Damascus was Paul’s first base of operation where he spread his propaganda of being a great preacher of the Jesus cause. In reality he was preaching in a manner that would repel the Orthodox Jews away from Jesus, i.e. by denigrating Moses. Initially, Paul tried to create a reputation for himself before he went to Jerusalem so he could join Jesus’ disciples as a disciple—claiming he had seen Jesus in the desert. He had hoped this would give him the stature and position from which he could sow his corruptions (Acts 9).
We demonstrate that Paul’s claimed vision, conversion story and appointment to the gentiles was not told to them. That was concocted much later. Paul realised that it was not possible to sow his corruptions in Damascus since Jesus Jewish community there was too large and his corruptions would be discovered. Whatever claims Paul made Jesus’ disciples rejected him as a liar and had nothing to do with him—but attached Barnabas to him.
The name of Jesus’ religious community was Ebionite. They were still considered as within the fold of Judaism. According to custom, guests included traveling preachers were allowed to preach to the synagogue congregation at the end of their services. Thus, Barnabas and Paul preached to Jews in the synagogues. Preaching to gentiles was incidental, i.e.: limited to those who had accepted Judaism as part of that congregation. Judaism was then a missionary religion--though Jesus commanded his disciples to confine their preaching to Israel.
Paul the Apostle inflames the Jews
paul the antichrist
What was the Apostolic Decree and why does it matter?
Since there were many gentiles who had become Judaised, it was not possible to avoid such Judaised converts entirely. They were however expected to fully comply with Moses’ Law, including males being circumcised. Paul, ever on the lookout to create differences between Orthodox Jews and Jesus Jews raised why such gentile Jewish converts in Antioch (Galatia) who accepted Jesus as the Messiah should be circumcised. Barnabas and Peter (from Judea) took the standard position that gentile converts had to follow all Moses’ Law, including circumcision.
Paul and Barnabas returned to Jerusalem seeking a ruling as to the proper theological position from James the leader of Jesus’ disciples. The Jerusalem Council was convened where James gave his binding decision. He looked at the issue in the much broader context of God’s plan for the future advent on earth of the fullest divine law, by an individual described as the coming of God Himself. At such a time, the gentiles would be brought within the Abrahamic covenant. Obviously, God’s future advent was a metaphor for a prophet reflecting his attributes perfectly—i.e. the Universal Sovereign. James decided that he could not usurp the latter’s function and that it was sufficient for gentiles converts to merely: ….abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality (Acts 15:29). This decision was clearly made under divine guidance, since it included belief in the unity of God and two basic aspects of human conduct that affects their morals, the food consumed and sexual morals.
This is important because the Apostolic Decree took place nearly two decades after Jesus’ crucifixion and Paul was present there. The Decree stated that ethnic Jews who accepted Jesus had to still comply with all aspects of Mosaic law for their salvation, within Jesus’ community. Gentile converts to Judaism who accepted Jesus as the Messiah needed still to keep a watered down version of the law. This thus proves that Paul’s assertions in his epistles that Jesus’ crucifixion had liberated the world from the curse of the law, by being a New Covenant through Jesus’ atoning sacrifice, was false. The apostles even twenty years after the crucifixion were still utilising the law and even requiring gentile Judaised converts to Jesus’ movement to continue applying some aspects of the Law, for salvation.
That Paul said nothing of such “revelations” he later claims, teaching him the above doctrines of Atonement, Resurrection and New Covenant, only exposes his hypocrisy.
Paul's lies begin in 1Thessalonians
James sent Silas, an elder from the Jerusalem Council with this Apostolic Decree, together with Paul on his second journey (Paul had made excuses not to go with Barnabas). Early on this trip Paul came across Timothy who he later recruited to his cause.
Paul could not start his corruptions openly in Silas’ presence since he knew Silas would report it back to James. Nonetheless, he began his corruptions secretly while Silas was still with him. We identify how Paul wrote 1Thessalonians under Silas’ name—who promptly disclaimed it in 2Thessalonians. 2Thessalonians also included Paul’s name—which means that he ostensibly also disclaimed 1Thessalonians. This shows that Paul had not come out openly yet. 2Thessalonians prophesied that the Man of Lawlessness who would usurp God’s throne would reveal himself once the person preventing him was taken out of the way.
After Silas had left (Acts 18), Paul propagated his corruptions openly. By the end of Paul’s second journey it was clear to Paul that he would be unable to divert the Jesus Jews away from Jesus. Seeing that his ten years of untold hardship in fulfilling his mission was doomed to failure, on his third journey he first claimed to be an apostle, in Corinthians. Later in Romans and Galatians, he claimed to be an apostle for gentiles. Clearly, Paul had decided that if he could not fulfil his mission by having a community of Jesus Jews following his doctrines, a community of gentiles would have to do—that would justify the attempted murder of Jesus and Stephen’s murder.