7:30pm EST
Questioning Paul
Apostle or False Prophet
...Did Paul Contradict God?

Chapter 11


Appropriate Response

How Are You Going to Respond

The longer the sentence, the more challenging it can be to comprehend. That is especially true with Paul. So, as we begin our review of the sixth chapter of his thesis and rebuttal to the Galatians, consider this rendition of his next pronouncement as it is rendered in the Nestle-Aland 27th Edition McReynolds Interlinear: “Brothers if also might be taken before man in some trespass you the spiritual ones put in order the such in spirit of gentleness looking carefully yourself not also you might be pressured.” It is almost as if Paul cleverly selected twenty-three words and strung them together as a puzzle to tantalize his fellow Gnostics.

While I am not exactly sure what this is supposed to mean, I know that it does not contribute to knowing Yahowah or to our understanding of His Covenant. And therefore, the following exercise in linguistics is for naught...

“And also (kai) brothers (adelphos), if (ean) a man (anthropos) may have previously detected or caught (prolambano – might have previously held) someone (tini) in (en) a false step (paraptomati – a slip up, misdeed, or deviation, trespass or transgression), you all (umeis), the spiritual ones (oi pneumatikoi – the ones who bear and bring forth the spirit), you must be prepared to completely restore (katartizo – you are commanded to make and render wholly mended; from “kata – according to” and “artios – perfectly fit”) the one (ton) such as this (toioutos) with (en – in) a meek and gentle (prautes – humble) spirit (ΠΝΙ / pneumati – Divine Placeholder for the Ruwach (however, since Sha’uwl’s spirit bears no resemblance to the Set-Apart Spirit, the lowercase is appropriate)), carefully observing (skopeo – focusing on, closely watching, being concerned, and thinking about) yourself (seauton), so then (kai) you, yourself, may submit and be tempted (ou peirazo – you, yourself may or may not be tested or trapped having tried to catch a mistake).” (Galatians 6:1)

Ever the paranoid hypocrite, Paul knew that he had been caught lying to the Galatians. And yet unlike his response to Shim’own Kephas, he wanted those he deliberately deceived to cut him a break. But since he has told us that he cannot lie, he couched his message in a generic instruction, one that everyone in his original audience would have seen right through.

There are so many things wrong with Sha’uwl’s last proclamation, with an eye to exposing errant Christian theology, let’s tackle these one word at a time. The problems begin with “prolambano – may have previously detected or caught.” This is very similar to the Qur’an asking Muslim children to spy on their parents and turn them in to the authorities if they suspect them of rejecting any of Muhammad’s commands. It was how most everyone in Stalin’s Russia and Hitler’s Germany were controlled. It was the spirit behind the Salem Witch Trials in America. And it is how professors, politicians, priests, preachers, and media spokespeople are compelled to walk a conforming path today. It is the operating mechanism behind Political Correctness. It is the spirit behind: “We are watching you, and if you step out of line (remember “stoichomen – march in a conforming line following the leader), we will send you off to be reprogrammed.” It is why the National Security Agency is spying on the phone calls and internet clicks of ordinary Americans.

Moving from Paul’s police to the “paraptomati – false step,” we discover that in the Pauline Faith “deviations” from Pauline Doctrine would not be tolerated. No one will be allowed to “slip away or turn aside from the path” which has been articulated by the self-proclaimed messenger of god. It is especially telling that paraptomati is a compound of para, meaning “from,” and pipto, “to descend, being thrust down, prostrating oneself.” Paul is establishing a religion, which like this letter, will not tolerate a rival, nor any challenge to his authority or instructions. All those who rebel and offer dissenting views must be caught and thoroughly dealt with. Welcome to the impetus behind the Inquisition.

By the way, Yahowsha’ encouraged us to carefully examine the rhetoric and platitudes of religious and political leaders, but not ordinary people. And His standard for this review was anything that deviated from His instructions in the Torah and Prophets. As a result, if we were to follow Yahowsha’s advice and example, we would all be holding Sha’uwl accountable for his deliberate deviations from the Word of God.

Prior to examining this passage, I had wondered how “pneumatikoi – being spiritual and acting spiritually” became synonymous with the Christian religion. But now I realize as do you that the concept was sponsored by Sha’uwl. And unfortunately, like faith and belief, it has given rise to a host of erroneous concepts and errant behaviors.

God never asks anyone “to be spiritual,” because the most active “spirit” on this planet is Satan’s. Instead, the standard God wants us to observe is the Towrah, which is why the example we are encouraged to follow is Yahowsha’—the Word made flesh.

Christians demonstrate what it means to “act spiritual” when they wave their arms in the air at praise services, and when they point to the heavens after achieving some success in an athletic event. Spirituality is on display when someone, ignorant of the purpose of freewill, says “God has a plan for your life,” or says “it was all part of God’s plan,” in an ill-advised attempt to blame their misfortune on God, suggesting that their failures were His will. Spirituality is manifest again at funerals when someone claims that a deceased friend was called home. Worse, Christians think that they are demonstrating their spirituality when they insist others do what “Jesus Christ,” did, not recognizing that the Christian caricature they worship was crafted by Paul, and thus is unrelated to God.

Also interesting in this regard, this is one of the few Greek passages where a form of pneuma was actually written out, as opposed to being represented by a Divine placeholder for Ruwach (as it is the second time in this sentence). The only thing which distinguishes pneumatikoi from pneuma is the tikoi suffix. Tikto means “to bring forth, to bear, and to produce.” It is used in the context of “a woman giving birth.”

If it were not for the fact that “katartizo – you must be prepared to completely restore” was written in the second person plural as katartisete, then it would have been a worthy instruction. But this is not our job. It’s the Qodesh / Set-Apart Ruwach / Spirit’s responsibility to “repair and renew” our souls, “making us totally complete and entirely sound.” Worse, katartisete was written as an active imperative, and thus as a “command” or “commandment” that the subject of this order must perform at the insistence of Paul.

Both times we have encountered prautes, I have translated it in accord with the primary definitions found in most every lexicon: gentile, meek, and timid. And that is because the favored meanings, while wildly hypocritical, fit Paul’s presentation of Gnostic attributes. However, the secondary connotation is “consideration.” Therefore, “prautes – ­an appropriate and considered response” is what Questioning Paul was written to inspire. You have been encouraged to “carefully evaluate the evidence and then respond appropriately.”

With regard to prautes, Aristotle said that the word stood in the middle between getting angry without reason and not getting angry at all. Prautes describes a “measured and considered reaction which is suitable to the circumstance.” It isn’t passivity or aggression, but instead the “fitting reply based upon adequate knowledge and proper understanding.”

Prautes is most often rendered “meekness or humility” but the word does not suggest weakness, being impotent, or being lowly or impoverished, because all of that misses the point. Prautes is the courage and character to do what is right regardless of the consequence. It was used by Yahowsha’ in the Sermon on the Mount to describe those who understand the appropriateness of relying upon Yahowah as opposed to themselves. Therefore, prautes isn’t about meekness as we use that word, but instead about understanding the human condition relative to Yahowah’s Word, and then engaging appropriately.

The merit of prautes is that it encourages us to consider the evidence thoughtfully before we respond. It is an “informed and rational reply.” So, now that you know that Sha’uwl’s message is the antithesis of Yahowah’s, who are you going to trust?

The key, or course, to making the right decision is “focus.” We must “skopeo – carefully observe, be concerned and think about” Yahowah’s Word. But unfortunately Paul told Christians to “skopeo seauton – focus upon, carefully observe, and think about yourself.”

The reason Sha’uwl wants Christians to be self-aware, guarded, and circumspect is so that “ou peirazo – you, yourself, may not be trapped by trying to catch a mistake” another has made. His message, therefore, cuts both ways. He wants his spies to toe the line he has drawn, so that they “aren’t tempted” to reject his dogma. And he is equally insistent that they don’t “test his instructions so as to ascertain the truth” for themselves.

Peirazo is from peira, “to conduct a trial.” But it also means “to know by way of personal experience.” It is often translated “to put to the test,” “to examine,” or “to prove.” But keep in mind; while these concepts are appropriate when it comes to evaluating a message or messenger, peirazo written in the second person singular, “you,” was coupled with “ou – yourself” in this text which negated all of these things.

Without the clutter of the Greek, and without excessive amplification, the opening verse of the sixth chapter reads: “And also brothers, if a man may have previously detected or caught someone in a false step, you all, the spiritual ones, you must thoroughly prepare and completely restore the one such as this with a meek and gentle spirit, carefully observing yourself so then you, yourself, may submit and be tempted, having tried to catch a mistake.” (6:1)

In the Latin Vulgate, Jerome blazed the trail all others have followed: “Brethren, and if a man be overtaken in any fault, you, who are spiritual, instruct such a one in the spirit of meekness, considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.” Based upon this interpretation, the King James Bible, as a translation of the Latin, and not the Greek, reads: “Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.”

Moving into the more modern translations, the literal New American Standard Bible scribed: “Brethren, even if anyone is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; each one looking to yourself, so that you too will not be tempted.”

In spite of the fact that there is no reference to “sisters,” “believers” or “godly” in the entire epistle, much less in this verse, the New Living Translation authored: “Dear brothers and sisters, if another believer is overcome by some sin, you who are godly should gently and humbly help that person back onto the right path. And be careful not to fall into the same temptation yourself.” In other words, adhere to church doctrine and don’t you dare think for yourself.

After that romp into the realm of religion, we encounter this pearl of fluidity. In it, Paul introduces yet a third “Torah.” We had Sarah’s promised liberation from the Torah, Hagar’s enslavement to the Torah, and now the Torah of Christou. And yet, like Yahowah and His Covenant, there is only one Torah. But beyond a Trinity of Torahs, the preamble to the myth may be even worse than its conclusion.

“Of one another (allelon), the (ta) weighty burdens (baros – hardships, heaviness, and oppressive sufferings) you carry, remove, and endure (bastazo – you undergo, bear, and take away) and (kai) thus in this way (houto) you all complete (anapleroo – provide, fulfill, enable, supply, replace, and obey; from “ana – in the midst” and “pleroo – make full, complete, furnish, and supply”) the (ton) Towrah (nomon) of the (tou) Christou (ΧΥ / Christou).” (Galatians 6:2)

Yahowsha’ and the Towrah are one – wholly inseparable. The former cannot be known, appreciated, understood, or capitalized upon without the latter. Yahowsha’ is the corporeal manifestation of the Word of God: the Word made flesh. But since Paul has condemned the Torah transcribed by Moseh on Mount Sinai, it’s obvious that his mythical “Torah of Christou” is an imaginary replacement crafted to fit his Faith.

And speaking of fantasies, the notion that ordinary people “complete and fulfill” the Torah is only possible in Paul’s religious realm. But in the world Yahowah created, He alone fulfills and completes His Word—and He does it His Way and on His schedule.

No man “bastazo – endures or carries, removes or bears,” the “baros – burdens” of others. We cannot remove our own burdens, much less someone else’s. This is God’s job. He alone is qualified. And this makes every aspect of Paul’s instruction fraudulent. Frankly, since Yahowsha’ endured pain and separation beyond imagination to fulfill the Towrah on Passover and Unleavened Bread explicitly to remove and bear our burdens, Paul asking others to perform this same job is presumptuous and insulting.

It is telling to note that Rabbis like Sha’uwl were told to avoid reading Yasha’yah / Isaiah 53, so Sha’uwl would never have considered its message while studying to be a Pharisee. And yet it affirms the Ma’aseyah’s role in our redemption. Please consider:

“Surely our sickness and maladies He, Himself, lifted from us, accepted, and bore (nasa’ – lifted up, sustained and carried away), and our pain (mak’ob – physical suffering and emotional anguish) He carried away (cabal – sustained the load, dragging our burden away).” (Yasha’yah / Salvation is from Yah / Isaiah 53:4)

“All of us like sheep have gone astray (ta’ah – erred by wandering away, staggered while intoxicated, deceived ourselves, and have been misled). Mankind has turned to his own way. But Yahowah has caused the guilt and punishment (‘aown – the liability, perversity, depravity, iniquity, and the consequence of twisting and distorting) of us all to fall on Him (paga’ – to encounter Him for Him to make intercession).” (Yasha’yah / Salvation is from Yah / Isaiah 53:6)

This next statement speaks of Yahowsha’s soul enduring She’owl on our behalf on the Invitation to be Called Out and Meet with God on Un-Yeasted Bread. “When, as a concession, He shall render His Soul as a guilt offering (‘asham – to be declared guilty, offensive, and desolate, suffering the punishment) for sin He will be numbered with those who rebel, Himself lifting up and bearing (nasa’ – taking and carrying away) the crimes and penalties of many. And He will intercede for those who are in rebellion. Shout for joy.” (Yasha’yah / Salvation is from Yah / Isaiah 53:10-12 - 54:1)

The contrast between Yahowah’s Word and Paul’s drivel is monumental. It is the difference between God and man. So why is it that billions believe Sha’uwl?

The Nestle-Aland McReynolds Interlinear published: “Of one another the burdens bear and thusly you will fill up the law of the Christ.” It is what Jerome wrote in the Vulgate as well: “Bear ye one another’s burdens: and so you shall fulfill the law of Christ.” So, we should not be surprised to see this repeated in the KJV: “Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.” Good luck with that.

Recognizing the hubris and pain associated with even pretending to do what the Ma’aseyah had done, the NLT arbitrarily changed “complete” to “obey.” “Share each other’s burdens, and in this way obey the law of Christ.” But that would require observing the Torah.

Having digressed from utter nonsense to utterly wrong over the course of two sentences, let’s approach the third with a touch of skepticism. Therefore, in our quest for accuracy, please note that we find “eiper – since if / if indeed” in Papyrus 46 in place of the Nestle Alands’ “ei gar – because if,” at the beginning of the next sentence.

“Since if (eiper – if indeed or if after all) someone (tis) supposes and presumes (dokei – is of the opinion or is reputed) to be (einai) somebody (ti) he is (on) nothing (meden). He deceives (phrenapatao) himself (eauton).” (Galatians 6:3)

Paul should have worn this as a sign around his neck. He claimed to be God’s exclusive apostle to the world, deceiving all who believed him.

He wrote this for the same reason that he used dokei previously in this letter, besmirching the authority Yahowsha’ vested in the Disciples Shim’own, Ya’aqob, and Yahowchanan. He viewed those God chose and trained as rivals and as a threat.

And from this reprisal, this new statement indicts Sha’uwl. It affirms that he was fully aware of the derogatory implications of “dokei – supposes and presumes” when he wielded it against the Disciples in order to demean their status. So, since Sha’uwl seems to know what the word meant here, he knew what it meant there. Remember Galatians 2:9: “And having recognized, becoming familiar with the Grace of the one having been given to me, Ya’aqob, Kephas, and also Yahowchanan, the ones presently presumed and supposed (dokei – the opinionated and imagined) to be leaders, the right place of honor and authority they granted to me, and to Barnabas fellowship as a result. We to the nations and ethnicities, but they to the circumcision.” Therefore, those who would cut Paul a break there, cannot use the word correctly here without foregoing their integrity.

As for the established translations, we find this in the NAMI: “If for thinks some to be some nothing being he deceives mind himself.”  From this, Jerome wrote: “For if any man think himself to be some thing, whereas he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.” Once again demonstrating that the KJV was a translation of the Latin Vulgate, not the Greek text, we find: “For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.” Writing their own bible, the NLT scribed: “If you think you are too important to help someone, you are only fooling yourself. You are not that important.”

After incriminating himself, the Devil’s Advocate boasts:

“But (de) the (to) work (ergon – deeds, assigned tasks, accomplishments, and performances) of himself (heauton) he must examine (dokimazo – he is commanded to scrutinize and demonstrate worthy, proving meritorious (present active imperative third person singular)) [each (ekastos – every) omitted from P46], and (kai) then (tote) to (eis – into) himself (auton) alone (monos – to the exclusion of all others) the (to) boast and brag (kauchema – justification for pride and praise, exaltation and glory) that person will possess and hold (echo – will have and experience (future active indicative third person singular)) [and (kai) omitted in P46], not (ouk) to (eis) the (ton) other (heteron – another).” (Galatians 6:4)

Playing with the pieces of the same puzzle, the NAMI assembled: “The but work of himself let approve each and then in himself alone the brag he will have and not in the other.” The LV proposed: “But let everyone prove his own work: and so he shall have glory in himself only and not in another.” Parroting Jerome, the KJV said: “But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.”

Smoothed out and streamlined a bit, my interpretation of Paul’s last two combined statements are quite similar to the translations, even though we would view the implications very differently: “Indeed if someone supposes and presumes to be somebody, he is nothing. He deceives himself. (6:3) But the work, performances, and accomplishments of himself, he must examine and prove meritorious, and then to himself, alone, at the exclusion of all others, the boast and brag, the justification for pride and praise, the exaltation and glory that person will possess and experience, and not for any other.” (6:4)

So, if this is what Paul meant to say, and it probably is, then we have to question his mental stability. The last two verses are at cross purposes with each other. One says that if someone presumes that they are important, then they are deceiving themselves. But then he says that we should examine everything we have done so that we can boast and glorify ourselves.

Beyond the duplicity, there is an additional problem. We shouldn’t be about the business of boasting in what we have done. We aren’t to glorify or exalt ourselves. Our mission should never be about us, especially to the exclusion of others. Our words and deeds should be focused on encouraging people to consider Yahowah’s words and deeds.

And yet, knowing Paul, the first of these two statements was designed to impugn his rivals, Yahowsha’s Disciples. And the second was postured for Paul’s benefit. He is trying to justify boasting, claiming that if you consider the scope of his work that he is worthy of exultation.

Recognizing this problem, the NLT simply changed the text to keep Paul from looking like an egomaniacal lunatic who had just contradicted himself. “Pay careful attention to your own work, for then you will get the satisfaction of a job well done, and you won’t need to compare yourself to anyone else.”

Speaking of hallucinogenic schizophrenia, after telling his audience that they should remove and bear other people’s burdens, as if they were, themselves, fulfilling the Towrah, Sha’uwl says that everyone will carry their own load. Some would call that an internal contradiction.

 “For (gar – because then) each and every one (ekastos) their (to) own individual and distinct (idion – unique and separate, belonging to oneself) burden (phortion – load, cargo, and obligations) will carry and bear (bastazo – will accept, undergo, endure, and remove).” (Galatians 6:5)

In the real world, Yahowah has already removed the burdens of all those who have engaged in His Covenant. But to know that, you’d have to read His Towrah.

Beyond the fact that Paul has contradicted himself regarding a command he has just issued, and beyond the fact that this negates Yahowsha’s fulfillment of Unleavened Bread, bastazo was rendered in the future tense and the indicative mood (making it a reality from the writer’s perspective). That means that Paul is saying that they “will actually continue to bear and endure” their “burdens” into the future. In other words: there won’t be any forgiveness. And unfortunately, for those who believe Paul, there will not be any.

These translations are an accurate reflection of Sha’uwl’s errors. NAMI: “Each for the own pack will bear.” LV: “For every one shall bear his own burden.” KJV: “For every man shall bear his own burden.”

But in league with those who benefit financially from Christianity, and therefore willing to alter the words which were written in Galatians to make Paul appear credible, the New Living Translation not only perpetuates the deception that Sha’uwl was inspired by God, they published a text that they knew was not accurate: “For we are each responsible for our own conduct.” There is no possible way the Greek scholars responsible for translating Galatians actually thought that “phortion – burden” meant “responsible,” or that “bastazo – carry” meant “conduct.” This is fraud, a knowing and willful deception perpetrated for money. It is criminal.

Now that the first paragraph of the sixth chapter is complete, let’s review what Sha’uwl has said thus far:

“And also brothers, if a man may have previously detected or caught someone in a false step, you all, the spiritual ones, you must thoroughly prepare and completely restore the one such as this with a meek and gentle spirit, carefully observing yourself so then you, yourself, may submit and be tempted, having tried to catch a mistake. (6:1) Of one another, the weighty burdens you carry, remove, and endure and thus in this way you all supply and complete the Towrah of the Christou. (6:2)

Indeed if someone supposes and presumes to be somebody, he is nothing. He deceives himself. (6:3) But the work, performances, and accomplishments of himself, he must examine and prove meritorious, and then to himself, alone, at the exclusion of all others, the boast and brag, the justification for pride and praise, the exaltation and glory that person will possess and experience, and not for any other. (6:4) For each and every one their own individual and distinct burden will carry and bear.” (6:5)

No matter how one slices and dices these words, written as a command, this next statement is a problem, especially in this context.

“But (de) one must share (koinoneito – one is ordered to participate together as a partner and in association with others, must take part in) the one (o) making the ears ring, verbally informing (katechoumenos – reporting the instruction and teaching orally; from “kata – according to” and “echos – loud-mouthed rumors and noisy reports”) the (ton) word (logos), orally instructing (katechounti – verbally communicating and loudly teaching) in (en) all (pas) good (agathois – worthy, excellent, useful, beneficial, and right).” (Galatians 6:6)

We are in the sixth chapter, and there haven’t been six passages cited from Yahowah’s Word thus far. And recognizing that the Torah verses which have previously been cited have all been misquoted and twisted, it’s obvious that the “word” Sha’uwl wants promoted is his own.

His purpose has been to demean the Word of God, obsolescing and besmirching the Torah. So there is no chance whatsoever that Sha’uwl was motivating the Galatians to share the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. And at this point, Mark and Luke had not been written, and Mattanyah’s eyewitness account wouldn’t have been of any value to the Galatians because it was initially written in Hebrew. Also, while Yahowchanan’s testimony was composed around this time, it had not yet been widely distributed. Therefore, the Devil’s Advocate was ordering, actually commanding since koinoneito was written in the imperative mood, the Galatians to recite what he had preached and written.

If the Nestle-Aland McReynolds Interlinear is right, then Paul was also saying that the one being instructed should do the instructing. That’s like asking a class of children to educate their teacher (a.k.a. a liberal American classroom). NAMI: “Let be partner but the one being instructed the word to the one instructing in all good.” Jerome agrees with them in the LV: “And let him that is instructed in the word communicate to him that instructeth him, in all good things.” And therefore, the KJV regurgitates this same upside down notion of the student informing their instructor: “Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.” Apparently suffering writer’s block, the NLT serves as a revision of the King James: “Those who are taught the word of God should provide for their teachers, sharing all good things with them.” This unique twist of the text is quite revealing. It says that “those who are taught the word of God,” which is code for “Evangelical Christians,” “should provide for their teachers, sharing all good things with them,” which is code for “pay your pastor a generous salary and provide him with a nice house and a munificent living allowance.” Not surprisingly, the authors of the NLT were money-grubbing preachers.

This next line comes out of the wild blue yonder. Devoid of context or an intelligent transition, the “Apostle” who has devoted himself to mocking God and treating His Word with contempt, said:

“You must not become misled and stray (me planaomai – you are commanded not to wander away deceived, deluded, or mistaken) because a god (ΘΣ) is not sneered at or ridiculed (ou mykterizo – he is not mocked nor treated with contempt, derided). For then (gar – for), whatever (o) if (ean) a man (anthropos) may sow (speiro – might potentially scatter), this (touto) also (kai) he shall reap (therizo – he will harvest).” (Galatians 6:7)

God is mocked all the time. Christians call Him “Lord,” an epithet for Satan, rather than referring to Him by His name. They mock God when they pray to “Jesus Christ” and when they credit and blame God for everything, trivial or significant, good or bad, that occurs in their lives.

Sha’uwl has been sneering at Yahowah from the onset of this letter. He has derided and ridiculed His Torah, treating the Word of God with utter contempt, suggesting that it enslaves and that it was annulled—even that it was impotent. As a result of these letters, Christians uniformly turn up their noses at the Almighty’s seven annual Invitations to Meet. And it’s hard to imagine wandering further from the truth than saying that there are two covenants, not one, or that the Covenant memorialized on Mount Sinai was established with Hagar and led to slavery. And what could be worse than replacing the relationship God is offering with religious delusions.

So once again, Sha’uwl is being a blatant hypocrite. He has been doing the misleading, the straying, the deceiving, and the deluding. He has been the one sneering, ridiculing, mocking, and deriding. But ever the clever one, he wants the faithful to believe that it is those who are exposing him as the fraud he has become who are what he is. In politics, those who are crafty, falsely accuse their opponents of the crimes they, themselves, are guilty of committing. That is what is happening here.

Beyond duplicity and hypocrisy, in the world God conceived, as a result of Passover and Unleavened Bread, we don’t all reap what we have sown. We are forgiven. Only those who deliberately lead souls away from God, as Paul has done, will reap what they have sown. Sha’uwl will spend his eternity in the place that shares his name: She’owl.

In an ongoing effort to preclude Christian apologists from dismissing Questioning Paul solely on the basis of my amplified and literal translations of the oldest Greek manuscripts, I will continue to provide you with at least four other renderings for your consideration. The scholarly NAMI published: “Not be deceived God not is mocked. What for if might sow man this also he will harvest.” The Roman Catholic LV promoted: “Be not deceived: God is not mocked. For what things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap.” The Protestant KJV proclaimed: “Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.” And last and least, the Evangelical NLT printed: “Don’t be misled—you cannot mock the justice of God. You will always harvest what you plant.”

If God’s justice cannot be mocked, then every Christian publisher who has encouraged believers to reject His Name, His Towrah, His Covenant, and His Invitations based upon Paul’s epistles is in serious trouble.

Speaking of reaping that which one sows, Sha’uwl continues to cultivate his agricultural theme while advancing his Gnostic beliefs. It is, however, not a revelation that flesh decays, which is why we won’t have bodies in heaven, or that a spirit is eternal.

“Because (oti) the one (o) sowing (speiron – scattering seed) into (eis) the (ten) flesh (sarx – corporeal nature or physical body) of himself (eautou), from (ek – out of) the (tes) flesh (sarkos – the physical body or corporeal nature) will reap (therizo – will harvest) corruption, destruction, and dissolution (phthora – depravity and death, decay which leads to perishing). But (de) the one (o) sowing (speiron) into (eis) the (to) spirit (ΠΝΑ / pneuma – Divine Placeholder for the Ruwach), from (ek – out of) the (tou) spirit (ΠΝΑ / pneuma) will reap (therisei – will harvest) life (zoe) eternal (aionios).” (Galatians 6:8)

To his credit, this is the first time in six chapters that Paul has written something that reads well. It even sounds nice. Too bad it isn’t true.

In his own sneaky way, Sha’uwl was saying: the circumcised are cut off. But in truth, this is nothing more than Gnostic propaganda. We actually reap many wonderful things from our corporeal nature, and the greatest of them is children born into a loving family. In the bodies Yahowah designed on our behalf, we can use our eyes and ears to read and recite His Word, getting to know our Creator in the process. And so it is through our human nature that we come to know, love, understand, respect, and trust the source of life.

For Galatians 6:8 to have been useful, Paul would have had to have done what Yahowsha’ did in His discussion with Nicodemus, and explain the process of Spiritual birth. But that wasn’t Sha’uwl’s intent. For him, “the flesh” remains synonymous with the tangible and concrete nature of “the Towrah” (in part because of its insistence on circumcision), and “the spirit” is represented by the unseen and nebulous ether of “faith.” Therefore, he is saying that sowing the seeds found in God’s Word leads to destruction and decay, while those who place their faith in the spirit of his writing will find life eternal. The opposite is, of course, true.

But not entirely so, because in the way Sha’uwl intended believers to understand it, if they were to consider sowing as being actively engaged planting and nurturing the lies of Pauline Doctrine, then they “will reap eternal life.” Unfortunately, it will be in She’owl.

And while it is a technical point, we don’t “sow into the Spirit.” We can sow the seeds of truth by conveying Yahowah’s Word, and we can invite the Ruwach Qodesh into our lives, but that is as far as we can go in this direction. Everything else flows the opposite way, from God to us, not the other way around. So the notion of “sowing into the Spirit” isn’t sound literally, operationally, metaphorically, allegorically, or Scripturally.

The following translations are accurate, but yet their message is not. NAMI: “Because the one sowing in the flesh of himself from the flesh will harvest corruption the but one sowing in the spirit from the spirit will harvest life eternal.” LV: “For he that soweth in his flesh of the flesh also shall reap corruption. But he that soweth in the spirit of the spirit shall reap life everlasting.” KJV: “For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.” NLT: “Those who live only to satisfy their own sinful nature will harvest decay and death from that sinful nature. But those who live to please the Spirit will harvest everlasting life from the Spirit.” We are not called to “please the Spirit,” we are only told not to belittle Her. And while our Spiritual Mother plays a crucial role in our salvation, “eternal life” isn’t the result of anything we do, including “living to please the Spirit.”

Not finished, Satan’s gardener continues to plow the fields of deception. In this case, after having recast and inverted good and evil, he encourages believers to harvest a field of human souls on behalf of his faith.

“But (de) the one (to) good (kalon – advantageous, fine, fitting, beneficial, beautiful, sound, and handsome) doing (poiountes – performing behaviors and working assigned tasks) we do not become malicious (me egkakomen – we do not give into harmful emotions or disparaging behaviors; from “ek – out of” and “kakos – a bad nature, injurious actions, pernicious thinking and destructive feelings”). Because (gar) on occasion (kairo – in an opportunistic time or specific season), for oneself (idio – on one’s own, separately) we will reap (therisomen – we will harvest), not (me) being discouraged by being bound (ekluomenoi – being weary, exhausted, or collapsing as a result of ties which bind; from “ek – out of” and “luo – binding ties and bandages”).” (Galatians 6:9)

Egkakomen initially was a bit of a riddle until I realized that it was a compound of “ek – from” and “kakos – a bad nature or wrong mode of thinking.” Kakos speaks of “injurious actions, a pernicious attitude, and destructive emotions,” and thus of “maliciousness.” But following “me – not,” it becomes a double negative, thereby denouncing the very thing Galatians has become.

Based upon several factors, it is obvious that Paul was taking another swipe at Yahowah’s Towrah. He has already called what he perceives to be the old system “malicious,” and he made a career out of claiming that the Towrah “binds and controls” us. Therefore, in Pauline Christianity, as well as in Greek Gnosticism, the spirit is both good and liberating while the evil flesh enslaves.

There is another insight worth exploring, because the seven Miqra’ey are not only directly associated with the “reaping” of saved souls, these “propitious harvests” are all celebrated “in season.” In fact, specifically, three of the seven are designated as harvests (First-Born Child, Seven Sabbaths, and Trumpets) and a fourth, Shelters, is symbolic of a covered shelter or storehouse of saved souls. So since Sha’uwl has told Christians to ignore Yahowah’s Harvests, and impugned the Torah which presents them, he is now offering a substitute – not unlike what Christmas and Easter have become.

And lest I forget, haven’t we been led to believe that “working away at assigned tasks” was the bane of the Towrah? But now works are good, so long as the workers are doing what Paul demands of them.

Having considered some of the many concerns surrounding this statement, let’s review the Christian renditions. NAMI: “The one but good doing not we give in to bad in season for own we will harvest not being loosed out.” LV: “And in doing good, let us not fail. For in due time we shall reap, not failing.” KJV: “And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.” NLT: “So let’s not get tired of doing what is good. At just the right time we will reap a harvest of blessing if we don’t give up.”

There are problems which arise in these translations which we should not ignore. First, it’s God’s job, not ours, to reap the harvest of saved souls. And second, far too many people go out ill-prepared and just spin their wheels endlessly. It’s like the person who has read some of the quotes in Prophet of Doom and then runs off to debate Muslims in chat rooms and wonders why they aren’t making any progress.

While there is nothing wrong with trying, those who are prepared get better results with considerably less effort. That is not to suggest that pertinent information and logical reasoning prevail with those still mired in religious delusions. All a prepared person can hope to accomplish is to provide a trigger that encourages open-minded individuals to approach their search for the truth from a different perspective. The better prepared you are, however, the better the chances are that you will eventually find a topic which resonates with your audience. Further, once you make the transition in your mind from knowing to understanding, you are equipped to enlighten the world.

This particular problem resonates throughout Paul’s letter. He throws all manner of poorly identified and unsupported things against the wall, hoping that something will stick. But he hasn’t presented sufficient evidence to educate anyone or to prove any of the points he has sought to make. He seeks faith, because in his world understanding isn’t possible.

A long time ago, when I was a salesman in the retail consumer products industry, I overcame my personal limitations (I was very shy) by being better prepared than those I competed against. I studied my customers, researched my factories, dissected my products, compared them to the competition, and then invested another many hours preparing and tailoring each sales presentation for each and every customer. Then, after the customer responded and purchased products from the firms I represented, I invested countless hours following through on the logistics of the shipment, making sure nothing went wrong. I was prepared, and thus prevailed.

Before we leave Paul’s field of lies, this appears to be an opportune time to share something from this “Apostle’s” most famous prophecy, one specifically related to a harvest, because it proves that he was a false prophet. While the purpose of religion is to control and fleece the masses, clerics achieve this goal in large part by artificially allaying people’s fears over the death of loved ones. So the founder of the Christian religion said:

“But (de) we really do not want or take pleasure in (ou thelo – we do not actually will, enjoy, or propose (present active indicative (denoting something that is actual))) you all (umas) being ignorant and irrational (agnoeo – ignoring and paying no attention and thus not knowing, being mistaken and failing to understand (present active infinitive (acting as a verbal noun))) brothers (adelphos) concerning (peri – about and because of) the ones sleeping (ton koimomenon – those who are deceased (present passive participle (a verbal adjective))). So that you might not grieve (ina ue luphesthe – in order that you may not be sad or distressed (present passive subjunctive (suggesting a possibility))), just as (kathos – to the same degree and inasmuch as) also (kai) the ones remaining (oi loipos – the rest who are left over and lacking (present active participle nominative)), the ones not possessing (oi me echo – those not holding or clinging to (present active participle)) hope (elpis),...” (1 Thessalonians 4:13)

Hope, like faith, is likened to religion in that they are all bred in “agnoeo – ignorance.” But since we will soon discover that Sha’uwl was wrong with regard to his prophecy, why would anyone who isn’t ignorant trust his reassuring words in this regard?

Also, how would it be possible, recognizing that this was his first letter to the second community he visited, for those who had passed away before his arrival to benefit from his faith? Was Paul trying to win the favor of the living by promising to save the dead?

God cannot die, and thus believing that He did, isn’t accurate nor beneficial. It is one of the great myths of Christendom.

“For if (gar ei – because under the condition) we really believe (pisteuo – we actually have faith (present active indicative)) that (oti – because namely) Iesous (ΙΥ) actually died (apothnesko – was physically dead (aorist indicative (at some unspecified time in the past)) indicative (in reality))) and (kai) genuinely stood up (anistemi – actually was caused to stand (aorist indicative)), thus likewise (houtos – it follows in this way) also (kai) being God (o ΘΣ), the ones put to sleep (koimeoentas – have been caused to be deceased (aorist passive (meaning that they were acted upon at some unspecified time in the past))) by or through (dia – because) of the (tou) Iesou (ΙΥ), will actually lead (ago – will really bring, take, carry, and guide) (future indicative)) with Him (oun auto).” (1 Thessalonians 4:14)

In keeping with the religious mythology echoed at most Christian funerals, Paul said that “God” was responsible “for putting people to sleep,” and thus for their death. Sha’uwl’s theology continues to be wrong.

Beyond the errant notion that God is the reason we die, the verb “ago – to lead” is a strange choice. While it was written in the third person singular, since it was not designated as masculine, it cannot be “he” or refer to “the Iesou.” So who is guiding and bringing whom?

If you’d like to gain a full appreciation from God’s perspective of exactly what happened on Passover, Un-Yeasted Bread, and First-Born Children, and why, and if you’d like to understand how it applies to you and your relationship with God and to your resulting salvation, you are invited to read the Salvation Volume of Yada Yah, free at There you will discover that Yahowah’s Spirit departed from Yahowsha’s body and His soul on the upright pole so that His physical body could die serving as the Passover Lamb while His soul descended into She’owl for the express purpose of enabling the promises Yahowah had made to make the children of the Covenant immortal and perfect. His soul, then reunited with the Spirit, became the living embodiment of First-Born Children, enabling God to adopt us into His family.

The implication in this next statement is that Sha’uwl is attempting to quote something Yahowsha’ said. If true, it would be the first time in any of his letters, but it wasn’t to be. Yahowsha’ never said anything like this. In fact, His depiction of the Taruw’ah Harvest was remarkably different. So why do you suppose Paul, other than speaking for his “Lord,” has been using “we” instead of “I” throughout this doctrinal prediction?

“For this (gar touto) to you all (umin), we actually say (legomen – we speak (first person plural, present indicative)) in (en) a word (logo – a statement (singular)) of the Lord (kuriou – of the Master, the one who owns, controls, and possesses slaves (genitive and thus possessive), that we (oti emeis), the ones (oi) living (zontes – alive (present active participle)), the ones (oi) presently left and currently remaining (perileiphomenoi – left behind; a compound of peri meaning concerning, and leipo, being left behind, being inferior, wanting, and forsaken (present tense, passive (currently being acted upon), participle (serving as a verb and adjective))) unto (eis) the (ten) arrival and presence (parousia) of the (tou) Lord (kuriou – Master who possesses, owns, and controls slaves), by no means might we possibly go prior to (ou me phoasomen – certainly not and never may we arrive beforehand, come to by preceding (first person plural, aorist (as a snapshot in time) subjunctive (indicating a possibility)) the ones (tous) having slept (koimeoentas – having been put to sleep and having been caused to die (aorist passive (meaning that they were acted upon at some unspecified point in time))).” (1 Thessalonians 4:15)

Feel free to speculate as to why Sha’uwl used the double negative ou and me in succession. When written in this form, ou typically represents “no” and me means “not or lest.” But when combined, rather than read as a negation of a negation, ou me can convey a “strong prohibition,” communicating “never, not at all, by no means, and certainly not,” which is how it was rendered above.

You may want to contemplate the reasons that Paul claims that his Lord caused so many people to die, why Paul refers to death as “sleep,” why the fate of the sleeping is universal and favorable, and why they must precede the living? I suspect that it was a ploy, one designed to promote the merits of his faith so that it would be more readily accepted. He told his audience what they wanted to hear. The fact that it was inaccurate, inconsistent, and irrational did not matter.

You can also speculate on the identity of Paul’s “Lord and Master.” But while doing so, consider the inherent conflict between representing a Lord, who is someone who “possesses, owns, and controls slaves,” and discounting the Torah because it was allegedly “controlling and enslaving.”

You may even want to speculate on why Sha’uwl claimed to speak for his god and yet neglected to cite any of said god’s instructions. And if we are to believe that Sha’uwl was speaking for Yahowah about His Taruw’ah Harvest, why didn’t he quote what God had His prophets write about this Miqra’ in His Towrah, in Yasha’yah (Isaiah), Zakaryah (Zechariah), or Mal’aky (Malachi). Yahowah had a great deal to say about this Spiritual Harvest of His children.

But getting past all of those inherent inadequacies, inconsistencies, and internal conflicts, it is undeniably clear that Paul predicted that he would be among “the ones presently left and currently remaining (perileiphomenoi – scribed in the present tense and passive voice (telling us that they were currently being acted upon)) unto the arrival and presence of the Lord.” But he wasn’t even close. He died alone and miserable nineteen centuries before the fulfillment of the still-future Taruw’ah Harvest. Moreover, his promises were hollow to those who were sleeping and living.

Yahowah had long since established in His Word that the Taruw’ah Harvest was predicated upon the concept of being a troubadour to trumpet His message. So while the association of the harvest with this instrument, a showphar, or ram’s horn in Hebrew, is accurate, it was not prophetic. As for the rest of this, while it is neither correct nor prophetic. Further, the “call of the archangel” is reminiscent of Islam.

“Because, Himself (oti autos), the Lord (o kurios – the Master who possesses, owns, and controls slaves), in (en – with) a command (keleusma – a shout, order, signal, and call) in the voice (en phone – in the sound and language) of the leading messenger (archaggelou – of the chief representative, the ruling envoy), and in (kai en – the with) a trumpet (salpiggi) of god (ΘΥ theou), will descend, stepping down (katabaino – will come down; a compound “kata – down from” and “basis – stepping”), separated from (apo) of heaven (ouranos), and the ones lifeless (kai oi nekros – so the ones deceased) in (en) Christo (ΧΥ) will actually stand (anastesontai – will really rise) first (protos – before).” (1 Thessalonians 4:16)

The order of rising, if indeed there is a difference, will be completely irrelevant in association with eternity. So this was spoken to accommodate religious sensibilities. And as a result, Christians believe that their dearly departed are already in heaven, looking down on them and waiting for their arrival. But what’s especially troubling here is Sha’uwl’s use of “apo – separated” as opposed to “ek – out of” with regard to heaven. While Yahowsha’ can come “from and out of” heaven, He cannot be “separated from” heaven.

Lastly, the reason for all of the colorful detail, the command, the voice, the archangel, the trumpet, and the stepping down, and soon left behind, seized, air, a meeting, and in the clouds, is to provide the semblance of knowledge. Muhammad painted heaven, hell, and the day of judgment with similarly vivid strokes.

In the conclusion of his errant portrayal, Sha’uwl predicts through the use of “emeis – we” and through his selection of verbs that he would be alive when the “harpazo – violent snatching away” occurred. Since he was wrong, he was a false prophet.

“Then later (speita – thereafter) we (emeis – the first person personal plural pronoun includes the speaker who is Sha’uwl), the ones (oi) currently alive (zontes – living (present active participle)), the ones (oi) left behind and remaining (perileipo – surviving (present passive participle)) at the same time (hama – together in association), with them (sun autois) we will actually be violently seized and snatched away (harpayesomeoa – first person plural future passive indicative of harpazo – will be attacked, controlled, drug away, spoiled, and plundered forcibly by thieves) in (en – with) clouds (nephele – obscuring atmosphere) to (eis) a meeting (apantesis – a rendezvous or encounter of those going in opposite directions; from “apo – to be separated” and “anti – to be against or opposed”) of the Lord (tou kuriou – of the Master who possesses, owns, and controls slaves) into (eis) air (aer). And (kai) thus (outos – likewise and in this manner) always (pantote – at all times) with (syn) Lord (kurio), we will actually be (esomeoa – we will really exist (future indicative)).” (1 Thessalonians 4:17)

It will be a long wait for those anticipating a rendezvous with the Lord in the clouds. And these questions linger: why take the dead and the living to a place of obscurity where nothing can be seen, where no one can stand, where light is diminished, and where it is cold, neither on earth nor in heaven? Why did he neglect to say whether this encounter would be for souls or reconstituted bodies? Why not explain when this is going to occur? Why not reveal why some will go and others will be left behind? Why not reveal what reaction should be expected on earth as this occurs based upon how many go bon voyage? After all, Yahowah explained all of these things many centuries before Paul penned this letter. And why paint such a violent depiction of something that should involve a loving embrace?

At issue, “harpazo – will be violently attacked, controlled, dragged away, spoiled and plundered forcibly by thieves” isn’t the kind of word one would normally associate with Yahowsha’, although it’s a perfect depiction of Satan’s (a.k.a. the Lord’s) idea of a good time. And what’s particularly interesting is that Yahowsha’ used a derivative of harpazo in Mattanyah / Matthew 7:15, “harpax – exceptionally self-promoting and self-serving,” to describe wolves such as Sha’uwl:

“At the present time, you all should be especially alert, being on guard by closely examining and carefully considering, thereby turning away from (prosechete apo – you all should choose to beware, presently paying especially close attention, actively and attentively watching out for and guarding yourself against so as to separate yourself from (present active imperative)) the false prophets (ton pseudoprophetes – those pretending to be divinely inspired spokesmen, from pseudo – deliberately false, lying, deceitful, and deceptive and prophetes – one who speaks of hidden things, declaring what he claims to have received from God) who (hostis) come to you, currently appearing before you (erchomai pros umas – who approach you, moving toward or up to you, making public appearances or statements against you (the present tense reveals that the false prophet is currently in their midst, the middle voice indicates that he is self-motivated, that his statements are affecting him, and that the more assertive he becomes, the more he is influenced by his aggressiveness and claims (i.e., one lie leads to another), while the indicative mood affirms that this is actually occurring)) from within (esothen – as an insider and thus from the same race, place, or group) by (en) dressing up in sheep’s clothing (endyma probaton – cloaked in the outer garments of sheep (note: the root of probaton is probaino – to go beyond, to go farther and forward, to go on and on, overstepping one’s bounds)), yet (de – but) they actually are (eisin – they correspond to, represent, are similar to, and exist without contingency as (present active indicative)) exceptionally self-promoting, self-serving, and swindling (harpax – vicious, carnivorous, and thieving, robbing, extorting, and destructive, ferocious, rapacious, and snatching; extracting and compelling under duress; from harpazo: to violently, forcibly, and eagerly claim and then seize for oneself so as to pluck and carry away; itself a derivative of haireomai – to take for oneself, choosing to be)) wolves (lykos – fierce individuals under dangerous pretenses who are vicious, cruel, greedy, destructive, overreaching, voracious, avaricious, acquisitive, and insatiable men impersonating beasts of prey).” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:15)

Recognizing these problems, it is telling that Paul concluded his false prophecy with this related command: “As a result (oste – therefore), you all must presently summon and plead with (parakaleite – you are all commanded to call out a summons while begging and imploring (present active imperative)) each other (allelon – one another) in (en – with) these (toutois) statements (logois – words, speeches, and treatises).” (1 Thessalonians 4:18)

It would be his statements Christians would henceforth proclaim, not God’s. As Roman Catholics, they would summon the world to their Lord and to their Church. And as evangelicals, they would plead, imploring the lost to go astray.

Now that we know that Paul was a false prophet in addition to being a deceitful messenger, and that he wanted believers to value and extol his words rather than the Word of God, let’s return to Galatians. There we find Comrade Paul, the Devil’s Advocate, telling everyone to start working for the benefit of his household:

“As a result (ara), therefore (oun), likewise (hos – in the same way and time), on occasion (kairon – period of time, moment, season, or opportunity), we are presently able to experience (echo – we really possess, hold onto, and currently have (first person plural, present indicative)) the potential to work (ergaxometha – we may presently do business and perform, perhaps laboring) for the (to) advantageous (pros – as is necessary and needed) generous benefit (agathos – for the good) of all (pas), but (de) especially and exceedingly (malista – chiefly and above all) benefiting (pros) those belonging to (tous oikeios – the relatives, immediate families, households, and members) the (tes) Faith (pisteos – religion or belief; while pistis originally conveyed trust, that concept is incompatible with Sha’uwl’s epistle).” (Galatians 6:10) (While in P46, the verb “might work” becomes ergaxometha, the noun “work,” my rendering is consistent with the Nestle Aland in this case because their verbiage fits better in the sentence.)

Therefore, according to Paul, man is enslaved when he chooses to act upon the Towrah’s guidance for his own benefit and for the enrichment of his family, and liberated when God’s instructions are rejected. But that is only so that he can now work for the benefit and enrichment of the Pauline Faith. Either way, it’s all about works.

Also, you’ll notice that while all of Yahowah’s benefits are for the enrichment and empowerment of His Covenant family, other than choosing to respond and participate in the Covenant, man does not make any contributions because God does all of the work. But here, man is the one laboring. And the beneficiary is Paul’s religion. Rather than God empowering His Family, Paul wants to exceedingly benefit members of the Faith he, himself, founded.

The Nestle-Aland 27th Edition McReynolds Interlinear renders the passage: “Then therefore as season we have we might work the good toward all especially but toward the households of the trust.” So it too reveals that after investing the first three-quarters of this epistle criticizing “works,” calling them unproductive, Paul is now promoting them as good. So much for consistency. But to be fair, or unfair depending upon your perspective, Paul wants everyone to do what he commands and not what Yahowah requests.

The Catholic Latin Vulgate reads: “Therefore, whilst we have time, let us work good to all men, but especially to those who are of the household of the faith.” Therefore, the KJV says: “As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.” Toeing a similar line for a change, the New Living Translation published: “Therefore, whenever we have the opportunity, we should do good to everyone—especially to those in the family of faith.”

In his own words, Sha’uwl wrote: “But one must share, partnering with the one making the ears ring, verbally informing the word, orally instructing in all good. (6:6) You must not become misled and stray because a god is not sneered at, ridiculed, or treated with contempt. For then, whatever if a man may sow, this also he shall reap. (6:7) Because the one sowing into the flesh of himself, from the flesh will reap corruption, destruction, and dissolution, depravity and death. But the one sowing into the spirit, from the spirit will reap life eternal. (6:8)

But the one good doing we do not become malicious, giving into harmful emotions, disparaging behaviors, or pernicious thinking. Because on occasion, for oneself we will reap and harvest, not being discouraged by being bound. (6:9) As a result, therefore, likewise, on occasion, we are presently able to experience the potential to work, laboring for the advantageous generous benefit of all, but especially and exceedingly benefiting those belonging to the Faith.” (6:10)

Sha’uwl’s next line is perplexing. Most scholars assume that it means that he has taken the papyrus and quill away from whoever was serving as his amanuensis, and was now writing these words in his own hand. It didn’t help. But it did establish a trademark, and verify that Paul himself composed this epistle. He will repeat this practice in subsequent letters as his way of demonstrating authenticity.

To begin, if we are to prioritize the oldest witness, Paul wrote “elikois – as old as and as tall as,” not “pelikois – how large and how great.” Elikos is from elix, “a comrade of the same age, height, and status,” and thus elikos is said to mean “as great as,” in addition to “as old and tall.”

What follows is one of many indications that Galatians was Sha’uwl’s first letter. He is telling believers to closely examine his handwriting so that they would be able to recognize it when they see it again, and thus be able to determine if subsequent letters were bona fide Pauline.

“You must look at and become acquainted with (idete – you all are ordered to see, notice, and become familiar with, paying attention to (written in the aorist active imperative as a command)) how old, tall, and great (elikois) to you (umin) the letters (grammasin – written alphabetic characters) I wrote (egrapha – I actually inscribed with pen) with (te) my (emos) hand (cheir).” (Galatians 6:11)

We cannot say for sure if Paul was bragging that his penmanship was great, or lamenting that his eyesight was so poor that his letters were large. But we do know that Paul establishing the fact that he, himself, was to blame for what we have read.

While the Nestle-Aland McReynolds Interlinear doesn’t add anything to the equation with: “See how great to you letters I wrote in the my hand,” should Jerome be right, we cannot blame the scribe for butchering Paul’s epistle. The Latin Vulgate reads: “See what a letter I have written to you with my own hand.” If this is correct, then Sha’uwl wrote all of this, from beginning to end, and what’s more, he’s proud of it.

Following the Catholic’s lead, or more accurately, plagiarizing him, Francis Bacon and the team he assembled to produce the King James Version, wrote: “Ye see how large a letter I have written unto you with mine own hand.” Here, Galatians is being called substantive as opposed to great.

Always entertaining, and sometimes even accurate, the novelists at the New Living Translation authored this in all caps (I suppose to be faithful to the text): “NOTICE WHAT LARGE LETTERS I USE AS I WRITE THESE CLOSING WORDS IN MY OWN HANDWRITING.” That’s hilarious. In modern social media parlance, Paul is now screaming at us.

Whether this is the second sentence Paul wrote in his own handwriting or the seventh from the last in his “great and large letter,” we still have to make corrections based upon the oldest witness. Papyrus 46 adds a placeholder for Yahowsha’s name after the one for the title, Ma’aseyah. And while there is also a conflict regarding the mood of the final verb (indicative as opposed to subjective), “may or might” works better in this context than does “really or actually.” And recognizing this confusion, I’m going to ignore the passive voice of the verb (as reflected in the NA27 and LV) because it renders the concluding clause senseless.

And in case you may have thought that I had been presumptuous suggesting that Sha’uwl was demeaning the Torah’s instruction on circumcision under the guise of “the flesh,” consider what the man wrote with his own hand...

“As much as (hosos – as great as, as far as, or as many as, even to the degree that) they currently desire (thelousin – they actually take pleasure in, propose, and presently enjoy) to make a good showing (euprosopesai – to make a favorable impression) in (en) this (houtos) flesh (sarx) to actually compel and force (anagkazousiv – to obligate and necessitate) you all (umas) to become circumcised (peritemno) merely (monon – only and just) so that (hina to) the cross (στρω / stauro Divine Placeholder for Upright Pillar indicating that God is the Doorway to Heaven and that He serves as the Upright Pillar of Yahowah’s Tabernacle and Covenant Home (but since Sha’uwl has disassociated God’s symbols from God’s purpose, it is unlikely that he would have made this connection)) of the (tou) Christou Iesou (ΧΥ ΙΥ / Christou Iesou – Divine Placeholders for the Ma’aseyah Yahowsha’ (but since the purpose of Galatians has been to disassociate Yahowsha’ from Yahowah and the Ma’aseyah from the Towrah, Sha’uwl most likely wrote the inaccurate Greek name and title)) they presently may not pursue (me dioko – they currently might not follow and strive toward, running after).” (Galatians 6:12)

Since Paul likes to namedrop, the Ma’aseyah Yahowsha’ was circumcised. So Paul is saying that Christians shouldn’t follow His example. He is also saying that the sign of Christendom, which is the cross, is nullified by those who accept the sign of the Covenant, which is circumcision. And this means that Paul’s religion and Yahowah’s relationship are in irreconcilable conflict.

What’s particularly sickening about all of this is that Sha’uwl has misappropriated the Ma’aseyah Yahowsha’ to appear as if He and Sha’uwl were on the same side, when in fact they are adversarial. And that, more than anything else, is the most beguiling aspect of Paul’s Faith. He has established the illusion that the religion he conceived was founded by “Jesus Christ.” And billions of souls have succumb to this deceitful, destructive, deadly, and damning proposition.

The big letters aren’t making a big difference. Sha’uwl’s premise and conclusion are wrong. Moreover, he is a hypocrite many times over. He was circumcised. He circumcised his lover, Timothy. Abraham was circumcised. Yitschaq was circumcised. And Yahowsha’ was circumcised.

By stating his point this way, it’s obvious that “desiring to make a good showing in this flesh” is to be read “making it appear as if they are observing the Torah.” And with this in mind, observing the Torah is then cast as an excuse not to pursue the benefits of Yahowsha’s Passover sacrifice. In other words, Sha’uwl is once again distinguishing between the Towrah and Yahowsha’ as opposed to connecting them.

Second, while “Jews” can be accused of many things, “forcing you all to become circumcised” has never been one of them. Moreover, even if there were such a thing as a “Judaizer,” the notion that these mythical people would “obligate and compel” others to become circumcised so that they could avoid pursuing a pagan symbol such as the “cross” is ludicrous. The opposite is true because Yisra’elites observe Passover, which is what the “Christian cross” has obscured.

Third, no one, not Yahowah, not Yahowsha’, not the most fundamentalist Rabbi, nor the most ardent Christian, ever postured the notion that “circumcision” was a substitute for Passover. However, according to God, a man who is not circumcised cannot benefit from Passover. So by avoiding circumcision, the benefit of Pesach, which is eternal life, is forestalled.

Fourth, circumcision is not only the sign of the Covenant, the fifth of five conditions for participating in the Covenant requires parents to see to it that their sons are circumcised. So while circumcision does not in and of itself save, there is no salvation apart from the Covenant. And therefore men and boys who are not circumcised cannot be saved. Not being circumcised prevents us from benefiting from Passover and thus from entering through the Doorway to Life.

And fifth, by associating “the flesh” and “circumcision” in this way, Sha’uwl is reinforcing the madness behind his mantra. In his warped mind: “the Torah can be dismissed as being of the flesh because it encourages circumcision.” Sure it’s a weak argument and a flimsy case, but simply misrepresenting one of Yahowah’s symbols while ignoring and rejecting the rest was sufficient to lead billions of souls away from God.

The NAMI, LV, KJV, and NLT all translate “they may not pursue” in the passive voice with a tertiary definition, suggesting that Paul wrote: “they may not be pursued or suffer persecution.” “As many as want to put on good face in flesh these compel you to be circumcised alone that in the cross of Christ not they might be pursued.” So for this rendering to be accurate, one would have to believe that Paul’s foes encouraged circumcision in order to avoid being pursued and harassed. And yet this inverts the historical record and has Jews persecuting Christians, as opposed to the actual legacy of Christians continually harassing Jews.

While Christian apologists might protest, saying that Gentile followers of The Way were acquiescing to circumcision to avoid being persecuted, that argument won’t fly either. Back in Paul’s killing days, he harassed Jews (who were circumcised at birth), not Gentiles. And he did so for the crime of acknowledging the association between Yahowah and Yahowsha’ which was blasphemous according to the Rabbis. At this time, the overwhelming preponderance of the followers of The Way were Yahuwdym, not Gowym—as was reflected in their affinity for the Towrah. And since they were born Jews, circumcision was a given, not something which was compelled later in life.

Reflecting this same inverted notion, and perhaps fanning its initial flames, the Catholic Latin Vulgate reads: “For as many as desire to please in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised, only that they may not suffer the persecution of the cross of Christ.” Surely Jerome was not attempting to equate the pain of circumcision with the anguish of crucifixion?

The KJV parroted the Roman Catholic publication: “As many as desire to make a fair shew in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised; only lest they should suffer persecution for the cross of Christ.” But if this is the case, if Paul wants us to believe that his foes encouraged circumcision to avoid Christian persecution, then he is again a false prophet because this is the opposite of what actually transpired.

As usual, the NLT has a novel rendition of this sentence—one which bears very little resemblance to the actual text they were purporting to translate: “Those who are trying to force you to be circumcised want to look good to others. They don’t want to be persecuted for teaching that the cross of Christ alone can save.” Since Paul has positioned himself as someone who was persecuted for “teaching that the cross of Christ alone can save,” this variation of the text presents Paul’s foes as cowards.

There are two additional discrepancies in this next sentence between Papyrus 46 and the Nestle-Aland 27th Edition. The opening word is “houte – neither,” instead of “houde – not even,” although neither option makes any sense. One says that those who were observing the Towrah were “not even” circumcised, which is an eternal contradiction, and the other establishes a “neither nor” which does not follow in the text. Further, the verb peritemnomenoi is rendered in the perfect passive participle, and thus conveys: “those who have already been circumcised” as opposed to “who are being circumcised.”

While it is a gnat among camels, no one boasts about being circumcised or brags about circumcising others. It is a private choice, one which parents make regarding how they intend to raise their children. It is made in quiet contemplation as mother and father commit themselves to sharing God’s Covenant within their home.

“For (gar – because then) neither / none of (houte) the ones (oi) already having been circumcised (peritemnomenoi) themselves (autoi) carefully observe (phulasso – focus upon so as to be protected and preserved by) the Towrah (nomon – nourishing allotment which facilitates an inheritance; used throughout the Septuagint to convey “towrah – source of teaching, instruction, direction, and guidance”). To the contrary and nevertheless (alla – but certainly), they presently want and take pleasure in (thelousin – they purpose and desire, even enjoy) you all (umas) becoming circumcised (peritemnesthai) in order that (hina) in (en – with) the flesh (te sarx) of yours (umetera) they may boast (kauchesontai – they might brag and be glorified).” (Galatians 6:13)

Paulos, who was by his own admission so uncontrollably conceited that Satan had to demon possess him to reign him in. The very man who had the audacity to contradict God and start his own religion just called those with the good sense to observe God’s Towrah “boastful.” Like most every politician today, Sha’uwl was a complete hypocrite.

Sha’uwl has covered this ground before, so other than to demean the Covenant’s Children in a completely hypocritical fashion, this is redundant. But since he has once again contradicted Yahowah’s testimony, here are the facts: In the Torah, Yahowah asks parents to circumcise our sons on the eighth day as a sign and symbol of our commitment to the Covenant and to raise our children so that they become God’s children. Abraham did as Yahowah requested—and on the very same day that he was asked, circumcised himself and Yitschaq. And while that single act didn’t save him, it demonstrated the appropriate attitude and mindset—one which we should all consider adopting. Unlike Paul, Abraham respected what Yahowah had to say—he trusted God—and as a result, Abraham followed and relied upon Yahowah’s advice. And that is what saved him.

The process of discounting Yahowah’s instructions, and renouncing His symbols, not only displays a bad attitude, and thus irritates God, it stunts our growth. But worse, when we openly criticize, even ignore, conceal, change, or corrupt elements of Yahowah’s plan, we dim the lights, blur the signs, and put stumbling blocks on the path to salvation. And that is what Paul is doing here.

The NAMI rendering of this abomination is as follows: “But not for the ones being circumcised themselves law they will guard but they want you to be circumcised that in the your flesh they might brag.” Jerome had a somewhat similar take on this verse in his LV to my own: “For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the law: but they will have you to be circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh.” And following his lead, the KJV reported: “For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the law; but desire to have you circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh.” Taking this ball and running with it, the NLT suggested: “And even those who advocate circumcision don’t keep the whole law themselves. They only want you to be circumcised so they can boast about it and claim you as their disciples.” This is more of a commentary than a translation, which would be fine if it was identified as such.

What these folks are all missing, including Paul, is that Yahowah is the one who is advocating circumcision. It is one of many things He prescribes in the Towrah. So, who are we to suggest that His advice is outdated and passé, or that our advice is better?

The Torah is Yahowah’s Way, His Operating Manual. Included therein along with His words are symbols which aid our understanding. Circumcision is one of these word pictures. Just as Yahowah “cut a covenant with Abraham,” one in which he agreed to separate himself from Babylon and be set apart unto God, trusting Him with his family, we can cut ourselves in on this same deal—the offer of a lifetime—and join Yahowah’s family by following His instructions. Yahowah’s Covenant is an open invitation. You and I are free to accept it or reject it. We can even criticize it. But we cannot change it. The path Yahowah has provided home isn’t open to human copyedits or alterations.

Speaking of copyedits and alterations, the oldest witness to Paul’s letter reveals a third “me – not,” this one following “may it not become” to make it “not boasting” in this next statement. Therefore, the ultimate hypocrite and demagogue wrote:

“But (de) for me (emoi), may it not become (me genoito) not boasting (me kauchasthai – bragging), if (ei) not (me) in (en) the (to) cross (στρω / stauro Divine Placeholder for Upright Pillar indicating that God is the Doorway to Life and to Heaven (but since Sha’uwl has negated the purpose of Passover, the symbolism is inconsistent with his letter)) of the (tou) Lord (KY / kuriou – Divine Placeholder for Upright One (but since Sha’uwl is speaking against God, the Adversary’s title is a better fit in this context)) of ours (emon), Christou Iesou (ΧΡΥ ΙΗΥ / Christou ‘Iesou – Divine Placeholders for the Ma’aseyah Yahowsha’ (but since the purpose of Galatians has been to demean the Work of Yahowah and to deny that “Yahowah Saves,” Sha’uwl would have used the corrupted Greek name and title)), by (dia) whom (ou) my (emoi) world (kosmos – universe, earth, or world system) has been actually crucified (ΕΣτρΑΙ / estaurotai – Divine Placeholder for being affixed to the Upright Pillar, identifying the Door to Life and the Way to Heaven with Yahowah (something Sha’uwl has sought to negate)) and likewise, I (kago) to world (kosmo).” (Galatians 6:14)

For those of you who needed proof that Sha’uwl did not include the Divine Placeholders in his autographs of his letters, you have it now. The στρω placeholder was designed to convey the “Upright One” and the “Upright Pillar” upon which He hung, fulfilling Passover, thereby denoting the Doorway to Life as being Divine. But Sha’uwl has negated the purpose of Passover, and he never refers to it as the Doorway to Life or to God’s Home. Also, KY is a Divine Placeholder for the “Upright One” who is the “Foundation and Upright Pillar of the Tabernacle,” concepts that are only understood based upon the deployment of ‘edon throughout the Towrah – a book Sha’uwl has relentlessly demeaned. But beyond this, by juxtaposing them in this way, if they were rendered appropriately, Sha’uwl would have said: “in the Upright Pillar of the Upright Pillar of ours.”

It saddens me to realize that Christians believe that the man who routinely contradicted Yahowsha’ and demeaned Yahowah’s Word “bragged in the cross,” rather than in his own perverted message, or that he was somehow “crucified” with the Ma’aseyah he never knew. Yes, he crucified himself with his own words, but that doesn’t count.

If Paul’s opening claim was actually true, then someone else other than Paul wrote the first several chapters of this letter, as they were crafted to defend and glorify Paul. If the self-proclaimed messenger of God was focused exclusively on what happened on Passover, his personal reputation, status, and authority would have been irrelevant. All that would have mattered was presenting Yahowsha’ as the diminished corporeal manifestation of Yahowah fulfilling the Towrah’s promises on behalf of the Covenant’s children on the Miqra’ey of Pesach, Matsah, Bikuwrym, and Shabuw’ah. But that is the antithesis of what we have endured throughout Galatians.

Further, there is no connection between Sha’uwl and Yahowsha’s sacrifice. Paul’s sacrifices, whatever they may have been, are completely irrelevant. Even if Paul had told the truth rather than convolute it, his actions have not and cannot save anyone. So it’s shameful that he continues to present himself as if he was a co-savior. Paul was not crucified, not on this day or any day. And since he was Towrahless, if he had been crucified a billion times over, it would not have benefited anyone. And even if he had correctly represented Yahowsha’s name and title, lying in God’s name is far worse than lying in one’s own name.

The NAMI touts: “To me but not may it become to brag except [n/a] in the cross of the Master of us Jesus Christ through whom to me world has been crucified and I to world.” Jerome, setting a literary precedent for paraphrasing the text, wrote the following in his LV: “But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ: by whom the world is crucified to me, and I to the world.” The textually unjustified “God forbid” statement found in both the LV and KJV serves as an indictment against the KJV claim that it is a translation of the Hebrew and Greek: “But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.” Continuing to buff and polish Paul’s image, the NLT proposed: “As for me, may I never boast about anything except the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. Because of that cross, my interest in this world has been crucified, and the world’s interest in me has also died.” It appears as if the NLT translators have never read Paul’s letters. But alas, if only: “the world’s interest in me had also died.”

Like a bad habit that won’t go away...

“But (gar – because then) neither (oute) circumcision (peritome) someone (ti) is (estin) nor (oute) uncircumcised (akrobystia), on the contrary (alla – but yet nevertheless certainly) a new (kaine – previously unknown) creation (ktisis).” (Galatians 6:15)

Just a moment ago, Sha’uwl claimed that those who were circumcised negated their salvation, but now it does not matter. For those who prefer honesty and consistency, this is known as an internal contradiction.

The only thing which has been “newly created” is Pauline Christianity. And it is “alla – contrary” to Yahowah’s guidance on everything from circumcision to salvation. Moreover, circumcision, itself, isn’t the means to our renewal or restoration. It is simply a condition to participating in the Covenant.

Had Paul wanted to be helpful here, as opposed to contradictory and argumentative, he would have said: By closely observing the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, we can know Yahowah and come to understand how and why Yahowsha’ came to fulfill our Heavenly Father’s promise to make us immortal and perfected children of His Covenant. By respecting His instructions, and by relying upon the seven-step path home He has provided, we can be born anew from above, by way of our Spiritual Mother, and find ourselves enriched and empowered by God.

When we are born spiritually into Yahowah’s family on “Bikuwrym – First-Born Children,” we are renewed by God, but that is not to say that “we become a new creation.” We aren’t recreated but instead our souls are “restored.”

It has become increasingly obvious that Paul required the “new creation,” one that became known as the “New Testament,” because he opposed the existing Covenant. But how can his new creation be valid if its premise contradicts the testimony of God?

As we have learned, Galatians was written as a rebuttal to the dressing down Sha’uwl received as a result of being called to Yaruwshalaim to confront Yahowsha’s Disciples. They were concerned about him because he was denouncing circumcision, the Covenant, and the Towrah. And now you know Sha’uwl’s reply. Rather than align his pronouncements so that they were consistent with God’s teachings, Sha’uwl not only invented his own religion, he demeaned everything associated with Yahowah in the process.

If this is what Paul scribed with his own hand, he shouldn’t have bothered. NAMI: “Neither for circumcision some is not uncircumcision but new creation.”  Trying to redeem the mother of his religion, Jerome proposed the following in the Latin Vulgate: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision: but a new creature.” The KJV merely plagiarized him: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.” But yet as someone who was without exception Towrah observant, Yahowsha’ was circumcised. And paraphrased in Elizabethan English, Yahowah said that “uncircumcised not availeth,” in that uncircumcised men are explicitly excluded from participating in Passover and His Covenant, and thus expressly excluded from eternal life as part of Yahowah’s Family and in His Home.

Speaking for themselves and Paul, but most certainly not Yahowah or Yahowsha’, the NLT promised: “It doesn’t matter whether we have been circumcised or not. What counts is whether we have been transformed into a new creation.” So why do you suppose Yahowah and Yahowsha’ bothered with the Torah or the Covenant?

The oldest witness of Paul’s extraordinary penmanship says that he scribed “stoicheosin – might follow” in the next line as opposed to “stoichesouin – will follow.” But the question remains, who or what are they to follow?

The only person Paul has asked the Galatians to “imitate” is himself. He has not asked them to follow in the footsteps of Yahowsha’ because that would cause them to be Torah observant. In fact, Paul has assailed, belittled, convoluted, and concealed the path the Ma’aseyah followed as it is laid out in the Torah.

“And (kai) as many and whoever (osoi) in this (to touto) rule, principle, and standard (kanoni – measuring rod) might imitate, marching in conformity by following along (stoicheosin – will proceed arranged in military ranks, and may walk compliantly in someone’s footsteps, harmoniously imitating (as in “onward Christian soldiers”)), peace (eirene) upon (ep) them (autous) and (kai) mercy (eleos – compassion and affection, loving kindness and clemency). And also (kai) upon (epi) the (tou) Yisra’el (‘Israel – a transliteration of Yisra’el, meaning “Individuals who Engage and Endure with God”) of the (tou) God (ΘΥ).” (Galatians 6:16)

If “this rule” is defined by his previous statements, that circumcision is either condemning or irrelevant, then Paul is asking believers to fall in line and consider Yahowah’s Word meaningless.

We first encountered “stoicheion – initial teachings and basic elements of the physical world which were improperly formed and underdeveloped, representing the first step in the worldly system of pagan mythology” in Galatians 4:3, where it was deployed to demean the Torah. It was there that we learned that stoicheion was derived from stoicheo, which spoke of “soldiers marching off (as in away from the Torah) from one place to another (as in from the “Old Testament” to the “New Testament”). We also discovered that stoicheo was similar to Yahowah’s depiction of His “mal’ak – spiritual messengers” who are: “saba – relegated to a military command and control regimen where they follow orders,” in that stoicheo describes “armies in orderly ranks, with each combatant simply following the leader, and with everyone moving in a structured line, existing in conformity” with the orders they have been given. And that’s important because it is Satan’s quid pro quo: he wants mankind treated as he was treated. So while stoicheo’s “submit and obey” connotation was meant to be derogatory when applied to God, it’s just fine when believers relinquish the benefits of informed freewill, and fall in line with Sha’uwl’s satanically-inspired commands. It’s little wonder Christians act like lemmings.

More telling still, albeit in a horrible way, the rule most important to Paul, the one he wants all believers to walk in conformity with, following his example, is: believe what I say. According to the Devil’s Advocate: “eleos – mercy” is afforded those who accept his standard which requires rejecting Yahowah’s standard.

And truthfully, there is only one “rule,” one “measure,” one “standard” which matters according to Yahowah—His Towrah. Even Yahowsha’ was measured and found perfect by this standard. That is why when our “sin was associated with Him,” in accordance with Second Samuel 7, Yahowah “did not spare the rod.” It is the reason Yahowsha’ endured Passover and Unleavened Bread. It is how He prevailed on our behalf.

And yet Paul has said that Christians should measure truth by the standard born out of his duplicitous and irrational rhetoric. So sadly, those who believe him will discover too late that neither his promises nor their faith will deliver “peace or mercy.”

Sha’uwl’s ending clause was intentionally provocative. Whether he meant to convey “the Israel of the God” or “the Israel of this God,” there is only one Yisra’el—and the name already includes ‘el, which is God’s title. So we must assume that Sha’uwl was making a distinction between the Yisra’el of the Towrah, and his “new creation”—the Christian Church. And that is why a distinction had to be made between Yisra’el and his Faith. It was the seed of what would become known as “replacement theology.”

And speaking of provocative, by writing the Greek word “eleos – mercy” at the end of a letter in which a new religion was established based upon the Greek goddesses Charis – Charities, known as Gratia or Graces in Latin and English, Paul proved conclusively that his elevation of the pagan goddesses to Christian legend was deliberate. While “eleos – mercy, compassion, affection, loving kindness, and clemency” was the perfect word to convey the nature of Yahowah’s “merciful” gift, the man who listened to and heeded the words of Dionysus during his conversion promoted the pagan god’s daughters to receptive Greek and Roman ears. In so doing, especially while simultaneously blending in a hefty dose of Gnosticism, Paul established the religious model Catholicism would follow. The Roman Catholic Church, by its own admission, was able to assimilate cultures en masse into their religion because clerics were always willing to incorporate pagan gods, rites, and holidays into the faith. This is a devastating blow to those who promote: “Grace alone.”

As we conclude our review of this statement, you’ll notice that the Nestle-Aland McReynolds Interlinear acknowledged the existence of “tou – of the, or of this” before “theos – God,” when they scribed: “And as many as in the rule this will walk peace on them and mercy and on the Israel of the God.” The Catholic Vulgate published: “And whosoever shall follow this rule, peace on them and mercy: and upon the Israel of God.” So why did the Catholics impose so many additional rules if ignoring circumcision was sufficient? Thirteen hundred years later, the Authorized Protestant KJV promoted: “And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.”

Paul did not write “God’s peace and mercy,” nor did Paul suggest that these gifts came from God. NLT: “May God’s peace and mercy be upon all who live by this principle; they are the new people of God.” Are the Tyndale publishers so anti-Semitic that they think they are justified in removing “Yisra’el”? Do you suppose they replaced Yisra’el because they believe that they have become “God’s new people?” Have they not proved my point – that this was intended to promote replacement theology whereby Pauline Christians became the recipients of all of the promises made to Yisra’el? But if so, why do Christians universally ignore the basis of those promises: the Towrah?

The same Sha’uwl who went out of his way to antagonize and harass his foes (who just happen to be Yahowsha’s Disciples), who made a career out of abusing members of Yahowah’s family, who demeaned his audience, calling them moronic, like all insecure individuals, had chronically thin skin and would not tolerate reprisals. This next statement is a command.

“Furthermore, from now on (tou loipos – for the remainder of time, henceforth), do not let anyone continue to (medeis parecho – allow no one to cause (present active imperative) cause trouble or difficulty (kopous – bothersome hardships and laborious toils, exhausting tasks and wearisome works; from “kopos – sorrowful beatings as a source of troubles”) for me (moi), for I (ego), indeed (gar – because), the scars and brands (ta stigma – the tattoos demarking a slave owned by a particular master, a soldier controlled by a general, or a religious devotee) of the (tou) Iesou (ΙΗΥ / ‘Iesou – Divine Placeholder for Yahowsha’, meaning “Yahowah Saves” (which was most likely added by a second century scribe because Sha’uwl’s letter disassociates Yahowsha’ from Yahowah), in (en) the (to) body (soma) of me (mou), I actually bear (bastazo – I genuinely and presently carry, endure, remove, provide, and undergo).” (Galatians 6:17)

In this vast swamp of delusional megalomania, this may be the most egotistical and depraved statement Sha’uwl has yet postured. Not only can’t he be bothered, the Galatians have been ordered to prevent anyone from giving Satan’s Messiah any trouble, now and forever. And this is because he personally claims that he actually bears the scars and brands of “Iesou,” an individual he never so much as even met. As lies go, this one is as egotistical and psychotic as they come.

Sha’uwl is presenting himself as Yahowsha’s savior, the one bearing his burdens. But unlike Yahowsha’, who willingly labored on our behalf, Sha’uwl does not want to be troubled.

Incidentally, when “loipos – furthermore, from now on, and for the remainder of time” was used in the context of Shim’own / Peter’s evaluation of Paul’s epistles, it was convoluted to mean “other” by most every English translation. And that was to infer that all of Paul’s letters were Scripture. But based upon these translations of loipos, it wasn’t because they didn’t know what the word actually means. They were trying to deceive you.

NAMI: “Of the remaining labors to me no one let hold to I for the brands of the Jesus in the body of me bear.”  LV: “From henceforth let no man be troublesome to me: for I bear the marks of the Lord Jesus in my body.” KJV: “From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.” NLT: “From now on, don’t let anyone trouble me with these things. For I bear on my body the scars that show I belong to Jesus.”

This wannabe “Apostle” clearly needs an attitude adjustment. Can you imagine Yahowsha’ telling Shim’own, or you and me for that matter: “If you bother me again I’ll have nothing to do with you?” Such a command does not bear the mark of God.

Since Sha’uwl has raised the specter of brands cut or tattooed into the skin, by virtue of Qara’ / Called Out / Leviticus 19:28, we know that Yahowah is opposed to both. So it is interesting that the man who has preached against God’s instructions to cut one’s foreskin as a sign of the Covenant has now proclaimed that he bears a stigma in his body, all in direct conflict with the Torah.

It should also be noted that Muhammad issued the same command on similar grounds. He ordered Muslims to stop bothering him (while he was having sex with children in the apartments surrounding his mosque) because he bore the mark and sign of Allah’s prophet – in his case, a hairy mole..

Christian apologists will no doubt capitulate that a stigma is a “brand or tattoo,” but they will protest that figuratively (albeit by way of religious editing) the word can convey the idea of a “scar” – but that is only as a result of cutting the brand into the skin. Disregarding this fact, they will say that Paul was actually claiming that he bore scars on his body because he spoke on behalf of “Jesus Christ.” But Paul never actually spoke on behalf of the Ma’aseyah Yahowsha’ (misquoting Him once doesn’t count), and his claims to have been beaten are no more credible than the rest of his errant testimony. If you recall, each time Paul has tried to recount his personal past, he has either contradicted or convicted himself. (Although to be fair, knowing what we have come to know about Paul, and appreciating the consequences of his false teachings on billions of Christian souls, given the opportunity, I’ve done my best to strike a mortal blow to his credibility.)

But there is good news. We have finally reached the end of Galatians. Unfortunately, Paul’s concluding comments contain the names of three false gods, five if you consider the Greek or English corruptions of the Ma’aseyah Yahowsha’. The first of these is especially incriminating, because just a couple of statements ago the Devil’s Advocate acknowledged that he was aware of a perfect Greek alternative to “Grace,” that being: “eleos – mercy.” Disregarding it, and promoting the pagan goddess yet again, Sha’uwl wrote the following on behalf of his Lord:

“Becoming the (‘H) Grace (Charis – Charities; the name of the Greek goddesses of lovemaking and licentiousness, from who the Roman Gratia, or Graces, were named) of the (tou) Lord (ΚΥ / Kuriou – Master who possesses, owns, and controls slaves), our (emon) Iesou Christou (ΙΗΥ ΧΡΥ / ‘Iesou Christou – Divine Placeholders for “Yahowsha’ – Yahowah Saves” and “Ma’aseyah – Implement Doing the Work of Yahowah” (however, Sha’uwl almost certainly wrote the corrupted Greek name and title which has been poorly transliterated “Jesus Christ”)), with (meta) the (tou) spirit (ΠΝΣ / pneumatos – Divine Placeholder for the Ruwach (however, Sha’uwl’s spirit (a.k.a. the Lord) bears no resemblance to the Set-Apart Spirit)) of you (umon) brothers (adelpoi). Amen (Amen – the name of the Egyptian sun god, as reflected in Amen Ra and Tutankhamen).” (Galatians 6:18)

If there were ever a place where an article was deadly, it is here. “Tou – of the” before the placeholder ΚΥ precludes the symbol from representing Yahowah’s name in this sentence. And that means that Paul purposefully left Him out of this salutation.

More devastating still, since “the Lord” is Satan’s title (derived from the Hebrew “Ba’al – Lord) and since Sha’uwl wrote “emon – our” before he personally scribed “‘Iesou Christou” with his own hand, we must assume that he was speaking of he and his Lord’s personal creation of the mythical “Jesus Christ”— a caricature which bore no resemblance to Yahowah Saving Us, and thus to the Towrah or Yahowsha’. Paulos’ “Jesus Christ” was neither God, Savior, nor the Word made flesh.

Also, Sha’uwl wrote “The Charis / Charities of the Lord.” And that is actually a valid association, properly identifying the Greek goddesses with Dionysus, the Greek god upon which his religion was conceived. So Paul has come full circle from his conversion to his corruption.

Continuing to clean up Paul’s mess, it should be noted that he forgot to include a verb in his parting statement. Further, while mankind has a “nepesh – soul,” humankind does not have a “pneumatos – spirit. Yahowah’s Ruwach Qodesh, or Set-Apart Spirit, is from God. She is not “with the spirit of you.” And since Sha’uwl has just asked believers to be spiritual, it has become obvious that the spirit of Christianity is adverse to God.

And lastly, when transliterated and capitalized, rather than translated, “Amen” is the name of a pagan god—the sun god of Egypt. Had the Greek transliteration (amane) of the Hebrew word ‘amen (also pronounced aw·mane) been translated “trustworthy and reliable,” then the pagan association would have been eliminated. But alas, it has become deified. Christians typically complete their prayers: “In God’s name, I pray, Amen,” making “Amen” the name of the Christian god. And this problem is exacerbated in Paulos’ concluding clause by the fact that Yahowah’s name was specifically excluded from a salutation which began and ended with pagan monikers.

One last time, let’s consider the scholarly Nestle Aland Greek New Testament, 27th Edition with McReynolds English Interlinear: “The favor of the Master of us Jesus Christ with the spirit of you brothers, amen.” And as we conclude, please notice that our trilogy of Christian publications transliterated the name of the Roman goddess “Grace,” but then translated “kuriou – Lord” rather than acknowledge the placeholder. They ignored the placeholders for Yahowsha’ and Ma’aseyah and transliterated the erroneous Greek name and title. Then, adding insult to injury, they respectfully transliterated “Amen,” even capitalizing it, demonstrating that it wasn’t a common Greek word, but instead the name of an Egyptian god.

The Catholic Latin Vulgate therefore reads: “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brethren. Amen.” The Authorized Protestant King James Version promoted: “Brethren, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen.” And the Evangelical Christian paraphrase and commentary known as the New Living Translation authored: “Dear brothers and sisters, may the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen.”

The final stanza of Sha’uwl’s personal vendetta against Yahowah reads:

“You must look at and become acquainted with, paying attention to how tall and great the letters I wrote to you with my hand. (6:11)

As much as they currently desire to make a good showing in this flesh to actually compel and force you all to become circumcised merely so that the cross of the Christou Iesou they presently may not pursue. (6:12) For none of the ones already having been circumcised, themselves carefully observe the Towrah. To the contrary and nevertheless, they presently want and take pleasure in you all becoming circumcised in order that in the flesh of yours they may boast. (6:13)

But for me, may it not become not boasting, if not in the cross of the Lord of ours, Christou Iesou, by whom my world has been actually crucified and likewise, I to world. (6:14)

But neither circumcision someone is nor uncircumcised, on the contrary a new creation. (6:15) And as many and whoever in this rule, the principle and standard, might imitate, marching in conformity by following along, peace upon them and mercy. And also upon the Yisra’el of this God. (6:16)

Furthermore, from now on, do not let anyone continue to cause trouble or difficulty for me, for I, indeed, the scars and brands of the Iesou in the body of mine I actually bear, I presently carry, and endure. (6:17)

To be the Grace of the Lord, our Iesou Christou, with the spirit of you brothers. Amen.” (6:18)

 “Grace,” “Lord,” “spirit of you,” and “Amen,” indeed.

It is with a heavy heart that I provide you with this final summary of Galatians. When God’s Word is used as the standard, Sha’uwl’s message is found to be:

Accurate: 5.9. (1 @ 0.7%)

Irrelevant: 1.2, 1.13, 1.14, 1.19, 1.21, 2.15, 4.20, 6.11. (8 @ 5%)

Insufficient: 1.18, 3.1, 5.5. (3 @ 2%)

Half Truth: 3.8, 3.16, 3.17, 3.26, 4.4, 4.6, 4.22, 4.30, 5.22, 6.3. (10 @ 7%)

Unintelligible: 1.7, 2.14, 3.20, 3.29, 4.11, 4.13, 4.18, 4.21, 4.29, 5.7, 5.8, 5.11, 5.13, 5.15, 5.26. (15 @ 10%)

Inaccurate: 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.8, 1.9, 1.10, 1.11, 1.12, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.20, 1.22, 1.23, 1.24, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10, 2.11, 2.12, 2.13, 2.16, 2.17, 2.18, 2.19, 2.20, 2.21, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12, 3.13, 3.14, 3.15, 3.18, 3.19, 3.21, 3.22, 3.23, 3.24, 3.25, 3.27, 3.28, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.5, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9, 4.10, 4.12, 4.14, 4.15, 4.16, 4.17, 4.19, 4.23, 4.24, 4.25, 4.26, 4.27, 4.28, 4.31, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.6, 5.10, 5.12, 5.14, 5.16, 5.17, 5.18, 5.19, 5.20, 5.21, 5.23, 5.24, 5.25, 6.1, 6.2, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, 6.9, 6.10, 6.12, 6.13, 6.14, 6.15, 6.16, 6.17, 6.18. (112 @ 75%)

Paul made one statement which was completely accurate. “Little yeast the whole batch yeasts.” Therefore less than 1% of Galatians was accurate.

Paul made eight statements which were totally irrelevant and three more in which he provided insufficient information for what he wrote to have had any value. Collectively, this waste of papyrus and ink comprised 8% of the epistle.

There were fifteen statements which were essentially incomprehensible, albeit there were many more which bordered on indecipherable. And while the entire letter from beginning to end was poorly written, the utterly unintelligible sentences represented another 15% of the total. If we were to add these to those which were simply inarticulate and incoherent, we would have a perfect match for the Qur’an.

But more than anything, Paul was wrong. A stunning one-hundred and twelve statements were inaccurate, which is to say that there were elements which contradicted God’s Word. His propensity to deceive was on display in a stunning 75% of all Galatians passages.

Therefore, our introductory challenge has been resolved. I had proposed that if Paul pulled off the miraculous feat attributed to him, if he managed to supersede something as well known and revered as the Torah, and if he supplanted it with something as nebulous and mystical as faith, and convinced the world that he had done so without contradicting God, Galatians would have to have been the most brilliantly written theses of all time. It was not.

Beyond this sorry state of affairs, my hopes were dashed. Properly identifying whether Paul was assailing Rabbinic Law or Yahowah’s Towrah did not reconcile a single statement throughout this letter. And while the translators took great liberties with regard to Paul’s words, the plethora of religious deceptions which have been disseminated as a direct result of this epistle cannot be blamed on errant translations. Therefore, all of my preconceived notions were shattered. Paul played me for a fool, just as he has billions of Christians before me.

The verdict is undeniable: Paul spoke for himself, and he was inspired by a spirit in direct opposition to God. He was most often wrong. And the one time he was right, the truth only served to make his lies more beguiling. That is the best possible face we can put on the evidence.

So the Great Galatians Debate is over. You can trust the Creator of the universe or a tent maker, the Author of the Torah or someone who rejected the Torah. Perhaps it’s just me, but if the Author of life authored a book, it might be in our interest to consider what He had to say.

For one last time, please hold your nose, here is the letter upon which the religion of Christianity was conceived and from which all Christians were doomed...

“Paulos, an apostle, not of men, not even by the means of man, but to the contrary on behalf of Iesou Christou and god, father of the one having awakened Him out of a dead corpse, (1:1) and all the brothers with me to the called out of the Galatias, (1:2) Grace to you and peace from god, father of us and Lord Iesou Christou, (1:3) the one having given Himself on account of the sins and errors of us, so that somehow, He might gouge or tear out, uprooting us from the past circumstances of the old system which had been in place which is disadvantageous and harmful, corrupt and worthless, malicious and malignant according to the desire and will of god and father of us, (1:4) to whom the opinion regarding the glorious appearance of the shining light, a manifestation of God’s reputation, by means of the old and the new systems, Amen, let it be so. (1:5)

I am astonished, wondering in this way quickly you changed, becoming disloyal, apostates and traitors away from your calling in the name of Grace to a different beneficial messenger (1:6) which does not exist differently, conditionally negated because some are stirring you up, confusing you, proposing to change and pervert the healing message of Christou, (1:7) but to the contrary, if we or a messenger out of heaven conveys a beneficial messenger to you which is contrary to what we delivered as a good messenger to you then a curse with a dreadful consequence exists. (1:8)

As we have said already, and even just now, repetitively, I say, if under the condition someone communicates a useful message to you contrary, even greater than that which you received, it shall be (in fact I command and want it to exist as) a curse with a dreadful consequence. (1:9) For because currently, men I persuade presently, actually use words to win the favor of, seducing, misleading, and appeasing the god. Or by comparison and contrast, I seek and desire to please and accommodate humans? Yet nevertheless, if men, I was pleasing and accommodating, exciting the emotions of and lifting up a slave of Christou, certainly not was me. (1:10)

But nevertheless, I profess and reveal to you brothers of the beneficial message which having been communicated advantageously by and through myself, because it is not in accord with man. (1:11) But neither because I by man associating myself with it. Nor was I taught or instructed as a disciple. But to the contrary, by way of a revelation, an appearance serving to uncover and unveil Iesou Christou. (1:12)

For because indeed you heard of my wayward behavior in some time and place in the practice of Judaism, namely that because throughout, showing superiority, surpassing any measure of restraint, to an extraordinary degree, and better than anyone else, I was aggressively and intensely pursued, persecuting, oppressing, and harassing the called out of god, and I was and am devastating her, continuing to undermine, overthrow, and annihilate her. (1:13)

And so I was and continue to progress, accomplishing a great deal, and I persist moving forward in the practice of Judaism, over and beyond many contemporaries among my race, zealous and excited, devoted and burning with passion to belong to the traditions and teachings handed down by my forefathers. (1:14) But at a point in time when it pleased and was chosen enjoyable and better for god, the one having appointed me, setting me aside out of the womb of my mother (1:15) to reveal and disclose, uncovering and unveiling the son of him in order that I could announce the healing message among the races, immediately. I did not ask the advice of or consult with flesh or blood. (1:16)

I did not ascend into Yaruwshalaim toward the goal of being with or against the Apostles before me, but to the contrary I went away, withdrawing to Arabia, and returned again to Damascus. (1:17) Then later in the sequence of events, after three years time, I ascended up to Yaruwshalaim to visit and get acquainted with Kephas and remained against / with him fifteen days. (1:18) But other of the Apostles, I did not see, I did not pay attention to, or concern myself with except Ya’aqob, the brother of the Lord. (1:19)

But now what I write to you, you must pay especially close attention in the presence of god, because I cannot lie. (1:20) Thereafter, I came to the regions of Syria and also of Cilicia. (1:21) But I was not known and was disregarded, I was either ignored or ignorant, not recognized or understood, personally by appearance as an individual by the called out of Yahuwdah in Christo. (1:22) But then only they were constantly hearing that the one presently pursuing and persecuting us at various times now he presently proclaims a healing message of faith which once he was attacking, continuing to annihilate, he was consistently ravaging and destroying. (1:23) And so they were praising and glorifying, attributing an exceptionally high value and status, considering illustrious and magnificent, dignifying and magnifying in me for god. (1:24)

Later, through fourteen years also, I went up to Yaruwshalaim along with Barnabas, having taken along also Titus. (2:1) I went up from uncovering an unveiling revelation which lays bare, laying down to them the beneficial messenger which I preach among the races down from my own, uniquely and separately, but then to the opinions, presumptions, and suppositions, into foolishness and stupidity, without purpose, I might run or I ran. (2:2)

To the contrary, not even Titus, a Greek being, was compelled, forced or pressured, to be circumcised. (2:3) But then on account of the impersonators who faked their relationship brought in surreptitiously into the group to spy upon and plot against the freedom from conscience and liberation from the constraints of morality that we possess in Christo Iesou in order that us they will actually make subservient, controlling for their own ends, (2:4) to whom neither to a moment we yielded, surrendered, or submitted in order that the truth of the god may continue to be associated among you. (2:5)

But now from the ones currently presumed and supposed to be someone important based upon some sort of unspecified past, they were actually and continue to be nothing, completely meaningless and totally worthless, to me. It carries through and bears differently the face of god of man not take hold of or receive, because to me, the ones currently presuming and dispensing opinions based upon reputed appearances, of no account, worthless was their advice and counsel in the past. (2:6)

Contrariwise, nevertheless, the objection and exception, having seen and perceived that because namely I have been believed entrusted with the healing message and beneficial messenger of the uncircumcised inasmuch as Petros / Rock of the circumcised. (2:7) Because then namely, the one having previously functioned in Petro to an apostle for the circumcision, it actually functioned also in me to the nations and ethnicities. (2:8)

And having recognized, becoming familiar with the Grace of the one having been given to me, Ya’aqob, Kephas, and also Yahowchanan, the ones presently presumed and supposed to be leaders, the right place of honor and authority they granted to me, and to Barnabas fellowship as a result. We to the nations and ethnicities, but they to the circumcision. (2:9) Only alone by itself the lowly and poor, the worthless beggars of little value that we might remember and possibly think about which also I was eager and quick same this to do. (2:10)

But when Kephas came to Antioch, I was opposed to and against his presence. I stood in hostile opposition because he was convicted and condemned, even ignorant. (2:11) Because, before a certain individual came from Ya’aqob, he was eating together with the different races, but when he came, he was withdrawing and was separating himself, out of fear of the circumcised. (2:12) So they were hypocritical, and also the remaining Yahuwdym. As a result even Barnabas was led away and astray with them in the duplicitous hypocrisy. (2:13)

Nevertheless, when I saw that they were not walking through life rightly with the truth of the healing and beneficial messenger, I said to Kephas in front of all: ‘If you Jews actively being ethnic, how the ethnicities you compel and force into being or acting Jewish? (2:14)

We are Jews by nature and are not from the social outcasts of sinful and heathen races, (2:15) having come to realize without evidence, that by no means whatsoever is man vindicated or made righteous by means of activities associated with the Towrah, if not by faith in Iesou Christou. And we on Christon Iesoun, ourselves, believed in order for us to have become righteous out of faith in Christou, and not by means of acting upon the Towrah, because by means of engaging in the Towrah not any flesh will be acquitted, vindicated, nor made righteous. (2:16)

But if seeking to be made righteous and innocent in Christo, we were found also ourselves social outcasts and sinners, shouldn’t we be anxious that Christos becomes a guilty, errant, and misled, servant of sin? Not may it exist, (2:17) because if that which I have actually torn down, dissolved, and dismantled, invalidated and abolished, subverted and discarded, this on the other hand I restore or reconstruct, promoting this edifice, I myself bring into existence and recommend transgression and disobedience. (2:18) I then, because of and by the Towrah’s ‘law,’ myself, actually died and was separated in order that to god I might currently live. Together with Christo, I have actually been crucified. (2:19)

I live, but no longer I. He lives then in me, Christos. This because now I live in the flesh, in faith I live of the god and Christou, the one having loved me and surrendered, entrusting authority to control, influence, instruct, and to betray exclusively and especially of himself for the sake of and because of me. (2:20) I do not reject or disregard the Charity / Grace of the god if because then by the Torah, righteousness as a result Christos undeservedly, for no reason or cause, without benefit, for naught, and in vain, died. (2:21)

O ignorant and irrational, unintelligent and unreasonable, Galatians. To whom were you bewitched, deceived, slandered, and seduced? (3:1) This alone I want to learn from you: out of accomplishments of the Towrah the spirit you received or alternatively out of hearing of belief? (3:2) In this way, you are ignorant and irrational, lacking in knowledge and unable to think logically. Having begun with spirit, now in flesh you are completing? (3:3) So much and for so long these things you suffered. You were affected and you were vexed, annoyed, and angry, without reason or result, if indeed, really without result. (3:4)

The one, therefore, then supplying you the spirit and causing it to function, operating powerfully in you, out of acting upon the Torah or out of hearing faith? (3:5) Just as Abram believed and had faith in the God so it was reasoned and accounted to Him as righteousness. (3:6) You know, as a result, the ones out of faith, these are Abram’s sons. (3:7)

Having seen beforehand then by contrast the writing, that because out of faith makes the people from different races and places right, God, He, before the beneficial messenger acted for Abram, that they would in time be spoken of favorably in you to all the ethnicities and nations. (3:8) As a result, the ones out of faith, we are spoken of favorably, even praised together with the faithful Abram. (3:9)

For as long as they exist by means of doing the assigned tasks of the Torah, they are under a curse, because it is written that ‘All are accursed who do not remain alive, persevering with all that is written in the scroll of the Torah, doing it.’ (3:10) So with that Torah, absolutely no one is vindicated or justified alongside God. It becomes evident: ‘Those who are justified and righteous, out of faith will live.’ (3:11) But the Towrah exists not out of faith, but to the contrary, ‘The one having done and preformed them will live in them.’ (3:12)

Christos bought us back from the evil and hateful curse of the Towrah, having become for our sake a maligning and malicious curse, because it has been written: ‘A vengeful curse on all those having hung on wood.’ (3:13) As a result, to the people from different races, the beneficial word of Abram might become in Christo Iesou that the promise of the spirit we might take hold, being possessed through faith. (3:14)

Brothers, according to man I say nevertheless a man having been validated with an agreement; no one rejects or actually accepts added provisions. (3:15) But to Abram these promises were said, ‘And to the offspring of him.’ It does not say: ‘And to the seeds,’ like upon many. But to the contrary, as upon one, and to the seed of you which is Christos. (3:16) But this I say, ‘A promised covenant agreement having been ratified beforehand by the God, this after four-hundred and thirty years, having become Towrah does not revokes it so as to invalidate the promise.’ (3:17)

Because if out of the Towrah, the inheritance is no longer from promise, but to the Abram by promise of God, He has forgiven and pleasured. (3:18) Then, therefore, why the Towrah? Until the seed which might come to whom it has been promised having been commanded by spiritual messengers in the hand and control of a mediator or middleman. (3:19) But now, the mediator, he is not of one, but the god, he is one. (3:20)

Indeed, consequently, the Torah accordingly is against the promises of the god. Not may it become (although it might be, even though I don’t want it to be). For if, per chance, had been given the Torah the power and ability, the capacity and resources, to impart life, certainly in the Torah would be the righteous and vindicated. (3:21) But to the contrary, the writing imposed restrictions, completely shutting the door on heaven, imprisoning everything under error and evil in order that the promise out of the Faith of Iesou Christou might be given to believers. (3:22) But before the arrival of the Faith, under the control of the Towrah, we were actually being held in custody as prisoners, restricted and trapped like fish in a net, to the bringing about of the Faith was revealed. (3:23)

As a result, the Towrah has come to exist as our disciplinarian using dogmatic old-fashioned methods extending until Christon in order that by means of the Faith we might, at some point in time, while doing nothing ourselves, be justified. (3:24) But now having come the Faith, no longer do we exist under an old fashioned and strict disciplinarian. (3:25) For all sons of God, you all exist by way of the Faith in Christo Iesou. (3:26) Because as many as to Christon, you all were actually at some point baptized, Christon you all clothe or plunge. (3:27)

No longer is there Jew nor Greek, no longer is there slave nor free, no longer is there male and female, because then all of you exist as one in Christo Iesou. (3:28) But if you all are Christou, then you are of Abram’s seed with respect to the promise heirs. (3:29)

So I say, as long as the heir exists childish and immature, he is no different than a slave, belonging to the lord and master who owns and controls everyone and everything. (4:1) Certainly, he is under the auspices of foremen who control the workers and administrators until the previously appointed time set of the Father. (4:2)

And also in this way it follows that when we were infants, under the elementary teachings and rudimentary principles of religious mythology, we were subservient slaves. (4:3) But when came the fullness of the unspecified time, the God sent out the Son of Him, having come to exist, originating from a woman, having come to exist under Towrah (4:4) in order that the ones under Towrah he might buy back in order to the son set we might receive back and obtain from. (4:5)

But because you are sons sent out the god, the spirit into the hearts of us shouts, ‘Abba’the Father. (4:6) So as a result, you no longer exist as a slave, but to the contrary a Son. But now if a Son and an heir by the chance casting of lots through a god. (4:7)

Certainly on the other hand, not having known or acknowledged god, you were enslaved to nature, not existing as gods. (4:8) But now having known god, but what’s more, having been known under god, how have you returned, changing your beliefs back upon the incapacitating and incompetent, the worthless, belittling, and terrifying elementary teachings and rudimentary principles of religious mythology representing the inadequate, simplistic, and improperly formed first step which back again and again from above you are choosing to be controlled as a slave (4:9) by observing and carefully attending days, and months, and seasons, and years? (4:10)

I am afraid and fear for you that maybe somehow without reason and for nothing I have grown tired and discouraged, struggling to demonstrate effort toward you. (4:11) You all must become and are commanded to exist like I. Then I as a emphatic priority as a result like you all become called brothers and fellow believers, the means I want to compel, to bind, and to control you all. In no way were you wronged, harmed, or treated unjustly as a result of fraud by me. (4:12)

But you realize that because of an incapacity, timidity, weakness, and limitation in the flesh I announced this healing messenger and beneficial message to you all previously. (4:13) And my temptation to prove my integrity and my submission to another, my fidelity and true nature of my character) in my flesh, you did not ridicule, despise, or reject. To the contrary like a spiritual messenger of god you received and believed me as Christon Iesoun. (4:14)

Where, therefore and consequently then, the declaration of blessedness and the pronouncement of happiness of yours? I witness and testify because of you that if possible and competent, your eyes having gouged and plucked out, you gave to me. (4:15) So as a result, a hostile and despised adversary of yours I have become telling the truth to you. (4:16)

They are jealous of you, not rightly, but to the contrary, they want to exclude and separate you, in order that you might be jealous of them. (4:17) But good and right to be jealous in good and right at all times. And not only alone in my presence with you. (4:18)

Children of mine whom also I have birth pangs, having engaged in the labor of childbirth as far as that which might be formed becoming Christos in you all. (4:19) But I would purpose to be present, to arrive and to come with you now and to change, altering the nature and character of my voice and language because I am at a loss, perplexed and puzzled, doubting and embarrassed, uncertain and I don’t know what to do in you. (4:20)

Speak to me those proposing and deciding to exist under the control of Towrah: can’t you hear the Towrah? (4:21) For indeed because it has been written that Abram two sons had, one from the slave girl and one from the free and unbound. (4:22) Certainly from the slave girl according to flesh has been born, from the free by way of a promise. (4:23) Whatever is being spoken of allegorically these then exist as two covenants or testaments, one indeed from Mount Sinai into subservience, slavery, and bondage, giving birth to whoever exists as Hagar. (4:24) So now Hagar exists as Mount Sinai in Arabia, therefore, corresponding to the present Yaruwshalaim. She is enslaved because of being associated with her children. (4:25)

But the Yaruwshalaim above in opposition, free and independent is who is our mother. (4:26) For indeed, it has been written, ‘Be glad infertile, the not giving birth, violently lacerating throwing an angry fit, viciously ripping things to pieces while distorting and convulsing, cry aloud, becoming the not suffering birth pains because many the children of the desolate, forsaken and deserted, more than of the possessing the man.’ (4:27)

But you brothers according to Yitschaq of promise children you are. (4:28) Otherwise just as at that time this accordingly, flesh having given birth pursued, persecuted, and expelled this according to spirit and so it continues even now. (4:29) Nevertheless, what says the Writing, ‘Throw out and expel the slave girl and the son of her for will not receive by lots the son of the slave girl with the son of the free.’ (4:30) Therefore, brothers, we are not children of slave girl, to the contrary, the free. (4:31)

This freedom and liberty of ours being Christos it freed, so you all are directed to stand firm. Therefore, also, not again in yoke of subservience and slavery you are held based upon a grudge against you all, controlling you and forcing you to surrender to someone who bears ill will, is resentful, violent, and quarrelsome. (5:1)

You pay attention, I, Paulos, myself say to you all that if on the condition that you may be circumcised, Christos is totally worthless and completely meaningless, not in the least bit helpful or useful for you. (5:2) So then, furthermore, repeating myself, I testify, insist, and protest to every man being circumcised that he actually is obligated to do and perform the entire and complete Towrah. (5:3)

You have invalidated and rendered inoperative, abolishing the purpose of the separation of Christou whosoever is in unison with the Towrah. You all having been declared righteous, and having been vindicated with the Charis / Gratia / Graces, you all have fallen away and have been forsaken. (5:4)

Because indeed, we in spirit out of faith hope. Righteousness we await patiently. (5:5) In Christo Iesou neither circumcision is someone is capable, powerful, and mighty nor uttermost part of the penis, on the contrary through faith love operating. (5:6)

You were trying, running, and progressing well, in a fine way that was pleasing. Who or what you it prevented and impeded, it offended and was beaten of the truth not to be persuaded, to obey, and to follow along faithfully? (5:7) The enticing persuasion and soliciting inducement not from the one providing a name to you all. (5:8) A little yeast whole of the batch it yeasts. (5:9)

I have been persuaded to coax and convince you, winning you over in the Lord because nothing different other than this may you all regard or ponder, potentially holding as a belief. So now, the one stirring you up and causing you great distress, confusing, bewildering, and mystifying you will undergo and endure the judgment, condemnation, and punishment, whoever this individual might be. (5:10)

But now, I, brothers, if conditionally circumcision nevertheless still I preach, why and for what further besides am I pursued and persecuted, made to flee timid and fearful at the commands of another? As a result, therefore perhaps it is possible, invalidated and annulled this offending trap and stumbling block which ensnares and is offensive of the crucifixion. (5:11)

And also how I wish and pray for a malicious curse, that they might castrate and emasculate themselves, suffering amputation of their penis and testicles, those troublemakers among you who stir you up to rebel by disseminating religious error and political seditions. (5:12)

For you upon freedom you all were named and were called brothers. Only not in the liberty to the point of the starting point of the original violent attack of the flesh. To the contrary, by of the love you all are slaves of each other. (5:13) Because of this then all the Towrah in one word has come to an end and is finished in the you loving of the nearby neighbor as yourself. (5:14) But if each other you all bite and you devour, you all watch out, not under one another you might be consumed. (5:15)

But I say in spirit you are all commanded to advance. And so the desire and passion of lustful craving of the flesh deny, lest you might come to an end. (5:16) For indeed, the flesh’s desires and passions against the spirit, and so then the spirit in opposition to the flesh, because of these one another it is hostile and adversarial in order to negate what conditionally you all might presently propose and want of these to possibly behave and do. (5:17) But if in spirit you all are not guided, you are under the control of the Towrah. (5:18)

But now evident, clearly seen, and widely known are the works and assigned tasks of the flesh which indeed exist as sexual promiscuity, impure materiality, sensuality, (5:19) the likeness manifesting what can be observed, the use and administering of drugs, hatred and hostile antagonism, strife, dissension, and quarrelling, deep devotion and jealousy, the desire to make a sacrifice, selfish ambitions and hostile rivalries, discord and division, taking another stand, the freedom to choose for oneself, (5:20) envious corruption, drunkenness, public partying, and that similar to this which I previously spoke to you inasmuch as I said before that the likes of such carrying out and committing these practices, the reign and kingdom of God, they will not inherit. (5:21)

But the fruit of the spirit is: love, happiness, peace, patience, mercy from an upright implement, being good through generosity, faith, (5:22) gentleness, meekness, and humility, self-control over one’s sexual appetite, with regard to such there is no Towrah. (5:23)

But the ones of the Christou the flesh has been crucified with the sufferings, passions, the deep desires, and longings. (5:24) If we live for spirit, for spirit we march in a line, behaving by imitating, living in conformity. (5:25) Not we might come to exist vainly boastful sharing opinions which are baseless, one another provoking and irritating, each other jealous and envying. (5:26)

And also brothers, if a man may have previously detected or caught someone in a false step, you all, the spiritual ones, you must thoroughly prepare and completely restore the one such as this with a meek and gentle spirit, carefully observing yourself so then you, yourself, may submit and be tempted, having tried to catch a mistake. (6:1) Of one another, the weighty burdens you carry, remove, and endure and thus in this way you all supply and complete the Towrah of the Christou. (6:2)

Indeed if someone supposes and presumes to be somebody, he is nothing. He deceives himself. (6:3) But the work, performances, and accomplishments of himself, he must examine and prove meritorious, and then to himself, alone, at the exclusion of all others, the boast and brag, the justification for pride and praise, the exaltation and glory that person will possess and experience, and not for any other. (6:4) For each and every one their own individual and distinct burden will carry and bear. (6:5)

But one must share, partnering with the one making the ears ring, verbally informing the word, orally instructing in all good. (6:6) You must not become mislead and stray because a god is not sneered at, ridiculed, or treated with contempt. For then, whatever if a man may sow, this also he shall reap. (6:7) Because the one sowing into the flesh of himself, from the flesh will reap corruption, destruction, and dissolution, depravity and death. But the one sowing into the spirit, from the spirit will reap life eternal. (6:8)

But the one good doing we do not become malicious, giving into harmful emotions, disparaging behaviors, or pernicious thinking. Because on occasion, for oneself we will reap and harvest, not being discouraged by being bound. (6:9) As a result, therefore, likewise, on occasion, we are presently able to experience the potential to work, laboring for the advantageous generous benefit of all, but especially and exceedingly benefiting those belonging to the Faith. (6:10)

You must look at and become acquainted with, paying attention to how tall and great the letters I wrote to you with my hand. (6:11)

As much as they currently desire to make a good showing in this flesh to actually compel and force you all to become circumcised merely so that the cross of the Christou Iesou they presently may not pursue. (6:12) For none of the ones already having been circumcised, themselves carefully observe the Towrah. To the contrary and nevertheless, they presently want and take pleasure in you all becoming circumcised in order that in the flesh of yours they may boast. (6:13)

But for me, may it not become not boasting, if not in the cross of the Lord of ours, Christou Iesou, by whom my world has been actually crucified and likewise, I to world. (6:14)

But neither circumcision someone is nor uncircumcised, on the contrary a new creation. (6:15) And as many and whoever in this rule, the principle and standard, might imitate, marching in conformity by following along, peace upon them and mercy. And also upon the Yisra’el of this God. (6:16)

Furthermore, from now on, do not let anyone continue to cause trouble or difficulty for me, for I, indeed, the scars and brands of the Iesou in the body of mine I actually bear, I presently carry, and endure. (6:17)

To be the Grace of the Lord, our Iesou Christou, with the spirit of you brothers. Amen.” (6:18)

LE: YY 09-20-2013