Written on the 27th of March 2016
The proof of Paul’s apostolate
Preface :
Hello everyone in the Lord Jesus,
Like most of us I guess, I have a lot of love for Israel. I also have love for all people, of course, but especially for each person who has everything they need to find “the Way”, but who unfortunately just misses It. Or someone who does not fully enter into freedom, that is to say “to be truly free”.
It’s a bit like the hundredth sheep: the christian, like his Master, will always be more interested in her than in the other 99, because of the imminent danger that is upon her.
Therefore I love Israel in my own way. One may love her in one way, the other in another, and will then use the means that are appropriate.
The main thing is that the driving force behind my motivation is “God’s Love poured out in my heart by the Holy Spirit”. In that case, that’s enough for me, because then it won’t be my love, but His. And that makes a big difference!
And just as I love Israel, I love at the same time the Israel of God.
—
Probably like you, no doubt, I then have a great deal of concern for those who are not sure of themselves, who are seeking and still seeking what is right in front of them though, but whom the vicissitudes of this world and false teachings make captive and partially blind, even though God loves them above all.
It is in this frame of mind that I write this paper.
I was like them, but God’s grace got me out of there. Therefore, knowing where I came from, my natural reflex is seeking to help others, because I know what it’s like “to be into the pit”.
So here is this little document towards all those who will recognise themselves in it :
The proof of Paul’s apostolate
I have to admit that many Christians, or at least believers, often lack security. They have a kind of security deficit. They no longer know who to believe, who to listen to, and this takes away a large part of their inner security.
For someone in particular, they may even feel that they have lost their faith, because they are hearing so many things that they no longer know who to believe or what to believe.
It is to them in particular that I send this message, hoping to be of assistance to them; that is my wish.
—
The Scriptures teach us that there was a time when some christians also had strong doubts, for various reasons that I won’t go into here straight away, for fear of confusing everything and running the risk of making today’s subject incomprehensible.
Yes, because these christians had practically lost the foundations of their faith, an effective remedy was given to them. They were asked to observe rather than to believe.
I’m giving you this message again today, towards someone who won’t even need faith, eventually, but only the observation of one thing. I think that many of us can do that. To observe is to observe, that’s all.
—
In fact, it is the story of a man who spoke the truth about the gospel of God; but after he left, false workers came after him and distilled things which, little by little, came to sabotage the first faith of these Christians, that had come from the preaching of the gospel of God.
I think you will have realised by now that we are talking here about the apostle Paul, and also about the enemies of the gospel.
Oh, it wasn’t always “face-to-face” detractors; no, it was much more subtle, everything was done from underneath.
To battle this, given that the faith of budding christians had been sabotaged, the apostle Paul used a very simple and very effective means: human reason. Yes, he simply asked them to observe something.
That’s what I propose you to observe with me today.
——
The observation in question is found written in the epistle to the Galatians, chapter 1 and verse 11, up to chapter 2 verse 14 :
11-12 But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.
13-14 For you have heard of my former conduct in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it. And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers.
15-17 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace, to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went to Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.
18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Cephas (Peter), remained with him fifteen days.
19 But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother.
20 (Now concerning the things which I write to you, indeed, before God, I do not lie.)
21 Afterward I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia.
22-24 And I was unknown by face to the churches of Judea which were in Christ. But they were hearing only, “He who formerly persecuted us now preaches the faith which he once tried to destroy.” And they glorified God in me.
2 1-2 Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and also took Titus with me.
And I went up by revelation, and communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to those who were of reputation, lest by any means I might run, or had run, in vain. (To be understood at the end)
3-4 Yet not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. And this occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage),
5 to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
6 But from those who seemed to be something—whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man—for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me.
7-9 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.
10 They desired only that we should remember the poor, the very thing which I also was eager to do.
11 Now when Cephas (Peter) had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed;
12 for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they (that is, the people sent by James) came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision.
13 And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him (that is, Peter), so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.
14 But when I saw that they were “not straightforward” about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter (that is, to the one responsible for this concealment) before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why (in that case) do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?”
15 “We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles” was indeed the message that Peter left behind. The whole of this notion, in Peter, is recorded in the books of the Acts of the Apostles. Reading is enough to understand this notion, especially during the episode of the great sheet with the clean and unclean animals.
But what message was Paul trying to get across to the christians of Galatia, and to us as a fallout?
I’m going to try to develop his thought a little more, hoping that this will bring a little more light. If not, please ignore it.
—
– Peter, why do you make use of this concealment ?
– Where are your real convictions ?
– Why, then, do you deal with some people in one way and with others in another ?…
– Why do you change your position depending on the circumstances ?
– Since you agree to change your attitude, as you are doing today by eating with Gentiles, even though you reject them in your heart, why, then, are you encouraging Gentiles to ‘Judaize’, you who do not have the courage of your opinions ?
– What are you afraid of, Peter ?
– Why do you fear the “circumcised” so much, given that you’re on their side ?
– Do you have anything to hide that should not be uncovered before them ?
– What do you have to fear from what you do with the Gentiles, apart from the presence of the circumcised ?
– Why do you disguise yourself in this way, trying to make the Gentiles believe what you are not before the circumcisised, and trying to make the circumcisied believe what you are not before the Gentiles ?
– Why this sudden reversal, just as a few people arrived sent by James, the brother of the Lord Jesus “according to the flesh”, and that, according to the teaching of James, “they are all zealous for the law” ?
– But don’t you know that, according to the truth of the Gospel, all nations are included in the blessing that was announced to Abram the believer, as it is written: “In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed“. (that is, a posterity coming from the believer Abram).
– Nevertheless the seed in question is the Christ, the one you say you know and about whom you have formally declared: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God“, when He Himself asked you and the other disciples: “Who do you say that I am” ?
– Peter, you know very well that under this aspect of faith there are no Jews, Greeks or anything else, -since you yourself are eating with gentiles today. So you know very well that all are grouped together in the same blessing given to all ‘believers‘, whether they are Jews or non-Jews…
– You know this well, since this “blessing” which is Christ, or : The “Sent Saviour”, makes no mention whatsoever of any difference of race or anything of the kind, in this aspect of faith.
—
– Peter, the Gospel is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes…
– Why then do you not walk uprightly, according to this gospel ?
– Doesn’t this gospel have the power to make you walk uprightly ?
– Isn’t this Gospel just as powerful for Jews as well as for non-Jews ?
– And you, since you call yourself an “apostle to the Jews”, how much more should the power of this gospel not lead you to walk uprightly, since as an apostle you are supposed to be the representative of this gospel to the Jews ?
– Isn’t there some kind of alteration in the concept of this Gospel of God that you have, Peter ?
– Doesn’t your attitude, which is to go from one to the other in an instant, looks like what the prophet Elijah said about “falter between two opinions“, that is, going from one side to the other ?
– If you recognise that there is only one Body in the aspect of faith, and therefore – only one Gospel–, why not let everyone live their lives normally, instead of influencing them by quickly changing their attitude, as you are doing here before us ?
– Why in Antioch do you behave like a true christian and no longer like a Jew, since you go to eat with Gentiles, whereas when people come from Jerusalem, who are zealous for the law, you suddenly leave the meal and the people you were with the moment before ?
– When you act in this way, aren’t you encouraging others to think that there are two Gospels, one for Jews and one for non-Jews ?
– And if, at the end, after having eaten with the non-Jews, you suddenly leave this fraternal meal to go to the Jews, are you not trying to show the superiority of the Jews in relation to the gospel, and thus add law to the gospel, which is only “by faith and for faith” ?
– If you believe that there is only one Body in Christ, -and this under the aspect of faith-, why then do you urge a Gentile to Judaize, which you do by withdrawing from them to side with those who come from Jerusalem, therefore “those who are zealous for the law” ?
– Why do you eat with the Gentiles, and at the same time urge them to Judaize when the men sent by James come, by avoiding them in this way and going to the last to arrive ?
– Peter, in the aspect of faith, are there people who are “more excellent” ?
– What’s preventing you from acting the same way in front of everyone, Peter ?
– Do you fear James because he is Jesus’ brother in the flesh ?
– Why do you lead the Gentiles into your hypocrisy, which is the result of your general attitude that leads you to never siding with the Gospel of God ?
– Why are you sending out this underlying message: “We are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles” ?
– In this way, aren’t you going against God’s gospel, Peter ?
—
That’s it, brothers and sisters in the faith. It’s a bit complex, but if we make a little effort to concentrate, we’ll see what all these passages are trying to show us come alive.
I’m well aware that we could draw on, here or there, a few useful passages to teach on a particular point, but that’s not at all my aim today. Today, let’s take a look at what all this means, so that security can be given to those who lack it.
In fact, the whole of this passage serves only (and I do mean only) show that the apostle Paul never received from a man the gospel he preached.
Never!
On the contrary, he declares loud and clear that he received it through the revelation of Jesus Christ.
Here, at least, that’s clear.
The Scriptures themselves will therefore prove to “those who lack security about Paul’s gospel (that is, to know if it is true or not) that they can have complete confidence in the writings of the apostle Paul. They’ll just have to observe, that’s all.
The gospel Paul received came to him by divine revelation. The proof : he never met Jesus in his lifetime, nor did he meet any apostle who could have communicated it to him.
This gospel must therefore be of the divine order, and therefore perfectly admissible. Let that be understood.
—
From my own experience, I know that many believers, and even some christians, say about Paul: “Oh Paul, you know, with his revelations…”. This showing that they do not believe in his presentation of the gospel, not to say the gospel itself.
I’ve known people like that personally, so I know what I’m talking about, since the problem took years before coming out. So I know that there is still a great deal of uncertainty is still reigning about the gospel of God, delivered by Paul.
Since the apostle Paul received the gospel through the revelation of Jesus Christ, we can already ask ourselves “how” did the other apostles receive Jesus’ teachings…
Oh, it’s very simple : they were contemporaries of Jesus, so they knew him according to the Spirit, no doubt, but also according to the flesh. There was a bit of both.
But let’s read it instead:
2 Corinthians 5 ; 16 b :
“Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer.“
In many places it is also written that “they remembered”. This was after the death and resurrection of Jesus.
“They remembered”…
Do you think that sounds like a real certainty? In fact, they were trying to piece together the teachings of Jesus from their memories. That was good ! But there was an enemy in the shadow, and so it was urgent for a man to stand up; a man who didn’t need to “keep remembering” to be able to act. (I won’t name him here, it’s part of another, much bigger document).
There you go, I hope that makes it a bit clearer.
—
So, because of this serious problem, the apostle Paul wrote to the christians of Galatia in order to prove the truth of his gospel of God by a “historical” mean and even by a “geographical” means. Yes, I do mean geographical.
In verse 15, he states that after “receiving the revelation of the Son”, he left immediately for Arabia. Then he returned to Damascus.
In this case, the facts are “geographical”.
So far, no contact between Paul and other apostles.
Then, from 18 to 20, Paul declares that, “wanting to see Peter”, he stayed with him for 15 days. But he strongly states that he did not see any of the other apostles there :
“But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother.
(So not James the apostle, but only James, the Lord’s brother).
(Now concerning the things which I write to you, indeed, before God, I do not lie.)”
Strong statement !
Here, Paul is categorical. What’s more, he takes God as his witness that what he says here is true. That’s not a small thing.
So this is here an extremely important matter!
Let me remind you that the question here is whether or not, apart from Peter and James, the Lord’s brother, Paul may have met another apostle. (In other words, someone who would have announced the gospel to him, and that Paul would then have passed on).
Then, that left Peter and James’ case, the Lord’s brother.
The crucial point in all this being : the Revelation. The fact that it was by revelation that the thing was given to Paul, therefore by the Spirit.
For us, it is sometimes hard to understand why Paul was so categorical here, to the point of taking God as his witness (before God, I do not lie); but we are going to move on a little and the point will become clearer and clearer.
——
After his stay in Arabia, from the “historical and geographical” point of view, the only apostle Paul saw was Peter, when he stayed with him for 15 days.
Obviously, we could immediately say that, given that Paul stayed with Peter for 15 days, Paul could have been evangelised by Peter. And it is true that this would be logical to human understanding. But the rest of the text will show us the huge difference in notions, from the point of view of the gospel, that existed between Peter and Paul, and consequently that he could not have received the gospel from Peter.
During the 15 days they spent at Peter’s house, it is clear that their discussions did not reveal any difference of opinion on the gospel, otherwise this would have been noted by Paul in this epistle to the Galatians. On the contrary, something had to happen later on to bring it all out into the open and thus prove that Paul could not have received the true gospel from Peter when he stayed with him for 15 days.
And with good reason: Peter was caught off guard at Antioch! He was withstood by Paul.
Duly noted.
—
It is also true that the apostle Paul met James, the Lord’s brother, who was not an apostle, but who was “greatly esteemed”. So no apostle there either.
However, with regard to James, who was “greatly esteemed”, we see in verse 6 of chapter 2 that James added nothing to Paul, no more than Peter or John did :
6 But from those who seemed to be something—whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man—for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me.
Nothing could stop Paul. Not even the brother of Jesus, who was yet greatly esteemed.
—
Titus was a Gentile, but “those who seemed to be something” did not succeed in imposing anything on Paul, which proves that these apostles were still “under the law”, although they were apostles of Jesus Christ.
But then again, they were only “eyewitnesses” to Jesus’ death and resurrection:
Luke 1 ; 1 and 2: Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, and so on.
No, I simply want to go step by step and prove that the apostle Paul received “no gospel” from a man, that’s all !
—
Then we read about Peter case, who was confronted by Paul, from 11 to 15. It was a lamentable case that Peter came to Antioch and ate with Gentiles… But suddenly, when he saw people coming who had been sent by James, the Lord’s brother (not the apostle), he brusquely changed his attitude… (What a strange thing!)
Paul then confronts him, and addresses him as the person responsible for the situation, having seen that they were not walking uprightly according to the truth of the gospel.
The truth of the Gospel…
So here we learn that there is a Gospel truth in which Peter did not walk uprightly…
Paul also teaches us, on the other hand, that since his gospel was the truth, he was straightforward about it !
Fine. So why wasn’t Pierre straightforward about it ?
Here again, I do not wish to go any further into the subject, otherwise the thread of my thought might get lost. What I do note, however, is that Pierre had this truth, even if it was embryonic in him; but above all that he was not ‘straightforward about this truth’, undoubtedly because of this lack of certainty.
He had no more certainty than James, the brother of Jesus, and no more than John at the time. You only have to read the whole text to be convinced: the three of them set out to impose something on Paul, but they didn’t succeed!
On the contrary, Paul was able to withstand Peter, “for dissembling”.
—
So, here again, at this precise point, no true gospel could be given to the apostle Paul other than by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
But I would now like to return to this Gospel, not from Matthew, Mark, Luke or John, but the Gospel of God : Rom. 1 ; 1-4 :
Paul, a bondservant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated to the gospel of God which He promised before through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures, concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead ,and son on.
So this gospel is God’s gospel. In other words, the good news announced from time immemorial, first by the prophets, then by… By whom? Well, we’ve just read it :
“Paul, a bondservant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated to the gospel of God“.
(See that Paul was not named among the twelve apostles, eyewitnesses, but nevertheless “separated” by God Himself)
Let’s understand that if the same thing had been received with the same force and the same Truth by “those who seemed to be something”, there would never have been any disagreements between them and Paul !
So there was only one gospel, but some people were not “straightforward about it”.
In order not to walk straight into something that is true, you have to add or subtract elements that can give it a different hue.
The result?
Oh, it’s simple. It is written :
1 ;7 which is not “another (Gospel)“; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.
Almost nothing…
—
Friends, if you are troubled, or if you feel that your faith is being turned upside down, leaving you vulnerable, it may be because you have heard a “distorted” gospel (written elsewhere). A gospel in which those who preach are not “straightforward about it”, for reasons only they know. Either because they haven’t properly understood the full meaning of the gospel, or because it calls everything into question, and that costs to human wisdom, the flesh.
Oh, it is certain that the disagreement didn’t come up straight away. The proof is that after a fortnight’s stay with Peter, apparently there is no mention of “any flagrant disagreement between him and Paul”. Nor with James, the Lord’s brother.
Apparently everything was going well. Yes, apparently…
The evil was well hidden underneath, but it was impossible to bring it out into the open. It had to be somewhere else, in Antioch, where the disciples were called christians by the people of the city, that the problem finally came to light. It just goes to show that the most terrible evils are not necessarily those that are obivous right away.
—
It’s true that afterwards there was a change in all the other apostles, and indeed the apostle Paul makes a good point of it when he says: “Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer…“. A great deal of inner work must have taken place to arrive at such a statement!
—
Brothers and sisters in a state of uncertainty, or those with a serious lack of security, or even those who are in between two things, two notions, know that you have here an effective means of basing lastingly.
All it takes is a little common sense to know to whom exactly the Gospel has been entrusted in a complete and indelible way, from the beginning or almost. You can’t go wrong there, and you can’t be deceived.
Indeed, Paul arrived well after Peter and the other apostles as eyewitnesses. But it was to right a situation that was gradually worsening (to be seen another time, God willing).
—
The truth is that the apostle Paul delivers us God’s gospel, not his own. The epistles he sends out, here and there, simply confirm the gospel contained in the epistle to the Romans, because that is where the gospel is condensed.
John also announces it, but in his own way. It’s more subtle, more refined. Everything he writes is like a refined dish for people who love Jesus, or made to love him even more. Indeed, there are many passages in which Jesus, John and Paul say the same thing, word for word. Concerning the apostle John, it is in his epistles that we can find similarities with the words of Jesus.
Yes, you can rest easy if you believe this gospel.
You will never be deceived about the Gospel, and therefore about your salvation, if you begin by receiving the teaching of the epistle to the Romans, for example, even though this letter is a little difficult to decipher, undoubtedly because of the words and terms used.
Judge for yourself the beginning:
Romans 1 ; 16 and 17: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. For in it (the gospel) the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written,
The just shall live by faith.”
Yes, he shall live. That’s a formal promise.
Whoever believes in me will live forever, declares Jesus formally.
At least that’s clear.
—
Why does Paul say that he is not ashamed of the gospel? Simply because it was a certain state of mind that prevailed at the time; and perhaps even certain servants of Jesus.
What was this shame? That of going against the “law of numbers”. In those days it was good form to be on the side of the law, even if it was a law of death. (2 Corinthians)
It’s shameful, don’t you think, to be ashamed of the Gospel?
Indeed, for someone under the law trying to save himself by his own works, it was shameful to be saved by simple faith in Jesus Christ. Yes, it was shameful because it was too simple, not costly enough for the flesh.
And that’s it. The tone is set from the outset. We can clearly see what the gospel is, why it is done, towards what, and towards who, and what it reveals.
Obviously, this gospel inevitably brings about a change of regime. And the sooner this change takes place in a person, the better (Acts 10; 1 to 29 and the whole context).
Yes, we see in this passage from Acts 10 that it took the apostle Peter, who had yet received great promises from Jesus, to come round and turn back from his false convictions, because God had taught him. (Read the whole text to understand)
Yes, the great apostle Peter was still under the law …
You can see that if christians of Jewish origin came to refuse to eat with Gentiles, or to force them to be circumcised, it was because they had a serious problem understanding God’s gospel ! A gospel that is universal and addressed to all men, without distinction.
(For God so loved…. the world).
When we see that it took three times to a vision of divine origin to be applied to Peter’s clouded eyes, so that he would finally agree not to consider as impure what God considered as pure, we have a better idea of the extent of Peter’s problem!
Three times is no mean feat! Especially when it comes from God Himself.
—
Paul didn’t have that problem. On the other hand, his real problem was passing the true gospel along to Christians who were still under the law.
So, here again, there is no trace of a gospel that Paul would have received from another man.
———
I don’t think it’s necessary to go into any further detail. It’s enough to take note that the apostle Paul did not receive the gospel from a man, but it was through the revelation of Jesus Christ.
On top of that, it must be known that what he received enabled him to straighten the other apostles called “those who seemed to be something“.
—
The twelve were eyewitnesses; but that did not make them, at least at first, “Lord’s freedmen“. No, they were still slaves, but they didn’t know it.
Why? Because they had known Jesus “according to the flesh”. Nevertheless, you know how deceitful the flesh is, since sin is in the members, in the flesh.
It’s true that they had learned a lot from Jesus – you only have to read Peter’s speech to be convinced of that. However, this knowledge was very limited compared to “to receive by revelation”, as it was the case for Paul.
To receive by revelation is to receive by the Spirit of God; it is much more powerful than by human means; and above all the fruit is not the same, because it does not have the same origin.
If that had been possible, then why would Jesus have called and “separate” a new apostle, given that previously it was Peter who had the preeminence? And why did He choose a man of dual nationality like Paul?
The twelve… weren’t they a full group since Matthias replaced Judas? Yes, of course there were twelve. Twelve “eye-witnesses”. Twelve “visual” witnesses.
It’s one thing to be a visual witness, and quite another to be a spiritual one. The proof : Paul’s ministry was far superior in all ways !
—
Am I denigrating Peter or John in relation to Paul? Far from it! I’m just saying that Jesus has a plan for the gospel, and that he’s working to spread it into the whole world; and to do that, he’ll use any means possible, like meeting a man on his way to Damascus, then turning him upisode down, shaping him and sending him out to do the opposite of what he was doing before.
Then this happened: Paul took the road to Damascus twice, but not in the same way. Once it was to imprison Christians, and the second time it was to go and proclaim the gospel, and so set people free. The way was the same, of course, but not the state of mind and even less the result.
He no longer had a religion that went so far as to persecute others, but he finally had a relationship with the One who had met him and set him right. In short, a Lord who had saved him from himself.
Yes, Paul was saved from Saul by Jesus.
—
Whether it was Peter, John or Paul, it was necessary for them to make a total conversion from their former convictions.
Just think about it : Even the main apostles were wrong!
———
So there’s a very important message to retain from all this, and one that can’t be avoided :
– The Gospel is the complete opposite of human concepts!
– It’s divine, not human.
– It’s from above, not from beneath.
– This is why it is addressed, not to the wise and the pudent, but to those who do not shine :
18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
19 For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.”
20 Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age ? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world ?
21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.
22-24 For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26 For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called.
27-29 But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, that no flesh should glory in His presence.
To understand, and to proclaim the gospel even better, we too have to be ready to make a complete break with our logical reasonings, and therefore human, because Jesus came to speak to us about the kingdom of heaven, and not the kingdom from beneath; which is what Paul continued to do right up to the end (Acts 28).
—
So I’d like to finish this little paper to say, once again, that if anyone lacks security, towards a lot of often contradictory preaching, then they should read what Jesus said, and then what the apostles Paul and John wrote, and they will no longer have any problems with discordant voices, because everything Paul said he drew it from the teaching of Jesus by revelation.
Therefore, I would like to repeat what the apostle Paul formally declared:
7 which is not another (gospel); but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. (Accursed)
9 As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1; 7 to 9)
Here it is signed and countersigned by Paul, who proved that he had received this eternal gospel by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
– So here’s to anyone who wants to announce another one…
– And eternal security for those who keep the good one.
Jesus said this interrogatively: “Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will He really find faith on the earth?” (Luke 18).
Jesus is asking the question here. That’s no mean feat!
Nevertheless, this is precisely the essential theme of the gospel of God, delivered by Paul:
Faith !
L’apôtre Paul
JeanP
Le code des couleurs dans les différents documents.
Dans les diverses études, articles et documents, nous abordons des thèmes, des principes et des notions souvent sprirituelles, dont parfois les mots seuls ne suffisent pas à en exprimer tout ce qu’ils contiennent en eux-même.
Pour y remédier, en tout cas partiellement, nous avons mis en couleurs certains mots, ou phrases, afin que chacun puisse saisir plus aisément “le sens réel de ce que nous voudrions transmettre aux autres.”.
Nous espérons que cela vous sera utile.
Ci-dessous vous trouverez le sens des couleurs :
Couleur de la parole qui vient du ciel, Jésus.
Couleur de la parole qui vient du ciel, ou celle d’anges, ou de l’Esprit.
Couleur rouge foncé de la parole de Dieu citée dans les Ecritures.
Couleur de la parole de Dieu rappelée, promesses, ou parole prophétique.
Couleur de la parole mélangée des hommes.
Couleur de la vie chrétienne normale.
Couleur de la foi.
Couleur de la loi noire.
Couleur orange de la gloire de Dieu et ce qui en découle.
Couleur des paroles du diable, ou de ses agents.
—
Bien à vous en Jésus,
0 Comments