I must say that in my opinion, of all the New testament writers, the apostle Paul certainly had the clearest view. He was not in the least bit bothered about taking to task any issue that he thought was erroneous, conflicting or just downright wrong. But even he had his failings, hey, don't we all? If any of my own writings or observations should survive and somebody in 2000 years time should read them with 2000 years more experience and evolution under their belt they may well pick a lot of the bones out of what I have said also.

The problem really only occurs when people demand that ALL of the Bible and everything in it is the word of God and therefore unquestionable. These people believe that if God is behind a writer then it was impossible for them to have been wrong or to make mistakes, and it is they who are in the unenviable position of having to uphold everything that it says.

Their fear of course, is that if one portion of it is allowed to be rejected, then where will it all end? My answer to this is - I would hope that it would all end in us all becoming wiser, more instructed and the better for it, but they seem to doubt it.

That is their problem, not mine.

As far as Paul was concerned he certainly did say some very good things based on astute observation, but whether he had got hold of the right end of the stick at times is doubtful, and at times he was absolutely dead wrong.

Confusidius: "Hi there, are you Paul?"

Paul: "Sorry?"

Confusidius: "I asked - are you Paul, the guy that keeps on sending out all of those letters to the different churches?"

Paul: "Yes. Do I know you?"

Confusidius: "No, my name is Confusidius."

Paul: "Oh, right. Where are you from Confusidius?"

Confusidius: "Galatia".

Paul: "Oh, Hi there, yes, I wrote a letter to you lot a few months ago."

Confusidius: "Yes, we got it."

Paul: "Jolly good. How can I help you?"

Confusidius: "I have just come over for a few days to stay with my cousin here on the coast and I heard you were here. You see I read that letter that you sent to us. Hey, I liked it by the way."

Paul: "Good."

Confusidius: "Oh aye, I thought it was brilliant. As you know we had a right problem over there with those legalistic hot heads demanding that we all got circumcised according to the law. Boy oh boy, I must admit I didn't fancy going through that one bit. I mean, let's face it, my tackle has held me in good stead for a few years now, and I didn't fancy the idea of letting one of them loose with a sharp stone lopping bits off, if you know what I mean?"

Paul: "Yes, I can well imagine how it might be unpleasant. I had my bits chopped off when I was eight days old so I don't remember it at all.

Confusidius: "Well, if you have got to have it done, that's about the best way I reckon."

Paul: "Anyway, what can I do for you?"

Confusidius: "Well, I would just like to clear a few things up. When you wrote to us you really did come down like a tonne of bricks, didn't you? I mean, some of the things that you said. Like -

"For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. GAL 2:18-19.

I really did like that, and it made a lot of sense. And again -

"For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them." GAL 3:10

And -

"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree." GAL 3:13

And I especially liked that bit about -

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." GAL 3:28

That really made sense to me.

Paul: "Good I am really glad that you liked it and it stopped the rot over there. But how can I help you?"

Confusidius: "Well, it's my cousin Trepidious who lives over in Corinth. He sent me a copy of the letter that you sent them over there."

Paul: "Oh right, did you like it?"

Confusidius: "No not really."

Paul: "Oh, I am sorry to hear that. Why not?"

Confusidius: "Because in that you said things which are totally opposed to what you wrote to us.

Paul: "Really?"

Confusidius: "Yes. In the letter to Corinth you said -

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law." 1 Cor 14:34-38

Now forgive me for asking, but how do you make that out. How can write to us and tell us that "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." And then write to them and tell them to - "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak, but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law." If there is neither male nor female, but we are all one in Christ, how can women be singled out as not permitted to speak?

Paul: "Yes, weeeelllll".

Confusidius: "No hang on I haven't finished yet. How can you say - "For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. And then say concerning their women - "but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law?

I mean, you used the argument that we are no longer under the law very well in the letter you wrote to us, if I may say so. But when writing to Corinth you see to be set on binding them to the law. If there is neither male nor female, and we are all become dead to the law that we might live unto God, how can you now say that women must keep silence in the church for it is not permitted them to speak?

I mean you told us that on one occasion you withstood Peter -

"But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?" GAL 2:14

Paul: "Yes, I see what you are saying. Hmm, good point, yes I had better write to the Corinthians and get it put right. It is a bit of a cock up."

Confusidius: "Well, yes, I should think so, because I would hate to think that these letters of yours should by some chance be found in a few hundred years time and then used for the two thousand years after that as authoritative.

Paul: "Oh, I wouldn't worry too much about that, Confusidius . That will never happen. Good grief, all copies of it will be long lost by then. Besides which if you can see the error for what it is, everybody else will surely be able to see it."

Confusidius: "Well, I hope so, because I would hate to think that you are trying to bind my cousin Trepidious to laws that you yourself teach that we are to become dead to so that we might live unto God. By the way, just for the record, where exactly in the Law does it say that?"

Paul: "Sorry?"

Confusidius: "Where does it say it? Where in the law does it say that women can't teach or speak in the synagogue or in the congregation? Do you know I have searched through my scrolls of law time after time and I can't find it anywhere."

Paul: "Oh, it is there somewhere, you are not looking hard enough".

Confusidius: And while we are at it, you also wrote in the same letters to Corinth -

"Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering." 1 Cor. 11:13-15

Paul: "Yeeees?"

Confusidius: "Well, actually, Paul, no it doesn't. Nature teaches me no such thing. In fact it teaches me exactly the opposite.

It is the Lion which has the glorious head of hair, not the lioness. It is the stallion which has the glorious mane, not the mare. Throughout the whole of the bird kingdom it is the males which have the beautiful ruffles and the glorious plumage's, not the females. It is the peacock which has the glorious display, not the peahen, etc. So your statement is just not correct is it?

Paul: "Well, thank you, Confusidius, but I must be getting along now, I have got to meet Timothy in the market square. Leave it with me, and I will write another letter to the Corinthians and put it right. Bye now."

The reason that I bring these two things into this section is because there are within the Protestant Christian community various groups who stick to these instructions like glue. I mean - they follow these laws to the letter!

Women ARE NOT allowed to speak in the church, neither to preach nor to ask a question, and they have taken the whole thing of a head covering to the extreme that simply having a long head of hair is not enough, but they must also wear a hat or scarf, or some other head covering.

Now this is not a problem, certainly not for me, and evidently not for them, but the fact still remains that it is a rule which is based on a load of nonsense which was inaugurated by the apostle Paul.

Nature does not show us that it is a shame for a man to have long hair and a shame for a woman to have short hair, quite the opposite. You may not like to see long hair on a male nor short hair on a female, but do not let your own personal likes, dislikes or preferences cloud your judgement when you are laying down the rules for others and telling them how they should act before God.

Paul was a Jew, and followed certain of the customs which he had been brought up to understand and follow. We have the account written in the book of Acts where he had shaved his head because he had taken a vow of some sort.

"And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow." Acts 18:18

Neither should you take it for granted that Paul was correct on either of these two issues - women keeping silent in the church, or the length of hair or a head covering, because he wasn't. He was wrong, he was dead wrong. He could not have been more wrong! He was far more correct when he said - "In Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female".

The exact date of St. Paul's epistles is not known, and I go with those scholars who are of the opinion that the epistle to the Galatians was written after the first letter to the Corinthians, although it must be admitted that scholars cannot agree on its exact date. I believe that it was written after Corinthians because I see in it a change of thinking.

In the earlier letter to the Corinthians he was quite happy to place them under bondage to law in these matters. By the time that he wrote to the galatians his thinking had changed quite dramatically regarding who should be placed in bondage in such a way to any law. But many Christians ignore this fact and preach the doctrines and teaching from both books side by side as if they were both equally valid. They have to you see, because after all, they believe that ALL of the Bible is the word of God, and this is where all of the nonsense comes in.

They do however still have to be yet confronted with the question - which God?

So you see, we must never take for granted that what we read is necessarily correct and true. When you enter the world of religion you are entering a domain of belief, faith and emotion. You are dealing with the tender consciences of many people. Things that you say can bind them or set them free. You are playing around in an area which has pitfalls all around. The majority of those in charge just do not give a donkeys chuff. They are so full of themselves and their own importance and position of power and authority that they would rather have their testicles stuffed in a lion's mouth than admit that they were wrong.

I have been wrong on many occasions, and I have had to admit it and swallow the bitter pill, but hey the good news is, once you have done it a few times it isn't quite so bitter. I now look upon my own walk with my God as ever changing. I am always learning different things and hopefully increasing in the knowledge of how to do it all better.

Christianity, on the other hand wets itself every time that it has to admit to being wrong. There is no room for improvement, no place for change, no advancement in learning, nothing but a static desolation of nonsense. It simply goes over and over the old ground reinforcing the utter crap into each new generation.

They instill fear and dread into any and all that come within their grasp so that they can add another convert to their list. I say that they, like Moses before them are mind-controlling gits. I have said it before and I will probably say it again many times before I depart from this life.

Now let us move right on in and get our teeth into some of the crazy, ludicrous, nightmare teachings of Christianity itself.