Running with the Exceptions

Paul was an exception from day one. By his recorded testimony, upon conversion Paul “did not immediately confer with flesh and blood” (Gal 1:16) but rather went to Arabia and then returned to Damascus. Finally after three years he met with Peter and James for about 15 days. Afterwards he went to the regions of Syria and Cilicia and was unknown by face to the churches of Judea. Then fourteen years later, he went up again to Jerusalem (Gal 2:1).

This means that Paul spent his first seventeen years as a Christian without “input” from the Christian community in Judea — save those 15 days with Peter and James. Let me ask you a good question, “Who was Paul’s pastor during those formative years?”

By today’s standards we would classify Paul as a backslidden Christian or an unfortunate shipwreck simply waiting to happen. Can you imagine someone coming to a revival service, getting saved then immediately moving out of state. One day, after 3 years he returns to spend 15 days with a leading pastor (or his associate), before disappearing for another 14 years. You might say that this man’s evolving doctrine would be pretty suspect — right? But this is the description of the guy who just wrote two-thirds of the New Testament. Maybe we shouldn’t be so quick to judge? And, maybe, the Holy Spirit was actually telling the truth when He said He could and would lead us into all truth.

Judaism vrs. Christianity?

Torah of Judiasm

Indeed initially, all understanding of the differences between “Christianity” and “Judaism” (Old and New Covenant) came by revelation — Paul being the central recipient of this information. Over time this information became formalized into theology and doctrinal beliefs. Paul’s letters became “canonized” and today two-thirds of our New Testament are comprised of his writings.

It is, however, interesting to understand one of the underlying reasons why Paul’s writings (and the other writers of Scripture) were canonized.

As time pressed on, it became increasingly evident that the last of the original 
“Apostles” would die before Christ’s anticipated return. This posed a very serious problem: who would solve future doctrinal disputes? Simple — the surviving writings of those who previously solved the debates would serve future generations as a final authority (of course, this assumed that future generations wouldn’t come up with new debate material).

Future “issues” aside, this solution led to an even greater challenge. Who would interpret the meaning of the writings — now that those who originally penned them were dead?

If you’ve been around Christian circles long, you’ve found that people are amazingly creative in interpreting Scripture in order to make it say what they want it to say. This was no less a problem in the early church. So who would become “interpreter” for the people? Who’s interpretation would be considered truly “authoritative”?

___________________________

Next up: Who Qualifies as Final Authority?
If new to this blog, begin here to read subject sequentially.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.