In part 1 of my rebuttal to pseudo-ebionite anti-Paulists propaganda we presented evidence of Paul's true character that anti-Paulists hope their impressionable victims will fail to notice. Among those character traits and facts regarding Paul we found:
We also discussed and presented examples of the following typical and primary characteristics of anti-Paulist counter missionaries:
As I continue with my rebuttal you will see more of the same anti-Paulists characteristics. As before, my response will follow each paragraph from the psuEb anti-Paulist. Also, as I said in Part 1, due to the depth of wickedness I see in much of the anti-Paulist and counter missionary material I read, I will not hold back from the necessary stern rebuke. This is an extremely important issue of unparalleled importance. It is for that reason I will be particularly blunt. The offense of anti-Paulists and counter missionaries is unchecked; therefore, I will respond in like manner and with equal force. I will NOT sit by while Yeshua the Messiah and his part in YHVH's (G-d's) Divine Plan are mercilessly attacked by those wishing to rid the world of him and his work. A primary means by which counter missionaries hope to accomplish their goal is through their ferocious attack of Paul.
Picking up where we left off in Part 1, we encounter the following statement from the pusEbs:
Who was sent to the gentiles with the message of Yeshua and the Coming Reign? The gospel of Matthew tells that the remaining 11 disciples were commanded by Yeshua to go into all the earth to teach all the nations (gentiles) the things he had instructed. Later, Yehuda (Judas) was replaced by Matthias and Yosef Bar-Abbas. But Paul declares himself "The" Apostle to the Gentiles, claiming the authority to supercede Yeshua and his disciples. Paul did not convert any gentiles. He joined them! Yeshua was tempted by the Adversary who offered Yeshua world dominion if Yeshua would bow to him. Did he accept it and the world? The followers of Paul joined with the Romans the rulers of the greatest empire of the day spreading Paulism (Christianity) throughout the inhabited world and establishing church leaders like powerful kings. Did Paul accept the Adversary's offer? [Mt 28; Acts 1; 10:1-11:18; Zk. 8, et alia; Gal 2:6-9]
This last paragraph illustrates yet again the pitiful spiritual psychosis to which I referred in Part 1. Yes, Paul was the apostle to the gentiles. What is so bad about that? The fact that anti-Paulists are forced to exert such energy to refute him, combined with the fact his writings comprise the majority of the New Testament, proves Paul correct! Therefore, anti-Paulists, themselves, provide a portion of the proof that Paul IS "THE" apostle to the gentiles (nations), which also substantiates the Divine inspiration of the New Testament, since the prophetic selection of Paul is shown - to this very day - to be confirmed in fact!
Could it be that the notion of "gentiles" is what causes such disgust to anti-Paulists? Actually, for many anti-Paulists, that is precisely the case! They, like their ultra-Semitic forefathers, think that "lowly gentiles" could not possibly be as loved by G-d as are Jews. The idea promoted by Paul that non-Jews could become part of the "Israel of G-d" is utterly repulsive to most counter missionaries, all of whom share a common hatred of Paul.
What about the charge that Paul was " ... claiming the authority to supercede Yeshua and his disciples. ...?" Where is the evidence for that? Talk about pulling evidence out of thin air! Wow! That one is a real classic! A classic lie! Anyone with an ounce of brain material and who reads Paul's epistles is repeatedly struck with Paul's unparalleled devotion, admiration, and service to Yeshua the Messiah. Accusing him of claiming to have authority over Yeshua is not just a lie, it is a grotesque and stupid lie without substantiation, and once again provides evidence of the evil nature of the "spirit" who drives anti-Paulists.
As far as the suggestion that he claimed authority OVER the other apostles, all one has to do is refer back to our previous discussion in Part 1 of Acts 15 where Paul deferred to the Jerusalem leadership and that accusation is also shown to be a lie. Sure! Paul was specifically chosen by Yeshua through a Divine vision. Are counter missionaries saying that the specific choice of Paul is not enough to qualify him? Well, yes and no. They simply despise the New Testament and do not consider anything in it authoritative; therefore, if they were to be honest, these psuEbs would simply tell the truth and admit that their real argument is with every word from Matthew 1:1 to Revelation 22:21.
The remaining sentences of the above paragraph from the psuEb liar are more lies on top of lies made by children of the father of lies. While reading it you can almost hear the pathetic and maniacal screams of the counter missionaries as they spew forth totally baseless accusations and insinuations.
"... Paul did not convert any gentiles. He joined them! Yeshua was tempted by the Adversary who offered Yeshua world dominion if Yeshua would bow to him. Did he accept it and the world? The followers of Paul joined with the Romans the rulers of the greatest empire of the day spreading Paulism (Christianity) throughout the inhabited world and establishing church leaders like powerful kings. Did Paul accept the Adversary's offer?..."
What slanderous trash.
First, the New Testament clearly shows that Paul DID convert gentiles. Few things are more implicitly and explicitly obvious than that.
Second, Paul did NOT "join" the godless gentiles. He did not join the Roman rulers. In fact, within the pages of the New Testament we find an epistle composed by Paul during his captivity in a Roman jail shortly before his probable execution by those anti-Paulists claim he had joined!
Furthermore, even as he neared his expected martyrdom, Paul's foremost thoughts were not for himself. Instead, Paul's concerns centered exclusively on those he loved and the proclamation of the gospel of Messiah.
Finally, "Paulism" is NOT Christianity and NOT what the New Testament (apostolic writings) promotes. There is no authentic evidence that the apostlic writings, most notably Paul's writings, advance an unscriptural "Paulism" except in the minds of wicked men who lustfully seek his destruction. Such a statement again proves how anti-Paulists wrongly attribute to Paul the doctrines promoted by traditional Christianity - a religions that completely misinterprets and misapplies Paul's statements.
Every time I read the disgusting dribble produced by anti-Paulists I am stunned at how they could speak so harshly of a man of such unequalled devotion and love. I honestly wonder if they have ever actually read Paul's material. If one reads Paul's personal letters recorded in the New Testament it is not possible to reasonably arrive at the hateful, slanderous opinion of Paul that is typical within anti-Paulists. Even if one disagrees with Paul, it is shocking to see how they can be so libelous and disrespectful of a man that so totally committed himself to what he considered G-d's eternal Plan for the world.
I can understand if there is disagreement with Paul's beliefs, and I respect one's differing opinions. But I cannot understand how he can be so horribly misrepresented by anti-Paulists counter missionaries. Since common sense logic and normalcy does not suffice to explain it, there can only be one explanation - demonic inspiration. The hatred and personal vendetta anti-Paulists betray is beyond the realm of even the most basic human qualities of goodness; thus, it must derive from the depths of spiritual darkness. It is that otherworldly evil basis possessed by anti-Paulists that, oddly, supplies some of the strongest proof that they are wrong, since it reveals a level of wickedness that cannot possibly originate from the One True, merciful, compassionate, and loving Creator G-d.
Continuing ...
When Yeshua confronts the Adversary, he defeats him by saying, "You shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of YHWH, and Him alone will you serve." When Paul is mobbed by people who (rightfully) wish to stone him for preaching against the Law of YHWH, he relies on the worldly authorities as a Roman entitled to the protection of worldly rulers who save him. [Dt 8:3; Mt 4:4; Acts 22:26; 23:27]
If a murderous mob was to attempt to kill this lying psuEb counter missionary, would he refuse the assistance of a nearby police officer? If he were near the US Embassy in Saudi Arabia and an anti-American mob rushed to kill him, would he just stand there or run to the Embassy for protection? If a protecting force had been nearby in Germany during the Satanic, murderous days of the holocaust and a Nazi mob was attacking helpless Jews to carry them to their death, would it have been wrong for them to seek protection?
Friend, what kind of sick mind sees wrong in Paul's actions? I'll answer that question. A mind that supports murder! This last paragraph by the psuEb reveals a depth of demonic darkness that causes me to shudder with disbelief. This psuEb anti-Paulist reveals quite directly that he would have gleefully taken part in murder! I will comment no further on his statement. I suspect most readers can easily discern the truth here, unless they are also hate filled accomplices to murder.
Yeshua said the Reign of the Heavens was not of this earth, and would not call down the heavenly armies to protect him or his disciples take up the sword against the worldly powers. But Paul says that worldly powers and their armies are representatives of God. Who is lying? [Lk 4; Jn 18:36, 19:18; Acts 4:26 vs. Rom 13]
Was Cyrus performing G-d's will? Are psuEbs teaching that all the world is chaos and G-d is not in control? I agree the verses from Romans 13 are troubling, but if we consider the specific context of the timeframe during which they were written, the problem with the verses dissolves away. During that time things were relatively peaceful. Paul did not wish those he loved to give the authorities cause for persecution. I suppose the psuEb that wrote this would have supported the Jewish Zealots or Sicarii who killed their own people during the siege of Jerusalem by the Roman armies. Whatever the case, relying upon it to "prove" Paul to be a false apostle is pretty desperate.
YHWH calls for consecration of certain individuals as Nazarites who grow their hair (and beards) long throughout their consecration. But Paul says that long hair is shameful. This means most likely that James (Ya'aqov), John the Immerser, who were said to be Nazarites were also shameful as was anyone obeying this commandment. Who is lying, YHWH or Paul? [Num 6:5, Lev 19:27 vs. 1Cor 11:14]
It is extremely doubtful those to whom he was writing were Nazarites; therefore, this psuEb's accusation is without any merit whatsoever. Also, Paul was writing to a specific group in Corinth regarding issues tailored to them. He was not writing to James, John, or Nazarites. I would also ask where in the New Testament it is shown that James and John were Nararites? I will research that, but barring evidence of his statement, this represents yet one additional statement by an anti-Paulist with no substantiation, which is another typical tactic of anti-Paulists. They often do not reveal their speculative data sources since they are, indeed, extremely speculative.
Here is a comment from David Stern's Jewish New Testament Commentary in which he sheds more light on this issue.
14-15 Does the nature of things itself, Greek phusis, "nature" (from which come English words such as "physics" and "physical"), really teach you that a man who wears his hair long degrades himself? Whether scientific measurement would uphold the assumption that men's hair naturally grows shorter than women's is not precisely the point; rather, there are natural distinctions between men and women which should not be obscured. Sha'ul is probably in some measure campaigning against homosexuality and transvestism. "Nature" here seems to include not only physical but social and cultural elements; we can theorize that in a culture where men wear their hair long without compromising their male identity and women with short hair are still considered feminine, Sha'ul might not press the issue as he does. We know from 9:19-23 that he was sensitive to cross-cultural interaction, but further speculation is probably fruitless. This leaves open the question of whether his strictures apply today or were only meant for first-century Corinth. But see 1 Ke 3:3N.
At this point I will present a crucial point that should ALWAYS be remembered whenever Paul's epistles are read, or for that matter most of Scripture. I obtained this wise observation from the book I mentioned in Part 1, Paul the Jewish Theologian, a Pharisee among Christians, Jews, and Gentiles, by Dr. Brad Young. In that book Brad Young insightfully compares the reading of Paul's letters to the game Jeopardy. In that game contestants are given answers to various questions without being given the original question. So, they must provide the question for the answer they were given. Here is a very simple example. Let us assume you are given the answer "Washington DC." Ok, now what was the question for which the answer is "Washington DC?" You might say, "Oh! That's an easy one! The question is 'What is the capital of the United States?' " Well, good guess, but the actual question is "Through what major US city does the Potomac river flow?"
You see, even apparently obvious "questions" are not the the correct question for which an answer was supplied. In the case of Paul's epistles, figuring out the original questions or situations that he addressed in his letters is FAR more difficult. The simple fact is both anti-Paulists and supporters of Paul are often left having to make "educated" guesses. However, the guesses of anti-Paulist are often not the least bit "educated" and are specifically presented to place Paul in the most condemning position possible. Anti-Paulists slanderers are sickening and wicked as they intentionally construct the most damning anti-Paul scenarios their evil little minds can conceive.
YHWH and Yeshua speak of feeding the poor without qualification, and earthly wealth as a hindrance able to keep one from YHWH. Paul says no work, no food, and is a friend (and collaborator) with Romans of wealth and power. But Paul uses the Law in order to receive pay! [Mt 6:24, 10:8; Mk 10:13-31; Lk 14:28-33; Acts 4:32-36; 1Cor 9:9, 11:34, 2Thes 3:6-12]
This is really getting tiresome. The juvenile way anti-Paulists participate in their outrageous tantrums of slander reminds me of blood sucking mosquitoes buzzing around my head. Ok, let's continue exposing their devilish little game.
The discussion being referenced in which Paul says "no work, no food" was not with respect to the poor. It was with respect to the LAZY freeloaders that sought to take advantage of loving donations. There were those that wished to be a parasitic nuisance and, therefore, prevented the truly needy from being served. There were also instances where people would show up to gorge themselves on food during communal meals, and these were of the same lazy, parasitic nature whose actions would sometimes profane Holy Feasts. This is one of those "common sense" issues that I will leave to your own minds to figure out. It is obvious that the anti-Paulist slanderer is showing yet more of his demonic heart.
I respond to the "... friend (and collaborator) with Romans of wealth and power ... ." lie elsewhere in my rebuttal; therefore, I will not do so here.
To limit the size of this article I will also not comment on the outlandish accusation that Paul sought to profit from his preaching. Read Paul's epistles yourself. Such an evil, baseless, and grotesquely slanderous accusation is not worthy of a response. If, AFTER reading his epistles, you agree with this pseEb liar, so be it. I will not entertain the thoughts of fools on this issue.
YHWH says that His Torah ("Law") is eternal, and Yeshua agrees that it will not end until the Heavens and earth do. But Paul calls YHWH's words of Torah a curse. Are the words of YHWH a blessing or a curse? [Dt 11:26ff, 12:28ff; Mt 5:17-19, 19:16-19; Lk 16:29-3; Rom 7:6; Gal 3:10, 5:18]
This comment reveals a surprising ignorance of Scripture on the part of the psuEb who authored the rubbish to which I am responding. To answer his question, "Are the words of YHWH a blessing or a curse?," the Scripture responds YES! They are BOTH a blessing AND a curse, and which one depends upon how G-d's instructions are received. Following are a few of the many passages from the Tanakh (Old Testament) in which YHVH (G-d) clearly specifies that the Law (torah, or G-d's teachings) CAN be a curse. So that I will not be falsely accused of utilizing a biased "Christian" Bible version, I will quote from the Jewish Publication Society's version of the Tanakh.
Paul, however, is not as ignorant as his detractors, as I will now show using the reference to Paul's epistle to the Galatians supplied by the anti-Paulist! Note that Paul fully understands the "curse" of the Law (torah).
The Law (Divine instructions) of G-d very clearly ARE a curse to those who sin. There is nothing more clearly shown in Scripture. In fact, the Law's curse resulted in the many punishments of Israel recorded in the Tanakh, which included their being lead away into captivity. A central, PRIMARY theme of the entire Tanakh centers around the curse of the Law as it records for us the result of those curses upon Israel! Furthermore, it is that same curse that, to this very day, keeps "Israel," especially the Jewish people, persecuted. Sadly, it is the fault of their rabbinic leaders that they remain under the curse, since they, along with counter missionaries like this psuEb, actively work to prevent "Israel" from embracing their Messiah and the clearly revealed truths found in the New Testament they despise and work to eradicate. They also REPLACE G-d's instructions with their own. In fact, Judaism has its own form of "Replacement Theology" as they REPLACE G-d's eternal torah with their own manmade "oral torah," piled high with Scripturally unsubstantiated, and often Scripture destroying, rabbinic traditions. Unfortunately, they are often assisted by ultra-Semitic Messianics and Netzarims who implicitly, and often explicitly, condone and even encourage the teaching of rabbinical foundations. Anti-Paulist who make imbecilic statements as this psuEb made above, do not grasp one of the most basic truths in all of Scripture. It is their failure to grasp this fundamental principle that leads them to the error they make in the next statement from this psuEb counter missionary.
Who follows Yeshua? Yeshua says that not those who say "lord, lord" are his followers, but those who do what he taught. The instructions of YHWH require works of obedience. But Paul claims that just a confession of faith that Yeshua was a human sacrifice for sin, and was resurrected is enough to be saved eternally and that works are wrong. Who is lying? YHWH, Yeshua, James, or Paul? [Mt 7:21, 19:16, 25:31-46; Acts 1:20; Jas 2:14-26; Rom 3:28, 10:9; 1Cor 15:35-44]
Here we go again! sigh!... As usual, this anti-Paulist is wrongly attributing to Paul the doctrines promoted by those within Christianity who completely misinterpret Paul's statements! Due to the large number of passages from Paul's own writings that refute the lies of this anti-Paulists, I will defer a response to this common accusation to another article, in which I will specifically address the false concept that Paul taught against obedience. To do so here would only serve to dramatically increase the size of this already lengthy article.
Why must Paul always defend himself from accusations of lying? Nowhere in the New Testament is Paul acknowledged to be an apostle by anyone, except by himself and twice by Luke. Evidently nobody was acknowledging him according to 1Cor 9:2ff! All Yeshua's followers in Asia had turned away from Paul. [2Cor 11:31; Rom 3:11ff, 9:1; Gal 1:20; 1Tim 2:7; 2Tim 1:15]
Can this guy really be that ignorant as he states, "... Nowhere in the New Testament is Paul acknowledged to be an apostle by anyone ...?" Then he refutes himself (!?!?) by saying, "...except by himself and twice by Luke..." I assume he is serious, but he really opened himself up to being proven foolish, as anti-Paulists often do. This psuEb Paul hater provides his own proof of his insane hatred! Wow! He is making this too easy for me! First I'll show one additional passage from the New Testament; then, I'll address the proof this somewhat disturbed psuEb anti-Paulists gave to refute his own argument.
It is quite obvious that Peter considered Paul to be a fellow apostle. By the way, the term "apostle" is a Greek word brought over into the English language. There is nothing special about the word "apostle." It simply means a messenger, one sent forth, as in sent forth to proclaim a message. Often people wrongly attribute some sort of mystical or exalted meaning to the word "apostle" that is not justified. In fact, ANY ONE that devotes himself or herself to promoting truth (or anything else) is literally an "apostle" for what he or she is promoting. If I were to go out and promote garbage bags in which to place anti-Paul material I would be a garbage bag apostle. Don't get overly enamored by the simple word "apostle."
It is true that the "apostles" in Jerusalem were more often mentioned as "the apostles;" however, that is simply to assist the reader in distinguishing between the Jerusalem apostles (James, Peter, John, etc.) from those that worked beyond the boundaries of Jerusalem, of which Paul is the most notable example.
Now, here are, I suspect, the two times when Luke clearly refers to Paul as an "apostle." Remember that Luke authored Acts.
It is quite evident from the previous verses that Luke considered Paul to be an apostle. Of course, Paul often refers to himself as an apostle all throughout his writings; however, anti-Paulists deceitfully reject those letters. Be that as it may, they are shown to be liars by the verses shown above without having to reference Paul's epistles.
This is really nuts. All someone has to do is read the New Testament and it becomes exceedingly obvious that Paul was CLEARLY a "messenger," one "sent forth" to proclaim the message of Yeshua's work and mission; therefore, only a complete fool would claim that Paul was not an "apostle." Did I say complete fool? OH! Well I guess that fits the psuEb anti-Paulist counter missionary who authored the sewage-like babbling to which I am responding.
Now, what about the implicit hyper-negative bias of this psuEb's comment, "... Evidently nobody was acknowledging him according to 1Cor 9:2ff! All Yeshua's followers in Asia had turned away from Paul. ..."
Note the psuEb gives no reason for people "turning away" from Paul. There are a number of reasons. Some turned away out of fear after seeing the persecution Paul received for his devotion to Messiah. Some turned away and were rebuked by ALL the apostles, due to an ultra-Semitic mind set. And some turned away simply because they could not persevere under trial. I will elaborate on this issue in an upcoming article. This one is getting too long. I also feel that I have provided more than enough proof to show how this psuEb anti-Paulists counter missionary is full of lies and wickedness. Read Paul's epistles and the implicitly slanderous intent of the "turning away" accusation will be shown to as false as all other accusations from this repugnant anti-Paulist.
Also, take note of something that is yet another standard method used by anti-Paulists and counter missionaries. Though I have not stressed this point, it is nevertheless consistently utilized by counter missionaries and anti-Paulists.
Paul teaches a New Israel, which to most Christians means that Israel has been replaced by gentiles as the Chosen People. But YHWH says that not only will he keep his people, but they will judge over the gentiles. In even the New Testament the people of YHWH sealed as his possession in Revelations are 144,000 Israelites, 12,000 from each tribe of Israel. [Mic 4,5; et alia throughout the Prophets; Rev 7]
Once again, (Sorry for the necessary repetition, but it's their fault, not mine.), this anti-Paulist is wrongly attributing to Paul the doctrines promoted by those within Christianity who completely misinterpret Paul's statements! This time, however, the psuEb anti-Paulist was at least smart enough to "imply" instead of explicitly accuse. That is why he said "... which to most Christians means ... ." Also, we see YET AGAIN (!!!) the standard counter missionary tactic I highlighted above is used. The counter missionary is using New Testament Scripture (Revelation) to "prove" his point even though he admittedly rejects the New Testament, including Revelation!
I will not comment here on the ultra-Semitic misapplication and interpretation of who G-d's people are. "Israel" is NOT made up of only Jews. The grotesque racism and arrogance of ultra-Semites is among the most despicable mind sets on the face of the earth. The double standard applied to anti-Semitism versus ultra-Semitism defies common sense. I will be elaborating in future articles on details of the elitist, haughty egotism suggested by this psuEb counter missionary. Some of the most racist, derogatory, and self-exalting material I have ever seen can be found within rabbinical teachings, and I aim to present those teachings, quoting directly from rabbinical literature, so that others will be able to grasp one of the reasons why Yeshua the Messiah's teachings are such a "stumbling stone" for rabbinical Jews and why they hate him with ferocious intensity. It is precisely Yeshua's and the apostle's opposition to ultra-Semitism that causes many to harbor such intense hatred for them, particularly in the Judaic based counter missionary camps, who distort YHWH's teachings to exalt themselves. Since Paul is a dominant spokesman for the equality of man found in Scripture, he is the main focus of ultra-Semitic attacks. Humility - TRUE humility - is an unknown and unpracticed concept among ultra-Semites.
What were these supposed "New Israelites" required to do? Acts says that James made a number of requirements related to idolatry and sexual practices, and others (based on the Law), including synagogue attendance, and Paul accepted. But to the Galatians Paul acts as if he never required any approval from anyone! Paul claims all his doctrine is directly from Yeshua. Paul decides all of these requirements voided for gentiles! He says that they must simply "remember the poor at Jerusalem." He basically swears what he says is true (Was someone accusing him of lying? Even then?!). But Yeshua says not to swear at all, but to simply say yes or no, and that more than this is "from the Evil One." But Paul swears a lie! [Gal 2, 18; Acts 15, 21; Mt 5:33-7]
Wait a minute? Just a few paragraphs before this one the anti-Paulists accused Paul of not caring for the poor. Now he sarcastically uses Paul's concern for the poor as part of his attack on Paul. ?? What does that indicate? Once again he is proving himself to be a liar. Anti-Paulists trip over their own arguments in their frenzied attempts to condemn Paul. It is as though they are planting land mines then stepping on them in their frantic haste to plant more. Their wild, unrestrained and vain attempts to prospect for spurious "proof" that allegedly shows Paul to be a false apostle often provides all the proof needed to reveal the idiocy of their fanciful arguments. It is actually somewhat comical to read their material as they make fools of themselves and reveal their truly wicked spirit.
This psuEb's last statements are simply more baseless lies, and I will not honor them with a response. He totally misrepresents Paul while betraying the deeply demonic inspiration and psychotic bitterness of most anti-Paulists counter missionaries. Besides, applicable answers to his statements are given throughout my rebuttal.
Paul makes much of Abraham and faith. Abraham and all his seed were to wear the sign of covenant, circumcision, without end throughout their generations or else be cut off from YHWH's people. Why then does Paul attack circumcision, damning it, claiming that circumcision will separate us from Him? Paul even hopes that those who preach YHWH's words concerning circumcision have their penises sliced off! He calls the sign of YHWH's covenant "mutilation." [Gen 17:1-14; Gal 5:2-4, 12; Phil 3:2]
I already addressed this in Part 1 of this rebuttal. I will repeat what I said then.
There is nothing said regarding circumcision about the children of the non-Jews anywhere in the New Testament, even in Galatians. The immediate circumcision barrier considered in Galatians applied ONLY to those males that were converting at that time. Circumcision would be (and is) far less of a barrier to their offspring, who could have the rite performed with less hassle and pain. Lots of non-Jews are circumcised anyway, including me. However, I agree with the Jerusalem elders in that I do not see it as a "salvation" issue. Nevertheless, I fully support those electing to be circumcised, so long at they do not impose it upon others.
It never ceases to amaze me how one of the most obvious physical/spiritual parallels in Scripture (circumcision) is almost totally constrained to the physical by many "Messianics." They also avoid discussing or considering the fact that Abraham's original acceptance by G-d, as well as all who came before Abraham, was NOT dependant upon circumcision of the flesh, but it WAS dependant upon the actual "circumcision" G-d requires, which was (and is) circumcision of the heart. Today, G-d's Divine teachings that predated Sinai are not considered by many claiming "torah" observance, almost as if G-d and His instructions did not exist until then. ?? To truly grasp "torah," one must often venture back in time beyond Sinai, a journey most "torah observant" individuals prefer not to take - and a journey Paul, Yeshua, and others DID take.
Paul's teachings regarding how Abraham was declared righteous by G-d BEFORE circumcision is a thorn in the side of circumcision proponents. They HATE to be reminded of that fact as they trumpet circumcision as a necessary ingredient. Necessary? It wasn't necessary for Abraham or ANYONE who predated him for the first 2000 years after creation. Hmm? Who is really correctly understanding the intent of G-d's original "torah," the circumcision of the penis crowd, or the circumcision of the heart crowd? Did G-d suddenly change his mind after 2000 years and say, "Oops! I messed up. I think I'll change my requirements." Once again we see ultra-Semitic barriers and attitudes being forced upon others, and it is now often forced by those claiming to be followers of New Testament doctrine. ??
Paul's "attack" in Galatians was correctly administered. He was referring to those that had previously accepted justification through faith and yet were now pursuing circumcision and becoming a Jew as necessary. To repeat what the true issue was I will present the commentary by David Stern regarding the Jerusalem conference that was called specifically to address the circumcision issue that arose in Galatia, which is recorded for us in Acts chapter 15.
Some men ... from Y'hudah (Judea). Verse 24 tells us they were from the Messianic community in Yerushalayim but had not been authorized to be teaching the brothers. Unauthorized teachers are also discussed at Galatians 2:11-13.; it may have been the same situation, or earlier, or later (scholarly opinions differ), but in any case it was at least similar.You. The "you" are Gentiles who have come to faith in God and his Messiah Yeshua without becoming proselytes to Judaism. The question of whether Jewish believers should have their sons circumcised is not raised here at all, but it is raised at Acts 21:21.
Unless you undergo b'rit-milah [circumcision] in the manner prescribed by Moshe. The condition named for salvation is actually shorthand for something far more comprehensive. These men from Y'hudah are insisting that Gentiles must become in every sense Jews. At v. 5 they make this clearer by adding explicitly that the Gentile believers should be directed "to observe the Torah of Moshe," by which they mean both the Written and Oral Torah. [Sadly, this "Judaizing" mind set is still very prevalent today among Messianics, who also seem to insists Messianics/Netzarims "must become in every sense Jews."]
This condition goes beyond the requirements for individual salvation set forth in the Tanakh, in Judaism or by the emissaries. The Tanakh says, and Kefa quotes it at 2:21, "Everyone who calls on the name of Adonai will be saved." Judaism teaches that to be saved Gentiles need only obey the seven Noachide laws (see v.20). The New Testament books of Romans, Galatians and Ephesians have as a central issue the equality of Jews and Gentiles before God, insofar as salvation is concerned; they make it clear that observance of the Torah, as it applies to Jews, is not a condition for the salvation of a Gentile.
Thus the requirement that Gentiles convert to Judaism and the teaching behind this requirement constitute a serious threat to the Gospel. For if individuals not born into Jewish culture and society are each required to become Jews before God will recognize their faith in him, far fewer Gentiles will trouble themselves to accept the Gospel. The real issue is: can faith in God and his Messiah transcend Jewish culture? Can a Gentile become a Christian without also becoming a Jew?
I will not comment further on the ignorance and lack of comprehension represented by this typical anti-Paulist. Read Galatians and Acts for yourself, if possible with an open mind. Paul's intent is easy for anyone to see whose heart is not filled with ultra-Semitic elitism and hatred of non-Jews.
Is Paul the false apostle referred to by Yeshua to Ephesus in Revelation? He had a lot of trouble there convincing the people of his "truths." Of the seven assemblies, Ephesos is the only city Paul declares himself as "Apostle." Yeshua lauds Ephesos' works, labor, and patience, unlike Paul who teaches the need works as a denial of grace. Did you know that the book of Revelations was not accepted by the Christian (Paulist) church for centuries? Perhaps, we are not the first to identify the false one in the book as Paul. [Rev 2:2; Acts 19:8-9; Eph 1:1]
He states Revelation was not accepted by Christianity. Well, it is accepted now and has been for almost 1700 years; so, what is his point? What does he care since he and all other counter missionaries reject it anyway? He also once again wrongly refers to Christianity as "Paulism." I've already been over that and will not lengthen this article with further repetition.
He also speaks as though the Messianic community in Ephesus rejected Paul. This is proven false in Acts, which was not written by Paul. In Acts we see find the report of an emotional, tearful departure of Paul from Ephesus. Read Acts 20 for proof. In fact, you may want to start with Acts 18. From Acts 18 through Acts 20 you will see quite clearly that Paul was greatly respected by the Ephesians. In Acts 19 you will also see that Paul was placed in danger while in Ephesus for his stand against idolatry
Another case of lying by this anti-Paulist..
The New Jerusalem will be built on twelve foundation stones (and with other twelves in its architecture) representing the twelve disciples of Yeshua and the twelve tribes of Israel. Which number disciple was Paul of Tarsus? None of them! [Rev 21] The number of the beast who puts his mark on mankind's hand and forehead (where the Name and commandments of YHWH should be - Ex 13:16; Dt 6:8, 11:18) has the number of a man, 666. In Hebrew gematria this number spells the word TRSU, the name of the city the man Paul came from. Paul taught an end to the Law so he could replace the marks of bedience to YHWH with his own teaching and its mark, law rejecting Paulism (Christianity).
Everything he just said is pure speculation; therefore, I will not respond. It is mindless trash. His air is becoming ever thinner as he seeks to pick "out of thin air" anything his wicked mind can conceive with which to slander Paul.
These are just some New Testament and Bible proofs that Paul of Tarsus was not who he claimed to be, but a Liar, just as our Ebionite forefathers exposed him to be. More details concerning Paul the Apostate can be found at http://ebionite.org on the worldwide web.
© Copyright 2000, The Ebionite Community.
Hahaha! Oh, sorry, I couldn't resist laughing at this anti-Paulists accusing Paul of lying after he presented his hateful diatribe filled with nothing but lies! If his propaganda were not so tragic and slanderous it would truly be useful as a script for a religious comedy. I really wish I knew the specific individual that authored this pseudo-ebionite garbage. It is among the most idiotic, error-ridden pieces of material I have yet come across; however, all anti-Paulist material possesses similar ridiculous arguments, slander, and lies, which is why I chose to use it.
Ok, we are through. Now, to show myself to graciously provide "equal time," I will now end my blow-by-blow rebuttal of this psuEb, anti-Paulist propaganda by showing the web site from which it was obtained. But don't be surprised if you find the material missing or heavily "revised," since I suspect once they receive word of my showing them to be fools they may quickly remove the material or dramatically edit it. Here is the link to the article. It is in Adobe *.pdf format. If you discover that the link does not work, don't blame me. http://ebionite.org/documents/xpault.pdf
In this two part rebuttal to a typical anti-Paulist counter missionary we repeatedly witnessed the following:
Regarding Paul we found:
We also discussed and presented examples of the following typical, and primary characteristics of anti-Paulist counter missionaries:
As I've responded to this typical anti-Paul propaganda I have become absolutely convinced, due to the obvious wickedness repeatedly shown by the anti-Paulist I refuted, that Paul is among the greatest spiritual minds and most devoted children of G-d that has ever walked the face of the earth. He literally devoted his life to the cause of Truth. He suffered greatly and spread the Truth about the TRUE torah (teachings) of G-d where ever he went. He is a great man, and great men are also greatly hated. He submitted himself fully, humbled himself completely, and to his dying day labored for advancement of the Kingdom of G-d. And for this, ultra-Semites, godless people, and bitter enemies of Yeshua the Messiah have taken it upon themselves to destroy him, his records, and the message of Truth for which he died.
Believe as you wish about Paul, but as for me, I will defend him and his message until my dying day for the simple reason that to attack Paul's message is to attack Yeshua the Messiah's position, power, and atoning work. But of course, that is the true intent of most anti-Paulists anyway isn't it.
May YHVH Elohim (G-d) open the spiritually blind eyes, soften the hardened hearts, and pour out His Divine Spirit upon the earth so that the truth of Paul's message will be recognized even by his most virulent opponents.