This is my one hundred and fifteenth monthly teaching letter and continues my tenth year of publication. We are now in a series of lessons pertaining to Paul’s writings. We may digress to earlier scriptures in order to show how Paul addressed them, because before Paul many things that had been kept secret from the foundation of the world. Yahshua Christ Himself revealed many things that had been kept secret, and Paul continued the process. Sometimes these hidden secrets are revealed over a span of years. Peter, for instance, didn’t fully understand his sheet-vision for fourteen years, as explained in Watchman’s Teaching Letter #111. But it fell on Paul to reveal the Gospel (good news) and take it to the nations which the 12 tribes had formed. It is incredible, but many do not know of what the Gospel consists, and the fact that it couldn’t have been offered before the death, burial, resurrection, and ascension of Yahshua Christ. Thus, in the shortest definition possible, the death, burial, resurrection, and ascension of Yahshua Christ is the good news of the Gospel. The Gospel was hidden in veiled language in the Old Testament by the prophets, of which Paul often reminds us. That the Gospel was prophesied but kept hidden is disclosed by Paul at Eph. 3:5-6: “⁵ Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; ⁶ That the [lost Israel] nations should be fellow heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel.” The KJV at this passage wrongly translates the Greek ethnê (meaning nations) as the Latin word Gentiles, which only muddies the water. It only makes sense that Israelites alone (lost or otherwise) could become “fellow heirs”. Once Israel was divorced, she lost her status of being heir to the Covenant, but with the Gospel, she was purchased back! If we don’t understand this fact, we really don’t know the purpose of the Gospel which the death, burial, resurrection, and ascension of Yahshua Christ put into effect. And before this was accomplished, the Gospel could not be proclaimed to the Israel nations. The term “Israel” here should not be confused with the Canaanite variety of bad-fig-jews, of which the pureblooded tribe of Judah was/is not a part!

This is my one hundred and thirteenth monthly teaching letter and continues my tenth year of publication. With this lesson, we’ll resume our series on the teachings of Paul. Paul makes it very clear at 1 Corinthians 11:1: “Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.” So don’t ever accuse Paul of starting a new religion! And inasmuch as Yahshua Christ Himself said at Matthew 15:24: “But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” So neither did Paul go to anyone other than “the lost sheep of the house of Israel”, or he could never have made such a statement as he did at 1 Corinthians 11:1!

It is amazing, but almost every denominational religious sect today proclaims two gospels. They surely don’t get such an idea from Scripture, for Paul’s Galatians 1:8 states: “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” From this verse, it should be manifestly clear that there is but one Gospel. Yet, one repeatedly hears the proclamation by so-called pastors: “Because the jews rejected Christ, He turned to the Gentiles.” They will demandingly insist that the jews (as they call them) are under the Covenant made to Abraham (as an earthly kingdom), and that the Gentiles are under the Gospel of grace (or a heavenly kingdom). Thus, they bring upon themselves the curse of Galatians 1:8. The bottom line is, the Gospel of the Kingdom which Yahshua Christ proclaimed is the same Gospel of the Kingdom which Paul took to the nations.

If the gospel to the nations were to anyone other than true Israelites, Paul could never have stated at Ephesians 1:7: “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace ...” Only a kinsman can redeem, so the Ephesians could only have been some of lost Israel Yahshua referred to at Matt. 15:24! Here Paul ties “redemption” and “grace” tightly together as one, so whenever Paul speaks of grace, he is referring to redemption. Redemption means to purchase something back which one owned before, so there is no way that Yahshua could have offered non-Israelites redemption. When Paul wrote, “In whom we have redemption ...” he was including himself on the same footing with the Ephesians, for both Paul and the Ephesians were Israelites! Paul continues at Eph. 1:10-11: “¹⁰ That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him: ¹¹ In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.” Again, Paul included himself with the Ephesians when he stated, “... we have obtained an inheritance ...” Had non-Israelites ever “obtained an inheritance”? Absolutely NOT! But both Paul, and the Ephesians he was writing to, did, through the covenant promises by Yahweh to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Paul never so much as hinted that the Ephesians were non-Israelites, yet that is the theme of churchianity today! Why didn’t Paul say, “In whom I have redemption” and “... I have obtained an inheritance ...”? What is there about the word “we” that many find so difficult? Why didn’t Paul tell the Ephesians, “I am under the kingdom promises made to Abraham, and you Ephesians are under the gospel of grace”? Yet, this is what nominal churchianity is reading into the scriptures today!

This is my one hundred and eleventh monthly teaching letter and continues my tenth year of composing these publications. Since WTL #88 we have been continuing a series defending the apostle Paul. We have, for now, completed the phase of defending Paul’s writings, and we will now concentrate on some of the more important passages of Paul’s epistles. Those who are condemning Paul have wittingly or unwittingly joined with the bad-fig-jews to destroy anything Christian. With this lesson, we will take up the subject of how it took Peter fourteen years to fully comprehend his vision at Acts 10:10-16. The other passage where this topic is discussed is at Galatians 2:1-21. The 15th chapter of Acts has probably raised more problems than any other chapter in the Book of Acts. Likewise, the 2nd chapter of Galatians is difficult to correlate with Acts chapter 15, even though both are addressing the same subject. It might seem to many that Paul was creating a new belief system, but he regarded his gospel as a fulfillment of former scripture. Paul makes this clear at 1 Corinthians 11:1: “Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.” So don’t ever accuse Paul of starting a new religion! And inasmuch as Yahshua Christ Himself said at Matthew 15:24: “But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” So neither did Paul go to anyone other than “the lost sheep of the house of Israel”, or he could never have made such a statement as he did at 1 Corinthians 11:1!

So, to get this lesson started on the right track, we must understand that Paul never went to anyone except lost Israelites, nor did he introduce a new religion. Just because the famous David Livingstone went to Africa to missionary among the natives, followed by Henry M. Stanley, does not lend credence to the view that such an activity was sanctioned by either Yahshua Christ or Paul, but just the opposite! Today’s churches are following Stanley and Livingstone rather than Yahshua Christ or Paul.

This is my one hundred and ninth monthly teaching letter and starts my tenth year of composing these publications. Since WTL #88 we have been continuing a series defending the apostle Paul. In the upcoming lessons I will continue commenting on Paul’s writings directly or indirectly. At this time I will bring your attention to some interesting information which may give you a new perspective on some little known evidence that the present-day roman catholic church was not the original church established by Paul at Rome. To do this, it will be necessary to critique several sources to come up with a logical assessment of what the truth might be. I must also state that I do not entirely agree with every minute detail from the sources which I am about to use.

From The Ensign Message, Ap-Jn, 2004, I gleaned some extraordinary evidence under the title “Where Did the Twelve Apostles Go?”, and subtitle “Where Are Peter And Paul Buried?” Paraphrasing it: it explains how in the year 656 A.D., Pope Vitalian sent the remains of Peter and Paul to Britain as gifts to king Oswy to be buried there. Cited for this is Bede’s Ecclesiastical History. The imperative question that demands to be asked is: to which church at Rome do we trace our theology? St. Peter’s Church is a replacement for the church built by Constantine between the years 326-361, supposedly over Peter’s tomb. The latter is modeled after the Roman Pantheon (temple of pagan gods), and hardly Christ-honoring! This article reads:

This is my one hundred and seventh monthly teaching letter and continues my ninth year of publication. Since WTL #88 we have been continuing a series defending the apostle Paul. This is a subject for our own time for Peter said at 3:3-4: “³ Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, ⁴ And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.” One of the “scoffings” that is going on today is that of ridiculing the apostle Paul. Surely Peter, in his second epistle, prophesied of what we are witnessing in our present day. Peter went on in verses 5 through 7 to remind his readers that the “last days” would be similar to the days just before Noah’s flood, and speaks of them as being “willingly ignorant”. In verses 9 through 12, Peter warns his readers that they shouldn’t become overconfident in their own estimation, as Yahweh is not “slack concerning His promise”, and that Yahshua’s second advent would come upon them as a “thief in the night”.

After Peter warns his readers of these things which were to happen in the latter days, he paints a very descriptive picture of the upheavals of those events (i.e. “great noise”, “elements shall melt”, “fervent heat”, “shall be burned up”, “be dissolved”). After presenting all this, Peter admonishes us not to discredit Paul (and the message is for our present day in which we live), verses 14-16: “¹⁴ Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. ¹⁵ And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; ¹⁶ 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.” I would highly recommend that all Paul-bashers reconsider their position and repent while there is still time to do so, for it’s your “destruction” of which Peter speaks! With this lesson we are going to address another topic related to Paul and the ekklesia, and it will be presented by William Finck as follows:

This is my one hundred and fifth monthly teaching letter and continues my ninth year of publication. Starting with WTL #88 we have been continuing a series defending the apostle Paul from the horrendously false charges that are being hurled at his epistles, and these accusations have their origins among the lowest moral sources one can imagine. For lack of space, we’ll now turn it over to William Finck:

Now once again we shall continue to address the second of Clayton Douglas’ Paul-bashing articles, SAUL OF TARSUS AND HIS DOCTRINE OF LAWLESSNESS, which he published in the January, 2004 edition of his Free American Newsmagazine. It had been noted quite early in this series responding to Douglas’ articles, that his writings may be welcomed by readers of The Trumpet or The Jerusalem Post, because Douglas rejects many of the fundamental tenets of Christianity, and not only Paul of Tarsus. This will again become apparent below, along with many other inconsistencies and conflicts in Douglas’ thought and writing. While much of Douglas’ article is merely a recycling of his earlier statements, he does add a few new twists, and a few new twisted arguments, and so his entire article must be presented and addressed