Chapter # 2 Paragraph # 1 Study # 8
April 24, 2011
Dayton, Texas
(Download Audio)

<076> Thesis: The response of the other "apostles" was rooted in what they "saw". Introduction: In our study last week we noted that God's gift of "apostleship" was the gift of an inerrant understanding of Truth. Those given such a gift had an unerring ability to ferret out any, and all, aberrations from the Truth. It did not include "omniscience", but it did include a supernatural ability to recognize any illogical "connections" between established "truths". Besides being evil, false doctrines are always irrational in the sense that the "logic" involved is faulty. With legitimate rationality, omniscience is unnecessary. It is important for us to understand that this gift did not include the purity of love that is necessary to live by the inerrant logic of the gift. Apostles could, and did, fail to live up to their gifting, but that does nothing to the essence of the gift; it only affects whether anyone could trust an apostle on any given day. When Paul went up to Jerusalem, he did so under the strength of the knowledge that the other apostles could not "honestly" resist his explanation of the Gospel. In this letter to the Galatians, he argued that they did not resist -- a strong evidence that his message carried the day. However, it might be argued that they simply caved in to his dominant personality out of fear: not resisting is not proof of a pure heart. Since a lack of resistance is not "proof", we have to understand why Paul set it forth as an evidence that the Galatians needed to consider.