From: "arah" 

 PAUL THE ROOT OF CHRISTIAN MISSIONARY DECEPTION

By Malik Ali

There was an apostle, who wrote an epistle, strange faith did he jostle,
and scriptures entwistle. His doctrines pentacostal, made GOD's people
bristle, and blapshemy collosal, led to his dismissal. Apostle, epistle,
collossal, dismissal, His writings bescissel, make faith so afissile.

GOD created man in his image.
Then the Christians came along and recreated GOD in man's image. Anonymous

Quite a number of the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) wish they
could Turn you (people) back to infidelity after ye have believed, from
selfish envy, after the Truth hath become Manifest unto them: But forgive
and overlook, Till Allah brings about His command; for Allah Hath power
over all things. Sura Al-Baqarah 2:109



In the annals of religious history, Paul happens to be a surprise. Why?, he
is the only figure to admit to lying and strangely enough, justifying it as
well. When the prophets clearly condemned this evil habit, Paul glorified
it, and put a new meaning to the ends will justify the means.
During the ministry of Jesus, Saul (Paul) was a dedicated member of a
powerful, exclusive Jewish sect called Pharisees (ACTS 26:5). Their
pretensions to sanctity had labelled them as hypocrites. When these
overbearing vainglorious Jews confronted Jesus, he called them:

"You are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father you
will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth,
because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie he speaketh of his
own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." John 8:44

Saul, a zealous persecutor of the devoted disciples of Christ, became the
first Christian missionary and an Apostle to the Gentiles after converting
himself to Christianity by a "vision", which he claims he had,
while on the road to Damascus. The missionary changed his name from Saul to
Paul and became the biggest contributor to the Books of the New Testament.
From the above verse, Jesus like many of his predecessors condemned lying,
deceit and hypocrisy. Lying is condemned several times  throughout the
Bible, and deceit by its own nature, is sinful and can only lead to
hazardous consequences. What does Peter say in regards to guile (which
means cunning, deceit, trickery, treachery)

For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue
from evil, and his lips that speak no guile 1 PETER 3:12

The verse speaks for itself. One of the factors that hinder mans success in
this world and eternal life in the hereafter, is the use of guile. But on
his own admittance, what does Paul say?:

But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless being crafty, I CAUGHT YOU
WITH GUILE
2 CORINTHIANS 12:16

On his own admission, Paul is saying that he uses deception in his modus
operandi. In all the new versions of the Bible, the more common term of
deceit is replaced instead. This statement is made long after his
conversion to Christianity, in the phase when he supposed to be blessed and
righteous, and most importantly of all, being guided by Christ.

For our exhortation [was] not of deceit, nor of uncleanness, nor in guile:
1 Thessalonians 2:3

Paul now speaks with two tongues, guile he can

But what I do, that will I do, that I may cut off occasion from those which
desire occasion;...
2 CORINTHIANS 11:13

In the New Revised Standard Version, the verse reads in order to deny an
opportunity to those who want an opportunity to be recognized as our
equals.. He can't be any clearer or succinct, If any other Christian group
tries to rival Pauls mission, he will seek to utilise means of destroying
any opportunity that may arise for his opponents. This goes completely
against the morals from what we know of Jesus and the Prophets of age. If
Paul believed he had the truth, there would be no need to play games and
power struggles, as the truth will always prevail in the end. The use of
deceit and craftiness is the mark of the insecure and paranoid, not so
certain that his own faith is correct, he had more hope in his will and
ways prevailing, rather than the truth of the message of Christ.

For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all,
that I might gain the more
And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them
under the Law, that I might gain them that are under the Law; To them that
are without the law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but
under the law to Christ) that I might gain them that are under the law.
To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all
things to all men, that I might by all means save some. I CORINTHIANS
9:19-22

What better illustration of hypocrisy could be given. For the sake of the
truth, Paul will use all means of deceit, insincerity, ruse etc in order to
gain more followers. Just like his successors today, the missionaries put
on a face of every ethnic race. You can see them at many of their websites,
to the Muslims; they put themselves under the guise of WORLD VISION and
other aid programs, and when they inject the needle, they also try to
inject the needle of Christianity along side it. To the Jewish people, the
Christian missionaries love Jews, Israel and Zionism (one point that they
could never mention to the Muslims), bagels and Seinfeld. This love becomes
so much that its insincere face starts to show.

It is the wish of a section of the People of the Book to lead you astray.
But they shall lead astray (Not you), but themselves, and they do not
perceive!
Sura Al-Imran 3.69

For if the truth of God,  hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory:
why yet am I also judged as a sinner? ROMANS 3:7

Even though Paul admits to lying (like he has in many other places), never
how much he tries to defend his actions, the rational spiritual mind will
never accept it. Lying is at the root of falsehood, the very element that
is completely opposed to truth. The truth is a means to an end. If a Muslim
wanted to build a Mosque and he required funding to do so; there are
several ways he could go about it. If he decided to rob a bank and used the
stolen cash to build the Masjid, all his efforts will be in vain. Allah
will never accept it from him, even though the man did it for Allah's sake.
The fact is that the ends don't justify the means, to get to paradise, you
must choose the road that leads to paradise. And deceit is definitely not
on that road.

Cursed [be] he that doeth the work of the LORD deceitfully, ... Jeremiah 48:10


ON THE ROAD TO DAMASCUS

The turning point in the life of Paul happens to be his crucial trip from
Jerusalem to Damascus. Many would agree that if Paul did see a vision of of
Christ, it would leave an undeniable imprint in his mind. And the fact that
this is supposedly recorded in the "Book of God", their should be
consistency in the way the incident is narrated. As God is not the author
of confusion.

  NARRATION 1
And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round
about him a light from heaven: And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice
saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou
persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he
trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the
Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee
what thou must do. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless,
hearing a voice, but seeing no man. ACTS 9:3-7
NARRATION 2
And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto
Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round
about me.
And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul,
why persecutest thou me?
And I answered, Who art thou, Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of
Nazareth, whom thou persecutest.
And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they
heard not the voice of him that spake to me. And I said, What shall I do,
LORD? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it
shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do. ACTS
22:6-10
NARRATION 3
Whereupon as I went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests,
At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the
brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with
me.
And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me,
and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is
hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And I said, Who art thou, Lord?
And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this
purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which
thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;
Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,
To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the
power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and
inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.
Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision:
But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout
all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent
and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance. ACTS 26:12-20


DISCREPANCIES IN THE NARRATIONS
In the first  we have a record of Paul's men, hearing a voice and seeing no
man (ie Jesus). In the second narration, we have Paul claiming that the men
saw Jesus, but did not hear a voice. The possibility of Paul manipulating
this "event" is clearly revealed in the second narration, we have
Paul defending himself before the Hebrew counsel, and twisting the point
that his companions saw a light, but did not hear the voice; apperantly
adds more credibility to his phenomenal vision. As a voice could be anyones
voice for what the Jews care. Yes there is a contradiction, but from what
we have seen from the character of Paul, it should not come as a surprise.
In the third narration, he omits any mention of the specific incident.

The first and second narration are consistent when it comes to claiming
only he fell to the ground when he saw the light. In the third narration,
he claims he and his companions fell down. Why the change of retrospect,
given the fact that Paul was defending himself in the third narration at
the Court of King Agrippa, dramatising the vision by claiming all his men
fell to the earth highlighted the desire  to show the great impact this
event had not just on his life, but those who were in his presence.

What clearly reveals the flaw-ness of his vision, is that in the third
narration when addressing King Agrippa and his Gentile court. He makes the
claim that in his vision, Jesus told him that he will be Delivering thee
from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee. So in
effect, Paul is claiming that Jesus sent him to the Gentiles, (possibly in
order placate the crowd present). And in the second narration to the Jews,
he brings absolutely no mention of this "I'am sending you to the
Gentiles" alleged statement that Jesus told him. Why not?, the obvious
answer lies in the respective audience being addressed.

In a Court of Law, such contradictory evidence would be held suspect and
hence dismissed or cross-examined.

Back to the specific issue of whether the disciples heard the voice or not.
The Apologisers for the New Testament, as well as the NIV bible, have tried
to cover up the contradiction between Acts 9:7 and 22:9 by translating Acts
9:7, "akouontes men tes phones" (literally "they heard the
voice", but, skewing the words of Acts 22:9, "phonen ouk
hakousan" (literally, "they did not hear the voice") into,
"they did not understand the voice".

And, according to Luke's own report of Paul, Paul was well familiar with
better words for "understanding". In Acts 28:26, Paul says,

"In hearing, you shall hear but not understand."

The Greek work he uses for "understand" is syniete. He also uses
the word in Rom 3:11, 15:21, 2 Cor 10:12, and Eph 5:17. Luke also uses this
word frequently, Luke 2:50, 8:10 (when Jesus is allegedly concealing his
meaning from folks), Luke 18:34, 24:45, and Acts 28:27 to indicate a lack
of understanding. So, if Paul (or Luke) had meant that Paul's companions
heard the voice but did not understand it, they could have easily chosen to
use "syniete" instead, so that there would have been no question
of contradiction in testimony. You'd think this would be important. Could
it be possible that Paul fell victim to his own theory

...For Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 2 CORINTHIANS 11:14

Regardless of the voice his campanions heard (and did not hear), there is
the issue of the big light that persuaded Paul. Even before he is told who
his Big Light is, Paul addresses it as "lord" (which tends to
make the whole account sound rather contrived). But, Paul already
recognises an "Angel of Light" as Satan (see 2 Cor 11:14 above).
And, in fact, an Angel of Light is identified in Isaiah 14:12 as Tyre the
Morning Star, who is the enemy of GOD fallen from heaven for claiming to
ascend to heaven (Tyre is often seen as representative of Satan). So, for
Paul to immediately call a Big Light his "lord" is quite telling.
Incidentally, St. John's version of Jesus calls himself the Morning Star
(Rev 22:16). And, it is interesting in light (excuse the pun) of the fact
that the "ascending" imagery in Isaiah 14:12 also closely
resembles the "ascending Jesus" of St. Paul's doctrine. It just
leaves wondering, and what is one to make out of this.

It is too much of a paradox, because the verse prior to the one above (in
which he refers to his rivals as discussed earlier). Paul states

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves
into the Apostles of Christ. 2 CORINTHIANS 11:13

The saint (?) is accusing others of being deceitful while he himself, not
only practices deceit, but admits to it as well as takes pride in it.
According to this strange mentality, he thinks he can beautify the word
"deceit", and expect everyone to buy into it. The term deceit
does not having opposing definitions, i.e., a positive connotation for Paul
and a negative one for his competitors.

Who can be more wicked than one who inventeth a lie against Allah, or
saith, "I have received inspiration," when he hath received none,
or (again) who saith, "I can reveal the like of what Allah hath
revealed"? If thou couldst but see how the wicked (do fare) in the
flood of confusion at death! - the angels stretch forth their hands,
(saying),"Yield up your souls: this day shall ye receive your reward,-
a penalty of shame, for that ye used to tell lies against God, and
scornfully to reject of His signs!" Al -An'am 6.93

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag