# Jesus vs. Paul



## DMcFadden (Oct 7, 2007)

I know this is probably old news to some of you lifers, but I was somewhat taken aback this morning by reading a progressive American Baptist dismiss Calvinism thusly: "Calvinism always runs to Paul and others to prop up the theory. But, Jesus just won't get with the Calvinistic program so, he gets ignored."

I have my own set of replies to the slam. How would some of the rest of your respond?


----------



## Devin (Oct 7, 2007)

1. Jesus never said anything about bestiality...so... "All these anti-bestiality apologists can only rely on Moses...They ignore Jesus!"

2. Paul's letters are the inspired word of God. Jesus is God. Done.


----------



## Greg (Oct 7, 2007)

DMcFadden said:


> But, Jesus just won't get with the Calvinistic program so, he gets ignored."



"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him...And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father." -John 6:45, 65

"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." -John 3:3

"I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. Yours they were, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word. Now they know that everything that you have given me is from you. For I have given them the words that you gave me, and they have received them and have come to know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me. I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours. All mine are yours, and yours are mine, and I am glorified in them." -John 17:6-10

Jesus won't "get the Calvinistic program", huh? 



> Calvinism always runs to Paul and others to prop up the theory.



Unless they hold to the view that Paul's writings are uninspired of God and run contradictory to the rest of Scripture, I don't see their point. Prior to Jesus' departure He said:

"I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you." -John 16:12-15

Here's the basis for Paul's (as well as the other Apostles) Apostolic authority. What he, and the other Apostles taught, did not originate from their own imaginings nor from their own agenda contrary to Christ's.

What Paul taught was in complete accord with what Christ taught...and with what was given by God since Genesis 1:1, as has already been noted. Jesus was quite "with the Calvinistic program".


----------



## RamistThomist (Oct 7, 2007)

DMcFadden said:


> I know this is probably old news to some of you lifers, but I was somewhat taken aback this morning by reading a progressive American Baptist dismiss Calvinism thusly: "Calvinism always runs to Paul and others to prop up the theory. But, Jesus just won't get with the Calvinistic program so, he gets ignored."
> 
> I have my own set of replies to the slam. How would some of the rest of your respond?



I would ask: Is Scripture divided? Unless he is a liberal (moderate), case closed.


----------



## DMcFadden (Oct 7, 2007)

Brad concludes, "Unless he is a liberal (moderate), case closed."

Yes, he is a self-identified "moderate" clergyman who migrated from the SBC to the ABC and stands four-square against people like Mohler. After serving on the national governing board of the ABCUSA, he employs "soul liberty," absolute and unfettered anti-"creedalism," and the freedom to believe whatever you want as the essence of the Baptist approach to church. After a lifetime among the mainlines, even I was taken aback by the crude reductionism of "Jesus vs. Paul." It must be a pretty sentimentalized gloss on the life of Jesus to come up with that one. However, his comments were sadly typical of the arguments against Reformed thinking being raised by this man and a few of his colleagues in ministry.


----------



## Bandguy (Oct 7, 2007)

I am sorry to say that he is probably caught up in the so called Red Lettered "Christian" heresy of people like Campolo. They basically deny the following:

1. All Scripture is inerrant and infallible
2. Jesus is God, and therefore, there is no conflict between Jesus and Paul since he inspired all of it.

It is a sad state of affairs, but it is the way of the liberal (I don't believe there is such a thing as moderate anymore) church. We should pray for them.


----------



## DMcFadden (Oct 8, 2007)

Campolo, the doyen of "cutting edge, prophetic" "evangelicalism" has stirred up much mischief through his imprecise, inexact, and over-the-top rhetoric that works better in warming up a crowd than satisfying the careful demands of written communication. More than once he has had to backpeddle from a statement that sounded so "cool" to his audience but so wrong in written form. 

This latest "Red Letter Christians" campaign nonsense is what you call it: heresy. Lately he has served as a bridge between mainline Christianity and the emergent church movement. People like MacLaren share with Campolo a perverse enjoyment in shocking people and seem to revel in the experience of precipitating anger in an audience. I still remember when Tony used profanity in a sermon (for effect). Then he announced with a withering disdain, "You are probably more offended by my use of the word "*%&*" than about the children who died of hunger tonight." Can anyone say "showboat"???


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Oct 8, 2007)

Read Machen, The Origin of Paul's Religion. He answered the Jesus vs. Paul question almost 90 years ago.


----------



## Dieter Schneider (Oct 9, 2007)

DMcFadden said:


> I know this is probably old news to some of you lifers, but I was somewhat taken aback this morning by reading a progressive American Baptist dismiss Calvinism thusly: "Calvinism always runs to Paul and others to prop up the theory. But, Jesus just won't get with the Calvinistic program so, he gets ignored."
> 
> I have my own set of replies to the slam. How would some of the rest of your respond?



Well - there really is nothing new under the sun. Check The Origin of Paul's Religion by J. Gresham Machen  or here


----------



## A5pointer (Oct 9, 2007)

How anyone can interperet John's recording of Jesus discourses and not see Jesus as all about the "divine prerogative" is beyoond me.


----------

