Sunday, January 21, 2018

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 doctrineJohn 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 newrevelations 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 9:31after 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 3:9Uh…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 2:10This 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   5:14Yahoshua said otherwiseMatthew 22:27-40, Mark 29-31.
Paul   declared ALL things lawful, I Corinthians 6:12-14, Colossians 2:16Yahoshua said otherwiseMatthew 5:18, Luke 16:17, John 14:15.
Paul   declared nothing unclean, Romans 14:14,   I Timothy 4:1-5Yahoshua and  James said   otherwiseActs 15:28-29, Revelation   2:14.
Paul   claimed Christ abolished the Law, Romans   6:14, 7:4Ephesians   2:15-16Yahoshua said otherwiseMatthew 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, 21The scriptures say otherwiseII 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 3:12-16Moses said otherwiseDeuteronomy   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 LawMatthew 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 3:7Moses   said otherwiseDeuteronomy 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 7:7-13James told us that’s not soJames 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 10-16This 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 3:1There 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 2:7Not so.  All   the apostles were told to preach the gospel to all the worldMatthew 28:19, Mark 16:15, Luke   24:27Yahoshua 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 4:15-16Yahoshua   said not to do this, Matthew   23:9.
Paul preached his   own gospel, Romans 16:25I 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 1:15-16What 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, 22Which 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   lieRomans 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   2:17Yahoshua said otherwiseMatthew 10:34-37Luke 12:51.
Paul set himself equal to or above   the apostles:
Paul   boasted he was equal to the chiefest apostles, II Corinthians 11:5, 12:11Not 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 thisJames 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 BenjaminRomans 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?

Why Is Paul An Anti-Christ?


Why Is Paul An Anti-Christ?

By easteagle13

When someone you don't know, suddenly shows up in front of your door and claims he is a representative of an important man, will a laminated ID suffice to ascertain if he is really WHO HE CLAIMS, HE IS?
Let us just say, that this man claims, that he was sent by the Roman Catholic Pope, and that you (for the sake of argument) is a pious Catholic. Maybe he is even dressed like a priest, talks calmly and even moves like one.

If what this man is asking you to do will mean you have to entrust your life into his hand, would you just do it as he asks? Would you entrust your future to this man because of the above?
What if he keeps on repeating that the "Pope" sent him? Or what if he makes "better" promises than what you usually hear from the pulpit? Will that make you trust him completely now?
No? Not yet? Why? What would it take for you to completely trust this man?
What if he tells you an amazing story on how he became a faithful(Roman Catholic)? Still NO?
I can understand how you feel. It would take a lot more to make us trust a person with our life, our future and our family's welfare.
Sadly though, many people do EXACTLY that to an even worse situation. The person they trust with these precious things is someone, they did not even meet IN PERSON.

That man is Paul.

Simply put, these are the claims of Paul:
  • That he was sent by Christ.
  • That Christ revealed to him that the LAW of God has been "crucified" (nullified, abrogated, removed), hence there's no need anymore to observe them.
  • Faith is enough for "salvation"
  • He is equal if not better than the Apostles of Christ.
  • He is an Apostle because Christ made him so.
  • There's no need to observe the God ordained festivities (Sabbaths, New Moons, Passover..etc.)
  • He is the "father" of those worshipper that he helped spiritually.
  • That the greatest LAW is to "love your neighbor as yourself".
These constitute a very little part of a vast number of claims that paul made through his epistles. While claiming concurrently that HE IS A REPRESENTATIVE OF CHRIST.
Now, do we just trust Paul because he said things as so?
What manner of verification can we do?
A failsafe method to check if Paul's claims are true is to compare Paul's words, to Christ's words. Would you agree?
Would it suffice for you to prove or disprove Paul's teachings according to HOW IT MEASURE UP TO CHRIST'S?? I sure hope so.
It will be similar to the man on our example above, and then being able to talk to the R.C. Pope and ask him directly about the man's credentials!
This is one of Paul's conversion narrative.
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.
8 Saul got up from the ground and opened his eyes, but could not see a thing. So they took him by the hand and led him into Damascus.
9 For three days he was not able to see, and during that time he did not eat or drink anything.
Please note that, Paul never met Christ in person, while Christ was physically alive, although they were contemporaries. Meaning, if someone suddenly talks to him without showing his face to Paul, Paul would have no idea, if that man is, INDEED Christ or not.
This fact of not KNOWING CHRIST, put Paul in a very vulnerable situation. ANY EVIL SPIRIT CAN MAKE PAUL BELIEVE HE IS TALKING TO CHRIST! And this is what actually happened above. Why can we be sure that this is the case of Paul's "miraculous" conversion?
You have to understand how DIFFERENT the person and the teachings of this "invisible one" who talked to Paul compared to Christ. What are the differences?
  • When the real Christ was still alive, he does not directly announce his identity to people, even when ASKED or investigated. Christ's answers varies from "it is he you are talking to" to "the son of man will be revealed" kind of replies, but never I AM JESUS/CHRIST. (frequently fraudters are eager to be acknowledged to be who they pretend to be).
  • Christ has all the time to choose his apostles when he was still physically alive. In fact he did and taught them all they need to learn. Christ made those apostles as EYEWITNESSES to the things he did. Especially Christ's resurrection. It is the reason why, even after Judas Iscariot failed to faithfully fill his office, Paul was not even considered to replace him, nor any other man who does not measure up to being an eyewitness to Christ's life and ministry to be "sent out". We all know Christ has ascended to heaven and if he planned to make Paul an important part of his earthly ministry, the voting for Judas replacement time will be the best opportunity to acknowledge Paul into his legitimate church. Making Paul to be NOT CHOSEN WHEN CHRIST WAS PHYSICALLY ALIVE and STILL NOT CHOSEN WHEN CHRIST WAS SPIRITUALLY ALIVE. Only Christ's enemy will choose Paul to serve another purpose.
  • Christ's Apostles are still alive that time, they are holding Jerusalem as the center of their ministerial work. If the spirit that spoke to Paul was indeed Christ, to whom do you think he will send Paul for "further instructions"? Where? It's easy to understand that it should be to the Apostles and in Jerusalem. None of these, were done by the spirit. Why?
  • Christ never inflict HARM to anyone, much less BLINDS someone, when he was still alive. He does not need to put SICKNESS to someone just to look good by HEALING them afterwards. Who do you think employ such tactics of making people sick just to be a hero figure when they heal their victims? Yup, the fraudulent "faith healers".
  • After Christ's resurrection, he talked to his disciples and apostles in person BEFORE GOING UP TO HEAVEN. Then he promised that after he went to heaven, a helper will be sent that will help the faithful. Do we find any other conversations between Christ and any of his apostles after he went to heaven? No, even John whom Christ "love so much" has only "visions" of Christ after his ascension.
  • The spirit told Paul to preach to the gentiles. MINUS the LAW. Which Paul diligently did. Compare that to Christ's direct words at Matthew 5:17-19 ,which goes like, whoever disobeys the LAW and teaches others to do the same will be least(smallest, the most worthless) to the kingdom of heavens. And in Matthew 10:5-6
5These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, 6but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Sending the real Apostles ONLY TO THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, with a deliberate command to AVOID the gentiles!
Thus this spirit's instruction to Paul is doubly adversarial to Christ's own intructions.
With all of the above details, all pointing to different TEACHINGS, METHODS, CHARACTERISTICS and DISPOSITIONS compared to Christ, We are only fooling ourselves to BELIEVE that the spirit that talked to Paul is CHRIST(if that incident even really happened(THERES NO ONE WHO CORROBORATES PAUL ABOUT THIS).

So we are left with the possibilities that the narration of Paul about his conversion is either a MADE UP STORY of Paul to give himself some credentials or it really happened but the spirit that talked to him is an EVIL SPIRIT working against Christ.

Let us consider that it really happened for the sake of the argument. What were the results of this "conversion"? Does the fruits of Paul's labors show that indeed it is of Christ?
Sure the "Christian churches" are now spread across the world and everyone of them acknowledge Paul as the source of much of their contradicting doctrines. But what about the fact that these same "Christian" churches teach many doctrines that are in direct contrast to what Christ taught?
If you claim you represent Christ and then teach the opposite things than what Christ taught, do you really REPRESENT HIM? Or you are just USING Christ's authority to subdue followers for your own TEACHINGS?
In this regard, we can actually say, Paul was not sent by Christ.


It is without doubt that PAUL TAUGHT that there's no need to observe the Law!

if someone will confront Paul and ask him to SHOW PROOF THAT HE FOLLOWS THE LAW, what should Paul's reaction be, if he is consistent with his words and teachings? He can say; THERE'S NO NEED TO SHOW PROOF THAT I FOLLOW THE LAW, IT IS NAILED TO THE CROSS ALREADY AND CANCELLED!
Yet, when Paul was ACTUALLY confronted regarding his teachings about the law, this is what happened:
Read Acts 21:18-26
18 The next day Paul went with us to see James; and all the church elders were present.
19 Paul greeted them and gave a complete report of everything that God had done among the Gentiles through his work.
20 After hearing him, they all praised God. Then they said, "Brother Paul, you can see how many thousands of Jews have become believers, and how devoted they all are to the Law.
21 They have been told that you have been teaching all the Jews who live in Gentile countries to abandon the Law of Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or follow the Jewish customs.
22 They are sure to hear that you have arrived. What should be done, then?
23 This is what we want you to do. There are four men here who have taken a vow.
24 Go along with them and join them in the ceremony of purification and pay their expenses; then they will be able to shave their heads. In this way everyone will know that there is no truth in any of the things that they have been told about you, but that you yourself live in accordance with the Law of Moses.
26 So Paul took the men and the next day performed the ceremony of purification with them. Then he went into the Temple and gave notice of how many days it would be until the end of the period of purification, when a sacrifice would be offered for each one of them.
Maybe this is what PAUL calls as "BEING EVERYTHING TO ALL MEN!" Hypocrisy. Making people believe the things that ARE NOT TRUE is not a POSITIVE TRAIT.
While Christ emphasized the importance of OBEYING the LAW, this man Paul, emphasized the opposite and hypocritically acted BEFORE the real APOSTLES, on his stand on the matter.
Considering this point, would you still claim Paul is a representative of Christ?

Here are Paul's smooth words regarding salvation by FAITH ALONE.
Rom. 5:1, "therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ;"
Rom. 11:6, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace."
There are of course, many more passages along these lines. Proving that Paul teaches this doctrine.
Is it inline with Christ's teachings? Do the other Apostles also taught this?
I have posted an article titled "The Covenant", where I discussed the meaning of Christ's words found in Matthew 7:21-23.
Let me ask you, do you have FAITH enough to heal? Cast off demons? Or maybe do some miracles? Would you agree that these kind of POWERFUL WORKS need immense FAITH to do? YET, despite their faith, these KINDS OF PEOPLE are still NOT ELIGIBLE TO BE EVEN CALLED "GOOD" BY CHRIST! Would we expect them to be saved?? Does this answer the question if whether Paul's doctrine that having FAITH alone is enough for salvation is true or not??
NO, Paul is not a representative of Christ.

He is equal or greater than the Apostles of Christ. (2 Corinthians 11:1-31)
So this man comes and knowing you respect the apostles, claims he is equal or greater than them, with a little mix of feigned humility. Paul even call the apostles as "super-apostles", you'll have to remember that at that time, when none of the books of the "new testament" is in circulation, the only people who are called apostles are Christ's. Only later on when Paul has stablished his own version of the churches that these terms became widespread. But those people submit to Paul's authority and therefore are not the subject of his tirade here.
He managed to insert the idea that these apostles are "evil" because they are bringing a "different Christ" to his followers. "Different gospel". Look at how insidous Paul! Because he knew very well that HE IS IN FACT TEACHING A DIFFERENT CHRIST AND GOSPEL, he charges the Apostles that are teaching the REAL CHRIST and GOSPEL to be evil. Then goes on to compare score cards with them, claiming all his hardships to spread his gospel version as proof of his supremacy over the real Apostles.
There was a church who tested Paul's claim of apostleship. It was the church in Asia. What was their verdict?
When Paul wrote Ephesians 1:1 (Ephesus is a church in Asia) He said "
1Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God," -Ephesians 1:1
So they examined Paul's claim. And what they found made THEM desert Paul
You know that everyone in the province of Asia has deserted me, including Phygelus and Hermogenes. - 2 Timothy 1:15
What did Christ say about these?
“‘I know your works, your toil and your patient endurance, and how you cannot bear with those who are evil, but have tested those who call themselves apostles and are not, and found them to be false. -Revelations 2:2 A message to the church at Ephesus.
A church mustered the courage to examine Paul and found him lying, then Christ commended them. It only means that while Paul MAY CLAIM ALL HIS CLAIMS to be an APOSTLE, but he is not.
Nope, Paul is not even equal to a real Apostle of Christ.

Having proven the above, all following claims of Paul loses credibility. If examined will only emphasize the fact that he carried a different Christ and a different gospel. A gospel loved by those in authority today. This is the very reason why, his epistles made its way into the canon of the Bible.
Therefore we will not be surprised if there are many "scholars" who vouched for Paul, evil has many company anyway. But truth does not lie in number or time. Even if the whole world claim something as GOOD, and only Christ says it is not. Number will not help the case.

The truth will set you free from lies, only if you are willing to accept it when you found it. -east