185Questioning Paul

Devil’s Advocate

…Plague of Death

 

6

Pharmakeia | Poisoned

 

Toxic Tale…

Once upon a time, I had expected that errant translations and misinterpretations of Galatians had been responsible for Christendom promoting the myth that the Torah had been annulled. And yet, Paul, himself, has been responsible for this deadly delusion. He has gone well beyond simply relegating the Torah to a bygone era. He has assailed the Covenant, calling it a source of slavery, rather than liberation.

Sha’uwl has condemned himself to She’owl with his own words. If that was all there was to this investigation, so be it. But unfortunately, Paul’s noose was woven into a net which has ensnared billions of souls and turned Gentiles against Jews. For those reasons, we will press on, unraveling his trap.

As we turn the page and open the fifth chapter of Galatians, Sha’uwl remains fixated on the distinction between the liberty he claims he possesses and the servitude he has associated with observing the Towrah. In the process of having made Yahowah’s Covenant man’s mortal enemy, the concluding clause is exceptionally demeaning, even for Sha’uwl.

“This (te) freedom (eleuthera – liberty) of ours (ego) is in becoming Christos (ΧΡΣ – Divine Placeholder used 186by early scribes for Christou | Drugged or Chrestou | Useful Implement to usurp the Septuagint’s credibility and infer Divinity) it freed and unrestrained (eleutheroo – it liberated, exempted, and released). You all are directed to stand firm (steko – you must persist steadfast).

Therefore (oun – then), also (kai), not again (me palin) in yoke (zygos) of subservience and slavery (douleia – bondage and subjugation) you are held based upon a grudge against you all (enechomai – are submitting based upon hostility toward you all, burdening, opposing, and controlling you all, forcing you to surrender to someone who bears ill will, is resentful, violent, and quarrelsome).” (Galatians 5:1)

There is a rather complex grammatical situation occurring in the initial clause which can only be appreciated through close scrutiny of the cases, moods, and pronouns. “Christos,” for example, was written in the nominative case which conveys “to be” or “to become.” It renames the subject, in this instance, the reader, so that they become Christos.

Eleutheroo was written eleutherosen, in the third person singular, conveying “it,” and then scribed in the past tense using the aorist indicative. This requires a rendering of “it freed and unrestrained,” but what was “it?”

The associated verb, steko, was written stekete, in the second person plural, making it “you all” or “all of you,” and then in the present tense imperative mood which expresses a command. This communicates: “you all are directed to stand firm.” Such a directive is contradictory. How is someone who has been freed now subject to a command?

What Paul is attempting to say is that Christians will be freed from the Towrah so long as they obey his command. This, of course, requires the recasting of Yahowsha’ who was devoted to the Towrah.

187Because the rest of Sha’uwl’s statement is equally deplorable, let’s consider the Nestle-Aland McReynolds Interlinear interpretation of it before we dig any deeper: “In the freedom us Christ freed stand then and not again in yoke of slavery be held in.” These scholars ignored much of the prevailing Greek grammar and then translated the verb enechomai inadequately, perhaps even inaccurately. According to the ten most respected lexicons, its primary meaning is “to bear a grudge against someone and to violently control, harass, and burden them against their will in a hostile fashion.” It speaks of “the hatred and resentment which flows from being ensnared and entangled in a trap, and thus having to surrender and submit to a hostile foe.”

Let’s not forget, Sha’uwl has relentlessly sought to identify this “yoke of slavery” which “ensnares, burdens, and controls” its victims as being Yahowah’s Towrah. So now this is personal. Paul has gone so far as to slander God and demean His character.

To remove any doubt that enechomai was properly translated, and that Sha’uwl inappropriately associated its perverse connotations with Yahowah, and His influence over humankind from this preposterous Pauline perspective, we can turn to the most respected lexicons. They render it: “to bear a grudge against someone, to be resentful and hostile, to burden and harass someone violently, to control and subjugate others, and to ensnare and entangle them in a trap.” Also recognize that this verb was written as enechesoe, in the second person plural, present passive imperative. The passive voice signifies that “you all” (from the second person plural) are being acted upon by a verb which is in this case quite maniacal. And since the imperative mood is used to express a command, Sha’uwl is saying that our forced submission is the intended result of God’s announced declaration.

Therefore, the opening stanza of the fifth chapter of 188Galatians actually conveys:

“This freedom and liberty of ours by becoming Christos, it freed and released. So you all are directed to stand firm.

Therefore, also, never again associate with the yoke of subservience and slavery. You were held based upon a grudge against you all, controlling you and forcing you to surrender to someone who bears ill will, is resentful, violent, and quarrelsome.” (Galatians 5:1)

That was hard to write, much less read. It is hard to imagine Paul hating God to this degree.

Based upon Paul’s attitude, and the nature of his delusional and inverted thesis, it wasn’t much of a stretch for the New Living Translation to suggest: “So Christ has truly set us free. Now make sure that you stay free, and don’t get tied up again in slavery to the law.” Paul’s intent is obvious. Therefore, as a thought for thought paraphrase, the NLT nailed it.

Unfortunately, what Paul thought and wrote was not true. Yahowsha’s sacrifice as the Passover Lamb resolved our sins, not God’s.

By comparison, the KJV was a bit slow on the uptake: “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.” At least the King James accurately reflected one aspect of enechomai with “entangled.” And it was even a slight departure from the Latin Vulgate which is rare. Jerome wrote: “Stand fast and be not held again under the yoke of bondage.”

Galatians continues to be as painful as it is pernicious. Having attempted to censure God, the Devil’s Advocate unleashed his first official “I Paul say….” He would have the faithful believe that he was more credible and important than God. Sha’uwl was a blithering idiot. What you are 189about to read is yet another lie – this one deadly...

“You pay attention (ide – you look right now, listen and see, noticing this), I (ego), Paulos (Paulos – transliterated Paul, whom Strong’s called “the most famous of the Apostles;” the name is of Latin origin meaning Lowly and Little), myself, say (lego – I individually assert, declaring) to you all (umin) that (hoti – because) if (ean – on the condition) you may be circumcised (peritemno), Christos (ΧΡΣ – being the Ma’aseyah (but without the definite article, Christos is a better grammatical fit than the correct title “the Implement Doing the Work of Yah”)) for you (umas) nothing (oudeis – totally worthless and completely meaningless, annulling the possibility and negating the idea that) will be helpful (opheleo – will provide assistance or benefit, will be useful or valuable).” (Galatians 5:2)

According to this statement, to believe Paul’s word, you must reject God’s Word. Yahowah said the opposite. An uncircumcised man is prohibited from participating in Pesach – foreclosing the only means to eternal life. Moreover, God explicitly states that the soul of an uncircumcised man is barred entry to Heaven.

Beyond robbing every Christian man of the opportunity for eternal life, Paul has done something far worse. The man who had the audacity to claim that he alone was inspired by God, and had met with Yahowsha’ | “Jesus,” just negated the merit of his sacrifice as the Passover Lamb.

Distilled to its essence, the Plague of Death wrote…

“You pay attention, I, Paulos, myself say to you all that if on the condition that you may be circumcised, Christos is totally worthless and completely meaningless, not in the least bit helpful or useful for you.”

This is blasphemous in the extreme, with Paulos 190saying, “if you follow Yahowah’s guidance in the Towrah, you cannot be saved by Yahowsha’.” This time, the writing quality is sufficiently clear – it is the message which is at fault.

The depravity of Paul’s message is exemplified by the words he chose to convey it. The first one, “lego – I say,” pits Paul against Yahowsha’: “the ‘logos – word’ made flesh.” It is also a substitute for the “dabar – word” of God. Logos was written in the first person singular, present active indicative. Even though the pronoun “I” or “myself” was designated in the verb, Sha’uwl added “ego – I” separately, in addition to his chosen name, “Paulos,” to emphasize that he was the source of this “declaration, narration, command, assertion, and report.”

The present tense indicates that “Paulos,” as the writer, was portraying his statement as being currently valid and remaining so into the future. In the active voice, the verb confirms that Sha’uwl was the sole source, and solely responsible for this assertion and for its consequence. The indicative mood attests to the fact that Paul wanted his audience to believe that what he was portraying was completely accurate. As such, he has negated any possibility that he was speaking for Yahowsha’. Worse, Paulos, in saying such a thing, is annulling the purpose of Yahowsha’s life, making it impossible for anyone who believes him to be saved.

“Peritemno – you may be circumcised” was written as peritemnesoe in the second person plural, present passive subjunctive. The passive voice combined with the subjunctive mood signifies that there is somewhere between a possibility and a probability that the subject is being acted upon, suggesting in this case that Sha’uwl wanted us to believe that those who are Towrah observant may have been either hoodwinked or compelled into being circumcised.

191Moving on to the next word, at first blush, it appears as if oudeis, rendered “nothing,” was misused in this text. It is actually an adjective (meaning that it should be modifying the noun “Christos”), not an adverb, coloring the nature of “opheleo – will be helpful.” Oudeis is defined as “the negation of a noun,” as “no one, nothing, and nobody,” all of which are rather demeaning when associated with Yahowsha’ because it negates everything Yahowsha’ said and did, making him a “nobody” and his sacrifice for “nothing.” And yet that is what happens when Yahowah’s Towrah instructions regarding His Covenant and Miqra’ey generally, and circumcision, specifically, are ignored or, worse, rejected.

Similarly, oudeis conveys the idea that a noun, in this case a misnomer, “Christos,” is “in no respect valid, totally worthless, of no account whatsoever, and completely meaningless.” All of this is true when “Christos” is disassociated from God’s Word as Sha’uwl has done.

Oddly, noting that umas, designating the pronoun “you,” was rendered in the personal (referring to a person) second person plural (and thus “all of you” or “you all”) accusative (marking it as the direct object of the verb), “opheleo – will be helpful” was written in the third person singular, denoting “it will not provide assistance or benefit.” Therefore, to properly convey Sha’uwl’s convoluted citation into English, we need to move “umas – you” from between “Christos” and “ouden” (as it appears in the Greek text) to the end of the sentence, as I did for you in the statement’s summation.

Rendered in the future active indicative as ophelesei, the concluding verb conveys the notion that “its negated benefit will not actually be accomplished in the future” by the subject, who is “Christos.” And the future negated benefit is defined as: “being of help, assistance, or value, being useful or profitable, and being advantageous.”

192It should be understood here that as a Yisra’elite, and as the son of a Pharisee, Sha’uwl would have been circumcised eight days after he was born. So by writing this sentence, Paul was either saying that his rules don’t apply to him (as was the case with Muhammad, most politicians, and religious leaders), or he was publicly announcing that Yahowsha’s life and Yahowah’s Towrah are of no value to his Faith. I will let you ponder whether one or both realities is actually true.

Before we consider Yahowah’s position on circumcision, here is a consortium of English translations for your consideration. NAMI: “Look I Paul say to you that if you might be circumcised Christ you nothing will benefit.” LV: “Behold, I Paul tell you, that if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.” KJV: “Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.” NASB: “Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.”

In this case, the NLT has actually moderated what Paul has said: “Listen! I, Paul, tell you this: If you are counting on circumcision to make you right with God, then Christ will be of no benefit to you.” While Paul wrote that you have no hope of salvation if you are circumcised, the evangelical text softened that considerably to suggest that circumcision isn’t beneficial when it comes to salvation.

Since I am bereft of words when it comes to Pauline commentary, let’s ponder Yahowah’s position on circumcision as it was articulated in the Towrah. God’s message is so unambiguous and unwavering, there is no reason to interrupt Him with my commentary. He said...

“I will take a stand to establish and confirm (wa quwm – so I will validate and honor, setting up, constructing and building, fulfilling and accomplishing, carrying out and restoring, encouraging others to take a 193successful stand to raise up and keep (hifil perfect)), therefore (‘eth – in accordance with this association and through this relationship), My Covenant Family (beryth ‘any – My Family-Oriented Relationship Agreement, Vow of Marriage, My Home and Household Promise, My Pledge and Contractual Arrangement, My Binding Oath Regarding a Treaty Between Two Parties, from beyth – family and home).

For the purpose of encouraging understanding, achieved through making connections between Me and you, it will promote an association with (bayn ‘any wa ‘atah wa byn – to provide insights which facilitate a relationship between Me and you so that you and I can be discerning based upon closely examining and carefully considering teaching and instruction, using good judgment to respond properly throughout the long interval of time, so as to increase the comprehension of) your offspring (zera’ ‘atah – your seed, those conceived as posterity, your children, the harvest that is the result of what you have planted) after you (‘achar ‘atah – afterward and subsequent to you) for their generations to approach (la dowrym hem – for their people living at different times and in various places, their family line and lineage dwelling in a home and camping out throughout time) by way of (la – for the purpose of) an everlasting (‘owlam – an eternal, never-ending, always continuing) Family Covenant Relationship (beryth – Family-Oriented Agreement regarding the terms and conditions of living in a home as part of a household).

I will exist as (la hayah – for the purpose of being) your God (la ‘atah la ‘elohym – and for you to approach the Almighty) as well as (wa) for your offspring (la zera’ ‘atah – for your posterity and children to move toward the goal) after you (‘achar ‘atah – afterward and subsequent to you).” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 17:7)

“So then (wa) God said (‘amar ‘elohym – the 194Almighty affirmed and declared, making a request (qal imperfect – literally with unfolding consequences)) to (‘el) ‘Abraham (‘Abraham – the father who raises and lifts up those who stand up and reach up, father of the abundantly enriched, merciful father, or father of the multitudes who are confused and troublesome), ‘As for you (wa ‘atah ‘eth – in addition and with regard to you), you should continually examine and genuinely consider (shamar ‘atah – you should consistently observe, always focusing upon, look at and pay attention to, learn from and care about, diligently and literally contemplating the details which comprise (qal imperfect – literal interpretation of the relationship with ongoing and unfolding consequences throughout time)) My Family Covenant Relationship (beryth ‘any – My Household Accord and Agreement).

In addition, so should the offspring you conceive (wa zera’ ‘atah – as well as your seed, descendants, and prodigy) following you (‘achar ‘atah – after you) so that they might approach throughout their generations (la dowrym hem – for them to draw near and reach the goal no matter when or where they live, for every age, period, lineage, race, or class of individual). (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 17:9)

This specific (zo’th – this one and only, singular entity being discussed as the (demonstrative singular feminine pronoun from zeh – lamb and sheep)) Familial Covenant of Mine (beryth ‘any – My Family Agreement, My Household Accord, and My Home (singular feminine construct)), which beneficially marks the way to the relationship (‘asher – which to show the way to this fortunate and joyful place that is found by walking the correct way, thereby revealing the steps which lead to life), you should continuously observe, closely and literally examining, while carefully considering (shamar – focus upon, look at and pay attention to, be aware of, learn about and remember, care about and cling to, retain for 195protection, diligently contemplate and in great detail evaluate (qal stem imperfect conjugation – literally and genuinely, consistently and continually, with actual and ongoing implications regarding the relationship)).

You should strive to be discerning and make an intelligent connection to understand Me (bayn ‘any – to pay attention while being observant and diligently join things together in a rational and prudent way which lead to perceiving, properly regarding, and comprehending Me). This is for you to be perceptive and prudent regarding the association (wa bayn ‘atah – for you to make the appropriate connection after exercising good judgment).

To form a thoughtful relationship and make a comprehensible connection between (wa byn – to consider the instruction provided and make an intelligent association with) your offspring (zera’ ‘atah – your descendants and children, your seed and posterity, those you conceive who are harvested) following you (‘achar ‘atah – after you), you should circumcise (muwl – you should cut off and remove the foreskin, warding off a deadly and debilitating curse by way of this oath, changing priorities while making a binding promise to undergo the benefits of circumcision (scribed with the niphal stem denoting the genuineness of this relationship while stressing the benefit accrued to the parent, while the infinitive absolute intensifies the importance of the act, and in the imperfect conjugation, reveals that this instruction on circumcision will endure uninterrupted throughout time with ongoing benefits)), accordingly (la – to facilitate their approach), your every male to help them remember their status (‘atem kol zakar – every son of yours, every man and every boy to remember, memorialize, and honor the status and renown associated and implied with this celebration of the relationship).’ (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 17:10)

And (wa) you all shall make a declaration by 196cutting off and separating (malal – you shall truthfully proclaim and speak about being circumcised, announcing the truth regarding the principle of circumcision as a sign, as a subtle means of communicating what it means to be set apart (the niphal stem is used to convey the voice of genuine relationships where the subject, which is “you” as a parent, receives the benefit of the verb, which is circumcision, in the perfect conjugation designating that this instruction and resulting action should be accomplished and considered whole and complete, and in the consecutive associating it with our basar – flesh)) your foreskin’s (‘arlah – the fold of skin covering the conical tip of the masculine genitalia; akin to ‘aram and ‘arak – the tendency of people to gather together before the cunning and crafty, to be drawn in by the clever counsel and calculating tendencies which are conceived, arranged, set forth, ordained, and esteemed to appear comparable) association with (‘eth) one’s animalistic instincts and propensity to preach (basar – the physical body and animal nature but also separating from mankind’s propensity to proclaim and publish what the people yearn to hear).

And (wa) this will exist (hayah – this is and will be (scribed in the qal perfect, signifying the relationship is genuine and that the act is only performed once and is considered complete)) as (la) the sign to remember (‘owth – the example to visually illustrate and explain, the symbol and standard, the pledge and attestation of the miraculous nature (singular, as in the one and only sign, construct form, linking the sign to)) the Family-Oriented Covenant Relationship (beryth – mutually binding familial agreement, household promise, relational accord, marriage vow based upon home and family (feminine singular, scribed in the construct form, eternally associating the beryth – covenant with ‘owth – the sign of muwl – circumcision)) between Me, for the purpose of making a connection (byn – in concert with coming to 197know and understand Me as a result of being perceptive, prudently considering the insights which are discernible regarding Me) and between you, promoting understanding (wa byn – to cause you to be aware and to more readily comprehend the association). (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 17:11)

Therefore, with (wa – it follows that with) a son (ben – a male child) of eight (shamonah – from shamen, meaning olive oil, which is symbolic of the Spirit, of light, of being anointed, and of being rooted in the land) days (yowmym), you shall circumcise (muwl – you shall cut off and separate his foreskin (scribed using the niphal stem denoting a relationship which is genuine whereby the parents benefit from doing as God has requested, and in the imperfect conjugation which tells us that this must continue to occur over time because it is designed to produce ongoing results)) with regard to your (la) every (kol) male to remember (zakar – masculine individual; from zakar: to commit to memory, to remind, and to remember) throughout (la) your dwelling places and generations (dowr – your protected households and extended families, elevating and extending your lives), those naturally born (yalyd – those naturalized as a member of the extended family through natural childbirth) in the home (beyth – into the household and family (singular absolute)), and also (wa) those wanting to be (kasap – those desiring, yearning, and passionately longing to be) acquired and included (miqnah – purchased and obtained; from qanah – to be redeemed (speaking of adoption)), of (min) every (kol) son (ben – male child) of foreign lands (nekar – of places where they were not properly valued and appreciated, and yet who are nonetheless observant) who relationally (‘asher – by way of making a connection) are not (lo’) from (min) your seed (zera’). (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 17:12)

He (huw’ – third person masculine singular pronoun, 198addressing fathers) should absolutely circumcise him, definitely cutting off the foreskin (muwl muwl – he can ward off a deadly and debilitating curse by way of this oath, promising to cease what he is currently doing by changing his priorities while making a binding promise to undergo circumcision (scribed with the niphal stem denoting the genuineness of this relationship while stressing the benefit accrued to the parent, in the infinitive absolute which intensifies the importance of the act, and in the imperfect conjugation, telling us that this instruction on circumcision will endure uninterrupted throughout time with ongoing benefits)) of the naturally born (yalyd – naturalized as a member of an extended family through natural childbirth) in your home (beyth – into your household and your family) and also (wa) those desiring to be (kasap – those wanting, strongly yearning, and passionately longing to be) included (miqnah – acquired, purchased, redeemed, and obtained) as well as those who are acquired (miqnah – purchased through adoption and included) with your money (keseph – your precious metals; born out of a deep longing and love for adoption).

This shall be (hayah – this was, is, and will be, existing as (qal stem denotes a genuine relationship between the subject and the action of the verb which is existence, in the perfect conjugation revealing an act that is complete, lacking nothing, when accomplished, in the singular conveying that there are no other options or contingencies, and in the consecutive form, associating our existence with the beryth – family-oriented covenant relationship and its sign, muwl – circumcision)) My Family-Oriented Covenant Relationship (beryth-y – My mutually binding familial agreement and relational accord), in (ba) the flesh (basar – physical realm with humanity), serving as a means to approach toward (la – to the goal of) an everlasting and eternal (‘owlam – forever existing and never-ending) Family-Oriented Covenant Relationship (beryth – mutually binding 199agreement and promise, relational accord and marriage vow based upon home and family (feminine singular)). (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 17:13)

Therefore (wa), the uncircumcised (‘arel – the stubborn, unresponsive, untrusting, and self-reliant, those unwilling to listen and those who are unobservant, those who are not separated and who are unwilling to be set apart) male (zakar – man who fails to remember to do this) who relationally (‘asher – by association does not know the proper way or the benefits of the relationship and) is not circumcised (lo’ muwl – willing to change his direction and priorities and make this binding promise to ward off the curse (nifal imperfect – men who continually remain uncircumcised as a result of their inaction suffer the consequence)) with regard to (‘eth) the flesh (basar – physical, human, and animal nature in addition to being separated from those who preach and publish what mankind wants to hear in association with) of his foreskin (‘arlah – symbolic of ‘aram and ‘arak – man’s propensity to be drawn together by crafty counsel, by cunning tendencies, and that which is conceived, arranged, set forth, ordained, and esteemed to appear comparable), that soul (ha nepesh ha hy’ – speaking of what makes each individual unique, alive, aware, and conscious) shall be cut off, be excluded, and banished (karat – it shall be severed and cut down, it shall be uprooted and die, perishing and destroyed, ceasing to exist (nifal perfect – they will not only have caused their soul’s banishment, they will suffer the effect of their exclusion as a result of this singular failure during their brief lives)) from (min) her / Her (hy’ – addressing the nepesh which is now severed from the Ruwach Qodesh’s Covenant) family (‘am – people who are kin, related biologically or through a common language or experience).

By way of association (‘eth – therefore as a result), they violated and broke by creating two separate 200variations, thereby dissociating themselves from (parar – they nullified the agreement and injured themselves by revoking the Covenant’s promises, tearing asunder and thwarting the relationship’s benefits, splitting away and harming themselves in the process by severing the agreement through the process of tearing into two parts (hifil perfect – their act of creating a new covenant led to their own demise such that neither they nor their new covenant will endure)) My Family-Oriented Covenant Relationship (beryth-y – My mutually binding agreement and promise, My relational accord and vow based upon home and family (feminine singular, scribed in the construct form, connecting and associating the beryth – covenant with God’s ‘am – family; written with the first person singular suffix: My – reminding us that this specific and unique Covenant is God’s)).” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 17:14)

There can be no doubt; according to Yahowah circumcision and the Covenant are related and inseparable. A “New Covenant” of any kind, much less one where circumcision is considered counterproductive, is therefore a nonstarter. Do not believe anyone who tells you otherwise, and that includes Paul. Also, if someone condemns “the flesh,” calling it evil, as Paul is wont to do, please note that Yahowah’s Covenant was cut with us in the flesh – and there is nothing God prizes more highly.

Therefore, our Heavenly Father is serious about circumcision. So we should be as well. His statements are as enlightening as they are unequivocal. And especially relevant is ‘arel, a word which when fully amplified explains the nature of those who are uncircumcised. Those who do not embrace this, the fifth and final Covenant requirement, are considered: “stubborn and unresponsive,” they are “untrusting and therefore not reliant” because they “do not listen and refuse to be observant,” so as a result, they are “forbidden” because they are “not set apart” unto 201God.

Rather than Sha’uwl’s “if you might be circumcised, the benefit of Yahowsha’ is nullified,” God said: “if you are not circumcised, your soul will be cut off and separated from My family because you have broken and nullified My Familial Covenant Relationship.” Those who believe Paul must reject Yahowah, and He just happens to be God. Or we can trust Yahowah, which means rejecting Paul. The truth is undeniable: Sha’uwl’s faith and his promise are the antithesis of God’s promises – especially relative to the Covenant.

There are so many questions which are answered by Yahowah’s declaration, let’s linger here and consider them one at a time. First, karat, like so many Hebrew terms, has a dark and light side. The word’s divergent implications influence us differently depending upon the choices we make. On the bright side, karat is routinely used by Yahowah to tell us that He has “karat – cut” His “beryth – agreeable familial covenant relationship” with us – one which “separates” those who accept it from those who do not.

For those who ignore Yahowah’s Covenant, who reject it, or try to change it, they will endure the cutting and divisive side of karat. They shall be “cut off” and thus “separated from” Yahowah’s Family. They will be “excluded” from His Covenant and will be “banished” from His Home. Those who choose not to sign their acceptance of Yahowah’s Covenant by way of circumcision, those who are unwilling to “muwl – change their direction and priorities,” will be “karat – uprooted” from the Promised Land – a metaphor for Heaven. They will “karat – die” and their souls will “perish, ceasing to exist.”

Second, while “muwl – circumcision” is a physical act in the flesh, our “nepesh – souls” are everything but 202physical. The nepesh represents our “consciousness.” It is an essential part of our nature, the reservoir of our personality and means to observe and respond to what is around us.” This consciousness has no physical properties. It has no mass and it is not matter. And yet, by failing to be circumcised in the flesh, our soul dies, because it is expressly excluded from Yahowah’s Covenant Family. Therefore, the choices we make in our mortal, material bodies influence whether or not we are elevated to a spiritual status.

Third, circumcision is not, by itself, the means to reconciliation, but it is a barrier to salvation. While most of those who are circumcised will not be adopted into God’s family, one hundred percent of men and boys who have not been circumcised will be excluded.

Fourth, we either agree to God’s terms or we nullify the opportunity He has given us to survive our mortality and to live with Him. There is no hint of leniency here, no sense of compromise, no opportunity for a future revision to alter this requirement. We either accept it or not. No circumcision, no Covenant. No Covenant, no relationship with God. No relationship with God, no salvation. And therein is why such souls die.

This distinction is so well established, so clear cut, so unequivocal, and so obviously delineated as a condition of the Covenant, it means that Paul’s attack against Yahowah, His Towrah, and His Beryth was deliberate and overtly adversarial. It also means that Paul was wrong.

God is not going to negotiate this point nor is He going to capitulate. He cannot change the terms of His agreement without becoming dishonest and unreliable. As a result, there is a singular path to life, and we either walk to God along it without wavering, or it is goodbye and good riddance. There is no accommodation for individual approaches, or for the collective appeal of Christianity, 203Judaism, or Islam.

The implication here is something no Christian or Muslim, both who claim that the Towrah was inspired, seem willing or able to acknowledge. Most believe that it does not matter if their faith is in compliance with God’s instructions, because they have been led to believe that He knows the content of their heart. Contradictions, therefore, become irrelevant. To them, God is God no matter what you call Him. To them, Friday prayers and Sunday worship are perfectly acceptable. Jihad and Grace are both embraced by the faithful, and many paths are thought to lead to Heaven. Sure, Christmas and Easter are pagan, but since that is not what they mean to the celebrant, they believe that their god will be understanding. For them, mercy invokes a level of capriciousness which they do not see as inappropriate. Their god would not reject them for getting some of the details, well actually, everything, wrong.

And yet, all of these musings are inconsistent with the God who inspired these words. With Yahowah, you accept the Covenant on His terms or not at all. Not only are we in no position to negotiate with God over something integral to His nature, we have everything to gain if we agree to His terms, and He loses nothing if we do not.

Fifth, the “nepesh – souls” of those who do not rely upon God’s instructions “karat – die, they perish and cease to exist.” Throughout the Towrah and Prophets, this is the prevailing outcome for the vast preponderance of human souls. At the end of most peoples’ mortal lives, when they die, they will cease to exist because their souls will simply perish.

The evaporation of a soul is not a penalty or a Divine punishment. In fact, Yahowah has little to do with this eventuality. It is by “karat – disassociating from” God that this fate occurs. And that is because eternal life with God 204is predicated upon us associating with Him in the specific manner He has delineated. If we do not accept His terms, if we don’t avail ourselves of the path He has provided, then our souls, disconnected from the source of life, perish, which means that an individual’s consciousness will simply cease to exist.

All religions, but most especially Christianity and Islam, seek submission among their adherents by threatening eternal suffering and fiery tortures in hell for all of those who don’t acquiesce to their edicts. However, not a person among such believers pauses to think that, if their god actually said “love me and agree with me or I’ll see to it that you suffer forever,” such a spirit would not be lovable. A god who would make such statements would be sadistic. And that is why there is an alternative fate awaiting souls which is neither heaven nor hell, neither a reward nor a punishment. Religious leaders, however, universally deny the fact that God has such a provision since this outcome is neither something to be coveted nor feared and cannot be used to threaten masses of people into submission.

That is not to say that there is not a place of eternal separation – there is. But there are no fires blazing or physical tortures perpetrated therein. She’owl is a lightless place which exists only in the dimension of time. It was established for Satan, fellow demonic spirits, and for those who lead others astray by associating with them. This is the place of separation, filled with the most outspoken and notorious religious, political, economic, and military advocates. It is for those who victimize others, oppressing them, and leading them away from the Towrah and its Covenant. It is where Sha’uwl | Paul will endure eternity.

No doubt, eternal separation from God is a penalty, but having one’s soul perish is not. Each individual is given the gift of life and freewill. Everyone can do with them as they please. If a person chooses to avail themselves of 205Yahowah’s Covenant, to walk away from Babylon and to walk to Him along the path He has provided, God has promised eternal life, merciful forgiveness of sins, adoption into His family, tremendous empowerment and enrichment.

Those who choose to ignore Yahowah’s provision, to rely on a different scheme, to alter the deal He has cut with us, or simply reject it, will be ignored by God and remain unaltered by His Covenant promises. It is ashes to ashes and dust to dust. Such individuals do not know God and God does not know them. Death will be the end of life.

The sixth lesson we can learn from this Towrah presentation brings us back to Sha’uwl. Circumcision is the fulcrum upon which those who rely on Yahowah’s Word move in a different direction than those who believe the self-proclaimed thirteenth “Apostle.” In Acts, the moment we are introduced to Paul, we learn that he was preaching against circumcision. As a result, he was called to Yaruwshalaim, by those Yahowsha’ had chosen and taught, to explain his departure from Yahowah’s Covenant instructions. They told Paul that he was wrong, so in his initial letter, the one he wrote to the Galatians, Paul demeaned Yahowsha’s disciples, especially Shim’own | Peter, Yahowchanan | John, and Ya’aqob | Jacob (Yahowsha’s brother, who was renamed “James” to flatter an English king). In Galatians, Paul ruthlessly attacks the Towrah, demeans the Covenant, and then denounces circumcision, inferring that God’s plan “enslaves” and is a “curse,” “incapable of saving anyone.”

Therefore, Christians have a choice. They can trust Yahowah, or they can believe Paul. Their claims are diametrically opposed and irreconcilable.

It is also instructive to know that we can’t blame this conflict between Yahowah and Paul on scribal error. These specific passages from Bare’syth / Genesis on circumcision 206are not only extant among the Qumran scrolls, they are unchanged. There isn’t a single discrepancy between the Dead Sea Scrolls, dating to the 2^nd century BCE, and the Masoretic Text from Bare’syth 17:12 through the end of the chapter. And on the other end, we have a complete copy of Paul’s letter to the Galatians dating to the 2^nd century CE.

Moreover, the preposterous notion that Paul didn’t write Galatians, a book he claims to have written, a book which is universally attributed to him, a book which provides the most sweeping panorama of his life, and a book which serves as the most direct rebuttal to the disciples regarding his animosity toward circumcision, the Covenant, and the Towrah, does not exonerate Paul. He is equally opposed to circumcision, the Covenant, and the Torah in Acts and also in Romans.

And that means that the conflict between Yahowah and Paul cannot be resolved. If you side with Paul, you will invalidate the benefits of the Covenant. You will be excluded from God’s family. And your soul will cease to exist. And that is why the choices we make in the flesh, while we retain our physical and animal nature, are so important.

The seventh lesson we can learn from God’s definitive statement is not to trust English bible translations. Yahowah actually said:

“And (wa) the uncircumcised and unresponsive (‘arel) male who fails to remember this (zakar), who to benefit from the relationship (‘asher), is not (lo’) circumcised and changed (muwl) with regard to (‘eth) the flesh (basar) of their foreskin (‘aralah), those souls (nepesh) shall be cut off, they will be excluded and banished, ceasing to exist (karat) from (min) Her (huw’) family (‘am).

By way of association (‘eth), they violated and 207broke, disassociating themselves from (parar) My Family-Oriented Covenant Relationship (beryth-y).” (Bare’syth 17:14)

While not as revealing or complete, the Roman Catholic Vulgate was accurate up to the point of identifying whose family a soul would be excluded from. “The male whose flesh of his foreskin shall not be circumcised, that soul shall be destroyed out of his people: because he hath broken my covenant.” Not only is the pronoun “Her” scribed independently in the Hebrew text via hy’, “‘am – family” was suffixed in the third person feminine singular, reinforcing the fact that it is “Her family.” Also, the reference to “his people” suggests banishment from the villages and land of Yisra’el rather than from the “beryth – Covenant,” yet another feminine noun.

The King James Version reads identically. It promotes the same myth, one which would reinforce the church’s desire to excommunicate those whom they opposed.

Recognizing that the translators had both made a mistake, the New Living Translation, not knowing how to deal with “Her,” added a second “covenant” and substituted it for “Her.” “Any male who fails to be circumcised will be cut off from the covenant family for breaking the covenant.” Since it is God’s Word, and since accuracy is therefore important, you should know that there is no basis for “any” in the Hebrew text. They combined “‘arel – uncircumcised and unresponsive” with “lo’ muwl – is not circumcised or changed,” as if only one of these words were spoken by God. Then they completely ignored “‘eth basar ‘aralah – with regard to the flesh of their foreskin” – ostensibly to avoid destroying Pauline Doctrine. But in their conclusion, reversing course, they not only repeated “beryth – covenant” twice, even though it was written once, they neglected to convey that beryth was scribed inclusive of the first person singular suffix, 208making it “My Covenant.”

Simply stated, as a sign of our desire to participate in Yahowah’s Covenant, males are to be circumcised. The foreskin is to be removed from the male genitalia which is responsible for consummating marriage and producing children. It reveals that we have agreed to be “separated, and thus set apart.” Our Heavenly Father’s Covenant is about bearing children and building a family set apart from the world of corrupt institutions. Yahowah does not want anyone to miss these points.

Therefore, considering Yahowah’s position on this particular topic, and Paul’s, it would be inappropriate to spin Galatians to infer anything other than Paul is overtly opposed to God and to His Covenant. Satan’s Apostle is not only assailing God’s instructions regarding circumcision, Paul’s position states that if you rely on God’s Word you cannot be saved. Good luck with that.

Continuing to assail Yahowah’s Covenant, whose sign remains circumcision, and God’s Towrah, the man who considered his testimony more vital than the Almighty’s, according to the NAMI ineloquently opined: “I testify but again to all man being circumcised that debtor he is whole the law to do.” Let’s be perfectly clear so that no one is misled: this is Paul’s testimony, not God’s.

“So then (de) once again (palin – furthermore, repeating myself), I testify (martyromai – I solemnly declare as a witness, I affirm, insist, and protest) to every (pas) man (anthropos) being circumcised (peritemno) that (hoti) he actually is (eimi) obligated (opheiletes – in debt and required) to do and perform (poieomai – to work, toil, and carry out the assigned tasks of) the entire (holos 209– all of, the whole, total and complete) Towrah (ton nomon – the nourishing allotment which leads to an inheritance; used throughout the Septuagint to convey Towrah – the Source of Teaching, Guidance, Instruction, and Direction).” (Galatians 5:3)

There are only five requirements in the whole of the Towrah, and they all pertain to participation in the Covenant. Everyone is free to accept these conditions, reject them, or ignore them. But for those who act upon them, the rest of the Towrah exists to liberate, enlighten, and empower the Children of God. The best example of this is Dowd (errantly known as David). He responded to the terms of the Covenant as they were presented in the Towrah, and God responded by vindicating the man who violated much of His Towrah’s guidance on how we should live our lives among men. Therefore, the fact that Yahowah calls Dowd “right, righteous, and vindicated,” demonstrates that Paul’s premise was wrong.

In that this is an important distinction, since Yahowah called Sha’uwl the “plague of death,” since God affirmed that Dowd was “correct,” let’s contrast what we have been reading to Dowd’s testimony to determine why one flawed individual was despised and the other was loved.

The following lyrics represent the initial sixteen verses of the one hundred seventy-six which comprise Dowd’s ode to the Towrah...

“Enjoyable, favorable, and blessed (‘ashry) is the Way (derek) to becoming innocent, perfect, and entirely blameless (tamym) by walking (halak) in (ba) the Towrah (Towrah) of Yahowah (Yahowah).

Properly guided (‘ashery) are those who are saved and preserved (natsar) by His enduring and restoring testimony (‘edah). They genuinely seek to have a relationship with Him and His witness (darash) for all (la kol) time (dowr).

210Therefore (‘ap), they do not carry out (lo’ pa’al) that which is harmful or wrong (‘eowlah) by walking in His ways (ba derek halak).

You (‘atah), Yourself, provided and ordained (tsawah) Your precepts, these instructions which You have entrusted to us, encouraging us to respond appropriately to You (piquwdym) in order that they would be diligently examined and carefully considered (la ma’od shamar).

As a result (‘achalay), my path through life (derek) will be properly prepared and firmly established (kuwn), approaching by (la) observing (shamar) Your truth, Your consistent, never-changing, enduring, and reliable testimony (‘emeth).

Then (‘az), I will not be ashamed (bowsh) by (ba) looking at (nabat) all of (kol) God’s (‘el) terms and conditions as they relate to Your binding covenant contract (mitswah).

You, I will publicly acknowledge and thank, expressing my gratitude while professing Your attributes (yadah) directly in an upright attitude (ba yashar leb) when (ba) I learn and properly respond to (lamad) Your righteous and vindicating (tsadaq) means to resolve disputes (mishpat).

According to (‘eth) Your clearly communicated and inscribed prescriptions of what we should do in life to live (choq), by being observant (shamar), I will not be forsaken by You. I will never be neglected or disassociated from You (‘azab), not for one hundred (me’ah) eternities (‘ad).

In what way (ba mah) can a young man (na’ar) keep his path pure so as to be acquitted (zakah ‘eth ‘orah)? By being observant, closely examining and carefully considering the associations in (ka) Your Word (dabar).

211In all my heart and with all my being (ba kol leb), I seek to form a relationship with You, seeking to learn more about You (darash). You do not want me to be misled or stray (shagah) from (min) the terms and conditions of Your relationship agreement (mitswah).

In my heart (ba leb), I have genuinely treasured (tsaphan) Your instructions and promises (‘emrah) so that (ma’an) I will not fail to reach You as a result of going astray and missing the way, nor by my wrongdoing or guilt (lo’ chata’ la).

Yahowah (Yahowah), You (‘atah) have knelt down in love to bless and provide divine favor (barak). Teach me so that I respond properly to (lamad) Your clearly communicated prescriptions of what I should do to live (choq).

With my lips and in my spoken words (ba saphah), I consider and proclaim from the written text (saphar / sepher) all of (kol) the means used to achieve justice, resolve disputes, and exercise sound judgment (mishpat) which come from Your mouth (peh).

In the Way (ba derek) of Your Witness regarding our restoration (‘eduwth), I am pleased and delighted, enjoying the ensuing relationship (suws), as if (ka) before all of the Almighty’s abundance, God’s sufficiency and substance (‘al kol hown).

Concerning Your precepts and directions (ba piquwdym), I will choose to meditate on them and speak of them (syach). And (wa) I will choose to consistently observe so that I understand (nabat) Your ways and Your path through life (‘orah).

Concerning Your clearly communicated and inscribed prescriptions of what I should do to live (ba choq), I find them fun, even enjoyable (sha’a’). I will never overlook or ignore (lo’ shakah) Your Word (dabar).” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 119:1-16)

212Dowd loved the Word of God, especially His Towrah, and wrote songs to extol its virtues. Yahowah loves Dowd, calling him both “right” and “vindicated,” in addition to “My son,” “Messiah,” and “King.” Sha’uwl hated the Word of God, especially His Towrah, and wrote letters to demean and discard it. Yahowah despises Paul, calling him the “Plague of Death,” in addition to “the Father of Lies” and “Son of Evil.” And that leaves us with only one question: why is this comparison too difficult for Christians to understand?

In order to control his audience, Paul needed the faithful to believe that he was the foremost authority on the Towrah as well as the world’s leading expert regarding salvation. Therefore, in the case of his most recent proclamation, the myth he is promoting is that if someone does anything Yahowah asks, they must do everything He asks, or they are dead men walking. But as we just noted with Dowd, that clearly was not the case.

In this regard, the third condition for those desirous of participating in the Covenant relationship with God is that we walk to Him along the path He has provided to make us perfect. This path, which is comprised of seven invitations to meet with God, is presented in the heart of the Towrah, in the book aptly named Qara / Called Out / Leviticus. Yahowah offers His remedy for our inadequacies after formalizing the Covenant with Abraham. And along His Way, Yahowah does the work so that nothing other than attendance and appreciation is required of us.

But that is not to say that Paul’s myth, one born out of a hatred for God, was not persuasive. Christians the world over and throughout time have been cheated by Sha’uwl’s belligerent deceptions into believing that “the problem with the Torah is that its restrictive and antiquated rules require perfection.”

Let’s pretend for the sake of argument that Paul was 213right: how can disobeying everything God requests endear a person to the One making those recommendations? And that is precisely what Paul is insisting upon. The self-proclaimed messenger of God wants Christians to reject God’s entire Towrah – all of it from beginning to end. Now, I ask you: who do you suppose inspired him to say such a thing?

Paul is wrong and he knows it. He was aware that the Ark of the Covenant was unavailable, and that according to Yahowsha’ the Temple itself would soon be destroyed. He also recognized that the people were under the yoke of Roman law. So, Paul knew that there were many things which were prescribed in the Torah which could not be done. Therefore, salvation could not have been a matter of doing everything the Torah prescribed, but instead understanding its prescriptions sufficiently to trust Yahowah’s remedy.

Seeing religion among the rubbish, the NLT again interpreted Paul correctly, which of course put them in opposition to God. “I’ll say it again. If you are trying to find favor with God by being circumcised, you must obey every regulation in the whole law of Moses.” Nowhere does God state that men “find favor” with Him as a result of being circumcised. Circumcision is prescribed as “the sign of the Covenant,” not the symbol of salvation or reconciliation. Moreover, for the vast preponderance of people, circumcision isn’t a choice, but instead something done to them when they are eight or fewer days old. Not a single newborn in human history has said or thought: “I want to have someone cut off the end of my external plumbing so that I can earn favor with God?” And as a result, Paul’s animosity against circumcision is misplaced.

For consistency sake, here are the Roman Catholic and Protestant versions of Paul’s poison. The LV reads: “And I testify again to every man circumcising himself that he is a debtor to do the whole law.” And the KJV says: “For I 214testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.”

The operative term in this next statement from the Devil’s Advocate is apo. It “describes the separation of something from an object which it was previously united but is now disjoined.” In this case, Sha’uwl is speaking of the purported separation of “Christou from the Towrah.” So now, addressing those who had chosen to follow Yahowah’s Torah instructions regarding circumcision, Sha’uwl testified:

“You have invalidated and rendered inoperative (katargeo – you have put an end to, made inactive and useless, and abolished the purpose and function of) the separation of (apo – the movement away and disassociation of) Christou (ΧΥ – a Divine Placeholder for the Ma’aseyah (but without the definite article, the errant misnomer, Christou, is a better grammatical fit than the correct title meaning “the Implement Doing the Work of Yah”)) whosoever (hostis) is in unison with (en) the Towrah (nomo – the nourishing allotment with enables an inheritance).

You all having been declared righteous (dikaioo – you having been acquitted, put right, and vindicated) with the (tes) Charis / Gratia / Graces (Charis – a transliteration of the name of the Greek goddesses known as the Gratia or Graces in Roman mythology), you all have fallen away and have been forsaken (ekpipto – you have become inadequate and have descended from a higher place to a lower one, you have bowed down and prostrated yourselves).” (Galatians 5:4)

Sha’uwl was a man on a mission. Too bad it involved promoting pagan deities, and demeaning the only actual Deity, on behalf of the Adversary.

And speaking of Paul’s mission, he had become a broken record. In a rut, he was demeaning the Galatians 215again. However, by lambasting the entire community of those he had preached to for completely rejecting what he had demanded of them, Paul’s letter proves that those who knew Paul best did not believe him.

The Nestle-Aland McReynolds Interlinear renders the Greek text somewhat differently, albeit the resulting message is no less inaccurate: “You have been abolished from Christ who in law are made right the favor you fell out.” This is perhaps more incomprehensible than the more literal and exacting presentation of the same words.

But as you probably anticipated, this poorly expressed thought has been interpreted by Christendom to say: “For if you are trying to make yourselves right with God by keeping the law, you have been cut off from Christ! You have fallen away from God’s grace.” To the contrary, it is only by observing the Towrah that we come to avail ourselves of what Yahowsha’ accomplished. This in turn enables us to rely upon Yahowah’s merciful gift. Those who disassociate the Towrah from Yahowsha’ separate themselves from Yahowah. Therefore, the New Living Translation has become an agent leading the faithful away from God.

But they were not the first to commit this heinous crime. There was a long line of false witnesses before them, starting with Paul. The Latin Vulgate reads: “You are made void of Christo, you who are justified in the law: you are fallen from Gratia.” The King James Version parroted this thought by publishing: “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.” It is interesting, however, that not one of these variations has properly translated “katargeo – you have invalidated and rendered inoperative” in the initial sentence, and most either ignored or misstated the meaning of “apo – the separation of.” But it’s Paul’s grammar that is to blame for the variant renderings of the second sentence.

216Considering the onslaught of lies that preceded it, in context, Paul is now saying that, since the Towrah cannot save anyone, only those who accept his Faith have hope. Even if his premise were true, and it is not, accepting it would not lead to this conclusion. Pretending that one thing is wrong does not demonstrate that something different is right, even if there were only two options available to humankind. Therefore, Paul has compounded the problem, moving from deceitful statements to logical fallacy.

“Because (gar – for then, because, and indeed) we (emeis) in spirit (ΠΝΙ – a Divine Placeholder used to convey ruwach – spirit) out of (ek) faith (pistis – originally conveyed “trust and reliance” but migrated as a result of Sha’uwl’s epistles to mean “belief”) hope (apekdechomai). Righteousness (dikaiosyne – being acceptable, virtuous, and innocent) we hope for (elpis – we expect and await patiently).” (Galatians 5:5)

If nothing else, Sha’uwl has defined his use of pistis for us. With “faith” there is never anything beyond “hope.” The faithful are left to hope that their religion is right. They never know.

The NAMI suggests that Paul said: “We for in spirit from trust hope of rightness we await.” LV: “For we in spirit, by faith, wait for the hope of justice.” And the KJV edits the “Apostle’s” words this way: “For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.”

While faith is counterproductive, the Spirit indwells those who come to know, trust, and rely upon Yahowah. But the instant the Set-Apart Spirit takes up residence in us, we are purified, and thus instantly become right with God. This isn’t something that we “hope for,” or “eagerly anticipate,” but instead enjoy.

Even more confused than Paul, and completely missing the purpose of the Spirit, the NLT conveys: “But we who live by the Spirit eagerly wait to receive by faith 217the righteousness God has promised to us.”

Nothing comes to us by way of “faith.” Yahowah’s “promises” are knowable because they are all memorialized in the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. We realize we can trust God’s testimony because it is all enveloped in prophetic predictions which have proven to be accurate. As such, those who know the Towrah are in a position to trust Yahowah and rely upon His provisions. Those who don’t understand God’s Word are relegated to faith, while those who understand God’s Word recognize that faith is counterproductive.

Using the Nestle-Aland McReynolds Interlinear as a handrail in this upside down, backward, and twisted realm of Paul’s mind, we find: “In for Christ Jesus neither circumcision some is strong nor uncircumcision but trust through love operating.”

Or, more precisely and completely:

“[For (gar – indeed because then) omitted from P46] In (en) Christo Iesou (ΧΡΩ ΙΗΥ – divine placeholders used by early Christian scribes for Christou | Drugged or Chrestou | Useful Implement and Iesou – a corruption of Yahowsha’) neither (oute) circumcision (peritome) is someone (ti) is capable, powerful, and mighty (tis ischuo – is able, competent, strong, or healthy) nor (oute – neither) uncircumcision (akrobystia – a word Paul made up comprised of “akron – the uttermost part of” and “posthe – penis”), on the contrary (alla), through (dia) faith (pistis – belief) love (agape) operating (energeo – functioning and working).” (Galatians 5:6) (Papyrus 46 renders “energeo – working” in the genitive participle rather than the nominative, and therefore, it modifies the noun, “agape – love,” not “pistis – trust.”)

This is to say that everything God conveyed in the Torah and Prophets regarding His Covenant and its sign, circumcision, was mistaken. Even the Christian “Christ 218Jesus” was neither Torah observant nor trustworthy. Everything he said during the Sermon on the Mount was evidently untrue. He may have been a “Judaizer.”

His crucifixion on Pesach was pure happenstance, as was the reunification of Yahowah’s soul with the Set-Apart Spirit on Bikuwrym. He was not yet in touch with his inner sha’uwl when he said that we could come to know him through the Torah and Prophets. Ignorance really is bliss. Just believe Paul and hope that he was right in contradicting and demeaning God.

It is always laughable when those prone to protest in hateful fashion, as Paul has done since the beginning, claim that they are loving. And yet there is no difference between hating under the pretense of love and claiming to speak for the God one constantly denigrates. Citing the Towrah’s presentation of the Covenant and salvation of Abraham to claim that the Towrah cannot save is equally duplicitous. But few things are as hypocritical as claiming to have been chosen by Yahowsha’ only to negate the purpose and benefit of his Passover sacrifice. And yet Paul has done all of these things, and worse.

Should Paul have been saying that “our faith expressing itself in love” was the means to our salvation, as the NLT claims, then he would have been wrong on all accounts. Our redemption is predicated upon relying upon Yahowah’s demonstration of His love for us as proposed in His Towrah. “For when we place our faith in Christ Jesus, there is no benefit in being circumcised or being uncircumcised. What is important is faith expressing itself in love.” KJV: “For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.”

Christian apologists will no doubt protest that it’s time to give Paul a break. After all, they believe that he was preaching about “faith expressing itself in love.” What 219could possibly be wrong with that? The problem is that rejecting our Heavenly Father’s advice, which is what Paul is asking, is the opposite of loving God. And placing one’s faith in Paul’s deplorable rhetoric, which is what he is demanding, is hateful to God.

Here then is a summary of Paul’s most recent assault on the truth. These are the most deceitful, destructive, deadly, and damning words ever written:

“This freedom and liberty of ours by becoming Christos, it freed and released. So you all are directed to stand firm.

Therefore, also, never again associate with the yoke of subservience and slavery. You were held based upon a grudge against you all, controlling you and forcing you to surrender to someone who bears ill will, is resentful, violent, and quarrelsome.” (Galatians 5:1)

You pay attention. I, Paulos, myself say to you all that if on the condition that you may be circumcised, Christos is totally worthless and completely meaningless, not in the least bit helpful or useful for you. (Galatians 5:2)

So then, furthermore, repeating myself, I testify, insisting and protesting to every man being circumcised that he actually is obligated to do and perform the entire and complete Towrah. (Galatians 5:3)

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

Because indeed, we in spirit out of faith hope. Righteousness we await patiently. (Galatians 5:5)

In Christo Iesou neither circumcision is someone 220capable, nor is the uttermost part of the penis. On the contrary through faith love operating.” (Galatians 5:6)

Since She’owl alone would be insufficient to hold Sha’uwl accountable for the hell he has unleashed upon humankind, I wonder how Yahowah intends to punish him.