Did Paul distort the Gospel of the Disciples James and Peter in the Church of Jerusalem?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jas84173
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jas84173

Guest
James led the very Jewish Jesus movement in Jerusalem, while Paul developed a radically divergent form of Jesus devotion among Gentiles that spread all over the Mediterranean. Paul’s Gentile Christianity came to so outnumber law-observant Jewish devotion to Jesus that James’ point of view has almost disappeared from history. But while James and Paul were living, James strongly resisted Paul’s law-free version of the gospel.
There’s no doubt that James emerged as the Jerusalem church’s leader. Although many people assume that Peter was more prominent, a close reading of Acts demonstrates James’ authority. Roughly speaking, Peter is the most prominent figure in the first half of Acts, while Paul dominates the second. But read more closely, and you notice that James has the last word when a major decision is being reached (Acts 15:13-21) and that Paul makes a special point to meet with James (21:18). At one point even Peter acknowledges James’ authority: miraculously delivered from prison, Peter says, “Report these things to James and the brothers” (Acts 12:17). Paul’s own letters also point to James’ leadership (1 Corinthians 15:7; Galatians 1:19; 2:9, 12).
There’s also no doubt that James and Paul had issues to resolve. James led the Jewish community of Jesus followers in Jerusalem, who understood following Jesus as a very Jewish thing and who continued to observe the Torah. Paul, on the other hand, exercised his leadership among Gentiles, and he never required them to convert to Judaism by observing the Torah. Both Acts 15 and Galatians 2 reflect that James and Paul had to sort these issues out. It would be no surprise if the actual conversation was more difficult, perhaps adversarial, than Acts and Paul suggest. Indeed, Paul’s visit to James in Acts 21 suggests that many in Jerusalem remained unconvinced that Paul was living up to their agreement (21:17-26). Beyond Galatians, Paul’s letters, particularly Romans and Philippians, reflect ongoing tension regarding the circumcision of Gentile converts.
How things really stood between Paul and James, we cannot know. But we can say with confidence that Paul did not “invent” Christian adoration of Jesus, as some claim. How do we know this? Paul’s ministry began only a couple of years after Jesus’ death. Paul based his ministry from several churches located in prominent cities. The first was in Damascus, a city in southern Syria: the church there existed prior to Paul’s arrival. We later learn that Paul worked from Antioch, a city in Northern Syria: the church in Antioch included Gentiles before Paul’s arrival (Acts 11:20-22). Later, Paul moves from Ephesus, the greatest city in what we would now call Turkey: again, it seems the church there had been established by others (Acts 18:21-19:10). Finally, Paul seeks to use Rome as a center for his work (Romans 15:28): but Paul has never visited Rome, where the church already includes both Jews and Gentiles. In short, Paul did not invent Christianity - or even Gentile Christianity. Instead, he played an important role in a movement that was radically decentralized.
 
That is because Jerusalem is called the “See of James” to this day. He remained there (and was martyred there), while Peter, Paul and the others traveled. As well, do you not notice that Peter silenced the council regarding circumcision? He spoke, by the Holy Spirit, that the law was a burden upon the Gentiles that not even the Jews could keep. Remember also that this was a baby Church and other than following our Lord as best they could, they were groping for answers. I don’t know you yet - are you a Sabbatarian?
 
No not at all. It just seems the message Jesus taught and the message Paul taught contradicted each other at times.
 
Jesus was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel. After He ascended, He sent Paul to the Gentiles. Different audience, but the same Gospel. Remember that Paul went to Jerusalem to make sure his Gospel accorded with that of the Apostles. Galatians 2 will shed light on this.
 
See that’s where I get confused and I’m not at all trying to argue. I like your answers.
Why did Christ choose disciples but then not choose one of his earthly disciples to spread the gospel of Jesus? Why would he choose some guy he never met, not to mention is raising havoc on that same group of believers to proclaim his message? Paul didn’t know anything about Jesus’ earthly message. He wasn’t there on Good Friday or maybe he was yelling crucify him for all we know. And the book of Acts, I love it I do. But it was also written by Luke who was a physician who followed Paul and wrote according to what Paul most likely told him. Notice in Acts how the second half of the book, following say chapter 15 is nothing more than an account of Paul? You only see small glimpses of what the Apostles are doing. Not to mention there are those who claim when Paul wrote " if anyone comes to you proclaiming a Gospel contrary to the one proclaimed by me let him be accursed!". Some believe this letter may have been written to counter that James was sending messengers to correct Paul’s errors. All I’m really saying is, bible wise there is very little unfortunately on what the Apostles did in the years after. Sure there’s many extra canonical texts that can give an overall idea but those need to be taken with a grain of salt as many were written long after. Though a lot of our traditions come from these texts in regard to where Apostles spread the gospel and accounts of their deaths. However in the Canon of scripture there’s really not much. It’s like the Church is established and the Apostles do stuff Paul converts and then it’s all about him. And like I said Acts is definitely biased to Paul just by the author. I really wish there was more information on a lot more that was going on in the Church in Jerusalem but unfortunately when Rome utterly destroyed the city in 70 AD that side of Christianity was lost and what we know now is the Christianity Paul proclaimed. I am not saying it is wrong, Christ very well chose Paul. But it would still be nice to know more about Peter and the other disciples following the council in chapter 15. After that it basically becomes a missionary book on Paul.
 
You know that last say that St. James had? It was about how Gentiles don’t have to follow the law to be Christians. And St. Paul agreed with him.

What did St. James do or say that St. Paul disagreed with, and vice versa?

Christi pax.
 
Jesus knew Paul well, and allowed Paul’s evil to go on so that greater good could be brought from it. Don’t listen to those who claim contradictions in the scriptures - they are murmurers. Read what Jesus had to say about murmuring.

The thing is, the Apostles wrote little, as the Gospel was oral. Same with Paul, except that as he traveled, he had to write letters when the various assemblies went off the rails. We know absolutely nothing about half the Apostles - does not mean that they were inactive, only that they didn’t write things down - which was a novel concept to them. They expected Christ to return any day, and so what’s the point of writing?

Anyway, this all shows the inadequacy of bible alone.
 
In Romans, 5:1-2, Paul writes, “Therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God.”

James seems to say just the opposite, “You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.” This appears to be a first rate contradiction.
 
Context, context, context. Paul was speaking to a different audience in a different place and different time for different reasons. Not a single word he writes can be separated from the full Gospel message, and he consulted with Peter, James and others to ensure consistency and continuity. Paul never wrote “faith alone” - that was a German innovation 1,500 years later. Even Luther’s follower Philipp Melanchthon wrote an apologetic harmonizing Paul and James. Paul wrote unceasingly of “good works” which are a necessary outgrowth of saving faith.

We mislead ourselves if we scrutinize text in a vacuum. Words have numerous meanings and this is especially true of the scriptures. I think that you will benefit from consulting with a reliable scripture commentary. A good one can be found here: http://haydock1859.tripod.com/confraternity/index.html as well as the classic Rev. George Leo Haydock Commentary here: http://haydock1859.tripod.com/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top