Did John’s Epistle Identify Paul As A False Prophet?

This article is from Chapter 13 of Yahshua’s words on Salvation over at http://www.jesuswordsonly.com


John’s First & Second Epistle talk in words reminiscent of Revelation 2:2. John speaks in his first epistle about testing those who claim to have come from God. John says you can find them to be false prophets. John writes:

Dear friends, don’t believe everyone who claims to have the Spirit of God. Test them all to find out if they really do come from God. Many false prophets have already gone out into the world (1 John 4:1 CEV).

In John’s epistles, John thereafter gives us several tests that his readers can use to know whether some alleged prophet comes from God.

His spirit [does not] say that Jesus Christ had truly human flesh (sarx, flesh). (1 Jn 4:2.)

We belong to God, and everyone who knows God will listen to us [i.e., the twelve apostles]. But the people who don’t know God won’t listen to us. That is how we can tell the Spirit that speaks the truth from the one that tells lies. (1 John 4:6 CEV.)

These people came from our own group, yet they were not part of us. If they had been part of us, they would have stayed with us. But they left, which proves that they did not belong to our group. (1 John 2:19 ASV.)

Whoever transgresses [i.e., goes beyond] and doesn’t remain in the teachings of Christ, doesn’t have God [i.e., breaks fellowship with God]. He who remains in the teachings [of Jesus Christ], the same has both the Father and the Son. (2 John 1:9 Websters.)

Thus, John gives us several criteria to identify the false prophets even if they “claim to have the Spirit” of God:

  • They teach a heresy that Jesus did not come in truly human flesh (i.e., his flesh just appeared to be human flesh); or
  • They do not listen to the twelve apostles; or
  • They became a part of the apostles’ group but left the apostles’ group; or
  • They do not remain in the teachings by the twelve of what Jesus taught.

As hard as it may be to believe, each of these four points in First and Second John apply to Paul.

Did Paul Refuse to Listen to the Apostles?

First, Paul did not listen to the twelve apostles. Paul rails in Galatians 2:1-9 at the three “so-called” apostolic pillars of the Jerusalem church (including John) (Gal. 2:9). Paul says again they were “reputed to be something” (Gal. 2:2,6), but “whatsoever they were it makes no difference to me; God does not accept a man’s person [i.e., judge by their position and rank].” (Gal. 2:6.) Paul then expressly declares that he received nothing from the twelve apostles.

I say [those] who were of repute [i.e., the apostles in context] imparted nothing to me, but contrariwise they saw that I was entrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision. (Gal. 2:7.)

Paul was boasting of his failure to take any information about Jesus’s teachings from the original apostles at Jerusalem. He claimed his failure to do so was positive proof his message for Gentiles came direct from God. Paul puts a spin on his behavior that he would be a lesser figure in Christendom had he learned anything about Jesus from the twelve!

Please read all the commentaries you can on those verses. They all agree on this characterization of Paul’s meaning. Read the verses yourself to verify the disdain Paul was expressing toward learning anything about Jesus from the apostles or the reputed pillars of the church–Peter, John, and James.

Now listen again to what John–one of the three mentioned by Paul as “seeming pillars”–had to say about this kind of behavior. John writes:

We belong to God, and everyone who knows God will listen to us [i.e., the twelve apostles]. But the people who don’t know God won’t listen to us. That is how we can tell the Spirit that speaks the truth from the one that tells lies. (1 John 4:6 CEV)

John clearly would regard someone such as Paul who refused to learn from the twelve as someone who does not “know God.” The fact Paul would not listen to the twelve (and was proud of it) allows us to realize Paul is one who “tells lies,” if we accept John’s direction.

Paul’s Admission of Parting Ways With the Apostles

Paul also fits 1 John 2:19 because he left their group. Paul admits this. However, Paul claims it was because the twelve apostles decided they would alone focus on Jews and Paul alone would go to the Gentiles.Paul’s explanation is implausible in the extreme. Let’s follow John’s directive to “test” those who claim to have the Spirit. We will see Paul’s admitted split from the twelve apostles is more proof that John is speaking of Paul in veiled terms.

In Galatians 2:9, Paul tells us:

and when they perceived the grace that was given unto me, James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision;

Does Paul’s account, any way you mull it over, make sense? Not only are there issues of plausibility, but, if Paul is telling the truth, it means the twelve apostles were willing to violate the Holy Spirit’s guidance to the twelve that Peter was the Apostle to the Gentiles, as is clearly stated in Acts 15:7.

God Already Appointed Peter the Apostle to the Gentiles

The Holy Spirit had already showed the twelve that Peter (not Paul) was the Apostle to the Gentiles. At the Jerusalem Council, with Paul among those at his feet, Peter gets up and says he is the Apostle to the Gentiles in Acts 15:7:

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.

Peter’s statement in Acts 15:7 means God had spoken to him about his task to preach to Gentiles. We even have evidence what that included. God showed Peter visions of the unclean food so he would know to reach the Gentiles. As a result, Peter had converted Cornelius in Acts chapter 10.

If Peter sincerely believed “God made choice among us that” he was the apostle to the Gentiles in Acts 15:7, why would Peter later give this mission up to Paul? Yet, Paul in Galatians 2:9 clearly says Peter agreed Paul would go to the Gentiles and “they [i.e., Peter & the Jerusalem leaders] unto the circumcision [i.e., Jews].”

What Paul claims happened makes no sense. If it happened by mutual agreement, then you would have to conclude Peter believed God changed his mind about Peter’s role. This would require Peter to disregard God’s choice a “good while ago” mentioned in Acts 15:7 that he be the Apostle to the Gentiles. This is completely implausible.

Thus, to believe Paul, you have to believe God would change His mind who was to go to the Gentiles. Yet, for what purpose? Wouldn’t two be better than one? Why would God cut out Peter entirely?

Furthermore, why would Peter diminish this Gentile ministry among the twelve that he initiated with Cornelius? Why would he put Paul alone as the leader to convert Gentiles? Moreover, there were Gentiles right in Jerusalem. How could the apostles sensibly divide up their mission field on the basis of Gentile and Jew?

The answer to all these paradoxes is quite obvious. Paul is putting a good spin on a division between himself and the home church. By claiming in a letter to Gentiles that he was still authorized to evangelize to them, they would believe him. They could not phone Jerusalem to find out the truth. Now listen to John’s evaluation of what this really meant:

These people came from our own group, yet they were not part of us. If they had been part of us, they would have stayed with us. But they left, which proves that they did not belong to our group. (1 John 2:19 ASV)

Did Paul Teach Jesus Did Not Truly Have Human Flesh?

Most Christians might concede the prior points from First John possibly apply to Paul. What most Christians would not concede as possible is that Paul also taught Jesus did not have truly human flesh.

Before we address this point, let’s distinguish this next point from what has preceded. This `human flesh’ issue is a completely independent ground to evaluate Paul. John could be talking about Paul on the issue of leaving their group (1 John 2:19) and not listening to the twelve (1 John 4:6), but not be addressing Paul on the `human flesh issue’ in 1 John 4:2. One point does not necessarily have anything to do with the other.

That said, let’s investigate whether this issue of `human flesh’ in 1 John 4:2 applies to Paul as well.

To understand what teaching John is opposing when he faults as deceivers those who say “Jesus did not have human flesh,” one must have a little schooling in church history. We today assume John is talking about people who say Jesus came in an imaginary way. This is not John’s meaning.

The heresy that John is referring to is the claim Jesus did not have truly human flesh. Marcion’s doctrine is an example of this viewpoint. Marcion came on the scene of history in approximately 144 A.D. John’s epistle is written earlier, and thus is not actually directed at Marcion. Marcion helps us, however, to identify the precursor heresy that John is attacking. Marcion’s doctrines are well-known. Marcion taught salvation by faith alone, the Law of Moses was abrogated, and he insisted Paul alone had the true Gospel, to the exclusion of the twelve apostles. (See Appendix B: How the Canon Was Formed at .) Upon whom did Marcion claim his authority that Jesus only came in the appearance of human flesh? It was obviously Paul.

Marcion said, according to Tertullian’s derisive quote, that Jesus “was not what he appeared to be...[saying He was] flesh and yet not flesh, man and not yet man….” (Tertullian, On Marcion, 3.8.) [See Carm.org version, “incarnate without being flesh, human without being man” On Marcion 3.8.15]

Marcion was not denying Jesus came and looked like a man. Rather, Marcion was claiming that Jesus’ flesh could not be human in our sense. Why? What did Marcion mean?

Marcion was a devout Paulinist, as mentioned before. Paul taught the doctrine that all human flesh inherits the original sin of Adam. (Romans chapter 5.) If Jesus truly had human flesh, Marcion must have been concerned that Jesus would have come in a human flesh which Paul taught was inherently sinful due to the taint of original sin. Incidentally, Paul’s ideas on human flesh being inherently sinful was contrary to Hebrew Scriptures which taught all flesh was clean unless some practice or conduct made it unclean. (See, e.g., Lev. 15:2 et seq.) In light of Paul’s new doctrine, Marcion wanted to protect Jesus from being regarded as inherently sinful. Thus, Marcion was denying Jesus had truly human flesh.

Marcion’s teaching on Jesus’ flesh is known by scholars as docetism. The word docetism comes from a Greek work that means appear. Docetism says Jesus only appeared to come in human flesh. Docetism also became popular later among Gnostics who taught salvation by knowledge and mysteries. (Marcion taught salvation by faith in Jesus, so he is not Gnostic in the true sense.) The Gnostics were never the threat to Christianity that the Marcionites represented. Gnostics were simply writers who had no churches. TheMarcionites, on the other hand, were successful in establishing a competing Paul-oriented Christian church system in most major cities that rivaled the churches founded by the twelve apostles. The Marcionites had church buildings, clergy, regular services, etc.

It was in this context that John’s letter from the 90s A.D., in particular 1 John 4:2, must be understood as condemning docetism. John’s epistle became crucial later in defeating Marcionism. This victory did not decisively happen until the 400s. Marcionite churches survived even into the eighth century A.D., but they remained weak. They later even spawned the Armenian Paulicians. This group endured into the 1200s.

However, a mystery remains. John in the 90s A.D. is writing 50 years prior to Marcion’s appearance on the stage of world history.

Then of whom was John speaking? Was it Paul who Marcion claimed as his mentor in all things? Did Paul teach docetism?

Yes. Heretical docetism is found expressly in Paul. For Paul writes Jesus only appeared to be a man and to come in sinful human flesh. (Rom. 8:3 “likeness” or “appearance” of “sinful human flesh;” 1 see alsoPhil. 2:7 “appeared to be a man”.) 2

Specialists in ancient Greek who are Christian struggle to find no heresy in Paul’s words in both passages. Vincent is one of the leading Christian scholars who has done a Greek language commentary on the entire New Testament. Here is how Vincent’s Word Studies tries to fashion an escape from Paul uttering heresy. First, Vincent explains Paul literally says in Romans 8:3 that Jesus came in the likeness of the flesh of sin. Vincent then says had Paul not used the word likeness, Paul would be saying Jesus had come in “the sin of flesh,” which “would [then] have represented Him as partaking of sin.” Thus, Vincent says Paul does not deny Jesus came in the flesh (i.e., Paul is not denying Jesus’ humanity), but rather Paul insists that Jesus came only in the likeness of sinful flesh.

My answer to Vincent is simple: you have proved my case. Vincent is conceding the Greek wordhomomati (which translates as likeness) means Jesus did not truly come in the flesh of sin. Vincent is intentionally ignoring what this means in Paul’s theology. To Paul, all flesh is sinful. There is no such thing as flesh that is holy in Paul’s outlook. For Paul, you are either in the Spirit or in the flesh. The latter he equates with sin. (Gal. 5:5,16-20.) So Paul is saying Jesus only appeared to come in sinful human flesh. In Paul’s theology of original sin (Rom. ch. 5), this is the same thing as saying Jesus did not come in truly human flesh. It only appeared to be human (sinful) flesh. Paul was completely docetic. That is how Marcion formed his doctrine: straight from Paul.

Furthermore, when you compare Romans 8:3 to Philippians 2:7, there is no mistaking Paul’s viewpoint. In Philippians 2:7, Paul this time says Jesus came in the “likeness (homomati) of men,” not flesh of sin. Following Vincent’s previous agreement on homomati‘s meaning, this verse says Jesus did not truly come as a man. He just appeared as if he was a man. Vincent again struggles desperately to offer an interpretation of Philippians 2:7 that avoids Paul being a heretic. Vincent ends up conceding “likeness of men expresses the fact that His Mode of manifestation resembled what men are.” When you strip away Vincent’s vague words, Vincent concedes Paul teaches Jesus only appeared to be a man. Thus, he was not truly a man. This means Paul was 100% docetic. Listen to John’s evaluation of the false prophets:

His spirit [does not] say that Jesus Christ had a truly human flesh (sarx, flesh). (1 Jn 4:2.)

Was Marcion really that far from Paul? As Tertullian summarized Marcion’s view, we hear the clear echo of Paul. Marcion taught Jesus “was not what he appeared to be…[saying He was] flesh and yet not flesh, man and not yet man….” (Tertullian, On Marcion, 3.8.)

John’s Epistles Are Aimed At A False Teacher Once at Ephesus

The likelihood that John’s epistles are veiled ways of talking about Paul gets stronger when we look at other characteristics of the heretic John is identifying in his first two epistles. Historians acknowledge that John’s epistles are written of events “almost certainly in Asia Minor in or near Ephesus.” 3 John’s concern, Ivor Davidson continues, was about someone in that region who said Jesus was “not truly a flesh-and-blood human being.” To counter him, John also later wrote in his Gospel that the Word “became flesh” (John 1:14.)

Who could John be concerned about who taught docetism in that region of Ephesus? Again the answer is obviously Paul. For it was Paul who wrote inRomans 8:3 and Philippians 2:7 that Jesus only appeared to come as a man and in sinful human flesh. Paul must have carried the same message with himself to Ephesus. John’s focus in his epistles is obviously on the same person of whom Revelation 2:2 is identifying was “a liar” to the Ephesians. John has the same person in mind in the same city of Ephesus. John’s intended object must be Paul.

Did Papias Understand John’s Epistle Message Was Against Paul?

The only later figure whom we confidently can conclude knew Apostle John is Papias. He was John’s pupil. Papias appears to have understood Apostle John was criticizing Paul. The surviving fragments of the writings of Papias, bishop of Hierapolis (130 A.D.) “do not contain any quotation from Paul” even while quoting John’s Gospel and 1 Peter. 4 This and other evidence led Christian scholar Charles M. Nielsen to argue that Papias was writing “against a growing `Paulinis’ [i.e., Paulinism] in Asia Minor circa 125-135 A.D., just prior to full blown Marcionism [i.e., Paul-only-ism].” 5 Nielsen contends Papias’ opponent was Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, who favored Paul. (We have more to say on Polycarp in a moment.)

Thus, in Papias–a bishop of the early church and close associate of Apostle John–we find a figure who already is fighting a growing Paulinism in pre-Marcion times. This allows an inference that Apostle John shared the same concern about Paul that we identify in John’s letters. Apostle John then passed on his concern to Papias. This led Papias to fight the “growing Paulinis” (i.e., Paulinism) in Asia Minor–the region to which Ephesus belonged.

What About Polycarp? Did He Know John Yet Accept Paul?

A word on Polycarp is necessary. Polycarp’s surviving epistle holds high praise for “glorious Paul.” However, it is still not Pauline in a thematic sense. There is no grace teaching in them. There is no salvation-by-faith alone doctrine in them. Regardless, the surviving epistle does highly praise Paul. At the same time, it is often said that Polycarp knew Apostle John. If so, and these Johannine Epistles were written by Apostle John negatively about Paul, as I contend above, then why does Polycarp have such high praise for Paul?

It is a good question. However, it turns out that Polycarp did not likely know Apostle John. Thus, the question becomes irrelevant. It rests on a faulty assumption that Polycarp knew Apostle John.

How did we arrive at the commonly heard notion that Polycarp was associated with Apostle John? It comes solely from Ireneaus and those quoting Ireneaus such as Tertullian. However, there is strong reason to doubt Irenaeus’ claim.

Irenaeus wrote of a childhood memory listening to Polycarp tell of his familiarity with Apostle John. However, none of the surviving writings of Polycarp make any mention of his association with Apostle John. Nor is such an association mentioned in the two biographical earlier accounts of Polycarp contained in Life of Polycarp and The Constitution of the Apostles. Yet, these biographies predate Irenaeus and thus were closer in time to Polycarp’s life. Likewise, Polycarp’s own writings show no knowledge of John’s Gospel. This seems extraordinarily unlikely had John been his associate late in life. As a result of the cumulative weight of evidence, most Christian scholars (including conservative ones) agree that Ireneaus’ childhood memory misunderstood something Polycarp said. Perhaps Polycarp was talking of a familiarity with John the Elder rather than Apostle John. 6

Thus, it is not likely that Polycarp knew Apostle John personally in a period after these Johannine Epistles. Also, technically speaking, we have no dates on Polycarp’s epistle . Thus, we do not know if his “glorious Paul” comment came before or after John’s epistles. Thus, even if there were some association between John and Polycarp, we cannot be sure whether Polycarp’s positive view of Paul continued after that association began.

Accordingly, there is no clear case that someone associated with John after he wrote his epistles had a positive opinion of Paul. To the contrary, the only person whom we confidently can conclude knew John in this time period–Papias–was engaged in resistance to rising Paulinism, according to Christian scholars.

Thus, John’s letters appear to reveal even more clearly who was being spoken about in Revelation 2:2. John’s true friends (i.e., Papias) had the same negative outlook on Paulinism at that time.


Accordingly, when John’s epistles tell us the four characteristics of a false prophet and teacher who left associating with the twelve apostles, they fit Paul like a glove. Scholars agree that John is identifying a false teacher who once had been at Ephesus who taught Jesus did not come in truly human flesh. This too fits Paul like a glove. Paul expressly taught Jesus did not come in human flesh–it only appeared that way. John in his epistle is thus pointing precisely at Paul without using Paul’s name.

John, in effect, tells us in 1 John 4:2-3 to regard Paul as uninspired and a liar, no matter how appealing Paul’s theological arguments may sound.

Given what we find in 1 John 4:1-3, is it then really any coincidence that by the hand of the same John,Revelation 2:2 depicts someone as a liar who told the Ephesians he was an apostle but he was not? Or is it really coincidence that John’s hand wrote Revelation 2:14 which refers to a Balaam figure in the apostolic New Testament era who teaches it is permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols? Balaam, remember, was a prophet converted from evil to a Holy Spirit-filled prophet of God by his experience of seeing an angel on the Road to Moab. Yet, Balaam later apostasizes by teaching it is permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols. Paul likewise followed the identical pattern. 7 Apostle John like ourselves can read where three times Paul says it is permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols. John is not so unaware that he could not have known of whom Jesus was speaking when referencing an apostolic era Balaam. 8

Accordingly, when we turn to John’s epistles, we hear John talk about false prophets in terms that uniquely fit Paul:

  • A recent figure at Ephesus said Jesus only appeared to have human flesh.
  • A recent figure once had been part of the apostolic church but who later took a route exclusive of the twelve apostles.
  • A recent figure had been at Ephesus and did not accept the teachings of Jesus from the twelve, and instead transgressed them.

John always omits names, even as John in his own Gospel never refers to himself by name. John refers to himself as the “apostle whom Jesus loved.” John prefers we use deduction and context for us to deduce of whom he speaks.

Yet, the fact Revelation 2:2, 14 and John’s epistles are referring to Paul is shocking to most Christians. It is even more shocking because you can deduce Paul is being identified by relying alone on Scripture you have read for years.




1. In Romans 8:3, Paul writes: “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son in the likeness [i.e., appearance] of sinful flesh and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.” (ASV)

2. Of course, like Marcion, Paul does not dispute that Jesus was the Godhead who appeared in a “body” (somatikos). (Col. 2:9.) A body does not imply human flesh. Yet, Robertson believes that Col. 2:9 disposes with the docetic theory. Yet, Robertson describes this theory as “Jesus had no human body.” This is not a precise description, at least of Marcion’s docetism. Rather, docetism says the body in which Jesus lived lacked human flesh. It just appeared to be human flesh. Robertson’s analysis thus lacks precise focus on what is docetism.

3. Ivor J. Davidson, The Birth of the Church: From Jesus to Constantine A.D. 30-312 (Tim Dowley Ed.) (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker, 2004) at 162.

4. “Papias,” The Catholic Encyclopedia.

5. Rev. (Lutheran) D. Richard Stuckwisch “Saint Polycarp of Smyrna: Johannine or Pauline Figure?” Concordia Theological Quarterly (January-April 1997) Vol. 61 at 113, 118, citing Charles M. Nielsen, “Papias: Polemicist Against Whom?” Theological Studies 35 (September 1974): 529-535; Charles Nielsen “Polycarp and Marcion: A Note,” Theological Studies 47 (June 1986): 297-399; Charles Nielsen, “Polycarp, Paul and the Scriptures,” Anglican Theological Review 47 (April 1965): 199-215.

6. Rev. (Lutheran) D. Richard Stuckwisch “Saint Polycarp of Smyrna: Johannine or Pauline Figure?” Concordia Theological Quarterly (January-April 1997) Vol. 61 at 113 et seq. (agrees that Polycarp did not likely know Apostle John).

7. For a full discussion on the Balaam-Paul identification, see the chapter entitled Why Does Jesus Mention Balaam in Rev. 2:14.

8. See the chapter entitled Paul Contradict Jesus on Idol Meet.

“I must with the best of reasons approach this inquiry with uneasiness when I find one affirmed to be an apostle, of whom in the list of the apostles in the gospel I find no trace…. [Let’s] put in evidence all the documents that attest his apostleship. He [i.e., Paul] himself, says Marcion, claims to be an apostle, and that not from men nor through any man, but through Jesus Christ. Clearly any man can make claims for himself: but his claim is confirmed by another person’s attestation. One person writes the document, another signs it, a third attests the signature, and a fourth enters it in the records. No man is for himself both claimant and witness.” (See Tertullian, Against Marcion (207 A.D.) quoted at 418-19 infra.)




  • Emmanuel Swedenborg implies that Paul is in now hell . He does, nevertheless, at times quotes “some” of Paul’s quotes, and says that God uses (Un-Holy) men when necessary to spread the Gospel — in the case of Paul to the gentile world.

    Swedenborg claims that Paul’s zeal came form self love (not as a servant), which explains his fervent desire to be an Apostle ( famous, important, etc )

    • Considering the fact that Paul spends a lot of time in his epistles bragging on his own greatness, I would absolutely agree

  • Within the sums Forum, all the solutions related to the example above and
    saved and posted on the web site, so that’s there are different folks who have the same suspect they can flick thru the
    solutions immediately https://math-problem-solver.com/ .
    A change in the worth of ‘x’, will change the worth of ‘y’.

  • Great website! I have been listening to yadayahowah.com and questioningpaul.com for 10 years now. Great info there. Goes into great detail on the Dead Sea Scrolls and examines every Hebrew word using every credible lexicon and interlinear. Did you know that the book of Habukkuk, Ch 2, is a prophecy about Paul (Saul/Shawuel)? Yes, we are all angry for having been misled by Paul. See, also, Facebook – The Unpopular Truth and Questioning Paul groups.

  • Hi all, the truth can never be locked in chains for ever. This surely is an awakening taking place over the globe. I have been searching for this information and I found this blog very useful especially being halfway across the globe in Zimbabwe. You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.
    Warm Regards

    • Hi everyone, Many of you may have already seen this one, but here is a really great link to the archives of false apostle saul/paul .http://false-apostle-paul-archive.blogspot.com/

      Thank you Mishayah, for providing this forum, where those of us who have been excommunicated, can come here and lick our wounds and get some healing and fellowship, and thank you for sharing your bread with us.

      Me too, Eddie, it is great to be free. Our Father has given us His Words of truth and life, through Our Dear Savior.
      Joh_6:63 The Spirit alone gives eternal life. Human effort accomplishes nothing. And the very words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.

      your very grateful sister, with you, seeking THE TRUTH while there is time.

  • dont know if this site is still around, my story is a bit different

    i have the KJV audio bible CD and i decided on my 1 hour commute to work i would listen to it. made it all the way to pauls writings with no issue (although some old testament stuff was pretty dry, but not CONFUSING). what i noticed on audio verses reading the bible, is that my brain filtered it so much differently. what was different was i noticed that paul was a constant bragger and boasting, and contradicted himself. i would play the CD over again and again cause it was so confusing, redundant and what i thought was pointless ramblings. but what struck me and made me fully question it all and pray to God to make sure i was correct was this verse:

    “1 Timothy 1:15King James Version (KJV)

    15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

    i had to reply that 3 or 4 times cause it struck me so overwhelming. all the other times i read the verse it came off as he was being meek and humble, but hearing it out loud it sounded like all the rest of pauls blabbering…full of BOASTFULNESS. not only is he boasting but its the word chief that really made me think, he didnt boast he was the worst sinner, or shitty sinner or lowly sinner, no he used the word chief.

    its not hard to look up the definition and synonyms for chief, but i will show you why it really made me think

    – The person who is in charge of an organization or department, or who has the main responsibility for something
    – The leader of a group of people who have the same customs, beliefs, and language and live in a particular area
    – First in rank or in importance
    – The supreme ruler
    – A person of the highest authority
    – Used figuratively, chief implies maximum importance or value
    – Someone or something of the first order in power or significance

    Here are some synonyms
    – boss, chieftain, director, head, headman, hierarch, leader, master, foreman, foreperson, forewoman, manager, overseer, superintendent, supervisor, taskmaster, capital, cardinal, first, foremost, key, leading, main, major, number one, paramount, premier, primary, prime, principal, top

    so here is Paul saying he is the Supreme ruler, the boss, the master, the authority, the first order of power, the main responsibility of SINNERS…..well there is only one individual that can claim those titles that that’s satan….

    it was after that that i realized so many more things that showed paul to be the antichrist, then found out so many other people have seen something wrong with paul. its interesting to read about things i hadnt thought of yet and try to add to the list of things i noticed

    tarsus was a city in Assyria.
    saul was from the tribe of Benjamin, and tried to kill the rightful king david who was from judah
    paul aka saul was from the tribe of benjamin, and killed the borthers and sisters of christ and christ is son of david and thus again judah

    paul was beheaded in rome, the antichrist says it receives a mortal head wound and comes back to life, now maybe im stretching that a big but no doubtably would the world fall to pauls feet if he was raised from the dead. i mean he is the self proclaimed “FATHER” of Christianity and regarded as the most influential, most important and most revered in the whore of babylon catholic church.

    • That was really good Chad, thanks. Have you been to http://www.jesuswordsonly.com
      It has a ton of great articles on Paul, very well done.
      Paul was pretty much a non issue at the end of his life, kind of the Hillary of his day. However in 144ad Marcion discovered a trunk with Paul’s writings in them and he subsequently resurrected Paul. But thanks again, good comment

    • Good post. I just wanted to comment on the head wound to the beast and Paul being the antichrist. Paul was Satan’s Yeshua. Yeshua did not speak a single word or perform a single miracle that were not directly from the Father. Every bit of Yeshua’s power and authority were given to him by the Father. That doesn’t mean Yeshua is the Father any more than it makes Paul Satan. God spread his word and law through Yeshua and Satan spread his word and law through Paul. I even believe the words (shown in red letters in some bibles to show that Yeshua spoke those words) that Paul claims were spoken to him by Yeshua in his “vision” were actually the words of Satan himself and because Paul did not know God, he was easily deceived just as all of organized religion has been deceived by the perpetuation of Satan’s words through Paul.

      The 12 apostles were Peter, Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas, Matthew, James (son of Alphaeus), Thaddeus (Jude), Simon the Zealot and Matthias who replaced Judas. No Paul and no room for Paul. Peter was apostle of the gentiles and said so somewhere in Acts (it’s too late for me to go looking) and began with the vision from God of the unclean food foretelling the conversion of Cornelius who was on his way to see him.

      The head wound is, well.. my opinion on that is also different. I am fairly confident that the Dragon is Satan and the Beast of Revelation is the Papacy. The vision of Daniel that he gave to Nebuchadnezzar were describing the Dragon’s heads. They represent the Kings of Babylon, Medo-Persia, the four headed Leopard beast are Grecian kings and the seventh and only head left alive of the Dragon is Rome. The two horned beast of Revelation 13:11 is most likely the USA. It had two horns “like a lamb, but spoke like a Dragon.” The motto of the USA is “In God We Trust” which is certainly not true at all.

      On that seventh head is the little horn AKA the Beast who uproots three Roman kingdoms (Ostragoths, Vandals, Heruli) who are sacrificed to make room for it. The seven heads of the beast are the seven Papal names used by popes since 1798. The Papacy was created in 538 AD and began the 1260 years of hiding the scriptures from the public until 1798 when Napoleon captured Pius VI who died in captivity and the Papacy was declared dead. Pius XI brought the Papacy back to power by being the first pope to use communication technologies to preach to the whole world; this is the healing of the head wound. Pius, Leo, Gregory, Benedict, John, Paul and John Paul are the seven heads of the beast. When all of their pontificates are added up (Pius 1 + 2 + 3 etc..) and then added all together, you get the number 665. The eighth head is one who would use his own name and would equal one pushing the number to 666 and identifying the man of sin. Francis currently fits this prophesy.

      So, really, Satan (through Paul) was the father of all these false doctrines and all these “whores” known as organized religion. Paul’s message is what people want to hear and it is his message that modern christianity/catholicism is based on and not those of the Father in Heaven through Yeshua.

      Anyway, you can read the Beast stuff in more detail here. I stumbled on that years ago and it took me awhile to wrap my head around it all, but it’s the only attempt to identify these things that I’ve read that fits into place so effortlessly:


  • A kingdom divided against itself shall not stand, leave your church. Kingdom of YHUH is within you.
    Paul & Barnabas was the beginning split which is now 40,000 denominations who all hate each other, but all love Paul & are serve the Caldeans (Catholic, the devils church).

    The sheep know the shephards voice, but do they know the Devil’s voice?
    Appolyon is the Devil’s Messiah, words of filth.

    The first will be last & the last first has many meanings, but if you been with church a long time, you’ve past the point of questioning Paul therefore drank the wine, the strong drink mixed without measure, that all nations have drank.

    the last will be first because they believed in YHUH and waited for the truth, but utterly regected Churchianity/Paulianity.

    He had to offer a choice, just as he had to be born flesh as we are to judge a righteous judgement.

    The law and prophets were ALL about this choice between Paul & his master or Yasha/YHUH.

    Put Psalm 119 on repeat with the context of Paul.

    we havent even exposed the tip of the Paul iceberg🤔, i personally quit researching the Paul heresies, but i teach Appolyan of Tarsus/devils prophet to everyone i meet.

    it breaks my heart & makes me angry to think about.

    Lets pray he sends more laborers into the vineyard, there are many out there who instantly believe once you tell them the greatest mystery of the last 2000 years, many who have never drank of the wine.

    • The Chaldeans (Catholic’s) invented Islam to capture Jerusalem & create a scapegoat for the False Prophet, Paul 13th apostle, house of Esau the 13th tribe, obviously the Chaldean Church is Edomite & I bet Paul was too…he says hes a Jew, yet from the tribe of Benjamin…

      see the connection? 12 apostles representing 12 tribes, Judas representing House of Judah who YHUH divorced in none other than Babylon, for falling in love with the Chaldeans….

      & its plainly obvious the white “christian” people of Europe & America are the 10 “lost tribes” who have been tricked by their treacherous sister Judah into losing their identity & believing the Chaldean lie of “Ball” “Globe” earth & every other Chaldean lie “Image of the Beast”.

      • Oh my goodness, HonestMechanic. I love your comment. I agree with it (including the globe earth lie). I rarely come across other individuals with similar mindsets. I love this website and Mishiyah’s articles and don’t want to distract from the subject of this article by responding to you, but want to say I completely agree with what you’ve commented here. Do you have a website also?

      • Sorry, I spelled your name wrong in the above comment, Mishayah.

    • I praise and thank Our Father for His mighty works in you Mishayah. When I started having problems with Paul, it was “in the likeness of sinful flesh” that was really bothering me. I started asking Our Father hard questions, and He did not rebuke me. I thought I was the only one sitting on this pot of gold, but now I am glad to find hundreds of witnesses. I have believed for a while, that coming out of Babylon is leaving behind the organized churches, the religious commerce, and now I realize that all of those churches are built on paul’s doctrines, and that paul does worship “another Jesus.” I am very thankful to find this site, and I subscribed just now, and this is my first comment. I am just a little one, but I look forward to learning, instead of being handed over to satan for the destruction of the flesh. I am a truth seeker, so I question everything, and I have loved reading the Scriptures for several years now, and I do note even skip the begats….LOL!
      May Our Father bless all of you.

      • This is kind of embarrassing but my problem with Paul began with his Roman fashion statements on how long my hair could be. Also he was a city boy and didn’t know the first thing about animals and their glory :). Had a big problem with his no women teachers, personally I always thought women had a real knack for teaching. Anyway James 1 is a fantastic nutshell of the gospel. But hey, I am so glad you see the truth about Paul, he boogered the works for 2000 years.

  • It is great to hear and read other folk`s comments on how The Truth is being revealed to the sheep who “know His voice”. Paul`s voice now seems so unfamiliar that I can clearly discern between his and my Master and Lord. Yahshau clearly taught in the parable of the wheat and tares that the enemy came directly after the seed was sown and sowed his tares. He also taught that the tares would grow alongside the wheat until the harvesting. We are being separated because the harvest is near. Even so come Lord Jesus!

  • For those who think Peter was supporting Paul, you may want to read this for further clarification: http://www.judaismvschristianity.com/yeshua's.htm

    If link does not take you directly to Chapter 10, scroll down to bottom of page and click on “Outline”, then click on Chapter 10.

    I think that Apollyon refers to Paul in an encrypted way.
    A = Apostle
    Pol = Paul
    Lyon = Lying


  • First of all Paul didn’t claim to be a prophet. As for him saying that Jesus came in the likeness of sinful flesh it means he was not born of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. God was His Father, therefore He had no sin nature, nor could He sin. It simply means God had prepared a body for him. That’s the likeness, a body.

    • You are putting words in Pauls mouth, he never said Yahshua came in the flesh, only the likeness of human flesh. If you actually knew the son of God you would recognize Paul as an abomination.

    • Replying to the anonymous person above: What you say is incorrect. The false apostle Paul DOES consider himself a prophet. Although Acts may not be inspired, it can be used for historical reference; and it indicates what was believed about Paul at the time. Also, in 1 Corinthians, Paul himself claims to be a prophet.

      Acts 13:1 Now in the church that was at Antioch there were certain PROPHETS and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and SAUL. As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, “Now separate to Me Barnabas and SAUL for the work to which I have called them.”

      “Acts 15:32 Now Judas and Silas, themselves being PROPHETS ALSO, exhorted and strengthened the brethren with many words.

      1Cor 12:7-10 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues.

      1Cor 12:28-29 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles?

      1Cor 13:2 And though I have the gift of PROPHECY, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.”

  • Where do you get the information about the word ‘Believe’ being a mistranslation and actually meaning obedience? All the commentaries I read just say that the word was meant to mean a very strong sense of believe. I’ve been questioning Paul and many other things. Information like this could solve so many problems for me.

    • Hi Hunter, this particular article is from http://www.jesuswordsonly.com there is tremendous info on that site, also http://www.truthseekers.co.za which is a forum with many many articles and studies on Paul along with several threads.

      • Thank you very much for the links. It’s truly awesome to find others like yourself standing up for God’s Truth and questioning the traditions men. Within the last 2 months I’ve been to hell and back. I was drowned out in confusion begging for an answer. The answer came to me through many different experiences and signs that pointed me against myself and everything that was embedded in my mind since childhood. I have to say that the Truth is so beautiful that it brings tears to my eyes. I can only bow down and praise my King for having shown such Mercy towards me.

  • I started questioning Paul years ago when the Holy Spirit directed me to study the law (the real law, not what most people erroneously believe to be the law.) I found a law class and one of the first things I learned was that the governments of this world were all wicked, excepting one, because they were instituted by the wicked one. Paul, however, states that all governments were instituted by God, therefore we must obey them to the letter–let’s see…Does that mean that we must celebrate gay rights, or it’s ok to abort babies, etc. just because the government says it is ok? If the government says it’s ok, has it been instituted by Yashua?

    At this point in time, one can see that our government and all except one are very wicked and we are taught to obey Yahshua rather than man (or man’s government). This inconsistency gnawed away at me for years, like water dripping on a rock. After a while it made a deep-enough impression on me. I started doing a study com-paring the words of Yahshua with Paul and realized that Paul was the one who said that all the governments were good because they were instituted by Yah. Oh yeah? Was Nazi Germany good? Was Rome good? Was Communist Russia good? Were they instituted by Yah? (They all massacred Yah’s people. Would Yah have instituted that?)

    This was the tipping point for me. I realized that Paul was dead wrong on this point alone. One lie makes a liar. Yashuah never lied. So who is right? Me thinks it is the one who can’t be shown to have uttered one lie–ever! In addition, I commenced an in-depth comparison between Paul’s words & Yashuas words. They are as different as oil and water. If you can see a conflict therein, wouldn’t you take Yashua’s (the Son of God’s) words over those of a mere man? I mean, really?

    I just don’t see why it is so hard to understand, but I do have a number of friends who don’t have the stomach for doing this kind of comparison, because, if the facts were known, their doctrinal positions would fall out from underneath them and they would be hanging over a precipice. I think I understand the fear, because I had a fear that I would then have to give up Paul’s “saved by grace” doctrine, for walking the narrow, afflicted path of Yashua–Torah accountability, and all that. It is far more pleasant to think one can live life as usual, without that trouble-some law getting in the way. What do we do witih our lack of love, or our laziness, self-centered-ness, lack of self control, etc. Ouch! Did I step on some toes? Sorry, but I felt compelled to let the chips fall where they may. And, no–I am no angel. By the end of each day I look back and see where I fell short! (very short). But I’m still wrestling with myself over this, since I know it is going to be a daily battle, but the end result will be worth it, and the end is getting closer each day.

    • Wondeful comment there Greta, oh, yeah, all those godly Pauline governments…..
      James is very important book to me. i think it may be the only one in the NT that really tells us just who the real savior is. James says the Word of truth is both savior and ‘Lawgiver’

      • This is to everyone who believes this truth of Paul leading everyone astray by twisting doctrine and the teachings of Jesus (Yeshua).
        I’ve been there for a few years now. Paul rubbed me wrong as soon as I started reading the Whole new testament for myself. My question is, what now? I don’t have a church. I occasionally go to a Messianic Synagogue, but they still believe in Paul. So much of the teaching, if I try to go to a mainstream Church infuriates me. When I first started researching and discovering this I was on fire about it. But as time goes on I feel like I’m getting farther and farther from God instead of closer because of my lack of fellowship and ability to talk to anyone about it. I don’t understand how a denomination, a group or fellowship whatever you want to call it has not developed that is non Pauline. I’ve searched for it and only found one in Chicago. I know that we are not the only ones I’ve met people occasionally. At a church I was at a while back, the pastor even made a point to talk about these people who were trying to tell people that Paul was a false prophet and how he kicked them out of the church. We have to have somewhere to go? I’m in Rockwall its Dallas suburbs. If there’s anyone else with similar beliefs around here let me know

      • I’m in the same boat, Heather. 😦 I have met one person online that I’ve developed a friendship with that all began with our realizations about Paul. But as for a church or group of believers to fellowship with… I cannot fund any. The nearest messianic congregation is 2 hours from me and it doesn’t even matter because they teach Pauline doctrine just like the rest of Christianity. I tried to go to a Jewish synogogue and just not discuss Jesus and attend as a “noahide” gentile but they have not returned my phone call. My husband and I are thinking about just going back to a Protestant church, and ignoring the stuff about Paul l, but like yoy, we get infuriated at the false doctrine. Maybe we’re all just stuck in some unknown territory where “church” as we know it (which was Paul’s design anyway) is not for us. It would be great to find like-minded people to fellowship with though. I do miss that. Blessings to you on your spiritual journey of truth-seeking. ♡

      • If anyone would like to talk or just chat concerning Paul or anything else, just give me a shout…there are plenty of us out there, and there are massive things that God is opening up, so let’s chat…

      • hey everyone, for all of who have been shown the truth about Paul, yeah we are far and few between. But consider that all of you are in line for the tree of life. The rewards from the rev are happening. And each of you coming out of Pauline Christianity are well known in the kingdom of heaven. You are the first wave of overcomers.

      • Thank you for the encouragement, Mishaya. 🙂 It’s really a relief to know we can ask questions on here and come together SOMEWHERE. Thank you for this blog, your articles and comments. Very, VERY, appreciated. I’ll be asking several questions in the near future. 😉

    • Hi again Greta, I had meant to point something out to you….namely that the founding father’s of the USA also rejected Paul, Jefferson called Paul ‘Christianity’s first Heretic. They had to drop Paul in order to rebel against the British, according to Paul the FF’s would have been in sin, however, Paul was a liar and they recognized this and ignored his kissing gov butt doctrine 🙂

      • I know you are commenting to Greta, but I just want to say… Oh my! I did not know this about our founding fathers! I have only studied a little in this area but would love to read more. I know that some of them were masons but had no idea some rejected Paul and that this helped in their ability to revolt from England. It seems so obvious now because of the whole Paul-based governmental authority crap. Lol. Wow. It’s too bad the truth about Paul wasn’t more prevalent during those first settling years because Pauline Christianity is all anyone knows now. It’s practically a miracle I happened upon this truth through prayer and study. Who knows how much more I am blind to. 😦 Can you recommend any books or articles about this aspect of American history? I’d love to read it.

      • Hi FaithLorraine,
        I posted an article on your question, however I don’t have any books strictly relating to your question, but there are articles on this subject over at JWO and truth seekers.
        But do a Google search and you’ll find some good stuff.

      • Ok cool, thank you for the ideas. I will look into all of those. And thank you for replying. 🙂

  • Paul was bipolar, he was a cold blooded killer and he is in a very hot spot in hell. If he can kill thousands of people and claim he has seen the light and if anybody blieve’s him well you can go out and murder but first make them curse God but you have to kill good people by the thousands. He put many good people in hell and laugh about it and then you can do the same if you believe him but after you kill thousands you will be shot full of bullet holes or if you make to jail and then court you will go to the chamber and then you pray and ask God to forgive you and believe this before you die then I would say you are crazy and God will not hear you. The kingdom of God Will not be made up of killer’s, child malester, and perverts and rapest this is who Paul should have went after but he was a Devil and the devil was a muderer from the beginning so was Paul. Paul played God but he was a man and not God.

  • I have to ask, I have been fighting with the same questions you have and then I read 2 Peter 3:15-18 where Peter agrees with Paul’s epistles. What do you think.

    • I think a far better source for just what Peter really taught and felt about Paul is found in the Clementine Homilies, Peter declares in the 17th, that Paul was more wicked than the devil himself.

    • Consider the condemnation of those who speak against Paul compared to those who speak against the Son of Man…

      2 Peter 3:15-16
      And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
      As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

      Matthew 12:32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

      Luke 12:10 And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.

      The words in 2 Peter 3 have been used by all sides of every argument. People hurl this verse like a spear to anyone who questions Paul. I have read that there was controversy in deciding whether or not 2 Peter should be canonized. I believe those making the decision were split in their opinions and it was decided to keep it in. But, regardless of the validity of 2 Peter, these verses jump off the page in sharp contrast to the words of the Messiah.

      • I must add that this condemnation of those who wrest Paul’s “hard to be understood” words which leads to them being labeled “unstable” and “unlearned” continues on to also condemn them to destruction. This does not seem like a fair punishment from a just God.

        I said above that this verse is used against those questioning Paul, but it is not only that…this verse is used to attack anyone who believes anything different than another person. Each side accuses the other of being unlearned, and wresting the words of Paul. These hurlers of spears are in the act of condemning the other person, and that is the job of The Ever-Existing One. Condemnation is not in our hands.

        I also notice the words “as they do also the other scriptures” I see Paul’s epistles being grouped together with the scriptures, and basically making his words as important as the law, and the prophets..

      • Excellent point Sherry, forgiven if you say anything against the ‘Son of Man, but damned if you speak against Paul.
        Personally I believe 2 Pet is a fraud, or at best a Catholic edition. But again…excellent point!

  • This is the best page regarding this topic on the Web I’ve found: I went to Christian School my whole life and had the teachings of Paul crammed down my throat. Only by the power of Almighty God was I allowed to find the truth.
    Paul is a Heretic.
    All the apostles new it. Paul couldn’t kill us fast enough, so he had a vision and changed his stance.
    Cant beat em join em and twist them, destroy from within. Same stance satan always uses.
    Same stance as the Jesuits.
    Nothing new under the sun. Great work on this and may you be blessed by the Most High.

  • This is a great blog. Very informative. Longtime believer who is Roman Catholic. As with other posts here, I started questioning myself and my beliefs, finding inconsistencies here and there in the Bible.

    All of my research and findings all come back to Paul/Saul. My beliefs are so ingrained within Paul’s teachings, that it’s hard to break free from “His Gospel”. I wish more believers would research Paul and his lies instead of just blindly following because “they” said so. Thanks again for this blog. It’s helping me to open my eyes.

    • Hi Michael
      It helps if you can divorce yourself from everything you think know about the Son of God that you learned in religion. Start at ground zero with only the Holy Spirit leading you and guiding you into all truth and understanding. And in that, read, research and above all to practice the teachings of Yahshua. Do this and before long the fog will lift from your mind and truth will come with great clarity and peace.

      • Thank you for the kind words and encouragement. The journey towards peace and clarity begins, to me, with my love for Yahshua and HIS words. Not Paul/Saul’s. Thanks again!

    • As one who always found Paul to be an arrogant chauvinist, I was excited to study these points. However, I found myself in Paul’s defense. First…John writes: “Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist – he denies the Father and Son”. ! John 2:22.
      Point 1 Then on your main points of argument, It is clear to me that the (ones who seemed to be important {because} -[of external appearance], are not James Peter and John who he refers to as “those reputed to be pillars.” Reputed is his way of saying they have a reputation of being pillars [of Christianity]…after describing the previous people as seeming to have been important…doesn’t know, doesn’t care, God judges the heart not the outward appearance making them SEEM important. It is two different sets of people he is talking about.

      Point 2 Heretical docetism? I don’t see evidence of this either. Philippians 2:7 But made himself nothing taking the very nature of a servant being made in human likeness and being found in appearance as a man he humbled himself and became obedient to death…. Saying he took on the form or nature of a human…does not negate that he was flesh, in fact it supports it. This is exactly what He did. As God, came down to be a servant, in the form of flesh…not in the form of God.

      Point 3 Peter IS the apostle to the gentiles….as well as Paul. The whole Catholic Church and the title of Pope or Pontiff, all circle around the idea of the apostle Peter as leader of the Christian church. Rome is where Peter escaped to, where his gentile ministry took off from and also where he died.
      Peter is the gentiles champion when he tells the assembly at the first church council, to let the gentiles be believers with out the yoke that neither the Jews or their ancestors could bear, and that they too were saved by grace [not Jewish customs].
      Then Paul was sent BY the apostles to the gentile believers in Antioch as written by Luke ( a neutral and believable party).
      The letter sent by the apostles to Antioch describes Paul and Barnabus as “The apostles”, and Judas and Silas as “elders”. And the whole party as “brothers”. So the actual original apostles did in fact gave Paul and Barnabus ” the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to”(him.)in Galatians2:9 as is proven in Acts 15:23. With them they sent the following letter: The apostles and elders, your brothers, etc. etc.

      You must really have a worse bend against Paul than even I thought I had. To try to fit this theory into truth takes an awful lot of manipulation of words and thoughts. I’d tread carefully if I were you…God doesn’t take kindly to his leaders being slandered.

      • How can you say that Paul was an apostle? Read the criteria for apostleship Acts 1, and you will find that Paul did not fulfil even one single point of criteria. It is very needful to have a good understanding of the Gospels and what Yahshua taught before blindly accepting Paul as anything even remotely resembling a leader. BTW are you under the impression that Yahshua needs to quote Greek playwrites to get His message across to Paul? Are you also under the impression that good proceeds from evil…or that any good can come from a a lie?

      • Point 1. Doesn’t Paul, on various occasion, make mention of himself in a manner of a hierarch as well? And all due to his “apostleship”?

        Point 2. Your illustrative view of the issue with The Messiah’s Flesh and Blood body is far removed from the actual writings of Paul.

        Point 3. You neglect to mention that Peter AND the rest of The Apostles still managed to instruct believers to avoid certain foods and other practices. All of which coincide with Levitical Law. Secondly, I can’t fathom how you can determine that Paul and Barnabas were Apostles, that were mentioned as such BY The Apostles. Its just not in any Scripture. Moreover, you make reference to Gal2:9 yet neglect the next verse. And this is of importance because Paul was most certainly instructed to do more than merely tell his congregants to remember the poor. This is validated by the same chapter in Acts that you use to promote Paul’s authority amongst The Apostles. But obviously Paul taught contrary to the idol issue in 1Cor8.

        And in conclusion, If I were you I would take my own advise. As Paul demonstrably slanders The Apostles and G-d’s own Law. To try and theorize the legitimacy of Pauls authority takes some serious conjecture and Scriptural gymnastics.

  • Great article.

  • what is a mystery, is so many smart Christians still quote Paul’s writings when they are exposing the truth about something…they are half right but when they back up their argument with Paul’s writings…they unfortunately lose credibility with me…I feel sad..because I am not really smart but when you start comparing/contrasting Christ’s words and Paul’s words, it becomes so painfully obvious.

    • It is so very very obvious isn’t it?

      • what is your opinion on the book of Acts..is it God’s Word?

      • I think the book of acts is a very useful history book but as you know if you don’t see it written as something to the effect ‘The Word came to me speaking, or ‘thus says YHVH’ Acts was written as a history or a record but it’s not God speaking.

      • Do you believe the story about Ananias and Sapphira? According to the account, they were confronted by Peter, an apostle. Was Peter a deceived apostle. The book of Acts relays many accounts of the apostles doing signs and wonders…sometimes names are mentioned i.e Peter, John (named Mark prior) and/ or it just says the apostles did “many signs and wonders…..” Acts 5:12 You say its historical but even Paul’s conversion accounts have been questioned since they are all a little different..so how can it be historically accurate and what would the purpose be for this book to be included in the New Testament?

      • The differing accounts of Paul fake conversion are one of the reasons why I think the book of acts is pretty historically accurate, who else would have shown Paul’s duplicity and you can use it to refute one way or another Paul’s diatribe in Galatians. Or even the fact that the disciples of Yahshua were ‘Zealous for the Torah. Something you will never find in Paul. Or what about the fact that it was Peter who was sent to the gentiles,NOT Paul. So yeah, I use the Book of Acts when necessary.

  • Besides the fact that you are wrong in so many ways what is your point? What change in Christ’s church do you wish to see? You don’t believe that Jesus fulfilled the law? That he is the new wine? Or what? I think I’d rather go with the teachings of Paul than the teachings of Shaun and Sherrie or whatever you and your inspirations name are. I’m pretty sure when John refers to the 12 apostles as you stated above he wasn’t including Judas. It might have been Paul though? Just saying.

    • The point is to choose the teachings of Jesus over Paul. Since their teachings clash, the obvious conclusion is that Paul was wrong and Jesus was right. Matthias was chosen to replace Judas as 12th disciple, not Paul. Acts 1:26

      • Maybe someone can help me. If Paul was a real disciple, why aren’t there 13 thrones in Revelation instead of 12? Thanks.

    • I don’t wish a change in christ’s church. It’s dead and should stay that way. Christ’s church is Paul’s church. If you desire to know the point in this article and others then there is no better place to begin that with the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth.
      Faith Lorraine is absolutely correct Matthias was and is the 12th Apostle, Paul was and is a fraud and that’s being exceptionally kind to the oracle of Satan.

    • What’s the point Lorraine? the point is God told us to test anyone who came in his name. You rather would follow Paul and so would most people because his doctor and it was easy. Didn’t Jesus say the path was narrow and hard. I would rather do a lot of things that doesn’t mean it’s right. God gave instructions on how to test. and one of the first tests should always be is someone telling the truth. it’s evident throughout the New Testament (which is not the Scriptures the Old Testament was the scriptures, the New Testament was collected added & by Constantine and his questionable group – most of it was not written to be Scripture, but random letters that were just collected never intended to be written in stone as Scripture) it’s evident there are several occasions where Paul lies. I can’t get in them here it would take too long, but if you Studied acts and his writings you would know he lied on several occasions. Jesus would never lie. Then just the one point Paul makes, to the Jew I became a Jew to the gentle became a Gentile, I become all things to all people in order to win them for Jesus? Would Jesus become all things to all people and change like a chameleon? Then even after having this Written as his belief of changing to be all things to all people – he goes on record blasting Peter saying peter is a hypocrite for eating with the Gentiles like the Gentiles and the Jews like the Jews exactly what he said he did. And that’s point number 3. Didn’t Jesus handpick his disciples, for years he trained them and they were to be his pillars and spread his teachings? Yet in Paul’s writing he shows his disdain for the apostles. On more than one occasion he bad mouthed the apostles and even admitted to not learning anything from them everything he had came from himself. I think that’s one of the biggest red flags of all, one of the criteria for being an apostle was too I’ve actually been there with Jesus. Paul was not. and as to the 12 disciples you’re right there was 12, and Judas was not the 12th he was removed and was replaced with Matias who fits the qualifications for an apostle. if Paul was added as an apostle that would make 13 we know how important numbers are for God and 13 is not the number 12 is. Jesus warned that people would come as wolf in sheep’s clothing. That’s because it’she knew people would come and act like they were part of his teaching but we’re not really, it’s easier to poison someone slowly. I believe Paul was the perfect counterfeit it’s very similar to what Jesus taught and the disciples but it’s just off. Enough that it’s a counterfeit and if you get caught with that money weather it looks like it or not it’s not the realGospel, it’s counterfeit. and that’s the point,it would be easier just to accept it all and go with the flow, but I don’t want to be caught with The counterfeit Gospel

      • Heather, you are responding to Jim’s comment, not mine (FaithLorraine) ;). I believe Paul is false.

  • After years of not understanding the contradictions and no one being able to give me logical answers to them, God has been opening my eyes. I had to quit listening to others and spend hours and hours and hours with the Bible and God. But when the Truth begins to become evident, it heartbreaking. Heartbreaking that I spent so much time not knowing and that so many are misled. Thanks for your post!

    • I am in the same boat. I totally empathize with you.

    • Hi Amy

      You’re welcome, you know those 3D pictures that if you stare at it for awhile you begin to see another image in the picture? The good part Amy is that now you know the truth and yeah lots are still deceived, but everyday more and more people are seeing the Truth about Paul and they are coming out in droves.


  • Yes Paul is a false apostle. When Jesus ascended an angel said he will come back that way. They say every knee shall bow, every eye shall see. But we are to believe Jesus stopped by to see Paul? Blasphemy! Paul says I am your father. Jesus said call no one your father. And many more. It’s plain as day Paul is against the law. And Peter wasn’t written by Peter. 2peter is a copy of Jude with some we love Paul paragraphs at the very end. They even say Pul is hard to understand. That’s bec he preaches against the law then says follow law then calls it a curse. This is who Jesus warned about. Rev 18:4 here is the patience of the saints, follow commandments, have faith in Jesus. In rev ther are twelve chairs for apostles not thirteen. What a deception! Almost got me! Whew!
    The Truth is out! Amen!

  • You are twisting Paul’s words. Just because he stopped traveling with the 12 apostles doesn’t make him false. I pray God opens your eyes.

  • John’s Epistles are the most blasphemous writings in the New Testament. I bet they are the pseudo-Apostle Paul’s writings, and not the Apostle John’s. Almost every word in the epistles of John I have highlighted in my Bible as false teaching, i.e. yeast in the dough which Jesus warned about, “Beware the yeast of the Pharisees…”. Paul/Saul was a Pharisee and descendant from the evil tribe of Benjamin (Judges Chp 19, 20, 21). Benjamites are sexual pervert, rapist, murderers.

    • Quite frankly there is nothing in John when understood in context that even remotely resembles Paul. I think part of the problem is with the word ‘Believe’ which has been woefully mistranslated and redefined to mean passive mental assent. Whereas the word believe in it’s original context, even how it was used 2000 years ago meant ‘to OBEY’ such as in Jn 3:16 ‘…whoever is obeying the SON will obtain eternal life.’
      The Word ‘believe’ which is in the Greek ‘Pisteou’ was refined by the KJV translators in order to harmonize John with Paul. The antithesis of Pisteou’ strictly means ‘Disobedience.’ and always has.

      • I commented on this thread a few months ago but want to comment again. Wow, I did not know this about the word “believe” meaning “obedience”. That definitely changes the context and therefore the life application. Thank you! (I mean it. I’m not being sarcastic. This is very helpful.) I mean, this is HUGE! It changes everything about how I should live and how I will explain John 3:16 to others. This mistranslation is a BIG deal because doctrine depends on it. I too had my eyes opened about Paul – by God. There is no other explanation. I had been praying my guts out for quite a few years about the inconsistencies in the bible – how Paul’s teachings don’t match Jesus’. I kept reasoning that I must not be “understanding” the mysteries of the NT correctly and begged God to open my eyes to His truth. For those years, I kept having this gnawing feeling that God wanted to tell me something that would shake my deepest foundation in my Christian beliefs. Then a few months ago during prayer, I blurted out to God in desperation, “What is it you want to say?! What is the thing that will wreck my foundations? I’m ready to hear it now. I will not give up on you no matter what it is that you reveal!” Suddenly, I heard a voice deep down say, “Paul is a false apostle and your bible has has mistranslated texts and books that do not belong in it.” Okay, this shocked me! So, I said, “No way… I have never questioned Paul… His epistles ARE foundational to Christianity.” Again, deep down I heard, “Will you follow Jesus or Paul?” I was blown away. I said, “If this is the truth that I am hearing, I choose you, God and I choose Jesus over Paul. I will research this.” Oh my goodness, did I research and after all I’ve learned, I will never be able to ho back to the blindness and confusion that I experienced as a believer in both Pauline doctrine and Yeshua’s. It’s an impossibility because they completely contradict! How did I even cope with this as a Christan before?! I was utterly confused no matter how devoted I was to the Lord l. And I AM devoted. I love Him. No matter what He reveals, I will try my best to swallow it. I know there is more down this rabbit hole and I choose God over any teacher, regardless of whether there is a canonized book in the bible approved of by the original bishops in the 300’s AD. They were wrong to highlight Paul at the expense of the original 12 disciples and Yeshua.

      • Hi FaithLoraine

        I really liked your testimony. Right where the rubber meets the road. Yeah, the word ‘Pisteou’ and it’s original usage is a major game changer.

  • John’s Epistles are the most blasphemous books in the Bible. You should see my Bible how I marked it up with a pen when I came to John’s letters. I’m sorry John, bnut the truth is that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. We have only one choice, not to abstain from sin, but to look to the snake on the pole, and eat the manna. John sounds like a Pharisee. John sounds like Saul/Paul.

    Jesus is a snake one a pole. The 2nd snake, 2nd manna, 2nd concubine. Confirmation in 3.
    Those who handle the true snake’s body(the flesh of Jesus, the heavenly manna bread) and drink its poison (blood of Christ) will live and not die. And these signs will follow those who believe, they will take communions i.e. handle snakes and drink poison. The life of animals is in their blood. JEHOVAH forbides drinking/eating animal blood because it is the life of the animal. Drink the blood of Jesus(communion wine) instead and live. The life of Jesus/Christ/Yeshua is in his blood. Those who eat his flesh and drink his blood will live forever. Look to the snake on the pole, Jesus. The sin cursed, lifted up Christ on a cross. The 2nd snake, 2nd manna, 2nd concubine. Confirmation in 3.

    • So instead of questioning the validity of the Pauline doctrine, you take a pen and scracth out the book of an an Apostle who actaully knew The Messiah and was a witness with Him and others? But you’ll take the word of one who can only claim to have seen him? That makes no sense. Thats the equivalent of denying the word of a soldier who served under a particular general in favor of someone who’s only read about him.

      The only fathomable reason I see why you would prefer Paul over John, is that Paul’s method of entry into Heaven is so much easier. But this in itself is a huge red light, The Messiah Himself said that the road to life was narrow and that only a few find it (Matt7:14). This is vastly different from what Paul preaches.. So its really up to you who you want to believe, its either what The Messiah and His 12 Apostles say, or take the word of an admitted pharisee.

      • Please go back and read my comment again as I do not “prefer” Paul over John.

        I mention the Epistles of John (not the Gospel) as sounding like Paul, as if Paul wrote them and signed John’s name to them. Since Paul had already written so many books, it was about time for him to pass the credit for his continued own works off as those of the real Apostles. I don’t believe PAUL to be an Apostle since Matthias replaced Judas as the 12th, and only 12 are mentioned in Revelation. Requirement to be an Apostle was to be with (Jesus in the flesh) from Baptism through Resurrection and Ascension as a witness to his earthly ministry.

        Paul never saw Jesus heal the blind and sick, thus Paul could make the outrageous claim that he was blinded by Jesus. When did Jesus ever blind anyone?

        Beware the yeast of the Pharisees & Saduccees & Essenes, Jesus warns us. A little yeast (i.e. False doctrine) works through the whole batch of dough (of God’s Word). Jesus, THE WORD, is the Bread of Life.

        The Holy Spirit chose Matthias to replace Judas, but the devil chose Saul/Paul. The devil was not done yet.
        The devil needed to see that the true Gospel of Jesus Christ was well hidden/lost in Paul’s prolific writings.
        The devil is jealous. That is why he used Paul to steal the glory from Jesus. The devil wants you to focus on what Paul (the devil’s accomplice) has to say, not what Jesus said.

        There is plenty to read about Jesus in the Gospels without the need for Paul’s writings. Why do you think there is so much disunity & disfunction in the Church, and evil in the world, and people leaving the church?

        Paul promotes: slavery, women as secondary citizens, doctrine of loss of salvation if you continue sinning (i.e. nailing Jesus to the cross a 2nd time), the idea that sexual sin is the worst kind of sin. WHO TOLD YOU SEXUAL SIN WAS THE WORST KIND OF SIN!? (I can just hear JEHOVAH and JESUS ask us.) Remember, it was God who asked Adam, WHO TOLD YOU THAT YOU WERE NAKED!? in the Garden of Eden. Well, likely it was the devil who planted that seed of worry and condemnation upon Adam and Eve after they sinned. Now the devil continues this after Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross by planting the seed of condemnation regarding sex as the worst possible sin.

    • Eric, you are way confused and delusional. We look to Christ for salvation and forgiveness but not so that we may return to sin as a dog returns to his vomit. The Law is eternal. It was the teachings and traditions of men which Jesus did away with.Yet, if we should again fall and be stung by the accusing serpent, we again look to Jesus, who is our eternal forgiveness. When the rich ruler asked Jesus :What must I do to enter the kingdom? Jesus did not preach the word of grace, did he? He said keep the commandments. What were the commandments which Jesus commanded of us? Love the Lord your God, etc… AND love your neighbor as yourself. IN THESE ARE THE FULLFILLMENT OF THE LAW (ie: the 10 commandments). Yet Paul says: forget the law. It’s all a matter of grace. Paul’s message is why our churches are today filled with runaway divorce rates, adultery and the love of money. Our churches preach grace WITHOUT repentance, the worst of all false doctrines. Who is the LEAST IN THE KINGDOM? THOSE WHO TEACH OTHERS TO DIGRESS THE LAW (words spoken by Jesus)

  • Thank you for this information. I have been a Christian my whole life but I’m stubbornly, constantly searching for truth and much of what I learn conflicts with what I’ve been taught in Christianity. Because I grew up with Paul’s teachings, it is very hard for me to fully say that he was, in a lot if ways, a heretic. So, I will say I’m very grateful for this insight you provided, and dare I say it witnesses to my spirit. But… I’m cautious with what I hear and read so I will continue to study this matter until my heart is either transformed or solidified in truth! Thank you so much. Blessings to you.

    • Consider this: Christianity has whole heartedly followed the teachings of Paul for centuries, yet where, again where is the manifestation of the Kingdom Of heaven? Is it mentioned ever as the Pearl of Great Price, is it ever fought for, longed for, greatly desired? Do men give everything they have within them in order to obtain it?The KIngdom of Heaven is within you, if that is you have been planted or rather been sown with the Word of Truth. You are beginning to see the Truth, it’s a journey. But the at the end of the trail is Heaven and the Life. The Word of Truth will transform you into the living breathing manifestation of true life. You will become a garden paradise and the fragrance of your being will delight and enrapture. Such a worthy goal, don’t you think?

      • Yes. I totally agree. I’ve been asking that exact question over and over – to myself, to God, to my Christian friends and family. “Where is the manifestation of the Kingdom?” I have been studying more since I last wrote the comment above. (Thank you for replying.) I have really come to the understanding that Pauline doctrine is not the same gospel as Jesus’ / Yeshua’s. The truth of Yeshua’s words is doing more change in my life this week than ever in my Christian walk. I hace always studied the bible, theology. But my prayer life was always the thing that brought me to truth because I was so confused when I read the bible’s inconsistencies. I would yell at God sometimes knowing that HE is always right. I would say, “Which is it, God?! Is it faith or is it works?!, Are all things permissable or are their rules of morality?!” The confusion drove me nuts. It dawned on me, “What if all the books of the bible aren’t from God?” What if the canon were put together by an Orthodox Church with an agenda? That is how I ended up here. I am SO glad. I will never stop searching for the truth. When you grow up with well-meaning lies, it feels like your soul is dying when you try to dismantle them.

      • I liked your question, is it faith or is it works? Both actually. But I think this has been totally misunderstood and subjected to the masters of confusion. When the Holy Spirit gives you truth, such as ‘keep the Commandments’ and you in turn keep the commandments, that is faith plus works.
        When the Holy Spirit says ‘Have mercy on this person’ and you grant them mercy, that is faith plus works. You heard and you responded by doing what you heard. So when the Father says ‘This is my Beloved Son, Hear ye Him’ Hear in the Hebrew is a twofold word and it means to hear and obey. So the Works part of faith is simply doing what you heard the Word telling you to do. So to simplify matters just allow the Holy Spirit to define things like faith, instead of using the church, christianity, pastors, teachers and of course Paul. Also when dealing with the Law, if you let Paul define the law then you will never understand it. But if you let the Holy Spirit define it, then it will become the most awesome thing you ever beheld. The Physics of Heaven and Earth and how it all works and functions, not to mention the indescribable power of the Feasts. Christians like Jews love their traditions, however what tradition does is to force a person to always look backwards, they look back at what took place in history instead of looking at the always ever present God and How He is moving today, not yesterday. Wow way off track here 🙂

        The agenda was to thoroughly bury the truth in the mire and labyrinth of false doctrine. The KIngdom of Heaven is within you. Imagine that! Heaven is within you, but how to get there, that’s the question. The New Covenant is the Law/Torah written in your heart AND in your mind. One day the Holy SPirit said to me, ‘Son point your finger to the sky, so I did, and He said ‘Big Heaven’ thenHe said point your finger to your head, and agin I did and He said ‘Little Heaven’, So what happens as YHVH writes His Law/Torah which begins at Gen 1:1, in your heart and in your mind you enter an Exodus from death and into life. What’s interesting about this is that it is both horizontal and vertical. Horizontal is esy to see cuz it is very much like the Exodus from Egypt and vertical is very much like and is the Tabernacle. As the journey progresses you begin to see and understand how He is forming the Tabernacle within you. Very exciting!

    • Oh thank you thank you thank you for the witness. I have read the Bible for decades and John reads like sweet poetry and the letters written by Paul were making me into a schitzophrenic. I knew that I knew that I knew that something was wrong bit I couldn’t find it. I asked God and then questioned Paul’s authority and whether what I was reading was inspired or not and through the Scriptures and the revelations to others I am now so relieved. But I also feel like puking the Paul out of me — all that control and manipulation and circular illogic. I can rest now but I still am very, very angry for being so decieved for so long. But it is written the the serpant will bruise thy heel, but we will crush it’s (Paul’s) head. Thank you. Brother.

      • Hi Melinda:
        You know it’s the time of the separating of the wheat and the tares. But yeah, puking the paul out of you, it’s takes a little time to get it all out, so be patient with yourself. Get immersed in the teachings of Yahshua and soak it all in. From time to time a little remnant of Paul will pop up in your mind, no sweat, just stomp it a few times and it will go away. Besides I understand how angry you can get over the deception, but use that anger when any of his stuff pops up, you’ll feel a lot better 🙂 One trap that many of us have fallen into, is to burn with a rage against Paul and then get all messed up on the inside, and then we have to go back and get our heart cleansed from the bitterness. So be careful not to fall into bitterness over the deception. The message to the church of Ephesus concerning the false apostle is paramount and always remember to stick to your first love otherwise like I say you can get messed up and tangled up. Go to the Truthseekers forum, the link is on the right hand side of page. This is a very polite forum and folks will treat you with a good deal of respect. Also Jesus Words Only is a marvelous site and Doug Del Tondo has tremendous articles that will really bring you up to speed. This article is from his website and was written by him.


  • Thank you for this great article. I agree with you and have been telling my husband about all of this. He disagrees with all the evidence that is against Paul and he made some points that I couldn’t argue with.

    One thing he pointed out was the places where Paul does acknowledge God in the flesh in 1 Timothy 3:16 “Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.” and also in Colossians 1:22 “he has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before him”

    Can you help me explain this to my husband?

    • The question is, what flesh is Paul referring to? He states that Yahshua came in the resemblance of sinful flesh. but not in actual flesh, it just resembled it? But quite frankly, it was never the flesh that sinned, it was the heart, it was the soul. The soul that sins shall die, not the flesh. So what’s the point of pointing out flesh, it has not one thing to do with anything. But here is another point to consider, what is the fruit of Paul? Has Christianity ever at anytime ever obtained the Kingdom of Heaven. Yahshua said the Kingdom is within you. So why do Christians today only identify with heaven after they are physically dead? I mean where is the good news in that? The Kingdom of heaven is to be obtained while you still live in a body. So the fruit of Paul is this, it is death. Until folks divorce Paul, they will continue to spin their wheels going nowhere, while the Kingdom of Heaven remains lost in the shroud of time. Yahshua came to give you LIFE and that life is powerfully manifested when we obtain the Kingdom. Is it possible for today? Of course, but the Gospel of the Kingdom is not the same as Paul presented it. The KIngdom is the Pearl of Great Price, it is not a freebie and it will cost you everything. Which is why Christians have missed it for 2000 years. They thought it was free, no it isn’t and neither is salvation. Salvation is obtained when we obtain the Kingdom and there is much to endure in order to get there. Read Exodus or Deuteronomy, same scenario only this time it is vertical/ spiritual as opposed to geographical. Also I share this with you, about 2 decades ago after a major fear of God experience, the Holy spirit said to me, and I had about 12 years into my walk at this time, He said ‘are willing to give up all that you know and all that you think you know? Are you willing to give all that you have learned and all that you think you have learned?’ In short, I answered YES! Then He said ‘Good, now I will be your teacher.’ Since that time, it has been the Exodus and just recently the Heavenly promised land. And I tell you very emphatically, WOW! There you have a real Oneness with your Heavenly Father, a real oneness with Yahshua, infinitely beyond what you could hope or dream today, but it’s real, it’s real, its real. And it is available to anyone who will simply hear an obey the Son. Paul will hinder to the extreme, however if you divorce yourself from Paul and cling to and abide in the Word of Truth, the Word of Yahshua then you have a marvelous beginning. So I rarely speak about Paul anymore, he was left in the distant past where death reigned. 🙂

  • I find this very exiting as I am busy studying the Pauline doctrine. I’ve received a clear message from the Holy Spirit in October 2012 to read and study Jesus’s Gospel only. I could not understand at the time as to why. As the time went by everthing just unfolded. Thank you so much for all the effort that you have put into it. Jesus Christ is our only Savior amen.

    • Thanks you Lucia, folks like yourself make all the effort so very worthwhile. That’s an excellent message you received from the Holy Spirit, seeing as how He only reminds us of Yahshua’s Words, not Paul’s.

  • You will notice at the top of the page that this article is a copy of the one over at http://www.jesuswordsonly.com, so you may want to redirect your comments to doug del tondo at the aforementioned website.

    • Thanks for pointing that out. Now I’m off to refute jesuswordsonly.com’s slander and misinformation against Paul. Even though for the time being I am a skeptic until further notice…I don’t buy ‘Apostle Paul the false Prophet’ theory. And I apologize if I slander You in anyway, Mishayah because at first I thought YOU wrote the article and not someone else.

  • Thank you for exposing the truth. May you be eternally blessed!

  • Definitely a great post! Thank you for sharing and many, many blessings to you…Robin

    • Isn’t it interesting that Paul claimed that Yahshua did not actually come in the flesh? Glad you liked it. Doug Del Tondo has a marvelous gift, the only attorney I’ve ever liked:)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s