Robbing Peter to Pay Paul - underground-cantina.83190.x6...

Free for your own research, no copyright. Some fair use of other sources included. V1.0 6 June 2017 Page 1 of 26

Robbing Peter to Pay Paul

Jesus, or broad easy road to destruction?

Purpose

• Jesus gave us the true Gospel. He said beware deceivers who will try to undermine

Me.

• Paul’s gospel, and Paul’s “Jesus” is that false gospel and false “Jesus”. This is old

news.

• Paul’s writings are not in the bible by mistake. They are meant to be there. Since the

serpent in the Garden on, we see the words of the deceiver always given fair airtime.

• The tragic consequences for a world believing they can safely ignore the

commandments Jesus gave us, because Paul said so.

• It has seemed impossible to follow the commandments Jesus gave in todays world, but

now we know it is not. On the contrary, the entire world structure is built to give us

this exact choice. At the moment we are on the wrong side of the choice Jesus gave us.

Overview

In a previous document, we considered 3 key elements.

1. Time is short, the “great wonder in Heaven” described in Revelation 12:1-2, will

occur for the first time in recorded human history, September 23, 2017. Very few

people care.

2. Extensive evidence of the fact that the world construct is firmly rooted in the bible

(Royal law), and specifically the “true” Gospel of Jesus Christ. Accordingly those who

do not obey are bound by the power of the Keys that Jesus gave to Peter, and we see in

painful detail precisely how real those bindings are today. And how if we are bound

on earth, then we are also bound in heaven. Very few people care.

3. Evidence that the same world construct that binds us so mercilessly, also has built into

it the opportunity for repentance of our wrongdoing. To be redeemed, and a possibility

for us to follow the commandments of Jesus. Very few people care.

Given the consequences, now and in the future, I was surprised and not a little puzzled. Until

a certain man told me why the total lack of concern - “one word, GRACE”.

Grace? A quick check of the bible shows Jesus never used that word even once. He says

things like repent, and do the works of repentance (not that difficult, at least in principle), and


keep my commandments. I’d not realised that some Christians were using Paul as an excuse

to ignore Jesus – that is to say, just believe JC died for you, rose again, and then you are under

grace, justified by faith, and can completely ignore Messiah’s commandments. As we will

see, that is a risky approach ….. yes, there is grace, but the first time we see it explained in

context is in Acts 4, and only AFTER people have chosen to obey Jesus.

This is tragic. So many deceived, who believe that following Paul = following Jesus. So many

non-believers shunning the beautiful Gospel of Jesus, thinking they also have to swallow

Paul’s poisonous message. So many who wanted to follow Jesus, and have walked away in

confusion and disappointment. Because they were misled by self-appointed teachers who

corrupt the simple teachings of Jesus with the confusion of Paul.

If you believe, or are open to belief, but cannot figure the discrepancies, why not reconsider

what Jesus actually had to say? If you don’t believe, perhaps ask yourself why? When we

drop Paul from the picture, the true Gospel is beautiful and a stunningly practical way towards

a world that could work for all here today.

The Gospel of Jesus was reasonably plain and apparently complete. Do you ever get the

feeling that Paul only complicates things? Was there really any more to be said after Jesus

was done talking?

There has been much debated and written on this topic, which will be summarised in the first

6 Chapters. But, this is all old news, skip straight to chapters 7 & 8 if you are already well

aware of the problems with Paul.

Chapters 7 & 8 are the main purpose of this article, building on the known problem with Paul,

and then to build on that from two further perspectives, namely;

1. That in the Commonwealth, Queen Elizabeth II has promised to uphold the “true”

Gospel. And in Her coronation ceremony the Gospel reading was from Matthew. So

we might ask - is there then also a “false” gospel? Our legal and societal structure is

built in accordance with the Gospel of Jesus. And we can see the clear evidence that

we are bound by Peter’s Keys due to our failure to obey the Gospel of Jesus in a very

practical and worldly sense. We can also see the way back. So we now have the option

to ditch Paul and his “cheap grace” doctrine, and see that it is actually possible to obey

Jesus. Good for all, a way to decent society. As Jesus taught.

2. The notion that Paul must be a true apostle because his writings are in the Bible, the

very word of God, and God does not lie, so Paul must be true. That circuitous

argument makes little sense, and such a knee jerk reaction fails to consider that the

bible has numerous examples of false doctrines included to good purpose – every

good story needs a villain. To test us, as Jesus, Eve, and Job were tested, and as Judas

was a necessary betrayer. We’ll consider that when Jesus warned us that many would

be deceived, the logical place to put the deceiver’s words is right there in the New

Testament collection, so those words can survive for the next 2000 years as well. The

deceiver deserves some airtime too – only fair, just as Eve and Job were allowed to be

tested. So don’t be surprised that falsehood and deception is in the New Testament.

But rather expect it, as a consistent continuation what came before.

Before we get to those aspects, let’s review some of the key highlights on this old debate.


Contents Page

1. Was Jesus’s Gospel and Ministry complete? 4

2. Are the Gospel’s of Jesus and Paul basically the same? 5

3. What warning’s did Jesus give us regarding Deceiver’s? 8

4. What warnings do we find in Acts? 12

5. What warnings do Peter, James and John give us? 16

6. So what does Paul have to say for himself? 19

7. We should expect words of the deceiver in the bible 22

8. We can obey Jesus, the choice is built into our world system 24


1. Was Jesus’s Gospel and Ministry complete?

If we take the first Gospel (Matthew), and the first 6 chapters of Acts, a basic chain of events

might be summarised as follows;

Jesus the prophesied Messiah is born, tested in the wilderness and baptized. (Matthew

Chapter 1 to Chapter 4:16).

Jesus begins his ministry preaching “Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand”

(Matt 4:17), appoints apostles, preaches the Sermon on the Mount (Matt chapters 5 –

7).

Jesus does miracles, gives more teachings and commandments, tells parables, warns of

false prophets. Peter is given his commission “And I say also unto thee, That thou art

Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail

against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever

thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on

earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Matt 16:18,19). His ministry includes Gentiles.

(Matt chapters 8-26).

Jesus is betrayed and crucified. Rises after 3 days and appears to some. (Matt chapters

27 and 28). Gives the apostles specific instruction before his ascension “ And Jesus

came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and

of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I

have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.

Amen.” (Matt 28:18-20 the last 3 verses in the book).

Apostles commence their ministry, all were of one mind and had all things in

common. And all that believed were together, and had all things common; (Acts

2:44), and And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul:

neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but

they had all things common.33 And with great power gave the apostles witness of the

resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all.34 Neither was

there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses

sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,35 And laid them down

at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had

need. (Acts 4:32-35).

A beaurocracy is established to take care of the common property and its distribution

(Acts 6). Though today that is up to each of us to implement as given to be able.

Preaching of the Gospel of Jesus by the apostles includes the Gentiles (e.g. Acts 10

and 11).

So at this stage Jesus has said what he came to say and do. He has been given “all power in

heaven and in earth”, and seen fit to build his church on Peter the rock, and give Peter the

Keys. Peter and the apostles are doing the Duty Jesus gave them, the message is on its way to

the “ends of the earth”.


Jesus did not change his story after his resurrection, rather he affirmed it. No mention of

further gospels specifically for the gentiles (they are already included), no mention of

additional apostles, no mention of secret mystery stories.

It is true that Jesus did give us further information in the last book of the bible, the Revelation

to John. The critical distinction is that revelation was by an ANGEL (or messenger). Jesus did

NOT appear directly to John – at least not on earth.

2. Are the Gospel’s of Jesus and Paul basically the same? In short – No. So we have to choose whose Gospel to follow. The Gospel of Jesus is laid out

for instance in Matthew.

The gospel of Paul is a little harder to pin down, but according to Paul it is very simply this –

and no more;

For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him

crucified. 1 Corinthians 2:2

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which

also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep

in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3 For I

delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our

sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the

third day according to the scriptures: 1 Corinthians 15:1-4

However, Jesus had something very specific to say about precisely this simplistic and false

notion, which we will come back to shortly.

Meanwhile, we see that the problem with Paul’s different gospel is already well understood,

this is hardly a novel concept.

Before we look at the relevant internal evidence in the bible, here are a selection of statements

by other’s who are/were well aware of the problem. These are taken from this page

http://30ce.com/paulstatements.htm , and that page has many more similar quotes listed.

Statements about Paul by Prominent Theologians and Bible Scholars

The fact that Paul spread his own version of Christianity independent of Yeshua'

teachings has been well known for centuries. Only the Church doesn't agree to that.

Paulianity displays very little of the teachings of the humble Jewish Rabbi, Yeshua,

and adds much that Yeshua would have found appalling.

Below are quotations from the writings of renowned theologians and other scholars.

Most were taken from Rev. Abba Nazaria's very informative article, "YAHOWSHUA

OR PAUL?" (http://www.essene.org/Yahowshua_or_Paul.htm).

In Christ or Paul?, by Rev. V.A. Holmes-Gore: "Let the reader contrast the true Christian standard with that of Paul and he will see the

terrible betrayal of all that the Master taught. . . . For the surest way to betray a great

Teacher is to misrepresent his message. . . . That is what Paul and his followers did,

and because the Church has followed Paul in his error it has failed lamentably to


redeem the world. . . . The teachings given by the blessed Master Christ, which the

disciples John and Peter and James, the brother of the Master, tried in vain to defend

and preserve intact were as utterly opposed to the Pauline Gospel as the light is

opposed to the darkness."

Theologian Soren Kierkegaard, in The Journals: "In the teachings of Christ, religion is completely present tense: Jesus is the prototype

and our task is to imitate him, become a disciple. But then through Paul came a basic

alteration. Paul draws attention away from imitating Christ and fixes attention on the

death of Christ The Atoner. What Martin Luther, in his reformation, failed to realize is

that even before Catholicism, Christianity had become degenerate at the hands of Paul.

Paul made Christianity the religion of Paul, not of Christ. Paul threw the Christianity

of Christ away, completely turning it upside down, making it just the opposite of the

original proclamation of Christ"

Theologian Ernest Renan, in his book Saint Paul: "True Christianity, which will last forever, comes from the gospel words of Christ not

from the epistles of Paul. The writings of Paul have been a danger and a hidden rock,

the causes of the principal defects of Christian theology."

Martin Buber, the most respected Jewish philosopher of this century, in Two Types of Faith: "The Jesus of the Sermon on the Mount is completely opposed to Paul."

The theologian, Helmut Koester, in his The Theological Aspects of Primitive Christian Heresy: "Paul himself stands in the twilight zone of heresy. In reading Paul, one immediately

encounters a major difficulty. Whatever Jesus had preached did not become the

content of the missionary proclamation of Paul. . . . Sayings of Jesus do not play a role

in Paul 's understanding of the event of salvation. . . . Paul did not care at all what

Jesus had said. . . . Had Paul been completely successful very little of the sayings of

Jesus would have survived."

Thomas Jefferson, third president of the United States and author of the Declaration of Independence in his "Letter to William Short": "Paul was the first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus."

Renowned English philosopher Jeremy Bentham, in his Not Paul But Jesus: "It rests with every professor of the religion of Jesus to settle within himself to which

of the two religions, that of Jesus or that of Paul, he will adhere."

H.L. Mencken, called one of the most influential American writers of the first half of the 20th century, in his Notes on Democracy: "The plain fact is that this bogus Christianity has no more relation to the system of

Christ than it has to Aristotle. It is the invention of Paul and his attendant rabble-

rousers--a body of men exactly comparable to the corps of evangelical pastors of

today, which is to say, a body devoid of sense and lamentably indifferent to common

honesty. The mob, having heard Christ, turned against Him. His theological ideas

were too logical and plausible for it, and His ethical ideas were enormously too

austere. What it yearned for was the old comfortable balderdash under a new and

gaudy name, and that is precisely what Paul offered it. He borrowed from all the

wandering dervishes and body-snatchers of Asia Minor, and flavoured the stew with

remnants of Greek demonology. The result was a code of doctrines so discordant and

so nonsensical that no two men since, examining it at length, have ever agreed upon

its precise meaning. Paul remains the arch theologian of the mob. His turgid and

witless metaphysics make Christianity bearable to men who would otherwise be


repelled by Christ's simple and magnificent reduction of the duties of man to the duties

of a gentle-man."

Admittedly this is a bit of an unbalanced list, since plenty of people obviously love Paul. So

here is the view from an evangelical theology professor of 15+ years. Who grew up as a

Pauline Christian, and was a little surprised when he went to bible college, to find that Jesus

had something to say in terms of Gospel also! The article from which the following excerpts

are taken is here http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2010/december/9.25.html?start=1

…Something was clearly happening to me. Formerly I had loved Paul and thought

with Paul. Then, when I encountered Jesus, as if for the first time, I began learning

to think with Jesus. One of my colleagues occasionally suggested I was getting too

Jesus-centered and ignoring Paul. I'm not so sure I was ignoring Paul; after all, I was

teaching a few of his letters on a regular basis. But I had unlearned how to think in

Pauline terms and was thinking only in the terms of Jesus. Everything was kingdom-

centered for me.

Evangelicalism is facing a crisis about the relationship of Jesus to Paul, and many

today are choosing sides.

And, truth be told, I was so taken with Jesus' kingdom vision that reading Paul

created a dilemma every time I opened his letters.

An Evangelical Crisis My experience is not unusual. Many of us have made a move from Paul to Jesus, and

an increasing tension remains among evangelicals about who gets to set the terms:

Jesus or Paul? In other words, will we center our gospel teaching and living on "the

kingdom" or "justification by faith"?

The choice matters. It can be said without exaggeration that the evangelical

movement owes its fundamental strength to the Reformation and the Great

Awakenings and revivals of the 18th and 19th centuries; that is, it is a Paul-shaped

movement through and through…..

…a young New Testament scholar at one of Fuller Theological Seminary's extension

sites, recently sent me a manuscript for review. The first suggested title was, Jesus

Have I Loved, But Paul? That perfectly captures something I have observed in 15

years of teaching college students. Students love the Jesus part of the class, but their

eyes seem to glaze over when we move from Jesus to Paul…

Those addicted to kingdom language struggle to make Paul fit, while those addicted to

Paul's theological terms struggle to make Jesus fit. I know the experience because I,

too, struggled to make the Pauline message fit the kingdom vision, and that was after

struggling to make Jesus fit into the Pauline message.

Two approaches

Evangelicals have offered two ways to resolve this dilemma—that is, to bring Paul

and Jesus into a more perfect harmony. What stands out is that each approach

imagines that it is articulating the gospel itself. One approach is to master Jesus'

gospel, the kingdom vision, and show how Paul fits. The other approach is to master

Paul's gospel, his theology of justification, and show how Jesus fits. Each approach

requires some bending of corners and squeezing of sides but, with extra effort and

some special explanations, each thinks it can show the unity of the messages of Jesus

and Paul and that the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of justification are one

and the same.

An even more fatal flaw resides in this approach: kingdom means more than the

"dynamic" reign of God at work in Christ. The emphasis on "dynamic" leads me to

think that we evangelicals want "kingdom" to refer to the personal experience of


conversion, so that it can fit with our evangelical Paul. The roadblock here is

insurmountable: kingdom for any and every Jew in the first century had at least four

components: a king (Jesus or God), a people (Israel), a territory (the land of Israel),

and a law that governed the people (the Torah or law of Moses). My conclusion: You

can't begin at kingdom with Jesus and simply cross the path and conclude that

Jesus was, after all, talking about justification.

….But caring for the poor and the outcast, and a revolutionary message about

possessions—well, they just don't show up enough in Paul to lead one fairly to

conclude that Paul was essentially teaching the same thing as Jesus. Kingdom and

justification are not the same thing.

And he goes on in his article to attempt harmony, though the argument remains weak,

essentially trying to fit Jesus into Paul (i.e. just believe in JC and you’ll be right). While

wrong, this is understandable, as most people don’t know how they could possibly follow the

commandments of Jesus in today’s insane world. So a vain hope in Paul’s faith/justification

seems the only hope. But today we do know how to follow the commandments. So we are

left without excuse. We do not have to harmonise Jesus and Paul, they are light and dark. We

have to obey Jesus.

3. What warning’s did Jesus give us regarding Deceiver’s? Jesus tells us in Matthew (4-5, 23-27)

4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. 5 For many

shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many…..

23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.24 For there

shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders;

insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. 25 Behold, I have told you

before. 26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth:

behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.27 For as the lightning cometh out of the

east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Paul fits this warning;

• The Old Testament specifically refers to the wilderness of Damascus, which

wilderness is where Paul had his terribly exciting experience (1 Kings 19:15).

• Paul is deceived in the wilderness by a voice saying “I am Jesus”. He does not test this

spirit to see whether it was of God - 1 John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but

try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into

the world.

• So Paul did signs and wonders – so what? Jesus specifically tells us that proves

nothing positive, though he confirms false prophets will also do great signs and

wonders – Matthew 21:22, 23

• This supposed “second coming” of Jesus was not seen by everybody. This seems a

hallmark of a false encounter. When Jesus returns we won’t need anyone to tell us

about it For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so

shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Matthew 24:27

• Jesus was also quite clear that after he was gone he would stay gone until His

triumphant return –


John 13:33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me:

and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; …

John 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go

away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I

depart, I will send him unto you. 8 And when he is come, he will reprove the

world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:9 Of sin, because they

believe not on me;10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see

me no more;11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.12 I

have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.13 Howbeit

when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he

shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak:

and he will shew you things to come.

Paul claims he is given a Gospel which effectively replaces the Gospel of Jesus. I.e. rather

than for instance “repent, have faith, follow my commandments”, we see a “justification by

faith” a gospel of the cross, or cheap grace, as preached by Paul.

Jesus did not mention grace at all during his ministry. In fact, a word search of the KJV

reveals that the word “grace” is used only once in the 3 synoptic Gospels, Luke 2:40 tells us

the “grace of God” was upon Jesus. In John 1:16 we see we may receive “grace for grace”,

and this is consistent with the Lord’s prayer for instance, forgive us our debts as we forgive

our debtors and a few verses later we see if we do not forgive others then neither will our

Father forgive us – Grace, it seems, may not be quite that cheap. This shows us that some

action is required on our part. In fact, the first time we specifically see a great grace was upon

them all is in Acts 4:32-35 AFTER the people have chosen to walk according to the

commandments Jesus taught. And we see belief is active, not passive.

Acts 4:32-25 And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one

soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his

own; but they had all things common. 33 And with great power gave the apostles

witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 34

Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of

lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, 35 And

laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man

according as he had need. [Acts 2 also tells us believers have all things common].

This is consistent with what Jesus says – Matthew 9:13 But go ye and learn what that

meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but

sinners to repentance. And we see that repentance is not passive, but requires action on our

part – Matthew 3:8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:

Jesus further confirms that empty words are not enough, confirming the old adage “the road

to hell is paved with good intentions”. We see;

Matthew 7:21-23 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the

kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22

Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and

in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23

And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work

iniquity.


And again, in the last verses of Matthew, and in the last verses of Revelation, the message is

consistent KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS

Matthew 28:18-20 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given

unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing

them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching

them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you

always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Revelation 22:11-14 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let

him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is

holy, let him be holy still.12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me,

to give every man according as his work shall be. 13 I am Alpha and Omega, the

beginning and the end, the first and the last. 14 Blessed are they that do his

commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through

the gates into the city.

We can see that Jesus did not change his mind after his resurrection. He told the apostles to

teach what he had taught during his ministry. His ministry included Gentiles. There is one

Gospel for all nations. If we are to believe that Paul was given a special secret gospel after

the ascension of Jesus, (as exciting as that may sound), then we have to also believe Jesus was

wrong – He had not been given all power in heaven and earth, because he apparently did not

know about the special secret gospel. So when Paul tells us about his special little secret

(Romans 16.25; Ephesians 6.19), we have to believe Jesus was wrong, and had to come back,

correct his mistake, and tell Paul to preach a different gospel – and this after Jesus had been

quite specific about only coming back once. Oops….

If things had changed in the message Jesus wanted his apostles to preach after his

resurrection, He could surely have just told them so when he spoke to them after his

resurrection?

Rather, when we take a look at this so-called secret that Paul shares, we see that Jesus had

already described it during his ministry – a further warning. As follows;

Matthew 12:38-40 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying,

Master, we would see a sign from thee. 39 But he answered and said unto them, An

evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given

to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: 40 For as Jonas was three days and three

nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in

the heart of the earth.

Now – is this sign not precisely the so called gospel of Paul?

1 Corinthians 15:1-4 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I

preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which

also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have

believed in vain.3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how

that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried,

and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

1 Corinthians 2:1-4 And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of

speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. 2 For I determined not


to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. 3 And I was

with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. 4 And my speech and my

preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the

Spirit and of power:

So we see at the core of Paul’s gospel, the sign of Jonas. That is not to say we should not

believe that sign obviously. But Jesus never said that believing that sign would let us off the

hook in terms of obeying the commandments he taught. We also see again that Paul tells us

his gospel is based on signs and wonders (which Jesus says proves nothing), and Paul came in

fear, while Jesus tells his apostles to “fear not”. While in James we see that devils also believe

and “tremble”. Paul comes in weakness, Jesus said he would build his church on a ROCK

(i.e. Peter).

Another direct warning from Jesus regards Pharisees.

Matthew 16:11,12 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you

concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the

Sadducees? Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of

bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

While in Acts 23:6 we hear But when Paul perceived that the one part were

Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I

am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am

called in question.

Further on the subject of leaven. Leaven was added to dough to make it rise in those days, as

we still do today with sourdough bread, and similar to our use of yeast. Adding leaven

changes the nature of the whole mix. Thus, if a bad leaven is mixed in, the entire batch of

dough will be ruined. So it seems that Jesus is saying to be careful not to mix in any doctrine

of the Pharisee to His teachings whatsoever, or it will spoil everything.

Jesus also gave us the parable of leaven in a different context.

Matthew 13:33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like

unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole

was leavened.

One might interpret that to mean when we accept the leaven of the sound teachings of Jesus,

and walk in His commandments, then we are akin to a leavened lump. Paul says the opposite,

NO, we should be unleavened lumps…

1 Corinthians 5:7,8 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as

ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us

keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness;

but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

Another piece of detailed research on Jesus vs. Paul can be found here

http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/books/292-jesus-prophecy-about-who-identified-himself-as-

jesus-to-paul.html


Finally, Jesus had something to say about the importance of witnesses. Even for his own

Gospel he said witnesses were required, and anyone who bears witness of themselves is not

true; This is a requirement from the Law, Deuteronomy 19:15.

John 5:31 If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.

Matthew 18:16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that

in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

The abject failure of Paul to meet the witness requirements can be considered next under

Acts.

4. What warnings do we find in Acts? Acts is a most interesting and difficult book. Luke (not an apostle) is thought to have written

both the Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Luke, and the Book of Acts. Up to and including

Chapter 6 of Acts we have a nice simple story of the implementation of the Gospel of Jesus in

a practical sense via the apostles, and the appointment of a beaurocracy to implement the

practicalities (Stephen and co.). After that it gets tricky.

It is Luke that writes the accounts of Paul’s so-called conversion, not Paul himself. And Luke

never actually says Paul was converted, neither does he ever say Paul is an Apostle (only Paul

says that, bearing witness of himself….).

What Luke does tell us is that Paul’s actual name was Saul, a murderer and blasphemer and

son of Pyrrhus. Apparently his father was central in the Trojan Horse attack, and we might

consider that allegory in terms of the sound teachings of Jesus being infected from an

apparently harmless outside source….

Paul himself in his letters never reveals his first name, we only know that he was Saul because

Luke spilt the beans. Would that make Paul a liar?

Luke is also the one that give us 3 different accounts of Paul’s so-called conversion. Those

who enjoy mocking the bible have a great time with this, because how can one author, in one

book, tell 3 conflicting versions of one event? Too much of that new wine - right? Well, no. It

turns out this style of story telling has a very specific purpose relevant to the time it was

written. It is an accepted form of allegory. Rather than coming out and saying “Liar, liar,

pants on fire” (a most unsporting approach), three conflicting versions are told. So Luke, in

Acts, is the whistleblower.

Here is the well researched article on this subject, see for yourselves.

http://www.thenazareneway.com/The%20Gospel%20of%20Paul.htm

On top of the very good summary from these authors, we might also consider the witness

aspect, which they have not fully addressed in their article. I.e. not only are the 3 versions of

Paul’s conversion different, but NONE of the 3 meet the witness requirements. Luke seems to

have been quite careful to ensure that not one of his 3 different stories could be misconstrued

to meet lawful witness requirements. Paul’s own version of events does not meet witness

requirements either.

We see from the above referenced article;


It must be remembered that Paul never met Jesus.

So In Luke’s 3 accounts, we see that the first instance Paul’s companions saw no one though

they did supposedly hear a voice. Not only do we never find out the names of the

It must be remembered that Paul never met Jesus. His description

of his “conversion” is quite sparse, mentioned or alluded to in just

three of his letters:

I Corinthians 9:1: "Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our

Lord?"

I Corinthians 15:3-8: "For I handed on to you as of first

importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our

sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that he was buried, and

that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the

scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.

Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at

one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died.

Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as

to one untimely born, he appeared also to me."

Galatians 1:11-17: "For I would have you know…that the gospel

which was preached by me is not man's gospel, nor was I taught it,

but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ. For you have

heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church

of God violently and tried to destroy it…so extremely zealous was

I for the traditions of my fathers. But when he who had set me

apart before I was born and had called me through his grace, was

pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him

among the Gentiles, I did not confer with flesh and blood, nor did

I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I

went away into Arabia; and again I returned to Damascus."

Luke, however, filled in many of the blanks Paul failed to mention

in any of his letters to the churches. The problem is, Luke told

three versions of Paul’s claimed conversion, and none of the three

agree on the details: [continued over page] -

Version One:

Acts 9:3-17: "…[Saul] was approaching Damascus, suddenly a

light from heaven flashed around him. He fell to the ground and

heard a voice saying to him, `Saul, Saul, why do you persecute

me?'…The men who were traveling with him stood speechless

because they heard the voice but saw no one. Saul got up from

the ground, and though his eyes were open, he could see nothing;

so they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus. For

three days he was without sight, and neither ate nor drank.…there

was a…disciple at Damascus named Ananias…laid his hands on

Saul and said, `Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you

on your way here, has sent me so that you may regain your sight

and be filled with the Holy Spirit."

Version Two:

Acts 22:6-21: "While I was…approaching Damascus…a great

light from heaven suddenly shone about me. I fell to the ground

and heard a voice saying…Saul,Saul, why are you persecuting

me?...those who were with me saw the light but did not hear the

voice…I could not see because of the brightness of the

light…those with me…led me to Damascus…Ananias, who was a

devout man according to the law and well spoken of by all the

Jews living there…said…get up, be baptized, and have your sins

washed away, calling on his name."

Version Three:

Acts 26:12-18: "…I was traveling to Damascus…I saw a light

from heaven, brighter than the sun, shining around me and my

companions. When we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a

voice saying to me in the Hebrew language, `Saul, Saul, why are

you persecuting me? It hurts you to kick against the goads…the

Lord answered, `I am Jesus whom you are persecuting…get up

and stand on your feet…"

Which Version is the reader to believe? Saul alone fell to the

ground; those with him stood speechless because they heard the

voice but saw no one; Saul was without sight for three days;

Ananias was a disciple who laid hands on Saul to restore his sight

and fill him with the Holy Spirit.

Or

Saul alone fell to the ground; Those with him saw the light but did

not hear the voice; No mention of three days without sight or

food; Ananias was "a devout man according to the Law and liked

by the Jews."

Or

Everyone fell to the ground; the voice spoke in the Hebrew

Language; no blindness, no Ananias, no baptism, no restoration of

sight, no “filled by Holy Spirit”!


companions, nor hear any more from them, but how can they be eye witnesses if they did not

see anything?

Second account is the exact opposite! Now his companions saw the light (a light, not Jesus in

the flesh of course) but they can’t hear anything. Well, if you don’t see Jesus and can’t hear

him, then once again the witness requirements are not met.

In the 3rd scenario everyone fell to the ground and Paul supposedly says I heard a voice , no

mention whatsoever of whether his companions saw or heard anything at all. And so the

witness requirements are still not met.

Luke also has Paul blinded in one of the scenario’s, and Jesus told us Let them alone: they be

blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

(Matthew 15:14).

So coming to what Paul had to say for himself on this matter, the first instance can be

discounted. It is only a question, and the answers might be “seems unlikely”.

I Corinthians 9:1: "Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our

Lord?"

The second instance is Paul saying that AFTER the ascension of Jesus, he also

appeared to Paul.

Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to

one untimely born, he appeared also to me."

This seems to be a case of Paul bearing witness of himself, as no other witnesses are

mentioned in this fable. Remember Jesus said - John 5:31 If I bear witness of myself, my

witness is not true.

The third instance is identical, it is simply Paul making a bare-faced claim, witnessing of

himself, without any other witness at all.

Galatians 1:11-17: "For I would have you know…that the gospel which was preached

by me is not man's gospel, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of

Jesus Christ.

All this is what makes Acts a very difficult book, certainly after chapter 6 when Saul makes

an appearance, because we now know Luke is writing in allegory – i.e. not necessarily true

stories. So we have to start all over again, and consider the book in this light. Perhaps the

purpose of the book is at least twofold, to demonstrate the proper apostolic mission, and to

contrast that to the deeds of Paul via allegory. If we look past the polite language, and Luke’s

references to Barnabas and Paul being apostles, we might view the stories quite differently. A

few initial observations;

Firstly, we see the peculiar story of Paul making a big Hoo-hah about whether gentiles should

be circumcised or not. Despite this burden never having been placed on the gentiles by Peter

and the apostles (or Jesus for that matter);

Acts 15:10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the

disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?....


19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the

Gentiles are turned to God:

20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from

fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled

you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the

law: to whom we gave no such commandment:

And then, having supposedly “won” this spurious argument which never was…. in the very

next chapter Paul goes and has a gentile circumcised! (Acts 16:3). In contrast to the apostles

who did not do so. James warns us of the double minded man – James 1:8 A double minded

man is unstable in all his ways.

Secondly we see Barnabas is Paul’s traveling companion. Barnabas was a Levite, of the

priestly tribe, forbidden to own land (Deut 10:9). But he did own land (Acts 4:36), which

suggests he was a law-breaker according to his customs – an appropriate traveling companion

for a killer perhaps?? Also, there is a rejected book, the “Gospel of Barnabas”, which is not

included in today’s bible. Barnabas, like Paul, claims he is one of the apostles in his book

(he’s not). The book is otherwise anti-Paul. That would seem to make these two traveling

together a highly unlikely tale, though Luke nevertheless joins law-breakers and self-

appointed apostles together. Allegory?

The Gospel of Barnabas is a book depicting the life of Jesus, which claims to be by

the biblical Barnabas who in this work is one of the twelve apostles…

This work clearly contradicts the New Testament biblical accounts of Jesus and his

ministry but has strong parallels with the Islamic faith, not only mentioning

Muhammad by name, but including the shahadah (chapter 39). It is strongly anti-

Pauline and anti-Trinitarian in tone. In this work, Jesus is described as a prophet and

not the son of God,[46] while Paul is called "the deceived."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnabas

Thirdly, we know that Jesus was accused of casting out demons by demon powers. Jesus

clearly explains this is not possible;

Matthew 12:24 Now when the Pharisees heard it they said, “This fellow does not cast

out demons except by Beelzebub, the ruler of the demons.” 25 But Jesus knew their

thoughts, and said to them: “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to

desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand.

While in Acts, Luke tells a very strange story of a casting out going pear-shaped. Why?

Because an attempt was made to cast out an evil spirit by Paul’s Jesus, not the real Jesus.

Apparently, as Jesus said, evil cannot cast out evil… seems Paul and evil spirit might have

been – cosy?

Acts 19:13-16 Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call

over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you

by Jesus whom Paul preacheth. 14 And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew,

and chief of the priests, which did so. 15 And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I

know, and Paul I know; but who are ye? 16 And the man in whom the evil spirit

was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they

fled out of that house naked and wounded.


And it is not that the problem was with the vagabond Jews perhaps lacking faith, Jesus made

it quite clear that even those who He does not know are quite capable of performing such

miracles in His name;

Matthew 7:21-23 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the

kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22

Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and

in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23

And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work

iniquity.

The allegories we see in Acts in respect of Paul are no doubt worth a lot more study and

laughter, curious tales like Paul pulling handkerchiefs and aprons out of his body! Which

Jesus nor the apostles engaged in by contrast… moving on however –

5. What warnings do Peter, James and John give us? James is a short and pointed epistle, which says that faith without works is dead. This is

against Pauline thinking where faith is enough on its own. It is neither one nor the other alone.

But BOTH.

James specifically cites the example of the belief of Abraham when he was asked to sacrifice

his son Isaac. Abraham did not passively believe, he acted on the commandment of God, even

though it turned out to be only a test. His action was imputed to him for righteousness.

The book of James is so consistent with Jesus, and so contrary to Paul (the Paul who Luther

and the reformed/evangelicals base their doctrine on), that Martin Luther tried unsuccessfully

to have the epistle of James removed from the bible (along with Revelation and a few other

books that perhaps inconveniently suggest we should keep the commandments of Jesus)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther%27s_canon

Incidentally, did you know that Luther had a similar experience as Paul did?

Then, on July 2, 1505, returning to Erfurt after visiting home, Martin was caught in a

severe thunderstorm in which he was flung to the ground in terror, and he suddenly

vowed to become a monk if he survived. This episode, as important in Christian

history as the equally famous (and parallel) scene of St. Paul's conversion, changed the

course of Luther's life. …..Luther himself saw this decision as sudden and based upon

fear: "I had been called by heavenly terrors, for not freely or desirously did I become

a monk, much less to gratify my belly, but walled around with the terror and agony of

sudden death I vowed a constrained and necessary vow."

http://www.encyclopedia.com/people/philosophy-and-religion/protestant-christianity-

biographies/martin-luther

Why are we not surprised? Here is the beautiful story which Luther wanted gone.

James 2:14-26 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and

have not works? can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of

daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled;

notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what

doth it profit?17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.18 Yea, a

man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works,


and I will shew thee my faith by my works. 19 Thou believest that there is one God;

thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. 20 But wilt thou know, O vain

man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by

works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? 22 Seest thou how faith

wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?23 And the scripture

was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for

righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. 24 Ye see then how that by works

a man is justified, and not by faith only.

Peter also gives clear warning

2 Peter 1:16-21 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made

known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were

eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received from God the Father honour and

glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my

beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven

we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. 19 We have also a more sure

word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth

in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing

this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the

prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they

were moved by the Holy Ghost.

And having set the stage warning us of those who are NOT eyewitnesses, and spreading

fables, this author goes on to give us a most explicit warning about Paul – namely, be sure

you do not misinterpret his confusing writings to be something different from what Jesus

taught, because that will lead to DESTRUCTION.

Notice that while Peter refers to “brother” Paul, he does not call him an apostle. Neither does

he make any judgment as too how much or little wisdom Paul might have, and we know Paul

tells us himself that his wisdom is less than excellent. (And I, brethren, when I came to you,

came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom. 1 Corinthians 2:1) He also does not call

Paul a fool, as Jesus clearly commanded us not to call men fools unless we want to be judged

accordingly ourselves (Matt. 5:22), although Paul does call the Galatians fools (Gal. 3:1). So

the “beloved brother” statement we should not read too much into, rather take note of the

explicit warning, and beware;

2 Peter 3:15-17 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; 16 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.17 Ye therefore,

beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with

the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.

Attributed to John are one of the Gospels, 3 epistles, and Revelation. We saw earlier that John

tells not to simply accept the words of any spirit (like Paul did), but rather test to see whether

they are of God. He has more warnings, but first we need to consider perhaps one of the most

well known verses today,

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that

whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.


This appears at first glance to support the Pauline notion of justification by faith. Let’s

examine that notion. We just saw that James explained how belief is to be taken in the active

sense, citing the example of Abraham who was not sitting around passively believing

something, but took action to obey the command of God.

James 2:20-23 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? 21

Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son

upon the altar? 22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was

faith made perfect? 23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed

God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of

God.

And this has to be the correct interpretation, otherwise John is at odds with Jesus, and himself.

John’s writings are full of references to keeping the commandments, and there is no contrary

indication at all. In the same Gospel according to John for instance we see;

John.13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have

loved you, that ye also love one another.

John.14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments….

21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he

that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest

myself to him…..

31 But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me

commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence.

John.15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have

kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love...

12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you….. 14 Ye

are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you…..

17 These things I command you, that ye love one another.

Some people may argue that Jesus was talking to his apostles here, so therefore we don’t have

to take any notice of this “keep the commandments” stuff. Remember though, Jesus told his

apostles to teach his commandments to all nations. There can be no excuses or slippery work-

arounds, it is simply our choice. Keep His commandments, or not.

And John remains pretty hot on this topic in his epistles, just one of many examples;

1 John 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar,

and the truth is not in him.

And we saw before that Revelation also closes with a fairly strong message in this vein;

Revelation 2:5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do

the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick

out of his place, except thou repent.

Revelation 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have

right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.


That should put to rest any notion that we can use John 3:16 to support Paul’s justification by

faith doctrine as an excuse not to obey Jesus. “or else”.

Here is a detailed study of the interpretation of “believe” being more properly interpreted in

the Greek as “obey”.

http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/images/stories/Salvation/John%203%2016.pdf

We see another direct reference in Revelation relating to false apostles. First we see there are

only 12 apostles, NOT 13. Matthias replaced Judas, not Paul.

Revelation 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the

names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

And we are told that it was Paul who was not fully accepted in Ephesus.

Acts 19:30 And when Paul would have entered in unto the people, the disciples

suffered him not.

And consequently we see that same church of Ephesus is commended in Revelation for

rejecting false apostles.

Revelation 2:2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst

not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles,

and are not, and hast found them liars:

For more on what John has to say in relation to Paul, this is a further helpful article.

http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/component/content/article/1-jwo/110-chapter-thirteen-

jwo.html

6. So what does Paul have to say for himself?

We’ll only touch the tip of the iceberg. A few examples each, of three different problems.

1. Did Paul contradict Jesus?

2. Did Paul contradict the Old Testament?

3. Did Paul contradict Paul?

Did Paul contradict Jesus?

Paul also calls himself the light unto the gentiles, while Jesus says He is the light of the world.

And specifically in Isaiah we see this dual role, of Jesus, for both Israel and gentiles.

John 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he

that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

Isaiah 49:6 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up

the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a

light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.


And we see that Jesus ministry did include gentiles, and the apostles also included gentiles in

their ministry, as Jesus commanded them to teach all nations (and we might easily consider

the parable of the wedding feast in this same light as well).

Acts 15:7-8 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.8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy

Ghost, even as he did unto us;

We see only one Gospel, the Gospel of Jesus, on its way to the end of the earth. No different

gospel or ministry is required for the gentiles. But Paul seems to think otherwise, and this also

ties back to Paul’s exciting secret…..

Luke suggests in Acts that Paul (and Barnabas) are the light to the Gentiles.

Acts 13:47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of

the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.

But that just Luke’s opinion, Paul did not write this verse saying that he, and not Jesus, was

the light to the gentiles prophesied by Isaiah. So does Paul concur?

Ephesians 3:3 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, 2 If

ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:

3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few

words, 4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of

Christ) 5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is

now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; 6 That the Gentiles

should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by

the gospel: 7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God

given unto me by the effectual working of his power. 8 Unto me, who am less than the

least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the

unsearchable riches of Christ;

Seems Paul does concur. Paul thinks he is for the gentiles, while in contrast Jesus already was

for the gentiles and instructed the apostles accordingly, with Peter specifically picking up the

lead role. Paul seems to have forgotten that Isaiah already prophesied the “light to the

gentiles”, so it’s no secret, unless Paul thinks he is the messiah??

Paul thinks he is privy to some mystery that Jesus was apparently not aware of. Paul confirms

he thinks “his” Pauline gospel was not previously known “unto the sons of men”. So Jesus,

who says he is the son of man, and came in the flesh, and gave us a gospel, what was Jesus

doing? Passing time until the “real” gospel could be given to Paul by the Spirit? Basically

Paul is denying that Jesus gave us the true gospel while he was in the flesh. John specifically

warns us that those who deny Jesus in the flesh are false prophets.

1 John 4:4 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of

God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the

Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of

God: 3 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. 4 Ye are of God, little children, and


have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

5 They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth

them.

So we see two gospel’s, and two Jesus’s. One is Jesus who says he is the Son of man, who

came in the flesh and gave us a beautiful gospel to follow, as witnessed in the gospels, the

first 3 books of the New Testament. By His authority demons can be removed. The other

“Jesus” (common enough name) is Paul’s “Jesus”, who supposedly appeared not in flesh but

in spirit, only to Paul, and without witnesses. The gospel of this other “Jesus” deceives us

away from the true Gospel. And by the authority of Paul’s “Jesus” no demons can be removed

(as we saw earlier), because evil cannot remove evil, a house divided against itself cannot

stand.

For more examples see http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/books/175-pauls-contradictions-of-

jesus.html

Did Paul contradict the old testament?

Paul tells us to deny charity to young widows under 60 years old. And those over 60 years old

qualify only if they have been very good girls indeed.

1 Timothy 5:9-13 Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years

old, having been the wife of one man. 10 Well reported of for good works; if she have

brought up children, if she have lodged strangers, if she have washed the saints' feet,

if she have relieved the afflicted, if she have diligently followed every good work. 11

But the younger widows refuse: for when they have begun to wax wanton against

Christ, they will marry; 12 Having damnation, because they have cast off their first

faith. And withal they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house; and not

only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not.

This does not sound much like the Jesus that commanded love, and told us the story of the

good Samaritan. However, it is also directly against Old Testament law which commands

charity for widows of any age, and curses anyone that perverts that law. Paul has changed the

law, which is strictly forbidden, and which Jesus confirms when he says not one jot or tittle

shall be taken from the law.

Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall

ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God

which I command you.

Deuteronomy 27:19 Cursed be he that perverteth the judgment of the stranger,

fatherless, and widow. And all the people shall say, Amen.

Seems ironic Paul thinks he is pardoned and can ride the “Gracy” train without works, being

merely a self-confessed killer and blasphemer. While young widows are apparently much

worse - irredeemable lazy hussies, one and all, “dammed”. To be pre-judged accordingly and

refused charity outright. Only a life of impeccable good works, including regular cleaning of

the feet of saints (of whom Paul perhaps considers himself one), “might” make it right for

these unfortunate girls when they turn 60.


Do we recall who it was that washed the feet of the apostles at the last supper?? Do we recall

who it was running around having followers of Jesus killed (i.e. a widow-maker) before his

so-called “conversion”?

Did Paul contradict Paul?

We’ve just seen that Paul rejects works, but then says young widows must spend their life

until 60 doing exactly that before they qualify for charity.

A few other examples of contradictions within the same letters even;

Romans 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his

sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Contradicted by:

Romans 2:13 For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the

law shall be justified.

And

Galatians 6:2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

Contradicted by:

Galatians 6:5 For every man shall bear his own burden.

7. We should expect words of the deceiver in the bible

Paul’s letters inclusion in the New Testament is no mistake, rather, entirely consistent. In the

Old Testament the deceiver get’s fair airtime. Why should the New Testament be any

different?

Jesus warned of deceiver’s trying to subvert his teachings. So the good story needs a villain,

and right there in the collection of New Testament writings seem the logical place put it.

Ensuring that everyone who hears the truth, also has opportunity to be tested and deceived.

Let’s consider the internal evidence in the bible, and see whether there is any precedence for

deceiver words being in the bible. If there are, then we might reconsider the validity of any

emotional knee-jerk reaction along the lines “It’s written in the bible, the word of God, so

everything written there must be true”. It may not be quite so simple.

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the

Lord do all these things.

If God creates evil, might we reasonably expect to find some of this in the bible?

This separation, or dichotomy, happens quite early on;

Genesis 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the

light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.


And God creates another good/evil dichotomy shortly after, and tells the man “don’t touch”.

We see man’s freedom to choose which of two roads he will take is given ample opportunity.

Genesis 2:9,17 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is

pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden,

and the tree of knowledge of good and evil…..

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the

day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Next the deceiver makes an appearance – apparently it is important that there is some

antagonist to tempt and deceive man down the wrong path, after God has made it perfectly

clear what the right path is. The cunning villain is a central and apparently necessary element.

Every thesis needs to be balanced with antithesis.

Genesis 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

Job, we see, is also allowed to be tested. The adversary complains that, sure Job is a good

sort, little wonder as he has everything he desires. Watch him fail if you test him. And so God

allowed the testing, to establish the choice of Job, true or false. Recall Who it was created

Satan….?

Job 1:9-12 Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought?

10 Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he

hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is

increased in the land. 11 But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath,

and he will curse thee to thy face. 12 And the Lord said unto Satan, Behold, all that

he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went

forth from the presence of the Lord.

Job also receives lengthy advice from 3 of his friends, spanning across chapters 4-25. That’s a

lot of talk, and the words of these 3 men are written in the bible. And whatever is in the bible

must be true right? Seems God does not agree;

Job 38:1,2 Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, who is this that

darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?

Job 42:7 And it was so, that after the LORD had spoken these words unto Job, the LORD

said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two

friends: for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath.

If there is good counsel, it must balanced by bad counsel. Seems a hardwired aspect of God’s

plan, both aspects must be presented to us for our choice.

That is enough to see the pattern established in the Old Testament. In the New Testament we

see that Jesus appointed Judas, even though he knew Judas would betray him – nevertheless

the story needed a betrayer. Jesus also tells us the parable of the prodigal son. The son has a

choice to claim his inheritance early, although that was a terrible choice. As in the Garden

when God says lest ye die, we see at the end of the parable that the prodigal son’s poor

choice, in being covetous as Adam and Eve were, he effectively became dead to the Father.


Luke 15:32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother

was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.

We see Jesus was tested himself by the adversary. The devil suggested Jesus jump of a cliff,

to test God. Here we see the important fact that the adversary uses words out of the

scripture itself to do the tempting and deceiving. Jesus was able to distinguish. Are we? Or

should we think that jumping off a cliff is a good plan because it is written in the bible?

So we see this pattern, the adversary must get fair airtime in the bible. When God tells us

what’s right, it is followed by some cunning words to entice us away.

When Jesus and His apostles are done talking, what then, might we expect to see next?

8. We can obey Jesus, the choice is built into our world system

The bad news is, regardless of our beliefs or intent, we are pretty much all on the wrong side

of the choice Jesus gave us. But there is another way, built and waiting.

The evidence is provided in detail in a previous document “Bound on the Wrong side of the

Gospel”, here https://goo.gl/ZRufSk We will review the main points briefly here.

We now know that St. Peter’s Keys are with the Crown, Queen Elizabeth II wears the purple

Robe of Estate, signifying that the priestly functions associated with the Keys are transferred

to her. This is confirmed in our system of law, we see that estate law is, and always has been,

ecclesiastical law. So wherever in the world we see jurisdiction in respect of estate law, that is

the power of the Keys given Peter being wielded. And it is a very practical and worldly

power. As Jesus told Peter;

Matthew 18:18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be

bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

So we see this is a choice we have to make in our time given here on earth, a one-way street.

It won’t magically come right in heaven. Furthermore, we can flap our lips saying “Lord

Lord”, “Yes Jesus”, and “Amen”, till we’re blue in the face. It won’t help while we remain

disobedient. We must vote with our feet, like we saw Abraham did, and in the WAY Jesus

taught us. The Crown holds the Keys to bind and loose on earth. The world construct is built

accordingly to give us only one of two possible choices. It seems, like Jesus, the Crown really

could not care less what we believe or say. Only our deeds are relevant.

Matthew 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the

kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Not to be judgemental. It is true that this choice has not been apparent. It is true that obeying

the commands Jesus gave us, especially in the Sermon on the Mount, does appear to be

impossible in today’s world. And so the cheap grace option that Paul provides as an

alternative might be appealing as a last resort.

Though if it was possible to follow Jesus, sermon on the Mount style – would you want to?

The following 2 diagrams summarise firstly how the Crown became responsible for

upholding the true Gospel of Jesus, and accordingly came to wield Peter’s Keys in an entirely


worldly sense. Secondly how the legal person (whom we know God has no respect for), is the

necessary mechanism to give us the choice, and bind or loose us on earth accordingly.

The supporting evidence is already laid out in more detail in a previous document

https://goo.gl/ZRufSk We see covetousness is the key problem. Coveting got Adam and Eve

kicked out of the Garden, nothing has changed. We might step back and ask ourselves – in a

world we did not create, how can we claim “This is MINE”? Jesus had something to say

about this.

This is not to seem judgemental, we all have needs, and we all love our children dearly. It

may be hard to imagine a mother putting the common welfare before the welfare of her

children, and perhaps even harder to imagine that this is what Jesus was really commanding

us. But let’s start with the notion that it may in fact be possible to do both – give all freely,

AND have faith that things will work out well for society as a whole, and us and our families.

We see the story of Elijah, he tells a widow to feed him first (SHARE ALL) while she is

expecting her and her child to die in the middle of a famine – sounds ridiculous, right?

10 So he arose and went to Zarephath. And when he came to the gate of the city,

behold, the widow woman was there gathering of sticks: and he called to her, and

said, Fetch me, I pray thee, a little water in a vessel, that I may drink. 11 And as she

was going to fetch it, he called to her, and said, Bring me, I pray thee, a morsel of

bread in thine hand. 12 And she said, As the Lord thy God liveth, I have not a cake,

but an handful of meal in a barrel, and a little oil in a cruse: and, behold, I am

gathering two sticks, that I may go in and dress it for me and my son, that we may

eat it, and die. 13 And Elijah said unto her, Fear not; go and do as thou hast said:

but make me thereof a little cake first, and bring it unto me, and after make for thee

and for thy son. 14 For thus saith the Lord God of Israel, The barrel of meal shall not

waste, neither shall the cruse of oil fail, until the day that the Lord sendeth rain upon

the earth. 15 And she went and did according to the saying of Elijah: and she, and he,

and her house, did eat many days. 16 And the barrel of meal wasted not, neither did

the cruse of oil fail, according to the word of the Lord, which he spake by Elijah.

In the Sermon on the Mount we see a similar example. Thousands of people without enough

food for dinner. Jesus commanded all available resources to be gathered together for the

miracle of the loaves and the fishes.

Contemplate for a moment – some mums’ and dads’ had the foresight to bring some food,

knowing that their littlies, if not fed, would get mighty grumpy come the witching hour. They

are asked to give it into the common pot for all. Thousands of careless people (and their kids),

who could not figure to grab a bite for later as they left the house. And now there is obviously

not enough to go around. But share they did, and not just some - ALL. And all were fed. See

also Acts 4:32-35.

I believe in miracles. I believe, and can see, that this reality is built into our world construct

today if we would choose it.

For the iniquity of his covetousness was I wroth, and smote him: I hid me, and was

wroth, and he went on frowardly in the way of his heart. Isa.57:17

Last word in the Old Testament - Then shall ye return, and discern between the righteous and

the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not. Malachi 3:18


Adam and Eve are removed from the Garden. They coveted the

forbidden fruit. Their will, not God’s will. They lost Dominion.

Covetousness in Strong’s Concordance

By and by dominion of world is given to the King of Babylon

(God’s servant) and his successors (see Daniel). Babylon is still

there in Revelation, as predicted. Today this is the Crown.

Things change a bit 2000 years ago. Jesus gives a new covenant for

all nations. Conditional upon keeping the two great commandments

- Love God above all, Love our neighbours as ourselves. Jesus

went away, giving Peter the Keys to bind on earth the disobedient,

and loose on earth the obedient. Our choice.

Peter demonstrates early in Acts that walking in the Jesus Love

Commandments means all things (property, money etc) are held in

common – Share and share alike. (Acts 2 and Acts 4:32-25). We

see this aspect is absolutely not negotiable when Peter binds

Ananias and his wife Sapphira, for holding back property for their

own benefit (Acts 5). As Jesus taught quite plainly.

Peter is not here anymore, so where them Keys at then? They are

with the Crown. Queen Elizabeth II wears the purple robe of estate

with the gold crown woven directly into it. That evidences that the

priestly functions are transferred to her. Estate law IS ecclesiastical

law. This ecclesiastical law, the power of the Keys in a very earthly

sense, is wielded by the nation-states all over the world.

So we start to approach MYSTERY BABYLON. A dichotomy.

We see that the Crown is both Babylon that has the earthly

dominion, and also holds the priestly functions and St. Peter’s Keys

to bind or loose us. Entirely according to our choice.

We supposedly live in a common-wealth. The choice is given us

via our status in relation to the legal person, registered with the

Crown, for each and every one of us when we were born. There are

only 2 possibilities. Either it is used 100% for the public benefit

and common wealth, i.e. love/charity – or we claim even the

slightest part for our own self-willed covetous ends. We are free or

bond accordingly.

The New Zealand Supreme Court Act 1841 shows us that ecclesiastical law IS estate law.

That the power of the Keys is exclusively with the Crown. God’s will? Our will? Property?

Date post:	20-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Robbing Peter to Pay Paul - underground-cantina.83190.x6...

Documents