JB_139_322.xml

Title: [1817 Sept. 29  Cancelled[?] Not Paul]

Description: 1817 Sept. 29  Cancelled[?]

Not Paul

Peter’s Exploits

Peter’s Exploits

The unambiguous command to whom was it given? Not to Peter only /alone/ but to him and the rest of the eleven at the same time. The ambiguous permission - if a permission it was and that permission given, to whom was it given? To Peter, and Peter alone: and to him no otherwise than in a vision that is in a dream: in plain language it was not given to him, but he dreamt it was.

Taking now for granted though inconsistent as we have seen it /it has just been/ with the Gospel history it can only be for argument sake that every thing was as related by the author of the Acts or at any rate that he had more or less ground for the reporting of that which we see reported, let us present a joint view of this vision and the other which belongs to it.

In Cæsarea dwells Cornelius, a man of rank and power a member of the official establishment ‘a centurion of the band called the Italian {band}’: he it is upon whom the experiment made is to be made upon the heathen for their conversion is to be tried is to be reported as having been tried, and of course successfully tried. In him is /his person was/ to be seen the first convert made among the Gentiles.

Acts X. 1.

No where in the Mosaic law that we have is there, nor probably in any tradition grafted upon it has there been any thing to prohibit on the part of the Jews /children/ all converse with the rest of the children of Adam and Noah stiled in our English version the Gentiles i.e. /under which denomination were comprized all /non-Jews. But whether for the purpose in question or any other for which frequent and habitual and frequent intercourse is necessary, such are the opportunities afforded by the social table /board/ small would be the chance of him who should make a point of abstaining from in comparison of him who should allow himself to profit by an occasion so favourable to the confidential intercourse of minds.

JB_139_514.xml

Title: [1817 Sept. 21 Not Paul Ch Period]

Description: 1817 Sept. 21

Not Paul

Ch Period between Visits 2 & 3

Peter’s Exploits

§. 5. Cause of Offence

Thus stood the matter among the earliest converts: converts to the religion of /preached by/ Jesus - to Christianity as how so ever improperly and inexpressively /uncharacteristically/ it came ultimately /finally/ to be called, they were not converts from Judaism.

But in the field of Christianity there was moreover /yet/ another quarter in which was carried on /which furnished ground for/ the contest between faith and works.

Jesus was born a Jew: the /a/ religion which to the last he ceased not in public at any rate to profess was Judaism: though liberalists, though latitudinarians, as by themselves and one another so still more decidedly by /in the eyes of/ those by whom they were not viewed but as it were at a distance - in a word by the Gentiles - /regarded but in the eyes of the Gentiles they were but a particular sect of Jews/ by the votaries of all those religions and in particular by those of the state religion of the established religion - the religion of Jupiter Juno and their colleagues regarded but as a sect of Jews: and hence it was that at a period /point of time/ so late as that in which Pliny the younger wrote to the disciples of him whose characteristic law was the law of universal benevolence were imputed that hatred of mankind those principles of almost universal malevolence which with but too near[?] an approach to justice might at all times have been imputed to the great body of the Jews.

JB_139_323.xml

Title: [1817 Sept. 29  Cancelled[?] Not Paul]

Description: 1817 Sept. 29  Cancelled[?]

Not Paul

Ch Peter’s Exploits

Peter’s exploits

True it is that so long as it were at his own board /table/ every thing dressed in the proper manner - no vessels employed with which any thing improper or dressed in an improper manner had ever come in contact, nothing was there in that law to prevent the most pious among Jews from thus associating with Gentiles: such at least is the case at present nor has any reason been found for any such surmisal[?] as supposing that it was ever otherwise. To eat with them in the character of guest, yes: in this there was nothing unlawful. But if those with whom it would be in the power of a traitor[?] of the word to eat in this character would necessarily be to make the trial of it confined within very narrow bounds: whereas of those with whom it would be in his power to eat in the character of a guest, there would be no /scarce any determinate/ limits. How much more blessed so ever it might have been in this way to give than to receive yet of the two supposing the intercourse /matter/ carried to any considerable extent, to receive of the two courses would be the only practicable one.

Remained therefore at any rate according to the view taken of the matter by the author of the Acts /our historian/ this /two/ problems to be solved - /the first was/ viz. how in such sort to order matters as that without giving offence to Jews such converts to the religion of Jesus as were Jews /as it found in a state of Judaism /the state of Jews// a teacher of that holy /new/ religion might without giving offence to Jews avail himself and partake as often as opportunity presented itself of the hospitality of the Gentiles.

Here then we have the first problem. The second was - how to introduce to each other a teacher and a Gentile disciple who should not only be /have been/ himself a convert but have been keeping a table to which were accustomed /in the habit of sitting[?]/ to sit down a number and more or less considerable of others who to the opportunity had added the disposition to become converts.