Did Saint Paul corrupt Christianity?

Hey all,

I was wondering if anyone could give me a good refutation of the argument that Paul “hijacked” Christianity. Many people use verses from the Pauline letters that seemingly contradict the gospels. Some groups seem adamant the Paul is an antichrist. Does anyone have a straightforward way of refuting this claim?

Thanks,
Potato1237

You should read the end of 2 Peter. St. Peter seems to support his teachings very much so.

ROTFL!!! What specifically, because if they truly believe that then they have the way wrong interpretation of the verses…

Give us the verses so we can examine and discuss them.

Catholic Christianity is based on the teaching of the Apostles, all of them, with Peter at the head. Paul is just one Apostle. Peter and Paul both organized the church of Rome.

For example?

Some groups seem adamant the Paul is an antichrist.

What groups?

Impossible especially when we have the Mass and the Eucharist.

I’ve heard this type of misinformation…especially from the youtube Imam videos. Paul corrupted Christianity. :rolleyes:

MJ

Please give us the verses you are referring to. That way its easier to discuss.

Only people I have ever heard make such a claim are Muslims.

And that is because Paul taught salvation by grace through faith, not keeping Jewish laws. He doesn’t jive well with their works based theology.

They need a fall guy as to why the “people of the book” strayed off and started worshiping what they think is only a man in Jesus Christ.

The answer to the question is NO, Paul was accepted by the Apostles as genuine. Peter was the chief Apostle and he accepted him.

Paul gave up his life for the Lord Jesus Christ. He went from being the hunter to the hunted. Suffered in prison, ultimately beheaded for the faith.

Of all the Apostles, Paul is the one I am most interested in talking to in heaven. He is such a fascinating guy, so articulate and so bold in the Lord.

Potato, if you have any verses they are objecting to from him, present them and let’s discuss.

Thanks…

Potato, tell them to get themselves Bibles with marginal cross-references (sometimes they are at the foot). These aren’t very expensive and are worth the investment.

Every part of the Old and New Testaments is dependent on every other.

The cross-references act as multiple hyperlinks penetrating and interconnecting the entire Bible through and through.

If they subtract from Scriptures for their own “amusement” in their own space, tell them you are entitled to spurn their approach for doing so (last section of Revelation).

What sort of denomination are these individuals from?

Thanks for your answers everyone.

For those who asked for instances in scripture, I have heard people object to Paul calling himself a spiritual father to others because jesus said call no man father. They also claim that Paul is always defending his legitimacy as an apostle in his writings, as if It was called into question.

Here’s something fascinating about Islam’s view of St. Peter. The Shia Muslims believe that Peter was the first “Imam” after Jesus.

Peter’s figure, especially in Shia theology, is important as he is generally regarded as the first Imâm (Leader) after Jesus,[3] and therefore is in accordance with the Christian (specifically the Roman Catholic) view of Peter as the ‘Prince of the Apostles’.

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_in_Islam

MJ

My thought was that maybe some Muslims claim this. I was having a conversation with a Muslim friend and he told me they believe that Christians “corrupted” the Bible. My thought was, that, even if that is true, is that the scriptures were corrupted (I don’t think they were), we still have documents from fairly early on that attests to Jesus’s divinity. I would say that’s much more reliable than the Koran, as it’s closer to the source. I think they have a problem with Paul because of his heavy emphasis on Jesus’s divinity.

In this case, if we reference Galatians 1:11-12, we could argue that Paul himself received the Gospel “from no man.” But what people who dislike Paul don’t reference is his entire point, which is that he was called by God, but that he was accepted by the Apostles (Galatians 2:1-10) who extend him the “right hand of fellowship.” So yes, Paul said to have received the Gospel from no man, but he quickly goes on to explain how he is affirmed by the Apostles. Later, in 2 Peter 3:14-16, Peter, who was one of Jesus’ closest disciples, affirms Paul’s writing as scripture. Furthermore, he notes that “his letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort.”

What is generally understood of your question is that Paul used different language when explaining the teaching of Jesus, because Jesus is not bodily present with Paul. The language is different, but the message is the same: forgiveness of sins through faith. And so, because Jesus was not bodily present with Paul, Paul has much less to say about Jesus ministry, and much more to say about Jesus’ saving work on the cross.

Paul certainly recognized that the saving work was through Jesus Christ. Though I certainly won’t cite all examples, this one from Romans 3:21-22 comes to mind. “But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference” (emphasis added).

So these points aside, let me end with a quick return to my main point, which more aptly covers your question. Paul was not bodily present with Jesus, so he did not share as many stories of Jesus’ life and ministry. Because Luke compiled his Gospel of Jesus while he was on mission with Paul, it’s likely that Paul knew the stories. However, Paul didn’t spend much time with the other Apostles, so he may not have felt the need to spend much time elaborating on Jesus’ life, and more focus on the mission of Christ. There is also a notable lack of stories in the epistles of Peter and of John. Their epistles read much more like Paul’s, than any of the Gospels. However, the central message of Jesus teaching and the central message of Paul’s teaching are the same: that Jesus Christ was crucified for the sins of the world.

To think Paul corrupted Christianity is just wrong.

Well, unfortunately in this crazy world of rejecting the orthodox Teachings of Catholic Bishops, there is pretty much anything under the sun you can imagine.

justgivemethetruth.com/paul_was_a_deceiver.htm

I will admit that some of their arguments seem convincing! Paul had a way of saying a lot of things that could easily be misunderstood! I’ve even considered starting a thread about all the seemingly contradictory statements he made. Of course in good fun. He was truly a great Apostle, working harder than all the rest.

The corruption route fails due to the fact that there are no proofs provided to trace these so called corruptions. No Islamic authority to handle such a thing in the first place.

MJ

That is another argument I have heard about Paul giving contradictory accounts of the same event happening. Do you know what religious group “justgivemetruth.com” is associated with?

I dont. They probably aren’t the only ones. I just don’t have the motivation to search them out… :smiley:

Do you have specifics?

Jewish.
webring.org/l/rd?ring=protorahantipaul;id=4;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ejustgivemethetruth%2Ecom%2F

Edit: Ok, actually I looked more into this ‘sherry shriner’ person and she just seems insane. The website claims to be pro-torah which appears like some kind of radical zionist thing, but I looked up the person ‘‘sherry shriner’’ who’s behind justgivemetruth and she calls herself a prophet, and is into a lot of conspiracies so…just seems kinda cultish and nutty.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.