Paul's Letters came first and the Gospel response was a refutation

by Terry 12 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Terry
    Terry

    If you pick up your Bible and look at the order of the books in the New Testament you'll find that the Gospels come before Paul's letters.

    This might casually indicate to the unaware that the Gospel writers actually wrote before Paul. Not so. Paul's letters containing Paul's remarkable theology came first. (chronologically)

    Might we view the Gospels as a REPLY to Paul and the dramatically new theology he was spreading?

    Consider the following apparent clash between the Gospel teachings and the Pauline teachings:

    Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.

    Well wasn't it PAUL who taught such things?

    Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same will be called least (smallest)

    Does this perhaps allude to Paulus the surname meaning "small"?

    in the kingdom of heaven...

    Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven ...

    Didn't Paul insist that confessing Jesus (whoever calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved) was what was needed for salvation?

    but only the one who does....

    Paul taught faith and not works, right?

    the will of my Father in heaven.

    On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many deeds of power in your name?

    Part of the Pauline churches practices, right?

    Then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; go away from me, you evildoers ..

    Literally the "lawless" ones who abandoned the Law and insisted that Faith produced salvation as preached by Paul.

    The apparent clash between Paul's teachings and the Gospel teachings and warnings make sense best when they are viewed as a response to Paul or a refutation of his letters considering that they came afterward.

    This isn't hard to swallow. The Gospels were written by Judeo-Christians who had invented their own Jesus (an Anti-Paul Jesus) just as Paul had invented a Jesus who was Anti-Jewish Anti-Law Christ.

  • Open mind
    Open mind

    But Terry, the table in the back of the New World Translation says that the writing of Matthew was completed by 41 CE.

    You must be mistaken.

    Very interesting post. Thanks.

    om

  • cyberjesus
    cyberjesus

    Very interesting Terry, if we dont have the originals how can we even tell when were they written?

  • JWoods
    JWoods

    I don't see how any real tangible proof can exist of what order these books were written, or any reliable dates.

    All of it might actually have been first written two centuries past the 0-70 A.D. era.

    (BTW, there is also a lot of contraversy over which of the four gospels was first, over similar arguments)

  • Deputy Dog
    Deputy Dog

    Terry

    I don't see any clash, but, I can see the problem for the JW or XJW.

    Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven ...

    Didn't Paul insist that confessing Jesus (whoever calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved) was what was needed for salvation?

    That is what Peter said as recorded by Dr Luke in the book of Acts chapter 2.

  • Terry
    Terry

    We have to stop and ask ourselves a question. Why is there possible so much uncertainty?

    The basics aren't even covered: Who, What, When, Where, How? These are all up for grabs fact-wise and yet

    we base Western Civilization on such a fallacy from ignorance!!

    We don't have anything to go on but a jigsaw puzzle posing as a Divine roadmap.

    But, what is it a picture of? One group sees this and another group sees that.

    We've all divided up into groups as a result.

    Tribes and armies of opinions warring against guesses and conjectures and worshipping at the altar of AUTHORITY.

    We don't know and can't know what the actual words of those uncorrupt original texts were. Those who crave certainty go crazy ASSERTING at the top of their voices that we DO KNOW all we need to know.

    Well, duh! You can't make something out of nothing. All we have is a sort-of-something and the rest is guesswork.

    Textual Criticism by the scholars who devote their lives to making-something-out-of-what-we-have brings a blur into a dull focus.

    Paul's epistles precede the Gospels in their consensus.

    Were the Gospels a reaction to Paul's assault on Judaism? There is a dissonance either way.

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips

    Well wasn't it PAUL who taught such things?

    Chronology. When were Jesus' statements, and when were Paul's?

    Paul taught faith and not works, right?

    Many works are mentioned in Paul's Epistles. Paul himself was a Worker! Look at his indefatigable travel in declaring the Gospel. The abuses he was submitted to. The martyrdom that crowned the end of his life. Paul had nothing negative to say about the idea of human effort or good works, and said many positive things about both.

    On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many deeds of power in your name?
    Part of the Pauline churches practices, right?

    The question suggests exclusivity when in fact there was none. In Acts, we see the other Apostles doing the same great things in the name of Jesus. Exorcisms, healings, prophecy, etc. Even when Jesus was on earth, we see the disciples casting out demons in Jesus' name in the Gospels.

    The apparent clash between Paul's teachings and the Gospel teachings and warnings

    Apparent is the key word in your sentence. However, there was a definite tension between Gentile and Jewish Christians. However, Paul wrote:

    I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. My brothers, some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this: One of you says, "I follow Paul"; another, "I follow Apollos"; another, "I follow Cephas(Peter)"; still another, "I follow Christ."

    Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into the name of Paul? I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized into my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don't remember if I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel — not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

    We don't see Peter refute Paul. We see Peter refute incorrect interpretations of Paul. The Marcionites come to mind. Peter wrote:

    So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position.

    Peter baptized the first Gentile, Cornelius. And Acts 10 records Peter's vision:

    About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. Then a voice told him, "Get up, Peter. Kill and eat."

    "Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean."

    The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean."

    This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.

    While Peter was wondering about the meaning of the vision, the men sent by Cornelius found out where Simon's house was and stopped at the gate. They called out, asking if Simon who was known as Peter was staying there.

    While Peter was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit said to him, "Simon, three men are looking for you. So get up and go downstairs. Do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them."

    Peter went down and said to the men, "I'm the one you're looking for. Why have you come?"

    The men replied, "We have come from Cornelius the centurion. He is a righteous and God-fearing man, who is respected by all the Jewish people. A holy angel told him to have you come to his house so that he could hear what you have to say." Then Peter invited the men into the house to be his guests.

    We also note that Paul submitted the issue of the Law to the rest of the Apostles later on in Jerusalem in Acts 15. Their collective ruling was authoritative, and the pronouncement of the decision was made by the most observant Jew in the group, James the Just. We have no record of Paul gainsaying the decision.

    What real clashes occurred, occurred between heterodox, breakaway sects, not apostolic Christianity. On the one hand, you had the Marcionites, which said Paul was the only true apostle and renounced anything to do with the Old Testament. On the other you had the Ebionites, who were judaizers, and said Paul was an apostate.

    BTS

  • Terry
    Terry

    What real clashes occurred, occurred between heterodox, breakaway sects, not apostolic Christianity. On the one hand, you had the Marcionites, which said Paul was the only true apostle and renounced anything to do with the Old Testament. On the other you had the Ebionites, who were judaizers, and said Paul was an apostate.

    Don't stop there! The landscape was crawling with sects, divisions, competing orthodoxies and hybrids and that is just the beginning.

    There is a really good reason for all that controversy. IT WAS ALL BASED ON HEARSAY.

  • XJW4EVR
    XJW4EVR

    Very interesting Terry, but I must ask where are the Wikipedia citiations to back up your assertions?

  • willyloman
    willyloman

    This conversation reminds me of a time I was out in FS and got into a long and interesting discussion with a man who was very well versed in the bible and its history. At one point, when I referenced "early Christianity" he countered with: "You mean Paul-ianity, don't you?"

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit