Did Peter Preach and Lead to Salvation Gentile Christians in Corinth?

[TEXBOW]

In 1 Corinthians 1:12:14 we see Paul correcting the Church at Corinth. He references Cephas (Peter) as one who some in the Church follow or who were taught by and baptized along with Apollos. I do not think this proves that Peter came to Corinth as Corinth Church members could have heard Peter preach in Jerusalem or other location.

12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. 13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;

Historians date the letter from Paul to the Church around 55/56 AD. If some of Gentile and Jewish converts in the Church at Corinth were of Cephas and we also assume that Cephas is the Cephas (Peter) of the 12 (we see no reference to any other Cephas) this would seem to suggest that the pathway to salvation was more universal and common across the Apostles earlier in the 1st century than some might like to believe. Difference between the 12 and Paul existed but not as much as some would have us believe. Paul did not tell the Church that Cephas had a message of works and law and to reject him, nor Apollo. Where they all preaching the same message of salvation by faith alone sooner than we might understand? Paul did not write that Cephas had a different Gospel.

Gaius in verse 14 shows up in a few places after this letter. The most interesting is in 3 John 1.
1 The elder unto the wellbeloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth.
Looks like Gaius hung out with Paul and John. Would be odd if Paul and John were bringing forth two different Gospels and if converts were fellowshipping with both.

Points to Ponder. Hyper grace folks try to drive a wedge between Paul and the 12. They try to discount all scripture outside of Pauls epistles. I do not think the 12 ignored the revelation of the mystery from the Holy Spirit. Might have taken then a bit to fully get onboard but I think it happened and why we find evidence of the 12 taking the Gospel to Gentiles in addition to Jews across the known world in the 1st century. We must remember that when Jesus told the 12 to preach to the Jews the mystery had not been reveled by God yet to anyone. Things changed after the cross.

 

[MatthewG]

Hello texbow,

Like what you said “pathway to salvation was more universal and common across the Apostles earlier in the 1st century than some may like to believe”.

The Gospel of Christ was universal. It was for the Jews and Gentiles alike. Even though the Jews had Christ crucified: they helped in a sense to allow salvation to be made for everyone due to some of their envying.

The Jews are still looked down upon by some as “Christ killers” that is not a good attitude to have when it comes to loving others, in my estimation.

Just thought would comment,
Thank you.

 

[Desire Of All Nations]

You're reading too much into that passage. Paul's rhetorical mention of Peter doesn't prove Peter was actually there in Corinth or that he taught Gentiles. Flacius' commentary sheds light on exactly why Paul said that:

“Under the pretext of Christ’s name they[the Corinthians] scorned all teachers and would have, nothing to do with them, pretending that they were wise enough for themselves without the aid of other instructors. For there was sin on both sides, either by exalting Church teachers too much or by appreciating them too little.”

The premise of Paul mentioning himself, Apollos, and Peter in that manner is that the Corinthians were deciding for themselves who had a superior revelation or who preached the kind of theology that they wanted to hear, and they consequently figured it was best for them to follow that person instead of the apostle who God assigned to them. If they arrived at the conclusion that none of those men were preaching what they wanted to hear, they just did what a lot of professing Christians do today when it comes to making themselves their own teacher and followed their own brand of Christianity while claiming to have a relationship with Christ. In all probability, this attitude is probably the root cause of why the congregation refused to discipline the man who was committing adultery with his stepmother.

 

[TEXBOW]

You're reading too much into that passage. Paul's rhetorical mention of Peter doesn't prove Peter was actually there in Corinth or that he taught Gentiles. Flacius' commentary sheds light on exactly why Paul said that:

“Under the pretext of Christ’s name they[the Corinthians] scorned all teachers and would have, nothing to do with them, pretending that they were wise enough for themselves without the aid of other instructors. For there was sin on both sides, either by exalting Church teachers too much or by appreciating them too little.”

The premise of Paul mentioning himself, Apollos, and Peter in that manner is that the Corinthians were deciding for themselves who had a superior revelation or who preached the kind of theology that they wanted to hear, and they consequently figured it was best for them to follow that person instead of the apostle who God assigned to them. If they arrived at the conclusion that none of those men were preaching what they wanted to hear, they just did what a lot of professing Christians do today when it comes to making themselves their own teacher and followed their own brand of Christianity while claiming to have a relationship with Christ. In all probability, this attitude is probably the root cause of why the congregation refused to discipline the man who was committing adultery with his stepmother.

Even using your view the fact that Paul used Peter as an example is telling.