The Unique Calling of the Apostle Paul

In these days there is such a lack of "rightly dividing" the Word that any movement and even cult can cull out a doctrinal beachhead from anywhere in the Bible and work their way out. This study is to put in context what I believe is a necessary understanding of the overarching context of the entire Bible. And it is the misuse and melding of the Scriptures that have given way to the modern day falling away, as well as cults.

Now why is this topic germane to the current emergent crisis? Because any investigation as to the source of their theology will quickly reveal a dependence on the gospel narratives as well as the Old Testament at the obvious diminishment of the epistles, especially Paul. When queried about it they will skillfully admit that the narrative of Jesus' life is more authoritative in doctrinal formation than the teachings of Paul. But let us examine the Biblical claims of the Apostle Paul himself, which were never questioned by any of the other original apostles. Look at what Paul says to the church at Galatia:

Gal.1:11 - But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

No other apostle has made that claim. And in reading the book of Acts we find that when Paul came on the scene he had to correct a number of issues that the first apostles had gotten wrong, and they acquiesced to Paul's obvious calling to the predominately Gentile church that was coming. Peter himself had to be convinced that Gentiles could be saved by the experience of Cornelius and his household, but Paul was taught the universality of God's grace by Jesus Himself.

Eph.3:1-6 - For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, If you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God, which is given me to you-ward: How that by revelation He made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote before in few words, Whereby, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto His holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ by the gospel.

So Paul claims special revelation from the Lord Jesus Himself concerning the church, and many times he refers to the gospel as "my gospel", meaning the version that he alone received from Christ. None of the apostles recognized the offer of God's grace included Gentiles, much less the pervasive Gentile nature of the body of Christ. In I Corinthians Paul refers to himself as an apostle "born out of due time" because he had not seen Jesus before His resurrection, but Paul was the only one to see Jesus after His ascension, save John. Now if you discount Paul, or even diminish his calling as the revelator to the church, your doctrine can go anywhere you want it to go. (i.e. the emergent movement)


Who was the "apostle" to Israel, the Old Testament children of God? Moses, of course. Even Jesus made the reference, "you have heard Moses say", and Moses is referred to throughout the New Testament. Why? Because Moses was God's instrument of the law, which was in its primary purpose a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. Now consider this, who did God use as His instrument to bring the entire revelation of the Gospel of Christ? So I believe that Paul is to the church as Moses was to Israel. Here are some similarities between Paul and Moses.

• Both were thoroughly trained in wisdom and dialectics, both were well educated
  
• Both were chosen before birth for a special ministry. Moses was preserved from Egyptian slaughter, and Paul states he was "separated from birth".
  
• Both had supernatural initial encounters with God. Moses at the burning bush and Paul on the Damascus Road.
  
• Both were taught their ministries not by man but "face to face" with God as it were.
  
• Both had been murderers
  
• Both carried a supernatural burden for their flock and both counted the lives of their people more important than their own. Moses asked God to kill him instead of Israel, and Paul wished himself accursed in place of Israel.
  
• Both warned of damnation to anyone who would add or subtract from their revelation.
  
• Both were very humble, Moses the meekest man on earth and Paul "less than the least of all the saints".
  

So the similarities are striking, and this is the point. As Moses was to Israel so Paul is to the church, to diminish Paul's epistles and use the Old Testament or the gospels as the foundation for church doctrine and revelation is to not "rightly divide" the Word of truth. The gospels were primarily to present Jesus as the Messiah, the Savior, and the Son of God. There is much rich teaching and example in them as well, but they cannot be the primary source of church doctrine. Now what do we mean by "church doctrine"? Let's illustrate. Leviticus is an inspired book that is part of the Word of God. Everyone agrees. But how many would agree that we should follow what is written there to the letter? Anyone? Of course not, God uses Leviticus to provide a historical perspective of the law as well as Israel's history that in context of the New Testament helps us realize the severity of sin and the blood atonement that would be fulfilled in Christ. The same with the gospels. Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day in the Temple, should we in the church follow that as church doctrine? Of course not, the gospel narratives were still under law, we are no longer under law. Does that discount any examples in the life of our Lord that the Spirit uses to exhort us to follow "in His steps", no, there are many. But Christ taught us through the Apostle Paul what he desired this new mystery, the church, to look and be like.

Now there are many teachings and revelations that the church takes for granted today that are either unique to Paul or at least more fully expounded through Paul. Here is a limited list of some of those precious doctrines and teachings.

• The Universal Headship of Christ (Eph.1:9-10)
  
• The Headship of Christ Over the Church (Col.2:16-19)
  
• The Emphasis of the Cross (Gal.6:14)
  
• The Revelation of the Mystery (20 times only Paul)
  
• The Teaching of the Rapture (I Thess.4 & I Cor.15)
  
• The Body of Christ (Rom.12:5)
  
• The Bride of Christ (II Cor.11:2 & Rom.7:4)
  
• The Gifts of the Spirit (I Cor. 12 & 14)
  
• The Offices of the Church (Ti.1 & I Tim.3)
  
• Justification by Faith (Rom.5:1)
  
• The Contrast of Law and Grace (Gal. 4)
  
• The Contrast of the Old and New Man (Eph.4 & Col. 3)
  

And on and on we could go to identify the litany of teachings that are directly for the body of believers called the church and which are distinctively Paul's revelation. And if you do not assign Paul the office that Christ assigned him you are doomed to fall into error at the very beginning of your doctrinal foundation. For instance, since Jesus was circumcised as an eight year old boy should we teach that all church members should have their boys circumcised on the eighth day? Jesus entered the temple on Saturdays, should we teach the church that is the preferred day to worship? Jesus observed the Jewish feast days should the church observe them also? The answer to those questions is only if Paul taught the church that Jesus revealed to him that we should.

Now in some future posts I will expand on the truth that the Apostle Paul is the revelator to the church, a conduit of Jesus to be sure, but the primary instrument of Christ nonetheless. For homework do a study in the gospels of events and teachings that are edifying and exhorting but not as church doctrine, or in other words directly teaching and instructing the church as the collective body of Christ. And then, I challenge you, read from Romans through Hebrews in four days and see what the Holy Spirit speaks to you.

Jesus the Christ is my Lord and I His unprofitable servant.