ied by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified." (Gal 2:16) "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill .... Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven.." (Matt 5: 17 & 19) Although I realize the Book of Matthew was written after Galatians, the preachings of Jesus were made before Matthew was even a Christian! Points to consider before accusing Paul of defying Jesus would be to find out if Paul had access to all the words of Jesus. The Quell was supposedly present during Paul's lifetime. It is also possible that Matthew added these words of Jesus in his book, but they may not have been true ... he has added other unproven events before. Weather Paul was aware of these words or not, he was obviously preaching a fundamentally different belief than Jesus was. Paul argues his position only up to Gal. 5:12, after that, he contradicts his preaching until 6:10, where he ends the letter. This area is full of rules/laws for the Galatians to live by. Of course, he justifies that Christians live by these laws because they "Walk in the Spirit of Christ." (Gal 5:16) If Christians are to "imitate" Jesus' actions & morals, then why should they decide to follow some, and not others? This is more evidence of Peter trying to create a "convenient" religion. The problem of acceptance of Jewish Law, I believe, is the fundamental split in Christianity. It can still be seen today: Catholicism represents Paul's view of Christianity, while Seventh Day Adventist Christians keep Jewish Law. However, if Paul had preached the Law, I don't believe that Christianity would even be present today (especially among the gentiles). He did much to advance Christianity; however, Gentile Christianity became a religion of Paul, rather than a religion of Jesus....
