I am not defending the author who spoke on Coast to Coast - did not listen to the program & have no idea who he is/was.
While there can be many arguments for why that author is wrong to call Paul someone who worked against Yeshua and created a false gospel about Him; and good arguments that that author does not have independent proof of his position; many things that Christian’s take as irrefutable about Paul have only the word of Paul himself, and Luke - believed to be an assistant of Paul’s and the author of Acts as “proof”.
Did the elders in Jerusalem - led by James the Just, brother of Yeshua, have a different view than Paul about Paul himself, about his mission, about his conversion, about his Christian theology?? The fact that if they did disagree deeply with Paul we are missing a record of it is also NOT proof there never was such things recorded or that if recorded they were not lost in the final sacking of Jerusalem in the Roman wars against the Jews or that such records were not lost during the final diaspora from Jerusalem at that time, when those in the church in Jerusalem are thought to have escaped to Petra if they escaped at all.
Does any of that make the author’s view “right”? No. But it shows there is a case for questioning the circular logic that simply accepts Paul without question because Paul says so.
The author is certainly not the first to question the bonafides of Paul.
At the Council of Jerusalem Peter and the rest of the Jerusalem church accepted correction coming from Paul. It is nonsense to claim that Paul was teaching something different- he in fact was the one who corrected Peter’s error.
Your criticism relies on dismissing not only the writing of Paul but also that of Luke, which none of the early church questioned.
John lived longest of all the Apostles, had there been a conflict between the theology of Paul and the rest of the Apostles John had the time to address it. He didn’t. John’s last writing was the Revelation of Christ- did Christ also forget to mention a conflict between the teaching of Paul and the other Apostles? Apparently so if we accept your argument.
The early church was filled with the students of the Apostles, we have volumes and volumes of their ante Nicene father letters, and they wrote nothing about the supposed conflict that you claim exists.
While there can be many arguments for why that author is wrong to call Paul someone who worked against Yeshua>>>>>>
That is a sensible way to look at it.
There are several contradictions between Pauls letters and the history wrote down in acts, yet the People who believe Paul was the number one apostle will refute the facts with so called proof that proves nothing.
I am not anti Paul and i do not believe he was any anti Christ but if any one reads his letters how can they help but see that Paul does a lot to make the other apostles seem lessor and actually puts himself as the greatest even though he admits he is the least.
I believe Paul was a believer, and i also think he was a man who was very likely to make mistakes like all other men, he was not a God.