In Acts 13: the apostle says, "Beware lest that come upon you" (verse 40);  in

Acts 28: we see the threatened judgment fall. How could the apostle say that he was

bound for the hope of Israel in Acts 28:, if he had set aside Israel in Acts 13:?

Acts 18: 6 is said to be "absolutely identical" with Acts 28: 28. The term

"absolutely" is not to be taken seriously. We find, however, that the apostle took the

earliest opportunity of  "entering a synagogue and  reasoning  with the Jews"

(Acts 18: 19), which shows that he at least had no idea that his words in 18: 6 were

"identical" with those of Acts 28: 28. Still further, he was anxious to keep the feast

that was due at Jerusalem (18: 21), and spoke boldly in the synagogue at Ephesus

(Acts 19: 8).  Paul had no scruples against associating himself, in the temple at

Jerusalem, with men who had a vow, and there is no suggestion that he was wrong in so

doing. So that we cannot accept the statement of "identity" in these two passages, much

less that of "absolute identity".

Exception is taken to our statement that at Acts 28: an equality never known

before is introduced; and we are told that this same equality is stated in Acts 11: 15. We

must remember that Peter called himself a Jew under law, and did not hesitate to tell

Cornelius that but for the vision of the sheet he would have regarded him as common and

unclean (Acts 10: 28). His words in 11: 15 refer to the fact that the spirit came upon

Cornelius as it did at Pentecost upon the Jewish believers. We have never taught that the

"equality" of Ephesians had anything to do with Pentecost. And we cannot see how the

admission of the Gentile to Pentecostal baptism can be the same thing as equality of

membership in a unity then unknown and unrevealed. That no such conception was in

the mind of Peter and those with him is evident from Acts 11: 19 where the word was

still preached to "Jews only".

Moreover, the question comes up again in Acts 15:, the result being that a distinct

difference is perpetuated between the Gentiles who believed and the believers of the

circumcision (Acts 15: 19-21). This difference constituted a "middle wall of partition"

(Eph. 2: 14), the "ordinances" of Eph. 2: 15 being the "decrees" of Acts 16: 4.

The equality of Eph. 2: is that "the both are created one new man", but one looks in

vain for such a creation in Acts 11: or 15: The equality of Eph. 3: 6 is unique. Never

before was there a unity which, while containing Jewish and Gentile believers, was a

"joint body".

We are afraid that "B" will have to revise his statements, both as to the absolute

identity of Acts 18: 6 with Acts 28: 28, and as to the connection between Peter's

reference to Pentecostal baptism and Paul's revelation of the newly-created new man. If

these things can be called identical, it is vain to attempt to "try the things that differ".

Positive teaching, under these conditions, would be impossible, for no weight could be

given to any word of Scripture, and the truth would sink under a mass of generalities.