Where does Paul’s Authority Come From?

Taking a New Testament class over the summer, I was again immersed in the vast array of writings from the early Christian leader Paul. I’m always surprised at the vast amount of Christian doctrine that was borne about through a single individual: seven of the epistles of the New Testament are certainly Paul’s writing and seven more are generally attributed to him but remain in dispute among scholars. Paul is largely responsible for the doctrine of Atonement, the idea that Jesus came to fulfill the law and that it no longer applied, and a considerable amount of eschatology of the NT.  

His pastoral epistles are still used in modern church communities in order to help structure the authority of a church’s staff, and even his questionable views on women are still exercised in certain denominations. His imprint on modern Christianity is undoubtedly important, and it still largely resides today.

Paul was educated as a Pharisee and was an escalating figure in the Jewish tradition. He regularly considers himself perfect in the practice of Judaic laws (those ones in the OT about not eating shellfish and not wearing mixed clothing). In fact, he actually persecuted Christians as a Roman and tried to stamp out the early flames of the religion himself.

For a figure that is so central to a dominant religious tradition, it seems only natural to ask where Paul’s authority is derived from. Did he receive special education that made him privy to such information?  Did he speak to Jesus directly and formulate opinions based off of his background as a Pharisee? Was he convinced by testimony around him that Jesus was God incarnate? Had Paul carefully weighed the evidence of the Torah and decided that Christ had fulfilled the Old Testament prophecy of the impending savior?

The real answer is quite disappointing. Paul had a vision on the road to Damascus, and considering this vision a prophecy from God. In Galatians 1, in an attempt to assume doctrinal authority, Paul recounts the tale:

11 I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

Here is the story itself, for those who haven’t heard it before: (Acts 9: 1-7):

1 Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples. He went to the high priest 2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, so that if he found any there who belonged to the Way, whether men or women, he might take them as prisoners to Jerusalem. 3 As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”

5 “Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked.

“I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied. 6 “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”

7 The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. 8 Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus. 9 For three days he was blind, and did not eat or drink anything.

Paul has this dramatic conversion on the way to Damascus and finds himself believing that he received divine revelation. If I put on my Christian hat and pretend that I do believe that  people receive divine revelation from God, there are still a lot of questions. Why should I believe Paul’s story of divine revelation over someone else’s? When people making competing claims about the physical reality, we can test and observe those claims and eventually weed out the ones that don’t hold up to scrutiny.

This is the difficulty with substantiating supernatural claims: to what evidence do we appeal if we want to test claims of divine inspiration? Most Christians presently say ‘the Bible’, but this appeal doesn't work when we’re questioning the divine revelation of someone who wrote [up to] 14 books of the New Testament. Why should I believe Paul actually spoke to God?