Was Saint Paul an Apostle?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hamburglar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

hamburglar

Guest
I know, pretty elementary question, but was Saint Paul an Apostle like Peter, James, John, Andrew, etc. were?

Also if Paul didn’t ever meet Jesus, how can we explain that he can receive Divine Revelation?
 
I know, pretty elementary question, but was Saint Paul an Apostle like Peter, James, John, Andrew, etc. were?

Also if Paul didn’t ever meet Jesus, how can we explain that he can receive Divine Revelation?
Yes.

“Paul, called by the will of God to be an apostle of Christ Jesus …” 1 Cor 1:1.

“Am I not free? Am I not an apostle?” 1 Cor 9:1.

“Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by command of God our Savior and of Christ Jesus our hope …” 1 Tim 1:1.

“For this I was appointed a preacher and apostle …” 1 Tim 2:7.
 
I know, pretty elementary question, but was Saint Paul an Apostle like Peter, James, John, Andrew, etc. were?

Also if Paul didn’t ever meet Jesus, how can we explain that he can receive Divine Revelation?
By definition, an apostle means ‘someone sent out’ with a message; e.g. a delegate. Technically, everyone who had received a mission from God, or Christ, to man could be called an ‘apostle’. Jesus Himself was called an ‘apostle and high priest’ in Hebrews 3:1.

As for Paul, he claimed to have received the Gospel through a revelation of Jesus on the road to Damascus (cf. Gal 1:12; Acts 9:3-19, 26-27, 22:6-21, 26:12-23), thus he would, in a sense, be an ‘apostle’, albeit one “born out of time,” in his own words.
 
I know, pretty elementary question, but was Saint Paul an Apostle like Peter, James, John, Andrew, etc. were?

Also if Paul didn’t ever meet Jesus, how can we explain that he can receive Divine Revelation?
Yes
 
Okay, I thought there were only 12 Apostles? We have 12 minus Judas + Matthias = 12. Paul would make it 13.

I understand that one can be an apostle to a nation as a missionary, but I thought there were a total of 12 Apostles appointed by Christ.
 
Okay, I thought there were only 12 Apostles? We have 12 minus Judas + Matthias = 12. Paul would make it 13.

I understand that one can be an apostle to a nation as a missionary, but I thought there were a total of 12 Apostles appointed by Christ.
We also have a number of bishops… Your point?

Paul was not among the Twelve when Christ was alive. Just as the apostles in our line of succession also surpass twelve.
 
Okay, I thought there were only 12 Apostles? We have 12 minus Judas + Matthias = 12. Paul would make it 13.

I understand that one can be an apostle to a nation as a missionary, but I thought there were a total of 12 Apostles appointed by Christ.
St Stephen was stoned to death before St Paul’s conversion.
 
We also have a number of bishops… Your point?

Paul was not among the Twelve when Christ was alive. Just as the apostles in our line of succession also surpass twelve.
Well, today’s bishops are not apostles. They are the apsotles’ successors. The carry the same authority as the apostles, but they lack the inspiration of the apostles — their preaching is not the inspired word of God as was the preaching of the apostles (1 Thes 2:13).
 
I know, pretty elementary question, but was Saint Paul an Apostle like Peter, James, John, Andrew, etc. were?

Also if Paul didn’t ever meet Jesus, how can we explain that he can receive Divine Revelation?
Paul was an Apostle but not like the others you list. He did not walk with the Lord during His earthly mission. That is the difference.

The similarities are greater however… he was called and sent by the Lord and inspired like the others.
 
St Stephen was stoned to death before St Paul’s conversion.
Stephen was a deacon, not an Apostle. The first of the Apostles to be martyred was James the brother of John, after Paul’s conversion.
 
From By What Authority:

Scripture shows that only the Apostles are “entrusted” with the care of the Gospel message:
• St. Paul “…they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised.”(Gal. 2:7)
“…in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation.” (2 Cor. 5:19)
“…in accordance with the glorious gospel of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.” (1 Tim. 1:11)
• St. Timothy
“Paul, Silvanus [Silas], and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians… we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel.” (1 Thess. 1:1, 2:4)
“O Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you.” (1 Tim. 6:20)
“…guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us.” (2 Tim. 1:14)
You may object at this point that St. Timothy was not an apostle. I will concede that he was not an “Apostle,” with a capital “A,” but you must concede that Scripture clearly calls St. Timothy an apostle, thereby attesting to his apostolic authority:
“Paul, Silvanus [Silas], and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians… nor did we seek glory from men, whether from you or from others, though we might have made demands as apostles of Christ.” (1 Thess. 1:1, 2:6)
It is not only St. Timothy who is called an apostle by Sacred Scripture, but also St. Barnabus, Apollos, and St. Titus:
St. Barnabus - “But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, they tore their garments and rushed out among the multitude…” (Acts 14:14)
Apollos - “I planted, Apollos watered… He who plants and he who waters are equal.” (1 Cor. 3:6, 8)
“I have applied all this to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brethren… For I think that God has exhibited us apostles as last of all, like men sentenced to death.” (1 Cor. 4:6,9)
The objection will be raised: Titus is nowhere in Scripture explicitly called an apostle. I reply, it is implicit in what kind of authority is accorded to the apostles. Scripture testifies that only apostles are given full authority. Compare what is said of St. Paul and St. Timothy (both of whom are called “apostles”) with what is said of St. Titus:
St. Paul - “…nor did we seek glory from men, whether from you or from others, though we might have made demands as apostles of Christ.” (1 Thess. 2:6)
St. Timothy - “As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine…” (1 Tim. 1:3)
“Command and teach these things.” (1 Tim. 4:11)
“Remind them of this, and charge them before the Lord to avoid disputing about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers.” (2 Tim. 2:14)
St. Titus - “This is why I left you in Crete, that you might amend what was defective, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you.” (Tit.1:5)
“Declare these things; exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you.” (Tit. 2:15)
“…our boasting before Titus has proved true. And his heart goes out all the more to you, as he remembers the obedience of you all, and the fear and trembling with which you received him.” (2 Cor. 7:14-15)
Scripture also shows that only the Apostles refer to the Gospel message as their own personal possession:
“…when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.” (Rom. 2:16)
“Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ…” (Rom. 16:25)
“Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, descended from David, as preached in my gospel.” (2 Tim. 2:8)
“Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians… for our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction.” (1 Thess. 1:1 & 5)
“Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians… God chose you from the beginning to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth. To this he called you through our gospel…” (2 Thess. 1:1 & 2:13-14) The Apostles possess the Gospel message precisely because it was (as the above passages demonstrated) “entrusted” to them, i.e., given to them, and not taken by them on their own initiative. This is completely in keeping with the restriction imposed by Heb. 5:4.
 
I was told that the reason we can’t promote private revelations was because all was already given by the time of Jesus’ death, and that after His death, nothing else is revealed. Or something like that. So how can Paul give us Divine Revelation?
 
I was told that the reason we can’t promote private revelations was because all was already given by the time of Jesus’ death, and that after His death, nothing else is revealed. Or something like that. So how can Paul give us Divine Revelation?
You’re thinking of the death of the last Apostle, not the death of Jesus. All of the New Testament was written after Jesus’ death, so obviously divine revelation didn’t end with Jesus’ death. God’s general revelation to humanity included two things: (1) Scripture, and (2) the preaching of Jesus and of the Apostles (1 Thes 2:13). When the last Apostle died (I believe it was John the Evangelist), God’s general revelation to humanity ended, and the deposit of faith was completed.

Nothing new can ever be added to the deposit of faith, since no Apostle remains alive.

Private revelations are binding only upon the person who receives them. If anyone says to you, “God told me to tell you such-and-such,” you as a Catholic never can be required to accept it as a divine revelation.
 
I was told that the reason we can’t promote private revelations was because all was already given by the time of Jesus’ death, and that after His death, nothing else is revealed. Or something like that. So how can Paul give us Divine Revelation?
Public revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle, John the Beloved Disciple. Paul was an Apostle, and he wrote and was martyred before the death of John.

Private revelation may continue to this day, but no one (other than the recipient) is obliged to believe it.
 
Public revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle, John the Beloved Disciple. Paul was an Apostle, and he wrote and was martyred before the death of John.

Private revelation may continue to this day, but no one (other than the recipient) is obliged to believe it.
Sure, sure, say the same thing as me in half the space. Hmmpf!
 
Public revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle, John the Beloved Disciple. Paul was an Apostle, and he wrote and was martyred before the death of John.

Private revelation may continue to this day, but no one (other than the recipient) is obliged to believe it.
Okay, that’s right, that’s what I was thinking. Anyway, I still don’t really know if Paul was an Apostle, like you say. I don’t know how to explain it. He wasn’t one of the 12. Why does he have a special place?
 
I know, pretty elementary question, but was Saint Paul an Apostle like Peter, James, John, Andrew, etc. were?

Also if Paul didn’t ever meet Jesus, how can we explain that he can receive Divine Revelation?
Saint Paul was certainly an Apostle.

He was not, however, just like the rest of the apostles.

He was called by Christ to be an “apostle to the gentiles” in a unique way. His mission was confirmed by Peter and the rest of the apostles, who laid hands upon him and instructed him before he set out on his own.

So in addition to the direct divine revelation that I’m sure he received from Christ Himself, he had one heck of a set of RCIA instructors.

🙂

Chuck
 
Saint Paul was certainly an Apostle.

He was not, however, just like the rest of the apostles.
Right. The Eleven were called by Jesus while he was still a man on the earth; St. Paul was called through a vision and a heavenly voice. And that is why we see in Scripture:
“And God did extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul, so that handkerchiefs or aprons were carried away from his body to the sick, and diseases left them and the evil spirits came out of them.” (Acts 19:11-12)

(Read the rest of By What Authority to see why it is that extraordinary miracles are required of those called through a vision and a heavenly voice.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top