 |  |
Not only could Paul declare that his message was "according to the Scriptures", but
Peter, who confessed that there were many things in Paul's writings "hard to be
understood", which the unlearned wrested unto their own destruction, Peter, who so
clearly expresses his understanding of the inspiration of Scripture (II Pet. 1: 19-21), Peter
includes Paul's epistles among the Scriptures (II Pet. 3: 16). Paul wrote by the same
authority as did Moses, Matthew, Peter and John.
#5.
Christ Risen.
pp. 189, 190
There are some who say with Mary, "They have taken away my Lord", when they
refer to the supposed results of following the teaching of the epistles of Paul.
Unconsciously by so quoting Mary's statement they reveal the true state of affairs.
Shorn of sentiment Mary's utterance amounts to a confession of unbelief in the
resurrection of Christ. Those who oppose the teaching of Paul's epistles know Christ
after the flesh, but seem to have no practical place for Christ risen. When once the fact
has been grasped that the same Person, Christ Himself, speaks whether in the Sermon on
the Mount, Peter's epistles, the Apocalypse, Romans or Ephesians, all such invidious
distinctions must cease, and Matthew, Peter, John and Paul are channels only,
ambassadors, servants, mouthpieces, but not originators.
Paul's conversion was by the personal revelation of the risen Christ (Acts 9:). His
gospel was
"Concerning His Son . . . . . declared to be the Son of God with power . . . . . by the
resurrection from the dead" (Rom. 1: 3, 4).
So vital was the truth of the resurrection to the apostle's ministry, that he declared that
forgiveness of sins, future hope, and present faith were vain, if Christ were not risen. The
life which the apostle lived in the flesh he lived by faith of the Son of God (Gal. 2: 20),
and heart belief that God had raised Christ from the dead meant salvation (Rom. 10: 9).
Apart from resurrection Christ could not have entered into His office as the last Adam
(I Cor. 15:).
"To this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that He might be Lord both of the
dead and living" (Rom. 14: 9).
Paul's teaching starts with the death and resurrection of Christ, whereas Matthew's
ends with it. In the prison epistles the emphasis is not only upon the risen Christ, but also
upon the ascended Lord, for resurrection does not necessarily remove from earth to
heaven. To those who turn a deaf ear to the words of the risen Christ by reason of
antipathy towards the instrument He has chosen, we would quote Heb. 12: 25:--