Jesus and Paul: Similarities and Purported Differences

* An informal essay done for my Introduction to the New Testament class.*

----------------------------------

Jesus and Paul: Similarities and Purported Differences

                The textbook has several handy lists of similarities and differences, which will be the primary reference for this essay (Ehrman 389 and 390). Some of the differences are used to claim that Jesus and Paul advocated different religions. The focus of this essay is not to argue that point, though it will come up a bit. The primary purpose of this essay is to compare and contrast Jesus and his apostle, Paul.

                First, the similarities; these cannot really be refuted, a basic reading of the text (New Testament) will agree with these particular similarities. Both men were born Jewish, and though were Christians, believed they adhered to the Jewish Law all their lives. Both ascribed to an apocalyptic view of faith (that the end would soon come). Jesus and Paul predicted the coming of the Son of Man to judge the world (the textbook specifies their belief as the return of Jesus within the lifetime of Jesus’ disciples; this is not a commonly held belief by Christians today). First Jesus, then Paul, by their actions and their preaching taught that the Law was not salvation (i.e. obeying the Law to the letter will not save a person from hell). Finally, both men taught that faith in God is necessary, and that the Law, stripped down, was summed up by loving your neighbor.

                Now, for the differences (differences highlighted): Jesus taught that the “the coming judge of the Earth is the Son of Man.” Paul taught that the judge was Jesus. This is not a contradiction. While Jesus never directly said “I am the Son of God.” He was approached by several people who called him God, and he did not refute them. He also said, “he that hath seen me [Jesus] hath seen the Father” (John 14:9). By Jesus’ history, he was the “Son of Man” having been born to Mary.

            Jesus taught that “to escape judgment, a person must keep the central teachings of the Law as Jesus himself interpreted them.” Paul taught “to escape judgment, a person must believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus, and not rely on observance of the Law.” Again, this is not a contradiction. Jesus did teach his followers to uphold his version of the Law. “love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself” (Matt. 22:37-39). However, Jesus also said “I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man cometh unto the Father but by me” (John 14:6). This is the same as what Paul taught. Paul taught to believe on the resurrection of Jesus, and the death and resurrection of Jesus was how Jesus offered salvation to the world. One more thing, Paul may not have required strict adherence to Jewish law, but he made it clear that Christians were to act in a way which honors the Lord. The instructions, admonishments, and praise for actions, line up with the Law, it can be inferred that while following the Law is not salvation, it is fine to still follow the Law, and that it likely is a good guideline.

            Jesus taught that “Jesus own importance lies in his proclamation of the coming of the end and in his correct interpretation of the Law.” Paul taught that “Jesus importance lies in his death and resurrection for sins.” This view assumes that Jesus did not believe he was the Son of God, which is not the case. If Jesus importance did lie in “the coming of the end and in his correct interpretation of the Law” why did he assert the need for salvation, through himself? (John 14:6) When the belief is that Jesus knew he was the Son of God and was teaching that Jesus is the only way to God (which seems likely based on Scripture), then Paul’s belief again lines up very well with Jesus teaching.

                Jesus taught that “The end of the age began in the lives of Jesus’ followers, who accepted his teachings and began to implement them in their lives.” Paul taught that “The end of the age began with the defeat of the power of sin at the cross of Jesus.” This can be argued both ways, to the moon and back. This seems almost trifling. Why does the exact beginning of the age really matter? Is not the true issue that Jesus offered salvation to everyone? Even before his death, Jesus was pointing people toward God in the exact same way that people are pointed toward God today. Again, John 14:6, “no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” So, based on that statement, then perhaps the end of the age began when Jesus said that. It is reasonable, however, for Paul to have correlated the death of Jesus with the end of the age. What is the answer? I don’t know, and maybe it isn’t that important?

             So, a lot of the differences between Jesus’ and Paul’s teachings seem to be based on the fact that Paul was teaching afterward. His teachings do not contradict Jesus’ teachings, they simply are based on Paul’s worldview, and since his teachings do not contradict or negate Jesus’ teachings, it is simply inaccurate to say that Paul and Jesus taught different religions. Paul’s beliefs—that Ehrman portrays as much different from Jesus’ beliefs—actually agree with Jesus’ teachings.

* Like with all these essays, any reference to the textbook is from Bart Ehrman's "A Brief Introduction to the New Testament" 3rd Edition

Vicarious Suffering

*Informal essay done for my Intro to the New Testament class.*

-----------------------

Vicarious Suffering

First, what is vicarious suffering? I had never heard of it until I read about it in the textbook. Auburn University provides this definition (as it relates to Jesus’ vicarious suffering): “In one sense the sufferings of Christ were vicarious; they were in man's behalf as are the mother's in behalf of the child. But they were not instead of man. They were in no sense substitutional. Love suffers for its object, and in a sense experiences vicarious sufferings.” So, this definition is almost useless if you have no idea what vicarious means. 

You may have a vague idea about vicarious: it means alive, exciting, like, really feeling life, you know, living in the moment, but usually you talk about someone “living vicariously through another person”...so there is a vague clue, but really, what does it mean? Well, Google to the rescue, right? And now you know my thoughts about the word vicarious. What is the dictionary definition of vicarious? It means: “experienced in the imagination through the feelings or actions of another person.” So, basically, you imagine experiences happening to yourself based on another person’s actual experiences. Like a book or movie that makes you imagine yourself in it. There is, however, a secondary definition: “Acting or serving in place of someone or something else; substituted.” Now, this secondary definition certainly makes a lot more sense than the first one.

Alright, so to sum up vicarious suffering, we would say: that the suffering of Jesus’ (or any other ‘vicarious sufferer’) are in behalf of someone else, the sufferings are not substitutional (even though that definition does say ‘substituted’). 

Jesus’ death to save others was not a new thing. In Jewish history there were several others who died to save others. During the Maccabean Revolt a man sacrificed his life to kill an elephant so that others lived. Other descriptions in the Maccabees describe the torture that Jews went through when they refused to give up their religion. The notion of this suffering for someone else was coined as ‘vicarious suffering’ by Christians.

There have been many, many more ‘vicarious sufferers’ throughout the years of Christianity. There have been countless martyrs, countless abuses toward Christians. The tortures, the deaths, the insults, the snide remarks, the mean glances, the shunnings, the shamings, all these things have Christians endured for their faith, these are vicarious sufferings. Each Christian will vicariously suffer in his own way. I am in no way saying that Jesus’ and the martyrs deserve less credit for their sufferings (God forbid I am faced with what they faced), but the little insults each day, the sidelong glances (America’s way of subtly shaming a Christian, and sometimes it is much more than subtle), to the recently converted Christian in Iran (who literally faces death for her choice), these are all examples of vicarious suffering.

To suffer is natural; the Bible warns Christians that they will suffer for their faith (John 15:20), but not just for their faith, for Jesus. Many Christians face death, the ultimate sacrifice, and are willing to give up their lives for Jesus, on behalf of their fellow Christians. These are the ‘vicarious sufferers.’ May God give strength to them and to the ones he continues to call.

* Like with all these essays, any reference to the textbook is from Bart Ehrman's "A Brief Introduction to the New Testament" 3rd Edition

Suicide

Again, just an informal essay for my Intro to the New Testament Class. I have to say, the class is certainly introducing me to many different viewpoints and views of the New Testament.

------------------------------------

Suicide

Suicide is a tough subject, no matter what your view on the subject, there is no way to soften the topic. Some people believe that anyone who commits suicide is bound for hell. Other people take a gentler approach, and say that suicide does not prevent a person from getting into heaven. Some people even say that the apostle Paul contemplated suicide and since Paul was is such an important Christian figure, and he contemplated it, then it must not be bad.

First, why do people believe that Paul contemplated suicide? Bart Ehrman gives an example from a book written by Arthur Droge and James Tabor to support the idea that Paul was suicidal (Ehrman 245). The idea put forth is quite interesting. Most people equate suicide with depression, hopelessness, anxiety, etc. Hardly anyone thinks that a “happy” person will commit suicide. It appears that there was a Jewish tradition of “self-inflicted death as a gain over present inflictions that should be accepted joyfully” (Ehrman 245). Several examples are then provided. So let’s move on to Paul himself. Paul states in Phil. 1:21 that “to live is Christ and to die is gain.” This is the basis for the “suicidal Paul” argument. Yet another passage that seems to support this idea is Phil. 1:22-24 “ If it is to be life in the flesh, this would be a good work for me, and I do not know which to choose, but I am constrained by the two things, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is much better, but to remain in the flesh is more necessary for your sake.” So was Paul contemplating suicide? Paul did not commit suicide, but it appears he may have been contemplating it. So, if Paul was contemplating suicide, does that mean suicide is not wrong? 

The other group does not believe Paul was suicidal. This group believes that suicide is wrong. Suicide is murder, the Sixth Commandment says “thou shalt not kill” (Ex. 20:13). Paul himself says several things that completely contradict the notion of committing suicide. Phil 4:11 “in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.” This verse conveys an idea that one should be content in their situation, being content in the situation can hardly be described as suicide. 

Yet another reason that it is doubtful that Paul was suicidal is that Christians believe that the primary purpose of man (the reason humans were created) is to glorify God. One of the very best ways to glorify God is to bring others to him, that they may glorify God as well. In cutting off your life, you are cutting off opportunities to glorify God and to bring others to the knowledge of him. This is, essentially, cutting off the relationship with God. Suicide is selfish, it hurts others, suicide is not just something that affects only the individual who does it, and it has widespread ramifications. How can someone think that it is ok for them to decide when they will die? God knows the proper time for a person to die, Psalm 139:16 “Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.” A person who commits suicide is going against God’s will for their life. If they hadn’t decided their time to die, then they would have lived longer. 

Finally, it actually is likely that Paul craved heaven. It is only natural for a Christian to want to get past these tough, stressful, hard days of earthly life to get to that wonderful final reward, eternity with God. If heaven weren’t something to be desired, then there would be no need for it. Christians live as if they are citizens from a foreign land, their true home is elsewhere, heaven (1 Pet. 2:11-12). Christians look forward to eternity, but they don’t cut off their earthly life for it, in fact, a lot of Christians believe suicide will condemn a soul to hell. Living out life here, in the best way possible, doing their best to glorify God, makes the “prize” of heaven worth it. In 2 Timothy, life is compared to a race, with heaven as the prize. In order to get the reward, the work must be done for it. The verses Paul wrote about looking forward to heaven are an introduction to how wonderful heaven will be.

In conclusion, I don’t believe that Paul was suicidal. What I do believe is that he craved heaven and the intimacy with God that comes with it. He may have longed for heaven (I believe he did, as all Christians should), but did not actually consider suicide. Suicide is a selfish action, one that takes away from our purpose here on earth, and that makes it a sin.

* Like with all these essays, any reference to the textbook is from Bart Ehrman's "A Brief Introduction to the New Testament" 3rd Edition