PAUL CAN NOT BE AN APOSTLE ALONG WITH PETER AND THE APOSTLES

[VictoryinJesus]

Some say there is only one church in the Bible.

Let's examine the implications of this position on the apostleship of Paul, as well as the twelve apostles.

Paul was, with out controversy, an apostle..........[Galatians 1:1 KJV] 1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)............So if there is one church, then Paul would be an apostle along with the twelve. Since there is only one church, they would all be apostles in it. To be an apostle with Peter and the twelve, Paul would have to have been with the other apostles during the entire time Jesus was on earth, beginning from the baptism of John until the ascension of Christ..........[Acts 1:21-22 KJV] 21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.

An apostle proclaims the gospel (Galatians 2:2), builds up the church (Romans 16:25), oversees many churches (2 Corinthians 11:28), establishes doctrine (1 Timothy 1:3), establishes order (1 Corinthians 14:40), designates pastors and deacons and their qualifications (Titus 1:5).

Those who believed Peter's preaching were added to the church, and continued in the doctrine of Peter and the apostles...............[Acts 2:41-42 KJV] 41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added [unto them] about three thousand souls. 42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.............Here is a problem, Paul establishes doctrine for the church as well............[2Timothy 3:10 KJV] 10 But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience,...........Paul exhorted that no doctrine other then the doctrine he established should be preached............[1Timothy 1:3 KJV] 3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,...........how is the doctrine of Peter and Paul to be reconciled if they are different?

Here is a major conflict in doctrine between Peter and Paul. Peter kept the law..........[Acts 10:13-14 KJV] 13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. 14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
[Acts 10:28 KJV] 28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
If Paul, and Peter, and the apostles, were all operating as one church, then there would be a conflict because Peter held to the law, and Paul said we aren't under it. Paul taught we aren't under the law..........[Romans 6:14 KJV] 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Paul appointed bishops and deacons in the church............[Philippians 1:1 KJV] 1 Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:..............Here arises another problem, in the church in Jerusalem overseen by Peter, there are no pastors or deacons, it is a church that worshipped in the temple......... [Acts 3:1 KJV] 1 Now Peter and John went up together into the temple at the hour of prayer, [being] the ninth [hour].

How could Paul have been an apostle in the Jerusalem church headed by Peter, if he was being accused of teaching Jews to forsake Moses and the law?...........[Acts 21:20-21 KJV] 20 And when they heard [it], they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: 21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise [their] children, neither to walk after the customs.

[Acts 2:44, 46 KJV] 44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common; ... 46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,..........What would Paul and the twelve have in common? How could there possibly be all one church when there exists such discrepancies between them?
God is not the author of confusion..........[1Corinthians 14:33 KJV] 33 For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Paul is our apostle for the body of Christ, but he could not be an apostle to the church in Jerusalem headed by Peter.

A few points that may help, or not. Ephesians 2:18-22 speaks of built on the apostles and prophets foundation with Christ the cornerstone stone. Christ is the foundation …laid without hands, not Paul or Peter —but Christ on whom they both stood as a sure place to stand.

For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. [19] Now therefore you are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; [20] And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; [21] In whom all the building fitly framed together grows (edifying itself in love, Ephesians 4:16 ) unto an holy temple in the Lord: [22] In whom you also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Also, later you mention Peter keeping the law by never eating anything unclean. Personally I do think the point was for Peter to be taught of God “you ought to Love one another”—same thing Paul was taught by the Revelation of Jesus Christ.
Or that is my takeaway Acts 11:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

but let’s say it’s about Peter having never eaten anything unclean. Romans 14:1-9 speaks on not judging whether one eats, or doesn’t eat.
— For none of us live to himself, and no man dies to himself. [8] For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's. [9] For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.

 

[Doug]

A few points that may help, or not. Ephesians 2:18-22 speaks of built on the apostles and prophets foundation with Christ the cornerstone stone. Christ is the foundation …laid without hands, not Paul or Peter —but Christ on whom they both stood as a sure place to stand.

Good point
Thought you might like to read this

WHAT FOUNDATION IS THE CHURCH BUILT UPON?

 

[MatthewG]

Hello to the group,

I read this this morning, whether it has value or not. Beats me, all I can do is share.

Galatians 1:1 Paul, an apostle (not sent from men nor through the agency of man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead), and all the brethren who are with me, To the churches of Galatia:

I think this kind of shows how Mattihas was picked through human effort by the casting of lots.

Grace, and peace,
Matthew

 

[Doug]

but let’s say it’s about Peter having never eaten anything unclean. Romans 14:1-9 speaks on not judging whether one eats, or doesn’t eat.
— For none of us live to himself, and no man dies to himself. [8] For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's. [9] For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.

Peter still followed the law..............[Act 3:1 KJV] 1 Now Peter and John went up together into the temple at the hour of prayer, [being] the ninth [hour].

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Good point
Thought you might like to read this

WHAT FOUNDATION IS THE CHURCH BUILT UPON?

I did check out the link. If there is two foundations, ones fall is great?
Matthew 7:24-27 Therefore whosoever hears these sayings of mine, and does them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: [25] And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. [26] And every one that hears these sayings of mine, and does them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: [27] And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Peter still followed the law..............[Act 3:1 KJV] 1 Now Peter and John went up together into the temple at the hour of prayer, [being] the ninth [hour].

It makes me think of Jesus telling them He had much to tell them but they could not bear it yet. Saul was no different from Peter. Thinking himself zealous and a Pharisee. Jesus told Peter satan wanted to sift him as wheat…and when Peter returned “strengthen your brothers.” They all carry the example of flesh failing, the Spirit carrying them where they willed not to go. That it’s of God and not men. Romans 7 I speak to you that know the law—how as long as the husband lives you are called an adulterous woman. By the body of Christ you are freed from the law of jealousies of the wrathful angry husband who would stone you, dead. You are free to bring forth fruit unto God. I love how Paul shows the transfiguration of transformation (made without hands) from Saul to Paul, who once persecuted the body of Christ to then preaching what he once destroyed. But it wasn’t only Paul. For example the sons of thunder wanting to call down fire to destroy. They show the same transfiguration from darkness unto Light, from death unto Life. No longer calling down fire to destroy but edifying the body in love. Not only do they transform but what comes out of their mouths goes from the glory of men unto the Glory of God; changed from glory to Glory. How are Peter and Paul not brothers? Don’t forget Stephen stood as Paul later stands, saying to a young Saul “God doesn’t dwell in temples made with hands”. Miraculous with later—“yet not I, but Christ lives in me.”
Point is—Peter also experienced from law keeping and judgement to mercy and truth.

 

[MatthewG]

Hello Creed,

Me either.

Thank you,
Matthew

 

[Muna]

Of course He was, but I've also listened to many false teachers in our day calling themselves Apostles. It's a completely misused term.

Agreed

I don't know how I overlooked,, "This must be some new wacky brand of dispensationalism."

But I did, and I agree

 

[Davy]

Gnats & Fleas, that ought to be the name of this Thread, arguing over gnats & fleas.

Per Acts 9, Jesus said Saul (Paul) was His "chosen vessel". A 'chosen sent one' is what the Greek word for apostle means.

Lord Jesus chose Paul to mainly take The One Gospel to the Gentiles. But Jesus also chose Paul to preach that SAME Gospel also to the kings, and to the children of Israel (Acts 9).

Lord Jesus chose Peter to take The One Gospel to the Jews mainly, but Peter also preached that SAME Gospel to Gentiles.


So who are the CHARLATANS that try to divide The Only Gospel of Jesus Christ into TWO SEPARATE GOSPELS? Those are CHARLATANS THAT WORK FOR THE DEVIL THAT TRY TO DIVIDE CHRIST'S CHURCH. And what's funny is that while Paul taught that Christ's Church is ONE BODY made up of believing Jews and Gentile, those CHARLATANS instead try to preach they are TWO SEPARATE BODIES!

It ain't difficult to recognize those DEVILS. They preach DIVISION of Christ's Body, something that Apostle Paul NEVER PREACHED.

 

[Behold]

Paul is our apostle for the body of Christ, but he could not be an apostle to the church in Jerusalem headed by Peter.

Paul is an Apostle.
This is not related to any Church.
He's an apostle because Jesus chose Him and anointed Him to be an Apostle.

Consider that Peter was appointed an Apostle before there was any Local Church created.
IN Acts 2 Peter the Apostle is preacing to Jews during Pentecost... and there is no local church created yet, by any apostle.

When Jesus told all the APOSTLES......to "go into all the world and make disciples"'....there were no churches yet.......not one.

 

[ProverbsInPink]

Gnats & Fleas, that ought to be the name of this Thread, arguing over gnats & fleas.

Per Acts 9, Jesus said Saul (Paul) was His "chosen vessel". A 'chosen sent one' is what the Greek word for apostle means.

Lord Jesus chose Paul to mainly take The One Gospel to the Gentiles. But Jesus also chose Paul to preach that SAME Gospel also to the kings, and to the children of Israel (Acts 9).

Lord Jesus chose Peter to take The One Gospel to the Jews mainly, but Peter also preached that SAME Gospel to Gentiles.


So who are the CHARLATANS that try to divide The Only Gospel of Jesus Christ into TWO SEPARATE GOSPELS? Those are CHARLATANS THAT WORK FOR THE DEVIL THAT TRY TO DIVIDE CHRIST'S CHURCH. And what's funny is that while Paul taught that Christ's Church is ONE BODY made up of believing Jews and Gentile, those CHARLATANS instead try to preach they are TWO SEPARATE BODIES!

It ain't difficult to recognize those DEVILS. They preach DIVISION of Christ's Body, something that Apostle Paul NEVER PREACHED.

It's confusing you judge members are debating over gnats and fleas here and yet you inject your own gnat or flea.

Paul cursed any *who* would bring a different gospel than what he identified at least eleven times as his gospel.

I read your protestations as an argument from ignorance.

You might study the record and differences that are in Scripture between the Gospel of Jesus and ,as he identified it himself, Paul's gospel.My gospel.

*edit to add that missing word*

 

[Aunty Jane]

It seems to me that most are overlooking one very obvious factor here.....WHY was Paul chosen as “an apostle to the nations” after the death of Jesus?

The 12 were chosen as uneducated men, those not schooled by the Pharisees and therefore not loaded down with Pharasaical doctrines. Jesus himself was derided for not being educated at the schools and for keeping company with unlearned men. (John 7:15; Acts 4:13) He chose them specifically because, like himself, they were sent exclusively to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel”.

The appeal was obvious....the apostles were like the ones they were sent to preached to, not pompous self-righteous men relying on their lineage and education to hold power over the people. These religious leaders were supposed to shepherd the sheep, but unless the sheep treated them as their masters, they relegated them to the bottom of the barrel...treating them like dirt. How refreshing to have humble people like themselves, giving them hope that the religious leaders denied them.

The assignment of the 12, was to gather the “lost” ones among their own people first, but Israel were not the only ones to be saved, as God had already pointed out to Abraham....when he was asked to sacrifice his son, God said to his obedient servant...
“ And by means of your offspring all nations of the earth will obtain a blessing for themselves because you have listened to my voice.’” (Gen 22:18)

It was always God’s intention to include the Gentiles of “all nations” in his promise of salvation....but he promised Israel first places in the Kingdom to honour Abraham. The 12 apostles form the very foundation of his Kingdom in heaven. (Rev 21:14)

This is where Paul comes in. Can his apostleship be questioned? No way!
But was his assignment meant to eclipse the work of the other apostles? Again, there is no indication that his assignment was anything other than the choice of a man who was qualified for the job at the time it was needed.

Peter was actually used to inaugurate the ministry to the Gentiles with the conversion of Cornelius and his household....the first to be converted directly to Christianity without first converting to Judaism.

Saul was an educated Pharisee and his zeal for the worship of his God was seen in his persecution of Christ’s disciples. He was on his way to round up more Christians, when he received a visit from the risen Christ. He was a proud man on a mission that he thought was righteous....God saw his zeal and redirected him. That once proud Pharisee became the humble apostle who came to be loved by his brothers and fellow apostles. His affection for the disciples and the other apostles was obvious...even when personal differences got in the way sometimes, they worked it out.

He was not taught by the 12, but received his education directly from Jesus, as they had.

As has been mentioned, the title “apostle” simply means “one sent forth” and was applied also to Jesus. (Heb 3:1) So the whole basis of this thread is a shallow misconception. Paul was an apostle whose work assignment was complementary to that of the 12.

His education gave him advantages over the other apostles as his ministry to the Gentiles meant being brought before governors and high officials. He was also found equal to the Greek philosophers who would have laughed at fishermen trying to educate them.

Paul’s choosing becomes obvious when you don’t have to alter Scripture to make him out to be more than he was....a humble servant of his God in company with the 12. He is not part of the foundations of the Kingdom as he was never one of the 12. His assignment gave him equal status with his fellow apostles and he did not preach a different gospel...he simply had a different audience.

Even when brought before Jewish high officials he was in equal standing with them educationally and positionally as a “Pharisee and a son of Pharisees”. He could speak as one of them, and he also had Roman citizenship which also gave him advantages among the Gentiles.

As I see it, Paul’s ministry was part of the total assignment that Christ gave to all his disciples...to go out to the people and teach them how to save themselves. (Matt 10:11-14) All they had to do was accept Christ’s sacrifice and bring their lives into harmony with his teachings.....not Peter’s....not John’s.....and not Paul’s....the teachings were all from the Master that they all served as their teacher and savior.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Another point that needs clarification (IMO) is the meaning of the word “gospel”.

According to Strongs Concordance, “gospel” means “glad tidings” or “good news”......so those reporting the “good news” to others, could call it their “gospel” without indicating that it was something exclusively theirs.

You can have several news media outlets reporting the same event in different words and sometimes with a different slant on one aspect of the event.....same news...but not the property of the ones reporting it.

 

[Muna]

Another point that needs clarification (IMO) is the meaning of the word “gospel”.

According to Strongs Concordance, “gospel” means “glad tidings” or “good news”......so those reporting the “good news” to others, could call it their “gospel” without indicating that it was something exclusively theirs.

You can have several news media outlets reporting the same event in different words and sometimes with a different slant on one aspect of the event.....same news...but not the property of the ones reporting it.

You know AJ even "the doctrine", which is referred to as "the doctrine of Christ"
is the doctrine of God.

As Jesus tells us

Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.

John 7:17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God,
or whether I speak of myself.

As he told them earlier

John 1:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment,
what I should say, and what I should speak. (Deut 18:18, John 6:68, John 17:8)

John puts it this way

2 John 1:9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God.
He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

John 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine,
but the Father's which sent me.

Same thing referred to in different ways,
The gospel of God, the gospel of His Son, and my/Paul's gospel (in the preaching of His Son Jesus Christ)

Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,

Romans 1:9 For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing
I make mention of you always in my prayers;

Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one
that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Romans 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ,
according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

I agree with that, and just wanted to post my reasons why I do using His words