Tag Archives: Paul

Posted on

Did St Luke mention Christ appearing “over 500” from 1 Corinthians?

by

The day after Easter I wrote about the appearance of Christ to “over 500 at the same time” mentioned by Saint Paul in 1 Corinthians. Who were they? You can read it here. I provided four possible options.

Since then I’ve found a fifth option within Saint Luke’s Gospel. As I explain in my book The Catholic Perspective on Paul, I always try to interpret Saint Paul’s Epistles in light of Luke-Acts and vice versa. I do this because Saint Paul explicitly cites the Gospel of Luke as Sacred Scripture (read about it here).

So this new “fifth option” of finding Christ appear to the 500 within Luke’s Gospel is especially attractive to me, since I believe that Saint Paul received and carried Luke’s written Gospel as his favorite Gospel:

Luke on Christ appearing to more than the Apostles “at one time”:

It is the episode after the apparition of Christ to the two disciples on the Road to Emmaus on the actual afternoon of Christ’s resurrection. First, Christ appears to “the women,” and then to Peter in the morning. Then later, on the road to Emmaus Christ appears to the two, and then once again to a larger group that includes the Apostles who are gathered with an unspecified number of people:

33 And they [the two Emmaus witnesses] rose that same hour and returned to Jerusalem; and they found the Eleven gathered together and those who were with them [Is this the 500? We are not told how many had gathered together with the Apostles on that day, but word had gotten out already since the two on the road had already heard of it – so the followers of Jesus were already talking and likely coming together on Sunday], 34 who said [to the two returning from Emmaus], “The Lord has risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon!” [So Luke records Jesus appearing to Peter here] 35 Then they told what had happened on the road, and how he was known to them in the breaking of the bread. [Euchastic theology here]

36 As they were saying this, Jesus himself stood among them, and said to them [the Apostles, the two from the Road to Emmaus and however many more – is this the 500?], “Peace to you.” 37 But they were startled and frightened, and supposed that they saw a spirit. 38 And he said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do questionings rise in your hearts? 39 See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you see that I have.” 40 And when he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet. 41 And while they still disbelieved for joy, and wondered, he said to them, “Have you anything here to eat?” 42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43 and he took it and ate before them. [It doesn’t get more “resurrection of the body” than that.]

This is definitely a resurrection appearance of Christ, but I had never previously noted that the Apostles were not alone. They were with “others.” Could this be the “500 at one time” from 1 Corinthians. I’m now inclined to think so.

Luke’s Timeline for First Week after Resurrection:

I’m also wondering if Luke has telescoped the timeline here. Luke specifically says that the two disciples arrived to Emmaus on the day of the resurrection: “today is the third day since these things happened.”

But then after dark they have invite the Stranger (Jesus) to dine with them and during the dinner the Stranger “breaks bread” and they realize that is is Jesus! By now it’s likely 8pm.

It says that they rose up and returned to Jerusalem. But Jerusalem is 7 miles from Emmaus. If they ran it would take 1-2 hours. If they walked, it would take about 3 hours. By now it’s closer to midnight.

I believe that the two Emmaus disciples actually met up with the Eleven one week later. Why?

Luke says that the “eleven” were together, and that they touched and “handled” Christ. However, John tell us on the day of the Resurrection (first day of Easter), only 10 Apostles were assembled and not all 11 Apostles since Thomas was absent. It was the next Sunday that Thomas was there (all 11 Apostles) and we have the details of touching and handling Jesus Christ. This, I think, is when the 2 Emmaus disciples met with the “eleven.”

For those interested in private revelation, Blessed Anne Katherine Emmerich states that the two disciples on the Road to Emmaus were Cleopas (named in the Gospel) and…Saint Luke.

You can leave a comment by clicking here.

Posted on

The Resurrected Christ appeared to 500: When and Where did this Happen?

by

Saint Paul mentions an interesting detail: that the resurrected Jesus appeared to 500 people! That’s a big deal. Why isn’t it mentioned in the Gospels (or is it)? We’ll explore this detail in this post:

In 1 Corinthians 15, Saint Paul recites what seems to be a formula or creedal statement about the resurrection of Christ. I’ll bullet point it to make it clear:

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received:

  • that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures,
  • that he was buried,
  • that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,
  • and that he appeared to Cephas,
  • then to the Twelve.
  • Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.
  • Then he appeared to James,
  • then to all the Apostles.
  • Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. (1 Cor 15:3-8)

Here we have the kernel of the Apostles Creed (died, buried, rose on third day) but appended to it six resurrection appearances. Five apparitions and then finally one apparition to Saint Paul himself.

Paul speaks of the resurrected Christ appearing to “more than five hundred” and this event is recorded nowhere in the four Gospels or within St Luke’s Acts of the Apostles. So what is Saint Paul describing?

Christ Appearing to Over 500?

There are 4 opinions on this “500 witnesses event”:

  1. Never Happened: Liberal scholars say that Saint Paul made this up to make it sound like there were plenty of witnesses to the resurrection. It never happened. It’s a lie. The Catholic Christian cannot allow that the Apostle Paul would bear false witness within Divine Scripture.
  2. Galilee Event: Saint Paul refers to the Galilee appearance of the resurrected Jesus Christ as described by Saint Mark: “But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee. There you shall see him, as he told you” (Mark 16:7). The 11 Apostles would have then gathered over 500 believers to join them in Galilee where Jesus appeared to them in His resurrected body.
  3. After the Ascension: Saint John Chrysostom speculates that this event happened after Ascension because the Greek “more than (ἐπάνω) five hundred” could accurately be translated “above five hundred,” as in “above in the sky.”
  4. Pentecost in Jerusalem: Saint Paul is referring to Pentecost. Saint Luke says that 120 Christians (Mary, Apostles, the Seventy, the women, the brethren of Jesus) were gathered for miracle of the descent of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost in Jerusalem. These 120 and the first several converts somehow witnessed an apparition of the resurrected Christ on this day, as well. Or perhaps the manifestation of the “Spirit of Christ” is counted as an apparition of Christ by Paul.

The majority position is (2) that this happened in Galilee when the Apostles went back to Jerusalem to witness Christ there. Here’s why this is the best answer:

  1. The Ten Apostles (without Thomas) saw the resurrected Christ on the evening of the Resurrection Sunday when Christ appeared to them within locked doors and breathed on them.
  2. The Eleven Apostles (now with Thomas) saw the resurrected Christ one Sunday later and allowed Thomas to place his fingers within His wounds.
  3. If the Apostles saw Christ at least twice in Jerusalem, why then would Christ instruct them to go to Galilee to be witnesses there? Presumably so that all of Christ’s followers in Galilee could see Him resurrected there. This would make sense and this is why “more than five hundred” would see Christ resurrected. This “more than 500” would be the nucleus of the 5000 that were fed and of those who had seen His miracles.
  4. When Saint Paul writes: “then to all the Apostles,” at the end of his list, he is likely referring to the Ascension of Christ. So the appearance to 500 likely happened before the Ascension. That rules out (3) Christ appearing after Ascension as suggested by Saint John Chrysostom. Sorry Chrysostom.
  5. It also rules out (4) Christ appearing at Pentecost, because Christ appearing to disciples at Pentecost would have been recorded by Paul’s friend Saint Luke. After all, Saint Luke mentions Christ appearing to Saint Stephen – so why would he omit an apparition of Jesus on Pentecost? So then, it seems safe to say that Christ did not appear on Pentecost.

It could also be that Saint Matthew records the “500 Event” as having occurred in Galilee without mentioning “500”:

“The eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw him they worshipped him, but some doubted” (Mt 28:16-17).

Matthew speaks only of the 11 living Apostles but says “some doubted.” Surely the 11 didn’t doubt at this time since it follows the “doubting Thomas” event that happened 13 days after the Resurrection in Jerusalem. So it could be that “some doubted” refers to “some of the 500 doubted.”

Christ is risen!
Dr Taylor Marshall

Question: I’d love to hear others weigh in on this topic. Who were the five hundred and when did it happen? I think it was the Galilee Event but I’m open to other ideas. You can leave a comment by clicking here.

Please share this post on Facebook.

Posted on

Saint Paul never once mentions the word Hell

by

I’m writing a commentary on Romans for the New Saint Thomas Institute, and I’ve been going over his passages on salvation and damnation. I’m certainly not the first to notice it, but Paul never once mentions “hell” or “hades” or “gehenna” in his epistles. This is interesting, because our Lord Jesus Christ speaks about hell all the time. Yet Paul does not mention the word once.

Don’t take this too far. Saint Paul speaks plenty of human damnation and believes in punishment in the afterlife. For example:

“But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed…But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger.” (Rom 2:5, 8)

“If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!” (Gal 1:8-9).

“He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people and to be marveled at among those who have believed.” (2 Thess 1:8-10)

“All will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.” (2 Thes 2:12)

My belief is that Paul is does not use the language of “Hades” because it conjures ideas of Homer and Virgil in Roman audiences. And he does not use the language of “Gehenna” because it’s an exclusively Jewish idea. So “eternal condemnation” and “fire” are his favorite categories for Gentile audiences.

There is a lot of crazy stuff on the internet (and bookstores) on Saint Paul. If you want a concise Catholic commentary on all the writings of Saint Paul, please check out this book: The Catholic Perspective on Paul.

 

Posted on

Why Do Christians Worship on Sunday and Not Saturday Like Jews?

by

NSTI Student Member Paul C asks:

I also hope Taylor could address Seventh Day Adventism in a video.

My in-laws are Adventists and a few are curious about Catholicism. At family get-togethers I’ve gotten questions, such as, wasn’t Constantine the founder of the Catholic Church? and, didn’t a Pope change the Sabbath day in order to attract converts from followers of a Sunday pagan ritual? They’ve been taught a lot of misinformation!

Clearly Constantine was not the founder of Catholicism. See our video(s) on Constantinian era on this.

Screen Shot 2017-02-21 at 11.00.26 AM

Regarding Sunday, it goes back to the Apostles:

“And on the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to depart the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight,” (Acts 20:7).

Here Saint Paul is breaking bread (Eucharist) and preaching on Sunday.

Paul preaching on Sunday

Saint Paul also recognizes Sunday as the day of Christian gathering here:

“On the first day of every week let each one of you put aside and save, as he may prosper, that no collections be made when I come.” (1 Cor. 16:2). So the offering was taken on Sunday – during Liturgy.

The Jews kept Saturday (last day of week) because they looked forward to Messiah. Christians keep Sunday (first day of the week) because we look back to the Messiah.

Moreover, Christ rose again from the dead on Sunday and the Holy Spirit descended at Pentecost on a Sunday. Christ is King of the New Creation and so Sunday, the day of creation is the day of His worship.

Seventh Day Adventists are thus Judaizers and they do not understand the fulness of Christ’s fulfillment of not only the Old Law, but the Old Creation. If you want to see study how Christ fulfills the entire Old Testament (including an appendix list of over 300 prophecies), see my book The Crucified Rabbi: Judaism and the Origins of Catholic Christianity.

Crucified Rabbi Look Inside

Posted on

Was Saint Paul Related to Herod? 7 Reasons Paul was Herodian

by

Saint Paul says that he is of the tribe of Benjamin and a Hebrew of Hebrews (Phil 3:5). In my book The Catholic Perspective on Paul (2010), I assembled a historical biography of Saint Paul and showed how his life informed his theology. Since then, I have been trying to fit another piece of the Paul puzzle – Paul’s relation to Herod.

Herod's family tree

Paul was originally a Herodian. By “Herodian” I mean that he seems to have connections with the family and court of the Herods. Theologically, Saul/Paul favored the theology of the Pharisees before his conversion but his family connections relate him to the inner circle of Herod Agrippa.

Here are the reasons demonstrating that Saul/Paul had Herodian connections

Sanzio_01_Plato_Aristotle_jpg__804×1052_

Timaeus was Plato’s Most Popular Book

1. Saul/Paul was highly educated both in Hebrew Scripture/Tradition but also in Greek philosophy. He seems familiar, for example with Plato’s Timaeus. He is Hebrew, but he also dabbles in Gentile learning and culture. This is the Herodian style: Jewish identity, loyalty to Jerusalem, familiar with the priests, but appreciative of Gentile power and learning. Sounds like Paul…

2. Saul/Paul was a Roman citizen. Jews were not typically citizens. We learn that Saul/Paul gained his Roman citizenship by birth. This means that his parents were Hebrews with Roman privilege. In the first century, Hebrews with Roman privilege were linked to the Roman appointed rulers of Palestine – the Herod’s.

3. Saul/Paul officially persecuted Christians on behalf of the Temple authorities. This is odd. Think about how hard it was for the Sanhedrin to kill Jesus Christ. Back and forth between the Roman Pontius Pilate and the Roman appointed “King” Herod Antipas the Tetrarch. Killing Christ was complicated and difficult.

Screen Shot 2015-07-30 at 7.31.55 AM

And yet somehow we are to believe that Saul received certificates of authority in around the year AD 36 to go about capturing and killing Christians without trial…even as far away as Damascus? Ahem, this is the Roman Empire with laws and rules. A man can’t get permission from the priests of one city and then go and capture people in another city.

How did Saul/Paul get that power? The High Priest and the Jewish Sanhedrin in Jerusalem could not have authorized Saul to arrest Christians in Damascus. The High Priest and the Jewish Sanhedrin in Jerusalem had no power in Damascus, a city in the Roman Province of Syria. Jerusalem belonged to the Roman Province of Judea. Saul seems to have gained an authority entrusted to him by a civil power connected to the Temple. This means that Saul needed religious authority (Temple) and he needed Roman authority in Damascus (King Aretus IV of Damascus).

King Aretus IV of Damascus. King Aretus IV who ruled over Damascus during the period of Saul/Paul’s conversion was the father-in-law of Herod Antipas the Tetrarch (d. AD 39). You might remember how Saint John the Baptist was preaching against Herod Antipas for divorcing his wife in order to marry his brother’s wife Herodias. Well Saint John the Baptist was defending the honor of Herod Antipas’ first wife Phasaelis – the daughter of King Aretus IV. Small Herodian world!

Which one politician of this period had deep connections with the High Priesthood at the Temple in Jerusalem and political influence in Damascus?  Who was the only man on earth who could arrange for Saul to act on behalf of the High Priest in the foreign city of Damascus? Oh that’s right, Herod Antipas the Tetrarch!

Why was Saul/Paul able to fulfill his desire to persecute Christians on behalf on the High Priest throughout the Roman Empire? Because his family was close to the family of Herod.

4. Saul/Paul is grouped with those raised with Herod Antipas the Tetrarch. “Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers as Barnabas and Simeon that was called Niger and Lucius of Cyrene and Manaen which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch and Saul. (Acts 13.1) The Greek is unclear but there is certainly a group of young Jewish men in Antioch who are associated with Herod Antipas the Tetrarch.

According to Josephus, Herod Antipas the Tetrarch, his full brother Archelaus and his half-brother Philip were raised and educated in Rome (Josephus, Antiquities 17.20–21). Hence, those raised with Herod Antipas the Tetrarch were educated in Rome. I would not be surprised if Saul/Paul had also studied in Rome as a young man, even though he is younger than Herod Antipas the Tetrarch.

5. Saulus/Paulus was not merely a plebian rabbi. He had political clout. When Saul/Paul is arrested, the commander assigns, get this, 470 men to guard Paul’s life!

“Get ready a detachment of two hundred soldiers, seventy horsemen and two hundred spearmen to go to Caesarea at nine tonight. 24 Provide horses for Paul so that he may be taken safely to Governor Felix.” (Acts 23:23)

  • 200 soliders
  • 70 horsemen
  • 200 spearmen

Yes, Paul was a Roman citizen, but Roman citizen’s didn’t normally receive 470 body guards. Saul/Paul was being protected because he was connected to the family of Herod Agrippa.

Josephus bust

Josephus the Jewish Historian

6. Josephus refers to a “Saulus” who persecuted people in Jerusalem. From the Antiquities (20.9.4) of Josephus:

“Costobarus also, and Saulus, did themselves get together a multitude of wicked wretches, and this because they were of the royal family; and so they obtained favour among them, because of their kindred to Agrippa; but still they used violence with the people, and were very ready to plunder those that were weaker than themselves.”

Is this the same “Saul”? It’s hard to tell, but a Saul who was “of the royal family” and “kindred to (Herod) Agrippa” and who “used violence with the people” sure sounds like Saul/Paul in his pre-Christian days.

7. Paul identifies his Herodian kinfolk. We don’t need Josephus to tell us about a “Saul ” was also “kindred to (Herod) Agrippa.”

In Romans 16:11 Paul writes: “Greet Herodion, my kinsman.”

Paul has connections in Rome. He even has a Jewish relative in Rome named Herodion! We don’t know who Herodion is, but his name links him to the Roman-Jewish rulers associated with the dynasty of Herod the Great.

Conclusion: Paul as Herodian Pharisee

Some might counter my arguments by stating that Saul/Paul himself clams to have been a Pharisee and not a Herodian.

But this is where things get interesting. The Pharisees and Herodians worked together!

When the Herodians are mentioned in the Gospels (Mark 3:6, 12:13; Matthew 22:16; cf. also Mark 8:15, Luke 13:31-32, Acts 4:27), they are coupled with the Pharisees. For example, in Mark 3:6, the Pharisees plot against Jesus regarding his teaching on the Sabbath day by incorporating the Herodians into their conspiracy. In Mark 8:15, Christ described the alliance of Pharisees and Herod against Him. In Mark 12, the Pharisees and Herodians together, try to trap Christ with their question about paying taxes.

The fact that Saul/Paul was a Pharisee does not disqualify him from being a Herodian. Rather, it substantiates it.

Question: Do you have any arguments pro or con regarding my Paul the Herodian thesis? You can leave a comment by clicking here.

PS: I plan to revise and update my The Catholic Perspective on Paul to incorporate this new research.

Catholic Perspective on Paul Open Inside

Posted on

Saint Luke as the Roman Lucius and Famous Brother in the Gospel (2 Cor 8:18)

by

Saint Luke wrote the majority of the New Testament – even more than Paul.

The Gospel according to Saint Luke (the longest of the four Gospels) and Acts of the Apostles rank Saint Luke in first place as largest contributor to the New Testament. As I argued in my book The Catholic Perspective on Paul, Saint Luke is also the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Paul is the “author” and Luke is the “writer” or “drafter” Hebrews. (The Paul/Luke production of Hebrews is also the position of Saint Thomas Aquinas.)

Screen Shot 2015-07-30 at 6.30.31 AM

Saint Luke was Lucius and the Paul’s “Famous Brother”

Saint Luke as Loukas (3 mentions in NT)

This Luke (Λουκᾶς) is mentioned in Paul’s epistles three times:

Our dear friend Luke (Λουκᾶς) the physician, and Demas send greetings. (Col 4:14)

Saint Paul mentions Luke as his fellow worker along with Mark in Philemon:

And one thing more: Prepare a guest room for me, because I hope to be restored to you in answer to your prayers. Epaphras, my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, sends you greetings. And so do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas and Luke, my fellow workers. (Philem 1:22-24)

And then again in 2 Timothy in connection with Mark yet again:

“Luke alone is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you; for he is very useful in serving me.” (2 Tim 4:11)

Note here that Luke is Paul’s “dear friend,” Paul’s “fellow worker,” and Paul’s sole companion at the end of his life.

Saint Luke as Lucius (2 mentions in NT)

Lucius or Loukios (Greek: Λούκιος) appears two times in the New Testament, once in Acts (written by Luke) and once in Romans.

Lucius is the Romanized version of the name Luke. In a Roman context, Greek men would adapt their names to Latin by creating a -us ending so that their names would rightly decline in Latin. Hence, the way to give Λουκᾶς or “Loukas” a Roman ending is to modify the ending and render it as Lucius.

And wouldn’t you know it, we find this form of Luke’s name in Paul’s Epistle to the Romans!

Timothy, my co-worker, sends his greetings to you, as do Lucius (Λούκιος), Jason and Sosipater, my fellow Jews. (Rom 16:21)

Origen in his Commentary on Romans states that the “Lucius” in Romans is Saint Luke.

Lucius is also mentioned in connection with Barnabas and Paul in Acts:

In the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene (Λούκιος ὁ Κυρηναῖος), Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. (Acts 13:1)

Note here the connection between Paul/Saul, Lucius, and Barnabas with…drumroll…Herod the Tetrarch. This proves that Paul/Saul was a Herodian. I’ll write more about this in a future post.

Luke as the “Famous Brother in the Gospel”

There is a unnamed man in 2 Corinthians that Paul refers to as a brother made famous in the Gospel:

But thanks be to God who puts the same earnest care for you into the heart of Titus. For he not only accepted our appeal, but being himself very earnest he is going to you of his own accord. With him we are sending the brother who is famous in the Gospel among all the churches (τὸν ἀδελφὸν οὗ ὁ ἔπαινος ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ διὰ πασῶν τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν); and not only that, but he has been appointed by the churches to travel with us in this gracious work which we are carrying on, for the glory of the Lord and to show our good will. (2 Cor 8:16-18)

Paul is sending Titus and another man who is famous “in all the churches.” Apparently, he is so famous that he doesn’t even need to be mentioned by name. The Corinthians know him already. Notably, he is famous “in the Gospel throughout all the churches” (ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ διὰ πασῶν τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν). Paul frequently speaks of the Gospel, but never in this way. Some English translations wrongly read “famous for preaching the Gospel,” but the Greek says “famous in/for the Gospel.”

Saint Thomas Aquinas suggests that this “famous brother” is Saint Luke and that he famous because Saint Luke has by this time published his written Gospel and that it has made him “famous throughout all the churches.” The date of 2 Corinthians is around AD 57 and so this would date Saint Luke’s Gospel before AD 57.

Modern scholars will laugh at this, but I think it makes great sense since Saint Paul cites the Gospel of Luke as Sacred “Scripture” in 1 Timothy 5:17-18.

You can leave a comment by clicking here.

Posted on

Saint Paul Cites the Gospel of Luke as Scripture

by

Modern scholars will laugh at this post because they (wrongly) believe that Paul did not write 1 Timothy and that Luke did not write the Gospel according to Saint Luke [I refute this revisionist claim here].

Yet for the Catholic, the biblical demonstration below strongly defends the traditional authors (Paul and Luke) and traditional dates – especially an early date for the Gospel of Luke. If we Catholics are going to defend the historicity of Christ, His teachings, and His actions, we need to be able to substantiate how the four Catholic Gospels depict Him without error. Part of our work depends on us demonstrating that the four Catholic Gospels are early and written by the historical Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

luke writing luke

Saint Luke writing Luke (with a nice looking tonsure)

Saint Paul cites the Gospel of Luke as Sacred Scripture

So let’s get started.

Saint Paul cites “Scripture” twice in 1 Timothy 5:17-18:

Let the presbyters who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labour in preaching and teaching; for the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.” (1 Timothy 5:17–18):

Paul’s quote “You shall not muzzle an ox” (the motto of the New Saint Thomas Institute) comes from Deuteronomy 25:4.

But what about his second citation of “Scripture” that he quotes as: “The laborer deserves his wages” (Ἄξιος ὁ ἐργάτης τοῦ μισθοῦ αὐτοῦ)?

Does this phrase (Ἄξιος ὁ ἐργάτης τοῦ μισθοῦ αὐτοῦ) appear in the Old Testament or in any variant in the Septuagint? It does not appear in the Old Testament Scriptures, but it does appear in the New Testament Scriptures.

In Luke 10:7 we find the exact phrase with the Greek word order preserved just as Saint Paul cites it:

And remain in the same house, eating and drinking what they provide, for the laborer deserves his wages. Do not go from house to house (Luke 10:7).

ἐν αὐτῇ δὲ τῇ οἰκίᾳ μένετε, ἐσθίοντες καὶ πίνοντες τὰ παρ’ αὐτῶν, ἄξιος γὰρ ὁ ἐργάτης τοῦ μισθοῦ αὐτοῦ. μὴ μεταβαίνετε ἐξ οἰκίας εἰς οἰκίαν (Luke 10:7 in Greek).

In 1 Timothy 5:17–18 we observe Saint Paul quoting the Gospel of Luke as Scripture on equal level with Deuteronomy!

I take 1 Timothy as authentically Pauline (I’m Catholic). This demonstrates that:

  1. The Gospel of Luke was written and published before the death of Paul (AD 66/67)
  2. Paul had read the Gospel of Luke
  3. Paul regarded the Gospel of Luke as Scripture
  4. Paul considered Luke to be inspired by the Holy Spirit (2 Tim 3:16)
  5. Paul assumed that Timothy also regarded the Gospel of Luke as Scripture

Since Paul knew the Gospel of Luke and cited it as Scripture, there is no problem in identifying Paul’s “famous brother in the Gospel” (2 Cor 8:18) as Saint Luke made famous for publishing the Gospel of Saint Luke.

Suddenly there is an internal strength to the canonical New Testament. The NT wasn’t spliced together one hundred years after Christ. The Gospel of Luke comes less than thirty years after the resurrection…and it’s being cited by the Apsotles as “Scripture” on par with the Torah!

You can leave a comment by clicking here.

You can share this on Facebook by clicking here.

facebook-share-button

Posted on

Saint Paul was a Catholic Priest

by

To celebrate the conversion of Saint Paul (Jan 25), I’m sending you a Catholic video about the core Catholic teaching of Saint Paul and a link to an 11 part audio series (mp3s) about Saint Paul.

Free Video: Catholic Core of Saint Paul

Free audio mp3s: Catholic Perspective on Paul (11 presentations)

GK Chesterton once observed that the Catholic Church has been “attacked on all sides and for all contradictory reasons. No sooner had one rationalist demonstrated that it was too far to the east than another demonstrated with equal clearness that it was much too far to the west.” The same may be said of Saint Paul. The history of heresy is essentially a series of contradictory positions, each claiming the authority of the Apostle Paul.

In today’s video I explain how understanding Paul’s “core theology” can help you explain and defend EVERY Catholic teaching and doctrine:

According to some heretics, Paul was the first corrupter of the life and doctrines of Jesus Christ. To others Paul alone preserved the true message of Christ that had been corrupted by the Twelve. Some consider Paul to have been the champion of grace, while others accuse him of yielding to the so-called Jewish legalism of Peter and James. Paul has since been accused of being too Greek, too Jewish, too gnostic, and too orthodox.

Paul faith and works

Catholic Perspective on Paul Open InsideIn his own day, he was held by some to be an apostle and by others to be a heretic. Martin Luther claimed Paul’s authority, as did the Catholic Council of Trent. He has been called both a misogynist and a liberator of women. Some hail him as a proponent of freedom and others revile him for imposing rules against sexual freedom and social progress. Always and everywhere, Paul is pulled and tugged in opposite directions. Paul has been stretched out so thinly that his features have become faint, almost forgotten. Prophetically, Saint Peter aptly described the controversial nature of Paul’s epistles:

Also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you: As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, to their own destruction (2 Pet 3:15-16).

All the detractors of Paul stand united in their conviction that the historical Paul is certainly not the same Paul revered by the Catholic Church. There is today a deep prejudice against the so-called “Saint Paul” of the Catholic Church. They will grant that Paul was a rabbi, missionary, mystic, polemicist, author, and apostle. However, they will not grant that the man enshrined in the mosaics, statues, and stained glass of a thousand Catholic cathedrals is the Paul of history. The critics are convinced that the Catholic religion as we know it today has little to do with the historic Paul of Tarsus.

Paul is none other than a saint of the Holy Roman and Catholic Church. He spent his life wishing to bring his feet within the walls of Rome and he surrendered his head to the sword outside those very walls. Within his writings, we find the primitive and pristine doctrines of the Catholic Faith. We discover a Paul who is Catholic, a theologian who is sacramental, a churchman who is hierarchical, a mystic who is orthodox.

Please watch this video to learn more about Saint Paul:

You can leave a comment by clicking here.