I realize the following article is lengthy but it is comprehensive. It addresses much of the false accusations against the Apostleship of Paul. Please enjoy and get informed.
What a precious treasure we have in our salvation, in Yeshua, and in the Bible. Sadly, though, there are those who are out to steal all three treasures from us. I personally know of several brethren in my circle of acquaintances who have renounced Yeshua as their Savior. They failed to guard their treasure and their hearts. Those treasures were stolen from them. The theft occurred slowly over time and it all began with doubting the Apostle Paul.
The Ebionite teaching that the Apostle Paul is a false apostle is being revived. If it hasn't touched you yet, it will. This study is actually a refutation to an article entitled, "Paul, The Good, The Bad, The Ugly", as well as other accusations not found in that article. Hopefully, this refutation will prepare you to discern the truth of the matter.
The foundation of the belief that Paul is a false Apostle lies in the inability to harmonize Paul with the rest of the Bible. Rather than waiting on Yahweh to provide understanding concerning Paul's writings, the anti-Paulists prefer to simply dismiss his writings as those of a false teacher. Peter warned us that this would happen.
2 Peter 3:15,16 reads, "And account that the longsuffering of our Master is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."
Conveniently, however, anti-Paulists would say that the second epistle of Peter was not written by the Apostle Peter and therefore should not be part of our current New Testament canon. This reveals the extent that they will go. They would discard the entire epistle in order to get rid of two verses in support of Paul. The fact is that no one knows for sure that Peter did not write this second epistle. At this point in time it is simply a theory. I offer two sources which defend Peter as the author of the second epistle; 1 , 2.
Historical Arguments
Anti-Paulists have no choice but to discard "The Acts of the Apostles" as well because it, too, contains pro-Paul statements. Luke, for example, calls Paul an "apostle" twice in one chapter (Acts 14:4, 14). The anti-Paulist says of those two verses;
"By this time in the record, Luke would have been very familiar with Paul calling himself an apostle and was no doubt in agreement with Paul's assessment of himself. By these statistics alone, it is evident that Paul is by far his own biggest fan... and his side kick Luke was his number two fan. This leaves no one else anywhere in the Bible going on record as recognizing his apostleship!"
Luke is also the only one in the Bible who goes on record to describe the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Feast of Weeks). Should we doubt that account because only Luke records it? Of course not.
According to Yeshua's words to Ananaias, Paul was specifically chosen by Yeshua to bear his name before the Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel (Acts 9:15). In other words, he was sent by Yeshua which is what the word "apostle" means. We see Paul's actual separation as a sent one (apostle) in Acts 13:1-4 where the Holy Spirit spoke to the prophets and teachers in the Antioch congregation.
"Now there were in the assembly that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to the Master, and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. So they, being sent forth by the Holy Spirit, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus."
It was actually the Holy Spirit that separated Barnabas and Paul for the work. Was the Holy Spirit incorrect in doing that?
Anti-Paulists will attempt to discredit Luke and Paul by showing how the three accounts of Paul's conversion differ from one another. Acts 9:7 says the men traveling with Paul "heard a voice". Acts 22:9 says of those same men, "they heard not the voice of him that spoke to me".
I offer three possible reasons for this difference;
1) One voice spoke to Paul while a different voice spoke to the rest saying something like, "Fear not"
2) They heard the same voice, but could not hear the actual words that were spoken
3) They heard all the words, but did not understand. The Greek word for "hear" can have the meaning of "understand" as in Jn. 8:43,47. The NIV uses the word "understand" in Acts 22:9, basing it upon the Greek text which reads differently.
9:7 - akouontes men tes phones
22:9 - ten de phonen ouk ekousan tou lalountos moi
Here are the notes from Dr. James R. White (a Greek scholar) in his book entitled, "Scripture Alone", pg.160:
"First, in 9:7 akouo, the verb that means "to hear," is a nominative plural participle; in 22:9 it is a plural aorist verb.
Second, in 9:7 phone, a "sound" or "voice," is a singular genetive noun; in 22:9 it is a singular accusative noun.
Third, in 9:7 akouo precedes its object; in 22:9 it follows its object. Fourth, in 9:7 the phrase is not modified; in 22:9 it is modified by "of the one speaking to me."
Finally, in 9:7 Luke is narrating an event in Greek; in 22:9 Paul is speaking to a crowd in Hebrew or Aramaic . . ."
The context of Acts 22:9 suggests that the reason the men did not hear the voice is because the voice was speaking to Paul in Hebrew, which they did not understand. Remember, Paul said they did not hear the voice and then says, "of the one speaking to me."
That either Paul or Luke was lying is not a valid choice.
Acts 29:9-18 is the third conversion account wherein Paul goes into greater detail as to what Yeshua said to him. These differences in Paul's conversion account lead anti-Paulists to doubt his apostleship.
I don't know about you, but when I give my testimony to people, it never comes out the same. I share more info with certain people than with others based on who I'm talking to and how much time I have to give my testimony. To accuse Paul of lying to King Agrippa when giving his testimony for the third time is outrageous to say the least
Anti-Paulists accuse Paul of lying in Acts 23:6. It reads as follows:
"But when Paul perceived that the 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: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question."
They contend that he was not called in question over the resurrection, but simply lied in order to save himself. Let's look back and see what the original cause was. In Acts 21:28, Paul was falsely accused of bringing Greeks into the temple. I say "falsely" because his accusers only "supposed" that Paul brought Trophimus into the temple (Acts 21:29).
As Paul was being led away, he asked to speak to the people. He then began to recount his conversion in which he told them the resurrected Savior spoke to him. This speech took place in Jerusalem where everyone was well aware of the events that took place in putting Yeshua to death. By saying Yeshua spoke to him after his death, Paul was confirming his resurrection, through which all believers have hope in a future resurrection. Is that not what Paul said in Acts 23:6: "of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question"? Eventually, the mob cried out, "Away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live" (Acts 22:22).
Paul is then taken before the Sanhedrin where he makes an honest mistake in rebuking the high priest out of ignorance of his identity (Acts 23:2-5). Anti-Paulists accuse Paul of lying here as well. They say he had to know it was the high priest because he knew he was his judge and he knew the difference between the Pharisees and Sadducees. Paul, however, had been absent from Jersualem for quite a while, during which a change in the high priest may have been made. High priests at that time were set up at the whim of the Roman government for political reasons. Additionally, any number of other circumstances may have led to Paul's ignorance in this matter.
What saddens me is that the anti-Paulists do not give Paul the benefit of the doubt in anything. They are so quick to condemn Paul in every little point they can dig up.
Paul's ensuing comments in verse 6 were perfectly true, for that is the real reason why any believer is persecuted. That is why they falsely accused Stephen in Acts 6:11-12 as well as Paul in Acts 21:28.
The Sanhedrin were well aware of that because they were guilty of such persecution for that very reason. Acts 22:4-5 read as follows:
"And I persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women. As also the high priest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the elders: from whom also I received letters unto the brethren, and went to Damascus, to bring them which were there bound unto Jerusalem, for to be punished."
Paul was commissioned by the high priest and the council of elders to imprison as many of Yeshua's followers as he could find. See also Acts 9:1-2.
Anti-Paulists continue their attack on Paul by showing how he fulfills Mt.10:16-18. It reads,
"Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues; And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles."
The accounts of Saul's persecution of believers certainly seem to fulfill those verses, but does Paul's actions prior to his conversion really matter? What about the prediction Yeshua made in Mt.26:34?
"Yeshua said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this night, before the rooster crow, thou shalt deny me thrice."
Should we also consider Peter a false apostle based on his actions prior to conversion? What about each of us? Were we not forgiven of much at our conversion? So, too, should Saul of Tarsus be forgiven.
Paul is also accused of lying to the Galatians. To understand this false accusation, we need to first read Acts 15:19-29;
"Wherefore my judgment is, that we trouble not them that from among the Gentiles turn to [Elohim]; but that we write unto them, that they abstain from the pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from what is strangled, and from blood. For Moses from generations of old hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath. Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole assembly, to choose men out of their company, and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren: and they wrote thus by them, The apostles and the elders, brethren, unto the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greeting: Forasmuch as we have heard that certain who went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls; to whom we gave no commandment; it seemed good unto us, having come to one accord, to choose out men and send them unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Master Yeshua Messiah."
Please note that James calls Paul and Barnabas "beloved". Do the anti-Paulists seek to throw James out of the NT canon as well?
"We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who themselves also shall tell you the same things by word of mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication; from which if you keep yourselves, it shall be well with you. Fare you well.
"There are actually several things going on here but first I want to focus on the instructions of the council. They instruct Paul to write to the churches that they avoid eating meat sacrificed to idols and from meat with blood, and from fornication (or idolatry). This is very clear. So what did Paul write to the churches about his instructions from Jerusalem?"
Galatians 2:7-10 (NASB95)
7 But on the contrary, seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised 8 (for He who effectually worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised effectually worked for me also to the Gentiles), 9 and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, so that we might go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. 10 They only asked us to remember the poor the very thing I also was eager to do.
WHOA! What just happened? Paul admits to being in Jerusalem. He admits to having met the apostles. He brags that they accepted him as a brother and then concludes that all they asked us to do was remember the poor which I will gladly do. Where did this come from? Did the council ask Paul to tell the churches to remember the poor? NO! The council told Paul to write to the churches to avoid eating meat sacrificed to idols and from fornication (idolatry). Did Paul flat out lie here? Again, we will note that Paul not only refused to pass along the warning from Jerusalem but he actually taught the OPPOSITE to the churches (that is that it is ok to eat meat sacrificed to idols)."
There are actually several accusations here. I'll address the last one first. They said, " Again, we will note that Paul not only refused to pass along the warning from Jerusalem . . ." Is that true? One need only continue reading Acts 15:30-31;
"So they, when they were dismissed, came down to Antioch; and having gathered the multitude together, they delivered the epistle. And when they had read it, they rejoiced for the consolation."
Acts 16:4-5 read as follows:
"And as they went on their way through the cities, they delivered them the decrees to keep which had been ordained of the apostles and elders that were at Jerusalem. So the assemblies were strengthened in the faith, and increased in number daily."
So was Paul actually lying? No. It's the anti-Paulist's who have grossly erred in assuming and falsely accusing Paul.
Thank you LitleDavid for your defense of the Pauline Epistles.
It is interesting to note that we have had 4 attackers of the Pauline Epistles in the last 6 months:
Hark, ADAM7777, Sadlup and Chuckles!!!!
Chuckles Satanic Quotes:
"Paul's advice should stand or fall on its own, rather than being declared words from the lips of God and therefore "New Commandments."
"Paul's advice is not a New Commandment from God."
"Who made Paul's words into God's word for all churches for all time????" "You have no Scriptural support to back your assertion that Paul can impose (new) Commandments as Moses and Jesus."
"Who gave Paul equal authority with Moses and Jesus to write new commandments?"
Neither Moses or Paul had the authority to make new commandments!!
2 Peter 1:20-21: Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit!
God the Father inspired the 32 writers of the OT to write what He wanted them to write. Just as God the Father gave Jesus all authority in the New and better Covenant of faith and love.
John 16:12-15: Jesus says, "I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear . But when he, the Spirit of Truth comes he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own, he will speak only what he hears, an he will tell you what is yet to come. He will glorify Me because it is **FROM ME** THAT HE WILL RECEIVE WHAT HE WILL MAKE KNOWN TO YOU**! All that belongs to the Father is Mine. That is why I said the Spirit will **RECEIVE FROM ME** what he will make known to you.
Hebrews 12:2: Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the **AUTHOR** and **PERFECTOR** OF OUR FAITH**!!**!!
Matthew 28:18-20: ! Therefore Jesus says, "**ALL AUTHORITY** in heaven and earth has been given to **ME**! Therefore go and make disciples of all nations... Teaching them to **OBEY EVERYTHING I HAVE COMMANDED YOU**{The entire New Testament}. And surely I am with you always to the very end of the age
And so Jesus told the Holy Spirit what he should inspire the 8 writers of the New and better Covenant to write the New and Better Covenant which included about 400 New Covenant commandments all inspired by Jesus!!!
We know that Paul was martyred by orders of Nero Caesar in December of AD 66 and we know that Paul was inspired to write 2 Timothy the last of his 14 inspired books just before he ascended into heaven because of 2 Timothy 4:6-8: Paul said, "For I am already being poured out like a drink offering, and the time for my departure is near. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race. I have kept the faith. Now there is in store for me the Crown of Righteousness1
All the other books of the New Testament except Revelation were written between AD 42 and AD 62 and had been distributed to most of the churches in the Roman Empire And so 2 Timothy 3:16: 4:1-3 included all the books of the Bible except Revelation:
2 Timothy 3:15; 4:1-3: All Scripture is **GOD-BREATHED** and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus {The Author of the NT}, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of His appearing and His Kingdom, I give you this charge: **PREACH THE WORD** {The **ENTIRE NEW TESTAMENT} Be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage--with great patience and careful instruction. For the time will come when people {Like Sadlup, ADAM7777, Hark} will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires , they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear!
And in AD 96 Jesus added the book of Revelation to the New Testament:
Revelation 22:16,18,19: I, Jesus, have sent My angel to give you this testimony **FOR THE CHURCHES**!... I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone {Like Chuckles}**ADDS* anything to them, God will *ADD* to that person the plagues described in this book {Which will include eternal torment in hell as per Rev 14:9-11}. And if anyone**TAKES WORDS AWAY** { Like the Preterists, Chuckles Sadlup, ADAM777 and Hark}God will **TAKE AWAY** from that person any share in the Tree of Life and in the Holy City {The ETERNAL **NEW JERUSALEM**} which are described in this book!!
Peter 1:23-25: You have been **BORN AGAIN THROUGH THE LIVING AND ENDURING **WORD OF GOD**!! All men are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field, the grass withers and the flowers fall, but the **WORD OF THE LORD STANDS FOREVER**. And this is the **WORD** that was preached to you.
Matthew 24:35: Jesus says, Heaven and earth will pass away, but **MY WORDS WILL NEVER PASS AWAY**!"
Colossians 3:16: Let the **WORD OF CHRIST** dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom!
What did Jesus and the Word of God say about the Apostle Paul in Acts and in 2 Peter 3:15-16??
Acts 22:24:15: Ananias said to Paul, "The God of our ancestors has **CHOSEN YOU** to **KNOW HIS WILL** and to see the Righteous One and **TO HEAR WORDS FROM HIS MOUTH**. **YOU WILL BE HIS WITNESS TO ALL PEOPLE** of what you have seen and heard.
Acts 26:16-18: The Lord Jesus said to Paul, "Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you and **APPOINTED YOU** AS A SERVANT AND AS A WITNESS OF WHAT YOU HAVE SEEN AND WILL SEE OF ME**! I am sending you to the Gentiles to open their eyes and turn then from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they my receive **FORGIVENESS OF SINS** and a place among those who **SANCTIFIED BY FAITH IN ME**!"
Acts 9:15: The Lord Jesus said to Ananias, "This man {PAUL} is **MY CHOSEN INSTRUMENT**to proclaim My name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel!"
Acts 20:27: Paul said, "For I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the **WHOLE WILL OF GOD**!"
Chuckles &Satanclaim the above 4 Scriptures that God inspired Luke to write are lies, thus making God a liar. These are definitely unpardonable sins which will earn chuckles eternal torment in hell.
2 Peter 3:15,16: Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our **DEAR BROTHER PAUL ALSO WROTE WITH THE WISDOM THAT GOD GAVE HIM**! He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand {For the Lost}. which IGNORANT AND UNSTABLE PEOPLE DISTORT, {Like Chuckles} as they do other Scriptures to **THEIR OWN DESTRUCTION**!{Which would be eternal torment in hell}
John 12:48: Jesus says, "There is a Judge for the one {Like Chuckles} who does not accept My words, the very words I have spoken {In Acts 9:15 & Acts 26:16-18 above} will condemn them at the Last Day!"
Galatians 6:2: **FULFILL THE LAW OF CHRIST**!!
Hebrews 12:2: Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the **AUTHOR** AND **PERFECTER** OF OUR FAITH**!
So was Paul actually lying? No. It's the anti-Paulist's who have grossly erred in assuming and falsely accusing Paul.
The other false accusation of Paul lying concerns the reference to Gal.2:7-10. Paul said, " They only asked us to remember the poor the very thing I also was eager to do" (vs.10). The anti-Paulist responds with,
"WHOA! What just happened? Paul admits to being in Jerusalem. He admits to having met the apostles. He brags that they accepted him as a brother and then concludes that all they asked us to do was remember the poor which I will gladly do. Where did this come from? Did the council ask Paul to tell the churches to remember the poor? NO! The council told Paul to write to the churches to avoid eating meat sacrificed to idols and from fornication (idolatry). Did Paul flat out lie here?"
The answer to the last question is no, he did not lie. Paul was writing a letter to the Galatian assembly. The council never said their decrees were for all Gentile congregations, but only for the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia (Acts 15:23). Paul had no reason to give those decrees to the Galatians because the council never told him to. I mention more about this later.
Anti-Paulists also use Gal.2:6 to show Paul's supposed lack of respect of the other twelve apostles and how they have no authority over Paul. Gal.2:6 reads thusly:
"But from those who were reputed to be somewhat (whatsoever they were, it makes no matter to me: [Elohim] accepts not man's person)--they, I say, who were of repute imparted nothing to me:"
One anti-Paulist then says,
"Here Paul goes full board in his lack of respect for the twelve. Paul says of the twelve that they seem to be important but that it makes no difference to me. In other words the twelve apostles aren't important to Paul despite their apparent positions of authority. He then brags again that they ADDED NOTHING to his message. Paul wants to really drive the point home that the apostles mean little to him and wants his audience to know that he does not take direction from them nor has he been taught anything by them."
These remarks are based on divorcing verse 6 from the context which includes verses 3-5.
"But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: and that because of the false brethren privily brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Messiah Yeshua, that they might bring us into bondage: to whom we gave place in the way of subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you."
Paul was not attacking the other twelve apostles. He was referring to false brethren that snuck in to teach their doctrine of salvation by works.
To further compound their error, the anti-Paulists fail to cross reference properly. They say,
"There is one other point often overlooked in the decision of the Jerusalem council and that is that the apostles apparently didn't have full trust in Paul and thought it necessary to send someone along with him as a witness to what he was teaching. In the letter which the council drafts they say:
24 "Since we have heard that some of our number to whom we gave no instruction have disturbed you with their words, unsettling your souls, 25 it seemed good to us, having become of one mind, to select men to send to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 "Therefore we have sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will also report the same things by word of mouth.
The council's letter acknowledges that Paul has received no instruction from them but has been preaching on his own. Remember, Paul himself bragged about that. The council also acknowledges that what Paul is teaching has been disturbing those who hear him."
The anti-Paulist applies verse 24 to Paul when, in reality, it is a reference to Acts 15:1, 2, 5, 6 which read as follows:
"And certain men came down from Judaea and taught the brethren, saying, Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved. And when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and questioning with them, the brethren appointed that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question." . . . "But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees who believed, saying, It is needful to circumcise them, and to charge them to keep the law of Moses. And the apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider of this matter."
Verse 24 is referring to the legalistic Pharisees which believed in justification by works, and were teaching the same. They were of the "number" of Jews in Judea where the Apostles were from. They went to Antioch to preach their false doctrine without the Apostles instruction to do so. The council sent their "beloved" Barnabas and Paul to correct the problem.
Anti-Paulists teach that all the believers in Asia turned away from Paul and tried to kill him. They write;
"Now to the meat of the matter! First I will prove from the accepted canon and from Paul's words himself that he was rejected in all the churches of Asia."
Acts 19:8-10 (NASB95)
8 And he entered the synagogue and continued speaking out boldly for three months, reasoning and persuading them about the kingdom of God. 9 But when some were becoming hardened and disobedient, speaking evil of the Way before the people, he withdrew from them and took away the disciples, reasoning daily in the school of Tyrannus. 10 This took place for two years, so that all who lived in Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks.
Before we saw that Paul reasoned with the Jews in the synagogues but now we hear a little more of the story. Paul continued to preach in Ephesus but he wasn't well received for long for Luke records that some there began to speak evil of the Way before the people and that they had to withdraw from them. Putting aside the good and bad for a moment the facts are that Paul preached in Ephesus but eventually had to leave as they turned against him."
Who turned against Paul in the above passage, believers or hardened and disobedient, unbelieving Jews in the synagogue? Who was Paul reasoning with and persuading about the Kingdom of Elohim? Believers were already persuaded and embraced the Kingdom through Yeshua. It was the unbelieving Jews who needed persuading and who turned against Paul.
8 For we do not want you to be unaware, brethren, of our affliction which came to us in Asia, that we were burdened excessively, beyond our strength, so that we despaired even of life; 9 indeed, we had the sentence of death within ourselves so that we would not trust in ourselves, but in God who raises the dead; 10 who delivered us from so great a peril of death, and will deliver us, He on whom we have set our hope. And He will yet deliver us,
Paul admits that while in Asia that things got so bad they had the sentence of death put on them. In other words, the believers in Asia were going to kill Paul and his companions!"
These verses refer to the wrath of the Ephesians after Paul said their goddess Diana was no mighty one at all. Let's pick up the account in Acts 19:28-32.
"And when they heard this they were filled with wrath, and cried out, saying, Great is Diana of the Ephesus. And the city was filled with the confusion: and they rushed with one accord into the theatre, having seized Gaius and Aristarchus, men of Macedonia, Paul's companions in travel. And when Paul was minded to enter in unto the people, the disciples suffered him not. And certain also of the Asiarchs, being his friends, sent unto him and besought him not to adventure himself into the theatre. Some therefore cried one thing, and some another: for the assembly was in confusion; and the more part knew not why they were come together."
This mob wasn't thinking. They were wild with resentment and wrath. If the town clerk hadn't calmed them down in verses 35-41, they may have rashly put Paul and his companions to death.
The thing that is so unbelievable to me is that the anti-Paulists read 2 Cor.1:8-10 to mean "believers" wanted to kill Paul and his companions. Would any believer go against our Savior's command to love our enemies (Mt.5:44-48) by killing them? Can you picture any believer in Acts killing anybody? Believers are sheep to be slaughtered, not slaughterers of the sheep.
The anti-Paulist also appeals to 2 Tim.1:15. They say,
"2 Timothy 1:15 (NASB95)
15 You are aware of the fact that all who are in Asia turned away from me, among whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes.
Now Paul tells us that ALL of those in Asia turned away from him. Paul had to flee Ephesus for some reason and all the believers in Asia wanted him killed."
We are not told why they turned from Paul. I suspect it was a result of what took place at Ephesus. The weaker believers feared for their lives and fled from Paul because he was the lightning rod of that entire wrath. Does that sound familiar? Did not all of Messiah's disciples turn from him out of fear for their lives? Does that make Yeshua a false Messiah? Neither does it make Paul a false apostle.
