THE ROLE OF ST. PAUL IN FORMULATING

MODERN CHRISTIANITY DOCTRINES

 

·        Not to Abolish the Law

·        Innovations

·        Mother and Child

·        Law Abolished

·        James Rebukes Paul

·        The New Testament

·        CONCLUSION

 How can one account for the difference between Christianity as preached by Jesus and Modern Christian doctrines. This can only be answered by knowing the influence of St. Paul on modern Christian doctrines.

 St. Paul, whose real name was Saul, is one of those who leave an indelible mark on the pages of history. In whatever from they appear on the stage of the word, they always play a leading role. Through his inconsistent and contradictory actions, Saul became an enigma for the world of religion-a fact that leaves the thinker’s mind greatly perplexed.

 In the beginning Saul appears before us in the ugly role of a blood-thirsty persecutor and a firebrand lieutenant of the High Priest chasing and hunting the small group of humble people who had accepted Jesus, son of Mary as their Promised Messiah. But a little later we see him being himself hunted and persecuted by his former friends, the tyrannical Jews. When a Pharisee, he proved himself a thorn in the side of the early Christians and we see him standing self-assured in the crowd that witnessed the martyrdom of St. Stephen. But a few years later, he himself is slain for championing the cause of Christianity. When brought before King Agrippa we see him pleading for himself in a masterly manner and Pharisee-a very conservative sect that firmly believed in the Commandment-, “You shall have no other god before Me.” But only a little later, we find him concocting a theory diametrically opposed to the idea of one God. Although Jesus had repeatedly called himself ‘son of man’, yet Paul insisted on making him a deity not only equal in rank with the Creator but co- substantial with Him.

 The New Testament provides us with abundant proofs of the high-handed conduct of Paul in propagating the new faith. Having met with little success among the Jews, he turned towards the Gentiles. In order to entice them, he thought it expedient to recast the whole structure of the Christian faith. He introduced so many changes that his faith acquired a great resemblance to pagan conceptions. Through arbitrary innovations, he made many things lawful which were absolutely unlawful according to the law of Moses. He even mutilated the basic tenet of the law-Unity of God.

 Not to Abolish the Law

 Jesus had clearly told his disciples that he was not sent to change the law of Moses:

“Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them. For truly I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxed one of the least of the commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven ; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called greater in the kingdom of heaven.”     [Matthew 5:17-19]

 We also have the testimony from Luke:

“It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, but my words will not pass away.”    [Luke 16:17]

This statement is again corroborated by Mark in [13:31]. But in spite of this positive and awe-inspiring command of his master, Paul without the least hesitation, announced that the law was superfluous and redundant and assuming the role of lawgiver, he declared:

“I do not nullify the Grace of God; for if justification were through the law Christ died to no purpose.”   [Galatians 2:21]

And again he reiterates:

“Therefore by works of law no flesh will be declared righteous before him, for by law is the accurate knowledge of sin”    [Romans 3:20]

Now the question a rises: How did Paul manage to gain ascendancy over the Church and succeed in implanting innovations completely at variance with the original teachings of Jesus Christ?

The question is not difficult to answer. Paul came from an affluent and respectable family. His father had acquired Roman nationality. This fact alone guarantees that his family wielded considerable influence in the upper Roman society and the official circle. He performed self-appointed tasks. He was a native of Sarsus and belonged to the Pharisees-a sect known to hold bigoted views. Having learnt about Jesus and his claim, he came down to Jerusalem to lend aid to the High Priest and the elders in persecuting the followers of the new prophet.

“But Saul laid waste the Church, and entering house after house, he charged off men and women and committed them to prison.”     [Acts 8:3]

During the entire period of the ministry of Jesus, Saul remained in the forefront of the persecutors. He had never met or even seen Jesus. The only time he saw him, was as claimed by him, only in a vision he had when he was going to Damascus on his mission of persecuting the followers of Jesus. He claimed, he saw a dazzling light and heard a voice saying, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?”

Paul’s claim to apostleship is based on this vision. According to him, Jesus choose him as his instrument for carrying his teachings to the Gentiles as well as the Jews. This is the only evidence Saul could produce for his bid for the leadership of the new Church. No wonder the Jews were highly skeptical about the whole claim and would not listen to him.

It is an undisputed fact of history that Paul simply refused to derive any benefit from the easily available opportunity of guidance from those who had been very near and dear to Jesus. Because he could not suffer himself to play the second fiddle, he assumed leadership of the Church through sheer force of his personality.

It is indeed very strange that during his ministry while Jesus was living among his disciples in Palestine, he taught them that the law of Moses was no case to be abolished. He thoroughly engraved upon their minds that they were not to take his teachings to Gentiles.

“Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel”.    [Matthew 10:5-6]

And Jesus reiterates:

“I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel”.    [Matthew 15:24]

Yet within a very short time after the crucifixion he appears, in a vision to abrogate his previous teachings. It is strange indeed that he does not appear to his own trained and tried disciples but chooses a person who was one of his bitterest enemies and completely neglects his devoted friends and followers.

As instructed in this famous vision, Saul went to Damascus where Ananias, a devoted disciple, opened his eyes fully to the truth. Having accepted Jesus, Saul lost no time in assuming the role of the leader. The Jews in Damascus were anxiously awaiting the arrival of the party, led by Saul, for arresting the renegades for persecution. They were flabbergasted to see their young leader not only advocating the cause of Christians but actually exhorting them to accept Jesus, who they believed died an accursed death on the cross. They were extremely disappointed and very much annoyed at this strange behavior of their champion. In vengeance they dubbed him a turncoat and conspired to kill him. But Saul’s companions got wind of their evil intentions and at night let him down in a basket through an opening in the wall.

After this narrow escape, he was forced to go into hiding.

 “I did not go at once”. Said Paul,

“Into conference with flesh and blood. Neither did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles previous to me but I went off into Arabia, and I came back again to Damascus”.    [Galatians 1:16-17]

In the solitude of the Arabian desert he sized up his position and racked his brains for the line of action to use in the future. He fully realized that very few Jews would, after having witnessed the crucifixion, accept Christ as a godly person. It would, therefore, be necessary to think of something else. “If the Jews”, thought Saul, “were inaccessible, the Gentiles would be easy to handle. But to attract the Gentiles, some sort of modifications would be absolutely necessary”. Bearing these considerations in mind, he returned to Damascus where he worked for some time and then went to Jerusalem. He stayed with Cephas for a fortnight.

“But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother”.   [Galatians 1:19]

Innovations

It is evident that Paul was not at all keen to see the other disciples and the appointed apostles of Jesus. This is rather strange and unnatural. It would have been a normal behavior if he had shown eagerness to see and meet those who had lived with Jesus and had been taught and trained by him. But this evasion was not without purpose. In the solitude of the Arabian desert, he had marked out a course of action for himself in which he would not accept any interference or advice. Had he discussed this matter with the apostles or taken any of them into his confidence, it would mean a definite setback to his scheme of preaching a modified religion to the Gentiles. The apostles would have very strongly opposed the whole idea, and would have denounced the whole idea as an abomination. There is ample proof provided by the New Testament that the Disciples and the earliest followers of Jesus abhorred the innovations of Paul. They were deadly against the emancipation granted arbitrarily by him.

And certain men came down from Judea and began to teach the brothers, “Unless you get circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved”    [Acts 15:1]

This caused no little dissension and Paul and Barnabas vehemently disputed the preaching of these men who, apparently had been sent by James, the head of the church at Jerusalem. Consequently, a deputation which included Paul, Barnabas and some other went to Jerusalem to thrash out these matters. On their way, this deputation stopped at various places and related in detail the conversion of the Gentiles to the congregations. Through his fiery speeches, Paul enlisted support of these congregations who were extremely pleased at the news that the Greeks, the Romans and other nations were accepting the new faith in great numbers. When this deputation at last reached Jerusalem, the elders of the Church received them with great enthusiasm.

James, the head of the earliest Church in Christianity and who was also the younger brother of Jesus, had called a meeting of the elders of the church to discuss the innovations of Paul and his companions. We must remember that in this congregation though the elders and the disciples living in Jerusalem were in the majority, yet they found themselves utterly helpless before the onslaught of the fiery speeches and arguments of Paul and his companions. The apostles and the disciples were, almost all of them, from poor families and, therefore, illiterate or semiliterate. They were no match to Paul and his companions who belonged to the upper class of society and were highly educated. Paul, an extrovert, was not only a man of great influence but gifted orator and skilful debater. He also had the support of clever companions. Through tactful handling and ingenious reasoning they gained the sympathy of their listeners and won their admiration. It was in such an atmosphere that James the brother of Jesus had give his ruling. He had to be judicious. He stood up and said:

“Therefore, my judgement is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, but should write to them to abstain from the pollution of idols and from unchastity and from what is strangled and from blood. For from early generations Moses has had in every city those who preach him for he is read every Sabbath in the synogogues”    [Acts 15:19-21]

The above ruling proves that James succumbed to the general consensus and granted a limited concession in respect of circumcision to the Gentiles only. This ruling was not a charter of general liberties with the law of Moses. On the contrary he advised that Law of Moses was being read and explained in all the synagogues every week. The details of the law could easily be learnt there. But Paul and his companions took all sorts of liberties. Adopting the role of a law-giving prophet he abrogated the law.

“In reality” said Paul, “the law produces wrath, but where there is no law, neither is there any transgression”.    [Romans 4:15]

The abrogation of the law of Moses in the Christian Church has been a gradual process. In the beginning Paul started with a few innovations. Later the Gentile element kept on tampering with the books and introducing new ideas so that Christianity was radically changed from Judaism. Innovations introduced by Paul were simply to entice the Gentiles. He started with canceling the law of circumcision. But one wrong step led to the next inequity and ultimately it ended into a faith which more resembled pagan beliefs than the revealed teachings of Moses and the later prophets including Jesus, son of Mary.

The very first commandment said, “You shall have no other gods before Me”. But we all know that the Christian Church believes in two more gods besides the Creator of the universe. Paul had to incorporate the idea of ‘Trinity’ into his teachings as all the known religions of his time believed in three gods. The cult of ‘Trinity’ outside Judaism, was an established fact. The oldest known cult was the one started by Nimrod, the son of Cush. He is reported to have married his own mother Semiramis. Thus, it was Nimrod who was probably the first human being to be deified along with his mother-wife Queen Semiramis. His evil act of marrying his own mother was made into a mystery as he was the husband and the son of his own wife as well as he was his own father and his own son. His name means, “he rebelled”.

Mother and Child

Nimrod, the mighty hunter as he is called in the Bible, died young and his mother-wife Semiramis was accepted as the head of this apostate cult and she made it known that Nimrod had survived as a spirit being and claimed that a full grown tree had sprung up overnight from the trunk of an old dried tree in front of her palace. This she claimed was the symbol of springing forth into new life of the dead Nimrod. Her status was later raised to the “Queen of Heaven”. Nimrod also, therefore, became the “divine son of Heaven” as he was also supposed to be the son of Baal, the Sun-god. Thus, the “Mother and Child” became chief objects of worship. From Babylon this worship spread to other places, but the idea of ‘Trinity’ first appeared. This Trinity consisted of Baal, the Sun-god as father, Semiramis, the Queen mother and Nimrod, the divine child. A day was set aside to rejoice over and to celebrate the re-birth of the young god. As true imitators, the Christians also adopted the same days for their Christmas celebrations.

The worship of “mother and child” was also prevailing at the time of Jesus Christ. In Western Asia, the god Attis was worshipped as the child of miracle, born to a virgin mother Nana. He was a shepherd and the beloved of Cybele, the mother of gods. Some held that Attis was her son. He was killed in the prime of his youth by a wild bear. Some other say that he castrated himself under a pine tree and bled to death. A similar story is told about Cybele and Deoius, or maybe Attis was also known as Deoius. In Egypt, we have again the same belief with a change of names. There Isis and Osiris were worshipped as “Mother and Child”. According to the myth, Osiris was an offspring of an intrigue between the earth-god and the sky-goddess Nut. Her husband the sun-god Ra, laid a curse that she should be delivered of child in no month and no year of the calendar. But another of her lovers, Toth by name, had, in a game of draughts, won from the moon a seventy-second part of each day. These were added to the Egyptian year of 360 days. On the first of these five days was born Osiris ; on the second day Horus; Set was born on the third day; goddess Isis on the fourth day and the goddess Nephthys on the fifth. Set married his sister Nephthys and Isis was married to Osiris.

In ancient art, Isis is also shown suckling the infant Horus and in the annual festivals her image as ‘Mother of god’ was taken out with great pomp and shoo. In these processions are shown scantily covered and shaven priests; homage and devotion are expressed by them and the common man, the accompanying music and the jeweled images of the ‘Mother of god’ having a striking resemblance to the pomp and ceremonies of the Catholic Church. This resemblance is in no way accidental. It is a historical fact that Rome had borrowed extensively from Egypt in everything.

In Rome, the “Mother and child” deities are know as Fortuna and Jupiterpuer, in Greece, Demeter and Dionysus and in other countries such as India, Tibet and China, counterparts of Madona the Catholic ‘Mother of god’ can easily be found. The ‘Mother and child’ concept was only an off-shoot of the belief in the ‘Trinity’. During his contemplation in the Arabian desert, Paul was forced to realize that if he wanted quick results, he must modulate his views according to the popular concepts of the Gentile races. It was on this axiom that he based his future plans and actions. As he had found preaching to the House of Israel totally fruitless, he concentrated his energies in and diverted his attention wholly to the Gentile races. His efforts were not unrewarded. They were indeed attracted to this new faith.

It has already been stated that Paul started by revoking the law of circumcision as this was the foremost stumbling block for the Gentiles. This he removed by saying that true righteousness did not rest merely on removing the foreskin ; but rather it rested on faith. He argued that Abraham was already righteous when he was commanded to undergo circumcision.

“He received circumcision as a sign or seal of the righteousness which he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised.”    [Romans 4:11]

When the elders at Jerusalem learnt about the presumptuous encroachments of Paul, they tried to undo the damage and James wrote to the new congregations:

“What does it profit my brethren, if a man says he has faith save him? …….Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? You see that faith was active along with works and was completed by works”.    [James 2:14-22]

Law Abolished

Seeing that the Israelite elders still persisted in the strict observation of the law and strongly resisted his efforts to introduce innovations, Paul hit upon the idea of doing away completely with the law and he contended:

“For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is transgression”.    [Romans 4:15]

Having disposed of the matter of the law for good and to his own satisfaction and to the satisfaction of the Gentiles, Paul now turned his attention to the ‘Trinity’ of the pagans. A very important part of the pagan faiths was the belief in a god who was young and handsome and was supposed to have died or mutilated himself for the sake of mankind. These young gods were invariably supposed to be the offspring of the ruling supreme god. When Paul pondered over the matter, he found a ready solution in the historical fact that Jesus, son of Mary, had been put on the cross. The Jews and other who had witnessed the crucifixion did believe that he had died on the cross and later when his body was reported not to have been found in the grave, they had all wondered. This mysterious disappearance of Jesus could certainly be put to an advantageous purpose. Moreover, it was commonly known that Jesus was born of a virgin mother though many were skeptical about it. Paul turned all these ideas to his own advantage and concocted the theory of sonship. As the Gentiles were used to or rather were in the habit of worshipping a number of deities out of which three were held more important, Paul provided three deities, i. e., God the Father, God the son and God the Holy Ghost. This new religion of Paul had very little resemblance to Judaism the religion of Moses and the religion about which Jesus had again and again declared that:

“It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away’ than for one dot of the law to become void”.    [Luke 16:17]

James Rebukes Paul

No doubt Paul did succeed in bringing the Gentiles into the fold of the religion conceived and devised by him and though he preached in the name of Jesus Christ, yet his gospel was at complete variance with the teachings of Jesus. That is why James the Head of the Church and younger brother of Jesus considered Paul nothing better than a renegade and a polluted person. That was why he advised Paul to go and cleanse himself according to the law of Moses.

“Do therefore what we tell you”, advised James, ‘We have four men under a vow; take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses”.   [Acts 21:22-24]

Paul no doubt did achieve tremendous success among the Gentiles through his arbitrary deviations from the teachings of Jesus, yet the true Church under James remained firm and loyal though “The Rock of the Church” showed feet of clay and wavered and seldom knew his own mind. James and his fellow elders refused to budge from the original teachings of their master. They steadfastly continued to teach what they had learned direct form Jesus and paid no heed to visions that led to the darkness of pagan idolatry. Evidence of the conflict between James and his companions on the one side and Paul and his associates on the other, can easily be found in the New Testament even though the New Testament, as it is now, consists mostly of Paul’s own writings and the remaining books support ideas introduced by him.

The New Testament  

We must remember that the New Testament was canonized in the year 325 at the Council of Naecia where 27 books were selected by a majority vote, of course in that congregation the majority was of those who believed in the ‘Trinity’ and other pagan conceptions. Those who represented the true church were a small minority and though they vehemently opposed all abominations, they were on pain of torture and death, forced into silence. The Bishop of Rome, the head of the majority church, had the Emperor Constantine at his back to support him. Few dared oppose the Bishop and the Emperor.

The books that were accepted in this congregation had little historical evidence as to their authenticity. Truth has remained obscure behind the curtain of uncertainty and skepticism. It is impossible to know for certain the real authors of these books. The claim that these books were inspired has yet to be proved.

The fact remains that Paul did succeed in his purpose and his concepts and ideas were gladly welcomed by the Gentiles and his religion prevailed everywhere. Does this mean that he was a divinely inspired reformer and he worked under the Divine command? The Bible provides the answer to this question:

“But the Prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other Gods, that same prophet shall die.”     [Deuteronomy 18:20]

And again:

“Therefore thus says the Lord God, we, see because you have uttered delusions and seen lies, therefore behold, I am against you says the Lord God. My hand will be against the Prophet who sees delusive visions and who give lying divinations; they shall not be in the council of my people, nor be enrolled in the register of the house of Israel, nor shall they enter the land of Israel; and you shall know that I am the Lord God.”     [Ezekiel 13:8-9]

And we all know how Paul met his end.

CONCLUSION 

In the preceding arguments, I have inquired into some of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity; the examination has led me to the conclusion that the dogmas of the Trinity, the Divinity of Jesus, the Divine-Sonship, the Original Sin and Atonement are neither rational nor in conformity with the teachings of Jesus. These dogmas came into being and were due to pagan influences. They show that Christianity has departed considerably from the religion of Jesus. Having demolished the alleged basis for these doctrines, it is now left for any Christian in Nigeria or in any part of the word to refute any of my arguments on the authority of the Bible.

How can one account for the difference between Christianity as preached by Jesus and Modern Christianity? This question can only be answered by knowing the influence of St. Paul on Modern Christian doctrines. Since the appearance of St. Paul and his playing a leading role in the moulding of Modern Christianity, the Christian has abandoned the religion of Christ.

What is most essential for the dignity of man and social progress is freedom of thought, the very freedom which the Churches have striven through, centuries of religious wars and persecutions to destroy. The progress that Europe and America have made in the fields of science, democratic institutions and social welfare has not been due to Christianity but rather as a consequence of becoming free from the strangle-hold of the Christian Churches.

According to the Christian priests, salvation from Hell depended not so much upon the manner of life people led or the good deeds they performed as upon the faith they had, as well as in the words of the Christian minister who chanced to be preaching. In the state of ignorance then prevailing among the people, this faith was hardly to be distinguished from supernatural fear. The “Holy Man”, from the Pope to an Ikare Clergyman was someone to be regarded with awe and often with terror.

On these lines, the Christian Church for centuries kept the laity in subjection. For what end? The history, when dispassionately studied, shows clearly that the church as an organization failed to use its tremendous influence on the side of justice, honor, love and compassion. Instead, the hierarchy of the Christian Church of Rome devoted itself consistently to worldly affairs until the Pope became one of the leading political powers of Europe. The main object of the Roman Catholic communities, from the large and opulent monastery to the humble cell of the village priest was to maintain the supremacy of the Papacy, claimed as no potentate has ever claimed before: Universal dominion over the minds and bodies of mankind. This pursuit of worldly power maintained by the suppression of all who questioned even the least of the Church’s actions was soon linked with an even greater crime against mankind-the attitude that Christianity adopted towards the spread of science, that is towards the attempt by inquisitive men to explain natural phenomena. Until the seventeenth century men of genius had either to recant what they knew about truth and submit to Christianity or be prepared to be tortured to death or imprisoned as the instances of Bruno, Galileo and a host of other reveal. The diabolical instruments of torture invented by the Spanish Inquisition and heresy-hunters all over the Christian world have no parallel in the history of mankind!

In no instance did the Christian Church encourage the pursuit of knowledge, save only when some knowledge seemed to support her own pretensions. Therefore, at best the influence of the Church was static; at the period of the Reformation the priests were offering the people the same “spiritual” food they had been concocting at the time of Constantine.

The Reformation was the result of these faults and follies on the part of the Church .It was partly a political movement and partly a revolt by those who, awakened by their conscience and fresh developments, were dissatisfied with the monstrous growth of abuses sanctioned by Rome. The reaction against Rome was, however, of little benefit to mankind at large, since it produced the long and dreadful religious warfare that so split Europe that any potentate with some personal end to serve could, by taking the name of Protestant or Catholic, obtain a large following of the fanatical, the ignorant or the self-seeking mass of people.

The Renaissance in its ultimate analysis was a severe setback to the temporal power of the degenerate church and as the church wielded political power at that time, it reacted with all the vigor and venom at its command. Consequently, the leaders of the Renaissance became the sworn enemies of the Church and soon this movement transformed itself into enmity towards Christianity which culminated in hatred and that today the majority of the population in Europe and America is either agnostic, atheist or existentialist!

However, leaving aside the question of Modern Christian doctrines, we must now examine the Bible critically and other aspects of Christianity.