www.ArgumentCenter.org - Where hard questions are answered

Of the times in the Bible where Paul is referred to as an apostle, only twice is he referred to by someone other than himself, and those two times are by his close travelling companion, author of Luke and Acts (Acts 14:4,14). Acts 9:24 and 2 Cor 10-13 reveal controversy over the acceptance of Paul's apostleship.

So, was he really an apostle?

< STRONG The established criteria for apostleship was different than that of Paul's. This didn't matter to Paul; for him, his Damascus experience confirmed his apostleship.

The criteria for apostleship, firstly, was that one must have been a disciple of Jesus and have been appointed by Jesus as an apostle (Luke 6:13). Secondly, one must have been a part of the Jesus movement from the time of Jesus' baptism to his death (Acts 1:21). Paul didn't fit this criterion; he didn't follow Jesus during his time on earth, but became a follower after Jesus appeared to him on the road to Damascus.

Paul's Damascus experience took place between 31-33 CE, after Jesus had already been crucified, raised from the dead, and after he returned and appeared to his disciples. Thus, Paul's experience of seeing the risen Lord came later than expected, and Paul recognized this (1 Cor 15:8). Yet, Jesus' appearance to Paul was profound, causing Paul's conversion, call, and commission to apostleship. Paul was converted from a Christian persecutor into a Christ follower. He received his call to be a prophet, writing in language used for Jeremiah's call (Gal 1:15, Acts 22:14,9:15). He also received, he believed, his comission as an apostle: "But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and had called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles" (Gal 1:15-16).

Although some doubted Paul's vision of Jesus and his right to apostleship (Acts 9:26), he vehemently defended himself and believed his commission to be valid (2 Cor 10-13). Further, the established criteria for apostleship didn't matter much to Paul. Immediately after he received his commission, he didn't go to Jerusalem to confirm it with the other apostles, but instead began preaching to the Gentiles in Arabia (Gal 1:17). He went to Jerusalem three years later, staying with Peter for two weeks and seeing no other apostles except James the Lord's brother (Gal 1:18-19). He didn't return to Jerusalem until the Apostolic Council meeting was held, fourteen years later. Thus, he wasn't very interested in receiving approval from the other disciples, he was more concerned with fulfilling God's purpose for him.

Therefore, although Paul didn't meet the established criteria for apostleship, he believed Jesus' appearance to him and his instruction to be a witness to the Gentiles affirmed his commission.

-JM

>> WEAK No, he was a false apostle. In fact, in Revelation, Jesus commends the Church in Ephesus for rejecting false apostles- most likely referencing Paul.

In Revelation, Jesus instructs John: "What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea" (Rev 1:10-11). To the Church in Ephesus: "I know your works, your labor, and your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars" (Rev 2:2).

Revelation was written around 65 CE, around the same time as 2 Timothy. 2 Timothy is believed by many scholars to contain the last recorded words of Paul. Look closely at what Paul writes: "This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me" (2 Tim 1:15). All of Asia? Really? The province containing the seven churches to which Jesus speaks to in Revelation? These churches had been established for some time, and were obviously alive and thriving. Paul didn't write that they rejected Jesus, but that they had rejected him! And from his words, "this you know" it was apparently common knowledge he'd been rejected. Acts also corroborates this when it speaks of men from Asia accusing Paul of teaching against the law:

"When the seven days were almost completed, the Jews from Asia, who had seen him in the temple, stirred up all the crowd, and laid hands on him, crying out, "Men of Israel, help! This is the man who is teaching men everywhere against the people and the law and this place; moreover he also brought Greeks into the temple, and he has defiled this holy place" (Acts 21:27-29).

And again when his teachings were rejected:

"And he entered the synagogue and for three months spoke boldly, arguing and pleading about the kingdom of God; but when some were stubborn and disbelieved, speaking evil of the Way before the congregation, he withdrew from them, taking the disciples with him, and argued daily in the hall of Tyran'nus" (Acts 19:8,9).

Again, Jesus commends the Ephesian Church for rejecting someone claiming to be an apostle. Apart from the original twelve apostles, we only have record of Paul asserting his apostleship (Eph 1:1). Further, we know that he had made his claim to the Ephesian church and was rejected by them! Jesus must have been referring to Paul. Paul is, therefore, a false apostle.

- http://judaismvschristianity.com/paulthe.htm

< STRONG The Ephesians did NOT reject Paul, nor did all of Asia. Acts doesn't corroborate that point, but in fact suggests otherwise.

Paul's time in Ephesus is marked by some ups and downs, however it's clear that the Ephesians came to accept Paul. While Paul was in Ephesus, he led many believers to receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 19:5,6), stirred up the fear of God and of Jesus' name (19:13,17,18), and led many believers to openly confess their evil deeds (19:18). These believers may well have been those in the synogogue who had previously become obstinate, speaking badly of the way. When Paul left Ephesus, he preached to the rest of the Asian province, performing extraordinary miracles and healing the sick, so that "all the Jews and Greeks" living in Asia heard the word of Lord (Acts 19:10, 11). This doesn't sound like Paul was rejected by them, does it?

Further, in Acts 19:25-27, Demetrius, a silversmith who made shrines for the god Artemis, said to his fellow workmen "Paul has convinced and led astray large numbers of people here in Ephesus and in practically the whole province of Asia. He says that man-made gods are no gods at all." This directly shows that Paul was accepted widely throughout the region.

Even more convincing is Acts 20:17-38, where Paul gives a farewell speech to the Ephesian elders, after which they "wept as they embraced him and kissed him. What grieved them most was his statement that they would never see his face again. Then they accompanied him to the ship" (20:37-38). They most certainly do not sound as if they rejected Paul; quite the contrary, in fact!

Acts 21:27-29 is speaking of some unbelieving Jews rejecting Paul. John Calvin writes: "It is certain that these men were enemies to the name of Christ and of Christians, so that whilst Paul is bent to pacify the faithful, he incurreth the rage of the enemies. Those of Asia are, indeed, the raisers of the tumult; but the minds of all the people were so corrupt with the hatred of him that they all became partners in the fury." (Commentary on Acts).

John Macarthur also believes these were unbelieving Jews: "[Paul] had not only a dramatic affect on Ephesus and established a church there, and taught day and night in the school of Tyrannous, but it also created tremendous havoc in the synagogue. So the Jews from Asia may well have met him in the City of Ephesus... and the fact that they were so uptight about Paul indicates they might have been a part of that synagogue in Ephesus that Paul devastated for Christ. He moved into that place, and he wanted even the leader of the synagogue. So when they saw Paul, these Ephesian or at least these Asia Minor Jews, they really saw their opportunity." (Paul's Arrest, Part 2 Sermon)

These Jews came from Asia to Jerusalem and saw their opportunity to get back at Paul. They exclaimed that Paul was preaching against the Jews, the law, and the temple (21:27-28). "This was unfounded. Paul simply rejected trust in any of these as a basis for righteousness before God, which comes only through Jesus Christ" (David Guzik). They also claimed he brought a Gentile into the temple area, which was strictly forbidden (21:28). This angered the people in the city (other Jews) and led to Paul's arrest.

Notice that these Jews in Acts 21:27 were unbelieving Jews. These weren't the believers in Asia (or Ephesus) to whom Jesus speaks of in Revelation, nor were they the ones to whom Paul preached, baptized, and led to Christ.

Therefore, looking at scripture, there isn't sufficient evidence to suggest that Paul was rejected by the Ephesians or churches in Asia. Nor is there any evidence to proclaim that Jesus was speaking against Paul in Revelation.

-JM

>>  STRONG 2 Timothy is a pseudonymous writing, and is therefore not really written by Paul.

Most scholars agree that 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus (the Pastoral Epistles) were written by a later member of one of Paul's churches. "The author wanted to appeal to Paul's authority in dealing with a situation that had arisen after his death." (Bart Ehrman, "The New Testament: A Historical Introduction")

< Of the Pastoral Epistles, 2 Timothy is most often viewed as genuine.

One position taken by some scholars includes 2 Timothy as including genuine fragments of Paul's letters.

<< That is a minority position.

The majority of scholars believe all three are pseudonymous.

< Yes. Paul lists several valid points to establish his title as an apostle. Peter also defends his apostleship.

In 2 Cor 10-13, Paul defends his title as an apostle, apparently in response to harsh criticism.

Paul makes several valid points in order to establish his authority:

• 10:14-15 The faith of those in Corinth and the existence of their congregation is clearly indicative of Paul's true apostleship (see Acts 18:1ff; 1 Corinthians 2:1ff; 4:15)
• 11:7-9 He preached without charge (perhaps unlike his opponents) so as not to be a burden to them (mentioned again with irony in 12:13)
• 11:22-28 He boldly (yet reluctantly) describes his credentials (as compared to the claims of his opponents) and enumerates his sufferings for the cause of Christ
• 11:30-12:10 He boasts of weakness, the true characteristic of an apostle (again, as compared to the bold claims of the false apostles); see 4:7-15; 5:11-12; 6:4-10; also 1 Corinthians 4:9-13; even the vision itself was a display of weakness in that he gained nothing he could express (12:4); finally, he was even given a "thorn in the flesh" to ensure his humility as a true servant of the Lord; in 12:11 he states he was compelled to boast because such was the manner of the "most eminent apostles" (false apostles; some suggest they may be identified with the Gnostic false doctrine of superior knowledge)
• 12:12 Paul says that the signs, wonders, and miracles of a true apostle were performed among them (perhaps indicating credit goes to God and the Holy Spirit rather than himself); see also Romans 15:18-19; Galations 3:5; 1 Corinthians 2:4; 1 Thessalonians 1:5 concerning such signs accompanying the proclaimed word; the book of Acts records several miracles in connection to Paul (14:8-10; 15:12; 16:16-18; 19:11-12; 20:7-12; 28:1-9)
• 13:10 Paul concludes by clearly stating that his authority as an apostle was given him by the Lord, and that with such he intends to build them up, not tear them down; he has established numerous times his sincere love for them and desire to give of himself for their benefit (12:15) ...

Probably the greatest proof of Paul's apostleship and authority is found in 2 Peter 3:15-16. There Peter refers to Paul as "our beloved brother." He states that Paul wrote "according to the wisdom given him." Finally, Peter refers to (apparently) a collection of Paul's letters and calls them "Scripture." It is true that, in the early church, the term "Scripture" was generally used to refer to that of the Old Testament. But notice that Peter categorized the writings of Paul in the same class as "the rest of the Scriptures," thus giving a clear indication that Paul's writings are indeed truthful and authoritative.

Further, because scripture is God-breathed, or inspired by God, when Peter wrote this about Paul he was under divine inspiration. John was inspired when he wrote Revelation. The same goes for Luke in writing Acts. Thus, we have divinely inspired scripture telling us of Paul's authority and apostleship.

- http://www.biblelessons.com/paul.html

>> 2 Peter is a pseudonymous work, written after Peter's death.

2 Peter is pseudonymous, meaning that someone else wrote it and ascribed Peter's name to it. Further, scholars believe it was written approximately 100 years after Jesus' death, much later than the apostle Peter lived (he died between 65-68 CE). Therefore, Peter isn't really confirming Paul's apostleship or authority, someone else a few decades later is.

Click here for more information.

< The apostle Peter may have been the author.

Click here for arguments on this topic.

< STRONG Yes, Paul was an apostle- one "sent" by God as evidenced through the Holy Spirit and his fellow believers' acceptance of his calling.

Jesus himself said, "I tell you the truth, whoever accepts anyone I send accepts me; and whoever accepts me accepts the one who sent me." John 13:20 So if Jesus was a "sent one" - the meaning of apostleship - then to accept or reject an apostle is to accept or reject Jesus. Thus John wrote, "We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood." 1John 4:6

The following facts affirm Paul's apostleship:

1. Peter affirmed Paul's writings as scripture in 2Peter 3:15,16

2. Ananias testified of Paul's appointment. The Lord said to Ananias, "Go! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel." Acts 9:15

"A man named Ananias came to see me. He was a devout observer of the law and highly respected by all the Jews living there. He stood beside me and said, `Brother Saul, receive your sight!' And at that very moment I was able to see him. "Then he said: `The God of our fathers has chosen you to know his will and to see the Righteous One and to hear words from his mouth. You will be his witness to all men of what you have seen and heard." Acts 22:12-15

3. The Holy Spirit confirmed his calling through the church. Acts 13:2 While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them."

4. Paul is given the right hand of fellowship by Peter and the other apostles. Galatians 2:9 "James, Peter and John, those reputed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews."

5. There is no attack on Paul by the other apostles.

6.  Luke, Paul's traveling companion, compiled the gospel of Luke and the book of Acts. And Mark, who wrote the gospel of Mark, was also co-laboring with Paul to the end. (2Tim 4:11)

7. Jesus said, "By their fruit you will recognize them." Mat 7:16 The fruits of Paul's labor prove his apostleship. Paul notes of the Corinthian church, "Do we need, like some people, letters of recommendation to you or from you? You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, known and read by everybody. You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts." 2Cor 3:1-3

- http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/pauline.html

>> 2 Peter is a pseudonymous work, written after Peter's death.

2 Peter is pseudonymous, meaning that someone else wrote it and ascribed Peter's name to it. Further, scholars believe it was written approximately 100 years after Jesus' death, much later than the apostle Peter lived (he died between 65-68 CE). Therefore, Peter isn't really confirming Paul's apostleship or authority, someone else a few decades later is.

Click here for more information.

(from another argument)

< The apostle Peter may have been the author.

Click here for more on this topic.