Jesus vs. Paul Refuted

There is a meme circulating that attempts to pit Jesus against Paul in their teaching in the New Testament. From the looks of it, it appears to be an image from the introduction to a class on Romans, one clearly not taught from a believing Christian perspective [1]. 

The claim is that Paul contradicted Jesus, and three sets of Scripture texts are provided to attempt to demonstrate this.

First, we have Jesus’s statement in Matthew 5:17 pit against Paul’s in Ephesians 2:15.

Next, we have Jesus’s statement in Matthew 5:18 set against what Paul said in Romans 10:4

Last, we have what Jesus said in Matthew 19:17 contrasted with Paul’s claim in Romans 3:20.

In each of these situations, I will demonstrate that the context of both Jesus’s statement and Paul’s statement is completely ignored, as is other material from Paul that clearly supports what Jesus said in Matthew 5. It will take much more print than the meme, but, as nearly everyone knows, it takes far longer to respond to and correct an error than it does to make one, and there are three errors to correct here.

Let’s start with the first.

Matthew 5:17 and Ephesians 2:15

Context is important, so some will be provided.

Matthew 5:17-20 (ESV)  "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. (18)  For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. (19)  Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (20)  For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus is saying that the Law will not be abolished until something happens -- that is, until all is accomplished.

The question is this -- what of the Law is accomplished and when?

The Law comes to us in three forms, perhaps better said, three different kinds of Law:

We have the Moral Law, summarized in the Ten Commandments, which shows us God’s eternal moral character and gives us the transcendent standard of morality that goes beyond culture.

Another kind of Law, which is best understood as the Moral Law applied to the civil (that is, civil government) sphere, is called the Civil Law or the Judicial Law. This is the Law that governs what is proper for civil magistrates to enforce, shows us the distinction between things that are just sins (morally wrong, such as coveting [10th Commandment]) and crimes (that which the civil government ought to punish in some way, such as murder), and determines what proper punishment is for crimes.

The last kind of Law is often referred to as the Ceremonial Law or the Restorative Law. These are Laws that surrounded the sacrificial system of Ancient Israel and also showed, at the time, how the people of God were to be separate from the nations around them, showing themselves to be a holy people unto God.

Though it is true that the Torah/Pentateuch (the Five Books of Moses [Genesis through Deuteronomy]) isn’t painted three different colors to mark out what is what, this three-fold distinction is very easily seen in the Book of Exodus starting in chapter 20. Most of chapter 20 is the Ten Commandments -- the Moral Law. Chapters 21 through chapter 23 verse 9 is Judicial Law (where the Moral Law is applied to society), and then most of the rest of the book (with a break in the early 30’s for some historical narrative) is Ceremonial Law. The difference in the character of the Laws is easily seen.

What does all of this have to do with what Jesus said here and what Paul says in Ephesians? Let’s look:

Ephesians 2:11-16 (ESV)  Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called "the uncircumcision" by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands— (12)  remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.  (13)  But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.  (14)  For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility  (15)  by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,  (16)  and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.

What Law is Paul talking about here? It is evident that he is talking about the Ceremonial Law, not the Moral or Judicial Law. How do we know this? There are at least two reasons.

First, remember the descriptions. It was the Ceremonial Law that showed the people of Israel as a separate people from the rest of the nations around them. This was the “dividing wall of hostility” Paul spoke of. Gentiles (non-Jews) were excluded from God’s Covenant People as they were not separate unto Him and were unclean.[2]

Second, remember what Jesus said. He said that He came to fulfill it, and that none of the Law would pass away until it was all accomplished. The Ceremonial Law is kept in Jesus Christ Himself, through His sacrificial death on the cross, being the true sin-bearer, His blood accomplishing what the blood of bulls and goats never could. So, this is why the dividing wall of hostility is broken down; Christ has fulfilled it, keeping it all for all who believe. It’s why Paul writes the way he does and also why Jesus, in His exposition of the Law throughout chapter 5 of Matthew, always addresses the proper understanding of the Moral Law (fulfilling it that way, that is, correcting the wrong understanding of it that the Pharisees were teaching). Thus, the Moral Law and its application are still in force, and Paul agrees with this completely, saying as much in Romans 13 and elsewhere:

Romans 13:8-10 (ESV)  Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law.  (9)  For the commandments, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."  (10)  Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

Paul, far from what the meme suggests in its a-contextual citing of Ephesians 2:15, is by no means saying that the entirety of the Law is abrogated or set aside. Rather, He tells us to love our neighbor as ourselves. And what does it look like to love neighbor? Paul tells us, providing the Second Table of the Ten Commandments, the Commandments that Jesus Himself expounds in Matthew 5.

There is no disagreement between Jesus and Paul here; rather, there is perfect harmony.[3]

Let’s look at the second.

Matthew 5:18 and Romans 10:4

The first text, from Jesus, is the next verse from our first one. I cited it earlier.

Matthew 5:17-20 (ESV)  "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. (18)  For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. (19)  Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (20)  For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

The claimed contradiction from Paul comes from Romans 10:4. Some context is useful once again.

Romans 10:1-4 (ESV)  Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved.  (2)  For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge.  (3)  For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness.  (4)  For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

With the context, it might be easy to see already that there is no contradiction. In fact, Jesus and Paul are not even talking about the same thing. Jesus, as I mentioned earlier in this article, is talking about the proper use of the Moral Law. Paul is saying that the Law as a whole pointed to Jesus (the “end [Greek: telos] of the Law”), the Righteous One, and that the only way to have true righteous standing before God is in Jesus. 

The Jewish leaders of the time, notably the Pharisees (with whom Jesus had more than a few conflicts), thought that they could have righteous standing before God by keeping the Law. 

They were wrong.

Being declared righteous before God was always through Christ, either the one to come, or the one who has come, and the Law always testified to this. [4]

So, in short, Jesus was telling people the right way to live and what really constituted breaking God’s Law, as shown by His extended exposition of that Law.

Paul is briefly saying what it takes to be right before God, to be seen as righteous in His sight, something that cannot be produced by Law-keeping, as sin cannot be removed that way.

All of this is related to the final alleged contradiction, which we now briefly examine.

Matthew 19:17[5] and Romans 3:20

We will see that, once again, Paul and Jesus are not contradicting each other, but rather complementing each other, with Paul using the very principle Jesus illuminated in His discussion with the Rich Young Ruler. We’ll look at Paul first.

Romans 3:19-20 ESV  Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God.  (20)  For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.

Paul makes clear that no one is declared righteous in God’s sight by keeping the Law. Rather, everyone’s mouth is stopped and everyone is shown to be accountable to God through the Law, as the Law exposes sin and shows that we are guilty before God.

This is precisely how Jesus uses the Law in his interaction with the Rich Young Ruler[6]: to show his guilt before God.

Matthew 19:16-22 ESV  And behold, a man came up to him, saying, "Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?"  (17)  And he said to him, "Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments." (18)  He said to him, "Which ones?" And Jesus said, "You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, (19)  Honor your father and mother, and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself." (20)  The young man said to him, "All these I have kept. What do I still lack?"  (21)  Jesus said to him, "If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me." (22)  When the young man heard this he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.

When Jesus presented the young man with the statement “keep the commandments,” He was not telling Him that he could gain eternal life by keeping them. Rather, He was drawing out of the young man the fact that he had not kept the Law.

That was the point of him saying he needed to keep the Commandments. The young man would have needed to keep the Law, all of the Commandments, and to have done so perfectly. Jesus’s first statement was meant to get the young man to admit that he had failed to do this. Jesus had set forward an impossible standard, with the solution being in verse 21 -- the man needed to follow Jesus.

The guy didn’t get it. He wanted to know which commandments, as if he had really kept them. Jesus responded with the Second Table of the Law -- man’s duty to man. Again, the young man ought to have admitted his failure -- no one has kept even that part of the law perfectly. Who has never lied, never coveted, never disobeyed parents as a child? Yet even here, the man has the nerve to claim he has obeyed God’s Law.

Jesus doesn’t let up. His statement that the man needed to sell his belongings and give to the poor is not somehow a rejection of having wealth. Rather, Jesus was drilling him on the First Table of the Law, that is, man’s duty to God. Namely, the man’s wealth had become his god, and that was a violation of the First Commandment.

Exodus 20:3 ESV  "You shall have no other gods before me.

The man’s trust was in his money, and not truly in the True God. Jesus knew this, and told him to repent. The man ought to have repented, but did not, and turned and walked away.

The Law of God had done its work, the same work that Paul says it does in Romans 3:19-20. It exposed the man’s sin and showed him his need for the Savior. In this case, the man rejected Jesus’s invitation. In others, and others I myself have seen using this method (what the organization Living Waters calls “The Way of the Master”) I have seen people realize their need for Jesus and repent of their sin and turn to Him in faith.

Far from being a contradiction, Paul (who would have been familiar with this account of Jesus) was simply stating plainly what Jesus demonstrated: The Law of God, as one of its most important uses, shows us our sin and renders us guilty.

There is only one hope: Repent from your sin, believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, trusting Him alone for forgiveness, for righteousness, for salvation. You will find Him a perfect Savior.

Acts 4:12 ESV  And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."

_______________________________________________

1. I say this because a consistent, believing Christian would accept the entire Bible as the word of God without contradiction, and would see Paul and Jesus as perfectly harmonious.

2. It’s more complicated than this, but that is the thrust of what Paul is saying here. I have written more extensively on what constituted the Covenant Nation of Israel elsewhere.

3. This is seen even more so when you compare what Paul says in Romans 13 with what Jesus says in Matthew 22:37-40 about the Greatest Commandments.

4. Paul’s extended discussion in Romans 3 and Romans 4 shows this to be the case. Justification before God is by grace (from the work of Christ) through faith. The Jewish leaders missed that, but Gentiles who believed had it. That’s Romans 10:4.

5. I delivered a sermon on this text recently which can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zscNuYFyydI

6. Why he is called the “Rich Young Ruler” is something I explain in the sermon linked above.