Paul's trip to Jerusalem

[Dot Matrix]

Did Paul disobey God? Or was he told to go and was willing to be bound etc?

I am in a heated talk with a dear friend, I think VP's angle on it was right (probably taken from a book someone else wrote, but right none-the-less)

This is what I think

http://my.en.com/~anders/chapter10.html

http://my.en.com/~anders/intro.html

MY friend thinks Paul was doing the will of God and God was showing him what was going to happen when he got there. So, I said but there was nothing good or profitable that happened because he went. He thinks Paul wanted to conclude his "race" at Jerusalem... I dunno

Edited June 19, 2008 by Dot Matrix

[Mark Clarke]

Dot,

I don't know that I would say nothing good came from going to Jerusalem. It was as a result of the events there that Paul went to Rome and appealed to Caesar. Acts 27:24 seems to say that it was God's will that he go before Caesar: "Saying, Fear not, Paul; thou must be brought before Caesar: and, lo, God hath given thee all them that sail with thee."

Also, VPW said that after Jerusalem, Paul never won anybody to the Lord, the closest he got being the king's saying "Almost thou persuadest me." But there is no basis for thinking that, since he spoke the Word to everybody he met, continued to preach for two years while under house arrest, "no man hindering him" (Acts 28:30-31), and wrote several epistles from prison.

I think The Way's take on this was based on their belief that since "God is light and in Him is no darkness" that everything is supposed to go well, and if it doesn't it's your own fault. But there are many instances in the Bible where God allowed bad things to happen, but turned them around to work for good. In Phil. 1:12, Paul specifically says, "But I would ye should understand, brethren, that the things which happened unto me have fallen out rather unto the furtherance of the gospel."

[Dot Matrix]

My friend is saying what you are saying - maybe it is just another thing I need to rethink! sigh....

[WordWolf]

Did Paul disobey God? Or was he told to go and was willing to be bound etc?

I am in a heated talk with a dear friend, I think VP's angle on it was right (probably taken from a book someone else wrote, but right none-the-less)

This is what I think

http://my.en.com/~anders/chapter10.html

http://my.en.com/~anders/intro.html

MY friend thinks Paul was doing the will of God and God was showing him what was going to happen when he got there. So, I said but there was nothing good or profitable that happened because he went. He thinks Paul wanted to conclude his "race" at Jerusalem... I dunno

I've gone over this over the years. I have some conclusions.

A) I believe the messages God gave Paul were meant to tell Paul "Don't go to Jerusalem."

B) I believe the commas issue was clever but false.

I believe they knew that Paul was going into danger, but they gave up and put the entire mess into God's hands.

Incorrect: "And when he would not be persuaded, we ceased saying 'the will of the Lord be done.' "

Meaning, whe we couldn't persuade him, we stopped trying to get him to to the will of the Lord.

Incorrect: what's taught as the meaning of

"And when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, 'the will of the Lord be done.'"

Meaning, you wanted to do God's will all along, we won't try to interfere with that anymore.

What I think happened:

God tried to warn Paul off.

Paul insisted on going anyway.

Luke and the others tried to talk Paul into not-going.

Paul insisted on going anyway.

They said "We put this in God's hands from here on."

=======

As to Paul's effectiveness once he's arrested, I find he was LESS effective in prison than if he was not in prison.

However, vpw's claim about him being INeffective was a gross exaggeration and an oversimplification.

One need only read the book of Philemon to see that.

One need only read the Epistles written from prison. What would we do if they weren't there?

Would there be different books from different times and locations?

I think God would have covered it, one way or the other.

So, I haven't just dismissed everything because vpw said it, nor accept everything because he said it.

[JeffSjo]

Hi Dot,

It's been a while it seems, I hope you are well.

I think along the same lines that Wordwolf does on this topic.

But either way the thing that I always come back to when I think of Paul's time in prison is ch 23, vs 11 where the Lord and gave him a course to follow and something to do later. How huge it seems to me that THE LORD STOOD BY PAUL, I love it.

Whether or not Paul was disobedient or not (even though I believe that he was) it has allways given me comfort to see this record of the Lord's faithfullness to him.

JEFF

P.S.

You have inadvertantly (perhaps) given me a very good and sound scriptural reason to judge our teachers without respect of persons. Thank you, because it is a blessing to me.

[Mark Clarke]

WordWolf,

I agree with you about that commas thing. It wasn't that they had been saying "Paul, do the will of the Lord" and then quit saying it. The phrase in the text is not "do the will of the Lord" but "the will of the Lord be done." When they quit trying to persuade Paul, they said "the will of the Lord be done" which is a common way of expressing the desire. It's in the sense of, "whatever happens, may the Lord's will be done." And regardless of whether God had wanted Paul to go to Jerusalem or not to begin with, in the long run His will ended up being done, when Paul went before Caesar, and wrote his epistles from prison, etc. God is not limited by our believing, as TWI taught.