It is the claim that the self appointed apostle Paul was visited by Jesus. Even if that were true, Paul, from his writings, doesn't appear to know Jesus. It doesn't appear that he knows the gospels, either, the ones dubbed John, Matthew, Luke and Mark. Here is a big example.
In 1 Corinthians 4:14-15 we see Paul refer to himself as a "father through the gospel". What gospel would that be, his letters, the tanakh? In Matthew 23:9 Jesus is reported to give a warning. To "call no man father for there is only one father and that's God."
Paul talks as one who had heard the religion and became "saved" but doesn't have the context that the Jesus appointed apostles had from walking with Jesus. Paul was even said to have "sharp disagreement" with the apostles. Acts 15:36-37. I can only speculate what that shar disagreement might have been but we know Paul was prepared to his grace through belief, a salvation for the gentiles outside the law. Paul is missing the greatest commandment and even the golden rule, doesn't really understand the core message of love that Jesus exemplified through all words and actions.
In 1 Corinthians 5:11 Paul says not even to associate with sinners which is in stark contrast to the Jesus "he without sin cast the first stone" and the Jesus who ate with sinners. Mark 2:13-17.
Too many red flags from Paul in my view. Thoughts or objections?
At the Jerusalem Council in Acts, Paul is shown as agreeing to the decrees of James via the Holy Spirit, let's focus on the one where it is forbidden to eat meat sacrificed to idols, false gods.
In one epistle Paul deems obedience to this Decree for the weak brothers and says it is OK to eat this idol meat, so long as it does not become a "Stumbling block" to the weak brother. Advising them to be careful with this new "Liberty."
Now, turn to Revelation and read what Isa al Masih states, declaring that some have been teaching the "Doctrine of Balaam" who taught Israel to eat meat sacrificed to idols, thus placing a "stumbling block" before Israel.
The only person in the entire Bible who is a self proclaimed apostle and prophet that openly teaches that it is fine to eat idol meat, and that Isa (as) could be referring to, is Paul.
Now if Paul was the prophet and apostle he claimed to be, why is he teaching what God, Isa(as), the Holy Spirit and the Nazarenes, the true disciples including the 12 (not 13) Apostles, unanimously forbid?
A Prophet who teaches contrary to the Law, declares the Law a "curse", is not a Prophet of the God who is the author of Divine Law, does not call said Law a curse or mistakenly believe, contradictory with the Torah itself, that the "Law was ordained by angels."
Paul, if even a real historical person, had one goal and never truthfully was a Nazarene, but a Herodian Jew with friends named "Herodion" (little Herod) and a "Foster brother of Herod the Tetrarch."
What you are now trying to learn has been known since the first century and the Ebionites and Nazarenes, is recorded in the writings of Heresiologists as early as Iranaeus, which is that Paul was not who he said he was, and rejected by the" Jewish Christians " for speaking against the Law of Moses and the Covenant, which is likely the reason they became declared Heretics by Rome, and probably became Muslims, as the beliefs of the two faiths are remarkably similar.
Pure Monotheism (no pagan Trinity), the rejection of Paul's vicarious atonement human sacrifice doctrine, rejection of the pagan belief that Isa (as) was literally the son of God, which to them was figurative and earned by Righteousness and bestowed at Baptism (see ancient MSS. of Luke which agree with the Nazarene Gospel Baptism, "This day I have begotten you" from Psalms, to King David originally.
Which of course makes Islam the religion that is most like the original Nazarene Way, or in Arabic, Sunnah.
Meaning that the Way of Isa (as), used as a name for the movement, is the Sunnah of the Prophets and Isa (as) a Sunni, and as one who submitted to the Will of الله a Muslim.
Paul was, according to Tertullian, "Apostle to the heretics" meaning Marcionite "Christians" from whom the earliest and later Syrians had to distinguish themselves from by calling themselves "Messianists" according to their own Catholic history.
An earlier history, the Doctrine of Addai, does not go beyond a mention of Paul, like the Teachings of Simon Peter and pre Roman subjugation history of Christianity in Syria, perplexing the translators from about a century ago, leading to the ridiculous assumption that Medieval corruption is responsible for the lack of mention of the "Apostle who labored more abundantly than them all" who was neither Apostle or abundant laborer according to anyone but himself, and his portrayal as a team player in Acts is one contradicted by him.
Old news, read books, asking a question about this gets few reactions other than Christians who do not know the Bible pretending that the internal evidence in the New Testament that exposes the rivalry that Acts seeks to smooth over, doesn't, and poorly done though it is, if you are a Christian you probably won't ever realize it because Christians talk about the Bible and spew rhetoric and quote everything out of context to imagine that the Trinity is Biblical and that Isa (as) never said "The Lord OUR God is ONE..."
And if they do actually read it, they end up asking why does a man who obviously never met Isa (as) get treated as more important than those who knew him in reality?
Or why does Paul know nothing about the man he claims to be an Apostle of, why do the Pauline revelations conflict with the teachings of the Messiah in the Gospel?
Or they just nod and smile, hoping that faith, not good deeds or works of Divine Law, obedience to, as Paul claims, are what matter, despite the fact that Isa (as) says to obey the Commandments if you want to inherit the Kingdom of God. (One wonders how this goes unnoticed by most Christians or rather why Paul is believed over the Messiah (as) they worship but do not follow, Christians are not the religious descendants of the Messiah (as) but of Roman Catholic paganism, dressed up as Biblical Monotheism and the religion founded by Isa (as), which is really the religion invented by Paul as Isa (as) never came to start a separatist religion.
Originally the Jews who rejected Isa (as) as Messiah tolerated the Nazarenes, later rejecting them, neither Christian or Jew accepted them, and the popularity of Marcionite Christianity essentially forced Paul on the Romans who really created modern Christian theology, the Trinity, to make it pagan acceptable, and forced, with the power of the Emporer, fusion of a pagan theology with the Nazarene Way.
As vicarious atonement involving a man is just st human sacrifice, and pagan, as is a dying, resurrecting godman, like Tammuz, pagan deity who women wept over according to the O. T., as with Isa (as) and the New, whose "brother" Judah was nicknamed Thomas or Tammuz Didymus, Aramaic and Greek for twin.
Hope that helps, Salaam, if you need citations for specific passages just ask, this is from memory, and a topic I have studied to death, but Acts Jerusalem Council on circumcisionrej and Revelation 2 are the sources of the information provided, I forgot where Paul declared idol meat kosher, but I am happy to look it up.
