What do we say to people who try to pit Jesus against Paul?

I posted a sermon by Dr. Voddie Baucham on Facebook yesterday, and I got attacked by one of my brother's friends who used to be in youth group with me. His beliefs have obviously trended away from orthodox Christianity. Aside from taking some of Jesus' words out of context and parroting some of the popular beliefs of today's leftists, he put this out there:

"I encourage you to re-read the gospels only focusing on the red letters, and skipping Paul’s 'additions' to Christianity.
I think you’ll find a social justice is the core of Jesus’s message. I did when I did this experiment.
What this man is 'preaching' is capitalism disguised as Christianity. That’s gross."

Have any of you come up against this idea that Paul added to Christianity things that Jesus wouldn't agree with? I've heard of the so-called "Red Letter Christians," but I've never actually known one personally until now. What do you present to them to show them that Paul's writings (as well as those of the rest of the New Testament writers) are of God just as the Gospels are?

The funny thing is, this fellow openly accused me (or at least Dr. Baucham) of picking and choosing what we liked from the Bible…only to encourage me to pick and choose only the parts of the Bible that he likes.

And for those of you who haven't stopped reading…how the heck do I approach stuff like this without feeling like I'm going to faint? Whenever I get pushback to something religious I post online, I suddenly get weak and tingly, similar to how I feel when I don't eat lunch early enough sometimes. It's anxiety manifesting as a physical feeling, I think. I get it whenever I read feedback to a short story I've written, too. Oh, for the confidence of someone like William Lane Craig, so that interacting with differing beliefs wouldn't make my body feel like it's falling apart!

Well, the Apostles gave Paul their seal of approval in Acts. If I recall, they were there when those "red letters" were spoken.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 comes to mind.

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Of course, those are the word of Paul. So your friend may dismiss them. I guess it comes down to whether you accept all the writings of the New Testament as canon scripture. If he doesn't, you have very little common frame of reference for a meaningful conversation and it may not be worth bothering.

AdamCollings wrote:I guess it comes down to whether you accept all the writings of the New Testament as canon scripture. If he doesn't, you have very little common frame of reference for a meaningful conversation and it may not be worth bothering.

YEs, this may be a "do not cast your pearls before swine" situation.

jorowi wrote:

AdamCollings wrote:I guess it comes down to whether you accept all the writings of the New Testament as canon scripture. If he doesn't, you have very little common frame of reference for a meaningful conversation and it may not be worth bothering.

YEs, this may be a "do not cast your pearls before swine" situation.

I'm trying to keep that in mind. Also trying to determine which of these applies:

"Answer not a fool according to his folly,
lest you be like him yourself.
Answer a fool according to his folly,
lest he be wise in his own eyes."

Regarding your specific situation, he may not be in a place to hear truth. So I'd agree with the Pearls/Swine reference as worth considering. It's why I have Matthew 7:6 & 10:14 taped to the wall over my computer monitor.

As for the issue itself, it's worth noting that ancient Greek did not have quotation marks, AND Jesus was not speaking Greek. So the "red letter" words are actually translations of (likely very accurate) paraphrasing of what Jesus said. NOT actually his words. They are accurate transmissions of the meaning/intent of what he said and taught. But not strictly accurate quotations. That just wasn't a thing writers did back then. So getting fixated on only the red letters does not make the best sense. The non-red letters in the gospels are just as inspired by the Holy Spirit. (And for those who don't believe in inspiration, it can still be said they are equally reliable records of the life and teaching of Jesus.)

I've also actually been thinking about this lately because of a personal study/meditation I'm doing related to questioning the inspiration of Paul's writing.
Here are some notes I've put together so far:

Because the Gospels are reliable concerning Jesus' life events/teaching, and because Jesus was raised, his claims are validated, including:

(John 14:26, ESV) But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

This does not state it overtly, but provides basis for inspiration of other epistles.

As one who was given this promise of clear memory of Jesus' teaching, and the promise to be taught by the Spirit, Peter said that Paul's letters were "scripture":

(2 Peter 3:15-16, ESV) 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.

Given Jesus' promise, Peter would have to have been lying to call Paul's letters scripture if they were not. (That, or Jesus' promise would seem to have failed to come true, for Paul to make so gross an error despite being instructed by The Holy Spirit.) Lying about this would have been greatly out of character and would only have brought harm and not advantage of any kind. Therefore it is most reasonable to conclude that Paul's letters are scripture, and therefore the inspired words of the Holy Spirit.


As for the anxiety you feel in these kinds of situation, I can relate. And since you bring up Craig I'll pass along what I've heard him say. He doesn't get nervous in debates because he has just plain researched the arguments into the ground. He has put in the time and gained such familiarity with these questions and objections, that he sees how obviously weak they are.

The longer I've been answering the same kinds of objections and criticisms myself (thanks, youtube!), the more I likewise have become comfortable with hearing and responding to them. Each time I've received objections, I've revisited the issues, checking my facts, only to see, again and again, that the objections are groundless. In fact with some objections, I don't even go through that process every time anymore, because I've just become so familiar with the weakness of them.

One more element that has been helpful to me is recognizing the signs of someone who is caught up in some kind of sin that is affecting their beliefs. Signs of pride, or anger, or hurt. The more I see those kinds of "emotional tells" in their writing(or in their life, if I know them away from the keyboard), the more quickly my mind is able to go to a place where I can say and genuinely feel, "Oh, this isn't about me or even the facts. This is about something they have gone through or are going through now." Then my tension begins to dissolve (not always completely) and I start thinking more clearly and tactically about how I can meet this person where they are at with the right combination of grace and truth.

Tough stuff, man! I will pray for you as you navigate the facts, your feelings and the feelings of those you're interacting with!

Thank you all for your input. As an update, I decided (after prayer) to continue the conversation, but not in the way I would have instinctively done. I quoted Galatians 3 to confirm that my friend and I agree that racism is bad, but then I said that the Dr. Baucham's sermon could speak for itself regarding the issues my friend raised. I did take the liberty of expounding on a verse my friend took out of context, explaining the what Jesus meant when he said that it will be difficult for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God. Finally, I ended by explicitly asking whether my friend believed in Jesus Christ as the true Son of God.

His response actually surprised me, because I was expecting vitriol. But he said that he has "more doubt than faith" because he's read the New Testament in Greek and thinks that the church has been teaching it incorrectly. So he didn't give me a straight yes or no, but with that much doubt about the trustworthiness of the Scriptures, I think it's probably a no. And then he got into politics again, which I'm kind of trying to steer things away from.

So I responded this morning (I leave long gaps between reading and responding when challenged on social media) and kindly asked for some examples of what he thinks is in conflict between the Greek text and what it taught today. I haven't braved reading the response yet.

All that to say that the conversation seems to have gotten away from the reliability of Paul, but I suspect it will come up again if we continue long enough.

I was also greatly blessed to get a private message this morning from another friend from youth group who currently lives and works in South Korea. He'd read what our conversation and encouraged me to keep up the good fight and keep listening to godly voices who will build my faith. It's been a while since a friend has reached out to me at such a perfect time, so I'm riding high on thankfulness right now.

Thanks for the update, Reed!

You might find reasonablefaith.org to be a useful resource, though it sounds like you're already familiar with Craig. I mention him because he argues chiefly for "Mere Christianity" in his debates with non-theists. (The essential core of the Christian faith, not the numerous other issues Christians disagree on.) His arguments for the resurrection of Jesus and his validation as the unique Son of God do not depend on the inerrancy of the New Testament. So even if your friend can only look at the NT as man-made documents that are even unreliable in a number of places, Craig's arguments still hold. Gary Habermas is another name that even MORE so provides great arguments from the facts the even the most critical and liberal scholars agree to be true.

Thank you, Paeter. That's the kind of stuff I'll go for if necessary. Right now, I'm just asking questions, trying to draw out the root of his problems and get him to hopefully second guess himself.

Turns out he's not a "Red Letter Christian" after all. He's basically agnostic. He thinks Jesus was a good teacher like Socrates, but not God. Right now, I'm kind of just asking for a bunch of objections he has. This is partially just so I know what arguments are out there. I've never really interacted with an unbeliever's evidence like this before, so I'm going slowly, trying to learn what I'm up against.

My plan is to ask him how he knows what's good and what's bad. Then I'll probably have to ask wiser people how to think through whatever he says.

AGoodReed wrote: Right now, I'm just asking questions, trying to draw out the root of his problems and get him to hopefully second guess himself.

Using questions is such a good idea. People generally like to talk more than listen, it shows him you're interested in him, and it also requires him to think about and clarify what he believes and why.

If you haven't yet, you might consider including some "life-experience" questions along with straight "belief-content" questions. In other words, asking about experiences he had that led to his current thinking, asking about how those experiences felt, and sympathizing with those feelings where you can.

Please let us know if we can be praying for you or help in any other way! Thanks for sharing this with us Reed!

Paeter wrote:Please let us know if we can be praying for you or help in any other way! Thanks for sharing this with us Reed!

Pray for wisdom. After my first response (where I put Jesus' words about the rich young ruler in context), I haven't done anything except ask questions. I could probably keep doing that until he got sick of me or said something that gave one of us an epiphany. I just want to know if or when I'm supposed to switch to presenting things instead of asking.

It's tough because he's obviously more well-studied in academics than me, or he seems to be. He did a study abroad at either Cambridge or Oxford (I forget which). He was a Rhodes Scholar. He has a philosophy degree. Even if I go and find scholarly answers to his scholarly objections, I'm sure I'm very low on the intellectual totem pole to him, so I'll just get the "You don't understand, simple man" treatment.

Like, here's an excerpt from his response to when I asked where Jesus differs from Paul:

"[S]o it’s not so much looking at it as 'teachings' as looking at the gospels and the letters of Paul as two separate text written at different times for different reasons. Textual analysis.
"Basically by all accounts it seems Jesus was a Jewish radical zealot who was preaching a fundamental re-imagining of Jewish society, largely focused on religious politics of the time between Pharisees and Sadducees, while Paul’s project is welcoming everyone including Greeks, into this new thing called the Church which it doesn’t seem Jesus knew about."

Like, I know that's bunk, but I don't think me challenging it directly will do anything but waste time.

I kind of wish I could pass him off to someone like James R. White, an accomplished scholar and debater who has pretty much memorized the New Testament in Greek and geeks out over the Textus Receptus.

I'm currently formulating the wording of my next question, which I think should be, "What do you think about the numerous people who have read the NT in Greek and come away with even more faith? Martin Luther, for instance, said that if he hadn't even read the original languages, he would have remained a monk under the oppressive Catholicism of the time. Reading and studying the Greek seems to make scholars like James White even more reformed. Why do you think it strengthened them while it gave you such doubt?" And then I hope to pursue the questions of where ultimate truth comes from and how we know what is good.

So pray for wisdom.

Will do! I don't think you need to feel burdened, just available. But yeah, knowing when to continue, or how, or when to keep silent or be done is a huge challenge. Praying for you.

BTW, William Lane Craig's discipline is philosophy, so if you wanted to recommend a respectable, academically credentialed thinker for him to compare his thoughts to, I don't think you could do much better.