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.
Catholics publicly remember the LORD Jesus Christ for his paschal sacrifice and confess his resurrection with reverence and faith. He is at the right hand of the Father now. Mary is forever blessed, as are the holy saints, the Apostles who will sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
>> “my mistake for thinking in English” <<
.
What exactly were you thinking in English? - Sabbath obviously means seventh, that is where we got the name for the number.
Like I said, ours is the religion of the bible alone...It's as old as Jesus and the apostles...
Yes...it IS. The Christian faith - the one that believes in Jesus Christ as Lord God and Savior - is the faith of the Apostles and the very first disciples of Jesus Christ. This faith, in reality, goes all the way back to beginning of the human race as our first parents (Adam & Eve) were clothed in the skins of animals slain BY God as a foretaste of the blood of the Lamb of God who would NOT just cover our sins but take them away forever!
For those insisting that obedience to the Law of Moses - or ANY human law - is how we achieve the righteousness required to be in God's presence in heaven, God's word says that it is in the righteousness of CHRIST which we are found and not our own. Our obedience to God is a sign of our sanctification and not the cause of it. So, no matter what religion someone claims to follow, if it is not the gospel of salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone, it is NOT the Christian faith.
Uhhhh about those commandments....let’s look at what Christ said about his commandments...pay particular attention to Luke 10 verse 28(the way to eternal life). Matthew 22:35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,
36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Luke10:25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live
John 15:9As the Father hath loved Me, so have I loved you; continue ye in My love.
10If ye keep My commandments, ye shall abide in My love, even as I have kept My Father’s commandments, and abide in His love.
11These things have I spoken unto you, that My joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full.
12This is My commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.
13Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
14Ye are My friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you. 15Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth; but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of My Father I have made known unto you.
16Ye have not chosen Me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain; that whatever {whatsoever} ye shall ask of the Father in My name, He may give it you.
17These things I command you, that ye love one another.
We couldn’t remember every regulation, thought, creed that the old Testament would have had us follow by way of the order of Aaron and Moses; that is why Christ; ruling by the order of Melchizidek simplified the law that we were to follow under the two great commandments and then instructed the Holy Spirit to BUILD THOSE INTO EACH OF US THE WAY HE SEES FIT, not the way any man would see fit.
Forget ritual feasts...feed a starving neighbor if needs be. Forget ritual washings and clothes...clothe your naked neighbor. Forget trumpets....trumpet instead the word of God!
Forget keeping the Sabbaths but rather keep the Lord of the Sabbath with you always, indeed...be a Sabbath rest for a suffering friend; refresh the fearful with the kindness of God! That is what Christ died to teach us and his resurrection was God’s exclamation point!
The English work week starts on Monday. Saturday is the sixth day of the English week. Sunday is the seventh day of the English week; you know, the day they worship football.
The Catholics and the Orthodox are the only churches of which I'm aware that can trace their succession to the Apostles. There was a reason for laying on of hands. The Orthodox Jews also trace their succession back to the giving of the Torah. The rest sprang up as different denominations, sects, cults, or religions and they formed their own rationale to try to sell themselves as legitimate to history.
Wow. The irony.
Christianity is about Christ, not the love and unity of the apostles and Mary.
The love and unity of the apostles and Mary is not a church (the body of Christ); it's about being followers of men.
And again, Catholics display an abysmal failure to comprehend what the church really is. It's the body of Christ, an organism, not a denomination, an organization.
Many people belong to organizations called churches but are not part of organism, the body of Christ, by virtue of the fact of being born again.
Forget keeping the Sabbaths but rather keep the Lord of the Sabbath with you always, indeed...be a Sabbath rest for a suffering friend; refresh the fearful with the kindness of God! That is what Christ died to teach us and his resurrection was God’s exclamation point!
AWESOME!!!!
The Apostles and blessed Mary are the body of Christ; They are the holy catholic apostolic church. You might read 1 John asking the Holy Spirit why John uses the word for love so often, and who were "the brethren" of whom he wrote (hint: no, it was not the Protestant group with whom you affiliate now; who were they ? Name names).
Why would you want to try to fool us (and each other)??? Peter didn't appoint anyone to take his place according to scripture...There are a number of missing links in the line which were filled in much later than they supposedly happened...
Eusebius who was responsible for providing names for many before his time has no evidence that he was telling the truth...So yours is not a true story at all...
There was a reason for laying on of hands. The Orthodox Jews also trace their succession back to the giving of the Torah.
True...To them was given the oracles of God to keep and preserve...Theirs is the religion of the bible...Catholicism is not...They have nothing to do with your religion...
The rest sprang up as different denominations, sects, cults, or religions and they formed their own rationale to try to sell themselves as legitimate to history.
The rest sprang us while Paul was creating the different churches in the times of the bible...And have been doing so since the apostle Paul thru Jesus brought them into the body of Christ...
Us ?
Since you choose not to identify the denomination/sect that "us" refers to, I assume it was formed within the last three hundred years, give or take. You may not even know the history.
Get real! - What else could “times and seasons” possibly mean?
Get real?! Indeed, have you ever done a word study of chronos and kairos (times [G5550], seasons [G2540]) used in 1Thes. 5:1?! Evidently not as neither word is found referring to liturgical times and seasons except that "kairos" is used in censuring the keeping of them by those who desired to be under that Law for salvation!
Ye observe days, and months, and times [kairos], and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain. (Galatians 4:10-11)
What other times are there but the appointed times? You cannot be serious.
What other times? The fact is they words refers to many other times except that of commending the keeping of OT feasts!
But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. (1Th 5:4) And thus "times" or "seasons" refers to understanding what signifies the return of the Lord in judgment and salvation, and thus is used for the actual time which was not revealed to the apostles:
And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times [chronos] or the seasons [kairos], which the Father hath put in his own power. (Act 1:7)
Similarly, chronos or kairos is used in rebuking those who lacked discernment of the times in which they lived:
Ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky and of the earth; but how is it that ye do not discern this time [kairos]? (Luke 12:56)
Likewise for the "latter times:"
This know also, that in the last days perilous times [kairos] shall come. (2Ti 3:1)
Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times [kairos] some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; (1Ti 4:1)
How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time [chronos], who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. (Jud 1:18)
Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times [chronos] for you, (1Pe 1:20)
And thus for the Lord's return:
Whom the heaven must receive until the times [kairos] of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. (Act 3:21)
Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time [kairos]. (1Pe 1:5)
More can be given, but the idea that 1Thes. 5:1 refers to OT feast days is absurd, as it contextually refers to discernment of the times in which the Lord would return, proceeding from chapter 4:
For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17)
Paul speaks of shaping his scheduled travel to accommodate the appointed feasts in several places. (1Cor 16:8 "...But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost)
Indeed, and consider that Paul's purpose was conversion of souls:
That was an important event for outreaching the Gospel to a great number of Jews, and likely to meet with believers who would have more time for fellowship.
Likewise we have many times hasted to be at an important event for outreach, but does not mean we ran after the same thing those lost did.
Moreover, if anything, rather than keeping OT feasts with unconverted Jews being sanctioned, going to Jerusalem is shown to be a dangerous thing, (Acts 21:4,12) and being part of a OT worship with unconverted Jews and attempting an admixture of law and grace is shown to be a wrong thing, as the ill-advised counsel of James in Acts 21 almost got Paul killed!
The charge was that Paul taught that the Gentiles ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs, and James and co. exhorted Paul to show he kept the Law.
Yet Paul did not require circumcision, nor keeping the dietary laws or literal feast keeping, and while being at liberty to do so.
And in contrasting what Paul is exhorted to do, that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law (as regards the purification and like ceremonial statutes), James himself states:
As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing , save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication. (Act 21:25)
The keeping of the Sabbath is understood in their everyday lives, and what of the traditional “coming together on the first day of the week” immediately after the sun sets for Havdalah? Paul even had to raise one of his followers from the dead when he fell out of a window late on a “saturday night” during one of his services.
That is more Roman-like reading into the text that which simply is not there. Faced with absolutely zero reiteration of the 4th commandment in the entire NT, you actually turn a Christian meeting on the 1st day into an observance of the 7th day sabbath!
And which you were reproved for doing before . "Saturday night" is the beginning of the first day.
[3] Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee. Get it? If you keep the times (watch) he will not come as a thief, but if you will not watch he will come as a thief.
This is more insolent assertions, as once again there is absolutely nothing here (except what you read into it) or anywhere in writing to the church in which literally observing OT feasts is what makes one prepared to meet the Lord. And in fact this imagined failure is no more given as a cause of reproof than failing to submit to a supreme infallible pope in Rome But i am sure eisegesis can read both into texts.
Do you think all those words in the epistles about the feasts are just chaff?Did Paul mention them but then ignore them?
All those words in the epistles about the feasts?! All what words? The only manifest mention of any special "feast" that the church kept was the Lord's supper,
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come...., (1Co 11:26) Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. (1Co 11:33)
These are spots in your feasts of charity [agapē], when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; (Jud 1:12)
Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. (1Co 5:7-8)
The "leaven" and "unleavened bread" are spiritual, and observing the Lord's supper is "as often as ye do this," which is not that of ordaining a liturgical calendar.
Thus your manner of argumentation relies on insolent assertions ("Get real" Get it?) as they simply lack the actual evidence you insist is there, and marginalize you as one worth much time to refute.
Indeed. Like the preacher's notes that were discovered: "Point weak here: pound pulpit."
That's how we know your religion is not the Christian church of the scriptures...
Act_8:1 And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.
The church was scattered but your supposed magisterium was not...The Christian church is not the apostles or their supposed successors...The church is the people...Born again Christians...The Catholic 'church' is the group of people who wear robes...That is not the Christian church...
The church does not include the apostles, that which you call the magisterium...
Act_8:3 As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison.
Act_14:23 And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed.
Act_15:4 And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.
The church, AND the apostles and elders...The apostles and elders, nor Mary, nor your religion is the church of the Scriptures...It's easy to see by comparing scripture with what you claim the Catholic 'church' is...
It ain't the Catholic church neither.
That isn't named by name in Scripture.
Jesus said He would build HIS church and NOWHERE in the Bible does it say that *Catholic church*.
The Catholic church claimed to be it retroactively with absolutely no basis for the claim but their say so.
And again, for the reading challenged. NO one denomination is the true church. The body of Christ is an organism comprised of born again believers, not a organization or denomination that one sets up and makes claims about itself that can't be supported by Scripture.
LOL!
If only Yeshua went by the English work week!
Stop squirming!
The “Great commandment” didn’t in any way relieve us of the rest. His words were an explanation of the nature of all of the commandments: LOVE.
Go back to Matthew 5 and see when the commandments cease (when the Earth ceases to exist).
.
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.