The Gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.

— Galatians 1: 11-12

The apostle Paul met the Lord on the Damascus road in the days of his persecution of the Church. That vision brought a complete change in him in every way.

Almost immediately, Paul began to preach Christ as the Son of God. There were other revelations of Jesus that he had in his early Christian life which shaped his Christian character and gave him the message that he would afterward call, “my gospel.”

In Galatians 1:11–12, Paul declared he neither received the gospel from man nor was he taught it, but he said it came by the revelation of Jesus Christ. In other words, the gospel was a revelation of the Person of Jesus Christ. It was a revelation of His character and perfections as the Divine Son of God. Then, the gospel is not merely a set of teachings or doctrines, but it is what is seen in the Person of Jesus.

In Romans 1:16, Paul declared that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation. Then, the gospel in its outworking is the Divine operation of God’s character perfections in the lives of men who believe.

Not only was Jesus revealed to Paul, but He was also revealed in him. That is, revelation of Jesus brought impartation of Him into Paul’s heart and life. What he received by revelation stayed with him and became part of him. Christ was in him the Hope of glory!

This impartation of Christ was to enable Paul to preach to the Gentiles (Ephesians 3:8). And with Paul’s preaching, there was imparted to the hearers the very life, virtues, and perfections that he had received when Christ was revealed in him.

PR

“…one of the early 20th Century’s prophetic voices still speaks today…” — Jack W. Hayford

Reprinted with permission from Daily Seedings: A Devotional Classic for the Spirit-Filled Life by Ivan Q. Spencer (selected and edited by Edie Mourey), Furrow Press, 2008.

For more about Ivan Spencer, see “Following in His Steps” by Edie Mourey.

Joseph A. Marchal, ed., Studying Paul’s Letters: Contemporary Perspectives and Methods (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012), 248 pages, ISBN 9780800698188.

Introduction: Asking the Right Questions by Joseph A. Marchal.

This provocative book has been formatted by Joseph Marchal to make available the latest and most relevant critical perspectives on Paul to students in seminaries, small liberal-arts colleges, and universities. To achieve this goal, he has put together a remarkable group of outstanding Pauline scholars, and begins by posing and addressing the question of why anyone would study Paul. Traditionally, people have sought answers from Paul to questions about widespread issues such as women in leadership, slavery, gays, Jews, foreigners, pagans, the poor, children, and even the government. Marchal proposes to challenge readers to think in different ways about how to approach Paul, not only within the context of his own time, but in relation to our own world. According to Marchal, these critical perspectives can make us more savvy about the dynamics of our world and our application of Paul’s letters to it (2).

Marchal limits his study of Paul to what he calls the “authentic” letters of Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon (3). Thus, he does not address why these are authentic and the others are not. He also accepts these letters as reflecting the linguistic influences of Hellenization with its widespread cultural practices, rhetorical presentations, and argumentation (4). Also assumed is that Paul’s letters were written at specific times, in response to particular situations, rather than being theological treatises or historical records (4-5).

Marchal’s goal is not simply to pass along information, but “to encourage a more critical and creative formation and even a transformation in how people negotiate their contexts” (8). This book certainly includes the latest trends in Pauline studies (9). Some approaches overlap, resonating and conversing with one another. Taken together, they clearly present the relevant issues, concepts, and practices for the various methods, and at the end of each chapter, include a demonstration of the application of amethod to a particular Pauline passage. Each chapter concludes with annotated selections for further reading.

Each chapter is written by a scholar who is both an expert in a selected method and an excellent teacher.

The individual essays begin with Melanie Johnson-Debaufre’s Historical Approaches: Which Past? Whose Past? She considers the nature of current biblical studies as characterized by “multiplicity and possibility,” and frames three basic principles which help to “reorient how we might approach history in relation to the letters of Paul” (15):

1. “Language does not describe or reflect reality, it creates and shapes reality” (15).
2. “What we see depends on where we stand” (16).
3. “History is an interpretation of the past, not the past itself” (17).

Johnson-Debaufre also suggests three corrective trends in Pauline studies which should be taken into account:

1. Paul should be de-Christianized, that is, he should be considered as a Jew within Judaism (18) rather than a convert to Christianity.
2. Paul should be politicized, that is, he should be read in terms of politics and economics rather than religion (20).
3. Paul should be de-centered, that is, he should be seen as only one part of the history of the early church rather than as the center of the movement (22-3).

In Chapter 2, Rhetorical Approaches: Introducing the Art of Persuasion in Paul and Pauline Studies, Todd Penner and Davina C. Lopez show the significance of understanding rhetorical strategies of ancient times when reading Paul: rhetoric pervades every aspect of our lives as well as those of ancient times. Arguments are persuasive depending on their relationships within the contexts and world-views of the times in which they were written. Hence, only by understanding how Paul’s arguments operated in the broader philosophical, social, and cultural environments of his time can the reader hope similarly to engage and apply these arguments to our world (49). Studying Paul is ultimately not about recovering a theology or an ideology, rather it is about “studying ourselves”, about using rhetorical analyses to better understand our world, not his. (50).

This article by the Associate Professor of Biblical Studies at Western Baptist College attempts to show that Paul’s ability to heal diminished towards the end of his ministry and finally ceased. Professor Derickson gives an introduction to his subject by discussing some of the basic concepts of cessationism and makes reference to both sides of the miraculous gifts debate.

Derickson states that the debate about the cessation or continuance of the miraculous gifts is not about whether God can or does heal today, but whether or not God does so through human agents.

Definitions

Derickson understands that charismatics believe that miracles “performed by miracle workers” (p. 301) can and should be experienced today. He does not intend to deal in this article with every area of what he calls the “modern faith healing debate,” but, “Rather, it examines only one aspect of the debate, namely, the New Testament evidences concerning the status of ‘miracle workers’ as the Apostolic Age drew to a close” (p.301, footnote). However, the conclusion he draws at the end of his article is, “… it is wrong for proponents of faith healing to claim that God must work the same today as He did at the beginning of the church” (p. 315).

The thesis of this article cannot contribute greatly to the theological debate about contemporary spiritual gifts because of the difficulty that arises from Derickson’s definition of a “miracle worker.” Derickson’s definition of a supernatural miracle would be acceptable to the majority, if not all evangelicals. His suggested definition for miracles “worked” by human agents is what charismatics would have difficulty with. “The miracles discussed in this article are those that involve a human agent through whom they are worked. The following is a suggested definition: ‘Miracles by miracle workers are those acts of God which He chooses to perform through the agency of either an apostle or gifted person with the authority and ability to exercise miraculous power at will.’ Only those performing supernatural acts at will are considered miracle workers” (p. 302). On a positive note, this definition may help refine the cessationist position on “miracle workers” and therefore bring to greater contrast the differing views that exist in the “modern faith healing debate.” The greater the contrast, the less likely this theological debate will be trivialized into a useless squabble. The fact of the matter is that whether the church today should go to God with an expectation of the miraculous is a big issue—one that says much about the future of the church worldwide.

The question that is begging from Derickson’s definition of a miracle worker is whether or not anyone has ever worked miracles at will. One of the few points of general agreement among the diversity of the charismatic movement is their belief that there are anointings or giftings for the working of miracles, God working through a human agent. Charismatics and Pentecostals do not believe, however, that such healers and miracle workers are able to do these things at will. Most charismatics believe quite strongly that it is God who heals, even though it is often through a human agent.

Miracles: Performed At Will?

There are some passages in the Old and New Testaments that might seem to indicate miracles and healings were done by the will of the human instrument being used by God. Many examples also exist that indicate quite the opposite. There are many examples of healings and miracles which were “performed” through the agency of an anointed individual that had nothing to do with that individual’s personal volition. Consider some of the following miracles that happened apart from the will of man, yet men were the point of contact for the supernatural to take place.