The formation of the theology of the Apostle Paul

[Dr Denis O'Callaghan]

Gentle Reader,

Many have neither the idea that there has been a great controversy about the author of 14 books of the New Testament. nor the fact as some even believe that Paul was the founder of “Christianity” and that Paul’s idea of the church and Christ’s were totally different. Considering the deistic who would you believe?
Many people think that Judas was the supreme betrayer of Jesus. However others say that Paul (Saul of Tarsus) holds that title.

Judas gave Jesus over to the authorities to be tortured and put to death (isn’t that just like mankind if you can’t silence them “kill em” ) Paul it is claimed buried His spirit . Paul was charges with substituting his theology over the simple teachings of that itinerant preacher from Galilee. So lets get all the detritus out of our thinking by looking first at the accusers of Paul and then in this 1st century at Paul’s own testimony.

As recently as our past president Thomas Jefferson that wrote in a letter to his friend that Paul was “the first corrupter of the doctrine of Jesus”. Now remember that while Jefferson was a deistic [The belief, based solely on reason, in a God who created the universe and then abandoned it, assuming no control over life, exerting no influence on natural phenomena, and giving no supernatural revelation. ] he in fact, cut parts of the Bible he didn’t like.

G. B. Shaw said basically the same thing in the preface to his play “Androcles and the Lion”.

Nietzsche called Paul, in the Antichrist, “the Dysangelist” (Bad news bearer) and “ The man with the Genius for hatred”. Shaw told a reporter that it would have been better if Paul had never been born. What a contrast from Paul’s own words, and Christ’s own call to Paul.

From Paul’s conversion to his death he never thought that he was "starting a new religion"! Paul had the authentic understanding of the Tanakh [Old Testament] and the passing of the old economy, giving way the new spiritual reality.

Paul came from Cilicia (specifically Tarsus) and became a follower of Jesus in Syria (Demascus). Paul didn’t even go to Judea for 3 years after he professed his allegiance to Jesus, and then he spent only 2 weeks. After this first visit it was 14 years before he returned. Paul was by his own account first a Jew " Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;

Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;

Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless." (Phil. 3: 4-6 ).

How then could he have known the risen Christ beyond his private revelation on the Damascus road. You have the answer right in front of you, for he was a Pharisee and a teacher of the Law [The word Pharisees comes from the Hebrew prushim from parush, meaning "separated", that is, one who is separated for a life of purity. The Pharisees were, depending on the time, a political party, a social movement, and a school of thought among Jews that flourished during the Second Temple Era (536 BC–70 AD). After the destruction of the Second Temple, the Pharisaic sect was re-established as Rabbinic Judaism — which ultimately produced normative, traditional Judaism, the basis for all contemporary forms of Judaism and even the Karaites use the Rabbinic canon of the Hebrew Bible or Tanakh.]

Paul was a scholar and taught by scholars and why he went at once to begin to preach "For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
And that he was seen of Cephas,[ Peter] then of the twelve:

After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God." 1 Cor.15:3-9

The thing to notice here that according to Luke, Paul’s biographer is that Jesus "appeared " to Paul from the Greek Optanomai ophthe "he was seen" which means in English to allow one's self to be seen. Paul put his experience along with others that "saw" the risen Christ! "Paul, an apostle, (not from men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead ) Gal.1:1. Called to be an apostle by the “Very One” whom he persecuted. What a beautiful testimony for us to emulate . That is forgiveness!

No wonder Paul could write in Romans Chapter 5 verse eight "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, [ sinners by nature] Christ died for us." The word sinners is Hamartolos (ham-ar-to-los'); which has the force from the figure of speech [Greek Cat-a-bas-is or Gradual Descent {see Phil. 2: 6-8} used to emphasize humiliation, sorrow ] where Paul uses in verse 10 as enemies."For if, when we were enemies,( by practice) we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life” ( Romans 5:10). Which, then we translate that verse in this manner, “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet enemies” see Romans Chapter 5 verse ten, Christ died for us." .

Now think of your most hated enemy. Would you die for them? Christ did and that was not lost in the life and teaching of the Apostle Paul. Also note the word Reconciled, we’ll look at this concept at another time.

There are several reasons why Christians have never fully grasped the importance of the New testament writings of Paul. First, many Christian Pastors don’t understand him and as a result, never bother to acquaint themselves with the 14 books that we have in our Bible as worth studying!

We have seen the same mentality in our Seminaries. I once ask a student about his studies in regards the Apostle’s writings and he replied "Oh yes I had a semester of all Paul’s books"! A semester!!! And in another occasion I ask an older Bible teacher ( my Mentor) the same question and he replied " I have been studying the Epistles of Paul for 35 years and I think I am beginning to get a handle on understanding him a little bit"!

When God called Paul, I am sure that Paul had some idea that things would be a bit difficult. But He had studied with some of the very best theologians of his day and was a scholar as he had given himself over to the study of "the Law" which is all that the Jewish believers had at that time. Now, there were several groups Paul could have chosen to aline himself.

The Sadducees were members of a Jewish sect founded in the second century BC, possibly as a political party. They ceased to exist sometime after the first century AD. While little or none of their own writings have been preserved, the Sadducees seem to have indeed been a priestly group, associated with the leadership of the Temple in Jerusalem. Possibly, Sadducees represent the aristocratic clan of the Hasmonean high priests.

The Essenes were, strictly speaking, an ascetic Jewish religious group that flourished from the 2nd century BC to the 1st century AD. Many separate, but related religious groups of that era shared similar mystic, eschatological, messianic, and ascetic beliefs. These groups were collectively referred to by various scholars as the "Essenes". The Essenes may have emerged as a sect of dissident priests. They are believed to have rejected either the Seleucid appointed high priests, or the Hasmonean high priests, as illegitimate. Ultimately, they rejected the Second Temple, arguing that the Essene community was itself the new Temple, and that obedience to the law represented a new form of sacrifice.

The Essenes have gained fame in modern times as a result of the discovery of an extensive group of religious documents known as the Dead Sea Scrolls, commonly believed as being their library. These documents include preserved multiple copies of the Hebrew Bible untouched from as early as 300 BC until their discovery in 1946. The multiple copies of the Old Testament in the original Hebrew confirmed that the Old Testament has remained relatively unchanged since it was redacted in 450 BCE, with some slight changes in wording but not meaning. Among the scrolls recording each "book" of the Bible separately, only the Book of Esther did not survive the effects of time. This library also included many other, diverse religious texts, adding significant historical insights into various social and religious movements and events around the region.

The main source of information about the life and belief of Essenes is the detailed account contained in a work of the 1st century Jewish historiographer Flavius Josephus entitled The Jewish Wars written about 73-75 AD (War 2.119-161) and his shorter description in his Antiquities of the Jews finished some 20 years later (Ant. 18.11 & 18-22). Claiming first hand knowledge (Life §§10-11), he refers to them by the name Essenoi and lists them as the followers of one of the three sects in "Jewish Philosophy'" (War 2.119) alongside the Pharisees and the Sadducees. The only other known contemporary accounts about the Essenes are two similarly detailed ones by the Jewish philosopher Philo (fl. c. 20 AD - c. 54 AD; Quod Omnis Probus Liber Sit XII.75-87, and the excerpt from his Hypothetica 11.1-18 preserved by Eusebius, Praep. Evang. Bk VIII), who, however, admits to not being quite certain of the Greek form of their name that he recalls as Essaioi (Quod Omn. Prob. XII.75), the brief reference to them by the Roman equestrian Pliny the Elder (fl. 23 AD - 79 AD; Natural History, Bk 5.73). Pliny, also a geographer and explorer, located them in the desert near the northwestern shore of the Dead Sea, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in the year 1947. The Dead Sea Scrolls, found in caves at Qumran, are believed to be the work of Essenes or to reflect Essene beliefs.

Then there were the Zealots The Zealots were a "fourth sect", founded by Judas of Galilee (also called Judas of Gamala) and Zadok the Pharisee in the year 6 against Quirinius' tax reform, shortly after the Roman state declared what had most recently been the territory of the tribe of Judah a Roman Province, and that they "agree in all other things with the Pharisaic notions; but they have an inviolable attachment to liberty, and say that God is to be their only Ruler and Lord." (18.1.6)

The Zealots were a Jewish political movement in the 1st century which sought to incite the people of Iudaea Province to rebel against the Roman Empire and expel it from the country by force of arms during the Great Jewish Revolt (CE 66-70). When the Romans introduced the imperial cult, the Jews unsuccessfully rebelled. The Zealots continued to oppose the Romans due to Rome's intolerance of their culture and on the grounds that Israel belonged only to a Jewish king descended from King David.

And then we had Paul’s chosen group. Perhaps the "fundamentalist" of the day. The Pharisees ,the Pharisee ("separatist") party emerged largely out of the group of scribes and sages who harked back to Ezra and the Great Assembly, were one of at least four major schools of thought within the Jewish religion around the first century and were most prominently in opposition to the Sadducee sect. [The only two that we read about in our Bible are the Pharisees and the Sadducees]. They were also one of several successor groups of the Hasidim (the "pious"), an anti-Hellenistic Jewish movement that formed in the time of the Seleucid king, Antiochus Epiphanes (175–163 BC). (This group is distinct from the Hasidism established in 18th century Europe.) The social standing and beliefs of the Pharisees changed over time, such that the role, significance, and meaning of the Pharisees evolved as political and social conditions in Judea changed. The sages of the Talmud [The Talmud is a record of rabbinic discussions pertaining to Jewish law, ethics, customs, and history. It is a central text of Rabbinic Judaism, second only to the Hebrew Bible in importance ] see a direct link between themselves and the Pharisees, and historians generally consider Pharisaic Judaism to be the progenitor of Rabbinic Judaism, that is normative, mainstream Judaism after the destruction of the Second Temple.

For most of their history, Pharisees considered themselves in opposition to the Sadducees. Conflicts between the Sadducees and the Pharisees took place in the context of much broader conflicts among Jews in the Second Temple era, which followed the Babylonian captivity of Judah. One conflict was class, between the wealthy and the poor. Another conflict was cultural, between those who favored hellenization and those who resisted it. A third was juridico-religious, between those who emphasized the importance of the Temple, and those who emphasized the importance of other Mosaic laws and prophetic values. A fourth, specifically religious, involved different interpretations of the Bible (or Tanakh), and how to apply the Torah to Jewish life, with the Sadducees recognizing only the written letter of the Tanakh or Torah and rejecting life after death, while the Pharisees held to Rabbinic interpretations additional to the written texts.

In short the Pharisees believed in the resurrection and the Sadducees did not.
Paul was a Pharisee and zealous of the "law." "Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath reason to trust in the flesh, I more:Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; with respect to the law, a Pharisee;
Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; with respect to the righteousness which is by the law, blameless." [ Philippians 3:4-6] As to all Jewish privileges, he possessed them in the highest degree. He had outstripped every one in holy zeal against innovators. But when Saul became Paul all that changed. It was as if he had been given ears to hear and eyes to see what God really wanted from not only his chosen people but mankind as a whole. And thus Paul set out with his renewed understanding of Scripture and a mission that would change the world!"

The mission of Paul and his theology is so clear to me that I am amazed that more Pastors/Bible teachers have not picked up on what seems to me to be an obvious truth. Paul was chosen to reach not only his own people but those of a non Jewish persuasion {i.e. Gentiles} and so he had not one but two commission. And when we begin to read in the book of Acts. We can see some of this when we recognize when Paul wrote to the various groups for example “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God to salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. “ [Romans 1:16 written around A.D. 58 From Corinth Paul had never been to Rome when he wrote this epistle (1:11-15). He intended to go to Rome after visiting Jerusalem (15:23-28). This was his purpose in Acts 19:21. This gives us a time setting. He was going to bear a collection of alms from Macedonia and Achaia to Jerusalem (15:26, 31). He carried the collection from Corinth to Jerusalem at the close of this three months' visit (Acts 24:17). When Paul wrote this epistle, Timotheus, Sosipater, Gaius and Erastus were with him (16:21-23). Out of these four, Luke mentions three in the Acts as being with him at Corinth during the three months' visit (Acts 20:4).]

The first record of Paul’s public witness is given in Acts Chapter 9 where we read: And immediately he preached Christ in the synagogues, [ Note: always to the Jew first] that he is the Son of God. But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews who dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ [verse 20, 22]. Incidentally these last references show that, to a Jew acquainted with the Scriptures, the fact that Jesus was the Christ would also prove that He was the Son of God ( John 20:31, Matt 16:16 ), although to the untaught mind such a connection would be neither necessary or obvious. Later in Acts 17 we learn that this was his usual procedure “And Paul, as his manner was, went in to them, and on three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, Opening and alleging, that it was needful that Christ should suffer, and rise again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach to you, is Christ. [verses 2-3]

Note: the following that at Antioch the Jews withstood the gospel and were stricken with judicial blindness “Be it known to you therefore, men, brethren, that through this man is preached to you the forgiveness of sins; And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses. Beware therefore, lest that come upon you which is spoken in the prophets;
Behold, ye despisers, and wonder, and perish: for I work a work in your days, a work which ye will in no wise believe, though a man declare it to you. And when the Jews had gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath. Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas; who speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God. And the next sabbath came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God. But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spoke against those things which were uttered by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming. Then Paul and Barnabas became bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first be spoken to you: but seeing ye reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldst be for salvation to the ends of the earth. And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life, believed. ( Acts 13: 38:48 ).

Notice also that Paul’s first miracle contrasts with Peter’s first miracle. Peter heals a Jew; Paul blinds a Jew. This Jew withstands the truth, and a Gentile, [ Paulus] who bears the same name as the apostle believes. Resulting from the opposition of the Jews at Antioch, there is a local turning from the Jew to the Gentile and Paul utters that word of warning which anticipates that dreadful quotation of Isaiah 6 with which the Jew was to be finely set aside as we can so easily see and read in Acts Chapter 28 “ And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.

And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not.
And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers,
Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive:For the heart of this people [The Jewish leaders] is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.”
When the Jewish leaders representing the nation refused, Paul turned to us (Gentiles) as God had foretold hundreds of years before. (see the book of Hosea where Israel became Lo-ammi = "not my people") Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God. [Hosea Chapter 1 verse 9].

Establishing Paul an Apostle with an independent ministry. Paul was an apostle but not one of the 12.
When the Apostle Paul preached the good news concerning Christ and His Church, at Ephesus, his ministry continued in Asia for the space of two years (Acts 19:10). We read that the Word of God grew mightily and prevailed, and that "all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus." And yet, at the close of his ministry, and of his life, he writes his last Epistle to Timothy, when he says "I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand" (II Timothy 1:15): "This thou knowest that all they that be in Asia have turned away from me."

We are told, on every hand, today, that we must go back to the first three centuries to find the purity of faith and worship of the primitive church! But it is clear from this comparison of Acts 19:10 and II Timothy 1:15, that we cannot go back to the first century. No, not even to the apostle's own lifetime!
This turning away could not have been merely personal; but must have included his teaching also. For in chapter 2, verse 18, he speaks of those "who concerning the truth have erred." In chapter 3, verse 8, he speaks of those who "resist the truth." In chapter 4, verse 4, he speaks of those who "turn away their ears from the truth" and are "turned unto fables."
It was Pauline truth and teaching from which all had "turned away." It was this turning away from the truth as taught by the Holy Spirit through Paul, especially as contained in the Epistle to the Ephesians, that led necessarily:
To the loss of the teaching concerning the Mystery; that truth concerning the one Body of Christ. The effect of this was at once to put everything wrong ecclesiastically, and to make room for all the various and different "Bodies," so-called, with all the consequent divisions and schisms of the church. Instead of recognizing "the One Body" which God had made, men set about making their own "Bodies" and Sects! and with this ecclesiastical confusion came the loss of the truth as to the Christian's perfect standing in Christ as having died and risen in Him.

Next, after this, went the truth of the Lord's promised return from heaven; and of resurrection, as the one great and blessed hope of the church. Other hopes, or rather fears, came in their place, and "death and judgment" took the place of those lost hopes. Having lost the truth of what God had made Christ to be unto us, and the joy as to our standing thus given, in looking for that blessed hope, preparation for death and judgment was the necessary result, and therefore:

The next thing to go was the truth as to what God had made us to be in Christ; and "justification by faith" and by grace was lost. The way was now open for the full tide of error to come in: and it came in, like a flood, with all the corruption and superstition that ended in centuries that have the significant description "the dark ages."

Everyone is familiar with the term, and with the fact. But what were the dark ages? How did they come? They were not brought on suddenly by some untoward event. There must have been some cause, something that made them possible. The corruption was historical. The Eastern churches today are in similar darkness. And the Western churches, where the Reformation has not removed it, are in the same darkness.

The Reformation what was it? The beginning of a recovery of these great truths? The remarkable fact is that the recovery of these truths has taken place in the inverse order to that in which they were lost.

Justification by grace through faith was the first great truth recovered at the Reformation. This was the truth over which that great battle was fought and won, though the victory was far from complete. For not until the begining of the nineteenth century did the Lord's return from heaven begin to be understood as the blessed hope of His church. In later years the subject became more and more precious to increasing numbers. However, this great and "blessed hope" is not yet really learned, because it ought to be the natural outcome of truth received and held, instead of being treated as an independent subject artificially produced. It must come from the heart and developed into the life, and not to be merely held and retained in the head, if it is to be productive of the blessed results seen in the Thessalonian church. It must be learned experimentally as a vital and essential part of our standing as Christians, and not be studied as if it were an extra subject, in order to produce Thessalonian fruit. Hence, it is that we more often see prophecy taken up as a study, rather than as the result of indwelling of God's Son from heaven.
The last of the three truths to be recovered is the truth taught in The book of Ephesians; and it is only in our own day that we see any real sense of the loss, with any real effort to recover it. The truth of the Mystery, as it was the first to go, so, it seems, is the last to be recovered.

It is with the hope of doing something to recover this truth that this paper has been written on the Theology of Paul and his Epistles. May the Lord use them to bring back vital truths to their proper place, that their power may be felt in the hearts and seen in the lives of an increasing number of the members of the Body of Christ.
The cause of all the confusion around is that thousands of those who profess to be Christians know little or nothing of these Pauline (Church) Epistles, that have produced Paul’s theology. There is no other profession they could enter without being able to pass a satisfactory examination in the text books, set forth for that purpose. There is no position in life that anyone could apply for without being asked how much one knew of its duties and responsibilities. Tthe Christian "profession" is treated in quite a different manner, and as quite a different matter. Anyone may undertake that, and all the while be totally ignorant of these Pauline Church Epistles: -- "The Creed, the Lord's prayer, and the Ten Commandments" are considered as sufficient for Christian position and profession. Hence the almost total neglect of these Epistles. The four Gospels and the Sermon on the Mount are taken as the essence of Christianity, instead of the Epistles specially addressed to Church which is His Body. Hence the great ignorance of Christians as to all that God has made Christ to be unto His People and all that He has made them to be in Him. Not knowing their standing in Christ, and their completeness and perfection in Him, they are easily led into error concerning their state and their walk. Many, who know they are justified by grace, yet seek to be sanctified by works.

Nothing but full knowledge of what is revealed for our instruction in these Church Epistles will effectually deliver us from all the new doctrines and schools of thought which find an entrance into our midst.

May our great Head of the Body the Church, own this effort, and use it and bless it to the deliverance of many from all the variable winds of doctrine, and build them up in their most holy faith.

That's my message,
Love,
Denis

[Christopher R. Dockrey]

Wow. There is a lot in here. I'll probably have to reread it later. Dr. Denis, I wonder if you wouldn't mind elaborating on the following:

"For not until the beginning of the nineteenth century did the Lord's return from heaven begin to be understood as the blessed hope of His church. In later years the subject became more and more precious to increasing numbers. However, this great and "blessed hope" is not yet really learned, because it ought to be the natural outcome of truth received and held, instead of being treated as an independent subject artificially produced. It must come from the heart and developed into the life, and not to be merely held and retained in the head, if it is to be productive of the blessed results seen in the Thessalonian church. It must be learned experimentally as a vital and essential part of our standing as Christians, and not be studied as if it were an extra subject, in order to produce Thessalonian fruit. Hence, it is that we more often see prophecy taken up as a study, rather than as the result of indwelling of God's Son from heaven."

In what ways particularly do you think the church needs to do to correct this? How do you propose we should approach eschatology so that it becomes more than a study, such that it becomes a vital part of our Christian experience?

Personally, I think at least part of the problem arises from the way prophecy is viewed in popular Christian culture. This could not be the root of the problem, but may at least have something to do with prolonging it. For instance, the popularity of fiction based on dispensational premillennialist theology seems to lend itself to escapism. I mean no offense to anyone who is a fan of this literature; I am just merely pointing out what I see as a general cultural hazard of it. This is not to say that there may not be truth in the theology, but mingling fantasy with eschatology of any kind could potentially have a similar effect. Much the same way people normally use fiction to "escape", people often do the same thing with these novels. Consequently, the return of Jesus - perhaps subconsciously - becomes something more of fantasy than reality. Even the best efforts of some to approach Jesus as the soon coming King could be hindered by a perception of him that is clouded by an extra-biblical narrative.

[Dr. Henry, President of the AOCI]

Good Writ Dr. Denis. Thank you for sharing this peice on the Aposlte Paul. God bless.