Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
Talk about distortion!
Here is what Marvin Vincent really said about I Cor 1.1: 1. Called to be an apostle. See on Rom 1.1. Compare I Tim. 1.1 Not distinguishing him from other apostles. Compare Matt 4.21; John 6.70; but Paul was called no less directly than these by Jesus Christ.
Here is what Marvin Vincent really said about I Cor 1.2: Theirs and ours. The A.V. and Rev. connect with Jesus Christ our Lord. Better with in every place. Every place in the province where Christians are is our place also. The expression emphasizes the position of Paul as the founder and apostolic head of Christianity in Corinth and in all Achaia.
Vincett said that Paul brought the gospel to Corinth and defended his authority as "founder and apostolic head of Christianity in that city," and as such he defended the gospel against the false apostles and false teachings.
I protested the word "head" because folks like Evangelical would yank it out of context, and place this pseudo-crown on Lee.
And that he surely did. |
I also find this discussion despicable. If I am talking to an unbeliever and they say that Paul is the founder of Christianity I have no issue with that because they have already taken a stand that they do not believe in the resurrected Christ. Likewise with historians.
To a believer the reality of "Christianity" is the Body of Christ. This is the "new creation" and came about at Jesus Resurrection from the dead. We are only required to keep Baptism and the Lord's table -- both instituted by Jesus, not Paul.
Paul was a great apostle, and to an unbeliever they can call him "the head of the church" because their is no confusion with the head of the Body, nor can you insult Jesus the head if you have no faith in Him.
To believers Paul was a gift to the Body so that we could understand the change in the Age and how the New Covenant related to the Old Covenant. He was a servant, not "the head".