|
Word Gems
exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity
The apostles Peter and James did not think
that Paul and his writings were divinely
inspired and infallible - anything but.
return to the main-page article on "Bible"
Preview and Summary: Peter and James attempted to undermine the work of Paul, viewed as too liberal, straying from the Old-Testament laws. Paul, in kind, blasted them from the pulpit. Clearly, these apostles did not consider each other's writings to be "infallible" - hardly.
There are certain verses in the New Testament that Big Religion never speaks of. It is not generally known that Paul, in a public way, before the whole church, called Peter out as a racial bigot and a hypocrite.
Few, even among those who read the Bible, understand that there was a doctrinal war going on between Peter, but especially James, in Jerusalem and Paul out in the missionary field.
The Jerusalem-party was preaching that it was necessary to become a Jew first in order to become a Christian; that one still needed to observe many of the old Jewish laws.
Paul would have none of this legalism and blasted the emissaries of James when they came to evaluate him. He called them "spies"! In Galatians 2:12 we learn that "certain came from James" to investigate what Paul was doing in the outlying churches.
James, a strict Old-Testament legalist, was fond of sending out "spies" (Galatians 2:4) to check up on this free-wheeling "apostle to the Gentiles."
In several of his letters, Paul harshly references these traveling Jewish bureaucrats from Jerusalem who would try to undo and undermine his work. They would publicly call Paul "second-class," a "johnny-come-lately" apostle!
Clearly, the Jerusalem-party did not harbor sanctimonious opinions of Paul as divinely inspired or his works as "infallible"! Quite the contrary.
And Paul, in response, eviscerates the "infallible" teachings of the Jerusalem crew. Paul's Galatians has a hidden focal point and target to which it is addressed. It is the leader James, who was attacking the teachings of Paul - and Paul, personally.
More and more, these two philosophical camps divided company on one primary issue: those in Jerusalem held fast to the old scriptures of Jewish law and ritual, while, increasingly, Paul would emphasize the new way of "living in the Spirit" and being led by "the Spirit of truth."
- Editor's note: for a more complete discussion, see my commentary on Galatians.
|
Editor's last word:
I would like you to carefully consider the following point as I believe it to be very important:
One of the main charges of the Jerusalem-party against Paul was,
"Who is this Paul-cherry, anyway!! Who does he think he is! Was he one of the 12! Was he personally taught by Jesus as we were! He never even met Jesus!! - and here he comes now with his high god-talk about 'spirit this' and 'spirit that,' presuming to tell us, the ones hand-picked by the Master, what the real meaning of Jesus' teachings are! Can you believe his chutzpah!!"
Well, you have to admit, on the surface of things, they had a pretty convincing argument. But, it is amazing actually, their mindset represents the very problem that Jesus addressed on that last night.
The apostles wanted Jesus to stay; but he said it didn't matter, and that they were better off if he left - because, if he went away, they would receive "the Spirit of truth"! - which was far more important than Jesus' physical nearness, which, by itself, couldn't help them.
And now, 20 years later, they still hadn't understood Jesus' message. Here we find them, not only taking shots at the teachings of "the Spirit," but calling Paul a "second-class" apostle because he hadn't personally spent time with the physical Jesus! What an upside-down philosophy, utterly contrary to what Jesus was trying to tell them on that final evening!
But is not the error of the Jerusalem-party the same argument, in principle, brought to us by Big Religion? Listen to them bluster now:
"We are the ones serving as custodian of the ancient teachings and doctrines! It is our heritage and traditions that go back all the way to the apostles! It is our church and hierarchy who 'sit in the chair' of the Jesus' hand-picked men!"
As if this sophistry were to mean something; as if proximity, in time and space, were the avenue to what's real - as if "the Spirit of truth" meant nothing.
This kind of reasoning didn't cut much ice with Paul, as it should not with us today.
A final note: The head-apostle in Jerusalem was James, not one of the 12, but a blood-brother of Jesus, born of Mary. Amazingly, the group chose him to be leader - elected him, but not only as "apostle" but "chief apostle"! - because he'd had the most physical contact with Jesus!!
It was all upside down. Incredible. Exactly what Jesus warned against! Absolutely and stunningly ironical is their obtuseness!
|
|