For the Jews I Became Jewish, Part 2

When Paul wrote, “To the Jews I became as a Jew … to those who are under the Law, as under the Law” (1 Corinthians 9:20), he was not talking about accommodating the message. He was simply saying he would not jeopardize his ability to preach the message by unnecessarily offending people.

Several illustrations of that principle appear in the New Testament. In our last post, we looked at the example of the Jerusalem Council. Out of love and concern for Jewish unbelievers, the council asked new Gentile converts to abstain from engaging in cultural practices that the Jews found offensive. That was in Acts chapter fifteen.

Acts chapter sixteen includes a similar illustration. It is the first time in Scripture we meet Timothy. Luke records that he was “the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but his father was a Greek” (v. 1). Jews would have considered him a Gentile, because his father was a Gentile. Moreover, Timothy’s mother would have been considered a virtual traitor for marrying a Gentile.

Yet Timothy “was well spoken of by the brethren who were in Lystra and Iconium. Paul wanted this man to go with him; and he took him and circumcised him” (vv. 2, 3).

Wait a minute. Why did he do that? Paul certainly didn’t believe Gentiles needed be circumcised to be saved. In fact, Paul refused to have Titus circumcised when the Jerusalem legalists demanded it (Gal. 2:1-5). Furthermore, Paul once opposed Peter to his face because Peter had compromised with the legalists (Gal. 2:11–14). He asked Peter, “If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?” (v. 14). So why did Paul have Timothy circumcised? Was he compromising the issue, demonstrating inconsistency?

No. Timothy wasn’t doing it for salvation. He obviously had not undergone circumcision when he was saved. And he wasn’t doing it to make hardened legalists happy or to tone down the offense of the gospel. He simply wanted to identify with the Jews so he might have an entrance to preach the gospel to them. Paul and Timothy were not hoping to pacify pseudo-Christian legalists, act the part of hypocrites, or mitigate the gospel in any way. They simply wanted to keep open lines of communication to the Jews they were going to preach to. This was not an act of compromise or men-pleasing. It was loving—and physically very painful—self-sacrifice for the sake of the lost.

Wherever he could acknowledge the strong religious tradition of a people and not offend their sensitivities, Paul was glad to do so—when it did not violate God’s Word or impinge on the gospel. But the apostle never adapted his ministry to pander to worldly lusts or sinful selfishness.

Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: “People of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: to an unknown god. So you are ignorant of the very thing you worship—and this is what I am going to proclaim to you.

In order to preach the gospel, Paul went so far as to use an altar of worship to a pagan god as a way to introduce God.

John MacArthur would likely die of apoplectic shock if some televangelist did this today.

When he answers the question as to why Paul circumcised Timothy, he makes the assumption that Paul was correct to do so by saying:

They simply wanted to keep open lines of communication to the Jews they were going to preach to.

But forgive me for asking, wasn’t Paul called specifically by God to preach to the Gentiles?

He goes on to say, “Wherever he could acknowledge the strong religious tradition of a people and not offend their sensitivities, Paul was glad to do so—when it did not violate God’s Word or impinge on the gospel. But the apostle never adapted his ministry to pander to worldly lusts or sinful selfishness.”

I wonder if MacArther applied that same Pauline principle when he self righteously penned, “Strange Fire”

. . .Grace to you, indeed.

Paul went so far as to use an altar of worship to a pagan god as a way to introduce God. John MacArthur would likely die of apoplectic shock if some televangelist did this today.

John MacArthur has remarked on several occasions how he models his ministry after Paul. Here is John MacArthur's take Acts 17:16-34.

But you're right. John MacArthur would probably die of apoplectic shock if some televangelists model their life after Paul. As a matter of fact, so would I. :O)

I wonder if MacArther applied that same Pauline principle when he self righteously penned, “Strange Fire”

I listened to MacArthur's Strange Fire Conference video on youtube and found it very educational.

I find him unnecessarily severe and legalistic in many regards, but he did raise some valid concerns about the movement as a whole and the excesses and unScriptural practices that have been infiltrating the charismatic movement. No Scripture to support ANY of it and to claim that *drunken glory* is of God is a mockery of the Holy Spirit and His work in someone's life. Fire tunnels, angel orbs and portals indeed.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.