The apostle Paul, the writer of fourteen books of the twenty-seven in the New Testament, is called various things and dismissed because his teachings do not align with various social standards. Many claim Jesus yet reject the apostle Paul. Many have degraded Paul’s writings as though his writings have no place in the Bible. They set Paul aside for not being a disciple during Jesus’s ministry despite being converted from hostility as a witness of Jesus’s resurrection.
Conflict with Paul
The apostle started and helped start churches throughout the Mediterranean from Syria to Italy if not Spain. His words reflect the earliest record Christian beliefs and Paul’s conversion dates to 2–3 years after Jesus’s crucifixion. Paul’s words about grace and love are cast aside because he taught people to humble themselves and live lives of sexual purity. However, he is supposedly sexist for revealing God’s made men first and God set men to be spiritual leaders (1 Tim 2:11–14). Some think Paul was bigoted for exposing the depravity of a society that rejects God and is given over to sexual passions even unnatural lusts (Rom 1:24–27). Some do not prefer the church government presented in Paul’s words because each congregation is autonomously led by elders rather than a single ruling pastor, committees, votes, or a hierarchy of bishops with a Pope (1 Tim 3:1–15, Titus 1:5–9).
Paul and All the Others
What are the effects and consequences of not accepting Paul’s writings? Does not accepting Paul’s writings mean not accepting the rest of the writings in the Christian Scriptures? If you do not accept Paul, then you cannot accept 2 Peter because the writer accepted the writings of Paul as Scripture (2 Pet 3:16). No one can reject Paul and accept 1 John as that book recognizes the writing of the apostles including Peter (1 John 1:1–4). Furthermore, Peter also accepted John (2 Pet 1:16–21). Now, those who reject Paul must reject 1 Peter to be consistent. After all, the apostle Peter instructed Christians to subordinate to the governing authorities, servants subordinate to masters, and wives subordinate to husbands (1 Pet 2:13–3:6).
By rejecting Paul’s writings, one would have to dismiss the Gospel of Luke since Luke was with Paul and agreed with Paul (Acts 16:10). Paul quoted Luke’s Gospel as Scripture (1 Tim 5:18; cf. Luke 10:7; 2 Tim 2:8). Setting aside Luke also means setting aside Luke’s book of Acts and the previously written gospel narratives that Luke mentioned in Luke 1:1–3. The gospel narratives that Luke extensively shares material with the Gospel of Matthew and shares chronology with the Gospel of Mark. This leaves only two New Testament authors, James and Jude. However, Jude closely resembles 2 Peter 2 even speaking of fulfillment of Peter’s revelation, so the one rejecting Paul and Peter could not reasonably accept Jude. James was also an apostle with Peter, associated with the Twelve, and accepted Paul (Acts 15; Gal 1:18–2:10), so someone dismissing Paul would dismiss James’s epistle.
The Cross on Christ
If someone rejects Christ’s words given through the apostle Paul, do they reject Christ? Paul taught about the apostles of Christ, “These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches” (1 Cor 2:13). This is just as Jesus declared that He would give His words to His apostles (John 17:8). Those who listened to Jesus would listen to His apostles (John 15:20). Jesus also revealed that He would send His Spirit to guide His apostles in all truth (John 14:26; 16:12–13). Because of this, Paul wrote, “If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord” (1 Cor 14:37). Paul was converted by Christ, claimed revelation from Christ, preached a gospel revealed separately yet was accepted and approved by the other apostles (Gal 1:11–19, 23; 2:2, 9).
The consequences of rejecting Paul’s writings are devastating so that such a person enters into a cloudy deism at least. Rejecting the writings of Paul means rejecting the New Testament. By rejecting the New Testament, the consistent person would reject all the words of Jesus found throughout the Gospels, Acts, Epistles, and Revelation. However, as previously noted, Jesus revealed that all of the Truth in Christ’s words were given to His apostles as revealed through His Spirit. By dismissing Paul, there goes the apostolic Scriptures and the early Christian faith (Eph 2:20; 3:5).
You or God?
The rejection of Paul is a character judgment of the sincerity and honesty of Paul and all of the New Testament writers. Can believers dismiss the apostle Paul and by so doing dismiss Christ? Jesus declared, “My doctrine is not Mine, but His who sent Me. If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is from God or whether I speak on My own authority” (John 7:16–17). When dismissing Paul’s words for conflict of one’s preferred social ethics and personal righteousness? Are people to listen to their own hearts first or to God’s Word in the Scriptures? Jesus proclaimed, “For what is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God” (Luke 16:15). Jesus taught things that offended people so that crowds stopped following Him (John 6:66). Isaiah presents God’s words, “‘For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways,’ says the LORD. ‘For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts'” (Isaiah 55:8–9). Rejecting Paul’s words includes questioning Paul’s inspiration noted by his definition of love, his proclamation of the fruits of the Spirit, and much more. Such rejection devastates holy virtue in the faithful. Can highly esteemed opinions stand against Paul’s most profound statements? Should anyone consider personal thoughts higher than God’s thoughts?
By rejecting Jesus’s words given through His apostles and prophets, then faith is all or nothing for the Scriptures. Should people give up prejudices toward the Bible that are based on their personal morality? Should people reinterpret certain scriptural writers to disregard teachings that offend them and others? The whole point of the Bible is to reveal God because humanity is sinful and will contradict God.
True Christian discipleship starts with Christ. True faith consists of essential virtues of humility and meekness for which the world mocks and scoffs at the thought of such for their declaration of “pride.” However, the apostles taught everyone to subordinate to God in faith, thus to subordinate to their government, their masters, and each other (1 Pet 2:13–3:6). Humble submission to God is the virtue of true faith that trusts in the God of Jesus Christ. By this, Christians trust God to work things out through His grace. Without sincere humility, there is no real faith, and this is what this discussion is all about. Humble yourself before the words of Christ as delivered through His apostles and prophets, and let no one consider one’s thoughts greater than God and His Son, Jesus Christ.
Seeing God's Breath 
Great Article!!
LikeLike
You are saying this as though it weren’t universally agreed upon by any scholar who isn’t a creedalist that 2 Peter is an obvious and blatant pseudepigraph written over 50 years after Peter died.
The only books you need to remove on top of Paul’s letters are Luke, Acts, and 2 Peter. The whole arch of your argument and all of the moralistic simperings and beggings for sympathy fall apart with a great crash when you realize that without Paul: Matthew, Mark, John, James, Jude, Peter, and the Apocalypse stand stronger and with less contradictions than with Saul in the picture.
LikeLike
To clarify, since my former post must obviously leave questionable motives for the way I mentioned the Simon Magus issue.. it’s only fair that I clarify my stance on this, so anyone reading this can make a sound judgement call on my own personal faith, considering I do not attend or endorse any church establishment..
So after studying the historical records of the Vatican, I have concluded the following, and they are only my own conclusions based on my research:
1. Ireneaus’ claim of being an understudy of Polycarp, being an understudy of Apostle John does has merit or historical evidence, but is based simply on his own claim.
Irenaeus’ actions against what he himself, on behalf of the early remnants of Roman Catholic Church, called “heresies” are not only of doctrines he himself lived by; but also were a result of him slandering his political rivals, namely, people like his rival, Valentinius.. with contradicting stories by other Roman church authorities throughout the Roman Empire of that one, Simon Magus now practicing witchcraft, and attributing all of it to what seems to be anyone who disagreed with the Roman church..
Under Emperor Commodus (I may have the emperor wrong, due to latency in historical inaccuracies regarding time periods) near the end of the 2nd century, Pope /Bishop Victor 1, excommunucated ALL churches in Asia Minor, including Philadelphia, and although it was said that Irenaeus “rebuked” Victor 1, Ireneaus, remained in good, honorable standing with a religious authority who just so happened to excommunicate major figured in the early church..
I encourage people to research Irenaeus’ interpretation of the book of Revelation as everything he said regarding it, points in all directions except his own “developing Christian catholic Roman world order” and when he backs himself into a corner of having to do so, he paints the prophesies in a light of taking place in a distant future, where the true Christianity of the catholic order undergoes a future apostacy..
If anyone wishes to believe him, that’s fine.. However, the point is, he directs all attention away from what Rome was doing to the Christianites at that time. His writings of what he called heretics and the enemy of the church were clearly anyone and everyone EXCEPT the Roman Empire or the Roman church. For all his piety and supposed faith wisdom and legitimacy, Irenaeus lacks that same righteous indignation towards his own Roman Empire; and instead, paints a picture of all too many sects of Christianity (of whom were poor and commonfolk) as practicing “witchcraft” which is erroneous and all too similar to the false cases made by the Pharisees against Yeshua… who both The Pharisees and the Roman order’s, leaders crucified.
Lastly, there’s a popular controversy that some say is disproved while others don’t, about Ireneaus claiming that Yeshua died at the age of 50.. thus devalidating his claim to be a second generation understudy of John or any other direct ties to the original Apostles.
Ireneaus, also, admitted to practicing the very hermetic traditions he based his anti heresy campaign on, to include Easter, December 25th, Sunday, naming the Sabbath Saturn’s day (Saturn, being Satan, Marduk), worshipping Sophia as a godhead instead of attributing “Saphira” as a feminine transliteration of “Spiritual Wisdom” as spoken of, by King Solomon in Proverbs.. ask of which are evidences of blasphemy of the holy spirit and calling good evil and evil good.. Christian apologetics, ignore this, while foolishly accusing the early Christians of “worshipping” queen of heaven, Asheroth , and attribute it to the Kabbalah for its use of Saphirah , while ignoring that Solomon and many other biblical figures referred to “Wisdom” as a “her”… thus, by default, validating Irenaeus’ deception and devalidating true Christians .. because of cherry picking a technicality in biblical etymology .
I challenge anyone and everyone to please dispute all this as doing so, will prompt research.
LikeLike
Hi people, I’m not a member of any church. I’m here simply because I USED to be a religious person.. and as a result, I’ve spent over 30 years reading all things regarding this issue as possible.
I say this to encourage people to research these evidences on their own, not to cause fighting but to further faith wisdom and knowledge among all people.
Here are the facts:
1.Yeshua did appoint James The Just as a trustworthy advocate of truth for those in need of clarification in matters of confusion and deception. (Look it up)
2. Yeshua made a spiritual declaration regarding the apostle formerly known as Simon.. as the example of the very definition of this faith which El Shaddai , through Christ SHALL be the solid cornerstone of The House of El Shaddai.. although, not a physical temple, rather the kind of temple spoken of in the end of Revelation…. STILL to be shown to provide evidence of works , as works are a result of faith and grace. If John the Baptist, the greatest of all prophets openly challenged the Pharisees (Paul himself described himself as a Pharisee, then a Roman, then an apostle, look it up) to produce “fruits of repentance”…understandably, people choose to take the entire declaration as non literal, while dismissing the fact that the declaration did in fact include a literal attribution to Simon’s weak, Satanic, faithless, worldly cares of man regarding The Word entering Jerusalem; to the new , solid Rock who is Peter.. and all who do as Peter, has, that same blessing.
3. Yeshua warned about those who say, “Look, he comes in the wilderness, look, he comes in the secret chambers”… Saul of Tarsis, after killing apostle Stephen for blowing the whistle on the Pharisees ignorant worship of Saklas/ Remthan as a representation of worshipping Yahweh, faith in a temple and other spiritual foolishness… The Clementine homilies of the Ebionites, who Pauline Romans , in the spirit of Pauline Roman Bishop Ireneaus declared as “heretics” wrote about their own clarification of who Simon Magus really was, as opposed to who the church of Rome said Simon Magus was.. that this SM was none other than Paul, and they recorded a historical count of Paul having James Killed AFTER Paul’s supposed conversion. This leaves us to either side with people like Ireneaus, Paul and Victor 1 , who excommunicated all Churches in Asia Minor including the church of Philadelphia, or the ebionites who isn’t taught about in Sunday school, yet geographically holds a certain evidence of their element in this matter.
As for the this impostor, Yeshua WARNED about, showing up in secret chambers, where did Paul recovered his eyesight?
4. Paul’s own letters contradiction in doctrine and personal schism between himself and the ones who actually spent time with Yeshua..
Paul saw a light from heaven, Yeshua said he saw Satan fall from heaven as lightning.. how do you get around that one?
5. Look up Paul’s relationship to Nero.. whether accurate or not, these allegations must be considered.
Thank you all for reading my two cents.. think for yourselves and think with a clear mind, reason and impartiality
LikeLike
I think you need to reconsider your position. Please, take another look at your facts.
LikeLike