Topic: I4:JESUS WARNED FROM PAUL

PAUL, FALSE PROPHET (?WOLF IN LAMBS CLOTHING?), ANTI-CHRIST! (Allah knows best)

Why did Jesus call false prophets as "wolf's in sheep's clothes"? Of course because they will be hard to spot, they claim to follow Jesus and act as supposed to, and their teachings do not appear to be (so badly) wrong. But it is not so much WHAT you teach, it is also HOW (and to WHOM) you teach it:

Notice how Jesus described false prophets as Paul described himself, by words (doing) ?SIGNS? and ?MIRACLES?:

Matt.24:23. ?At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe it. 24. For false Christ?s and false prophets will appear and perform great SIGNS and MIRACLES to deceive even the elect (disciplines) - if that were possible. 25. See, I have told you ahead of time (told YOU, disciplines, as a warning). 26. "So if anyone tells you, 'There he is, out in the desert,' (Paul?s "Jesus revelation" on road to Damascus) do not go out; or, 'Here he is, in the inner rooms,' ("Jesus-revelation" in prison) do not believe it (Mohammed did not claim to have seen Jesus in desert/house, nor say to be Messiah/Christ, but Paul "prophesied" for example about persecutions of Christians in future, that were already reality and so not prophecy at all, and even claimed to be wittness to resurrection of Jesus, so God soon killed him as He promised to do in Deut.18:20-22 for ALL false prophets)?.28. Wherever the corpse is (new religion), there the vultures will gather (satan strikes).?

2.Corinth.12:12. ?When I was with you, I certainly gave you every proof that I am truly an apostle, sent to you by God himself. For I patiently did many SIGNS and wonders and MIRACLES among you.?

And if Jesus warned (in 24:23,26) about that "call" ("revelations" of Paul), about somebody claiming to have seen Jesus, WHY DID HE DO IT? And how can going to hell be depended on that, when Jesus warned about it?

Jesus HAD TO KNOW that revelation "there on the desert" (road to Damascus) and "here inside house" (Ananias, Paul in prison) will be understood as warning about Paul, as it fits totally into him (and to Ananias). Did not Jesus warn that even "ELECT", disciplines/apostles, are going to go astray? Who from history of Christianity could be more "ELECT" than them?

Why did not Jesus order to follow Paul, or why he did not clearly warned about Mohammed (pbuh), if there would have been need for that?

From Dead Sea scrolls of Qumran, it can be clearly seen that Deut.32:8 declared that Jews were not only nation to have prophets, as Christians and Jews claim, but that ?sons of God? have been given to numerous nations as Islam teaches. This is how this part went in Greek text:

"When the Most High assigned lands to the nations, when he divided up the human race, he established the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of (Qumran: ?sons of God?) angelic beings."

As in Dead Sea Scrolls, which read of the sons of God, and Greek version, which reads of the angels of god. Can word of God have so great conflict in matter so important, dividing religions? Problem really is in interpretations and understanding past times. Old Testament (Jewish) Bible is full of "sons of God" (son written with big first letter is Greek invention, as Hebrew does not have small or big letters), and so is called almost all prophets in Bible, even Adam (who had not even mother according to Bible, Koran does not deny even that he had mother/(HUMAN!)father, see beginning of astronomy/human development links and introduction). But times of persecution Matt.24:23-28 is talking about, came:

Thing is that it is FIGURE OF SPEECH for Jews, words describing someone very important for God (even Jesus himself answered accusations about using word "son of God" that "doesn?t your writings say: 'they were gods'?"). Adam, Jacob, Saul, David, Salomon, Jesus.... and many others, enough examples? Just write "son of god" into search engine on some Bible-site and you see. Jews understood that, as according to acts of apostles Jews allowed Christians to use synagogues even though they knew how Jesus was called, as Jews themselves have had prophets who were accepted by many other Jews but not by all. Jews never would have let Christians to worship Jesus as god in synagogue, so that is proof that early Christians thought him only as prophet. In fact EVERYTHING is figure of speech, as speech has only meanings that has been given for it. That is why in Islam Allah has 99 extra-names. He just shows that He makes us to call Him as He wishes. Jesus called Allah as "Father" because he wanted to make distinction between Jewish names of God and coming of Islam, to reduce conflicts on that. But situation changed:

As Paul had permission from apostles to teach pagans (Jesus himself said in Matt.15:24 that "I have not been sent but for lost sheep?s of house of Israel", and in the end mission-order meant "nations" of Israel, as there had been 13 of them), and had permission not to "bother" them by Torah or law, most pagan-Christians did not understand correctly "son of God"-term. After Jewish Christianity was almost totally wiped out by Romans in destruction of Jerusalem, pagan-Christians did came as dominant sect of Christianity and modern churches are based on their beliefs.

Paul tried to kill ALL Christians, he had army for that, but noticed that Christians just flew to other towns ("turn other cheek") and spread their message. So he understood that only possibility is to destroy threat to Judaism from inside, spreading twisted form of faith to large areas until it overcomes rest. He even send Ananias ("new Christian" according to Bible) before him to confirm his "revelations of Jesus" to another Christians, and so got credibility among Christians. That is evil. What gives more credibility to Paul than for example to Mormon-prophet Joseph Smith, who also claimed to have seen Jesus? Of course that was will of Allah too, but there is a time-limit until full responsibility is over People of the Book (Quran 2:62, and in 65:7 ?Allah puts no burden on any person beyond what He has given him?.), that separates them from pagans who are not judged only if they are "people without knowledge (about Islam)", and have not be introduced to Islam (as it is almost everywhere in Asia and Africa introduced, but still lack of literacy and information, like internet, is limiting knowledge about Islam there, as it has arrived so to west especially).

Until (late) 20th century Koran was not even translated to most European languages, and there were only few Muslims in Europe. In Asia Islam has been for thousand years everywhere (33% population Muslims), but in China and Vietnam/Laos communism and relatively small/local Muslim-populations postpone knowledge about Islam and so full judgment on "pagans", in Africa (50% Muslims) nearly only rainforest and southern areas were animistic (now Christian) where Islam had not arrived. So in fact pagans have either knew about Islam, accept it or not and be judged, or not knew about it. Christians have always KNEW ABOUT ISLAM as it has been their rivalry and very close to them, but they have NOT KNOWN what ISLAM IS ABOUT (for People of the Book this matches same as total lack of knowledge for pagan).

When that time is up, and knowledge of Islam has come for everyone (like in internet), no Christian has no excuse why they did not learn about Islam, then curse of Paul has its full affect, and many are going to hell because of him. On the other hand, Jesus told about shepherd who got that one lost sheep out of hundred back to safety in desert/mountain (depends on evangelium, both describe very well dominative natural conditions in Muslim-countries), that represents those few chosen one?s from Christians who through Bible understood that Islam is right religion (like me), and possibly move to Islamic country in safety (no need anymore for that in secularism, but in middle ages definitely, if pagans had ruled in Europe/America/Africa, then not one had got alive into Muslim-world).

As you see, Christians can be accepting Islam through Bible, even if they thought that it is corrupted, if given good and accurate enough explanations and descriptions. Proofs against Paul as evil who messed Christianity is important.

(31)

Also remember Matt.5:17-20, there Jesus told that law will not change even a bit until heavens and earth will vanish, and that whoever will teach otherwise will be called "most least" in heavens (=by those on heaven), meaning lowest hell where he is.

Paul taught that law had end into Jesus, even though Jesus claimed exact opposite as you see from part above, Jesus did not claim to "fulfil law". Jesus did not even claim that for salvation belief into crucifixion is needed, and he did not even say it is going to happen for real or ask to call him "son of God". Paul even taught (Gal.5:2) that who is going to be circumcised, cannot be saved (although Jesus himself was circumcised and as a "god" did not order before his birth not to circumcise, to give an example).

Jesus even told that satan is thief, killer and liar and will never change (and that those who have killed even one of followers of Jesus are ALWAYS going to be astray), and Paul was all those, stealing crops of Jesus by killing and lying, Paul even claimed that he had witnessed resurrection of Jesus as his "gospel is witness for it". Jesus even told he was send only for "lost lambs of children of Israel", and told about people who will go beyond seas into far away lands to get even one convert, so that they can make him even more certainly food for fire of hell than what themselves already are, that sounds what Paul (and even modern missionaries) did.

Claims that he became good have no basics, as we see result of his plan, and can see how much his teachings were in contradiction against Jesus (even though he claimed to be in his work, best way to get trust), and especially as we can see how Jesus warned about Paul and how Paul did his "mission" to destroy Christianity that threatened Jewish-religion (Paul was fundamentalist Jew when he was killing Christians) from inside, and how he did that by using pagans that understood Christianity completely in different way than Jews who were thought by other apostles (in many ways with similar methods and teachings, even though some of it was affected by Paul into wrong direction). If you would be trying to get somebody astray from teachings of Jesus, would you try to twist and use those teachings for it, or would you try to deny those completely and try teaching something completely new?

Paul saw that Christians can not be killed even with army, they just flew into other towns and spread their faith, this realization is recorded in church-history too. Paul understood that Christianity can not be wiped out unless it will have competition (and as a "bonus", competition that is not danger to Judaism, as worshipping prophet as god is not). So Paul saw that game could be lost already in Middle-East, as Christianity were spreading among Jews.

What to do? Only threat to Christianity could be VERY SIMILAR religion, because much different would not be accepted easily, and so in fact would compete among many different religions (also Judaism), and so from different people (as certain people WANT TO believe into religion Jesus founded). So Jesus had to be in plan too (it was only bonus that Jews were against him).

What could be more powerful than Israel full of Christians? Of course pagan-Rome that is controlling it. Usually result in history when two powers and religions collide, is that more different religions, more difficulty will be to assimilate/convert that minority. And so usually more less-willing head of state is to do that, as in his interests is peace and stability more than uncertain attempt to try something that simply will not work, maybe only turn against itself. Roman Christianity (= head of state also head of church in Byzantium) finally had bloody persecutions for centuries against Christians who did not accept divinity of Jesus or trinity. Arabs conquered Middle-East and North-Africa so quickly because of these oppressed minorities, who did welcome Muslims as liberators.

Paul was both Jew and Roman citizen, even proud of it. He had saw what happens when two religions mix together in Rome (there was LOT religions in Rome), logical end for all this plan was to go make Roman-pagans Christians (Rome was hated among Jews, so less danger to Judaism, and Romans did not appreciate Jews to bother to know about their religion), Paul knew well that it will form totally new religion, especially if foundation of this new religion (Torah) is forbidden and lost.

Jesus also made sure (even because of pagans) what "son of God" meant when he told (Joh.20:17) for Maria Magdalena that he is going to his father, and to theirs (Maria, disciplines, etc.) father, to his God and theirs God, or when he answered Jews accusing him claiming to be god "does not your scriptures say: 'they were gods`", meaning that it was usual that Jewish prophets were called "sons of God". He also confirmed this all by saying that God has given life to him (John.6:57).

Here is evidence how Christianity were twisted very fast after Paul founded congregations among pagans, and how "trinity" began to have its form/birth, as pagans did not know (after Paul persuaded disciplines that they do not need to be "harassed" with Torah or laws) that "son of God" is meaning somebody important for God, notice how among disciplines and Jewish Christians there were not teachings anything like this, like among these Christians with pagan background (except little in "Letters of John" as some of this is from there, those letters had no known and certain authority, Paul could have written them even by himself and order them to be send):

Ignatius of Antioch

"To the Church at Ephesus in Asia . . . chosen through true suffering by the will of the Father in Jesus Christ our God" (Letter to the Ephesians 1 [A.D. 110]).

"For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary in accord with God?s plan: of the seed of David, it is true, but also of the Holy Spirit" (ibid., 18:2).

(32)

Justin Martyr

"We will prove that we worship him reasonably; for we have learned that he is the Son of the true God himself, that he holds a second place, and the Spirit of prophecy a third. For this they accuse us of madness, saying that we attribute to a crucified man a place second to the unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator of all things; but they are ignorant of the mystery which lies therein" (First Apology 13:5?6 [A.D. 151]).

Theophilus of Antioch

"It is the attribute of God, of the most high and almighty and of the living God, not only to be everywhere, but also to see and hear all; for he can in no way be contained in a place. . . . The three days before the luminaries were created are types of the Trinity: God, his Word, and his Wisdom" (To Autolycus 2:15 [A.D. 181]).

Irenaeus

"For the Church, although dispersed throughout the whole world even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and from their disciples the faith in one God, the Father Almighty . . . and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became flesh for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit" (Against Heresies 1:10:1 [A.D. 189]).

And here is about most common "evidence" used by Christians about divinity of Jesus: Beginning from gospel of John is almost straight copy from text of Pthylo of Alexandria, Greek philosopher, who lived in 15 BC -30 AC. Only words "Word was God" is not in original text but in form "Word was God?s", that is in Greek small letter-error between two similar letters. Jesus even said that nobody (so certainly not disciplines he was talking to) has EVER heard voice of God or seen His face, and even though Jesus said that he is one with father, he also said that disciplines are one with him and God as well, so does Christians have 15 god?s? Also words of Jesus about nobody entering paradise but through him is true, according to Islam we have to believe ALL prophets to be saved, and in front of all prophets we will be on judgement. Jesus as being "way" (example of worshipping only one God, and being loyal servant of Him), "truth" (as Jesus teached about God and stated in Mark.12:29 "Hear o Israel: Your God is one God") and "life" (what you get when you do what Jesus, and also Mohammed pbuh said), is only again matter of interpretation. And if I say "I am who I am", it does not make me god!!!

Jesus himself did not say that for salvation is needed to believe into his death and resurrection through cross, or that it is required to believe into him as a god. Why would "god" not make that clear if that is most important thing? In Bible NOWHERE God said that all of the Bible is his Word, or that He will protect it from corruption, so should we count in our salvation especially for something that is not even mentioned there by Jesus/God himself? Would it not be QUITE big mistake, especially from view of Muslims, not to mention most important doctrine in religion (belief into resurrection/divinity of Jesus to be saved)???


As a small (kind of) joke in the end of all for all Christians: Christmas is for Christian shareing, and (Turkish) substitute of Jesus lives in village of Santa Claus in Rovaniemi, not in Rome. So why did not Jesus share salvation with all of the people, if he made himself to die for it, for forgiving all sins of all mankind? Why did he put stupid exception there, that one have to believe into a STUPID (not even any clear and undeniable evidence from Jesus himself) belief about Jewish prophet as a god to receive this "deed" Jesus did? Really, think about it, there is no sense of any kind...


TRANSLATED HERE SO FAR.