Is the Paul of Acts at Odds with the Paul of His Own Letters?

[00:00:01] Is the Paul of acts at odds with the Paul of his own letters written by Bart Ehrman, read by Ken Teutch? [00:00:10] Here I continue my few remarks on the differences between Paul's proclamation as recorded in the speeches he gives in the book of acts and the views he sets forth in his own letters. Again, this is taken from my book. Peter, Paul and Mary Magdalene. [00:00:27] Further contrasts between what Paul says about his proclamation and what acts says about it can be seen in the first major speech Paul delivers in acts on the first of his three missionary journeys in the book. In the town of Antioch, Pisidia, Central Asia Minor, Paul and his companion Barnabas arrive in town, and on the sabbath they go to the synagogue for worship with their fellow Jews. As outside guests, they are asked if they have anything to say to the congregation. Paul stands up and delivers a long sermon. [00:01:04] He addresses his hearers as Israelites and gives them a brief summary of the history of the jewish people down to the time of King David. He then skips to speak of the descendant of David, Jesus, indicating that he was proclaimed as the long expected one by John the Baptist, but that he came to be rejected by the Jews of Jerusalem, who handed him over to Pilate to be executed. But God raised him from the dead, as was predicted by none other than David himself. In the jewish scriptures, it is in Jesus, Paul continues, that everyone can find forgiveness of their sins. [00:01:39] This sermon receives a warm welcome, with many devout Jews following Paul to learn more about what he had been saying. The next week the synagogue is packed as people have come out to hear Paul speak again. But the jewish authorities are jealous. They can't get this kind of turnout and publicly dispute Paul's words. Paul and Barnabas respond by saying that since their message is being rejected by the Jews, they will have to take it to the Gentiles. Eventually they are run out of town by a jewish mob. Now the reader, who sees everything as basically the same, can look at this sermon and see in it reflections of Paul's own preaching. Jesus is the son of God who was executed and raised from the dead for salvation. But the reader, who sees everything as unique, can see striking differences between this sermon and anything Paul was likely to have said and done. To begin with. As we have seen, Paul never gives any indication that he first took his gospel to Jews in the synagogue and that only when they rejected his message would he rather reluctantly turn to try his luck with the Gentiles footnote, even if he did occasionally preach in the synagogues, which might be suspected on the basis of two corinthians 1124. He never indicates that he had any jewish converts, and his letters seem to be addressed to converted pagans. [00:03:03] Instead, he saw himself as an apostle to the Gentiles. His modus operandi was evidently not to use the synagogue, but rather his workshop as the place of his proclamation. [00:03:16] Moreover, in the sermon itself, it is striking that Paul stresses the history of Israel, especially Jesus ties to his ancestor David. This is not at all an emphasis that we find in Pauls letters, where he never recounts the events of jewish history. More striking still, Pauls Sermon gives a summary of the life of Jesus, a kind of precis of the gospel narratives about Jesus, which begin with John the Baptist and end with Jesus crucifixion and resurrection. But there is nothing in Pauls own writings to indicate that Jesus earthly life was of primary or any importance to him. This last point strikes many of my undergraduate students as odd, so I have them do another little exercise. I tell them to read through all of Pauls letters in the New Testament and to make a list of everything that Paul says about what Jesus said and did during his life. Many students are surprised to learn that they dont need a three by five card. We will be exploring the question of why Paul doesnt speak more about Jesus in a later chapter. At this stage its enough to note that references to such key figures as John the Baptist and Pontius Pilate, in fact to just about everyone mentioned in the gospels, are absent from Pauls letters. Finally, there is an important theological contrast between this sermon in acts and Pauls own writings. It has to do with one of the most fundamental questions of christian doctrine. How is it that Christs death brings salvation? Paul had a definite view of the matter. So did Luke, the author of acts. What careful readers have realized over the years is that Paul and Luke expressed their doctrines of salvation quite differently. According to Paul, Christs death provides an atonement for sins. According to Luke, Christs death leads to forgiveness of sins. These are not the same thing. The idea of atonement is that something needs to be done in order to deal with sins. A sacrifice has to be made that can make up for the fact that someone has transgressed the divine law. The sacrifice satisfies the just demands of God, whose law has been broken and who requires a penalty. In Pauls view, Jesus death brought about an atonement. It was a sacrifice made for the sake of others so that they would not have to pay for their sins themselves. This atonement purchased a right standing before God. [00:05:46] The idea of forgiveness is that someone lets you off the hook for something that youve done wrong without any requirement of payment. If you forgive a debt, it means you dont make the other person pay. Thats quite different from accepting the payment of your debt from someone else, which would be the basic idea of atonement. In Pauls own way of looking at salvation, Christ had to be sacrificed to pay the debt of others. In Lukes way of looking at it, God forgives the debt without requiring a sacrifice. Why then, for Luke, did Jesus have to die, if not as a sacrifice for sins? When you read through the speeches in acts, the answer becomes quite clear. And it doesnt matter whether you look at Pauls speeches or Peters, since, if youll recall, all these speeches sound pretty much alike, since they were, after all, written by Luke. [00:06:37] Jesus was wrongly put to death. This was a gross miscarriage of justice. When people realize what they or their compatriots did to Jesus, they are overcome by guilt, which leads them to repent and ask for forgiveness, and God forgives them. Thus, Jesus death for Luke is not an atonement for sins. It is an occasion for repentance. And it is the repentance that leads to the forgiveness of sins and thus a restored relationship with God. See, for example, Peter's first speech in acts 237 39. This is fundamentally different from a doctrine of atonement such as you find in Paul. It.