Pitting Paul Against Jesus

One of the pitiful practices and all-too-common tactics  used to support flawed theological positions is pitting Paul against Jesus, and vice versa.  As we’ve seen, dispensationalists use this device to defend their Israel/Church dichotomy and exclusivist position that Jesus’ kingdom belongs only to Israel and not to Gentile believers today.  (See my blog, “Israel Insanity or God’s Purpose?” – www.prophecyrefi.org.)

Believe it or not, here’s how one Facebook group poster pitted Paul against Jesus: “Two groups of People were being addressed with the NT: the Circumcision (Israelites or Jews) and the Uncircumcision (Nations or Gentiles). Anything that was NOT written by the Apostle Paul, was addressed to the Circumcision. All that was written by Paul was addressed to US, because he was the ONLY Apostle commissioned to the Gentiles” (FB, Jan. 31, 2013).

This practice is “justified” by appealing to 2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV): “rightly dividing the word of truth” – with the emphasis on “dividing” rather than on “rightly.”

So do you see any scriptural problems with this dividing tactic?

For starters, how about Paul’s writing later on in 2 Timothy 3:16 that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness?”  Then how about his statement in Galatians 3:28 that “There is neither Jew nor Greek?”  Lastly, what about Paul’s presenting and teaching the kingdom of God to the Gentiles (eat your heart out Israel/dispensationalists — see Acts 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31; Rom. 14:17; 1 Cor. 4:20; 6:9-10; 15:50; Gal. 5:21; Eph. 5:5; Col. 1:13; 4:11; 4:16; 1 Thess. 2:12; 2 Thess. 1:5; Heb. 12:28)? If the kingdom was only meant for Israel, wouldn’t Paul’s teachings here be highly confusing for his Gentile audiences?

Sad, truly sad, the extent to which some Christians will go to support their flawed doctrines and divisive beliefs.

But what do you think?  Perhaps, you know of some other scriptures that refute this all-to-common and reductionist tendency?  If so, I’d like to know about them.