Jesus Vs. Christ: Did the Historical Jesus Even Matter?

When reviewing Paul’s overall mythology, one begins to question whether the historical Jesus even mattered, and particularly when comparing the Christ of Paul’s theology with the Jesus of the Gospel narratives. This debate touches on the very foundation of Christianity, raising concerns about whether its movement is rooted in a real historical figure or a theological construct that evolved independently of any specific individual.

Paul’s Christ Without a Historical Jesus

Paul’s letters, the earliest Christian writings, present a Jesus who is overwhelmingly mythological and theological; a cosmic Christ, whose death and resurrection define Christian theory. Unlike the Gospel narratives, Paul rarely references the life and teachings of Jesus. Instead, his Christ is the sacrificial atonement, a divine mediator between God and humanity. The implications are significant: if Paul’s Jesus was primarily theological and not based on an earthly figure, does Christianity even need a historical Jesus?

In 1 Corinthians 15:3-5, Paul states:

"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve."

This passage, one of the few instances where Paul presents an early Christian creed, does not focus on Jesus’ earthly life or teachings but on his death and resurrection. This emphasis suggests that for Paul, the significance of the Jesus character lay not in his historical actions, but in his theological function. Paul’s Jesus is universal, transcendent, and salvific—not a rabbi or social revolutionary, but a divine intermediary.

The Gospel Jesus: A Narrative Counterbalance?

In contrast, the Gospels somewhat anchor Jesus firmly in Jewish tradition. They depict him as a prophet, a teacher of ethics, and a proclaimer of the philosophy of the Kingdom of God. The Jesus of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John interacts with his disciples, debates with religious authorities, and preaches about justice and the inward work of God the Father. His teachings, particularly in the Sermon on the Mount, emphasize morality and social ethics in ways that Paul does not.

Given that the Gospels were written after Paul’s letters, were they attempting to correct his vision of the Jesus character? Some within the field argue that the Gospel writers sought to ground the theological Christ in history, providing a biographical framework that Paul had ignored. Others suggest that Paul’s vision was the original, and the Gospel narratives were a later mythologization, an effort to make a cosmic savior more relatable to a broader audience.

Paul’s Theology: A Jewish Evolution or a Radical Departure?

Pamela Eisenbaum, in Paul Was Not a Christian, argues that Paul remained fundamentally Jewish and was not “converting” to a new religion, but rather reinterpreting Jewish messianic expectations in light of his revelations. Paul’s Jesus was not a moral teacher but, according to Paul’s perception, a fulfillment of divine prophecy, a necessary sacrifice for the redemption of humanity.

This perspective further complicates the issue of the historical Jesus. If Paul’s vision was the earliest and most influential, then the Gospel Jesus might be a theological innovation rather than a corrective. That is, Jesus the rabbi and ethical teacher may have been a later narrative construct to appeal to Jewish and Greco-Roman audiences.

Christianity Without a Historical Jesus?

If Paul’s Jesus was primarily a theological concept, can Christianity function without a historical Jesus? Some in the field argue that it already does. Christian faith, as articulated by Paul, depends not on the deeds or words of an earthly Jesus but on belief in his death and resurrection. Paul himself claims that his Gospel was received “through revelation” rather than human tradition, suggesting that historical veracity was secondary to theological truth.

Yet, the absence of a historical Jesus would create existential challenges for Christianity. Without a tangible figure to ground its beliefs, Christianity risks being seen as a philosophical or mythical system rather than a historical faith. The tension between Paul’s cosmic Christ and the Gospel’s Jewish teacher reflects an ongoing struggle within Christian thought: is faith rooted in theological necessity or historical reality?

The Question

The question of whether the historical Jesus even mattered ultimately hinges on what one considers essential to Christian theory. If Christianity is about faith in a figure of salvation, then Paul’s theological Jesus is sufficient. If Christianity seeks historical legitimacy, then the imagined narrative of the Gospel Jesus becomes indispensable for a mythological historical framework (I realize that a “mythological historical framework might sound odd, but Greek epic writers, this was literary culture, namely, to make epic appear historical). The divergence between Paul’s letters and the Gospel narratives suggests that early Christianity was simply a lively and evolving belief system—one that continues to have a losing battle with the balance between history and theology.

 References:

Bedard, S. J., J. (n.d.). Paul And The Historical Jesus: A Case Study in First Corinthians. In McMaster Journal of Theology and Ministry (Vol. 7, pp. 9–22).

Matthew, D. & Pamela Eisenbaum. (2009). PAUL WAS NOT a CHRISTIAN: the original message of a misunderstood apostle. In HarperCollins.

Taylor, N. (2003). Paul and the historical Jesus quest. Neotestamentica, 37(1), 105-126.

The Evolution of Jesus: Did the Gospels Alter Paul’s Original Christ?

Paul’s writings were the first to introduce Jesus to the mainstream, predating the Gospels by decades. His letters present a cosmic Christ, emphasizing salvation through faith in his death and resurrection. In contrast, the Gospel Jesus is depicted as a Jewish teacher proclaiming the Kingdom of God. This raises the critical question: Did the Gospel writers reshape Paul’s Jesus, or did they seek to reclaim a more authentic version of the historical figure?

Who Was the Real Jesus?

Paul’s letters, written between 50-60 CE, present a Jesus as a divine figure whose crucifixion and resurrection define the Christian faith. Paul speaks little of Jesus' earthly ministry or ethical teachings, focusing instead on his role as a risen Lord. The Gospels, appearing later, ground Jesus in Jewish tradition, portraying him as a prophet and moral teacher. The shift in emphasis suggests that either the Gospel writers were correcting Paul’s theological vision, or that Paul’s Jesus was already a theological innovation distinct from a historical figure.

Paul’s Jesus is fundamentally theological. He emphasizes justification by faith and salvation through grace, a departure from the Gospel Jesus, who calls for repentance and righteousness in preparation for the Kingdom of God. While Jesus in the Gospels preaches ethical living and social justice, Paul frames faith in his Christ’s death as the sole path to salvation. This distinction highlights the possibility that the Gospels sought to counterbalance or reinterpret Paul’s influence.

Theological vs. Narrative Jesus: A Major Shift

Ethical teachings play a significant role in the Gospels but are largely absent from Paul’s letters. Jesus' Sermon on the Mount advocates love, humility, and nonviolence, while Paul constructs a Christ-centered theology with little reference to these teachings. Scholars like N.T. Wright argue that Paul’s vision of Jesus shaped early Christian doctrine, setting the foundation upon which Gospel writers later built. The work of Oropeza further emphasizes that Paul’s use of the term “gospel” (euangelion) was influenced by Roman imperial and Jewish traditions, reinforcing the idea that Paul’s portrayal was already a reinterpretation of either an already familiar Jesus character or figure.

Despite these differences, both Paul and the Gospels emphasize the death and resurrection of Jesus. Paul’s writings insist that without the resurrection, faith is meaningless, making it the cornerstone of Christian belief. The Gospels also build toward this climax, portraying the crucifixion as a fulfillment of prophecy. However, because Paul’s letters predate the Gospel accounts, it is possible that the Gospel writers adapted their narratives to align with the theology Paul had already established.

Did the Gospel Writers Correct Paul’s Theology?

If Paul’s letters represent the earliest theological reflections on Jesus, the Gospels may have been an attempt to reshape or refine his vision. It is academically suggest that Paul’s Jesus came first as a cosmic savior, and the Gospel writers later grounded him in history. Others propose that the Gospels intentionally corrected Paul’s theology, reestablishing the Jesus character as a Jewish messiah rather than the universal figure Paul preached. Paul himself claims in Galatians that his gospel was received through revelation, rather than human tradition, reinforcing the idea that his Jesus was the first “official” Jesus, later modified by Gospel writers. This would actually mean that no actual “Jesus” existed, as Paul only refers to his Jesus in theological terms.

Rather than Paul deviating from Jesus, it may be that the Gospel Jesus deviated from Paul’s theological framework. If Paul’s Jesus was the first to dominate Christian thought, then the Gospel narratives represent an evolution—whether to align with Jewish traditions, expand Christian theory’s appeal, or clarify aspects of Jesus’ life that Paul had not defined. The contrast between Paul’s cosmic Christ and the Gospel’s moral teacher reflects either a dynamic or divergent development of early Christian belief.

Did Paul Invent Christianity?

The question of whether Paul invented Christianity remains a topic of debate. His letters set the foundation for Christian theology, and the Gospel writers may have responded by creating a narrative to go along with it. Yet, the apparent deviation in the Gospel Jesus from Paul’s Jesus might also show a shift in understanding. The gospels don’t really portray the Jesus character as a cosmic figure; such perceptions exist due to a carrying over of Paul’s insights into those narrative. If Paul’s Jesus never existed, and if letters of more anonymous writers surfaced, breaking own to gospel Jesus as Paul breaks down his cosmic Christ, would we even think of the Jesus character in the way that Paul does? Whether Paul’s Jesus was the first true version or the Gospel Jesus was a necessary re-write, their relationship remains one of the most intriguing aspects of early Christian history.

References:

Oropeza, B. J. (2024). The Gospel according to Paul: over a hundred years of interpretation. Religions, 15(12), 1566. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15121566

Wright, N. T. (1978). The Tyndale New Testament Lecture, 1978. TYNDALE BULLETIN, 29, 62–64. https://tyndalebulletin.org

The Revelation of Adam: Awakening the Devotional Conversation to Itself

The Apocalypse of Adam, a text from the Nag Hammadi Codex V, presents an interesting alternative to the traditional narrative within the Bible. Here, Adam is not merely the first man of Genesis, but a figure of cosmic awareness, speaking to his son Seth in the seven hundredth year of his life (NHC V,5 64:1-4). Unlike the patriarchal blessing of the Old Testament, Adam’s revelation is an esoteric transmission of lost knowledge—gnosis—that transcends the Creator Deity known to the Hebrew tradition.

The Eternal God and the Primordial Glory

Adam recalls a time before “the fall,” when he and Eve existed in unity with the eternal god, a transcendent deity distinct from the creator. Adam recounts:

"When the god had created me of the earth with Eve your mother, I lived with her in a glory that she had seen in the aeon from which we had become. She taught me a word of knowledge of the eternal god" (64:6-13).

This description presents a stark contrast to the Genesis narrative, where Adam and Eve were fashioned from dust and placed under the rule of a singular deity. In The Apocalypse of Adam, their true origin is tied to a seemingly divine reality beyond the material realm, revealing an essential Gnostic theme: the distinction between the eternal God of Light and the Creator, who is but a lesser, flawed Being or Deity.

The Fall as a Consequence of Knowledge

The fall, as Adam describes it, was not a punishment for disobedience, but an act of suppression by the Demiurge (the Creator Deity). He states:

"Then the god, the sovereign of the aeons together with the powers, decided (against) us in wrath. Then we became two aeons, and the glory in our heart left us" (64:20-25).

This "god"—the Demiurge—acts in jealousy and fear, recognizing that Adam and Eve possess a supernatural spark that makes them superior to him and his powers. Adam continues:

"We resembled the great eternal angels, for we were higher than the god who had created us and the powers who were with him, whom we did not know" (64:14-19).

This statement upends the traditional theological theory of Genesis. Here, Adam’s awakening is not a sin but a realization of divine origin. The demiurge, identified with the God of the Old Testament, becomes a cosmic tyrant, seeking to obscure humanity’s true nature.

Noah, Sakla, and the Suppression of Gnosis

As the revelation unfolds, Adam recounts the coming of three mysterious figures—Abrasax, Sablo, and Gamaliel—who unveil the truth about humanity’s origins (76:1-7). Yet, the demiurge, now called Sakla, attempts to erase this knowledge through the flood (69:1-71:26). However, Seth’s lineage preserves the gnosis, escaping Sakla’s wrath through the intervention of higher powers.

This is definitely a reinterpretation of the flood narrative. The Old Testament flood is supposed to be (on the surface) a “divine” cleansing of “corruption,” but here, it is an attempt to annihilate those who bear the knowledge of the Eternal God.

The Illuminator

The text reaches its climax in the hymnic section (77:27-83:4), where an "Illuminator" is prophesied to come, performing signs and wonders to expose the demiurge and his powers:

"The Illuminator will come... and he will perform signs and wonders to scorn the powers and their sovereign" (77:7-18).

This figure, most likely the Gnostic Christ, leads souls out of the Demiurge’s domain and restores them to the light of the Eternal God. Ritual participants, through this knowledge, undergo a spiritual rebirth, breaking free from the false divinity that binds them. One may understand the difference between the Gnostic Christ and the Christian Christ, as the Christian Christ, still employing the tactics of the Demiurge, yet binds individuals to flawed philosophy of the Creator Deity, while the Gnostic Christ spiritually liberates from the chains of such a Christ and flawed Deity.

The Escape from Religious Law

The Apocalypse of Adam is not merely an inversion of the Genesis story; it is a radical philosophical revelation on the fact of the devotional experience. The "God" of the Old Testament is not a Deity per se, but (in reality as you weigh the philosophy from Genesis to Malachi) represents a philosophy centered on righteousness through religious law. The Garden of Eden becomes the first scene of devotional struggle to escape legalistic devotion in favor of direct, experiential understanding.

This idea finds echoes in Psalm 51:10: "Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me."

Here, "cleansing" is not about adhering to external commandments, but about inner transformation, awakening the conscious spark within the devotional conversation’s conscience and recognizing the point of the Bible’s wisdom beyond the rule of the Figure calling for enslavement by religious law.

A Call to Awakening

The Apocalypse of Adam encourages its readers to recognize the chains of false religious authority and embrace wisdom that transcends the realm of the religious world, wisdom that, in all actuality, is found at the core of the Bible. Through the figure of Adam, it presents a stark warning: the god of this world (religious world) is not the true source of life, and salvation lies in reclaiming the lost wisdom of the “Eternal God.” In reality, the wisdom that has been lost is that the devotional conversation does well to break its bond to religious law and tradition for the cultivation of self-regulating wisdom, and that “Eternal God” is but the revelation of an understanding of personal and devotional growth eclipsing that false religious experience. This Gnostic text therefore, when coupling it with the Bible, offers a powerful critique of legalistic religion, inviting minds to escape the tyranny of religious law into the liberty of devotional illumination.

 

Linder, P.-A. & Lunds Universitet. (1991). THE APOCALYPSE OF ADAM NAG HAMMADI CODEX V,5 CONSIDERED FROM ITS EGYPTIAN BACKGROUND. In T. Olsson (Ed.), LUND STUDIES IN AFRICAN AND ASIAN RELIGIONS (Vol. 7, p. 165) [Thesis].