He was the teacher of lawlessness. Eusebius documents what the early Nazarenes thought of him in EH.
Eusebius wrote one hundred years later, and spoke nothing of lawlessness, but of his accomplishments. The Early Church Fathers are not considered scripture. They fall into the category of delightfully debatable history.
They weren't false accusations. Just look at his teachings in Romans and Galatians.
Wish you would...Especially the first nine chapters of Romans. Paul grasped the significance of the Son and His work of sacrifice. And of you and your rejection. He also understood what it meant to promote you to the jealousy you display. Abraham was sent to be a blessing to the nations...and Paul makes it clear, so that we become a blessing to you in return.
Despite our failure, that has always been the plan.
Rotfl... you prove you don't have a good defense.
No...I prove that tradition artificially and deliberately sets expectations way too low. I have nothing to defend.
Look to his teachings regarding clean and unclean foods.
Trust me...I do daily. I'm going through scripture OT/NT six or seven times a year. You need to understand that God was doing more than proscribing bacon with the food laws. The epistle of Barnabas had interesting insights as well...that never ended up in scripture, but it shows how folks were thinking.
And still elsewhere. Paul started his false churches every where even though he had zero authority. He definitely didn't abide by the Jerusalem Council nor the Spirit which guided it.
Paul did not start "false churches." And he had the authority of the Spirit by the laying on of hands at the behest of the Holy Spirit in Antioch. He quoted the Jerusalem council, and held to in in those churches that disputed. In Corinth...he even clarified the intent of the Jerusalem council, and his writings were approved later in Peter's epistles.
Of course it was. Until heaven and earth...
Hmmm...Rabbinical traditions do not resemble Temple practice...pragmatic substitution is not exactly the same...is it?
Nope. There was no change.
Clearly...Not with your people. It's sad but true. But also foreseen. As Paul said: "until..."
Daniel didn't have a temple either. We just follow his example.
There is no testimony of scripture as to his practice, beyond three times a day prayer.
Actually, Gamaliel taught a acceptance approach to Nazarenes, while Paul persecuted them. Quite different than his Nasi, which shows Paul wasn't under his tutelage.
Beyond the testimony of Acts, what do you know? What is written? We know of persecutions after Stephen was martyred (Gamaliel's reticence didn't help there much, did it?
Paul was a hero who never gave up on you...and was willing to let his own life be anathema for your sake.