Was Paul an Imposter?
_The resources set forth here is simply presented for your
consideration. It is left to you, the truth seeker, to weigh it,
discarding that which you feel is unsound or irrelevant, and to come to your own
conclusions. It is not an easy journey by any means, however it is a
necessary journey, as the beloved and true Apostle John wrote: "Beloved,
believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of
God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world." (John 4:1) In addition, we find Jesus commending those at Ephesus because they test those who claimed to be apostles and were not. Rev 2:2 "I know thy works, and thy labor, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars." Should we not do the same?
Consider the following and then ask yourself the very simple question posed at the end. Here are the TWELVE Apostles by Name:
1. Peter
2. Andrew
3. James
4. John
5. Philip
6. Bartholomew
8. Thomas
9. James
10. Thaddeus
11. Simon
12. Judas (replaced by Matthias)
Rev 21:14 "And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the TWELVE apostles of the Lamb."
Which gate is assigned to Paul?
Paul was educated by his mother until the age of five. From age five to ten he studied with his father in the Hebrew scriptures and traditional writings. At the same time, being a Roman citizen and living in a Greek and Roman environment, he received a thorough education in the Greek language, history, and culture.
He was sent to Jerusalem at about the age of ten to attend the rabbinical school of Gamaliel, who was the son of Simeon the son of Hillel. Gamaliel was a most eminent rabbi who was mentioned both in the Talmud and in the New Testament (Acts 5:24-40; 22:3). Gamaliel was called Rabban - one of only seven teachers so called. He was a Pharisee, but he rose above party prejudice. He composed a prayer against the Christian "heretics". He lived and died a Jew.
The religious school of Gamaliel (Hillel) was chiefly oral and usually had a prejudice against any book but the Hebrew Scriptures. They used a system of Scriptural exegesis, and Josephus in his writings expressed the wish to have such a power of exegesis. When school was in session, learned men met and discussed scriptures, gave various interpretations, suggested illustrations, and quoted precedents. The students were encouraged to question, doubt, even contradict.
When Paul became a Christian, his very thorough education was enormously helpful. He was able to assimilate Christian doctrines rapidly and relate them accurately to the Scripture teaching he had received. From his education from Gamaliel, Paul developed a slanted viewpoint and attitude toward human history.
Before his conversion Paul was a zealous persecutor of Christians. According to Paul, God (Jesus as a spirit Being) blinded Paul and caused him to repent when he was on his way to Damascus to hunt for believers and drag them back to Jerusalem for punishment. But we read in Matthew 24:26-27 - “So if anyone tells you, ‘There he [Jesus] is, out in the desert,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here he is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man." After three days God instructed a disciple living in Damascus, Ananias, to visit Paul in the city and heal him of his blindness. Ananias, however, told God he was reluctant to see Paul because of his notorious reputation for persecuting Christians. "But the Lord said to him, (Ananias) 'Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.' ” (Acts 9:15-16, NK)
Since Paul's conversion happens in Acts 9, and the Council of Jerusalem happens in Acts 15, it seems like the timeline is very short. But we know that Paul, after the scales came off of his eyes in the home of Ananais, then began to preach in Damascus so strongly that the Jews desired to kill him. He was lowered in a basket to escape, and Barnabas took charge of him in Jerusalem because the apostles were very wary of him. In fact, the Apostles sent him packing after another plot to kill him was discovered. They sent him to his home town of Tarsus where he made a living, not as a preacher and not as an apostle, but for 9 years as a tent maker.
Acts then shifts the scene to Peter, but what of Paul?
The answer is in the book of Galatians. Galatians 1, after Paul’s introduction, verse 13, Paul says “You heard about my former actions in Judaism”. He then says he did not go back to Jerusalem ‘to those apostles who were before me, rather I went into Arabia and then returned to Damascus. After three years he went up to Jerusalem to confer with Cephas, Peter, and stayed with him for 15 days, not seeing any of the other apostles. Then he went to Syria and Cilicia, and was unknown to the churches of Judea. Chapter 2 starts off “After 14 years…and presented to them the gospel I was preaching. Verses 7-9 is when the apostles “recognized the grace bestowed upon me” they “gave me and Barnabas their right hands in partnership, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.”
Self acclaimed imposter "apostles" had beguiled the Corinthian congregation for some time. In contrast to Paul whose “personal presence was unimpressive, and his speech contemptible” (2 Corinthians 10:10), the imposter apostles projected themselves as strong, self-assured, and successful. These “new lights” were striking in their appearance, self-confident in their demeanor, and smooth in their communication skills (2 Corinthians 10:12). Thus, to counteract the imposter apostles, Paul boasted of his weaknesses (2 Corinthians 11:12-15, 30).
But to enhance their apostolic credentials, these false teachers also claimed to have had extraordinary religious experiences just like Paul claimed. So reluctantly, Paul countered their claims by referring to his “visions and revelations of the Lord” (2 Corinthians 12:1).
To the Corinthians Paul wrote:
"I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a man was caught up to the third heaven. And I know how such a man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows—was caught up into Paradise, and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak." (Paul, 2 Corinthians 12:2-4, NASB)
To recap how Paul became an apostle, he was converted (not his own word), went into the desert, then after three years went to Jerusalem, spent 9 years as a tent maker, then after 14 years he went back to confer with the apostles, at which time they laid hands on him to accept him in friendship.
Even his devoted follower Luke tries to cover the Truth and records people saying what he wants them to say, but ultimately fails to convince the discerning mind.
Acts 9:7 "And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man."
Acts 22:9 "And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me."
Acts 26:14 "We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic, ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads'."
Lets see… They saw the light that blinded Paul, but could themselves still see, to lead Paul by the hand to Damascus??? And this was his own company of persecutors of Jesus followers, who did not see, or did they? And did not hear, or did they? Were they standing or did they fall to the ground?
We now have a clearer picture of what the writer of II Peter was alluding to, speaking of "brother" Paul, where as was his custom he referred to the reader as "beloved" in chapter 3:
15And account that the long-suffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness.
How can someone, anyone, become an apostle? Acts 1:21-26 (NIV)
21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”
23 So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24 Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” 26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.
Paul was not at all shy about calling himself an apostle. In fact, in nine out of thirteen of his books, he introduces himself as an apostle of Jesus, and in each case states in some way that his apostleship is by heavenly decree. Of the 22 times in the Bible where Paul is referred to as an "apostle", only twice is he referred to as an apostle by someone other than himself! These two instances came from the same person. Not from any of the ORIGINAL apostles, but from Paul's close traveling companion Luke. Both accounts are found in Luke's record of the Acts of the Apostles, (chapter 14:4,14). Here Paul is referred to as an apostle along with Barnabas.
There is a likely reason why Luke chose to follow Paul and record his story in the first place. Paul branded himself the apostle to the Gentiles, and Luke, being a Gentile, would have seen Paul as where things were happening for him. When we consider Paul taught that there is no difference in God’s eyes between Jew and Gentile, but all believers in Jesus now constitute "the true Israel of God", what Gentile who desired to get close to the God of Israel wouldn’t be absolutely thrilled with following Paul's teachings? But even though the view from the book of Acts seems to be biased, it is still very important in helping us understand what was happening at that time. Without it we wouldn't have much of an idea at all. What was done and said as recorded by Luke is priceless. The important thing to remember is that the book of Acts was written from a very singular point of view.
Paul considered himself to be God's special gift to the Gentiles, and claimed for himself a prophecy that was given exclusively to Isaiah in Isaiah 49:6. "For so the Lord has commanded us: 'I have set you to be a light to the Gentiles that you should be for salvation to the ends of the earth." Acts 13:47
Paul's view of himself as an apostle didn't stop at only claiming to be an apostle. He also did what he could to communicate to his followers that he topped them all. He even had the nerve to belittle the very apostles that Jesus had personally called and trained for three and a half years to be his witnesses! Among Paul's self-flattering quotes are the following.
"For I consider that I am not at all inferior to the most eminent apostles". ...."As the truth of Christ is in me, no one shall stop me from this boasting in the regions of Achaia." 2 Corinthians 11:5,10
Sometimes, as though he knew he should be ashamed of challenging the stature of Jesus' personally chosen twelve, he would preface his boast with a statement of unworthiness.
"For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all...". 1Corinthians 15:9,10
As though he had exclusive rights to the Gentiles and the twelve were to stay with the Jews, Paul even had the gall to condescend specifically on Peter, James, and John when he belittled them to the Galatians.
"But from those who seemed to be something - whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man- for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), and when James, Cephas (Peter), and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised." Galatians 2:6,7,9
A couple verses later, Paul takes another cheap-shot at Peter. With Peter nowhere around to defend himself, Paul brags to the Galatians how he had determined Peter was a hypocrite, and how he had put him down before the entire church of Antioch.
"But when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews played the hypocritewith him so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straight forward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, "if you being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?" Galatians 2:11-14
Earlier, in Galatians 1:8,9, Paul commanded his followers to consider "accursed" anyone who preaches a different gospel than his. There is little doubt that Paul wanted the Galatians to think this way toward Peter, if not James, and John as well. It is obvious to anyone reading the book of Galatians that Paul was demanding the Galatian church follow no one but him, not even the original apostles back in Jerusalem.
Aside from Paul's incredible arrogance, Paul himself was the ultimate hypocrite for condemning Peter for accommodating Gentiles when he was around Gentiles and acting like a Jew around Jews. Here is what he claimed to do, and commanded the Corinthians to do as well.
"For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win the more; and to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law; to those who are without the law as without law... that I might win those who are without law; to the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some." 1Corinthians 9:19-22
"Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. Give no offense, either to the Jews or to the Greeks or to the church of God, just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved. Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ." 1Corinthians 10:31-33
So here we have Paul, claiming to be greater than any other apostle, belittling Peter, James, and John by saying they only "seemed to be" pillars of the church, and that they "added nothing" to him. Then he brags about how he told off Peter... calling him a hypocrite, and he subtly curses the apostles by telling the Galatians to consider accursed anyone who differs with him. If anyone else had even begun to do and say the things that Paul did, we would have recognized their incredible conceit and rejected them a long time ago. Here is something relevant that Solomon said.
"Let another man praise you, and not your own mouth; A stranger, and not your own lips." Proverbs 27:2
"And he [Paul] went into the synagogue and spoke boldly for three months, reasoning and persuading concerning the things of the kingdom of God. But when some were hardened and did not believe, but spoke evil of the way before the multitude..." Acts 19:8,9
Remember, this is recorded from Luke’s (Paul's close friend) point of view and he believed Paul's doctrine was "the Way". Notice that those who rejected Paul are men of the synagogue and not atheists or pagans. If these men had stood up in front of the synagogue and said, "Paul's doctrine is flawed. He is a false apostle, and a liar", Luke would no doubt have seen this as "speaking evil of the Way".
It is a most interesting quote from Paul's own pen that shows how Christians at that time perceived his self-proclaimed apostleship. It comes from his second letter to Timothy, written during the same Neronian persecution in which John was given the Revelation. This letter is believed by many scholars to contain the last recorded words of Paul. Here he makes a short statement of lament that seems to have gone unnoticed... the implications of which are devastating to Paul if one is able to hear everything that is being said. Paul makes this statement to Timothy.
"This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me." 2Timothy 1:15
When he said, "This you know", it sounds like this must have been relatively common knowledge at that time. Asia! The very place that Jesus told John to write, where his seven churches were! Paul did not say that Asia had rejected Jesus. Obviously they hadn't because there were thriving churches there that Jesus wanted to address through John. Instead Paul said that all Asia had rejected him personally! This is also corroborated in the book of Acts where men from Asia accuse Paul of teaching against the Law.
And when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him. crying out, "Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the Law, and this place: and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place." Acts 21:27-29
Try to grasp the profound significance of all this. Here we have in the book of Revelation the words of Jesus commending the Ephesian church for rejecting someone who claimed to be his apostle, while Paul is the only person other than the twelve original apostles to have claimed to be an apostle... and we know he has made this very claim to this same Ephesian church. At the same time, Paul laments himself of the fact that he has been rejected by them! How could it NOT be Paul and his associates that Jesus had commended the Ephesian church for rejecting? Could it be much more obvious? Here are the facts, paraphrased, one more time.
Paul to the Ephesians: "I am an apostle of Jesus"
The Ephesians to Paul: "No you're not."
Jesus to the Ephesians: "Well done!"
Paul's calling from Jesus was not as an apostle but as a minister and a witness: "But get up and stand on your feet; for this purpose I have appeared to you, to appoint you a minister and a witness not only to the things which you have seen, but also to the things in which I will appear to you;" Acts 26:16
It is obvious from Scripture accounts alone that there was a marked difference between Paul and his followers, and Jesus' followers. The "fellowship" between Paul and the original Apostles, was not as close as even the writer of Acts tries to make us believe. After Paul so boldly confronted Peter in Antioch, it was Paul who had to leave his base of operations, to never return.
As for the collection for the 'Set Apart' assembly at Jerusalem, the account in Acts neglects to mention it, leading to the assumption that James the Just (the leader of the Judeo-Christian church at that time) refused the bribe.
It is also obvious from his letters, that Paul resented the church elders in Jerusalem. It seems the reason for this was that missionaries were sent from Jerusalem by the elders, to Paul's churches, to testify to the Truth of God's Salvation, and some of Paul's followers were starting to see the distinction. Of course Paul also had trouble with some of the "heathens", that he had tried to convert. That is exactly what happens, when you try to do away with God's Commandments and expect people to just be "righteous". Why? Because I said so!
So the big question is, "Why did Paul's followers survive the Roman persecution and other Christians get so nearly destroyed?" The answer to this question, is for the present, impossible to ascertain, but once you have the courage to question his "teachings", and methods, it starts to make sense, why he spoke so vehemently against such practice in his letters.
It was Paul that gave the power to Rome, over God's chosen people who were told to obey, without question. It was Paul's teachings that was therefore so very appealing to Emperor Constantine, whose "conversion" story is so frighteningly similar to that of Paul's. It was only natural that Christianity would be found so suitable for "The State Religion", which even passed religious laws like changing the time of the sabbath from seventh day to what they call Sunday.
Because that he was such "a wise master builder, laying the foundation for another to build on" ( I Corinthians 3:10) Paul laid a broad based foundation for a fully adulterated One World Religion, with plenty of room to later add pagan rituals and incorporate pagan beliefs. Paul's teachings led the way for establishing the Papacy and for rewriting the Gospels to suit the Emperor's whims.
So, unlike Paul, a true prophet or apostle does not have to go to such extraordinary lengths to convince the world they are who they say they are. Even Jesus said that if he alone bore witness of himself, his witness was invalid. (John 5:31) And of all the people who shouldn't need to have others testify on their behalf, Jesus was that person. Yet he had Moses, the prophets, the Psalms, John the Baptist, the Fathers voice from heaven saying, "You are My beloved Son..." and hundreds of those who witnessed his resurrection. Paul had none of these.
"Let another man praise you, and not your own mouth; A stranger, and not your own lips." Proverbs 27:2
Many men appoint themselves to positions and through doing so, gain the recognition of other men. They may have the right motive; they want to do something good to help others so they seek out positions of authority in the church. But God's kingdom differs from earthly kingdoms in that God calls us into leadership positions, while in the earthly kingdoms, we choose our positions or we are appointed/elected by other people. Quite often, failure in the ministry is created by the fact that the people involved were never called to that position in the first place. They may have meant well, but good intentions aren't enough.
Consider the following and then ask yourself the very simple question posed at the end. Here are the TWELVE Apostles by Name:
1. Peter
2. Andrew
3. James
4. John
5. Philip
6. Bartholomew
8. Thomas
9. James
10. Thaddeus
11. Simon
12. Judas (replaced by Matthias)
Rev 21:14 "And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the TWELVE apostles of the Lamb."
Which gate is assigned to Paul?
Paul was educated by his mother until the age of five. From age five to ten he studied with his father in the Hebrew scriptures and traditional writings. At the same time, being a Roman citizen and living in a Greek and Roman environment, he received a thorough education in the Greek language, history, and culture.
He was sent to Jerusalem at about the age of ten to attend the rabbinical school of Gamaliel, who was the son of Simeon the son of Hillel. Gamaliel was a most eminent rabbi who was mentioned both in the Talmud and in the New Testament (Acts 5:24-40; 22:3). Gamaliel was called Rabban - one of only seven teachers so called. He was a Pharisee, but he rose above party prejudice. He composed a prayer against the Christian "heretics". He lived and died a Jew.
The religious school of Gamaliel (Hillel) was chiefly oral and usually had a prejudice against any book but the Hebrew Scriptures. They used a system of Scriptural exegesis, and Josephus in his writings expressed the wish to have such a power of exegesis. When school was in session, learned men met and discussed scriptures, gave various interpretations, suggested illustrations, and quoted precedents. The students were encouraged to question, doubt, even contradict.
When Paul became a Christian, his very thorough education was enormously helpful. He was able to assimilate Christian doctrines rapidly and relate them accurately to the Scripture teaching he had received. From his education from Gamaliel, Paul developed a slanted viewpoint and attitude toward human history.
Before his conversion Paul was a zealous persecutor of Christians. According to Paul, God (Jesus as a spirit Being) blinded Paul and caused him to repent when he was on his way to Damascus to hunt for believers and drag them back to Jerusalem for punishment. But we read in Matthew 24:26-27 - “So if anyone tells you, ‘There he [Jesus] is, out in the desert,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here he is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man." After three days God instructed a disciple living in Damascus, Ananias, to visit Paul in the city and heal him of his blindness. Ananias, however, told God he was reluctant to see Paul because of his notorious reputation for persecuting Christians. "But the Lord said to him, (Ananias) 'Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.' ” (Acts 9:15-16, NK)
Since Paul's conversion happens in Acts 9, and the Council of Jerusalem happens in Acts 15, it seems like the timeline is very short. But we know that Paul, after the scales came off of his eyes in the home of Ananais, then began to preach in Damascus so strongly that the Jews desired to kill him. He was lowered in a basket to escape, and Barnabas took charge of him in Jerusalem because the apostles were very wary of him. In fact, the Apostles sent him packing after another plot to kill him was discovered. They sent him to his home town of Tarsus where he made a living, not as a preacher and not as an apostle, but for 9 years as a tent maker.
Acts then shifts the scene to Peter, but what of Paul?
The answer is in the book of Galatians. Galatians 1, after Paul’s introduction, verse 13, Paul says “You heard about my former actions in Judaism”. He then says he did not go back to Jerusalem ‘to those apostles who were before me, rather I went into Arabia and then returned to Damascus. After three years he went up to Jerusalem to confer with Cephas, Peter, and stayed with him for 15 days, not seeing any of the other apostles. Then he went to Syria and Cilicia, and was unknown to the churches of Judea. Chapter 2 starts off “After 14 years…and presented to them the gospel I was preaching. Verses 7-9 is when the apostles “recognized the grace bestowed upon me” they “gave me and Barnabas their right hands in partnership, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.”
Self acclaimed imposter "apostles" had beguiled the Corinthian congregation for some time. In contrast to Paul whose “personal presence was unimpressive, and his speech contemptible” (2 Corinthians 10:10), the imposter apostles projected themselves as strong, self-assured, and successful. These “new lights” were striking in their appearance, self-confident in their demeanor, and smooth in their communication skills (2 Corinthians 10:12). Thus, to counteract the imposter apostles, Paul boasted of his weaknesses (2 Corinthians 11:12-15, 30).
But to enhance their apostolic credentials, these false teachers also claimed to have had extraordinary religious experiences just like Paul claimed. So reluctantly, Paul countered their claims by referring to his “visions and revelations of the Lord” (2 Corinthians 12:1).
To the Corinthians Paul wrote:
"I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a man was caught up to the third heaven. And I know how such a man—whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows—was caught up into Paradise, and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak." (Paul, 2 Corinthians 12:2-4, NASB)
To recap how Paul became an apostle, he was converted (not his own word), went into the desert, then after three years went to Jerusalem, spent 9 years as a tent maker, then after 14 years he went back to confer with the apostles, at which time they laid hands on him to accept him in friendship.
Even his devoted follower Luke tries to cover the Truth and records people saying what he wants them to say, but ultimately fails to convince the discerning mind.
Acts 9:7 "And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man."
Acts 22:9 "And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me."
Acts 26:14 "We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic, ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads'."
Lets see… They saw the light that blinded Paul, but could themselves still see, to lead Paul by the hand to Damascus??? And this was his own company of persecutors of Jesus followers, who did not see, or did they? And did not hear, or did they? Were they standing or did they fall to the ground?
We now have a clearer picture of what the writer of II Peter was alluding to, speaking of "brother" Paul, where as was his custom he referred to the reader as "beloved" in chapter 3:
15And account that the long-suffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness.
How can someone, anyone, become an apostle? Acts 1:21-26 (NIV)
21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”
23 So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24 Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” 26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.
Paul was not at all shy about calling himself an apostle. In fact, in nine out of thirteen of his books, he introduces himself as an apostle of Jesus, and in each case states in some way that his apostleship is by heavenly decree. Of the 22 times in the Bible where Paul is referred to as an "apostle", only twice is he referred to as an apostle by someone other than himself! These two instances came from the same person. Not from any of the ORIGINAL apostles, but from Paul's close traveling companion Luke. Both accounts are found in Luke's record of the Acts of the Apostles, (chapter 14:4,14). Here Paul is referred to as an apostle along with Barnabas.
There is a likely reason why Luke chose to follow Paul and record his story in the first place. Paul branded himself the apostle to the Gentiles, and Luke, being a Gentile, would have seen Paul as where things were happening for him. When we consider Paul taught that there is no difference in God’s eyes between Jew and Gentile, but all believers in Jesus now constitute "the true Israel of God", what Gentile who desired to get close to the God of Israel wouldn’t be absolutely thrilled with following Paul's teachings? But even though the view from the book of Acts seems to be biased, it is still very important in helping us understand what was happening at that time. Without it we wouldn't have much of an idea at all. What was done and said as recorded by Luke is priceless. The important thing to remember is that the book of Acts was written from a very singular point of view.
Paul considered himself to be God's special gift to the Gentiles, and claimed for himself a prophecy that was given exclusively to Isaiah in Isaiah 49:6. "For so the Lord has commanded us: 'I have set you to be a light to the Gentiles that you should be for salvation to the ends of the earth." Acts 13:47
Paul's view of himself as an apostle didn't stop at only claiming to be an apostle. He also did what he could to communicate to his followers that he topped them all. He even had the nerve to belittle the very apostles that Jesus had personally called and trained for three and a half years to be his witnesses! Among Paul's self-flattering quotes are the following.
"For I consider that I am not at all inferior to the most eminent apostles". ...."As the truth of Christ is in me, no one shall stop me from this boasting in the regions of Achaia." 2 Corinthians 11:5,10
Sometimes, as though he knew he should be ashamed of challenging the stature of Jesus' personally chosen twelve, he would preface his boast with a statement of unworthiness.
"For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all...". 1Corinthians 15:9,10
As though he had exclusive rights to the Gentiles and the twelve were to stay with the Jews, Paul even had the gall to condescend specifically on Peter, James, and John when he belittled them to the Galatians.
"But from those who seemed to be something - whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man- for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), and when James, Cephas (Peter), and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised." Galatians 2:6,7,9
A couple verses later, Paul takes another cheap-shot at Peter. With Peter nowhere around to defend himself, Paul brags to the Galatians how he had determined Peter was a hypocrite, and how he had put him down before the entire church of Antioch.
"But when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews played the hypocritewith him so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straight forward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, "if you being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?" Galatians 2:11-14
Earlier, in Galatians 1:8,9, Paul commanded his followers to consider "accursed" anyone who preaches a different gospel than his. There is little doubt that Paul wanted the Galatians to think this way toward Peter, if not James, and John as well. It is obvious to anyone reading the book of Galatians that Paul was demanding the Galatian church follow no one but him, not even the original apostles back in Jerusalem.
Aside from Paul's incredible arrogance, Paul himself was the ultimate hypocrite for condemning Peter for accommodating Gentiles when he was around Gentiles and acting like a Jew around Jews. Here is what he claimed to do, and commanded the Corinthians to do as well.
"For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win the more; and to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law; to those who are without the law as without law... that I might win those who are without law; to the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some." 1Corinthians 9:19-22
"Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. Give no offense, either to the Jews or to the Greeks or to the church of God, just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved. Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ." 1Corinthians 10:31-33
So here we have Paul, claiming to be greater than any other apostle, belittling Peter, James, and John by saying they only "seemed to be" pillars of the church, and that they "added nothing" to him. Then he brags about how he told off Peter... calling him a hypocrite, and he subtly curses the apostles by telling the Galatians to consider accursed anyone who differs with him. If anyone else had even begun to do and say the things that Paul did, we would have recognized their incredible conceit and rejected them a long time ago. Here is something relevant that Solomon said.
"Let another man praise you, and not your own mouth; A stranger, and not your own lips." Proverbs 27:2
"And he [Paul] went into the synagogue and spoke boldly for three months, reasoning and persuading concerning the things of the kingdom of God. But when some were hardened and did not believe, but spoke evil of the way before the multitude..." Acts 19:8,9
Remember, this is recorded from Luke’s (Paul's close friend) point of view and he believed Paul's doctrine was "the Way". Notice that those who rejected Paul are men of the synagogue and not atheists or pagans. If these men had stood up in front of the synagogue and said, "Paul's doctrine is flawed. He is a false apostle, and a liar", Luke would no doubt have seen this as "speaking evil of the Way".
It is a most interesting quote from Paul's own pen that shows how Christians at that time perceived his self-proclaimed apostleship. It comes from his second letter to Timothy, written during the same Neronian persecution in which John was given the Revelation. This letter is believed by many scholars to contain the last recorded words of Paul. Here he makes a short statement of lament that seems to have gone unnoticed... the implications of which are devastating to Paul if one is able to hear everything that is being said. Paul makes this statement to Timothy.
"This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me." 2Timothy 1:15
When he said, "This you know", it sounds like this must have been relatively common knowledge at that time. Asia! The very place that Jesus told John to write, where his seven churches were! Paul did not say that Asia had rejected Jesus. Obviously they hadn't because there were thriving churches there that Jesus wanted to address through John. Instead Paul said that all Asia had rejected him personally! This is also corroborated in the book of Acts where men from Asia accuse Paul of teaching against the Law.
And when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him. crying out, "Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the Law, and this place: and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place." Acts 21:27-29
Try to grasp the profound significance of all this. Here we have in the book of Revelation the words of Jesus commending the Ephesian church for rejecting someone who claimed to be his apostle, while Paul is the only person other than the twelve original apostles to have claimed to be an apostle... and we know he has made this very claim to this same Ephesian church. At the same time, Paul laments himself of the fact that he has been rejected by them! How could it NOT be Paul and his associates that Jesus had commended the Ephesian church for rejecting? Could it be much more obvious? Here are the facts, paraphrased, one more time.
Paul to the Ephesians: "I am an apostle of Jesus"
The Ephesians to Paul: "No you're not."
Jesus to the Ephesians: "Well done!"
Paul's calling from Jesus was not as an apostle but as a minister and a witness: "But get up and stand on your feet; for this purpose I have appeared to you, to appoint you a minister and a witness not only to the things which you have seen, but also to the things in which I will appear to you;" Acts 26:16
It is obvious from Scripture accounts alone that there was a marked difference between Paul and his followers, and Jesus' followers. The "fellowship" between Paul and the original Apostles, was not as close as even the writer of Acts tries to make us believe. After Paul so boldly confronted Peter in Antioch, it was Paul who had to leave his base of operations, to never return.
As for the collection for the 'Set Apart' assembly at Jerusalem, the account in Acts neglects to mention it, leading to the assumption that James the Just (the leader of the Judeo-Christian church at that time) refused the bribe.
It is also obvious from his letters, that Paul resented the church elders in Jerusalem. It seems the reason for this was that missionaries were sent from Jerusalem by the elders, to Paul's churches, to testify to the Truth of God's Salvation, and some of Paul's followers were starting to see the distinction. Of course Paul also had trouble with some of the "heathens", that he had tried to convert. That is exactly what happens, when you try to do away with God's Commandments and expect people to just be "righteous". Why? Because I said so!
So the big question is, "Why did Paul's followers survive the Roman persecution and other Christians get so nearly destroyed?" The answer to this question, is for the present, impossible to ascertain, but once you have the courage to question his "teachings", and methods, it starts to make sense, why he spoke so vehemently against such practice in his letters.
It was Paul that gave the power to Rome, over God's chosen people who were told to obey, without question. It was Paul's teachings that was therefore so very appealing to Emperor Constantine, whose "conversion" story is so frighteningly similar to that of Paul's. It was only natural that Christianity would be found so suitable for "The State Religion", which even passed religious laws like changing the time of the sabbath from seventh day to what they call Sunday.
Because that he was such "a wise master builder, laying the foundation for another to build on" ( I Corinthians 3:10) Paul laid a broad based foundation for a fully adulterated One World Religion, with plenty of room to later add pagan rituals and incorporate pagan beliefs. Paul's teachings led the way for establishing the Papacy and for rewriting the Gospels to suit the Emperor's whims.
So, unlike Paul, a true prophet or apostle does not have to go to such extraordinary lengths to convince the world they are who they say they are. Even Jesus said that if he alone bore witness of himself, his witness was invalid. (John 5:31) And of all the people who shouldn't need to have others testify on their behalf, Jesus was that person. Yet he had Moses, the prophets, the Psalms, John the Baptist, the Fathers voice from heaven saying, "You are My beloved Son..." and hundreds of those who witnessed his resurrection. Paul had none of these.
"Let another man praise you, and not your own mouth; A stranger, and not your own lips." Proverbs 27:2
Many men appoint themselves to positions and through doing so, gain the recognition of other men. They may have the right motive; they want to do something good to help others so they seek out positions of authority in the church. But God's kingdom differs from earthly kingdoms in that God calls us into leadership positions, while in the earthly kingdoms, we choose our positions or we are appointed/elected by other people. Quite often, failure in the ministry is created by the fact that the people involved were never called to that position in the first place. They may have meant well, but good intentions aren't enough.