How should St. Paul be classified?


#1

Before you answer, I invite you to scan [thread=76267]this thread[/thread]. That thread should explain why I am posting this poll.


#2

I voted that he was Catholic, and some may disagree, but I look at him as the first “reformer” because his teaching was integral in the church opening up to gentiles and developing doctrine pertaining to whether or not gentiles needed to be jewish first.


#3

I voted not Catholic. If your poll wasn’t skewed with the word Catholic, I may heve voted differently. Everyone was either Christian or Non-Christian in that time. Even there the line wasn’t clearly defined between Jew and Gentile. In either Johns or Peters Letters. I forget which, they speak of going to the Temple as a group. Dan


#4

[quote=dancus]I voted not Catholic. If your poll wasn’t skewed with the word Catholic, I may heve voted differently. Everyone was either Christian or Non-Christian in that time.
[/quote]

In this time as well. Other labels can be applied on top of Christian or Non-Christian.


#5

If St. Paul wasn’t Catholic (ie in line with Catholic doctrine), the Catholic Church would not have put his epistles in the New Testament canon :thumbsup:


#6

I read your original posit, which you apparently thought “proved” Paul a protestant, but like all such cullings of Scripture, it doesn’t say enough to prove anything.

Paul was not being disobedient when he told the Gentile believers that meat offered to idols was nothing. He was speaking the truth, the truth which in no way negated or set aside the degree of Jerusalem. He was saying that meat offered to idols means nothing but, he goes on to say not to eat it before those with a tender conscience. In other words, he was giving pastoral advise that Peter and the other Apostles would have found perfectly in accord with their intentions with the degree of Jerusalem.

You will recall that the Judaizers wanted the Gentile believers to fulfill the whole of the ceremonial law, but knowing the freedom of Christ, they wouldn’t agree to that, but to keep that faction from existing, they told the Gentiles to refrain from eating meat offered to idols. It wasn’t a dogma or a doctrine, but a discipline, which changed when it became apparent that even this concession wouldn’t silence the objections of the Judaizers.

You don’t have a case for Paul being a Protestant with this. You only have a misunderstanding regarding what type of order it was and why it was given.


#7

[quote=Genesis315]If St. Paul wasn’t Catholic (ie in line with Catholic doctrine), the Catholic Church would not have put his epistles in the New Testament canon :thumbsup:
[/quote]

My thoughts exactly!


#8

[quote=Angainor]Before you answer, I invite you to scan [thread=76267]this thread[/thread]. That thread should explain why I am posting this poll.
[/quote]

I voted:

Paul was unique. Being an apostle, he didn’t have to be Catholic

I’m not mad keen on the first three words, simply because there were other apostles - but the rest reflects what I think :slight_smile: ##


#9

[quote=Gottle of Geer]## I voted:

Paul was unique. Being an apostle, he didn’t have to be Catholic

I’m not mad keen on the first three words, simply because there were other apostles - but the rest reflects what I think :slight_smile: ##
[/quote]

Hmmm, I would say kind of the opposite. I would say almost by definition being an Apostle made him Catholic since Catholicity is defined by the Apostolic faith :thumbsup:


#10

[quote=Genesis315]If St. Paul wasn’t Catholic (ie in line with Catholic doctrine), the Catholic Church would not have put his epistles in the New Testament canon :thumbsup:
[/quote]

It may well have been the best move the Church ever made. Dan


#11

Paul is to be classified as the one person in the entire Bible who wrote specificly to us, the Body of Christ.

God raised up Paul and revealed the mystery to him first (Rom 16:25; Eph 3:1-10) and then let other apostles know of this new revelation - that a person need not be CIRCUMCISED to be saved or follow the LAW as Jews were required to. The necessity of circumcision and doing the ENTIRE LAW is what Christ taught The Twelve and they taught their converts. Thats why when Paul reveals that God is going in a new direction, taking a different route then the one He set out on in early Acts that those in Jerusalem argue so strenuously with Paul.

Also, it no longer matters whether one is a male or female or slave or free. The mystery that God hid for so long and revealed to Paul is that He wants to come and dwell within those who trust Him and have an incredibly intimate relationship with every person that puts their trust in Him - whether Jew or Greek or whatever.

The doctrine that we are to promote today is what we find in Paul’s epistles. Where Paul differs from Peter and John and James in doctrine we are to go with Paul.

For example: According to the gospel of circumcision, many miracles would occur. Ask for it and it would come about as Christ promised concerning prayer (Matt 18:19 and 21:22) and concerning sickness (James 5:14-15). According to the gospel of uncircumcision, in the Body, if you get sick you’re gonna die. thats what every priest experiences each month and anyone reading this can attest to. A member of the Body may get prayed for but they still die and are not raised up to good health like the promises in James 5 says. And the prayers are not answered as promised as Christ stated in Matt 18:19 and 21:22.

The reality for the Body today is what Paul relates in Phil 4:6-7

Philippians 4:6-7 Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God; 7 and the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.

See. No promise to fulfill a believer’s request there. ITs different and the difference is we are realting to God according to the “administration” or “house rules” that God gave to Paul for us (Eph 3:2).


#12

Now, you may have some problems with what I have said in the post above. I understand that. I did too at first. But, to show this more clearly, let me give an overview of why things happened the way they did.

God promised Israel a kingdom. He also promised that if Israel did bad that He would repent of the good He said He would do.

Jeremiah 18:7-10 "The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy [it,] 8 "if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. 9 "And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant [it,] 10 "if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.

Christ speaks in similar terms about Israel’s future in this parable in Luke 13:6-9.

He also spoke this parable: "A certain [man] had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it and found none. 7 "Then he said to the keeper of his vineyard, ‘Look, for three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree and find none. Cut it down; why does it use up the ground?’ 8 "But he answered and said to him, 'Sir, let it alone this year also, until I dig around it and fertilize [it.] 9 ‘And if it bears fruit, [well.] But if not, after that you can cut it down.’ "

Christ came 3 years looking for fruit on Israel, the fig tree. He let it alone another year and fertilized it with the Holy Spirit on Pentecost and after Israel rejected the message preached by Peter in Acts 3 God cut off Israel as He said He would.

Acts 3:19-26 "Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, 20 "and that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before, 21 "whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began. 22 "For Moses truly said to the fathers, 'The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear in all things, whatever He says to you. 23 ‘And it shall be [that] every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.’ 24 "Yes, and all the prophets, from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also foretold these days. 25 "You are sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.’ 26 “To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one [of you] from your iniquities.”

Once this occured, God raised up Paul who would have been a great asset to The Twelve had Israel repented or had he the humility over the past 3-4 years necessary to follow Jesus. But God uses Him for another purpose. Now that the plan (Acts 1:8) had gone awry due to Israel’s rejection of the risen Christ, God took a different route. Instead of reaching the world with one nation, God would reach the world through one man, the Apostle Paul.

And thats what He did. God converted much of the world through Paul’s ministry and the gospel of the uncircumcision that Christ committed to Paul. A gospel that did NOT require circumcision, or abstaining from certain foods or tithing or a myriad of other things that the law required of Israel.

Today we are not to preach the message Christ gave to Peter through the Gospels and in early Acts, but the message Christ gave to Paul. What Paul refers to as

my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began Rom 16:25


#13

That Paul and his helpers were sent to the entire world while James, Peter and John agreed to minister to the Jews whom they had been ministering to in the first place is beyond all dispute. As we read in Gal 2:2-9

2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to those who were of reputation, lest by any means I might run, or had run, in vain. 3 Yet not even Titus who [was] with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. 4 And [this occurred] because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage), 5 to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you. 6 But from those who seemed to be something – whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man – for those who seemed [to be something] added nothing to me. 7 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision had been committed to me, as the gospel of the circumcision was to Peter 8 (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), 9 and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we [should go] to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.

Those who seemed to be something that added nothing to Paul’s message are James, Cephas and John. Or at the very least the Judaizers or “men from James”

Galatians 2:11-13 Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; 12 for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. 13 And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.

Paul has the authority in the end because only someone with his kind of authority could withstand Peter to his face. And more importantly, Paul is the one whom God decided to give the most RECENT revelation about what God is doing with the Body of Christ. This info Paul had to share with Peter when he met with him and James (Gal 1:18-19; 2:2). Its Paul’s gospel and message that lives on and continues to be effective today :thumbsup:


#14

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.