Luke now refers to Saul exclusively by his Greek name, Paul. As a messenger to the Gentiles, the shedding of his Jewish name is quite logical. Regarding the earlier dispute over circumcision for Gentile converts, an official response was issued from the church in Jerusalem. The letter was authored by James, who was the son of Mary and Joseph and therefore Jesus' half-brother. James was the leader of the church in Jerusalem and later, the author of the epistle "James". The official position of the church was to ask Gentile converts to adhere to four restrictions, all of which are believed to be linked to pagan worship practices...eating food sacrificed to idols, sexual immorality, eating meat from strangled animals, and drinking blood. These requirements were intended not only to help new converts cut ties with their pagan observances but also to help them assimilate with Jewish believers. It was also essential for any Christian hoping to witness to Jews, that they not offend their cultural sensibilities. It was for this reason that Paul arranged for the circumcision of Timothy (who was half Greek, half Jew) prior to their missionary journey. The restrictions placed on these Gentile believers by the Jewish Christians should not be viewed as perquisites for salvation, as had been the case with the original dispute over the imposition of circumcision. Instead, it should be viewed as "sensitivity training" in the face of cross-cultural evangelism. It is always incumbent upon Christians to consider the impact of their freedoms on other believers and non-believers. Several Scriptures come to mind..."everything is permissible but not everything is beneficial..." and "whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. Do not cause anyone to stumble..." and "do not destroy the work of the Lord for the sake of food". All of these verses get at the heart of what James and Paul were teaching. While there are no legalistic obsesrvances that must precede or accompany our salvation, we must be prepared at any time to surrender that freedom if it is in the best interest of the advancement of the Gospel.
Tomorrow's reading: Acts 17:16-18:3; 1 Thes. 1:1-5:11
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Not related to today's reading but going back to your post re. what happened to the Apostles - thanks for doing that research, I have often wondered. Also, I have always considered it miraculous that, in particular, Paul's & John's writings survived them, & that Paul was able to write letters from prison and have them delivered. How was he able to get them out - were they smuggled out or did his Roman captors actually let him send "mail"?
ReplyDeleteOne more comment unrelated to today's reading - see my comment/question on your Nov. 10 post. Thanks!
ReplyDeleteJackie,
ReplyDeleteYou have now hit your allotment for hard questions that require research! I had never thought of this before, but it is a great question. I expected to find out that there was a sympathetic jailer involved, but it seems that Paul was under "house arrest" when he composed his "prison epistles". They are apparently named as such because he was imprisoned, just not in the traditional setting of a jail cell. His letters were delivered by other believers, not restricted as Paul was.