The Problem With Paul

Of the Ebionites it was noted by the early Church writer Irenaeus: "Those who are called Ebionites agree that the world was made by God... they use the Gospel of Matthew only, and repudiate the Apostle Paul, maintaining that he was an apostate from the Law."  What does this mean? Did the Ebionites condemn Paul?  Or did they condemn the misunderstandings of the Law that many spiritually ignorant non-Jews assumed Paul to be promoting?  The problem is not so much with Paul -- but rather, the ignorance of both the Jews and the Christians with respect to why the Ebionites seemingly condemned Paul.   

To begin to understand why the Ebionites condemned Paul, you must first understand that his Epistles were not only corrupted (see Orthodox Corruption Of The Scriptures), but numerous writings attributed to Paul were authored by anti-Jewish Gentiles who were members of the very Gnostic Greek Mystery religions.   Yet, Paul was not wrong on a number of points -- but he espoused a very different religion than Yeshua.  This fact is noted in the Encyclopedia Britannica where it writes: “In calling Paulinism 'Christocentric', one raises the question as to its relation to the Gospel proclaimed by Jesus... how far he unconsciously modified the Gospel by making Christ its subject matter rather than its revealer.... Paul... put all into so fresh a perspective as to change the relative emphasis on points central to the teaching of Jesus, and so alter its spirit. A school of writers, by no means unappreciative of Paul as they understand him, of whom W. Wrede may be taken as example, answer that Paul so changed Christianity as to become its 'second founder' - the real founder of ecclesiastical Christianity as distinct from the Christianity of Jesus.  They say, 'either Jesus or Paul' it cannot be both at once’”.  

When Paul wrote that a ritual observance of the Torah equated to the "letter that killeth" -- that the Law is spiritual, and is not to be observed outwardly in the ritual manner of the Pharisees -- is seen in the words of Epiphanius when he wrote about the Ebionites that they "do not accept Moses' Pentateuch in its entirety; certain sayings they reject... stating Christ has revealed this to me, and will blespheme most of the legislation" (Panarion 30.18.7-9).   Thus, the Law has a spiritual meaning and must be turned within using the Key of Knowledge, in order to overcome the Laws in the manner that Yeshua did.   And that the literal written word of the Torah is as a cloak for the inner soul and spiritual meaning that the people of a carnal and organic mind of this world are blind to, is seen in the statement of Jewish Mysticism in the Zohar when it warns: "Thus the tales related in the Torah are simply her outer garments, and woe to the man who regards that outer garb as the Torah itself, for such a man will be deprived of portion in the next world." (see http://ebionite.com/Torah.htm ).   Yet, in defiance of what Yeshua's Ebionite disciples observed, as well as both Paul's and the Jewish Mystics warning, most Christians attempt to read the text of the Old Testament literally and form an opinion about the nature of God and Creation.   That they cling to the literal text to their own spiritual demise, is explored in the article An Inconvenient Truth.

It is impossible to understand both the Gospel, and those points in the original Epistles where Paul was correct (prior to being corrupted), until one begins to understand the teachings of Yeshua that the Kingdom is within -- that each of us is the prodigal son of our Heavenly Father -- and that organic man dwells in what Yeshua portrayed as the "outer darkness" of mind and being (see Outer Darkness) -- and that only by picking up one's own cross and travailing in TheWay, can the inner "narrow strait gate" be opened unto you, and can you return to your Source (see Gate Of Eden).   And when Yeshua accused the very Torah Observant (carnal) leaders of the Jews of throwing away the Key of Knowledge, it was because they were interpreting the scriptures outwardly in ritual and tradition, instead of using them as the Key of Knowledge, to open the inner door to the Kingdom.   That the Ebionites were enlightened to the spiritual meaning of the Torah, and did not observe it outwardly in ritual and tradition, is the reason why Epiphanius wrote that they "do not accept Moses' Pentateuch in its entirety; certain sayings they reject... stating Christ has revealed this to me, and will blaspheme most of the legislation" (Panarion 30.18.7-9).   For them to be accused of "blaspheming most of the legislation",  means that they did not at all observe the Torah in accordance with the letter of the written word -- but rather, they understood the allegorical symbolism that was applicable to unlocking the inner door to the Kingdom.  

Many modern pseudo-Ebionites and pseudo-Nazarenes focus on the condemnation of Paul in the writings of Peter's disciple Clement, but they ignore these same writings which portray the written text of the scriptures as the "books with the power to deceive" (see Mystery Of The Books).    Which means that these pseudo-Ebionite/Nazarene groups don't at all understand why both Peter and the original Ebionites opposed and condemned Paul as the proverbial Simon Magus.    Yet, these same pseudo-Ebionite/Nazarenes who are themselves blind to the spiritual meaning of the Torah -- and have themselves been fooled and seduced by what Peter portrays at the "mystery of the books with the power to deceive" (see  An Inconvenient Truth),  remain equally blind to the spiritual meaning of the Gospels.     

The problem with Paul from an historical sense is seen in the fact that a number of non-Jews authored his Epistles in his name, and many of them were hostile to Judaism.   Paul, therefore, is the father of Christian Gnosticism -- which in and of itself is not necessarily bad -- but we must also remember that there were major differences in the Greek Mystery religions (Gnostic) and the system taught by Yeshua and the people of the New Covenant.   But since the vast majority of modern pseudo-Ebionite/Nazarenes do not understand the meaning of the word Gnosis as being Spiritual Knowledge revealed directly to the mind of True Disciples and Seekers of TheWay (see The Reality Of Gnosis),  in their ignorance they condemn and reject the Divine Manna from Heaven.   And while Paul was not wrong in his assertion that it would have been a waste of time for the non-Jews to become ritually Torah observant -- much quicker enlightenment was achieved by non-Jews who converted to a spiritual quasi-Buddhist lifestyle which was what Paul promoted.   But the problem worsened when the carnal non-Jewish converts who were themselves ignorant of the spiritual meaning of the Torah, started writing their doctrines directly into the Epistles associated with Paul.   Many of the more anti-Jewish pro-Gnostic Epistles attributed to Paul were in fact eventually suppressed by the Church, because these writings demonstrated that they were authored by a non-Jewish Gnostic.  

As an example: The second century Church Father Clement of Alexandria writes that: “And further, that the same God that furnished both the Covenants was the giver of Greek philosophy to the Greeks, by which the Almighty is glorified among the Greeks, he shows.  And it is clear from this.  Accordingly, then, from the Hellenic training, and also from that of the law are gathered into the one race of the saved people those who accept faith: not that the three peoples are separated by time, so that one might suppose three natures, but trained in different Covenants of the one Lord, by the word of the one Lord.  For that, as God wished to save the Jews by giving to them prophets, so also by raising up prophets of their own in their own tongue, as they were able to receive God’s beneficence, He distinguished the most excellent of the Greeks from the common herd, in addition to ‘Peter’s Preaching,’ the Apostle Paul will show, saying: ‘Take also the Hellenic books, read the Sibyl, how it is shown that God is one, and how the future is indicated. And taking Hystaspes, read, and you will find much more luminously and distinctly the Son of God described, and how many kings shall draw up their forces against Christ, hating Him and those that bear His name, and His faithful ones, and His patience, and His coming.’ Then in one word he asks us, ‘Whose is the world, and all that is in the world? Are they not God’s? ‘ Wherefore Peter says, that the Lord said to the apostles: ‘If any one of Israel then, wishes to repent, and by my name to believe in God, his sins shall be forgiven him, after twelve years. Go forth into the world, that no one may say, We have not heard’”.

These words attributed to Paul by Clement of Alexandria, have been suppressed by the Church, and the ignorant Christians are under the grave misconception that the Ebionite/Nazirenes opposed him merely because he condemned a ritual observance of the Torah -- which the Ebionite/Nazirenes who were Gnostic and vegetarian, did not themselves hold to.   

Some of the writings attributed to Paul were outrageous, but the ignorant Christians today know nothing about these.   As can be seen in the above words, Clement quotes an Epistle of Paul where he (the author) uses the Sibyl of the Greek Mystery religions as an authority.   He also quotes Hystaspes -- which I will provide a research article: "According to Avestan history, Vištâspa offered asylum to Zarathustra when the latter was hunted down by his opponents, the priests of the god Mithra. Later, the king organized a debate between the prophet and the priests; when Zarathustra had proved that his doctrines were superior, Vištâspa became an adherent of the new religion. Legend has elaborated this story and added an intervention by Ahuramazda in person"  (see SEARCH)   

If the Ebionite/Nazirenes would have accepted the Greek Gnosticism that was promoted under the authorship of Paul, they would have totally undermined their own position among the Essenes and Hebrews -- and would not have been able to guide carnal Jews in TheWay.   While I understand Gnosticism, these writings of Paul, and most other religious paths as alternative paths for people of different paths, I was forced to take a different position back in the first century (see Brother Of Yeshua/Jesus).    Because few Jews today understand the Inner Spiritual Revelation of the Torah, the great majority of modern Jews have been alienated from their own religion.  And because most non-Jews are too carnal to comprehend the very Gnostic Epistles of Paul -- and in not understanding the inner meaning of the scriptures (see  An Inconvenient Truth) -- and have themselves thrown away the Key of Knowledge -- they falsely believe that Yeshua did away with the Law.   This condition of profound spiritual ignorance is responsible for the greater number of Christians and Messianic Jews that have in fact alienated themselves from the teachings of TheWay that they claim to champion.  

In the book Christ or Paul?, the Rev. V.A. Holmes-Gore wrote: "Let the reader contrast the true Christian standard with that of Paul and he will see the terrible betrayal of all that the Master taught....For the surest way to betray a great Teacher is to misrepresent his message....That is what Paul and his followers did, and because the Church has followed Paul in his error it has failed lamentably to redeem the world....The teachings given by the blessed Master Christ, which the disciples John and Peter and James, the brother of the Master, tried in vain to defend and preserve intact were as utterly opposed to the Pauline Gospel as the light is opposed to the darkness."

The theologian Soren Kierkegaard, writing in The Journals, echoes the above sentiment: "In the teachings of Christ, religion is completely present tense: Jesus is the prototype and our task is to imitate him, become a disciple. But then through Paul came a basic alteration. Paul draws attention away from imitating Christ and fixes attention on the death of Christ The Atoner. What Martin Luther. in his reformation, failed to realize is that even before Catholicism, Christianity had become degenerate at the hands of Paul. Paul made Christianity the religion of Paul, not of Christ Paul threw the Christianity of Christ away, completely turning it upside down. making it just the opposite of the original proclamation of Christ"

The theologian Ernest Renan, in his book Saint Paul, wrote: "True Christianity, which will last forever, comes from the gospel words of Christ not from the epistles of Paul. The writings of Paul have been a danger and a hidden rock. the causes of the principal defects of Christian theology."

Albert Schweitzer, winner of the 1952 Nobel Peace Prize, has been called "one of the greatest Christians of his time."  He was a philosopher, physician, musician, clergyman, missionary, and theologian. In his The Quest for the Historical Jesus and his Mysticism of Paul he writes: "Paul....did not desire to know Christ....Paul shows us with what complete indifference the earthly life of Jesus was regarded....What is the significance for our faith and for our religious life, the fact that the Gospel of Paul is different from the Gospel of Jesus?....The attitude which Paul himself takes up towards the Gospel of Jesus is that he does not repeat it in the words of Jesus, and does not appeal to its authority....The fateful thing is that the Greek, the Catholic, and the Protestant theologies all contain the Gospel of Paul in a form which does not continue the Gospel of Jesus, but displaces it."

William Wrede, in his book Paul, informs us: "The oblivious contradictions in the three accounts given by Paul in regard to his conversion are enough to arouse distrust....The moral majesty of Jesus, his purity and piety, his ministry among his people, his manner as a prophet, the whole concrete ethical-religious content of his earthly life, signifies for Paul's Christology nothing whatever....The name 'disciple of Jesus' has little applicability to Paul....Jesus or Paul: this alternative characterizes, at least in part, the religious and theological warfare of the present day"

Rudolf Bultman, one of the most respected theologians, wrote in his Significance of the Historical Jesus for the Theology of Paul: "It is most obvious that Paul does not appeal to the words of the Lord in support of his....views. when the essentially Pauline conceptions are considered, it is clear that Paul is not dependent on Jesus. Jesus' teaching is -- to all intents and purposes -- irrelevant for Paul."

Walter Bauer, another eminent theologian, wrote in his Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity: "If one may be allowed to speak rather pointedly the Apostle Paul was the only Arch-Heretic known to the apostolic age."

George Bernard Shaw, winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1925; in his Androcles and the Lion, we read: "There is not one word of Pauline Christianity in the characteristic utterances of Jesus....There has really never been a more monstrous imposition perpetrated than the imposition of Paul's soul upon the soul of Jesus....It is now easy to understand how the Christianity of Jesus....was suppressed by the police and the Church, while Paulinism overran the whole western civilized world, which was at that time the Roman Empire, and was adopted by it as its official faith."

Will Durant; in his Caesar and Christ, he wrote: "Paul created a theology of which none but the vaguest warrants can be found in the words of Christ....Through these interpretations Paul could neglect the actual life and sayings of Jesus, which he had not directly known....Paul replaced conduct with creed as the test of virtue. It was a tragic change."

Martin Buber, the most respected Jewish philosopher of this century, wrote in Two Types of Faith: "The Jesus of the Sermon on the Mount is completely opposed to Paul"

In one of the best books on early Christianity, Those Incredible Christians, Dr. High Schonfield reports: "It was not only the teaching and activities of Paul which made him obnoxious to the Christian leaders: but their awareness that he set his revelations above their authority and claimed an intimacy with the mind of Jesus, greater than that of those who had companied with him on earth and had been chosen by him....It was an abomination, especially as his ideas were so contrary to what they knew of Jesus, that he should pose as the embodiment of the Messiah 's will....Paul was seen as the demon-driven enemy of the Messiah....For the legitimate Church, Paul was a dangerous and disruptive influence, bent on enlisting a large following among the Gentiles in order to provide himself with a numerical superiority with the support of which he could set at defiance the Elders at Jerusalem. Paul had been the enemy from the beginning. and because he failed in his former open hostility he had craftily insinuated himself into the fold to destroy it from within."

It is important to understand the relationship between the teachings of Jesus, and the theology that has been created from the perspective of the Epistles of the Apostle Paul -- a man who never met Jesus in his lifetime.   Under the heading of Jesus and Paul, the Encyclopedia Britannica writes: “In calling Paulinism 'Christocentric', one raises the question as to its relation to the Gospel proclaimed by Jesus... how far he unconsciously modified the Gospel by making Christ its subject matter rather than its revealer.... Paul... put all into so fresh a perspective as to change the relative emphasis on points central to the teaching of Jesus, and so alter its spirit. A school of writers, by no means unappreciative of Paul as they understand him, of whom W. Wrede may be taken as example, answer that Paul so changed Christianity as to become its 'second founder' - the real founder of ecclesiastical Christianity as distinct from the Christianity of Jesus.  They say, 'either Jesus or Paul' it cannot be both at once’”.