- Mar 18, 2014
- 38,117
- 34,056
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Add to that Peter speaks for Paul's position at the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Sure he confirms the apostleship of Paul. The logic is simple:
1. When he refers to Paul's epistles, he puts them on equal ground with the "other scriptures."
2. Only scripture is on equal ground with scripture.
3. That means that he is acknowledging Paul's epistles as scripture
4. Scripture cannot be broken, and all scripture is God-breathed
5. Paul's epistles, which have now been identified as scripture by Peter, identify Paul as an apostle
And I would say whether or not a scripture is easier for opportunists to twist to their own ends is not a reason to treat it differently than any other scripture.
More correctly, Peter reveals God's revelation.
When Jesus sent out His 12 Apostles, he instructed them to preach the gospel to Jews. They were not to preach to the Gentile nations.
Logic is not the way to understand spiritual things! There cannot be more than 12 apostles! Peter calls him only beloved brother. The word scripture in the NT refers to only the OT verses.
Is that really the Gospel in totality?
Qualified people have been churning out their own convenient theology since the ministry of Paul!
Requiring an interpreter for gibberish speaking!
So Paul never heard Jesus while on earth!
Jesus' message supersedes all messages. John indirectly hinted at false apostles (other than the chosen 12) in Revelation.
Despite contrary belief, i think that the words of Christ were written down pretty quickly. This only makes sense, seeing how it was the word of God. Surely they wrote it down as soon as he was resurrected, if not before. Its possible that paul had the words of Christ in writing. Aside from that however, Paul heard the Gospel message just as the rest of the pharisees did.
And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. (2 Peter 3:15-16)
If their is fault, it is with the readers interpretation of what Saint Paul wrote, not with what was written. Saint Peter vouched for him and that endorsement is enough proof for me. I would say that Saint Paul's letters should not be the first source that is used to derive doctrines because what he is saying is on a more advanced level and his audience consists of people who have already received the Gospel. So these people would read the letters in light of what Saint Paul has already told them in person. Many errors are committed by people who read Saint Paul's letters, interpret it for themselves and then attempt to force their interpretation back on the rest of the Bible. Doing this can make it seem like their is some kind of conflict between what Saint Paul and Jesus are saying.
Galatians 1
I think they are referring to the belief in Faith alone.
Don't you think Paul would have mentioned that tiny little detail in his writings, not to give more authority to his teachings because he opposed Christians initially and persecuted Christians, but as someone who heard the word from Messiah himself and still persecuted Christians. How much more of a testimony of Messiah's saving grace that would be....Yes, Paul still heard the gospel preached from Christ himself, and his disciples when he was a pharisee, just as all pharisees heard it. They were always listening, looking for some way to trap Christ and His disciples. Like wolves stalking their pray. I bet later, after his conversion, Paul remembered those words and his knowledge of Torah was also with him, and the spirit lead him by those things.
Don't you think Paul would have mentioned that tiny little detail in his writings, not to give more authority to his teachings because he opposed Christians initially and persecuted Christians, but as someone who heard the word from Messiah himself and still persecuted Christians. How much more of a testimony of Messiah's saving grace that would be....
Yes, Paul still heard the gospel preached from Christ himself, and his disciples when he was a pharisee, just as all pharisees heard it. They were always listening, looking for some way to trap Christ and His disciples. Like wolves stalking their pray. I bet later, after his conversion, Paul remembered those words and his knowledge of Torah was also with him, and the spirit lead him by those things.
Galatians 1 is not implying what you provide above.
You know yourself that pharisees heard Christ preach. They heard Stephen preach too. Paul held their coats while they stoned stephan, right after they heard his message. I dont think we have enough scripture to say whether paul did or did not hear the Gospel preached when he was a pharisee. My only point is that we dont know, but its likely that he may have heard it. Hearing the message however doesnt mean we understand it. Only Christ could have made Paul understand the message. Perhaps thats what he meant when he said that he didn't learn from flesh and blood.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?