A familiar and popular thesis criticizing Christianity states that the religion Jesus taught differs markedly from the religion described in Paulнs letters. According to this view, Jesus taught an orthopraxis religion of ethics while Paul taught an orthodox religion of theology. Others have proposed explanations of the differences that highlight the underlying unity of the teachings. Jesusнs and Paulнs teachings of the law encompass the crucial issues of this controversy because law and its application define the type of religion involved. The differences between Jesusнs and Paulнs legal teachings are ultimately compatible and reflect Jesusнs and Paulнs different roles and audiences.

Jesus and Paul have different roles as Messiah and church-planter/missionary, respectively. These different roles help to explain the differences in their teaching. In the gospels, Jesus confronts people with the Kingdom of God. In the letters, Paul addresses problems of doctrine and practice that have arisen in the churches he planted. Jesus comes as the Messiah (Mark 14:61) to мserve and to give his life as a ransom for manyо (Mark 10:45). He describes himself as the Son of Man, a figure who was to possess everlasting dominion and receive worship from people of every language (Daniel 7:13-14). Jesus concentrated his efforts not on the masses, but on a small group of disciples who were to continue his work when he was gone. Jesusнs life and death and part of his message, so Paulнs message becomes essentially мChrist and him crucifiedо (1 Corinthians 2:2). Paul letters include theological reasoning that Jesusнs teaching lacked. As a church planter, Paul had to answer questions that arose which Jesus in many cases never addressed--or at least are not recorded in the gospels. Paulнs writing indicates that he has received specific instruction from God on matters he does not describe as his own opinion (1 Corinthians 7:10, 12, 25) and can be trusted as Godнs mouthpiece.

Jesus uses a distinctive teaching style based on his audience and how he anticipates they will respond to his message. This teaching style significantly limits what he says in his public ministry. Jesus recognizes that people are evil (Matthew 7:10), unseeing and unhearing (Matthew 13:14-15), and overall unwilling to be gathered together with him (Matthew 23:37). This willful resistance suggests the inefficacy of simple, clear explanations. Consequently, Jesus avoids simplicity and clarity along with theology and systematic teaching. If he had taught clearly and systematically in public, people would not have listened openly or understood. Much of his teaching involved parables, which have hidden meanings that Jesus reveals only to those who inquire. Jesus wisely refrains from мcasting pearls before swine,о or giving his message to people he knows will only despise and reject it (Matthew 7:6). In addition to teaching with parables, Jesus accomplishes this by not telling the Pharisees the origin of his authority since they would only use his answer against him (Mark 11:27-33). Instead of clear expository teaching, Jesus employs a strategy of making people disturbed and disquieted about their sinfulness so they will open their hearts to receive his teaching, embracing it with repentance (Mark 1:15) and the faith of a little child (Mark 10:15). Jesus refuses to violate the peopleнs wills, so they must come to him of their own choice and accept him on his terms. His terms mean coming as a broken sinner (Mark 2:17, Matthew 5:3) like the tax collector (Luke 18:9-14) or the centurion (Luke 7:4-7) or the prodigal son (Luke 15:21), not as one confident in oneнs own righteousness, like the rich young man (Mark 10:17-23) or the proud Pharisee (Luke 18:9-14). Jesus notes that the prostitutes and tax collectors are entering the kingdom of God ahead of the religious leaders because the leaders refuse to repent and believe (Matthew 21:28-32). Like the others who trusted in their own righteousness, they cannot see themselves as sinners in need of repentance, and so cannot enter the kingdom. To help people recognize their sinfulness, Jesus uses unsettling teaching (Petersen, interview). He teaches that people should cut off limbs and gouge out eyes that cause them to sin (Mark 9:42-50) to emphasize the gravity of sin. He teaches them that they need to eat his flesh and drink his blood (John 6:53-54). He makes impossible demands such as мBe perfect... as your heavenly Father is perfect о (Matthew 5:48) and мstop sinningо (John 5:14, 8:11). Finally, he teaches that the peoplesн righteousness must surpass that of the Pharisees and teachers of the law if they are to enter heaven (Matthew 5:20). To those who inquired of Jesus, a clear answer was always given. Jesusнs strategy of reaching rebellious sinners explains why he left so much unstated. It also explains his exhortations to perfection, which he knew from the Hebrew scriptures (Isaiah 64:6, Ecclesiastes 7:20, Psalm 53:3) to be impossible. Furthermore, it provides a helpful framework for understanding Jesusнs teachings on the law in contrast to Paulнs.

Both Jesus and Paul teach about the nature of legal requirement. In fact, Jesus says more about this aspect of the law than any other. This emphasis reveals Jesusнs goal for the Jews to live in loving faith without legalistic attachment to human traditions. Jesus teaches that the correct way to follow a law is to fulfill its purpose (the spirit of the law above the letter), that keeping or breaking a law starts with loving motives (Bruce, p. 45-46), and that piling tradition on Godнs law is wrong. Correctly understood, this understanding of the law negates legalism by revealing sinfulness in contrast to an unkeepable, holy law. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus emphasizes the lawнs demand for perfect intent as well as perfect practice. In the Beatitudes, Jesus praises such attitudes as humility, mercy, and purity of heart as basis for blessedness. He reveals the intent behind laws dealing with adultery, murder, taking oaths, and loving others. He also exposes the impure motives of the religious leaders in their alms giving, prayer, and fasting (Matthew 6). When the law is externalized, it becomes possible to achieve (Philippians 3:6), so the Sermon on the Mount restores the Lawнs original unattainability (Petersen, interview) by restoring its demands on righteous intent as well. In the Sermon, Jesus next requires out-performance of the Pharisees to enter heaven (Matthew 5:20), which Paul explicates in terms of imputed righteousness (Romans 3:21). In other words, Paul explains that a believerнs righteousness, which is credited to him on the basis of his faith (as it was to Abraham, Romans 4:3), will exceed that of the Pharisees because that righteousness is from God, not from sinful man (Philippians 3:9). While Jesus does not give this theological explanation, his teaching is consistent with his strategy of bringing those in his audience to an unsettling realization of their sinfulness before an impossible law.

Jesus teaches that observing the letter of the law is less important than living by the spirit of the law. For example, he explains that divorce laws were only given because of the Hebrewsн hard hearts and straying from the original design (Mark 10:2-9). Jesus reminds the people that God desires mercy, not sacrifice (Matthew 9:13, 12:7). Ceremonial observance takes second place to fulfilling the purpose behind a commandment. Again, Jesus only restores the original understanding of legal requirement; he offers nothing new. The priority of the spirit of the law is part of the Hebrew scriptures that Jesus would have studied growing up (Hosea 6:6, Isaiah 58:6, Micah 6:8, Deuteronomy 10:12-13). In another case, Jesus tells his audience not to offer a sacrifice to God when any of them needs to be reconciled to a brother first (Matthew 5:23). Jesusнs healing on the Sabbath further reveals his view of the spirit above the letter. While his healing only violates their tradition and not the law itself, he goes further to state that the Sabbath is for manнs benefit, not vice versa (Mark 2:27), and to describe Davidнs unlawful action in time of need.

The heart figures at the center of Jesusнs teachings. Love fulfills the Law and prophets (Matthew 22:37-40), and Jesusнs life accomplishes and displays this love. In love, Jesus heals a leper, though ceremonial law said he would be guilty of defilement for doing so (Leviticus 5:2, 13:45-46). Jesus refused to be small-minded about ceremony when life-changing love could be given. Mark notes that Jesus supersedes the dietary laws with his teaching about uncleanness of the heart (Mark 7:19; Bruce, p. 47). In declaring all foods мclean,о Jesus takes an enormous step in interpreting the nature of legal requirement. External conformity matters nothing in comparison with the heart.

Jesusнs teaching on the nature of legal requirement tears down the oral traditions regarding the law as well. Jesus denounces the Pharisees for nullifying Godнs word for the sake of their tradition (Matthew 15:6) and for letting go of his real commands to embrace human traditions (Mark 7:8). The Pharisees come near God only in speech, but their hearts are far away and their worship empty (Mark 7:6). They cannot enter the kingdom in such a state, and Jesus explains their error so perhaps they can. In their zealous legalism, the Pharisees go as far as straining out unclean gnats from drinking water and tithing a tenth of their spices but fail in the most important areas: mercy, justice, and faithfulness. Jesus says they should practice the latter without neglecting the former (Matthew 23:23-24). Finally, Jesus charges them with burdening people with an unbearable load (Matthew 23:5), a sharp contrast to the light burden (Matthew 11:28-30) of living by love which Jesus offers.

With regard to the nature of the lawнs requirements, Paul agrees with Jesus that love and the heart are the essence of the Law. Likewise, he emphasizes the demand for perfect intent when teaching on love as the necessary motive (1 Corinthians 13:1-3). As Jesus admonished the Pharisees for worrying about unclean food and hands instead of what came from their hearts (Matthew 15:2,10), Paul asserts that the мKingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by menо (Romans 14:17-18). Focusing on the weightier matters of serving God, Paul similarly urges his readers not to destroy Godнs work for the sake of food (Romans 14:20).

A second aspect of the law Jesus and Paul address was Jesusнs relationship to the law. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says he came to fulfill the law, not to abolish it (Matthew 5:17). Jesus gives clues about what he means by мfulfill[ing] the law,о but Paul as explicator provides the longer theological explanation. Jesusнs transfiguration indicates that he was the culmination which both the Law (Moses) and the Prophets (Elijah) anticipated (Gregg, lecture). Jesus says love fulfills the Law (Matthew 22:37-40), and his life reflects the love of God and fellow man that he says characterize perfect observance of the Law. Jesus comes closest to Paulнs theology when speaking of John the Baptist: мThe Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the Kingdom of God is being preached...о (Luke 16:16, Matthew 11:13). Paul elaborates on this last point. He explains that the law was added to the Abrahamic promises until the time the promises would be fulfilled by the coming of the Seed (Galatians 3:19). Jesus was born under Law to redeem those under Law (Galatians 4:4), apparently through his fulfilling the law, which Paul also says is accomplished by love (Romans 13:8-10). Paul goes further: мChrist is the end of the Law, so there can be righteousness for all who believeо (Romans 10:4). According to Paul, Christнs fulfillment of the law meant that believers did not need to try to attain righteousness through the law.

The purpose of the law provides a third aspect of the law for analysis. Jesus says characteristically little if anything about the theological purpose of the Law, which Paul explains in depth. Paul writes that the мlaw was put in charge to lead us to Christ, so we could be justified by faithо (Galatians 3:24-25). The law leads us to Christ by making us aware of sin (Romans 3:20) and by provoking us to sin more, revealing our true, мutterly sinfulо natures (Romans 5:20, 7:7-13). The law has this power because the мapart from the law, sin is deadо (Romans 7:8) and the мpower of sin is in the Lawо (1 Corinthians 15:56). In other words, the sinful nature responds to a law and breaks it, but cannot do so unless a law is there to break. However, the law itself is holy and good (Romans 7:12), but cannot make people righteous because the sinful nature prevents obedience to the law (Romans 8:1-3, 7). As a result of the lawнs work within people, the whole world stands silently guilty and accountable before God (Romans 3:19). At that point, once we despair of our own effort at keeping the law, we can be justified by grace through faith. Though Paulнs elaborate theological explanation of the lawнs purpose lacks comparison points in Jesusнs teaching, his explanation is consistent with Jesusнs use of the law to show people their sinfulness by contrast.

Applying the law is the final and most important aspect in comparing Jesusнs and Paulнs teaching. Jesus gives two significant teachings relating to the role of the law in the believerнs life. First, he tells people that мnot the smallest letter, or the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplishedо (Matthew 5:19). Second, he says that the teacher and doer of the Law will be called great and the one who breaks it and teaches other to do the same will be will be called least (Matthew 5:19). At first, it appears that Paulнs teachings contradict Jesusнs on both points. Paul states that believer has been released from the law, so that he can мserve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written codeо (Romans 7:6). Paul explains that this release came as the believer died to the law (Romans 7:4, Galatians 2:19). He adds that мthe law is made not for the righteous, but for lawbreakersо (1 Timothy 1:9), who need the law to bring them to Christ to receive righteousness by faith. After performing this role, the law no longer defines the way of life for the believer, who thereafter will live by faith (Romans 1:17, Habakkuk 2:4). In this way, мChrist is the end of the lawо (Romans 10:4) and has мabolish[ed] the lawо (Ephesians 2:15) and мcanceled the written codeо (Colossians 2:14). Paulнs use the law in Ephesians (6:1) indicates that мabolishing the lawо refers to removing it as a supervisor (Galatians 3:25), not destroying it at an expression of Godнs moral will. All the preceding language seems to contradict Jesusнs teaching that the Law would not go away, but Paul reconciles the life by faith with the fulfillment of the Law through the Holy Spirit. Paul does not make an unqualified statement about freedom from the law, but says the believer who is led by the Spirit is not under law (Galatians 5:18) because the actions of the Spirit break no law (Galatians 5:22-23). Similarly he wrote to the Romans that Christ came as a sin offering so that мthe righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature, but according to the Spiritо (Romans 8:4). Since the believer indirectly fulfills the law through the Spirit, the life of faith does not nullify the law, but upholds it (Romans 3:31). Paul speaks of reliance on observance of the law for righteousness as slavery (Galatians 5:1), imprisonment (Galatians 3:23), and a curse (Galatians 3:10). The new way of the Spirit is absolutely essential for the law to be fulfilled because the sinful nature prevents successful observance of the law, which for that reason becomes a curse, which Jesus has lovingly taken upon himself.

Paul carefully protects his message from both legalistic (relying on the law for Godнs acceptance) and antinomalist (licentious) misinterpretations. To combat legalism, he urges his readers to stand firm in their freedom from the written code (Galatians 5:1-4). To combat antinomalism, he tells them not to use that freedom as a license for sin, but for loving service that fulfills the entire law through love (Romans 6:1-2, Galatians 5:13-14). Paul really advocates an ideal life through the Spirit that avoids the dangerous extremes of these two misunderstandings of the law. Because Paulнs letters answer questions about the Gentiles, he devotes more effort combating legalism, the trap most likely to entangle them. Freedom from the law is almost a moot point for the Jews because it is culturally ingrained in them, and thus not as likely to cause confusion about living by faith as for the Gentiles. For this reason, Paul commands the Galatian Gentiles of weak conscience not to circumcise themselves (5:2), but has Timothy (a mature Gentile) circumcised for expediency (Acts 16:3). In the same way, Jesusнs teaching strongly combated antinomian and external views of the law, for these were the dangers for his audience, culturally conditioned to the law.

Jesusнs recorded teachings highlight his strategy of disturbing his hearers into opening their hearts and recognizing their sinfulness. He avoided theology because he aimed to make disciples of outsiders to the Kingdom, and these outsiders would not listen. He was also reticent about himself and his purpose in his public ministry so as not to throw pearls before swine. Finally, his Judaic audience could best avoid legalism by following Jesusнs interpretation of the law. These reasons explain the conspicuous absence of theology in Jesusнs teachings concerning the law. On the other hand, Paul solves problems that have arisen between believers. These problems require explanation and interpretation. Moreover, his believing audience was not Jesusнs unhearing, unseeing audience. Also, the Gentiles in his audience, to whom the law was an alien concept, needed teaching about freedom from the law to avoid legalism. For these reasons, Paul explicated the teachings of Jesus about the law in his letters. Paul interpreted, but did not corrupt, Jesus, whom he laid as the only foundation of the gospel (1 Corinthians 3:11; Fraser, p. 309). Most significantly, Jesus and Paul together offer a complete picture of teaching the gospel to the believer and non-believer, to the Jew and to the Gentile.

Bruce, F.F. Hard Sayings of Jesus.

Fraser, J.W. Jesus and Paul. Appleford: Marcham Manor Press, 1974.

Gregg, Robert. Lecture.

Petersen, Jim. Interview.