch – unthinkable in later times and maybe difficult for us to understand. 1. The Christian anti-Judaism of the time Starting with the 4 th century speaking against the Jews was ‘fashionable’. ‘The whole Christian literature relating to differences between Jews and Christians – writes Lev Gillet – falls under two possible headings. Such writings belong either to the type Tractatus adversus Judaeos , or to the type Dialogos pros Tryphona 3. They are either polemics against the Jews, 1 His surname ‘Chrysostom’ occurs for the first time in the ‘Constitution’ of pope Vigilius in the year 553 (cf. Migne, P.L. 60, 217). 2 Very probably in the beginning of 381 the bishop Meletius made him deacon, just before his own departure to Constantinople, where he died as president of the Second Ecumenical Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapters 15 the Council of Jerusalem Review of Ch 13 - 14 Gentiles Receive the Word
    CHAPTERS 15 THE COUNCIL OF JERUSALEM REVIEW OF CH 13 - 14 GENTILES RECEIVE THE WORD Who is God? Lesson Theme? God’s salvation is by grace through The God of Our Salvation faith, not works of the law WHERE? • Back in Jerusalem to deal with this important matter that has come up in the churches of the Gentiles WHEN? • Takes place soon after the 1st missionary journey is finished. • The fact so many Gentiles are obeying Jesus causes these Jews to start causing trouble ACTS 15: WATCH AND LISTEN A HUGE CONFLICT People Issue and Response • Said Gentiles had to be circumcised and keep the Judaizers law of Moses • Angry with Judaizers for teaching lies • Opposed Peter because he was acting like a Paul hypocrite for a little while • Who can tell me what a hypocrite is? • Agreed with Paul on this issue Barnabas • Was briefly led to follow the Judaizers • First agreed with the Judiazers James • Later came to agree with Paul based on his reason SAY WHAT? Term Definition • Jewish believers from Jerusalem • Came from the Pharisees Judaizers • Didn’t think Gentiles could be true Christians • Sometimes referred to as the circumcision group • Someone who says one thing, but does something that goes against what they say Hypocrite • For example someone says to not steal, but they like to steal gum from the store ACTS 15 KEY POINTS • Some Jews were still causing problems • This problem, related to salvation, required a long trip back to Jerusalem to talk • Many of the apostles were still there and even some of them were tempted to teach that Gentiles had to follow the law of Moses • They had debate and dispute, but came to understand God’s truth and sent the encouraging letter to the Gentiles • Galatians chapter 2 give us some more detail that was going on in Acts 15 GALATIANS 2 Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me.
    [Show full text]
  • Anti-Semitism and Religious Violence As Flawed Interpretations of the Gospel of John Paul N
    Digital Commons @ George Fox University Faculty Publications - College of Christian Studies College of Christian Studies 2017 Anti-Semitism and Religious Violence as Flawed Interpretations of the Gospel of John Paul N. Anderson George Fox University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/ccs Part of the Christianity Commons Recommended Citation Anderson, Paul N., "Anti-Semitism and Religious Violence as Flawed Interpretations of the Gospel of John" (2017). Faculty Publications - College of Christian Studies. 289. https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/ccs/289 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Christian Studies at Digital Commons @ George Fox University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications - College of Christian Studies by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ George Fox University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ANTI-SEMITISM AND RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE AS FLAWED INTERPRETATIONS OF THE GOSPEL OF JOHN1 Paul N. Anderson Professor of Biblical and Quaker Studies, George Fox University Extraordinary Professor of Religion, North West University, Potchefstroom, SA While it is a tragic fact that the Gospel of John has contributed to anti-Semitism and religious violence during some chapters of Christian history, John is not anti-Semitic. It was written by a Jewish writer, about a Jewish messianic figure, targeted first toward convincing Jewish audiences that Jesus was indeed the Jewish Messiah. Salvation is “of the Jews,” according to the Johannine Jesus, and each of the “I-am” sayings embodies a classic representation of Israel. John is no more “anti-Semitic” than the Essene community or the prophetic work of John the Baptist.
    [Show full text]