If Yeshua was referring to Paul as a false apostle and liar in the book of Revelation, how is it he was a liar? His claim of apostleship itself would be the most obvious lie, but in my thinking, the label “liar” goes further and implies a character defect that is habitual. Interestingly enough, just by the way Yeshua stated it, he appears to make the same distinction.
“And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars.”
Revelation 2:2 NKJV
Notice that the idea of being an apostle is completely negated first by Yeshua and then the idea of liar appears in addition to the fact they were not apostles. It would appear that Yeshua is saying the Ephesians found Paul, and possibly Timothy as well, to be liars in general! So if these two were the ones Yeshua was referring to, I would expect there to be significant evidence that they made a practice of lying and not telling the truth. Of course, Paul’s many doctrinal errors and abuses of Scripture could come under the heading of lies, and Timothy would have undoubtedly preached them since he stayed in Ephesus to make sure only Paul’s doctrines were being taught, but there is significant proof that Paul was indeed a habitual liar.
Consider then, if Paul’s letters are the inspired and infallible word of Almighty God, breathed through Paul by the Holy Spirit …as Christian doctrine asserts, would it have been possible for Paul to have told an outright lie in them? I think not. So if he did, what would that directly imply concerning the notion that his words are God’s words? Consider the following.
Paul and the Jerusalem Council
In the book of Acts, Luke records two separate trips Paul made to Jerusalem to discuss doctrinal matters with the head Messianic leaders, Peter and James. The first incident is recorded in Acts 15. Here, as the story goes, there had been a disagreement as to whether the Gentile believers needed to be circumcised. So Paul and Barnabas were sent to Jerusalem to find an answer to the question. When they came to Jerusalem, the elders received them, and Paul told them of his work among the Gentiles. At this point, a group of believing Pharisees stated that it was necessary for the Gentiles to be circumcised and that they be required to keep the Law. This must have been the hot topic of the day because it was just what Paul and Barnabas had been sent there to discuss. Acts says that there was “much dispute” among those who were at the conference. Then Peter speaks and makes reference to an event where he had been sent to the Gentile Cornelius, and he goes on to say these words.
“So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as He did to us, and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers or we were able to bear?”
Acts 15:8-10 NKJV
Here, Peter appears to be calling the Law an unbearable burden! This needs to be addressed before going on to the subject of Paul being a liar. Many Christians in fact teach that Peter called the Law an unbearable burden here. Then there are those on the pro-Torah side who can’t believe Peter or James would ever call the Law an unbearable burden. Some of these of the second group have actually gone on to charge Luke with lying and putting words in Peter’s mouth that he never spoke. As mentioned before, I see no reason to accuse Luke of malice. I believe Luke accurately recorded what he saw and heard. The people he quotes may have been in doctrinal error, and his own commentaries may have been made in Paul-induced ignorance, but I have a hard time with the notion that Luke was part of a grand conspiracy to destroy the Law. I see Luke as a very typical everyday person, a Gentile with honorable intentions. It is also true that Luke records events that call Paul into question as you will see. If Luke is discredited as a reporter, then nothing he says is reliable anymore …in which case we would have to dismiss the Gospel of Luke as well.
The key to understanding Peter’s quote that appears to call the Law an unbearable burden is to remember who started the argument and who he is addressing… the Pharisees. (see previous three verses. Acts 15:5-7) Even Yeshua called their idea of the Law a burden. He said:
“The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses seat. Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do. But do not do according to their works; for they say and do not do. For they bind heavy burdens hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders (like a “yoke”); but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.”
Matthew 23:2-4 NKJV
These words of Yeshua were echoing in Peter’s memory when he heard the Pharisees demand that the Gentiles keep the Law of Moses. He knew what their idea of the Law with all its added oral traditions was. A burden! Yeshua kept the whole Law as given by Moses, and yet said:
“My yoke is easy and my burden is light.”
Matt.11:30 NKJV
Listen to what the apostle John said about God’s Law.
“For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome.”
1 John 5:3 NKJV
The true unadulterated Law of Moses is not an unbearable burden. But Peter and James did not want the Pharisees dictating to the Gentiles their idea of the Law with all its traditions and additions. This is what Peter was referring to when he called the Law an unbearable yoke.
Having dealt with that issue, let’s continue. Paul and Barnabas then tell of “the many miracles and wonders God had worked through them among the Gentiles”. Then James begins to speak, and after a short speech says:
“Therefore I judge that we should not trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God, but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood. For (because) Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath.”
Acts 15:19-21 NKJV
Here, James has endorsed dietary and sexual purity laws with Moses in general. It is reasonable to assume that James intended for the four laws he outlined to be a kind of stop-gap measure, to keep the new believers from defiling themselves before they could receive the rest of the Law through the reading of Moses in the synagogues every Sabbath. Notice that it appears James is assuming the new Gentile believers will be keeping the Sabbath and they will be in the synagogues listening to Moses being read on the Sabbath! The idea of “troubling” the Gentiles is his way of saying the Pharisee’s oral law and traditions were a burden. The issue of circumcision is left up in the air. The fact is, in the Law of Moses, circumcision for Gentiles is an option and not the command that it is for those who are born the children of Israel. If a Gentile wanted to become a sojourner with Israel and take part in the Passover and other Jewish celebrations, he could become circumcised …in which case he would then be as one born of Israel. It appears that James hoped the new believers would come to desire and choose to be circumcised sojourners with Israel when they heard Moses read in the synagogues. They would then follow through with the rest of the Law concerning the feast days and so on.
The Messianic leaders then decided to write a letter to the Gentile believers. This was to be the official position on the issue, and it was given to Paul, Barnabas, and other leading men of the congregation who went with them to confirm its authenticity and see that it was delivered properly. When it comes to the subject of being a liar, the part of this official decision that we will focus on is the list of four immediate requirements concerning dietary and sexual purity laws. They are listed a second time in the official letter itself:
“…For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”
Acts 15:28,29 NKJV
Twice, these four requirements are listed in Acts 15. Later, in chapter 21, Paul returns again to Jerusalem, only this time he was in trouble for what he had been teaching. After confronting Paul about the ‘rumors’ everyone was talking about …which were that Paul had been teaching even the Jews to forsake Moses, James reiterates the list of four requirements again.
“But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written and decided that they should keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.”
Acts 21:25
…the same four requirements listed again.
Paul’s lie
In Galatians 2, Paul tells the Galatians about his first trip to Jerusalem and what was supposedly determined concerning the Law there. But first, it would be helpful to take an overview of the subject matter of the book of Galatians.
Christian theologians fondly refer to Galatians as “the Magna Carta of spiritual emancipation”. One reference says, “…it remains as the abiding monument of the liberation of Christianity from the trammels of legalism.” It is evident to the reader of Galatians that Paul’s position to the Law is quite hostile. His intention is to convince the Galatian believers not to give the time of day to the “Judaizers”, like Peter, who were teaching the Law of Moses including circumcision. As mentioned in the previous chapter, Paul twice commands the Galatians to curse anyone who teaches anything other than his doctrine. Galatians 1:8,9. Among his numerous anti-Law statements in the book of Galatians are these quotes:
“…for by the works of the Law no flesh shall be justified.” 2:16
“But that no one is justified by the Law in the sight of God is evident…” 3:11
“Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the Law…” 3:13
“Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole Law. You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by the Law; you have fallen from grace. Galatians 5:2-4 NKJV
In this last quote, Paul drops his own name as if it were a household name throughout the Roman empire that needed to be reckoned with, and with that supposed authority he tells the Galatians what is a damnable lie. He said if you become circumcised, “Christ will profit you nothing”. This alone demonstrates that Paul is a liar. It is a doctrinal untruth and therefore a lie. But this isn’t the one we’re in the process of exposing. To continue, here’s another of Paul’s anti-Law statements.
“For all the Law is fulfilled in one word, even this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself’”.
Galatians 5:14 NKJV
And this is another doctrinal lie, and still not the one we’re looking for! Yeshua said something very different.
“Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?” Yeshua said to him, “’You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the first and the great commandment. And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these TWO commandments hang ALL the law and the prophets.”
Matt. 22:36-40 NKJV
To continue again, Paul is so filled with malice toward those who preach circumcision that he even wishes the knife would slip and they would mutilate themselves and cut their own penises off! (Galatians 5:11,12) Yes, that is exactly what he is implying! In Philippians 3:2 Paul refers to circumcision as “the mutilation”. His attitude toward the Law and those who teach it is very hostile.
I have pointed out these passages to show just how against the Law of Moses Paul was. Keeping these in mind, let’s now take a look at Paul’s recounting of this meeting with the Jerusalem elders and the lie that he told to the Galatians.
“Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and also took Titus with me. And I went up by revelation, and communicated to them that gospel which I preached among the Gentiles… But from those who seemed to be something—whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man—for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter… and when James, Cephas, and John who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. They desired ONLY that we should remember the poor, the very thing which I was also eager to do.” Galatians 2:1,2,6-7,9-10
When Paul said that the church in Jerusalem desired “only” that he remember the poor, how could this be anything less than an outright lie? Remember, Paul was forcefully trying to persuade the Galatians to not be circumcised or follow the Law of Moses. As I have shown, this is the theme of the entire book. What’s more, Paul was clearly lying to the Galatians in painting the picture that he had Jerusalem’s full support to teach his anti-Law doctrine, and this in spite of the fact that he didn’t think he needed it from those who only “seemed” to be something, who “added nothing” to him. In light of his anti-Law doctrine that he was trying to drive home, he couldn’t afford to tell the truth that the official edict from Jerusalem included four requirements from the Law of Moses, three of which were dietary. So he told them a lie when he said, “They desired only that we remember the poor”. The official letter stated that the Gentiles were to“keep themselves from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.” And this lie wasn’t a simple matter of conveniently leaving out something. He went and replaced all four of them with one command that wasn’t in the official letter! Nowhere in the letter is there any mention of “remembering the poor”! Then Paul has the gall to arrogantly state it in a manner like; “…they didn’t need to tell me that either. I have always been eager to remember the poor. Those who only seemed to be something couldn’t add even that to me.”
This picture that Paul was painting to the Galatians needs to be reiterated again. In 1:18 Paul told the Galatians about his contact with the Jerusalem elders. Before this, in verses 11 and 12, he told them that his doctrine was given to him by divine revelation because he didn’t get it from any man …clearly implying it didn’t come from the original apostles who had walked with Yeshua. In 2:6-9 Paul outright states that the apostles only seemed, or appeared, to be pillars of the church because they added absolutely nothing to him and his doctrine. But, if it mattered to the Galatians, he still had Peter, James, and John’s full support anyway. This is the picture that Paul painted. His condescending arrogance alone is breathtaking …to say nothing of the lies!
After mentioning his contact with Peter, James, John, and the elders in Jerusalem to discuss what would be required of the Gentiles, he says these words.
“Now concerning the things which I write to you, indeed, before God, I do not lie.”
Galatians 1:20 NKJV
Paul had the gall to preface a lie with a lying oath of honesty! One has to ask the question of why Paul felt compelled to assure the Galatians he was not lying! Yeshua had a few words to say about taking this type of oath:
“Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord.’ But I say to you, do not swear at all, neither by heaven, for it is God’s throne’ nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes’, and your ‘No’ be ‘No’. For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.”
Matthew 5:33-37 NKJV
Paul’s own words convict him again. He was a liar, along with being a false apostle just as Yeshua had commended the Ephesian church for exposing. He was a liar regardless of whether or not the Ephesian church was aware of this particular lie. It is possible that the Ephesian church was very familiar with both Paul’s letter to the Galatians as well as the official letter from the Jerusalem council. The Jerusalem council letter would have been circulated to all the Gentile churches, and we know that Paul’s letters were being copied and circulated among the churches as well. Peter makes this apparent in 2 Peter 3:15,16 when he speaks of Paul and the content of “all his epistles”. Peter could not say this without being familiar with those that were in circulation at the time! One can also see from the passage that he assumes his readers are aware of them as well. (2 Peter 3:15,16 is the passage in which Peter appears to call Paul’s letters Scripture. I deal with this issue in chapter 10.)
The fact that Paul lied to the Galatians is by itself enough to establish him as a liar. Pride and arrogance always give rise to lying. As we have seen, Paul was incredibly full of himself. This was his character. We know this was his character because it continues. His lies to the Galatians are by no means his only.
Paul’s lie before the Sanhedrin
When Paul was arrested in the temple during his last visit to Jerusalem, he had to be rescued from the Jews by the Romans. On the following day, the Roman commander allowed Paul to be taken before Ananias the high priest, and the Sanhedrin to defend himself from the charges against him. During this trial of sorts, Paul makes an interesting claim.
But when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, “Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee; concerning the hope and resurrection of the dead I am being judged!” And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided.
Acts 23:6,7 NKJV
This was a divide-and-conquer ploy in which there was not one shred of truth. For Paul to say he was being judged on the issue of the resurrection of the dead was an outright lie. It had nothing to do with his arrest. The truth concerning why he was arrested is recorded a little earlier in Acts.
…the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him, crying out, “Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the law, and this place…”
Acts 21:27,28 NKJV
The truth is that Paul was being judged on the matter of teaching against Israel, the Law of Moses, and the temple which is exactly what he had been doing! Paul couldn’t afford to have the truth of the matter come out, so he lied. Paul had also previously said that he was willing to die in Jerusalem for his gospel. One has to ask; why, when he finally had to face it, didn’t Paul have the courage to stand by what he had in fact been teaching? More on this in the next chapter.
Paul’s lie to King Agrippa
Later in Acts, Paul lied to King Agrippa when recounting his conversion experience on the road to Damascus.
The story of Paul’s conversion on the road to Damascus is also mentioned three times in the book of Acts. The first is documented in the narrative by the author Luke.
And as he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven. Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul Saul, why are you persecuting Me?” And he said, “Who are You, Lord?” And the Lord said, “I am Yeshua, whom you are persecuting, It is hard for you to kick against the goads.” So he, trembling and astonished, said, “Lord, what do You want me to do?” And the Lord said to him, “Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”
Acts 9:3-19 NKJV
The second account is Paul’s personal account of his experience as given before the angry Jews in Jerusalem.
“Now it happened, as I journeyed and came near Damascus at about noon, suddenly a great light from heaven shone around me. And I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?’ So I answered, ‘Who are You, Lord?’ And he said to me, ‘I am Yeshua of Nazareth, Whom you are persecuting.’ …So I said, ‘What shall I do, Lord?’ And the Lord said to me, ‘Arise and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all things which are appointed for you to do.’
Acts 22:6-15 NKJV
There is no significant problem or conflict in these two accounts. Even with the slight variations, the main points remain basically the same. The fact is, they are consistent and corroborate each other.
The third record of Paul’s conversion experience is given by Paul in his own defense before King Agrippa. Here is how the story goes now.
“While thus occupied, as I journeyed to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests, at midday, O king, along the road I saw a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, shining around me and those who journeyed with me. And when we all had fallen to the ground, I heard a voice speaking to me and saying in the Hebrew language, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’ So I said, ‘Who are You , Lord?’ And he said, ‘I am Yeshua, whom you are persecuting. But rise and stand on your feet; for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to make you a minister and a witness both of the things which you have seen and of the things which I will yet reveal to you. I will deliver you from the Jewish people, as well as from the Gentiles, to whom I now send you, to open their eyes and to turn them from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me.’ Therefore, King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision…” Acts 26:12-19
This doesn’t sound anything like the previous two accounts, does it? In the other accounts, Paul wasn’t told anything except go to Damascus and there he would be told “all things” that he was to do. Now Paul wants Agrippa to believe Yeshua told him everything right there on the spot!
This is not just a simple case of information having been left out of the first two accounts. If in fact, Yeshua had actually said anything like, “Here is the reason why I have appeared to you…”, what he said immediately following this would be the main point of every recollection of the incident. But nothing of the sort can be found in the first two accounts. On the contrary, what Paul said he was told to do in the first two accounts proves that what he said in the third account was a fabricated lie. The question is: Was he told everything he was to do right there on the road to Damascus or was he told to go to Damascus where he would be told all things he was to do?
It should be apparent that Paul wanted to paint a picture for King Agrippa that he believed was his unavoidable destiny, so he embellished the account of the vision with a lie. The part of his story in bold print above is a total fabrication …sounding far more like something Paul would say than anything Yeshua would say. Paul put those words in Yeshua’s mouth. The purpose for which Yeshua confronted Paul on that road is obvious and found in his very first words: “Why are you persecuting me?” Yeshua’s purpose was to stop the persecution! That was the only reason why Yeshua stopped him. The fact that Paul obeyed and submitted himself to Yeshua by asking, “What would you have me do?” is a secondary outgrowth from the event. Had Paul stubbornly tried to continue on his way to Damascus to arrest the Messianic believers, it would have been the end of him on the spot. The scene is very reminiscent of Balaam being stopped by the Angel of the Lord because he intended to curse Israel. The parallels between Paul and Balaam are striking. They both started out as enemies of God on their way to curse God’s people when they were stopped by a blinding vision on the way. They both repented, converted, and served God for a short time, then turned on Him and His people again. If it can happen to Balaam, why not Paul?
It is evident in Paul’s story that he fabricated it to try to impress upon King Agrippa that it was divine destiny for him to be delivered from the hands of both Jews and Gentiles. Paul undoubtedly hoped that King Agrippa would agree and resign himself to Paul’s supposed destiny and let him go. But Yeshua never said those words. The proof is in the fact that Paul never was delivered from the hand of the Gentiles! It was just another big lie!
Later in the story, (Acts 26:24,28) Festus and Agrippa mock Paul and come to the conclusion Paul was little more than a harmless crackpot. This is when Paul opts for making an appeal to Caesar for justice. I’ve heard a number of Christian teachers portray Paul’s appeal to Caesar as a brilliant tactical move. But something King Agrippa said to Festus appears to have gone unnoticed.
“This man might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.”
Acts 26:32 NKJV
Paul’s appeal to Caesar is part of the subject matter of the next chapter.
Back to Outline ——- Next Chapter ——- Home ——- Contact