Paul, or Saul of Tarsus is undoubtedly one of, if not the most important figure within Christianity. Many notable scholars and historians testify to this point. For example, Michael H. Hart called Paul the founder of Christianity in his book titled “The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History”. The reasoning behind Paul’s importance in the Christian faith is due in part to his contribution to the New Testament. According to mainstream, Christian scholars Paul is the author of Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Philemon and Galatians, Philippians and 1 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy and Titus.
It is because of Paul’s great influence and presence in Christian history that he has been given the title “Apostle”, but was he really an Apostle? Was he a Prophet? Or was he indeed an Apostle, but not in the sense that most understand him to be? If we look to the Bible for an answer to this we do indeed see Paul being referred to as an Apostle. In the Bible we read:
“Paul called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,” (1 Corinthians 1:1)
“Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,” (Romans 1:1)
The Christian contention here is that since Paul is referred to as being an Apostle in the Bible he must have been a true Apostle in the sense of the word. The problem with this argument is the fact that the author of the two quotations I mentioned above were written by Paul himself. This fact should automatically disqualify these quotations as being offered as tangible evidence of Paul’s authenticity because one could easily conclude that Paul is doing nothing more than “Blowing his own horn”. One would expect to see Paul referring to himself as an Apostle in his own writings because this was the image Paul wanted to display for the masses he was preaching to.
Before I continue we must lay the groundwork for what it means to be an Apostle. In order to do so we must look for a definition for this word so we can have a clear understanding of what an Apostle is. In the dictionary we read the following definitions for the word Apostle:
“any of the original 12 disciples called by Jesus to preach the gospel: Simon Peter, the brothers James and John, Andrew, Philip,Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James the son of Alpheus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot, Judas Iscariot.” (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/apostle)
I want you to notice that in the definition given Paul or Saul of Tarsus is not mentioned. Since he is not mentioned here we can not refer to Paul as being an Apostle like the original 12 disciples of Jesus. It is interesting to note that EVERY English dictionary on the planet fail to mention Paul’s name along with the 12 disciples of Jesus.
When this evidence is shown to educated Christians they respond by giving a secondary definition of the word Apostle that they claim is better suited to Paul. This definition is as follows:
“a title borne by persons sent on foreign missions.” (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/apostle)
The argument here is that since Paul was sent to preach Christianity to the Gentiles (Non Jews) he could be considered an Apostle, since he was sent on a mission to preach Christianity to people who were foreign to Jewish rights, customs and religion. During the ministry of Jesus the religion of the Jews (Old Testament) was preached and taught to Jews only. They often referred to themselves as being “the children of Israel” or “the lost sheep of Israel”. Everyone else were referred to as being a Gentile. This satire was not lost when Jesus came upon the scene. Jesus makes himself quite clear of this fact when he said:
“But he (Jesus) answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 15:24)
Now that we have established the fact that Jesus himself testifies that he was sent for the Jews only let us focus back on Paul. Paul portrayed himself as being an Apostle for the Gentiles in various parts of the Bible. In the Bible we read:
“For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office” (Romans 11:13)
“Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.” (2 Timothy 1:11)
Once again we see the character of Paul proclaiming himself an Apostle for the Gentiles. The problem with such a proclamation is the fact that it contradicts Peter’s proclamation as being the Apostle for the Gentiles. We see Peter giving himself this title in the following Bible quotation:
“And when there had been much disputing, PETER rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that THE GENTILES BY MY MOUTH SHOULD HEAR THE WORD OF THE GOSPEL, AND BELIEVE.” (Acts 15:7)
The obvious question here is who should we believe? Should we believe Peter, who was an original disciple of Jesus? A man who knew Jesus personally, who spoke with Jesus, walked with Jesus and heard Jesus speak. Or should we believe Paul, a man who was not an original disciple, a man who never knew Jesus personally or heard or seen Jesus during his ministry. I leave this decision to the reader but the choice should be as clear as crystal.
There is a third definition of the word Apostle but I would like to set this aside and address it at a later stage in this essay. What I would like to do now is re-examine Paul’s character, using different standards. I would like to see if Paul meets the requirements of one who is considered a Prophet.
In order for us to properly look at this aspect we must first define what it is to be a Prophet. We must then examine Paul’s conversion to Christianity to see if it meets the requirements of Prophethood. Again, if we look to the dictionary for a definition of the word Prophet we read:
“a person who speaks for God or a deity, or by divine inspiration.”
“a person regarded as, or claiming to be, an inspired teacher or leader.” (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/prophet)
Paul refers to himself as being an appointed teacher to the Gentiles in the Bible:
“Whereunto I am APPOINTED a preacher, and an apostle, and a TEACHER of the Gentiles.” (2 Timothy 1:11)
The question we must ask at this point is who appointed Paul to be a teacher to the Gentiles? In order to understand this we must look at the accounts of Paul’s conversion to Christianity. Paul’s conversion is mentioned in three places in the book of Acts. The first account is as follows:
“And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.” (Acts 9:3-7)
The second account is as follows:
“And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me. And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And I answered, Who art thou, Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest. And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me. And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do.” (Acts 22:6-10)
The Third account is as follows:
“Whereupon as I went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests, At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me. And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,” (Acts 26:12-17)
It is obvious that the one who appointed Paul to teach the Gentiles was Jesus. It is the Christians contention that Jesus was God made flesh or God incarnate. If this is indeed the truth (I do not believe it to be) then Paul’s vision of Jesus was an act of divine intervention. Paul’s encounter is very different from the 12 disciples because they knew Jesus personally. They took what they had heard and learned directly from Jesus and went out to preach to the Jews. Paul never new Jesus personally and was instructed by Jesus via a vision to preach the gospel. If Jesus is indeed God or part of a triune God then there is no difference between Paul being instructed by Jesus (God incarnate) to preach the word and God instructing Moses to preach the word. In both instances God came via a vision to instruct and bring good tidings.
If we study these three accounts carefully we start to see inconsistencies in Paul’s account of what happened on the road to Damascus. Here are those inconsistencies:
1. In the first and second account we are told that when Paul seen the light, he was the only one who fell. “And HE fell to the earth” (Acts 9) and “. And I fell unto the ground” (Acts 22). In the third account Paul states that everyone who was with him fell after seeing the light “And when WE WERE ALL FALLEN to the earth” (Acts 26)
2. In the first account the men who were travelling with Paul heard a voice, but saw nothing “And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, HEARING a voice, but SEEING NO man.” (Acts 9). In the second account we are told the men saw something and heard nothing “And they that were with me SAW INDEED the light, and were afraid; but they HEARD NOT the voice of him that spake to me. The third account makes no mention of this event.
The inconsistencies in Paul’s three accounts can only lead us to the conclusion that Paul was lying. If we examine the three stories, in the order that they were given we can also see an evolution of the story, which accounts for the inconsistencies I mentioned above. In the first two accounts Paul claims that the light he saw from the heavens shone around him alone “suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven” (Acts 9), “suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me.” (Acts 22). This account evolves in the third account in an attempt to legitimize Paul’s account of seeing a light. In the third account everyone who was with him saw the light “, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me.” (Acts 26). Also, in the first account Paul merely says that Jesus spoke to him. In the third account, however, Paul tries to legitimize his account by adding that the voice he heard spoke to him in Hebrew “heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?” (Acts 26).
To call Paul a liar is a serious statement. In order to prove this I will refer to the “experts” and what they say about the nature of lying. Web Md, a medical website, has an article titled “10 ways to catch a liar”. In this article they compile a list a ways by which one can catch someone lying. The number 1 way, according to them, is:
““When you want to know if someone is lying, look for inconsistencies in what they are saying," says Newberry, who was a federal agent for 30 years and a police officer for five.” (http://www.webmd.com/balance/features/10-ways-catch-liar)
This is a very popular tactic utilized by police detectives. If a police detective is sure of a person’s guilt they will ask that person to tell their story more than once during an interrogation. The reasoning behind this is because if the suspect is lying, his/her story of what happened will change, evolve or have inconsistencies. If Paul’s three accounts were offered into a court of law, they would not be accepted as matter as fact because of these major inconsistencies in his three accounts.
The obvious question at this point in the article is why Christians do not refer to Paul as being a Prophet? To answer this question we must look to the Bible and what Jesus was reported to have said. It says:
“Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” (Matthew 24:23-24)
If we take this saying of Jesus into account it makes perfect sense as to why Christians do not refer to Paul as being a Prophet. If they claim him to be a Prophet he is automatically deemed a false Prophet according Matthew 24:23-24. It is also important to point out that in verse 23 Jesus says “Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.” If Jesus did in fact say this then Paul’s accounts of having a vision of Jesus while on his way to Damascus is false because Jesus says whoever claims to see him; believe him not. Another point of interest in these verses is that these false prophets will “shew great SIGNS and WONDERS” (Matthew 24:24). Paul is reported to have said, of himself:
“Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in SIGNS, and WONDERS, and mighty deeds.” (2 Corinthians 12:12)
Jesus says a false prophet will come with signs and wonders and Paul offers his authenticity as an Apostle by mentioning his signs and wonders.
Did Jesus make mention of Paul as being a false Apostle? To find an answer to this question we can look within the Bible itself. It says:
“Unto the angel of the church of EPHESUS write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks; I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou HAST TRIED THEM WHICH SAY THEY ARE APOSTLES, AND ARE NOT, and hast FOUND THEM LIARS:” (Revelations 2:1-2)
Who is the false Apostle in this verse who visited the Ephesians? In order to come to an answer we can look at the following passage from the bible:
“PAUL, an APOSTLE of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at EPHESUS, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus: (Ephesians 1:1)
Also, Jesus warned his followers about the Pharisees and Sadducees. In the Bible we read:
“Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.” (Matthew 16:6)
Could this warning from Jesus be applied to the character of Paul? Indeed it can be because Paul makes the following statement in the Bible:
“But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, HE CRIED OUT in the council, Men and brethren, I AM A PHARISEE, THE SON OF A PHARISEE: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.” (Acts 23:6)
Also, Paul admits that he s a liar in the Bible. Many devote Christians are aware of this fact but they choose not to make mention of this because of its implications. If Paul is exposed as a liar, then we must doubt his authenticity because the word of God is truth, and truth never lies. So, what does the Bible say? Are my claims of Paul being a liar valid or invalid? In order to answer this question, I offer the following quotes from Paul in the Bible:
“Be that as it may, I have not been a burden to you. Yet, crafty fellow that I am, I CAUGHT YOU BY TRICKERY!” (2Corinthians 12:16)
The New Living Translation of the Bible has translated the verse as follows:
“Some of you admit I was not a burden to you. But others still think I WAS SNEAKY AND TOOK ADVANTAGE OF YOU BY TRICKERY.” (2 Corinthians 12:16)
“For if the truth of God hath more abounded through MY LIE unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?” (Romans 3:7)
In 2 Corinthians Paul admits that he caught the people by using trickery and in Romans Paul admits he lied to further glorify God. It is also interesting to point out that in Romans Paul asks “why yet I am also judged as a sinner?”. It would appear as if Paul thought there was no problem in utilizing trickery and lies to gain an audience, as long as the people accepted his version of Christianity. To answer his question we can look to the Bible. It states:
“CURSED be he that DOETH THE WORK OF THE LORD DECEITFULLY, and cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood.” (Jeremiah 48:10)
“He that WORKETH DECEIT SHALL NOT DWELL WITHIN MY HOUSE: he that TELLETH LIES SHALL NOT TARRY IN MY SIGHT.” (Psalms 101:7)
In these two Bible verses we are told by God that people who lie and deceive people are cursed and that these people will not be in the presence of God. God is letting us now that liars to his faith are not blessed people and since Paul himself admits to lying, shall we consider him a true man of God? I leave that to the reader of this article to answer.
Some lesser educated Christians are also quick to point out that Paul had a great relationship with the Apostles of Jesus. They make this claim in ignorance of their very own scripture. If one examines the Bible we see that the relationship between Paul and the Apostles of Jesus was shaky at best. Paul’s discontent for the Apostles of Jesus is self evident when we read the following Bible verses:
“But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference ADDED NOTHING TO ME:” (Galatians 2:6)
“But when Peter was come to Antioch, I WITHSTOOD HIM TO THE FACE, because he was to be blamed.” (Galatians 2:11)
“But when I saw that THEY WALKED NOT UPRIGHTLY according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?” (Galatians 2:14)
So, to surmise Paul said the Apostles of Jesus added nothing to him, the Apostles of Jesus walked not uprightly and he publically rebukes Peter to his face, which is a sign of supreme disrespect; not to mention ungodly.
So where does this leave us? Although I have provided ample evidence disproving Paul as being an Apostle (as most understand the word to mean), the Christians will still say he was a genuine Apostle. Although I have shown that Paul can be considered a prophet (Which means he was a false Prophet according to Jesus in the Bible), the Christians will still say he is an Apostle. In the beginning of my article I gave two definitions of the word Apostle from the dictionary. I also said there was a third definition for this word and believe this definition of the word Apostle fits Paul perfectly. The third definition of the word Apostle is as follows:
“a pioneer of any reform movement.” (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/apostle)
What this definition is saying in plain English is that an Apostle can be considered a person who was/is the first to change something. The word “reform” is often associated with change that is an improvement to something that is corrupt or wrong but in this case it is impossibility because Paul is reforming or “improving” the teachings of Jesus. Since Christians regard Jesus as being God incarnate it is foolish for them to promote such an idea because it implies that Paul is better than Jesus. Therefore, we must conclude that Paul’s reform to the original teachings of Jesus is a negative reform. Christians will often make the claim that Paul did not reform the original teachings of Jesus and that Paul’s message is in complete unity with the original teachings of Jesus. Like I said, this is a claim but is it a sound claim? Is it reliable? To answer this question we must look at what Jesus taught and compare it to Paul. If they taught the same thing there should be no difference in the underlying theme of each person’s mission.
In the Bible Jesus was recorded as saying:
“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:17-19)
In this passage Jesus tells us that his mission is not to destroy or change the law but to fulfill or abide or follow it. He further states that not jot or the smallest of things shall be changed. He also says that anyone who breaks the law and teaches others to do so will be amongst those who are the least in the kingdom of heaven.
This message is contrary to what Paul taught
“Knowing that a MAN IS NOT JUSTIFIED BY THE WORKS OF THE LAW, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and NOT BY THE WORKS OF THE LAW: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.” (Galatians 2:16)
“Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith WITHOUT the deeds of the LAW.” (Romans 3:28)
It is quite clear from these passages from the Bible that Paul taught a brand of Christianity that propagated desertion or abandonment of the law. This is different from the teachings of Jesus when he stated that he had not come to destroy the law, but fulfill it. Also, Paul promotes a brand of Christianity that is based on faith alone, without works (“Man is not justifies by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ” (Galatians 2:16) and “A man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law” (Romans 3:28)
This faith based Christianity Paul tries to promote contradicts the Christianity James taught. In the Bible James says:
“But wilt thou know, O vain man, that FAITH WITHOUT WORKS IS DEAD?” (James 2:20)
“Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and NOT BY FAITH ONLY.” (James 2:24)
“For as the body without the spirit is dead, so FAITH WITHOUT WORS IS DEAD also.” (James 2:26)
James tells time and time again that faith and works together is the right path to salvation. Who are we to believe here? Do we believe James, who was one of the original 12 disciples of Jesus, a man who was called the brother of Jesus since they both had the same father, or do we believe Paul who never personally new Jesus at all? Like with Peter, we see a difference between what Paul teaches and what the original 12 disciples of Jesus taught.
Pauline Christianity is the underlying reason why see the staunch corruption within the church today. Faith based Christianity has given authority to those who call themselves Christians to participate in acts that are an abomination to the original teachings of the prophets, including Jesus Christ. A good example of this regards the consumption of Pork. The Old Testament prohibits people from eating this dirty animal in the following verse:
“Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.” (Leviticus 11:4)
A pig falls into this category because it is an animal that eats its own cud (stool or feces). Since Jesus said he had not come to destroy the law (Old Testament) but fulfill it (Matthew 5:17-19 quoted earlier) he would have followed this law and enforced it. Jesus new of the unclean nature of the pig and the prohibition in the Old Testament, which is why cast demon spirits into the bodies of pigs. In the Bible we read of this account:
“The demons begged Jesus, "If you drive us out, send us into the herd of pigs." He said to them, "Go!" So they came out and went into the pigs, and the whole herd rushed down the steep bank into the lake and died in the water.” (Matthew 8:31:32)
How ironic is it that of all the animals around the demons chose to be cast into the very animal the people were not allowed to eat! And how ironic is it that Jesus cast them into the bodies of pigs!
Other offences done by modern day Christians, with the understanding of Pauline’s faith based teachings include pre-marital sexual relations (read about God’s wrath against the people of Sodom and Gomorrah for their sexual transgressions), a crime that is punishable by stoning in the Old Testament and the choice by some Christians to not have their male babies circumcised (a commandment given to Abraham by God). If Jesus himself said he had not come to destroy these laws, why is it that so many so called Christians break these laws? Why do they believe the words of Paul over the teachings of Jesus?
I would like to close this article with a quotation from the Bible. We read:
“And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples (disciples of Jesus): but THEY WERE ALL AFRAID OF HIM, and believed NOT that he was a disciple.” (Acts 9:26)
Why were the disciples of Jesus afraid of Paul and why did they all believe he was not a disciple? Think about it!
No comments:
Post a Comment