Apostolic Friends Forum

Apostolic Friends Forum (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/index.php)
-   Fellowship Hall (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   "Doubtful Disputations" (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=21159)

Jermyn Davidson 12-18-2008 05:22 PM

"Doubtful Disputations"
 
What does Romans 14:1 mean?

Encryptus 12-18-2008 05:24 PM

Re: "Doubtful Disputations"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 662137)
What does Romans 14:1 mean?

Why do I feel a one step vs three step combined with a little standards debate coming on?

Cindy 12-18-2008 05:26 PM

Re: "Doubtful Disputations"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Encryptus (Post 662141)
Why do I feel a one step vs three step combined with a little standards debate coming on?

Cause you are on AFF?

Jermyn Davidson 12-18-2008 05:27 PM

Re: "Doubtful Disputations"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Encryptus (Post 662141)
Why do I feel a one step vs three step combined with a little standards debate coming on?

:) :) :)

I just discovered this verse!!!

Maybe this is why I really had no problem calling my AOG best friend from the USMC "brother" and really mean it.


But I would like to see this scripture discussed among other Apostolics, who are much more Apsotolic than I am-- maybe I've got the wrong idea or something.

2020Vision 12-18-2008 05:28 PM

Re: "Doubtful Disputations"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 662137)
What does Romans 14:1 mean?

before the forthcoming answers, this portion of Scriptures is talking about Gentile Christians and Jewish Christians, and the differences they had. The gentiles in Rome were cautioned against offending Jews by boasting of some of their "freedoms" from Judaic custom. Paul thought it better that Jews believe Christ and Him crucified, than to digress on some of their convictions. If they believed in Christ, served Him and had a genuine Christian spirit, the other things they did certainly did not hinder. Causing contention over it would have been a disaster. The major issue of contention was circumcision.

Personally glad that tradition never ceased :)

2020Vision 12-18-2008 05:29 PM

Re: "Doubtful Disputations"
 
Well, the churches in Rome were "Apostolic". Context means everything for this.

Count me out if this turns into a three-step/standards debate.

Jermyn Davidson 12-18-2008 05:32 PM

Re: "Doubtful Disputations"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by 2020Vision (Post 662152)
before the forthcoming answers, this portion of Scriptures is talking about Gentile Christians and Jewish Christians, and the differences they had. The gentiles in Rome were cautioned against offending Jews by boasting of some of their "freedoms" from Judaic custom. Paul thought it better that Jews believe Christ and Him crucified, than to digress on some of their convictions. If they believed in Christ, served Him and had a genuine Christian spirit, the other things they did certainly did not hinder. Causing contention over it would have been a disaster. The major issue of contention was circumcision.

Personally glad that tradition never ceased :)


I know Paul told Timothy to be circumcised and he did so as an adult to help in spreading the Gospel.


Which that is mind boggling to me. How would they know if others were circumcised or not?

WHY DID THEY CARE?!

I mean, I know about the law, the commandment and the separation, but it seems a bit uh misguided for them to care so much about their "brothers" private parts.


"Brothers" are in quote because wasn't their status as a brother questioned or even denied if they weren't circumcised?

2020Vision 12-18-2008 05:36 PM

Re: "Doubtful Disputations"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 662158)
I know Paul told Timothy to be circumcised and he did so as an adult to help in spreading the Gospel.


Which that is mind boggling to me. How would they know if others were circumcised or not?

WHY DID THEY CARE?!

I mean, I know about the law, the commandment and the separation, but it seems a bit uh misguided for them to care so much about their "brothers" private parts.

ROFLOL! I think this was such a big part of culture. They probably asked each other. Maybe he didn't want to be a fraud either. I don't know. Hopefully they didn't carry around the foreskin.

2020Vision 12-18-2008 05:37 PM

Re: "Doubtful Disputations"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 662158)

"Brothers" are in quote because wasn't their status as a brother questioned or even denied if they weren't circumcised?

That was Paul's point and the debate in Acts 15. They concluded the are brethern, and on the flip side, the Gentiles "liberty" of not requiring the snip job was not to be lauded. Along with other customs.

Jermyn Davidson 12-18-2008 05:43 PM

Re: "Doubtful Disputations"
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by 2020Vision (Post 662159)
ROFLOL! I think this was such a big part of culture. They probably asked each other. Maybe he didn't want to be a fraud either. I don't know. Hopefully they didn't carry around the foreskin.

lol

sick!


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.