A Hell Called Paul: The Hijacker of Christianity

[antimason]

Roughly one in every three people who walk this earth today profess to be Christian. They claim
Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour but is he really? Do Christians today truly follow the
religion which Jesus taught or was his call hijacked somewhere along the way? Remember Jesus
told us to watch out for false teachers, deceivers who appear as wolves in sheep’s clothing a
reminder that the most dangerous enemies are the ones who you think you can trust. The ones
who infiltrate and devour a flock from within. Jesus Christ the good shepherd told us exactly
who to follow after him, he named his chief disciple Simon Peter as his successor the rock upon
which his church would be built but somehow another man not Simon Peter ended up to
becoming the dominant voice of Christianity. Roughly half of the books which filled the pages of
the New Testament were written by one man, a man who never even met Jesus, a man with a
deeply rooted hatred for Christians, a man called Saul of Tarsus better known today as the
Apostle Paul. Paul’s teachings are so influential some even have dubbed him the founder of
Christianity, a claim which reveals a big problem. Paul’s doctrine is often at odds with the
message of Jesus which begs the question was Paul an apostle or an imposter, a messenger from
Christ or an AntiChrist who has led one-third of the world’s population astray. Join us on Alrayat
Alsud Satellite Channel as we tell the story of the man who stole the religion of Jesus and
founded Christianity as we know it today, Paul the false apostle.

The year is roughly 36 AD, the place Jerusalem, this is the holy city where the teachings of
Christ once rang out into the air but now just a few years after the crucifixion, the winds have
changed direction and some people are on a hunt for Christian blood. An angry mob zeroes in on
a godly man by the name of Stephen drags him out of the city and begins to stone him. They lay
their coats in front of a young man called Saul of Tarsus who fully consented to Stephen’s death
and later admitted.
“ And when the blood of your martyr Stephen was shed, I stood there giving my approval and
guarding the clothes of those who were killing him.”
~ Act 22:20

This story alone is shocking enough but this was not the only time Saul got his hands dirty. Saul
was born into a strict Jewish family and spent his youth studying under the famous Rabbi

Gamaliel the man who trained him as a Pharisee. These are the same Pharisees whom Jesus
referred to as Vipers and sons of the devil. Saul’s zeal for the law led him to become an
inquisitor of the Jerusalem temples priesthood. Saul was a blood hound and admitted to
mercilessly chasing and killing many Christians. According to the book of Acts, Saul was:
“Still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord’s disciples”

~ Acts 9:1

When he had a transformative experience on the road to Damacus, a vision of the resurrected
Jesus. It was that experience which allegedly changed everything, Saul became Paul and
declared himself a freshly converted apostle of Christ but there is a problem with this story, Paul
can’t quite get the details straight. It is considered a red flag when a person can’t keep their story
straight when detectives work to solve a crime they test witnesses on the consistency of their
accounts if the story keeps changing, suspicions arise. You might assume that a vision of Jesus
would be memorable enough to stick in someone’s memory but the so-called Apostle Paul tells
three different versions of his operation on the road to Damacus recorded in the book of Acts. In
Acts chapter 9 verse 7 we find one account where Paul claims that his travel companions did not
see Jesus but heard his voice. And in Acts chapter 22 verse 9 we find another version of the story
they:
“Saw the light, but they did not understand the voice of him who was speaking to me”

~ Acts 22:9

In one version Paul is blinded for three days in another he makes no mention of such a thing. We
are left wondering which version should we believe but perhaps a more important question to ask
is why does this all matter? It matters because the entire validity of Paul as a messenger hinges
on this story. This is the single proof he used to convince people to take him seriously as a
messenger from God having never met Jesus in the flesh, this is all he has to go on and it just so
happens that it cannot be verified by anybody. There is no mention of Paul in the Gospels by
Jesus or anyone else for that matter nobody gives Paul the title of apostle other than Paul himself.
So we have to ask these questions was Paul a man who saw the error in his ways and turned his
life around or did he carry out his original agenda utilizing a different strategy destroying the
Christian faith from within. In any case one thing is certain, Paul’s claimed to Apostleship
directly contradicts what Jesus taught. Throughout his ministry, Jesus had many disciples, at one
he amassed followers in the thousands but there was always an inner circle of 12 men
handpicked by Jesus. That number twelve was no accident there was a specific purpose behind it.
Talking about his second coming Jesus said:

“Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the son of man sits on his glorious throne,
you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”

~ Matthew 19:28

These words demonstrate just how important the sacred number twelve is. How could 11 or 13
apostles judge twelve tribes? The disciples themselves understood the significance of this
number. After Jesus left them, the remaining 11 apostles set out to replace the fallen one from
among them Judas Iscariot who betrayed Jesus. Praying for divine guidance the men drew lots
and in the end they reported that God chose Matthias to be the 12 th disciple. There was one
important criteria for the selection. Therefore it is necessary to choose
“… one of the man who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among
us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us.”

~ Acts 1:21-22

So imagine the confusion of the 12 disciples when years later Paul came along and inserted
himself into the equation as the thirteen disciple. Paul a man who never met Jesus certainly
didn’t qualify to be one of them but that didn’t stop Paul from making some dramatic changes to
the religion of Jesus and the early Christians did not consider Paul to be an authority in the same
right as the 12. One of the most notable new concepts which Paul brought to Christianity was the
abolishment of the Old Testament law. Claiming to speak on behalf of Christ, Paul said:
“ For sin shall no longer be your Master, because you are not under the law, but under

grace.”
~ Roman 6:14

He claimed that:
“ Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written

“Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole””

~ Galatians 3:13

Basically, Paul argued that when Jesus died so too did the law. The old covenant between God
and man was overturned in favor of a new one. One by which all sins are forgiven of the one
who simply says I believe. There is just one major problem with Paul’s logic though. According
to the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus appeared to the twelve after the crucifixion saying this:
“ Therefore go and make disciples of all nations… and teaching them to obey everything I

have commanded you.”
~ Matthew 28:19-20

And Jesus clearly commanded them to keep the commandments:
“ Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy but to

fulfill them…”
~ Matthew 5:17

Jesus was a reformer. His mission was to bring things back to the old ways of theology. He came
to guide people back to the religion of God. Jesus the long-awaited Jewish Messiah affirmed the
message of the Hebrew prophets before him. He adhered to the Jewish law and never once
indicated that the law of the Old Testament prophets would or should be abolished. In fact he
said:
“ It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of

the law.”
~ Luke 16:17

So why did Paul come out and teach the opposite just as Jesus said:
“…If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

~ Matthew 19:17

Paul said:
“… No one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law…”

~ Roman 3:20

It simply couldn’t make sense unless Paul had another agenda. Paul initially preached to people
of his same religious background the Jews but when he found that he could not convince many
that Jesus was divine, he went outside of Israel to the Gentiles but once again he faced difficulty.
The Gentiles who were open to accepting Christ were not observers of Jewish Law. Their food
wasn’t kosher but the biggest obstacle Paul faced with the Gentiles was the circumcision law the
covenant between God and believers dating back to Prophet Abraham. At first Paul encouraged
Gentile converts to follow the law. He even had his companion Timothy circumsized as
confirmed in acts 16 but somewhere along the way he changed his tune. The law was an obstacle
standing in his way so he cast it aside. Jesus said follow the law down to the letter but Paul said
the exact opposite. Not only did he remove its obligation, he went so far as to call it harmful:
“ I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at
all…You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have

fallen away from grace.”
~ Galatians 5:2-4

Where was he getting this from? It certainly wasn’t a man who Jesus named as his successor,
Simon Peter. When Jesus knew he wouldn’t be around much longer. He handed the keys of the
kingdom to his successor Simon Peter stating:
“ And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell
shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever
you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed

in heaven.
~ Matthew 16:18-19

Although Jesus clearly designated a shepherd for his flock to follow in Peter, Paul argued that he
was given a new gospel to spread, he said:
“And of this gospel I was appointed a herald and an apostle and a teacher.”

~ 2 Timothy 1:11

You might imagine that Paul as a follower of Christ would have jumped at the chance to learn
from the twelve men who lived with and learned from Jesus in the flesh but that’s not what Paul
did. It was a full decade after Jesus’s death that Paul first met Peter in Jerusalem then he went out
preaching and teaching his own gospel in Asia Minor for another ten years before making a
return trip to Jerusalem around 50 AD. It was only then 20 years after the crucifixion that Paul
met the rest of the Apostles for the first time. Paul did not preach the same thing as the Twelve
Apostles and there was constant friction between him and the Jerusalem church about one issue
in particular the law. Tensions eventually boiled over and cause Peter and Paul to come to blows.
When Peter visited Antioch he clashed with Paul over whether or not Gentile Christians needed
to uphold the law. We only get to hear Paul’s side of the story of course but if we take his epistle
at its word the two men came to an agreement. Paul would go forth as an apostle to the Gentiles
while Peter would preach to the circumcised but there is a problem there. The agreement which
Paul speaks of contradicts the book of Acts which states that Peter not Paul was chosen by God
to minister to the Gentiles. In Acts chapter 15 verse 7 Peter said:
“Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles

might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe.”

~ Acts 15:7

Nevertheless, Paul claimed to have a different gospel than Peter and the other apostles, the
gospel of the uncircumcised a gospel which he

“Didn’t receive from any man nor was he taught it”

~Galatians 1:12

His gospel came purely from revelation and therefore couldn’t be verified by anyone as truthful
and yet Paul’s new gospel spilt the religion of Christianity into two distinct confessions. One
rooted in Judaism and a version tailored for the Gentiles. Concluding this chapter of Galatians,
Paul argues that his way is the correct way because eventhough Jesus said:
“ Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord,Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the

one who does the will of my Father…”

~ Matthew 7:21
Paul taught that salvation comes not by works but by faith alone:
“ For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. I have been crucified with
Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith
in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not set aside the grace of God,
for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing.”

~ Galatians 2:19-21

Paul’s depiction of Jesus as a divine Saviour perfectly suited the Gentiles who disliked the law
and adored stories of myth. People from a polytheistic culture who regarded holy figures as
deities. Perhaps this explains the origin of a controversial claim how Jesus became God. Today
virtually all Christians accept Jesus as the human embodiment of God one part of the Holy
Trinity but it wasn’t always like that. The early Christians were not in agreement on this point. In
fact, up until the 4 th century Christians fell into two camps, those who believed Jesus to be a
divine messenger of God and those who believe that Jesus was both fully human and fully God.
How these radically different understandings of Jesus evolve? Perhaps the best way to solve this
mystery is to take a look at the words of Jesus. Did Jesus ever call himself God? The answer not
even once. Jesus said there is only one God and it isn’t him. He famously asked:

“ Why do you call me good? No one is good—except God alone.”

~ Mark 10:18
And Jesus warned against those who deified him saying:
“ But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men ”

~ Matthew 15:9

[antimason]

He also differentiates himself from God numerous times throughout the Bible. In the book of
John Jesus says:

“ By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgement is just, for I seek not

to please myself but him who sent me.”

~ John 5:30

And he also says:
“ For I did not speak on my own, but the father who sent me commanded me to say all that I

have spoken.”
~ John 12:49

If Jesus never called himself God, how did he become known as God? The Pauline epistles are
sprinkled with statements conflating Jesus with God. Paul refer to
“Christ, who is God over all”
in Romans Chapter 9 verse 5

and in Titus chapter 2 verse 13:
“ Our God and Savior Jesus”

It seems like a blatant contradiction but perhaps it suited Paul’s grand agenda to misguide
people. If people are worshipping Jesus as God, they are associating others with him
undercutting the very foundation of monotheism. Not only did he called Christ God, he
revamped Christ’s image. If Jesus was God he couldn’t be seen as an ordinary man. He had to be
seen as celibate. If you know anything about Jesus today it’s that Jesus unlike all the messengers
before and after him was supposedly celibate. But what exactly do the scriptures say? The
answer is absolutely nothing. The Gospels never specify whether Jesus was married or
unmarried, the idea of celibacy was somehow superior to marriage came entirely from Paul in 1
Corinthians chapter 7 verse 7 Paul wrote:

“ I wish all were single just as I am.”
~ 1 Corinthians 7:7
To help prevent the desire to be married Paul said:

“It is good that a man should not touch a woman.”

~ 1 Corinthians 7:1

Paul sexual asceticism came to shape and color the Christian faith as we know it today celibacy
is practiced by Roman Catholic priests and nuns but where did Paul get this stance from? It
certainly wasn’t Jesus because as Paul admitted himself:
“ I have no command of the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who by the Lord’s mercy is

trustworthy.”
~ 1 Corinthians 7:25

Had Jesus been celibate, Paul would certainly have invoked him as an example when arguing for
celibacy but he doesn’t. Never once does Paul argue that Christians should be celibate because
Jesus was celibate. For one we know that Jesus’s apostles were married. In fact, Jesus famously
resurrected Simon Peter mother-in-law from the dead as recorded in the Gospels and the Gospel
of Matthew records Jesus affirming the sanctity of marriage quoting Old Testament scripture
saying:
“ Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and
said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the
two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has

joined together, let man not separate.”

~ Matthew 19:4-6

Despite what Jesus said Paul in his epistle to the Corinthians said that all unmarried people
should not seek to get married. Why might Paul want to spread this doctrine of celibacy. What
would it mean for the future of Christianity. Well if marriages stop so to do children.
Dramatically reducing the number of Christians born into the world. Today we might call Paul a
eugenicist but he took himself as an example of the celibate life. He never married a woman, a
fact which is so shocking once we hear what Paul had to say about the status of women. Jewish
culture in the first century was decidedly patriarchal but Jesus came along and refused to treat
women as inferior. The Gospels writers each testified that Jesus treated women with respect in
opposition to the cultural norms. He spoke to women in public, he healed women, he allowed
women to sit at his feet and learn from him and we know from the Gospel of Luke that Jesus
journeyed from village to village with a caravan including female disciples. There was Mary
called Magdalene, Susanna and many others. These women were helping to support them out of
their own means. The Gospel of Mark states that the women who were present at crucifixion had
followed him when he was in Galilee and ministered to him. Given that Jewish women at this
time were not to learn the scriptures or even leave their households. Jesus’s message was
distinctly different in liberating for women. So it stands to reason that any true apostle of Jesus
would also embrace female leadership. That’s not what Paul did at all. Unlike Jesus, Paul said
that women shall remain silent in his epistle to the Corinthians Paul says:

“The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to
subject themselves, Just as the law also says. If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their
own husband at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.”

~ 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 ~

And Paul also says:
“ I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.”

~ 1 Timothy 2:12~

But doesn’t this fly in the face of Jesus’s actions? Three days after the crucifixion when Jesus
makes his comeback, he doesn’t appear first to Peter or even to one of the other twelve men, he
appears to a woman Mary Magdalene and sends her on a mission. He says
“Do not hold on to me for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers
and tell them…” Mary (Magdalene) went to the disciples with the news: “ I have seen the

Lord!” And she told them that he had said these things to her.”

~ John 20:17-18~

For this reason Mary is called the Apostle to the apostles. But Paul tried to strip her of this honor
and erase her important role from history. In his letter to the Corinthians, Paul said explicitly that
Jesus appeared first to Peter then to the 12 apostles then to 500 people and finally to Paul
himself. He makes no mention of Mary Magdalene but this is only one example of Paul’s
questionable rulings on the right of women which modern Christians may take issues with. Paul
also demanded that women cover their heads with a veil. Today the hijab or veil is viewed as an
Islamic tradition but it did not originate with the religion of Islam. It traces back to the words of
the so called apostle Paul who explained that women must cover their hair while praying not for
the purpose of modesty but because according to Paul, women are inferior to men. In 1
Corinthians Paul wrote:
“… I want you realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is
man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered
dishonors his head. But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered
dishonors her head. It is the same as having her head shaved. For if a woman does not cover
her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have
her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover
his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For a man
did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but

woman for man.”
~ 1 Corinthians 11:3-9 ~

Althought Jesus never said anything along these lines, the Roman Catholic Church adopted
Paul’s decree. The second Catholic Pope Linus a disciple of Paul made head coverings for
women a mandatory practice in the year 70 AD and it remained an official ruling in the Catholic
code of law up until 1983 that women however shall have a covered head and be modestly
dressed especially when they approached the table of the Lord. All of this just goes to show how
far Christianity deviated from the essence of Jesus’s true message. Over time Paul’s doctrine has
eclipsed the words of Jesus to such an extent that Paul is perhaps the most influential person in
the history of Western civilization. We are all cultural heirs of Paul. In contrast, Jesus the Jewish
Messiah who sought to establish the kingdom of God on earth has been largely lost to our
culture. This world has many pitfalls which Jesus warned about, among them love of money and
power. For Jesus, money and it’s corrupting a lure had no place in religion. He taught his
disciples to:
Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Freely you received, freely

give.
~ Matthew 10:8~

In other words, do not accept payment for preaching and teaching but Paul on the other hand said
that people should pay for the word of God.
“In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the Gospel should receive

their living from the Gospel.”
~ 1 Corinthians 9:14 ~

And Christianity as we know it today has followed in the footsteps of Paul rather than Jesus.
Religion has become a billion-dollar industry complete with mega churches and celebrity
preachers whereas Jesus taught to have nothing and own nothing. Pastors like Joel Osteen,
Kenneth Copeland and many others traverse the globe on private jets, live in mansions and hoard
hundreds of millions of dollars for themselves. Isn’t this exactly the kind of corruption that Jesus
warned against when he commanded his followers to freely give. So why then did Paul teach the
opposite. It is impossible to mention extravagant wealth and religion without mentioning the
Roman Catholic Church well known for its opulent costumes and décor. The Vatican sits atop
billions of dollars in assets. The Pope exemplifies the word of Paul rather than Jesus and what’s
more the Pope’s hands are dirty from shaking hands with the tyrants of this world. Jesus taught
that the nations of the world are under the rule of the devil, in the Gospel of Matthew, Satan
offers Jesus authority to rule the kingdoms of the world but Jesus refuses saying:
Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’

~ Matthew 4:10 ~

Jesus was a revolutionary who taught that submission should only be given unto God. So why
did Paul preach submission unto tyranny? He wrote in his epistle to the Romans:
“ Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that
which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has

instituted…”
~ Romans 13:1-2 ~

And this is the very verse that the United States uses their government-funded preachers to go
out into neighborhoods and times of Martial Law to get them to submit to the tyrannical
measures of the US government but wait a minute did Moses ever bow to Pharaoh? Did
Abraham ever submit to Nimrod? Did Jesus pledge allegiance to Caesar? Or was it Paul who led
his followers down a dangerous road teaching them to love the very same tyrants who put Jesus
to death.

PAUL THE FALSE APOSTLE

Paul sympathy towards the tyrants makes more sense perhaps given that the Ahlul Bayt listed
him in the same category as some of the worst tyrants of all time. Imam Musa Al-Kazim said in a
long narration about Hellfire:
Imam Musa Al-Kazim (PBUH) said:
“…And in the abdomen of that viper there are boxes in which five of the previous nations and
two of this nation reside…As for the five, they are Cain who killed Abel, and Nimrod who
argued with Abraham about his Lord, and said “I give life and cause death.” And Pharaoh
who said, “I am your most exalted Lord,” and Yahoud who brought forth a new Judaism for

the Jews, and Paul who Christianized the Christians anew…”

~ Bihar Al-Anwar, Vol.8, P.310-311

And isn’t it clear that Paul’s doctrine was a brand new version of Christianity. He altered the
very core of the religion with his innovative concept of atonement. It was prophesied in the
Torah that the blood of Jesus the Messiah would be poured out as a ransom for many.
Isaiah said:
All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned-every one- to his own way; and the Lord

hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

~Isaiah 53:6 ~

In Jesus himself confirmed that he was meant to die a sacrificial death.

He said:
For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a

ransom for many.
~ Mark 10:45 ~

But how exactly does that work? Jesus never said. Those gaps were filled in by none other than
Paul. According to Paul, Jesus’s death signified the end of the original sin the state of sin in
which humanity has existed since the fall of man when Adam went against God’s decree and ate
from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, he was cast out off paradise and his sin brought
death upon mankind. But according to Paul, Jesus is sacrificial death atoned for Adam’s sin. In
his epistle to the Romans Paul said:
“Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this

way death came to all people, because all sinned—”

~Romans 5:12 ~

And in 1 Corinthians chapter 15 verse 22:

“ For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.”

~ 1 Corinthians 15:22 ~

According to Paul, all we have to do is believe.
He said:
“ If you declared with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised

him from the dead, you will be saved.”

~ Romans 10:9 ~

There is just one glaring problem with this logic, we still die. If Christ his sacrifice really meant
that believers would no longer be held accountable for original sin, we would never taste death
but the obvious fact is we do. Clearly, there must be more to this story. The truth is Jesus was the
long-awaited

…Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

~ John 1:29 ~

Just as the prophecies proclaimed but Paul misinterpreted just what that meant. Jesus made it
clear in the book of John that when a messenger of God is slain, it is only by his own choice as
Jesus said:

Therefore my Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it again. No one
takes it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down and I have power to

take it again. This command I have received from my Father.

~ John 10:17-18 ~

So God’s messenger can only be slain if he chooses. Jesus chose to die as a mercy for many
because anytime God’s vicegerent is martyred, his death signifies the forgiveness of humanity’s
sin at that time which are breaking the Covenant of God. But not forever as Paul misunderstood
because over time sins accumulate once again but the moment a messenger lays down his life for
the sake of God, the people’s sin are wiped clean. This applies to nearly everyone. The only
people who evade this mercy are the enemies those who fight and kill God’s messengers but it
doesn’t apply for all people for all eternity. And the proof of that is the simple fact that we still
die. As a result of Paul’s deception, many people have gone to their graves believing that faith
alone will save them but that contradicts Jesus who clearly said that faith alone is not enough.
He said in Matthew chapter 7 verse 21:
Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord,Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one

who does the will of my Father who is in heaven

~ Matthew 7:21 ~

If you take a look at Paul’s overarching message, he made salvation effortless. He abolished the
covenant, the agreement between God and mankind and basically told people to follow their own
desires as long as they believe in Jesus. Isn’t this exactly what Jesus warned about when he said:
Enter through the narrow gate, for wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to
destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to

life, and only a few find it.
~ Matthew 7:13-14 ~

So here we have two distinct camps, Jesus Christ and someone who comes along after Jesus
pretending to speak on his behalf while leading people astray, the opposite of Christ, what can
only be described as history’s very first Antichrist and he is responsible for repeating a pattern
which has plagued God’s religion throughout time. Oftentimes after a prophet is gone someone
comes along and corrupts their message to the core. Imam Al-Sadiq the sixth Imam from the
family of Muhammad said:

Imam Al-Sadiq (PBUH) said:
“ God did not send a prophet except that there be in his nation two devils who harm him and
mislead the people after him… As for the two companions of Jesus, they are Paul and

Meriton…”

~ Tafsir Alqummi, Vol.1, P.214 ~

And this may come as a shock but Jesus himself told us that Paul was a liar and this warning has
been right there in the Bible all along, hiding within the pages of Revelation is a secret encoded
message from Jesus. As the story goes two decades after Paul’s ministry came to an end. Jesus
appeared to John on the Isle of Patmos sometime in the final years of the first century and
revealed a wealth of knowledge. Much of the revelation focuses on the events of the end times
that we are living in today, the sign of Christ is second coming but the second chapter of this
book contains more timely advice. In Revelation chapter 2 verse 2 Jesus addresses seven
churches among them the church at Ephesus in Asia Minor. According to Jesus’s words there
was a trial at Ephesus of persons who told the Ephesians they were apostles but the verdict found
they were not true apostles. In Revelation chapter 2 verse 2 Jesus said:
I have known thy works, and thy labour, and thy endurance, and that thou art not able to bear
evil ones, and that thou hast tried those saying themselves to be apostles and are not, and hast

found them liars…
~ Revelation 2:2 ~

Now who could this verse be referring to? Do we know of any individual who visited the Church
of Ephesus claiming to be an apostle of Christ? As a matter of fact we do. Remember how Paul
went off for ten years preaching his gospel in Asia Minor, he definitely visited the Christian
community at Ephesus and in his epistle to the Ephesians he declared himself an apostle
addressing his letter:
“From Paul, chosen by God to be an apostle of Christ Jesus. To God’s people who live in

Ephesus and are faithful followers of Christ Jesus.”

~ Ephesians 1:1 ~

There is no evidence for Paul being an apostle except from Paul’s own mouth. Even in the book
of Acts none of the Twelve Apostles lend that title to Paul. The only person in the entire New
Testament to say Paul is an apostle of Jesus is Paul himself. Is that enough to prove someone as
truthful? If we listen to the words of Jesus no it is not.

Jesus said:

If I testify about myself, my testimony is not true.

~ John 5:31 ~

Jesus was verified by a witness John the Baptist who passed on the torch of God’s leadership to
him. Paul had no witness and no one to verify his claim. Now the question becomes is there any
evidence in the Bible that the Ephesians determined Paul as not an apostle and the answer is yes.
Both Paul and Luke mentioned that Paul was subject to a heresy trial at Ephesus. In one of his
epistles Paul says:

“ This thou knowest, that all that are in Asia turned away from me.”

~ 2 Timothy 1:15 ~

And the book of Acts records:
“… Paul… came to Ephesus… and he entered into the synagogue [at Ephesus], and spake
boldly for the space of three months, reasoning and persuading as to the things concerning
the kingdom of God. But when some were hardened and disobedient, speaking evil of the way

before the multitude, he departed from them [the Ephesians].”

~ Acts 19:1,8-9 ~

All of this parallels what Jesus spoke about twenty years later in Revelation clearly Paul went to
the Ephesians and preached before they decided his message deviated from Christ and turned
against him but just what was their complaint against Paul? Fortunately for us their complaint
was recorded in the book of Acts. In Acts Chapter 21 Luke tells us that Jews from Asia at
Jerusalem were disturbed by what Paul was preaching that Jesus’s death brought a new covenant
one which abolished the law of Moses and the Jewish people’s position as covenant partners
with God. In Acts chapter 21 verse 28 Jews from Asia appealed to the Apostle James for help
complaining:
“ This is the man that teacheth all men everywhere against the people, and the Law…”

~ Acts 21:28 ~

These Jewish followers of Jesus who appealed to James for help against Paul who was
pressuring them to break the promise of God the law which Jesus said to uphold. The Ephesians
back in the first century chose to stick to the words of Christ and Jesus commended them for it
but what about us today fast forward nearly 2000 years and most of the world has forgotten or
perhaps chosen to ignore all that Jesus had to say. Long ago Saul of Tarsus set out to destroy the
religion of Christ and if you really look at it, isn’t that exactly what he did. Over the years, Paul
dedicated his life to spreading his religion far and wide but exactly what religion did he spread?

Did he succeed in converting many to Christianity or an entirely different religion? Paulinity.
Isn’t he exactly the type of person Jesus warned about when he said:
…Many will say to me, ‘Lord,Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in
your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I

never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

~ Matthew 7:22-23 ~

Jesus came with a certain message to call the people back to God but if you look at Christianity
today, it is defined not by his message but by the message of Paul. Just take a look at the
Apostles Creed which states that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the virgin
Mary and that he was crucified, dead and buried and on the third day he rose again from the
dead. It jumped straight from Jesus’s birth to his death completely erasing what he taught in the
middle. Now consider how Christianity as we know it today erases the life of Christ and is
defined by Jesus’s birth and death, Christmas and Easter a direct result of Paul’s doctrine. If we
erase Paul’s contribution from the Bible, Christianity would look like something else entirely and
how can we honestly call the fake Christianity at all when it goes against all that Jesus taught.
Paul caused the religion of Jesus to diverge into two paths and now you stand at the crossroads,
will you walk the straight path of Jesus Christ or the one Paul paved the road which leads to
destruction as Prophet Muhammad said
Prophet Muhammad(PBUHAHF) said:
“ The arrogant ones shall be gathered on the day of resurrection like atoms in the image of
men, humiliation will surround them from everywhere, they shall be taken to a prison in

Hellfire called Paul.”
~ Tirmithi, Vol.4 P.67 ~

A Hell called Paul

[Bill10558]

Thanks for the Sunday school lesson. Reminds me of what Sabbatai Zevi did to the Jewish faith.

[sunnyboy]

@antimason

Over the years, Paul
dedicated his life to spreading his religion far and wide but exactly what religion did he spread?

Did he succeed in converting many to Christianity or an entirely different religion? Paulinity.

Thank you for your comprehensive and (interesting to me!) essay on Paul. Some years ago, I read similar ponderings, about Paul’s role in the church (interestingly, by some animal rights scholars), which at that time started me wondering about Paul. (There had been aspects of his gospels that never resonated with me, and I could not pin down why). You come at it from different angles, bring many of these things to the surface, and you have obviously spent much time thinking about this question. Thank you for putting thought to this question, and also for voicing what you think.

[antimason]

This is not my essay. It is the work of brother Joseph, one of the companions of the Qaim of Ale Muhammad. It is the trancript of the attached video which was aired thru satellite channel on fb and youtube before different governments of the world got involved and they took it down.
It has been reestablished last year

The Ahmadi Religion of Peace and Light | AROPL

[alg]

Interesting. A few comments:

Paul most certainly colored Jesus’ teachings with his own perspectives and guidance. He is also the apostle most responsible for establishing the Christian Church.

Jesus taught not of Law but of our relationship with the divine. The ‘true’ religion he gave us is to be found in the manner in which he lived his life - doing the will of his father in heaven.

The 10 Commandments were a rudimentary baseline for human conduct, so of course he did not violate these principles. Nor did he go out of his way to attack the scaffolding of the Jewish faith. He uplifted it in a positive teaching technique that built upon the good.

But he did indeed attack the laws when their use violated higher principles. Attacking the money changers in the temple is one such occurrence, perhaps, but he made it clear to his accusers on that day he healed a man on the sabbath. When people speak of laws, they stumble into a trap set by pharisees. Ritual hand washing, the distance one may walk on the sabbath, etc. These were not the teachings of the Messiah. That he did not explicitly condemn something is in no way a confirmation.

Christianity is Evolutionary and Revealed. No man can touch a thing and call it perfect. Certainly not Paul. But this is the nature of things. God reveals, and men do their best not to screw it up - but invariably do. It is left to us to navigate the complexities of mortal living. How could it be otherwise? Other than Jesus, what man has perfect knowledge of the creator and his will? Certainly not the largely primitive and superstitious peoples of the 1st century.

Nor the largely primitive and superstitious peoples of the 21st century.

[antimason]

In fact that man has appeared. His name is Abdullah Hashem-aba Sadiq from him is peace and he is the Riser of the family of Muhammad mentioned in the will of Prophet Muhammad pbuhahf.
He is inviting all people to join his call no matter what race, creed, sexual orientation, faith or social status. The door is open for everyone.

[Bill10558]

Good sermon, “Scare the hell out of ‘em.”

[vardas3]

Sorry… not here. And cherry picking what you want from the Gospel of John without any reference to the Greek, and Christ’s repeated use of the “ego eimi” construction and what it means, and the reference to some new Imam Mahdi… ? Give me a break. Not here man, not here. I’m as willing as the next guy to entertain speculations about Paul and have done so many times. Not here.

[antimason]

I’m sorry dr. Farrell that the narrative is not to your liking, can you maybe explain exactly what reference to the Greek you mean, and what ego eimi construction and what it means do you have in mind?
I know that you’re an orthodox catholic and have vast knowledge about the subject. I also have your magnum opus God, history and dialectics, though I didn’t have the chance to read it yet.
So can you please in short refer the sources you have in mind that I’m not aware of?
And if it’s a forbidden subject to speak about this kind of things on this forum, while there’s all kinds of subjects covered, then I must say that I’m disappointed by your response, because I thought that we can have a reasonable debate. I’m not forcing my beliefs on anyone. I respect your creed and where you come from, so why can’t we have a discussion about it before you throw the whole thing in the trash?

Thank you for responding

[vardas3]

What I object to is the one-way posting, ending with a reference to a claimant to be the imam Mahdi… I will NOT allow this site to become a site for anything promoting Islam. Period. As for the references, I have talked about them many times in vidchats. The reference in my head at the time was St. John, 8: 58(I think). Such constructions occur many times in the gospels, but basically, in the Greek, the first person singular of the verb “to be” is “eimi”. You do NOT need to add the first person singular pronoun “ego”. If you do, it is an emphatic usage, as if you were to say, “Before Abraham was, I am.” In other words, the person speaking it is pointing to himself. Given that the Hebrew name of God is YHWH (I am), the emphatic usage here (particularly in the context) is a clear indication or claim.

Now, I am NOT trying to prove Christ’s divinity nor claims to you. Rather my point here is more limited: that among all the views of Christ out there, that of the traditional view of the Church has been there from the beginning. It was not an “invention” added later in some evil plot by Paul, Constantine, evil scheming Christian bishops, or any of the other nonsense that has gone on on “modern” thinking (Marcion or Thomas Jefferson being cases in point). There is also a school of thought, represented by the late Anglican bishop (and definitely NOT a “traditionalist”) J.A.T. Robinson, or John Robinson, that the Gospel of John was not the last Gospel to be composed, but the first, and was written prior to the Fall of Jerusalem (a view to which, incidentally, I incline). I mention that because it makes some of the statements in it even more breathtaking. Anyway, I hope that helps but I have to get busy with my email sorting and blogging, otherwise we’d be here all day, all week, all next month and into the new year.

[antimason]

Thanks for your quick response.
First of all, I’m not in any way promoting islam as a traditional religion as you know it. I have also watched your seminars about how Prophet Muhammad pbuhahf didn’t exist and how the whole religion of islam is a hoax. I meant to write my looks about it in the comments, but I saw no point, since it’s an old webinar and no one would read it. We, the believers of Ahmadi religion of peace and light denounce all islamic creeds today per say and distance ourselves from them, because our members are in fact attacked by islamists in islamic countries and persecuted by them. There was even an issue at the United nations about that. You can look it up if you want.

Religious Persecution - The Ahmadi Religion of Peace and Light

So I’m not promoting islamism, Hamas or Isis, because our group is actually attacked by those people

Isis Members Assault Members Of The Faith In Detention

What I wanted is to open awareness about religious topics, and as a muslim I don’t enforce my beliefs on anyone because it is written in the Quran that there is no compulsion in religion. So we are basically against islam that is known as islam today and believe that Imam Mahdi pbuh is bringing new islam as a completely new religion and jurisprudence.

Hope that is clear.

As for reference you bring up where Jesus calls himself “I Am” is not as clear as a statement as those he made saying Mark 10:18 “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone.” for example.

I believe there were many more gospels written than just those that the church claims. Nag Hammadi manuscripts are the proof of that.

So anyway, just let me know if it is forbidden to mention Prophet Muhammad pbuhahf and anything about him on this forum and I’ll leave it. I know when I’m not wanted. That will also prove that you’re not an unbiased academic.

Thank you

[vardas3]

I never claimed to be unbiased. Everyone has biases, including me. And certainly you exhibit yours, especially with the pronouncement about no one would want to read my Islam Webinar, and I’m perfectly well aware of those other Gospels. You, however, are not aware nor inclined, it would seem, to become aware of why the current canon was formed nor do you seem terribly interested. You’re here, by your own admission, to propagandize for your version of Islam. And while we’re at it, I note that you did not cite ANYONE within any recognizable Christian tradition, Gnostic or otherwise, in support of your implied interpretation of calling no one Good but God. Good day.

[antimason]

I didn’t state that anyone wouldn’t want to read your islam webinar, I said that nobody would read my reply if I wrote it in comments and especially not you, since it’s an old webinar.

About the canonizations of the gospels, pope Irineus made perfectly clear with his book against the heresies why the gnostics were outlawed. Constantine did the same with Aerius in Nicea.
And I didn’t cite anyone because this OP originally never meant to be an academic discussion about gnostic or christian traditions.

But we can for sure talk about that to present our point of view, but…it has to do with mentioning Prophet Muhammad pbuhahf, because these things are interconnected. So if you’re a priori forbidding me to have an opinion from my point of view because mentioning of islam has become taboo, then I can’t speak freely and there’s no point to have further discussion.

[vardas3]

And let me be even more clear, when you say above, “First of all, I’m not in any way promoting islam as a traditional religion as you know it. I have also watched your seminars about how Prophet Muhammad pbuhahf didn’t exist and how the whole religion of islam is a hoax. I meant to write my looks about it in the comments, but I saw no point, since it’s an old webinar and no one would read it,” you make assumptions about the value and worth of the webinar to other people. IN short, you’re basically telling people “don’t watch it; it’s superfluous.” That is honestly insulting to me, so please, kindly LEAVE in peace. If you are going to cite Christian scripture, then you MUST cite SOMEONE from that tradition, hopefully from, say, the first four or five hundred years, in support of your interpretation, and since we’re talking about BIAS, you must also cite someone from the Christian tradition from that period who DISAGREES with your interpretation, and THEN you must argue your conclusion. Until you do so, sir, do NOT lecture me about biases and “neutrality.”

[vardas3]

Irenaeus was NOT a pope…good grief.

[antimason]

Well he was a sort of inquisitor whose works Church used to exterminate heretics.

As for the biases, I’m open to different views, be it christian, islamic, jewish, hindu, buddhist or any other religious view, you on the other hand, respected professor, are cleary not. And I didn’t mean in any way to defame the value of your webinar. I just didn’t see any point to write a lenghty comment under it for which I presumed I would get no reply to. Geez, all of a suddenly I’m in a defamation mode.

And why would I need to cite works of the scholars who disagree with me in a forum topic? You can’t even agree to disagree per say for that point.

[vardas3]

OK that’s it anti-mason. You came here to PREACH. Irenaeus did not anywhere advocate the extermination of heretics. That occurred after the east-west schism, and if his works were thus used as a justification, he was HIMSELF never an “inquisitor.” Your lack of ability to understand historical nuance and so on, is BREATHTAKING, and whether you MEANT things or not is clearly not my point: your language could certainly be CONSTRUED that way, because you were here to preach, because the LENGTH of your initial posts indicates that. So, having invoked LENGTH, why did you not take the time to BACK UP your interpretations, and to DEMONSTRATE your “neutrality” by citing sources CONTRARY to the interpretation you’re PUSHING? I have tolerated atheists here, agnostics, and pretty much everything. What I will NOT tolerate is someone claiming to be what they are not: namely, unbiased, “openness to different views”, when they do not and will not admit they took NO time, while gathering their bible verses to prove their point, to cite anyone from that early period in demonstration that their interpretation is manifest in a particular course of performance! If you come here to preach, then you must back it up. You came here, not to engage in a discussion, antimason. You came here to push a sect of Islam, to defame me while pretending to hide behind peace, to argue a point and then take exception to me when I ask you to back up your interpretations, and to acknowledge that their are other interpretations of the very passages you cite.

The fact that you want to continue to argue, without arguing, and cannot even acknowledge that your wording with respect to the webinar can be taken in any number of ways, indicates to me that, again, you’re simply here to preach. And that AFTER I’ve asked you to leave in peace. I’ve given you chance after chance, and you have refused each and every one.

You’re gone.

[Morrisville]

About time somebody called it!!! We don’t even know if Jesus was really crucified or if it was a tale made up by Josephus or someone else!! It was a great shock to me at age 70, after being in the Religious Right for a life time, to begin to question if The Bible might just be one of the greatest tools in The Toolbox of The Controllers!!! Why did we never question where it came from???

[David8pies]