Does the political grandstanding in the New Testament make more sense if read in chronological order?

Question

For example, being that Matthew was likely composed nearly two decades after Paul's letters, his book makes much more sense in opposition against Paul's teachings - specifically things like "I have not come to abolish the law but to complete it", and referring to Peter as the rock on which the church will be built, etc, etc.

Answer 1

You've got it.

It's all first century politics, even the original rebellions that started it.

Answer 2

Eh, trying to make sense of your question. The first letter was 1st Thessalonians, written by Paul in 70 C.E.. Most scholars largely believe that Mark was written first somewhere between 100-150 C.E., and Matthew and Luke borrowed largely from him, while all three shared a source called Q, which was a theoretical list of Jesus sayings. John is its own beast with its own sources written around the same time. Acts was written by the same author as Luke. Paul's letters from Romans to Philemon are organized in the New Testament in order by decreasing size. There is nothing to suggest that the order, established by a millenia of church use, was arranged to say anything political beyond the political of the Roman world versus God's world. Though there may be some suggestions of tensions between Peter and Paul evolving around Jew-Gentile relations, Paul's letters and the gospels largely corroborate each other and fit into a large picture of God's plan. The reason why the Gospels were written so late after Jesus' death was because there was no reason to write them---the disciples led the churches the Christians were in. If there was a question about Jesus, just ask the disciple. It wasn't until they died and their successors died that there was a fear that the info was going to be lost. So then it was written. These stories were widespread enough to be swiftly checked if some renegade scribe got the story wrong.

As to your quote: "I have not come to abolish the law but to complete it", this is in reference to Jesus coming to complete the law of Moses (found throughout the book of Deuteronomy), thus transforming the believing Jews into Christiains. "Peter as the rock" was written by the same guy who wrote the Gospel of Luck, so there is no problem there. I don't know where you got your information from, but it doesn't quite work as a conspiracy theory. It definitely makes for some interesting discussion though.

Answer 3

You're imagining a power struggle for which there is absolutely no historical support for.