I. The opposition of the believed Pharisees V.5
In the first century some of religious group like “believing” sect of the Pharisees were converted and accept Jesus as their personal savior. Even though, they converted to Christianity but they were very conservative for the laws of Moses or Torah. This verse (v.5) speaks about the believing Pharisees who belonged to the party of Pharisees. They argue for the need of circumcision and the necessity of keeping the law as Carter and others explained the Pharisees position in the following ways “the Pharisees requirements of the Gentiles disciples for church membership it is needful to circumcise them and to charge them to keep the Law of Moses are even more demanding here than as stated at Antioch, …show more content…
They made their own requirements for Gentiles believers. Therefore, Gentiles have to do something like Jews which is prerequisites for all Gentiles salivation. These pre-conditions are all males must be circumcised and should obey the Law of Moses’ (V.5). This group were not sent by Jerusalem church as Carter and others describes “they were sent by this Judeo-Christian party to Antioch to propagate their doctrine through the falsely claimed to have been sent by the Jerusalem apostles is equally evident.” The Pharisees group claim show that for Gentiles believers no room for salivation by faith alone unless first they should converted to Judaism. The other thing I understood from this claims is the one who did not sent by church made problems in the middle of unbelievers and new planted churches at the mission field. Therefore, church takes care when they sent an evangelist to different parts of the world. The Jerusalem council solved the problem as Peterson explained in his commentary in the following ways “fundamentally, the problem would be solved by recognizing that God had been saving Gentiles on the same basis as Jews, namely through faith in Jesus as the crucified and resurrected Messiah.” The other point I see from this part is the necessity of church council to solve problems among …show more content…
As J.I. Packer describes in his commentary “both Jews and Gentiles equally were drawn by God to the hope of the same inheritance, and that they raised to the same degree of honor, that they might be children of God and members of Christ and, finally, holy descendants of Abraham and a priestly and royal people.” There is no difference in the kingdom of God because those who believe in Christ became one body. This is why in (Gal. 3:28) Paul describes there is no Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female…you are one in Christ Jesus. The dialogue between Peter and others general council participants influenced Paul and others preacher in first
In the first century some of religious group like “believing” sect of the Pharisees were converted and accept Jesus as their personal savior. Even though, they converted to Christianity but they were very conservative for the laws of Moses or Torah. This verse (v.5) speaks about the believing Pharisees who belonged to the party of Pharisees. They argue for the need of circumcision and the necessity of keeping the law as Carter and others explained the Pharisees position in the following ways “the Pharisees requirements of the Gentiles disciples for church membership it is needful to circumcise them and to charge them to keep the Law of Moses are even more demanding here than as stated at Antioch, …show more content…
They made their own requirements for Gentiles believers. Therefore, Gentiles have to do something like Jews which is prerequisites for all Gentiles salivation. These pre-conditions are all males must be circumcised and should obey the Law of Moses’ (V.5). This group were not sent by Jerusalem church as Carter and others describes “they were sent by this Judeo-Christian party to Antioch to propagate their doctrine through the falsely claimed to have been sent by the Jerusalem apostles is equally evident.” The Pharisees group claim show that for Gentiles believers no room for salivation by faith alone unless first they should converted to Judaism. The other thing I understood from this claims is the one who did not sent by church made problems in the middle of unbelievers and new planted churches at the mission field. Therefore, church takes care when they sent an evangelist to different parts of the world. The Jerusalem council solved the problem as Peterson explained in his commentary in the following ways “fundamentally, the problem would be solved by recognizing that God had been saving Gentiles on the same basis as Jews, namely through faith in Jesus as the crucified and resurrected Messiah.” The other point I see from this part is the necessity of church council to solve problems among …show more content…
As J.I. Packer describes in his commentary “both Jews and Gentiles equally were drawn by God to the hope of the same inheritance, and that they raised to the same degree of honor, that they might be children of God and members of Christ and, finally, holy descendants of Abraham and a priestly and royal people.” There is no difference in the kingdom of God because those who believe in Christ became one body. This is why in (Gal. 3:28) Paul describes there is no Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female…you are one in Christ Jesus. The dialogue between Peter and others general council participants influenced Paul and others preacher in first