Joshua of Nazareth, the Light of the world says:
If Joshua is your Shepherd/Pastor, then why are you listening to Paul's voice or Moses' voice or "your pastor's" voice, or any other person's voice regarding who God is and what God is like and what God wants? You can only have ONE leader/shepherd/pastor...only ONE voice who guides you...only ONE you love and trust supremely. "No one can serve two masters" Matt. 6:24 Who is it? Who is your Master?
There is only One Man who deserves to be exalted, and that Man is the Man Joshua of Nazareth, the Son of the Living God (John 17:5). There is only One Man we are to follow, Joshua (or Jesus) (Matt. 16:24; John 21:22). There is only One Shepherd/Pastor of our souls, the Man Joshua, the Son of the Living God (John 3:16-18; 10:16). We can only serve ONE Master (Matt. 6:24) There is only One in whom is Life everlasting, and that One is Joshua of Nazareth (John 14:6).
Any other person who says you must listen to him or her to understand God - or who says God says you ought to listen to him or her in order to properly understand or follow Joshua - is wrong, deceived, a liar or is wrongly trying to exercise authority over you.
This author had spent much of his early faith years looking up to various men and aspiring after their religious status and achievements - prominent men in the circles of today's churchianity. Sadly, my past error and confusion is very common today, as the "protestant" organizations have their versions of the pope. Men who are "great scholars", or who have started the most organizations, or who "pastor" the largest organizations, or who can sell the most books, or "evangelists" who can pack the largest stadiums. I have realized that trying to follow after these men was foolishness - I was badly missing the mark.
But perhaps this author's greatest hero of the faith was the man who wrote most of what is termed the new testament - the man who claimed the title "the apostle" Paul. Paul is highly regarded by most of organized Christian religion, and is regularly spoken of as the "Great Apostle Paul". Just today this author heard Paul referred to as 'the greatest Christian the church has ever had'. Indeed, as we read Paul's writings - and the writings of Paul's friend Luke in the book of Acts - a picture is painted before us in the new testament of a very important man who worked exceedingly great works 'in the name of the Lord Jesus', and who labored tirelessly for Jesus.
But is Paul, "the great apostle" as he claims? I know this question is unthinkable for many to contemplate, but please at least ask yourself why this question is so uncomfortable for you to consider? Does contemplating it bring reproach or dishonor upon God the Father or His Son, Joshua? In truth, no, it does not.
So why are so many offended at exploring this question? Why, perhaps, are you, dear reader, offended at examining Paul's teachings in light of Joshua' teachings? Perhaps Paul has too high a place in your heart? Perhaps there are some traditions of men that Paul teaches which you are comfortable in, and that you are unwilling to give up in order to truly follow Joshua? Perhaps you have as your standard of truth "the bible", instead of the One who plainly says, he is the Truth? (Is the doctrine of the "inspiration of the bible" as given by Paul and promoted by the churchmen taught by Joshua? For an examination of that question in light of the Joshua's Words, please see the article, Did Joshua Teach the Bible is the Word of God?.)
The purpose of this article is to examine some of Paul's teachings in the light of Joshua' teachings, and to thus seek out the truth. I pray the reader will not be afraid to do this, and let the truth be known. If any man's teachings contradict Joshua' teachings, we ought to throw out those teachings that contradict Joshua ' teachings. If we don't, then we betray the fact that we don't really believe that Joshua is the best, highest, most perfect representation of God the Father, nor that his Words were successfully captured and preserved in the four gospels. We also reject Joshua' own Words where he claims to be the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and no man comes to the Father except through HIM ALONE (John 14:6). He says, he is the Door, and we must come through him, and NO other man or way (John 10:9). And if this is true, then Paul is excluded as well.
So, have courage, dear reader, and ask, seek and knock as the Light asks...
Joshua says, "Follow Me." (Matt. 10:38)
Paul says, "Imitate Me." (1 Cor. 4:16; Phil. 3:17)
Who should we "imitate"? Joshua or Paul? In the above citations of Paul's commands, he did not qualify that command anywhere in the context with a statement like, "as I follow Joshua". If Paul did not walk or teach exactly like Joshua, and we follow Paul, where will that lead us? Could Paul have walked or spoken exactly like the sinless one? If we are walking in the humility Joshua teaches, then wouldn't it be wrong to urge others to imitate us - we with all our imperfections, faults and weaknesses? (Matt. 7:11, 19:17, Luke 17:10) Should we not only point others to Joshua, the one without whom we cannot even know for sure what good is? (John 15:4-5) Should we not simply follow Joshua and encourage others to follow him with us?
If Joshua is reaching out to you and asking you to "follow him", and then another voice comes along and says something to the effect of, 'in the name of God, you ought to imitate me", isn't that going to be very confusing? Isn't that exactly what Paul did? How could you listen to both voices at the same time? Could not those new to faith who don't know the Master well yet, be easily mislead by another voice? If that other voice is truly repeating Joshua' voice, then it won't contradict Joshua's Words in any way and it would point to Joshua only, right?
Here, Joshua makes it plain that the truly humble are justified before the Father, and not those who have pride in their religious behaviors or who boast about themselves and their good deeds.
Here, Joshua plainly teaches that even if we perfectly obey God - which we do not - we still did nothing more than what He asks us to do, and thus we are still " unprofitable servants". To profit means to exceed that which one started with. How can we do more (profit) than what God asks, for he asks for perfection? We cannot. God requires perfection, and that is something none of us execute continually. Believing and practicing this teaching of Joshua is utterly incompatible with boasting about one's self or one's deeds, for Joshua says the best we can utter is that we are "unprofitable servants".
Joshua teaches us to not promote our deeds done to help others, but to do them in secret being satisfied that our Father in heaven sees and will compensate us appropriately.
In these verses, Joshua teaches that in comparison to God, we are "evil", "not good", and that without him, we can do nothing of eternal value to God. If these things be so - and Joshua says they are so - then what do we have to boast about? Absolutely nothing, and he says that we should not exalt ourselves, which would clearly include boasting - one of the most obvious and outward forms and expressions of arrogance.
Paul: "For who makes you to differ from another? And what do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as if you had not received it?" (1 Corinthians 4:7)
Paul parallels Joshua' teachings on the matter in the verse above (Paul in a good moment OR the bait to draw a person in).
Paul: "But may it never be for me to boast, except in the cross of our Lord Joshua the Messiah, by whom the world is crucified to me, and I to the world." (Galatians 6:14)
Paul promised to never boast, except in the cross of our Lord Joshua the Messiah. Of course he quickly adds that he has been crucified to the world, which is a form of boasting! But Paul has said, as Joshua taught, that boasting is sinful, and that he would "never" boast about himself.
Paul: "What I speak, I speak not according to the Lord, but as it were, foolishly, in this confidence of boasting. Seeing that many boast according to the flesh, I also will boast." (2 Cor. 11:17-18)
Paul promises that he would never boast about himself, and then admits boasting is foolish and sinful, but then goes ahead and boasts! So, for those of you who believe the doctrines of inerrancy and infallibility of the bible - is this passage inspired by the Holy Spirit and thus inerrant and infallible!?
It appears Paul is vigorously contending for authority over those in Corinth - so hard, in fact, that he disobeys the Light's teachings on humility, and seeks to win then to himself. As part of Paul's attempts to be the main authority over the disciples in Corinth, he uses bitter sarcasm, such as, "For you put up with fools gladly, since you yourselves are wise!" (2 Cor. 11:19) In using this type of speech, Paul also plays the hypocrite and contradicts himself, since he calls them wise, yet he plainly says elsewhere they are foolish. Did Joshua speak this way to his disciples, using bitter sarcasm or double-speak? No he did not. Did Joshua teach that there are appropriate situations to use bitter sarcasm? No, he did not, and in fact he taught we should be humble and loving towards one another in all circumstances, especially in our corrections and rebukes.
Paul also contradicts himself here with his other teachings, as in his second letter to Timothy, where he teaches, "And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel, but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition"" (2 Tim. 2:24-25). Was Paul " gentle to all", "patient", "in humility correcting" the people in Corinth? How about in his first letter to the Corinthians, where he says, " You are already full! You are already rich! You have reigned as kings without us - and indeed I could wish you did reign, that we also might reign with you!" (1 Cor. 4:8) Those words are gentle and humble? Ye they are "inspired by the Holy Spirit"???
Paul elsewhere says this:
"For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity; not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God; we have had our conduct in the world, and more abundantly toward you." (2 Corinthians 1:12)
Paul testifies that his conduct in the world is "in simplicity and godly sincerity". How does that testimony line up with his words in 1 Cor. 4:8 and 2 Cor. 11:19? Could those words of bitter sarcasm possibly be made to fit into the description of "godly sincerity"?
Paul: "For I know your eagerness, of which I boast to Macedonia on your behalf, that Achaia was ready a year ago; and your zeal has aroused the greater number. " (2 Corinthians 9:2)
Paul says he boasts about others, while teaching that we ought not to boast.
Paul: "For even if I also should boast somewhat more fully of our authority (which the Lord has given us for building up, and not for pulling you down) I will not be put to shame"" (2 Corinthians 10:8)
Paul boasts of his and his comrades authority over the people in Corinth. Thus, he contradicts Joshua' teachings on two points. First, he boasts about himself. Second, he claims authority over other people trying to follow Joshua, while Joshua teaches that he is the only authority over his disciples. (Matt. 23:8-12) [We will look at this second point more closely a bit later.]
Paul: "But we will not boast beyond measure, but according to the measure of the rule which the God of measure distributed to us, to reach even to you." (2 Corinthians 10:13)
Paul says he will boast, but not beyond measure. Where does Joshua teach such a thing - a level of boasting about oneself approved by God? And then who does Paul blame for his boasting? God! If you read the surrounding verses of the passage above, you will see a very good example of Paul's confusing double-speak. He sadly sets the example of many clergymen today. Joshua taught in simple language, so that the simple could understand and receive. Paul, on the other hand, waxes into complex and often contradictory language that the sincere and simple of heart have a difficult time understanding [No doubt some reading this will aim 2 Pet. 3:16 at this author. So be it. This author lets his lot rest with Joshua and not Paul or words attributed to Peter.]
Paul: "Indeed, it is not profitable for me to boast. For I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. I know a man in Christ fourteen years before (whether in the body, I do not know; or outside of the body, I do not know; God knows) such a one was caught up to the third Heaven. And I know such a man (whether in the body, or outside of the body, I do not know; God knows), that he was caught up into Paradise and heard unspeakable words, which it is not allowed for a man to utter. I will glory of such a one, yet I will not boast on my behalf, except in my weaknesses. For if I desire to boast, I shall not be foolish. For I will speak the truth. But I spare, lest anyone should think of me as being beyond what he sees me, or hears of me; and by the surpassing revelations, lest I be made haughty, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I be made haughty." (2 Corinthians 12:1-6)
Most agree that Paul is speaking about himself in this tortured passage, which makes perfect sense given the context of his boasting in his works in the latter verses of chapter 11; his trying to impress those in Corinth with himself; and the confession as much in verse 7. Truly, these are the words of a man who knows the concept of humility, but is unable to control his pride, and thus the gibberish that is uttered.
So, let us take a look at this simply, clearly and logically. Paul starts by saying it is not profitable for him to boast, yet he just boasted previously, and will now continue in a thinly veiled, guised manner. He boasts about his vision of being in the presence of God, the third heaven. Then he says that he will glory in this man, which in fact is himself. Yet he says that he will not boast on his own behalf, which is exactly what he is doing! Then he tries to justify his boasting by saying that he is speaking the truth, as opposed to, I guess, others whom he calls liars. Finally, in verse 7, he tells his readers that he is the one with "surpassing revelations", but that God supposedly gave him something to humble himself. Given Paul's own contradictions and boasting, I think it is reasonable to question whether this alleged "messenger" sent of God was successful in humbling Paul.
Paul: "But let each one prove his own work, and then he alone will have a boast in himself, and not in another." (Galatians 6:4)
Paul writes to those in Galatia that it is good for a man to "boast in himself". Does Joshua teach that is all right for a man to exalt himself, as long as he doesn't express it to anyone else? No, in fact Joshua plainly teaches that sin starts in the heart, as does even James (Matt. 5:28; Mark 7:14-23, James 1:14-16)
Paul: "Are they ministers of Christ? I speak as a fool - I am more: in labors more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequently, in deaths often. From the Jew five times I received forty stripes minus one. Three times I was beaten with rods; once I was stoned; three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I have been in the deep...in fastings often".
I seems apparent that Paul is trying hard to convince those in Corinth that he is "great" through openly proclaiming to them many of his works for God. Yet how does this action and attitude and Paul's words square up against Joshua's words in Matt. 6:3-4? Unfortunately, they contradict the spirit of Joshua's teachings on humility, and instead promote the man Paul.
Joshua of Nazareth, the very begotten and only Son of the living God, often told his disciples and people that he healed to not tell anyone who he was or the works he did for them. If anyone is truly "wonderful" then that would be God's Messenger to mankind. But Joshua never boasted about himself or his works. Rather, he pointed people to his Father, and called men to follow him in order to be made right with his Father. Joshua never boasted about his works, or how wonderful they were. He simply spoke the truth in true humility, and went about his mission. He did not go around trumpeting who he was, even though if there was anyone who ever could be justified in doing this, it is he. He is the Good Shepherd, who meekly and humbly calls men to himself. And he says in regard to gentleness or meekness:
Please hear Messiah as he says, "blessed are the gentle or meek". Should not those who follow him then seek that quality?
Let us look at some of Paul's words in this context.
"Already you are full! Already you are rich! You have reigned as kings without us! And oh that indeed you did reign, that we also might reign with you. For I think that God has set forth us last, the apostles, as it were appointed to death; for we have become a spectacle to the world and to angels and to men. We are fools for Messiah's sake, but you are wise in Messiah. We are weak, but you are strong. You are honorable, but we are despised. Even until this present hour we both hunger and thirst and are naked and are buffeted and have no certain dwelling place. And we labor, working with our own hands. Being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer it; being defamed, we entreat. We are made as the filth of the world, the offscouring of all things until now. I do not write these things to shame you, but as my beloved children (see Matt. 23:8 regarding calling or submitting to a man as a spiritual father) I warn you. For though you have ten thousand instructors in Messiah, yet you do not have many fathers (see Matt. 23:8 regarding calling or submitting to a man as a spiritual father); for I have begotten you in Messiah Joshua through the gospel. Therefore I beseech you, be imitators of me. For this cause I have sent Timothy to you, who is my beloved son (see Matt. 23:8 regarding calling or submitting to a man as a spiritual father) and faithful in the Lord, who shall remind you of my ways which are in Messiah, as I teach everywhere in every church. As to my not coming to you now, some are puffed up. But I will come to you shortly, if the Lord wills. And I will not know the speech of those who are puffed up, but the power. For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power. What do you desire? Shall I come to you with a rod, or in love and the spirit of meekness?" (1 Corinthians 4:8-21)
In this passage, Paul is attempting to bring the people in Corinth into submission to himself, instead of under Joshua. He starts with bitter sarcasm (verses 8 - 10). He also boasts of his good deeds in verses 11 - 13. Then he exalts himself above the other people at Corinth by calling them "my beloved children" as well as their spiritual "father". This is in direct contradiction to Joshua' words in Matt. 23:9-10 where Joshua says, "And call no one your father on the earth, for One is your Father in Heaven." He culminates his lording it over the brethren in verse 16, where he plainly says, "be imitators of me".
Paul, why not, "be imitators of Joshua, the One Master, Teacher and Leader"???
Paul then goes on to call Timothy his "son", again making himself Timothy's spiritual "father". He closes his lord-it-over words with an open threat, when he says, "What do you desire? Shall I come to you with a rod, or in love and the spirit of meekness?". Paul plainly threatens to come and beat them "with a rod", and he makes this plain with the contrast of "spirit of meekness". Even if you insist on reading his language about the rod figuratively, what kind of an attitude is associated with the threat of a figurative beating? Meekness?
Can you possibly reconcile Paul's words with Joshua's teachings above, regarding how brothers and sisters are to interact with on another? Here are Joshua' words again, "And their great ones exercise authority on them. But it shall not be so among you. But whoever desires to be great among you, let him be your servant. And whoever of you desires to become first, he shall be servant of all."
Aren't you glad, reader, that Joshua says of himself...
Joshua is "meek and lowly in heart" to those willing to submit themselves to him, his disciples! In contrast, Paul, in writing to those trying to be Joshua's disciples in Corinth, uses bitter sarcasm, self-aggrandizement, disobeys Joshua' commands about humility, and uses out-right threats in order to get the people to submit to him. The contrast could not be clearer for those who have ears to hear and eyes to see.
That question is a fundamental questions all human beings who believe God exists want answered. The nature and character of God is crucial in understanding God and what God wants of us. If God is an angry and wrathful being, eager to punish and willing to torture people eternally (send people to hell), we will have a much different 'attitude' towards that God then we would towards a compassionate God who is eager to guide us and willing to forgive our weakness and faults in order to help us along the road of becoming a better human being.
This issue is really critical and it is here that Paul's teachings about God vary tremendously from Joshua and thus Paul does great harm to people seeking to answer the question, 'what is God really like?' Here are some quotes from Paul regarding God's nature and character:
"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness..." Romans 1:8
"Much more then, having now been justified by His blood (that is Jesus' 'blood sacrifice'), we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him." Romans 5:9
"Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord." Romans 12:19
"For it is because of these things that the wrath of God will come upon the sons of disobedience..." Colossians 3:6
"...hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved; with the result that they always fill up the measure of their sins. But wrath has come upon them to the utmost." 1 Thess. 2:15-17
Those are just a few of the many sayings where Paul echo's his beloved Hebrew scripture regarding God's nature of wrath, anger, vengeance and propitiating all that by the blood sacrifice of first animals and finally with the supposed blood sacrifice of his innocent Son.
The fact is that Joshua of Nazareth never said he would be a blood sacrifice in order to stay or mitigate or 'propitiate' his Father's wrath. That all comes from the Hebrew scripture and the Jew's (and many other peoples) like Paul who believed those false views of God. Thus, Paul supports the wrong and horribly damaging view of God that God is really mad at people (wrath) and chomping at the bit to send them to hell.
Yes, Paul also writes about God's love a number of times, but all that does is to present the schizophrenic god of the bible. The god who character is both loving and patient as well as wrathful, vengeful and blood thirsty. The god who 'loves his own', but hates those who don't believe him and who are 'not his people'. Fortunately, The Light of the world came along as announced that God so loved ALL PEOPLE that He send His Only Son to save us from ourselves!
Paul's schizophrenic god is imaginary...a god made in the image and likeness of the people who wrote the Hebrew scripture. Ultimately a god made in the image of what people think god is like, and we tend to believe that God is like we human beings with our light and darkness in us. Fortunately, God does not have darkness him but only Light...God does not have hate and wrath and vengeance and blood thirstiness in Him like we do.
The truth is that God is disappointed and dismayed at how we human beings throw our lives away and harm each other and condemn and destroy ourselves instead of actually loving one another. He desperately wants to save us from ourselves BUT He allows us to make our choices. God forces no one to do anything AND God does not desire the destruction of a single person on this earth. Rather, He desires that we turn from out dark ways and instead live by Light and love!
Which God are you, being guilty, going to reach out to? The Real Creator revealed by His Messenger...the God of compassion and forgiveness? Or are you going to reach out to the schizophrenic god who loves you part of the time but just might strike you down if he sees your sin and is having a wrathful moment?
What was Paul's attitude towards the chosen sent one's of Joshua - those closest to Joshua himself? Does he give proper honor, as he preaches, to the three closest disciples of Joshua - John, James and Peter?
Paul: Rom. 12:10, "Be kindly affectionate to one another with brotherly love, in honor giving preference to one another."
This is a sound teaching of Paul that parallel's Joshua' teachings on holding others in higher esteem than we hold ourselves. This is an important foundational block to love and humility.
Paul: Phil. 2:29, "Receive him therefore in the Lord with all gladness, and hold such men in esteem;"
Paul sent a man named Epaphroditus back to the Philippians, after Epaphroditus had been very ill. He instructs the brethren at Philippi to "hold such men in esteem", since he helped Paul when Paul was in need, and because "for the work of Christ he came close to death, not regarding his life, to supply what was lacking in your service toward me." (Phil. 2:30). Paul added a back-handed rebuke at the end of this, saying the brethren's service towards Paul was inadequate.
Paul: 1 Tim. 5:17, "Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine."
Here is Paul's clearest teaching on giving honor to men. He plainly says that those elders who rule well ought to be counted worthy of double honor, especially those men who teach the scripture and it's doctrine. Certainly this would include the very sent one's of Joshua, his apostles, would it not? And yet, for all of Paul's words in all of his letters, he says nothing about those personally chosen by Joshua except the following.
Paul was quick to exhort others to honor and esteem those who esteemed Paul (Phil. 2:29). What does Paul have to say about the three men whom Joshua chose, and who were closest to Joshua?
"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...and when James, Peter and John, who seemed to be pillars. Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed...and the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all..." (Gal. 2:6, 9, 11, 13, 14)
These words are hardly words of honor and esteem for the three disciples closest to Joshua of Nazareth. The words of jealously and envy just well up out of Paul in this passage - they are the farthest thing from love and true humility. The envy and belittling is painfully obvious through his phrases of "who seemed to be something" and "added nothing to me" and "who seemed to be pillars". Can the reader imagine visiting some faithful disciples who have gone before you after Joshua for years, and then coming back to others and saying, 'well, these brothers added nothing to me - they shared nothing of value to me - I learned nothing from them' (you might as well just say, 'because I'm so great'). So, in Paul's view, those who walked most closely with Joshua - those personally chosen by Joshua to follow him personally for over three years - had NOTHING to edify Paul with???
He doesn't leave it there though. He now proceeds to tell everyone in Colossi how he publicly rebuked Peter "to his face". How Peter was a "hypocrite" and how Peter didn't know, or was ignorant of "the truth of the gospel". Pretty rough claims from a man who wasn't chosen as one of Joshua sent ones (apostles) by Joshua, and who didn't walk with Joshua - about someone who was those things. It seems to this author that at best, such difficult matters would be best left in the private realm, and to boast about such a hurtful matter - especially publicly - is the last thing that true love and humility would cause one to do. If this isn't a clear passage portraying a man fighting in the flesh to be "great" at the expense of other disciples, then I don't know what is.
I can hear all those still trapped by the voice of Paul trying to explain this away by saying things like, ''oh, don't you see how Paul had to do that in order to...''. So, Paul had to break Joshua' commands and sin in order to help those in Galatia? Pretty strange reasoning.
Unfortunately those exalting Paul will say that Paul was not breaking Joshua' commands in these verses, because they are unwilling to seek out truth no matter what the cost. Just as a veil was over the eyes of Jews who exalted Moses above their Messiah, another veil exists over those who exalt Paul above Messiah. Oh, those guilty of this would NEVER admit it because being deceived means that you honestly believe the false things in your own mind. But their words betray them as they preach and quote Paul ten times more than Messiah. And they build their little kingdoms on Paul's words and behavior instead of obeying Joshua's teachings and example.
Paul: "For I consider that I am not at all inferior to the most eminent apostles." (2 Cor. 11:5)
Here Paul plainly gives us his view of himself, and two things are of note. First, it contradicts another statement he made in 1 Cor. 15:9, where he said, "For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called and apostle, because I persecuted the church of God." This statement by Paul also contradicts the scripture's teachings on how one became a sent one (apostle), which was by God's choosing, not by works (Luke 6:13). This is particularly interesting due to Paul's gospel of by grace through faith only, with works playing no part in one's salvation. In other words, Paul claims one is saved by grace, but that works played a role in God's choosing Joshua's apostles. This is inconsistent. Paul was not an apostle because he was not chosen by Joshua (Acts 1:21-22; Rev. 21:14) - not because of his sins against others.
Second, it is yet another self-glorifying statement where he is comparing himself against those actually chosen by Joshua. Read 2 Cor. 11:5 in different translations to get the full gist of his envy.
And what did Paul have to say elsewhere regarding envy and jealousies?
"Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are selfish ambitions-envy-of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God." (Gal. 5:19-21)
Can the reader not see the problems with Paul's writings, as he himself commands not to envy, yet he himself envied? Are any of us exempt from hypocrisy at times? No - and neither was Paul, so let us not call his envy as expressed in his letters "inspired of God" as the churchmen define "inspired". God through His Spirit, does not inspire sin of the heart or of the mouth or pen.
What Joshua teaches:
How does Paul view the Son of Man's passion to love his friends? What does Paul think about Joshua' final act of love and of showing the Way Home on the cross? What does Paul think about Joshua successfully paying the ransom? Does he agree with Joshua, when Joshua proclaims, "It is finished".
What Paul teaches:
Col. 1:24, 29, "I now rejoice in my suffering for you, and fill up in my flesh what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ, for the sake of His body, which is the church. To this end I also labor, striving according to His working which works in me mightily."
It could not be more plainly stated by Paul. Paul states that he is suffering for the saints at Colossi (and according to verse 27, as you read his words in context, Paul states for the gentile believers in general). Paul says that he is filling up in his flesh, what is lacking in the afflictions of Joshua when Joshua was brutally mocked, beaten and crucified in order to lay down His life for His sheep. And Paul plainly says his - Paul's - atoning sufferings apply to "the ekklesia" (or church). Notice how he again boasts of himself and his works by saying God "works in me mightily". What about Joshua' words, "whomever exalts himself will be humbled, and whomever humbles himself will be exalted."?
The only reason that you won't read his words about his alleged atoning work plainly and literally - as Paul wrote them down - is because you are holding onto the lie of the doctrine of inspiration as originally given by Paul and believed by contemporary religious leaders. Or because you elevate Paul to a place he ought not to be elevated to, and thus are unwilling to face the truth about Paul - that he was a man who at times was full of pride and not faithful to all of Joshua' teachings. I can promise the reader that if you will accede to this truth about Paul, you will start on the road to freedom that Joshua promises! For Joshua says...
Joshua says, "follow Me", not 'follow me and Paul and Peter and anyone else who claims to represent God . . .' (Matt. 4:19, 8:22, 9:9)
If we receive these words of Joshua as he plainly states them, he leaves no room for any one to be over us or leading us or teaching us - except himself. John, one who was chosen by Joshua and was with him personally for about three years, says as much as well - if you need more than Joshua's own words - in 1 John 2:20, 27. Wouldn't we be fools to place ourselves under any one's spiritual authority except The Master, the ONLY Worthy Teacher and Shepherd...the only Judge of our lives and the One who grants eternal life?
Paul: "Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Joshua I became your father through the gospel." (1 Cor. 4:15)
Paul says that he is the saint's in Corinth's spiritual "father". Contrast this with Matt. 23:9 where Joshua says, "Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven." (Matthew 23:9).
Paul: "For even if I also should boast somewhat more fully of our authority (which the Lord has given us for building up, and not for pulling you down) I will not be put to shame;" (2 Corinthians 10:8)
Paul both boasts and he boasts about his authority over them - of course he throws in the double-speak about the Lord giving him this authority for their good. But Joshua says, "It shall not be so among you" regarding authority over one another, for He plainly says, "for you are all brothers".
Paul: "Therefore I write these things while absent, lest being present I may not deal sharply with you according to the authority which the Lord gave me for building up, and not for pulling down." (2 Corinthians 13:10)
More of the same, but now including a threat.
Paul: "(not because we do not have authority, but to make ourselves an example to you, to imitate us)." (2 Thessalonians 3:9)
Who gave Paul this authority that he pounds the people with? Not Joshua, that is for sure, for Joshua teaches that he is the only authority, and our role is to encourage other's onto the narrow Way through example - through being the lowest servant of all - and those trying to be the lowest servants DO NOT exercise authority over anyone except themselves.
Paul: "And truly He gave some to be apostles, and some to be prophets, and some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors (poimen - see John 10:16 above) and teachers (didaskalos - see John 13:13 above), for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ." (Ephesians 4:11-12)
Here Paul essentially destroys God's intention - as plainly given by Joshua - for His people/Family/ekklesia. Instead of servant brothers following after their Master together as His Family, we now have all the titles and rulers and the resultant fiefdoms that make up Christianity's religious system - in direct contradiction to Joshua' own Words! As is typical for a master deceiver (Satan), it is proffered as being 'for the good of the body of Christ' - a concept Joshua never taught. It should give the reader at least reason to pause that the same Greek word "poimen" is translated "Shepherd" when Joshua uses it in John 10, but as "pastor" when Paul uses it in Eph. 4. This fact strongly begs for an answer as to why. The only reasonable explanation is that the followers of Paul - and those who have deep allegiance to the religious systems of Christianity, and who translated the scriptures - could see the clear contradiction if they translated the word poimen as "shepherd" in Eph. 4, and thus sought to avoid that contradiction by using the term 'pastor' instead.
The fact remains clear that Paul (Eph. 4:11) flatly contradicts and thus nullifies Joshua's Words about his being his disciples ONE Shepherd (John 10:11, 16). This has the deepest and most radical implications.
The truth is that protestant Christianity's religious system is built largely upon this one verse from Paul along with Paul's 'gospel of grace', which 'gospel' Joshua does not teach. The fact is that protestant Christianity is not based upon the teachings of Joshua, but rather upon the teachings of Paul, which teachings contradict and nullify some of Joshua's most important teachings.
Paul: "And God set some in the church, firstly, apostles; secondly, prophets; thirdly, teachers, then works of power, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, kinds of languages." (1 Corinthians 12:28)
Paul's back-up for Eph. 4:11.
But who does Joshua say he will send? Does Joshua say he will send evangelists, pastors and teachers? No, He does not. Rather, he says this:
So Joshua names who He will send, and He says "prophets, wise men and scribes". Notice two important things about this fact.
First, Joshua' words are virtually universally ignored by the Christian religious systems leaders on this important matter, and Paul's words rule instead. Why would that be?
Do the men and women who rule the religious organizations they call "the church" call themselves "wise men" and "scribes"? Or do they take Paul's titles of "evangelists", "apostles", "bible teachers" and "pastors"? That really should give the reader occasion to pause. Joshua plainly says who he will send, and it excludes "evangelists, pastors and teachers". The reason he does not include these titles/functions is because he says he is our Leader, Teacher and Shepherd, and that ALL disciples of Joshua are to be 'evangelists' (which means good news bearers). An evangelist is one who proclaims the good news about Joshua, and Joshua plainly commands all his disciples to proclaim him to others (Matt. 28:19; Acts 1:8). Joshua does not send teachers and shepherds (pastors) because he is those things to his sheep.
(A brief aside here about Joshua being our only Teacher. This does not deny that "teaching" occurs among the disciples, for we are to teach others about Joshua. What it does mean is that disciples don't assume or take some position as "spiritual teacher" nor do we have any authority as "a teacher". All the Family members are to proclaim and repeat Joshua's teachings and share their experiences of following Joshua, which enables others to learn more about following Joshua.)
Notice secondly how whom Joshua says he will send does not fit into who Paul says Joshua will send. The only similarity is "prophet", and most of Christianity has no "office" or position of prophet, but only of "pastor/leader". In fact, most of Christianity either fears or mocks those who might actually be real prophets, or they exalt the false prophets (who love to take that title or that of evangelist) who preach the 'gospel' that particular version of Christianity wants to hear e.g. say these words and gain salvation, believe these set of facts and be saved, health and wealth, carnival 'healing' sessions, latest pop psychology, continuing to trust in money while calling it "stewardship" or whatever. You see, a prophet is one who typically warns and exhorts, and that is just too judgmental and "intolerant" in today's western culture and it sub-culture of Christian religious groups. It is not very popular to tell the people that they are ignoring Joshua. Pretty tough to "build a ministry" doing that.
Then there are the "wise men" and "scribes". Trying to make "wise man" a title in Christianity's religious system is difficult at best. In truth, a wise man is just what a man is or isn't. Having the office of "wise man" instead of "pastor" just doesn't fit with today's false humility either. "Pastor" is just so much more deceitfully vague, because the people don't see the contradiction with Joshua wanting to be their only Shepherd - even though "pastor" means shepherd! Yet the title "pastor" seems so tame and innocuous and nice. In today's pretentious social circles, it is ok to think oneself wise, but unwise to proclaim oneself wise!
How about "scribes". Wow, that's a tough one to make into a religious leader, since all they do is promote the words of Joshua through their writings. Not very glamorous or flashy and the people need that in their religious leaders. Those who might be labeled as "scribes" today are those selling the most books on the 'prophesy circuit' or among the 'evangelical book sellers association'. The real scribes are those distributing Joshua's words in writing as best they can with the resources God has given them.
Finally, and most importantly, what does Joshua say will happen to those he sends? He says, "some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city". Hardly what the contemporary "pastor" envisions as his reward for completing seminary! And tragically for he and his sheep, hardly what "pastor" will experience as he makes sure he offends as few people as possible and is thus 'at peace with all men' in order to enjoy his material benefits from his sheep (contrast with Joshua's words in Luke 6:22-26).
Yes, the Son of God, in his Father's wisdom said who he would send, and yet his words are almost universally ignored and in their place are Paul's words and his system of lording it over titles and fleshly authority. Does this fact prick your curiosity at all, or are you dead in your religious traditions?
"For I consider that I am not at all inferior to the most eminent apostles." (2 Cor. 11:5)
Thus - Paul is saying - you ought to submit to me and to my authority OVER you because I am among the greatest apostles. But doesn't Joshua say that the greatest will be servant of all? Do servants faithful to their master vie for authority over each other?
Paul: "Now therefore you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God, and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Joshua Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone." (Ephesians 2:19-20)
I don't find Joshua teaching that His ekklesia will be "built upon the apostles". I see Joshua teaching that His ekklesia will be built - and remain - upon himself (Matt. 7:22-27; John 8:31-32, 36).
(Some will point to Matt. 16:18 as proof of Joshua teaching that He will build His ekklesia on the apostles. As you might know, Roman Catholicism uses this verse as their proof text for justifying their religious hierarchy all the way to the position of pope. What Joshua says in that passage is that he will build His ekklesia upon FAITH IN HIM, which Peter professed in verse 17. On "this rock" [the world "rock" here is the Greek transliterated "Petra" which means "great boulder", in contrast to "petros" which is the Greek transliteration of "Peter", and it means "little stone"] - faith in Joshua as God's Messenger - Joshua will build His Family.)
"To this I am ordained a preacher and an apostle (I speak the truth in Christ, I do not lie), a teacher (didaskalos) of the nations, in faith and truth. " (1 Timothy 2:7)
Why did Paul feel the need to say, "I speak the truth in Christ, I do not lie"? Doesn't Joshua say let your yes be yes and you no be no, and everything beyond that comes from the evil one? (Matt. 5:37)
When Paul claims he is "a teacher of the nations", how does that line up with Joshua saying, "You call me the Teacher (didaskalos), and Master, and you say well, for I am. If then I, the Master and the Teacher (didaskalos), have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet." (John 13:13-14) The same thought is clearly expressed in Joshua' words here, "...do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers."? (Matt. 23:8-12) Even if Paul did in function "teach" people from many nations about Joshua, does this mean he is justified in making statements about himself as a teacher, let alone the boast of "a teacher of the nations"? Is this just word equivocation, or is it a spirit of pride?
Paul: "...to which I am appointed a preacher and an apostle and a teacher (didaskalos) of the nations." (2 Timothy 1:11)
Once again, Paul making quite a claim, which claim is in direct opposition to Joshua's teaching that He alone is our "...Master and Teacher". Paul ought to have proclaimed Joshua's message, but he ought not to have promoted himself in opposition to Joshua's commands against such activity.
If you look at the context of Titus 1, you will see that Paul is commanding other disciples to forcefully stop men who Paul deems as speaking lies and falsehoods contrary to the gospel ("whose mouth you must stop"). Was this Joshua's way? Did Joshua teach his disciples to use force in stopping others from proclaiming things that contradicted or nullified his teachings? No, he did not, and in fact Joshua taught that we ought to be kind and merciful even to our enemies. Joshua plainly taught, "love your enemies".
Look at Joshua's example. He did not use force of any kind in trying to stop the religious leaders and other proud people from slandering and maligning his person and his Message. In fact, Joshua tried to avoid the religious leaders, and instead tread quietly and look for the lost sheep in their midst, in an effort to bring them to his Father. He did not teach his disciples to try to "stop the mouths" of the religious leaders to stop condemning Joshua with their words and actions. In fact, Paul's words, "whose mouth you must stop", is of the same spirit of the religious leaders who killed Joshua and persecuted Joshua's followers! It is a spirit of insecurity and fear, of not trusting in God to handle things, but rather taking things into your own hands to force people to do what you think is right, or to force people to stop doing what you think is wrong. It cannot be reconciled in truth with "love your enemies", and "blessed are the meek".
"For it is written in the Book of Psalms, "Let his estate become forsaken, and he not be living in it." And, "Let another take his overseer ship." Therefore, it is right that one of these men who have companied with us all the time that the Lord Joshua came in and went out among us, beginning from the baptism of John to that same day that He was taken up from us, to become a witness with us of His resurrection. And they appointed two, Joseph called Barabus, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed and said, You, Lord, knower of all hearts, show which one You chose from these two, to take the share of this ministry and apostleship from which Judas fell, to go to his own place. And they gave forth their lots. And the lot fell upon Matthias. And he was numbered with the eleven apostles." (Acts 1:20-26)
"And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb." (Revelation 21:14)
Joshua himself defines what it was to be directly sent by him (an apostle) in John 15:27, where He says, "And you (He was speaking to his disciples, certainly including the eleven, and probably just the eleven) will also bear witness, because you have been with Me from the beginning (of his earthly ministry, the baptism by John the Baptist). The only one's who were given a special role of bearing witness to Joshua due to their being intimately familiar with him, where those who had been with Joshua over the three plus years of his public works, and thus those who were directly trained and sent by Joshua - who had "been with him from the beginning". Remember, the word apostle means "sent one", and it means sent directly by Joshua during his first coming.
Now, if John 15:27 and Acts 2 plainly gives the qualifications of an apostle - and the book of Revelation confirms that there will ever be only twelve apostles - then how could Paul have been an apostle? The word "apostle" (now a revered and sought after title of authority, with Paul as its first coveter - similar to pope, or bishop or senior pastor) actually means "sent one". Joshua plainly sends all his disciples into the world to preach his gospel and make disciples (Matt. 28:19; Acts 1:8). Therefore, the only reasonable conclusion is that the term "apostle" or "sent one", finds its unique meaning in the fact that Joshua personally chose and taught twelve men, whom he personally sent. Paul did not qualify to replace Judas, even if they knew Paul at that time. Joshua did not choose Paul as one of his twelve sent ones. Paul was alive and available all during Joshua's earthly ministry, and yet Joshua did not seek him out or choose him as one of his sent ones. Conclusion is that Paul was not chosen by Joshua as one of the twelve apostles, and thus could not legitimately lay claim to being an apostle. Perhaps this is why Paul spent so much time defending his alleged apostleship?
(It is interesting to note that the book of revelation has Joshua - in speaking to the ekklesia in Asia in Revelation chapters 2 and 3 - saying this of the ekklesia of Ephesus, "And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars". Why is this interesting? Paul says in 2 Tim. 1:15, "This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me, of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes." So, revelation has Joshua speaking to the ekklesia who have survived thus far, and those ekklesia are "in Asia" (Rev. 1:11). Paul himself testifies that "all in Asia" have turned away from him. Would this not include those in Ephesus since Ephesus was in Asia? The only ekklesia in Asia that we are aware of that had contact with Paul was the ekklesia in Ephesus. And that ekklesia was commended in revelation for having, "tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars". The implication is difficult to miss.)
Even if one wants to claim the Damascus road experience as Joshua sending Paul on a mission, those accounts never say that Joshua labeled Paul "an apostle" . It is only Paul claiming to be an apostle in his letters (and one instance of Paul's friend Luke in the book of Acts).
“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
Because He anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor (those who don't have much money)
He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives, (captive in our self-made cage of self-pride and fear and selfishness)
And recovery of sight to the blind, (blind due to love for money, material things and this world)
To set free those who are oppressed, (captive and oppressed by our fear, self-pride and selfishness and my wrongness and the wrongness of others)
To proclaim the favorable year of the Lord.” Luke 4:18-19
What qualifications will those who partake in the "resurrection of life" have? Does Joshua say, "...and shall come forth, those who had faith to the resurrection of life, and those who did not believe to the resurrection of condemnation"? Joshua plainly says, "those who have done good" i.e. GOOD WORKS! And how is it possible to be "considered worthy to attain" something without works?
James on salvation and justification:
"But will you know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Do you see how faith worked with his works, and from the works faith was made complete? And the scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness, and he was called the friend of God." You see then how a man is justified by works, and not by faith only. And in the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she had received the messengers and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." (James 2:20-26)
James preaches Joshua' gospel...faith AND works.
This teaching of James is in direct contradiction to Paul's writings in Eph. 2:8-9, and for a person to deny there is a contradiction between the two teachings, is irrational (this author remembers trying to reconcile these two teaching when he first became a believer in Joshua. It took six pages of double speak to try to harmonize the two teachings.) To deny the contradiction just proves how we can be blinded by our intellectual stubbornness and clinging onto the doctrines of men instead of seeking the Truth with all our hearts. But don't despair reader, there is a way to be free of the falsehood, and that way is to reject the churchmen's doctrine of inspiration (Is Biblical Inerrancy Taught in the Scripture?), and instead listen only to Joshua!
Also one might want to wonder who James has in view in chapter 2 verse 20, where he speaks about a vain or foolish man who is preaching faith without works as the path to salvation.
Sum of Joshua "good news" - trust in his Father and himself (faith) and follow him (works of obedience) - faith and works. None of us will make it Home without real faith in the Father and Joshua (faith). And none of us will make it Home without trying our best to obey the commands of Joshua (works). The works are not optional, they are what occurs from a person who has faith and love.
Before we look at Paul's gospel, there are two noteworthy observations. First, Paul places a curse on all who don't believe his gospel. Second, he does call it "his gospel" or "my gospel" on several occasions, as opposed Joshua's gospel (Rom. 2:16, 16:25; 2 Tim. 2:8). Why wouldn't he call it Joshua' gospel or at least "the gospel"?
Paul: "For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. " (Ephesians 2:8-9)
By grace through faith, no works!
Paul: "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the works of the Law." (Romans 3:28)
Faith without works:
Paul: "...knowing that a man is not justified by works of the Law, but through faith in Joshua Christ; even we believed in Joshua Christ, that we might be justified by the faith in Christ, and not by works of the Law. For all flesh will not be justified by works of law." (Galatians 2:16)
Grace and faith as the whole of salvation with love or faith work's playing no contributing role.
This author would like to give Paul the benefit of the doubt and say that he was just confused a bit on Joshua' teachings about salvation. However, Paul is very dogmatic about his teachings and he added a very important concept to Joshua' message on salvation...he introduced grace, which Joshua NEVER spoke about. Joshua never uses the word "grace" even once in the context of salvation, and thus "grace" was NOT part of Joshua' good news regarding salvation. This is an irrefutable fact. Thus, by his concept of grace, Paul essentially nullifies Joshua' teachings on both love and the responsibility of works contributing to our salvation. This author believes that we enter into salvation by faith and a receiving of God's mercy, but that this is just the beginning of "following Joshua". Paul's words in Eph. 2 regarding salvation are almost universally interpreted by those in Christianity as being the whole of the salvation experience, or the whole of the act of justification by God to use the churchmen's terms.
What is the result of this "grace only" gospel? People who live for the world and the things of the world and their flesh, and who will only obey those teachings of Joshua that fit their religion and/or lifestyle. Since they have head knowledge about Joshua (what is passed off as ' faith'); and since they do the Word-nullifying rituals their Christian religion and leaders tell them to do (what is sold as obedience to the bible's teachings); then they are sure they are justified before the Father. After all, if salvation is truly by Paul's definition of "grace", then truly there is nothing that one can contribute to one's salvation - including obedience to Joshua' commands. Those who follow Paul's gospel of 'grace only' argue that obeying Joshua is a fruit of faith only, not a necessity. But this is NOT what Joshua teaches...see the quotes above. God the Father and His Son certainly have gracious characters, but they have not decreed that salvation is by grace. Rather, they have decreed that salvation is by faith AND faithfulness.
This article focuses on some of Paul's faults and teaching that contradict Joshua' teachings, that can be gleaned from reading his letters to others. Since popular Christian religion exalts Paul as the greatest saint to have ever graced the "church", this article is not likely to be received very well. Paul seemed to be very sincere in his beliefs, but sincerity is no substitute for truth. Paul's sincerity does not preclude our rejecting those aspects of Paul's teachings which interfere with our knowing or following Joshua better.
The vast majority of Paul's writings seem to be very sound and harmonize with Joshua' teachings. However, Paul is a regular man, just like the rest of us. Paul had problems with his flesh, just like the rest of us. Unfortunately, one of Paul's struggles was with pride - as is amply documented in this article - and this sin is perhaps the worst sin that any of us can struggle with. Perhaps most unfortunately, people are encouraged to exalt Paul, and equally unfortunately, Paul gives them plenty of justification to elevate him above the disciples of yesterday and today. Paul had a very high view of himself and his works, and he clearly spent much of his time and energy promoting himself and arguing why he should be elevated above the brethren as what he considered the highest position with the most power the new religion offered - an " apostle".
Is it any wonder then that the error in his writings serve as the model for the clergymen who have followed in his footsteps?
Paul clearly had many things right about Joshua, as we look at Paul's writings in light of The Light's utterances. Paul also tried very hard to make himself look good in other people's eyes, so perhaps the most important thing he apparently never fully grasped was Joshua's teachings on true humility and what it means to strive to be the lowest servant of all. These faults of Paul's - which faults are evident in his writings - coupled with Christianity's doctrine of inspiration, makes for much opportunity for the nullification of Joshua's foundational teachings as documented in this article. Since people are told by their religious leaders that they need to believe every word/concept/teachings in the bible - a teaching of Paul! - this means many people will believe every word that Paul teaches - even the sinful ones that contradict Joshua's Words. This is especially true since some of Paul's teachings pander to our flesh and nullify the Way's Words.
The fact is that Paul's sinful words are used to justify the powerbase of the clergy. I remember using his sinful words to justify my sinful words and ambitions in the past.
Sadly, Paul's words nullify two of the most important beliefs that Joshua teaches. First, he offers a different way to heaven then what Joshua taught and lived - grace instead of faith and love. Second, he nullifies Joshua' teachings on his (Joshua) being the only spiritual leader that his followers are to have. Paul teaches all kinds of intermediaries between men and Joshua - apostles (especially himself), prophets, pastors, teachers, elders, deacons, ministers, etc. ad nausea.
When people run into the passages documented in this article, they will turn to their clergymen who will use many words to attempt to harmonize the plain contradictions. The clergymen do this because they would condemn themselves otherwise and because they teach their version of the inspiration of the scripture, which teachings says that there are NO contradictions in the scripture. For some strange reason, they believe that holding this teaching is somehow noble among men or honoring to God - even in spite of the truth. The churchmen teach that every word in the bible is directly from the mouth of God, and that we should accept all of Paul's words as a pattern for us to imitate. For a brief article showing the fallacy of the churchmen's version of the doctrine of the inerrancy of the bible, please read my article "The Doctrine of Biblical Inerrancy".
So you, reader, must choose who you are going to believe...whose good news - Joshua's or Paul's?
Make no mistake, they are different and they will lead you in two different directions...one of Light and one of darkness.
You must search your heart and see who you are truly following, for in truth, we can only have one Master. Is it truly Joshua, or is Paul or others with merely paying lip service to Joshua?
According to Joshua, we ought to follow Joshua alone, and no other man. Let us see Paul for what he was and not turn a blind eye to his faults. Let us lose our lives for the Son of God, and continue pressing forward in the faith and looking to forsake all this world has to offer. Let us love back the One who loved us and gave his life for us that we might Live forever with him and His glorious Father! Let us get our eyes off of Paul, and onto the only One who is worthy of our deepest love and affections, and which One is the only One who can grant us life eternal.