In Defense of the Apostle Paul
by Richard Blackford
We have heard it said that Paul was not an authentic apostle. They say he injected his prejudices into his writing, that he was a misogynist and a homophobe. Others don’t care much for Paul because of his teaching on baptism. They also claim to be Christians, but they mainly just follow the red letter edition and claim to adhere only to the words of Christ, so just a small portion of the New Testament. It appears to be based more on a dislike for Paul’s teaching than a lack of evidence of his authenticity.
- Was Paul authentic? Luke’s account shows that he was (Acts 9). Remember that Acts 9 is not Paul’s personal testimony telling of his own conversion, but Luke, a frequent companion of Paul is relating what happened that resulted in Saul’s (Paul’s) conversion. If Luke’s account in Acts can’t be trusted, then consistency would also demand that those who claim to follow only the words of Christ (red letters) reject the book of Luke, which records many of the words of Jesus. While the other two accounts of Saul’s conversion (Acts 22 and 26) repeat Saul’s (Paul’s) personal account, they are still recorded by Luke as authentic and harmonized with Luke’s account in Act 9.
- Jesus put his stamp of approval on the apostles as his representatives. “The one who receives you receives me, and the one who receives me receives Him who sent me” (Matthew 10:40). He told the apostles that He would send the Holy Spirit to guide them into all truth and call all things to their remembrance that he had taught them (John 15:13; 14:26).
- Some don’t believe Paul is authentic because he wasn’t one of the original Twelve. It’s as though the Lord knew someone would make that argument, and he took care of that through the apostle Peter. Peter, one of the original Twelve, said concerning Paul’s writings: “And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote unto you; as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; wherein are some things hard to be understood, which the ignorant and unsteadfast wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction” (II Peter 3:15-16). Notice five things:
- Peter regarded Paul as “our beloved brother,” even though Paul had to rebuke him on one occasion (Galatians 2:11-14);
- Peter said wisdom was given unto Paul;
- Peter referred to Paul’s writing as” Scripture”;
- Peter said it was possible to wrest Paul’s writings to their own destruction. That means all of Paul’s epistles are authoritative, as are the other scriptures, and if you try to twist what Paul said, you will destroy yourself;
- Peter said that those who wrest Paul’s writings are ignorant and unsteadfast.
- Paul corroborates that what he taught was from the Holy Spirit (I Corinthians 2:12-13). Peter, Paul, and Luke all agree.
Why Paul Was Not a Misogynist
Paul taught husbands
- to love their wives as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her;
- to love their wives as they loved themselves and their own bodies;
- to nourish and cherish her (Ephesians 5). He is her protector, provider, and leader (I Timothy 5:8; 2:11-14).
Because Paul taught that women have a different role than men, it says nothing about their worth. Some have confused the chain of authority in Scripture (I Cor 11:3). A private in the army is no less a human than a general. Their rankings determine the soldier's authority, not the individual's worth. Elders are given the oversight of the church, but deacons are not of less worth.
There are two reasons given for the different roles of men and women. “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression” (I Timothy 2:12-14).
- The first reason is that Adam was formed first. God has a record of giving seniority a leading role. The firstborns were given a double portion of the inheritance. They often had added responsibilities when a father died. This reason is totally unrelated to the culture of Paul’s time.
- The second reason for her not to usurp authority over the man was her being deceived in the Garden. Eve was deceived, but Adam was not. It is not to Adam’s credit that he knowingly participated in eating the forbidden fruit with his eyes wide open, but that was not the point. The point was that Eve was deceived and took the leadership role. God decided that man was better suited for leadership.
Neither of the two reasons had anything to do with the culture of Paul’s time or Paul’s personal prejudices. He crossed all cultures and went back to the beginning.
Paul highly praised numerous women for their role in furthering the gospel: Phoebe, Priscilla, Mary (Romans 16), Eudodia, Syntyche (Philippians 4), Nymphas (Colossians 4), and Lois and Eunice (II Timothy 1).
Why Paul Was Not a Homophobe
He clearly rejoiced at the salvation of many Corinthians who had lived in immorality. “You know that wicked people will not inherit the kingdom of God,… Stop deceiving yourselves! Sexually immoral people, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexuals, thieves, greedy people, drunks, slanderers, and robbers will not inherit the kingdom of God. That is what some of you were! But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of our Lord Jesus the Messiah and by the Spirit of our God” (I Corinthians 6:9-11 ISV).
Paul and Baptism
Paul makes no apologies for his teaching on this. In his own conversion, he was commanded to “Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). Luke records that “He arose and was baptized” (Acts 9:18). He is clear in saying that baptism is a burial. We are “buried with Christ in baptism” (Romans 6:4; Colossians 2:12). He is also clear that when we obey that “form,” We are “then made free from sin” (Romans 6:17-18), “having forgiven us all our trespasses” (Colossians 2:12-13). He said the Corinthians were “washed……in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ…” which corresponds to “baptism…in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins…” (Acts 2:38). Numerous times in the New Testament, baptism is tied to remission of sins, being saved, being put “into Christ,” etc. Of all those many occasions that baptism is mentioned, not once is it recorded that anyone argued against it. But today, many ignore Peter’s warning about wresting Paul's writings to their own destruction.