----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Breuss Wane" <breusswane@...>
> in
> your case, the disobedience is the necessary "consequence" of believing
that
> the book of Hebrews condemns what Paul did.

I realized later that this only might be true of Moe's interpretation... it
was John who brought up the Hebrews question.  So it's better written: in
your case, the disobedience is the necessary "consequence" of using Acts
16:6,7 to interpret Acts 21:4-15.

Chad