Corpus-Paul

["Edgar M. Krentz" <ekrentz AT earthlink.net>]

> Steve Black wrote:
>
> >  Loren wrote
> >  >
> >  >That Paul went to Jerusalem "in order to be sure that
> >  >he wasn't running in vain" (Gal 2:2) should put to
> >  >rest notions that he didn't care what the pillars
> >  >thought about the matter. Gal 2:6 -- "From those who
> >  >were supposed to be acknowledged leaders (what they
> >  >actualy were makes no difference to me; God shows no
> >  >partiality") -- is, I believe, part of the face-saving
> >  >rhetoric which runs through Gal 2:1-10.
> >
> >  You make a good point here, Loren.
> >
> >  It seems that perhaps Paul was both arrogant and insecure. This
> >  twinning of traits is not as strange as may at first appear, and in
> >  fact might be connected.
>
> Another point to consider is Paul's experience on the road to Damascus.
> Assuming that the reports are genuine (in the sense of there being no
> intent to deceive) then Paul clearly believed that his 'mission' came
> directly from Jesus.  As such, I believe there is no reason for him to
> feel 'inferior' or 'under the control' of the Jerusalem church.  Instaed,
> it seems reasonable for Paul to consider himself at least equal to the
> leaders of that church.  Nevertheless, it would be reasonable for him to
> connect with them from time, initially to find out what they were doing,
> and how that might affect him.
>
> Dave Inglis
> david AT colonialcommerce.com
> 3538 O'Connor Drive
> Lafayette, CA, USA

Paul himself claims his apostleship as the result of a direct vision 
of the Lord (1 Cor. 9:1-2; 15:8-11).

Galatians beings with a strong statement of his apostleship (Gal 1:1; 
1:12). Paul goes on to a fourfold argument that he is independent of 
the Jerusalem authorities. (1) Gal 1:15-17: His call as apostle led 
immediately to his proclaiming the Gospel in Arabia, not going to 
Jerusalem; (2) Gal 1:18-23: when he did go to Jerusalem, he went up 
to interrogate Peter (check the Greek verb historesai, not to seek 
the approval of Jerusalem; (3) when he went up after 14 years, the 
Jerusalem leaders recognized his gospel as legitimate (Gal 2:1-10) 
and (4) when Peter did "not walk upright according to the gospel" in 
Antioch, Paul faced him down. In short, Paul asserts his independence 
of Jerusalem forcefully.

This does not mean, of course, that Jerusalem recognized it!

And, just by the way, I do hold that Gal 2:1-10 and Acts 15 refer to 
the same meeting. Try to work out a chronology of Paul that will fit 
Galatians chronological data into what Acts says, and you will have 
difficulty coming to a different conclusion.

Edgar Krentz
+ + + + + +  + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Edgar  Krentz                                                     
Professor Emeritus of New Testament                       
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
1100 East 55th Street
Chicago, IL 60615
Telephone: (773) 256-0773               Home Tel: 773-947-8105
Office e-mail:  ekrentz AT lstc.edu        Home e-mail: ekrentz AT earthlink.net
 GHRASKW D' AEI  POLLA  DIDASKOMENOS.
 "I grow older, learning many things all the time." [Solon of Athens]
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++