Alright friends, grab a drink and settle in. Today got messy, but man was it interesting. That whole “Paul as apostle” question popped into my head this morning after skimming some comments online. People were fighting tooth and nail about it, like really fired up. I figured, “Heck, I’ve got some notes somewhere… let’s actually dig in properly today.” Gotta see what all the fuss is about.
First Steps: Coffee and Paper Chaos
Honestly started kinda rough. Grabbed a lukewarm coffee (typical) and literally dumped my theology notebooks onto the kitchen table. Papers flew everywhere – sticky notes about grace, scribbles on Old Testament laws, random receipts mixed in. Took me like ten minutes just to find anything mentioning Paul specifically. Knew I had stuff jotted down from sermons and that one podcast series ages ago. Found a page titled “Big Paul Arguments” – handwritten mess, but it was a start. Underlined part said “Apostle = Witnessed Jesus?”. Okay, obvious first stop.
Hopped online, trying to find Paul’s own words on this. Searched phrases like “Paul defends apostleship” because hey, that’s what this felt like, him defending himself. Went straight to the source: his letters. In 1 Corinthians 9:1 he straight up says: “Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?” That felt huge at first. Case closed? Not so fast. Folks online argued this “seeing Jesus” meant the Damascus road blinding light thing – not hanging out with the living, breathing Jesus before the cross like Peter or John did. Was that the same kind of witness? Debate started heating up even in my own head.
Hitting the Books (Well, Screens Mostly)
My notebooks weren’t enough. Needed more voices. Scoured articles and summaries online. Different opinions flying:
- Team YES: Said Jesus personally commissioned Paul directly (like Acts talks about). His missionary work proves it. He behaved like an apostle.
- Team NO: Hammered the point: the original apostles were picked by Jesus during his life. Matthias replaced Judas because he’d been with them since John baptized Jesus. Paul wasn’t even in the picture then. Outsider.
- Team KINDA: Some suggested a different category – apostle specially sent to the Gentiles, but maybe not fitting the “original twelve” mold exactly.
This is where my brain started to ache. Romans was kinda vague on the specifics. Galatians (1:15-24) is where it got spicy. Paul insists he got his gospel straight from Jesus himself, not from the other apostles. He even confronted Peter later! That showed real independence. Made you realize how big the disagreement might have been back then too. Imagine the arguments! Felt more real suddenly.
Tangled Webs and My Couch
Then it got tangled. Did Paul call himself an apostle? Yep, constantly in his letter openings. But some folks argue that title wasn’t fixed early on. Others pointed out the original apostles eventually seemed to accept him, like James and John giving him the right hand of fellowship (Galatians 2:9). But did that mean they officially ranked him as one of them? Or just respected his work? Language got fuzzy fast. Wanted to punch a couch cushion.
And THEN came the heavyweights. Found articles digging into the Greek “apostolos.” Sometimes it just meant “messenger,” like an errand runner. Other times, definitely meant these specific commissioned guys. Which one for Paul? Exhausting.
Looked back at the New Testament organization itself. Saw how Hebrews doesn’t list an author. James and Jude? Disputed letters. But Paul’s stuff is front and center as scripture alongside Peter and John. Felt like at least the early church saw him as foundational. Does scripture status kinda imply apostleship? Felt like a chicken-or-egg question.
My (Totally Unprofessional) Hot Take
After hours down this rabbit hole? My take is messy, just like today’s research. Technically, by the strict “chosen during Jesus’ earthly life” club definition? Paul doesn’t seem to fit the original 12-member application. He crashed the party later via divine commission. But his impact? Massive. The dude defined the job description through his work and suffering, whether folks liked it or not. He acted as one, wrote as one, and basically forced everyone to deal with it. And let’s be real – his letters shaped Christianity more than most. So maybe the debate is proof enough that Paul broke the mold. Does the label “Apostle” perfectly fit? Maybe not. Does he deserve a seat at that table? Hard to argue against it after seeing his impact. I ended up respecting the messy debate way more than when I started. More coffee definitely needed.
