The more I look into it the more suspect Paul appears. It has me rethinking a few things. Peter vs Paul.
The New Testament is not cut and dry. It was heavily edited. What about allusions to Paul’s ministry in the D&C? What, truly, is the rod of iron?
https://www.judaismvschristianity.com/c ... e-apostle/Chapter 8: Paul The False Apostle
In the previous chapters, I have shown that Paul’s concept of God’s foreknowledge and his doctrine of predestination do not exist in Yeshua’s words or in the Hebrew Scriptures. What we find instead is much evidence to the contrary. We might call this the DNA evidence against Paul (Doctrine Not Accurate). This is the most important part of the case against him, but it’s not all there is. There is much more. But before getting to that evidence I’d like to take a minute to address a couple of defenses that always pop up as soon as Paul is called into question. The reason I want to address them here is that these defenses of Paul are constantly nagging in the back of many people’s minds which makes it difficult to seriously consider the possibility that Paul was a false apostle. The most common defense for Paul comes from 2 Peter chapter 3 where Peter supposedly calls Paul’s letter’s “Scripture”. I address that issue in chapter 11. But there are three issues I want to deal with briefly here. The first is the notion that Yeshua supposedly commissioned Paul as an apostle in Acts 9:15. The second is the issue of Paul working miracles, and the third is the fact that Paul died a martyr for what he believed.
Didn’t Yeshua commission Paul as an apostle in Acts 9:15?
Contrary to what many believe, Yeshua did not appear to Paul. In the record of Paul’s conversion in chapter 9 of Acts, Paul was stopped by a blinding light that shone around him from heaven, and Yeshua only spoke to him. Paul only heard Yeshua. He did not see him. Yeshua confronted him about his plans to persecute his followers in Damascus. Paul’s persecution of believers was the one issue that Yeshua had come to address. Paul was not going to be allowed to continue. The fact that Paul didn’t challenge Yeshua to try and stop him, but instead chose to become a believer himself means Paul wasn’t stupid. His conversion was merely a secondary outgrowth of the encounter. Had Paul stubbornly tried to continue, it no doubt would have been the end of him right then and there. In the story of Balaam, it certainly would have been the end of him if he had tried to continue on his way to curse the children of Israel. He was stopped by the angel of the Lord who had a sword in hand and was ready to strike him down. (Numbers 22:22-33) The similarities between Paul and Balaam are striking! It was only after each of them had submitted to the Lord that they got out of danger. Paul asked Yeshua what he wanted him to do, and Yeshua told him to go to Damascus where he would be told what to do. This he did. Later, Yeshua spoke to Ananias in a vision and told him to go to Paul to heal him of the blindness that had occurred to him. Ananias said he was afraid of Paul because he had heard from many about how much harm Paul had done to the believers in Jerusalem, but Yeshua told him:
“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 NKJV
Because of what people have come to believe about Paul they tend to read way more into this passage than is really there. Notice that Yeshua did not say Paul was to be an apostle. Paul was a “chosen vessel”. Apostles and chosen vessels are not the same thing. Of course, all Apostles could be considered chosen vessels, but not all chosen vessels are automatically apostles. Vessels are used for carrying things, and the only thing that Yeshua said Paul would carry was his name. Yeshua didn’t even say Paul would carry his gospel! Yeshua’s name and his gospel are also two different things. Those who carry Yeshua’s gospel obviously also carry Yeshua’s name, but all those who carry Yeshua’s name do not automatically carry Yeshua’s gospel. Yeshua had spent his entire ministry teaching and training those who he wanted to carry his gospel, and Paul was not one of them. All that Yeshua said Paul would carry was his name. What’s more, he told Ananias why Paul would carry his name. Remember, Ananias had just mentioned to Yeshua how brutal Paul had been to the believers in Jerusalem. What Yeshua said was simply to assure Ananias that he was going to put Paul on the receiving end of the same kind of treatment he had been dishing out to others. There is nothing more that can be gleaned from this passage. Yes, I believe Paul became a true believer, and yes, Yeshua had intentions of using him just like he did the other believers. But nothing more than these simple truths about Paul’s future, which Yeshua had stated, was written in stone. The fact that Paul himself came to believe his encounter on the road to Damascus was a glorious meeting with an apostolic destiny does not make it so. The influence of Greek philosophy concerning destiny together with his incredible pride are what caused Paul to jump to that conclusion in his own mind.
Did Paul’s working of miracles prove anything?
That question can be answered with this question: Does the fact that Judas Iscariot worked miracles prove that Judas was infallible? That’s right, Judas worked miracles as well! See Matthew 10:1-8, and Luke 9:1,2. You can be sure there were those in Israel who were healed by Judas who also thought Judas was the greatest apostle who ever lived! But the name “Judas” has since become synonymous with “traitor”. So if Judas, who was much closer to Yeshua than Paul ever was, could go bad, how can we possibly assume that Paul could never go wrong?
Doesn’t the fact that Paul died for what he believed prove he was right?
Absolutely not! Does the fact that Millions of Muslims are willing to die for what they believe prove they are right? The willingness to die for what a person believes only proves that they truly believe they are right. Nothing more. Paul had a real encounter with Yeshua on the road to Damascus, and he probably carried Yeshua’s name to the grave with him, but in no way does that prove Paul was an apostle, or that he preached Yeshua’s true gospel.
Having dealt now with these nagging Pauline defenses, let’s take a closer look at Paul’s claim to be an apostle of Yeshua.
Paul’s claim of apostleship
Many Christians believe that Paul was the greatest apostle who ever lived! After all, he was the single biggest contributor to the New Testament. But in claiming the title of apostle, Paul was also claiming to have the authority of an apostle to teach the things that he did. This is the same as claiming that he, like the other apostles, had Yeshua’s instructions and blessing to teach what he did. But at the same time, as hard as it is to imagine, Paul virtually never quoted Yeshua! There are only a couple of instances and a handful of words in each instance where Paul actually quoted him. This shocking fact has not been lost on scholars. Many have rightly pointed out that if all we had were Paul’s letters, we would know virtually nothing about what Yeshua did and said. This testifies to the fact that Paul was not there and did not walk with Yeshua during his ministry. So, one has to ask: Did Yeshua really call Paul to be an apostle? We’ve already established that Paul’s doctrine is terribly messed up. Now we’re going to see that there is more than ample evidence to suggest that he wasn’t even a true apostle of Yeshua …let alone the greatest one who ever lived.
There are a number of historical facts, including things that both Yeshua and Paul said as recorded in the Bible, that leave us with some very compelling evidence against his apostleship being recognized in heaven.
There are several interesting facts surrounding this case that should be noted.
Paul’s apostleship was unrecognized by others
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 instances didn’t come from Yeshua or any of the original apostles but from Paul’s close traveling companion and personal press secretary Luke. Contrary to what many might be inclined to think, Luke was not himself an apostle. He didn’t walk with Yeshua. He wasn’t even a Jew. Both of these accounts where Luke referred to Paul as an apostle are found in Luke’s record of the Acts of the Apostles. They are found in Acts 14:4,14. Here, Paul is referred to as an apostle along with Barnabas. By this time in the story, Luke would have been very accustomed to Paul calling himself an apostle, and he would no doubt have been in agreement with Paul’s assessment of himself. By these statistics alone, it is evident that Paul is by far his own biggest fan, and his sidekick Luke was his number two fan. This leaves no one else anywhere in the Bible going on record recognizing his apostleship! The fact that neither Yeshua nor any of the original apostles ever called him an apostle is most telling.
“I wanna talk about me!”
No other epistle author in the Bible wrote like Paul. This would be true on a number of levels, but one aspect is of particular interest when we are considering how Paul views himself. He had an extraordinary way of drawing attention to himself with his usage of personal pronouns. When it comes to how often he uses words like, “I”, “me”, “my”, or “mine”, the overall rate in his epistles is almost three times that of his next closest rival. When it comes to the book of Hebrews, there are a number of reasons why many scholars don’t believe Paul was its author. One obvious reason is that in the other epistles, Paul doesn’t hesitate to identify himself along with his supposed credentials. The author of Hebrews is strangely silent on these matters. Some scholars believe Barnabas was the author of Hebrews. My pet theory is it was Apollos …but that’s a discussion for another time. The point is, no one knows for sure. But Paul certainly couldn’t be in the running as the author of Hebrews when one considers the statistical rate at which personal pronouns are used in Hebrews. The author of Hebrews refers to himself only 9 times, which is approximately 1.3 personal pronouns per thousand words. To help put this in perspective, let’s compare the book of Hebrews to the book of Romans. They are both relatively large books of similar length, divided into 13 and 16 chapters respectively. Yet in only the first half of the first chapter of Romans, which is 16 verses worth, Paul uses twice as many personal pronouns as the author of Hebrews uses in his entire book! In the book of Romans, Paul refers to himself 103 times, which is a rate of about 18.2 times per thousand words! That is 13x greater than Hebrews. In 1 Corinthians, Paul refers to himself 175 times, in 2Corinthians 103 times again, and in the relatively short book of Galatians, he refers to himself 69 times which is a rate of 25 personal pronouns per 1000 words!
It should be evident that Paul is at least as concerned with making a statement about himself as he is in communicating what he believes to be the gospel.
Paul’s claim of apostleship stands alone
Other than the twelve apostles who walked with Yeshua during his ministry, no one other than Paul can be identified as having claimed for themselves the title of “apostle”. Barnabas was referred to as an apostle along with Paul by Luke in Acts 14:14, but there is no record of Barnabas claiming the title for himself.
Our view of the early church is polarized
When we take a survey of the New Testament, we notice that Paul is the single greatest contributor to it. When we read the book of Acts, we can’t help but get the impression that the great bulk of what God was doing in the early church was happening through Paul. But this is misleading because the book of Acts was written from only one man’s perspective ..Luke’s! Luke traveled with Paul on his missionary journeys and the bulk of the book of Acts is the account of those travels. What we have in Acts is only one man’s point of view. From Luke’s perspective, Paul’s story would have appeared to be front and center stage which is why it appears that way in his record. The reason Luke chose to follow Paul is obvious. 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 that Paul taught there is no difference in God’s eyes between Jew and Gentile, but that all believers in Yeshua now constitute “the true Israel of God”, it becomes perfectly understandable why a Gentile who desired to get close to the God of Israel would be enthralled with Paul. Yet, in spite of the fact that the view from the book of Acts is polarized and biased, Luke’s record is still extremely important in helping us understand what was happening at that time. Without the book of Acts, we wouldn’t have much insight at all. What was done and said as recorded by Luke is priceless, and we have no good reason to question what he saw and heard. Luke’s own personal thoughts and opinions which he interjected occasionally may be questioned, but they are few. I see no good reason to accuse Luke of malicious intent. The fact is, Luke’s faithful record also exposes Paul to scrutiny. Luke is the one who records that Paul’s own contemporaries accused him of teaching against the Law. More on this later. The important thing to remember is that the book of Acts was written from a very singular point of view that generally favored Paul.
God’s Spirit was doing many other things at that same time. We don’t have a detailed record of them, but we do have some clues. God was certainly working through the 11+1 true apostles, some of which are recorded in the earlier parts of Acts. The apostle John was hard at work for his Lord, but we hear very little from him until we get to his epistles and the book of the Revelation at the end of the New Testament.
Paul’s arrogance:
Paul’s claims of apostleship
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 Yeshua. In each case, he states in some way that his apostleship is by divine decree.
Here is the question. Should we automatically believe the testimony of a person who makes grandiose claims about themselves when all we have for confirmation of their claim is little more than their word and maybe a statement or two from their best friend? If so, then we should likewise confirm those like Jim Jones and David Koresh! Unless there is obvious corroborative evidence to support such claims, all of them need to be taken with a large grain of salt. 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 Yeshua 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, Yeshua was that person. Yet he had Moses, the prophets, the Psalms, John the Baptist, the Father’s voice from heaven saying, “You are My beloved Son…” and hundreds of those who witnessed his many great miracles as well as his resurrection. Paul had none of these. Some might object stating that Paul did work some miracles. But that fact doesn’t make him an apostle. Especially in light of the fact that when Yeshua sent the 12 apostles out to heal the sick and cast out demons, he sent seventy others to do the same thing! See Matthew 10:5-8, and Luke 9:1,2. There is also in the Law a command to reject and turn away from anyone who works miracles if their teaching comes against God’s law in any way. See Deuteronomy 13:1-3.
Paul: God’s gift to the gentiles?!
In his conceit, Paul considered himself God’s gift to the Gentiles and claimed for himself a prophecy that was not about him but was given exclusively to Isaiah the prophet 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 NKJV
The greatest apostle?!
Paul’s view of himself as an apostle didn’t stop at merely claiming to be an apostle. He also did what he could to communicate to his followers that he topped all the other apostles. He even had the nerve to belittle the very apostles who Yeshua had called and trained to be his witnesses! Among his braggadocious 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 NKJV
Sometimes, as though he knew he should be ashamed of challenging the stature of Yeshua’s true apostles, he would preface his boast with a statement of unworthiness. No doubt he hoped people would embrace him as the greatest apostle because he was so humble.
“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…”.
1 Corinthians 15:9,10 NKJV
Aside from the fact that in the following text it was a lie to suggest the Gospel had been split between Jews and Gentiles (suggesting Paul had exclusive rights to the Gentiles, and the 12 were to stick with the Jews) Paul even had the gall to condescend specifically on Peter, James, and John and 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 NKJV
This is nothing but a lie. In no way did Peter or the others abandon the Gentiles to Paul. Nowhere is there any evidence to corroborate this statement. The fact is, Paul indirectly admits this himself when he later accuses Peter of compelling Gentiles to live as Jews. He does this only a couple of verses later. Here, Paul takes a cheap shot at Peter. With Peter nowhere in sight to defend himself, Paul brags to the Galatians how he had supposedly caught Peter in hypocrisy, and how he had dressed him down for it in front of 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 hypocrite with 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 NKJV
Paul conveniently leaves out Peter’s response as though Peter were left speechless against Paul’s blinding wisdom. Peter most certainly would have objected to the accusation he had been “living in the manner of the Gentiles.” Eating with Gentiles may have broken a tradition of the Pharisees, traditions that Yeshua himself condemned, but it did not break with Moses.
Earlier in Galatians 1:8,9, Paul actually commanded his followers to consider “accursed” anyone who preached a different gospel than his. The way Paul treats Peter just a moment later in the same letter leaves little doubt that Paul wanted the Galatians to consider Peter “accursed”. It is obvious to anyone who reads the book of Galatians that Paul was demanding the Galatian church follow no one but him, not even the original apostles from Jerusalem.
If all this isn’t bad enough, after calling Peter a hypocrite for acting like a Jew around Jews and a Gentile around Gentiles, listen to what Paul tells the Corinthians he does!
“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.”
1 Corinthians 9:19-22 NKJV
“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.”
1 Corinthians 10:31-33 NKJV
Paul did the very thing he lambasted Peter for doing. What’s more, he told the Corinthians to do the same! Paul admitted he was a chameleon who blended in with his surroundings. Then he had the audacity to claim he imitated Yeshua in this! Can anyone seriously imagine Yeshua blending into his surroundings and saying something like, “I am all things to all people”, or “I please all men in all things”? Of course not! Yeshua offended many people! Considering Paul never walked with Yeshua and refused to learn anything from those who did, is it any wonder he had no idea what it meant to “imitate Christ”?
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. All this, while in fact, he was being the greatest hypocrite of all! 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. Paul had obviously forgotten what Solomon said.
“Let another man praise you, and not your own mouth; A stranger, and not your own lips.”
Proverbs 27:2 NKJV
The book of Revelation exposes Paul as a false apostle
Back when I still believed Paul was a legitimate apostle, I was puzzled by one thing. If he was the greatest apostle who ever lived, why didn’t God give him the greatest prophecy since Yeshua …the book of Revelation? There are some interesting facts surrounding the book of Revelation as well as things Yeshua said as recorded in it that answer that question. There is a good reason why Yeshua didn’t give such an obviously high endorsement of Paul to the world. John was not given the Revelation simply because Paul was a lesser apostle compared to him. The implications are far worse for Paul. Paul wasn’t given the Revelation because part of the message of Revelation was given for the very purpose of exposing him as the false apostle that he was! There is a good reason why Yeshua used John the apostle. Not only was John one of the 12 who had walked with Yeshua during his entire ministry and had been training by him to be his witness, but he was also one of the inner three who were closest to Yeshua. He was also one of the three Yeshua took with him to the mount of transfiguration.
When was Revelation written?
Establishing the Authorship Date of Revelation
A critical factor in realizing that Yeshua was speaking of Paul in the book of Revelation is understanding when the book was written. Many scholars (but by no means all of them) have postulated a date around 96 A.D. When it comes to this date, those who push for it must ultimately rest the entirety of their case on a single short and obscure statement made by Eusebius in the early fourth century where he quoted a lost, late second-century document of Irenaeus. Here are the supposed end-all-debate words of Eusebius and his quote of Irenaeus.
“In this persecution, it is handed down by tradition, that the apostle and evangelist John, who was yet living, in consequence of his testimony to the divine word, was condemned to dwell on the island of Patmos. Irenaeus, indeed, in his fifth book against the heresies, …speaks in the following manner respecting him; ‘If, however, it were necessary to proclaim the name of the Anti-Christ, … it would have been declared by him who saw the revelation, for it is not long since it was seen, but almost in our own generation, at the close of Domitian’s reign.’”
(Eusebius, III, XVII)
This is all there is for evidence of Revelation being written later. There is also uncertainty among scholars as to Eusebius’s understanding of whom Irenaeus was referring to. Was it Domitian, or Domitius (Nero)? Even if Irenaeus had indicated that the Revelation was given to John later during Domitian’s reign, one must ask how much doctrinal stock they want to put in a man who was known for making fantastic errors in dates and times. Irenaeus also taught, for example, that Yeshua was crucified at fifty years of age! (See Irenaeus Against Heresies, chapter 22) Irenaeus’ few words as quoted by Eusebius are all that exist for outside evidence that Revelation was written very late in the first century. That’s it! Some scholars claim that other “early church fathers”, like Tertullian, Origen, Victorinus, and Jerome, confirm the later date of Domitian’s reign, as though “early” means they were near eyewitnesses to it. But these men wrote anywhere from 100-300 years after Irenaeus and were simply following his lead. Scholars and teachers who opt for the later date must ultimately rest the entirety of their case on these few obscure and unreliable words of Irenaeus. There is however within the book of Revelation evidence that totally discredits Irenaeus’s claim. In chapter 11, John is told to measure the Temple for its destruction. That destruction we know occurred in 70 A.D. The Revelation couldn’t possibly have been given after that because there was no Temple left to be measured! What’s more, John was told the destruction would occur in exactly 42 months from that day when he measured it! That means John had his vision early in the year 67 A.D. There are other ancient sources that corroborate this date as well. (For a fascinating study on this, please see my article The Dat of John’s Revelation and the Josephus Connection in the appendix.) If recognized academic credentials are of any value to the reader, scholars who have argued for an earlier time period include; David E. Aune, Ph.D.1; A. Tholuck, D.D.2; and J.A.T. Robinson, Ph.D. just to name a few.
There is also the consideration of John’s age. Being a contemporary of Yeshua, it’s safe to assume he would have been close to the same age as Yeshua. If John had been as much as 10 years younger than Yeshua, he would have been only 20 when Yeshua called him to follow him. It would seem doubtful that Yeshua would have called someone so young, but for the sake of a conservative estimate, if John was only 20 when he was called by Yeshua, he would have been approaching 60 in the year 67. If he had been the same age as Yeshua, he would have been pushing 70. By first century standards, 70 was considered a significantly old person. If John received the Revelation significantly later in the year 95 as some suggest, at the youngest, John would have been in his late 80s. This was virtually unheard of in the first century. If he had been the same age as Yeshua or older, (not out of the question), he would have been anywhere from his 90s to over 100 years old. This is highly improbable.
To whom was Revelation written?
One haunting fact from Revelation that Christianity must deal with is, in spite of Paul’s supposed popularity, Yeshua never mentioned him by name, nor did he give any recognition to his work among the Gentiles. Of the seven churches in Asia to whom the book is addressed, one of them we know for certain had significant dealings with Paul. It was Ephesus!
Paul and the Ephesians
Aside from Peter, Paul is the only person from that time period known to have claimed to be an apostle. John didn’t even use the title that was rightfully his to identify himself in the book of Revelation, but Paul claimed the title many times and introduced himself as such, to the Ephesians of Asia Minor. The book of Ephesians was written right around 61 A.D.
“Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints who are in Ephesus…”
Ephesians 1:1 NKJV
A few years later, around 64 A.D. Paul wrote to Timothy who happened to be staying in Ephesus at the time. In that letter, Paul orders his young apostle-apprentice to stay in Ephesus and deputizes him to police his exclusive doctrine there in his stead.
“…remain in Ephesus that you may charge some that they teach no other doctrine.”
1 Timothy 1:3 NKJV
In that same letter, Paul displays an unusual defensiveness for his title of “apostle” in a manner that clearly suggests some there in Ephesus had accused him of lying about it!
“…for which I was appointed a preacher and an apostle—I am speaking the truth in Christ and not lying…”
1 Timothy 2:7 NKJV
Question: Who is ever compelled to defend themselves with a statement like “I am not lying” if they have never been accused of it? Paul’s defensiveness speaks volumes. He had undoubtedly been accused by the Ephesians of lying about his apostleship!
A few years later in 67 A.D. John receives the Revelation. Yeshua tells John to write to all his church assemblies in Asia. The first one he mentions is Ephesus:
“What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.”
Revelation 1:10,11 NKJV
Yeshua then commends the Ephesians for exposing as “liars” some who have claimed to be apostles!
“To the messenger of the church of Ephesus write…” “I know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars;”
Revelation 2:1,2 NKJV
After this, and after addressing each church, Yeshua stated that the truth he speaks to these churches is good for any and all who are willing to listen.
“He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.”
Revelation 2:7,11,17, 29 & 3:6,13, 22 NKKJV
Because of the urgency of some prophecies, like the obvious time-sensitive information in 2:10, the Revelation was immediately copied and circulated to all 7 Messianic assemblies in Asia as Yeshua had commanded.
Somewhere between one and two years later, in what is believed to be his last written letter, out of his own mouth Paul complains to Timothy that not just the Ephesians, but ALL of Asia had rejected him!
“This you know, that ALL those in Asia have turned away from me.”
2 Timothy 1:15
Asia! All of them! Rejecting Paul! And when he says, “This you know”, it sounds like this must have been relatively common knowledge at that time.
Now ponder this: Here we have all the believers Asian suddenly turning their backs on Paul right after John had sent a letter to every Messianic assembly in Asia …a letter in which Yeshua had commended the Ephesians for rejecting as liars some who had claimed to be apostles. With this, we know of no others from that time who claimed to be apostles, anywhere, yet we know Paul claimed to be an apostle, and that he specifically claimed to be an apostle to the Ephesians! We also know that Paul had defended himself against being called a lying false apostle to Timothy who happened to be in Ephesus at the time! Are we really to believe this is just coincidence, and that all of Asia just happened to turn its back on Paul at this time? No, these circumstances couldn’t possibly be a coincidence.
Furthermore, Paul did not say Asia had turned away from Yeshua! Those who would try to defend Paul must believe that Paul would have placed a higher value on Asia believing in Yeshua than on his own personal acceptance there. As such, Paul would have been more distressed by Asia’s rejection of Yeshua and would have said so had that been the case. But that was not Paul’s concern. His was a personal complaint. Paul said Asia had rejected only him! This should not come as a surprise in light of the above. Every assembly in Asia knew Yeshua was referring to Paul and his young apostle-apprentice Timothy. The other six assemblies quite apparently had “ears to hear” what the Spirit had said to the Ephesians and went and did likewise!
When you add this evidence to what we have uncovered about Paul so far, what other conclusion can possibly be drawn? He was, without doubt, the very false apostle Yeshua was referring to. But we aren’t done yet. There is more, including the fact that he outright lied a number of times as will be seen in the next chapter.
Ok.
eat things sacrificed to idols
, and to commit fornication.
