Is Paul The Antichrist?Written by MikhayahSaturday, 24 December 2005Throughout the ages there has been great discord between the three great Abrahamicfaiths of Judaism, Christianity and Islaam. The latter, of course, having beencommonly referred to derogatorily in the West for centuries (up until moderntimes), as "Muhammadism". This has been due to the fact that the Qur'aanic term"Islaam" itself is a more religiously purist of a term than what the latter dayfollowers of the customs (which they ascribed to the term), themselves have oftenbeen fulfilling.While much of this discord can be reconciled by religious purism - getting back tothe "roots" if you will - there is one major sticking point of contention in thearea of theological seamlessness of these faiths. That is, of course, the theologywhich sprung forth from the epistles of Paul, and the accounts of his disciplessuch as Luke (the presumed author of the Gospel account by the same name and ofthe Book of Acts). Both from the theological standpoint of traditional Judaism,and the Qur'aanic dissention of Islaam maintains a more or less unanimity onissues such as the Oneness of God, the illogicality of notions of "Trinity" andDivine Incarnation. When it comes to reconciling both pre and post "Christ"positions on this, we are rarely pointed to the words of Jesus Christ, or YashuahHa'Mashiach, himself, but are instead directed to the Epistles or Letters of theindividual Christian tradition has historically referred to as the "Apostle Paul."From the outset, before his departure from the public light, Jesus warns hisfollowers to: "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing butinwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Are grapesgathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? So, every sound tree bears goodfruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, norcan a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cutdown and thrown into the fire. Thus you will know them by their fruits." Matthew7:15-20An important question that his followers, his TRUE followers, must ask themselvesis "Who were these false prophets which he spoke of?" Did this not occur? Did suchfalse prophets not emerge? Were they of little or no consequence in the grandscheme of things? If so, why would such a wise man have made it such a point towarn against them? Furthermore, Yashuah said clearly: "Then if any man tells you,'Behold, here is the Messiah,' or, 'There,' don't believe it. For there will arisefalse messiahs, and false prophets, and they will show great signs and wonders, soas to lead astray, if possible, even the chosen ones." Matthew 24:23-24Thus, it is clear that Jesus was warning of "Antichrists" or "Imposter" Messiahs,not merely people parading themselves around on the prophet auction block ofpublic opinion. So the question arises, who could Jesus have been warning against,and if this was a legitimate and serious threat - in the same sort of crafty waythat Christianity views the "coming Antichrist" - then is it not possible thatthis was not some low level sorcerer, or petty delusional man that Jesus waswarning against on so many occasions as being a false prophet and an ImposterMessiah?To get a small glimpse into the sort of subtle Messianic claims to which Jesus mayhave been referring, one need look no further than the Epistles of Paul, or"Sha'ul" (consonantally identical with the name of the Underworld "Sheol" found inthe Tanakh), who said: "For in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through theGospel. Therefore I beseech you, be imitators of me." 1 Corinthians 4:15-16Here Paul claims that HE, not "Christ" had "begotten you." He "beseeches you" tobe HIS followers, HIS imitators. The impostor claims are not made out rightly soas to astonish, but to subtly influence and brainwash the masses over a long term,strategic ministry of indoctrination (one which continued well on past 65 C.E.).Thus, when Jesus said in Matthew 24:5: "Many will come in my name, saying, 'I amthe Messiah' and they will lead many astray," this was not merely saying thatthere would be a man who would stand up a few short years later claiming to be theMessiah. Rather, this was saying that there would be an underlying Messianic claimas well as claims to Prophethood, Apostleship and Divine Authority in general. Andyet what did Paul himself claim? "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live;yet not I, but Christ lives in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh Ilive by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me."Galatians 2:20Paul says it is not really "him" that you see, the "he" was crucified, and it is"not I but Christ" living in his body. He is claiming that he is essentiallyChrist, and for this reason he is superior to all of Christ's Disciples whoopposed him at every turn. Christianity remarkably has no problem hypothesizingabout a super-human leader rising to brainwash and lead the entire world, but formost it has become impossible to suspect that this leader could have been soclever to have not openly advertised his indoctrination right from the start.Thus, one of the greatest failings of Christianity is that they have left theirtheological door open to "strangers" because they naively have not believed that astranger would enter unannounced under the guise of someone feigning nobleintentions.Yet Paul's claims make it clear what he is saying. Since "Christ" supposedly livedin Paul, this "christ" was calling the shots. The direction that "the church"would go in was now up the dictation of a man who only even claimed to have metJesus once, and then only to be rebuked for being an oppressor (who sanctioned themurder), of the Disciples.Jesus' Brother Yaqov or "James" is almost entirely written out of the picture, andis referred to in a butchered historical account of Acts (an account which isretold in original, more precise terms in the Dead Sea Scrolls), by a descriptivenoun "Stephen" (`Atarah, or the "Crown"), rather than by his true name. However,neither the censored Gospel accounts - relegated to the "Apocryphal works" thatdidn't make the Council of Niceas "cut" in 325 C.E. - nor the "early Churchfathers" were silent in regards to James and this outright war on Paul. Once wehear what they have to say about James, then his works in the so-called "NewTestament" become clear as a direct attack on Paul, and not mere vaguegeneralizations that aren't in any way inapplicable to Paul.For instance, Paul said: "Yet knowing that a man is not justified by the works ofthe Torah but through the faith of Jesus Christ, even we believed in Jesus Christ,that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Torah,because no flesh will be justified by the works of the Torah." Galatians 2:16Yaqov poignantly rebuked this statement, saying: "What does it profit, mybrothers, if a man says he has faith, and doesn't have works? Can faith save him?If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food, and one of you saysto them, 'Go in peace, be warmed and filled, without giving them the things neededfor the body, what does it profit? So faith by itself, if it doesn't have works,is dead." James 2:14-17In 2 Corinthians 12:16, Paul makes a perplexing, yet revealing, statement: "But beit so, I did not burden you: being crafty, I took you in by deceit."Does Christianity accept "taking in by deceit" as a means of "ministering," andpropagandizing?The Torah, the "Law," which Paul mocked and considered a "yoke" and "bondage,"says: "Do not steal. Do not lie. Do not deceive one another." Leviticus 19:11Does Sefer Ha'Berasheet (Genesis) 3:1 not refer to the Nachash or "Serpent" whowalked upright as "more crafty more subtle than any beast of the field?" Sha'ulhimself boasts proudly about sharing this trait with the Serpent. Like theSerpent, Paul too is "subtle" and "crafty" in approach; not trying to deceive youwith something appearing as a lie. To convince you he mixes a small portion oftruth with a predominance of pagan lies. The crucifixion, resurrection, Eucharistand the like are all found in pagan mystery religions often thousands of yearsolder than Jesus himself!"What then will we say that Abraham, our forefather, has found according to theflesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, butnot toward God. For what does the Scripture say? 'Abraham believed God, and it wasaccounted to him for righteousness.' Now to him who works, the reward is notcounted as grace, but as debt. But to him who doesn't work, but believes in himwho justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness. Even as Davidalso pronounces blessing on the man to whom God counts righteousness apart fromworks." Romans 4:1-6Paul got it all wrong again, when he emphasized only Faith. James rebuked Paul,showing the balance of Faith with actual works manifested from one's SpiritualPractice, or "Deen." This is the literal meaning of "Religion" in both Hebrew and`Arabic. Both Judaism and Islaam - from Adam, to Abraham, to Moses, to Jesus, toMuhammad - has always maintained that both "Faith" ("Emunah" in Hebrew and Emaanin `Arabic), as well as "Works" or "Spiritual Practice" ("Deen" in both Hebrew and`Arabic alike), are necessary."Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac uponthe altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith wascompleted by works, and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, 'Abraham believedGod, and it was reckoned to him as Righteousness;' and he was called the friend ofGod." James 2:21-23A person may believe that they are a great gymnast, but unless they put in thetime and work, they will never be great. One may also believe they are good at anysport or at a martial art, but without time and work, their belief means nothing.If someone would claim belief without works, then as James said, their faith isdead. Such an individual is delusional in thinking that they have salvationwithout works, just as much as an athlete would be delusional to "run a race"without practice."We maintain therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works ofthe Torah." Romans 3:28In reply to this James the Brother of Jesus said: "Even so faith, if it has notworks, is dead, being alone. Yes, a man may say, you have faith, and I have works:show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.You believe that there is one God; you do well: the devils also believe, andtremble. But will you know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was notAbraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon thealtar?" James 2:17-21According the Bible Paul never met Jesus in person. He only claimed to have beentold by Jesus' spirit to stop persecuting Jesus who Paul and his propagandistsclaim was actually in Heaven at that time.In short, the case against Paul doesn't look too good. Aside from being named outrightly in the Habakkuk Pesher of the Qumran "Dead Sea Scrolls" and foundconsonantally named in the Book of Habakkuk (which, recall, didn't havediacritical vowel marking ascribed to it until absolutely no earlier than the 6thcentury C.E., and possibly not until the 10th or 11th century), Paul was alsoblind in the right eye, fitting the Book of Zechariah's prophecy of the Antichristcalled "the Worthless Shepherd" (Zechariah 11:17), and also the many Islaamic"Ahadeeth" (oral traditions) speaking of the "Antichrist" (Maseehu-d-Dajjaal), asbeing blind in the right eye.Beyond that, Paul was an admitted murderer who never stood trial for his crimes.He merely claimed that the "blood of Jesus" had absolved him from his sins. Whatcivilized person would accept such a defense from admitted murderers wishing toescape justice today or 2,000 years ago?Moreover, Paul said that "Christ" spoke his very words, that "Christ" lived withinhim and that this same "Christ" was his god. While this may seem quite innocentenough to the modern day Christian who was reared on Christian theology, Paul wasin effect claiming to be speaking for his god, claimed to be essentially possessedby his god and accordingly claimed to be the flesh within which his god wasclothed. This is a very dangerous position for one defining theology to be placingthemselves in. For if "Christ" lives within you and "Christ" is the same God whoCreated the Universe, who you pray to, and the like, and at that same time you areclaiming that your lips are moving but it is this "God" speaking the words, thenyou are essentially claiming to BE "God" for all PRACTICAL purposes.Interestingly, Paul himself never once admits that he was from Tarsus, Greekmythology's entrance to "Hades" or "Sheol" in Hebrew (consonantally the samespelling as Paul's Hebrew name "Sha'ul"). This fact is written in his biography,the book of Acts, after his mysterious disappearance and presumed death in 65 C.E.Why does Paul himself keep his Roman origins from us if not for the fact that Jewshas long known from oral tradition that the Antichrist or "Armilus" was to be a"Roman Jew?"Though Paul spoke of his preaching of "the Gospel" he himself tells us little tonothing of the historical "Yashua Ha'Mashiach" or "Jesus Christ." Whatbiographical information could an individual who had never been around the Messiahpossibly tell us about him? The "Gospel" or "Good News" that Paul was preachingwas not the "Good News" of the Messiah and his Torah-based teachings, it wasinstead the "Good News" that the pagan Roman Imperialists could continue to eatthe flesh of swine, eat flesh sacrificed to satanic idols, disregard the Torahthat Jesus told us would never pass away (Matthew 5:17-20) and still attain"salvation" through "faith," alone. This was the very notion that James theBrother of Jesus vehemently attacked in the canonical Book of James.Finally, 500 years after these events, the `Arab prophet Muhammad - who wasforetold throughout the Torah and also by Jesus himself - claimed that the"Antichrist" was a bowlegged individual, blind in the right eye, who had for sometime been held captive in chains beneath a monastery on an island in theMediterranean Sea. Barring the seemingly strange accounts of his long life-spanand subterranean imprisonment, this description fits that of Sha'ul, down to everylast detail and is admitted by Christian historians and in the non-Canonicalaccounts of Paul and Thekla."Who is wise and understanding among you? Let him show by his good conduct thathis deeds are done in gentleness of wisdom. But if you have bitter jealousy andselfish ambition in your heart, don't boast and don't lie against the truth."James 3:13-14What James was talking about follows in the boastings of Paul: "Are they Hebrews?so am I. Are they Israelites? so am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? So am I. Arethey ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool) I am more; in labors more abundant,in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths often." 2Corinthians 11:22-23"As the truth of Christ is in me, no one will stop me from this boasting in theregions of Achaia. Why? Because I don't love you? God knows." 2 Corinthians 11:10-11"I say again, Let no man think me a fool; if otherwise, yet as a fool receive me,that I may boast myself a little." 2 Corinthians 11:16Line for line, the debate matches up; point by point through the admonitions ofJames regarding the wickedness of Paul. Yet still there are so many who will neverchose to see that their master Paul was a murderer, deceiver and imposter from thebeginning, and still to this very day nothing has changed.As well, Paul admitted to theft and swindling churches. These are his own words:"I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service." 2 Corinthians11:8Paul's defensiveness over being called "the Liar" in the Dead Sea Scrolls is quiteclear. In his "Epistles" he says:"The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore, knowthat I do not lie." 2 Corinthians 11:31"I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness inthe Holy Ghost." Romans 9:1"Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ,and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity." 1 Timothy 2:7"Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not." Galatians1:20Were this anyone besides Paul, all would accuse him of lying, if for no otherreason than for the fact that he was so redundant about claiming that he is not"The Liar" of the Dead Sea Scrolls of Yochanan (John the Baptist/Immerser), Jesusand James' Community?One must never imagine that someone is an "Apostle" simply because they claim tobe. For Jesus Christ warned us numerously of such "wolves in sheep's clothing." Tothis day history leaves us no record of Paul having answered his critics. To thisday he has not explained why he said one thing and Jesus said another. He has notexplained why there is no positive prophecy mentioning him anywhere in the Bible,if he was in fact intended by God to be such a central, or even extant figure."Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law (Torah) or the Prophets(Nevi'im); I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you thetruth, until Heaven and Earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the leaststroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law; until everything isaccomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these Commandments (Mitzvot)and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of Heaven,but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in thekingdom of Heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that ofthe Pharisees and the teachers of the Law, you will certainly not enter theKingdom of Heaven." Matthew 5:17-20However, in utter contradiction to Jesus Christ's affirmation of the eternalvalidity of the Torah, as long as Heaven and Earth are extant, Paul blasphemouslyclaims that the Messiah came to "destroy the barrier... by abolishing in his fleshthe Torah." This alone is proof that Paul is an outright Imposter and Liar, theGreat Pretender."But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near throughthe blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and hasdestroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his fleshthe Law with its commandments and regulations." Ephesians 2:13-15So who is right? Is Jesus correct when he says "I have not come to abolish theLaw" or is Paul right when he says that Jesus "destroyed the barrier... byabolishing in his flesh the Law with its commandments and regulations?" Was JesusChrist right when he said that Heaven and Earth would sooner pass away than "oneletter of the Law," or should we instead follow Paul who said the anti-thesis ofMessiah's words: "But now the Law has come to an end with Christ and everyone whohas faith may be justified." Romans 10:4Again i ask you, did Jesus Christ, Yashuah Ha'Mashiach, not say himself that aslave cannot serve two masters?"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, butonly the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. Many will say to me on thatday, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name? Did we not drive out demons inyour name? Did we not do mighty deeds in your name?' Then I will declare to themsolemnly, 'I never knew you. Depart from me, you workers of LAWLESSNESS(anomian).'" Matthew 7:21-23
Comments