The Apostle Paul - The great apostasy

[Youtellme]

I have a hypothesis. Jesus said that after him would come the great apostasy.
I believe that Paul may have been it. Paul was a persecutor of Christians who apparently had a miraculous change of heart on the Road to Damascus.

If there was one way to do a lot of damage, this would be it. Pretend to be converted, preach your own message as being from the Lord and see where that goes.

It is Paul's version of Christianity most Christians practice today. He wrote 14 books of the NT and set most of the rules of modern day Christianity and even introduced teachings in direct opposition or without direction from Jesus. 1 Corinthians 7:12

Jesus associated with tax collectors and sinners. It was Paul who said that wrongdoers should be removed from amongst the congregations.
It was Paul who said women should be silent. The list goes on.

So, I believe it was perhaps Paul who did more damage to the teachings of Christ then anyone else.

 

[oldbadger]

I have a hypothesis. Jesus said that after him would come the great apostasy.
I believe that Paul may have been it. Paul was a persecutor of Christians who apparently had a miraculous change of heart on the Road to Damascus.

If there was one way to do a lot of damage, this would be it. Pretend to be converted, preach your own message as being from the Lord and see where that goes.

It is Paul's version of Christianity most Christians practice today. He wrote 14 books of the NT and set most of the rules of modern day Christianity and even introduced teachings in direct opposition or without direction from Jesus. 1 Corinthians 7:12

Jesus associated with tax collectors and sinners. It was Paul who said that wrongdoers should be removed from amongst the congregations.
It was Paul who said women should be silent. The list goes on.

So, I believe it was perhaps Paul who did more damage to the teachings of Christ then anyone else.

Yes.

I think that Saul had a brilliant idea on the road to Damascus. Quite blinding. An incredibly easy way to manipulate and control massive numbers of people. I don't think Paul had any real belief in Jesus at all.

 

[Shermana]

I have a hypothesis. Jesus said that after him would come the great apostasy.
I believe that Paul may have been it. Paul was a persecutor of Christians who apparently had a miraculous change of heart on the Road to Damascus.

If there was one way to do a lot of damage, this would be it. Pretend to be converted, preach your own message as being from the Lord and see where that goes.

It is Paul's version of Christianity most Christians practice today. He wrote 14 books of the NT and set most of the rules of modern day Christianity and even introduced teachings in direct opposition or without direction from Jesus. 1 Corinthians 7:12

Jesus associated with tax collectors and sinners. It was Paul who said that wrongdoers should be removed from amongst the congregations.
It was Paul who said women should be silent. The list goes on.

So, I believe it was perhaps Paul who did more damage to the teachings of Christ then anyone else.

The understanding of the truth of Paul is growing every day, may your words reach many.

Most important is the seeming complete dismissal of Jewish Law, which Jesus advocated would be in force until Heaven and Earth collapse. They're still here, I looked outside.

 

[outhouse]

I have a hypothesis. Jesus said that after him would come the great apostasy.
I believe that Paul may have been it. Paul was a persecutor of Christians who apparently had a miraculous change of heart on the Road to Damascus.

If there was one way to do a lot of damage, this would be it. Pretend to be converted, preach your own message as being from the Lord and see where that goes.

It is Paul's version of Christianity most Christians practice today. He wrote 14 books of the NT and set most of the rules of modern day Christianity and even introduced teachings in direct opposition or without direction from Jesus. 1 Corinthians 7:12

Jesus associated with tax collectors and sinners. It was Paul who said that wrongdoers should be removed from amongst the congregations.
It was Paul who said women should be silent. The list goes on.

So, I believe it was perhaps Paul who did more damage to the teachings of Christ then anyone else.

First Paul only wrote 7 epistles, 5 are with certainty, and the other 2 highly probable from his own hand, the others are debated and or outright later edition by people trying to soften pauls view up.

One thing you need to realize is the early on, Paul was viewed as a martyr not a grand theologian.

Also what is stated by the unknown author of Acts and the "Road to Damascus" is not what Paul tells us himself. Paul states he had a feeling within himself that made him turn towards Jesus. In other words, he thought about it and found the beauty and wanted salvation based on what he learned hunting these people .



And on a last note, we have no clue if Jesus stated "after him would come the great apostasy" we only know a later author wrote that phrase.

 

[kjw47]

I have a hypothesis. Jesus said that after him would come the great apostasy.
I believe that Paul may have been it. Paul was a persecutor of Christians who apparently had a miraculous change of heart on the Road to Damascus.

If there was one way to do a lot of damage, this would be it. Pretend to be converted, preach your own message as being from the Lord and see where that goes.

It is Paul's version of Christianity most Christians practice today. He wrote 14 books of the NT and set most of the rules of modern day Christianity and even introduced teachings in direct opposition or without direction from Jesus. 1 Corinthians 7:12

Jesus associated with tax collectors and sinners. It was Paul who said that wrongdoers should be removed from amongst the congregations.
It was Paul who said women should be silent. The list goes on.

So, I believe it was perhaps Paul who did more damage to the teachings of Christ then anyone else.

Jesus appeared to Paul(Saul) and appointed him. Paul taught truth--- after the apostles and christians were all murdered--truth died as well--- catholicism popped up( the great apostasy--teaching a false trinity god.
The ones Jesus associated with, were not considered brothers of the faith yet-- the ones who were to be removed were ones who were allready brothers( baptized). they turned back to sin and were unrepentent.

The reason why there is such a disunified mass of confusion within religions calling themselves christian is because some individual had a hypothesis and twisted truth.

 

[Awoon]

I have a hypothesis. Jesus said that after him would come the great apostasy.
I believe that Paul may have been it. Paul was a persecutor of Christians who apparently had a miraculous change of heart on the Road to Damascus.

If there was one way to do a lot of damage, this would be it. Pretend to be converted, preach your own message as being from the Lord and see where that goes.

It is Paul's version of Christianity most Christians practice today. He wrote 14 books of the NT and set most of the rules of modern day Christianity and even introduced teachings in direct opposition or without direction from Jesus. 1 Corinthians 7:12

Jesus associated with tax collectors and sinners. It was Paul who said that wrongdoers should be removed from amongst the congregations.
It was Paul who said women should be silent. The list goes on.

So, I believe it was perhaps Paul who did more damage to the teachings of Christ then anyone else.

Saul/Paul or whoever the writer was, never sat under the teachings of Jesus. He persecuted Christians then joined them and taught them different teachings then they had been taught. He went on to threaten them that his teachings only were to be followed. Seems strange.

He who never sat under Jesus became greater then those who did.
Do we see a evolution of Jesus' teachings or a completely foreign Greko/Roman thought created to undermine Jesus and the Jewish teachings?

Another thought would be none of them ever lived and the whole NT is made up theo political propaganda against the Jewish people.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/3182757-post1.html

I've always believed that Paul completely messed up the message and teaching of Jesus. He had no idea what he was talking about, except that he was teaching what he did for nothing more than power.

 

[outhouse]

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/3182757-post1.html

I've always believed that Paul completely messed up the message and teaching of Jesus. He had no idea what he was talking about, except that he was teaching what he did for nothing more than power.

If we get into Pauls epistles, the ones attributed to him with certainty, its obvious he was not into power.

He was trying to raise money, he states he wants to give to the church in Jerusalem, but when the time comes there is silence on this topic. They may not have even wanted to take the money from him and told him to beat it, we just dont know. But power no.


Paul really didnt mess up the original message, we dont know enough about the original message within Judaism to state he messed it up.

The message had already spread throughout the Roman Empire after Jesus death and Passover and the oral raditions grew for a decades before paul tries correcting the different beliefs out there.


Where I think your confusion lies is that after Jesus death oral tradition grew into traditions that were appealing to Proselytes and Gentiles, there were other teachers besides Paul spreading the Hellenized version within the Hellenized communities. Paul just came along and tried to correct what he thought were mistakes within the Hellenized houses he had influenced, which were not the only ones. Thats the key statement, Pauls small house churches were only a small part of the movement already progressing foward. by the time Paul writes Romans he was then speaking to a general audience looking for cash and for the first time teaching to those from the movement he had not founded.

He was writing to the Romans already having their own version of the movement long before he met them.


So Paul was not into Power and he didnt pervert the message despite what you may think. Teh movement progressed beyond Judaism and became a strickly hellenized version on its own merit due to the people that found the oral tradations so profound they gave up polytheism for it.


With all that said, its understudied and mentioned just how many Roman and Hellenistic proselytes there were at this time that followed Judaism but didnt convert fully that found Jewish monotheism attractive, when Jesus legends developed under the Hellenistic people, it was the match that set off the movement that would become Christianity.

You gave Paul to much credit

 

[CG Didymus]

The understanding of the truth of Paul is growing every day, may your words reach many.

Most important is the seeming complete dismissal of Jewish Law, which Jesus advocated would be in force until Heaven and Earth collapse. They're still here, I looked outside.

Supposedly, it is God, the One and Only God, that said to do certain sacrifices and to stone transgressors of certain laws. If it weren't God that gave them those laws, forever, for all there generations, I'd say get rid of them. But I question if it really was God talking. I have no problem believing that the Hebrew people made those laws and said that "God said so" to give them divine authority, but I'm not a believer. Christians do believe that was God, the unchanging, not able to lie, God. He gave his people those laws. How do you get rid of them if they are in the way of making your new religion? I'm not even close to being a Bible scholar and I find Paul manipulating verses and taking things out of context everywhere. Do you think most Christians are in denial? Or, that most don't even know, or don't even care to know?

 

[sincerly]

I have a hypothesis. (1)Jesus said that after him would come the great apostasy.
(2)I believe that Paul may have been it. Paul was a persecutor of Christians who apparently had a miraculous change of heart on the Road to Damascus.

If there was one way to do a lot of damage, this would be it. Pretend to be converted, preach your own message as being from the Lord and see where that goes.

(3)It is Paul's version of Christianity most Christians practice today. He wrote 14 books of the NT and set most of the rules of modern day Christianity and even introduced teachings in direct opposition or without direction from Jesus. 1 Corinthians 7:12

(4)Jesus associated with tax collectors and sinners. It was Paul who said that wrongdoers should be removed from amongst the congregations.
It was Paul who said women should be silent. The list goes on.

(5)So, I believe it was perhaps Paul who did more damage to the teachings of Christ then anyone else.

Hi Youtellme! Welcome to the forums. All are entitled to their "Hypothesis"/opinions. Since these debates are concerning what is written in the Biblical Scriptures, What the Bible says is the standard, by which, to judge ones "hypothesis" or opinions.

(1) What is your source for:""Jesus said that after him would come the great apostasy.""

(2) Jesus taught the same principles as were written by Moses and the Prophets.John 5:45-47
Saul(Paul) was zealous for GOD, and studied under Gamaliel. It was the Jewish leaders who were teaching contrary to Moses as seen above and in Mark 7:7,9, "Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men.....And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. "
There was no pretense on the Road to Damascus. In Gal.1:11-12, "But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ".
And to show his steadfastness(faith in that zeal for GOD), in Acts24:14, this was his confession(near the end of his life). "But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:"

(3)Paul's version of the teachings of the message presented by Jesus and was first called "The Way" and then "Christian"----was the same as that of Jesus and few find that "straight path". Most who "profess to be Christians" do so with "lip service" rather than that of "the heart".
Yes, there did come a "falling away" as prophesied by Dan.7:25 and Paul in 2Thess.2:3-4. That "power is sitting today" "as God".

The principles seen in 1Cor.7:12+ are seen in writings of the OT.

(4) Yes, Jesus did associate with "Sinners". HE Taught them the truths OF GOD and lead them to repentance.----Therefore, to be welcomed into the congregation which they were "NOW OF THE HOUSEHOLD OF GOD" Eph.2:19

"Women silence" wrong understanding. Acts 18:26, "And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto [them], and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly. "

There were prophetess as well who Spoke to the people(OT and NT)

(5)Paul's teachings were based upon the OT and the "revelation of Jesus Christ."

 

[Shermana]

Supposedly, it is God, the One and Only God, that said to do certain sacrifices and to stone transgressors of certain laws. If it weren't God that gave them those laws, forever, for all there generations, I'd say get rid of them. But I question if it really was God talking. I have no problem believing that the Hebrew people made those laws and said that "God said so" to give them divine authority, but I'm not a believer. Christians do believe that was God, the unchanging, not able to lie, God. He gave his people those laws. How do you get rid of them if they are in the way of making your new religion? I'm not even close to being a Bible scholar and I find Paul manipulating verses and taking things out of context everywhere. Do you think most Christians are in denial? Or, that most don't even know, or don't even care to know?

Well I'm a believer and believe those laws WERE given, but I can respect your disbelief on the matter. What's more important is the the last questions. I do in fact believe that most Christians are "in denial", militantly in denial, and many don't care to know the different opinions. They have a belief that the Law was done away with, that Paul was an authentic apostle, and nothing will shake that belief, just like nothing will shake mine. The difference is that, I believe, I and those who believe as I do at least take the time to hear and consider the opposing arguments, and have a much higher regard for consistency and not relying on doctrines of men that have no scriptural support or require radical twistings that contradict itself. Even those who take up the anti-Law position reject and deny basic things like what Jesus taught under various arguments like "That was only meant for the Jews" followed by "It was all undone on the Cross", ignoring that James berated Paul about a rumor of teaching Jewish Christians to abandon Moses, or saying things like James was changing doctrine to not rock the boat, etc.

 

[CG Didymus]

Deep denial and twisting and contradicting--It's been accepted for so long, it is as if we are seeing things that aren't there. If we say it contradicts, they say "No it doesn't." I asked about Paul's misquotes and been told "No, he's interpreting it right." How do you argue against the dominant view? But, then again, how do you prove wrong doings in things that happened 2000 years ago?

 

[Shermana]

Deep denial and twisting and contradicting--It's been accepted for so long, it is as if we are seeing things that aren't there. If we say it contradicts, they say "No it doesn't." I asked about Paul's misquotes and been told "No, he's interpreting it right." How do you argue against the dominant view? But, then again, how do you prove wrong doings in things that happened 2000 years ago?

It can be rather impossible to argue against the dominant view with people who refuse to listen to arguments or claims that go against their beliefs. The best you can hope for is to discuss it with reasonable and humble people who are more interested in objectivity than feeding their egos and confirmation biases (although the concept of "Confirmation bias" can also apply to having a bias for an objective, consistent and sound reading). It's hard to prove anything that happened 10 years ago, the best we can do is examine the evidence of the manuscripts available and use our common sense and apply it to the evidence. Sometimes we have to hypothesize as well, such as for example whether the earliest known manuscripts reflect what was there originally or include early interpolations, what canon they went by, etc.

 

[CG Didymus]

It can be rather impossible to argue against the dominant view with people who refuse to listen to arguments or claims that go against their beliefs. The best you can hope for is to discuss it with reasonable and humble people who are more interested in objectivity than feeding their egos and confirmation biases (although the concept of "Confirmation bias" can also apply to having a bias for an objective, consistent and sound reading). It's hard to prove anything that happened 10 years ago, the best we can do is examine the evidence of the manuscripts available and use our common sense and apply it to the evidence. Sometimes we have to hypothesize as well, such as for example whether the earliest known manuscripts reflect what was there originally or include early interpolations, what canon they went by, etc.

This might not be what I was told, but this is how I interpreted what I was being told. The Law was for then and it is over and done. It was a shadow, now Jesus, the real, has come. No one could follow the Law anyway. It was there to show people that it is impossible to be righteous on our own; we all fall short. Jesus is the true sacrifice. God never wanted the blood of bulls and goats. We are not saved by works of the Law; we are saved by grace. The only Laws that were important were the Ten Commandments (I assumed Sunday was the Lord's Sabbath).

Years later, after falling away, I went to a Jewish Center and asked, "What are your reasons for not believing that Jesus is the Messiah?" Paul's name came up quite a bit. They showed me how Paul turned Jewish Scripture into Christian "proofs." The clincher for me was Romans 10:8 vs Deut 30:14. A twist by Paul made the Law obsolete. When I read the Law was "not" too far, not too hard, etc. in Deut, I wondered why nobody ever told me this? Paul was taking things out of context. Denial is too good a word--criminal is much better. It is a spiritual cover-up. I know you still believe in Jesus plus the Law. I can't trust anybody yet. So how do you do it? And, what is it you know?

 

[Shermana]

This might not be what I was told, but this is how I interpreted what I was being told. The Law was for then and it is over and done. It was a shadow, now Jesus, the real, has come. No one could follow the Law anyway. It was there to show people that it is impossible to be righteous on our own; we all fall short. Jesus is the true sacrifice. God never wanted the blood of bulls and goats. We are not saved by works of the Law; we are saved by grace. The only Laws that were important were the Ten Commandments (I assumed Sunday was the Lord's Sabbath).

And that's the most common mainstream version of Christianity and interpretation of the writings, and I detest it with a vigorous passion, I've tried imagining and thinking as they do on this and it leaves me feeling empty and enraged at the same time. I can't express my contempt for this view, no matter if its the most common with appropriate words. However, most don't even consider the Sabbath to be important, they reduce it to the 9 commandments essentially. They don't even go by the (alleged) Council of Jerusalem prohibition of eating blood. I don't even think they usually consider breaking the 10 (9) commandments to be that big of a deal in the first place since you're not saved through works in their eyes.

If you're not saved by works and only through grace, not only did Jesus lie such as in verses like 7:22-23, but he wasted a LOT of breath in talking about how your works lead to your salvation, how you enter through the narrow gate, etc. Such a view is pure convenience and based on appealing to comfort and lack of having any personal responsibility, shedding any of the Jewish roots of Jesus's teachings in favor of some easy-believe universal appeal. May it come to an end soon.

Years later, after falling away, I went to a Jewish Center and asked, "What are your reasons for not believing that Jesus is the Messiah?" Paul's name came up quite a bit. They showed me how Paul turned Jewish Scripture into Christian "proofs." The clincher for me was Romans 10:8 vs Deut 30:14. A twist by Paul made the Law obsolete. When I read the Law was "not" too far, not too hard, etc. in Deut, I wondered why nobody ever told me this? Paul was taking things out of context. Denial is too good a word--criminal is much better. It is a spiritual cover-up. I know you still believe in Jesus plus the Law. I can't trust anybody yet. So how do you do it? And, what is it you know?

[/quote]Yes, Paul is one of the main stumbling blocks preventing my brethren from seeing (what I believe to be) the truth of Yeshu's message and teachings. A similar sentiment is seen in the Clementine Homilies. Most Christian doctrine indisputably comes from Paul, and many even use Paul to trump Jesus and negate his words. Paul doesn't even seem to interpret the writings properly. And that brings up an interesting issue....we know that several of Paul's writings are most likely forged....could there be other forgeries from gentiles who had no idea what those Hebrew scriptures he was quoting mean? I could give Paul a SLIGHT benefit of a doubt in that case.

But it's amazing how hostile mainstream Christianity is to the idea of personal responsibility, following the commandments, and personal works and effort, the Evil one has done a remarkable job turning Jesus's message entirely on its head, but I don't know whether to blame Paul, the Pastors, or the individuals who don't take the effort to think outside their boxes.

 

[CG Didymus]

...shedding any of the Jewish roots of Jesus's teachings in favor of some easy-believe universal appeal.

That's what I think happened. It is simple and appealing and still works. Who wants a bunch of laws cramping their style. Unfortunately, it is the God they claim to believe in that made those laws. It would have been so easy for God or Jesus to make the changes, but Paul? And, I know that is probably what you're facing. They will say that Paul had the authority of God and Jesus. Oh well, good luck and thanks again for being true to your believes.

 

[sincerly]

Originally Posted by Shermana
It can be rather impossible to argue against the dominant view with people who refuse to listen to arguments or claims that go against their beliefs. The best you can hope for is to discuss it with reasonable and humble people who are more interested in objectivity than feeding their egos and confirmation biases (although the concept of "Confirmation bias" can also apply to having a bias for an objective, consistent and sound reading). It's hard to prove anything that happened 10 years ago, the best we can do is examine the evidence of the manuscripts available and use our common sense and apply it to the evidence. Sometimes we have to hypothesize as well, such as for example whether the earliest known manuscripts reflect what was there originally or include early interpolations, what canon they went by, etc.

This might not be what I was told, but this is how I interpreted what I was being told. The Law was for then and it is over and done. It was a shadow, now Jesus, the real, has come. No one could follow the Law anyway. It was there to show people that it is impossible to be righteous on our own; we all fall short. Jesus is the true sacrifice. God never wanted the blood of bulls and goats. We are not saved by works of the Law; we are saved by grace. The only Laws that were important were the Ten Commandments (I assumed Sunday was the Lord's Sabbath).

Hi CG D, I tried twice to respond to your post at the end of page one---lost both. Possibly I needed to await this one.
You had your early years in the "Mother Church"----Mine was in several of the "daughters", for short periods of time. Then in early teens, just as entertainment of the "various evangelic tent meetings". That period between the "tent meetings" and the fall of my 19th birthday was basically "out of sight out of mind". The only "belief" that raised a "flame" was Lev.11; Deut.14 along with Gen.1:29 and Gen.9;3-4. (that about my 14th year)
During a week-end, while visiting a church with a friend, I felt the need to be Baptized and was---into One of those "daughters".
However, after about six weeks, Scripturally, the teachings and the scriptures were contradictory. I studied the Scriptures(over a year and a half)---comparing doctrines with the truths found in the Scriptures; and settled upon one Church. Isn't that what those Bereans were doing? (Acts 17:11) And isn't that the message of Jesus in John 5:39. (After 60 years, the Scriptures are still valid--hold true.)

Granted, there were no "computers" back then and I didn't rely on any man's works. the various "doctrines" were looked at in reference to the text as sourced. What I see now and saw then was the same principle as "fooled Eve"---that of a third party speaking lies----disbelieving the word of GOD.

Years later, after falling away, I went to a Jewish Center and asked, "What are your reasons for not believing that Jesus is the Messiah?" Paul's name came up quite a bit. They showed me how Paul turned Jewish Scripture into Christian "proofs." The clincher for me was Romans 10:8 vs Deut 30:14. A twist by Paul made the Law obsolete. When I read the Law was "not" too far, not too hard, etc. in Deut, I wondered why nobody ever told me this? Paul was taking things out of context. Denial is too good a word--criminal is much better. It is a spiritual cover-up. I know you still believe in Jesus plus the Law. I can't trust anybody yet. So how do you do it? And, what is it you know?

CG D, as shown above the OT Scriptures were the only Teachings of/From The Creator GOD at the time of the Apostles and Paul. AND Jesus said, "they are they which testify of me".John5:39. Those prophecies were written in the OT. and "shown to be fulfilled" in the writings of the Apostles and Paul.

Paul made "NO LAW OBSOLETE". In Acts and Romans, one can find all of the Decalogue by Paul except the Third. James has it.
There is no violation of the Decalogue by any who "Keep the Law". That is Paul's and James message. 2Pet.3:16 informs one that the Scriptures and Paul's writings are twisted by others. Paul was teaching and preaching the Truth of the Scriptures.

Anyone can still believe or disbelieve anything one wants to believe.

 

[Shermana]

There is more to the Law than the Decalogue.

Do you know the passages in question where Paul seems to outright reject the Law?

 

[sincerly]

There is more to the Law than the Decalogue.

Do you know the passages in question where Paul seems to outright reject the Law?

That is very true! The Torah includes the sum total of ALL the Laws given by GOD. Those laws include all things to govern man's relationship to GOD First and mankind next and to man's environment and finally to one's self.
Had those Laws in their categories been Obeyed by Adam and Eve, we wouldn't be having these debates.

First, there are Laws which, when disregarded, carry the death penalty. GOD specifically wrote then on the tablets of stone and spoke them to the people from Sinai. They are THE DECALOGUE.
Second, GOD then Gave Moses a set of Laws(atop Sinai) which were to allow any of mankind who had broken those laws to be reconciled/redeemed back into the Graces of A Loving Merciful GOD.(All planned before the foundation of the world and fall of mankind).
That system/pattern was shown to Moses during his forty days atop of Sinai with GOD. It was called the Sanctuary and had divine services Patterned after the one in Heaven. A Heavenly Being was the sacrifice for the redemption of Mankind and Moses was told certain earthly animals were to be selected to represent that LAMB slain in the heavenly one.
It was all those Laws pertaining to the Sanctuary System which Jesus Christ "Came to Fulfill"---AND DID.
Paul didn't reject any of GOD"S Laws, But he did specify those which were "fulfilled" and how/the means.
You will see these in Acts, Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Colosians, etc.
God had always wanted those who desired to have GOD as their GOD to have their stony hearts to be "Circumcised".(Deut.10:16; 30:6; Jer.4:4; Rom.2:24-29)
The "earthly sanctuary with all its laws" was only to last until the "Body" of those casted "shadows" Came. "For the time then present". Col.2; Heb.9
Those included the Daily sacrifices and the Annual festivals.

The Dietary laws; the sanitary/health laws; the environmental laws; the civil laws; etc. are still valid.

 

[Jonathan Hoffman]

Btw, Jesus made a prophecy about Paul in John 5:43. Be sure to also read the preceding verses!!