PAUL: A STUDY OF A BIPOLAR SCHIZOPHRENIC PSYCHOPATH
Paul's Psychological Profile
From The Journal of Neuropsychiatry & Clinical Neurosciences
Paul (Saul of Tarsus)
Acknowledgments | References
Paul lived during the first century CE. It has been speculated that his religious experiences resulted from temporal lobe epilepsy.43 We would argue that it is not necessary to invoke epilepsy as an explanation for these experiences. Paul’s mood in his letters ranged from ecstatic to tears of sorrow, suggesting marked mood swings.44,45 He endorsed an abundance of sublime auditory and visual perceptual experiences (2 Corinthians 12:2–9) that resemble grandiose hallucinations with delusional thought content. He manifested increased religiosity and fears of evil spirits, which resembles paranoia. These features may occur together, in association with primary and mood disorder-associated psychotic conditions.
In 2 Corinthians 12:7, Paul relates “a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger from Satan, to harass me, to keep me from being too elated.” This thorn has been speculated to be a reference to epilepsy.43 Other theories have proposed that the thorn was a physical infirmity, the opposition of his fellow Jews,46 or a harassing demon.47
We propose that he perceived an apparition or voice that he understood to be a harassing, demonic messenger from Satan. This perception might have afflicted him with some amount of negative commentary of the type characteristic for psychotic conditions, resulting in psychological distress.
The complexity of Paul’s interactions in his perceptual experiences weighs against a seizure ictus as a cause, as does the lack of evidence for more common epileptic accompaniments, such as repetitive stereotyped behavioral changes and cognitive symptoms, as previously discussed. Paul does, however, manifest a number of personality characteristics similar to the interictal personality traits described by Geshwind,48–50 such as deepened emotions; possibly circumstantial thought; increased concern with philosophical, moral and religious issues; increased writing, often on religious or philosophical themes; and, possibly, hyposexuality (1 Corinthians 7:8–9). These characteristics are controversial as to their specificity for epilepsy,51,52 with a preponderance of larger studies not confirming a specific personality type associated with seizure disorders.51–57 Similar features may also be present in bipolar disorder5,35,36 and schizophrenia.35,36 As previously mentioned, productive writing tends to be more strongly associated with mood disorders than psychosis or epilepsy. This is persuasive toward Paul having a mood disorder, rather than schizophrenia or epilepsy.
Paul’s religious conversion on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:1–19, 22:6–13, 26:9–16) is an event understood as marked by the acute onset of blindness. This blindness has been hypothesized to have been postictal in nature43 or psychogenic.58 There appears to be a lack of clarity as to whether this was literal visual blindness or metaphorical, since Paul refers to persons outside his immediate belief system as spiritually blind or having their eyes closed to spiritual truth (Acts 28:26; Romans 11:8, 11:10; 2 Corinthians 4: 3–5; Ephesians 1:1. Differences in the three most detailed conversion-experience accounts contribute to this ambiguity. Acts 26:12–18 relates his conversion, during which a vision of Jesus tasks him to spiritually open the eyes of the people to whom he will be sent (see Figure 4). In this account, there is no mention of acute-onset visual loss followed by its restoration. The application of the blindness metaphor in Acts 26:12–18 may suggest that Paul’s own loss of vision was equally metaphorical and served as a descriptor of his profound realization of feeling suddenly bereft of spiritual understanding; that is, realizing his eyes to be spiritually closed, before the completion of his conversion to the new religious sect. In such an emotional state, it is speculated that he might have required encouragement and emotional assistance to reach Damascus. Another possibility would be that of blindness due to conversion disorder. The absence of other episodes of visual loss (i.e., lack of event stereotypy), the absence of features often seen with postictal blindness (a generalized seizure, anosognosia for deficit, or a gradual return of vision),59 the presence of complex, mood-congruent auditory–visual experiences resembling hallucinations, and the possible sudden return of his eyesight with a compassionate touch does not fit well into a readily discernable neurological pattern of vision loss. His perceptual experiences, mood variability, grandiose-like symptoms, increased concerns about religious purity, and paranoia-like symptoms could be viewed as resembling psychotic spectrum illness (see Table 1). Psychiatric diagnoses that might encompass his constellation of experiences and manifestations could include paranoid schizophrenia, psychosis NOS, mood disorder-associated psychosis, or schizoaffective disorder. Paul’s preserved ability to write and organize his thoughts would favor a mood disorder-associated explanation for his religious experiences.
Source: D. Landsborough, "St. Paul and Temporal Lobe Epilepsy," J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1987; 50; 659–64: 
Paul's Polar Opposite Camps of Die-Hard Defenders:
Catholics/Christians Messianic "Jews"
Believe the Law is "a curse" Believe Paul kept and preached the Law
and "nailed to the cross"
How can this be? Consider the possibilities...
1. Paul was a bipolar schizophrenic who gave 2 very contradictory teachings / writings.
2. Paul was a typical hypocrite Pharisee that the Messiah warned of so repeatedly because they said and practiced one thing and then said and did something completely contradictory the next moment. You simply have to read Acts to see how he swung from one thing to another within the same writing.
3. Paul was telling converts one thing and then said something entirely different to the true Apostles to win their
favor.You needn't go any further then to see how "James" the half-brother of the Messiah makes an example of Paul
because of the confusing and contradictory teachings he was giving to converts. Thousands of Judeans wanted to kill Paul for preaching a Torah-less (God-less) gospel and he was rejected from the churches of Asia for the same reason.
4. Paul was an agent provocateur - in other words, he infiltrated the sect of the Way to destroy their message from the inside. This is something Jesuits and Zionists practice with proven results who may have taken this strategy from Paul. Remember he persecuted and killed the true Saints of Elohim - he may have found it more effective to join them and given his ability to speak and persuade began to lead new converts astray with an an entirely different "gospel" that contradicted that of the Messiah and Talmidim.
5. "Paul" was the creation of 2 completely separate writers with entirely different agendas.
Pick your poison.
No matter how you slice or dice it, it's impossible to reconcile such contradictory writings and by extension, teachings. It cannot be argued that he so blatantly contradicts himself because he changed his way of thinking AFTER his "alleged conversion" which by the way, does not add up either - he gave 3 different versions but more on this later - rather, ALL his bipolar teachings/writings took place AFTERWARDS.
So either he was a delusional schizophrenic OR a Machiavellian character of the worst kind OR perhaps more disturbing still, he was both. Why might Paul be a bipolar schizophrenic? As the above clearly shows, there are numerous scriptures where he clearly preaches FOR the Law and just as many scriptures where he is clearly preaching AGAINST the Law of God. Why then might Paul be an agent provocateur? Because it would be far more effective to infiltrate and destroy from within the Nazarene movement of the Saints he persecuted and put to death by pretending to be one of them, gaining their trust by claiming to preach the Law, and ultimately positioning himself as the sects "ringleader" (Acts 24:5) which he would exploit to preach a Lawless "gospel" contrary to what the Nazarenes were commanded by the Messiah and the true 12 Apostles to keep (BOTH the Law and Testimony of the Messiah). Was Paul's agenda effective? Spectacularly so - The original Nazarene movement was almost entirely wiped off the face of the earth - but miraculously survived - today a remnant few still keep BOTH the Law and Testimony staying true to the Word of the Father and Son of God who stated, "upon this rock I will build My church and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it." (Matthew 16:18) after Peter correctly declares the Messiah is the Son of the living God (the Word - Torah - made flesh). The Messiah's church therefore is made up of Saints who keep His Torah and give Testimony He is God with us.
It cannot be ruled out that Paul was both a bipolar schizophrenic and agent provocateur. You will find he is often defending and opposing the Law within the same breadth of scriptures. Either way, it should be obvious that it is both complete foolishness and eternal suicide to rely on this individual for sound doctrine - particularly when he is preaching a Lawless doctrine when we are REPEATEDLY told by the Father and Messiah from Genesis to Revelation to keep Their Law or be denied at Judgment. Regardless of the side you take, it is a useless exercise to defend Paul who is like a serpent chasing its own tail.
While it would be very easy to add the 24 "For the Law" scriptures Paul is claimed to have voiced to add to The Heaven Religion's list of over 100 scriptures to keep the Law as one of the two criteria to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, paradoxically his 26 "Against the Law" scriptures would have to be given just as much credit. Since his For and Against scriptures of the Law completely contradict and cancel each other out, they were best left out. More importantly, his "Against the Law" scriptures fly completely against the Word of Elohim the Father and Messiah, which is why it was best to completely ignore his bipolar scriptures altogether.
You need not look any further then to see that Catholicism/Christianity is based on Paul's Lawless heretical teachings - it was he and not Peter that arrived to Rome. It is actually Paul and not Peter who is Catholicism's first "Pope"- AntiChrist. If Paul was truly telling converts to keep the Law (Torah), then all Christians would be keeping the Law - but this is not the case - in fact, quite the opposite is true - they reject it completely just as Paul taught.