couldn't have said it better myself..

Paul and Ananias


Jesus said that true prophets can be distinguished from false prophets by
"their fruits." He mused, "Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of
thistles?" In other words, he told us to check out the story of a so-called
prophet or person of influence. If the story doesn’t add up, then the person
in question should be viewed as a false prophet.

Having stated that, here is some additional information about Paul. Firstly,
Paul was linked—from the moment of his so-called conversion in Damascus—to
one of the same high-priests who had Jesus killed.
The man’s name was
"Ananias" (Acts 9:10, King James). It was Ananias who restored Saul's sight
after being blinded during his so-called vision of Jesus at Damascus.

The Bible states that Ananias [complained to the Lord that Paul] had "authority

from the chiefs to bind all that call on thy name" (Acts 9:14). [So Ananias was

apparently quite familiar with the hierarchy of the high priests and the Sanhedrin.

Ananias may have been somewhat influential himself.] Possibly a former high priest.

Ananias [may have been] one of the high priests in the Sanhedrin who questioned
Jesus before his execution. In the King James Version of the Bible, this man's
name is spelled "Annas." He was the father-in-law of Joseph Caiaphais, the high
priest who decreed that Jesus must die (John 11:49-51). In fact, Jesus was
first questioned by Annas after being arrested by the Sanhedrin guards. Annas
turned Jesus over to Caiaphas who turned him over to Pilate for crucifixion.

The English translations of Antiquities, by Josephus, identifies "Ananus" as a
high-priest appointed to head the Sanhedrin a few years before Caiaphas (ref.
Josephus, Antiquities, Book 18, Chapter 2). In John 18:13, it states that Annas
(Ananus) was the father-in-law of Joseph Caiaphas.

So we know that Ananus and Annas were the same person, but different authors or
translators spelled their names differently (in Antiquities versus John). So it
seems highly plausible that the person known as Ananias (from Acts 9, Saul's
pal) is also Ananus/Annas.

It is highly suspicious that the same high priest who was deeply involved in the murder
of Jesus was also linked to Paul’s conversion to Christianity.
(More than likely his co-conspirator to help Paul with his fake vision lies)

Secondly, Paul’s teachings are much different from those of Jesus. Jesus
taught people how to live their lives in a manner that would please God. In
addition, he said in no uncertain terms that those who practice Pharisaic
teachings would not escape hell. He called them the children of the Devil. Paul
WAS a Pharisee. In addition, Paul focused on the meaning of the resurrection
in an obsessive manner that left most of Jesus’s teaching
forgotten—particularly the damnation of the Pharisees and their followers.

Thirdly, Paul never attempted to atone for his life as a Pharisee or his
association with one of the high priests involved in the murder of Jesus. In
fact, he boasted of his status as a Pharisee. It should be regarded as
blasphemy that an active Pharisee would spread Christianity and [may have

been] aided in [his] efforts by one of Jesus’s murderers, high-priest Ananus.

Jesus said of false prophets, "Ye shall know them by their fruits." I can see
nothing but rotten fruit produced from Paul.