The Problem with Paul
Why do some Christians misunderstand the Apostle...?
Let’s be honest.
Many believers quietly struggle with the Apostle Paul.
His letters can feel complicated.
Sometimes even contradictory.
One minute he sounds fiercely doctrinal and the next he seems intensely personal.
There's times he’s rigid with extreme traditional religious views then we read on and he becomes incredibly flexible.
For some of us this raises a question:
Was Paul simply making things up as he went along?
And if his letters were written before the Gospels, does that mean his theology came from personal experience and feelings rather than the life of Jesus?
Hey maybe it's just me... but I'm here to dig into Scripture, gain some historical context and find out exactly what was going on with Paul
So lets examine the facts.
● Yes —Paul’s Letters Came First.
Most scholars agree that Paul’s letters were written between
AD 48–67.
The Gospels were written later:
Gospel of Mark – AD 65–70
Gospel of Matthew – AD 70–85
Gospel of Luke – AD 70–90
Gospel of John – AD 90–100
That means Paul was writing
20–30 years after the resurrection, but before the Gospel accounts were formally written down, this is something many never realise when or consider.
However, this does not mean Paul had no foundation.
The early church operated through oral transmission, a very strong Jewish tradition where teachings were memorized and repeated faithfully.
This is exactly what Paul says in First Epistle to the
Corinthians 15:3–4:
“For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance…”
Paul is explicitly saying:
“This isn’t my idea. I received it.”
● The Resurrection Creed is Older Than Paul
Many scholars believe the creed in 1 Corinthians 15:3–7 originated within a few years of the crucifixion.
That creed declares:
Christ died for our sins
He was buried
He was raised on the third day
He appeared to witnesses
Showing the core Gospel message existed before Paul ever wrote a letter.
Paul wasn’t inventing Christianity.
He was defending what the church already believed.
● Paul Didn’t Quote the Gospels.
He couldn't but he did quote Jesus...
A common argument is that Paul never quotes the Gospels.
But remember we found when we studied that the Gospels weren’t written yet.
Yet Paul still references Jesus’ teachings.
For example in First Epistle to the Corinthians 7:10:
“Not I, but the Lord…”
And in First Epistle to the Corinthians 11:23–25, Paul recounts the Last Supper tradition, the same event recorded later in the Gospels.
Again he says:
“I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you.”
Paul consistently points back to a tradition he inherited.
● Why Paul Sometimes Sounds Contradictory
Here’s where many skim readers get tripped up.
Paul was not writing systematic theology textbooks but he was writing letters to solve problems.
Every church he wrote to had different issues:
●Epistle to the Galatians Paul had to address legalism
●Epistle to the Romans he was addressing Jew/Gentile tensions
●First Epistle to the Corinthians Paul was dealing with chaos & immorality
●Epistle to the Philippians was to encourage under persecution...
Because the problems were different, the tone and emphasis changed.
What some read as a contradiction was pastoral leadership, where Paul was dealing directly with issues that needed firm and decisive action.
A good leader addresses the issue in front of him.
● Paul Was a Jewish Rabbi,
Not a Western Philosopher...
Modern readers want everything to fit into neat categories.
But Paul was trained as a Pharisee under Gamaliel (Acts 22:3).
Jewish teaching often holds tension between ideas.
●Grace and obedience
●Faith and works
●Freedom and discipline
Paul was not confused.
He was explaining how the Gospel works inside real human lives.
● But is the real problem Paul?
The real issue is often how modern Christians read him.
We pull individual verses out of letters that were never meant to be read that way.
Imagine reading one paragraph of someone’s email and trying to reconstruct their entire worldview.
That’s often how Paul gets interpreted.
But when his letters are read in context, a powerful picture emerges.
A man radically transformed by Christ.
A missionary planting churches across the Roman world.
A pastor fighting to protect the truth of the Gospel.
Final Thought
Paul did not invent Christianity.
He risked his life to defend it.
His letters were written into messy churches filled with real people, real struggles, and real spiritual battles.
And maybe that’s why his writings still resonate today.
Because the church is still messy.
And the Gospel is still the answer.
How Men Should Read Paul
Recovering the Strength Behind the Apostle’s Words
1. Read Paul Like a Soldier, Not a Spectator
Paul constantly used military language because the Christian life is war.
In Epistle to the Ephesians 6:11 he commands:
“Put on the full armour of God.”
Armour isn’t for comfort.
It’s for combat.
Paul assumes believers are in a fight:
against sin
against deception
against spiritual powers
Men who read Paul as abstract theology miss the point entirely.
Paul expected men to stand their ground.
Not drift.
Not negotiate with sin.
Stand.
2. Read Paul Through Discipline, Not Emotion
Modern Christianity often reads Scripture through feelings.
Paul did the opposite.
He spoke the language of training and self-mastery.
In First Epistle to the Corinthians 9:27 he says:
“I discipline my body and keep it under control.”
The Greek word carries the idea of striking under the eye—like a boxer training for a fight.
Paul is saying something radical:
A man must master himself before he can lead others.
No discipline = no authority.
That principle still stands.
3. Read Paul Through Mission
Paul was not writing comfortable devotional material.
He was planting churches in hostile territory.
In Second Epistle to Timothy 2:3 he tells Timothy:
“Endure hardship as a good soldier of Christ Jesus.”
Hardship wasn’t an exception.
It was expected.
Paul assumed men following Christ would face:
opposition
rejection
suffering
Yet modern Christianity often promises the opposite.
Paul’s message to men is clear:
If you follow Christ seriously, resistance will come.
4. Read Paul With Context, Not Isolated Verses
Many of the “contradictions” people see in Paul come from pulling sentences out of letters written to specific problems.
For example:
Epistle to the Galatians fights legalism.
Epistle to the Romans explains the Gospel to a divided church.
First Epistle to the Corinthians deals with chaos and immorality.
Paul adjusts his tone, not his truth.
Strong leaders do that.
A commander doesn’t speak the same way to:
a disciplined unit
a rebellious one
Paul was doing pastoral triage.
5. Read Paul With the Life of Jesus in Mind
Paul’s message always flows from the life of Christ.
He summarises the Gospel in First Epistle to the Corinthians 15:3–4:
Christ died for our sins
He was buried
He was raised on the third day
Everything Paul teaches grows out of that reality.
His message is not complicated:
The crucified Messiah changes everything.
That truth reshapes identity, leadership, suffering, and purpose.
The Masculine Pattern in Paul
Look closely at Paul’s life and you see a pattern men should recognise.
He was:
intellectually sharp
spiritually disciplined
physically resilient
mission driven
willing to suffer for truth
In other words:
Paul embodied strength under authority.
He submitted to Christ and therefore carried real authority.
Final Word to Men
Paul wasn’t confused.
He was forged.
Beaten.
Imprisoned.
Shipwrecked.
Rejected.
Yet he kept advancing the Gospel.
In Second Epistle to Timothy 4:7 he declares:
“I have fought the good fight. I have finished the race. I have kept the faith.”
That’s not theology.
That’s the testimony of a man who refused to quit.
And that might be the real reason Paul unsettles modern Christianity.
Because his life confronts comfortable faith.
Paul doesn’t call men to admire the Gospel.
He calls them to live it.
Badger out 🦡
