A concrete “case study” demonstrates how the tactics of the serpent in the Garden of Eden are used to sow doubt about biblical statements and the gospel as a whole. Contradictory statements in the Bible are simply assumed to be fact in order to suggest certain behaviors in response to such discrepancies.
The Snake’s Tactics
Casting doubt on the Bible’s credibility is the most fundamental attempt to deter or dissuade people from faith, after the Roman Catholic Church’s attempt to keep it under lock and key and destroy it had failed miserably. Placing the Word of God in a completely false light, on the other hand, was (seemingly) more successful. In this regard, the opponents of the gospel strikingly often employ the same approach as the serpent in the Garden of Eden: suggesting supposed facts through open doubt combined with a lie.
God had clearly explained to Adam and Eve that they could eat the fruit of the trees, but only one thing: the tree of knowledge. The serpent, however, wrapped Eve around its finger with the following sentence:
“Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” (Genesis 3:1).
Clever. Openly questioning whether God could actually have said such a thing, and then deliberately misrepresenting that ALL trees were being discussed. A tried-and-tested recipe, as the use of this rhetorical trick can still be observed with regularity today.
Specific case in a Facebook group
The question is repeatedly asked how it is possible that Jesus Christ and Paul made different statements about the law when the Bible does not contradict each other. In this case, a (supposed) contradiction is simply presented as a fact, while the bottom line is simply to give greater credence to either Jesus or Paul.
This is a view expressed in a Facebook group. This is from an active participant who, given his history, could be assumed to be quite understanding, and therefore the actual intention of deliberately misleading is not far-fetched:
“I have recently been studying more intensively the statements of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew and those of Paul in Galatians and Romans – and I wonder whether we sometimes shy away from taking their different statements on the validity of the Torah seriously.“
It’s already clear that this isn’t about resolving a contradiction, but rather about how to deal with this “obvious contradiction.” He presents this discrepancy between the statements of Jesus and Paul as a given.
Selected Bible quotations
He uses Matthew 5:17-20, the statement of Jesus Christ, and highlights the following extract:
“Not one jot or one tittle will pass from the law until heaven and earth pass away.“
In addition, it refers to the statements in Matthew 23:2-3 and states the following:
“Whatever the scribes tell you, do and observe.”
He then contrasts Jesus’ statements with Paul’s explanation, which sounds “quite different.” An excerpt from Galatians 3 includes the following quotation (from Galatians 3:24;25):
“The law was our instructor toward Christ.”
and
“But after faith has come, we are no longer under a teacher;“
The following is the presentation of Romans 10:4:
“Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for everyone who believes.”
Accordingly, it sounds “as if with Jesus’ death the scope of the law was fulfilled—and thus ended,” he concludes.
The actual concern about the matter
He posed the following questions to the discussion group:
“Do you recognize this difference and respect it as an intra-biblical diversity?”
“Or are you trying to harmoniously reconcile the perspectives of Jesus and Paul?”
He further clarifies his concerns with the following comment:
“And so as not to immediately shift the discussion to another level: I’m explicitly not referring here to the question of whether the law applied to Jews or Gentiles—or what was decided at the Council of the Apostles in Acts 15. Rather, I’m referring solely to the question of the duration of the Torah’s validity from the perspective of Jesus and Paul.
I would be very interested to hear your views on this—and whether the “Paul lovers” among us perhaps read Jesus in Matthew 5 too often in a Pauline way, instead of listening to his own words.“
The wedge between Jesus and Paul
The apologist himself accomplishes what he wishes to avoid. He raises this supposed contradiction between the statements of Jesus and Paul to his own level, that of the apparent fact that it is a contradiction. This is beyond doubt. Furthermore, by calling himself a “Paul lover,” he reveals that he intends to drive a wedge between Jesus Christ and Paul anyway.
Incidentally, Paul and his letters, especially the Epistle to the Romans, are already in the sights of the opponents of the gospel, or rather, the advocates of ecumenism. They contain “too much law” and thus also the required obedience to God. This, of course, cannot be allowed within the framework of unifying ecumenism. The wedge between the gospel and Paul, whom they emphasize as an “eccentric,” is therefore programmatic. (Info).
Only excerpts from individual verses
Take individual verses, even just an excerpt, and place them in your own context, and you’re already presenting yourself as standing on the foundation of the gospel. An extremely bad and, unfortunately, widespread practice.
Verse fragments from Matthew 23
His example from Matthew 23:2-3 contains far more information when one understands the context. To do this, one only needs to understand the context of this verse excerpt. He simply quoted:
“Therefore, whatever the scribes tell you, do and observe.”
and that, taken alone, suggested that the scribes were guiding principles, had authority, and therefore one must obey their words.
The explanation (Matthew 23:1-7, highlighted extract) provides a little more context for this quotation:
“Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.“
Anyone who takes the trouble to read the entire chapter of Matthew 23 will find that Jesus Christ has absolutely nothing good to say about the scribes and Pharisees. The quote used by this apologist has been completely twisted into its opposite to support his own thesis.
Context in Galatians 3
According to the apologist, Paul claims the opposite of what Jesus Christ said. To this end, he uses excerpts from two verses, Galatians 3:24 and 25:
“The law was our tutor leading us to Christ.”
and
“But after faith has come, we are no longer under a teacher.“
As before, everyone is (actually) responsible for verifying such representations through their own research. Nothing simpler than that, because all it requires is opening the Bible to the passage in question. The context must be grasped, or rather, the question must be asked: in what context did Paul write this? Thus, in Galatians 3, the immediately preceding verses 19 to 23 provide the answer:
“Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.“
Because of transgressions, this law was added! It is therefore clearly not the 10 Commandments of God, but rather the additional laws concerning feasts and ceremonies (ceremonial laws). For the 10 Commandments of God show man what sin actually is, while the ceremonial laws were introduced BECAUSE man sinned. These ceremonial laws reflected the saving acts of Jesus Christ and were abolished with His death on the cross. For these were thus fulfilled..
The contradiction disappears into thin air
What the apologist didn’t intend with his suggestive questions—one could even claim that he wanted to avoid them—dissolves into nothingness if one only grasps the context of his misused verse fragments. There is absolutely no contradiction between the statements of Jesus and Paul.
Jesus Christ speaks about the Ten Commandments of God in Matthew 5, and Paul speaks about the ceremonial laws in Galatians 3. It’s that simple.
Precisely for this reason, according to Romans 10:4, Jesus Christ is also the end of the law. Which law? The ceremonial law, e.g., Matthew 27:50-51:
“Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;”
Jesus died on the cross, thereby fulfilling the ceremonial laws that had previously symbolized Him, and thus became obsolete. It was “finished.” The tearing of the curtain in the temple makes it clear that the sacrificial service thus ended.
This was precisely the essential problem with the teachings of the Pharisees. They preached righteousness based on obeying the laws, that is, righteousness by works. Furthermore, they imposed their own laws (traditions) on people, some of which even contradicted God’s laws. This continued long after Jesus Christ had returned to heaven. The final punishment, that is, the rejection of Jesus Christ and His work of salvation through continued sacrifices, followed in 70 AD. The temple was completely destroyed.
Administered wine of Babylon
The difference between the commandments of God (the Ten Commandments) and the commandments of Moses (ceremonial laws) is enormous, and it is at least equally important to strictly distinguish these legal texts from one another. The apologist does not do this, but rather lumps both laws together. Yet commandments and ceremonial laws exhibit easily recognizable differences, all of which are described in the Bible (Info).
Like the serpent in the Garden of Eden, so too is the style of those who seek to lead people away from the truth of the Gospel and toward an ecumenical, strongly Gnostic-influenced philosophy. A direct lesson and a clarification of what such a poisoned “Babylonian wine” can actually look like.
Personal responsibility
It can’t be emphasized enough: Check it out for yourself, check it out, verify it, and investigate it. Loud voices and majority opinions have never been synonymous with the truth. In our day and age, individual praise, especially from the media, much applause and approval from a (supposed) majority, the constant repetition of various topics, and laudatory awards are actually flashing, howling, bright red warning signals that should be immediately questioned.
While the presumption of innocence generally applies (and should apply) to accused people, which is a very good thing, it is now better to apply the presumption of guilt to such topics that receive heavy media coverage. This is not about individual people, but about a set of facts. In other words, treating something as untrue until, if necessary, the truth has been proven. The gospel also has something to say about this, Revelation 22:15:
“For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.“
The bill will definitely come.
They shall lick the dust like a serpent, they shall move out of their holes like worms of the earth: they shall be afraid of the LORD our God, and shall fear because of thee.
Micah 7:17
Bible verses from King James Version (1611)
