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

Chapter 12

Metanoeo

Change Your Perspective

Are You Prepared to Change Your Thinking and Your Perspective


As is often the case, we achieve a better perspective when we step back. All too often we get so close to our subject that we fail to see what is occurring in the greater context of the human experience. In this light, I recommend that we commence our closing arguments in the case of Yahowah v. Sha’uwl with God’s opening statement regarding this man and his religion.

Approximately 666 years before Sha’uwl penned his first letter, sometime around 615 BCE, Yahowah chose a man named “Embrace This” to expose and condemn an individual named “Question Him.” God’s concern was that this heinous man would lure billions of souls back to Babylon by negating His Towrah and replacing His Covenant. This stunning prophetic witness began with these words...

“The prophetic pronouncement (ha masa’ – the published prophecy) which beneficially (‘asher) was received as a revelation by (chazah – was revealed and witnessed by way of a prophetic vision to (the qal stem is the voice of genuine relationships and of literal truth while the perfect conjugation reveals that this revelation was totally complete, lacking nothing)) Chabaquwq (Chabaquwq – Embrace This, which is to receive, accept, and act upon what is being revealed), the prophet (ha naby’ – the individual who proclaims the message of God regarding future events).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:1)

Therefore, we know that Yahowah brought Chabaquwq / Habakkuk to a place in time where he was able to see the future. And based upon his reaction, what he saw was horrible. The man cried out to God, pleading for what he was witnessing to end.

“For how long (‘ad ‘an – where and when will the ancient and continual), Yahowah ( ), shall I plead for relief (shawa’ – should I vocalize this request for help during a desperately horrible and dangerous situation (in the piel stem the object (those observing this prophecy) are affected by the plea while the perfect conjugation reveals that the call for help is sufficient, lacking nothing))? But (wa) You will not actually listen (lo’ shama’ – You will not actually hear for an ongoing period of time (the qal stem is the voice of reality and imperfect conjugation conveys that this condition endures)) to my genuine and continuous appeal for help (za’aq – to my cry and summons as a result of this emotional anguish (qal imperfect)). Toward You (‘el – toward the Almighty) there are cruel lies and great injustice (chamac – there is Towrahlessness as a result of unrighteousness and error leading to death and destruction, ruining and wronging the people, plundering them), so (wa) You continuously withhold salvation (lo’ yasha’ – You do not provide deliverance (in the hiphil stem the subject (Yahowah) causes the object (in this case those influenced by the promotion of the lies) to suffer the effect of the verb, which is the denial of salvation and in the imperfect, this condition is ongoing)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:2)

There are those who will say that Habakkuk’s lament was over the treatment of Yisra’elites in Babylon after they were drug off into captivity. But since that horrific reality was imminent and would become a current event in Chabaquwq’s lifetime, something he could have witnessed with his own eyes, there would have been no reason for Chabaquwq to use “masa’ – prophetic pronouncement,” “chazah – prophetic vision received as a revelation,” or “naby’ – prophet who proclaims God’s testimony regarding future events” in his introductory statement. In addition, Yahowah had been clear, revealing to other prophets precisely why the Yisra’elites would be taken from the Land.

But also keep in mind that Yahowah is prone to foreshadowing, to using contemporaneous events to shine a light on those which are of even greater significance in the future. And in this light, Babylon represents corruption, and thus religion. To this day, it remains the greatest impediment to salvation. It is the first thing Yahowah asks us to leave in the Towrah before engaging in His Covenant. And it is the last plea Yahowsha’ makes to humankind, asking us in the waning chapters of the Revelation to Yahowchanan to come out of Babylon, which is the realm of religion – and most adroitly, Christianity.

Seeking the answer to the questions we have been pondering, Chabaquwq, asks...

“For what reason (mah – for whom and why) are You having me witness (ra’ah – are You showing me, revealing to me, and having me look at and consider (in the hiphil imperfect God wants this revelation to influence the witness forever)) this evil corruption (‘awen – the vain and wicked injustice, this immoral iniquity that has been perpetrated, this misfortunate act of deceit, this troubling presentation of idolatry (from an unused root meaning to pant, exerting oneself in vain)) and (wa) distressing and miserable labor (‘amal – abysmal situation brought about as a result of birth pangs) that You are considering (nabat – You are evaluating (hiphil imperfect))?

Cruel lies and great injustice (chamac – Towrahlessness as a result of unrighteousness and error leading to death and destruction, ruining and wronging the people, plundering them) are conspicuous to me and are related (la neged – are present before my eyes and they correspond to one another from my perspective). So he has been and continues to be (wa hayah – so he is continuously (imperfect conjugation scribed in the third person masculine singular)) contentious, taunting, and quarrelsome (ryb – insulting in a dispute and hostile in opposition, harboring a different perception and opinion regarding the proper standard which put God and man in conflict). And also (wa), strife and dissention (madown – a source of contention regarding judgment and argumentative objections with regard to vindication) he brings, actually lifts up, and continuously advocates (nasa’ – he consistently raises, carries forward and actually advances, he desires, honors, and exalts (qal stem imperfect conjugation scribed in the third person masculine singular)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:3)

If Yahowah had taken Chabaquwq to Babylon to view his immediate future, he would not have questioned why he was there. He could warn his contemporaries because much had already been revealed to explain the justifications behind the “timeout.” Chabaquwq knew that it was coming, and that it was both required and deserved. However, if we move 666 years forward in time to witness the quarrelsome contentiousness of Sha’uwl, it would be natural for Chabaquwq to ask God this question, realizing that the people who would benefit from this warning wouldn’t be born for another six centuries.

Babylon is based upon the Hebrew word for “corruption,” and clearly, the Babylonian religion was “perverted.” But the Yisra’elite captivity in Babylon was not an injustice. The people deserved what befell them. So while “chamac – the cruel lies and great injustice” that grow out of “Towrahlessness” leading to “error, death, and destruction” was prominent in Babylon, including a steady diet of “ryb – contentious taunts and quarrelsome insults,” this vision is directly analogous to Sha’uwl and his derisive arguments against the Towrah. And that is why ryb, speaking of this “insulting dispute and hostile opposition” was scribed in the third person masculine singular, and thus identifying a lone individual man who would be responsible for “harboring a different perception and opinion regarding the proper standard which ultimately put mankind in conflict with God.” Similarly, this “madown – source of contention and dissention regarding the means to vindication” was “nasa’ – advocated and advanced” by one solitary soul. Babylon was a nation of millions. And the only named perpetrator is Sha’uwl, and no one named Sha’uwl reigned over Babylon, not then or ever.

And now that we have completed our review of Sha’uwl’s first letter, we know that Chabaquwq 1:3 is a fitting summation of it. But that is just the tip of the iceberg gouging an irreparable gash in the hull of Christendom.

 “So likewise, therefore (ken), based upon this (‘al), he consistently and completely incapacitated and genuinely paralyzed the purpose of (puwg – he invalidated the function, weakening by causing a numbness toward (qal imperfect)) the Towrah (Towrah – source from which teaching, instruction, direction, and guidance flows). So he did not bring forth (wa lo’ yatsa’ – then he did not bring out or extend (qal imperfect)) the glorious and eternal approach (la netsah – the unending and everlasting means) to vindicate by justly resolving disputes (mishpat – to exercise good judgment regarding the Judge’s plan and prescriptions to resolve relational issues).

For indeed (ky – rather because), wickedness encompasses and guilt abounds (rasha’ kathar – hostile and unrighteous criminality surrounds and encircles, hemming in the hopeful (hiphil participle)) against (‘eth) the righteous and innocent (ha tsadyq – the upright who are vindicated and acquitted). So therefore in this manner (‘al ka), his judgment regarding his ongoing means to vindication (yatsa’ mishpat – his angry expression to actually bring forth justice and to continuously resolve disputes (qal imperfect)) is perverted and distorted (‘aqal – is twisted and false (in the pual stem the object, which is judgment, suffers the effect of the verb’s action which is to change, misrepresent, and twist)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:4)

The Babylonians were never a party to the Towrah. The nation did nothing to incapacitate Yahowah’s Guidance nor twist His purpose. But the modern incarnation of Babylon that grew out of Sha’uwl’s relentless assault against Yahowah’s Towrah has done these very things. Moreover, throughout Galatians, Sha’uwl’s hostility abounded against Yahowsha’s Disciples, represented here as the “tsadyq – righteous and innocent.” There were no such souls in Babylon.

Furthermore, if we were to distill Galatians down to core, we find Sha’uwl “attempting to incapacitate and invalidate the Towrah’s eternal means to vindicate by justly resolving disputes.” And as we know, he did so by assaulting the innocent, expressly Yahowah and Yahowsha’, Abraham and Moseh, Shim’own and Yahowchanan. Throughout his letter, the means to Sha’uwl’s madness was consistently “‘aqal – perverting and distorting, twisting and falsifying” the “Towrah – Teaching and Guidance” of God.

That is not to say that Yahowah wasn’t adverse to Babylon. He was. He is. The nation became His eternal metaphor for religious and political corruption, for the negative influence of militarism and jaundiced economic schemes, for the integration of religion and politics. It is the state of mind from which He most wants us to disassociate. Leaving Babylon, even for those who live two-thousand years after the nation was destroyed, remains His prerequisite for participating in His Covenant, and thus for salvation.

Throughout Yirmayah / Jeremiah, God’s most sweeping prophetic revelation to Gentiles, replete with denouncing Christmas, Easter, Sunday Worship, and calling Him “Lord,” Yahowah consistently paints Babylon as Christianity. And He methodically presents all of the reasons He is adverse to the religion and culture predicated upon Paul’s New Testament.

 “Choose to witness (ra’ah – elect of your own volition to actually view and consider (the qal stem denotes reality while the imperative mood expresses the volition and will of all parties) among the Gentiles (ba ha gowym – in the people from different races and places), and elect to be consistently observant, carefully considering and evaluating (wa nabat – pay attention (hiphil imperative)), and be astonished and astounded, amazed and surprised (tamah tamah – bewildered and stunned (hithpael and qal imperative)), that indeed (ky), a work will be done (po’al pa’al – to be carried out (qal participle)) in your days (ba yowmym) that you will not find credible (lo’ ‘aman – you will not find reliable (hiphil imperfect)), even when it is written down and he is held accountable (ky caphar – even if what is known about him is recorded and reported (the pual stem and imperfect conjugation addresses the continual consequence that befalls the object of the verb, also scribed in the third person masculine singular)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:5)

“Rather (ky – indeed), look to Me, and pay attention to Me (hineh – look up and notice Me), standing upright (quwm – take a stand and become established, rising up restored (hiphil participle)) against (‘eth – regarding) the Chaldeans (ha Kasdym – a synonym for the Babylonians), the nation of Gentiles (gowy – the heathen and pagan from different races and places) that are disagreeable and poisonous (mar – bitter and anguished), impetuous and senseless (mahar – the rash and disturbed (niphal participle)). He makes his way (ha halak) to the vast expanses of the world (la merchab ‘erets) as if an inheritance, taking possession of (la yarash) inhabited places that are not his (mishkan lo’ la).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:6)

“Terrible, dreadful, and intimidating (‘aym yare’ – frightening through shock and awe (the niphal stem indicates genuinely but passively)): this from his decision, his plan, and lofty status (huw’ min mishpat wa se’th) which he brings forth (yatsa’ – which he advances and spreads (qal imperfect)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:7)

In that our goal is to align our perspective so that we are standing in a place where our viewpoint is the same as God’s, the inclusion of “Kasdym – Chaldeans” makes an essential contribution. Immediately before Yahowah asked Abraham “to walk away from his country,” establishing the Covenant’s lone prerequisite, God told us that Abraham was living in “Ur of the Chaldeans.” Therefore, by negating the Towrah’s presentation of the Covenant, Sha’uwl took believers back to the poligious and militaristic realm God wanted His children to leave. And that is why, in the Revelation of Yahowchanan, Yahowsha’ concludes His prophetic message to humankind asking those enduring the Tribulation to come out of Babylon. The nation is long gone, but thanks to Paul, not its influence.

The religion Paul conceived has more in common with the mythos of Babylon than any other. As was the case with the Babylonians, Christians are fixated on their Trinity, on their Cross, on the celebration of the Winter Solstice and Easter Sunday when their god is born, dies, and is resurrected, a god whom they call “the Lord,” using Satan’s title.

And while there are a handful of nations which could claim the title of most Christian, such as Italy, Greece, Spain, Mexico, Brazil, and America, Babylon was condemned for more than just being religious. Their relentless deployment of their military, one which was overwhelming in its day, and their corrupt mercantilism where the empowered cheated and controlled the masses, were also hallmarks of Babylonian influence. So when we bring these elements together, today one nation stands naked and exposed before God – America. 

Finally transitioning from “he” to “they,” at least for a moment, Yahowah temporarily broadens the scope of His warning from the man we know as Sha’uwl to the warmongering nations and lethal institutions he inspired.

“And they recede more swiftly (wa qalal – they are disdained and despised because they are vile in the contempt (qal perfect)) than the dregs of a scummy remainder (namer – a filtrate or panther). His horsepower (cuwc) is as fierce and menacing as wolves (wa chadad min ze’d – is harmful, destructive, and predatory (qal perfect)) at dusk (‘ereb – following sundown in the darkness of night). His dispersed and fast running (puwsh – his spread out and swift (qal perfect)) chariots and mobile weaponry (parash wa parash – mechanized weapons of war which pierce and separate) come from afar (min rachowq bow’ – arrive from a great distance, pursuing by (qal imperfect)) flying and darting about, even hovering (‘uwp – continually and actually airborne (qal imperfect)), like (ka) birds of prey (nesher), swooping down (chuwsh – moving very rapidly (qal participle)) to consume and destroy (‘akal).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:8)

Since this warning has focused on the most vicious weapons of war, and especially on fighters, bombers, helicopters, and drones, it is all too easy to see America’s immense war machine, particularly its menacing birds of prey, in these words. The nation has been in a continual state of way, dispatching its military horsepower far and wide to swoop down, destroying nations around the world, most recently focusing on the Muslim fiefdoms of the Middle East while engendering shock and awe. And sadly, no nation on earth is more Babylonian, more influenced by the vicious wolf known as Paul. No other nation has engaged in fifteen wars in sixty years. No other nation has a military so enormous, it exceeds the cost of all others combined. And that is sobering considering the fact that Babylon was never duped by Sha’uwl and Rome never deployed aircraft.

This still sounds an awful lot like America, which facing east has fought on behalf of and supplied twenty-five times more weaponry to Israel’s Islamic foes than it is to God’s Chosen People, even right down to the nation’s cobbled together coalitions and insatiable desire to impose its will on other countries. 

“With all of his (kol) violent and destructive pursuits (la chamas – terror and killing without restraint), he eagerly assembles and consistently brings vast hordes (bow’ magamah – eagerly arriving and assembling in mass (qal imperfect)). Facing east (paneh), he assembles together and then moves (wa ‘acaph) like the sand (ka ha chowl) to control other countries (sheby – to capture territory).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:9)

“And he at the kings (wa huw’ ba ha melek) mocks (qalac – he makes fun of, scoffing at, deriding (the hithpael stem reveals that the mocker causes others to scoff at and deride him (as we are doing with Sha’uwl) and the imperfect conjugation speaks of ongoing behavior)), and the governors (rozen – rulers) scoffs in scorn (mischaq – as if at an object to be derided), toward them and to all their fortifications and defenses (la huw’ la kol mibtsar) he laughs in amusement (sachaq – he considers a joke (qal imperfect)). Piling up rubble (wa tsabar ‘aphar - making a massive mess (qal imperfect)), he seizes them (lakad –seeking to control them (qal imperfect)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:10)

The most Pauline nation in world history, and thus a living embodiment of Babylon, has made a habit of vilifying world leaders while ridiculing their alleged weapons of mass destruction. America has amused itself with inferior fortifications, all while turning one nation after another into piles of rubble. So while our focus is on the natural extension of Pauline Christianity, for those who might also be looking for references to America in prophecy, perhaps we have found common ground.

Affirming what became obvious when Galatians turned Gnostic, Yahowah warned us that Sha’uwl would promote the wrong spirit in his attempt to elevate Babylon’s god. And in this next statement, our brief exposure to the consequence of the Pauline epistles is over so that God can focus His condemnation on the culprit, himself. 

“Then at that time (‘az), he will actually go with a new and completely different spirit (chalaph ruwach – he will discard the Spirit, sweeping Her aside, actually exchanging the existing Spirit for a totally dissimilar spirit (qal perfect)). He will become arrogant, meddling, intoxicating, and alienating (wa ‘abar – he will transgresses and take away (qal imperfect)). He is totally guilty and will genuinely suffer punishment (‘asham – he is liable for complete wrongdoing and will endure recompense for his acknowledged offenses (qal perfect)). For this is (zu – because this is regarded as) the influence (koah – the power and might, the resources and qualifications) of his god (la ‘elowah).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:11)

Paul was “arrogant” to a fault. Rather than create his religion out of whole cloth, he cut, redyed, twisted, and rearranged snippets of Yahowah’s Word, “meddling” with His Covenant. He thereby “alienated” believers from God, “intoxicating” them. 

But more than anything, Christianity was born out of the spirit Paulos admitted possessed him – “a messenger from Satan.” The resulting religion was, therefore, “koah la ‘elowah – the influence of his god,” a wannabe deity known as the Adversary. And while we are addressing his “chalaph ruwach – different and newly conceived alternative spirit” “la ‘elowah – of his god,” be aware that like the perpetrator of evil being prophetically exposed and condemned in these words, both were singular. The Babylonians were not “spiritual” and they worshiped a plethora of deities, further isolating this Divine sanction to the lone individual named in the second chapter of Habakkuk.

While Paul’s Christianity, and especially its expression in America, represents Babylon today, there is still a distinction between Sha’uwl and his faith and between ancient Babylon and its modern incarnation. Paul was guilty of corrupting and negating Yahowah’s testimony so he will spend his eternity in She’owl. Beguiled by Paul, most Christians in America will avoid this fate. Also, while there were many rulers and many gods in Babylon, Sha’uwl was a lone individual who had but one false god. So this condemnation continues to fit Paul perfectly while also prophetically predicting the consequence of his faith and spirit on the world – all while using the negative aspects of Babylon as a metaphor for the havoc the integration of religion, politics, economics, and militarism unleashes on an unsuspecting world.

At this point, we find Chabaquwq wondering why anyone would oppose Yahowah, especially by proposing a religion based upon His death, as is the case with Pauline Christianity. And yet while the “death” of the Christian god is reported to be the means to salvation, that wasn’t the most indicting aspect of this next prophetic revelation. God revealed the name He would personally give to the individual He appointed to rebuke Sha’uwl: “Shim’own Kephas – the Rock who Listens.”

“Are You not from eternity, an unlimited duration of time (ha lo’ ‘atah min qedem), Yahowah ( ), My God (‘elohym), My Set-Apart One (qodesh)? You cannot actually die (lo’ muwth – who cannot be killed (qal imperfect)), Yahowah ( ). Concerning this (la), judgment (mishpat) You have actually appointed for him (sym – You have placed upon him upon examining him (qal perfect)).

And the Rock (wa suwr), You have established to argue against and rebuke him (yacad yakach – You have positioned, appointed, and ordained to prove that he is wrong, to chide him, accusing and judging him (the hiphil stem causes the object, Sha’uwl, to respond while the infinitive construct presents a verbal noun, making Sha’uwl argumentative)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:12)

Paul was constantly focused upon the alleged “death” of his god on a pagan cross. And yet God “lo’ muwth – cannot die.” This is a blow to the heart and soul of Christianity. It is why Sha’uwl has already been judged and found guilty.

But it is hard to imagine anything more incriminating than the concluding sentence of this verse. Sha’uwl’s admitted foe was Shim’own, the “Kephas – Rock” – the Disciple who stood up against Paul in Yaruwshalaim to rebuke him. It was even the moniker Paulos used to identify his adversary in this debate.

“Too flawless (tahowr – too pure and clean) are eyes to witness (‘ayn min ra’ah – is understanding from observation to see (qal infinitive)) such malignant and displeasing evil (ra’ – such saddening and troubling wickedness, such distressful and miserable, disagreeable and unpleasant injustice). To look upon and consider (wa nabat – or to observe and evaluate (hiphil infinitive)) such grievous and perverse labor (‘amal – the travail of childbirth this painful and full of iniquity), You cannot endure (lo’ yakol – You are unable because it is opposed to Your nature (qal imperfect)).

Why would You look at or consider (mah nabat – why would You pay attention to, attend to, or show any regard for (hiphil imperfect)) treacherous betrayal that is neither trustworthy or reliable (bagad – the adulterous transgressors and offensive deceit (qal participle))?

You are silent and still (charash – You are inactive, neither listening, speaking, nor taking action (hiphil imperfect)) in (ba) devouring (bala’ – swallowing and destroying) the wicked (rasha’ – the unrighteous guilty of violating the standard) more righteous than him (tsadyq min – more upright and proper than him, less wrong and guilty than him).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:13)

This is to say that that the founder of the Christian religion was so vile, so wicked, that Yahowah could not remain silent regarding his treacherous betrayal. It also reveals that a copy of Sha’uwl’s letter made it to the Almighty, because God is taking exception to the wannabe apostle’s claim to having endured a painful labor to give birth to the faithful.

For the most part, however, Yahowah pays no attention to those who pay no attention to Him. Live and let die is His motto in this regard. The malignant and displeasing victims of religion are unknown to God, and thus when they die apart from the source of life, their souls simply cease to exist. That is the reason Yahowah is reporting that the promises manifest in religions like Christianity are not reliable, making the faith a treacherous betrayal of trust.

Paul was fixated upon presenting himself as second to none, as not taking a backseat to anyone, including Yahowah, Yahowsha’, or the Disciples. He pronounced himself to be the lone authorized apostle to the Greek and Roman world. He ordered the faithful to follow him and obey him. And he spoke on behalf of his Lord, the Adversarial spirit, who sought to possesses and control humankind as if we were slaves. Therefore, Yahowah had His prophet write...

“So You act and engage with (wa ‘asah – You fashioned (qal imperfect consecutive)) humankind (‘adam – men and women who have a nesamah / conscience) in similar fashion to (ka – as and according to) fish (dag) of the sea (ha yam – in the water), as creatures which move freely about (ka remes – like the multitude of highly mobile animals) without a ruler in control claiming dominion (lo’ mashal – without a controlling governor who claims to be in charge (qal participle)) over them (ba – among them).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:14)

Fish don’t have lords, and they don’t submit to governmental authority, nor should we. And fish are free to swim wherever they like, even at different levels, some in the depths of darkness and others near the glistening waves of light. They even swim in schools, which symbolically suggests that they, unlike the religious, are receptive to proper instruction.

I suppose that it would be naïve to suggest that it is just a coincidence that each and every criticism fits Sha’uwl as if every one was written to indict him. And it is just per chance that nary a statement has been made that does not apply to the author of half of the “Christian New Testament.”

Baiting and hooking his audience, and netting vast numbers of souls, Sha’uwl killed everyone who took his bait. Worse, he was so depraved that he rejoiced in what was nothing less than mass murder.

“In everything associated with him (kol ba), a fishhook (chakah – a small, sharp implement used as a lure to snag, bait, and catch fish) is used to withdraw (‘alah – lift up, sacrificing (hiphil perfect)), and (wa – found in the DSS but not MT) he catches and drags away (garar – in a whirling fashion, he tears apart) in nets designed to trap (ba cherem – he ensnares, bans, and utterly destroys), and he gathers them (wa ‘acaph – so he harvests, collects, and removes them (qal imperfect)) in his dragnets (ba mikmereth – in his fishing nets designed to trap and snare). But concerning this (‘al ken – so therefore in this way), he actually and continually rejoices (samach – he consistently delights and is genuinely elated (qal imperfect)) and he is glad and exults (wa gyl – he shrieks and shouts as if this was favorable and good (qal imperfect)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:15)

Considering the hundreds of millions of people Islam has slaughtered in religious rage, it’s sad to report that Sha’uwl was more murderous still when one considers the number of souls he lured to their demise. And keep in mind, not only does religion constrain our freedom, similar to a net with fish, the reference to “ensnaring fish” is indicative of Christianity, where the faithful used the image of a fish to identify themselves with their religion. This symbol remains prevalent today in the Christian Ichthus, the Greek for “fish,” where the letters IXΘΥΣ were formed inside the “sign of the fish.” It purports to be an acronym for “Iesous Christos, Theou Yios, Soter – Jesus Christ, God’s Son, Savior.”

“So therefore in this way (‘al ken – so concerning this), he kills every living thing (zabah – he sacrifices and butchers, slaughtering (piel imperfect)), those approaching and ensnared in his trap (la cherem – accordingly those devoted to and destroyed in his snare which banishes). And he blows smoke to illicit worship (qatar – he kindles aromatic incense in a religious setting, encouraging offerings; from qatar – to bind and shut in, fumigating a living space to drive out the occupants (piel imperfect)) for them to move toward his dragnet (la mikmereth). For indeed (ky), with them he shares seductive words regarding an easy life without any work (ba hem cheleq – he offers a persuasive plot which appears satisfying but is fattening so with him they share the same fate). And so his food (wa ma’akal – then his fruit) is fashioned to be consumed leading to obesity (bary’ – is created to be fattening and rank; from “bara barah – created to be devoured”).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:16)

Among the Dead Sea Scrolls, the 8HevXII rendering of Habakkuk 1:16 suggests that Sha’uwl’s “bread grew large.” And if that is what the prophet was inspired to write, it means that it retains its yeast, and thus is rife with sin. This could well be a reference to Paul’s “a little yeast the whole loaf of bread yeasts.”

Muhammad inspired the massacre of millions with sharp swords while Paul used seductive slogans. But with both, their religions became deadly.

“So how is it (ha ‘al ken) that he continues to pour out (ryq – he consistently brings out and dumps (hiphil imperfect)) his ensnaring net (cherem – his trap used for netting the devoted, banning and destroying them), only to (wa) constantly (tamyd – continually and regularly into perpetuity) kill (la harag – slay, commit murder, and destroy out of hand (qal infinitive)) Gentiles (Gowym – people from different races and places, the heathens and pagans), showing no mercy (lo’ chamal – sparing none while incapable of pity or compassion).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 1:17)

Once again we are confronted by a discrepancy between the Masoretic Text, first compiled in the 11th century CE, and the Qumran Scrolls, dating to the 2nd century BCE. According to the DSS, Chabaquwq queried: “So how is it that he continues to bring out his sword, only to continually kill the Gentiles, showing no mercy.”

Sha’uwl indeed targeted Gentiles. And while professing his “Gospel of Grace,” he showed “lo’ chamal – no mercy.” The means Yahowah had provided to mercifully save His children was rejected, and a deadly religion was put in its place.

There are a number of reasons that we have returned to consider a wider swath of Yahowah’s prophetic pronouncement against Sha’uwl, and association, against Christendom. But foremost among them was to forestall the inevitable gymnastic apologetics that would otherwise be brought to bear against such compelling evidence in opposition to the world’s most popular religion. So since Paul’s devotees have no hope of refuting the universal condemnation that Yahowah levels against Sha’uwl in the second chapter of Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk, their only hope is to dissuade Christians from considering it by protesting that the prophet was speaking exclusively of Babylon. Therefore, by closely examining and carefully considering the preamble to the most damning prediction found anywhere in the prophets, we have proven that God had Paul’s number – a wrong and disconnected number out of touch with the truth.

With this in mind, I’ve taken the liberty of color coding the first chapter of Chabaquwq, with burgundy pointing to Sha’uwl and blue addressing Babylon. I suspect that you will enjoy the specificity of God as He lowers His sights and takes direct aim at the world’s single most hideous person.

Even the prophet’s name, “Chabaquwq – Embrace This” is telling when considered next to “Sha’uwl – Question Him.”

“The prophetic pronouncement which beneficially was received as a vision and revelation by Chabaquwq (Embrace This), the prophet who proclaims the message of God regarding future events. (1:1) For how long, Yahowah, shall I plead for relief? But You will not actually listen to my genuine and continuous appeal for help.

Toward You, there are cruel lies and great injustice, error leading to death and destruction, so You continuously withhold salvation. (1:2)

For what reason are You having me witness this evil corruption, wicked injustice, and distressing and miserable situation brought about as a result of considerable labor that You are evaluating and considering?

Cruel lies and great injustice are conspicuous to me and are related. So he has been and continues to be contentious, taunting, and quarrelsome, insulting in a dispute, and hostile in opposition, harboring a different perception regarding the proper standard which put God and man in conflict. And also, strife and dissention, even argumentative objections with regard to vindication, he brings, actually lifts up, and continuously advocates. (1:3)

So likewise, therefore, based upon this, he consistently incapacitated and genuinely paralyzed the purpose of the Towrah (the source from which teaching, instruction, direction, and guidance flows). So he did not bring forth the glorious and eternal approach to vindicate by justly resolving disputes.

For indeed, wickedness encompasses and guilt abounds, hemming in the hopeful against the righteous and innocent. So therefore, in this manner, his judgment regarding his ongoing means to vindication is perverted and distorted, twisted and false. (1:4)

Witness among the Gentiles, observing, considering and evaluating, so as to be astonished and astounded, amazed and surprised that indeed, a work will be done in your days that you will not find credible even when it is written down and he is held accountable. (1:5)

Rather, look to Me, paying attention to Me, standing upright, established, and restored against the Chaldeans (a synonym for the Babylonians), the nation of heathens and pagans that is disagreeable and poisonous, impetuous and senseless. He makes his way to the vast expanses of the world as if an inheritance, taking possession of inhabited places that are not his. (1:6)

Terrible, dreadful, and intimidating: this from his decision, his plan, and lofty status which he brings forth, advances and spreads. (1:7)

And they recede more swiftly and are despised because they are more vile in the contempt than the dregs of a scummy remainder. His horsepower is as fierce and menacing as wolves, harmful, destructive, and predatory at dusk in the darkness of night.

His dispersed and fast running chariots and mobile weaponry come from afar flying and darting, continually and actually hovering about like birds of prey, swooping down to consume and destroy. (1:8)

With all of his violent and destruction pursuits, killing without restraint, he eagerly assembles and brings vast hordes. Facing east, he assembles together and then moves like the sand to control other countries and capture territory. (1:9)

And he at the kings mocks, deriding, and the governors scoffs in scorn, toward them and to all their fortifications and defenses, he laughs in amusement. Piling up rubble, he seizes them. (1:10)

Then at that time, he will actually go with a new and completely different spirit, exchanging the existing Spirit for a totally dissimilar spirit. He will become arrogant, meddling, intoxicating, and alienating. He is totally guilty and will actually suffer punishment, genuinely enduring recompense for his acknowledged offenses. For this is the influence of his god.(1:11)

Are You not from eternity, an unlimited duration of time, Yahowah, My God, My Set-Apart One? You cannot die and cannot be killed, Yahowah. Concerning this, judgment You have appointed for him.

And the Rock, You have established to argue against and rebuke him, You have positioned, appointed, and ordained to prove that he is wrong, to chide him, accusing and judging him. (1:12)

Too flawless and clean are eyes to witness such malignant and displeasing evil. To look upon, consider, and evaluate such grievous and perverse labor, the travail of childbirth this painful and full of iniquity, You cannot endure.

Why would You look at or consider treacherous betrayal that is neither trustworthy or reliable? You are silent and still, inactive, neither listening, speaking, nor taking action in devouring the wicked more righteous than him. (1:13)

So You act and engage with humankind in similar fashion to fish of the sea, as creatures which move freely about without a ruler in control claiming dominion over them. (1:14)

In everything associated with him, a fishhook, a small, sharp implement used as a lure to snag, bait, and catch fish, is used to withdraw, and he catches and drags away in nets designed to trap and destroy, and he gathers them, harvesting and removing them in his dragnets. But concerning this, he actually and continually rejoices, and he is glad and exults, shrieking and shouting as if this was favorable and good. (1:15)

So therefore in this way, he kills every living thing, slaughtering those approaching and ensnared in his trap. And he blows smoke to illicit worship; fumigating a living space to drive out the occupants for them to move toward his dragnet. For indeed, with them he shares seductive words regarding an easy life without any work, offering a persuasive plot which appears satisfying but is fattening, so that his bread grows, therefore with him they share the same fate. And so his food is fashioned to be consumed leading to obesity. (1:16)

So how is it that he continues to bring out his sword and ensnaring net, banning and destroying the devoted, only to constantly and continually kill Gentiles, showing no mercy, sparing none while incapable of pity or compassion.” (1:17)

I don’t suppose that it would be possible for a rational individual who has carefully considered these words to think that this was all about Babylon circa 609 to 538 BCE instead of Sha’uwl’s ongoing influence commencing in 52 CE.

But if you are predisposed to see all of this as God’s fixation on the brief and flickering history of the nation of Babylon, a brief history may be in order. In that Chaldea includes Assyria, this story begins with the initial Assyrian conquest of Yisra’el which was led by Tiglath-Pileser III and Shalmaneser V. It began around 740 BCE, more than a century before this prophecy was written. Sargon II and his son, Sennacherib, completed the twenty-year campaign, ending with the captivity and demise of ten of Yisra’el’s twelve tribes. This story is told in 1 Chronicles 5 and 2 Kings 15. By 722 BCE, Samaria was the final Northern Kingdom city to fall (2 Kings 17 and 18). Assyrian cuneiform tablets reveal that 27,290 captives were hauled away from Samaria as slaves.

Shortly thereafter, with 185,000 Assyrians returning to finish off Yaruwshalaim and the Kingdom of Yahuwdah, King Chizqyah / Hezekiah found a copy of the Towrah. After reading it, he decided that destroying all vestiges of religion while observing Passover, Unleavened Bread, and First-Born Children would be the only way to spare the lives of his people. God agreed, killing the assailants instead.

But the means to salvation was soon forgotten, and throughout most of the 7th century BCE, Yahuwdah became a client state of the Assyrian empire. However, once the Babylonians defeated the Assyrians, Egypt became concerned about its survival and launched a preemptive strike, seizing territory up to the banks of the Euphrates River in Syria. Babylon counterattacked, bringing Yahuwdah into the fray, killing King Yowshyah / Josiah in the Battle of Megiddo in 609 BCE. This was within five years of the time Yahowah inspired Chabaquwq to pen this prophecy.

Upon losing the battle, Yahuwdah became a client of Babylon, forging a treaty of alliance in Yaruwshalaim which kept Yahuwdah sovereign. But just a decade later, Yahuwdym revolted against Babylon. So in 599 BCE, they picked the fight that ultimately led to their demise, just as Rabbi Akiba and the warlord Bar Kocpha would do in 133 CE, repeating this history with the Romans. As a result, Nebuchadnezzar II began the Siege of Yaruwshalaim in early 597 BCE, with resistance crumbling a few months later. While the city was not destroyed, it was pillaged and a few prominent Yahuwdym such as the prophet Yachezq’el / Ezekiel were taken to Babylon.

Then, against the warnings Yahowah made through the prophet Yirmayah / Jeremiah, King Tsidqyah / Zedekiah entered into an alliance with Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt and revolted once more against Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar returned, defeated the Egyptians and laid his sights on Yaruwshalaim, destroying the city wall and the Temple. Zedekiah was blinded and taken to Babylon along with many other Yahuwdym, and Yahuwdah became the Babylonian province of Yahuwd Medinata (the Aramaic word for “province”) in 587 BCE, briefly losing its sovereignty.

But after the fall of Babylon to Persia under the leadership of Cyrus the Great in 538 BCE, the occupiers were gone and the enslaved Yahuwdym returned to Yahuwdah to join those who had remained. And that was the end of Babylon – at least as a nation. Its menacing influence over Yahuwdah lasted less than fifty years. Whereas Sha’uwl’s influence is still being felt 1,938 years after he penned his first letter.

Moreover, when Yahowah had an issue with a Chaldean king, He called him out by name. But the only individual named here is Sha’uwl, and no one by that name ever ruled over any Mesopotamian nation. In addition, Yahowah devoted most of Yirmayah / Jeremiah, a man much closer to the scene, to presenting His overt condemnation of Babylon. And the prophets Yachezq’el / Ezekiel, Zephanyah / Zephaniah, and Dany’el / Daniel were all better positioned to tell its story.


While that was the end of the first chapter of Chabaquwq, as we discovered early in Questioning Paul, Yahowah was just getting warmed up. God’s haunting prediction regarding Sha’uwl continued by telling us that He isn’t about to alter any of the requirements to participate in His Covenant or change the approach that He has taken to facilitate our salvation – no matter what Paul has led billions to believe.

“Upon (‘al – on this) My requirements and responsibilities (mishmereth – My mission which functions and serves as a safeguard to watch over and preserve the observant; from shamar – to observe, closely examining and carefully considering, retaining My focus), I have decided I will literally and continually stand (‘amad – I will always be present, actually standing and thereby genuinely enabling others to consistently stand, sustaining and enduring (scribed in the qal stem which addresses actual events which are to be interpreted literally, imperfect conjugation which reveals that God’s presence here will continue throughout time, and in the cohortative which expresses volition and desire)). And (wa) I will choose to always stand and present Myself (yatsab – I will consistently stand firm, appearing and presenting Myself (the hithpael stem tells us that God alone is taking this stand, the imperfect conjugation reveals that His stand is consistent, continual, and enduring throughout time, and the cohortative form conveys the idea that where and how He presents Himself is His choosing)) upon (‘al – on the Almighty’s) that which protects and fortifies (matsowr – the defensive stronghold which safeguards, preventing a successful attack by the adversary).

So then (wa) I will be on the lookout (tsapah – I will of My own volition continually keep watch (scribed in the piel stem where the object of the verb suffers its effect, imperfect conjugation which reveals that God is constantly observant, and cohortative form, affirming that this is His decision)) in order to see (la ra’ah – so as to observe, consider, and perceive) what he will say about Me (mah dabar ba – posing a question concerning what he will communicate regarding Me and what message he will convey in association with Me). But then (wa) how can I be expected to change My attitude, My thinking, or My response (mah suwb – why should I reverse course and mislead) concerning (‘al – during and upon) My disapproving rebuke (towkechath – My complaint, correction, reproof, and strong disapproval, My rational arguments in response and subsequent punishment).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:1)

When God announced that He would be on the lookout for the likes of Sha’uwl, ready in advance to rebuke him for falsely testifying that He had changed His plans, it should have stopped Paul dead in his tracks. No one other than Sha’uwl in all of human history fits this prophecy. He not only tried to change God’s requirements for participation in His Covenant relationship, he sought to replace God’s conditions and provisions with his own. Worse, he claimed to speak for the God he was contradicting and undermining.

And that is why Yahowah has infused this prophecy with an affirmation that He isn’t going to replace His specific requirements for participating in the Covenant with something as nebulous as faith, especially in Grace. He isn’t going to shirk His own commitment to become the living embodiment of His approach to salvation through His participation in Passover, Un-Yeasted Bread, First-Born Children, or the Promise of the Sabbath.

Life was conceived in the real world by the one and only real God. His one and only Covenant was affirmed in this same corporeal realm, its conditions and benefits written down and communicated to us in the flesh, with Yahowah providing His Guidance in His Towrah. And so God became corporeal, the living manifestation of His Towrah, to fulfill His promises in the flesh. This is God’s accounting, and it is wholly different than the Gnostic agenda that permeates Paul’s letters.

“Then (wa) Yahowah ( ) answered, approaching me (‘anah – responded to me), and He said (wa ‘amar), ‘Write (katab – use the alphabet to inscribe) this revelation (chazown – this communication from God), and then (wa) expound upon and reiterate it using those letters (ba’ar – teaching others its significance by plainly and clearly declaring it using large and distinct alphabetic characters) upon (‘al) writing tablets (luwach – engraving it in stone) so that (ma’an – for the express purpose and intent that), by reciting this (ba qara’ – by reading this), he might run and go away (ruwts – he might flee).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:2)

The lines of demarcation are clear, and the consequence of being deceived are severe, so Yahowah left little doubt regarding this man, naming him as we shall soon see, in this prophecy. And let’s be clear: this entire prediction has been positioned against one solitary man, which is why “he” is deployed throughout using the third person masculine singular.

 While a handful of individuals have earned a rebuke of this magnitude, only one man meets all of the criterion that has been provided – and he is a perfect fit, right down to his propensities, peculiarities, and personal and proper name. Sha’uwl deceived billions during the “mow’ed – meeting times.” He was in Yaruwshalaim, studying to be a rabbi, when Yahowsha’ was fulfilling the “Mow’ed Miqra’ey – Invitations to be Called Out and Meet with God.” And as a rabbi, he did an about face to attack God from an entirely new direction. Sha’uwl even admitted to being conceited, to being demon-possessed, to being preoccupied with Gentiles and circumcision – things which will loom large in a moment.

Since it would be six centuries before Sha’uwl would question God’s Word, earning His disapproval, Yahowah encouraged those who first read these words to be patient. This warning was for another day...

“Still indeed (‘owd ky – so therefore the expectation and subsequent realization of), this revelation from God (chazown – this divine communication) is for the Mow’ed Appointed Meeting Times (la ha mow’ed – for the time of the Mow’ed). It provides a witness to and speaks, pouring out evidence (puwach – it reveals facts which condemn, trapping and ensnaring) in the end (la ha qets). The extended period of time required for this question to be resolved (‘im mahah – question him, because no matter how long it takes) shall not prove it false (lo’ kazab – this revelation shall not deceive, delude, nor fail). Expect him in this regard (chakah la – be certain concerning this) because indeed (ky), he will absolutely come (bow’ bow’ – he will certainly come upon the scene and make his appearance), neither being delayed nor lingering (lo’ ‘achar).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:3)

The first four “Mow’ed – Meeting Times” – Pesach, Matsah, Bikuwrym, and Shabuw’ah – were fulfilled by Yahowsha’ and the Set-Apart Spirit in year 4000 Yah, more commonly known as 33 CE. They enabled the Covenant’s promises and our salvation. Sha’uwl was in Yaruwshalaim at this time training to be a rabbi. Shortly thereafter, he began undermining the Mow’ed, beginning with this letter around 52 CE. So I find it interesting that now, in 2013, just twenty years shy of Yahowah’s return, we are finally studying this prophecy and identifying it with Sha’uwl. Better late than never.

And speaking of late, can you imagine God telling a prophet just a handful of years removed from the Babylonian conflict: “this revelation is for the Appointed Meeting Time. It provides a witness to and speaks in the end. The extended period of time required for this question to be resolved shall not prove it false?” Since that approach would be utterly absurd, this was not about what was going to occur in six years (from 615 to 609 BCE), but instead in 666 years (in 52 CE).

Lest I forget, Yahowah loves to provide hints which facilitate understanding among those who are observant. The “mahah – question to be resolved” was to “sha’uwl – question him.” If you think about it, you will come to realize that God has to be a bit coy. If he had written one-hundred years before the Classical Hellenistic Period or the Roman Republic had begun that  “a religion named ‘Christianity,’ as a transliteration of a Greek word for ‘drugged,’ would sweep like a virus throughout the Roman world as a result of some letters scribed by a “Jewish” man who changed his Hebrew name from Sha’uwl to the Roman, Paulos, beginning in year 52 CE” in a calendar that had not yet been invented, by providing such specificity and making it easily accessible, He would have negated the validity of the prediction, assuring that it would no longer occur. So while God provided copious and convincing clues as to the identity, character, scheme, and consequence of the perpetrator, only those who treasure Yahowah’s Word sufficiently to closely examine and carefully consider what He had to say become sufficiently informed to understand. This is the same approach He has taken with all of His end-times prophecies. They are all there for the taking, but most of the fruit is out of the reach of those bowing down to false gods.

As bad as this has been thus far for Paul and Christianity, it is about to get much worse. What follows strongly suggests that Yahowah is directly responding to what Sha’uwl would later write in the letters that now dominate the “Christian New Testament.” Above all else, this wannabe Apostle was egotistical and irrational...

“Pay attention (hineh – behold), he will be puffed up with false pride (‘aphal – his head will swell and he will be haughty and arrogant, he will be lifted up for being boldly presumptuous heedless of the truth). His soul (nepesh), it is not right nor straightforward (lo’ yashar – he does not consider anything appropriately and is circuitous in his reasoning, he wanders away by twisting and convoluting the teaching, and nothing is on the level) in him (ba).

So then (wa) through trust and reliance (ba ‘emuwnah – by being firmly established, confirmed and upheld by that which is dependable and steadfast, always truthful and reliable), those who are righteous and vindicated (tsadyq – those who are upright, innocent, and acquitted) shall live (chayah – they shall be restored to life, being nurtured and growing).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:4)

While narrowing in on Sha’uwl in the first stanza, in the second, Yahowah reminds us that vindication and life everlasting come to those who trust and rely on His firmly established and always dependable testimony. This is and always has been the antidote for religion, especially Paul’s Faith.

In Galatians 3:11, in the midst of his initial assault against the Towrah, Sha’uwl misquoted this verse, the very one which condemns him for mocking God. Removing it from its context and truncating it, he used his perverted variation to promote his faith: “But because with regard to the Towrah absolutely no one is vindicated or justified by God becomes evident because: ‘Those who are vindicated and righteous out of faith will live.’”

As is often the tendency of a daredevil when faced with the specter of death, Sha’uwl was so transfixed by this damning and deadly prophecy regarding him, he cited it once more, this time at the beginning of his most famous letter: “For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from belief to belief, as it has been written, ‘But the righteous shall live by belief.’” (Romans 1:17) Sha’uwl and Satan were taunting God. In this way, their collective arrogance is unmatched.

Moving on, there are six specific details in this next prophetic statement from Yahowah, all of which implicate Sha’uwl six-hundred and sixty-six years before he incriminated himself. But one clue in particular removes any doubt about whom God is warning us because Yahowah identifies His foe by his personal and proper name. If you are a Christian, you may want to pay attention to this...

“Moreover (‘aph), because (ky) the intoxicating wine and inebriating spirit (yayn – the consequence of the inebriation) of the man (geber – the individual human being) of deceptive infidelity and treacherous betrayal (bagad – of adulterous and offensive behavior, of handing people over to the influence and control of another without justification through trickery and deceit) is a high-minded moral failure (yahyr – is arrogant, meritless presumptive), he will not rest, find peace, nor live (wa lo’ nawah – then he will not succeed, achieve his aim, or reach his goal, not be beautifully adorned nor abide (qal imperfect)), whomever is open to the broad path (‘asher rachab – the wide, greedy, opportunistic, duplicitous, and improper way) associated with (ka – according to) Sha’uwl (Sha’uwl – the personal and proper name of the individual in question, it is also the name of the place of separation, the realm of the dead, the dominion of questioning: She’owl (she’owl and sha’uwl are written identically in the Hebrew text (consider Strong’s 7585 and 7586))). He (huw’) and (wa) his soul (nepesh) are like (ka) the plague of death (maweth – a pandemic disease that kills a large population of people).

And so (wa) those who are brought together by him, accepting him (‘acaph ‘el – those who associate with and join him, those who are removed and withdrawn by assembling with him, moving toward him and thereby gathered in and victimized by him) will never be satisfied (lo’ saba’ – will not find contentment nor fulfillment (based upon the Dead Sea Scrolls)). Most every Gentile (kol ha Gowym – the people from every race and place) will gather together unto him (qabats ‘el – will assemble before him), all of the people from different races and nations (kol ha gowym).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:5)

The oldest extant copy of this text from the caves above Qumran also infers that “he cannot be satisfied.” This reveals that Sha’uwl, like all chronically insecure megalomaniacs, is never satisfied. There is never enough adulation or prestige, never enough power or devotees. This thought is then carried into the text of the next verse.

And speaking of the Dead Sea Scrolls, most of Chabaquwq is extant, including the specific reference to Sha’uwl. His identification cannot, therefore, be dismissed to subsequent scribal exuberance.

In 1 Corinthians 11:20-21, Sha’uwl / Paulos tells those who have joined his assembly not to participate in Passover, which is the ultimate plague of death, and not to drink wine in association with it, which thereby nullifies the symbolism associated with the blood of the Passover Lamb. This serves as a treacherous betrayal of Yahowah’s instructions regarding the narrow path He provided to salvation. Attacking the heart of Yahowah’s plan in this way is the epitome of presumptuousness and immorality. Those who ascribe to such lies die. Those who promote it will find themselves in She’owl along with Sha’uwl. And yet, Pauline Doctrine is popular, providing those who are open to it, man’s broadest path to destruction.

Yahowsha’, Himself, picks up on this same theme, saying that the popular and broad path away from the Towrah leads to death and destruction. He offered this affirmation of Yahowah’s prophecy at the outset of His Instruction on the Mount, so it is hard to miss.

Sha’uwl promises the gift of life, but his religion, the most popular ever conceived, is the plague of death. Sha’uwl promises heavenly rewards to those who place their faith in his Gospel of Grace, and yet those intoxicated by this myth will never be satisfied. They will remain estranged from God because, unlike Yahowah’s assurances in the Towrah, Sha’uwl’s hallow promises will go unfulfilled. And that means that the people Sha’uwl claimed as his own, the Gentiles – individuals from many different races and places – will suffer the consequence of his New Testament.

Even if Sha’uwl had not been condemned by name, with the specter of the Gentiles being raised twice, it’s hard to miss the Pauline fixation on the “ethnos – races” throughout his letters. Pauline Doctrine has influenced more people in more places in this world than any other corruption of Yahowah’s testimony. And the means to this madness is consistent with Yahowah’s prophecy, in that Paul egotistically and irrationally claimed that God had authorized him to alter the requirements upon which Yahowah had already taken His stand regarding eternal life.

In spite of the fact that Sha’uwl means “Question Him,” nary a Christian considers the irresolvable conflicts between Paul’s letters and God’s Word. So while the following continues to identify the culprit, most Christians remain oblivious to Yahowah’s prophecy regarding them or him...

“They do not ask questions, any of them, about him (ha lo’ ‘eleh kol ‘al – nor are any of them against him). Terse references to the Word they lift up as taunts to ridicule (mashal nasa’ – simplistic and contrived equivalencies, often easy to remember aphorisms (clichés, dictates, and adages) become bywords with implied associations with that which is well known to mock and to exercise dominion through comparison and counterfeit), along with (wa) allusive sayings and mocking interpretations (malytsah – derisive words wrapped in enigmas arrogantly spoken).

There are hard and perplexing questions which need to be asked of him (chydah la – there are difficult enigmas to be solved, dark and hidden secrets, and double dealings, to be known regarding him). And (wa – moreover) they should say (‘amar – they should declare), ‘Woe (howy – alas, expressing a dire warning) to the one who claims to be great so as to increase his offspring, acting like a rabbi (rabah – to the one who thrives on numbers and who considers himself exceedingly great (the basis of rabbi, something Sha’uwl claimed to be)),’ neither of which apply to him (lo’ la – which is not his). For how long (‘ad mathay – until when) will they make pledges (‘abtyt – will they be in debt) based upon his significance (‘al kabed – pursuant to the weight and burden of his testimony and the grievous honor afforded him)?’” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:6)

The Qumran witness does not include the phrase “‘ad mathay – for how long” before the last sentence, turning a rhetorical question into a simple statement of fact. It then becomes: “They continue to make pledges based upon his significance.”

Sha’uwl’s modus operandi was to justify his “allusive sayings” through “terse references to the word.” His “mocking interpretations” were all “arrogantly spoken.” His arguments were “simplistic and contrived,” resulting in the most popular “counterfeit” ever foisted against humanity, one bolstered by his always-present “clichés.” He even claimed to bear “offspring,” experiencing birth pangs to deliver the descendents of his faith. In this regard, Sha’uwl was fixated on “misapplying” the connotations and “significance” of the Hebrew word for “offspring,” ­zera’, claiming that it gave rise to his faith. And as is the case with most deceivers, Paulos made “pledges” and demanded that believers hold them and him in the “highest esteem.” He even claimed that he was the co-savior, completing the sacrifice and message.

Sha’uwl dismissed and demeaned all those who would dare question him. He claimed that by challenging him, a person was actually demonstrating their animosity toward God, and that by implication, such a person was serving Satan. Although the opposite is true, most Christians fall for this ad hominem ploy, dismissing evidenced arguments against their religion and its author by claiming that the critic is hell-bent.

Believers routinely commit the logical fallacies of ad hominem, non sequitur, red herring, and straw man. Using the ad hominem fallacy, they readily discard a valid proposition by demeaning the one who pronounced it. For example, the overwhelming preponderance of Muslims were unable to refute anything in Prophet of Doom so they dismissed the best documented, most comprehensive, contextual, and chronological presentation of Muhammad’s words and deeds by profane attacks on my character. A thousand pages of evidence were thereby discarded with a flippant: “the author is a jerk.” With the non sequitur approach, the faithful make general statements which are widely accepted, but such statements, regardless of their veracity, do not support their premise. It is this disassociation that makes such an argument fallacious. An example of this would be: “Since God’s Word is eternal that proves that my Bible is inerrant.” With the red herring fallacy, rather than deal with the evidence brought against their religion, believers try to distract people’s attention from it. For example, rather than deal with Paul’s admission that he was insane, a person deploying this fallacy will say something like: “You can’t tell me that I don’t have a relationship with Jesus or that Christ isn’t my savior.” And finally, as the straw man fallacy implies, rather than attempt to refute the case which has actually been presented, the apologist will errantly convey their opponent’s argument and then attack their artificial construct. Someone deploying this fallacy would “disprove” the creation account by criticizing religious interpretations of it rather than address the actual Hebrew text Yahowah inspired.

The reason religious belief systems like Christianity are adverse to evidence and reason, and the questions these tools raise, is because those who seek the truth lose their faith. Neither facts nor logic matter in matters of religion. The believer’s pledge, even in a vacuum, is considered sufficient and binding.

Before we press on, here is a summary of where we have just been. Of Sha’uwl, Yahowah revealed...

“Upon My requirements and responsibilities, I have decided I will literally and continually stand. And I will choose to always stand and present Myself upon that which protects and fortifies.

So then I will be on the lookout in order to see what he will say about Me, observing how he will question Me. But then, how can I be expected to change My attitude, My thinking, or My response concerning My disapproving rebuke? (2:1)

Then Yahowah answered, approaching me, and He said, ‘Write this revelation and then expound upon and reiterate it using letters upon writing tablets so that by reciting this, he might run and go away. (2:2)

Still indeed, this revelation from God is for the of the Mow’ed Appointed Meeting Times. It provides a witness and speaks, pouring out evidence in the end which entraps. The extended period of time required for this question to be resolved shall not prove it false. Expect him in this regard, because indeed, he will absolutely come, neither being delayed nor lingering. (2:3)

Pay attention, he will be puffed up with false pride. His soul, it is not right nor straightforward in him. So then through trust and reliance, by being firmly established and upheld by that which is dependable and truthful, those who are righteous and vindicated live. (2:4)

Moreover, because the intoxicating wine and inebriating spirit of the man of deceptive infidelity and treacherous betrayal is a high-minded moral failure, and is arrogant with meritless presumptions, he will not rest, find peace, nor live, whoever is open to the broad path, the duplicitous and improper way, associated with Sha’uwl.

He and his soul are like the plague of death. And so those who are brought together by him, accepting him, will never be satisfied. Most every Gentile will gather together unto him, all of the people from different races and nations. (2:5)

They do not ask questions, any of them, about him. Terse references to the Word they lift up as taunts to ridicule, along with allusive sayings, simplistic and contrived equivalencies, and mocking interpretations, controlling through comparison, counterfeit and clichés, along with derisive words arrogantly conveyed.

There are hard and perplexing questions which need to be asked of him, and double dealings to be known regarding him. And so they should say, ‘Woe to the one who claims to be great so as to increase his offspring, acting like a rabbi, when neither apply to him. For how long will they make pledges based upon his significance, becoming burdened by his testimony?’” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:6)

This next statement is associated with the previous prediction. It is rendered from the Dead Sea Scrolls because the Qumran text differs considerably from the Masoretic:

“And (wa) he loads himself down (ta’an – he burdens himself) with (‘eth) thick (‘aphelah – dark and wicked) mud (tyt – dirt and dust to be swept away), so why not (ha lo’) quickly, for a short period of time (peta’ – instantly), rise up and take a stand (quwm)? And (wa) those of you who are bitten and are making payments to him (nashak – those showing interest, earning money, or becoming indebted to him), wake up from your stupor (yaqats – take action and alter your state of awareness) moving away in fear of him (zuwa’ – in dread of him, abhorring his terrifying and vexing nature). Because (wa) you will be (hayah) considered (la) plunder, victimized by them (mashchah la – as booty, spoiled by them).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:7)

God is saying that the only thing “kabed – weighty and significant” about Sha’uwl is that he has covered himself and others in muck. Methinks Yah was poking fun at Sha’uwl’s murky and messy prose. But clearly, God does not want us to remain in the mud with him, which is why He is asking us to get off of our knees and take a stand.

So we cannot say that we were not warned or advised. God even told us how to respond to this horrible individual. He wants us to stand up against all forms of corruption: political, religious, military, and economic. We are to confront lies and liars.

Paul routinely solicits money from believers. It is one of many reasons Christian clerics embrace him. Following his example, Christian institutions have made merchandise of men. So Yah is trying to rouse his victims before it is too late.

“Because (ky) you (‘atah) have plundered, stealing the possessions of (shalal – you have looted and victimized) an enormous number of (rab – a great many; and serving as the basis of rabbi) Gentiles (Gowym – people from different races and places), so (wa – therefore (from the DSS)) they shall loot and victimize (shalal – plunder and rob) all of (kol) the remaining (yether – the residue of the wealth of) nations (Gowym – Gentiles from different races and places) by means of (min) the blood (dam) of humankind (‘adam – mankind) and also (wa) through the violent and cruel destructive forces terrorizing (chamac – the immoral maiming and murdering which oppresses) the Land (‘erets – the Promised Land, singular, and thus Yisra’el) and (wa) Yah’s city (qiryah – to Encounter Yah, Yaruwshalaim – the source of teaching regarding reconciliation, also singular; from qarah – to encounter and meet Yah – an abbreviation of Yahowah), even all of those (wa kol) living in her (yashab ba – dwelling in her (Yaruwshalaim is a feminine noun)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:8)

Paul mercilessly attacks “Jews” throughout his letters, making them the enemy of his new religion, thereby, creating the anti-Semitism that ultimately took root in the Christian church. Paul, a Roman citizen, seeded the hatred of God’s Chosen People that boiled over seventy years later with the destruction of Yisra’el and Yaruwshalaim by the empire’s legions. It happened just as Yahowah predicted it would. Six-hundred and eighty-four years from the time this prophecy was committed to writing, Yaruwshalaim was sacked and the temple was destroyed. Sixty-three years later, Yisra’el was salted, and those not murdered by Rome where hauled off into slavery.

According to Yahowah, to be “cut off” from Him is to be estranged from the Covenant, thereby, excluded from this relationship, and forsaken, which is to be damned. Therefore, you do not want God to say of you what He said of Sha’uwl...

“Woe (howy) to one who is cut off, coveting (batsa’ – to one who is greedy and dies), while wickedly (ra’ – harmfully and immorally, adversarialy and malignantly) soliciting ill-gotten gain (betsa’ – theft through deception, and threat of violence, immoral solicitation and plunder) in relation to him setting (la sym – for him to place and appoint) his house and temple (la beyth – his household and establishment) in association with heights of heaven (ba ha marowm – in an advantaged, desirable, elevated, and high place or status in association with God’s home in heaven) so as to spare (la natsal – for the purpose of snatching away and delivering the plunder) the acquired property and possessions (qan – what has been confiscated through envy and religious zeal, the nest egg and snare) from the paws (kaph – hands and palms, the control) of fellow countrymen (ra’ – of those living in close proximity).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:9)

The Roman Catholic Church, which was founded on Pauline Doctrine, not only constructs gold-laden cathedrals and has storehouses filled with tens of billions of dollars of ill-gotten gain, they have positioned themselves as having sole possession of the keys to heaven. It is interesting, however, that recently they have had to return more than a billion dollars to the families of children their priests have molested, priests following the Pauline mandate not to marry.

Yahowah’s next line is a succinct, unambiguous, and damning summation of Galatians and the consequence of Pauline Christianity. God’s verdict regarding this man is irrefutable.

“You have deliberately decided upon and conspired at the advice of another to promote a shameful plot to confuse (ya’ats bosheth – after consultation, you have come to an informed conclusion through deliberation to conceive and perpetrate a lowly plan with the intended purpose to confound while displaying an adversarial attitude; note: bosheth – shameful, lowly, and confusing is from bashan – the serpent, associating this adversarial scheme with Satan, with whom Sha’uwl admittedly consulted) those who approach your house (la beyth – those who enter and are associated with your household and your construct), ruining and reducing by cutting off (qatsah – severely injuring and destroying by scraping away and ending the existence of) many (rab – a multitude of) people from different races and places (gowym – Gentiles; Greeks in Sha’uwl’s parlance who he claimed exclusively for himself) and in the process (wa) losing (chata’ – forfeiting by impugning guilt upon through missing the way and bearing the loss on) your soul (nepesh).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:10)

This answers a question I’m often asked: did Paul deliberately perpetrate this fraud or was he misled. It also affirms the now obvious connection between Sha’uwl and Satan, the very spirit he acknowledged had possessed and goaded him.

Recognizing that “beyth – family and home” serves as the basis for the “beryth – family-oriented covenant relationship,” with this second reference to “home, family, and household,” God is inferring that Sha’uwl’s “new covenant” is a shameful plot designed to confuse the unwary, leading them away from His Covenant And remember, Paul referred to himself as the mother of the faithful, and thus of his new covenant family. He even wrote about life in the household he had conceived.

To be cut off from Yahowah’s Covenant, the Covenant Sha’uwl condemned in Galatians, is to die with one’s soul ceasing to exist. So while the soul of the perpetrator of this crime will be lost forever in She’owl, the souls of his victims are reduced to nothing, their lives squandered as a result of Sha’uwl’s shameful scheme.

Since God has a lot more to say about Sha’uwl, while I’d like to move on to other tests and prophetic statements, let’s linger here a while longer and see if Yah has anything more to say that might be of value regarding His perceptions of this man and his message. And what we find in the next verse is another reference to “the Rock,” to the Disciple Yahowsha’ prepared, established, and named to publicly question and confront Sha’uwl.

“Indeed (ky – surely and truly), the Rock (‘eben) as part of the structure of a home (qyr – as the walls and ceiling which provide protection for a family), will issue a proclamation (za’aq – will issue a summons for an assembly meeting and will cry out (qal imperfect)), and (wa) that which connects (kaphyc – the plaster, the rafter, and the beam comprising the structure of a home) from (min) the timber (‘ets – the carpenter’s work, the tree, and gallows), he will answer and respond (‘anah – making a public declaration, providing a contextual reply (qal imperfect)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:11)

And while we know that Shim’own Kephas, the man Yahowsha’ personally named the Rock, “summoned” Sha’uwl to Yaruwshalaim and issued a “proclamation” against him, there are some other, less obvious, symbols in the verse. And foremost among them is that Shim’own acquired the moniker “Rock” when Yahowsha’, in Hebrew, told Shim’own: “Upon (‘al) this (ze’th) Rock (‘eben), I will build (banah) My Invitations to be Called Out and Meet (Miqra’ey).” Banah speaks of “building and reestablishing a home for the family,” and thus is quite similar to qyr and kaphyc which represent the physical sum and substance of the home – its “flesh” – the walls, ceiling, plaster, rafters, and beams. Throwing the rock at the man who in Gnostic fashion hated the flesh, by referencing the building materials associated with a home, is Yahowah’s way of rewarding and enlightening those who are observant.

Similarly, Yahowah associates Yahowsha’ with “‘ets – timber” to reveal how He, as the Passover Lamb and the Upright Pillar of the Tabernacle, provides eternal life for His family by way of the upright wooden pillars of Passover’s doorway. And that is why Yahowah uses “‘anah – to answer and respond” in this context. It is the operative word of the Miqra’ey, where Yahowah asks us “‘anah – to answer and respond” to His Invitations to be Called Out and Meet, because they provide the lone means to salvation.

“Woe to (howy – a strong warning to) the one who reestablishes (banah – the one who builds a family, erects and constructs a home (qal participle)) the place of exposed naked flesh and anguish (‘iyr – the city where terror is exposed; from “‘uwr – to incite and to stir up by blinding and rendering the chaff naked and laying the skin bare”) in blood (ba dam – through death; from “damam – to destroy by making deaf and dumb”), and he forms (wa kuwn – he proposes, prepares, establishes, and supports (the polel stem reveals that the subject suffers the effect of the verb’s action and the perfect conjugation affirms that the process is complete)) a populated institution promoting (qiryah – a city; from “qarah and qary’ah – to encounter, meet, and befall the foundation, beams, building, and furnishings of an institution where people congregate based upon preaching”) that which is unrighteous, invalid, and harmful (ba ‘awlah – in wickedness with evil intent, unjustly damaging others through perversity).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:12)

It’s interesting that immediately after using banah to make a point relative to the previous verse, we find it in this one. Great minds think alike. Not mine, mind you, but here we find Yahowsha’ and Yahowah communicating the same message by juxtaposing “rock” and “build.” And here banah is being deployed to warn readers against participating in his “banah – rebuilt and reconstructed” family of faith.

In most English bibles, you will find both ‘iyr and qiryah rendered “city” as if they were translating a repetition of the same word. But considering Yahowah’s prowess for effective communication, when we find different words being deployed to convey a similar idea, examining the etymology is always productive, as it is here.

In that ‘iyr is from ‘uwr, we discover that it addresses the “blindness” so many have to “the flesh being naked and exposed” or how they can be “incited” so that they “suffer anguish” and “perpetrate terror.” And in that qiryah is a derivative of qarah and qary’ah, in this word’s history, we “encounter the foundation and furnishings of a popular institution where many people congregate as a result of and to listen to preaching.” These are loaded terms with Pauline implications.

Blood is of the flesh. A miniscule amount is shed during circumcision, but it is poured out in great abundance by the Passover Lamb.

While no connection may be intended, from a pronunciation perspective, ‘Uwr, the name of the Babylonian city that Yahowah’s asked Abraham to “yatsa’ – come out of” in “Kasdym – Chaldea” so that he could “la halak – walk toward” God in the Promised Land, sounds similar to ‘iyr, in that it is actually based upon ‘uwr.

Sha’uwl’s testimony is “‘awlah – invalid and harmful, perverse and damaging, unjust and evil,” leading to “unrighteousness.” And while that was Paul’s intent, it is Yahowah’s to “howy – warn us” about him.

There is a much better choice...

“Why not look here and pay attention (ha lo’ hineh – why not look up and behold (“hineh – pay attention” is conveyed by the two found in )) by means of an association with (min ‘eth – by approaching and being part of) Yahowah ( ) of conscripts who provide assistance (tsaba’ – vast array of spiritual implements who are enlisted and arranged in a command and control regimen, serving as effective tools by following orders)?

But instead (wa), the people (‘am – family) expend their energy and grow weary (yaga’ – they toil and labor, growing tired for lack of rest (qal imperfect)) amongst an abundance of worthlessness (ba day ‘esh – with excessive trifling uselessness which is of no value), and the nations which gather together (la’owm – the peoples who congregate) in more than enough (ba day – with an excess of) delusions and fantasies which are poured forth which are unreal and have no benefit, resulting in nothingness (ryq – fictitious myths which are unreliable, of empty and vain deceptions which are poured out, experienced, and consumed) exhausting and destroying them (ya’eph – physically draining and ruining them and causing them to be slighted, diminishing to nothingness (qal imperfect)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:13)

Here, ‘am can mean “people, family, or nation,” and almost always speaks of Yisra’el. La’owm addresses “large populations which gather or congregate together,” who seldom have an affinity with the Promised Land. The former, representing Sha’uwl and Rabbinical Judaism, obeying their Talmud, toil for nothing. The latter, representing Paulos and Christianity, believing the myths, delusions and fantasies this man has extolled are destroyed by them.

As an interesting aside, ‘esh, the word translated “worthlessness,” also speaks of “lightning,” addressing the “worthless flashing light” Sha’uwl claimed to see in the sky which became part of his conversion experience. It also means “fire,” especially in the sense of that which “combusts and consumes.” In this role ‘esh serves as a metaphor for judgment.

And once again, there is a better, more satisfying and fulfilling choice...

“Indeed (ky – but this is reliable and true), She will fulfill, edify, and completely satisfy (male’ – She will impart an abundance of that which is healthy, valuable, empowering, and satisfying (the niphal stem is the grammatical voice of genuine relationships and the imperfect conjugation addresses ongoing effects)) the land (‘erets – realm, region, and world) to approach, to actually know, and to become genuinely familiar with (la yada’ ‘eth – to move toward, discover, and acknowledge, coming to understand and appreciate becoming friends in association with (qal infinitive)) Yahowah’s ( ) manifestation of power, glorious presence, and abundant value (kabowd – splendor, honor, respect, status, and reward), similar to (ka) the rain (maym – the waters) providing a covering (kacah – spread over and overflowing, filling and adorning (piel imperfect)) for the sea (‘al yam – upon a lake).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:14)

“She” refers to the maternal manifestation of God’s light, the ‘ishah, better known as the “Ruwach Qodesh – Set-Apart Spirit.” Our Spiritual Mother makes us appear perfect before God by adorning us in Her Garment of Light. She not only plays the leading role in fulfilling most of the Miqra’ey, She enriches and empowers the Covenant’s children, imparting an abundance of valuable information. She not only equips us to better know Yah, She makes it possible for us to enter His presence.

When we consider what has preceded this statement, it is hard to miss the fact that Paul’s spirit weakens and destroys while Yah’s Spirit enlightens and edifies. Paul’s spirit poisons while Yah’s Spirit heals. And that is because Yahowah’s promises are all fulfilled by His Spirit during the Miqra’ey, while Sha’uwl’s promises are all as vain and worthless as the spirit which possessed him.

‘Erets – land” and “kacah – to cover” are initially brought together in the story of the flood, where Yahowah washes away the initial and vicious scum of religion and politics so as to give humankind the opportunity to get to know Him, to approach Him, and to be with Him – to la yada’ ‘eth Yahowah. Moreover, the “kacah – covering” in the sense of the Garment of Light adorning the Covenant’s children, “maym – waters” representing the source of life and cleaning, and “kabowd – the manifestation of power and glorious presence” of Yahowah, are all references to the Set-Apart Spirit of God.

Also, by condemning the destructive mythology of Sha’uwl in verse 13 to the completely satisfying presence of our Spiritual Mother in verse 14, we find Yahowah doing what I have attempted to do throughout Questioning Paul: comparing the empty myths of man to the glorious and satisfying nature of God.

We considered this next statement way back in chapter three. It not only warns us about Sha’uwl’s profuse venom and his perverted sexuality, it addresses Paulos’ “little and lowly reputation” in addition to his animosity toward circumcision. So from Sha’uwl and Questioning Him to Paulos and his lowly and little moniker, from poisonous toxins to an unacceptable approach to the sign of the Covenant, this is an indicting summation of this man’s legacy.

“Woe to (howy – a strong warning to) the one who causes and allows his companions and countryman to drink (shaqah ra’), thereby, associating them with (caphach) this antagonizing venom upon you (chemah – this poisonous and serpentine toxin which injures and antagonizes you, making you displeasing and antagonistic), but also (wa ‘aph – and yet surely) intoxicating (shakar) for the purpose of (ma’an) looking at (nabat ‘al) their genitals (ma’aowr – male genitalia).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:15)

“You will get your fill of (saba’ – you will be met with an abundance of (the qal perfect indicates that his is completely reliable while the second person masculine singular reveals that this is directed a lone male individual)) shame and infamy, a little and lowly status (qalown – dishonor, disgrace, scorn, and a very small and humbling reputation) instead of (min) honor and glory (kabowd – the manifestation of the power and presence of God which rewards and empowers).

Choosing to intoxicate (shathah – deciding to actually inebriate (qal imperative)), in addition (gam – besides), you (‘atah) also (wa) elect to show them unacceptable, going round about over their choice not to become circumcised (‘arel muwcab – choosing to deploy circular reasoning in altering their perspective regarding their decision to remain uncircumcised for religious reasons, you have chosen to actually make them unacceptable (niphal imperative and qal imperative)).

Upon you is (‘al – before you is) the binding cup (kowc) of Yahowah’s ( ) right hand (yamyn – serving as a metaphor for judgment), therefore, (wa) public humiliation and a lowly status (qyqalown – shame and ignominy, dishonor and disgrace) will be your reward (‘al kabowd – the manifestation of your reputation and attribution of your status (second person masculine singular suffix – thus addressing a solitary man)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:16)

Pauline Doctrine is an intoxicating poison, venom from the most vile of serpents. But more indicting still, Sha’uwl, who never knew the love of a woman, provocatively expressed his love for a young man, Timothy. And even though Paul detested circumcision, and spoke hatefully about the sign and requirement of the Covenant, he personally circumcised his love interest. Furthermore, Sha’uwl so craved recognition and status, he heaped it upon himself. But here God is saying that Sha’uwl’s poisonous and inebriating attack against the decision to be circumcised will come full circle and engulf him in shame. The man who claimed to be God’s exclusive apostle to the Gentiles has become the man of infamy: “Paulos – Little and Lowly.”

I dare say, in the whole of Yahowah’s prophetic testimony, no prediction is as dire as this one. But that is because no one ever did what Paul has done. It was not required of anyone else.

If nothing else, Yahowah has provided His evaluation of Paul and His assessment of his followers. In this light, the only way to view him and his religion favorably would be to ignore God and estrange ourselves from Him. The debate is over. The choice is black and white. If we are to be true to this prophetic warning, we should question everything Paul says and writes. And we should hold him accountable. It may be too little, but it is never too late.

Continuing to intertwine encouragement into the midst of this overwhelming condemnation of Sha’uwl and his demonic associate, Yahowah reaffirms His promise...

“Indeed from (ky – this is reassuring instead because from) this grievous injustice against and blatant wrongdoing in opposition to (chamac – this unrighteous and unrestrained campaign of error and towrahlessness in destructive conflict with) that which purifies, empowers, and enriches (labanown – typically transliterated Lebanon, but from “laban – purifying, cleansing, and whitening” and “‘own – being substantially empowered, growing vigorously, while becoming enormously enriched”), He will constantly keep you covered and continually protected (kacah – He will always provide a covering by which He adorns you, clothing and forgiving you (the piel imperfect affirms that we, as those being clothed, receive continuous protection) and as for (wa) the destructive demonic (shed – the Devil’s devastating and ruinous) beasts (bahemah), He will shatter them (chathath – He will astound them, causing them to wane)...” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:17)

I was personally stunned that Sha’uwl actually and unequivocally admitted to being demon-possessed, because back when I was a Christian, we constantly speculated on what the “thorn in my side” represented, oblivious to the fact that he answered the question not once, but twice. But even when I first came to be troubled by the conflicts between Paul and God, I never thought that Yahowah was this frank with us. And yet six-hundred and sixty-six years before the most blatantly errant and hideously destructive man in human history perpetrated his great crime against humanity, Yahowah referred to him and his wayward spirit as “demonic beasts.”

While Paul and Satan have had their run, and their way with humankind, their dominion is about to come to a crashing end. Babylon and the Beast will soon be shattered. Their power will wane. And when that happens, when the unrighteous campaign against the Towrah is snuffed out, those who remain under God’s constant protection will stand tall, not unlike the once towering cedars of Lebanon.

Those standing beside Yahowah upon His return will have four things in common: 1) We will have come to know and love Yahowah. 2) We will have accepted the conditions of the Covenant. 3) We will have answered Yahowah’s Invitations to be Called Out and Meet. 4) And we will have arrived at this place and time because we devoted the time to observe His Torah and Prophets.

The rewards are priceless, but they do not come without a significant investment of time. This verse is a classic example. Chamac could have been superficially defined as “violence against” instead of “this grievous injustice against and blatant wrongdoing in opposition to.” The former, however, requires us to ignore the fact that nouns are defined by their verbal forms. And here the verb chamac communicates: “injustice and wrongdoing in opposition to oppress, and unrighteousness based upon an unethical and false witness which is laid bare against the standard.”

Labanown could have been transliterated “Lebanon” instead of being defined by its component parts. And as we now know, laban is defined as: “purifying, cleansing, and whitening.” And ‘own speaks of “being substantially empowered, growing vigorously, all while becoming substantially enriched.” Therefore, the translation of labanown as “that which purifies, empowers, and enriches” is more relevant and edifying than a simple transliteration.

Kacah could have been flippantly rendered “He conceals and hides you.” But, instead, “He will constantly keep you covered and continually protected” enables us to incorporate the implications of the piel stem and imperfect conjugation. And it is considerably more consistent with how kacah is deployed throughout the Towrah and Prophets.

Shed was written as a construct noun, which means that it is forever bound to “bahemah – the beasts” in this sentence. That means that the “beasts” possess the attributes associated with shed. These could have been inadequately translated “the havoc making and destructive nature of” instead of “the destructive demonic.” But by choosing the former, we’d have to ignore the fact that prior to the Masoretic diacritical marks the Hebrew word written Shin Dalet was equally comfortable being rendered “breast,” “demon and devil,” or “destructive havoc.” While “bosom” can be disregarded in this context, there is no valid justification for selecting “demonic” over “destructive.” Therefore, when trying to communicate the whole truth, the only responsible and sensible approach is to include both definitions, especially since they work in harmony to define the nature of the “beasts.”

Speaking of the bahemah, the plural form could have been conveyed as “wild animals” rather than “beasts.” However, in light of Yahowsha’s integration of the Devil, the Beast, the False Prophet, and the Whore of Babylon in the Revelation to Yahowchanan, any other rendering would have been irresponsible.

Also, chathath could have been translated “He will frighten and dismay them” instead of “He will shatter them.” However, since the primary definition of the word provides a perfect foreshadowing of what we are told will be the ultimate fate of Satan, His Beast and False Prophet, in addition to his religious, political, economic and militaristic system known as the Whore of Babylon, why not render the word accordingly?

So in every case I took the time to consider every aspect of each word, consistently examining the roots. And as a result, the renderings I selected are every bit as justifiable, if not substantially preferable, to those typically found in popular bible translations. The only difference is that I was careful and strove to methodically examine every word under an etymological microscope, while striving to provide a rendering that was not only as correct and complete as is possible, but also the most fitting within this context of this discussion.

Here now is the conclusion of Chabaquwq 2:17...

“...as a result of (min) the blood (dam – death) of humankind (‘adam), and also (wa) this grievous injustice against and blatant wrongdoing in opposition to (chamac – this unrighteous and unrestrained campaign of error and towrahlessness in destructive conflict with) the land (‘erets – realm, region, or world), the city (qiryah – to encounter Yah’s foundation, the upright pillar, beams, and furnishings associated with the Word), and all (wa kol) of her inhabitants (ba yashab – who have settled there to meet, to marry, to be restored, to be established, and to live (qal participle)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:17)

Keep in mind that during the Magog War, Satan’s little helpers, motivated by their religion, will annihilate more than half of the world’s population in their failed assault on Israel. Then a couple of years later, politically, militaristically, and economically motivated men and women will return to finish what the Muslims will have failed to achieve. They will raise havoc in the Land, ravaging Jerusalem, killing two-thirds of the remaining Yisra’elite population. So before they are shattered, there will lots of blood shed at the behest of the Adversary.

In this case, either of our two renderings of qiryah apply because the “‘erets – land” is Yisra’el and the “qiryah – city” is Yah’s City, Yaruwshalaim. It is the place where we “encounter Yah” and also the place where we find “the foundation, beams, and furnishings” associated with His Covenant and Word.

“How does he succeed with a caricature (mah ya’al pecel – why does he benefit by valuing an idolatrous image he has shaped (hiphil perfect))? Indeed (ky), he will construct him (pacal – he will shape it), fashioning him (yatsar – he will devise, form, and ordain him (qal perfect)) by offering a veiled form of a pagan god (macekah – by forming an alliance which conceals and an association which hides, covering up the true identity (qal perfect)) and by teaching lies (wa yarah sheqer – and through deceptive, misleading, mistaken, and useless instruction, guidance and direction (with the hiphil stem the subject, Sha’uwl, is putting the lies into action while the participle is a verbal adjective, making Paul a deceiver)), so that (ky) he adds credence and partiality to (batach – he makes credible and believable, even preferable, so that believers stumble and the unsuspecting fall as a result of their penchant and fondness for and partiality to) the one who created the construct of him (yatsar yetser – the one who devised, planned, prepared, fashioned, and formed such thoughts and reasoning regarding him (qal participle)), for him (‘al) to make (‘asah – to act and cause) the shepherds (‘alylym) bound and mute (‘ilem – tied up and negated, appearing dumb).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:18)

There is another discrepancy here between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic text worth noting. Rather than saying “fashioning him by offering a veiled form of a pagan god and “by teaching lies,” the Qumran scrolls read: “by making a deceptive appearance,” which is an “invalid manifestation.”

There are a number of additional clues in this statement, all of which point to Sha’uwl. First, God is “mah – questioning him,” a reference to Sha’uwl name and to what we all should be doing.

Second, Sha’uwl created a “pecel – caricature” of Yahowsha’, one which bore very little in common with the Ma’aseyah. Third, Paul’s “Iesou” was not only a “macekah – veiled version of the pagan god” Dionysus, his “Christou” was “yatsar – devised” to “macekah – conceal the true identity” of Yahowsha’ by “covering up” His nature and purpose.

Fourth, each time the Pauline “caricature,” “offering,” and “construct” is presented, we find the third person masculine singular suffix, making this the image of a man and not a thing. Moreover, there is only one of “him,” something wholly incongruous with pagan idolatry.

Fifth, since “yarah – teaching, instruction, direction and guidance” is the verb upon which title Towrah is based, we find Sha’uwl promoting a Torah which is “sheqer – deceptive, misleading, mistaken, and useless.” And sixth, the full implications of batach are especially Pauline. It reveals that Paul’s deceptive guidance regarding the caricature he devised “batach – would cause the unsuspecting and naïve to stumble and fall based upon what they were led to believe.”

And this leads us to the final phrase which is no less revealing. The combination of yatsar yetser following batach was translated “the one who created the construct of him” because the verb was scribed in the masculine singular (the one) and the noun was written to include the third person masculine singular suffix (him). This is relevant because God’s statement is saying that Sha’uwl’s false characterization of Yahowsha’ was created to make Sha’uwl appear more credible, not Yahowsha’. The phony construct was devised because Sha’uwl wanted readers to believe him. Sha’uwl wanted all those he encountered to show partiality toward the one who conceived the false god, Iesou Christou, causing the unsuspecting to stumble over Him while praising him.

Lastly, ‘alylym can be rendered two very different ways, as “idols” or “shepherds.” And while Sha’uwl effectively mooted Yahowsha’s voice, with his letters overriding Him, ‘alylym was written in the plural form, disassociating it from Sha’uwl or his caricature. Further, since this is presented in Yahowah’s voice, He would never refer to Yahowsha’ as an “idol” even if the plural form had not been used. But, we know that Yahowah routinely deployed the shepherd metaphor to convey Yahowsha’s nature and purpose, one Yahowsha’ developed even further. Also, Yahowsha’ specifically asked Shim’own Kephas, the Rock, to shepherd His sheep, explaining the use of the plural form. And in that discussion, Yahowsha’ warned Shim’own that Sha’uwl would attempt to “bind and tie” him, so as to constrain his ability to care for God’s sheep. And in doing so, we are afforded yet another clue linking this prophecy with the plague of death.

Also interesting in this regard, the two most common Hebrew words featuring the yl combination (the letters following “‘el / ‘al – Almighty God” in ‘alylym (noting also that the “ym” suffix denotes plural)) are “yalad – children” and “yalak – walking.” And that makes ‘alylym: “children who walk with God.”

 “Woe to the one who says (howy ‘amar) to the wooden pillar (la ha ‘ets – approaching the upright timber, tree, carpenter, and gallows), return from the dead (quwts – awaken from lifelessness and become alive again after death; from the verbal form which addresses the idea of abruptly starting something after having been asleep), rising up to blind by providing false testimony and precluding further observation (‘uwr – awake in the flesh, ready to blind the observant so that they are unjustly deprived of an accurate recollection of what was witnessed), to the Rock (la ‘eben), he who consistently teaches (huw’ yarah – he who instructs and constantly provides guidance to the Rock (hiphil imperfect)), be silent (duwmam – be silenced and be struck dumb and mute).

Behold (hineh – pay attention), he (huw’) has actually been seized, captured, controlled, and then covered (taphas – has been grasped hold of and wielded skillfully (qal passive – having this actually done to him)), brilliantly shimmering (zahab – splendorous and golden), extremely valuable and desirable (keceph – ornamented and gilded in silver so as to be yearned for and desired), but (wa) without (‘ayn – devoid of) any (kol) spirit (ruwach) in his midst (ba qereb – in his corpse and physical being animating his life).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:19)

Sha’uwl has repeatedly stated that “the wooden pillar,” more commonly known as the “Christian Cross,” was the means to be “quwts – awakened from the dead,” or to be “resurrected” in religious parlance. He even equated “sleep” with death and spoke of those who were sleeping rising up abruptly. So the initial statement is an allusion to the Pauline fixation on the wooden cross, from which he promotes resurrection from the dead.

With quwts scribed in the hiphil stem, imperative mood, and paragogic form, Yahowah is revealing that Sha’uwl will “show his desire to control the Upright Pillar, commanding Him into action, demanding that He abruptly rise from the dead to perform based upon Sha’uwl’s inclinations.”

And as bad as that appears, it gets far worse with the addition of ‘uwr, which suggests that Sha’uwl contrived his variation of bodily resurrection following death on the cross to “provide false testimony which would blind, precluding further observation.” This trend continues south with the desire to “duwmam – silence” the “‘eben huw’ yarah – the Rock, he who consistently teaches and instructs.” While this is yet another reference to Sha’uwl’s desire to moot Shim’own Kephas’, the Disciple (one who learns and thus can teach), the ultimate “yarah – source of teaching and instruction” is the “Rock of our Salvation” – Yahowah manifest as Yahowsha’. And as a result of Sha’uwl’s mischaracterization of Yahowsha’, Christians have been blinded, no longer observing Yahowsha’s message or Yahowah’s Towrah, effectively silencing God.

The contrivance Sha’uwl seized upon and controlled was made to appear valuable, even glorious and desirable, but with this corpse, there was no spirit. And such is the case with the Passover Lamb. The Spirit departed prior to the death of the physical body, and the remaining corpse in accordance with the Towrah’s instructions was destroyed that same night. God was not killed and His body was not resurrected. But, pretending this to be so became the basis of Pauline Christianity.

“And so (wa) Yahowah ( ), in His set-apart (qodesh), brilliant, prevailing, and enduring Temple (heykal – capable, empowering, and enlightening sanctuary; from yakol – enabling and prevailing, powerful and everlasting): Be silent and stop speaking (hacah – hush, hold your tongue, and be quiet and cease all this troubling talk) before His presence and appearance (min paneh – from His face and physical manifestation) all on the earth (kol ha ‘erets).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:20)

We have done more talking than listening, more contriving than observing. So Yahowah is recommending that the likes of Paul “shut up.” He has said far too much already. And yet sadly, every time a Christian opens their “New Testament” to one of Paulos’ epistles, and recites it aloud, the hideous voice of the Adversary continues to resonate on earth.

It should be noted that heykal affirms that Yahowah is fully capable of delivering on His promises, and thus not impotent as Sha’uwl has cast him. Moreover, the word following “heykal – brilliant, prevailing, enduring, capable, empowering, and enlightening” in most every Hebrew lexicon and dictionary is “Heylel – the ruler of Babylon, also known as Satan.” The Adversary’s name means “Bears Light,” confirming that as a spiritual being he would appear to glow – just as Paul saw him. And this is how Satan came to be rendered into Latin as “Lucifer – the Light Bearer.”

What follows is a wonderful affirmation of what Yahowah has done for us, of His reliability, and of His willingness to personally and mercifully engage so that we might live. But to understand any of this, we have to stop talking and start listening...

“A request for intervention (taphilah – a plea and petition for justice) concerning (la – for) Chabaquwq (Chabaquwq – Embrace This), the prophet (naby’ – the one who spoke about the future on behalf of God), on behalf of the Almighty’s (‘al) exceedingly great owth (sigynowth – awesome promise; a compound of “sagy – exceedingly great” and “owth – promise”).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 3:2)

“Yahowah ( ), I have actually listened to the entirety of (shama’ – I have literally and completely (from the qal stem and perfect conjugation) heard) Your announced message (shema’ – the testimony You have reported to be recited and thus heard). I respect and revere (yare’ – I am in awe), Yahowah ( ), Your work (po’al – the things You have done) in the midst of the years (ba qereb shanahym – throughout the middle years). You make known that (yada’ – You reveal and acknowledge that (hiphil imperfect)) He will live and restore life (chayah – offering and restoring His life) throughout the middle years (ba qereb shanahym – in the midst of the years) in turmoil (ba rogez – with great hardship, agitated, and intensely anguished), making Your mercy known (racham zakar – making certain that Your genuine love and compassion would continuously be remembered because of Your ongoing promise (qal imperfect)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 3:2)

According to Yahowah, He worked six days and then He rested on the seventh. These six plus one days represent the seven thousand year history of mankind that have and will transpire from the moment we were expelled from the Garden of Eden to the time we are invited back inside. In year 2000 Yah (1968 BCE), God initiated the Covenant with Abraham. And in year 4000 Yah (33 CE), God did His greatest work, fulfilling and enabling the first four Miqra’ey: Pesach, Matsah, Bikuwrym, and Shabuw’ah. Noting that His work began in 0 Yah and concludes in 6000 Yah, 2000 Yah and 4000 Yah are the middle years.

“From (min) the right hand (tyaman – denominative from “yaman – the right hand”) of God (‘elowah), He will actually come (bow’ – He will literally and consistently arrive (qal imperfect)), and (wa) the Set-Apart One (qodesh – the purifying one) from (min) the Mount (har) of Glorification / Pa’ran (Pa’ran – where one is glorified (from pa’ar); denoting the route of the Exodus and the mountain upon which the Towrah was revealed). Pause a moment to weigh the uplifting implications (celah). He adorns (kacah – He decorates and covers) the spiritual realm (shamaym – the heavens) in His splendor and glory (howd – His majestic countenance and vigorous life). So (wa) with His love and renown (tahilah – with His shining brilliance and commendable nature) She fills up and completely satisfies (male’ – She abundantly furnishes and completes (qal perfect)) the earth (‘erets – the material realm or the land).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 3:3)

Yahowsha’ is “the right hand of God.” He is the “Set-Apart One.” And He is the living embodiment of the path away from being abused by mankind’s religious and political institutions and to God, so that we can live with Him in the Promised Land. This is the Way of the Miqra’ey. It is the Guidance the Towrah provides.

As such, Pa’ran represents the mountainous desert along both sides of the Gulf of Aqaba, and thus between the Sinai and Arabian Peninsulas. The region encompasses most all of the noted encampments during the Exodus on the western side and also Mount Horeb (where the Towrah was revealed) along the eastern shore.

It is in this way that Yahowah’s Set-Apart Spirit supplies God’s love, reveals His glory, adorns us in a Garment of Light, fills our needs, and completely satisfies. She also serves to enlighten us...

“And also (wa) knowledge and enlightenment (nagah – brilliant shining and radiant) consistent with (ka) the Light (‘owr), She exists as (hayah – She was, is, and always will be (qal imperfect)) brilliant shining rays of illumination (qeren – the power, authority and strength symbolized by the ram’s horn, a signaling showphar, or ram’s horn trumpet, conveying brilliant illumination from a supernatural source on the summit of the mount) coming forth from His hand (min yad) on His behalf (la). And here, His name (wa shem) is His fortified and mighty (‘oz – His dependable and empowering, unchanging and necessary) covering of love (chebyown – a veil of power which cherishes and conceals; from a compound of “chabab – in fervent love” and “‘own – being substantially empowered, growing vigorously, while becoming substantially enriched”).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 3:4)

It’s a lot to give up just to flirt with Paul.

I have enjoyed this voyage through Yahowah’s prophetic witness. It is always a pleasure and a good idea to check in with God when seeking answers to important questions. His perspective on Paulos matters – and His verdict is in fact conclusive, irrefutable, and damning.


In the Towrah, and specifically in Dabarym 13, Yahowah tells us that if a self-proclaimed prophet stands up, establishing himself, as Paulos has done, he is a false prophet. If he claims to have performed miracles as proof of his calling, as Paulos has done, he is a false prophet. If he encourages his audience to accept other gods by other names, like the Roman Gratia or Greek Charis, even the Babylonian Lord, all of whom Paulos sponsored, he is a false prophet. If he encourages religious worship, which is the legacy of Paulos’s letters, he is a false prophet. If his writings don’t affirm our love of Yahowah, the God whose words and plan Paulos has called incompetent, impotent, and enslaving, he is a false prophet. If he directs us to disregard the terms and conditions of the Covenant or the Path Yahowah has provided for our salvation, he is a false prophet. And of such self-proclaimed prophets, God says that they are in opposition to Him, both ruinous and deadly, so we should completely remove their disagreeable, displeasing, and evil corruptions from our midst.

“With regard to (‘eth) every (kol) word (dabar – statement) which beneficially (‘asher) I am (‘any) instructing (tsawah – providing guidance and direction to) you with accordingly (‘eth ‘eth), observe it (shamar – closely examine and carefully consider it, focusing your attention on it) for the purpose of (la) engaging in and acting upon it (‘asah – responding by profiting from and celebrating it), not adding to it (lo’ yacaph ‘al – never increasing it (through a New Testament, for example)) and not subtracting from it (wa lo’ gara’ min – reducing nor diminishing the intent (by suggesting that it can be distilled into a single promise, a single act, a single statement, or a single profession of faith, for example)).

Indeed, if (ky) a prophet (naby’ – a person who professes to proclaim the message of a deity and / or foretell the future) stands up trying to establish himself (quwm – rises up and exalts himself) in your midst (ba qereb) or an interpreter of revelations (chalowm chalam), and provides (wa natan) a sign (‘owth – an omen via a consent decree (thereby claiming to be authorized to speak for God as Sha’uwl did)) or (‘o) miracle (mowpheth – something which appears marvelous or wonderful, inspiring awe (as Sha’uwl claimed as well)) to you (‘el), and the omen or miracle worker (ha ‘owth ‘o ha mowpheth) appears before you (wa bow’) who has spoken thusly (‘asher dabar – who has communicated and promised this) to you (‘el) to say (la ‘amar), ‘Let us go after (halak ‘achar – later let us again walk toward and follow) other (‘acher – different or additional) gods (‘elohym) which (‘asher) you have not known (lo’ yada’ – you do not recognize and are not familiar with (as is the case with Grace, Lord, Iesous, and Christos)) and let us serve and worship them (wa ‘abad – ministering on their behalf), do not listen to (lo’ shama’ ‘el) the words (dabar – statements) of that prophet (ha huw’ naby’) or (‘o) interpreter of revelations (ha huw’ chalowm chalam), because (ky) the test (nacah – the means to learn if something is true) of Yahowah ( ), your God (‘elohym), accordingly (‘eth) for you (la) to know (yada’ – to recognize, acknowledge, and understand) is whether this affirms your (ha yesh) love (‘ahab – relationship with and affection) for Yahowah ( ), your God (‘elohym), with all (ba kol) your heart (leb) and with all (wa ba kol) your soul (nepesh).

After (‘achar – following) Yahowah ( ), your God (‘elohym), you should walk (halak – you should be guided and directed (which means following His Towrah guidance)). And with Him (wa ‘eth), you should always and genuinely be respectful (yare’ – you should actually show admiration, reverence, continually and esteem (qal stem denotes a literal interpretation and genuine response while the imperfect conjugation conveys that this respect should be ongoing throughout time)). And (wa – in addition) in concert with (‘eth – in association with and concerning) His terms and conditions (mitswah – His directions and prescriptions, the codicils of His binding covenant contract and His instructions regarding the relationship), you should continually and actually be observant (shamar – you should consistently focus upon them, closely examining and carefully considering them (qal imperfect)).

Concerning His voice (wa ba qowl – then regarding His proclamations and pronouncements), you should always and literally listen (shama’ – you should make a habit of continually hearing (qal imperfect)) so that (wa), with Him (‘eth), you can consistently serve (‘abad – always engage as a productive associate (qal imperfect)). And (wa) to Him (ba – with Him), you should always choose to cling (dabaq – you should literally and genuinely stay close, actually choosing to join together and be united, tightly holding on (scribed in the literal qal stem, the continuous imperfect conjugation and the paragogic nun ending which serves as an expression of freewill)).

So therefore (wa), that prophet (ha huw’ naby’) or (‘o) interpreter of revelations (ha huw’ chalowm chalam) is deadly (muwth – he is the absence of life, is destructive and damning (with the hophal stem, the subject of the verb, in this case, the false prophet, causes the object of the verb, which is those listening to him, to participate in the action which is to die)). For indeed (ky – because this is reliable and true) he has spoken (dabar – the entirety of what he has communicated is totally (scribed in piel stem whereby the object suffers the effect of the action and the perfect conjugation, collectively communicating that everything the false prophet said should be considered revolting because it totally separates us from God because it is)) rebellious renunciations (carah – of revolt and disassociation, of turning aside and departure, of defection and withdrawal, of being removed) concerning and against (‘al) Yahowah ( ), your God (‘elohym), the One who led you out (ha yatsa’ ‘eth – the One who descended to serve you by extending Himself to lead you out) from (min) the realm (‘erets) of the crucibles of Egypt (mitsraym – human oppression and divine judgment) and the One who redeemed you (wa ha padah – the One who ransomed you) from the house (min beyth) of bondage and slavery (‘ebed – of servitude and worship).

His desire is to seduce and scatter you (la nadach – his purpose is to entice and compel you to be drawn away and thrust aside) from (min) the way (ha derek – the path) which beneficially (‘asher – which fortuitously as a result of the relationship), Yahowah ( ), your God (‘elohym), described, providing you with a complete set of directions (tsawah – He taught, told, and instructed you, totally appointing these prescriptions for you (scribed in the piel stem, these directions guide those who follow them, teaching and instructing them, and in the perfect conjugation, it means that these existing directions are totally complete)) for you to walk in (la halak ba).

And so (wa) you can choose to completely remove (ba’ar – as an expression of freewill, you can totally purge, completely ridding so that it no longer exists (scribed in the piel stem, perfect conjugation, and consecutive mood telling us that all things displeasing to Yahowah are completely removed from us when we choose to follow His Towrah directions, including)) that which is disagreeable, displeasing, and evil (ha ra’ – that which is wicked, no good, counterproductive, immoral, malignant, mischievous, troubling, undesirable, unpleasant, distressing, injurious, and harmful) from your midst (min qereb – from your inner nature and thus from your soul).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 13:1-6)

The intent of Galatians wasn’t just to subtract God’s advice on His Covenant and its sign, circumcision, it was also promoted to completely negate the purpose of the Invitations to be Called Out and Meet with God. Paul strove to negate the Towrah’s entire purpose—diminishing its status to the point that it would be considered a liability rather than an asset.

Paul’s condescending and antagonistic dismissal of Yahowah’s Towrah Teaching and its Covenant wouldn’t engender love or respect for the God who authored and offered them. Therefore, the only way to cling to Paul would be to let go of God.

God says that no one has been or will be authorized to add to or subtract from His Towrah. Therefore, if we witness the Towrah’s role in our lives being diminished, or if we find a writer adding something new, like a new covenant, be careful because such a person isn’t speaking for God. This realization alone is game over for Christianity.

Yahowah has reinforced a simple, yet profound, truth: once we take the Towrah seriously, closely examining and carefully considering its guidance, we can no longer take Paul seriously. Paul’s letters are the antithesis of Yahowah’s Towrah, and for that reason alone it would be wholly ignorant and irrational to believe Paul.

Yahowah revealed that the best way to know who isn’t speaking for Him is to closely examine and carefully consider every word the self-proclaimed prophet and God have written. If they differ, the man is a liar. Therefore, knowing and understanding God’s Towrah comes first. Then, compare what Yahowah said to what the prophet is claiming. If they differ, expose and condemn the false prophet and encourage others to disassociate themselves from him.

Simultaneously, it is always a good idea to act upon God’s guidance. So if you haven’t already done so, consider acting upon the terms and conditions of the Covenant Relationship.

Since opinions are to conclusions as faith is to trust, and since we have at our fingertips another way to determine with absolute certainty whether or not Paul was speaking for Yahowah or for himself, there was no reason for us to presume anything. Here is God’s secondary means to determine the veracity of a witness...

“Surely (‘ak – indeed, emphasizing the point), the person who proclaims a message on behalf of a deity (naby’ – a prophet) who (‘asher – relationally) oversteps their bounds and speaks presumptuously and contemptuously (zyd – has an inflated sense of self-worth, demonstrating self-reliance while taking liberties to defy, who arrogantly pretends to know, who insults others and is disrespectful, displaying pride in the pursuit of personal recognition and acclaim while despising rivals, who rebels against that which is established and is prone to rage, who seethes with anger and is often furious, overbearing, rude, and conceited in their plans (here the hiphil stem reveals that the prophet and his statements are one, thereby sharing a similar effect and purpose, while the imperfect conjugation speaks of their continual and ongoing influence)) for the express purpose of conveying (la dabar – for the intent of communicating a verbally or in writing (piel infinitive construct – by design and intent)) a statement (dabar) in (ba) My (‘any) name (shem – proper name, renown, or reputation) which accordingly (‘asher ‘eth – inferring access, relationship, and benefit which) I have not expressly appointed, taught, guided, nor entirely directed him (lo’ tsawah – I have not provided the totality of his instruction, nor assigned, constituted, decreed, prescribed, or ordained for him, deliberately and demonstrably making him My understudy (piel stem and perfect conjugation)) to (la) speak (dabar), and (wa) who (‘asher – relationally) speaks (dabar) in (ba) the name (shem) of other (‘aher – different and additional, even subsequent) gods (‘elohym), indeed, then (wa) that  prophet (ha naby’ – that individual who proclaims a message on behalf of that false deity), he (huw’) is deadly (muwth – devoid of life and destructive).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:20)

Therefore, Yahowah’s second test is a relatively simple one. It contains six elements (with six being the number of man):

  1. Is the person a naby’: someone who claims to speak on behalf of god? This is a screening codicil. If a person admits that they are speaking for themselves, then they would be excluded from this analysis. The evaluation, therefore, does not apply to Obama but would apply to Osama. Paul’s favorite line, “but I say to you,” would ordinarily have been sufficient to exclude him from this test (and thereby also exclude his epistles from consideration), because by repeating this phrase, he was admitting that he was speaking for himself and not for God. But since he was duplicitous and often vowed that he had been personally selected and authorized to speak for God, he subjects himself to God’s test. And yet, he has already failed the first codicil. And that is because the preponderance of Paul’s message was delivered under the banner of “but I say,” instead of “Yahowah says.” That should have been more than sufficient to disqualify Paul as God’s agent. So it is strike one. (Where one strike is deadly.)
  2. Is the person zyd: someone who oversteps their bounds, acting presumptuously with an inflated sense of self-worth, demonstrating self-reliance while taking liberties, someone who arrogantly pretends to know, who insults others and is disrespectful, displaying pride in the pursuit of personal recognition and acclaim while demeaning competitors, someone who rebels against the legitimate authority and is prone to anger, someone who seethes with frustration and is often furious, overbearing, rude, or conceited? Sha’uwl has insulted Shim’own, Ya’aqob, and Yahowchanan, in addition to Yahowah / Yahowsha’. His claim to the world as if it was his personal domain has been overbearing and presumptuous. His assertion that he was incapable of lying and that he was the perfect example to follow were conceited in the extreme. He has been rude to the Galatians and disrespectful of most everyone, consistently misquoting God’s Word and then twisting it. And he has routinely shown great contempt for the Towrah, consistently demeaning it. Strike two.
  3. Does the person la dabar dabar ba ‘any shem: openly and publicly preach to others, communicating their message in the name of God? As was the case with the first codicil, this is also a screening test. If the individual in question has an insignificantly small audience, if their preaching is done in private, if their influence is limited in time and place, then there would be no reason to assess their credentials. But, Paul begins his epistle bragging that he was speaking for God, not men. He claims to have had his own private session with God. This, along with the fact that Paul’s preaching in the book of Acts and his letters comprise half of the “Christian New Testament,” and that his words are quoted more often by Christians than God’s, puts a bull’s eye on Paul. Strike three.
  4. Is the person’s message ‘lo tsawah: inconsistent with what God has instructed and directed, does the message conflict with what God appointed, constituted, and decreed, does it vary from His instructions? Galatians, like Romans, is an attack on the Towrah. As such, Paul’s letters represent the most extreme breach of Yahowah’s fourth test. The only thing worse than advocating ideas which are extraneous to God’s witness is to promote things which contradict His testimony. Paul’s repudiation of the Torah, combined with his replacement theology (which is essentially comprised of believing him), is therefore an egregious and deadly violation of God’s fourth test. It is also a direct violation of the Third of Three Statements Yahowah etched upon the First of the Two Stone Tablets, for which there is no forgiveness. Strike four.
  5. Does the person dabar ba shem ‘aher ‘elohym: speak in the name of gods other than Yahowah? Paul’s Gospel of Grace (Charis/Gratia) elevates the Greek and Roman pagan goddesses above Yahowah. And in his parting comment, Paul excludes Yahowah’s name and signs off in the moniker of the Egyptian sun god, “Amen.” He also revealed a proclivity for addressing his god as “the Lord.” This is strike five in a life and death encounter where one strike is fatal.
  6. Does the person hayah: accurately convey what is happening and what has happened in the past, and do their predictions of the future bow’: materialize and come to exist as they have stated them? Paul’s errant portrayal of the Yaruwshalaim Summit is an undeniable breach of the hayah clause—as was his testimony regarding his contradictory accounts of his conversion experience and his mythical trip to Arabia. The fact that there were no prophecies in Galatians, a false prophecy regarding his personal inclusion in the Trumpets Harvest in his second letter, and no fulfilled predictions in any of his other letters, serve as an undeniable breach of the bow’ clause of this codicil. So since Paul’s demonic source of inspiration was incapable of properly guiding his false prophet, it is: Strike six. Therefore, it is off to She’owl for Sha’uwl. And if you believe him, your soul will be destroyed at the end of your mortal life. That is why this test exists.

Yahowah, as we know, proved that He inspired the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms by punctuating His words with prophetic predictions—all of which came true, or are coming true, just as He had revealed. Since only God has seen the future, He isn’t actually “predicting” it, but instead reporting in advance what He actually knows will occur. That’s why He is always right, and it’s why He uses prophecy to demonstrate that His testimony is reliable.

Here is the conclusion of Yahowah’s Dabarym 18 declaration...

“And if (wa ky) you actually say (‘amar – you genuinely ask over the course of time (scribed in the qal imperfect)) in (ba) your heart (lebab – your inner nature and attitude where understanding becomes part of the fabric of your life), ‘How (‘eykah) shall we actually and consistently know (yada’ – shall we continually possess the information required to genuinely distinguish, discriminate, understand and acknowledge (here the qal stem was used to convey actually, genuinely, and literally while the imperfect conjugation reveals that the ability to know is ongoing, consistent, and continual irrespective of time)) accordingly if the (‘eth ha – whether the) statement (dabar – written or spoken communication) which (‘asher – under the expectation of a beneficial relationship) he speaks or writes (dabar – his complete testimony (here the prefect conjugation requires us to examine the totality of the person’s written and spoken communication while the piel stem reveals that our perceptions of the object’s writings, Yahowah’s Towrah in this case, suffer the effect of the false prophet’s testimony)) is not (lo’) Yahowah’s ( )?’

If that which (‘asher) is deliberately spoken over time (dabar – has continually orchestrated through written or spoken communication (with the piel stem the subject influences the object and with the imperfect conjugation the consequence is ongoing)) by the one who proclaims the message (ha naby’ – prophet who claims divine inspiration) in (ba) Yahowah’s ( ) name (shem – reputation and renown) is not literally and consistently present and established (lo’ hayah – is not actually instituted and existing (qal imperfect)), or it does not actually come to be (wa lo’ bow’ – does not consistently arrive (such as a predicted harvest) or literally happen (such as an errant prediction) (qal imperfect)), the message (ha dabar – the written statement and spoken communication) which (‘asher – from the perspective of a beneficial relationship) he (huw’), himself, has deliberately spoken to influence (dabar – the totality of what he has communicated orally and in writing to effect one’s perceptions regarding the object, which is God (piel perfect)) is not (lo’) Yahowah’s ( ).

In (ba – with) arrogance and presumptuousness (zadown – with an inflated view of himself, self-willed and self-motivated, this morally flawed, disrespectful, imprudent, insulting, and shameless individual has taken great liberty while overstepping all due bounds in contempt of the established authority), the prophet (ha naby’ – the one claiming to be issuing inspired statements from God) has spoken and written (dabar – he has conceived and presented his message (piel perfect – he has completely and deliberately sought to influence)). You should not respect or revere him nor conspire to rebel with him (lo’ guwr min – you should not fear him, join him, congregate or live with him either).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:21-22)

In a text where a single conflict portends the death of the one testifying falsely, as well as the demise of those who are led to believe him, Paul has failed all six. That’s not my opinion. It is an undeniable conclusion based upon Yahowah’s standard. It is case closed. The verdict is “Guilty!” Paul was a false prophet. If you trust him, you do not know or trust God.

There are two additional thoughts in this Towrah passage worthy of our consideration. The first is an indictment on all religions, but especially Christianity and Judaism. Indeed, when you come into the land associated with Yahowah, your God, which is given to you, you shall not accept, teach, imitate (lamad – be trained in, instruct, become accustomed to, disciple others in), or act upon ('asah – engage in, celebrate, profit from, bring about, ordain, or institute) any of the disgusting religious ways (tow'ebah – abhorrent rites, detestable idolatrous things, repulsive and loathsome rituals, abominable festivals) of these Gentile nations.” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:9)

Pauline Christianity is Dionysian, and thus Babylonian, while also being steeped in Greek Gnosticism. To this, Constantine’s Roman Catholic Church integrated their affinity for Mithras. The resulting religion remains disgusting.

Without the Torah, there is no call for Abraham to come out of Babylon—to flee man’s religious schemes. And worse, Paul’s epistles call believers in the opposite direction, back to Babylon, which is why the faithful remain mired in mankind’s religious muck.

Then speaking of the Word personally delivered by Yahowah on Mount Horeb, and of the promised arrival of the Word made flesh, God said: “According to all you inquired about and requested of Yahowah, your God near Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, ‘Let me not hear again the thunderous voice of Yahowah, our God, nor let me see this great fire again, lest I die,’ Yahowah said to me: ‘They have successfully and rightfully spoken. I will come onto the scene, standing upright, establishing them as an inspired prophet from among their brothers, as Myself, in a point in time. And I will put My Word in His mouth, and He shall say to them all that which I direct and instruct. And it shall come to pass that any man who will not listen to My Word, which He shall declare in My name, I will question and judge him, holding him accountable.’” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:18-19)

The fact remains, Paul didn’t listen to Yahowsha’ speak Yahowah’s Word. He only quoted Yahowsha’ one time in all of his letters, and even then he misquoted Him. And each time he attempted to recite something from Yahowah, he not only truncated God’s testimony, he purposefully twisted Yahowah’s message.

And let’s never forget God’s position on His family: “Yahowah will enable you to stand upright, restoring and establishing by Him,  as a set-apart family, because beneficially by way of association He has made a sworn promise to you, if you closely observe, carefully examine, and closely consider, the terms and conditions regarding the Covenant relationship of Yahowah, your God, and walk in His ways.” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 28:9)

The purpose of the book Paul demeaned is to provide us with the opportunity to get to know God and then participate in the Family-Oriented Covenant Relationship with our Heavenly Father. Salvation, then, is a byproduct of that relationship, making the Covenant and its children perfect and enduring. Therefore, Yahowah’s testimony remains diametrically opposed to Galatians.

You’ll also notice that Moseh inscribed the Towrah on behalf of Yahowah, not Hagar nor Ishmael, that there was only one Covenant, and that the Covenant and the Towrah are inseparable...

“And as soon as it came to be that Moseh finished writing the words of the Towrah on the Almighty’s document, completing it, Moseh instructed the Lowy to lift up and carry Yahowah’s Ark of the Covenant, saying, ‘Grasp hold of this written documentation of the Towrah and place it beside Yahowah, your God’s, Ark of the Familial Covenant Relationship, existing there as the everlasting witness and restoring testimony among you.” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 31:24-6)

This is an unequivocal refutation of Sha’uwl’s claims that: the Towrah cannot save, that the Towrah came to an end,” and that the Covenant and Towrah are unrelated. God’s position and Paul’s are the inverse of one another.

Sha’uwl’s instructions and Yahowah’s are completely irreconcilable. They are mutually exclusive. And that means Sha’uwl lied when he claimed that he spoke for God. As a result, absolutely nothing he said or wrote should be considered trustworthy.

The Torah’s message, its purpose, and its ongoing place in the lives of those who seek to live with God remains incongruous with what Sha’uwl has written. “Moseh instructed them, saying, ‘At the end of seven years, in the appointed time, the year of canceling debts, releasing debtors from their obligations, during the festival feast of Shelters / Sukah, when all Yisra’el, the individuals who engage and endure with God, come to see and experience the presence of Yahowah, your God, at the place which relationally He chooses, you shall read and recite this Towrah (towrah – teaching and instruction, source of guidance and direction) before all Yisra’el (kol Yisra’el – every individual who engages and endures with God), so that they can hear it.’” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 31:10-11)

In that it is God’s hope that we answer His invitations and choose to campout with Him, this might be an opportune time to consider Yahowah’s guidance regarding Sukah. He revealed...

“And Yahowah spoke to Moseh, for the purpose of saying, ‘Speak to the children of Yisra’el, to say, “On the fifteenth day of the seventh month is the Festival Feast of Sukah Shelters for seven days for you to approach and be near Yahowah. ...For seven days approach and come near the maternal manifestation of the light to be with Yahowah.

On the eighth day, there exists, and will always be, a set apart invitation to meet, a Miqra’, on your behalf. And you should answer and respond to the invitation, appearing before the enlightening Mother according to Yahowah. Her joyous assembly does not engage in, doing any of the work of the heavenly messenger who is God’s spiritual representative.

These Godly and specific designated meetings times of Yahowah, which relationally and beneficially you are invited to attend as set-apart Miqra’ey, as Invitations to be Called Out and Meet, reading and reciting, are for the purpose of coming near and approaching the maternal manifestation of the light of Yahowah and are a gift which elevates, a reconciling sacrifice for forgiveness, and also a pouring out of the Word – a day for His day.

As part of the Shabats, the seventh days, the days of promise, the days to cease your ordinary work and reflect on the relationship with Yahowah, and as part of your contribution to the relationship, as part of all of your vows, and as part of your expression of your freedom to choose, relationally and beneficially give yourself, entrusting yourself to Yahowah.

Indeed, on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when you have gathered in your yield from the land, you should celebrate the Festival Feast of Yahowah for seven days. With the first and foremost day, there shall be a Shabathown for the promise of empowerment and enrichment, and on the eighth day a Shabathown for resting and reflecting on this opportunity to grow. ...Rejoice and be glad in the presence of Yahowah, your God, for seven days.

Celebrate it as a Festival Feast in association with Yahowah seven days during the year. It is a clearly communicated and inscribed prescription of what you should do in life to live forever, throughout your generations. Celebrate it in the seventh month.” (Qara’ / Called Out / Leviticus 23:33-41)

And that leaves all of us with a clear choice. We can accept God and reject Paul, or we can accept Paul and reject God. But no matter whom you choose to trust or believe, one thing is certain: Paul lied.


While the answers are overwhelmingly obvious, at least for those who are rational, two questions may remain for the most ardent Pauline advocates. Are the eight remaining epistles (1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians), the four personal letters (1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, and Philemon), and the citations in Acts attributable to Paul as errant and repulsive as Galatians? And what motivated Paul to oppose God?

Over the course of Questioning Paul we have chronicled copious amounts of material gleaned from Paul’s letters to Corinth, Thessalonica, Rome, and Ephesus, and we have studied his preaching as it is reflected in Acts, in addition to the morose conclusions he conveyed to Timothy. What we discovered is that they were even less credible and more condemning. That is not to suggest, however, that nothing Sha’uwl wrote elsewhere was encouraging. I cite the following example in Acts 24: “Paul responded: ‘But this I will admit to you, that according to ‘The Way,’ which they call the sect, I do serve the God of our fathers, trusting everything that is in accordance with the Torah, and that is written in the Prophets.” (Acts 24:14) If that was all that Paul wrote, then the verdict regarding his testimony would be different. But the same man also said that he pretended to be Torah observant when it served his interests.

The fact is: liars lie, but not all the time, otherwise no one would believe them. To make something false appear credible, every myth must include some accurate elements.

Christian apologists might cite the “Gifts of the Spirit” in First Corinthians 12 as evidence that Paul was inspired by God. And yet, most everything he included in his list was inconsistent with Yah’s teaching. Others will protest that the next chapter in Corinthians, which was dedicated to love, could not possibly be errant, but it is nonetheless. Much of what Paul wrote departs from God’s perspective on the same subject. And while I am going to leave you to verify the evidence behind these conclusions for yourself (because I’d rather study the Torah and Prophets), it should be obvious to everyone that Sha’uwl was a living contradiction—routinely displaying behaviors which contravened his own testimony.

Recognizing that three-quarters of Galatians has been overtly opposed to God’s revelation, for there to be any hope of finding some beneficial testimony in the letters to the Thessalonians, Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians, they would all have had to have been written by someone other than the author of this epistle. And yet each was explicitly identified with Paul in their salutations, and each was expressly associated with communities Paul visited according to the book of Acts. So the odds Galatians was written by someone other than Paul, the man depicted in Acts, and the author of the epistles to the Thessalonians, Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians are remote in the extreme. Consider the required makeup of an imposter, and the circumstances under which a conman would have had to operate under to perpetrate such an astonishing fraud.

The Galatians ghostwriter would have to have convinced the Disciple Shim’own Kephas that Paul wrote this letter to the Galatians, even though that was not true. And that means the Pauline imposter would have had to have perpetrated his fraud during the height of Paul’s fame, and while Shim’own was still alive, because the Rock specifically, and adroitly, addressed the letter to the Galatians in his second epistle. Considering the number of times these men met, considering the enormous responsibility borne by Shim’own, the imposter would have had to have been the most adroit impersonator in human history.

This charlatan, should one exist, would have had to pull off this stunning fraud without Paul himself knowing about it or objecting to it. And therein, the hypothetical scenario of a ghostwriter crumbles, because as anal as Paul was about signing his letters to prevent frauds from being perpetrated, as intense as he was about not allowing anyone to alter his message, as self-indulgent and paranoid as he was, it is ludicrous to think that Paul wouldn’t have had a conniption fit over someone pretending to be him, and writing a falsified letter in his name.

And there is no way to credibly push out the timeline on Galatians beyond Sha’uwl’s and Shim’own’s lives (which terminated around 65 CE), particularly because these men left a lasting legacy of their reactions to people around them. Especially relevant, it’s obvious that Galatians was written in 50 to 52 CE, and that it was Paul’s first letter, composed in the immediate aftermath of the Yaruwshalaim Summit, when nerves were still raw and tempers enraged. This was all very personal, emotional, self-serving and self-promoting, and thus very, very Paul. The self-proclaimed “Apostle” would have had twelve subsequent letters in which to expose an imposter—something Paul surely would have done had there been one.

There are a score of reasons to acknowledge that Galatians was Paul’s first letter. It’s the only one which details his life story from birth to the Yaruwshalaim Summit, which strives to validate his calling, and which describes the inception of his preaching. In his salutation, Paul uncharacteristically greets the Galatians alone, having been recently separated from Barnabas (Paul’s companion while in Galatia) but not yet united with Timothy (whom Paul would meet in the immediate aftermath of the Yaruwshalaim Summit).

Further, the Galatians epistle shares something in common with those penned in haste to Corinth and Thessalonica—in that these hurried and defiant replies were written to the three most rebellious assemblies Sha’uwl encountered. And since we know that he crafted both of his letters to the Thessalonians and to the Corinthians within two years of his initial visits to these places, it’s instructive to know that the timeline which can be deduced from the book of Acts places Paul and Barnabas in Lystra, Galatia in 48 CE.

Moreover, this conman would have had to fool Barnabas and Timothy, and then Luke as well. But knowing Luke’s penchant for detail that would have been impossible. If Luke smelled a fraud, his suspicions, Peter’s, Barnabas’, or Timothy’s protestations, would have been chronicled in Acts.

But there is more to consider. A potential impostor would have to have been an expert in the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. For example, in this letter, and again in Romans, the author cited (albeit misquoted) Habakkuk, a book most people don’t even know exists. He identified a Torah passage which could be misconstrued to associate the Torah with a curse. He even recognized that zera, the Hebrew word for “seed,” was singular throughout Genesis. And yet this imposter would have to have despised the Torah sufficiently to dedicate himself to denying its purpose. You could count such individuals on one hand and not use all of your fingers, meaning that the pool of potential applicants in line to impersonate Paul in the mid-first century would have been very small. In fact, there was only one: Paul himself.

Should there have been a pretender, the conman would have to have been schooled sufficiently in Rabbinical Law to pass himself off as a former Pharisee who trained under Gamaliel—the most esteemed religious teacher of his day. And yet, he would have to have hated Judaism sufficiently to demean the religion and condemn Jews—positioning them as the faith’s foe. And while it is not uncommon, even today, to find Jews who are self-destructive and self-loathing, Paul’s condemnation of his own people in 1st Thessalonians 2:14-16 is a league apart—uniquely qualifying Sha’uwl as the anti-Semite who wrote Galatians.

Should Galatians have been penned by a mystery writer, the perpetrator would have had to have received formal training in Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, as well as in classic literature, mythology, and rhetoric (the basis of debate), at a time when just being literate was rare. Keep in mind, that while Paul’s message has been hard to decipher, that’s partly because elitists of the day sought to impress one another by communicating in the fewest possible Greek words, leaving the reader with the challenge of correctly interpreting them. And that is some of what we are witnessing in Galatians, and is why the New Living Translation has more than doubled the letter’s word count in their attempt to convey its intent.

The ghostwriter, should there have been one, would have to have accompanied Paul and known the timing and nature of his travels during a time bereft of rapid or public communications. He would have had to know intimate details about his life, including the grotesque physical stigmata he bore while visiting the Galatians. He would have had to have known what Paul said to this audience during his previous visit, and also know why this remote province was now rebelling against him. And he would have to have had a reason to intervene in the midst of a nasty argument, and somehow benefit from such animosity.

The Galatians imposter would have had to be willing to perpetrate a fraud to artificially elevate Paul’s status above Yahowsha’s Disciples in the midst of conceiving a new religious faith. And yet the only person in recorded history known to hold such views, and to be similarly motivated, Marcion, hadn’t even been born when this fraud would have had to have been perpetrated. Further, in the case of Marcion, entire tomes have been written to marginalize him, yet nothing was ever said about this hypothetical ghostwriter who turned out to be vastly more influential.

Pseudo Paul would have had to have been a party to the Yaruwshalaym Summit, because rather than coming up with an entirely different story, he was clever enough to twist what actually occurred, so that it would serve a wannabe apostle’s peculiar agenda. And he would have to have been in the room when Sha’uwl condemned Shim’own for hastily leaving a meal – and to have had a reason for demeaning one of Yahowsha’s Disciples. And why if this person wasn’t Paul, was he so obviously angry and so emotionally involved in Paul’s affairs?

What’s more, this imposter would have had to be skilled at impersonating Paul’s handwriting, because the last half of the last chapter of Galatians claims to have been penned in Paul’s hand. And that would have been especially challenging since it’s obvious that this is the first letter Paul wrote. Moreover, the charlatan would have had to have had Paul’s jargon down pat, including knowing his propensity to use alla, charis, euangelion, stoicheion, and pistis, in addition to the now ubiquitous: “but I Paulos say...”

The Galatians ghostwriter would have had to have hired a courier whom the Galatians would have trusted as one of Paul’s emissaries. And then he would have had to convince the leaders of wealthier assemblies to pay scribes to copy his fraudulent letter and include it in codices with other Pauline epistles.

And along these lines, since we know that Paul wrote a letter to the Galatians, if the one we have is a fraud, the pretender would have had to have confiscated Paul’s original before replacing it with his own, and to have done so without anyone noticing. I say this because the time interval isn’t sufficient for an authentic Galatians epistle to have arrived, been circulated, and then been forgotten, so that the imposter’s letter could have replaced it without anyone noticing that they were different.

And lastly, Paul’s letter to Rome reprises the climax of Galatians—the existence of two covenants, one of the flesh, the other of the promise. This was Paul’s amazingly clever, albeit devastatingly deadly, means to circumvent the Torah, bypassing it by going from Abraham to the Ma’aseyah, with nothing in between. It is the crowning achievement of Pauline Doctrine, his signature. Therefore the man who wrote Romans, also wrote Galatians.

Also, as we have discovered, Second Corinthians was penned by a man whose ego, credibility, and spirit were a perfect match for those on display throughout this epistle. Moreover, the adversarial attitude on display throughout the Thessalonians letters is consistent with what we have read in Galatians.

But even if someone could pull off the greatest fraud in human history, why would they? Who in the first century benefited from defending Paul by attacking God? Who else met the criterion of the devastating prophecies Yahowah and Yahowsha’ leveled against this man? Why did Yahowah call him “Sha’uwl” and Yahowsha’ refer to him as “Lowly and Little?”

While we have covered some of this material before, in support of Galatians being from Paul, we must recognize that the book of Acts reveals that Sha’uwl had the kind of contentious relationship with the Galatians, and with Yahowsha’s Disciples, which is reflected in this epistle. Shim’own, specifically, wrote critically of Paul’s letter to the Galatians, so if not this one, where is that one? Moreover, the language the Rock used to describe Galatians adeptly identifies the issues which permeate this surviving copy. The subtle twists and clever interpretations of the Jerusalem Summit, as chronicled in Acts, tells a similar story.

And as we have learned, Galatians is all about Paul, about his childhood, his education, his qualifications, his preaching, his detractors, and his trials and tribulations, even his personal issues with God. Within its text, we find the author referring to himself as the mother of the faithful, as the parent of his spiritual children, as the perfect example to follow, as a person who can do no wrong, and as someone who cannot lie—all themes which are echoed in the other epistles attributed to him. So if Paul didn’t write it, why would anyone ascribe such a lofty status on another, especially in the midst of a letter purported to speak on behalf of God?

How was it possible that a copy of Galatians was included in the midst of the oldest extant codex containing Paul’s epistles: Papyrus 46? There we find in order of their appearance: Romans, Hebrews (which is widely considered to have been written by one of Paul’s disciples), 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, and 1st Thessalonians. And since P46 is dated between 85 and 125 CE, there would be no way to attribute this fraud, if it is such, to someone writing at a time when everyone who had actually known Sha’uwl was long since dead.

And as we know, Paul had a propensity to sign his letters so that his audience would have complete assurance that he was actually the author. But with Galatians, he did more than just sign his name. The last chapter attests to having been penned in his own hand. He even commands believers to pay particular attention to the specific characteristics of his handwriting so that they could use it later to verify the veracity of subsequent epistles.

Recognizing also that Sha’uwl knew the Torah, that he was an expert in Judaism, that he was skilled in public debate, and that he was fixated on proving his calling, all of which are prerequisites for authorship, that leaves us with only one viable alternative: that the person depicted in Acts and associated with the epistles to the Thessalonians, Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Timothy was the author of Galatians as well.

Therefore, the only informed and rational conclusion is that Paul wrote Galatians to establish a new religion. As a result, the best possible spin we can put on this disastrous tome is that he was clearly angry, and may well have dashed off an emotional response that, from a more sober perspective, he would have thrown away. But, then again, Paul’s ego was way too big for somber reflection.


You don’t need me to tell you that Sha’uwl was the plague of death... Yahowah affirmed this in no uncertain terms in Chabaquwq / Habakkuk – 666 years in advance no less.

You don’t need me to tell you that Paul was a false prophet We now know that he failed all of Yahowah’s tests in Dabarym / Deuteronomy 13 and 18.

You don’t need me to tell you that Sha’uwl lied We now know that his testimony regarding our means to become part of God’s family was in complete conflict with Yahowah’s Towrah and Yahowsha’s testimony.

You don’t need me to explain what happened on the road to Damascus. Paul confessed to the crime. And in this regard, Yahowsha’ would be remarkably specific about who the wannabe Apostle saw on the road to Damascus. Describing Satan’s fall from heaven, and our dominion over him, Luke, in 10:18, translates Yahowsha’ saying:

“But then (de) He said (eipon) to them (autois – addressing the seventy witnesses He had sent out), I saw (theoreo – I was watching) the Adversary, Satan (ton Satanan – the Devil who opposes; a transliteration of the Hebrew satan – adversary and antagonist who slanders and accuses in opposition), as (hos – like and similar to, approximating) lightning, a bright beam of flashing light (astraphe – a ray of light in the form of a natural, weather-based phenomenon like lightning; from astrapto – a shining and dazzling object) from (ek – out of) the heavens (tou ouranos – the sky and the spiritual abode of God), having fallen (pipto – descending to a lower realm, now prostrate, bowed, failed, and inadequate). Behold (idou – now pay attention, indeed), I have given you (didomi umin – I have offered and provided to you all) the authority, ability, and opportunity (ten exousia – the legal jurisdiction and authorization, the control, power, choice, and right) to trample (tou pateo – to step and tread under foot, to crush, subdue, subjugate, and devastate), being superior to (epano – being above and having authority over), serpents (ophis – venomous snakes which serve as a metaphor for Satan and his fellow demons) and scorpions (kai skorpios – poisonous insects which sting and supernatural demonic powers, from skopos, skeptics who conceal). So upon (kai epi) the entirety of (pas – all of) the Adversary’s (tou echthros – the hated and odious hostile enemy’s) power (dynamis – ability and rule, capability and strength, especially the performance of miracles), therefore (kai), you (umas) will absolutely never be harmed by his fraudulent deceit (ouden ou me adikeo – will not be injured by his wrongdoing and injustice or his violation of the standard).” (Luke 10:18-19)

Now, let’s compare that to Paul’s depiction of what he experienced: “But (de) to me (moi) it happened (ginomai – it came to be), traveling (poreuomai – going to) and (kai) approaching (engizo – nearing) Damascus (te Damasko – a transliteration of Damaskos, the capital of Syria; from the Hebrew Dameseq, a compound of dam and tsedeq: justice torn asunder leaves the righteous weeping) around noon (peri mesembrian – near midday), suddenly and unexpectedly (exaiphnes – unforeseen and immediately) from (ek – out of) the sky (tou ouranou – the atmosphere (singular masculine)), a nearby lightning strike (periastraphai – lightning glittering roundabout, shining brightly all around, flashing nearby; a compound of peri – about, near, and concerning, and astrape – lightning, a beam or flashing ray of bright light which dazzles (aorist as a moment in time unrelated to any plan, active and thus doing the flashing or striking, and infinitive, turning glittering into a verbal noun)), sufficient and adequate (hikanos – enough) light (phos) about (peri – around and concerning) me (eme).” (Acts 22:6)

Paul’s depiction is exactly as Yahowsha’ had described the fall of Satan. Paul even used the same words. So it is remarkable that Christians the world over disregard the accurate prophecy to embrace the false prophet.

He even went on to say: “And (kai) do not (ou) wonder (thauma – marvel at this miraculous vision, nor be amazed in admiration), for indeed (gar), he (autos), the Adversary Satan (Satanas), changes his appearance (metaschematizo – masquerades, disguising himself, transforming his image) into (eis) a spiritual, heavenly messenger (angelos – divine representative) of light (photos).” (2 Corinthians 11:14) How’s that for an admission of guilt?  

You don’t need me to tell you who Sha’uwl heard on that frightful day. The false prophet already did so by quoting the false god, Dionysus “And everyone (te pas) of us (emon) having fallen down (katapipto – having descended from one level to another, lower one) to the earth (eis ten ge), I heard (akouo – I paid attention, listening, comprehending, and obeying) a voice (phone – a sound, crying out) saying to me (lego pros ego – speaking according to me) in the (te) Hebrew (Hebrais) language (dialektos), ‘Sha’uwl, Sha’uwl (Saoul, Saoul – a transliteration of the Hebrew name, Sha’uwl, meaning “Question Him,” a designation synonymous with She’owl – the pit of the dead), Why (tis) are you actually pursuing me (dioko me – are you following me, really striving with such intense effort to reach me, hastening and zealously running toward me)? It’s hard (skleros – it’s demanding and difficult, even rough, harsh, violent, and cruel, especially offensive and intolerable) for you (soi) to resist (laktizo – to kick, to strike with the heel) against (pros) the goad (kentron – a pointed sharp stick used to prick and prod and thus control animals featuring the stinger of a deadly scorpion with the power to ruin and kill, making resistance vain or perilous).” (Acts 26:14)

Paul deliberately put a pagan proverb into the aberration’s mouth in the third of his three depictions of his conversion experience in Acts 26:14, wherein he was defending himself before King Agrippa.

Paul’s citation as you now know came from Euripides’ The Bacchae, where “rebelling against the goad” was used to describe the consequence of personally having to endure the havoc and madness that would be wrought by the Greek god, Dionysius, on the kingdom if someone refused to worship him. But before we reconsider why Dionysius was chosen by Paul (or Satan), please note the intersection between the “scorpions” in Yahowsha’s demonic reference and Sha’uwl’s quote. This too is telling.

When we examine the myths which grew out of Satan’s religious counterfeits, we find that the closest pagan parallel to Yahowsha’ is Dionysius, which is why he was chosen. Just as Yahowsha’s blood is represented by wine, Dionysius (Bacchus in Roman mythology) was the god of wine. He died each fall but was reborn at the Winter Solstice (December 25th on the Julian Calendar), and then was supposedly resurrected each spring. This “renewal,” became an annual religious festival celebrating the promise of an afterlife. Held over the course of five days each Spring, the Dionysia set the stage for the Christian replacement of Passover, Un-Yeasted Bread, and First-Born Children, with Palm Sunday (“Passion Sunday”), Maundy Thursday (“institution of Communion”), Good Friday (“death and burial of Jesus Christ”), Holy Saturday (where “Jesus rested in the grave”), and Easter Sunday occurring during the last week of the Babylonian festival of Lent, where there was great weeping for Tammuz – the son of the sun.

Just as Yahowsha’ had a divine father (Yahowah) and a mortal mother (Mary), Dionysius is said to have had a divine father (Zeus (the father of the gods)) and mortal mother (Semele). And by his death and resurrection, Dionysius was responsible for liberating his believers and thereby providing the faithful with eternal salvation, in complete harmony with being liberated from the Torah by way of faith in Paul’s Gospel. And lest we forget, Paul’s beloved Charis, the Roman Gratia, were the progeny of Dionysus and Aphrodite. And I wouldn’t be surprised that Paul was inspired in this regard by the reverence he experienced in Lystra, Galatia in 48CE, where he and Barnabas were worshiped as Zeus (king of the gods) and Hermes (messenger of the gods).

You don’t need me to tell you that Paul deceived believers when he claimed to have represented Yahowsha’ Seventeen years in advance of the day they would benefit from this advice, Yahowsha’ warned His Disciples to be especially wary of the likes of Paul. His Olivet Discourse began with:

“And Yahowsha’ (ΙΣ), having responded judgmentally (apokrinomai – having answered using discernment to separate fact from fiction; a compound of apo – from, and krino – separation, thereby being discriminating), said to (eupen – spoke to) them (autos – speaking of His Disciples), ‘It’s important that you are observant and that you pay attention, presently being aware and perceptive (blepete – choose to look closely and watch out, consider carefully and be discerning, think so that you understand (present active imperative)), lest (ue) someone (tis) will try to cause you to wander away from the truth (planeon umas – he will intentionally deceive and will probably try to delude you, attempting to lead you astray (aorist active subjunctive). (24:4)

In a private meeting in which only His Disciples were present, Yahowsha’ “told them to pay attention and to be careful, lest someone will cause you to wander away from the truth, deceiving and deluding you.” Since this warning was stated specifically to and for the Disciples, might this someone be Paul, and the occasion be the Yaruwshalaym Summit? And if not him, who? If not then, when?

“For (gar – because) many (polys) will come (erchomai) in (en – [from Papyrus 70]) My (mou) name (onoma – reputation), saying (lego – claiming), ‘I (ego) represent (eimi – am, exist for, belong to, and I stand for) the (o) Ma’aseyahΣ – a placeholder used to convey Ma’aseyah, the Implement Doing the Work of Yah). And so (kai) many (polys) they will mislead (planaomai – they deceive and delude, causing to go astray).’” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 24:5)

I would count the billions of Christians who have been led away from Yahowah and His Torah, who have been deceived and deluded by Paul’s Gospel of Grace, as “many.” In fact, it would be impossible to identify another individual who has misled more people than Paul. And as for Yahowsha’ saying “them” instead of “him,” just as was the case in Ephesus, Paul had a posse comprised of his own disciples.

“Then (tote) if (ean) someone (tis) might say (eipon – may speak) to you (umeis), ‘Behold (idou – indeed, suddenly now, look, and pay special attention, emphasizing that), here in this place (hode), the Ma’aseyah (o ΧΣ),’ or (e), ‘In this case, over there (hode),’ you should not think that this is trustworthy or reliable (me pisteuo)(Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 24:23)

Paul claimed to have seen the Ma’aseyah on the road to Damascus, and then again in Arabia. And he is the only one to have made such a claim within the lifetimes of Yahowsha’s audience—the Disciples. So the sandal still fits him, and he alone.

“Because (gar) those pretending to be useful implements Doing the Work of Yahowah (pseudochrestui) and (kai) false prophets (pseudoprophetai) will arise and take a stand (egeiromai – arousing and stirring the comatose), and (kai) they will give (didomi – they will claim the authority to provide, offer or bestow) many great (megas – significant and surprising, important and astonishing) signs (semeion) and (kai) wonders (teras – miraculous and portentous events) in order to (hoste – therefore as a result to) momentarily deceive and mislead (planao – to in a moment in time attempt to delude, temporarily wandering away from the truth so lead astray (aorist active)), if possible (ei dynatos – if able), even (kai) those who choose to be called out (tous eklektos – those who select and are selected because of the word, from ek, out of, and legos, the Word).’” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 24:24)

When Paulos took his stand against God and rose up before Yahowsha’s Disciples in Yaruwshalaim and tried to impress them by bragging about the “signs and wonders” he had performed, using the exact same phrasing Yahowsha’ had warned them about, they should have remembered this conversation and responded appropriately. And so should we. Paul continues to fail every test: Yahowsha’s and Yahowah’s.

Yahowsha’ would be even more specific regarding Paul, tailoring His prophetic prediction to reflect the wannabe Apostle’s boast that he would meet with Yahowsha’ in Arabia—the ultimate Scriptural wilderness—and then report this myth to the Disciples...

“Pay close attention (idou – indeed look, being especially observant, encouraging the listener to focus upon this subject), I’ve told you this beforehand, forewarning you (proeipon umin – I have spoken to you about this previously, predicting in advance that it will actively and actually occur in your future (perfect active indicative)). (24:25) Then when, therefore (ean oun – indeed when the condition is met and surely), someone says to you (eiposin umin), ‘Look, suddenly (idou – calling everyone’s attention to emphasize a narrative), in the wilderness (en te eremo – in a deserted, remote, and uninhabited place in the desert) it is currently present (estin – it is presently, actively, and actually (present tense, active voice, indicative mood in the third person, singular and thus “it exists,” and not “I exist”),’ you should not leave  (me exerchomai – you ought not go forth). Indeed, you (idou – emphasizing this to you) in the (en tois) inner room (tameion – the reserved and secure chamber of a household and storehouse where [the Spirit] will be distributed) should not consider this to be truthful (me pisteuo – you should not think that this is reliable).” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 24:25-26)

Juxtapose this with Paul’s claim to have encountered the Messiah on the road to Damascus, and then to meeting with Him in Arabia, and we discover that once again, Paul is not only a perfect fit for this warning, he is the only candidate who made these claims within the lifetimes of Yahowsha’s audience. So either Yahowsha’ erred in this prophecy, or He was warning us not to trust Sha’uwl’s claims. And let us not forget, Yahowsha’ told His Disciples that when He returned, everyone on earth would see Him simultaneously, not just one man.

You don’t need me to tell you that Paul and his traveling companions were the only men who claimed to be Apostles in Ephesus during the short time span covered in the Revelation 2 prophecy

“I am aware of and recognize (oida) your (sou) works and undertakings (ergon – the things you have responded to and have engaged in), the difficult and exhausting encounters (kai ton kopos – the bothersome trouble burdens encountered), and your (sou) unswerving and enduring perseverance (kai ten hypomone – continual steadfastness and unwavering dependability, fortitude under circumstances where others would succumb) and that (kai oti) you cannot possibly accept, tolerate, support, nor endure (ou dynamai bastazo – you haven’t the will, desire, ability, or state of mind to take up with, walk along side of, lift up, or carry forward, advance, sustain, or promote) that which is incorrect, immoral, injurious, pernicious, destructive, or baneful (kakos – errant, wicked, wrong, evil, harmful, noisome, morally corrupt, diseased, culpable, mischievous, demonic, or hurtful having an ill effect, a bad nature which is not as it ought to be, and a mode of thinking, feeling or acting which is invalid).

And you have observed, examined, and objectively tested (kai peirazo – you have scrutinized, coming to learn the nature and character of others through enquiry, judging them and catching the mistakes of) those who claim and maintain (tous phasko – those who say, affirm, profess, declare, promise, or preach) of themselves (eautous) that they are (eimi) apostles (apostolos – special messengers who are prepared and sent forth) but are not (kai ouk eisin). And (kai) you have found them (heurisko autos – you have examined and scrutinized them, you have come to understand, discovering and learning through closely observing them that they are) false, deceitful, and deliberate liars (pseudes – are pretending to be something they are not, they are erroneous deceivers).” (Revelation 2:2)

Frankly, this prediction is so specific, it’s a wonder Paul’s reputation survived it. Especially relevant in this regard is that Ephesus was the only city listed among the seven described in Yahowsha’s Revelation letters where Paul and his pals were known to have preached. And it is the only one with a warning against false Apostles. Surely this is not a coincidence.

While Revelation is a prophetic book, Yahowsha’s commendation relative the Ephesians was written in the present and past tense. And that is significant because Yahowchanan scribed Revelation in 69 CE, less than seven years after Sha’uwl wrote his letter to the Ephesians, and within close proximity of Sha’uwl’s lonely and isolated death. So considering the fact that Paul and his traveling companions were the only men who claimed to be Apostles in Ephesus during this short span of time, Yahowsha’ was calling Sha’uwl an “errant, demonic, deceitful, charlatan.” We are without excuse. Christians cannot claim that they were not warned about this devil.

But there is even more to this prediction than just a scathing indictment against Paul in the form of praise for not acquiescing to his false teachings. Yahowsha’ would go on to suggest that while the Ephesians rejected the “self-proclaimed Apostle,” they ingested some of his poison: Nevertheless, I hold (echo – regard, count, and consider) this against (kata – in opposition to, as something that is depressing about, a downer concerning) you, that you have forsaken (aphiemi – laid aside and sent away, departed from and left, dismissed, divorced, neglected, abandoned, and rejected) your first (protos – foremost, most important, influential, honorable, and desirable) love (agape – familial devotion, benevolence, object of affection, and moral and caring friendship). Remember (mnemoneuo – be mindful of, think about, make mention of and respond to) therefore the source from whence (pothen – the place, origin, and condition from where and why) you have descended from a higher place to a lower one (ekpipto – fallen and dropped away, become thrust down and lowered, gone from standing upright to prostrate, bowing down and falling under judgment, overcome by the attack of demonic spirits who bring grief, terror, and death). Change your perspective and attitude and think differently (metanoeo – reconsider and change your mindset) and bring forth the most first, foremost, most desirable, most important and influential investments of your time, works and deeds, or else I will come suddenly and remove your light from its place unless you reconsider, change your perspective, your thinking, and your attitude (metanoeo).” (Revelation 2:4-5)

The Ephesians were eventually swayed by Paul and thus they forsook God’s Word—the Towrah. We cannot love God without first coming to know Him – which occurs when we study His Towrah. Further, the lone path to a loving Covenant relationship with God is through His Invitations to be Called Out and Meet—which is the Way of the Towrah.

The proof that Paul and his associates preached in Ephesus, that they presented a contrarian view to that of Yahowsha’s Disciples, and thus singled themselves out as being the deceitful liars who were falsely claiming to be apostles, is recorded by Luke. And while we considered this evidence previously in the 5th chapter, when it comes to knowing the truth, a little reinforcement is always a good idea – especially when myths are prevalent and the consequences are so extreme. So then once again corrected and amplified modestly from the Nestle-Aland McReynolds Interlinear’s presentation, here is the testimony which demonstrates conclusively that Paul and his disciples represented the false apostles of whom Yahowsha’ spoke:

“But it became in the Apollos to be in Corinth, Paulos, having gone through the uppermost parts, came down to Ephesus so as to find some Disciples. (19:1) But he said against and regarding them, ‘If conditionally, spirit holy you received having trusted the ones but not him, then not spirit holy there is we heard.’ (19:2) He said, ‘But into what then were you immersed?’ And they said, ‘Into Yahowchanan’s immersion.’ (19:3) But Paulos said, ‘Yahowchanan immersed immersion of change mind to the people, saying to the coming after him that they might believe this is in the Iesous.’ (19:4) So having heard, they were immersed into the name of the Lord Iesou. (19:5) And having set on them the hands of Paulou, it came, the spirit of the holy on them. They were speaking but in tongues and were uttering prophecy. Were but the all men as twelve.” (Acts 19:1-7)

While it is impossible based upon the writing quality to know for certain what actually happened, it appears that Paul was threatened by the information he received from Apollos in Corinth. He knew that his message was vastly different than Yahowsha’s Disciples, and he was convinced that one or more of them was treading upon his turf by speaking to these Gentiles. So he headed south, arriving in Ephesus to find the Disciples who had challenged him. When he arrived, rather than meeting with Shim’own or Yahowchanan, Sha’uwl sought to undermine them, suggesting that the Spirit they received as a result of responding to Yahowchanan was not the right spirit – substituting one of his own.

Then this dialogue gets a bit murky because Paul’s next sentence has two hypothetical conditions, three buts, and a negation in the original Greek text. Navigating through them, it appears that Paul was troubled by the idea that the Ephesians had been immersed in Yahowchanan’s message. So Paul immediately claimed that Yahowchanan had instituted unauthorized changes. He then questioned the nature of the spirit they had received. So after listening to Paul’s contrarian view, a dozen Ephesians were re-baptized by Paul, with Paul laying his hands on them. This then imbued these men with an entirely different spirit, one which caused them to blather on in tongues, believing that they were inspired prophets. But whatever they were saying, the twelve were now Sha’uwl’s disciples, just as Yahowsha’ had chosen twelve.

It is telling, however, that Yahowsha’ never once immersed or baptized anyone, so there is no need for it and no established way to do it. Therefore, it was absurd to suggest that Yahowchanan’s technique was wrong and Sha’uwl’s was right. Further, baptism is not the means Yahowah or Yahowsha’ designated to receive the Set-Apart Spirit. There is no mention of it anywhere in the Towrah. And adding insult to injury, when the Spirit came upon those who were set apart in Yaruwshalaim on Seven Sabbaths, they were empowered to speak the languages of the nations surrounding Yisra’el. They were not baptized, there was no laying on of hands, they knew nothing of Sha’uwl, they did not speak in tongues, and they did not prophesize.

Unfortunately, Paul was just warming up. “But having gone into the synagogue he was preaching fearlessly for three months, disputing (dialegomai – arguing and contending) and persuading (peitho – to coax followers to become disciples and to seduce them to obey) about the kingdom of the god.” (Acts 19:8)

Next we find Sha’uwl’s hypocrisy in full bloom. He presented his “Gospel of Grace” as the alternative to obeying God’s Torah, which he presents as an onerous set of laws. And while there is no Hebrew word for “obey,” and while Torah does not mean “law,” Sha’uwl routinely demanded that his audience obey him...

“But as some were being stubborn (sklerynomai – were being hard headed and obstinate, even offensive and intolerable, refusing to listen) and they were disobedient (apeitheo – they were disobeying, refusing to believe, rejecting faith, being noncompliant, rebellious, and insubordinate), speaking abusively of and maligning (kakologeo – cursing and maligning, insulting and denouncing) the way before the crowd. Having revolted against, forsaken, and alienated them (aphistamai – abandoned, avoiding association with them), he appointed and marked off boundaries, separating (aphorize – he set aside and excluded in an attempt to get rid of) the Disciples (tous mathetes – those who had been taught by and followed Yahowsha’) through daily disputes (dialegomai – arguments and speeches presenting a different message) in the lecture hall of Tyrannus. (19:9) And this took place for two years so that everyone residing the Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Judeans and Greeks.” (Acts 19:9-10) (We are continuing to rely on the Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds English Interlinear to recount Paul’s testimony, while augmenting and clarifying it using the most highly regarded lexicons.)

If you recall, Yahowsha’ specifically stated that there were some in Ephesus who did not believe the false apostle, a reality which has been resoundingly born out in Paul’s own words. And while Yahowsha’ praised the Ephesians for rejecting the liar and his lies, Sha’uwl saw them differently. The very people Yahowsha’ commended, Sha’uwl condemned, calling them “sklerynomai – stubborn, hardheaded, and obstinate, even offensive and intolerable, for refusing to listen.” Based upon skleros, Paul viewed those he could not beguile as “hard, harsh, and rough men who were stern, intolerant, offensive, and violent.” That’s almost funny considering the source.

Sha’uwl went on say that his rivals were apeitheo, which means that he saw the Disciples as being “insubordinate” because they “disobeyed him and rejected his faith.” If that doesn’t take your breath away, considering whom he was rebelling against, you may want to check your pulse. One of the most egotistical and presumptuous men to ever purport to speak for God called the Disciples God had chosen “apeitheo – disobedient,” and that was because they “apeitheo – refused to believe” him when his message differed from the one God had conveyed to them in word and deed.

Paul was laying down the law, his law, to which everyone had to obey or suffer the consequences. There was a new Lord in town.

Contentious to the bitter end, Paul once again bragged of “dialegomai – arguing against and disputing” the Disciples because their “thinking was markedly different.” But this time, Paul was not to be found in the synagogue – in the place where those seeking to learn about Yahowah considered His Towrah. Sha’uwl turned instead to the “Tyrannos Schole,” where Tyrannos denotes “the Lord is a Tyrant.” There should be no mistaking that Paul’s Lord was indeed a despot seeking supremacy. And Paul was lecturing on his behalf.

It is a fact little known, but if Paul’s preaching is reflected in his letters, he never accurately conveyed anything Yahowsha’ said. In just one of his thirteen letters, he made a brief passing attempt, citing a few words Yahowsha’ spoke about Passover, albeit taking His testimony completely out of context while misquoting Him. So rest assured, when Sha’uwl claims that everyone in Asia heard him “preach the word of the Lord,” he was preaching Satan’s mantra. Reinforcing this reality, Yahowah consistently refers to the Adversary as “ba’al – lord” because Satan craves supremacy, mastery, control, obedience, subordination, enslavement, and ownership.” Sha’uwl’s predilection for these very same things is revealing.

Yahowah and Yahowsha’ routinely tell us that “dunamis – ability, inherent power, miracles, signs, and wonders” typify braggadocios false prophets. But since Christians don’t listen to either, they typically associate such things with God. And yet here, Paul is saying that God had nothing to do with them. His supernatural power and his extraordinary mastery and skill were the work of his hands, conceived, fashioned, and brought forth without God’s assistance.

“The ability to perform miraculous miracles and powerful supernatural wonders (dynamis) and not having obtained in association with the god (te ou tas tygchano o theos – having disclaimed an experience with, having disavowed happening upon or meeting with, even relationship with God) were performed through the hands of (dia ton cheiron – by way of the person, authority, control, and power of) Paulou.” (Acts 19:11)

I realize that this sounds too incriminating to be true, not unlike Paul admitting to being both insane and demon-possessed. So I encourage skeptics to verify the meaning of te (likewise and corresponding to, serving as the marker of a relationship), ou (constituting a negation and denial), tas (the definite article in the accusative form), and especially tygchano for yourself. It was negated in this statement by “ou – not in any way” and precedes “tas theos – of God.” Therefore, in this context it denotes “having disclaimed an experience with God, having disavowed happening upon or meeting with God, and of not having a relationship with God.” And while that’s indicting, by turning to tygchano’s secondary connotation, we find Paul admitting to “not hitting the mark regarding extraordinary and unexpected performances which require uncommon skill.” Therefore, it appears that the very attitude which got Satan expelled from heaven was now afflicting Paulou.

And his legend grew with these fanciful claims...“Also that upon the weak was to be carried away from the skin of him, handkerchiefs or aprons and to be settled upon them the illnesses and annoying spirits (pneumata ta poneros – worthless, morally corrupt, seriously faulty, toilsome, and wicked spirits) to depart out and leave.” (Acts 19:12)

Paul is claiming that napkins or aprons were placed upon his skin and then carried to those who were sick, and that as a result annoying spirits were exorcised from the diseased. This is creepy in the extreme, not unlike today’s charlatans who fleece their flock by pretending to heal the sick during religious spectacles. It is another case of Paul claiming to be divine. But this time he was also incriminating himself by suggesting that “evil spirits” cause “disease” and must be “exorcised” to heal the “sick.”

The “spirits to depart out” were called “poneros – annoying, burdensome, harassing, troublesome, wicked, corrupt, worthless, faulty, and criminal.” It is the same revolting word Paul associated with “the old system” which he later identified as the Torah. And here, the Spirit associated with Yahowchanan, Yahowsha’s most beloved Disciple, was the one rejected by Sha’uwl and replaced by another of his choosing during the rebaptism. So I suspect that the reason Paul saw the Set-Apart Spirit as “annoying” is that She was opposed to everything he said and did.

When Paul’s own testimony is considered as a legacy of Yahowsha’s denunciation of the apostles of Ephesus, he alone is convicted of that crime. His confession was also scribed in his first letter to Timothy.

“Paulos, Apostle of Christou Iesou by mandate, command, and direct order of God, deliverer of us, and Christou Iesou, the hope of us, (1:1) to Timothy, genuine, lawful, and legitimate child in faith, grace, mercy, peace from god, father, and Christou Iesou, the Lord of us. (1:2) In as much as I pleaded with you to remain longer and continue on in Ephesus while I was proceeding to Macedonia in order that you might command certain individuals not to teach a different doctrine...” (1 Timothy 1:1-3)

As clearly as words allow, Paulos was confessing to the crime Yahowsha’ told us had been committed in Ephesus. Sha’uwl admitted that Ephesus was the primary battleground in his war against Yahowsha’s teaching as it had been conveyed through Yahowchanan – their first love. Having fought for years against both, Paul would deploy every resource to keep God’s emissaries at bay.

Seeking to undermine the Torah with its long genealogies (wherein the beneficiaries of the Covenant are documented), Paul wrote: “...nor give oneself over to myths and fables or endless genealogies with unlimited family lineages, or whatever worthless speculation and aimless arguments they maintain and cling to instead of, alternatively, the administration and oversight of god in the faith or belief system.” (1 Timothy 1:4)

“They were disabled through avoidance, straying and turning away by meaningless conversations, idle and empty talk, senseless and vain words. (1:6) Deciding and desirous of being teachers of the Towrah, not ever providing nor understanding, considering, or comprehending it, neither in  what they say nor what they are concerned about and state with such confidence, insisting upon, maintaining, and proclaiming so assuredly. (1:7)

But we have come to be somewhat aware that the good use of the Towrah is if conditionally someone might deal with it correctly in accordance to the rules. (8) Having realized this, the Towrah is not in place for the righteous or saved, but for the Towrahless, for the disobedient who are not subject to religious beliefs, for unholy sinners and disobedient outcasts who are mistaken, for those who are accessible and open-minded who kill their own fathers, and for murderers of their own mothers, those slaughtering mankind, (9) for the sexually immoral and perverted, for homosexual pedophiles and sodomites, for slave traders and kidnappers, for liars and perjurers who provide false witness, and also if some other, different, or alternative thing be opposed to the accurate and sound doctrine (10) in accord with the beneficial message of the brilliant and glorious, the blessed and fortunate god which was entrusted to me, myself.” (1 Timothy 1:8-11)

With this confession, Yahowsha’s warning regarding the false apostles operating in Ephesus becomes nearly as incriminating as Yahowah’s prophetic revelation in Habakkuk.


You don’t need me to tell you that Paul, to the exclusion of all other individuals, became the living embodiment of what Yahowsha’ warned Shim’own Kephas about just before He ascended into Heaven

“This was already the third time Yahowsha’ was revealed and seen with the Disciples who were Learners, having been aroused, restored, and equipped to stand up out of lifeless separation. (21:14)

As a result, while they ate breakfast, Yahowsha’ said to Shim’own Kephas, ‘Shim’own of Yahowchanan [He who listens to Yahowah’s Mercy], do you demonstrate your love for Me more than these?’ He said to Him, ‘Yes, Yahowah, You are aware that I am engaged in a loving and familial relationship with You.’ He said to him, ‘Nourish My sheep.’ (21:15)

He said to him again, a second time, ‘Shim’own of Yahowchanan, do you respect and love Me?’ He said to Him, ‘Yes, Yahowah, You are aware that I am engaged in a loving and familial relationship with You.’ He said to him, ‘Shepherd My sheep.’ (21:16)

He said to him a third time, ‘Shim’own of Yahowchanan, are you engaged in a loving, family-oriented relationship with Me?’ The Rock was saddened because He said to him a third time ‘Are you engaged in a covenant relationship with Me?’ So he said to Him, ‘Yahowah, Upright One, You are aware of everything. You know and understand that I am engaged in the loving, family-oriented, covenant relationship with You.’ Yahowsha’ said to him, ‘Feed, tend to, guide, and care for My sheep.” (Yahowchanan / Yahowah is Merciful / John 21:14-17)

Yahowsha’, whom it appears Shim’own Kephas of Yahowchanan thoughtfully and appropriately addressed as “Yahowah” in His post Bikuwrym state based upon the Divine Placeholder, wasn’t talking to His pupil about grazing, about sheep, or about animal husbandry. The “sheep” were a reference to Yahowah’s “Covenant children.” It is why Yahowah is called “My Shepherd” in the 24th Psalm, and is credited with guiding, nurturing, and protecting His flock. Their “food” is “the Towrah.” As a “shepherd,” Yahowah through Yahowsha’ was asking His Disciple “to guide and protect” His flock, keeping His sheep out of harm’s way, while keeping the wolves at bay. And never forget, they were and remain “His” sheep, not “Peter’s,” and especially not Paul’s, not a pope’s or a pastor’s.

“Tending” to Yahowah’s Covenant children requires a shepherd to be “properly prepared,” which means Shim’own would have to diligently study Yahowah’s Towrah while comparing Yahowsha’s words and deeds to it, so that he would be able to teach our Heavenly Father’s children what they need to know to survive and grow, and to be properly nourished and guided.

To tend the most highly valued sheep in the universe, “the Rock” would have to remain “observant,” which is to say that he must be vigilant, never letting his guard down, lest a diseased or vicious predator, unfit food, improper guidance, or an unauthorized shepherd mislead God’s flock. And the best way to do that would be to nurture Yah’s children on the merits of the Torah, so that they would be equipped to care for their children for generations to come, keeping all of His sheep out of harm’s way by keeping the wolves at bay.

“‘Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were younger, you girded yourself and you walked whenever you intended and wherever you desired. But when you grow older, you will extend your hands and another will gird you, placing a yoke on you to control you, and he will move you to a place where you do not presently intend or desire.’ He said to him, ‘You should follow My path.’ (21:18)

And then this, He said making the future clear, signifying what kind of deadly plague (thanatos – pandemic death and physical demise, judgment separating diseased souls) he [speaking of the wolf in sheep’s clothing] will attribute to Yahowah (doxasei ton ΘN – he will impart and extol as being supposedly worthy regarding his opinion on how to properly judge, value, and view God). And this having been conveyed, He said to him, ‘You should choose to follow Me (akoloutheo moi – you should decide to actively accompany Me and engage as My Disciple, learning from Me and electing to side with Me on My path; from “a – to be unified and one with” “keleuthos – the Way”).’” (Yahowchanan / Yahowah is Merciful / John 21:18-19)

Yahowsha’ was asking Shim’own to feed and protect His flock even in the face of someone attempting to tie him up and drive him away, taking him to a place he did not intend to go. One individual in Shim’own’s future dedicated himself to dragging “the Rock” away from his God-given responsibilities. Sha’uwl forced Shim’own out of Antioch in the midst of feeding and protecting God’s children, and then drove him back to Yaruwshalaim. Sha’uwl’s rhetoric and force of personality caused Shim’own to cower as he had before, and even retreat, leaving Yahowsha’s flock to be devoured by a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Even Shim’own’s comments regarding Paul’s epistles have been used in a way he never intended. Rather than being seen as an overt warning to God’s sheep to be on their guard lest Paul lead them to their own demise, Christendom twisted what the Rock wrote to infer that Paul’s letters were Scripture. Shim’own had indeed been taken to a place he did not intend to go.

You don’t need me to tell you that the second most indicting statement God made against Paulos was delivered during Yahowsha’s Sermon on the Mount In light of what we have read, God’s every word specifically and comprehensively undermines, utterly destroying, Paul’s credibility and with it the foundation of Pauline Doctrine—and thus the religion of Christianity.

In that we considered Yahowsha’s first and most comprehensive public proclamation in the first chapter of Questioning Paul, I’ve once again elected to remove most of the Greek nomenclature from this summary review. 

“You should not think or assume that I actually came to tear down, invalidate, put an end to, or discard, subvert, abrogate, weaken, dismantle, or abolish, any of the implications, influence, or validity of the Towrah or the Prophets. I actually came not to create a division, to dismiss, to invalidate, or to discard to abrogate, to weaken, or to abolish, dismissing any implication or its influence, but instead and to the contrary, to completely fulfill, proclaim, and complete, conveying the true meaning and thinking, to liberally supply, accomplishing, and rendering it totally and perfectly. (5:17)

Because in deed and in truth, I say to you, up to the point that with absolute certainty the heaven and the earth cease to exist, not ever under any circumstance shall one aspect of the smallest letter, the Yowd, nor so much as a single stroke of the pen distinguishing any aspect of any Hebrew letter cease to be relevant, be averted or neglected, having any chance of being ignored or disregarded from the Towrah until with absolute certainty everything might take place, becoming a reality. (5:18)

Therefore, and as a result, whoever may at any time dismiss or attempt to do away with, seeking to toss aside, invalidate, or abolish, tearing asunder one of the smallest and least important of these prescriptions and instructions which are enjoined, these authorized directions, precepts, and teachings, and he might instruct or indoctrinate, expounding or explaining so as to enjoin people in this manner, he will actually be provided the name and will be judicially and legally summoned as “Little and Lowly (elachistos – Paulos in Latin, meaning: small and inadequate, insignificant and insufficient, irrelevant and unimportant, immaterial and inconsequential (with Paulos representing the Latin name Sha’uwl adopted as his own))” by the kingdom of heaven.

But by contrast, whosoever may act upon it, engaging through it, making the most of it, while teaching it and sharing its instructions while expounding upon it, this will properly be referred to, named, and called “Great and Important (megas – astonishingly valuable, splendid and sensible, albeit surprisingly uncommon)” among those who reign within the heavens.” (Mattanyah / Yahowah’s Gift / Matthew 5:17-19)

That was as unequivocal as it was opposed to the Christian traditions Paulos contrived. To discount or discard any aspect of the Towrah, an individual such as Paulos has to contradict Yahowsha’. And it is irrational for anyone to claim to have been granted authorization to speak on behalf of God when their message contradicts His.

The notion of a “New Testament” is torn asunder because God’s original testimony remains valid. So based upon this statement, Paul’s letters which seek to invalidate the Towrah must be discarded.

A Christian cannot discount this testimony without simultaneously discounting Yahowsha’s credibility. And the moment that is done, everything crumbles. But on the other hand, to believe God, you have to reject Christianity.

Equally telling, especially since the Prophets were included, the majority of Yahowah’s prophecies, including His return and His ultimate renewal and restoration of the Covenant with Yisra’el and Yahuwdah, have not yet occured, and the heavens and earth remain. Therefore, the Torah still stands. Now that’s something for Christians to think about, especially considering the subject and speaker. Therefore, as a Christian reading this, since you are no longer ignorant of this proclamation, your only options are to reject Christianity or be irrational. And what do you suppose the merits might be of believing in something which is invalid?

Since we are now undeniably aware of Yahowsha’s assessment of those who attempt to dismiss and discard any portion of the Torah, and that He referred to such attempts as “Paulos,” it is now impossible to consider Paul’s purpose for writing Galatians, which was to demean and devalue the Towrah, favorably. So how is it that Sha’uwl convinced the world that God had authorized him to do precisely what Yahowsha’s just testified should not, and could not, be done? Said another way, is there any chance whatsoever that God inspired, even condoned or endorsed, the writings of a man who invalidated His Torah in view of this statement by Yahowsha’? Do Christians honestly believe that Paul can contradict God and still be trusted?

Indirectly incriminating Sha’uwl, a man who not only dismissed the Towrah, but who also claimed to be a Rabbi and Pharisee, in addition to being a religious expert, scholar, and writer, please consider what Yahowsha’ said next:

“For indeed, I say to you all, that unless conditionally your righteousness, integrity, and standing in the relationship is abundantly superior to and immanently more appropriate than the religious teachers, experts, scribes, and scholars (ton Grammateus – government officials, politicians, public servants, reporters, writers, clerks, lawyers, and judges), and Pharisees (Pharisaios – members of a fundamentalist religious party comprised of hypocritical Jews who coveted authority, were overtly religious, set rules which others had to abide by, established religious rituals and traditions, and interpreted Scripture to their liking), you will absolutely never move into nor experience the realm of the heavens.” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 5:20)

While the mythos of Christendom has been rendered moot by Yahowsha’, God had a lot more to say during His Instruction on the Mount that is germane to our evaluation of Paul. Speaking to those who are willing to invest the time required to actually know Yahowah, to those who actively seek to learn the truth, to those willing to engage in the process which leads to admission into God’s home, Yahowsha’ provided a set of instructions which completely undermines the ignorance of blind faith...

“You should ask (aiteo – at the present time it is desirable for everyone act on their own initiative to earnestly request information, knowledge, and answers) and it will be given (didomi – in the future this will reliably produce the desired result) to you. You should seek (zeteo – currently it is desirable for everyone act on their own initiative to attempt to find information, searching for knowledge and answers) and you will actually receive an education. You should knock (krouo – everyone should act on their own initiative to physically demonstrate and announce their presence at the door desiring acceptance and admittance) and it will be opened to you. (7:7) For then the one asking receives, the one seeking, earnestly trying to obtain information though personal interaction, actually finds by participating in the discovery, and the one knocking, announcing his or her presence at the door desiring acceptance, it will be opened. (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:7-8)

Yahowsha’s statement is wholly consistent with Yahowah’s Towrah guidance. God encourages us to be observant, which is to closely examine and carefully consider His instructions, especially the provisions associated with the Covenant. He encourages us to listen to His prescriptions for living so that we can act upon what we discover and thereby come to be invited into His Home. This, however, is the antithesis of Paul’s proposition which is salvation through faith. God’s method requires us to learn and then engage. But with faith, both the process and response would be unnecessary, even counterproductive.

Yahowsha’s next statement further undermines Christianity because Yahowsha’ is directing our attention not to Himself, but instead to Yahowah, to our Heavenly Father, and to the Father’s gift – something which is found in the Towrah. But beyond this, by juxtaposing these thoughts, Yahowsha’ is also revealing where we should look to find the door to seek acceptance. He is even contrasting the merits of Yahowah’s offer and promises with the statements and promises of a man.

Should you be considering an alternative, what man currently exists from among you whom when his son will ask for a loaf of bread will give him a stone? (7:9) Or should you be considering a logical contrast between opposites, when he asks for a fish, will he hand him a snake? (7:10) If, therefore, you all presently and actively being troublesome and morally corrupt (poneros – seriously flawed, evil and annoying, blind and diseased) have in the past been familiar with and have actually known how to give good and beneficial gifts to your children, how much more by contrast will your Father, the One in the Heavens, actually give, personally responding to reliably produce, grant, and bestow something good, moral, generous, and beneficial to those asking Him?” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:9-11)

Paulos is offering the gift of faith and Yahowah is offering the gift of the Covenant. Which offer do you suppose might be more beneficial? And since this follows a presentation on asking and seeking, do you suspect that Yahowsha’ is indicating where we ought to look to find something which is reliably good, valuable, and kind? And since the answers to these questions are obvious, why do Christians, who claim that their religion is based upon Yahowsha’, ignore this and turn to Paul instead? In light of this, how did Sha’uwl manage to convince them that the Towrah was anything but good, generous, capable, or beneficial?

The moral of the story is that since we don’t want a millstone, a premature burial, a poisonous snake, or a serpent representing Satan given to us by men or by their institutions, and would be vastly better served with Yahowah’s good, generous, and beneficial gift, we ought to offer our fellow man access to God’s gift – providing them with the valuable and kind offer found in our Heavenly Father’s Towrah and Prophets.

“Anything, therefore, to whatever to the degree or extent you might want or may enjoy as a result of men being human doing so to you, also in this way, you should choose to actively do to them.

This then actually and presently is the Torah (o nomos – becomes the means to being nourished by that which is bestowed to become heirs, existing as the precepts which were apportioned, established, and received as a means to prosper and to be approved, and prescriptions for an inheritance) and the Prophets: (7:12) under the auspices of freewill, you all should choose at some point in time to enter, personally engaging by moving through the narrow, specific, seldom-tread, and exacting door (tes stenos pule – the doorway with strict requirements, the passageway which is unpopular and seldom walked, an infrequently-trodden gateway whereby a stand will be taken to enable others to stand, to be firmly established, and to be upheld).

Because broad, man-made, and crafted to be wide open (platys – molded, malleable, plastic, and easily crafted and plied, a wide and artificial thoroughfare; from “plasso – formed and molded by man”) is the door and spacious (eurychoros – as encompassing as nations, widely regional, and broadly societal; sharing a base with “eusebeia – especially religious, speaking of belief systems and their devout and pious practices”) is the way which misleads and separates (e apago – that takes away, leading through deception; from “ago – directs, leads, and guides” to “apo – separation”) onto utter destruction (apoleia – needlessly squandering and ruining the valuable resource of one’s existence, causing it to perish; from “apollumi – to be put entirely out of the way, to be rendered useless and to be abolished, coming to an end and ceasing to exist”). And a great many (kai polys – the vast preponderance, an enormous number) are those who are influenced into moving while suffering the consequences of entering (oi eiserchomai – who as a result of being acted upon are affected by taking the first step toward and then going in, manipulated in the process of beginning a journey while experiencing the effect of going out) through it. (7:13)

Certainly, the specific doorway has strict requirements, it is narrow, seldom-tread, and it is an exacting passageway (e stenos pule – the doorway is highly restrictive, the passageway is unpopular and infrequently walked), and it completely goes against the crowd to the point of persecution (kai thlibomai – it is so totally unpopular the past act influences the future to the point of hardship and harassment, even to oppression and affliction), the one way which leads, separating those guided unto life (zoe – vigorous and flourishing living, the fullness of a restored and active existence), but very few (oligos – an extremely small quantity over a very short time) are those finding it (heuriskomai autos – presently learning and actively discovering the location of it, themselves experiencing it).” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:12-14)

This may be the single most devastating declaration ever made against religion, because the one thing religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Socialist Secular Humanism have in common is that they are very popular. A great many people have placed their faith in them, ranging from tens of millions to many billions. But Yahowsha’, the diminished manifestation of God, just said that the popular ways are not only artificial and manmade, they lead to destruction, needlessly squandering countless souls.

So while this statement is catastrophic to Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, and Socialist Secular Humanism, when Yahowsha’s divine credentials are established, there is no out for Christianity. Based upon this declaration alone in the midst of the Proclamation on the Mount, the moment Constantine made the Christian religion the official faith of the Roman Empire, there was no longer any hope that it could be the path to life. It must, therefore, be one of the many ways which lead to destruction.

Yahowsha’ did not say that Christianity was destructive because it’s popular, but only that the path to life is unpopular. Christianity is deadly because it is based upon Sha’uwl’s man-made and artificial path.

I am not trying to rub salt into an open wound, but I would be remiss if I didn’t remind Christians that in Habakkuk, Yahowah specifically revealed that there would be a “broad path,” a “duplicitous and improper way, associated with Sha’uwl that would be the plague of death.”

You do not need me to tell you that Yahowsha’ popped Paul’s balloon twenty years before the Devil’s Advocate began spewing hot air because Yahowsha’ was not yet finished warning Christians about the consequence of disregarding the Torah. With these words, He would tell everyone willing to listen to Him not to trust Paul

“At the present time, you all should be especially alert, being on guard by closely examining and carefully considering, thereby turning away from the false prophets, those pretending to be divinely inspired spokesmen, who come to you, currently appearing before you from within, as an insider and thus from the same race and place, by dressing up in sheep’s clothing, yet they actually are 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 as) wolves.” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:15)

While the combination of God’s warnings and Paul’s admissions are devastating, leaving Sha’uwl and his associates as the only viable and known potential culprits, there was a subtlety in Yahowsha’s depiction of the wolf. He described the predator using a derivative of the same term Paulos selected to present his “harpazo – rapture.” It was such an odd choice for Paul, especially considering its negative connotations that by being translated using it in His public declaration, God gave us yet another clue regarding the identity of this wolf in sheep’s clothing.

And yes, God is into the details. In His Towrah, He revealed: “Benjamin is a wolf viciously tearing apart, continually mangling and actually killing, plucking the life out of his victims, in the early part of the day, consistently devouring his prey, and during the dark of night at the end of the day, he divides and destroys, apportioning and distributing that which has been spoiled.” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 49:27) And again, in his own confession, Sha’uwl wrote in Romans 11:1: For indeed, I am an Israelite, from the seed of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin (Beniamin – a transliteration of the Hebrew Benyamyn).”

While there were many Benjamites, there is only one man known to have publicly proclaimed to have been from the tribe of Benjamin who was present in Yaruwshalaim during the time Yahowsha’ delivered His Instruction on the Mount. Beyond this, Sha’uwl, who was learning to be a rabbi at the time, also admitted to faking his true identity, which is the very essence of a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Proof of Paul’s willingness to change his outward appearance to take advantage of an unsuspecting audience is found in this confession...

“And I became to the Jews like Jews in order that I might make a profit by procuring an advantage over Jews. To those under the Towrah, I appeared to be under the Towrah, myself not actually being under Towrah, but instead for the purpose that to those under the Towrah, I might procure an advantage. (1C9:20)

To those Towrahless, and thus without the Towrah, I appeared Towrahless, not being Towrahless of God, to the contrary and making a contrast, in the Torah of Christou in order that I might make a profit by procuring an advantage and winning over those without the Towrah. (1C9:21)

I came to exist to the inept and morally weak, incapacitated and inadequate, in order that of those impotent and sick, I might procure an advantage. To everyone I have become every kind of thing in order that surely by all means some I might save.” (1 Corinthians 9:20-22)

I don’t suppose that Yahowsha’ could have made His message any clearer for us. He told us we could rely upon the Towrah and then He warned us whom we should not trust, revealing that a self-serving insider would feign an alliance with Him so that he could more easily snatch souls away from God. He, of course, was speaking about Paul—and those who have allied themselves with him.

One would have to be naïve not to see Paul in Yahowsha’s statement telling us to “be alert and turn away from false prophets who come to us from within dressed in sheep’s clothing who are actually self-serving and self-promoting wolves.” By examining Yahowah’s test, we know for certain that Paul was a “false prophet.” As a Jew, he “came to” this audience “from within.” We know that Paul was effective, that he was believable, because he presented himself as the ultimate “insider.” And yet while he claimed to speak for the Ma’aseyah, he never quoted Him. As such, he “dressed himself up as” one of Yahowsha’s “sheep” when he appointed himself Yahowsha’s Apostle. And as we know, Paul, more than anyone who has ever claimed allegiance with the tribe of Benjamin (something which can no longer be done in that all genealogical records were destroyed in 70 CE) was the “wolf” Yahowah and Yahowsha’ predicted would savage their flock. And then when we recognize that this warning came in the midst of a discussion regarding the eternal role the Torah plays in our salvation, the very thing Paul sought to undermine, we are left with a singular conclusion: Paul of Tarsus was the false prophet, the wolf in sheep’s clothing, the insider, who led many to their death and destruction by way of his popular path.

This is especially poignant, because on another occasion Yahowsha’ spoke of the comparative influence He would have versus Paulos. God’s statement is one of the reasons that I consider Paul to be the most influential (albeit not in a positive way) man who ever lived. Yahowsha’ revealed:

“I, Myself, have come in the name of My Father, and yet you do not accept Me nor prefer Me. But when another, completely different individual, comes forth, presenting himself in his own name, that individual, that lone and specific man, you all will actually receive, accept, choose, and prefer.” (Yahowchanan / Yah is Merciful / John 5:43)

If you do not know Yahowsha’s name, you do not know Him – nor do you know the Father who sent Him. His name defines who He is, from whom and why He came. When it is changed or replaced, the result is no longer God. And when the object of one’s belief ceases to be credible, their faith is in vain.

Considering how often the founder of the Christian religion wrote: “but I Paulos say...”, it’s a wonder more people don’t recognize him as the one who not only came in his own name, a moniker he actually chose for himself, but also as the one so many have received. Paulos even said “imitate me.” He wrote: “if someone teaches in opposition to what I say let him be accursed.” He was not only fixated on himself, he claimed the entire world for himself. And today, the vast preponderance of Christian bible studies, sermons, and quotations are based upon Paul’s letters rather than Yahowsha’s pronouncements – and almost never upon His Instruction on the Mount.

Recognizing that we last reviewed the conclusion to Yahowsha’s most famous, longest, and most revealing public presentation in the first chapter, long before we had considered the opening lines of Galatians, now with Paulos’ initial letter behind us, let’s listen to God conclude His argument against this man and his faith.

“From their fruit, by conducting a careful, thorough, and competent inquiry in the future, you all will be able to use evidence and reason to genuinely comprehend them. Is it even rationally possible to collect a bunch of grapes from a thorn (akantha – something sharp an pointed often found on a thorny bramble or brier), or from a thistle, figs?” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:16)

Just as we can delight in the subtlety of Yahowsha’s use of a “harpazo – rapture” derivative to direct our attention to Paul’s false prophecy, akantha, translated “thorn” in verse 16, is from akmen, which means “point.” God is thereby directing our attention to two of Paul’s most incriminating statements, both of which we will reconsider later in this chapter.

Yahowsha’s instructions continued with... “In this way, every good and useful fruit tree produces exceptionally suitable and commendable, genuine, approved, magnificent, admirable, advantageous, superior, attractive, fitting, valuable, highly beneficial, and proper production and results. But a tree which is corrupt, rotten, and harmful bears diseased and worthless (poneros – seriously flawed and faulty, annoying and perilous, malicious, troubling, and painful) fruit.” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:17)

With the test so simple, with the evidence so plentiful, with the stakes so high, why do you suppose so few people have deployed this criterion to evaluate the fruit of Paul’s pen? Equally troubling, with God being so definitive, expressly saying that cherry picking snippets from a rotten source isn’t acceptable, why are so many Christians willing to exonerate Paul because they rather like some of what he has to say?

“It is not possible for a good and useful fruit tree to produce seriously flawed or disadvantageous (poneros – diseased, faulty, annoying perilous, troubling, counterproductive, or evil) fruit (karpos – production and results), nor a tree which is corrupt, rotten, and harmful (sapros – bad, unprofitable, unsuitable, and destructive) to make, create, produce, or provide suitable or commendable fruit and results.” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:18)

A bad tree can on occasion produce something edible, but such is not the case with a rotten prophet. If a person is speaking for Yahowah, everything they write and say is beneficial and reliable. With His prophets, because He is directing them, there are no mistakes and no misleading statements. But if there is a single error, one putrid statement, the smallest corruption in someone’s testimony who claims his words have been nurtured by God, we must reject that source entirely. Therefore, any one of the statements Paul has made in the corpus of his letters is by itself, individually, sufficient to require the rejection of the entirety of his letters – rejecting every word as harmful. Even that which may appear appropriate in an inappropriate source must be rejected, because that appearance only serves to make the venom more enticing to ingest.

When it comes to providing the proper perspective, there are few insights more important than recognizing that Satan and his messengers make their nauseating fruit appear delectable by coloring it with strokes from God’s brush. These resulting counterfeits fool the unsuspecting, the unobservant, and the indiscriminate into believing that a message crafted by the Adversary will lead them to paradise. But just as a counterfeit bill is completely worthless even when ninety-nine percent of its strokes are genuine, the more a false prophet says which is true, the more deadly he becomes.

Credibility is Yahowah’s strong suit, which is why deceivers like Paul misappropriate it to make their lies appear credible. Paul has fooled five billion souls deploying this strategy. And Satan, with the assistance of Paul, Akiba, Muhammad, and Wieshaupt, has deceived ten billion souls, beginning long ago with Adam and Chawah.

“Any and every tree not producing suitable, fitting, genuine, approved, commendable, and advantageous fruit shall actually be cut off and done away with and toward the fire (pyr – a metaphor for judgment), it is thrown. (7:19) So then, indeed, as a result and in reality, by their fruit, their production, harvest, and results, you will be able through careful observation and studious contemplation to actually know and understand them.” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:19-20)

Since epiginosko speaks of that which can be known for certain based upon a close examination and careful evaluation of the available evidence, this concept is being presented as the antithesis of, and thus as the alternative to, faith. Therefore, to the degree that Yahowsha’s statement was accurately translated, this is especially relevant. And that is because faith is Paul’s lone alternative to observing the Towrah.

It is surprising, but nonetheless true, that God and man differ dramatically on the concept which has become synonymous with religion. God, rather than asking us to blindly believe Him, wants us to read His testimony so that we come to know Him. That is why the Towrah and Prophets were written and given to us. And this voyage of discovery which leads to knowing Yahowah is vastly superior to believing that He exists. Similarly, actually engaging in His Covenant is better than believing that you have a relationship with God.

Then, speaking of the consequence of being influenced by Sha’uwl and his Lord, Satan, Yahowsha’ revealed:

“Not any one saying to Me, ‘Lord (kyrie – master, owner, one who rules over, controls, or enslaves) Lord,’ will actually as a result enter into the kingdom of the heavens, but by contrast the one presently acting upon and actively engaging in the purpose and desire of My Father, the One in the heavens.” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:21)

If you are still among those referring to God by Satan’s title, then you are unaware of Yahowah’s will – which is to serve His Covenant children as their Father. Lord and father are mutually exclusive concepts. God cannot be your Father if he is your Lord.

The only reason Yahowah created the universe, conceived life, engaged in our lives, and provided His guidance was so that we would be able to choose to engage in His family-oriented Covenant relationship. By mischaracterizing God’s nature and purpose in the way Paul has done, those who refer to God as “the Lord” are upending our Heavenly Father’s intent. This then bars entry into heaven. And that is because salvation is a byproduct or benefit of the Covenant. It is yet another thing Christians have reversed.

And should you be clinging to the myth that God is referred to as “the Lord” throughout Scripture, the truth is just the opposite. God spoke or wrote His name, “Yahowah ( ),” exactly 7000 times in the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. Religious rabbis and Christians then copyedited God, substituting “Lord” for His name.

Equally instructive, if one must act upon the purpose and desire of our Heavenly Father to enter heaven, then salvation does not come by way of faith as Paul asserts. To respond to God’s will, His intent, we must first come to know what He is offering and what He wants. And that brings us right back to the Towrah, to the one place Yahowah introduces His purpose and plan.

Since this comes as a shock to those lost in religion, as believers almost universally refer to their god as “Lord,” especially Christians, Yahowsha’ completely destroyed their every illusion.

“Many (polys – a very great number and the preponderance of people) will say to Me in that specific day, ‘Lord (kyrie – master, owner, one who rules over, controls, or enslaves) Lord, was it not in Your name that we actively spoke genuinely inspired utterances, and in Your name, we drove out demons, and in Your name, many mighty and miraculous things we made and did.” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:22)

But the answer to that question is a resounding “no!” Not one Christian in a million knows or uses Yahowsha’s name. In fact, once a person comes to know His name and understand what it means, he or she can no longer be a Christian. And that is because Yahowsha’s name means “Yahowah Saves.” And that means that the means to salvation is found in the Towrah rather than in the “New Testament.”

Thanks largely to Paul, you will not find a church where the sermon is delivered in Yahowsha’s name. Christians speak on behalf of Paul instead. They are inspired by Pauline doctrine rather than by Yahowah’s Towrah. In all of their many books, in all of their vast libraries, in all of their superficial bible studies, in all of their thoughtless radio and television programs, and in all of their religious institutions, they never speak or write in the name of God. Most don’t even know it.

As for driving out demons, the moment you come to understand that Christian clerics, like Paul, are inspired by Satan, it is easy to see why they would be able to exorcise demons. The Adversary controls both. So casting out demonic spirits becomes the perfect ruse.

“Mighty deeds and miracles” are so often claimed by those inspired by the Adversary that Yahowah tells us that when we see them we ought to be especially wary. Yahowah isn’t a showoff but Satan is. God does not have to prove His status or power, but Satan does. Moreover, Christians almost universally claim that their lives or those that they love have been miraculously transformed, something they errantly attribute to God. So Yahowsha’ is telling them that these things are neither proof nor valid, neither good nor appropriate.  

In an informed and rational world, Yahowsha’s conclusion would have scuttled Pauline Doctrine and destroyed the religion of Christianity with it. And so it is ironic Christians believe that their religion was created by the individual who cratered it before it was born.

“And then at that time, I will profess to them that because I never at any time knew you (oudepote ginosko umas – at no time was I acquainted with you, not even once or for a moment did I acknowledge you or understand you), you all must depart from Me (apochoreo apo emou – you are now ordered to leave, going away and separating yourselves from Me), those of you involved in Towrahlessness (anomia – who are in opposition to and have attempted to negate the Towrah, thereby those of you without the Towrah, who demonstrate a contempt for the Towrah and are thereby in violation of the allotment which provides an inheritance).” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:23)

There are two reasons the multitudes were sent away, both of which are related, either of which results in being rejected by God. Initially, Yahowsha’ said that He “never knew them,” which means that the overwhelming preponderance of people don’t know Him either. If they are involved in a relationship with god, their god is not real.

When God says “at no time was I acquainted with you,” it means that these individuals have all failed to capitalize on the Covenant. No matter what they may have felt or believed, they were not engaged in a relationship with God. Beyond this, when God says that “not even once for a moment did I acknowledge you or understand you,” it means that He never heard any of their prayers and that their opinions, even conclusions, regarding Him and their religion were incomprehensible. And this means that every argument Christians pose to justify their opposition towards Yahowah’s name, towards observing His Towrah, or towards engaging in the Covenant, are moot. God isn’t interested in them.

The point Yahowsha’ is making here is one that took me a very long time to fully assimilate. But God’s position is both simple and reasonable, even necessary. Salvation is only afforded to the children of the Covenant. And in fact, salvation, which entails becoming immortal, becoming perfected, being adopted while being enriched and empowered, collectively serve as the benefits of the Covenant. It would be senseless, even irritating, for God to save those who do not know Him – those who hold contrarian views toward Him. After all, God has to live with those who are saved for eternity. And if He saved everyone, heaven would be like hell – no different than the mess we have made for ourselves here on earth through politics and religion, militarism and patriotism.

Yahowsha’ has just delineated the issue which has now defined our debate. According to Yahowsha’, to reject the Towrah is to be rejected by God. But according to Paul, the inverse is true. He writes that a person must reject the Towrah to be saved. So who do you suppose is right?

Or better question yet, since Paul claims to speak on behalf of the individual his letters contradict, how could he be right? Said another way, based upon Yahowsha’s statement regarding admission into heaven, why would anyone in their right mind believe that Paul was telling the truth?

Have you been listening? This has been a scathing indictment of Pauline Doctrine and Christian teaching. Yahowsha’s name matters, as does His Torah. And the presence of miracles does not equate to the presence of God as Christian apologists claim. Countless Christians have justified their faith by claiming to have witnessed inspired healings and character transformations in the name of “Jesus Christ,” unaware of the fact that the Ma’aseyah Yahowsha’ said that observing the Torah, not miracles, was the proper means to evaluate whether or not someone actually has a relationship with the Father.

Yahowsha’ further proclaimed and promised: “Everyone, therefore, then who presently and actively listens to these statements of Mine, and he or she genuinely acts upon them, will be likened to a wise, intelligent and astute, a prudent and sensible, a thoughtful and judicious individual who edifies and strengthens his or her house upon the rock.” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:24)

Second only to their disdain for Yahowah’s testimony, as God’s Word is written in the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, the Christian aversion to Yahowsha’s testimony is telling. They are somehow unaware that they spoke with the same voice – as did the Disciple known as “the Rock” who would become Sha’uwl’s foe. So while Christians will acknowledge Yahowchanan’s assertion that Yahowsha’ is the Word of God, there is a disconnect in their minds between that statement and the realization that He was, therefore, the living embodiment of the Torah and Prophets. And that means that to listen to Him, you will have to read them. After all, that is why He began this instruction affirming the validity, value, and enduring nature of the Towrah and Prophets.

“And even when the rain (e broche – a besprinkling (akin to a baptism)) descends, the rivers come, and the rapidly shifting winds blow, descending upon this specific home and household (te oikia – the family), then it shall not fail because the foundation was previously established and is enduring upon bedrock (petra – solid rock).” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:25)

While Christians will tell you that Paul won the argument over the viability of the foundation God had laid with His Torah, Yahowsha’ begs to differ. He recognizes that not only is it the primary source of guidance regarding the Covenant and the Path to Salvation, it is also the most effective protection against the torrents of rapidly shifting winds others would bring against us. Fortunately, so long as we are grounded in the Towrah, our home is secure.

This knowledge is the reason Yahowsha provided this perspective on the Towrah along with His conclusions regarding those who would seek to discount its value in the midst of His initial public declaration. God’s guidance to mankind begins here. This is where the journey to life begins as well.


And you don’t need me to tell you that Sha’uwl was an egomaniac who admitted to being demon-possessed

“Because if I might want to brag, honestly I would not be imprudent or unjustified. For then, I will say (ero) I am presently refraining. But someone who not approaching me might have reason to promote an opinion beyond what he sees in me, or something he hears from me, (12:6) especially regarding the preeminence and awe-inspiring aspects of the revelations and disclosures.

Therefore, in order that I not become overly proud and be excessively lifted up beyond what would be justified, there was given to me a sharp goad and troubling thorn in the body, a messenger and envoy of Satan, in order to restrain me, so that as a result, at the present time, there is the possibility that I might not be conceited, currently exalting myself beyond what would be justified.” (2 Corinthians 12:6-7)

Speaking of this thorny goad, he also said: “And everyone of us having fallen down to the earth, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew language, ‘Sha’uwl, Sha’uwl, Why are you actually pursuing me? It’s hard, demanding and difficult, for you to resist against the goad, the pointed sharp stick used to prick and prod and thus control animals.” (Acts 26:14) And as we now know, he quoted Dionysus.

You do not need me to tell you that Paul was insane. He told you himself. “Having become insane (paraphroneo – having become deranged, completely irrational, and out of my mind, being senseless and devoid of understanding), I speak for the sake of, about, and beyond me, myself, with exceedingly great works and extraordinary burdens in overwhelming imprisonment by an abundance of guards, in extremely severe beatings and blows, in death dying many times, often, again and again.” (2 Corinthians 11:23)

Since Paul’s psychosis is germane to our investigation, let’s reconsider some of the other insane things the Devil’s Advocate had to say to the Corinthians.

Contradicting his own overt animosity toward legalism, the founder of the Christian religion hypocritically wrote: “And we are ready to punish all disobedience, whenever your obedience is complete.” (2 Corinthians 10:6) Not only is “obedience” something Yahowah opposes, justice is His not ours.

Of his role promoting such rubbish, the always arrogant, self-promoter, wrote: “Even if I should boast somewhat further about our authority...I will not be put to shame.” (2 Corinthians 10:8) I imagine Satan thinking the same thing.

This is followed by another odd and indicting comment: “For I do not wish to seem as if I would terrify you by my letters.” (2 Corinthians 10:9) Sure, the tone is condescending and the prose bizarre, but unless written by a despot with a large and ruthless army, why would a letter “terrify” anyone? It is as if Paul was trying dismiss his foes the same way homosexuals and Muslims do today, when they refer to them as being “homophobic” and “islamophobic.”

An even more peculiar reference is conveyed by: “For they say, ‘His letters are weighty and strong, but his personal presence is unimpressive, and his speech is contemptible.’” (2 Corinthians 10:10) While we ought not care what Paul looked like, you’d have to be delusional to view his rhetoric as weighty. But he was correct in this regard: his speech was contemptible.

Paul digresses further in opening of the 11th chapter of his second letter to the Corinthians, writing: “I wish that you would bear with me in a little foolishness; but indeed you are bearing with me.” (2 Corinthians 11:1) Unless I’m reading this wrong, to put up with Paul is to be foolish. But why would anyone want to suffer such foolishness if he or she could instead observe God’s brilliance by reading His Towrah?

Sha’uwl was afraid that his simplistic and erroneous presentation of the Ma’aseyah would be exposed and criticized by those who knew better, so he wrote: “For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted, you bear beautifully.” (2 Corinthians 11:4 from the NASB) And yet we know that Yahowsha’ bears no resemblance to the Christian Jesus, a character who has far more in common with Dionysus and Mithras than Yahowah or His Towrah. The Pauline Christian misnomer is decidedly not the living manifestation of the Word of God, but is instead a caricature contrived to annul it.

This leads to another arrogant and indeed errant announcement: “For I consider myself not in the least inferior to the most eminent apostles.” (2 Corinthians 11:5) Paul’s pride became blinding.

Incapable of being rational, he considered himself brilliant: “But even if I am unskilled in speech, yet I am not so in knowledge; in fact, in every way we have made evident to you in all things.” (2 Corinthians 11:6) If Paul was a fraction as smart as he claimed to be, he would have educated his audience by drawing their attention to the terms and conditions of the Covenant. He would have explained how the Covenant’s benefits were enabled by Yahowsha’s work during the Miqra’ey. But instead, he condemned the Covenant, created a new one, and denounced the Invitations to Meet with God because they got in the way of his faith.

A systematic review of the literature emanating out of the mid to late first century reveals that the only prophets and apostles which Paul could have viewed as being in competition with him, and whose message was opposed to his, were Yahowsha’s Disciples and perhaps those who had learned from them – and thus those filled and equipped by the Spirit on Shabuwa. That makes this next statement especially toxic. “For such are false prophets, treacherous and deceitful (dolios – tricky and clever) workmen (ergates – perpetrators) masquerading as (metaschematizo – converted and transformed so as to appear, disguised and pretending to be) Ma’aseyah’s (ΧPΥ) Apostles (apostolos – prepared messenger who is sent out).” (2 Corinthians 11:13)

So then this is Paul’s perspective, his foolish and contrarian message: “Furthermore (palin – also and again) I say (lego), let no one (me) presume of me (oe tis me dokei – someone should not be of the opinion) that I am (einai) ignorant and irrational (aphron – foolish, stupid, senseless, and devoid of reason). But (de) even if actually like this and foolish (ei me ge kai os aphron – if perhaps ignorant and really senselessness), you will receive (dechomai – believe and welcome) me (me) in order that (ina) I (kago) as someone little (to micron – small) I may boast in myself (kauchaomai – might brag and glory in me). What (o) I say (lalo) is not (ou) according to (kata) the Lord’s (KN) way of speaking (laleo – sayings), but to the contrary (alla) as (os) in (en) foolishness (aphrosyne – recklessness and thoughtlessness, senselessness and folly) in (en) this (houtos) substance and nature (hypostasis – essence or objective aspect and underlying reality behind everything; a compound of hupo, under, and histemi, standing upright) of (tes) boasting (kauchesis – pride and glorifying oneself).” (2 Corinthians 11:16-17) If this is correct, Paul is admitting the obvious. He was not speaking for Yahowah or Yahowsha’, but was instead speaking foolishly by bragging on his own behalf.

But Paul wasn’t finished exposing himself. “Because (epei – since) many (polloi) may boast (kauchaomai – brag and glorify themselves) according to (kata) the flesh (sarx – ­their physical prowess), I also (kago) glorify myself and brag (kauchaomai – boast).” (2 Corinthians 11:18) His personality and Satan’s began to morph, becoming indistinguishable.

It was at this point in the fourth chapter of Questioning Paul that we began to realize that Paul was psychotic. “For indeed (gar – because), gladly (hedeos – with delight and enjoyment) you accept (anechomai – bear, endure, and put up with) the senseless and foolish (aphron – ignorant and irrational) being (ontes) wise (phronimos – shrewd and intelligent).” (2 Corinthians 11:19)

And if not psychotic, then surely nauseating. This is making my stomach turn... “Because (gar) you put up with (anechomai – you accept as valid or true and forebear) someone who and something which (ei tis – whosoever and whatever) makes you subservient, completely enslaving you (katadouloo umas – imposes their unrelenting authority over you), someone who and something which (ei tis – anyone and whatever) is exploitive (katesoiei – devouring and destructive, taking complete advantage by being divisive), someone who and something which (ei tis – anyone and whosoever) is controlling (lambano – grasps hold of and acquires, possesses and takes advantage of), someone who and something which (ei tis – anyone and whatever) is exalted (epairomai – is highly regarded), even someone who or something which (ei tis) flays the skin (dero) of your (umas) person (prosopon – being and head, frontal proximity, appearance, and presence).” (2 Corinthians 11:20)

His letter devolved into a volcano of verbal diarrhea: “Relative to (kata) this disgrace and shame (atimia – this dishonorable approach, this vile ignominy and disparaging way), I say (lego), in this manner (os) that (oti) we (emeis) have been weakened and have become powerless (astheneo – we have become incapacitated and diseased, infirmed and feeble, through corruption and perversion). But (de) in (en) this (o), whomsoever (an tis) might dare be so extreme (tolmao – may be so bold and fearless, defiantly go so far regardless of the opposition) in (en) foolishness (aphrosyne – thoughtless ignorance, foolish folly without reflection or consideration, reckless stupidity, and rash senselessness and irrationality), I say (lego), I also (kayo) am extremely daring and bold in opposition (tolmao kago – have the courage to actually and actively defy).” (2 Corinthians 11:21)

Continuing to hallucinate, the delirious and deranged wannabe apostle wrote: “By Jews five times, forty besides one, I received. (2C11:24) Three times I was beaten with sticks, once I was stoned, three times I was shipwrecked. A night and a day, I was caused to drown in the depths (bythos – plunge to the bottom, sinking into the deep or abyss). (2C11:25) Many times in perilous journeys, in dangerous rivers, in threats from bandits, from perilous kin, from dangerous races, in a threatening city, in perilous solitude, in a dangerous body of water, by pseudo brothers, (2C11:26) in bothersome and difficult work and in toilsome hardship, in constant sleeplessness, in prolonged, severe hunger and thirst, in frequently going without food, in cold and nakedness, (2C11:27) independently and by myself (choris – without help, apart, alone, disassociated, and separated, estranged without a relationship), besides the addition of the constant stopping to quell rebellions (o epistasis – of halting to suppress attacks and upheavals, of the pressure, concern, burden of authority, and disturbing hindrance associated with riotous mobs) of the extent of my daily anxiety and distracting care of all of the called-out assemblies. (2 Corinthians 11:25-28)

Yes, not only was Paulos killed multiple times, evidently facilitating his own personal resurrections, he was the first to cruise in a submarine, having spent twenty-four hours at the bottom of the sea.

It isn’t often that we are afforded a window into a deranged and psychotic mind, but Paul in addition to being insane was a megalomaniac, so he was ever ready to share his afflictions and affinities. And now he seems to be telling us that when he is empowered, Yahowah and His Torah are weakened, becoming incapacitated and impotent. And that so long as he isn’t shot down in flames, God’s credibility is questioned, with His Towrah becoming unbelievable as a result of having been slandered and scandalized.

“Who is weak and incapacitated (tis astheneo – what is powerless, incapable, and impotent by being corrupted and perverted) when I am not incapacitated nor weak (kai ouk astheneo)? Who stumbles, ceasing to be credible (tis skandalizomai – what is slandered and scandalized becoming unbelievable, even offensive, being trapped, distrusted and deserted) when I am not (kai ouk ego) myself destroyed in the fire (pyroomai – myself consumed by flames, burning with passion, greatly worried and distressed, tempted with desires, or aroused sexually, incensed or indignant)? (2C11:29) So since it is necessary to brag (ei kauchasthai dei) of my limitation and weakness (ta tes astheneia mou – of this infirmity, lack of insight, frailty, incompetence and inadequacy of mine), I will boast (astheneia – I will brag, glorifying myself).” (2 Corinthians 11:30)

And speaking of psychosis, after what we have just read, Paul’s next statement borders on schizophrenic. “The God (o ΘΣ) and father (pater) of the Lord (tou ΚΥ) Iesou (ΙΗΥ) has known (oida – has actually and completely been aware of and has recognized and acknowledged) the one being (o on) praised and worthy of commendation (eulogetos – one being blessed; from eulogeo – with praiseworthy words and beneficial speech) throughout the universe and forever (eis tous aion) because (hoti) I absolutely cannot lie (ou pseudomai – could never deceive or mislead by speaking falsely or conveying anything that is not true).” (2 Corinthians 11:31)

In the midst of his braggadocios diatribe, with Sha’uwl presenting himself as the source of universal and everlasting truth, the most rational conclusion is that Paulos is presenting himself as commendable and praiseworthy – the source of healing words and beneficial speech. As further affirmation, he has already told us that God knew him and chose him before he was born. As such, this may be Sha’uwl’s most presumptions, egotistical, and delusional statement.

Paul is doing such a great job incriminating himself, let’s stick around a little longer to see how this plays out. After all, this is serious business. This psychotic megalomaniac bamboozled billions of people with this soaring rhetoric. “It is necessary to brag (kauchaomai dei), not advantageous (ou symphero – not beneficial). But now (de) as affirmation (men – indeed, surely and truly), I will go (erchomai – I will come) onto supernatural visions (eis optasia – to what appears to the mind by supernatural means) and (kai) revelations (apokalypsis – revealing disclosures, uncovering and unveilings) of the Lord (ΚΥ).” (2 Corinthians 12:1)

One way to avoid lying I suppose is to say that you can’t remember. But when they are allegedly transformative events in your life, encounters which provide your authority, that won’t fly. Nonetheless... “I am aware of (oida – I know, recognize, recall, or acknowledge) a man (anthropos) in (en) Christo (ΙὨ – a placeholder used by Yahowsha’s Disciples and in the Septuagint to convey Yahowsha’, meaning Yahowah Saves) before fourteen years (pro etos dekatessares) whether if (eite) in (en) body (soma – as a physical being) I do not know (ouk oida – I am unaware and do not recall) or if (eite) outside the body (ektos tou somatos – disassociated from a physical being) I do not recall or remember (ouk oida – I do not know, I am unaware, and I will not acknowledge). The God (ΘΣ – a placeholder used by Yahowsha’s Disciples and in the Septuagint to convey ‘elohym, the Almighty), He has known and has remembered (oiden – he has recognized, recalled, and acknowledged) having been violently seized and snatched away (harpazo – having been viciously attacked, ravenously plundered, forcibly possessed, harshly controlled, carried away, swindled, and extorted) like this (ton toioutos – in this kind of way) until (heos – as far as) the third heaven (tritos ouranos).” (2 Corinthians 12:2)

So if he cannot remember how he encountered this individual, whether he was out of his body or just out of his mind, how does he know whom he met or what he was told? And if he can’t recall what happened, why did he provide three detailed, albeit conflicting, accounts for Luke to record in Acts? Also, if God can be counted upon to remember either, then there would be no reason for Paul to ask us to forget what He said. Or should we consider all of this deranged musings and hallucinations – the product of an insane mind?

“And (kai) I recall (oida – I know and remember, I am aware and acknowledge) as such (ton toioutos – like this) a man (anthropos) whether if (eite) in (en) body (soma – as a physical being) I do not know (ouk oida – I am unaware and do not recall) or if (eite) without the body (choris tou somatos – apart from a physical being) I do not recall or remember (ouk oida – I do not know, I am unaware, and I will not acknowledge). The God (ΘΣ – a placeholder used by Yahowsha’s Disciples and in the Septuagint to convey ‘elohym, the Almighty), he has known and has remembered (oiden – he has recognized, recalled, and acknowledged) (2C12:3) because (oti) he was viciously attacked and plundered, harshly controlled and extorted (harpazo – He was violently seized and snatched away, forcibly controlled, carried away, and swindled) approaching (eis – inside and with reference to) the paradise (ton paradeisos – a Babylonian / Persian Sanskrit word for garden enclosure and hunting preserve) and he heard (kai akouo) words which cannot be spoken (arretos rhema – unspeakable and unsaid statements or matters which cannot be expressed; literally the unexpressed words) which it is not permissible, possible, or lawful (a ouk exesti – which ought not be obligatory; literally out of existence) for a man (anthropos) to speak (laleo).” (2 Corinthians 12:4)

But to Paul, hearing what he didn’t hear and saying what he could not say was reason for him to brag which he did while not boasting, unless self-glorification was in incapacitating timidity. I kid you not. “On behalf of such things like this (hyper tou toioutos), I will actually boast (kauchaomai – I will brag, engaging in self-glorification, expressing pride in myself) for the sake of it (hyper). But myself (de emautou – so on my own accord), I will not brag (ou kauchaomai – I will not engage in self-glorification) if not (ei un) in the (en tais) incapacitating inadequacy of corruption and perversion (astheneia – infirmity and illness borne out of dishonesty, timidity and limitations associated with fraud, weakness and sickness derived from defiling and profaning, inadequacy and lack of insights caused by polluting and sullying the established conditions).” (2 Corinthians 12:5)

This led, of course, to the declaration of being demon-possessed, the citation from 2 Corinthians 12:7 upon which this section of the final chapter of Questioning Paul began. And yet, somehow, it begs to be repeated... “Because (gar – for indeed) if (ean) I might want (thelo – I may decide, desire, propose, or enjoy) to brag (dauchaomai – to boast or to glorify myself) truthfully (aletheia – honestly), I would not be (ouk esomai) unjustified or imprudent (aphron – acting rashly without reason, inappropriate or foolish).

For then (gar – because) I will say (ero) I am presently abstaining (pheidomai – I am currently refraining). But (de) someone (tis) not (un) approaching (eis) me (eme) might ponder (logizomai – may have reason to logically conclude, embrace an opinion, or hold a view) beyond (hyper – over and above and because of) what (o) he sees (blepo – he will be able to view and discern) in me (me), or (e) something (ti) he hears (akouo – he listens to, receives, pays attention to) from (ek) me (emou), (12:6) especially of the (kai te – so with regard to the) extraordinary superiority of the (hyperbole ton – preeminence and exceedingly great, transcendent, magnificent, and awe-inspiring aspects of the exaggerated and overstated) revelations (apokalypsis – disclosures with the appearance of instructions concerning the unknown).

Therefore (dio – it should be self evident), in order that (hina – for the purpose that) I not become overly proud and be lifted up (me hyperairomai – I not become conceited, exalting myself beyond what would be justified, so as not to be insolent, audaciously lifting myself above the source of my inspiration), there was given to me (didomi ego – there was deposited upon me, allowing me to experience, there was granted and entrusted to me for my advantage) a sharp goad and troubling thorn (skolops – a sharp pointed prod used to control dumb animals, featuring poisonous scorpion’s stinger) in the body (te sarx – incorporated into the flesh and as an aspect of my physical, animal, and human nature), a messenger (angelos – a spiritual envoy or demonic spirit) of Satan (Satan – a transliteration of satan, Hebrew for the Adversary), in order to (hina – so as to) strike and restrain me (kolaphizo – adversely harm, beat, and torment me, violently mistreating me to painfully afflict, attack, buffet, and batter me; from kolazo – to prune, control, check, curb, and restrain me), so that as a result (hina), at the present time, there is the possibility that I might not be conceited, currently exalting myself beyond what would be justified (me hyperairomai – I may not be overly proud nor excessively exalted or lifted up, overdoing it (scribed in the present tense, meaning at this time, in the passive voice, affirming that this is being done to him, with the subjective mood indicating that this outcome is a mere possibility, and in the first person singular, thereby identifying Paulos as the one being possessed and controlled). (2 Corinthians 12:7)

Regarding this (hyper toutou – because of and about this), three times (tris) of the Lord (ton kupion – of the supernatural master who controls a person, the owner of slaves to whom someone belongs, the one who lords over and exercises supremacy, and the power to possess), I asked (parakaleo – I begged, urged, and pleaded) in order that (ina) it might be repelled (aphistamai – at some point it might possibly leave and be kept away, departing (aorist active subjunctive)), separated from me (apo emou – out of and disassociated from me).” (2 Corinthians 12:8)

I don’t suspect that Paulos much liked being demon-possessed. It must have been maddening and manipulative. So he pleaded with his spiritual accomplice, begging Satan to “aphistamai – to repel” the demon, not only “making it leave” but also “keeping it away. He knew, of course, that every “messenger of Satan,” and thus every “demon,” served the Adversary and thus would obey its Lord. And just as arrhetos was the “negation of the Word,” aphistemi is the antithesis of Yahowsha’s purpose: “to stand up for us so that we might stand with Him.” Therefore, to be aphistemi is to be separated from God’s purpose.

If you are looking for God’s help, if you what Him to respond to you, that will never happen if you call Yahowah or Yahowsha’, “Lord.” This is not only Satan’s title, and the name God uses to identify the Adversary, in that the name Ba’al means “Lord,” it is the antithesis of the way our Heavenly Father wants us to relate to Him in the Family Covenant. This is why Yahowsha’ said as much in His Instruction on the Mount.

“Therefore (dio – for this reason it should be self evident), I am pleased with and prefer, delighting in (eudokeo en – I enjoy and take pleasure in, I consider good and consent to) sickening perversions (astheneia – the inadequacies and infirmities caused by corruptions, illness borne of dishonesty, weakness which results from the tendency to defile, to profane, and to dishonor that which is set apart as common, incapacitation, weakness, and lack of insights derived from a willingness to pollute and sully the established conditions), in (en) presumptuous maltreatment and outrageously damaging insults (hybris – injurious treatment and harmful behavior, the invasion of the basic rights of others, ignominious hardships and impudent insolence, pride and haughtiness, wanton violence, and tempestuous wrongdoing), in (en) the necessity and inevitability of compulsion and punishment (anagke –  obligatory trouble, unyielding pressure, the destiny and advantage of distress and tribulation as well as imposed calamity), in (en) persecution and oppression (diogmos – harassment and molestation which causes people to flee in fear, driving them away through terror), and (kai) the difficulty of the distressing restrictiveness (stenochoria – the troublesome narrowness and resulting calamity and extreme affliction) regarding (hyper – associated with and because of) Christou (ΧΡΥ – a placeholder used by Yahowsha’s Disciples and in the Septuagint to convey Ma’aseyah) is the reason (gar – indeed, because) I am sickened by my perversions (astheneia – I am inadequate and infirmed through my corruptions, ill as a result my dishonesty, weakened by my tendency to defile, to profane, and to dishonor that which is set apart as common, incapacitated with a lack of insights derived from my willingness to pollute and sully the established conditions), and at the same time (tote) I am (eimi) empowered, competent and capable (dynatos – plausible, expert, and important, mighty, powerful, and influential).” (2 Corinthians 12:10)

“I have come to be (ginomai – I have become) ignorant and irrational (aphron – senseless and foolish, stupid, acting rashly, essentially out of my mind, lacking judgment). You (umeis), yourselves, compelled me (anagkazo me – forced this upon me, drove me to this, necessitating it). For this reason (gar), you all (umon) are obligated to me, and under me, you owe me (opheilo upo umon – you are indebted to me and it is indispensable and obligatory that you are required) to be commended and recommended (synistemi – to be approved, established, and legitimized). For indeed (gar – because), I lacked nothing, never falling short of (ouden hystereo – I wasn’t the least bit inferior to or lacking any benefit or advantage of) the (ton) preeminent (hyperlian – super and exceptional) if even (ei kai) I am (eimi) nothing (oudeis – a worthless, meaningless, nobody).” (2 Corinthians 12:11)

Turning to the ultimate authority on Sha’uwl, as if he were admonishing him, Yahowsha’ used kerdaino, the very same verb deployed here four times, to warn us: “For what will be accomplished and who will be helped (tis gar opheleo – what value would there be and who would be benefited) by a man if (ean anthropos – on the condition an individual) the entire universe (ton holos kosmos – the totality of the whole world) he might gain, winning over, taking advantage of and profiting from (kerdaino), but (de) his soul (autou psyche) he forfeits (zemioomai – he damages undergoing punishment)?” (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 16:26)

God’s insights are stunningly appropriate, especially when we consider Sha’uwl’s elaborate justification for personal payment in 1 Corinthians 9:1-12. If we knew where he was buried, this should be written on his tombstone.


Let’s be clear: Sha’uwl / Paul’s motivation for opposing God is irrelevant. All that matters is that he did. Yet I recognize that human nature causes us to wonder how Satan could have fooled Sha’uwl initially. And just as millions have pondered the nature of the thorn in Paul’s side, even though it was revealed in the text, we are likewise curious to understand the impetus behind his willingness to perpetrate the most deceitful, destructive, deadly, and damning fraud in human history. Therefore, recognizing that I’m moving away from that which you need to know, and from that which can be objectively known, to that which we would like to know, and which is purely speculative, I offer the following insights for your consideration.

The Roman name from which we have come to know Paul, Paulos, means “Lowly and Little” in Latin and not so coincidently, the common trait among all of Satan’s little helpers is insecurity. A truncated sense of value manifests itself in paranoia and ego. Hypocrisy reigns, which enables the wolf (which is actually a timid creature) in sheep’s clothing to devour unsuspecting foes who let their guard down. Their victims are predisposed to trust an insider, believing that they are telling the truth. And in this way, these predators share Satan’s persona and methods, and are therefore especially easy for him to manipulate, and effective for him to use.

To satiate their cravings to fill the painful void in their lives, insecure individuals demand attention, even reverence—and they will do or say anything they believe will serve their interests. In doing so, they become exceedingly divisive. It’s them against everyone, except those who are unrelentingly loyal, pledging their unwavering support – and yet even they are questioned. But these wolves are deadly, killing everything they touch by biting an opponent’s heels. As opportunistic hunters, they will devour most anything living or dead, including their own. Their insecurity drives them to be excessively territorial, and they will fight anyone who infringes on their turf. All of this makes insecure individuals particularly vulnerable and especially susceptible to those who can fulfill their yearning to be in control; to be admired.

Examples are: Paul (the wolf in sheep’s clothing), Nero (the prototypical “Antichrist”), Rabbi Akiba, Marcion, Diocletian (circa 303 CE with his persecutions), Emperor Constantine, Muhammad, Maimonides, Adolf Hitler, and Stalin. My father was hopelessly insecure, as was my most important customer in my first business, even the man I unfortunately hired to replace me in my last. Should you be interested in meeting them, I exposed the divisiveness of these individuals in Prophet of Doom and In the Company of Good and Evil.

Every word of Galatians oozes arrogance and hypocrisy—the telltale signs of insecurity. Sha’uwl’s life was a living contradiction. After claiming that he was an “Apostle” trained by God, Paul wallowed in self-indulgence. The first half of his letter was so overtly egotistical and self-centered, it was obvious that Paul was trying to compensate for his inadequacies and rise above his foes by putting them down. After alleging to have been chosen by Yahowsha’, he contradicted Him. After telling countless lies, he said that he cannot lie. After disassociating Yahowsha’ from the Torah which served as His exemplar, Paul told believers that they should follow his example. After being welcomed by Yahowsha’s Disciples, Paul demeaned them. His most repetitive phrases were “but I say,” and “to the contrary.” Then after ruthlessly attacking his foes, calling for their castration, Paul insisted that he not be troubled by their rebuttals.

Especially relevant in this regard, it is evident that Sha’uwl was rebuked by Messianic Yahuwdym who publicly demonstrated that he was lying. Since insecure men cannot tolerate criticism, Paul responded the same way Muhammad would centuries later—by demonizing Jews: calling the Chosen People the “enemy of God.” The argument he waged in Galatians against those who observed the Torah, flowed directly into his next letter, Sha’uwl’s anti-Semitic rant in First Thessalonians.

Sure, there were different strokes for different folks, which is why there are different religions, but the point of vulnerability is always the same. Insecure and egotistical people like Paul, and Akiba, Constantine, and Muhammad after him, crave power, reverence, and control. The founders of religious schemes lust for unbridled adoration, and will stop at nothing to garner the undivided attention they need.

Based upon what we have read in this letter, Paul was the perfect patsy. He was a Pharisee, the best student of the best teacher. He was among those Yahowsha’ called hypocrites and a brood of vipers—the children of demons. He was one of Satan’s children before he became Satan’s messenger. So, of course, Paul thought that the lesser light and voice came from his god. It did.

Paul’s life was also a living hell. His father sent him away when he was a young boy. So he desperately tried to prove his worth by being a good student, but something went desperately wrong. Rather than become a ranking Pharisee and serve in the Sanhedrin, Paul was sent back home to sew tents. Can you imagine how demeaning this must have been for someone desperate to prove himself? For a boy who craved attention, who yearned to be respected, he was doing women’s work.

Never having enjoyed a mother’s love, Paul turned on women. He grew to hate them. And in a culture where homosexuality was considered an abomination, he at the very least struggled with his sexual orientation, expressing his love for only one person—a man named Timothy.

Having witnessed his dark side, his penchant for tearing others down and abusing them, Rabbis chose Paul to harass those who recognized that Yahowsha’ was the Ma’aseyah. And even in this barbaric job, Paul would brag that he excelled. Imagine a soul dark enough to boast about such a thing. And so it was in this darkness, in the midst of being subhuman, that the man who had been rejected by his father, who had been rejected by the Pharisees, and who was good at being bad, was offered the one thing he craved: respect. The Adversary who wanted to be worshiped as if he was God had found his kindred spirit. And together they would reshape the world.

I suspect that Paul, like Constantine and Muhammad knew that something was amiss during the conversion experience. While all three embellished their account of it over time, only they know if they were actually fooled by Satan pretending to be God or not. But such delusions were fleeting. All too soon they were committed. Then up to their throats in their own self-serving charade, they couldn’t turn back and admit the truth—their egos wouldn’t allow it. And that is why Satan picked them in the first place. He knew that their need to be respected and to compensate for their broken childhoods drove a lust for attention and respect which he could manipulate.

So long before Paul wrote Galatians, he knew the truth. His ploy, the conception of two covenants, was way too clever, way too diabolical, way too false, for him not to have laughed at his victims for believing his story. But there was no turning back. He, like Muhammad, was demon-possessed, and thus was no longer in control. He had been betrayed by the Great Betrayer, the lord of egos, the prince of lies. The first step toward the dark side had set things in motion which could not be undone.

We know that Satan promised Muhammad, a dumb brute of a man, sex, power, money, and immortality. And he delivered on all four accounts, not that it did Muhammad any good. He was never satisfied. And we know that Satan promised General Constantine victory in a battle that would transform his life from becoming a slave as the loser, to becoming Emperor as the winner. And what I suspect Satan promised Sha’uwl—a pompous elitist—was to be his apostle—to be the single most influential man who ever lived. He delivered.

Surprisingly, the infamy of being the world’s most influential man doesn’t go to Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moseh / Moses, Dowd / David, Yasha’yah / Isaiah, or even Yahowsha’ or His Disciples, because as a result of Paul’s letters, too few people consider what they had to say. But Paul founded a religion—the largest and most influential in human history. He has been immortalized. Christians cite his words far more often than Yahowah’s and Yahowsha’s combined. He has become “Saint Paul”—the most famous “Apostle.”

And as a result of what he has done, the man who was rejected by his father, mother, religious teachers, Yahowsha’s Disciples, and God, took his revenge and damned more souls than anyone in human history. Billions have been poisoned by his words. He was the wolf in sheep’s clothing; the one in the best position to mutilate Yahowah’s Word and devour Yahowsha’s sacrifice. He was a trusted insider. And in the battle between knowing Yahowah and believing Paul, Satan achieved his greatest victory, and Christianity as we know it is the result.

If you are still a Christian, and are clinging to the notion that Paul spoke for God as opposed to Satan, and that his epistles are Scripture, you are now without excuse. The foundation of your religion has been torn asunder. Yahowah and Yahowsha’ have presented their case against him, and have proven that he was a false prophet as clearly as words allow. Paul’s way of faith and his gospel of grace are in direct conflict with God’s Word. So for Christians, it is time to metanoeo: to change your perspective to that of the Torah, your thinking so that it is consistent with God’s, and your attitude so that you rely upon Yahowah and not men.

If you are unwilling to do these things, appreciate the consequence. The souls of those who continue to believe Paul and reject God will cease to exist at the end of their mortal lives. And for those who promote Pauline Doctrine, which is essentially the religion of Christianity, you have put yourself in opposition to God. As a result of having sided with the Adversary, such souls will endure eternal separation in the place which shares Sha’uwl’s name: She’owl. Don’t say that you were not warned.

But if you are now free of Paul, and if you are liberated from the enslavement of his religious deception, then I invite you to turn to the God Paul rejected. Embrace Him on His terms, and He will embrace you. You have His Word on it:

“Yahowah’s Towrah (towrah – teaching and instruction, guidance and direction) is complete and entirely perfect, lacking nothing, correct, healing, beneficial, and true, returning, restoring, and transforming the soul. Yahowah’s enduring testimony and restoring witness is trustworthy and reliable, verifiable and establishing, making understanding and obtaining wisdom simple for the open-minded.” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 19:7)

LE: YY 10-1-2013