Posted on 06/24/2014 2:13:28 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Recently, a friend emailed me with a very common claim, namely, that, “Paul hijacked Christianity with no personal connection with Jesus and filled his letters with personal opinions.” This could be rephrased in the more common claim: Paul invented Christianity.
This claim is especially common among Muslim apologists who use it in an attempt to explain why the Qur’an simultaneously affirms Jesus as a true prophet while also contradicting the Bible at every major point. However, since my friend is not a Muslim and is not coming at the issue from that angle, I will just deal with the question more broadly.
My friend alleges that some of the “personal opinions” of Paul that were interjected into the New Testament include: “slaves obey your masters; women not to have leadership roles in churches; homosexuality is a sin (though there is Old Testament authority for this last, Paul doesn’t seem to base his opinion on it).”
“None of [of the above] were said by Jesus and would perhaps be foreign to his teaching,” he wrote. “I think Paul has created a lot of mischief in Christianity, simply because he wrote a lot and his letters have survived.”
Let’s deal with this point-by-point.
No personal connection to Jesus
Paul, in fact, did have a personal connection to Jesus. This is revealed in the famous “Damascus road” accounts in Acts 9:3-9, Acts 22:6–11 and Acts 26:12–18. Paul refers back to this experience elsewhere in his letters, though it is only laid with this level of detail in Acts, written by Paul’s traveling companion Luke.
The only way one can maintain that Paul had no connection to Jesus is to rule out the conversion experience of Paul a priori based on a presupposition. Of course, I can argue that such a presupposition is untenable, but that would take an entire post to itself. For the sake of brevity, I would just point out that it is illogical to employ such reasoning. It would go something like, “It didn’t happen because it couldn’t happen because it can’t happen therefore it didn’t happen therefore Paul had no personal connection to Jesus.”
Personal opinions
Yes, Paul does interject his personal opinions into his writing! However, when he does, he clearly delineates what he is saying as his personal opinion as an Apostle.
For instance, in dealing with the issue of marriage in 1 Corinthians 7, Paul clearly distinguishes between his own statements and the Lord’s.
In 1 Corinthians 7:10, Paul says, “To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord)…” and in 1 Corinthians 7:12, Paul says, “To the rest I say, (I, not the Lord)…” This example shows that Paul was not in the business of putting words in the mouth of Jesus. Paul had no problem showing when he was giving his own charge and when it was a statement made by the Lord Jesus, as it was in this case (Matthew 5:32).
Yet it is important to note that other Apostles recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture from the earliest days of Christianity, as seen the case of Peter (2 Peter 3:15–16).
Paul’s “personal opinions” and the Law
Out of the three examples, two are directly from the Mosaic Law. Obviously the Mosaic Law couldn’t have stated that women should not preach in the church because the Church did not yet exist and wouldn’t for over 1,000 years.
The claim that there is only Old Testament authority for the last of the examples is false. The same goes for the claim that Paul does not base his statements on the Law.
It is abundantly clear that Paul actually does derive his statements on homosexual activity from the Law.
For instance, in 1 Timothy 1, Paul mentions homosexuality in the context of the type of people the Law was laid down for (1 Timothy 1:9-11). This short list indicts all people, just as Paul does elsewhere (Romans 3:23), showing that all people require the forgiveness that can only be found through faith in Jesus Christ.
When Paul deals with it elsewhere, he mentions it in the context of other activities explicitly prohibited by the Law (1 Corinthians 6:9-11), again going back to the idea that the Lord Jesus Christ sets apart (sanctifies) His people and justifies them.
As for the command for slaves to obey their masters, this is regularly claimed to be objectionable by critics. By way of introduction, is important to distinguish between what we have in our mind about the institution of slavery as Americans and the institution of slavery as it existed in Paul’s day. After all, Paul explicitly listed “enslaverers” (or man-stealers) in the same list mentioned above (1 Tim 1:10). Since the entire institution of slavery in the United States was built upon the kidnapping of people, it is clearly radically different from what Paul spoke of. Furthermore, the stealing of a man was punishable by death under the Mosaic Law (Exodus 21:16). The practice of slavery in America would never have existed if the Bible was actually being followed.
Paul also exhorted his readers to buy their freedom if they could (1 Corinthians 7:21) and instructing the master of a runaway slave to treat him as “no longer as a bondservant but more than a bondservant, as a beloved brother” (Philemon 11). Paul grounded his statements in the defense of “the name of God and the teaching.” Paul said that bondservants should “regard their masters as worthy of all honor,” not just for the sake of doing so, but so there might be no chance to slander the name of God and the gospel.
The fact is that Paul knew the Law quite well (Philippians 3:5-6) and the Law does deal with slavery.
Ultimately, the claim made by my friend requires more fleshing out on his end and some evidence on his part in order to be more fully dealt with.
Paul’s teachings foreign to Jesus’ teachings?
This is another common claim. First off, one must ask if this statement implies that Jesus would simply have to repeat everything Paul said and vice-versa or else they would remain foreign.
The fact is that there is nothing contradictory between Paul’s writings and Jesus’ teaching. One must wonder why Luke – a traveling companion of Paul and the author of Luke-Acts – would have no problem writing the gospel that bears his name if he perceived such a contradiction. Furthermore, one must wonder why this apparent conflict was lost on the earliest Christians, including the Apostle Peter, who viewed Paul’s letters as Scripture (see above).
In affirming the Law (Matthew 5:17), Jesus affirmed all that Paul that was clearly grounded in the Law. Furthermore, if there was a real contradiction between Paul’s writings and the teachings of Jesus, Paul would have been rejected, instead of accepted as he has always been.
The Christian community existed before Paul became a Christian, as is clearly seen by the fact that he was persecuting Christians (Acts 8:1,3), and he even met with the leaders of the early church. They did not reject Paul, but instead affirmed what he had been teaching (Galatians 2:2,9). This makes it even clearer that Paul could not have invented or hijacked Christianity.
As for the claim that Paul has had such a large impact “simply because he wrote a lot and his letters have survived,” all one has to do is look at the other early Christian writings that survived in order to see that is not a valid metric.
We have seen that the claim that “Paul hijacked Christianity” is without evidence. While I have taken the burden of proof upon myself in responding to this claim, in reality the burden of proof would be on the one making the claim in the first place. No such evidence has been presented and no substantive evidence can be presented since Paul did not invent Christianity or hijack Christianity or anything similar to it. Instead, Paul was an Apostle of Jesus Christ commissioned to spread the gospel, something that he clearly did by establishing churches and penning many letters under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that we can still read today.
When one reads the gospels and the other writings contained in the New Testament, the message is cohesive and clear: all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Ro 3:23), God demands complete perfection (Mt 5:48) and all we have earned through our sin is death (Ro 6:23) and hell. Yet God offers the free gift of eternal life to all who repent and believe (Mk 1:15, Ro 10:9–11) in Jesus Christ, who died as a propitiation (Ro 3:25, Heb 2:17, 1 Jn 4:10) for all who would ever believe in Him (Jn 6:44) and rose from the grave three days later, forever defeating sin and death. Those who believe in Him can know (1 John 5:13) that they have passed from death to life (Jn 5:24) and will not be condemned (Jn 3:18), but will be given eternal life by Jesus Christ (Jn 6:39-40). Paul and Jesus in no way contradict each other on what the gospel is, in fact the four gospels and Paul’s letters (along with the rest of the New Testament) form one beautiful, cohesive truth.
“Bums” is much like you, in refusing the plain language of scripture, in favor of the words of deceiving nicolaitans.
The only difference between you and her is which nicolaitans to believe over the plain words of scripture.
.
Can't imagine where your ideas come from, but certainly not from the plain scriptures.
LOL! So just grovel and accept the fallible dictates of an anonymous poster? Like Any Griffith used to say, “you’re somethin’ else, you know that?” But no, I have looked at it very closely. Transubstantiation is sophistry on steroids, a late development unheard of in the apostolic age. No physical miracle of God was ever beyond sensory verification. What would be the point? But no, rather than acquiesce to the blaziingly clear use of metaphor in John 6 to describe faith in the crucified Christ, instead transubstantiation prepares the mind to live in a state of perpetual deception. This is antithetical to God’s own holy nature, Who cannot lie, and does not EVER invite us to believe a lie, not even in the name of faith.
“LOL! So just grovel and accept the fallible dictates of an anonymous poster?”
Your use of the words “grovel” and “dictates” show that you have some kind of emotional issue that is clouding your judgment. Too much work for me to take on. (And yes, I am qualified to say that.)
“Transubstantiation is sophistry on steroids, a late development unheard of in the apostolic age.”
Nonsense.
“No physical miracle of God was ever beyond sensory verification.”
Nor is transubstantiation. It must be noted, though, that many miracles were—and are—widely disbelieved.
“But no, rather than acquiesce to the blaziingly clear use of metaphor in John 6 to describe faith in the crucified Christ”
I specifically asked you to spare me whatever mental gymnastics you used to square your denial of scripture with your desire to be a Christian.
Here’s some plain language of scripture.
26:26. And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread and blessed and broke and gave to his disciples and said: Take ye and eat. This is my body.
This is my body…He does not say, This is the figure of my body—but This is my body. (2 Council of Nice, Act. 6.) Neither does he say in this, or with this is my body; but absolutely, This is my body: which plainly implies transubstantiation.
Did he speak English?
No, he spoke Hebrew, in which it was clear that he meant that the Levened Barley loaf he held represented his soon to be broken body.
The blessing that he spoke can be found in Nunbers 6:24.
Yeshua’s request of us was that as often as we break bread and say that blessing, we do it in remembrance of him.
All the mystical cannibalism came hundreds of years later when the pagan catholic church was created by Constantine and his pagan priestess mom.
If that garbage is more important to you than Yeshua, so be it.
.
Minor point, This in no way "implies" transubstantiation, It screams it from the rooftops in Gory and Truth!< P>Sadly it will fall on deaf ears. There are to many here that have to large an axe to grind.
Rom 2:6 who will render to every man according to his works:
Rom 2:7 to them that by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and incorruption, eternal life:
2Co 5:10 For we must all be made manifest before the judgment-seat of Christ; that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
2Co 11:15 It is no great thing therefore if his ministers also fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness, whose end shall be according to their works.
1Pe 1:17 And if ye call on him as Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to each man's work, pass the time of your sojourning in fear:
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne; and books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of the things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead that were in it; and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
Col 3:23 whatsoever ye do, work heartily, as unto the Lord, and not unto men; Col 3:24 knowing that from the Lord ye shall receive the recompense of the inheritance: ye serve the Lord Christ.
Luk_22:18 For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.
And Jesus says he will not drink any more of his own blood until the Kingdom of God shows up...
It's amazing all of the scripture that your religion has to trash to make your transubstantiation work...
No, some Catholics' abysmal definition of sola Scriptura is the biggest fraud ever perpetuated on Christianity.
If God's word says, All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. (II Tim. 3:16,17), then explain how it can possibly be a "fraud" to state that the Scriptures are the Divinely-ordained authority by which all claims of the rule of our faith must be measured?
Most people (many) know of the bad mark.
Revelation 13,16 He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
How many know there's a good mark?
Exodus 13,16 And it will be like a sign on your hand and a symbol on your forehead that the Lord brought us out of Egypt with his mighty hand.’
Notice it's the same numbers, 13, 16! Not to mention hand and forehead.
I have my Fathers mark because I observe Pesach and Matzah!
Exodus 13,9 says much the same thing.
9 This observance will be for you like a sign on your hand and a reminder on your forehead that this law of the Lord is to be on your lips. For the Lord brought you out of Egypt with his mighty hand. 10 You must keep this ordinance at the appointed time year after year.
When something is repeated pay attention! Reminds me of the Magen David. When the Hebrews placed the blood of the lamb on the doorposts and lintel it formed the triangle pointing up, when Yeshua hung on the tree He formed the triangle pointing down. The years between the two events (Pesach) is encoded in Daniel.
The other mark can be found in the Quran.
48. Surah Al-Fath (The Victory)
29. Muhammad () is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and falling down prostrate (in prayer), seeking Bounty from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. The mark of them (i.e. of their Faith) is on their faces (foreheads) from the traces of (their) prostration (during prayers). This is their description in the Taurat (Torah). But their description in the Injeel (Gospel) is like a (sown) seed which sends forth its shoot, then makes it strong, it then becomes thick, and it stands straight on its stem, delighting the sowers that He may enrage the disbelievers with them. Allah has promised those among them who believe (i.e. all those who follow Islamic Monotheism, the religion of Prophet Muhammad till the Day of Resurrection) and do righteous good deeds, forgiveness and a mighty reward (i.e. Paradise).
You get marked in the forehead from bowing to Mecca!
Shabbat Shalom!
Now for you Greek hillbillies...
Torah And Science Part 1
Rabbi Yosef Mizrachi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7AIUn8VcjI
The Debate - Christianity VS. Judaism Part 1
Rabbi Yosef Mizrachi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO76MWmKXpc
Lord have mercy upon me but I am compelled to respond to this. At every Holy Mass I attend the following is said:
To us also Thy sinful servants, who put our trust in the multitude of Thy mercies, vouchsafe to grant some part and fellowship with Thy holy Apostles and Martyrs: with John, Stephen, Matthias, Barnabas, Ignatius, Alexander, Marcellinus, Peter, Felicitas, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucy, Agnes, Cecilia, Anastasia, and all Thy Saints. Into their company we beseech Thee admit us, not considering our merits, but freely pardoning our offenses. Through Christ our Lord.
NOT by our merits. Our trust is in the mercy of God and His free pardon of our sins through Christ our Lord. I don't think this is some kind of word game, I believe it. The Mass goes on:
By whom, O Lord, Thou dost always create, sanctify +, quicken +, bless +, and bestow upon us all these good things. Through Him +, and with Him +, and in Him +, is unto Thee, God the Father + Almighty, in the unity of the Holy + Ghost, all honor and glory.
And all the people said Amen. No really, that's where the people say Amen.
Beautifully and eloquently stated!
So you cherry picked a bunch of verses that have no context within themselves or with each other...So what???
And that's the very grovelling I have no intention of doing. Where God opens up an opportunity to share the Gospel, that's worth doing, even if it irritates those who don't like to hear it. Besides, you crashed my conversation, not the other way around. And even that could have led to further adult conversation, but your "arguments" consist of "shut up" and "grrrr." Is that all you've got? I think it is. I am sorry for you. If you had some killer argument that established transubstantiation as truth, that card would have been played by now. Instead, its all about psyops. And I'm pretty sure making it personal, even if used as an avoidance tactic, is contra forum rules. There's a good reason for that. Do you feel you are beyond such limitations? Just curious.
Peace,
SR
“Who will render to every man according to his works”
Is a hard pill to swallow for those that have been fooled by the grace without obedience lie.
Those verses were not “cherry picked,” but Paul’s standard fare, if you were more familiar with his writings. He can be hard to follow for those not accustomed to his rambling style.
Romans chapter 2 is his simple explanation of the way of Yeshua. 1John 2 is the same message for those with less time to spend reading.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.