Yeshua challenged the Sanhedrin for murdering the prophets as atoning sacrifices in Matthew 23:27-38, Mark 7:1-13, and the Parable of the Wicked Husbandman (Matthew 21:33-46, Mark 12:1-12, and Luke 20:9-19).
Thus Christianity following the Pharisaic doctrine, "that the death of the righteous can atone for the sins of that generation" is why Yeshua cut off the Jews... So to make a religion up about the one thing he stood against, is absolute hypocrisy.
The early church knew this, and like the Parable of the Wheat and Tares, the Wheat is the teachings of the son of man in the Synoptic Gospels, and what is placed along side is the Tares (John
, and Simon
Jude 1:11 Woe to them! For they went in the way of Cain (killed their brother), and ran riotously in the error of Balaam for hire (Micah 6:5-8 = God does not require sacrifice), and perished in Korah’s rebellion (stood against God, and thus shall be destroyed).
If we try reading that in context, we can understand the Book of Jude is challenging Pauline Christian ideas that Yeshua came to die as an atoning sacrifice.
There isn't any proof that Paul was appointed, we have only his word for it on the road to Damascus, where the phraseology "I Am Christ" is warned about in all 3 Synoptic Gospels (Luke 21:8, Mark 13:5-6, Matthew 24:4-5)...
If Paul had been chosen to share the Gospel message it should be the same as Christ's Gospel in the Synoptic Gospels, that by good works, giving up wealth, following the commandments, being a light unto many we can be saved Vs Paul's dead Gospel, where we just have to believe in the death of jesus.
In my opinion.