Yahchanan.com Book of Love  
Welcome to Yahchanan.com

The Epistles of Paul


The person known to us as Paul was at first a man who murdered the apostles of the Messiyah, thinking he was doing Yahweh a favor. After that, he claimed to have had a vision and visitation from Yahushua Himself. After this he was a changed man.

Did he make up this story so that he could preach false doctrine and draw away the true followers of Yahushua? Some would say. But even Peter has appeared to have accepted him in the end, and Peter was certainly full of the Spirit of Yahweh. We can hope he knew the truth. However, Peter seemed to be complaining about some of Paul's teachings. The Essenes and the Nazarenes say the same as Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Mashiyachs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. And Peter was one of the elect who are capable of being deceived. Also, Yahushua Himself once told the disciples to allow people to preach His Name, even though the other person was not one of the main group.

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

So, was Paul for real, or, was he a liar who draws people away from the Truth? I don't know. Maybe Paul did not know. Paul claimed to have had a visitation from Yahushua, who appeared as a beam of light. But, satan also appears as a beam of light:

2Corinthians 11:14 And no marvel; for even Satan fashions himself into a malak of light. 15 It is no great thing therefore if his ministers also fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness, whose end shall be according to their works.

There are many who do not consider Paul's writings to be scripture, because he contradicts known scripture in many places. It is known that Paul often preached things differently than the apostles. That is the main reason to consider that he might have been a fake. Or, maybe, he thought he was for real, and didn't know that he was possessed by satan (if he was). For example, Paul says:

1Corinthians 7:36 But if any man thinks that he behaves himself unseemly toward his virgin [daughter], if she be past the flower of her age, and if need so requires, let him do what he will; he sins not; let them marry.

Ackk!! Obviously it is a sin to marry your daughter! But Paul seems to allow it. Comparing this verse in different bible versions shows that the translators have wrestled with it. They keep trying to bend it around to fit with other scripture, because the obvious meaning is against scripture. Also:

1Corinthians 11:14 Does not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a dishonor to him?

Hunh?? How does nature teach me that? Didn't Paul ever read the scriptures, like the part about Samson and Delilah? How about the parts about Nazarites? Like the prophet: 1Samuel 1:11 I will give him to Yahuwah all the days of his life and no razor shall come upon his head. And, why would he tell people to not drink water, is he trying to make them drunken?

1Timothy 5:23 Be no longer a drinker of water, but use a little wine for your stomach's sake and your often infirmities.

It certainly sounds like Paul is un-scriptural!! 1 Corinthians 10:23 "All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but not all things build up." He is saying that blasphemy, lying, stealing, etc, are lawful for him! HUNH?? Galatians 5:18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. He says he is no longer under the law, but the Messiyah said the law lasts forever. Paul says it is okay to eat food sacrificed to idols, since idols are nothing [1Corinthians 8:1-13]. But Revelation 2:14 and 2:20 plainly disagree. And Revelation 12:17 says to keep the commandments which Paul said you do not need to keep.

Also, remember that the collection we call the New Testament was collected by the catholics, who are begotten of satan. They only used writings that agreed as much as possible with their beliefs. Satan must have realized that he could not do away with The Way of Yahushua, so perhaps he used Paul to preach false doctrine and confuse people? I sure don't know!! And I am not Paul's judge. But I note that the catholics who put Paul into the bible are the same people who took the Names of Yahweh and Yahushua out of the bible.

Maybe they changed the writings of Paul, just like they changed the other words, so that Paul now reads like blasphemy? You might want to visit this page. Also try this page and this site.

I present Paul's writings from the catholic bible here. Most likely, Paul was for real. I hope he was. But I suggest you don't follow any of his sayings unless they agree with the rest of the scripture! Perhaps someone else changed his writings after he died? There is a very good chance of this. Check out:

Nazarenes 89:9. And yet another shall arise and he shall teach many things which I have taught you already, and he shall spread the Gospel among the Gentiles with great zeal. But the keys of the Kingdom I will give to those who succeed you in my Spirit and obeying my law. -- It sounds like Paul was the 'other who shall arise'. But notice that the keys to the Kingdom of Yahweh are NOT given to Paul's followers! They are given to those who keep the LAW of Yahweh. Paul said you do NOT need to keep the Law! Paul said you are saved by faith, and that is all you need to go to heaven. The Book of James seems to have been written to refute Paul's teachings, indicating that Paul's teachings were wrong as he taught them.

Furthermore, the Dead Sea Scrolls contain a book called Habakkuk Commentary, which describes the battle between the Righteous One (James) and The Liar (Paul) and The Wicked Priest (Simon Magus? Ananas?). It was apparently written while Paul was alive. In it, Paul is called "The Liar". A very evil person. It provides a way to reconcile the belief that Paul was not teaching scriptural doctrine with the words of the Apostle Peter who seemed to accept Paul. The discrepancy is reconciled by pointing out that, at first, Paul was brought into the fold because they believed in him - but then he was rejected when he changed his preaching to a new religion. He lied to get accepted, then he lied to create christianity.

Matthew 7:15 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves. 16 By their fruits you shall know them. 17 Even so every good tree brings forth good fruit; but the corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 20 Therefore by their fruits you shall know them. -- So, we see that Paul's fruit is christianity, which is anti-scriptural and evil. Therefore, using the standards set out by Yahshua the Messiyah, Paul must be a wolf in sheep's clothing (or else his words were distorted beyond recognition).

Apparently, when Paul wanted to infiltrate the group, he claimed his vision of Yahushua, then pretended to teach the same things the group taught. So he was brought in to Damascus (Qumran) for a while. Then, when Paul was widely known as being accepted by the true apostles, thereby gaining a name for himself, Paul began preaching his lies. First he lied to get established, then he began telling the lies which created christianity. That is when the disciples realized his true intentions, and he was ejected from the group.

Most of the words of Paul's epistles are good words. So there are two choices: Maybe he told the truth most of the time so that some would still believe when he lied. Or all of his words were the truth and someone changed some of them after he died. That is not unbelievable, since we know without doubt that the catholics changed the words of everyone else. However, it is true that the Jews in Jerusalem wanted desperately to kill him for teaching against the law, and blasphemy, etc. And the epistles of James and John seem to be completely a refutation of Paul's teachings - leading to believe that they were not changed later. Here is the most damning evidence there is:

Ephesians 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Mashiyach Yahushua through the will of Yahweh, to the saints that are at Ephesus,

2Timothy 1:15 This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me.

Acts 21:28 all Yahrusalem [Jerusalem] is in uproar because Paul preaches against the Law.

Revelation 2:1 To the malak of the assembly in Ephesus write: These things says He who holds the seven stars in His right hand, He who walks in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks: 2 I know your works, and your toil and patience, and that you can not bear evil men, and did try those who call themselves apostles, and they are not, and did find them false;

Shucks, no one ever questioned the twelve apostles who were appointed by Yahshua, nor the one they voted to replace Judas. Who else ever called himself an apostle? Paul claimed Paul was an apostle, he had no witnesses of divine appointment, just his word. And we know that his word must be questionable, because he murdered true disciples of Yahshua. And we know Paul taught against the apostles and the scripture until his death. Read through all his works again, do you see him ever quoting scripture or Yahshua to bolster his case? No? That is because he preached a different gospel! Do you know that Ephesus is in Asia? They turned against Paul when they learned the truth from the real apostles (the apostle Yahchanan [John, writer of Revelation] preached there, according to the Acts of Yahchanan). And Yahshua our Messiyah and Savior said they did the right thing to reject Paul!!! HE said Paul was evil and a liar. No doubt Paul referred to his own disciples [companions such as Luke] as apostles also, and that is where the plural form in Revelation 2:1 comes from. So please notice in Acts 1:21-26, this is where the true apostles elected another to join them to replace Judas the traitor. Verse 21 states that there was some number of men who were disciples of Yahshua from the start, and yet NONE of these men were called apostles.

In this group of books are letters Paul wrote to his followers around the "known" world.

The Epistle to the Hebrews does not declare its author, in fact, verses 5:11 and 6:9-11 show there was more than one author. Many experts have declared that Paul was most likely the principal author, and perhaps Luke. Hebrews is not completely in agreement with the Old Testament, but more in line with Paul's teachings, and so I have included that book here.

I have only included part of the Acts of the Apostles in this group, the parts about Paul; since many people believe Paul was not a true apostle, and was not even preaching the truth. I can not make that judgement, and I doubt if any man alive today can (except the Messiyah, of course!). However, it is normally accepted that Acts was written by Luke, the writer of the gospel bearing his name. Luke was a christian, a follower of Paul; not a follower of Yahshua.

Acts shows that the real apostles who actually knew Yahshua were opposed to Paul. They tried to kill Paul for preaching against the Law. Acts makes Paul look like the good guy, but apparently he wasn't. Acts makes it seem as if Paul's teachings are correct, but all the Jews knew that scripture still requires you to keep the Law.

If removing Paul ad hoc causes another religion, then the addition of Paul also caused a different religion. So one test of whether Paul's work is scriptural is whether it is exactly the same as all other scripture? And the answer is: NO! There are TWO religions in the catholic bible - that of Paul, and that of the rest of the book.

It is very well-known that Paul preached a different gospel than the Messiah preached. True scripture makes it plain that there were 12 apostles, and Paul was not one of them. Only Paul said that Paul is an apostle. Apparently Paul was the first "wolf in sheep's clothing" who went out and corrupted the true teaching of the true scriptures. That is why the catholics included him in their bible. That is why catholics always turn to his writings to back up their beliefs. When Paul and Acts do not say the same thing as the rest of scripture, it is the traditions of men. Please see my "Judgment Day" page for more information. Thank you!

Some famous people said these things:

BOULANGER 1746 "We should never finish, were we to relate all the contradictions which are to be found in the writings attributed to St. Paul"

THOMAS PAINE 1794 "That manufacturer of quibbles, St. Paul,... [wrote] a collection of letters under the name of epistles.... Out of the matters contained in those books,... the church has set up a system of religion very contradictory to the character of the person whose name it bears.

WILLIAM PALEY d. 1805 "He, the Apostle, could not mean to say this [i.e., salvation is by faith alone]; because if he did, he would say what is expressly and positively contradicted by other texts of at least equal authority with his own; he would say what is contradicted by the very drift and design of the Christian constitution; and would say, lastly, what is expressly denied and contradicted by himself. ...[He also] would say what is contradicted by the very highest authority...Our Savior's own [words]."

THOMAS JEFFERSON 1820 "Of this band of dupes and imposters, Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and the first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus."

JEREMY BENTHAM 1823 "It rests with every professor of the religion of Jesus to settle with himself, to which of the two religions, that of Jesus or that of Paul, he will adhere."

KIERKEGAARD 1855 "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."

WILLIAM WREDE 1904 "The obvious contradictions in the three accounts [of Paul's conversion in Acts 9 & 22 & 26] are enough to arouse distrust of all that goes beyond"

H.G. WELLS 1920 "Paul and his successors added to ... or imposed upon or substituted another doctrine for--as you may prefer to think--the plain and profoundly revolutionary teachings of Jesus"

MAHATMA GANDHI 1928 "I draw a great distinction between the Sermon on the Mount and the Letters of Paul."

ROBERT FROST 1947 "Paul: heís in the Bible too. He is the fellow who theologized Christ almost out of Christianity. Look out for him."

PATRICK HENRY 1979 "There remains in the popular mind a strong suspicion ... that Paul corrupted Christianity (or even founded a different religion)"

BART EHRMAN 1993 "What did the historical Jesus teach in comparison with what the historical Paul taught? ... Jesus taught that to escape judgment a person must keep the central teachings of the Jewish Law as he, Jesus himself, interpreted them. Paul, interestingly enough, never mentions Jesusí interpretation of the [Mosaic] Law, and Paul was quite insistent that keeping the Law would never bring Salvation. The only way to be saved, for Paul, was to trust Jesusí death and resurrection ... Paul transformed the religion of Jesus into a religion about Jesus."

ALBERT SCHWEITZER 1931 "What is the significance for our faith and for our religious life, of the fact that the Gospel of Paul is different from the Gospel of Jesus?"

Dr. HIGH SCHONFIELD "Paul was seen as the demon-driven enemy of the Messiah....For the legitimate Church, Paul was a dangerous and disruptive influence, bent on enlisting a large following among the Gentiles in order to provide himself with a numerical superiority with the support of which he could set at defiance the Elders at Jerusalem. Paul had been the enemy from the beginning. And because he failed in his former open hostility he had craftily insinuated himself into the fold to destroy it from within."

WILL DURANT "Paul created a theology of which none but the vaguest warrants can be found in the words of Christ....Through these interpretations Paul could neglect the actual life and sayings of Jesus, which he had not directly known....Paul replaced conduct with creed as the test of virtue. It was a tragic change."

WALTER BAUER "If one may be allowed to speak rather pointedly, the Apostle Paul was the only Arch-Heretic known to the apostolic age."

Next Book

Top Of The Page