At first Peter was worried about Paul's conversion because after all Paul was out killing the followers of Jesus. You can read in the gospel Paul held the coats of those that stoned St Stephen to death, and he got a order from the Pharisees to gather up more of Jesus's followers when he was on the road to Damascus.
After Peter was convinced of Paul's real conversion of faith there was the difficulty of incorporating the Gentiles into "the Way". Peter being a Jew was still leaning towards the old ways.. he was still going to the Temple on Saturday to read the Torah and most likely following many of the Jew's customs like not eating with Gentiles. When Peter needed to see Cornelius, the Roman Centurion, he was torn because he had to eat with them which was forbidden. But God came to him in a vision and told him nothing was unclean anymore and go there.
Once that was resolved Peter and Paul had to have a conference about the very serious issue of circumcision. This wasn't something Gentiles did and for it to happen to an adult was extremely painful. They resolved these differences too. There never was a schism unless you reading some strange book about things that never happened.
Both St Peter and St Paul are buried at St Peters's in Rome.
2007-04-08 05:13:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by Tapestry6 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The basic thing had to do with circumcision. Peter's opinion was that only circumcized men could become Christian and Paul, understanding that the mandate from Christ to convert people included the gentiles. Peter wanted them to be circumcized first, Paul seemed to think it did not matter.
2007-04-08 06:35:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by Polyhistor 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Paul said that the Jewish believers, who had criticized Peter for eating with Gentiles, were not walking uprightly according to the truth of the gospel. The gospel doesn't require a man be circumcized in the flesh, but in his heart. The difference lies in ritual observances as oppossed to a true committment that is based on faith in what Jesus did for us and not on what we do. The ritual is not a work, it's a memorial. Peter had this to say about Paul.
2 Peter 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
Peter said that Paul wrote that our salvation is in Jesus Christ, and that he wrote in the wisdom of God.
2007-04-08 05:37:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by hisgloryisgreat 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
There was a deal going on at a congregation north of Jerusalem, where Peter was accusing Paul of improprieties, something to do with peeping in lady's windows. It was all hushed up, and today hardly anything is known about it.
I think there may be something about it in the epistles of Titus or Jude.
2007-04-08 05:23:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by 2.71828182845904 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
One of them is in Galatians 2:11 where Paul got in Peter's face about hypocrisy. Look the rest up, it's pretty good.
2007-04-08 05:13:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by ravin_lunatic 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Paul had some issues with his hormones, that much I know. Peter believed Paul was nasty. Paul believed Peter was a butt-head.
2007-04-08 05:16:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
They fought a duel in the dusty town of Diononia, over a lady who attended the church there. Paul claimed he saw her first or something like that.
No one was hurt, cause neither of them could swing straight. It was quite a scandal there for a while.
2007-04-08 05:19:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I would hardly call it a schism. I suppose you are referring to the incident recorded at Acts 2:11-14.
"However, when Cephas came to Antioch, I resisted him face to face, because he stood condemned. For before the arrival of certain men from James, he used to eat with people of the nations; but when they arrived, he went withdrawing and separating himself, in fear of those of the circumcised class. The rest of the Jews also joined him in putting on this pretense, so that even Barnabas was led along with them in their pretense. But when I saw they were not walking straight according to the truth of the good news, I said to Cephas before them all: “If you, though you are a Jew, live as the nations do, and not as Jews do, how is it that you are compelling people of the nations to live according to Jewish practice?”
Hannah J Paul
2007-04-08 05:12:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by Hannah J Paul 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
The difference is that their message was aimed at different groups of people. Peter was aiming more towards Jewish converts and Paul was aiming more at Gentile converts. They adapted their messages to make Christianity appeal to people of different backgrounds. Plus they themselves were of very different backgrounds, so they had a different take on the teachings of Jesus.
2007-04-08 05:11:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by Link 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
Circumcision
2007-04-08 05:08:47
·
answer #10
·
answered by Turnhog 5
·
1⤊
2⤋