 |  |
The first reason why "M." failed in his search is basic. He does not rightly divided the
Word of truth. He does not clearly distinguish between the revelation of the mystery of
Christ which was shared by other apostles and prophets, and that revelations which Paul
declares was revealed to himself that he should enlighten all. He fails to rightly divide
between the ministry of Paul and Peter, for he says:--
"Peter had acted upon this `mystery' in preaching Christ to the Gentiles at Cornelius'
house before Paul began (our italics) his ministry, which FACT is enough of itself to
dispose of the idea that Paul was the first to receive knowledge of it."
"M." is rather fond of FACTS. He continually refers to some statement of his own as
"this fact", but we feel that most of these are open to doubt. The one before us is a case
in point. The casual reader, who does not test what is written by the Word, would
conceived that the idea of Paul's exclusive claim to the revelation of the "mystery" was
exploded by "this fact" from Acts 10: In Acts 9: we have the following FACTS
recorded by inspiration:--
"And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God"
(verse 20).
"He spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed with the Grecians; but
they went about to slay him" (verse 29).
Gal. 1: 17 supplies the ellipsis of Acts 9: 22, stating that Paul went away into
Arabia. The scriptural FACT is that Peter had not gone further in his testimony than to
the Samaritans, and upon his own confession would not have done so had he not received
the vision from heaven. This vision did not take place until AFTER Paul's conversion
and commission. Another FACT is found in Acts 26: 16-18. There, Paul reveals for
the first time what the Lord said unto him on the road to Damascus:--
"I have appeared unto thee for this purpose . . . . . delivering thee from the people, and
from the GENTILES, unto whom now I send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them
from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive
forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in
Me."
"M.'s" facts are fictions, anything being a good enough weapon with which to beat the
"postponement theory". But he can do nothing against the truth, and we cannot think
many real students will be impressed with the facts about the "mystery (whatever it be)"
that are of this character. We will accept his own explanation, and believe that he is
indeed "UNABLE to find a trace", etc., and agree that the failure so to do is found in his
own inability as a student and not in the inspired record.
The closing paragraph quoted on page 34 contains this wholesome suggestion:--
"The meaning being quite evident to those who give proper attention to the language."
We do not know the extent of "M.'s" acquaintance with the original tongue of the
N.T., but scattered through his books are references to the Greek and quotations from
"Bagster's Interlinear."