547Questioning Paul

Devil’s Advocate

…Plague of Death

 

14

Harpax | Self-Promoting

 

It Was Obvious…

Paul, to the exclusion of all other individuals, became the living embodiment of what Yahowsha’ warned Shim’own Kephas | “Peter” about just prior to the fulfillment of Shabuw’ah | the Promise of the Shabat. His advice appears to have fallen on deaf ears, and it has remained unheralded ever since…

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

As a result, while they ate breakfast, Yahowsha’ | Yahowah Saves 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.’ (Yahowchanan / John 21:15)

He said to him again, a second time, ‘Shim’own of Yahowchanan, do you respect and love Me?’

548He 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.’ (Yahowchanan / John 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’ | Yahowah Saves said to him, ‘Feed, tend to, guide, and care for My sheep.” (Yahowchanan / Yahowah is Merciful / John 21:17)

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 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 23^rd Psalm, and is credited with guiding, nurturing, and protecting His flock. Their “food” is “the Towrah.” As a “shepherd,” Yahowah through Yahowsha’ was asking the Rock “to guide and protect” the 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 549Towrah 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 on Earth, “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 Towrah, 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.’ (Yahowchanan / Yahowah is Merciful / John 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 Sha’uwl] will attribute to Yahowah (doxasei ton ΘΝ – 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 / 550John 21:19)

One individual in Shim’own’s | “Peter’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 the 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 leads them to their own demise, Christendom twisted what the Rock wrote to infer that Paul’s letters were “Scripture.” Thereby, Shim’own was taken to a place he did not intend to go.

You do not 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, Yahowsha’s every word specifically and comprehensively undermines Paul’s credibility and, with it, the foundation of Christianity.

In that we considered Yahowsha’s initial and also longest public proclamation in the first volume 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 invalidate or to abrogate, to abolish or dismiss, any implication or its influence but, 551instead, to completely fulfill, proclaim, and complete, conveying the true meaning and thinking, rendering it totally and perfectly. (Matthew 5:17)

Because 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 takes place, becoming a reality. (Matthew 5:18)

As a result, whoever may at any time dismiss or attempt to do away with, seeking to toss aside, invalidate or abolish, one of the smallest and least important of these prescriptions and instructions which are enjoined, these authorized directions and teachings, expounding 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)” 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, this will properly be referred to as great and important, astonishingly valuable and sensible among those who reign within the heavens.” (Matthew 5:19)

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 552anyone to claim to have been granted authorization to speak on behalf of someone 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 renouncing 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 occurred, 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, 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 553dismissed 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 your righteousness, integrity, and standing in the relationship is abundantly superior to and eminently 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 Jews who coveted authority and established religious rituals and traditions), you will absolutely never move into nor experience the realm of the heavens.” (Matthew 5:20)

The mythos of Christendom was rendered moot by Yahowsha’ at the inception of his Instruction on the Mount. And yet still, he had a lot more to say which 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 are dismissive of blind faith...

“You should ask (aiteo – at the present time it is desirable for everyone to 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 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 recognizance to physically demonstrate and 554announce their presence at the door desiring acceptance and admittance) and it will be opened to you. (Matthew 7:7)

For then the one asking receives, the one seeking, earnestly trying to obtain information through personal interaction, actually finds by participating in the discovery, and for the one knocking, announcing his or her presence at the door desiring acceptance, it will be opened.” (Matthew 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 undercuts Christianity because Yahowsha’ is directing our attention, not to himself, but instead to Yahowah, to our Heavenly Father. His reference is 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? (Matthew 7:9)

Or should you be considering a logical contrast between opposites, when he asks for a fish, will he hand 555him a snake? (Matthew 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 by personally responding, bestowing something good, generous, and beneficial to those asking Him?” (Matthew 7:11)

Paulos is offering faith in him and Yahowah is offering the benefits of the Covenant. Which offer do you suppose might be more life-sustaining, enriching, and empowering? 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 generous, capable, and beneficial?

The moral of the story is that, since we do not 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 generous and beneficial gift, we ought to offer our fellow man access to God’s gift – providing them with the 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 Towrah and 556the Prophets: (Matthew 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 to be firmly established, and to be upheld).

Because broad, manmade, and crafted to be wide open (platys – molded, malleable, plastic, and easily 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”) into 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. (Matthew 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 557crowd 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).” (Matthew 7:14)

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 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, but they also lead to destruction, needlessly squandering countless souls.

While this statement has negative implications regarding Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, and Islam, as well as 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 legalized the Christian religion throughout 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 manmade and artificial path.

I am not trying to rub salt into an open wound, but I 558would be remiss if I did not remind Christians that in Chabaquwq | 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 he was not yet finished warning Christians about the consequence of disregarding the Towrah. 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, and thus from the same race and place, by dressing up in sheep’s clothing, yet they actually are 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.” (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.

559God is into the details. In His Towrah, He revealed: “Benyamyn | 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)

Confessing, 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 from the tribe of Benjamin, there is only one man known to have publicly proclaimed to have been a descendant of Benjamin who was present in Yaruwshalaim during the time Yahowsha’ delivered his Instruction on the Mount. Beyond this, Sha’uwl, who was studying 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. (1 Corinthians 9:20)

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. (1 Corinthians 9:21)

560I 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 9:22)

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 his Iesou Christo, he never quoted Yahowsha’. As such, he “dressed himself up as” one of Yahowah’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 through Yahowsha’ predicted would savage His 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 561death 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. Yahowsha’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 to serve as the Passover Lamb. His name defines who he is, from whom and why he came. When it is changed or replaced, the result is no longer from 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 is a wonder more people do not 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 562public 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 Yahowsha’ 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 and pointed found on a thorny bramble or brier), or from a thistle, figs?” (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.” Yahowsha’ 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 and approved, advantageous and 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.” (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 Yahowsha’ being so definitive, expressly saying that cherry-picking snippets from a rotten source is not acceptable, why are so many Christians willing to exonerate Paul because they rather 563like 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, produce, or provide suitable or commendable fruit and results.” (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. 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.

564Credibility 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, and Muhammad, has deceived ten billion souls, beginning long ago with Adam and Chawah.

“Any and every tree not producing suitable, fitting, commendable, and advantageous fruit shall actually be cut off and done away with. And toward the fire (pyr – a metaphor for judgment), it will be thrown. (Matthew 7:19)

So then, by their fruit, their production and results, you will be able through careful observation and studious contemplation to actually know and understand them.” (Matthew 7:19-20)

Epiginosko speaks of that which can be known for certain based upon a close examination and careful evaluation of the available evidence. It 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 and knowing what God actually revealed.

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’ 565revealed:

“Not anyone 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.” (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, 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 the “Bible,” the truth is just the opposite. God spoke or wrote His name, “Yahowah ( – the proper pronunciation of YaHoWaH, our ‘elowah – God as directed in His ToWRaH – teaching regarding His HaYaH – existence and our ShaLoWM – restoration),” exactly 7000 times in the Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr. 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 566brings 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?’” (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.” Therefore, 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 Paul’s letters 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 Yahowah, our God. Most do not 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.

567“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 is not 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 Paul’s claims and destroyed the religion of Christianity with them. Therefore, 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).” (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 Yahowsha’ says “at no time was I acquainted with you,” it means that these individuals have all failed to 568capitalize on the Covenant. No matter what they may have felt or believed, they were not engaged in a relationship with God. Beyond this, when Yahowsha’ 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 toward Yahowah’s name, toward observing Yahowah’s Towrah, or toward engaging in the Covenant are moot. God is not 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. Its benefits entail immortality, becoming perfected, adoption, enrichment, and empowerment. Salvation is then a byproduct of these benefits. 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. 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?

569Have you been listening? This has been a scathing indictment of Pauline Doctrine and Christian teaching. Yahowsha’s name matters, as does Yahowah’s 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 Yahowsha’ said that observing the Towrah, 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 an intelligent and astute, sensible and thoughtful individual who edifies and strengthens his or her house upon the rock.” (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 the Prophets spoke with the same voice. 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, in order 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 570established and is enduring upon bedrock (petra – solid rock).” (Matthew 7:25)

While Christians will tell you that Paul won the argument over the viability of the foundation God had laid with His Towrah, 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 do not 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, I am presently refraining. But someone who is not approaching me might have reason to promote an opinion beyond what he sees in me, or something he hears from me, (2 Corinthians 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 571present 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 every one 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 and about 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, and 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, but justice is also His not ours.

In 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.

572This 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 to 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 would 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 the opening of the 11^th 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 Yahowsha’ would be exposed and criticized by those who knew better, so he wrote: “For if one comes and preaches another ‘Iesous’ 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 573manifestation 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 one of his own, 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 1^st 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 Set-Apart Spirit on Shabuw’ah. 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) Christou’s (ΧΡΥ) Apostles (apostolos – a prepared messenger who is sent out).” (2 Corinthians 11:13)

This then 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 574me 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 (ΚΝ) 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 was not 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 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)

575And 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)

576Continuing to hallucinate, the delirious and deranged wannabe apostle wrote: “By Jews five times, forty beside one, I received. (2 Corinthians 11:24) 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). (2 Corinthians 11:25)

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, (2 Corinthians 11:26) 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, (2 Corinthians 11:27) 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 11:28) He was hallucinating.

If one were to believe the village idiot, 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 is not often that we are afforded a window into a deranged and psychotic mind, but Paul, in addition to being insane was a megalomaniac, 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 577so long as he is not 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)? (2 Corinthians 11:29)

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 braggadocious 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 578praiseworthy – the source of healing words and beneficial speech. As a 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 cannot remember. But when they are allegedly transformative events in your life, encounters which provide your authority, that will not 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 579Almighty), 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)

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 cannot recall what happened, why did he provide three detailed, albeit conflicting, accounts for Luke to record in Acts? Also, if God cannot 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 this to be the deranged musings and hallucinations 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) (2 Corinthians 12:3) 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 580word 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 did not 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).

581For 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 a 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 582might 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 do not suspect that Paulos much liked being demon-possessed. It must have been maddening and manipulative. 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 arretos 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 want 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 583Covenant. 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) 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 584influential).” (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)?” (Matthew 16:26)

His 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 585where he was buried, this should be written on his tombstone.

Let’s be clear: Sha’uwl’s | 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 am 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 somewhat 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 586will 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 (the Father of Judaism), Marcion (Paul’s publicist), Diocletian (circa 303 CE with his persecutions), Emperor Constantine (with his claim to have seen a sign under which he could conquer), Muhammad (the demon-possessed founder of Islam), Maimonides (the man who codified Judaism), 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 commercial endeavor. 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 587disassociating 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 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 1 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 they will stop at nothing to garner the undivided attention they seem to require.

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 588Pharisee 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 young man named Timothy.

Having witnessed his dark side, his penchant for tearing others down and abusing them, Rabbis may have encouraged Sha’uwl to harass those who recognized that Yahowsha’ was the Passover Lamb. And even in this barbaric job, Paul would brag that he excelled. Imagine a soul dark enough to boast about such a thing. 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 were 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 knee-deep in their own self-serving charade, they could not turn back and admit the truth – their egos would not allow it. And that is why Satan picked them in the first place. He knew that their need to be esteemed and to compensate for their broken childhoods drove a lust for attention and admiration which he could manipulate.

589So 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 I suspect Satan promised Sha’uwl – a pompous elitist – that as his apostle he would become the most influential man who ever lived. He delivered.

Surprisingly, the infamy of being the world’s most influential man does not go to Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, 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.” They name cities and cathedrals after him.

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 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 590insider. 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 Towrah, 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. Do not 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 is trustworthy and 591reliable, verifiable and establishing, making understanding and obtaining wisdom simple for the open-minded.” (Mizmowr / Psalm 19:7)