Paul reshaping the church

[Drich]

So first off, I do apologise for me fellow atheists being so spiteful during the Easter season. I celibate Easter - I only eat fish on Good Friday and enjoy spending the time with family and friends.

Lamb was the central part of the Passover meal (which was the 'last supper' meal Jesus ate on the first 'good friday'.)

Thus I didn't want to pose this question during a time that our Christian friends might find confrontational. But my question is simple. In Acts 15 the Jerusalem Council is held. The first known recorded Christian council of its kind. And they debate whether converts to first century Christianity need to follow traditional Jewish customs and the Mosaic Law.

Circumcision pertained to an unconditional covenant that Jehovah made with Abraham: it was a seal of the said covenant. But to the gentile Christian converts, ancient land promises in the Levant had little meaning. Most of them by now (50 AD that is) live outside of it, and wouldn't have viewed living within it any more desirable. The council came to a decision. Non-Jew Christians wouldn't be bound by the Mosaic Law, nor Circumcision, but they would still be required to abstain from meat sacrificed to the Roman gods and meat that was strangled and "sexual immorality".

Ask yourself why... The answer is because Peter Himself in verses 7-17 of Acts 15 says the uncircumcised gentiles (in acts 2/Day of Pentecost) were blessed by the Holy Spirit just as the circumcised Jews were.
Which meant (according to him) 'God made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.'

Paul and Barnabas travelled from Antioch to attend the council and then returned to it after it was concluded (modern Turkey). Luke tells us in Acts 15:27 that the council sent two men with Paul and Barnabas named Judas and Silas to go with them and see that the letters were sent according to the council decision. Yet in Galatians and 1 Corinthians (both believed to have been the earliest surviving writings of Paul and believed to have been send from Antioch not long after the Council) Paul disobeys this decision.

The decision to tell those of antioch was unique to the situation at Antioch. Because the people of Antioch had such a strong OT/Messianic Church foundation the elders saw fit to saddle the believers their with rules they issued and not give them the freedoms Paul issued in Corinth or Galatia.
Explained here:
19 “So I think we should not make things hard for those who have turned to God from among the non-Jewish people. 20 Instead, we should send a letter telling them only the things they should not do:
Don’t eat food that has been given to idols. This makes the food unclean.

Don’t be involved in sexual sin.

Don’t eat meat from animals that have been strangled or any meat that still has the blood in it.
21 They should not do any of these things, because there are still men in every city who teach the Law of Moses. The words of Moses have been read in the synagogue every Sabbath day for many years.”

1 Corinthians 10:25: Eat anything that is sold in the marketplace without questions of conscience,

Now I hear that "well by then they decided differently". Rubbish. This issue was important enough that it had to be decided between a Council of the Church Leaders in 50AD, and we have no evidence whatsoever of another council being held between then and Corinthians. Therefore it seems very clear that Paul was knowingly disobeying the decision made by the Council in Acts 15, at which he attended.

So how do Christians justify following Paul when he clearly went his own way?

Paul 'going his own way' is yet another example of 'denominational freedom' in the church. We/Christianity were never meant to be saddled with one set of rules. In Christ there is freedom, That's why the council said the gentiles should not be 'yoked with the burden of circumcision.' And why at the same time they were yoked with the restrictions of meat while those in Corinth were not.

This principle was first established by Christ when He said "What ever you bind here on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose here on earth will be made free in Heaven." In otherwords what ever you make as a guidline or rule here on earth will be the rule you will be judged by in Heaven. That is why Christ in his ministry told us to take the plank out of our own eye first before we worry about the speck in the eye of our brother. This principle is also what Christ used to judge and label the pharisees 'Hypocrites, and blind guides.' They burdened the people with these laws they held by their traditions yet they themselves could not measure up against them. (kind what I've been doing with my pop morality thread)

Paul further explains/sums up this principle here:1cor8: 7 But not all people know this. Some have had the habit of worshiping idols. So now when they eat meat, they still feel as if it belongs to an idol. They are not sure that it is right to eat this meat. So when they eat it, they feel guilty. 8 But food will not bring us closer to God. Refusing to eat does not make us less pleasing to God, and eating does not make us closer to him.9 But be careful with your freedom. Your freedom to eat anything may make those who have doubts about what they can eat fall into sin. 10 You understand that it’s all right to eat anything, so you can eat even in an idol’s temple. But someone who has doubts might see you eating there, and this might encourage them to eat meat sacrificed to idols too. But they really think it is wrong. 11 So this weak brother or sister—someone Christ died for—is lost because of your better understanding. 12 When you sin against your brothers and sisters in Christ in this way and you hurt them by causing them to do things they feel are wrong, you are also sinning against Christ. 13 So if the food I eat makes another believer fall into sin, I will never eat meat again. I will stop eating meat, so that I will not make my brother or sister sin.

In short with our freedoms we are not to cause others to sin. For the gentiles to eat meat in the church of antioch would have put the Messinic Jews in a position to sin. Because again as it was explained in Acts 15 The church there was strong and steeped in Jewish tradition, and for the Gentiles to not have to follow any rules would cause the jews who have bound themselves to the law of moses to sin.

Do you get what I am saying?