Friday, December 25, 2009

Paul, the False Apostle by Scott Nelson

Good relatively short overview article exposing Saul/Paul:


Paul: The False Apostle


Thus far, I have shown that Paul's concept of God's foreknowledge, and his doctrine of predestination not only do not exist in Yahshua's words or the Hebrew Scriptures, but there is much evidence to the contrary to be found in them. We might call this the DNA evidence against him (Doctrine Not Accurate). It is an important part of the case against him. But it is by no means all the evidence there is against his supposed authority. There is more than enough evidence to suggest that he was not even a true apostle of Yahshua... let alone the greatest apostle who ever lived as he is so often eulogized.

There are a number of historical facts, including things that both Yahshua and Paul said as recorded in the Bible, that leave us with some very compelling evidence against his apostleship being recognized in heaven.

There are several interesting facts surrounding this case that should be noted and kept in mind.

His apostleship was unrecognized by others.

Of the 22 times in the Bible where Paul is referred to as an "apostle", only twice is he referred to as an apostle by someone other than himself! These two instances came from the same person. Not from Yahshua, or any of the original apostles, but from Paul's close traveling companion and personal press secretary Luke. Both accounts are found in Luke's record of the Acts of the Apostles, (chapter 14:4,14). Here Paul is referred to as an apostle along with Barnabas. By this time in the story, Luke would have been very accustomed to Paul calling himself an apostle, and he would no doubt have been in agreement with Paul's assessment of himself. By these statistics alone, it is evident that Paul is by far his own biggest fan... and his side kick Luke was his number two fan. This leaves no one else anywhere in the Bible going on record recognizing his apostleship!

"I wanna talk about me!"

No other epistle author in the Bible wrote like Paul. This would be true on a number of levels, but one aspect is of particular interest when we are considering how Paul views himself. He had a way of drawing attention to himself with his usage of personal pronouns. When it comes to how often he uses words like, "I", "me", "my", or "mine", the overall rate in his epistles is almost three times that of his next closest rival. There are a number of reasons why many scholars today believe Paul was not the author of the book of Hebrews. One obvious reason is, in the other epistles credited to him, Paul doesn't hesitate to identify himself along with his supposed credentials. The author of Hebrews is strangely silent on these matters. Many scholars believe Barnabas was the author of Hebrews, but I think Apollos is a far better candidate... but that's a different subject. The point is, no one knows for sure. But Paul certainly couldn't be in the running as the author of Hebrews when one also considers the statistical rate of the personal pronoun usage. The author of Hebrews refers to himself only 9 times, which is approximately 1.3 personal pronouns per thousand words. To help put this in perspective, let's compare the book of Hebrews to the book of Romans. They are both relatively large books of similar length, divided into 13 and 16 chapters respectively. Yet in only the first half of the first chapter of Romans, which is 16 verses worth, Paul uses twice as many personal pronouns as the author of Hebrews uses in his entire book! In the book of Romans, Paul refers to himself 103 times, which is rate of about 18.2 per thousand! That is 13x greater than Hebrews. In 1 Corinthians, Paul refers to himself 175 times, in 2Corinthians 103 times again, and in the relatively short book of Galatians, he refers to himself 69 times which is a rate of 25 personal pronouns per 1000 words!

It should be evident that Paul is at least as concerned with making a statement about himself as he is in communicating what he believes to be the truth about God.

His claim of apostleship stands alone.

Other than the twelve apostles who spent three and a half years with Yahshua, no one other than Paul can be identified as having claimed for themselves the title of "apostle". Barnabas was referred to as an apostle along with Paul by Luke in Acts 14:14, but there is no record of Barnabas claiming the title for himself.

Our view of early church is polarized.

When we take a survey of the New Testament, we notice that Paul is the single greatest contributor to it. When we read the book of Acts, we can't help but get the impression that the great bulk of what God was doing in the early church was happening through Paul. But it is misleading, because the book of Acts was written from only one man's perspective... Luke's. Luke traveled with Paul on his missionary journeys and the bulk of the book of Acts is the account of those travels. What we have in Acts is only one man's point of view, and from Luke's perspective, Paul's story would no doubt have appeared to be front and center stage. There is a likely reason why Luke chose to follow Paul and record his story in the first place. Paul branded himself the apostle to the Gentiles, and Luke, being a Gentile, would have seen Paul as where things were happening for him. When we consider Paul taught that there is no difference in God’s eyes between Jew and Gentile, but all believers in Yahshua now constitute "the true Israel of God", what Gentile who desired to get close to the God of Israel wouldn’t be absolutely thrilled with Paul? But even though the view from the book of Acts is polarized and biased, it is still very important in helping us understand what was happening at that time. Without it we wouldn't have much of an idea at all. What was done and said as recorded by Luke is priceless, and we have no good reason to question what he saw and heard. Luke's own personal thoughts that he interjected occasionally may be questioned, but they are few and far between. I see no good reason to accuse Luke of malicious intent. The important thing to remember is that the book of Acts was written from a very singular point of view.

No doubt, God was doing other things at that same time. We don't have a detailed record of it, but we do have some clues. God was certainly working through the original apostles, and some of those things are recorded in the beginning of Acts. The apostle John was hard at work for his Lord, but we hear very little from him until we get to his epistles and the book of the Revelation at the end of the New Testament.

Paul's claims of apostleship

Paul was not at all shy about calling himself an apostle. In fact, in nine out of thirteen of his books, he introduces himself as an apostle of Yahshua, and in each case states in some way that his apostleship is by heavenly decree.

Here is the question. Should we automatically believe the testimony of a person who makes grandiose claims about themselves when all we have for confirmation of their claim is little more than their word and maybe a statement or two from their best friend? If so, then we should likewise confirm those like Jim Jones and David Koresh. Unless there is obvious corroborative evidence to support such claims, all of them should be taken with a very large grain of salt. Unlike Paul, a true prophet or apostle does not have to go to such extraordinary lengths to convince the world they are who they say they are. Even Yahshua said that if he alone bore witness of himself, his witness was invalid. John 5:31 And of all the people who shouldn't need to have others testify on their behalf, Yahshua was that person. Yet he had Moses, the prophets, the Psalms, John the Baptist, the Fathers voice from heaven saying, "You are My beloved Son..." and hundreds of those who witnessed his resurrection. Paul had none of these. Though in his conceit, he considered himself to be God's special gift to the Gentiles, and claimed for himself a prophecy that was given exclusively to Isaiah in Isaiah 49:6.

"For so the Lord has commanded us: 'I have set you to be a light to the Gentiles that you should be for salvation to the ends of the earth." Acts 13:47

Paul, the greatest apostle!

Paul's view of himself as an apostle didn't stop at only claiming to be an apostle. He also did what he could to communicate to his followers that he topped them all. He even had the nerve to belittle the very apostles that Yahshua had called and trained for three and a half years to be his witnesses! Among this braggadocio's self-flattering quotes are the following.

"For I consider that I am not at all inferior to the most eminent apostles". ...."As the truth of Christ is in me, no one shall stop me from this boasting in the regions of Achaia." 2 Corinthians 11:5,10

Sometimes, as though he knew he should be ashamed of challenging the stature of Yahshua's 12, he would preface his boast with a statement of unworthiness. No doubt he hoped people would embrace him as the greatest of apostles because he was so humble.

"For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all...". 1Corinthians 15:9,10

Aside from the fact that it was a lie to suggest the ministry had been split up between Jews and Gentiles though he had exclusive rights to the Gentiles and the 12 were to stay with the Jews..., Paul even had the gall to condescend specifically on Peter, James, and John when he belittled them to the Galatians.

"But from those who seemed to be something - whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man- for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), and when James, Cephas (Peter), and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised." Galatians 2:6,7,9

This is nothing but an arrogant lie. A couple verses later, Paul takes another cheap-shot at Peter. With Peter nowhere around to defend himself, Paul brags to the Galatians how he had determined Peter was a hypocrite, and how he had put him down before the entire church of Antioch.

"But when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews played the hypocrite with him so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straight forward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, "if you being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?" Galatians 2:11-14

Earlier, in Galatians 1:8,9, Paul commanded his followers to consider "accursed" anyone who preaches a different gospel than his. There is little doubt that Paul wanted the Galatians to think this way toward Peter, if not James, and John as well. It is obvious to anyone reading the book of Galatians that Paul was demanding the Galatian church follow no one but him, not even the original apostles back in Jerusalem.

Aside from Paul's incredible arrogance, I also need to point out that Paul himself was the ultimate hypocrite for condemning Peter for accommodating Gentiles when he was around Gentiles and acting like a Jew around Jews. Here is what he claimed to do, and commanded the Corinthians to do as well.

"For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win the more; and to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law; to those who are without the law as without law... that I might win those who are without law; to the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some." 1Corinthians 9:19-22

"Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. Give no offense, either to the Jews or to the Greeks or to the church of God, just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved. Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ." 1Corinthians 10:31-33

When Paul says, "Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ" we should do as he says... because in no way did he imitate Yahshua! Can anyone imagine Yahshua playing chameleon and saying anything like "I have become all things to all men" or "I please all men in all things"?

So here we have Paul, claiming to be greater than any other apostle, belittling Peter, James, and John by saying they only "seemed" to be pillars of the church, and that they "added nothing" to him. Then he brags about how he told off Peter... calling him a hypocrite, and he subtly curses the apostles by telling the Galatians to consider accursed anyone who differs with him. All this, while in fact, he was being the greatest hypocrite of all! The superstitious belief that Paul's words are infallible is so thick that people can't see the forest for all the trees that are in the way! If anyone else had even begun to do and say the things that Paul did, we would have recognized their incredible conceit and rejected them a long time ago. Here is something relevant that Solomon said.

"Let another man praise you, and not your own mouth; A stranger, and not your own lips." Proverbs 27:2

The book of Revelation

Back when I still believed Paul was a legitimate apostle, I was puzzled by one thing. If he was the greatest apostle who ever lived, as Christianity made him out to be, why didn't God give him the greatest prophecy since Yahshua... the book of Revelation? There are some interesting facts surrounding the book of Revelation, and things Yahshua said recorded in it that answer the question why Paul was not given the "Revelation". In other words, there is good reason why Yahshua did not give such an obviously high endorsement of Paul to the world. John was not given the Revelation because Paul was just a lesser apostle compared to him. The implications are far worse for Paul. Paul wasn't given the Revelation because part of the message of Revelation was given for the very purpose of exposing him as a false apostle! There is good reason why Yahshua used John the beloved apostle. He was one of the 12 Yahshua had been with for three and a half years training to be his witness, and he said that John's testimony would remain till he returned. (More on this in the chapter 10, Yahshua’s prophecy concerning Peter)

When was it written?

The first thing we notice about the book of the Revelation is that it has been given to the beloved apostle John. The second thing we need to understand is that the Revelation was most likely given to John during the Neronian persecution around 65 A.D. This was about the same time we hear the last from Paul who was in prison in Rome when he wrote his second epistle to Timothy. We'll come back to 2 Timothy in a moment.

Many Scholars (but by no means all of them) believe that Revelation was written later during the Domitian persecution of A.D.81-96. This theory has its origin in the testimony of the historian Irenaeus who wrote around the year 180 A.D. some 100 years or more later. Irenaeus held Paul in the highest esteem and lived to emulate him. He was also instrumental in pulling together the many splintering factions of Christianity at that time. There is no other reason to assume a later date than A.D. 65 for the writing of Revelation than his say so. But there is significant evidence to contradict him. It is my belief that he saw the devastating impact on Paul’s credibility that an earlier date for Revelation would bring. Fighting division, and wanting union (especially in favor of Paul), he settled on the later date in an attempt to give Paul a little breathing room. This only helps Paul a little. Even in the unlikely case that the Revelation was written later, it continues to reflect badly on Paul as you will see. The other early historians who also render the later date, Victorinus (c. 270), Eusebius (c.328), and Jerome (c. 370) were simply following Irenaeus’ lead.

There is evidence that can be deduced from the book of Revelation itself that calls for an earlier date for it's writing. In chapter 11, John is told to measure the temple. That temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. It is nonsensical to imagine that John was told to measure the temple after it was gone. Also, when one adds up the numerical value of the consonantal letters in the name "N’ron Kahsar" (which is the way all Greek speaking people pronounced the name "Caesar Nero"), the sum totals 666. (See Caesar Nero = 666 in the appendix.) The churches of Asia would have believed Nero was the beast of which Revelation prophesied... even though he was only a type, a sort of preview of things to come in the distant future, much the way Solomon, David's son, was a preview of Yahshua's coming kingdom.

There is also the consideration of the age of John. Being a contemporary of Yahshua, it is safe to assume that he would have been close to the same age as Yahshua. If John had been as much as 10 years younger than Yahshua, he would have been only 20 when Yahshua called him to follow him. It would seem doubtful that Yahshua would have called someone so young, but for the sake of a conservative estimate, if John was only 20 when he was called by Yahshua, he would have been in his late fifties at the youngest in the year 65. If he had been the same age as Yahshua, he would have been in his late sixties. By first century standards, a person in age from late 50s to late 60s was considered a significantly old person. If the book of Revelation was written in the year 95 as some suggest, at the youngest, John would have been in his late 80s. This was virtually unheard of in the first century. If he had been the same age as Yahshua or older, (not at all out of the question), he would have been in his late 90s to over 100 years old. This is highly improbable. As long as one isn’t trying to salvage Paul’s reputation, the earlier date of 65 A.D. for the writing of Revelation, during the Neronian persecution, fits the data best.

To whom was it written?

One haunting fact from Revelation Christianity has to deal with, is that in spite of Paul's supposed notoriety, Yahshua didn't call him by name, nor did he give any recognition of his work among the Gentiles. Of the seven churches in Asia to whom the book is originally addressed, one of them we definitely know had significant dealings with Paul. It is Ephesus, the first on the list of the seven. Also, keep in the back of your mind that these seven churches are located in what is called "Asia". We will be coming back to this as well. Here is John's record of Yahshua's command.

"I was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day, and I heard behind me a loud voice, as of a trumpet, saying, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last," and, "What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea." Revelation 1:10,11

Yahshua goes on to tell John what to say to each church. The general flow of what he said to each church went like this. First, he would tell them what they were doing right and commend them for it. Next he would point out to them where they going wrong and reprimand them for it. Then he would exhort them to repent and change what they were doing wrong, or they would suffer the consequences. Then he would give them a promise of reward if they did repent and overcome their problems. Then, and this is important, at the end of each and every message to a church, he would speak to the whole world and say that what was true and good for this and all seven churches was good for anybody who cared to listen.

"He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches". Revelation 2:7,11,17,29 and 3:6,13,22

Paul and the Ephesians

Now, look at what was said to the church that we know Paul had been involved in... Ephesus. Among the things that Yahshua commended the Ephesian church for doing right, is this quote:

"I know your works, your labor, and your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars." Rev. 2:2

Yes. I have no doubts Yahshua was referring to Paul and his companions, and that his claim of apostleship, as well as his doctrine, were false! Hang in there and consider all the facts with me for a minute. Here are four of them... with the silver bullet coming shortly after.

1. Paul's doctrine on the foreknowledge of God is not only groundless (because he had to abuse Scripture to support it), it is blasphemous,
because it outright accuses God of unrighteousness. (See previous chapters)
2. We have record of Paul claiming to be an apostle to the Ephesians.

"Paul, an apostle of Yahshua by the will of God, To the saints who are in Ephesus," Ephesians 1:1

3. We have no record of anyone else claiming to be an apostle to anyone anywhere, not even to the Ephesians.
4. Paul and his doctrine had troubles being accepted in Ephesus.

"And he went into the synagogue and spoke boldly for three months, reasoning and persuading concerning the things of the kingdom of God. But when some were hardened and did not believe, but spoke evil of the way before the multitude..." Acts 19:8,9

Remember, this is recorded from Luke’s point of view and he believed Paul's doctrine was "the Way". Notice that those who rejected Paul are men of the synagogue and not atheists or pagans. If these men had stood up in front of the synagogue and said, "Paul's doctrine is flawed. He is a false apostle, and a liar", Luke would no doubt have seen this as "speaking evil of the Way".

If these four reasons are not enough to seriously call into question Paul's status as an apostle there is one more. It is a most interesting quote from Paul's own pen that finally seals the fate of his supposed apostleship. It comes from his second letter to Timothy, written during the same Neronian persecution in which John was given the Revelation. This letter is believed by many scholars to contain the last recorded words of Paul. Here he makes a short statement of lament that seems to have gone unnoticed... the implications of which are devastating to Paul if one is able to hear everything that is being said. Paul makes this statement to Timothy.

"This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me." 2Timothy 1:15

Asia! All of them! Rejecting Paul! And when he says, "This you know", it sounds like this must have been relatively common knowledge at that time. Asia! The very place that Yahshua told John to write, where his seven churches were! And they were alive, and obviously had been established for some time. Paul did not say that Asia had rejected Yahshua. Obviously they hadn't rejected Yahshua if there were thriving churches there that Yahshua wanted to address through John. Instead Paul said that all Asia had rejected him personally! This is also corroborated in the book of Acts where men from Asia accuse Paul of teaching against the Law, and bringing an Ephesian friend into the temple.

And when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him. crying out, "Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the Law, and this place: and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place." (For they had previously seen Trophimus the Ephesian with him in the city, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.) Acts 21:27-29

Try to grasp the profound significance of all this. Here we have in the book of Revelation the words of Yahshua commending the Ephesian church for rejecting someone who claimed to be his apostle, while Paul is the only person other than the twelve original apostles to have claimed to be an apostle... and we know he has made this very claim to this same Ephesian church. At the same time, Paul laments himself of the fact that he has been rejected by them! How could it NOT be Paul and his associates that Yahshua had commended the Ephesian church for rejecting? Could it be much more obvious? Here are the facts, paraphrased, one more time.

Paul to the Ephesians: "I am an apostle of Yahshua"

The Ephesians to Paul: "No you're not."

Yahshua to the Ephesians: "Well done!"

This should at the very least raise serious question about Paul. When we add to this the remaining evidence against his doctrine, as well as the documented fact that he outright lied a number of times (as I will show in the next chapter), we have more than enough reason to do as the Ephesian church and convict Paul of the crime of false impersonation of an apostle!

Yahshua’s description of Paul in Revelation was that he was a false apostle, and a liar. Consider his following words.

"He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."

"The Paul Paradox" (from Willie Martin Archive)

Lengthy article, but includes much good info:

The Paul Paradox

Those who study the New Testament may well note that popular ‘red‑letter’ editions of the text, with Christ's words thus highlighted, contain virtually no such rubrics thruout the Epistles of Paul. With the sole exception of the eucharistic formula at I‑Corinthians 11:24‑25, he does not quote any sayings of the historical YeashĂșa/Jesus, either as found in the written Gospels or from a contemporaneous oral tradition.

Indeed furthermore, he never even once alludes to the panorama of the Savior's biography, from the Nativity up to the Passion, which fills the pages of the first four books of the New Testament. This is, on the face of it, a most puzzling omission. (¹although, astonishingly, at Acts 13:24‑25 he does quote John the Baptist!; Acts 20:35, on the other hand, is actually a citation from Thucidides'/

Peloponnesian War, while Ac 26:14 is in fact a line from Euripides' Bacchae!)

Beyond this remarkable lack of historical concern, however, there is an even more enigmatic aspect of Paul's record in the New Testament. For an objective, philosophical reading of the documents would seem to reveal a number of logical contradictions, both within his biography and also between his theology and that of the Evangelists. It must be emphasized that these anomalies are conceptual rather than empirical in nature.


Here then is the matrix of antinomies, along with a brief statement of the apparent logical contradiction in each case (the original Greek should always be checked, at least via Adolph Knoch's superlative interlinear [Biblio.#17, above], as modern translations often blur these very discrepancies):

· 1. Acts 9:7 Acts 22:9

In the propositional calculus of modern logic, ‘p & not‑q’ is the truth‑functional negation of ‘q & not‑p’. Thus ‘they heard but did not see’ directly contradicts ‘they saw but did not hear’. Yet this famous event on the Damascus road was the sole original justification for Paul's supposed commission in independence of Peter/Kefa and the other Apostles.

· 2. Acts 9:26‑29 Galatians 1:17‑2:1

Did Paul then travel immediately; or seventeen years later! from Damascus to Jerusalem in order to meet with the entire Apostolic circle?

· 3. Mathewt 22:41‑45 Romans 1:3

Paul asserts that Christ is descended from David, which Christ himself in the Gospels explicitly denies (the synoptic genealogies merely providing the OT background to this transcending self‑assertion).

· 4. Luke 2:49, 19:45‑46 Acts 17:24

The Gospels endorse the OT designation of the Temple in Jerusalem as the very House of the LORD. Paul nevertheless proclaims to the Athenians that God inhabits no sanctuary made by human hands.

· 5. Acts 1:15 I‑Corinthians 15:6

How can Christ have appeared to over 500 Brothers at a time (prior to the ascension) when the entire Discipleship numbered only 120?

· 6. Matthew 10:2&40, 16:15‑19 Galatians 2:11‑13

The explicit designation of Simon Peter as the foremost Apostle, with all the delegated authority of the Lord himself, logically precludes any other Disciple or Apostle opposing him ‘to his face’ and (worse yet) calling him a hypocrite.

· 7. Matthew 28:16‑20; Acts 10:1‑11:18, 15:7‑8 & 13‑18 Galatians 2:6‑9

The Gospel doctrine is clearly that, after the resurrection, the remaining eleven Apostles were sent forth to proclaim the good news to the whole world. Paul nevertheless claims to be the one and only Apostle to the gentiles (‘the’ Apostle as he is often called), while Peter and the others according to this view were to be restricted to evangelizing among the Jews.

· 8. Matthew 5:48; Lk 1:6; John 1:14, 6:53‑56 Romans 8:8

The incarnation of the Logos, and also the injunction to be perfect, entail that those who are in the flesh can indeed please God.

· 9. Luke 24:36‑43; John 11:43‑44, 20:27; Acts 1:9‑11; Phippians 25 I‑Corinthians 15:50

The evangelists proclaim an incarnate resurrection and parousia (second coming), whereas Paul on the contrary takes an anti‑corporeal, frankly gnostic position.

· 10. Luke 4:5‑8; John 18:36, 19:18; Acts 4:26 (Psalm 2:2) Romans 13:1‑5

The celestial kingdom is described in the Gospels as of another order from the entire realm of the nations, which are ruled by Satan and whereby Christ was crucified. On the other hand, the secular authorities with all their weaponry (including Mark 15:16 ff.??) are stated by Paul to be God's own army.

· 11. Matthew 22:21 Acts 25:11

Christ cedes taxes to Caesar, Paul cedes his personal security to him (Nero, no less!).

· 12. Deuteronomy 23:15‑16; Matthew 23:10‑12; John 8:31‑36 Colossians 4:1; I‑Timothy 6:1‑2; Philemons 10‑19

The re‑conceptualization in the Gospels promises to emancipate the believers from oppressive relationships, while Paul literally endorses slavery within the Discipleship.

· 13. Matthew 12:46‑50, 23:8‑9; Luke 14:25‑26; John 1:12‑13, 3:1‑8, 11:52 Colossians 3:18‑21; I‑Timothy 5:8

Christ teaches that family ties are to be renounced in favor of; that is, replaced by, the Father/Motherhood of God together with the Brother/Sisterhood of their incarnate Sons and Daughters, whereas Paul adamantly defends the traditional family structure.

· 14. Matthew 19:10‑12; Luke 14:20‑26, 18:28‑30, 20:34‑36; Philippians 64! I‑Corinthans 7:2‑16 & 9:5(?!); Ephesians 5:22‑24; I‑Timothy 3:1‑4:3

The Gospels stipulate that those worthy of salvation must transcend matrimony (note that Luke 18:28‑30 occurs after Luke 4:38‑39); after all, according to Genesis 3:16, monandry was Eve's punishment for disobedience! Paul notwithstanding permits a continuation of marriage among the Disciples.

· 15. Numbers 6:5; Leviticus 19:27; Matthew 2:23 (Judges 13:5); Tr 21 I‑Corinthians 11:14

The Hebrew tradition was that long hair on male or female is a sign of holiness and special devotion to God. Indeed the word at Mt 2:23 is NAZWRAIOS (the LXX or Septuagint term for Nazirite), not NAZARHNOS (i.e. someone from Nazareth). Were not John the Baptist and Christ both thus consecrated from birth?

· 16. Matthew 6:24‑34, 10:8; Mark 10:13‑31; Luke 14:28‑33; Acts 4:32‑36 Acts 18:1‑3; I‑Corinthians 11:34; II‑Thessalonians 3:6‑12

Christ decrees a cessation of working for mammon, donating all private possessions to the poor, and following thereafter a lifestyle both communal and itinerant; childlike and without anxiety day‑to‑day like the birds and the flowers, with all shared possessions being distributed equitably among those who have need, thus lifting the curse of toil from mankind (Gensis 3:17‑19). Paul's advice, on the contrary, is to ‘eat at home’ and avoid idlers, who must either work or go hungry.

· 17. Mark 7:14‑23; Luke 7:34 Romans 14:21; I‑Corinthians 8:13

Either we ought, or we ought not, to maintain some particular diet for religious reasons. Yet Paul agrees with neither the OT's dietary rules (kashrut) nor the Savior's remarkable midrash (commentary) thereupon.

`· 18. Matthew 12:19 (Isaiah 42:2); Luke 10:7 Acts 17:16‑34, 20:20

Paul preActshes house‑to‑house, as well as in the streets and squares— contrary to Christ's paradigm.

· 19. Matthew 6:5‑6 I‑Timothy 2:8

Paul demands the very same outspoken prayer which Christ condemns as exhibitionist; the Savior states that one should only pray in solitude and in secret, never openly.

· 20. Matthew 18:1‑4; Mark 9:33‑35; Luke 14:7‑11 II‑Corinthians 11:5‑12:13

Paul's recounting of his travels is insubordinately boastful and rivalrous; rather than humble, respectful and obedient, toward those who preceded him in the Discipleship.

· 21. Matthew 5:43‑48, 7:1‑5, 9:10‑13, 18:21‑35; John 8:2‑11 I‑Corinthians 5; Galatians 5:12; Tit 3:10‑11

The Gospel attitude toward wrongdoers is merciful, yet Paul's is frankly inquisitional. Is ‘turning someone over to Satan for the extermination of the flesh’ intended to mean delivering him to the secular authorities for execution (as in John 19:17‑18)? Are we to love our enemies or condemn and castigate them?

· 22. Matthew 23:8‑12 Acts 20:28; I‑Corinthians 4:15; I‑Timothy 3:1‑13

Paul introduces the terms ‘father’ and ‘deacon’ and ‘bishop’ to designate religious leaders— the very sort of title (along with ‘pastor,’ ‘minister,’ etc.) which Christ had explicitly prohibited. Indeed, the passage in Matthew would seem to preclude any kind of hierarchy in the Discipleship other than simple seniority (thus PRESBUTEROS, ‘elder’, in Acts 21:18, Jasher 5:14, I‑Peter 5:1, II‑John 1) by which criterion Paul was obliged to submit to the original Apostles, quite contrary to II‑Corinthans 11:5 & Galatians 2:6.

· 23. Gen 17:10; Luke 2:21 Acts 16:3(?!); Galathians 5:2; Phlpenas 3:2; Titus 1:10‑11

Saying that it is necessary ‘to gag (EPISTOMIZEIN) circumcisionist dogs’ is conceptually inappropriate in an Apostolic context. In any event, even if Christ referred to that custom parabolically; as in Th 53, he certainly did not forbid its physical practice.

· 24. Luke 11:27‑28; John 4:1‑30, 11:20‑35, 20:11‑18; Th 21 I‑Corinthians 14:34‑35; I‑Timothy 2:11‑15

Various women speak up boldly to the Savior. Later, Mariam Magdalene as first witness (!) of the resurrection is sent by Christ to ‘angel’ (AGGELLW: p66* )* A B) his rising to the Apostles themselves. This is not a teaching of mere female submissiveness or keeping quiet in the Convocation!

· 25. Luke 7:36‑8:3, 10:38‑42, 23:55‑24:11; John 12:1‑3; Th 61b, 114; Phillipians 59 I‑Corinthians 7:1‑2; Ephesians 5:22‑24

The Gospels represent women as an intimate part of Christ's entourage; thus rescinding the punishment of husband‑domination in Genesis 3:16. Paul emphatically opposes any liberated role for females.

· 26. Matthew 3:11‑17, 28:19‑20; Philippians 73, 96, 115(!) Romans 6:3‑4; Colossians 2:12

The Gospels endorse John's Baptism in water as signifying repentance and cleansing vis‑Ă ‑vis the Torah, and which furthermore is explicitly to be undertaken ‘in the Name’. Paul, however, sees Baptism as a metaphorical or participatory dying!

· 27. Luke 23:43; John 5:24, 8:51; Th 1, 18, 19, 111; Ph 43 I‑Thessalonias 4:16‑17

Christ teaches that his Disciples will not experience death, regardless of martyrdom, whereas Paul writes of ‘the dead in Christ.’

· 28. Matthew 5:17‑19, 19:16‑19; Luke 16:29‑31; Acts 21:17‑24(!!); 4QMT:C.26b‑31 Romans 7:6; Galatians 3:10, 5:18

If the entire Torah; the decalogue in particular, but also the remaining mitzvot(moral rules) such as Leviticus 19:18 et passim, is in effect until the sky and earth pass away, then the Mosaic Law is not an obsolete curse from which believers are absolved. This was the very topic at issue when, after Paul had completed his three missionary journeys, ‘all of the Elders’ (!) in Jerusalem required him to take the Nazirite vow, to prove his continuing adherence to the Law of Moses. (‘The works of the Torah...will be reckoned to you as righteousness’; from the Dead Sea Scrolls)

· 29. Matthew 7:21, 11:2‑6!, 19:16‑19, 25:31‑46; John 13:34!, 14:21, 15:10; Jasher 2:14‑26 Romans 3:28, 10:9; I‑Corintians 15:35‑44

Christ says that one's calling him ‘Lord’ is not enough, but rather that the Disciple's total obedience is demanded; both the OT and the Gospels require obedience to a plenitude of divine commandments, with resultant fruitful deeds. Indeed, it was precisely by his works; and not merely by his faith, that Christ proved his own authority to John the Baptist! Paul on the other hand states that a simple confession of faith, along with a belief in Christ's (merely spiritual, not corporeal) resurrection, suffices, a thoroughly antinomian doctrine. (This subject must be carefully distinguished from that of forgiveness; both among humans and between God and humankind, as a pre‑eminently innovative tenet in the Gospels. For of course absolution logically presupposes a transgression of the rules, not their abrogation; compare e.g. Ezekiel 18 with Matthew 6:14‑15.)

· 30. Genesis 49; Judges 2:16 ff.; Matthew 19:28; Acts 1:13‑26; Revelation/Ap 2:2, 21:14 I‑Corinthians 9:1‑2; II‑Corinthians 11:5‑13

Finally, we must observe the fact that the permanent tally of the Apostles was established by the Savior at exactly twelve (for obvious reasons of historical symbolism; note the symmetry at Revelation/Ap 21:12‑14), and moreover that Paul was never numbered in that circle (see also the Epistle of Barnabas 8:3).

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Video: "False Apostle Paul and the Roots of Christianity"

Title of Video: "False Apostle Paul and the Roots of Christianity"

by Scott D. McQuate

Transcript of video:




Older Than CHRISTIANITY Itself














THE 7 ILL-VISIONED SKINNY COWS PERFECTLY PARALLEL THE 7 CHURCHES ESTABLISHED BY PAUL - Crete, Thessalonica, Colossi, Phillipi, Galatia, Corinth, and Rome

THE 7 PROPER-VISIONED FAT COWS PERFECTLY PARALLEL THE 7 CHURCHES ESTABLISHED BY YASHUA - Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicia



Is It Purely A COINCIDENCE That AFTER YASHUA LEFT That Paul Begins NEARLY EVERY ONE OF HIS BOOKS In His Own Name Stating 'I, Paul..."?



WHAT DID PAUL TEACH? "You Are No Longer SUBJECTED TO THE LAW." (Rom. 6:14, I Cor. 9:20, Galatians 3:23, 4:5, 4:21 etc.) And Calls It A CURSE (Galatians 3:10)


This Also Supports What David Said About The Law...Psalm 119:45 "I Will Walk At LIBERTY BECAUSE I Seek Thy Commandments."

And The Only People The Devil Wants to Destroy Are Those Who Obey The Commandments of YHWH (Revelation 12:17)


Therefore, We Must Ask Ourselves, Knowing that YHWH's People Were Enslaved Or Destroyed EVERY TIME They Viered From THE LAW...Has This Doctrine Of Paul, Taught By All Christian Churches Caused The Same Destruction/Enslavement For The Last 2000 Years?


This Tactic Is Called THE DOCTRINE OF BALAAM. In The Book of Numbers It Destroyed 24,000 People, 1,000 of which were PASTORS hanged by the neck Because YHWH Held Them Personally RESPONSIBLE.

Yashua Also Rebuked The Pergamos Church For Accepting This False Doctrine, Which Teaches THE EATING OF MEAT SACRIFICED TO IDOLS.

Is It Purely A COINCIDENCE That Paul Teaches That Doctrine In I Corinthians and elsewhere?










But Paul Is Also The Only Person In The Entire Bible Who Refers To Himself By Another Name...MASTERBUILDER.

MASTERBUILDER Is The Highest Degree One Can Attain And Is Known As The HOLY ROYAL ARCH Degree In A Secret Society Pre-Dating Christianity By Thousands of Years, Known As The Builders Or FREEMASONS.

Freemasons are known for using DUAL IDENTITIES. For Instance, FREEMASON Francis Bacon Who Was Hired By King James To Edit The Bible Was Also Known As WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE.


Ten Times He Refers To A Man Named Apollos (1 Cor. 1:12, 3:6 etc.). However, In An Ancient Code This Man's Name Is APOLLONIUS. WHO WAS APOLLONIUS? History Tells Us There Is Only ONE Famous Apollonius Who Lived At PRECISELY The Same Time As PAUL. His Name Was APOLLONIUS OF TYANA And He Was Raised In Tarsus...JUST LIKE PAUL. And He Planted 'Churches' In Asia Minor...JUST LIKE PAUL. And He Travelled With A Man Named Titus...JUST LIKE PAUL. And He Was Associated With A Man Named Demetrius...JUST LIKE PAUL. And He Was Associated With A Man Named Stephanus...And He Had A Scribe Named Demas...And He Was Associated With A Man Named Stephanus...JUST LIKE PAUL...And He Fought Wild Beasts At Ephesus...JUST LIKE PAUL. And He Escaped Prison By A Supposed Miracle...JUST LIKE PAUL. And He Founded A Religious Community At Corinth...JUST LIKE PAUL. And He Was Shipwrecked...JUST LIKE PAUL.

There Are Many More Parallels Between Paul and Apollonius. Paul's Name in Greek is PAULUS, Which is Nearly Identical to A-pollos.

Paul's Original Name SAUL Is Simply The Anglican Version of SOL meaning SUN.

APOLLO Was The Greek and Roman SUN GOD.


SO, WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT APOLLONIUS? He Was A Top Student At The School of Asklepius In Agaea, Greece. This School Was PYTHAGOREAN In Its Teachings. So, Paul Acquired His Knowledge From PYTHAGOREAN PHILOSOPHY. Pythagoras Is Said To Have Gotten His Knowledge From The Emerald Tablets of Toth (Ham). Toth (Ham) Is Said To Have Received His Knowledge From Two Tablets Called Marbell and Laturus, Inscribed By Two Sons Of A Man In The Bible Named Lamech, Whose Names Were JUBAL & JABAI, the Great, Great, Great, Great Grandsons OF CAIN.

CAIN DISOBEYED THE LAW OF YHWH, Was Cast Out, Received A Mark And Built The First City. For 6000 Years He And His Fellow Builders THE MASONS Have Laid The Foundation And Built The Prison Called CHRISTIANITY, Preventing Christians From Fellowshipping With YHWH (Cain's Punishment), And Giving Themselves Access To Take Back The Kingdom/Birthright (Which Cain Lost).

"The Violent Take The Kingdom By Force." Matthew 11:12

"Until The Ancient Of Days Came, And Judgment Was Given To The Saints And The Time Came When The Saints Possessed The Kingdom" Daniel 7:22



What's Wrong with the "Apostle" Paul?

Pt.1 Teaches Break Commands

Transcript of Part 1:

WHAT'S WRONG WITH "Apostle" Paul?

Paul teaches to Break Yahweh's (God's) Commandments...

Paul, Saul of Tarsus, Contradicts Yahushuah's (Jesus's) Teachings

MATT.5:17 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill."

18 "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, ONE JOT or ONE TITLE shall in NO WISE PASS FROM THE LAW, till all be fulfilled."

19 "WHOSOEVER therefore shall BREAK ONE OF THESE LEAST COMMANDMENTS, and shall TEACH MEN SO, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and TEACH THEM, the same shall be called GREAT IN THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN."

PAUL: Saved by Faith without works

YAHUSHUAH: Saved by Faith with works

Paul's Writings (his Gospel)

Ephesians 2:8 "For by GRACE ARE YE SAVED THROUGH FAITH; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 "NOT OF WORKS, lest any man should boast."

Romans 3:27 "Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is JUSTIFIED BY FAITH WITHOUT THE DEEDS OF THE LAW."


[stopped transcribing at 1:23 of video]

Pt.2 Eat Sacrificed Foods

Pt.3 Mark of the Beast

Apostle Paul, Saul of Tarsus, 13th Disciple from Hell

Saturday, December 19, 2009

Post from "MichaelEden" of Theology Online Forums (& follow-up posts from others)

Source: Theology Online Forums

Was Paul a false apostle? Scripture reveals he preached "another" gospel

Posted By MichaelEden
July 31st, 2003, 07:18 PM

"I know that you cannot tolerate wicked men, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them to be false." Revelation 2:2 (NIV)

"Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees" Matthew 16:12 (KJV)


Was the apostle Paul a false prophet? Did Paul preach 'another' gospel than that of Jesus Christ? Why wasn't Paul chosen as one of the original twelve, or chosen to replace the apostle that betrayed Christ? Why did Paul's 'conversion' result in blindness, when Christ performed miracles of restoring sight to many in the gospels? Why does Paul brazenly admit to things like:

(stealing) "I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service." II Cor 11:8

(boasting) "Since many are boasting in the way the world does, I too will boast." II Cor 11:18

(speaking NOT on behalf of Lord) "That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting" II Cor 11:17

(trickery and deceit) "Yet, crafty fellow that I am, I caught you by trickery!" II Cor 12:16

We've been warned before about "devils in disguise" as "angels of light"... Here is a scriptural look into the mind of a deceiver - via the pages of Corinthians I and II. The devil's in the details:

(Paul urges the Corinthians to imitate him, rather than Christ)

"Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus, I became your father through the gospel. Therefore I urge you to imitate me." I Cor 4:15/16

(Paul decides to pass judgment on someone)

"And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just if I were present." I Cor 5:3

(Paul decides to consult with Satan, not Jesus, concerning the man he passed judgment on)

"hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord." I Cor 5:5

(Paul thinks he is better than anyone else)

"I wish that all men were as I am." I Cor 7:7

(Paul admits to injecting his own opinions into scripture)

"To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord):" I Cor 7:12

(Paul, who is single, gives faulty advice on marriage)

"Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am" I Cor 7:8

"Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife." I Cor 7:27

(Paul advocates that husbands should start living the single life again)

"What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none;" I Cor 7:29

(Paul advocates staying the same and not progressing forward)

"Each one should remain in the situation he was in when God called him." I Cor 7:20

(What does Paul have against marriage?)

"An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord's affairs:" I Cor 7:34

"But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world - how she can please her husband." I Cor 7:34

(strange talk)

"In my judgment, she is happier if she stays as she is - and I think that I too have the spirit of God." I Cor 7:40

(Paul expects to make money off the gospel that Christ commanded to be preached freely)

"In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel." I Cor 9:14

"If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you?" I Cor 9:11

(Paul loves the sin of pride)

"I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of this boast." I Cor 9:15

(Paul decrees that a hairstyle can keep you from being a good Christian)

"Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a discrace to him," I Cor 11:14

(Paul even passes judgment on growling stomachs)

"If anyone is hungry, he should eat at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment." I Cor 11:34

(Paul curses an entire people who may not have heard Jesus' gospel)

"If anyone does not love the lord - a curse be on him."


Here is but one time that Paul mis-quoted scripture. In II Cor 6:2 Paul asserts that God said something that God didn't:

For he says, "In the time of my favor I heard you, and in the day of my salvation I helped you." II Cor 6:2

What Isaiah 49:8 REALLY says is:

This is what the Lord says: "In the time of my favor I will answer you, and in the day of salvation I will help you; I will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people, to restore the land and to reassign its desolate inheritances," Isaiah 49:8

Why did Paul lie, distort scripture? And how would any believer defend this as something "O.K."?

So that no one will accuse me of taking anything out of context - I will include surrounding passages in addition to referencing the chapter number and passage numbers for this next example:

"Since many are boasting in the way the world does, I too will boast." II Cor 11:18

---surrounding passages---

"In this self-confident boasting I am not talking as the Lord would, but as a fool." II Cor 11:17

"You gladly put up with fools since you are so wise!" II Cor 11:19

Here is Paul not only boasting as "the world does" - but expressing a "self-confident" attitude in this boasting! And then, shockingly, Paul confesses that what he says is not coming from the Lord. (who then is it coming from?) Then Paul admits that he is talking "as a fool"

A boasting, self-confident, self-proclaimed foolish talker who admits that he is not speaking godly wisdom?


(Paul causes the Corinthians pain and hurt on several instances)

"So I made up my mind that I would not make another painful visit to you." II Cor 2:1

"Even if I caused you sorrow by my letter, I do not regret it. Though I did regret it -- I see that my letter hurt you, but only for a little while." II Cor 7:8

(Paul shows envy of other apostles, false humility, a need for congratulation, and more foolish talk)

"I have made a fool of myself, but you drove me to it. I ought to have been commended by you, for I am not in the least inferior to the 'super-apostles', even though I am nothing." II Cor 12:11

(Paul admits that Satan is in him - tormenting him)

"To keep me from becoming conceited because of these surprisingly great revelations, there was given me a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me." II Cor 12:7

(Paul resorts to sneaky, under-handed tactics - WWJD?)

"And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal whith us in the things they boast about." II Cor 11:12

(Nothing seems to stop Paul from his boasting)

"I must go on boasting." II Cor 12:1

(Paul's threat to punish - what happened to the love of Christ?)

"On my return I will not spare those who sinned earlier or any of the others," II Cor 13:2 B

Is this who founded the Christian religion? A man who admits that Satan is in him tormenting him? Again - what about this self-confession of demon possession:

"To keep me from becoming conceited because of these surprisingly great revelations, there was given me a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me." II Cor 12:7

Are Christians really that quick to accept the teachings of a man who openly admits that a messenger of Satan (demon) is tormenting him...?

Especially when Jesus' works/miracles included healing the demon-possesed and casting out demons?

Do you not think that Jesus would have wanted to 'cleanse' or heal the "supposed" apostle to the gentiles? Couple this with the fact that Paul's initial "supposed" contact with Jesus resulted in blindness?

What if your preacher got up in your pulpit this Sunday, and then proceeded to tell you that a messenger from Satan resided in him... then why would you allow him to continue to preach the Word?

Looking forward to some wonderful insight, and discussion as we discern the Truth together.


Posted By MichaelEden
August 1st, 2003, 11:51 AM

Revelation Chapter 2 starts out:

"UNTO the angel of the church of Ephesus write;" Rev 2:1

and then verse 2 states:

"I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil; and thou has tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:


You guessed it... THE APOSTLE PAUL. He was the self-proclaimed apostle that founded the church of Ephesus. He was a liar, and was not an apostle of Jesus. He was counterfeit.

And there are 14 epistles full of evidence of misquoting scripture, boasting, not speaking on behalf of the Lord, strange doctrines, opinion presented as truth, envy, false humility, and some particularly venemous rants - such as the following:

(Paul advocates castration for those who disagree with his doctrine on circumcision)

"Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!" Gal 5:11/12

Paul's tasteless rant aimed at those of the circumcision - he wants some to just go ahead and cut it all off...? Why do people defending the devil when he exposes HIMSELF as that via the scripture? And for those who feel that I am taking something 'out of context'...

Whether these passages were the only thing on a page - or whether they appear in the bulk of a page - they are still 'evil leaven'. And if it was just one verse that was questionable - that would be one thing... But it's verse after verse after verse.

It's amazing how intensely people defend Paul even knowing that Paul was not the Messiah, he did not travel with Jesus and the other apostles, and Paul can do NOTHING for them on Judgment Day. But still they cling to Paul as some sort of 'Hero' or 'exalted apostle' even referring to him the 'greatest apostle' -

The deception is high in these end-times


Posted By MichaelEden
August 10th, 2003, 02:39 PM

For those who ask who my teacher is - it is Jesus Christ.
The scriptures reveal many things to those who seek the Truth.

In the case of Paul, Jesus showed me through the Holy Spirit, that he was not a true apostle. And if anyone reads his epistles very carefully - they will find evidence of Paul mis-quoting scripture, presenting personal opinions as truth, boasting, passing judgment, speaking harshly, lying, etc...

this passage ALONE should send up 'red flags':

"That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting" II Cor 11:17

Here in the very pages of scripture is a man admitting that he speaks things "not after the Lord" and admits to speaking "foolishly" in addition to speaking all of this in the "confidence of boasting"

Can you say 'What's wrong with this picture?'

...more demonic 'leaven':

(Paul vengefully advocates that his enemies - circumcised Jews - castrate themselves)

"Brothers, If I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!" Gal 5:11-12

(Paul insults/passes mean judgment on circumcised Jews)

"Watch out for those dogs, those men who do evil, those mutilators of the flesh." Phil 3:2

(Paul blasphemously claims to know whose names are written in the book of life!)

"Yes , and I ask you, loyal yokefellow, help these women who have contended at my side in the cause of the gospel, along with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life." Phil 4:2

(Paul stirs up the other apostles with accusation and hostility)

"When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong." Gal 2:11

Blessings and Truth to all saints in Jesus Christ

Posted By Geaney
June 22nd, 2005, 03:09 PM

Congratulations to Michael Eden for so expertly marshalling extracts from the writings of Paul himself which confirm that Paul was a false apostle and the very "enemy" (Matthew 13:25) warned of by Yeshuwa Hameshiyach.

In your attempted rebuttal of Michael Eden you wrongly state that "Paul was accepted by the disciples as a follower and a welcome addition. READ acts 9" .

Contrary to your assertion Acts 9 makes it abundantly plain that Paul, was NOT "accepted by the disciples"

"But when SAUL had come to Jerusalem HE tried to join the disciples; but they were ALL AFRAID OF HIM AND DID NOT BELIEVE THAT HE WAS A DISCIPLE "(Acts 9:26).

Later Paul 'PAUL' COMPLAINED BITTERLY to his disciple Timothy: "This you know that ALL THOSE IN ASIA HAVE TURNED AWAY FROM ME" (2 Tim. 1:15).

More seriously as Michael Eden also pointed out Paul preached a completely different "Gospel" to that preached by Yeshuwa and His Twelve apostles of The lamb.

Yeshuwa and "the twelve apostles of The Lamb" (Revelation 21:14) preached "The Good News of The Kingdom of Heaven" (Matthew 24:14. Mark 1:15)

Paul preached THE LYING "ABOMINATION" (Exodus 23:7. Proverbs 17:15) which he admitted was "another gospel" (2 Cor 11:4) in which he teaches THE LIE concerning a "god that JUSTIFIETH THE UNGODLY" (Romans 4:5) . 'PAUL and his CHRISTIAN MINISTERS give FALSE assurances to "[I UNGODLY...SINNERS...concerning his "god that JUSTIFIETH the UNGODLY" (Romans 4:5). [/i]

"YHVH Elohiym" (Exodus 9:30) emphatically declares: "I WILL NOT JUSTIFY THE UNGODLY"(Exodus 23:7) and further makes it clear:


Thank you for providing me with this opportunity to show that Michael Eden is not alone in declaring that Paul was indeed a "false apostle" (Rev 2:2).

Patrick Geaney

Posted By Messenger
May 5th, 2006, 05:34 PM

The Way, The Truth, and The Life

A rich man asked the Mashiach (Messiah, Christ) how he could enter the Father’s Kingdom. Yeshua (Jesus) replied, “Keep the commandments if you want to enter life.”

What commandments was he talking about? Was it the commandment to ‘just believe in him and be saved’? Or was it the commandment that somehow ‘his blood would wash away all sin’?

Lucky for us, he does list the commandments to which he was referring. Most people would recognize them as the holy and righteous law that his Father YHVH (aka God) has always upheld. The life that Yeshua leads is no different than what his Father has always asked for. Yeshua is the example that each man and woman should strive to emulate. The 14th chapter of the Gospel of John offers several insights into this relationship between Father and Son. Here are a few quotes from Yeshua:

“I am the way, the truth, and the life;” (v.6)

“no one goes to the Father except by me.” (v.6)

“Whoever has seen me has seen the Father.” (v.9)

“The words that I have spoken to you do not come from me. The Father, who remains in me, does His own work.” (v.10)

“I am in the Father and the Father is in me” (v.11)

“I am telling you the truth: whoever believes in me will do what I do” (v.12)

If you love me, you will obey my commandments.” (v.15)

This is the real gospel. This is it. The REAL DEAL. CASE CLOSED

Hmmm . . . this doesn’t exactly jive with what I’ve been taught . . . I’m pretty sure that the law is there to condemn us and that ‘there is none righteous under the law’ . . . yeah that’s what my pastor was saying last Sunday . . . oh yeah and my flesh will do what my spirit doesn’t want it to do . . . and man is ‘cursed under the law’ . . . yeah the law is a curse.

The Law is a curse? Your body does what your mind doesn’t want? There’s none righteous under the law? Have you gone mad child? Where did you get these teachings from?

Umm actually, it’s from a really smart guy . . . he wrote most of the new testament and he was God’s ‘greatest apostle’. His name was Paul.

Oh really, tell me what this Paul guy says then . . .

He says that nobody is righteous in Romans 3:10-12

10. As the scriptures say: “There is no one who is righteous,
11. No one who is wise or who worships God.
12. All have turned away from God; they have all gone wrong;
No one does what is right, not even one.

My bible says that he was quoting from Psalm 14:1-3 and Psalm 53:1-3 which are basically identical passages. Let’s see what it says:

Psalm 14:1-3

Fools say to themselves, “There is no God!”
They are all corrupt, and they have done terrible things;
There is no one who does what is right.
The LORD looks down from heaven at mankind to see if there are any
who are wise, any who worship him.
But they have all gone wrong; they are all equally bad.
Not one of them does what is right, not a single one.

Wow. It looks as though Paul has twisted the Psalms to imply that everyone is like that; not just the fools. If I keep reading what does Psalm 14:4 say?

“Don’t they know?” asks the LORD. “Are all these evildoers
ignorant? They live by robbing my people and they never pray to me.”

From this we can deduce that the LORD’s people are not included in the group that Paul describes. Paul twists the meaning of “no one” as written in the Psalms to include more people than just the ‘evildoers’ and ‘fools’. The LORD’s people are righteous because they do keep his Law.

Why don’t we have a look at Paul’s “conversion story”

Acts 9:3-7

3. As Saul was coming near the city of Damascus, suddenly a light from the sky flashed around him.
4. He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul! Why do you persecute me?”
5. “Who are you, Lord?” he asked. “I am Jesus, whom you persecute”, the voice said.
6. “But get up and go into the city, where you will be told what you must do.”
7. The men who were traveling with Saul had stopped, not saying a word; they heard the voice but could not see anyone.

Why don’t you tell it again Paul . . .

Acts 22:6-9

6.“As I was traveling and coming near Damascus, about midday a bright light from the sky flashed suddenly around me.
7. I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, ‘Saul, Saul! Why do you persecute me?’
8. ‘Who are you, Lord?’ I asked. I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you persecute,’ he said to me.
9. The men with me saw the light, but did not hear the voice of the one who was speaking to me.”

Hmmm, I wonder why he can’t tell his story the same way twice in a row? Did the men see the light or did they hear the voice? Which is it Paul? Maybe he just made the whole thing up?

Paul said in 2 Corinthians 11: 16-18

16. I repeat: no one should think that I am a fool. But if you do, at least accept me as a fool, just so I will have a little to boast of.
17. Of course what I am saying now is not what the Lord would have me say; in this matter of boasting I am really talking like a fool.
18. But since there are so many who boast for merely human reasons, I will do the same.

???? What? The more I look at this ‘Paul’ scripture the more it seems like he’s crazy. In Jeremiah 9:24, YHVH says, “If anyone wants to boast, he should boast that he knows and understands me,”

John 7:18

[Yeshua said,] “A person who speaks on his own authority is trying to gain glory for himself.”

Paul says in Romans 3:20 “For no one is put right in God’s sight by doing what the Law requires; what the Law does is to make man know he sinned.”

??????? Does this even require a rebuttal? Can I not just direct you to the teachings of the Messiah outlined in the start of this paper? The way into the Kingdom of heaven is to do what the Law requires . . . this truth coming straight from the mouth of Yeshua. (“Keep the commandments if you want to enter life.”)

The truth of the matter is that basically all of Paul’s writings are twisted and confusing. Why would God have and apostle that was difficult to understand? That just doesn’t make any sense. Keep comparing “Paul’s Gospel” to the true gospel of the real Messiah and the real apostles (Matthew and John), and you’ll see the difference is like night and day . . . spiritual night and day.

I would like to thank the members of for their insight and support.

Posted by Messenger
May 26th, 2006, 12:32 PM

People have written much to show where Paul and Jesus agree.

Here's my problem with Paul. Please tell me how to reconcile this if you can:


In claiming that “there is none righteous, no, not one” under the Law, Saul of Tarsus, also called Paul, contradicted the Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul says that none is righteous under the law, that obedience to the law justifies no one before God, and that the law was a curse:

Ro 3:10 - As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Ro 3:19 - Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Gal 3:10 - For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. 11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. 12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. 13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

But the Lord Jesus says there were many who were righteous under the law:

Mt 13:17 - For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.

Mt 23:3 - That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Mt 23:29 - Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,

In fact, some of the righteous under the law during the lifetime of both Jesus and Saul were:

Elizabeth and Zechariah, the parents of John the Baptist: Lu 1:6 - And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

Simeon, who waited to see the Messiah: Lu 2:25 - And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.

Joseph the husband of Mary, and Mary herself who was chosen to be Jesus’ mother: Mt 1:19 - Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example,was minded to put her away privily.

John the Baptist: Mr 6:20 - For Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him; and when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly.

Why did Saul contradict the Lord? The answer is simple: Saul misunderstood the relationship between the Law and the Love.

Saul preached that the law cannot justify or make man righteous before God:

Ro 3:20 - Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Ro 4:15 - Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

Ga 2:16 - Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Ga 3:11 - But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

In contrast, the Lord affirmed the law, came to fulfill his part in it, and exhorted his hearers to obey it. Thus:

Mt 5:17 - Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Mt 7:12 - Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

And the Lord added that, beyond or on top of the life that the law gives, he offers perfection to those who would follow him. Thus:

Mt 19:16 - And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? 21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

In summary, Paul’s gospel says: Never mind the law; just believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and you are saved. Thus many believers disregard the Ten Commandments without feeling guilty, believing that they have been saved by faith in Christ, and that once saved, always saved. But if they cannot enter life, how can they go to perfection?

But the Lord’s gospel says: Obey the law and enter life, then achieve perfection by following him. Faith in him makes easier entry to life and achievement of perfection, because the Holy Spirit puts and writes the law in our minds and hearts. But the Holy Spirit does not dwell in unclean vessels. The correct sequence therefore is: Repent, forgive, believe in Christ, be baptized, and the Holy Spirit will indwell us and lead us to life (by obeying the Law) and perfection (by following Christ in agape love).

Paul quoted from Psalm 14 and used a tiny truncated phrase to make a huge generalization to set aside the Law. Fully read, Psalm 14 clearly states that while none is righteous among the fools and children of iniquity, God always has a righteous generation who keep the Law.

Posted by Messenger
May 26th, 2006, 03:58 PM

Romans 7:13-22 (King James Version)

13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

(I am sold to my second master: SIN)

15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

I do know what is right, I just don't do it. Instead I serve a second master

16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.

????? What Paul??? ??????

17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Here's a great excuse everyone: It's not you that does it, it's the sin itself!

18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

I know that I shouldn't sin, but I don't have the self-control to do anything about it

19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

I chose evil over good everytime

20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Like I said, sin has a complete grip on my actions

21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.

So then . . . good = evil?

3 John 1:11 (King James Version)

11 Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God.

Malachi 2:17 (KJV)

17 Ye have wearied the LORD with your words. Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied him? When ye say, Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the LORD, and he delighteth in them; or, Where is the God of judgment?

Posted by Messenger
May 26th, 2006, 04:18 PM

The section of Romans 7 that I just outlined is complete bull. If you want to defend someone who talks like that (seemingly schizophrenic), fine. Just don't expect me to believe that Jesus sent him when he says things like this:

17. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

He is completely trying to duck the responsibility for his sins. He's saying that sin is a separate entity that somehow has gained complete control of him. Open your eyes please.

Posted by Messenger
May 26th, 2006, 06:22 PM

how about this verse: (This is what he says after the other schizo stuff he wrote earlier)

Romans 7:

25. I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Translated: "I serve two masters"

Posted by Messenger
May 26th, 2006, 08:54 PM

Originally Posted by RayOfLight
To question Paul is to question the authority of the other apostles since the Peter, James, and John accepted Paul's apostleship (Gal. 2:9). It is also putting the writings of Luke into question since in Acts 13:1-3, Luke wrote that it's the Holy Spirit who set apart Saul and Barny for the work they were called to.

It seems to me that Luke was like a journalist, writing down what he saw, and some times what people told him, just taking their word for it. He was a travelling companion of Paul.

I also notice that Luke disagrees with other gospels, for example, saying that disiples tarried in a certain town, when other gospels say that they were told not to and therefore departed. This makes me wonder about Luke.

It is also putting into question Peter's endorsement of Paul (2 Peter 3:15)

The book of 2 Peter is considered by most scholars to be pseudoanonymous. . and not written by Peter.

This is a tragic loss for Paul supporters because it is the ONLY time one of the original 12 apostles appears to refer to Paul in any of the books the 12 apostles had actually authored.

IMHO, the only part of 2 Peter that has any validity is the second chapter simply because it was taken from the genuine book of Jude.

And for anyone thinking that Peter wrote 1 Peter think again.

1 Peter 5:12 By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand.

Where else do we read about Silvanus :

2 Corinthians 1:19 For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea.

1 Thessalonians 1:1 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians which is in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

2 Thessalonians 1:1 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ:

Silvanus was clearly Paul's partner

Jesus gave us the prophecy of Peter's hands being tied (equivalent) so he is taken where he would not want to go ... if someone wrote something in my name after my death that I would object to in life, this would see me with my hands tied and taken where I wouldn't want to go.


Posted by Messenger
May 27th, 2006, 01:00 PM

Mat 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. 25 Behold, I have told you before. 26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not. 27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Paul said he saw Jesus ... or did he encounter a localised false Christ that Jesus had warned about? LK 10:18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
Paul knows this 2COR 11:14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
1COR 9:1 Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?

If people accept that Jesus spoke Truth, only then the answer to Paul's question is NO ... he has NOT seen Jesus because Jesus said nobody would see him in a localised place. Jesus warned that anybody who says they have seen him is to be avoided ie GO NOT AFTER THEM NOR FOLLOW THEM!!!!

Was the one who supposedly identified himself to Paul as 'Jesus' a false Christ as warned about by our Master or are they accusing Jesus of not telling the Truth in his warnings? ... do people believe Jesus or believe Paul? Did Jesus lie or did Paul lie ... easy answer ROM 3:7 For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?

2COR 12:7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.
(this word for 'messenger' is translated as 'angel' in every bible verse EXCEPT this one ... angel of Satan ... fits description of 'angel of light' Paul knows of)

Even if they check fruit and see that
Jesus delivers people FROM Satan while Paul delivers TO Satan ... opposites.

stopped reading thread at end of page 7