03:09:00
Sakshyam Education
Were he really incompetent to lead the church, could Jesus ever have selected and appointed him as his chief apostle, handing him over the keys of the kingdom of heaven? No. Not at all.
(Or)
Christians in the sense of the followers of Jesus
Followers of Paul
Did Jesus appoint Peter for this high office tentatively on temporary basis, to be dismissed after, when the eminent and suitable person like Paul was made available?
(Or)
Does Church regard Jesus as a person with flexible and unstable mind who appointed Peter in haste with vain and vague promises such as made which we have mentioned in our beginning pages, and later snatched away his leadership and gave it to Paul?
On examination of the “Book of Acts of Apostles” and the ‘Epistles’, it can be made evident that the Church has been founded on Paul and thus he became the chief apostle and founder of the Christianity. Who this paul was? Where has peter gone leaving the responsibility of feeding the sheep of Jesus in the hands of Paul? And how the leadership and the teachings of Peter have been supplanted by paul?
The prophecy of Jesus about Peter came true: “Verily, Verily, I say unto thee, when thou wast young , thou girdest thyself, and walkedest whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, then thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee,and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. -John 21:18
What a mystery?
Is the church which was built on Peter for circumcised ones (Jews), and the one that was built on Paul for uncircumcised ones (Gentiles)?1 There may be two or even more leaders with their respective jurisdictions for the reason of lessening the pressure of work. But there should be no more gospels than one which was given through Peter and his elected apostles by Jesus.
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. - Mark 16:15-16
From this passage one can understand that just before his depar- ture, Jesus entrusted the responsibility of preaching to his twelve se- lected apostles. They were not ordinary followers or disciples but were
1. Galatians 2:7-9.
given the status of apostles. And more over their jurisdiction was not limited to the Jews only but for the entire mankind. There was only one gospel given by Jesus through his apostles. It may be noted that only one gospel was preached by Jesus which was narrated by somany people (authors) while only four Gospels are incorporated in the Bible as authen- tic. Yet they are not free from contradictions and interpolations. Whoso- ever believes the real gospel given by Jesus through his apostles would attain Salvation and he that does not believe would be damned. There may be as many preachers as are necessary for conveying of the mes- sage1. But there can be no more apostle than the twelve as had been appointed by Jesus. And this is the reason why one cannot find any other name along with the names of the twelve apostles on the founda- tions of the heavenly city Jerusalem, (Revelation 21:9-16).
At the time of entrusting the responsibility of preaching the Gospel to his twelve apostles, Jesus stressingly says - “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved...”. This discloses the fact that the gospel nec- essary for one’s own salvation has been given already, which rules out the further demand and necessity of another Gospel, such as one for circumcised ones (Jews) and the other for uncircumcised ones (Gen- tiles) as made mention by Paul.
DOCTRINES AS PROPOUNDED BY PAUL
Now let us have a glance on the doctrines propounded by Paul, so as to find out the reasons for contradistinction between the two churches.
Jesus - apostle and high priest: 1st Doctrine of Paul
wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, con- sider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all his house. For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house. -Hebrews 3:1-3
After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place whither he himself would come. Therefore said he unto them the harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few; pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth labourers into his harvest. -Luke 10:1-2
In the above passage we find Jesus to have been given the status of an apostle and high priest. And further it is stated of him as one ap- pointed by God to whom he was very faithful. In the third verse discrimi- nation between Moses and Jesus is pointed out saying as that Jesus was counted worthy of more glory than Moses.
Apostleship and priest- hood are such favours as are conferred upon only human beings, and hence are not blasphemous or sacrilegious against God Almighty. More over Jesus claimed himself to be a prophet which point all his disciples agreed, as such there could have been no controversy nor dispute in this regard.
As regards to the distinction as pointed out between Jesus and Moses is also not so serious an affair as to make a deep probe into. Comparison between two prophets or men is a very common thing. As to this, read what Jesus says.
The men of Nineveh shall rise in Judgment with this genera- tion, and shall condemn it; because they repented at the preach- ing of Jonas: and behold, a greater than Jonas is here.
-Matthew 12:41
The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the utter- most parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon: and behold, a greater than Solomon is here. -Matthew 12:42
Hence the affirmation by Paul that Jesus was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, is not an offencive statement. So this point might not have been the reason for the dispute and controversy between the two Churches. And at the same time it became advantageous for Paul to attract the people and to get some prominence among the preachers.
2) Paul preached that Jesus is “THAT CHRIST”: II Doctrine according to Paul.
And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ. -Acts 18:5
An examination of the gospel records as stated by the various writ- ers reveals the fact that there is no firm opinion about Jesus’ being a Christ. Christian theologians interpret “Christ” as one chosen of God. Thus this word applies to every prophet of God in general. Because every prophet was a chosen one of God. We also admit that Jesus was Christ. But Jesus, we find in gospels, to have denied to be called as Christ. Let us examine.
Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the christ. -Matthew 16:20
And Jesus went out, and his disciples, into the towns of Caesarea Philippi: and by the way he asked his disciples, saying unto them, whom do men say that I am? And they answered, John the baptist: but some say, Elias: and others, One of the prophets. And he saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the christ .And he charged them that they should tell no man of him.
-Mark 8:27-30
------(same as above)----(and then) the final answer of the dis- ciple was-The christ of God.
And he straitly charged them and commanded them to tell no man that thing; -Luke 9:18-21
From the above three references, we find Jesus to have strictly ex- horted his disciples not to reveal before people that he was Christ. And in another place we find Jesus to have accepted before a Samaritan woman that he himself was Christ.
The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he -John 4:25-26
And another thing is, despite his clear order not to preach about him as Christ, not only did his disciples preach about him as Christ (Acts 5:42), but also all gospels made mention of him as Christ. So the ques- tion why Jesus ordered them not to call him Christ remains unanswer- able.
According to above statements we find ambiguity concerning the point of ‘christ’. No doubt Jesus was a Christ. In reply to the question to the disciples what were they thinking of him, Peter said (according to the existing gospel records) - “Thou art the Christ”. Then Jesus com- mended him, saying that this information was revealed by God Almighty only. And at the same time commanded not to say this before people. All gospels proclaim that Jesus was Christ; Disciples preached Jesus as Christ. Had he really warned them not to say before people that he was Christ, could ever his disciples and the gospel writers have dared to pro- claim that he was Christ?
According to Jesus that Peter was informed by the God Almighty that he (Jesus) was Christ. Despite this, Jesus’ warning to his disciples not to say about him as ‘the Christ’ became a mystery. Can Church unravel this ?
Basing on my prediction, the disciples might have said that Jesus was “That Christ.” For this only he might have raised his objection. Christ is different form “That Christ” just as ‘prophet’ from “that prophet”.
In the passage(Mark 8:27-30) we find Peter saying “Thou art the Christ”- Jesus charged them not to call him like that. But in the passage (John 4:25-26), the Samaritan woman says, “I know that Messias cometh which is called Christ”. Here he accepted that it was he himself. In the above two statements we find a crucial difference as regards to Christ. In the former one it is said- “The Christ” - it is denied by Jesus. In the latter one it is said - “Christ” - it is accepted by Jesus. Peter said “The Christ” in the sense of “That Christ”. Though the word “The” stand for “THAT” in literal sense, generally it goes unnoticed taking the meaning of “The” only as an article before every noun. And this is the reason why generally people are not able to make any distinction in this type of verses, particularly regarding “the Christ” and “the Prophet” when are used to mean “That Christ” and “That Prophet” respectively.
John was a prophet- but not that prophet
In this connection I would like to recall the incident as recorded in John 1:19-25.
And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites form Jerusalem to ask him, Who art Thou?
And he confessed and denied not; but confessed ,I am not the Christ;
And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.
Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself?
He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness. Make straight the way of the Lord , as said the prophet Esaias.
And they which were sent were of the Pharisees.
And they asked him ,and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ 1, nor Elias, neither that prophet?
-John 1:19-25
From the above passage, take note of the clauses- “why baptizest thou then if thou be not’ That Christ’ nor Elias, neither ‘That prophet’?”
“That Christ” - “That prophet.”
In the above passage, John said, that he was not “That Christ”
and said also that he was not “That prophet”.
Here we must bear in mind that John was a ‘prophet’ (Luke 1:76). Yet he accepted not to be called as ‘THAT PROPHET’- This discloses the fact that there is a great difference between a ‘prophet’ and ‘That prophet’ This is the same point that created ambiguity in the case of Jesus also. No doubt that he was Christ -but not “THAT CHRIST”. Thus Jesus had commanded his disciples not to preach about him as “That Christ” but might have, being Christ, asked them to preach about him only as a Christ. This was why they preached him as Christ and gospel writers made mention of him as Christ in their gospels.
And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ. -Acts 5:42
But Paul preached Jesus as “ THAT CHRIST” which point was re- jected by the apostles. Not knowing the minute difference between ‘Christ’ and “That Christ” people began to regard Paul as a great preacher of Jesus.
1. In the Open Bible, The new king James version ‘That’ is replaced by ‘The’. In Telugu version instead of That Christ, only ‘Christ’ is mentioned.
Therefore this second doctrine of Paul was also regarded as in favour of the doctrine as propounded by Peter’s Church.
Thus this type of preaching about Jesus by Paul was the reason that how he got a special place in the then Peter’s churches of other places1. These are two examples that how paul had used his devices to get promi- nence among the real followers of Jesus.
Jesus is redeemer-Through his blood salvation is ap- pointed. III Doctrine According to Paul
For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salva- tion by our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, that whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.
-I Thessalonians 5:9-10
In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the for- giveness of sins: -Colossians 1:14
In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgive- ness of sins, according to the riches of his grace:
-Ephasians 1:7
Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father.
-Galatians 1:4
And having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. -Colossians 1:20
Thus after getting some recognition in Peter’s churches in Damascus and in other places, probably he might have preached his invented doc- trines.
From the foregoing references from epistles we find Paul to have preached the salvation and forgiveness of our sins through the blood of Jesus on cross. And his contention is for this purpose he (Jesus) offered himself as a sacrifice and died on cross for us. Thus this new doctrine of Paul might have caused disturbance in the real teachings of Jesus as were being preached by Peter’s Church. Basing on such other doctrines as these,controversy began to take root in between the two Churches and two chiefs, and rivalry predominated.
Except Jerusalem because he did not come to Jerusalem in his early period.
The first thing that perplexed the minds of Peter’s people is, whether there could be any other person that could redeem mankind from the hands of God. For this we find God Himself saying that there is none competent enough to redeem.
Please observe the following few verses from the law and prophets.
See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill and I make alive ; I wound and I heal; neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand. -Deuteronomy 32:39
Yet I am the Lord thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me: for there is no saviour beside me.
-Hosea 13:4
Bless the Lord, O my soul: and all that is within me, bless his holy name. Bless the Lord, O my soul: and forget not all his benefits: Who forgiveth all thine iniquities;who healeth all thy diseases;Who redeemeth thy life from desrtruction: Who crowneth thee with loving kindness and tender mercies.
-Psalms 103:1-4
Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things: That stretcheth forth the heavens alone: that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself: -Isaiah 44:24
Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: For I am God and there is none else. -Isaiah 45:22
From the above passages we understand that God Himself alone is our Saviour, redeemer, and forgiver of the sins provided “We look at Him” meaning - if we repent and amend ourselves and follow the statutes.
The same view we can see in the following verses in clearer terms.
But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righ- teousness that he hath done he shall live.Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God, and not that he should return from his ways and live? -Ezekiel 18:21-23
Above passage provides a very simple way of getting oneself released (protected from entering into) of Hell and attaining of eligibility to enter into the paradise. That is by abstaining from committing sin,and follow- ing the statutes and by means of repentance. This much is enough for salvation.
But contrary to this Paul introduced and preached a peculiar doctrine of salvation by the blood (sacrifice) offering of Jesus on cross and his death as ransom and vicarious atonement. Of course ransom and atone- ment are recommended in old Testament,but they are for other purposes but not for this type of salvation of mankind.
(Or)
Christians in the sense of the followers of Jesus
Followers of Paul
Did Jesus appoint Peter for this high office tentatively on temporary basis, to be dismissed after, when the eminent and suitable person like Paul was made available?
(Or)
Does Church regard Jesus as a person with flexible and unstable mind who appointed Peter in haste with vain and vague promises such as made which we have mentioned in our beginning pages, and later snatched away his leadership and gave it to Paul?
On examination of the “Book of Acts of Apostles” and the ‘Epistles’, it can be made evident that the Church has been founded on Paul and thus he became the chief apostle and founder of the Christianity. Who this paul was? Where has peter gone leaving the responsibility of feeding the sheep of Jesus in the hands of Paul? And how the leadership and the teachings of Peter have been supplanted by paul?
The prophecy of Jesus about Peter came true: “Verily, Verily, I say unto thee, when thou wast young , thou girdest thyself, and walkedest whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, then thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee,and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. -John 21:18
What a mystery?
Is the church which was built on Peter for circumcised ones (Jews), and the one that was built on Paul for uncircumcised ones (Gentiles)?1 There may be two or even more leaders with their respective jurisdictions for the reason of lessening the pressure of work. But there should be no more gospels than one which was given through Peter and his elected apostles by Jesus.
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. - Mark 16:15-16
From this passage one can understand that just before his depar- ture, Jesus entrusted the responsibility of preaching to his twelve se- lected apostles. They were not ordinary followers or disciples but were
1. Galatians 2:7-9.
given the status of apostles. And more over their jurisdiction was not limited to the Jews only but for the entire mankind. There was only one gospel given by Jesus through his apostles. It may be noted that only one gospel was preached by Jesus which was narrated by somany people (authors) while only four Gospels are incorporated in the Bible as authen- tic. Yet they are not free from contradictions and interpolations. Whoso- ever believes the real gospel given by Jesus through his apostles would attain Salvation and he that does not believe would be damned. There may be as many preachers as are necessary for conveying of the mes- sage1. But there can be no more apostle than the twelve as had been appointed by Jesus. And this is the reason why one cannot find any other name along with the names of the twelve apostles on the founda- tions of the heavenly city Jerusalem, (Revelation 21:9-16).
At the time of entrusting the responsibility of preaching the Gospel to his twelve apostles, Jesus stressingly says - “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved...”. This discloses the fact that the gospel nec- essary for one’s own salvation has been given already, which rules out the further demand and necessity of another Gospel, such as one for circumcised ones (Jews) and the other for uncircumcised ones (Gen- tiles) as made mention by Paul.
DOCTRINES AS PROPOUNDED BY PAUL
Now let us have a glance on the doctrines propounded by Paul, so as to find out the reasons for contradistinction between the two churches.
Jesus - apostle and high priest: 1st Doctrine of Paul
wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, con- sider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all his house. For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house. -Hebrews 3:1-3
After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place whither he himself would come. Therefore said he unto them the harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few; pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth labourers into his harvest. -Luke 10:1-2
In the above passage we find Jesus to have been given the status of an apostle and high priest. And further it is stated of him as one ap- pointed by God to whom he was very faithful. In the third verse discrimi- nation between Moses and Jesus is pointed out saying as that Jesus was counted worthy of more glory than Moses.
Apostleship and priest- hood are such favours as are conferred upon only human beings, and hence are not blasphemous or sacrilegious against God Almighty. More over Jesus claimed himself to be a prophet which point all his disciples agreed, as such there could have been no controversy nor dispute in this regard.
As regards to the distinction as pointed out between Jesus and Moses is also not so serious an affair as to make a deep probe into. Comparison between two prophets or men is a very common thing. As to this, read what Jesus says.
The men of Nineveh shall rise in Judgment with this genera- tion, and shall condemn it; because they repented at the preach- ing of Jonas: and behold, a greater than Jonas is here.
-Matthew 12:41
The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the utter- most parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon: and behold, a greater than Solomon is here. -Matthew 12:42
Hence the affirmation by Paul that Jesus was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, is not an offencive statement. So this point might not have been the reason for the dispute and controversy between the two Churches. And at the same time it became advantageous for Paul to attract the people and to get some prominence among the preachers.
2) Paul preached that Jesus is “THAT CHRIST”: II Doctrine according to Paul.
And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ. -Acts 18:5
An examination of the gospel records as stated by the various writ- ers reveals the fact that there is no firm opinion about Jesus’ being a Christ. Christian theologians interpret “Christ” as one chosen of God. Thus this word applies to every prophet of God in general. Because every prophet was a chosen one of God. We also admit that Jesus was Christ. But Jesus, we find in gospels, to have denied to be called as Christ. Let us examine.
Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the christ. -Matthew 16:20
And Jesus went out, and his disciples, into the towns of Caesarea Philippi: and by the way he asked his disciples, saying unto them, whom do men say that I am? And they answered, John the baptist: but some say, Elias: and others, One of the prophets. And he saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the christ .And he charged them that they should tell no man of him.
-Mark 8:27-30
------(same as above)----(and then) the final answer of the dis- ciple was-The christ of God.
And he straitly charged them and commanded them to tell no man that thing; -Luke 9:18-21
From the above three references, we find Jesus to have strictly ex- horted his disciples not to reveal before people that he was Christ. And in another place we find Jesus to have accepted before a Samaritan woman that he himself was Christ.
The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he -John 4:25-26
And another thing is, despite his clear order not to preach about him as Christ, not only did his disciples preach about him as Christ (Acts 5:42), but also all gospels made mention of him as Christ. So the ques- tion why Jesus ordered them not to call him Christ remains unanswer- able.
According to above statements we find ambiguity concerning the point of ‘christ’. No doubt Jesus was a Christ. In reply to the question to the disciples what were they thinking of him, Peter said (according to the existing gospel records) - “Thou art the Christ”. Then Jesus com- mended him, saying that this information was revealed by God Almighty only. And at the same time commanded not to say this before people. All gospels proclaim that Jesus was Christ; Disciples preached Jesus as Christ. Had he really warned them not to say before people that he was Christ, could ever his disciples and the gospel writers have dared to pro- claim that he was Christ?
According to Jesus that Peter was informed by the God Almighty that he (Jesus) was Christ. Despite this, Jesus’ warning to his disciples not to say about him as ‘the Christ’ became a mystery. Can Church unravel this ?
Basing on my prediction, the disciples might have said that Jesus was “That Christ.” For this only he might have raised his objection. Christ is different form “That Christ” just as ‘prophet’ from “that prophet”.
In the passage(Mark 8:27-30) we find Peter saying “Thou art the Christ”- Jesus charged them not to call him like that. But in the passage (John 4:25-26), the Samaritan woman says, “I know that Messias cometh which is called Christ”. Here he accepted that it was he himself. In the above two statements we find a crucial difference as regards to Christ. In the former one it is said- “The Christ” - it is denied by Jesus. In the latter one it is said - “Christ” - it is accepted by Jesus. Peter said “The Christ” in the sense of “That Christ”. Though the word “The” stand for “THAT” in literal sense, generally it goes unnoticed taking the meaning of “The” only as an article before every noun. And this is the reason why generally people are not able to make any distinction in this type of verses, particularly regarding “the Christ” and “the Prophet” when are used to mean “That Christ” and “That Prophet” respectively.
John was a prophet- but not that prophet
In this connection I would like to recall the incident as recorded in John 1:19-25.
And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites form Jerusalem to ask him, Who art Thou?
And he confessed and denied not; but confessed ,I am not the Christ;
And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.
Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself?
He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness. Make straight the way of the Lord , as said the prophet Esaias.
And they which were sent were of the Pharisees.
And they asked him ,and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ 1, nor Elias, neither that prophet?
-John 1:19-25
From the above passage, take note of the clauses- “why baptizest thou then if thou be not’ That Christ’ nor Elias, neither ‘That prophet’?”
“That Christ” - “That prophet.”
In the above passage, John said, that he was not “That Christ”
and said also that he was not “That prophet”.
Here we must bear in mind that John was a ‘prophet’ (Luke 1:76). Yet he accepted not to be called as ‘THAT PROPHET’- This discloses the fact that there is a great difference between a ‘prophet’ and ‘That prophet’ This is the same point that created ambiguity in the case of Jesus also. No doubt that he was Christ -but not “THAT CHRIST”. Thus Jesus had commanded his disciples not to preach about him as “That Christ” but might have, being Christ, asked them to preach about him only as a Christ. This was why they preached him as Christ and gospel writers made mention of him as Christ in their gospels.
And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ. -Acts 5:42
But Paul preached Jesus as “ THAT CHRIST” which point was re- jected by the apostles. Not knowing the minute difference between ‘Christ’ and “That Christ” people began to regard Paul as a great preacher of Jesus.
1. In the Open Bible, The new king James version ‘That’ is replaced by ‘The’. In Telugu version instead of That Christ, only ‘Christ’ is mentioned.
Therefore this second doctrine of Paul was also regarded as in favour of the doctrine as propounded by Peter’s Church.
Thus this type of preaching about Jesus by Paul was the reason that how he got a special place in the then Peter’s churches of other places1. These are two examples that how paul had used his devices to get promi- nence among the real followers of Jesus.
Jesus is redeemer-Through his blood salvation is ap- pointed. III Doctrine According to Paul
For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salva- tion by our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, that whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.
-I Thessalonians 5:9-10
In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the for- giveness of sins: -Colossians 1:14
In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgive- ness of sins, according to the riches of his grace:
-Ephasians 1:7
Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father.
-Galatians 1:4
And having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. -Colossians 1:20
Thus after getting some recognition in Peter’s churches in Damascus and in other places, probably he might have preached his invented doc- trines.
From the foregoing references from epistles we find Paul to have preached the salvation and forgiveness of our sins through the blood of Jesus on cross. And his contention is for this purpose he (Jesus) offered himself as a sacrifice and died on cross for us. Thus this new doctrine of Paul might have caused disturbance in the real teachings of Jesus as were being preached by Peter’s Church. Basing on such other doctrines as these,controversy began to take root in between the two Churches and two chiefs, and rivalry predominated.
Except Jerusalem because he did not come to Jerusalem in his early period.
The first thing that perplexed the minds of Peter’s people is, whether there could be any other person that could redeem mankind from the hands of God. For this we find God Himself saying that there is none competent enough to redeem.
Please observe the following few verses from the law and prophets.
See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill and I make alive ; I wound and I heal; neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand. -Deuteronomy 32:39
Yet I am the Lord thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me: for there is no saviour beside me.
-Hosea 13:4
Bless the Lord, O my soul: and all that is within me, bless his holy name. Bless the Lord, O my soul: and forget not all his benefits: Who forgiveth all thine iniquities;who healeth all thy diseases;Who redeemeth thy life from desrtruction: Who crowneth thee with loving kindness and tender mercies.
-Psalms 103:1-4
Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things: That stretcheth forth the heavens alone: that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself: -Isaiah 44:24
Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: For I am God and there is none else. -Isaiah 45:22
From the above passages we understand that God Himself alone is our Saviour, redeemer, and forgiver of the sins provided “We look at Him” meaning - if we repent and amend ourselves and follow the statutes.
The same view we can see in the following verses in clearer terms.
But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righ- teousness that he hath done he shall live.Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God, and not that he should return from his ways and live? -Ezekiel 18:21-23
Above passage provides a very simple way of getting oneself released (protected from entering into) of Hell and attaining of eligibility to enter into the paradise. That is by abstaining from committing sin,and follow- ing the statutes and by means of repentance. This much is enough for salvation.
But contrary to this Paul introduced and preached a peculiar doctrine of salvation by the blood (sacrifice) offering of Jesus on cross and his death as ransom and vicarious atonement. Of course ransom and atone- ment are recommended in old Testament,but they are for other purposes but not for this type of salvation of mankind.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment