It is kind of true. Seeing as a lot of Christians tend to follow the words of Paul instead of Jesus.
Actually, they may not even be following Paul's words.
1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus are three short books included in the New Testament. They're purportedly written by St. Paul, but nearly 100% of scripture scholars doubt that - the writing style doesn't match Paul's other work (lots of writers at the time signed their work with well-known names so that it would get read). However, it appears that the three books were composed by the same guy, who was writing with the objective of establishing a male-dominated hierarchy in the early church. It's some deeply misogynist shit.
Throw out those books, and the New Testament is remarkably egalitarian on gender given that most of it was written in the first century. If only they hadn't ended up in the canon...
It's interesting to note that, aside from Acts (which was written by a different author as well), it becomes apparent that Paul (the real one... supposedly) didn't believe in a literal Jesus Christ, and instead was a proponent of Gnosticism, which was a prevailing... I wanna say "cult" during the time period, if only to refer to the size of the constituents rather than the mentality.
And also, Matthew/Mark/Luke/John were written by vastly different people who lived long after the eponymous apostles. Matt/Mark/Luke were based off of one supposed account, and John was based off of a different account.
And a lot of things in the Bible (specifically the New Testament) are more like annotations of what was already written there, that ended up being rolled into what was actually written.
In short, half the book is a clusterfuck upon clutserfock. And then the other half was stolen from Judaism, so... yeah.
Apologies if I offended, but I've done some hefty research on the subject myself.