An overview on apostle Paul

Author Serge Etele  •  Comments (0)

The translation from French of this article has been improved from a google translation and may still be imperfect. The original article in French can be found

If you can help improving its translation, please, don't hesitate. Email the translation at:

Paul is surely the most famous apostle of Christianity. Taking into account the fact that his numerous writings shaped enough the Christian doctrine, he may well be considered as the founder of Christianity as we know it today, since it is known that Christianity of early centuries which was not yet influenced by the doctrine of Paul, was very different from today's Christianity.

The first disciples of Jesus were Jews and remained so even after his death. It is reported that the apostles were assiduous to the temple (Acts 2, 46). These apostles continued to practice Judaism, therefore, not eating anything impure (we can considere as a proof of this the vision of Peter in which he is suggested to eat reptiles, he answers: "Certainly not, Lord, I have never eaten anything ritually unclean or defiled"-Acts 10, 14).

Those apostles even were Judaizing the Gentiles who wanted to convert to God, if we trust the discrepancy Paul refers to between Cephas(Petrus) and him (Gal. 2, 14).

Peter even said to Paul when he went to Jerusalem: "Brother Paul, you can see how many thousands of Jews have become believers, and how devoted they all are to the Law" (Acts 21, 20).
This shows that none of the apostles who walked with Jesus sought to destroy the Law, on the contrary!

Only Paul has positioned himself as an enemy of the Law that he constantly seeks to denigrate and destroy.

He was thus opposed to everybody and became a vehement opponent who contradicts the Torah, contradicts the one he calls his master, that is to say Jesus and, unfortunately, also frequently contradicts himself:

When Jesus says he came not to abolish the law, that G. Himself even talks of perpetual Laws, Paul says exactly the opposite, he says that Christ has brought the Law to an end (Romans 10, 4).

When G.D tells Israel not to eat anything uncleaned (De 14, 3), Paul boldly decrees that in reality, no food is itually unclean (Rom. 14, 14) and that one can eat all () and even meat sacrificed to idols (1Cor. 8, 8), because, according to him, there is even no idols in the world (1Cor. 8, 4).

While G. commands to circumcise all male children on the 8th day, the eloquent Paul says that circumcision is nothing (1Cor 7, 19); He insists that if someone allows himself to be circumcised, then Christ will no more be for any use to him (Ga. 5, 2) (apparently, the Christ of Paul is only useful when one transgresses the commandments of G.) and, after such strong warnings, he will nevertheless circumcise his own disciple Timothy (perhaps for Christ to no more be useful to him).

When G. says it is not good that man should be alone, Paul maintains that it is good for man not to touch a woman (1Cor 7, 1) and that it is good for those virgins not to get married, and after these remarkable recommendations, it will not fail to tax of "lying spirits teachingdoctrines of demons, spread by deceitful liars, whose consciences, as if burnt those who teach (like him) not to get married (1Tim. 4, 1-3).

When Paul says that everyone should estimate the days and food following his conviction (Romans 14, 5), does this mean that God who has fixed the daily dietary laws did so in vain?

And how Paul, after having read that God forbids Israelites to eating pork and many other impure animals and even not to touch their dead bodies, he has the arrogant audacity to say (Romans 14, 14): "I know and I am persuaded by the Lord Jesus that no food of itself is ritually unclean and that one food becomes unclean for anyone who believes it is unclean"? Does he despises God's opinion who said there are impure species?

And when he adds that "the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking" (Romans 14, 17), what does that mean? That we shall not eat in the kingdom of heaven, or that eating and drinking do not affect the salvation of the soul?
In the first case, all the parables of Jesus clearly show the master of the kingdom of heaven always offering a meal.
In the second case is that means, he neglects supremely these very words of God (Isaiah 65, 2-5): "I have always been ready to welcome My people who stubbornly do what is wrong and go their own way. They shamelessly keep on making me angry. They offer pagan sacrifices in sacred gardens and burn incense on pagan altars...they eat porks and drink broth made from meat offered...I cannot stand people like that-My anger against them is like a fire that never goes out."

Since Christianity is based on the doctrine of Paul, is it surprising therefore that Christians have had for Jews, in the course of time, only contempt and hatred?

However, few Christians have sought to analyze the personality of Paul.

They hear him calling the Law of God "ministry of death" or, " ministry of condemnation" (2Cor. 3, 7), when he says that "Law was introduced in other to increase wrongdoing" (Romans 5, 20), etc. and no one wonders if these statements are from a man who fears God!

They hear him saying many things that nobody understands and that probably didn't understand better and they respect him more!

When Paul says that "For whether or not a man is circumcised means nothing; what matters is to obey God's commandments " (1Cor 7, 19), is there any meaning in that? Does he know that circumcision itself is a commandment of God? What would you think of someone who would tell you that "whether or not a driver stops at a red light is nothing; what matters is to respect the highway code "? Would that man be reasonable to you?

When Paul writes: "...Christ our Passover lamb has been sacrificed" (1Cor 5, 7), he probably forgets to add that he was also eaten, as we had to eat the Passover and that to mark the great difference between the old Passover and the new one , his blood was also drunk, act that was never performed in the old Passover belonging to the old covenant.

You have to judge if such a man was worthy to so influence Christianity!