The Origin of Paul's ReligionMachen, J. Gresham (John Gresham)
Religion
The Origin of Paul's Religion
Machen, J. Gresham (John Gresham)
Bible. Epistles of Paul -- Theology; Paul, the Apostle, Saint
At a later time such an appeal could not have been made; at a later
time even the practice of the original apostles ceased to conform to
Jewish custom. The tradition according to which the apostle Peter
finally went to Rome is emerging triumphant[72] from the fires of
criticism; and if Peter went to Rome, it is inconceivable that
he separated himself from Gentile Christians. Even in the early
days, in Antioch, he had begun to abandon his Jewish manner of
life; surely he must have abandoned it more fully when he went to
the capital of the Gentile world. The tradition as to the Ephesian
residence of the apostle John also points to the abandonment of the
Law on the part of the original apostles, and to their definite
entrance upon the Gentile mission. That tradition has been rejected
only by attending to late and dubious evidence to the neglect of
what is plain. But it is not necessary to appeal to details. All
that has been said above about the position of Peter in the mind of
the Church shows that even the practice of the original apostles
finally adapted itself to the needs of the expanding Gentile work.
[72] See, for example, Lietzmann, _Petrus and Paulus in Rom_, 1915.
But in the early period, in Jerusalem, before it had become evident
that the Jewish people as such was to reject the gospel message,
the apostles continued to observe the Law. And by doing so, they
gave the Judaizers some color of support. Thus if the Judaizers
did appeal to the original apostles in support of their legalistic
claims, the appeal does not establish any real unity of principle
between them and the original apostles, or any divergence of
principle between the original apostles and Paul. But as a matter
of fact it is by no means perfectly clear that the appeal was made;
it is by no means clear that the Judaizers appealed to the original
apostles for the content of their legalistic message rather than
merely for their attack upon the independent apostleship of Paul. It
is possible that they said no more than this: "Paul was not one of
the original disciples of Jesus; his authority is merely a derived
authority; he is, therefore, no more worthy to be heard than we; and
we can tell you something new--the followers of the Messiah must
unite themselves with the chosen people and obey the Law of God."
At any rate, even if the Judaizers did appeal to the original
apostles for the content of their message, the appeal was a false
appeal; the original apostles repudiated the Judaizers, and
recognized Paul as a true apostle, with authorization as direct as
their own.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account