Wednesday, April 2, 2014

"History of Apostle Paul"


History of Apostle Paul

Paul was a Pharisee. One day he had a ‘revelation’. He changed his name from Saul to Paul, and straightway preached his revelations about the ‘Christ’ in the synagogues. Paul continued to have new ‘revelations’ that spoke ‘of’ and ‘for’ a Christ, but he was glaringly silent about the actual life of Yahoshua (Jesus) and his teachings. In Paul’s epistles we find him using the words ‘Christ, Son of God, grace, redemption, resurrection, etc.’, but we learn little or nothing about Yahoshua and his actual teachings. They’re virtually absent from Paul’s epistles. What we learn about are Paul’s revelations. Roughly 50% of the New Testament (13 epistles) is from Saul, a man who neither knew Yahoshua in the flesh, nor was instructed by the apostles. Rather, he taught by unsubstantiated revelation, Ezekiel 13:2-9.
Paul considered himself the ‘apostle’ to the Gentiles, primarily because his doctrine (called ‘that way’, Acts 19:9, 23) was rejected by Jewish Christians and the Asian churches alike; and he was forced to seek converts who knew nothing of Yahudim (Jewish) customs and the Law. Paul’s doctrine was adverse to the teachings of Yahoshua; and he was often in conflict with James, Peter, and John; the real apostles. And by the way, Paul was not an apostle.
Paul spent an inordinate amount of time defending himself and his teachings from accusations of guile, lies, and covetousness. None of the real apostles were so accused. Paul’s core philosophy of justification by faith and abolition of Torah Law stands in opposition to Yahoshua’s statements in the gospels. Paul thought nothing of lying or practicing pagan customs if it meant gaining a new convert to his own brand of salvation, Romans 3:7, I Corinthians 10:14-21, 9:19-22.
Paul’s words speak for themselves. His use of personal pronouns in his epistles (I, me, my, mine) is three times that of any other writer. Paul urged his followers to follow him. He preached by revelation. Paul preached his doctrine in the ‘name’ of Christ, but his teachings were not in alignment with Yahoshua’s teachings, John 5:43.

Paul claimed to be an apostle by divine intercession, Galatians 1:1, 12. He claims to be ordained an apostle, I Timothy 2:7, 2 Timothy 1:11. Ask yourself: By whom? All the real apostles are documented in scripture. There is no support for Paul’s claim other than his own word in the epistles that he wrote. Of the 22 times he is called an apostle, only two come from someone other than himself. That ‘someone’ was Luke, Paul’s friend, traveling companion, and biographer, Acts 14:4, 14. The real apostles did not recognize Paul’s apostleship and referred to him as ‘brother’. The real apostles met these qualifications: They were twelve in number, and all were witness to Yahoshua’s life, teachings, and resurrection; from the beginning to the end, Acts 1:21-22. Paul meets none of these qualifications. ZERO. Yahoshua verified the number twelve, Matthew 19:28, and verified it again, Revelation 21:14. There are no scriptural references for thirteen apostles. Matthias replaced Judas, Acts 1:26. If the Pharisee Saul/Paul is truly an apostle as many wish to believe, that means one of the twelve is not an apostle. Who got demoted?
Paul claims in his epistles that he’s an apostle by the will of God. However, he never knew Yahoshua in the flesh, and by his own admission, Galatians 1:11-20, he spent little time with the real apostles. ‘Pauline doctrine’ is the result of unsupported revelation. Paul teaches Pauline doctrine, John 5:31, 43.
If you’re familiar with Biblical Numerics, you’ll know that the number 12 represents governmental perfection. It is the product of 3 x 4 (3 is divine perfection and 4 is earthly creation). There are twelve tribes of Israel and twelve apostles. If Paul was indeed an apostle as he claimed, their number would be thirteen.
Every occurrence of the number thirteen, and likewise of every multiple of it, stamps that with which it stands in connection with rebellion, apostasy, defection, corruption, disintegration, revolution, or some kindred idea. –E.W. Bullinger.
The number thirteen also includes famine. Amos 8:11 tells us of the famine for the word of Yahweh in the last days. Could a 13th ‘apostle’ be the reason for this famine? Paul wrote 13 epistles in the New Testament. Saul’s name subtly changes to ‘Paul’ in Acts Chapter ‘13’, verse 9.
Qualification to be one of the twelve apostles is set forth in Acts 1:21-22. Paul clearly does not qualify. The idea of adding a 13th apostle is unacceptable because of Revelation 21:14. In order to overcome this obstacle, it’s been proposed that Matthias was not a divine apostolic selection, based on the casting of lots. However, Acts 1:24-25 shows that the apostles prayed for Yahoshua’s assistance in the matter. Also, nowhere do the Scriptures state that Matthias was removed from this number to make room for Paul, which would have been a noteworthy event, as in the case of Judas. That fact is, Paul does not qualify to be an apostle, was not chosen as an apostle, and is not an apostle.

Nowhere does Yahoshua mention, or even hint, that He would give ‘new’ revelations to someone after His resurrection. One has to question why Yahoshua would spend 3 ½ years in the flesh teaching the twelve chosen apostles that ‘till heaven and earth pass, not one jot or tittle will pass from the law’, Matthew 5:18; and then, after His resurrection, give new revelations to a Pharisee (Saul/Paul) that make the Law void by His resurrection. Furthermore, ask yourself why would Yahoshua bypass the apostles with this ‘new’ revelation; choosing instead to reveal it to a Pharisee, the sect He called ‘vipers’, Matthew 12:34, and sons of the devil, John 8:44?
We have three different accounts of Paul’s unsupported claim of conversion. Two of them are similar, Acts 9:1-18, 22:1-15 (except the part about him being sent to the Gentiles, 22:21), but not the third account, Acts 26:10-19. In the first two stories, Paul specifically asked the Lord what he should do and the Lord told him to go to Damascus where he would be told all things. In the third story, however, Paul received full revelation on the spot. Which one is it Paul? Paul is caught in a lie (there will be more).
In Acts 22:17-21, Paul ‘claims’ Yahoshua told him to “get out of Jerusalem, for they (the Jews) will not receive your testimony concerning Me (Yahweh)”. That indeed is an odd statement, as the Yahudim (Jews) were in fact receiving testimony from the real apostles.
In addition, Acts 9:22-25 states that Paul’s persecutors in Damascus were Jews. Paul contradicts this by naming the governor, under Aretus the king, as (the persecutor) desirous to apprehend him, II Corinthians 11:32-33.
In Galatians 1:16-17 Paul tells us that after his revelation he conferred not with flesh and blood, nor went up to Jerusalem to the apostles, but instead went to Arabia (for an unspecified amount of time) and then back to Damascus (coincidentally, these happen to be Essene [sect] locations). Three years later he spent fifteen days with Peter in Jerusalem, and then moved on to Syria and Cilicia (Tarsus and Antioch) for fourteen years.
However, Acts 9:20 contradicts this. It says that after his revelation, Paul was certain days with the disciples in Damascus, and preached straightway in Damascus. Then Barnabas took him to the apostles in Jerusalem (Paul assayed to join himself to the disciples; as yet making no claim of apostleship). Then Paul was sent forth to Tarsus (‘Then had the churches rest…’Acts 9:31, after Paul was sent away.)
There exists a three-year discrepancy between Paul’s conversion and his trip to Jerusalem, and he admits to having little or no tutoring by the apostles (Galatians is the earlier of the two accounts). Interestingly enough, there’s a document in the Dead Sea Scrolls, Q40266, called ‘The Damascus Document’, written around the time of Saul/Paul’s trip to Arabia (wherein existed the Essene site of Qumran). It’s an excommunication document condemning an unidentified man; referred to as the ‘Lying Adversary, the Lying Spouter, the Tongue, the Scoffer’ who rejected the law in the midst of the whole congregation.
Paul’s doctrine is all about revelation. He uses the word ‘mystery’ (Greek musthrion) seventeen times in his epistles. Outside of The Book Of Revelation, the word ‘mystery’ is used only one other time in the New Testament, and not at all in the Hebrew of the Old Testament, Mark 4:11. Through revelation Paul reveals to us the mysteries of God, Yahoshua, wisdom, and ‘the faith’, Romans 16:25, Ephesians 3:3-4, 9, 6:19, Colossians 1:26, 2:2, I Timothy 3:9. Uh…I believe they’re found in the Tanakh (Old Testament).
Paul instructs his followers in all manner of things: Law, circumcision, grace, faith, salvation by faith, the Holy Spirit, spiritual gifts, the armor of God, relationships, humility, worship, church qualifications etc. His ‘revelations’ must have indeed been inspired, because they certainly are a ‘mystery’. Yahoshua (Jesus) is nowhere to be found in most of Paul’s writings other than in phrases such as: Servant of Jesus Christ…through Jesus Christ…in Jesus Christ…by Jesus Christ…Jesus Christ our Lord…by the revelation of Jesus Christ…and so on. Paul uses these phrases to imply his ‘revelations’ have authority from Yahweh through Yahoshua, yet his epistles provide no references to Yahoshua’s actual teachings in the gospels. Instead, Paul runs afoul of the gospels. He particularly preaches a reoccurring theme of submitting to earthly authority, i.e. governmental authority, on the basis it shows us approved of God (Yahoshua did not say to do this, so why does Paul? Ask yourself: Why does Paul continually stress submission to earthly authority?).
Paul more or less makes up his doctrine as he goes, admitting he preaches by ‘revelation’, II Corinthians 12:1, Galatians 1:11-12. Regardless of the good things he does say, the problem lies in the many ‘not so good’ revelations he promotes in the name of Yahoshua. We come to Yahweh by Yahoshua, not by Paul, John 14:6. Yahoshua tells us, “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them”, Matthew 7:16, 20. Paul’s fruit is a legacy of dissention. (Posibly the cause of the current 30,000 plus differnent denominational splits from the original "Church".
Paul is a Pharisee by his own admission, Acts 23:6, 26:5, Philippians 3:5. He was taught by Gamaliel, Acts 22:3. (Gamaliel was the grandson of Hillel, a founding father of the Pharisees, who rejected the Torah in favor of the oral Talmud). Yahoshua warned of the Pharisees and their leaven (the Talmud), and referred to them as vipers, Matthew 12:24, 34, Mark 8:15, Luke 12:1. (The Pharisees were scribes, Kenites, the sons of Cain). It’s also interesting to note that nowhere did Paul repent for his persecution of believers; rather, he boasted of being a Pharisee.)
Paul was at odds with the real apostles. Galatians Chapters 1 & 2 are bold examples of Paul’s (hidden) anti-Torah view that was in conflict with the teachings of Yahoshua and the apostles. Paul pooh-poohed the significance of the real apostles, but…(just in case the Galatians cared) he assured them his doctrine had the real apostles’ support.
Paul came to words with Peter once Peter found out what Paul was teaching, Galatians 2:11.
Paul mocked James, Peter (Cephas), and John. He scolded Barnabas and rebuked Peter, Galatians 2:9, 11-14. In true contradictory style, he portrayed Peter as a hypocrite to his Galatian audience, and then boasted of himself, displaying a worse behavior to the Corinthians, saying, “I become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some”, I Corinthians 9:19-22. Note that Paul declares he is the one who gains the more, and that he is the one who is saving some. Did Yahoshua become all things to all men? I think not!
Paul was under fire at the council in Jerusalem (he kept silent his anti-Torah viewpoint). James decreed that the Gentiles must abstain from four points of the law. This is mentioned twice in the same chapter, Acts 15:20, 29. Paul then wrote to the Galatian church and told them that they (the apostles) desired “only they would that we should remember the poor”, Galatians 2:10. This is not what James said, which is confirmed by Acts 15:20, 29. Nowhere is there any mention of ‘the poor’ by James. Paul conveniently left out the four points of law in his letter to the Galatians. Paul lied.
Hold on, it gets worse! In Galatians 1:20, before Paul’s statement in 2:10, he told the Galatians “Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not”. Paul is again caught lying, red handed. Paul had the audacity to preface his lie with an oath of honesty...before God!
Read what Yahoshua had to say about this type of oath (before God), Matthew 5:33-37. Read what James said too, James 5:12.
Paul was in conflict with Barnabas and John Mark (about guess what?), so they left him, Acts 15:37-39.
Paul knew his teachings would again come under fire, Acts 20:22-23, 29, and they did, Acts 21:21-25. He was required to purify himself and keep the Law, but the Asian Jews did not buy the deception, Acts 21: 27-28. Paul was arrested and he then appealed to Rome (not Yahoshua) for rescue. His (varied) relationship with the apostles ended at this juncture, but the damage was done.
John gave warning about a doctrine that is not of Yahoshua, II John 1:10-11. He mentions ‘those that went out from us (from the apostles) but were not of us; for if they were, they would have continued with us, I John 2:18-19. Coincidentally, Paul dropped all contact with the real apostles after his chastisement in Jerusalem, Acts 21:18-26.
Yahoshua warned that He came in His Father’s name, yet He was not received. If another shall come in his own name (like Paul), he will be received, John 5:43.
Paul ran into trouble with the (Asian) church of Ephesus and they spoke evil of his teachings (that way), Acts 19:8-9, 23. He complained that ALL they which are in Asia be turned away from ‘me’, II Timothy 1:15. Paul doesn’t say they turned away from Yahoshua; he says they turned away from ‘me’. Whatever their shortcomings, we know from the Book of Revelation that the seven ekklesia in Asia were thriving, and Yahoshua specifically tells John to write to the angels of the seven Asian churches. Yahoshua commended the church of Ephesus for trying false apostles and finding them to be liars, Revelation 2:2. The real apostles were not were not rejected in Asia.
Here’s the big picture: Other than the real twelve apostles, Paul is the only other person on record claiming to be an apostle. We have a record of Paul stating this to the Asian church of Ephesus, Ephesians 1:1. The Ephesian church is the only church of the seven that is recorded as trying false apostles “and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars”, Revelation 2:2. The Ephesian church recognized Paul for what he was and told him to take a hike.
Paul visited the other six Asian churches, as Acts 19:10, II Timothy 1:15 indicate. In Revelation 2:9, 3:9, we see that Yahoshua commends the two churches of Smyrna and Philadelphia for recognizing false Jews. This likely refers to Paul. But the clincher is Paul’s recorded claim of apostleship, made specifically to the Ephesian church, and Yahoshua’s specifically praising the Ephesians for trying false apostles. Add this up and you get you-know-who. Who else fits the bill?

Then there’s the matter of Yahweh’s Law. Paul went to great lengths to make void the law. Yahoshua and the apostles said otherwise. Yahoshua taught obedience to Yahweh’s Law. Paul taught (in Christ’s name) that the Law passed away. As you can see, Paul spoke against the teaching of Yahoshua. Here are Paul’s teachings of the Law.
Paul said all the Law was fulfilled in one word (a Pharisaic teaching, Romans 13:8-9, Galatians 5:14. Yahoshua said otherwise, Matthew 22:27-40, Mark 29-31.
Paul declared ALL things lawful, I Corinthians 6:12-14, Colossians 2:16. Yahoshua said otherwise, Matthew 5:18, Luke 16:17, John 14:15.
Paul declared nothing unclean, Romans 14:14, I Timothy 4:1-5. Yahoshua and James said otherwise, Acts 15:28-29, Revelation 2:14.
Paul claimed Christ abolished the Law, Romans 6:14, 7:4, Ephesians 2:15-16. Yahoshua said otherwise, Matthew 5:17-20, 19:17, 28:20, Luke 16:17.
Paul claimed no one was justified by the Law, Romans 3:20, Galatians 3:11-12, 21. The scriptures say otherwise, II Samuel 22:21, Ezekiel 14:14, 20, Job 27: 29:14, Luke 1:5-6, James 2:20-22.
Paul claimed no man was justified by works of the Law, Galatians 2:16, 21. Yahoshua and James said otherwise, Matthew 16:27, James 2:20-22.
Paul claimed the Law was ‘veiled’ (too hard to understand), II Corinthians 3:12-16. Moses said otherwise, Deuteronomy 30: 10-14. John tells us the law is not burdensome, I John 1:53.
Paul called Yahweh’s Law a ‘curse’, Galatians 3:13. (Galatians Chapter 3 and Romans Chapter 3 detail Paul’s attack on the Law). Yahoshua instructed us to keep the Law, Matthew 19:17. He came to fulfill the Law, not destroy it, Matthew 5:17-18. The Law was a blessing, Deuteronomy 7:11-13, 11:26-27, 30:19-20.
Paul referred to the Law as ‘the ministry of death’, II Corinthians 3:7. Moses said otherwise, Deuteronomy 4:40, 5:29, 6:24-25, 30:15-20.
Paul declared he sinned because of the Law (this passage is really a piece of work), Romans 7:7-13. James told us that’s not so, James 1:13-14.
Paul speaks against questions he considers foolish, and genealogies, Titus 3:9. Since genealogies are immensely important to Adam’s seed and Satan’s seed in the old and renewed covenants, one must wonder why Paul tells Titus to avoid them.
Paul told slaves to be obedient to their masters, Ephesians 6:5. He re-enslaved Onesimus, Philemon 10-16. This is in direct conflict to the law, which provides freedom from slavery, Deuteronomy 23:15-16, Jeremiah 34:13-17. If Paul had been obedient to the Law, Onesimus would have been free. But, as we see from Paul’s action, he sent Onesimus back into bondage. Yahweh’s Law brings freedom; Paul’s freedom brings bondage.
Paul pretends to be humble before Philemon, stating that he has written him with his own hand, and that if Philemon has been wronged, he (Paul) will repay (the debt), Philemon 1:19-20. He then adds a cheap shot stating that Philemon “owes” him. In other words, Paul clearly states that he will not say the very backhanded comment he does indeed say. Paul’s words stand on their head.
Paul claimed we should submit to governing authorities because they are established by God. If we do not submit, we will be evil (this passage is what’s evil). We’re suppose to give the authorities whatever they demand, Romans 13:1-7, Titus 3:1. There is no scriptural basis for this statement (unless it be obedience to Yahweh’s Law). But, as we have seen, Paul denied the law.
Paul claimed he taught from ‘divine revelation’ (not from scripture or instruction from the apostles), Galatians 1:11-12. In other words, Paul is telling us his revelations supercede scriptural authority. Think about it. Are you willing to accept this? The real questions are: How good is Paul’s word? Do his teachings align with scripture and the teachings of Yahoshua? You be the judge.
Paul claimed to be blameless (sinless) in the Law, Philippians 3:4-6.
Paul devalued the Sabbath, Romans 14:5-6.
Paul drew the church (ekklesia) to himself, not Yahoshua. Yahoshua spoke of this happening, John 21:15-23. In essence, another [person] would subvert Peter [his word] and he would be led astray [his word would fail] i.e. the church would be led astray. Yahoshua expressly told Peter to “follow thou me”. In contrast, John [his word], however, would not die [will tarry].
Paul claimed to be the ‘apostle’ to the Gentiles, Galatians 2:7. Not so. All the apostles were told to preach the gospel to all the world, Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:15, Luke 24:27. Yahoshua did not have a separate gospel for the Gentiles. Paul lied to the Galatians. Paul went to the Gentiles because he was rejected by the Law abiding Jewish converts. The Gentiles didn’t keep the Law nor did they understand the Law. This made easy converts for Paul’s doctrine, which preached against the Law.
Paul claimed to have laid the foundation of the church, I Corinthians 3:10. (The Roman Catholic Church? Is this why his doctrine is in the canon?) Yahoshua said those ‘called out’ would be built on Himself (the petra-rock), not Paul (or Peter), Matthew 16:18. (Greek is ekklesia which means ‘a calling out’. Yahoshua did not promote a physical church hierarchy. Rather, He detested it.)
Paul claimed the title of ‘Father’, I Corinthians 4:15-16. Yahoshua said not to do this, Matthew 23:9.
Paul preached his own gospel, Romans 16:25, I Corinthians 15:1, Galatians 1:6-7, I Timothy 2:8, 3:10.
Paul instructs the Corinthians “be ye followers of ME”, I Corinthians 4:16. To the Thessalonians: ‘ye became followers of US…and of the Lord’, I Thessalonians 1:6. To the Galatians: (Syria and Cilicia) they glorified God in ME, Galatians 1:24.
Paul refers to his teachings as ‘MY gospel’ and ‘ye are all partakers of MY grace’, Romans 2:16. 16:25, Philippians 1:7, II Timothy 2:8.
Paul says “{I} suffer not a woman to teach, nor usurp authority over the man…” I Timothy 2:12.
Paul ‘cursed’ those who preached any other gospel than his, Galatians 1:8-9. Therefore he’s cursing James, Peter, and John, whom he mocks in Galatians Chapter 2.
Paul (flat out) tells us he doesn’t speak for (pertaining to) Yahoshua, in prelude to his boasting, II Corinthians 11:17.
Paul said God revealed his Son in him, Galatians 1:15-16. What does he mean by this double entendre?
Paul declared he was the last to see Yahoshua, I Corinthians 15:8.
Paul bragged about speaking in tongues, I Corinthians 14:18-19. Take note: Neither Yahoshua nor the real apostles spoke in tongues. (Speaking in tongues is only mentioned in Paul’s epistles, and the book of Acts; written by Paul’s biographer Luke).
Paul dispenses Pharisaic teachings, Mithraism, and Kabbalahistic mysticism, I Corinthians 15:51, II Corinthians 12:2, Ephesians 3:2, 4, 6:19. (The third heaven is Ma’on, well known to Pharisees who practiced the black magic of the Kabbalah.)
The real apostles never mentioned the word ‘Christian’. The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch, under the tutelage of Paul and Barnabas, Acts 11:25-26. Christianity came from Paul’s teachings, not Yahoshua’s and the real apostle’s.
Paul’s epistles had ‘things’ that Peter declared ‘hard to be understood’, II Peter 3:15-17. Peter is not supporting Paul in this passage. It’s anything but. He only agrees with the statement that the longsuffering of the Lord is salvation, in verse 15. In verses 16-17, he warns the reader to beware the error of the wicked (i.e. lawless, Greek aqesmos). See again Yahoshua’s prophecy for Peter, John 21:18. Even today, Peter’s word is spiritually hindered by Paul’s word.
Words found only in Paul’s epistles: Bishop, deacon, evangelist, and communion.
Lies, lies, and more lies.
Paul said that when the law was still in force, faith had not yet come, Galatians 3:23. However, he contradicts this in Romans 4:3, 22. Which way is it?
Paul defended a lie because it ‘glorifies God’ and he wondered why he was judged a sinner, Romans 3:7. He was caught lying and tried to wriggle out of it with a song and dance. He doesn’t seem to grasp that a lie is a lie, and never does it glorify Yahweh. Why does Paul keep insisting he’s not deceitful and does not lie? Romans 9:1, II Corinthians 11:31, Galatians 1:20, Philippians 1:18, I Thessalonians 2:1-12, I Timothy 2:7. Why are the real apostles not accused of lying as Paul is? Ask yourself this: Would Yahoshua (Jesus) lie ‘for the glory of God’ as Paul did? I think not!
Paul lied before the Sanhedrin, Acts 23:6-7. He said he was ‘called into question for the hope and resurrection of the dead’. This was strictly a divide and conquer ploy with no basis in reality. The truth of the matter is he was called into question on account of his anti-Torah teachings, found in Acts 21:27-28.
Paul lied again before Agrippa, about his conversion, Acts 26:12-19.
Paul claimed Christ preached peace, Ephesians 2:17. Yahoshua said otherwise, Matthew 10:34-37, Luke 12:51.
Paul set himself equal to or above the apostles:
Paul boasted he was equal to the chiefest apostles, II Corinthians 11:5, 12:11. Not only is he boasting, he’s not even an apostle. Furthermore, Paul seems to be unaware of Yahoshua’s word that the last will be first, and the first last, Mark 9:34-35.
Paul boasted of himself through God, II Corinthians 7:14, 10:8, 13; 11:16-17; 12:9. (He tells us he ‘could’ boast, but ‘won’t’ because he is the least. He used a disclaimer to tell us he wouldn’t do what he does.) James instructed against this, James 4:16.
Paul’s boasting and declaration that he does not lie is one twisted piece of work, II Corinthians Chapters 11 and 12. It’s impossible to read his words, verse by verse, and not get the creeps.
In II Corinthians Chapter 11, verse 2 Paul states he is the one who may present the Corinthians as chaste virgins to Christ. In verse 8 Paul declares he ‘robbed’ other churches to do service to the Corinthians (Greek is συλαω which does indeed mean “to rob” or “despoil”). In verse 10 Paul states that no man shall stop him from boasting in Achaia (Greece). Note that he cleverly omits Asia and Judea, the locations where the real apostles preached (because they would stop him). In verse 18 Paul glories after the flesh. He then tells us how great he is (in Christ), more so than other ministers, (verse 23). So humble is Paul, that if he needs to glorify himself (which he does), he will confine it to his infirmities (verse 30). Oddly enough, he then feels a need to assure his audience he does not lie(verse 31). Pay attention to Paul’s own words.
II Corinthians 12:5-7, Paul continues in the next chapter by stating that although he would desire glory, he will not glorify himself, but in his infirmities. He then spews forth self-deprecatory verbiage to soften his boast. According to humble brother Paul, he was given a thorn in his flesh, lest he should be exalted above measure through the abundance of his revelations. Now think about that statement for a minute. A man can’t get any more exalted than ‘above measure’. It’s beyond measurable. It doesn’t get any higher than that. If it weren’t for the thorn he was given, our man Paul’s ‘revelations’ would be cause for the ultimate right to brag.
What a great guy! Isn’t it comforting to know how superior this man was, according to his own words? I suggest you compare Paul’s posture with Yahoshua’s instruction in the gospels.
Paul quoted Christ as saying “It is more blessed to give than to receive”, Acts 20:35. It appears nowhere else in scripture, and given Paul’s admission that he spent little or no time with the apostles, Galatians Chapter 1, one might question where he came up with such a quote (which sounds more like advice from Dear Abby than a quote from Yahoshua).
In context of Acts Chapter 20, we find Paul preparing to go to Jerusalem, to appear before James and the real apostles, to stand accountable for his anti-Torah views, in Acts 21:18-36. He’s uses the aforementioned ‘quote’ to defend himself and his teachings to the church of Ephesus (who later rejected him), telling them to take heed for the ‘wolves’ that will lead them away from his doctrine when he leaves (such as the real apostles). In other words, he knows the real apostles are going to be irate with him and he’s trying to minimize damage before the Ephesians find out they were duped (which they later found out), II Timothy 1:15, Revelation 2:2.
It is one of only two times Paul quotes Yahoshua when the quote is not connected to a personal revelation (the other is I Corinthians 11:24-25, which is not in complete alignment with the gospels).
Genesis 49:27 (The sons of Jacob receive their blessings)- Benjamin shall ravin as a wolf: in the morning he shall devour the prey, and at night he shall divide the spoil. The tribal standard of Benjamin is the wolf.
Paul claimed to be an Israelite from the tribe of Benjamin, Romans 11:1, Philippians 3:5.
Philippians 3:5 presents an intriguing problem. Paul claims to be out of the race of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew out of the Hebrews, and a Pharisee according to the law. He’s telling us he’s the ‘real thing’. This poses a few problems.
The Greek word translated “ touching (according to)” is kata, which primarily means ‘against, opposition to’, especially when used with the accusative case (as it is here). The word “law” (used here in the accusative case) is nomon. Normally, the phrase kata nomon farisaious would be translated “a Pharisee against the law”, but in this case it was curiously rendered as “a Pharisee touching (according to) the law”. After all, it wouldn’t make sense for a Pharisee to be against the law…or would it?
Pharisaic law rejects the Torah in favor of the Talmud (rabbinic oral law). Yes, they certainly would be against Torah Law. If you accept the translation “a Pharisee according to the law”, by definition the law of a Pharisee is Talmudic, and anti-Torah. Both translations suggest there is a problem between Paul and Torah Law.
Furthermore, we know that the Pharisees were Kenites, the sons of Cain, the scribes who infiltrated Judah, I Chronicles 2:55. Was Paul really who he said he was?
Yahweh changed Abram’s name to ‘Abraham’ and Jacob’s name to ‘Israel’. Yahoshua changed Simon’s name to ‘Peter’. These were all divine name changes meant for a purpose. Paul changed his own name ‘Saul’ (which means ‘borrowed’) to ‘Paul’ (which means ‘little’ or ‘small’), also for a purpose. Neither Yahweh nor Yahoshua changed Paul’s name. The switch subtly takes place in Acts 13:9 (note that Paul is once again linked to the number 13, the number of rebellion). Just like the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees, Matthew 16:6-12, small Paul leavens the church with his doctrine.
Paul is credited with having written 13 epistles (13 is the number of rebellion). Paul’s epistles bring the total number of books in the Bible to 66 (6 is the number of man, and 66 is an occult master number). If Paul were really an apostle, he’d be the 13th one.
Paul negates the deity of Yahoshua, I Timothy 2:5. Paul tells us there is one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus (Greek is άνθρωποσ, ‘anthropos’). However, the word άνθρωποσ as used in the New Testament means ‘man’ as carnal man, i.e. man with a sinful nature (in secular use it means a human being, from which we get the word ‘anthropology’). With the exception of this one verse by Paul, άνθρωποσ is never (not even once) used in connection with Yahoshua’s deity (except in His title as ‘Son of man’). Only unbelievers in the gospels, who do not recognize Yahoshua’s divinity, use this word in reference to Yahoshua.
It’s quite an insult for Paul to refer to Yahoshua as a carnal man (άνθρωποσ) who mediates between God and us, for it debases Yahoshua’s stature and removes His divinity and authority. It’s such an overt act of blasphemy that it’s highly unlikely that a Pharisee like Paul would choose this word by mistake. Given the fact that άνθρωποσ is used 560 times in the New Testament, and 136 times by Paul in his epistles alone, it’s hard to believe that he did not understand what he had written.
If we look at the context of I Timothy Chapter 2, it’s typical Pauline instruction. It begins by telling us to support those in authority and ends by upbraiding women. In the middle he throws in some vague superlatives about God and Christ, which always sound nice but really say nothing. The only ‘meat’ we find is in verse 5, wherewith Paul calls Christ Jesus, the mediator, an άνθρωποσ (a carnal man bereft of deity). It’s a magnum doctrinal gem he slips in amongst the fluff so as to go unnoticed. He then follows up verse 5 with verse 7, to give himself an air of credibility, whereby he touts his ordination as a preacher (by whom?), his apostleship (according to him), and his truthful speech in ‘Christ’. Then, as if there is some reason to question Paul’s veracity (as there certainly is), for good measure he assures us he does not lie. Now why would he think, that we’d think, he was lying? Unless, of course, he was!
Okay, so now you’re aware of the problems with Paul. It’s undeniable that there is something amiss with his doctrine. ‘Disturbing’ is a better word. It clearly does not align with Yahoshua’s teachings. Furthermore, Paul went to great length to hide what he was teaching from the real apostles, and was twice taken to task for it in Jerusalem. The overwhelming number of problematic scriptures, and Paul’s troubles with the real apostles are glaring red flags.
How long will you ignore the problem? How hard will you fight to explain away Paul’s own words? How much longer will you lean back in your pew and listen to some talking head say, “What Paul really means is…”; only to grow weary because it sounds like the opposite of what you thought he said? Here’s a revelation: Paul meant what he said. You don’t need an interpreter. If Pauline Doctrine seems confusing and twisted, that’s because it is! If you really want to know what Paul said, read it yourself and look up the vocabulary. I did. So can you. Don’t accept someone else’s word for your salvation. This article gives you an ample supply of verses to stimulate your gray matter.
Prophecy tells us only a few will escape Satan’s deceptions in the latter days. Conversely, that means the bulk of Christianity will be deceived. So how will they be deceived if they’re such stalwart followers of Yahoshua? Enter Paul. If the mere thought of questioning Pauline Doctrine or Paul’s truthfulness ruffles your feathers, it’s a sign that Paul’s rotten spiritual fruit has taken root in your life. His seeds are seeds of oppression and bondage. Yahweh is the path to freedom, not Paul.
Take a look at the big picture: Paul was a Pharisee who freely admitted he taught by revelation. One more time-He taught by revelation. He was at odds with the apostles. They called him ‘brother’, not apostle. The Asian churches rejected Paul. The real apostles were not rejected. Paul is caught lying numerous times in his epistles. He is the only ‘brother’ who repeatedly has to defend himself from accusations of guile and lying. None of the twelve real apostles are so accused. What’s wrong with this picture?
Prophecy warns us that believers will be deceived (by the church) in the latter days (now). They’ll accept false doctrine as truth because their hearts are far from Yahweh. It’s disturbing to see the church’s reliance on Pauline doctrine today, and it’s even more alarming to see believers defend this position with quotes from Paul (rather than the word of Yahoshua and the prophets). This article was written to reveal Paul/Saul’s character through his own words.
Yahoshua warned of false teachers and deception. The apostles, aware of Paul’s epistles, did the same. Paul was turned out of the Judean-Christian community in Judea AND the churches of Asia for his teachings. Ask Yahweh to show you the truth in this matter. If you haven’t yet read the scripture that accompanies each statement about Paul, DO SO NOW. Don’t take my word for it; look up the scripture and study.
Paul ended up in Rome, and via coincidence, we now have the Roman Catholic Church; which bears a striking resemblance to Paul’s church structure, Ephesians 4:11, I & II Timothy. At the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, this same church chose to include 13 Pauline epistles into their biblical canon; while excluding such books as Enoch. Coincidence? Hardly. Just as Yahweh allowed Satan into the garden of Eden, so He allowed Paul in the Bible. Satan is the father of lies. Any guess as to whom Paul serves? (The answer is not Yahweh).
Paul’s revelations about salvation by faith alone and the abolishment of the Law has been poisoning the church for more than 2000 years. Again, by his own admission, Paul taught by ‘the revelation of Jesus Christ’, (not from the teachings of Yahoshua in the flesh, or from the teachings of the real apostles). Paul must have been quite a saint to receive special instructions that were withheld from the twelve real apostles. Yahoshua spent 3 ½ years in the flesh teaching the twelve chosen apostles to keep the Law. Do you really believe Yahoshua changed his mind, and suddenly gave ‘new revelations’ to Paul/Saul the Pharisee? There is no basis for Paul’s doctrine other than Paul’s own word. They are not the teachings of Yahoshua, and they are called ‘Pauline Doctrine’ for a reason.
If you think this is blasphemy, think about this: The Catholic Church is the organization that made the decisions about which books would or would not be included in (their) Bible. The Catholic Church made this decision for you. And, lo and behold, it’s Pauline Doctrine that supports their existence, not the teachings of Yahoshua. This should send shivers up your spine.
Paul’s writings are filled with far too many examples that conflict with Yahoshua’s teachings. More importantly, where is Yahoshua to be found in Paul’s epistles? Paul clearly denied Torah Law. Yahoshua clearly said the Law does not pass away. Do you believe Paul or Yahoshua? If you have to think about this, you’re in trouble.
If we (rightly) conclude the Law did not pass away, we see that Paul’s doctrine entirely crumbles. There’s no reason to follow him (as if there ever was). Yahoshua tells us to follow Him. We’re not to follow Paul, the church, or anyone else. We’re to seek Yahoshua and keep His commandments.
John tells us the number of the deceived (in the last days) ‘will be as sand of the sea’, Revelation 20:8. Peter told us judgment must begin with the church, I Peter 4:17. Yahoshua said, “Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall He find faith on the earth?” Luke 18:8. Paul clearly reveals his corrupt spirit when he says, “I become all things to all men…”, I Corinthians 9:19-22. Paul’s words speak for themselves.
Lastly, think of this. If so many people are deceived in the last days, who are these people? If the church is to be spared by rapture, then who are the unnumbered souls washed in the blood of the lamb, Revelation Chapter 7. If only 144,000 are sealed, explain what happens to the ‘church’ and the Christian ‘religion’? Simple math reveals that the numbers don’t add up. It appears that a lot of ‘Christians’ in the ‘church’ are going to get it wrong. How do you suppose that happens?
Do you trust the words of Yahoshua, or the ‘revelations’ of Paul?


  1. "Paul was a Pharisee."

    How do you know?

  2. An odd argument. If Luke's characterization of Paul as an apostle cannot be trusted, neither can the rest of Luke's Gospel and the Acts account; we therefore have no reliable account of the start of the church at all. Matthew is a self-proclaimed apostle so his authority rests on no more foundation than Paul's, and his gospel must be discarded. Mark records Peter's preaching and must be similarly invalidated as a circular witness, and the same must be said of John. So much for the New Testament and the entire record of Yehoshua's words and works.

    1. Matthew's apostleship is confirmed by two or more other witnesses. You have others, such as John and Mark attesting to the fact that Matthew was chosen by the Messiah as an apostle. This is not the case with Saul of Tarsus. No one testifies or gives witness to Saul being an apostle that was chosen by the Messiah...other than Saul/Paul himself. There were only 12 true apostles chosen by the Messiah. And Matthias was the replacement for Judas. Not Saul of Tarsus.

  3. "Every occurrence of the number thirteen, and likewise of every multiple of it, stamps that with which it stands in connection with rebellion, apostasy, defection, corruption, disintegration, revolution, or some kindred idea. –E.W. Bullinger."

    In Numbers 2, how many tribes were in the formation of Israel?