Book Review
Jesus' Words Only
Here is a book I hope will be causing a major uproar in Christianity in the days to come. Its writing is literally centuries overdue. The author, Douglas J. Del Tondo, a professional attorney, revives the nearly 2000 year old, cold case against Paul's supposed apostleship and his unique anti-Law-of-Moses doctrine. It is a case that was first begun by Paul's contemporary James, the brother of the Lord and leader of the first church in Jerusalem. Observant readers of Acts have long noticed that the question brought by James to Paul concerning his teaching against the Law of Moses was never settled! Many have noticed that James was in full support of the Law of Moses while Paul obviously taught against it... and yet Paul went and involved himself in a purification rite that included animal sacrifice in a deliberate attempt to deceive James into believing he too was in full agreement with the ongoing validity of the Law of Moses. In the middle of his charade, Paul was arrested, and the remainder of the book of Acts is a record of events that surrounded Paul as he headed off to Rome to be tried for his troublemaking in Jerusalem by Caesar himself.
Mr. Del Tondo picks up where we were cut off from history. In his case against Paul there is no stone left unturned, and no argument common to the support of Paul's supposed apostleship that is left un-addressed. The author exposes the fact that Paul's claim of apostleship was presumptuously taken... and went unrecognized by the 12 apostles that the Lord had specifically chosen himself and spent over three years training to be his witnesses.
Mr. Del Tondo accurately demonstrates the gross differences in the teachings and doctrines of Paul over that of the Lord. He also goes on to make the solid case that it was Paul who Yahshua (Jesus) referred to when speaking to the Ephesian church as recorded in Revelation 2:2. In this text, Yahshua commending the Ephesians for rejecting someone who had claimed to be one of his apostles and was not. This is something I have also taught since starting my site over ten year ago.
Mr. Del Tondo also handles this case very thoughtfully and realistically and does not go off into wild accusations of conspiracy on Paul's part as some others have. His position is quite similar to mine in that we both believe Paul had a real conversion experience on the road to Damascus but was never commissioned to be an apostle, and because of his pride he went very wrong. Mr. Del Tondo beautifully demonstrates the parallels between Paul and Balaam, a prophet who was also on his way to curse God's people when he was confronted by heaven. Balaam converted and spoke much good for a while, but then went bad. If it can happen to Balaam and numerous others, why not Paul?
Mr. Del Tondo makes numerous other excellent points that tie it all together into a masterful prosecution case that would stand up in court today. I dare say no impartial juror would ever consider acquitting Paul after hearing Doug's case. On a couple of occasions while reading this book ,I thought Mr. Del Tondo was getting out on a limb with what I considered a tenuous new argument... only to find that after staying with him a little longer, he pulled it all together with other facts that proved his point.
If you have ever had any doubts about something Paul said, this book is a must-read for you. By the end of it, you too will agree that the only words in the NT that should be elevated to the status if "Infallible Word of God" are the words of Yahshua (Jesus) alone, and all others must comply with his teaching.
Naturally, since no two people are going to agree on everything, there are
a couple of things Mr. Del Tondo states with which I would respectfully beg to
differ, and outline below.
The first one is that Mr. Del Tondo apparently still subscribes to the "Oneness" doctrine... the teaching that Yahshua (Jesus) is God the Father Himself. This doctrine is only alluded to in his book a time or two and is not a major... or even significant premise in his case against Paul. Those familiar with my site know from my debates with others that I do not subscribe to this doctrine. (See my debate, and statement of faith) My statement here to distance myself from this doctrine is out of concern for the Jewish people who are particularly offended by it. If you are from a Jewish background, be assured, you can read this book and look beyond this doctrine that is only briefly mentioned and see the truth concerning Paul. The fact is, the Jewish person will find far more truth in this book confirming him and the nation of Israel, and will clearly see that it was Paul's doctrine that is most responsible for the schism that has existed between Judaism and Christianity.
The second point of difference, Mr. Del Tondo occasionally comes across a little too strong on the hellfire threat than I personally agree with and like to see used. Again, those familiar with my site know I believe there are two books of life (See chapter Heaven or Hell, What's at Stake).
The last significant difference I have with Mr.
Del Tondo concerns the Trophimus incident.
It is very important for me to state that these differences have no bearing on the main thrust of Mr. Del Tondo's book. They are relatively insignificant. I very highly recommend this book to anyone who has had a question about Paul. I think Mr. Del Tondo's book is the very next book everyone should read right after reading the Bible. It should be required reading for every seminary student.
If you would like to order this book, it can be purchased at Amazon at the following link,
And if it is not available at the time, it can be purchased directly from the publisher at http://www.bbotw.com/ At this site you may have to do an ISBN search. This number is 0-7414-2965-9
So go ahead and order this great book, and while you wait for it to be delivered, please help yourself to more of my site.
Scott Nelson
The Trophimus Incident
In Acts 21:26-31 Luke records the account where
Paul was accused of bringing Gentiles into the temple and his subsequent arrest.
Within this account Luke interjects this interesting note in verse 29.
“For
they had seen Trophimus the Ephesian with him in the city, whom they supposed
that Paul had brought into the temple.”
It is evident
from this that Trophimus had indeed been caught in the temple for several
reasons. 1. The fact that Luke feels the need to mention this when if it were
not true there would be no need. 2.
No one would have confused one of the Nazarites who were with Paul for a
Gentile. 3. Neither Luke nor anyone else denies Trophimus was in the temple. If
no Gentile had been in the temple, it would have been Paul’s first defense. 4.
Luke only tries to put distance from the idea that Paul physically ushered
Trophimus into the temple in that “they supposed” it.
That Trophimus
was an Ephesian and friend of Paul is not in question. How Trophimus came to
believe he had some right to enter the temple is the real question. The answer
is obvious in light of what Paul had been teaching the Ephesians as recorded in
Ephesians 2:11-22. Paul had clearly taught that there is no difference between
Jew and Gentile anymore, and God had effectively torn down the wall of
separation in the temple between the two. Thus Trophimus boldly went where no
Gentile was supposed to go. When he was caught, arrested, and interrogated, his
natural defense would have been along the lines of, “…but Paul said there is
no difference between Jew and Gentile anymore, and I therefore have a right to
go into the temple.” This would perfectly explain a number of things that
occurred after this. First, that Paul is accused of bringing Gentiles
into the temple. Second, it perfectly explains the total uproar in the city
against Paul. And third, it explains the interesting fact that James never comes
to Paul’s rescue after this event when he most certainly had the authority and
would have done so if it were all just a simple misunderstanding! Prior to this
incident, James had given Paul the benefit of the doubt concerning the rumors
that were going around about him, and had given Paul the chance to prove he
continued to stand and abide by the Law of Moses. After Trophimus defiled the
temple and his subsequent Pauline defense became known, James couldn’t defend
Paul any longer. The rumors were true. Paul
had in fact taught “…against the people, the Law, and this (temple)
place…” Acts