Do you belong to a group that is classified as "Christian"? If so, I seriously hope that you will pay close attention to what I am about to share. It will not be easy to take, I suggest you read it with a heart inclined to the perfecter of our faith, the Christ.
Paul's teachings comprised most of the tenets of many Christian denominations of today.
What if Paul is really an anti-Christ?
Would you agree that it will be wise for us to make sure if he is or he is not?
Let us start with Paul's conversion story.
His conversion story is told 3 times in one book, The Acts. Written by his close confidant Luke. The case being like that, we can expect the following: The story will be written in such a way that it will be more favorable for Paul, and the other one is, that the story will be DIRECTLY told by PAUL to Luke.
Keep those in mind as we consider the three instances, that Paul recounts his "conversion" story.
The first one can be found in Acts 9:3-9
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.
Here are the important details that we will compare to the other two instances where Paul recounts this story.
- Light flashed around Paul.
- Paul fell to the ground(alone).
- The voice told him to go to the city of Damascus and there he will be told his mission
- Men with him stopped, did not say a word, HEARD a voice but do not see anyone.
- Paul was blinded.
The second instance can be found at Acts 22:6-11
6 "As I was traveling and coming near Damascus, about midday a bright light from the sky flashed suddenly around me.
7 I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, "Saul, Saul! Why do you persecute me?'
8 "Who are you, Lord?' I asked. "I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you persecute,' he said to me.
9 The men with me saw the light, but did not hear the voice of the one who was speaking to me.
10 I asked, "What shall I do, Lord?' and the Lord said to me, **"Get up and go into Damascus, and there you will be told everything that God has determined for you to do.' **
11 I was blind because of the bright light, and so my companions took me by the hand and led me into Damascus.
What are the changes in this second statements of Paul regarding his "conversion"?
- Light flashed around Paul. - CHECKED
- Paul fell to the ground(alone). - CHECKED
- The voice told him to go to the city of Damascus and there he will be told his mission - CHECKED
- Men saw the light but did not hear the voice - HMMM, Now the men saw te LIGHT but did not hear the voice, while on the first these men dont see anyone BUT HEARD THE VOICE. (CONTRADICTING)
- Paul was blinded. - CHECKED
Let us now consider the third instance, when Paul tell the "same story of his conversion" to Agrippa. Which can be found at Acts 26:13-18
13 It was on the road at midday, Your Majesty, that I saw a light much brighter than the sun, coming from the sky and shining around me and the men traveling with me.
14 All of us fell to the ground, and I heard a voice say to me in Hebrew, "Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting me? You are hurting yourself by hitting back, like an ox kicking against its owner's stick.'
15 "Who are you, Lord?' I asked. And the Lord answered, "I am Jesus, whom you persecute.
16 **But get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as my servant. You are to tell others what you have seen of me today and what I will show you in the future.
17 I will rescue you from the people of Israel and from the Gentiles to whom I will send you. 18 You are to open their eyes and turn them from the darkness to the light and from the power of Satan to God, so that through their faith in me they will have their sins forgiven and receive their place among God's chosen people.' **
For easier comparison, let us put these in a table:
| First Narration | Second Narration | Third Narration | Remark |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Light Around Paul | Light Around Paul | Light Around Everyone | SELF CONTRADICTING |
| 2. Only Paul Fell | Only Paul Fell | ALL Fell | SELF CONTRADICTING |
| 3. Men Heard Voice | Men Did Not Hear Voice | No comment about voice | SELF CONTRADICTING |
| 4. Go to Damascus for | Go to Damascus for | All instructions given | SELF CONTRADICTING |
| further instructions | further instructions | on the spot |
As you can clearly note from the table above, the short story of Paul's own recollection of his OWN conversion is full of contradictions. There are very few details in that story and out of that few, there are FOUR that are CONTRADICTORY.
These inconsistencies only happen to MADE UP STORIES told to different audiences. Therefore Paul only made up his SUPPOSED CONVERSION.
Are there any other proofs that Paul only made up his conversion story? Yes there are.
Paul claims that the voice who spoke to him, identified himself as the Christ. Let us examine this claim too.
You have to remember that Paul lived in contemporary with all other Apostles of Christ. Therefore, if Christ would really choose Paul for a very important mission of "Ministry to the Gentiles", Christ would have personally called Paul while Christ was still alive on earth. Just as Christ has done to ALL HIS HANDPICKED Apostles. Aside from being personally approached and invited by Christ, these 12 apostles, went thru a 3.5 years of rigorous personal training. Letting them personally hear, how and what He teaches, they are Christ's 12 eyewitnesses. These 12 is given the command by Christ to preach only to the lost sheep of Israel. Prohibited even to enter the Samaritan region.
Now think about this, the whole world of the gentiles is way much bigger than Israel. if the 12 apostles that is tasked to preach to Israel ONLY, needed Christ's 3.5 years of personal training, how much more time of training will a SINGLE PERSON such as Paul would need. The fact that Christ never called Paul while He is alive should be clear enough reason to doubt Christ will even consider Paul when Christ has already went to heaven.
ONE MORE IMPORTANT THING TO NOTICE is this phrase found in the third Paul narration of his conversion : " it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks" It is found from a Greek play written by Aristophanes around 423 years before Christ Era. Do you know what that means? It is a direct reference to the male sex organ, the penis. Now recall every proven words of Christ and point to me, even once, other than this claim of Paul that Christ taught someone using that STYLE of speaking.
No. Paul is a habitual liar. He lied about being converted, he lied about being chosen by Christ to minister to the gentile, he lied about the LAW of God being abrogated and HE LIED BEING A FOLLOWER of Christ, much less being Christ's apostle.
Indeed Paul and his teachings are adverse to the teachings of Christ, making PAUL an undeniable anti-Christ.
Below is an excerpt from http://www.problemswithpaul.com/ website. If you value your Christian faith. It is HIGH time to take a second HARD look at Paul.
Then there’s the matter of Yahweh’s Law. Paul went to great lengths to make void the law. Yahushua and the apostles said otherwise. Yahushua 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 Yahushua. 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. Yahushua said otherwise, Matthew 22:27-40, Mark 29-31.
Paul declared ALL things lawful, I Corinthians 6:12-14, Colossians 2:16. Yahushua said otherwise, Matthew 5:18, Luke 16:17, John 14:15.
Paul declared nothing unclean, Romans 14:14, I Timothy 4:1-5. Yahushua 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. Yahushua 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. Yahushua 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). Yahushua 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 Yahushua? 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 Yahushua. Yahushua 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. Yahushua 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. Yahushua 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?) Yahushua 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’. Yahushua did not promote a physical church hierarchy. Rather, He detested it.)
Paul claimed the title of ‘Father’, I Corinthians 4:15-16. Yahushua 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) Yahushua, 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 Yahushua, I Corinthians 15:8.
Paul bragged about speaking in tongues, I Corinthians 14:18-19. Take note: Neither Yahushua 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 Yahushua’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 Yahushua’s prophecy for Peter, John 21:18. Even today, Peter’s word is spiritually hindered by Paul’s word.
I know that it is tiring to examine all of the above, I only wanted to show you HOW EXTENSIVE are the things against Paul when his words are examined against the inspired word of God.
I hope that, I have inspired you to thirst for more eye opening truths. Because the truth DOES NOT FEAR examination. Truth can set you free from lies, only if you keep an OPEN MIND.
PLEASE DO UPVOTE, SHARE, FOLLOW and comment below on what you think about the subject of this post. -east
A few random objections:
Hi, stan
"minor" differences on one's own brief but very important moment in life can be allowed. but it sure give us a hint on how the narrator treat the "truth of things". If he can't tell things as they were PERSONALLY experienced by him, how can we trust him to witness correctly about the things HE DID NOT PERSONALLY WITNESS?
If forgetting the "Love God above all" part is a minor thing, I cannot fathom what issues will be "important".
Teaching people to abandon the law that was "nailed to the cross", then paying for the expenses of 4 men just to "show" that he is indeed following the law, is blatant hypocrisy.
There are many teachings of Christ of which Paul directly teach the adverse. Therefore Paul is "an" anti-Christ.
This is not a personal attack against you or the church that teaches Paul's teachings, rather it is an attempt to inform people, how Paul have been deceived by the evil spirit that claimed to be Christ, in order for him to plant the "weed" in contemporary with the wheat that is being planted by Christ and his 12 apostles. These 12 were never ever been called 13.
Again, the other Apostles just don't agree with you. The Christian communities in Corinth, Emphasis, Phillipi, Berea, Antioch, Jerusalem, Rome, Alexandria, Derbe, Lystra, Tarsus, Caesura, Philadelphia, Laodicea, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, and Thessalonica to name a few were all in constant contact and all knew Paul and scores of other of his associates. The Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 reviewed Paul's teachings and validated his legitimacy. Christian scholars have studied all the Scriptures in every generation and found no inconsistencies.
You seem to think that you have suddenly uncovered something new that went unnoticed for nearly 2000 years. Paul has been totally vetted by the Apostles, their contemporaries, the early church Fathers, the great theologians (Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Edwards, CS. Lewis...) and on and on.
There is no inconsistency in his teaching. There is just lack of understanding.
Paul did say, "I have become all things to all men so that by all means I might save some." If that's hypocrisy - well I'm sure he would happily plead guilty. This doctrine is spelled out quite clearly in Romans 14 where he explains that while the "strong sister" is free, she should limit her freedom if it would cause a "weak brother" to fall. He knows he is free to eat meat sacrificed to idols but will not do so if it would scandalize a weaker brother. This is not hypocrisy, it is sacrificing personal freedom for the benefit of others.
Which Apostles? No one among the 12 called nor acknowledged Paul as an apostle. The highest acknowledgement he got from Peter is "brother" and that is only because Paul feigned to follow Christ's teachings.
The "christian councils" after that are just adulterated bodies of self proclaimed authority much like Paul. They carried and taught "another gospel".
And much of Paul founded churches are gentiles who don't know anything about the law of God nor do they care to learn and follow it.
Paul becoming "all things to all men" is just a self confession of how he is willing to LIE and manipulate to gather any and all followers of his own version of Christ gospel.
For details regarding the Biblical citations regarding my points, will be linked here later. Again this is nothing personal against you, but only an attempt to expose Paul and his teachings as to what they really are.
KINDLY, examine the passages quoted in this post. https://steemit.com/spirituality/@easteagle13/you-need-to-take-a-hard-second-look-at-paul.
And here's another : https://steemit.com/spirituality/@easteagle13/why-is-paul-an-anti-christ
I guess you are entitled to your interpretation. But every point you have been making has another interpretation that doesn't impune his reputation, much less turn him into an antichrist. Nearly all of the great Bible scholars for nearly 2000 years have looked at the same text and not viewed it that way.
I don't ever take things personally. But I'm certainly gonna defend my man Paul. As far as I'm concerned, he was the greatest and most influential of the Apostles. I've been teaching advanced adult Bible classes for the past 13 years. I have many hundreds of hours in the classroom and spent thousands of hours comparing his teachings with all other Scriptures on every topic imaginable. His teaching hang together with the rest of the Bible perfectly - and in fact no one has ever done a better job of unifying all of the Scriptures than Paul.
As I said above - none of the Apostles objected to Paul or he would not have gained acceptance in the early church. John outlived him in Ephesus by a generation and had plenty of time to stomp out any of his alleged false teachings. Many of the first century church fathers quoted him. Peter did indeed refer to Paul's letters as Scripture, in the verse we have both quoted multiple times. To paraphase, "Our brother Paul's letters are hard to understand and people twist what he says like they do all the other Scriptures."
Peter is commenting about Paul's letters which comprise 49% of the New Testament. He is not talking about Paul himself.
God used Paul as an instrument to write down a portion of His Word.
What Paul wrote was 100% inspired by God, except in one or two instances where he asked permission to write down his own thoughts. What God wrote via Paul is only out of whack with the rest in false translations - deliberately created by the enemy to take away from what God explicitly stated. A truthful translation forms an unbreakable chain of evidence.
The whole Word of God was inspired by God, not just portions of it. This is why it is called the Word of God and not the Word of Paul, etc.
Understand that all of those who helped to create God's Word were mere instruments in God's Hand - it doesn't contain their own words and ideas (except in instances where permission was asked to state their own words and ideas).
I have listened to numerous videos by trustinjc user on youtube. If you haven't heard of him you will probably like.
Once closely examined, the faults that could be found about Paul will be the same. It's just a matter of pride to refuse the evidence against him. Thanks for sharing the vid.