In the criticisms of Paul, it is not uncommon to say he was a liar and proceed to prove it. But there is nothing corrupters cannot rationalize. Paul's theology was designed for being rationalized. Satan has millions of researchers who evaluate every dot of every i to rationalize significant corruptions such as Paul's theology. On top of that, major corruptions (like major accomplishments and technology) are the same in each cycle of the universe. They evolve and get infinitely refined. This ultra refinement is visible in the four Gospels in addition to Paul's theology.

Christ's approach was not to prove but to instruct. Truth is produced most effectively not by proving but by instructing. This is because truth is created and established through its relationships to all surrounding realities. The closest thing to proof there is is logic, not observation. Logic is the relationship to all surrounding realities.

Therefore, the significance of Paul's corruptions is less in the proving of details than in the meaning of the context. To show Paul's errors, the significance of what he says needs to be understood. Describing significance is a lot of work, because total meaning creates significance. So a small attempt will be made here to evaluate some additional significance of Paul's theology showing its falseness.

When considering an overview of Paul's claims, nearly everything he said is improbable beyond belief; but improbable means nothing to corrupters. They stack improbable on top of improbable as supposed fact and claim no one can prove them wrong. They error in not understanding how rationality works. Non-corrupt persons look at the meaning and whether it is correct rather than the provability of the improbable.

The first and most obvious question about Paul is, how could lightening have purified an admitted murderer and hater of Christians. Supposedly, God's magic wand did it. When everyone else must follow a difficult path to overcome sin or end up in hell, it is totally absurd to claim God used a magic wand to purify a hater and murderer of Christians. Paul's Character, including his self-admitted flaws and promotion of theological perversions, show that he was not purified.

At most, God actually spoke to Paul and chastised him telling him to do or say something. Paul's description of the event is not reliable, because he described vastly different versions of it, besides having the character of the world's worst liar. Paul tries to claim that being told to do something by God indicates reliability of his words. Aint no way, shape or form that it means that. God told everyone, through the Ten Commandments and the prophets, not to sin, and it didn't end sin.

Christ told Pilate that he would have no power over him if it were not given to him from above (John 19:11). God did not purify Pilate by giving him the power to crucify Christ.

Notice in this that Paul is changing all of the rules of morality and rationality. He is claiming things that do not follow properly in what people have been taught: purification through a magic wand, God using murderers to teach morality, literally correcting Christ.

A point that needs to be clarified is that God uses corrupters without purifying them. Pilate was an example; but everything in life is similar in that God is controlling the interaction between good and evil for the purpose of teaching people what the difference is. This does not mean that God creates the sin, as some persons claim; it means that he channels it in ways which make it more visible.

Adding all of this up, the meaning is this: God confronted a murderer of Christians and told him to preach Christ's message knowing full well that the result would be the most satanic theology that could be derived by satan and his researchers. The satanic alternative to correct moral theology had to exist for the same reason that good and evil must interact during the process of overcoming sin. People have to see the alternatives before they can understand them and make proper choices.

So a lot of persons chose Paul's theology over Christ's. That proclivity for corruption needed to be demonstrated to show the nature of the problem, just as Christ's crucifixion needed to exist to show the nature of sin.

Other web pages describe the specific errors of Paul's theology.