False teacher Jory Micah made a silly claim about the foundations of the Bible, presumably to prop up her true religion, which is radical feminism. I’m re-running this post because all the arguments apply to her bad theology as well.
A thread over at the false gospel-preaching Sojourners Blog had multiple accusations against a commenter about whether Jesus and Paul taught the same Gospel, saying things like:
. . . the question of whether the Gospel according to Paul agrees with the Gospel according to Jesus seem largely ignored.
A commenter there referred to someone quoting Paul as a “Paulian” instead of a “Christian” and a commenter here literally said that “Jesus trumps Paul.” And there have been whole TV shows and analyses about the alleged differences. But is this really the case?
The “Jesus vs. Paul” debate is what is known as a false dichotomy, or a false dilemma. It implies that you have to choose one side or the other, when there are actually other options. Please consider this:
1. Jesus is God. The Bible is the word of God. Therefore, it is all the word of Jesus. The original writings turned out just like He wanted them to, including Paul’s letters.
2. The “red letters” (direct quotes of Jesus sometimes printed in red ink) carry no more authority than any of the other verses, let alone the ~3,000 verses saying, “God said,” “The word of the Lord came to me,” etc.
3. Roughly 10% of the “red letters” quoted the “black letters.” Jesus unapologetically and frequently quoted from the Old Testament, including the most controversial parts such as Adam and Eve, Noah, Jonah and Sodom and Gomorrah.
4. Peter referred to Paul’s writings as scripture, along with a marvelous take-down of those who misunderstand him.
2 Peter 3:15–16 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, 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.
5. None of the people making this argument seem to question what Luke wrote in his Gospel, so why do they question what Luke documented about Paul in the book of Acts, including his encounters with Jesus and his acceptance by the other Apostles?
6. Unless you think Paul made up his whole story — which would raise a whole new set of issues — then his claims are just as authoritative as the Gospel writers.
For example, Luke was not a direct follower of Jesus but was a careful historian and under the tutelage of Paul. Mark was not an eye-witness but leveraged Peter for his Gospel. But Paul heard directly from Jesus.
7. Think about how much you know about the concept of grace and where that came from. Do you really want to toss that out?
8. Jesus and Paul don’t disagree. The clear trumps the unclear, but a Gospel writer’s presentation of Jesus’ teachings doesn’t trump Paul’s presentation of Jesus’ teachings.
9. Much of Paul’s writings pre-date the Gospels.
So I don’t think Paul disagrees with what others documented directly and indirectly about Jesus, and even if they did you wouldn’t necessarily go with the Gospels.
Quoting Paul doesn’t make one a “Paulian” instead of a Christian, it just means you are quoting the word of God. Don’t let anyone dismiss your claims because you quote Paul.
Just quote scripture, in context. It’s all good.