Did Paul invent or hijack Christianity?

Madison Ruppert ^ | 06/24/2014

[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.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: Acts 15 shows the apostles commissioned Paul and gave him authority

Yep, and Peter himself, one of the disciples closest to Christ EQUATES Paul’s epistles to SCRIPTURE.

“14 Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. 15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures” ( 2 Peter 3:14-16 )

[SeekAndFind]

Well, Peter himself, one of the disciples closest to Christ EQUATES Paul’s epistles to SCRIPTURE.

“14 Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. 15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures” ( 2 Peter 3:14-16 )

[WVKayaker]

Which pamphlet did that come out of?

Why do you say such things?

2 Peter 2: 2 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2 Many will follow their depraved conduct and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. 3 In their greed these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping. ...

It is not true.

2 Timothy 3: 15 ... you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

[Tucker39]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the writer might do well to actually READ the New Testament, and Acts 9 in particular. God arrested Paul, nee Saul, when he was enroute to Damascus to wreak additional havoc on Christianity, as was his wont at the time.

Immediately after Paul’s surrender to Christ, God sent Annanias to meet Paul, stating that Paul was “a chosen instrument to proclaim my Name to the gentiles, their kings, and to Israel. I will show him (Paul) how much he must suffer for my Name.” Acts 9:15. NIV To my understanding, Paul had no choice in the matter. God “volunteered” him, and he could refuse at his own peril!

This kind of silly, trumped up faux dispute on a subject such as this is exactly the kind of “vain disputation” God warns us not to waste time discussing.

[Salvation]

http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=1351

St. Ananias II

Missionary, martyr, and patron of St. Paul. A Christian in the city of Damascus, Ananias was commanded by Christ in a vision to seek out Saul, the future Paul, who had staggered his way into the city following his dramatic encounter with the Lord on the road to Damascus. Finding Saul blind, Ananias cured him and baptized him. After seeing Paul start his missionary work, Ananias went to Eleutheropolis, where he was martyred for the faith.

[zencycler]

Simply put, if Paul had no personal connection with Jesus, then neither does anyone else living today.

[Tucker39]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the writer might do well to actually READ the New Testament, and Acts 9 in particular. God arrested Paul, nee Saul, when he was enroute to Damascus to wreak additional havoc on Christianity, as was his wont at the time.

Immediately after Paul’s surrender to Christ, God sent Annanias to meet Paul, stating that Paul was “a chosen instrument to proclaim my Name to the gentiles, their kings, and to Israel. I will show him (Paul) how much he must suffer for my Name.” Acts 9:15. NIV To my understanding, Paul had no choice in the matter. God “volunteered” him, and he could refuse at his own peril!

This kind of silly, trumped up faux dispute on a subject such as this is exactly the kind of “vain disputation” God warns us not to waste time discussing.

[Salvation]

Amen!

[Jemian]

Christianity is the result of a covenant between the Godhead planned out before the foundation of the world was ever laid. The Bible, indeed all of history, is an unfolding, revelation, of that plan.

[Salvation]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3171859/posts?page=45#45

[GGpaX4DumpedTea]

“Christianity/Catholicism was founded by Jesus Christ on the Apostles, the first Bishops.”

Are you saying that if it is not ‘Catholicism’ it is not ‘Christian’?

[Salvation]

Why are you mindreading Bryan24

Let him answer my question, please.

[Salvation]

The headline said Christianity. Just trying to stick with the subject.

[maine-iac7]

Paul "jailed" by the Romans - not behind bars - but 'house arrest' in his mansion in Rome - things were a bit heated between him and the true Leaders of the church= this gave cool off time - and gave him space. But, as often happens with double agents, when they are of no use any longer to the realm, but know too much, they are 'eliminated' - in the case of Paul - his Crucifixion/death also was a boon to the Church - solidifying him and his teachings - which are, often, in conflict with Jesus' teaching.

I have what they call "The Jefferson Bible" - Jefferson was a learned and brilliant man. He detested Paul. He took scissors and past and cut out all the sayings/teachings of just Jesus and pasted them in a book. I have that and another book titled:"His Words" - which is basically the same as Jefferson's. I believe, with Jefferson and others that Jesus taught what His Gospel is - If we spend our lives studying and understanding and applying what HE taught, we need no other. To me, it seems ludicrous that people call Jesus God and Son of God and yet think He didn't - in 3 years of teaching before He died and then the concentrated teaching after the Crucifixion and before the Ascension - give us what we need to understand how to live His Way - that, in other words, He, & God, failed - and His hand chosen, personally taught disciples and Apostles failed. Why did the Apostles, in the beginning, call Paul a 'False Prophet?" And why did Paul dismiss them as all but irrelevant?

[married21]

Paul bothers me sometimes. His writing can be convoluted and frustrating to read.

But a guy who writes :
“Love is patient and kind. It is not jealous or boastful..etc., ....” (paraphrase, sorry).

That’s a guy filled with the Holy Spirit.
That’s a guy following the Way.

Paul’s not a highjacker.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: things were a bit heated between him and the true Leaders of the church= this gave cool off time - and gave him space

What historical source wrote that?

Here is what Peter wrote in his last epistle to the church in opposition to that:

15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. (2 Peter 3:15-16 )

Peter himself EQUATED Paul’s letters to the church with SCRIPTURE. So, if there was any “heat” between him and the other leaders ( and Peter was arguably one of their foremost leaders), that did not seem to be reflected in Peter’s last epistle.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: I have what they call “The Jefferson Bible” - Jefferson was a learned and brilliant man

Jefferson might be a brilliant man, but I don’t think it is wise to subscribe to his “cut and paste” type of Christianity.

He might be an authority in the founding principles of this country, but he isn’t to be referred to when it comes to the foundation of Christianity.

[maine-iac7]

Exactly - Paul and the Jewish hierarchy, were infuriated that Jesus taught women were equal, that he taught them directly, made them teachers, healers and disciples.

That was a great threat to the power structure, to keeping women subjugated.

And Rome, after ten years with their agent, Paul, slaughtering every follower they could find, realized they weren't succeeding. So - double agent: destroy from within.

Paul served both entities well.

I remember, over 30 years ago, in my investigative reporter days, infiltrating and "NO PRESS" meeting of the DSOC - Democrat Socialist Organizing Committee where they emphasized they were not powerful enough to come out as Socialists and that their new strategy would be to "infiltrate and take over the Democrat Party" Who can argue their success?

Times change. People don't.

[GGpaX4DumpedTea]

“The headline said Christianity. Just trying to stick with the subject.”

Ah, but you did not stick to the subject...you brought in ‘Catholicism’. And you also did not answer my question.

[statered]

.?? Jefferson's edits mostly took out the miracles.