Does Apostle Paul Contradict Jesus?

[Punchinello]

I ask this because my Fundie friend as well as some articles I found online said that there are no contradictions. From things I have read, it sure looks like there are contradictions.

I pointed out to my friend what Jesus said to the Lawyer who asked Him what does he need to do to be saved. Jesus said basically to Love God and treat others the way you want to be treated. "Do this and you shall live.". Paul, I believe, basically says that to be saved, you need to accept Jesus as your savior. Believe that and you'll get a golden ticket to heaven. My friend tried to harmonize what Jesus said by saying nobody can do what Jesus said to the Lawyer to do. We can't even come close. We're not going to give up all of our worldly posessions. I told him he was editorializing. He said he wasn't.

Here is Jesus telling the Lawyer what he needs to do to be saved and that's not a good enough answer?. Here is the Son of God telling the Lawyer exactly what he needs to do but some people say that's not good enough. Why would the Son of God give the Lawyer a half azzed answer or an incomplete answer?

This is my second post and I hope it doesn't cause an argument like my first post.

[Flail]

Jesus would not be a Christian were he alive today. He was born, indoctrinated and died a Jew; the same with his disciples, and at no time in his teachings or instructions to them did he suggest beginning a new religion.

#QUESTION Do the teachings and philosophies of Jesus as expressed in the Gospels, taken by themselves, indicate he intented to start a "new religion"?

Absolutely. He also chose 12 men and indicated they (principly Peter) would "feed his sheep" John 21:15-17). Those Christians, Jesus indicated, would "meet together" (Matthew 18:20) and follow at least two religous ceremonies (Luke 22:19; Mat 28:19)

Furthermore in Matthew 18 verse 17 Jesus provided the following guidelines:

"If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.."- New American Standard Bible (©1995)

http://bible.cc/matthew/18-17.htm

If Jesus had no intention for his followers to be part of a CHURCH or community of believers from which one could be excluded in some way, what were these guidelines pointing towards? Certainly he warned his disciples they should expect religious persecution and that his followers would be "thrown out of the synagogues" (see John 16:12). Thus Jesus was either speaking of reforming the "religion" which he and his early followers were already part of and teaching exclusion for those that do not repent to THAT original "church" or (more likely) the establishment of a new group, rejected by the Jewish religious community, comprising of individuals able to exclude or discipline non-repentant sinners in some way. Both of which imply an organized group with a recognizable set of religious standards and beliefs.

FEEDING THE SHEEP

The metaphorical use of sheep is often used in the bible to refer to God's people. While this of course also refers to the humble obedianet spirit Christians are expected to display, it is interesting that sheep are not usually lone animals (like tigers or wolves) but animals that live in groups. Jesus spoke a "sheepfold" (the enclosure into which sheep were bought at night for protection) Joh 10:2-4 and most notably Peter (and by extention the other 12 chosen Apostles) was told to "feed" Jesus' sheep.

It seems clear then that Jesus was indicating that there would be an identifiable group ("sheep") which Peter would be able to "feed" (give religious instruction to).

Jesus instructed the instutution of a system by which religious instruction and encouragement to be administred through a pre-prescribed chanel - as opposed to each individual member praying to God and being guided indepently to spritually upbuilding information.

RELIGIOUS MEETINGS & RITUALS

Jesus indicated he wished his Christian followers to stay in some kind of contact with each other; for example, on the last night of his life on earth, Jesus instituted a ceremony that involved bread and wine. He commanded that his followers "keep doing this in remebrance of me" (Luke 22:19). Indeed in Matthew Chapter 18 verse 20 Jesus stated "where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst.� Thus indicating far from his teachings to simply be carried in the heart of each individual follower, his people would meet together, be baptised (a religious ritual) and commemorate his death (another).

PREACHING THE GOSPEL

"Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded YOU." - Matthew 28: 19, 20 NWT

Jesus last commission quoted above also indicates furture organization amongst his followers. They would according to him have to teach a pre-prescribed set of beliefs. Without either direct verbal communication with those that heard these teachings from Christ the potential for these teachings to morph into something unrecongizable to its origins would be enormous.

In shorit the teachings of Jesus would have to be set in writing and/or some kind of link established between those 12 men appointed men that learnt them firstand and the newly baptised disciples that would come later. We can conclude either Jesus was commissioning a kind of global "chinese whisper" that would possibly span centuries (which would result in his teachings NOT being taught but something resembling them being taught) or command that a system be established that ensured his teaching be preserved and/or transmitted accurately. Both of which would require a degree of organization.

This would be reflected in the fact that Jesus trained first 12 and later 70 of his disciples to preach; , giving them specific instrucitons as to their message and how to procede. While this was obviously in connection with his own preaching tours, it does illustrate he was not adverse to set religious instructions/teachings and a specific organizational procedure.

CONCLUSION From the above it seems clear Jesus was not simply instigating a philosophy to be adopted by individuals that came in contact with his message independently of any fixed set of beliefs, religious meetings or rituals but rather a religous system with a distinct structure and orginisational procedures that would enable his followers to fulfil a global commission. meeting all the criteria for what we call today .. a religion.

In Matthew, Jesus' final instructions to his disciples, in which I assume he was giving final and key directives for them to follow upon His death, Jesus does not ever mention starting a new religion, building a church or rejecting Judaism. He sent them home to home and community to community to spread the good news not to start an entire new religious movement. Otherwise you'd think He would have mentioned that. Jesus did not instruct his disciples to perform any daily rituals of any kind or to attend any worship service of any kind nor to encourage others to do so.

[JehovahsWitness]

1Cor.5
[7] For Christ, our paschal lamb, has been sacrificed.
Eph.5
[2] And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.


Jesus says:

Matt.9
[13] Go and learn what this means, `I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.'"

Punchinello: The way that I interpret the above (and I realize that I am just a theological novice), Paul is saying it is the belief in Jesus Christ that saves you. Jesus seems to say that salvation comes from following the commandments and doing good works. If this is a contradiction, doesn't that shoot down the Fundamentalist argument that you can only be saved by accepting Jesus as your savior?

Paul says:
1Cor.5[7] For Christ, our paschal lamb, has been sacrificed.
Eph.5
[2] And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.


Jesus says: Jesus says:

Matt.9[13] Go and learn what this means, `I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.'"

FALSE ASSUMPTION :

(1) that Jesus was speaking in absolute terms and his quotation was a call for an end to all sacrifice
(2) that Jesus did not teach his life would be offerrd as a sacrifice

Math 9: 13"Go, then, and learn what this means, ‘I want mercy, and not sacrifice.’ For I came to call, not righteous people, but sinners.�"

MATH 12:5-8
Or, have YOU not read in the Law that on the sabbaths the priests in the temple treat the sabbath as not sacred and continue guiltless? 6 But I tell YOU that something greater than the temple is here. 7 However, if YOU had understood what this means, ‘I want mercy, and not sacrifice,’ YOU would not have condemned the guiltless ones. 8 For Lord of the sabbath is what the Son of man is.�

Cross reference: Math 23: 23 "“Woe to YOU, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because YOU give the tenth of the mint and the dill and the cumin, but YOU have disregarded the weightier matters of the Law, namely, justice and mercy and faithfulness. These things it was binding to do, yet not to disregard the other things

Math 20: 28 "Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many."(King James Bible Cambridge Ed.);

Math 26: 28 "because this is my blood of the new covenant that is being poured out for many people for the forgiveness of sins." (International Standard Version ©2008)


ANALYSIS: In Matthew19 perceiving his critics distain of sinners, Jesus is pointing out, not that sacrifices have no further value, but that no ritual has value if the one performing it lacks the "weightier" or more important basic qualities of love and compassion. Jesus quotes Hosea 6:6 which reads:

• For in loving-kindness I have taken delight, and not in sacrifice; and in the knowledge of God rather than in whole burnt offerings. [...]10 In the house of Israel I have seen a horrible thing. There there is fornication on the part of E´phra·im. Israel has defiled itself.

Just as Hosea was not calling for an end to all sacrifices, but emphasising that the nations deliberatly loose conduct and bad morals could not be overlooked because they offered sacrifices in accord with the Divine commands, Jesus was clearly emphasising that the heartless distain for others displayed by the Pharisees invalidated their sacrifices in the eyes of God. Indeed even after the Jewish exile in Babyon, and their reform the sacrificial arrangement continued, and was subsequently followed by Jesus himself. If Hosea (whom Jesus quoted) had been calling literally for an end to all sacrifice, Jesus would hardly have supported an invalidated arrangement himself or encouraged others to do so (see Luke 5:14; 22: 7, 8 ).

Jesus explicitly stated his life would be offered as a sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins and did not correct John the Baptist who publically referred to him [Jesus ] as the "lamb of God" - an expression which for a Jewish audience could but bring to mind the sacrificial lambs under the Mosaic arrangement.

CONCLUSION: Jesus quoting Hosea in no way negates the sacrificial nature of his mission, but was to emphasise the relative value mercy and compassion. Jesus taught his followers he would offer his life as a sacrifice which was completely in harmony with Pauls words quoted above

[Punchinello]

My clarification: Sorry that I didn't explain my reason for the original question "Does Paul contradict Jesus?"

The motive of my question was to show that maybe we shouldn't put so much stock in what Paul said. Doesn't Jesus's quotes trump everyone else's quotes?(Assuming that the Gospel writers accurately wrote down Jesus's quotes). If Jesus's advice to the Lawyer was to love God and treat your neighbor like you want to be treated and if you do that you are saved, then why trump that with what Paul said(you're saved by faith in Jesus alone). It doesn't seem that Jesus said that you have to believe in Him to be saved.

If there is a pattern of contradiction between Paul and Jesus, then why buy into what Paul says at all such as Jesus's crucifixion was for the atonement of sin? Wasn't Paul the first person that said that the crucifixion was for the atonement of sin? Is there any non-vague Pre-Paul evidence that the Messiah had to suffer and die to atone for our sins?

[Slopeshoulder]

The true mark of any believer is agape love that is unknown to the unregenerate soul. We know that we have passed from death unto life because we have an agape love.

Lots of non-christians have agape love. They devote their lives to altruism, sleflessness, and self-sacrifice. Your claim of uniqueness for Xty is innacurate and IMO offensive to others. Death to love>love applies to all or to none.

[Prince]

Yes ,I have said many times that if people would follow Jesus teachings and not Paul and the disciples, the world would be a better place.Jesus said to go into the world as He did with the same message and purpose. Here is the scripture to support this.

Jn 8;31 If continue in my words, you are truly be my disciples,
then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.

John 13; I have given you an example what I have done that‘s what you must do.
Amen, amen, I say to you, no slave is greater than his master nor any messenger greater than the one who sent him.
Once you know all these things, blessed will you be if you put them into practice.

Jn 20:21 "As the Father has sent me, so I send you."

Jn 15;7 If you live in me and my words remain part you, you may ask what you will and it shall be done for you.

Jn 17;6 "I revealed your name to those whom you gave me out of the world. They belonged to you, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word.
Now they know that everything you gave me is from you,
because the words you gave to me I have given to them, and they accepted them and truly understood that I came from you, and they have believed that you sent me.

Jn 17:18 I do not ask that you take them out of the world but that you keep them from the evil one.
They do not belong to the world any more than I belong to the world.
Consecrate them in the truth. Your word is truth.
As you sent me into the world, so I sent them into the world.

Here is what I do to follow Him; I spread the word of the Lord and then say who sent me by using His words which He gave to His followers to continue in His words.Here is an example below.

It is written;

Psalms 128:1 Happy is everyone who fears the Lord, who walks in his ways. You shall eat the fruit of the labor of your hands; you shall be happy, and it shall go well with you.

119:55 I remember your name in the night, O Lord, and keep your law.

119:77 Let your mercy come to me, that I may live; for your law is my delight.

119:142 Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and your law is the truth

119:174 I long for your salvation, O Lord, and your law is my delight.

145:13 The Lord is faithful in all his words, and holy in all his works.

145:17 The Lord is just in all his ways, and holy in all his works. 18 The Lord is near to all who call on him, to all who call on him in truth.

I am the good shepherd, I know my sheep and my sheep know me,
just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; To these sheep I will give my life. I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. These also I must lead, and they will hear my voice, and there will be one flock, one shepherd.
This is why the Father loves me, because I lay down my life in order to take it up again. No one takes it from me, I lay it down freely. I have power to lay it down, and power to take it up again. This command I have received from my Father."

The works I do in my Father's name testify to me.

My sheep hear my voice; I know them, and they follow me.
I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish. No one can take them out of my hand.
My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one can take them out of the Lord's hand. The Lord and I are one.
If I do not perform my Father's works, do not believe me;
but if I perform them, even if you do not believe me, put faith in the works, so that you may realize that the Lord is in me and I am in the Lord.

Those are the words of the Lord who sent me.Jesus sent me. We are One with the Father.

[JehovahsWitness]

My clarification: Sorry that I didn't explain my reason for the original question "Does Paul contradict Jesus?"

The motive of my question was to show that maybe we shouldn't put so much stock in what Paul said. Doesn't Jesus's quotes trump everyone else's quotes?(Assuming that the Gospel writers accurately wrote down Jesus's quotes). If Jesus's advice to the Lawyer was to love God and treat your neighbor like you want to be treated and if you do that you are saved, then why trump that with what Paul said(you're saved by faith in Jesus alone). It doesn't seem that Jesus said that you have to believe in Him to be saved.

If there is a pattern of contradiction between Paul and Jesus, then why buy into what Paul says at all such as Jesus's crucifixion was for the atonement of sin? Wasn't Paul the first person that said that the crucifixion was for the atonement of sin? Is there any non-vague Pre-Paul evidence that the Messiah had to suffer and die to atone for our sins?

Thank you for clarifying that the original post is based on a presumption of accuracy (a presumption applicable to both the gospel AND Paul's epistles) since without this we would be obliged to debate canonisity instead of content.

Since you say "If there is a pattern of contradiction between Paul and Jesus..." (especially in the light of the webiste you extensively quoted from in support of your position) I presume my posts proposing that no such "pattern of contradiction" actually exists, are not out of place.

I would appreciate your actually ADDRESSING these rebuttals (which is basically waht a debate is). I'm sorry rebuttals are staggered (and not in numerical order) but as you can imagine there are quite a number of points each of which require a fair amount of research, and it will take me some time to systematicaly address them all thus removing the basis upon which your presumption of contradiction is based.

Regards,
JW

[Flail]

Prince wrote:

Yes ,I have said many times that if people would follow Jesus teachings and not Paul and the disciples, the world would be a better place.Jesus said to go into the world as He did with the same message and purpose. Here is the scripture to support this.

One wonders what the world would be like if the committee who put the Bible together in the fourth century would have opted to include only the four Gospels. It seems Constantine and others had the committee bent upon organizing religion as opposed to illuminating Jesus' philosophy of life; so they included the diatribe letters of Paul, a church organizer and a zealot for religiosity; which to me are the very things that Jesus was against. Christianity is founded upon the teachings of Paul, and not upon those of Jesus.

[Student]

My clarification: Sorry that I didn't explain my reason for the original question "Does Paul contradict Jesus?"

The motive of my question was to show that maybe we shouldn't put so much stock in what Paul said. Doesn't Jesus's quotes trump everyone else's quotes?(Assuming that the Gospel writers accurately wrote down Jesus's quotes).

Thank you for the clarification.

The presupposition, "that the Gospel writers accurately wrote down Jesus' quotes" does invalidate my post.

However, in mitigation, the "Theology, Doctrine & Dogma" sub-forum might perhaps have been a more appropriate venue for this thread.

If there is a pattern of contradiction between Paul and Jesus, then why buy into what Paul says at all such as Jesus's crucifixion was for the atonement of sin? Wasn't Paul the first person that said that the crucifixion was for the atonement of sin? Is there any non-vague Pre-Paul evidence that the Messiah had to suffer and die to atone for our sins?

As Paul’s (seven authentic) letters were written before any of the gospels were produced it would be difficult to find any pre-Pauline evidence! Or are you also pre-supposing that the canonical gospels pre-date Paul’s ministry?

[JehovahsWitness]

Thank you for the clarification.

The presupposition, "that the Gospel writers accurately wrote down Jesus' quotes" does invalidate my post.

However, in mitigation, the "Theology, Doctrine & Dogma" sub-forum might perhaps have been a more appropriate venue for this thread.

Totally agree with you about the "miscat"; there's a thin line between the two forums when it comes to perceived (internal/textual) contradictions - as opposed to "contradictions" with known science, history or archeological evidence. In my experience both often boil down to how you are reading the text (interpretational issues) so even the latter could legitimately be in TD&D... Still as long as moderator doesn't move it, I'm happy to discuss the topic wherever but I generally push posters to tighten up their debate question for the very reason I don't want to do a bunch of research that is ignored because the reply will be "well, I'm going to ignore what you've said until you prove there's a God or Prove Paul existed".

[Mithrae]

My clarification: Sorry that I didn't explain my reason for the original question "Does Paul contradict Jesus?"

The motive of my question was to show that maybe we shouldn't put so much stock in what Paul said. Doesn't Jesus's quotes trump everyone else's quotes?(Assuming that the Gospel writers accurately wrote down Jesus's quotes). If Jesus's advice to the Lawyer was to love God and treat your neighbor like you want to be treated and if you do that you are saved, then why trump that with what Paul said(you're saved by faith in Jesus alone). It doesn't seem that Jesus said that you have to believe in Him to be saved.

If there is a pattern of contradiction between Paul and Jesus, then why buy into what Paul says at all such as Jesus's crucifixion was for the atonement of sin? Wasn't Paul the first person that said that the crucifixion was for the atonement of sin? Is there any non-vague Pre-Paul evidence that the Messiah had to suffer and die to atone for our sins?

I suspect there's the occasional Christian out there who'd suggest that Isaiah 53 and Daniel 9:26 imply that a messiah would die for folk's sins - they're definitely pre-Pauline, though your requirement for 'non-vague' evidence is a little vague.

Incidentally, while I'm no theologian I suspect that it's something of a misconception to believe that Paul said you are saved by faith alone - it's actually saved by grace alone, not by anything we've done:

• Ephesians 2:4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

This seems quite similar to the gospel according to John:

• John 10:25 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one."

While I'm more inclined towards Student's approach of wondering what Jesus actually taught, if we're assuming the validity of canonical gospel Jesus and canonical Paul, I'd say there's certainly a difference in emphasis: Jesus, like the prophets of the Tanakh before him, was exhorting the 'chosen people' to focus more and more on the compassionate and social justice aspects of the Law, rather than the separatist, purity and sacrifical aspects. Paul, a Jew, was writing mostly to Gentiles explaining how and why they were becoming part of God's 'chosen people' from whom he himself had descended and gleaned his understanding. Both of them questioned mere ritual, and both of them emphasised how we conduct ourselves towards others.