It is not just in Paul's writings that he is qualified to be an apostle. Luke wrote the book of Acts and Paul's conversion is told in there.
2006-11-26 00:54:29
·
answer #1
·
answered by Buzz s 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Paul seemed to limit the title "apostle" to those who had a personal experience with the person Jesus Christ. He included himself because of his Damascus road experience.
But Paul certainly opens it up for others as he lists "apostle" as one of the gifts to the church in Ephesians 4:11.
2006-11-26 06:41:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by happy pilgrim 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
During those years after Jesus' death, all the apostles continued the work Jesus started...preaching the Good News.
One by one, the Bible does not say, they died, either from sickness, persecution or accident. Paul's last Bible book, Hebrews, was written about 61 C.E. Peter wrote the book, Second Peter in Babylon in 64 C.E. Jude wrote his book in Palestine in 65 C.E. And John, the last apostle, wrote Revelation in 96 C.E.
It must always be remembered that when he was known as Saul, he persecuted Christians right to death. Only when he was spoken to...from heaven...by Jesus, did he properly re-direct his enthusiasm.
His enthusiasm was to maintain the Jewish belief system. In this he was devoted. Jesus redirected the devotion.
2006-11-26 06:44:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by pugjw9896 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Paul had his conversion experience apart from the Apostles and spent 3yrs as a student of this new religion, and the Apostles accepted the honesty and truth of his apointment by Christ.
2006-11-26 06:38:38
·
answer #4
·
answered by Sentinel 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Paul saw Jesus in His glory. It changed Paul's life from persecuting the church Saul to preaching for Jesus Paul.
1 Corinthians 15:9
For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
2006-11-26 06:34:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Interesting question. I do recall Peter citing Paul's writings as "scripture"; though this is not necessarily the same as calling him an "apostle", I guess it is consistent with the theory.
2006-11-26 06:37:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by Michael H 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Paul made it clear in his letters that he was appointed an apostle by the will of God. He did not qualified himself God has chosen him to be one and he was humbled that God has chosen him to be one for he claimed that he was least of the apostles. There is no way for a minister of God to be prideful if he is doing all God's work in God's power. God detest man' s flesh getting involved in His work. When working for God, we move in His power that is ministry and brings life but when we move in our own strength that is just performance and dead works.
2006-11-26 07:01:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by seekfind 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Beats me. I don't seem to find Paul in thinking with the general beliefs that Jesus lived.
If you follow Paul from 1 Corinthians, you're not even supposed to get involved in the dispute over stoning Mary Magdeline. Paul says you're not supposed to keep the company of Fornicators. If you can't even sit with them, then you certainly can't defend them!
2006-11-26 06:45:04
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
The word "Apostle", from the Greek apostello "to send forth", "to dispatch", has etymologically a very general sense. Apostolos (Apostle) means one who is sent forth, dispatched--in other words, who is entrusted with a mission, rather, a foreign mission. It has, however, a stronger sense than the word messenger, and means as much as a delegate.
2006-11-26 06:49:37
·
answer #9
·
answered by alexjem 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Same reason the Bible has been interpreted by man to please the whims of man, usually in an attempt to control the masses. King James wanted certain "rules and regs" put in the Bible, and he got them during that translation. True spirituality is in the hearts of men connecting one to another on a genuine basis.
2006-11-26 06:32:48
·
answer #10
·
answered by Cub6265 6
·
0⤊
1⤋