What about Paul?

The apostle Paul has to be the most misunderstood figure in the Bible.  Either that or he was a hypocrite.   Please allow me to explain.

Most of you reading this will already know that I am a huge proponent of being obedient to the Almighty's commandments.   In nearly every conversation I have with those who disagree, they will always refute the teachings of Jesus using the words of Paul.

Why does Jesus teach one thing and Paul another?  They don't.  Please indulge me for a moment.

For example, Jesus tells us to practice and teach all of Father's commandments:

19 Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commands and teaches people to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5)

 Later in Acts 9 we see Jesus pick the disciple named Ananias to heal Paul's blindness:

10 There was a disciple in Damascus named Ananias. And the Lord said to him in a vision, “Ananias!”   

“Here I am, Lord!” he said.

11 “Get up and go to the street called Straight,” the Lord said to him, “to the house of Judas, and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, since he is praying there. 12 In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias coming in and placing his hands on him so he can regain his sight.”

In Acts 22 we see this disciple described by Paul as being a devout man according to the law:

12 Someone named Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good reputation with all the Jews residing there, 13 came and stood by me and said, ‘Brother Saul, regain your sight.’ And in that very hour I looked up and saw him.

Earlier we see Jesus teach that whoever practices and teaches Father's commands will be great in the kingdom of heaven.  Now AFTER the resurrection we see Jesus personally choose a disciple that is a devout man according to the law as his disciple to heal Paul.

Let that sink in.  If Jesus's feelings on the law changed at the resurrection then why did he choose a devout keeper of the law to heal Paul?

Now let's have a look at how Paul behaved:

On one occasion upon his return to Jerusalem, Paul learns there is a rumor that he has been teaching the Jews to stop following Father's commands that came through Moses:

20 When they heard it, they glorified God and said, “You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law. 21 But they have been told about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to abandon Moses, by telling them not to circumcise their children or to walk in our customs. (Acts 21)

So there were thousands of BELIEVING Jews who are ZEALOUS FOR THE LAW.  They heard a rumor that Paul was teaching against such obedience.  What do the believing brothers recommend Paul to do?

22 So what is to be done? They will certainly hear that you’ve come. 23 Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have obligated themselves with a vow. 24 Take these men, purify yourself along with them, and pay for them to get their heads shaved. Then everyone will know that what they were told about you amounts to nothing, but that you yourself are also careful about observing the law.

The brothers recommend to Paul to participate in a Nazirite vow in order to prove that he is also CAREFUL ABOUT OBSERVING THE LAW.   If you aren't familiar with this vow, see Numbers 6.

Does Paul oblige?  Yes, he does!

26 Then the next day, Paul took the men, having purified himself along with them, and entered the temple, announcing the completion of the purification days when the offering for each of them would be made.

 Paul participates in the Nazirite vow to prove he is careful about observing the law. 

In this incident alone we see thousands of believing Jews are still zealous for the Law.  We see the believing brothers tell Paul to complete the vow in order to disprove the rumor and show that he is observing the Law.  Ultimately we see Paul do the vow surely for the same reason.

Quickly, here are a few more examples:  (Click on the Bible references to open them in a new window)

In Acts 23:1-5 Paul faults a member of the Sanhedrin for violating the law.  Upon learning he's the High Priest, Paul backs down according to Father's law of Exodus 22:28.

Immediately following in verses 6-9 Paul is still calling himself a Pharisee.  Also it's quite interesting to note that the scribes of the Pharisees defend Paul finding no fault with him.  If Paul was teaching the people to disregard Father's commandments given through Moses they would certainly find fault with that!

What had Paul done or said that the unbelieving Jews found fault with?  Paul tells us in Acts 23:6 and Acts 24:12-21.  He is in trouble for preaching the resurrection of the dead!   See also Acts 26:8.

Paul goes on to say that he hasn't done anything against the "law of the Jews"( Acts 25:7-8 ) or the "customs of our ancestors" (Acts 28:17-18).

Paul adds that he was seized because he went to the Gentiles teaching them to repent and do works worthy of repentance:  Acts 26:20-22. 

Please pay close attention to that last verse (22) where Paul says:

To this very day, I have obtained help that comes from God, and I stand and testify to both small and great, saying nothing else than what the prophets and Moses said would take place—

Please don't gloss over that.  Paul testifies that he has said nothing other than what the prophets and Moses said would take place!   In other words, if we believe Paul taught anything other than what is found in the Old Testament then we are in ERROR!

What about Paul's writings you say?  Let us recap before we continue.

1. Jesus obeyed the Law and taught others to do the same.
2. Jesus picked a man to heal Paul who was devout according to the Law.
3. Thousands of believing Jews, who were zealous for the Law, were troubled by the false rumor that Paul was teaching Jews to abandon the Law.
4. The believing brothers told Paul to participate in a Numbers 6 Nazirite vow to prove his dedication to obeying the Law.
5. Paul proves his dedication to the Law by completing the vow.
6. Paul submits to the High Priest according to the Law.
7. The scribes of the Pharisees defend Paul as they find no fault with him.
8. Paul says he hasn't done anything contrary to the law of the Jews or the customs of their ancestors.
9. Paul states that he is detained because of preaching the resurrection and teaching Gentiles to repent and perform works worthy of repentance.  
10. Paul exclaims that he has taught nothing other than what the Old Testament Prophets and the Books of Moses said would take place.

As I stated originally, people often refute the teachings of Jesus by quoting the writings attributed to Paul.  They do this while completely ignoring all of his actions described in the Book of Acts! 

Indeed, if I were to take books such as Romans or Galatians outside the context of the rest of the Bible, I would probably be of the opinion that the bulk of Churchianity is under today.  

So how can Paul's writings say one thing and his actions another?  Is he a hypocrite?  After all, Paul continued to identify as a Pharisee and Jesus regularly faulted them for being hypocrites.  See Matthew 6, 15, 23 and Luke 12 & 13.  

No.  I don't believe Paul was a hypocrite.  As I said before, I believe he is misunderstood.  How can there be such a huge misunderstanding?  That answer lies in 2 Peter 3:

15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.  16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
17 Therefore, dear friends, since you have been forewarned, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of the lawless and fall from your secure position.

Peter warns that Paul's letters contain things that are hard to understand.  He adds that ignorant and unstable people distort the meaning of these writings.  We are warned not to be carried away by the "error of the lawless".

This isn't that hard to believe when we remember that even back in Acts 21 above there were misunderstandings and/or distortions about what Paul was teaching.

I would very much like to have the originals of Paul's letters and be versed in the language he was using.  As for now, 1900+ years later, all we have are translations of copies of translations, etc.

In conclusion my position is that I don't want to succumb to the error of the lawless by following distortions of the teachings of Paul.  Instead, I choose to learn to practice the same law that he went out of his way to practice and that Jesus commanded us to practice.  If we claim that Paul taught contrary to his actions then he was a hypocrite.   Why would you follow a hypocrite?

My Master, the Messiah, wouldn't choose a hypocrite for such a noble task.

I encourage you to leave behind the lawless teachings of the ignorant and unstable.  Instead I hope you will walk as Paul walked.....as Ananias walked......as thousands of believing brothers walked......and ultimately as Jesus walked.