Graber - Section A, B

<Section A> H. Graber states: “Indeed I am aware of the controversy this message will percipitate [sic], but if there is one iota of TRUTH in this exposition, then I propose that the professed Christian must establish justification for the discrepencies [sic] between the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and the doctrine of the apostle Paul! It is not my purpose to generate controversy, but, rather to seek the truth and insure my eternal destiny. If we manufacture any justification for the doctrine of the apostle Paul, then we must concede that Jesus Christ erred in the presentation of His Gospel, while He walked this earth. Or we must acknowledge that Jesus Christ changed His Divine Plan after His resurrection and ascention [sic], and this premise must then acknowledge that Paul was spiritually inspired of God, to document his divergent doctrine.

“I shall be eternally greatfull [sic] to Dr. W. G. Finlay of South Africa, for his expose [sic. exposé] of this matter, which inspired me to verify his presentation in both scriptures and secular history. It will be impossible for me to present all the details of this picture of betrayal in this short treatise, but I shall endeavor to present the fundamental basis for this message, to serve as a rational guide for any sincere Christian to expand upon by their own research and study.”

In reply to section <A>: To begin, I will quote a statement of Graber’s from the end of his original document (page 8, paragraph 9): “... we are all indavidually [sic], the captains of our own destiny!” This statement alone exposes Graber as a humanist, and not a Christian, and also as a hypocrite, for in the following paragraph Graber claims: “I shall glean my spiritual sustenance from Matthew, John, Peter and James ...” yet who does Peter say is the Shepherd and Bishop of our souls, but Yahshua Christ (1 Peter 2:25)? We are not the “captains” of our own destiny; we are purchased by Yahweh, and our lives are not our own! Paul teaches this (Eph. 1:14, 1 Cor. 6:20, 7:23) as does Peter (2 Peter 2:1), which is the meaning of redemption in the first place (i.e. Isa. 43:1)! So who is a liar, but H. Graber? Pretending to be a teacher in Israel, he “doeth the work of Yahweh deceitfully” (Jer. 48:10) and conceives and utters “from the heart words of falsehood” (Isa. 59:13). But there is much more!

<Section B> H. Graber states: “The book, ‘The Great Lion of God’ by Taylor Caldwell, gives one a preview of Saul of Tarsus as a Pharisee, depicting a totally perverse and reprobate Jew, steeped in the traditions of Judaism. Further, he is depicted as a [sic.] short, stocky, and of strong stature, with a very unpleasant countenance. This is the character that admits his zealousness in killing Christians, (Gal. 1:13-14, Acts 22:4). Here I would like to ask you to read the words of Jesus Christ in His ‘Sermon on the Mount’, in Matt. 7:1-29, and then read Paul’s (Sermon on the Mount?), in Rom. 12:1-21. Certainly the divergent doctrine of Paul is evident in this comparison.”

In reply to section <B>: Last year [2002] I wrote to the original recipient of this letter, in response to an anti-Paul document he had sent to me, which discussed the alleged description of Paul echoed here by Graber above, and quoted from a book by Taylor Caldwell. For those interested, they will find that this alleged physical description of Paul is derived from the writings of a second century forger of scripture, one who contrived the so-called Acts of Paul and Thecla in order to pollute Christianity with his false doctrines. Now all of this was evident in an encyclopedia article which this same person had sent to me, and which information is readily available (see, for instance, Word Pictures in the New Testament by A. Robertson at 2 Cor. 10:10-11). This spurious description of Paul was repeated in another forgery using the name of Lucian in the fourth century. Because such a description of Paul is used by multiple forgers, and enemies of the truth and of Christianity, I would safely confer that the truth concerning Paul’s appearance is quite the opposite of what the forgers would have us believe! The authors of these alleged physical descriptions of Paul are discredited as frauds and forgers. Any historian is only as good as his sources. If H. Graber and T. Caldwell want to promote the works of a liar, then they themselves are become liars in doing so! I asked this person to also please refer to my discussion of this topic from our past correspondence, if he still had it, and which I regret not having available as I write this.

In this paragraph Graber also condemns Paul’s words at Romans 12, in comparison with Matthew 7. He makes no specific statements, however, (what a wonderful ‘scholar’) and I’m not going to stab at shadows, except to say that I find no fault at all in Paul’s discourse here, in comparison with the entire Sermon on the Mount of our Redeemer, which begins at Matthew 5, and includes Matthew 6! By comparing apples and oranges, and removing words from their contexts, Graber exposes himself as an underminer and dissembler.