Paul contradicts Jesus Here is a list of the major contradictions by Paul of things Jesus taught. Some of this was mentioned by others, so when applicable I quote and reference the source who mentioned this. This list is as of March 2013. Come back for updates as I continue to add to this list. Please send me any that you have discovered. 1-Jesus Says Not To Eat Meat Sacrificed to Idols, But Paul Says It Is Ok Three times Jesus in the Book of Revelation condemns eating meat sacrificed to idols, even saying this is the doctrine of a false prophet. (Rev. 2:6, 14 (Ephesus); Rev. 2:14-15 (Pergamum); Revelation 2:20 (Thyatira).) This absolute prescription also was set forth in James ruling at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15:20. Then it is repeated when it was put in a letter. (Acts 15:29.) Finally, James reiterates this for a third and final time in Acts chapter 21. James tells Paul that many claim Paul is teaching lawless doctrine. So James reminds Paul what was the ruling at the Jerusalem Council. He tells Paul that previously we wrote giving judgment that they [i.e., the Gentiles] should keep themselves from things sacrificed to idols.... (Acts 21:25.) However, Paul clearly teaches three times that there is nothing wrong in itself eating meat sacrificed to idols. (Romans 14:21;1 Corinthians 8:4-13, and 1 Corinthians 10:19-29.) The first time Paul addresses the question of eating meat sacrificed to idols, Paul answers: But food will not commend us to God; neither if we eat not.... (1 Cor. 8:8.) Paul then explained it is only necessary to abstain from eating such meat if you are around a weaker brother who thinks an idol is something. (1 Cor. 8:7, 8:10, 9:22.) Then, and only then, must you abstain. The reason is that then a brother might be emboldened to do something he thinks is sinful. The brother is weak for believing eating meat sacrificed to an idol is wrong. This is thus a sin for him to eat, even though you know it is not sinful to eat meat sacrificed to idols. Thus, even though you know better than your weaker brother that it is no sin to do so, it is better to abstain in his presence than cause him to sin against his weak conscience and be destroyed. (1 Cor. 8:11.) As Wikipedia says: A major controversy among Early Christians concerned whether it was permissible to eat meat that had been offered in pagan worship, see also Council of Jerusalem. Paul of Tarsus, who agreed to the Apostolic Decree, also wrote that it was permitted to do so, as long as a blessing was pronounced over it, and provided that scandal was not caused by it. (Idolatry and Christianity, Wikipedia.) For more discussion, see Chapter Six of Jesus Words Only, available at this link to an html page. ---------- 2-Jesus Says The Law Continues, But Paul Says No CAVEAT: The Law given Moses applicable to foreigners/sojourners (Gentiles) is a relatively small set of moral commands primarily from Leviticus, incorporating most of the Ten Commandments. So if the Law given Moses applies to Gentiles, it is not a burdensome list. Yet, we are still applying literally the Law, just as James did in Acts 15, by treating the term foreigner/sojourners versus Israel as literally as possible. This distinction perfectly explains why James said circumcision does not apply to Gentiles, i.e., Leviticus 12:1-3 only requires sons of Israel to be circumcised. See this webpage where we discuss this issue in more depth. Jesuss View on the Law. Jesus emphasized the validity of the Law up through the passing away of Heaven and Earth, thus confirming its inspiration and ongoing validity. In Matthew 5:17-19 we read: (17) Think not that I came to destroy the Law [of Moses] or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. (18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the Law, till all things be accomplished [i.e., all things predicted appear on the stage of history]. (19) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (ASV) Compare Luke 16:17 similarly says at a different time than the Sermon on the Mount -- meaning Jesus repeated the same point twice: It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law. (Luke 16:16-17 NIV.) Thus, Jesus can never be accused of seducing any Christian from following the Law. Jesus cannot be a false prophet under Deuteronomy 13:5 (false prophet is anyone who has miracles and wonders but seduces you from following the Law). Jesus said the Law remained valid until the Heavens and Earth pass away. This passing of heaven and earth occurs at the end of the Millennium. This is 1000 years after Christs Second Coming, according to the Book of Revelation. ---------------- 3-Pauls View on the Law. Paul says the opposite. Paul is blunt in Ephesians 2:15, Colossians 2:14, 2 Cor. 3:11-17, Romans 7:1-3 et seq, and Galatians 3:19 et seq. The Law is abolished, done away with, nailed to a tree, has faded away, and was only ordained by angels...who are no gods. If we were to cite Pauls condemnations of the Law in one string, the point is self-evident that Paul abrogated the Law for everyone. See Eph. 2:15 (setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations); Col. 2:14 (having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out that way, nailing it to the cross;) 2 Cor. 3:14 (old covenant); Gal. 5:1 (yoke of bondage); Rom. 10:4 (Christ is the end of the law); 2 Cor. 3:7 (law of death); Gal. 5:1 (entangles); Col. 2:14-17 (a shadow); Rom. 3:27 (law of works); Rom. 4:15 (works wrath); 2 Cor. 3:9 (ministration of condemnation); Gal. 2:16 (cannot justify); Gal. 3:21 (cannot give life); Col. 2:14 (wiped out exaleipsas); Gal. 3:19, 4:8-9 (given by angels...who are no gods [and are] weak and beggarly celestial beings/elements). Finally, in Romans 7:1-6, Paul claims when Jesus died, the husband died and this dissolved the Laws bonds between the husband (God of Sinai) and wife (Gods people). This henceforth made the law dead to us. (Romans 7:4.) This death-of-God-the-husband released the Jews, Paul contends, and when Christ resurrected the bonds of marriage with the old God were not renewed. (The implication, we contend, was Paul meant a new God emerges or otherwise if the same husband-God resurrected, why wasnt the bond to the Law renewed? Paulinists come near to admitting this is the only logical meaning while even confessing they are uncomfortable with the passages seemingly polytheistic explanation... Uggh. On our thorough analysis of Romans 7:1-6, see our webpage discussion.) For more discussion on Pauls abrogation of the Law, see chapter five of Jesus Words Only excerpted at this link. ----------- 4-How do those devoted to every word from both Paul and Jesus resolve the contradiction? Here is a perfect example: If [Jesus] is saying [in Matt 5:17 by saying He fulfilled the Law, and meant] he is the end of the Law [as Paul taught in Romans 10:4], then why does he say in the next verse that the Law will never disappear? ...There is something exasperating about trying to understand a verse like this....What the verse seems to say contradicts what we know from other verses in the New Testament. The truth is we cannot be expected to understand this verse. Bivin, David. Blizzard, Jr., Roy. Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus: New Insights From A Hebraic Perspective (Destiny Image, 2001) at 113. Incidentally, Bivin-Blizzard offer a Hebrew approach that Jesus means by saying he did not come to destroy the Law means his interpretations will not weaken its meaning, and to fulfill means to make it more lasting. Even with that, Bivin-Blizzard realize they havent removed the contradiction between Paul and Jesus. ------------ 5-Paul Says The Pharisees Followed The Law Rigorously, But Jesus Says They Were Lax About The Law Paul says in Philippians 3:5-6 that as a result of his time as a Pharisee that as touching righteousness, found blameless. Cf. Acts 26:5 where Paul says I conformed to the strictest sect of our religion, living as a Pharisee. Of course, Jesus taught contrarily that the Pharisees were lax in teaching and obeying the Law. See Matt. 23:23. See also, Matt. 15: 6,9. This contradiction between Paul and Jesus has probably had the most important impact on doctrine. By perceiving the Pharisees through Pauls eyes, we are led to believe Jesus condemned the Pharisees as legalists -- Pauls view. However, Jesus condemned the Pharisees as ANTI-LEGALISTS. Jesus condemned them as teachers abrogating the Law by their man-made ordinances. (Matt. 15:6). And Jesus condemned them as those who taught the lesser commands of the Law while ignoring the more weightier commands of the Law. (Matt. 23:23.) Hence, a wrong deduction is achieved by using Pauls contradictory perception of the Pharisees. Paul says the Pharisees are legalists; but Jesus says they are anti-legalists. These are radically opposite perceptions. If Pauls view were correct, then Jesus impliedly condemned obedience any longer to the Law by criticizing the Pharisees. However, if Jesuss view of the Pharisees as lax about the Law is correct (and who can deny our Lords veracity!), then Jesus condemned any teaching that either marginalized the Law or contradicted the Law. This fits precisely into Jesuss statement: he that teaches and keeps the Law of Moses will be great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matt. 5:19.) However, because Paul depicts the Pharisees - enemies of Jesus - as law-keepers, Paul is understood to be condemning all who are zealous of the Law of Moses as an enemy of Messiah. (Cosette, Id., at 21.) This means Paul indirectly condemned our Lord Jesus Christ when Paul condemned those who were teaching the Law should be followed, both big and little commands. CAVEAT: Please note that I have explained that the Law does not have but a relatively modest number of provisions that apply to non-Israelites/sojouners. It has provisions that specifically extend rules to sojourners/non-Israelites who join with the community. See this webpage where we discuss this issue. ------------- 6-Jesus Says Only God Is Your Spiritual Father, and Call No Man on Earth Your Father, But Paul Says He Is The Corinthians Only Spiritual Father Jesus said: and ye may not call [any] your father on the earth, for one is your Father, who is in the heavens, (Matt. 23:9 YLT) But Paul says: For even if you had ten thousand others to teach you about Christ, you have only one spiritual father. For I became your father in Christ Jesus when I preached the Good News to you. (1 Cor. 4:15, NLT) Incidentally, based on Paul, the Roman Catholic Church has countenanced the direct violation of our Lord’s words in calling a priest ‘father.’ See “Call No Man Father: Understanding Matthew 23:9,” catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0089.html (accessed 2010). Furthermore, Jesus likely primary point was He intended people to stop venerating Abraham, calling him Father Abraham in place of Our Father in heaven. Jesus makes this subtle point in a parable about one in hell who called out to Father Abraham in a prayer rather than to God Himself. (Luke 16:24.) In that light, then it is significant Paul violates Jesus words a second time when Paul refers to Abraham is the father of us all. (Romans 4:16.) Only Our Father in heaven is the father of us all. To exalt Abraham to that level, Jesus intended us to understand, is idolatry - putting Abraham on the same level as God. Jesus wants to call no one father in that venerating sense. Paul invited such spiritual veneration of himself as the spiritual father of the Corinthians as well as for Abraham -- all in contradiction to Christs words. ------------ 7-Paul Says Elders Are Entitled To Pay for Preaching & Teaching, But Jesus Says No In 1 Tim. 5:17, Paul wrote: The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. Then Paul uses a verse about not muzzling an ox in an odd extension to imply churchgoers have a duty to pay the elders for their service. (1 Tim. 5:18.) Elsewhere, Paul says: 14 In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel. (1 Cor. 9:14 NIV.) But I thought Jesus said to His disciples to lay no cost on anyone they served by preaching and healing? Without cost you have received; without cost you are to give. (Matt. 10:8, NAB.) Jesus in the prior verse was commanding the apostles to go out and preach the gospel, so the context makes quite clear that no charge was to be made on auditors to hear preaching of the gospel or healing ministries. Hence, 1 Tim. 5:17-18 and 1 Cor. 9:14 contradicts Jesus in Matthew 10:8. Incidentally compare: Micah 3:11 WEB which says similarly to what Jesus says: 11 Her leaders judge for bribes, and her priests teach for a price, and her prophets of it tell fortunes for money: yet they lean on Yahweh, and say, “Isn’t Yahweh in the midst of us? No disaster will come on us.” ----------- 8-Paul Exhorts Celibacy, But Jesus Clearly Says It is A Choice Not Within Everyones Power Paul taught against being married. He wrote in 1 Cor. 10:27-28: Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be free. Are you free from a wife? Do not seek marriage. But if you marry, you do not sin, and if a girl marries she does not sin. In line with this Paul also wrote: I wish all were as I am, meaning unmarried. (1 Cor. 7:7.) To help prevent the desire to be married, Paul said: ‘It is good that a man should not touch a woman.’ (1 Cor. 7:1.) If Paul is a true prophet and wishes something, such as avoiding touching a woman and to not seek to be married, then Paul clearly endorses celibacy for us too as a superior way of life. However, Jesus speaks differently of celibacy as something for some but not all disciples. It is not a command or even an exhortation. It is merely a legitimate option. He who is able to receive this, let him receive it. Matt. 19:12. The contradiction arises because Jesus never says or implies do not seek marriage. Significantly, Jesus never applies any moral suasion or pressure to be celibate, while Paul clearly does so. ----------- 9-Jesus Says There Is One Pastor and Teacher (Himself), But Paul Says There Are Many Pastors and Teachers Jesus said there is One Pastor and One Teacher: And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd/pastor (Grk poimen) (John 10:16.) But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your teacher, and all ye are brethren.... (Matt. 23:8)(ASV) Nor are you to be called teacher (Rabbi), for you have one Teacher (didaskolos), the Christ. (Matt. 23:10, NIV) However, Paul says And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors (shepherds, Greek poimenas) and teachers (didaskolos).... (Eph. 4:11.) And much more jesuswordsonly/recommendedreading/175-pauls-contradictions-of-jesus.html
Posted on: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 00:22:00 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015