Paul and Jesus: Divergent Teachings in Early Christianity

Supporting Evidence for Doctrinal Divergences Between Paul and Jesus

The assertion that Paul and Jesus’ teachings diverged significantly in early Christianity can be substantiated through a careful analysis of scriptural texts, historical accounts, and scholarly interpretations. This essay provides supporting evidence for the claims made about the differences between Paul’s doctrine and the teachings of Jesus and his disciples.

Scriptural Evidence of Divergence

1. Paul’s Teachings on the Law vs. Jesus’ Adherence to the Law In the New Testament, Paul’s epistles frequently emphasize justification by faith rather than adherence to the Mosaic Law. For instance, Romans 3:27-28 states, “Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” This directly contrasts with Jesus’ affirmation of the law’s enduring validity. In Matthew 5:17-20, Jesus declares, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” Here, Jesus underscores the permanence of the law, which contradicts Paul’s de-emphasis on legal observance.
2. Paul’s Mission to the Gentiles vs. Jesus’ Focus on the Jews Jesus’ ministry primarily targeted the Jewish people, as seen in Matthew 10:5-6, where he instructs his disciples, “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.” In contrast, Paul explicitly claims his mission to the Gentiles, as noted in Romans 11:13, “For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office.” This self-assigned role marks a significant shift from Jesus’ initial mission, expanding the Christian message to non-Jewish populations.
3. Suspicion Among the Disciples Acts 9:26 describes the initial reaction of Jesus’ disciples to Paul: “And when Saul had come to Jerusalem, he tried to join the disciples; but they were all afraid of him, not believing that he was really a disciple.” This skepticism was rooted in Paul’s prior persecution of Christians and possibly his differing theological views. The passage illustrates the early Christian community’s wariness and possible disagreement with Paul’s teachings.
4. Paul’s Admission of Deception Paul’s admission of using deceptive tactics is evident in 2 Corinthians 12:16: “But be it so, I did not burden you; nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.” The use of “guile” suggests a willingness to employ cunning or deceit, raising ethical concerns about his methods and further distinguishing his approach from the more direct teachings of Jesus.

Historical and Scholarly Perspectives

1. John S. Spong and Thomas Jefferson Episcopal Bishop John S. Spong¹ criticized Paul’s writings, asserting, “Paul’s words are not the Words of God. They are the words of Paul—a vast difference.” This perspective highlights the distinction between Paul’s personal theological interpretations and the teachings attributed directly to Jesus. Thomas Jefferson² famously attempted to remove Pauline elements from the New Testament, producing what is now known as the Jefferson Bible. He believed that Paul’s writings corrupted Jesus’ original message, indicating a significant doctrinal discrepancy.
2. Albert Schweitzer and Wil Durant Albert Schweitzer³ noted that Paul seldom referenced Jesus’ teachings or actions, such as the Sermon on the Mount or the use of parables. Wil Durant⁴ observed that “Paul created a theology of which none but the vaguest warrants can be found in the words of Christ.” Both scholars underscore that Paul’s theology was a departure from the teachings directly attributed to Jesus.
3. Hyam Maccoby’s Analysis In “The Mythmaker,” Hyam Maccoby⁵ argues that the author of Acts attempted to downplay the theological differences between Paul and the Jerusalem Church led by James and Peter. Maccoby asserts that, despite these efforts, the New Testament reveals underlying conflicts and divergent viewpoints, particularly regarding adherence to Jewish law and the mission to the Gentiles.

Conclusion

The evidence presented supports the claim that Paul and Jesus’ teachings were not wholly aligned. Paul’s emphasis on faith over law, his mission to the Gentiles, and his admission of deceptive practices all stand in contrast to the teachings and practices of Jesus and his immediate followers. These divergences have been noted by historians, theologians, and scholars, reflecting a broader debate within early Christianity about the nature of Jesus’ message and the appropriate path for his followers. Understanding these differences is crucial for a comprehensive study of Christian origins and the development of Christian doctrine.

Citations for “Historical and Scholarly Perspectives” Section:

1. John S. Spong: Spong, John S. Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism. Harper San Francisco, 1991, p. 104. Spong critically addresses Paul’s writings, highlighting their divergence from what he considers to be the true teachings of Jesus.
2. Thomas Jefferson: Jefferson, Thomas. The Jefferson Bible: The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth. Jefferson’s work attempts to remove the Pauline elements from the New Testament, reflecting his view that Paul’s teachings diverged from Jesus’.
3. Albert Schweitzer: Schweitzer, Albert. The Quest of the Historical Jesus. In his analysis, Schweitzer notes Paul’s lack of reference to Jesus’ teachings, such as parables and the Sermon on the Mount, indicating a theological departure.
4. Wil Durant: Durant, Will. Caesar and Christ: The Story of Civilization. Volume 3, Simon and Schuster, 1944. Durant discusses Paul’s creation of a theology distinct from the teachings of Jesus.
5. Hyam Maccoby: Maccoby, Hyam. The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1986. Maccoby explores the tension between Paul’s teachings and those of the Jerusalem Church, led by James and Peter.
6. Jeremy Bentham: Bentham, Jeremy. Not Paul, but Jesus. Bentham critiques Paul’s influence on Christianity, suggesting that Paul’s teachings significantly altered the original message of Jesus. (Not cited, but worth reading)