24). “Paul taught to follow your conscious, not the law”.

REBUKE:

I could be wrong but I believe what’s being referred to here is either Romans 2:11-16, which states:

“For there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel”.

Or Romans 14:13-23, which says:

“Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way. I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died. Let not then your good be evil spoken of: For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men.

Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another. For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence. It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak. Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin”.

Or quite possibly 2 Colossians 16:17 which states:

“Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ”.

Okay, in Romans 2:11-16, Paul is describing HOW Jesus Christ will judge souls on the Day of Judgement (in other words, Paul is describing Jesus’s judgement criteria as far as “spiritual hearts” go. So in other words, people who do things that are SINFUL according TO the law (but that had no knowledge of the law) will be judged accordingly. Those that only HEAR the law will NOT be counted as “justified” UNTIL they also start OBEYING the law (James 1: 22-25).

And when a person does NOT have the knowledge of the law of God but DOES things that are written in the law (i.e. honoring their elders/mother/father, taking care of their neighbors in time of need, helping to feed homeless people, putting other’s peoples’ needs above their own, etc.), THEY will be a law onto themselves (meaning, they will also be “justified”, just like the people who KNEW the law AND obeyed it will be justified?) There, Paul is not directly “against the law”. But is rather talking about HOW the law (in and of itself) is the “measuring stick” by WHICH we determine “sin”……if that makes any sense? 

In Romans 14:13-23, Paul is telling us that we are not to do anything to make fellow believers stumble. In other words, we are not to “judge” and “confuse them” when it comes to things like abstaining from certain meats, wine, etc. So in other words, if WE believe it’s forbidden to eat pork and another Christian does NOT, what Paul is saying in these verses is that we’re supposed to let them hash it out with God at their own pace, instead of trying to proverbially FORCE them not to eat pork anymore, since to do so wouldn’t be defined as true “Christian love” on our part, if that makes any sense?

We ALL come to God and come to a certain spiritual WALK with God at our OWN paces – therefore, to try to force EVERY believer to go at the SAME PACE as us is just – ungodly? You can’t FORCE it on them? Just like someone ELSE that knows that WE don’t eat pork should NOT eat pork in FRONT OF US! Etc. Also: If one knows pork is unclean and eats it anyways, etc. – what Paul is possibly suggesting there is that that particular person has then spiritually condemned themselves by their lack of faith *IN* THE (DIETARY) LAW(S?) Or is Paul talking about faith there in the last 4 verses and not food? 

And last but not least, 2 Colossians 16:17? Paul IS likely talking to the Gentiles there. Therefore, it DOES seem (at first glance) as though he’s saying that the Gentiles do NOT have to celebrate in the BIBLICAL holidays or BIBLICAL SABBATH. But is that REALLY what Paul is saying there? Let us examine this a bit further….Paul’s not directly telling Gentiles to NOT celebrate in the 7th Day Biblical Sabbath or Biblical Holidays. But rather, he’s likely telling the Gentiles to not let any Jewish soul judge them AS it pertained to the 7th Day Biblical Sabbath and Biblical holidays. (Or is Paul also addressing a “Jewish” audience, in which he’s telling Jews not to let any NON-Jew judge they, the Jew, IN their observing the 7th Day Biblical Sabbath and Biblical Feasts? We simply don’t know for 100% sure).

In other words, there were many over-zealous Jewish souls around the times of Paul that were more or less saying to all the Gentiles in their midst: “You HAVE to follow Jewish laws and precepts if you want to be saved/redeemed by God”. So what Paul was saying to the Gentiles is to NOT let those over-zealous Jewish souls judge THEM, the Gentile, AS it pertains to the biblical sabbath and feasts since to do so (on the Jewish soul’s part) would’ve been “ungodly” and “unrighteous”? 

On the flipside of that were likely some “over-righteous” Jewish souls that were NOT letting the Gentiles participate in the 7th Day “Jewish” Biblical Sabbath and the Biblical “Jewish” holidays. (As it still is to this day – many a Orthodox Jew today will label a “Messianic Jew/Judeo-Christian” as a SPIRITUAL CHARLATAN and will ESPECIALLY hate whenever a “Messianic Jew/Judeo-Christian” participates in “THEIR” *strictly Jewish* 7th Day Biblical Sabbath and Biblical Holidays! They will oftentimes be caught saying things such as: “Messianic Jews have NO SPIRITUAL RIGHT or REASON to participate in the 7th Day Sabbath and Jewish Biblical Holidays since they were made for JEWS, ONLY!” OUCH!) So perhaps Paul was addressing THEM, as well. But regardless, the whole point of Paul’s saying right there is that the Gentile was NOT supposed to let the non-Gentile judge THEM when it comes to “Jewish law” for ONLY Jesus Christ HIMSELF is the judge!

Paul was ALSO gently reminding the Gentiles that THE 7th Day Biblical Sabbath and Biblical Holidays were a shadow of things to come (i.e. Jesus was fulfilled IN some of the biblical feasts and WOULD someday be fulfilled in THE REST of the biblical feasts) and that ALL (Jew and Gentile alike) were the Body of Christ, the “church”, the “ekklesia!” So therefore, to HIGHLIGHT their differences was of “no effect” to the gospel and threw the gospel out of whack: “Love thy neighbor as yourself”. If that makes any sense. So in other words, Paul wasn’t telling them NOT to celebrate in “Jewish” biblical holidays, only that their FOCUS should be on Christ!  

But, regardless, I don’t really see any verses in the bible that would suggest that Paul is “against the law”. In fact, I see several verses to the contrary…..

In Acts 25:8, Paul says, “While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all”.

Romans 7:12 “Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good”

Romans 3:31 “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law”

2 Timothy 3:16-17 “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works”.

Romans 7:7-8 “What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead”

Galatians 5:13-14 “For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”

Galatians 3:19 “Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator”

Galatians 3:24-26 “Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus”.

25). “Paul says the law justifies, then says it doesn’t in the next chapter (Romans 2-3).

REBUKE: Romans 2:11-16 says: “For there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel”

Romans 3:23-31 says: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law”.

Summary: In Romans chapter 2, Paul is saying that the law is what determines “sin” and that those who HEAR *and* OBEY the law will be “justified” and also that those people who do NOT have access to “the law” but of whom DO the law “naturally” in their lives (i.e. respect their elders/parents, put others’ needs above their own, helping people in need, etc.) will ALSO be “justified?” However, those who “sin” (without the law) and those who KNOW the law but still sin will be “judged” according TO the law. And in Romans chapter 3 in the next chapter, Paul is saying that Jesus Christ’s death on the cross FULFILLED the law and that faith IN Jesus’s propitiation FOR our “sins” on the cross is what “justifies” us, IN ADDITION to being to a hearer AND doer of the law? In other words, salvation comes by grace through faith PLUS “faith-filled obedience (to the law?)”

26). “Paul added to and took away from the WORD in stereotypical Pharisee fashion”.

REBUKE: We know from the scriptures that THE WORD of God is JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF! Therefore, the bible (in and of itself) is considered THE WRITTEN WORD OF GOD! And true, various “scrolls” of written scriptures were around during the time of Paul’s time on Earth…..However, I’m not sure if what’s being alluded to here is the WRITTEN Word of God (the scriptures, in and of themselves) or if it’s specifically referring to THE WORD OF GOD (JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF!) But I’m gonna assume that what’s meant here is referring to JESUS/YESHUA, THE WORD OF GOD! 

Okay, first of all, before we dive into this one, we got to keep ONE thing in mind, here and that’s THIS: Acts 15 had them deciding that PETER should be LEAD APOSTLE to THE JEWS while PAUL should be the LEAD APOSTLE to THE GENTILES! PETER and all the OTHER apostles focused their “preaching” from the “Kingdom Perspective” of Jesus Christ (the point of time while Jesus was still on the Earth) while PAUL focused HIS preaching style from the “Resurrected Christ Perspective” (AFTER Jesus had been resurrected from the dead). Therefore, there’s a slight difference of preaching style/perspective that makes it APPEAR as though the two styles CONTRADICT each other but in essence, they really don’t, for they are both TWO pieces of the SAME GOSPEL PUZZLE! 

That being said, lets dig a little deeper into this. There are definitely some places in the bible where Paul’s words “seem” to “contradict” the words of Jesus. But lets examine this further:

  • In 1 Corinthians 12:28, Ephesians 4:11, 1 Timothy 2:7 and 2 Timothy 1:11, Paul uses the word “teacher” to describe various “offices” carried on within the “ekklesia”/”the church”/”the body of Christ”. 
  • This “appears”, at first glance, to contradict Jesus’s words in Matthew 23:8 in which Jesus says, “But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren”.

“Rabbi”, ofcourse, is the Hebrew word for “teacher” or “master”. However, Jesus and Paul are talking about two totally different concepts here, when it comes to the word for “teacher!” Paul is ofcourse using the term “teacher” in a very casual, loose sense. We all have different spiritual gifts, talents and “callings” in order to help spread the gospel of salvation upon the Earth, do we not? Some people are good at art, others are good at writing or philosophy. And yet others are good at preaching, teaching, caretaking, movie producing, etc. Therefore, what PAUL is referring to in those passages is the “spiritual GIFT/TALENT” of being a teacher, or of “being called by Jesus to become a teacher/instructor of the scriptures” and NOT the actual high, religious “TITLE” of being a rabbi/teacher! 

Jesus, on the other hand, IS referring to the high, religious “title” of any “human man” but HIMSELF being a “Teacher/Rabbi”, one who does so in order to “gain notoriety/prestige”, “to be seen as wise by others”, “to be seen/admired/highly respected by men”. (Book of Matthew, Chapter 23). Notice the difference there, folks? Nevertheless, Jesus more or less commanding people NOT to be called Rabbi or Master doesn’t “negate” the spiritual gift/talent of teaching, in and of itself but rather suggests that “teachers” of the written word are supposed to be HUMBLE about it, NOT calling themselves “Master or Rabbi” and NOT BEING LIKE the “rabbis” of Jesus’s day, clamoring for the official, RELIGIOUS “title” of “teacher”/”master” and what not (talked about in Matthew 23).

In 1 Timothy 2:7, Paul calls himself “a teacher of the Gentiles”, yes. However, Paul is NOT calling himself “teacher” in the official titled religious sense of “Rabbi” or “Master” but rather in the GIFT/TALENT/CALLING of teaching sense. In that passage, Paul is letting us know that he was ORDAINED by Jesus to teach. That is, he’s telling us right there that Jesus spiritually “gifted him” with the gift/talent/calling of “teaching” the Gentiles – though Paul means it more in a humble, loving, instructional way, NOT in a “holier-than-thou”/”Pharisee” type way…..Because please remember in liu of Acts 15, that Peter was put “in charge” of “teaching” the Jews, while Paul was put “in charge” of teaching the Gentiles. Make sense? Therefore, is it REALLY unfair that Paul “called” himself as such? He was only likely reiterating what the OTHER apostles/disciples were calling him around that time.  

Okay, lets examine a few more……

In 1 Corinthians 4:15, PAUL says: “For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel”

In Matthew 23:9-10, JESUS says: “And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ”.

In the above passage, Paul is suggesting that there are many, many, many “teachers/preachers” of the scriptures but that NOT very many OF those “teachers/preachers” are doing it for the RIGHT spiritual motives. In other words, I believe Paul is suggesting that MOST teachers/preachers of the scriptures back in THOSE days (and perhaps even today) was/are doing it for the “notoriety” and nothing more, putting their own selfish needs FOR notoriety/recognition/validation/attention/monetary gain ABOVE the “spiritual needs” of others to HEAR the gospel in its true, unadulterated FORM – and that ONLY those teachers/preachers who FOREVER HAD/HAVE THE “LOST SHEEP” IN MIND AS THEY PREACHED and that HUMBLY put others’ spiritual needs BEFORE their very OWN can be considered LIKE a “caring father” who cares for “his children”. 

In the 2nd part of the passage, I believe Paul is just letting us know that He was ORDAINED by Jesus Christ to “teach” the gospel unto to the Gentiles – and that LIKE a father “inherits” children (either biological, adopted or step), so has HE Paul “inherited” the Gentiles THROUGH the gifting/calling OF teaching that was ORDAINED by Jesus Christ! Paul is NOT referring to himself as “Father” in the OFFICIAL RELIGIOUS TITLE SENSE OF THE WORD! Otherwise, Paul would’ve said: “Call me Father Paul”. But NOWHERE in the bible does Paul say that! 

Jesus ofcourse, in the next passage, is telling us NOT to call any human man “Father” or “Master” in the SPIRITUAL SENSE for ONLY HE and The HEAVENLY FATHER are endowed to such spiritual “titles”. Think of the Catholics today that call their priests “Father”. Think of Buddhist Monks or Mormons or Masons who call their leaders “Master”. Those practices fly DIRECTLY in contradiction to the Holy Scriptures where Jesus tells us NOT to do that very thing!  

Okay, moving on…….

In 1 Timothy 5:17-18, Paul says, “Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine. For the scripture saith, thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward”.

In 1 Corinthians 9:11-12, Paul says, “If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ“.

JESUS says in Matthew 10:7-8 “And as ye go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand. Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give”. 

In 1 Timothy 5:17-18, I do NOT believe Paul is taking about “monetary rewards” but rather, ETERNAL REWARDS! And in 1 Corinthians 9:11-12, Paul is saying that he and the other disciples have the “technical” power to “take money/material possessions from God’s people” as a sort’ve “occupational tribute”……However, Paul is saying that he and the other disciples have NOT used their power and influence to do so, since, if they DID, that would actually HINDER THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST, which Paul and the other apostles DON’T want to do! And in Matthew 10:7-8, Jesus is saying that being payed to preach the gospel is NOT necessary since the gospel is FREE! This in no way, shape or form contradicts what Paul said about choosing NOT be paid for the gospel; it actually goes hand in hand with what Jesus said, concerning the matter! 

27). “Paul caused confusion and 50,000 Christian “denominations”.

REBUKE: In 1 Corinthians 1:10-15, Paul says the following: “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name”. 

Here, Paul is CALLING OUT four different “factions” within the Corinthian church! So we can clearly see that Paul is AGAINST “factions!”  And sure, we could say that, at times, Paul appears somewhat to be “perplexing” in the bible at first glance. But he always expounds on what he means in later passages and further explanations. And much like Paul, Jesus was the same way! Jesus ALSO had to later explain what HE meant by things alot of times as well, as he spoke in parables!

Now…..that being said. Did Jesus and/or the Holy Spirit “purposely” design some of Paul’s sermons/letters as “minorly confusing” so that people would think and pray and meditate on them more, rather than just automatically taking them at face value from the get-go? Possibly. But we shouldn’t ever use the “Paul is confusing, therefore, he’s a false prophet” argument because please remember that JESUS HIMSELF was oftentimes “confusing” as well – SO confusing at times that even his OWN DISCIPLES didn’t know what the heck He was saying! (Matthew 24:3). 

As far as “Christian denominations” go, Paul was calling out FOUR “factions” in HIS day and DENOUNCING THEM! It was in fact, THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH (IN AND OF ITSELF) AND THE REFORMATION DURING THE MIDDLE AGES that produced TONS OF DENOMINATIONS! The Roman Catholic Church didn’t really take off until 1097 or so A.D., while the apostle Paul is said to have been put to death by Emperor Nero in 64-67A.D.! And the Reformation happened during the Middle Ages! 

28). “Paul caused lawlessness among so many that it is added to him until this day“.

REBUKE: Okay, this one is kind’ve weird and I fail to see what actual scriptural passages this one is referring to….? Nevertheless, one of the things that Paul PREACHED ON was lawlessness (ESPECIALLY as it pertains to THE SON OF PERDITION/THE MAN OF LAWLESSNESS).

This is evident in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 in which Paul says: “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God”. 

The passage goes on, verses 7-12:

“For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness“.

Lets take a closer look at 2 Thessalonians 2:9: “Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders“.

That parallels Revelation 13:13-14 which states, “And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live”.

So in other words, Paul was preaching about THE LAWLESSNESS OF THE ANTICHRIST! In summary, Paul preached ON lawlessness and the “lawless one”/”son of perdition”, but didn’t HIMSELF embody it from what I can see from the scriptures. Did Paul maybe make mistakes from time to time? Sure. But then again, ALL apostles did, even Peter! Not to mention the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, David, Moses, Noah and Jacob! NONE of those guys were perfect, therefore, why does one expect Paul to be perfect? It begs of question! The only one who IS perfect is ofcourse, JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF! All others fall short of “perfection”. Because unlike Jesus Christ/Yeshua who was born WITHOUT SIN, ALL the patriarchs were born into sinful human flesh! 

As for how lawlessness could be “added” unto Paul, EVEN TO THIS DAY? I believe Paul is being confused with none other than SATAN! For ONLY Satan is credited with “lawlessness for eternity” (“even unto this day”), as it were!  

29). “Paul doesn’t pass the prophet test of Deuteronomy 13”.

REBUKE: We all know that a “false prophet” is someone who preaches “another gospel” that is different from the gospel of salvation IN Jesus Christ. However, Deuteronomy 13 is all about the Old Testament laws that stated that the Jews were supposed to immediately stone someone if that person just merely “suggested” worshipping OTHER gods!

Anyways, in Acts 14:11-18, the scriptures DO record “Pagan worshipers” attempting to worship Paul AND Barnabus as “gods”. But lets read the ENTIRE verses IN CONTEXT:

“And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men. And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker. Then the priest of Jupiter, which was before their city, brought oxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the people.

Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, THEY RENT THEIR CLOTHES, and ran in among the people, crying out, And saying, ‘Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should TURN FROM these vanities unto the living God,

which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein: Who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways. Nevertheless he left not himself without witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness’. And with these sayings scarce restrained they the people, that they had not done sacrifice unto them”.

Translation? The people wanted to WORSHIP Paul and Barnabas and when Paul and Barnabas HEARD of it, they RENT their clothes. That means to say, they TORE THEIR OWN CLOTHES TO BITS! That’s what the Jews DID back in ancient biblical times when they were GRIEVED IN THEIR SOULS ABOUT SOMETHING! Therefore, both Paul and Barnabas were GRIEVED IN THEIR SOULS when they heard that the people wanted to “worship” them and acted accordingly! For if Paul and Barnabas had WANTED the people to worship them, they would’ve GLADLY accepted to be “worshiped” but they DIDN’T! They ONLY wanted the true, LIVING God (the God of the bible) to be worshiped! 

And in Acts 19:26-27, it says: “Moreover ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods, which are made with hands: So that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at nought; but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worshippeth”.

Translation? Paul was actually turning lots of people in Ephesus/etc. AWAY from IDOL WORSHIP/WORSHIP OF other “gods” (like “Diana”, etc.). 

So from what I can see in the scriptures, Paul in no way, shape or form encourages worship of ANY other “god”, other than JESUS CHRIST, the one true living God! So yes, Paul does INDEED pass the “prophet test of Deuteronomy 13!” 

30). “Paul’s doctrines can not be confirmed by 2-3 witnesses”.

REBUKE: I’m pretty sure what this is referring to is 2 Corinthians 13:1 which states, “This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established“. 

Okay, we first have to understand that there’s SEVERAL words/verses throughout the bible that have “double meaning”. And in THIS case, I believe the word “witnesses” to have double meaning. On the one hand, it could mean DIRECT HUMAN witnesses, yes. But on another hand, it could mean SCRIPTURAL WITNESSES! So for example: If there’s a passage about baptism being required and a person finds one or two other scriptures that say the same thing, that would mean there were 1-2 other “witnesses” about baptism and that the commandment of baptism would then be “established”. Does that make any sense?

And there’s quite alot of places in the bible that CONFIRM what Paul is saying. Let us examine a few……

In 1 Corinthians 2:13, Paul says: “Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual”.

And in Galatians 1:12, Paul says: “For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ”.

In John 17:14 and John 17:17, Jesus says: “I have given them thy word……” and “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth“. Therefore, Jesus is CONFIRMING what Paul later said in Corinthians and Galatians! 

In Romans 13:9, Paul says: “For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”.

In Matthew 22:37-41, Jesus says: “…..Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets”.

Therefore, Jesus is CONFIRMING what Paul later said in Romans 13:9! And I think the reason that Paul didn’t mention the first commandment is because by Paul’s time, it was well-established and well-determined in the “Christian” and “Jewish” community that they weren’t supposed to worship ANY other “god(s)”, and that there was only ONE true God, therefore Paul didn’t feel the need to mention it, since the people of God ALREADY KNEW?

However, in the Roman Empire Christian community, the main “sins” the people struggled with were apparently adultery, murder, stealing, lying, envy, etc. Therefore, that’s why Paul “zeroed-in” on THOSE “sins” and left others out? But then Paul gives them a summary about how all the “sins” the Roman Empire Christians struggled with was more or less summed up in ONE sentence by their FAILURE to do ONE thing: “….and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself“. 

So Jesus CONFIRMS what Paul later says on alot of things. But if JESUS HIMSELF isn’t a good enough 2nd witnesses for Paul’s doctrines, there’s more:

Galatians 2:7-10 states: “But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:) And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do”.

So there, Paul was CONFIRMED by Jesus AND all the apostles! So folks, there’s your 2-3 witnesses to CONFIRM Paul’s doctrines! 

31). “James 3 seems to be directly teaching against Paul personally”.

REBUKE: I can only surmise that this is talking about James 3:13-15, which states: “Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom. But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish“. 

Okay, notice here that James is talking to the ENTIRE CONGREGATION when he says: “But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your HEARTS….” In other words, James is calling out members of the entire congregation for their “envy” and “strife”, reminding them that it’s “earthy, sensual and devilish” while ALSO reminding them that any professed “wise men” endued with knowledge AMONG THEM must show forth his spiritual wisdom “humbly” with “meekness”/a “humble spirit”. That in no way, shape or form is a direct attack on Paul but rather, a general warning to anyone in the congregation who “thinks” he’s a “wise men endued with knowledge”. If that makes any sense? For please remember that MANY in the congregation back in those days thought themselves as “learned wise men”. 

In conclusion, I don’t think James chapter 3 is in any way, shape or form talking about Paul personally but is rather talking about what a true “instructor”/”preacher” of the gospel should BE LIKE! For remember that there were MANY FALSE TEACHERS floating around during the times of Paul and the apostles! Therefore, the apostles often preached ABOUT false teachers (in general) so the congregations would know what types of things to look out for in false teachers! (Not to mention that James was ALSO warning people that they needed to “bridle their tongue” for the tongue has the power of both blessings and cursings!) 

32). “Paul says that works are “useless” for salvation, James (one of the 12) says the opposite”.

REBUKE: Paul and James actually AGREE on the merits of faith and works for salvation when read in CONTEXT……In summary, they both agree that salvation is by grace through faith plus obedience. Let us examine….

Romans 3:28 says: “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law” [PAUL]

James 2:24 says: “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only” [JAMES]

While Paul seems to be fighting against a wrong view of WORKS, James seems to be arguing against a wrong view of FAITH. James seems to be saying that we’re justified by faith AND works, while Paul seems to be saying that we’re justified by FAITH, only! However, what Paul is referring to there in the 2nd part of Romans 3:28 is “faithless works”; works that are done WITHOUT FAITH, or works that are done for all the WRONG REASONS/SPIRITUAL MOTIVES! Paul is not discounting the law or works (in and of themselves) but is rather talking about how one is justified by a faith completed in righteous works for all the RIGHT REASONS????? 

It’s interesting to note that BOTH James and Paul quote from Genesis 15 and 22 on the basis of Abraham’s FAITH. Genesis 22 talks about the point in time when Abraham was asked to sacrifice Isaac, while Genesis 15 focuses on God’s promise to Abraham to “multiply his descendants”. Yet, in BOTH of those examples, Abraham’s FAITH is COMPLETED by “righteous works”. In Genesis 15, Abraham doesn’t just merely “believe” God’s promises but ACTS in accordance to those promises (i.e. likely telling others and Sarah about the promises of God and ACTING as though he was a man who would soon have many descendants someday, etc.) And in Genesis 22, Abraham ACTED on his faith in God by PHYSICALLY PREPARING HIS SON ISAAC FOR SACRIFICE! 

So in other words, what both Paul AND James are both saying is that RIGHTEOUS FAITH THAT IS ACTED UPON is what “justifies” a person, and NOT just faith alone or works/the law alone! Make sense? 

33). “1 John Chapter 2 and 3 seem to warn against Paul as a false teacher”.

REBUKE: Though the apostle John briefly touches upon what type of spirit constitutes an “antichrist”, (for please remember that there were many antichrist “spirits” back in those days – as well as TODAY) his main points in those chapters seemed to be about “loving your neighbor as yourself” and “keeping the commandments”. 

But let us zero on the “antichrist qualities” that John talks about in 1 John 2:18-19, and verses 22-23, respectively: 

“Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us” [verses 18-19]

“Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also”.  [verses 22-23]

And also in verses 1 John 3:14-15, respectively:

“We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death. Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him” [verses 14-15]

Okay, let us just once again zero in on ONE verse: 1 John 2-22 which states: “Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son”.

Now WHERE in the bible do we see Paul DENYING Jesus or “hating someone without cause” AFTER his conversion? Anywhere? Anywhere in the New Testament a’tall? No? YES, the apostles CONSTANTLY WARNED about the “antichrist spirit” but I doubt they had a particular person in mind, other than “Simon the sorcerer”, perhaps. What’s IMPORTANT to note here is that John is very likely talking about “false teachers” IN GENERAL – He doesn’t name any off by name! If it WERE Paul that John was referring to, John would’ve no doubt NAMED HIM! John would’ve wanted to make 100% SURE that the people of God knew the “false teacher” BY NAME! 

And like I said, there is not ONE PASSAGE of scripture where Paul DENIES Jesus Christ or hates on someone (AFTER his conversion) that I can see. NOT ONE! Yes, there IS a case of where Paul doesn’t agree that a certain companion (John Mark) should come with him and Barnabas on a SECOND mission voyage (Acts 15:36-40). But nowhere did it say that Paul HATED that guy! It just implies that Paul was simply “unsure” about the guy going on the SECOND missionary trip, since, during an EARLIER mission trip (talked about in Acts 13), John Mark “abandoned” Paul and Barnabas and “returned to Jerusalem” (Acts 13:13). 

And what Paul was BEFORE he came to a saving knowledge in Jesus Christ DOES NOT MATTER! For IN the ressurected Christ Jesus/Yeshua, Paul was “made anew”. This echoes Isaiah 43:19 which states: “Behold, I will do a new thing; now it shall spring forth; shall ye not know it? I will even make a way in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert”.

34). “Paul taught that Messiah doesn’t come in the flesh, but in the “likeness” of flesh, a doctrine specifically stated to be an “antichrist” doctrine according to 1 John 4. “The likeness of men” and “the appearance as a man” are how Paul describes the Messiah”.

REBUKE: 1 John 4:1-3 states: “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world”.

Okay, so in summary, John is saying that whoever does NOT confess that Jesus came “in the flesh” is that “spirit of antichrist”. So this is easy. Did Paul EVER say ANYWHERE in the bible that Jesus Christ did NOT come in the flesh? Let us examine what Paul DID say about Jesus coming – or not coming – in the flesh, shall we? Philippians 2:5-11 states: 

“Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father”.

Okay, so right there in those passages, Paul is CONFESSING that Jesus Christ came in the flesh! And not only that but GLORIFYING JESUS TO THE FULLEST!

[Note: perhaps the anti-Pauliners are reading from a DIFFERENT bible version other than the King James Version? Because please remember that all the NEWER bible translations CHANGED, ERASED AND REMOVED THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF WORDS, from the NEW King James Version and on! Like, believe me, I GET the temptation to read “newer” bible versions, thinking that maybe they’re easier to understand than the King James Version, which is written in a type of Shakespearean-type format. But folks: if Revelation 22:18-19 warns AGAINST adding, removing [or changing words – if you read between the lines] and there were VERY, VERY dire warnings against all those who did/do so – ESPECIALLY bible PUBLISHERS – then doesn’t it stand to reason that we should ALL stick with the LEAST ALTERATED SCRIPTURES – the King James Version? If there’s a passage you don’t understand, fast and pray about it! The Lord will reveal the answer to you! The “newer” bible versions were PURPOSELY ALTERATED TO LEAD MANY ASTRAY! Satan knows no bounds, folks!!!]

35). “Paul testifies he was kicked OUT of the church of Asia (Ephesus). Ephesus was then rewarded in the Book of Revelation for kicking out a false apostle”.

REBUKE: In Acts 19-Acts 20:13, Paul is “stationed” at Ephesus, preaching onto the Jews AND Gentiles in those quarters. He stays there for a period of THREE YEARS! He is welcomed with open arms by the disciples in Ephesus and treated like a “brother and instructor in the faith”. In fact, some of the Pagans in Ephesus were starting to get PISSED at Paul FOR Paul’s preaching against IDOLS and IDOL WORSHIP (i.e. worship of other false “gods” made of stone, silver, wood, etc., SPECIFICALLY that of “Diana”….)

And towards the END of Paul’s stay there in Ephesus, they (THE IDOL WORSHIPPING PAGANS) wanted to round him up and kill/arrest/torchure him? (Acts 19:29-31). In Acts 20:16, it says, “For Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus, because he would not spend the time in Asia: for he hasted, if it were possible for him, to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost“.

Translation? Paul was NOT kicked out of the church in Ephesus. But rather, he PLANTED the church in Ephesus. He was there for a good THREE YEARS! At the end of the three years, he wanted to try to hurry and get back to Jerusalem for the Day of Pentecost! And folks, lets face it, Paul likely faced FAR MORE PERSECUTION POTENTIAL IN JERUSALEM THAN IN EPHESUS! For remember that the bible calls Jerusalem as the city that STONED THE PROPHETS! While Paul wasn’t considered a  “Prophet” or “one of the 12”, he was definitely one of the Lord’s messengers. Therefore, if the PROPHETS didn’t have an easy time in Jerusalem, what makes anyone think that the Lord’s messengers and/or Lord’s people would? Think about it. 

And in the first epistle to Timothy, Paul is more or less leaving Timothy as a “deacon” in the church in Ephesus. John was also a part of the church in Ephesus. So…..if Paul was declared a “false prophet”, wouldn’t Timothy and John have been declared “false prophets” as well, since they FELLOWSHIPED with Paul? Think about it folks…..Plus wouldn’t have Timothy and John have declared Paul a false prophet BY NAME? Several of the OTHER false prophets were “named” – therefore, why wouldn’t Paul be named, if he were a “false prophet?” Think about it, folks!  

36). “Paul taught the eating of food sacrificed to idols, an act CONDEMNED in the Book of Revelation, chapter 2”.

REBUKE: I believe what’s being referred to here is 1 Corinthians 8:1-13, which states:

“Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth. And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know. But if any man love God, the same is known of him. As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled. But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to them that are weak. For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol’s temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols; And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend”.

Translation? Paul is acknowledging that there were TWO groups of “Christian thought” at the time, AS it pertained to eating foods sacrificed to idols. One “Christian group” saw it as a “sin”, while the other “Christian group” was more “non-chalant” about it and didn’t think eating food sacrificed to idols was that much of a “big deal” since they KNEW there was only ONE true God and since they WORSHIPED the one, true God and saw the idols as “nothing of consequence”. 

And Paul, as we know, was CONSTANTLY trying to “keep the peace” between the Jewish AND Christian communities. So in the above passage, Paul seems to agree with BOTH of them. On the one hand, he’s agreeing with the Christians who see idols as “nothing”. But on the OTHER hand, he’s agreeing with the other group as well when he tells the “idols-are-nothing-in-and-of-themselves” group that they should NOT eat food sacrificed to idols, since they might cause the “weaker” brothers and sisters from either group A or group B to “stumble”. 

So….while one could possibly argue that Paul didn’t seem (at first) to make a CLEAR 100% stance one way or the other rather Christians should eat food sacrificed to idols or not, Paul DID tell them that they (in retrospect) should NOT eat food sacrificed to idols! Therefore, Paul is actually ALIGNED with Revelation 2, which FORBIDS the eating of foods sacrificed to idols. 

[Please continue on to PART THREE for the rest….]