Shavout

[good samaritan]

It is very interesting that every Jewish Shavuot,(Christian Pentecost),that Jews read the book of Ruth. The theme of the book of Ruth is about a Jew (Boaz) taking a Gentile bride (Ruth).

On the day of Pentecost, God poured out his Spirit by the sign of tongues. It wasn’t just any tongues, but it was foreign languages of people present in Jerusalem that day. I personally believe the sign of tongues is God’s way of telling us that His Spirit is for everyone (all nations and tongues). It is no longer an exclusively Jewish kingdom of God.

Peter, in Acts 2:39, said this promise is for you and your children and all that are afar off even as many the Lord our God shall call. When Peter made that proclamation, he didn’t even realize how profound what he had just said was. It wasn’t until chapters later, that Peter had the dream of the Lord commanding him to kill and eat the unclean creatures, that he would understand God was reaching out to the Gentile world.

The feast of weeks (Shavuot) is a harvest festival. The harvest of God is the whole earth!!! All people nations and tongues! Wikipedia stated that Orthodox Jews all over will be reading the book of Ruth every Shavuot, unaware of the depth of its meaning.

[Amanah]

I think many Jews have a sense that their ultimate purpose would be the blessing of all nations.

According to Genesis 12:2-3, God said to Abraham: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Amanah

I think many Jews have a sense that their ultimate purpose would be the blessing of all nations.

According to Genesis 12:2-3, God said to Abraham: “I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”

Except that Genesis 12:2-3 isn't about the people today called "Jews".

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Except that Genesis 12:2-3 isn't about the people today called "Jews".

Jesus fulfilled the promise unto Abraham and included us into it

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

It is very interesting that every Jewish Shavuot,(Christian Pentecost),that Jews read the book of Ruth. The theme of the book of Ruth is about a Jew (Boaz) taking a Gentile bride (Ruth).

On the day of Pentecost, God poured out his Spirit by the sign of tongues. It wasn’t just any tongues, but it was foreign languages of people present in Jerusalem that day. I personally believe the sign of tongues is God’s way of telling us that His Spirit is for everyone (all nations and tongues). It is no longer an exclusively Jewish kingdom of God.

Pentecost should be seen as a reversal of the Tower of Babel incident.

Peter, in Acts 2:39, said this promise is for you and your children and all that are afar off even as many the Lord our God shall call. When Peter made that proclamation, he didn’t even realize how profound what he had just said was. It wasn’t until chapters later, that Peter had the dream of the Lord commanding him to kill and eat the unclean creatures, that he would understand God was reaching out to the Gentile world.

Perhaps more care should be employed in guessing after what Simon Peter did or did not realize?

However, as far as Acts 2:39 is concerned, you must remember the audience. The promise is to you (Jews of Judea and the Diaspora) and to your children (Jewish descendants of the same), and as many as the Lord our God shall call (everyone else according to the call of God).

The feast of weeks (Shavuot) is a harvest festival. The harvest of God is the whole earth!!! All people nations and tongues! Wikipedia stated that Orthodox Jews all over will be reading the book of Ruth every Shavuot, unaware of the depth of its meaning.

It might not so much as being unaware, as holding a different sense of meaning. Orthodox Jews might look at the Christian interpretation of the story and determine that we are missing the depth of meaning.

[good samaritan]

The fact that the apostles along with Peter questioned Jesus before his ascension asking, “will you at this restore the kingdom to Israel.” The fact that Peter was taken back about killing and eating things that where common and unclean (non-kosher). Also, the fact that Jesus had told them only to go only to the lost sheep of Israel while he was with them. All these things are good indicators that Peter did not know the extent or at least expect the ramifications of Acts 2:39. I also know my experiences with God, and that He seldom gives the details, when He leads me to do or say anything. I have been preaching before and spoke out while under the anointing something totally off the cuff and that came from out of no where. Although Peter was the one physically preaching on Pentecost, It was no doubt the anointing of God that was on him that permitted him what to speak.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

The fact that the apostles along with Peter questioned Jesus before his ascension asking, “will you at this restore the kingdom to Israel.”

Jesus addressed that question, and immediately after, told them:

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.

Simon Peter, right then and there, knew he and the other apostles were going to bear witness to the resurrected Christ outside of Jerusalem and Judea, meaning, they would be preaching to non-Jews, in time.

The fact that Peter was taken back about killing and eating things that where common and unclean (non-kosher).

Which is completely understandable, because the symbolic nature of the vision wasn't revealed until the messenger from Cornelius knocked at the door. Until then, it was natural for Simon Peter to think the visions he was having were actually about food.

Also, the fact that Jesus had told them only to go only to the lost sheep of Israel while he was with them.

That was during the pre-cross mission. Post-cross, Simon Peter and the other apostles were given the Great Commission, to preach to every creature, to teach all ethnos (nations), not just Jews.

All these things are good indicators that Peter did not know the extent or at least expect the ramifications of Acts 2:39.

Nope. Simon Peter knew exactly what "all them that are afar off" meant. It meant what Jesus said in chapter 1: the uttermost parts of the earth.

I also know my experiences with God, and that He seldom gives the details, when He leads me to do or say anything. I have been preaching before and spoke out while under the anointing something totally off the cuff and that came from out of no where. Although Peter was the one physically preaching on Pentecost, It was no doubt the anointing of God that was on him that permitted him what to speak.

Experience doesn't determine truth or doctrine. Your personal experiences do not match my own. Shall I then hold up my experiences and claim them as some sort of litmus test against the Scriptures, like you have done here?

Yes, Simon Peter was anointed by the Spirit on Pentecost. But he also spent three and a half years with the Messiah, every single day, practically every moment of each day, plus, Jesus personally taught him for 40 days the things which pertain to the Kingdom of God, right before He ascended. The idea that Simon Peter extemporaneously preached his sermon on the fly without having had it taught to him is not the case. He was taught and prepared by the Lord.

Acts 2 is a master class of ancient world rhetoric and public speaking. It didn't happen by accident, and it didn't come by whim.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Jesus addressed that question, and immediately after, told them:

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.

Simon Peter, right then and there, knew he and the other apostles were going to bear witness to the resurrected Christ outside of Jerusalem and Judea, meaning, they would be preaching to non-Jews, in time.



Which is completely understandable, because the symbolic nature of the vision wasn't revealed until the messenger from Cornelius knocked at the door. Until then, it was natural for Simon Peter to think the visions he was having were actually about food.



That was during the pre-cross mission. Post-cross, Simon Peter and the other apostles were given the Great Commission, to preach to every creature, to teach all ethnos (nations), not just Jews.




Nope. Simon Peter knew exactly what "all them that are afar off" meant. It meant what Jesus said in chapter 1: the uttermost parts of the earth.



Experience doesn't determine truth or doctrine. Your personal experiences do not match my own. Shall I then hold up my experiences and claim them as some sort of litmus test against the Scriptures, like you have done here?

Yes, Simon Peter was anointed by the Spirit on Pentecost. But he also spent three and a half years with the Messiah, every single day, practically every moment of each day, plus, Jesus personally taught him for 40 days the things which pertain to the Kingdom of God, right before He ascended. The idea that Simon Peter extemporaneously preached his sermon on the fly without having had it taught to him is not the case. He was taught and prepared by the Lord.

Acts 2 is a master class of ancient world rhetoric and public speaking. It didn't happen by accident, and it didn't come by whim.

It didn’t come by whim, but came by the Holy Ghost. Jesus told his disciples that they where to be delivered up to the counsels and not to think on what they would say because the Holy Ghost would let them know what to say. I personally don’t believe this situation was any different. Peter was just allowing God to use him. Acts 4:13 says that they marveled when they heard Peter and John speak because they knew they where unlearned and ignorant.

You initially commented that we must be careful supposing what Peter knew or didn’t know. I agree with that, but I personally believe we can draw opinions based upon the text. That is how most people create context with the stories in the Bible. We simply have educated opinions about the setting that the scripture happened. It would seem that you are now presenting that Peter full well knew what God’s plan was for there the gentiles in Acts 2:39.

If that is the case, he seems very surprised at the conversion of Conrnelius household. Also why do you think he is being told to go to Cornelius house and what was the necessity of the vision of the clean and unclean. If Peter already knew that the gospel was for the gentiles why was he not Pursuing gentile converts before Acts 10? Also why did the apostles seem to reprimand Peter Acts 11 when they heard he companied with gentiles. To me if Peter knew all of this when he spoke what we read in Acts 2:39, then he was trying his best to get out of it.

[good samaritan]

You are correct that Jesus told them to go into the whole world. That still doesn’t mean that the apostles comprehended that Jews and gentiles would be serving side by side in this kingdom of God. All the epistles let us know, that Jewish church struggled breaking free from mosaic law. I will simply agree to disagree here. Regardless our differing opinions my initial idea was that it is interesting that Jews today don’t accept the gospel of the kingdom when it is right under their nose. I am not saying that to be antisemetic, I have respect for many notable Jews through out history. I pray that the Lord will open there eyes for their salvation. PS I am sorry for my bad grammar. I am usually posting from my phone on breaks and in between responsibilities. I have always enjoyed the dialogue on AFF and thank you for keeping it going.

[coksiw]

Votivesoul,
What if Peter originally understood the words of Jesus about preaching the Gospel outside Israel as preaching to the diasporas? Thoughts?