Answering Critics or Inquiries - All Anonymized

I enjoy dialogue. Iron sharpens iron. If you write a criticism (friendly or hostile), I will anonymize our dialogues, and share fully your points with my responses. Nothing is one sided. (I will even clean up your spelling mistakes.) You will find various criticisms and my responses under these various links:

• TS - Why Would Satan Turn Paul from Killing Christians?
• JJ - Paul Explicitly Prohibits Eating Idol Meat - with My Reply
• Molly - Billions of Christians reject JWO, so how can you persist against this?
• Mark - How Could God Let Half New Testament come from a False Prophet?
• Dennis - The New Covenant Means A New Law In Place of Old One
• Laura - How Can One Refute The Messianics that Paul was Law observant and endorser?
• David - Romans 7 Means Something Supposedly Different than I contend.
• Jonas - Pauline Pastor - series of questions to prove Pauline beliefs on salvation by faith alone, and the Law's abrogation. My answers.
• Layla - Argues Israel Rejected Jesus and thus Paul had a Replacement Dispensation To What Was Intended. Althought Paul Was Not A Prophet, Assumes Paul Must Be Followed As If He Was One or Hearing Jesus.
• Ray - Argues Paul Said Jesus was Sole Leader, And Jesus said Apostles Entitled to Pay for Preaching
• Ketch - Argues in effect, 'If you are teaching on your website, aren't you being a teacher when you claim Jesus is the sole teacher?'
• J.P. Holding - a hostile defamor who in the end agrees with me Paul is not a prophet. Da!
• Church History 101 - a critic who accuses me of misleadingly using Tertullian from 207 AD to assert Tertullian challenged whether Paul was a true apostle, and the accuracy whether Tertullian called Paul the "Apostle of the Heretics."
• Scott Schiffres Jr. / Pastor Church of Christ "So you Reject Paul but Accept Jesus?"
• "Anti-Paulinists and Rebellion of Korah" - my article disproving critic's claim that rejecting Paul is similar to Rebellion of Korah.
• Email Dialogues (This includes both inquiries and criticisms, with my answers.)
• Cross-the-Border site (now posted on Amazon 4/2014) challenging my reading of Romans 7 and my view the KJV wrongly translated Pascha in Greek as "Easter" in Acts. My reply is here.
• Mr. Moore liked Jesus's Words Only but in his Amazon review he criticizes my citation to Eisenman. Moore also claims Paul does not fit the Balaam prophecy because Paul helped the poor. I wrote him a reply posted at Amazon. You can find the reply in this sub-page posted here.
• Mr. Maugans makes a series of silly charges that do not address any substance.  My replies are here.
• Dulles / Weebly criticism -- argues that if Paul is invalid, then this is the same as arguing the gospels by apostles could be invalid. This nonsensical argument is based upon incorrect assumptions. My reply is here.
• Nwankwo v. Jcabra - Jcabra replies to the criticism of my YouTube video on whether Paul is identified by Jesus negatively in his warning about a law negator who would be called by the name "Least" -- the meaning of the Latin name that Paulus represents.

Still Waiting For Substantive Criticism As of November 2016

No critic has yet attacked the substance of the claim that Jesus' words are the sole inspired portion of NT scripture. No one has yet made an effort to disprove my points that: (a) Paul was not a prophet; (b) Paul was not an apostle of Jesus Christ confirmed by either words of Jesus or two witnesses with knowledge, such as the verifiable 12 apostles. I have contended that instead the evidence for Paul's supposed apostleship rests solely upon a self-serving claim of Paul. No one has seriously disputed that  (a) Paul abrogated the Law; and (b) that the Law and Prophets taught anyone doing so is a false prophet in Deut. 13:1-5, and also contradicts Jesus in Matthew 5:17-19. Nor has anyone yet seriously challenged my thesis that Paul is the prophesied Benjamite wolf in Genesis 49:27.

Instead, spurious sniping makes up the criticism so far -- as of November 2016 - nine years after JWO was first published. However, iron sharpens iron. I welcome anyone who is willing to show me any errors. I will post your arguments and my response via this page. I will also update JWO or JWOS if anyone can find a substantive flaw. The aim is truth, not defending something previously written.

Blessings,

Doug  

Abusive Emails - how Christian are these critics?