The Apostles' Authority
Maybe you’ve heard the argument of some, who claim that they like Jesus and his teaching, but reject the teaching of the Apostle Paul. Why? Because Paul appears to come down hard on women in leadership positions and comes down hard on homosexuality as a sin. The women’s liber’s out there and the gay crowd, do not like what Paul has to say. This article will not deal with women in church leadership, nor homosexuality, but whether we are able to justifiably separate Jesus teaching from Paul’s, accepting one, rejecting the other.
Clearly, in the case of Paul, he was an apostle. Not one of the twelve, who represented the 12 tribes of Israel, but a special apostle to the Gentiles. “And he said to me, ‘Go, for I will send you far away to the Gentiles,’” we see in Acts 22:21. And in Acts 9:15 Ananias is told, “But the Lord said to him, ‘Go, for he (Paul) is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles.’” Paul will confer with the twelve apostles on issues at times (Acts 9, Galatians 1, 2). But he also writes a majority of the New Testament as we consider his letters to the churches. Without a doubt, the early church accepted that Paul was a legitimate apostle.
Speaking of the New Testament, not all of it was written by apostles, just to be clear. Luke wrote one of the accounts of Jesus’ life, also the book of Acts, and was not an apostle, but he traveled with the apostles, so he had firsthand information to rely on. The same is true of Mark, who wrote another of the accounts of Jesus’ life; not an apostle but traveled with some of them. Mark is thought to have relied heavily on Peter’s preaching as he writes his gospel account. The books of James and Jude were written by half-brothers of Jesus who became disciples, well versed in both the Old Testament, and the teaching of Jesus and the apostles. With this note, the point is, all the New Testament is written by either an apostle or by an associate of an apostle (which the apostle could oversee and approve).
But maybe you have this thought cross your mind: Is the teaching of Jesus superior to the teaching of all the apostles? Would it be OK to just use what Jesus says to provide direction in my Christian-walk, or must I also include what the apostle’s tell me? In other words, since Jesus is my Lord, pay attention to the red-letter words of Jesus and forget all the apostles add in the books following Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
But we are told in 2 Timothy 3:16 that, “All scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.” And Peter will say, “No prophecy of scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Ptr.1). The books accepted as “canon” (official) by early church fathers were done so as they had a very serious process of vetting during the early centuries. Each book had to be by an apostle, or by an associate of an apostle, must not contradict Jesus’ teaching, and had to be widely accepted with a consistency that rang true. The councils of Hippo in 393AD and Carthage in 397AD both formally affirmed the 27 books we have today.
An apostle in the ancient world was an emissary for the king and spoke with his authority. Jesus appointed the twelve (Mark 3), later adding Paul. Apostle means “sent one.” If you reject the message of the apostle the king sent, you also reject the king who he represents. In other words, Jesus speaks through the apostles! In fact, all that we have in the New Testament, including the red-letter words of Jesus, come to us from the apostles. We know little about Jesus without them. So, you cannot justifiably separate Jesus’ teaching from the apostles. Both stand side-by-side as equal. The apostles speak in scripture with the authority of Christ.
Question: With the apostles as the foundation of the church (Eph. 2:20), Jesus the chief cornerstone, how should that impact our view of following Jesus as Lord?
Clearly, in the case of Paul, he was an apostle. Not one of the twelve, who represented the 12 tribes of Israel, but a special apostle to the Gentiles. “And he said to me, ‘Go, for I will send you far away to the Gentiles,’” we see in Acts 22:21. And in Acts 9:15 Ananias is told, “But the Lord said to him, ‘Go, for he (Paul) is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles.’” Paul will confer with the twelve apostles on issues at times (Acts 9, Galatians 1, 2). But he also writes a majority of the New Testament as we consider his letters to the churches. Without a doubt, the early church accepted that Paul was a legitimate apostle.
Speaking of the New Testament, not all of it was written by apostles, just to be clear. Luke wrote one of the accounts of Jesus’ life, also the book of Acts, and was not an apostle, but he traveled with the apostles, so he had firsthand information to rely on. The same is true of Mark, who wrote another of the accounts of Jesus’ life; not an apostle but traveled with some of them. Mark is thought to have relied heavily on Peter’s preaching as he writes his gospel account. The books of James and Jude were written by half-brothers of Jesus who became disciples, well versed in both the Old Testament, and the teaching of Jesus and the apostles. With this note, the point is, all the New Testament is written by either an apostle or by an associate of an apostle (which the apostle could oversee and approve).
But maybe you have this thought cross your mind: Is the teaching of Jesus superior to the teaching of all the apostles? Would it be OK to just use what Jesus says to provide direction in my Christian-walk, or must I also include what the apostle’s tell me? In other words, since Jesus is my Lord, pay attention to the red-letter words of Jesus and forget all the apostles add in the books following Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
But we are told in 2 Timothy 3:16 that, “All scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.” And Peter will say, “No prophecy of scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Ptr.1). The books accepted as “canon” (official) by early church fathers were done so as they had a very serious process of vetting during the early centuries. Each book had to be by an apostle, or by an associate of an apostle, must not contradict Jesus’ teaching, and had to be widely accepted with a consistency that rang true. The councils of Hippo in 393AD and Carthage in 397AD both formally affirmed the 27 books we have today.
An apostle in the ancient world was an emissary for the king and spoke with his authority. Jesus appointed the twelve (Mark 3), later adding Paul. Apostle means “sent one.” If you reject the message of the apostle the king sent, you also reject the king who he represents. In other words, Jesus speaks through the apostles! In fact, all that we have in the New Testament, including the red-letter words of Jesus, come to us from the apostles. We know little about Jesus without them. So, you cannot justifiably separate Jesus’ teaching from the apostles. Both stand side-by-side as equal. The apostles speak in scripture with the authority of Christ.
Question: With the apostles as the foundation of the church (Eph. 2:20), Jesus the chief cornerstone, how should that impact our view of following Jesus as Lord?
Posted in Waking Up Eutychus