An excellent piece
In this video, Mustafa Aykol talks about his book, ‘The Islamic Jesus’, where – amongst other things – he tracks the movement of the Early Jewish-Christian community. This is a must read for anyone interested in a scholarly account of the supposed ‘paradox’ in the (not-so?) surprising affinity from two divergent traditions: a) the up-to-date, historical analysis of that community and b) the normative Islamic presentation of early ‘Jewish-Christianity’, which it calls ‘Islam’ (literally translated as ‘The Revealed Way to Submit to only ALLAH [God]’).
View original post 1,548 more words
Paul never took a Nazarite vow in the NT as Faiz wrongly claims.
As I see it James asked him to pay for the sin offerings. That proves nothing substantial.
According to Acts, James demanded that Paul facilitate the performance of an action that involved offering a sacrifice. If this is is an actual event in history it means that the Jerusalem church continued to practice sacrifices and also that they would not have accepted the view that Jesus was a once-for-all sacrifice.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“That proves nothing substantial.”
For our islamic friends, that is.
It proves that Jewish Christians in Jerusalem took the Nazarite vow as long as the temple was in use.
The Jews had to keep the feasts anyway because that was part of their law. They could not be Jews and not keep the law.
It was significant that James did not impose the Jewish laws on Gentile Christians as the judaizers tried to do.
It needed further revelation to release the Jews completely and Paul provided this.