Bart D. Ehrman: Were the Teachings of Jesus Accepted by Paul?

Bart D. Ehrman, a prominent New Testament scholar and historian of early Christianity, has written extensively on the formation of Christian doctrine, the historical Jesus, and the apostle Paul. Among the many questions he has addressed, one particularly provocative issue stands out: Did Paul, the most influential writer of the New Testament, accept or even know the teachings of Jesus?

To many Christians, the answer might seem obvious—Paul is a central figure in the New Testament, so he must have faithfully continued Jesus’ message. But Ehrman challenges this assumption. Through careful historical and textual analysis, he raises significant doubts about whether Paul’s theology aligned with Jesus' own teachings. This article explores Ehrman’s perspective and the broader scholarly debate it engages.

Who Is Bart Ehrman?

Before delving into the topic, it's important to understand Ehrman's background. He is a professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a former evangelical Christian who later became an agnostic. Ehrman is best known for books like Misquoting Jesus, Jesus, Interrupted, and How Jesus Became God. His scholarship focuses on the historical development of Christian texts and beliefs, often questioning traditional views.

Ehrman’s approach is historical-critical. He does not treat the Bible as a divinely inspired whole but as a collection of diverse writings from different authors, each with unique theological aims and historical contexts. This methodology leads him to ask tough questions—one of them being whether Paul really taught what Jesus did.

Paul’s Relationship to Jesus

Paul never met Jesus during his lifetime. His knowledge of Jesus came from visions, personal revelation, and indirect contact with Jesus’ followers, especially Peter and James. According to Ehrman, this creates an immediate tension: Paul’s message is based not on Jesus’ earthly ministry, but on what he believed was the resurrected Christ revealing truths to him.

In Galatians 1:11–12, Paul writes:

"I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ."

Ehrman emphasizes this passage as a cornerstone of Paul’s theology—it’s not derived from Jesus’ teachings during his lifetime, but from what Paul believed was post-resurrection communication. In fact, Paul explicitly distances himself from learning the gospel from Jesus’ original disciples.

Was Paul Interested in Jesus' Teachings?

One of the key issues Ehrman explores is whether Paul ever showed interest in the actual teachings of Jesus—the parables, the Sermon on the Mount, the emphasis on the Kingdom of God, and ethical instructions.

The evidence suggests that Paul rarely, if ever, quotes Jesus. Of the 13 letters attributed to Paul (seven of which are considered authentic by most scholars), there are only a handful of references to Jesus’ sayings. One of the most well-known appears in 1 Corinthians 7:10–11, where Paul refers to Jesus' teaching on divorce. Another is in 1 Thessalonians 4, where he speaks of Jesus’ return.

But compared to the four Gospels, Paul's letters are remarkably silent on the life and teachings of Jesus. Ehrman sees this as a major clue that Paul was not primarily interested in Jesus as a moral teacher, but rather as the crucified and risen Lord.

Paul’s focus is not on what Jesus said during his lifetime, but on what his death and resurrection meant. To Paul, Jesus was not merely a prophet or rabbi—he was the divine Son of God whose death brought salvation to the world.

A Different Gospel?

Ehrman argues that Paul's theology marks a significant departure from Jesus' own message. Jesus, in the Synoptic Gospels, primarily preaches about the coming Kingdom of God, repentance, and living a righteous life in preparation for God's imminent rule. His teachings are filled with ethical instructions: love your enemies, give to the poor, be humble, and seek God's will.

Paul, on the other hand, centers his message on justification by faith, the redemptive power of Jesus' death, and the belief in the resurrection. As Ehrman often says, Paul preached not what Jesus preached, but about Jesus himself.

In this view, Paul doesn't continue Jesus' teaching—he transforms it. He creates a theological framework that focuses on sin, grace, salvation, and faith in Christ, rather than the earthly teachings and moral imperatives Jesus emphasized.

Ehrman is not alone in this assessment. Many critical scholars agree that Paul’s gospel is a reinterpretation of Jesus' message in light of his death and resurrection. For Paul, the crucifixion is not a tragic end but a cosmic event that inaugurates a new covenant. This interpretation leads Ehrman to question whether Paul would have even recognized the Jesus of the Gospels.

Conflict with the Jerusalem Church?

Ehrman also examines the tensions between Paul and the original apostles. In Galatians 2, Paul recounts a confrontation with Peter (Cephas) in Antioch, accusing him of hypocrisy for refusing to eat with Gentiles. This suggests a theological divide: the Jerusalem apostles were more closely tied to Jewish law, while Paul argued for salvation by faith alone, independent of the Mosaic Law.

Ehrman sees this as evidence that Paul’s version of Christianity diverged sharply from that of Jesus’ earliest followers, who likely continued to observe Jewish customs and laws. Paul, by contrast, saw no need for Gentile converts to follow Jewish law—circumcision, dietary restrictions, and Sabbath observance were all unnecessary in light of Christ’s death.

This, according to Ehrman, represents not just a different application of Jesus’ message but a fundamental shift in theology.

A Radical Transformation of Jesus' Message?

In Ehrman’s analysis, Paul’s theology is less a faithful transmission of Jesus’ message and more a radical reinterpretation. Jesus spoke primarily to Jews about the imminent arrival of God's Kingdom; Paul spoke to Gentiles about salvation through faith in a resurrected Christ.

Ehrman is careful not to accuse Paul of deliberate deception. Rather, he sees Paul as a sincere believer who interpreted his visionary experiences through his own theological lens. But the result was a form of Christianity that moved away from Jesus the teacher and toward Christ the Savior.

This transformation, Ehrman argues, was crucial for the development of Christianity. Without Paul, the movement might have remained a Jewish sect. It was Paul who turned Jesus' life and death into a universal message of salvation, accessible to all people regardless of their cultural or religious background.

Conclusion

Bart Ehrman’s exploration of whether Paul accepted the teachings of Jesus forces us to reconsider one of Christianity’s foundational assumptions. If Paul preached a message that diverged from or even contradicted Jesus’ own teachings, then much of what we think of as “Christianity” may be more Pauline than it is Jesus-based.

Ehrman's scholarship doesn't seek to discredit Christianity, but to understand how it developed historically. His conclusion is sobering: Paul did not so much preserve Jesus’ teachings as transform them into something new—a religion centered not on the Kingdom of God, but on the crucified Christ.

For those seeking to understand the roots of the Christian faith, this distinction is crucial. It raises challenging but important questions about authority, tradition, and the evolution of religious ideas. In Ehrman’s view, to understand Christianity, we must understand Paul—not just as a messenger, but as a founder in his own right.

When Did Christianity Separate Itself from Judaism?

The separation of Christianity from Judaism is one of the most significant developments in religious history, reshaping the spiritual, social, and political landscape of the ancient world and laying the foundation for what would become the world’s largest religion. But pinpointing exactly when Christianity separated from Judaism is complex. Rather than a single event, the separation was a gradual process that unfolded over several decades—arguably centuries—through theological disagreements, social divisions, and political pressures.

Shared Beginnings

Christianity began in the first century CE as a Jewish movement centered around Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus was born a Jew, lived as a Jew, and taught Jewish audiences. His earliest followers were also Jews who believed he was the long-awaited Messiah foretold in the Hebrew Scriptures (what Christians later called the Old Testament).

In the decades following Jesus’ death (around 30–33 CE), his followers, led by figures like Peter, James, and later Paul, continued to participate in Jewish religious life—attending synagogue, observing Jewish law, and celebrating Jewish festivals. They did not initially see themselves as forming a new religion but rather as reformers within Judaism who believed that the Messiah had come.

The Role of Paul

A key figure in the evolution of Christianity from a Jewish sect to a distinct faith was the Apostle Paul. Originally a Jewish Pharisee who persecuted Christians, Paul converted after a dramatic encounter with the risen Christ and became one of Christianity’s most influential missionaries and theologians.

Paul’s missionary efforts focused on Gentiles (non-Jews), arguing that they could become followers of Jesus without adopting the full requirements of the Jewish Law—particularly circumcision and dietary restrictions. This position was controversial. Some early Jewish Christians believed that Gentiles must convert to Judaism before joining the Jesus movement. The disagreement led to what is sometimes called the Council of Jerusalem (circa 49 CE), where church leaders agreed that Gentiles could become Christians without becoming Jews.

This decision marked an important early step in the divergence of Christianity from Judaism. It meant that Christianity was not bound to Jewish identity and could become a universal religion.

Emerging Theological Differences

As Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire, it began to develop theological beliefs that further distinguished it from Judaism. Key among these were:

• The divinity of Jesus: While Judaism awaited a human Messiah, Christians increasingly saw Jesus not just as Messiah but as divine—“God made flesh.”

• The Trinity: Christians developed the doctrine of the Trinity—one God in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This was incompatible with Jewish monotheism.

• A new covenant: Christians believed Jesus had instituted a "new covenant" that fulfilled and, in some interpretations, replaced the Mosaic covenant given to the Jewish people.

By the end of the first century, Christian writings such as the Gospel of John and the Epistle to the Hebrews began to reflect a more defined identity, emphasizing theological differences and at times portraying “the Jews” in polemical terms.

The Destruction of the Second Temple (70 CE)

A pivotal moment in Jewish-Christian relations was the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 CE, during the First Jewish-Roman War. This catastrophe led to a massive restructuring of Jewish religious life. With the Temple gone, Rabbinic Judaism emerged as the dominant form of Judaism, centered on Torah study and synagogue worship rather than sacrifices.

At this time, the Jesus movement, increasingly composed of Gentiles, continued to evolve in its own direction. The Temple’s destruction did not devastate Christianity in the same way it did Judaism, which furthered the divergence between the two communities.

The "Parting of the Ways"

Scholars refer to the gradual process of separation as the “Parting of the Ways”—not a single event, but a series of developments over the first few centuries CE that resulted in Judaism and Christianity becoming distinct religions.

Key signs of the growing divide include:

• Exclusion from synagogues: By the late first century or early second century, Jewish Christians were increasingly excluded from synagogues. Some scholars point to the Birkat HaMinim, a Jewish prayer against heretics (possibly including Christians), as evidence of formal separation.

• Christian self-definition: Early Christian texts began to define themselves in contrast to Judaism. For example, the Gospel of John (written around 90–100 CE) presents sharp distinctions between Jesus’ followers and "the Jews."

• Roman perceptions: Initially, Roman authorities saw Christians as a Jewish sect and thus extended to them the legal protections Judaism enjoyed. However, by the early second century, Roman writers like Pliny the Younger and Tacitus began to refer to Christians as a distinct group. This shift in Roman perception helped crystallize Christianity’s separate identity.

Persecutions and Political Pressures

The growing identity of Christianity as a separate religion also came with persecution. Christians were periodically targeted by Roman authorities for refusing to worship the emperor or participate in Roman religious rites. Judaism, while often looked upon with suspicion, was an ancient and recognized religion under Roman law. Christianity, on the other hand, was seen as a new and potentially subversive movement.

This forced early Christians to further clarify and defend their beliefs, often by distancing themselves from Judaism in both theology and public identity.

Constantine and the Triumph of Christianity

A major turning point came in the early 4th century when Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity and, through the Edict of Milan (313 CE), granted it legal status in the Roman Empire. By the end of the century, under Theodosius I, Christianity became the empire’s official religion.

This shift from a persecuted minority to a state-supported majority further widened the gulf between Christians and Jews. The Christian church, now allied with imperial power, began to develop laws and rhetoric that marginalized Judaism. Church fathers like John Chrysostom wrote virulent sermons against Jews, and some Christian communities prohibited intermarriage, attendance at synagogues, and Jewish-Christian cooperation.

By the Fifth Century: A Clear Separation

By the fifth century CE, Christianity and Judaism were fully distinct religions with separate scriptures, rituals, and social identities. Christianity had developed its own canon of sacred texts (the New Testament), its own clergy, and a well-established theological system centered on Jesus as the incarnate Son of God.

Judaism, under the guidance of Rabbinic leadership, had solidified its own identity, rooted in the Mishnah, Talmud, and synagogue-based worship. Each group now saw the other not just as different, but as religiously in error.

Conclusion

The separation of Christianity from Judaism was not a clean break but a slow and complex evolution. It involved theological disagreements, cultural adaptations, political changes, and social tensions. While the Jesus movement began entirely within Judaism, by the early centuries of the Common Era, it had become a new and distinct faith with its own beliefs, institutions, and identity.

Understanding this separation helps explain not only the origins of Christianity and Judaism as we know them today but also the historical tensions that have shaped Jewish-Christian relations throughout history. It remains a deeply significant chapter in the story of world religion and human culture.

Those who believe in Trinity will not enter Paradise, according to God in the Quran

In Islam, belief in the absolute oneness of God (Tawheed) is the most fundamental concept. The Quran, Islam’s holy book, strongly emphasizes monotheism and categorically rejects any division of God's nature. Among the most controversial theological differences between Islam and Christianity is the concept of the Trinity, which the Quran repeatedly refutes.

This article explores what the Quran says about the Trinity, how Islamic theology views it, and the implications for salvation in the afterlife.

---

The Concept of the Trinity in Christianity

The Trinity is a Christian doctrine that describes God as three persons in one essence: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit. Though not explicitly stated in the Bible as a single verse, the concept was formalized in early Church councils, such as Nicaea (325 CE) and Constantinople (381 CE). Christians believe all three are co-equal, co-eternal, and fully God.

From an Islamic perspective, this doctrine is viewed as a form of shirk, the sin of associating partners with God. This is considered the gravest sin in Islam.

---

Quranic Rejection of the Trinity

The Quran addresses the concept of the Trinity explicitly and warns against it:

"They have certainly disbelieved who say, 'Allah is the third of three.' And there is no god except one God. And if they do not desist from what they are saying, there will surely afflict the disbelievers among them a painful punishment."
(Surah Al-Ma’idah 5:73)

This verse is clear in its condemnation of Trinitarian belief, labeling it as disbelief (kufr). The Quran maintains that God is singular, eternal, and self-sufficient — not composed of parts or persons.

Another relevant verse is:

"Say: He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begets not, nor is He begotten; and there is none like unto Him."
(Surah Al-Ikhlas 112:1–4)

This short chapter, often memorized by Muslims, encapsulates Islamic monotheism. It rejects the notion of divine offspring or any form of partnership or division within God’s being.

---

Jesus (Isa) in the Quran

Jesus (peace be upon him), known as Isa in the Quran, is a highly revered prophet — not a part of God. The Quran repeatedly clarifies that Jesus was a human messenger, created by God and born of the Virgin Mary through a miraculous birth, but not divine.

"The Messiah, son of Mary, was no more than a messenger; many were the messengers that passed away before him... Say not 'Three': desist—it will be better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son."
(Surah Al-Nisa 4:171)

This verse firmly rejects the divinity of Jesus and the Trinity, stating that God is above the concept of having a son — a direct refutation of Christian belief.

---

The Fate of Those Who Believe in the Trinity

According to Islamic belief, salvation hinges on Tawheed—the belief in the oneness of God. Associating partners with God, especially through the belief in the Trinity, constitutes shirk, which is described in the Quran as an unforgivable sin if not repented from before death:

"Indeed, Allah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills. And he who associates others with Allah has certainly fabricated a tremendous sin."
(Surah Al-Nisa 4:48)

And again:

"Indeed, whoever associates others with Allah—Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers."
(Surah Al-Ma’idah 5:72)

This verse is extremely clear in its implications: Those who die believing in the divinity of Jesus and the Trinity are excluded from Paradise, according to the Quran. It classifies such belief as major disbelief that leads to eternal punishment unless a person repents and embraces pure monotheism.

---

Room for Repentance and Guidance

Despite the severe consequences outlined for associating partners with God, the Quran also extends a path to forgiveness for anyone who repents sincerely before death. God's mercy is emphasized throughout the Quran:

"Say, 'O My servants who have transgressed against themselves [by sinning], do not despair of the mercy of Allah. Indeed, Allah forgives all sins. Indeed, it is He who is the Forgiving, the Merciful.'"
(Surah Az-Zumar 39:53)

This includes those who may have previously believed in the Trinity but later come to embrace the oneness of God. As long as the person recognizes the error, repents, and affirms the truth of Islam, they are eligible for Paradise.

---

Why the Trinity Is Rejected in Islamic Theology

Islam’s strict monotheism is rooted in the principle that God is utterly unique, not resembling His creation in any way. The idea that God could incarnate as a human or share His divine essence with others is seen as a profound contradiction.

From the Islamic perspective, believing that Jesus is God or the "Son of God" is not merely a theological mistake—it is seen as an act of injustice toward God’s majesty and uniqueness. It undermines the pure monotheism taught by all prophets, including Abraham, Moses, and even Jesus himself, who Muslims believe preached the oneness of God.

---

Christian-Muslim Dialogue and Respectful Engagement

While Islamic theology is clear in its rejection of the Trinity, the Quran also calls for respectful dialogue with Christians:

"And do not argue with the People of the Book except in a way that is best..."
(Surah Al-Ankabut 29:46)

Muslims are encouraged to call Christians to Islam with wisdom and kindness, showing the beauty of Tawheed rather than resorting to hostility. Many Muslim scholars and da’wah practitioners emphasize common ground, such as the belief in one Creator, moral teachings, and reverence for Jesus — albeit understood differently.

---

Conclusion

The Quran leaves no ambiguity about its stance on the Trinity: those who die believing in it are considered disbelievers and are denied entry into Paradise. This is not because Muslims seek conflict with Christians, but because Islam upholds an uncompromising view of God's oneness that leaves no room for triune doctrines.

However, this theological disagreement is not a call to hostility. Islam emphasizes that guidance is ultimately in God's hands, and sincere seekers—regardless of background—can always turn to the truth. The door to repentance remains open for all, including those previously committed to Trinitarian beliefs, as long as they sincerely embrace the oneness of God before death.

In Islamic belief, eternal salvation depends on affirming Tawheed—the belief that “There is no god but Allah”, without any partners, divisions, or equals.

The Antichrist Appeared to Paul in a Vision on the Way to Damascus: A Theological Reimagining

The conversion of Saul of Tarsus, who later became the Apostle Paul, is one of the most dramatic and influential events in Christian history. As recorded in the New Testament (Acts 9), Saul was a zealous persecutor of early Christians until he encountered a blinding vision of Jesus Christ on the road to Damascus. This moment transformed him into Christianity's most passionate apostle and theologian.

But what if the vision he saw wasn’t Christ at all?

What if the blinding light and the voice from heaven came not from the Son of God, but from the Antichrist—the ultimate deceiver? What if Paul's vision was the first step in a great deception, rather than a divine calling?

Though speculative and controversial, such a reimagining invites profound questions about revelation, deception, and spiritual discernment. In this article, we explore the theological and symbolic implications of the idea that the Antichrist appeared to Paul in a vision on the way to Damascus.

---

1. Understanding the Damascus Road Experience

The biblical account in Acts 9 describes Saul’s journey to Damascus to arrest Christians. Suddenly, a bright light surrounds him, and he hears a voice: “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” When he asks who is speaking, the voice replies, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.”

This moment leads to Saul's blindness, followed by his healing and baptism by Ananias, and his radical shift from persecutor to apostle.

The traditional Christian interpretation holds that Saul genuinely encountered the risen Christ. However, if one considers an alternative reading—that the being he encountered was not Christ, but a spiritual deceiver—the implications would be earth-shaking.

---

2. The Nature of the Antichrist

The term “Antichrist” appears in the epistles of John, describing one who “denies that Jesus is the Christ” and one who “comes in the last hour” to deceive the faithful (1 John 2:18, 2 John 1:7). Elsewhere in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4, Paul himself speaks of a “man of lawlessness”, a figure who will exalt himself above God and deceive many through signs and wonders.

Traditionally, the Antichrist is seen as a future, satanic figure who mimics Christ to lead humanity astray. He will perform “lying signs and wonders” and present himself as divine.

In this light, the idea that the Antichrist could appear to someone as Christ himself is not beyond theological possibility. In fact, it aligns closely with his role as a false messiah—a counterfeit savior.

---

3. Paul’s Theological Authority: A Double-Edged Sword?

Paul’s influence on Christianity cannot be overstated. He authored 13 letters in the New Testament, systematized Christian theology, and extended the gospel beyond Judaism to the Gentile world.

But his writings have also sparked controversy. Critics, both ancient and modern, have noted that Paul's teachings sometimes appear to diverge from those of Jesus. While Christ preached the Kingdom of God, love for enemies, and radical simplicity, Paul emphasized faith over works, justification by belief, and submissiveness to authorities.

Some have gone so far as to suggest that Paul introduced a new religion altogether, one focused more on doctrine than discipleship. If one entertains the theory that Paul’s vision was from the Antichrist, this tension takes on an ominous dimension.

---

4. Could the Antichrist Precede Christ?

Traditionally, Christian eschatology holds that the Antichrist comes before the Second Coming of Christ, deceiving many. But what if the Antichrist had already been at work in the first century?

Paul himself warned of this possibility. In 2 Thessalonians 2:7, he writes: “The mystery of lawlessness is already at work.” Some scholars interpret this as an acknowledgment that deception was not merely a future threat, but a present reality.

If the Antichrist were already at work, disguising himself as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14), then Paul's own experience becomes theologically vulnerable. Could the great apostle have been deceived?

---

5. Paul’s Vision as a Test of Discernment

In this speculative framework, Paul’s vision might be seen as a test of discernment—a cosmic question of whether humanity can distinguish truth from falsehood, light from false light. If even Paul, a devout Pharisee, could be misled, then what hope is there for the rest of us?

This narrative echoes themes found in Gnostic Christianity, which often depicted the material world as a realm of deception, governed by false powers pretending to be divine. Some early Gnostics even viewed Paul as a heroic figure who saw through the deception of the Law and reached for deeper truth—while others saw him as deceived.

---

6. Paul’s Own Warnings About False Gospels

Interestingly, Paul himself warns about false visions and false gospels. In Galatians 1:8, he writes:

“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.”

The irony here is thick. Paul acknowledges that even heavenly visions can be deceptive—yet his own gospel originates in just such a vision. If one were to argue that his vision on the Damascus road was a deception, Paul’s own words would appear to indict him.

---

7. Implications for the Church

If this speculative idea were true—that Paul’s vision came from the Antichrist—then much of Christian theology would need to be re-examined. The doctrine of salvation by faith alone, the de-emphasis on Torah observance, and the establishment of hierarchical church structures could all be viewed not as divine revelation, but as strategic distortions.

Of course, mainstream Christianity rejects such a view entirely, affirming Paul’s apostleship and divine calling. But it’s worth asking: how do we discern true revelation from false? And how do we protect ourselves from spiritual deception that masquerades as truth?

---

8. Conclusion: A Cautionary Tale of Discernment

To suggest that the Antichrist appeared to Paul on the road to Damascus is not to assert historical fact, but to engage in a theological “what if” that invites deeper reflection on the nature of revelation, authority, and deception.

In a world where religious claims abound and spiritual experiences are subjective, the line between divine inspiration and deception can be perilously thin. Paul's story, whether interpreted as a miraculous conversion or a cautionary tale, remains a powerful reminder of the need for spiritual discernment and humility in the face of mystery.

The road to Damascus may not just be a road to enlightenment — it may also be a road that tests the very soul of belief.

---

Disclaimer: This article is a speculative theological exploration and does not reflect mainstream Christian doctrine. The idea that the Antichrist appeared to Paul is not found in canonical Scripture or accepted historical sources, and should be understood as a metaphorical or interpretive lens rather than a doctrinal assertion.