never mind what i said i was thinking of the verse Acts 21:26, what about that?when i read it, it sounded like St. Paul was making a animal sacrifice but i could be wrong
Most likely that one did involve an animal sacrifice, along with a food one.never mind what i said i was thinking of the verse Acts 21:26, what about that?
so did St. Paul commit sin then by offering the animal sacrifce? God blessMost likely that one did involve an animal sacrifice, along with a food one.
[bibledrb]Numbers 6:13-21[/bibledrb]
I don’t have an answer to that, but there is a lot of conjecture out there. Some say he did, some say he didn’t. Some say he hadn’t come to a full understanding. Others say he was just ritually observing the Jewish law in order to diffuse a tense situation.so did St. Paul commit sin then by offering the animal sacrifce? God bless
On this point there seems to have been a difference of opinion between Jerome and Augustine. For Jerome (Super Galat. ii, 11, seqq.) distinguished two periods of time. One was the time previous to Christ’s Passion, during which the legal ceremonies were neither dead, since they were obligatory, and did expiate in their own fashion; nor deadly, because it was not sinful to observe them. But immediately after Christ’s Passion they began to be not only dead, so as no longer to be either effectual or binding; but also deadly, so that whoever observed them was guilty of mortal sin. Hence he maintained that after the Passion the apostles never observed the legal ceremonies in real earnest; but only by a kind of pious pretense, lest, to wit, they should scandalize the Jews and hinder their conversion. This pretense, however, is to be understood, not as though they did not in reality perform those actions, but in the sense that they performed them without the mind to observe the ceremonies of the Law: thus a man might cut away his foreskin for health’s sake, not with the intention of observing legal circumcision.
But since it seems unbecoming that the apostles, in order to avoid scandal, should have hidden things pertaining to the truth of life and doctrine, and that they should have made use of pretense, in things pertaining to the salvation of the faithful; therefore Augustine (Epist. lxxxii) more fittingly distinguished three periods of time. One was the time that preceded the Passion of Christ, during which the legal ceremonies were neither deadly nor dead: another period was after the publication of the Gospel, during which the legal ceremonies are both dead and deadly. The third is a middle period, viz. from the Passion of Christ until the publication of the Gospel, during which the legal ceremonies were dead indeed, because they had neither effect nor binding force; but were not deadly, because it was lawful for the Jewish converts to Christianity to observe them, provided they did not put their trust in them so as to hold them to be necessary unto salvation, as though faith in Christ could not justify without the legal observances. On the other hand, there was no reason why those who were converted from heathendom to Christianity should observe them. Hence Paul circumcised Timothy, who was born of a Jewish mother; but was unwilling to circumcise Titus, who was of heathen nationality.
The reason why the Holy Ghost did not wish the converted Jews to be debarred at once from observing the legal ceremonies, while converted heathens were forbidden to observe the rites of heathendom, was in order to show that there is a difference between these rites. For heathenish ceremonial was rejected as absolutely unlawful, and as prohibited by God for all time; whereas the legal ceremonial ceased as being fulfilled through Christ’s Passion, being instituted by God as a figure of Christ.
I think that it would help to remind ourselves here that the very earliest Christians still saw themselves as Jews. By believing in Jesus, they did not ‘convert’ from Judaism into something else; they were, in St. Paul’s words, ‘called’ into a new vocation, a more fuller form of their faith. They did not cease to be Jews; instead they saw their belief as completing and fulfilling the life they had in Judaism. The apostles like Peter and John still worshipped at the Temple (they were there when they healed the cripple); Paul himself when pressed is keen to assert his Jewishness.Reading Acts 24:17 from the surface sounds like Paul still performing the Temple sacrifices after his conversion.
Or-- is this verse an indication of his performance of the Mass? If so, is this the only direct NT reference to an Apostle performing the sacrifice of the Mass?
IMHO it isn’t so much a belief in resurrection per se that ticked off Paul’s accusers (since the general resurrection of the dead was by then already a common belief anyway), but the idea that one Man could be raised from the dead before the end of days has come.14 "**But I admit that I follow the Way, which they call a sect. I worship the God of our ancestors, and I firmly believe the Jewish law and everything written in the books of prophecy. 15 I have hope in God, just as these men do, that he will raise both the righteous and the ungodly. 16 Because of this, I always try to maintain a clear conscience before God and everyone else. 17 “After several years away, I returned to Jerusalem with money to aid my people and to offer sacrifices to God. 18 My accusers saw me in the **Temple as I was completing a purification ritual. There was no crowd around me and no ****rioting. 19 But some Jews from the province of Asia were there – and they ought to be here to bring charges if they have anything against me! 20 Ask these men here what wrongdoing the Jewish high council found in me, 21 except for one thing I said when I shouted out, **‘I am on trial before you today because I believe in the resurrection of the dead!’” **
It sounds like Paul did do a purification ritual, but what sort of sacrifices he offered, it doesn’t say. He freely admits that he believed in the Jewish law, but what got him into trouble was saying that he believed in the resurrection of the dead
This is very insightful, and I think it could explain much of the Book of Hebrews.I think that it would help to remind ourselves here that the very earliest Christians still saw themselves as Jews. By believing in Jesus, they did not ‘convert’ from Judaism into something else; they were, in St. Paul’s words, ‘called’ into a new vocation, a more fuller form of their faith. They did not cease to be Jews; instead they saw their belief as completing and fulfilling the life they had in Judaism. The apostles like Peter and John still worshipped at the Temple (they were there when they healed the cripple); Paul himself when pressed is keen to assert his Jewishness.
I think this is extremely important, and is something that is spoken to in the Scriptures many times. It is spoken to most clearly in Acts 10 “what God has made clean, let no man call unclean”, and in Galatians 2:16 “because by the works of the Law no man sahll be justified”. The New Testament writings make it fairly clear that this was prevalent among the early Church. I would not be surprised if Paul continued to perform sacrifices in accord with the Law. As a matter of fact, I would be incredibly surprised if he didn’t.I think that it would help to remind ourselves here that the very earliest Christians still saw themselves as Jews. By believing in Jesus, they did not ‘convert’ from Judaism into something else; they were, in St. Paul’s words, ‘called’ into a new vocation, a more fuller form of their faith. They did not cease to be Jews; instead they saw their belief as completing and fulfilling the life they had in Judaism. The apostles like Peter and John still worshipped at the Temple (they were there when they healed the cripple); Paul himself when pressed is keen to assert his Jewishness.
Paul restored a man to life through the Eucharist.Thanks for all the insights… very informative.
Anyone know if there are any references to the Mass/consecration in the NT epistles? When do we start seeing the liturgical form of the Mass start appearing? After the Temple’s destruction?
Would the Jewish roots of the Mass and altar arrangement be traced back to this time period?