Some teachers always draw a distinction between Jesus and Paul. They claim to be Pauline in teaching and doctrine. They counsel their listeners to focus on the writings of Paul more than the writings of Jesus because Paul preached the Gospel.
Sometimes, they go as far as saying the audience of Jesus were Jewish and He preached under the law so His words aren't relevant to us today. That's a dangerous conclusion. If Paul preached the gospel of the Kingdom, then I ask, 'what did Jesus preach'? Anytime I hear this theology, it sounds awkward to me.
In the opening text, Jesus claimed that he was anointed to preach the good news( Gospel) to the poor. In other portions of scriptures, we read that Jesus proclaimed the good news( Gospel). See Luke4:43-43,8:1,20:1.
In 1Cor1:17, Paul said, "For Christ didn’t send me to baptize, but to PREACH THE GOOD NEWS—and not with clever speech, for fear that the cross of Christ would lose its power".
The Greek word "evangelizo" is translated as "preaching the gospel/good news". This is the same word used when the scriptures talked about Jesus preaching the good news and same was used all through the book of Acts.
There's no distinction or difference in the good news Jesus and Paul preached. That is what the bible says. It is a dangerous conclusion to say that Jesus preached the law but Paul preached grace. How can a man that is grace personified preach a different message?
Speaking about Jesus Christ, John 1:16 says, "And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace". Hallelujah!!! We didn't receive law for law in Christ but grace for grace. I wonder If some of those who are trying to draw distinction between Paul and Jesus read scriptures such as this.
The reason some persons do not regard the teachings of Jesus as gospel/good news is because his teachings always rebuke them. They see themselves as they are whenever they read Jesus, they don't like the correction in it and the harsh tone of Jesus.
The truths that Jesus taught confront them always, instead of repenting, they hide under certain Pauline scriptures. The words of Jesus are so important that's why they're printed in red in some bible translations. That a scripture rebukes you doesn't mean it is not good news.
The good news can excite you and make you sober to straighten you up. The flesh doesn't like the latter. Those in the camp that opposes Jesus do not like to read the book of Revelation where Jesus rebuked some of the seven churches. They don't see that book as part of the new testament because it doesn't suit their theology.
How I wish they read Pauline words such as this: "But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person" (1Cor 5:13).
In fact, Paul went further to say something like this about the sexually immoral man: "hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord". This is a big bang.
Dearest, we are in the end time. Paul said, "For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear",2 Tim4:3. We now live in the age Paul anticipated long ago.
Trying to distinguish between what Paul and Jesus preached is needless. Stay true to the teachings of the bible whether by Paul, Peter, John, Luke, or Jesus and other books of the bible. The book is one and the central theme is Christ.
