57Questioning Paul

Incredible

…Testing Faith

 

2

Anti-Semite

 

Worse than his Writing…

The initial draft of Questioning Paul was completed in 2009. Two years later, I rewrote it from the perspective of the prophetic portrayal of Sha’uwl presented in Chabaquwq | Habakkuk. The result was more accusatory, in keeping with Yahowah’s assessment of the man He called “the Plague of Death.”

A decade would pass before I would return to it, editing Questioning Paul a third time in early 2021. I had learned a great deal in the intervening period, particularly while studying Yasha’yah | Isaiah, the Mashal | Proverbs and Mizmowr | Psalms for the 7 volumes which currently comprise Observations and Coming Home. Based upon these insights, I began to update everything I had written to correctly reflect what Yahowah had revealed through His Prophets.

It was during this time that I began to fathom the most extraordinary insights, something the world had missed for the better part of 3000 years. God’s message would transform the lives of Yahuwdym | Jews while obliterating the tenets of Judaism and Christianity, undermining the Talmud and New Testament.

According to Yahowah, Dowd | David, the Chosen and Beloved of the Father, is the Son of God. He is the Shepherd, Messiah, and King. And he is the one who is 58returning to reestablish and lead Yisra’el. These designations, therefore, do not apply to Yahowsha’, much less Iesou Christos | “Jesus Christ.” He was the Passover Lamb. Accordingly, Paul was wrong – but so were Mark, Luke, and Matthew.

In this light, it is time we consider why the 7^th and the 89^th Mizmowr / Psalms were written to prophetically expose and condemn what Sha’uwl | Paul and his colleagues would say in their attempt to misappropriate what Dowd represents. Once we understand what Paul and his pals said, and why they said it, we will examine both Psalms in subsequent chapters to better appreciate Yahowah’s response.

What we are about to read lies in the heart of the Christian New Testament. It is the most reprehensible thing man has ever spoken or written. It is worse than Galatians, worse than Romans, worse than Corinthians, worse than Timothy.

Paul’s inaugural bout of anti-Semitism, leading to Replacement Theology, was presented in Acts 13, with Sha’uwl telling Luke what he wanted his publicist to disseminate. So, while he was not present, and did not even know Paul at this early date, Luke would later become Paul’s attaché, promoter, and even his propagandist. Luke would write for Sha’uwl, not Yahowah. The same is true of Mark and Matthew.

The presentation of Sha’uwl’s first alleged speech comes immediately after the self-proclaimed apostle claimed to have blinded a man who, like himself, he said was demon-possessed. We will consider that story in a moment, as it is germane to Sha’uwl’s transition from being Hebrew to appealing to Greeks by writing in their language as a Roman.

As the 12^th chapter of Acts comes to a close, “Paul” is still known by and is acting under his Hebrew name, 59Sha’uwl | Saul. This is particularly telling because at the time he had just returned from his scathing indictment before the Disciples in Yaruwshalaim | Jerusalem. It wasn’t until after he had been rejected by those Yahowsha’ had chosen that he would seek to reboot his fledgling credibility by altering his identity.

The 13^th chapter of Luke’s Acts of the Apostles opens with Sha’uwl | Saul sailing to the Greek island of Cyprus in the manner of Odysseus. It was there we are told that he elected to do the last thing one would expect from a credible witness: He replaced his given name, the one Yahowah cited to condemn him in Chabaquwq | Habakkuk and in the Mizmowr | Psalms. He did so to avoid the stigma of these horrendous prophecies. But more than this, Paulos was now a Roman appealing to Greeks, using their language, customs, philosophy, and gods.

His Latin moniker, Paulos, would more closely identify him with Apollo – the Greek Father of the Gods. That is telling because, at the time, Cyprus was best-known for male sexual tourism and producing effigies of Apollo, rife with allusions to the sun.

According to Luke, Sha’uwl’s transformation from Jew to Roman began upon “encountering a certain magician, a Jewish false prophet whose name was Bar-Jesus.” (Acts 13:6) As is the case with almost everything which follows in Acts, this meeting did not occur. It is a lie from beginning to end. Paul and Luke were in cahoots (along with Mark and Timothy).

This alleged encounter was contrived by Luke to develop Paul’s mystique. The story, like Luke’s fanciful fable of “John the Baptist,” replete with childish tales of dubious signs and wonders, was among Luke’s earliest pieces of fiction. These novel accounts are only rivaled by Luke’s portrayal of Sha’uwl’s encounter with Stephen the Martyr (Acts 7:54-60) – which was also a myth.

60The three stories, while not as well told, are as credible as Homer’s presentation of Odysseus’ fabled journey as he battled against the Greek pantheon in the Odyssey. And that is particularly telling because the Odyssey contained many of the same elements found in Paul’s prodigious role throughout the Acts of the Apostles: a long journey recounted by the hero of the story in the first person, his testing and claims of divine inspiration, his arrogance and deception, his harrowing escapes replete with curses and miracles, even the aid of the Charis, as one man single-handedly challenged the gods (Zeus, Helios, Circe, and Athena to name a few), engendering their ire. Odysseus’ chief antagonist was Circe, a mean-spirited sorceress who turned men into swine. This is especially telling because the Christian Church is transliterated from the name of this demonic goddess.

Just as Virgil’s Aeneid drew from Homer’s Odyssey to create the Roman utopia envisioned by Augustus with religion and politics inextricably intertwined, Luke/Acts was written in the style of the Greek and Roman epics, and it borrowed heavily from both. For example, it is only in Luke/Acts that supernatural beings interact with men in the fashion of the Odyssey and Aeneid. Angels make proclamations, open doors, provide directions, and remove chains.

But there may be far more to this literary connection with ancient Greece. Mark, who was deliberately solicited and then groomed to be Paul’s stooge, seems to have conceived elements of his “Gospel” story by placing “Jesus” in the role of Odysseus. Both epics begin by summoning an oracle, Homer by citing the Muse and Mark by misappropriating Isaiah. In both accounts, the son’s patrimony would be confirmed by a god in the form of a bird – in Mark’s case a dove. This confirmation prepares Odysseus and then Jesus to face an enemy in the very next scene: Telemachus for the former and Satan with the latter. 61Both would be tested and suffer. Both are carpenters. Both would seek to be welcomed home to restore the rightful kingdom of their fathers.

Mark, like his mentor, Paul, sought to malign and marginalize the Disciples. In addition to the traitorous acts of Judas and the betrayals of Peter, the Disciples were presented as an embarrassing band of nitwits, both cowardly and greedy. This is reminiscent of the way Odysseus was plagued with an unfaithful and dimwitted crew who displayed rather tragic flaws. Like Jesus’ Disciples, Odysseus’ colleagues asked foolish questions and never seemed to understand what the hero represented in the context of the nation and its people.

In one account, the crew are sailors, while in the other, they are a band of fishermen who make their living in boats. Peter, like Eurylochus, challenged the doomsday predictions of his master to his own peril. Both were accused of being under the influence of an evil demon. Both broke their vows. Beyond Peter, the depiction of James and John, the sons of Zebedee, appears rooted in the legends associated with Castor and Pollux, the Sons of Thunder.

Mark’s Jesus, similar to Odysseus, could never reveal his true identity because his home was rife with greedy suitors and murderous usurpers. And while the abrupt conclusion of Mark 16:6 stops short of affording the hero the opportunity to prove his resurrection – both Odysseus and Jesus are said to have journeyed to Hades and returned alive.

Allusions to the Odyssey and the conclusion of the Iliad explain some of the most enigmatic aspects of Mark’s Gospel, from the Disciples being inept and cowardly to Jesus’ recurring appeals to secrecy. There are similarities between Penelope’s suitors and the Jewish authorities. There is even a parallel between Circe, Odysseus’ demonic 62foe, and the demon Jesus battled in Mark 5.

Jesus’ transfiguration appears preceded by Odysseus projecting himself before his son. Both stories entertain readers with the heroes engaging with blind beggars and of their epic entries into famed cities. Jesus’ anointing by a woman in Mark 13-14 owes much to Odysseus being anointed by Eurycleia. In both cases, the woman was the only one to recognize the hero.

And Jesus’ prayer to avoid his execution at Gethsemane appears to be modeled after the conclusion of Odyssey in which Odysseus enjoys a “last supper” with Circe before sailing to Hades. As the story is projected on Yahowsha’, who explicitly came to serve as the Passover Lamb, it is counter to his nature and purpose.

In the matter of Jesus’ death, Mark may have drawn inspiration from Homer’s Iliad. Jesus imitates Achilles in his prediction of his imminent demise but, otherwise, resembles Hector, both of whom endure a violent death. Especially telling, their corpses were rescued for burial. It is by Priam in the Iliad and Joseph of Arimathea in Mark. To some extent, the young man at the tomb, on what would become known as Easter sunrise in Mark, emulates Elpenor from the Odyssey.

Of note regarding this fanciful tale of Paul’s alleged confrontation with Bar-Jesus, we learn that Mark’s account of “John the Baptist” may have been influenced by Homer’s depiction of the death of Agamemnon. Mark’s story of “John the Baptist’s” execution has no basis in fact, and yet by implicating women, it draws heavily from the Odyssey. Further, both times Mark has Jesus feeding the multitudes there are parallels to the two feasts presented in Odyssey 3 and 4. While the justification is not as convincing, Jesus’ ability to walk on water imitates to some extent Hermes who scampers “o’er the seas” with “flying feet” in the Iliad.

63While many of these connections are obvious, Professor Dennis MacDonald’s The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark, published by Yale University in 2000, takes this much further than I have done. His book includes the following side-by-side comparison:

Iliad 24:

“Priam, king of Troy, sets out at night to rescue the body of his son, Hector, from his murderer, Achilles. The journey was dangerous. He entered Achilles’ abode, and asked for the body of Hector. Achilles was amazed that Priam dared to enter his home. Achilles sent two soldiers to get the ransom, and summoned maidservants to ‘wash and anoint him’. Hector’s body had been saved from desecration. ‘So when the maids had bathed and anointed the body sleek with olive oil and wrapped it round and round in a braided battle-shirt and handsome battle-cape, then Achilles himself lifted it and placed it upon a bier’. [Hector’s bones would be placed in an ossuary, buried in the ground, and covered with stones.] [Priam left with the body at night and brought it to Troy for a fitting burial.] Cassandra was the first to see Priam coming with the bier in the wagon. Three women led in the lament: Andromache, Hecuba, and Helen. After elaborate preparations, they burned Hector’s body at dawn.”

Mark 15:42-16:2:

“When it was late, and since it was the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea, a distinguished member of the council, who was also himself waiting expectantly for the kingdom of God, dared to go to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate was amazed that he might already be dead; and summoning the centurion, he asked him whether he had been dead for some time. [A woman earlier had anointed Jesus.] When he learned from the centurion that he was dead, he granted the body to Joseph. [Jesus’ rapid death and 64burial saved the corpse from desecration.] Then Joseph bought a linen cloth and, taking down the body, wrapped it in the linen cloth and placed it in a tomb that had been hewn out of rock. He then rolled a stone against the door of the tomb. Mary Magdalene and Mary, the mother of Jesus saw where the body was laid. When the sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene and Mary, the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him. And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb.”

Other parallels are even more conclusive, albeit less significant to the historian than to the literary critic. For example, the parable of the Wicked Tenants told in Mark 12:1-12, along with the famous phrase, “for you do not know when the master of the house will come” revealed in Mark 13:34-5, evokes the account of Odysseus returning in disguise to surprise the suitors who have turned his house into a den of sin.

Other examples include an explanation for something that would otherwise make no sense in the Gospel of Mark. Why do the chief priests need Judas to identify Jesus in order to arrest him? They had debated him numerous times and in person. His triumphal entry into Jerusalem was exceedingly public. However, if MacDonald is correct, then Judas was modeled after Melanthius, which resolves this puzzle.

Melanthius, whose name means “the Dark Deity,” is the servant who betrays Odysseus and even fetches arms for the suitors to fight him. This is reminiscent of how Judas brought armed guards to arrest Jesus. And since Odysseus’ antagonists, known as suitors in the Odyssey, were unable to recognize him, Odysseus identifies himself upon their arrival. MacDonald also develops a comparison between the suitors and the Jewish authorities. In this regard, since Melanthius’ name means “The Dark Deity,” whereas Mark seems to be maligning the Jews with Judas, 65whose name is simply Yahuwdah | Judah – the kingdom of the Jews who serve Paul, Mark, Luke, and Matthew as those who sought to kill Jesus.

Similarly, why does Pilate agree to free a prisoner as if it were a Roman tradition to do so? Given Pilate’s reputation for callous disregard for Jewish sentiments, it is implausible to have him promoting a tradition for which there is no evidence of any kind. But if Barabbas is understood to be Irus, Odysseus’ swindling rival in the hall of the suitors, the story becomes a clever fiction. Both Irus and Barabbas were scoundrels. Irus’ name was derived from the goddess, Iris, while Barabbas means “son of the father,” designating him as a divine rival. Moreover, Homer reveals that Irus’ actual name was Arnaeus, which means: “the Lamb.”

Therefore, by using Irus | Arnaeus and Barabbas in this way, Mark was able to imply, among those familiar with the Odyssey, that the Jews chose the wrong “Son of the Father” and “Lamb.” Rather than accept the Odysseusian “Jesus,” the “dastardly Jews,” according to Mark’s borrowed fable, called out for the man who represented the Old Covenant and its presentation of the Messiah as a man of arms who would free and protect Israel.

In his review of The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark, Richard Carrier would write: “MacDonald goes on to develop many similar points that not only scream of Homer being on Mark’s mind, but also explain strange features of Mark. The list is surprisingly long: Why did Jesus, who nevertheless taught openly and performed miracles everywhere, try to keep everything a secret? Why did Jesus stay asleep in a boat during a deadly storm? Why did Jesus drown two thousand pigs? Why does Mark invent a false story about “John the Baptist’s” execution, one that implicates women? Why are the disciples surprised that Jesus can multiply food even when they had already seen him do it before? Why does Jesus curse a fig tree for not 66bearing fruit out of season? How does Mark know what Jesus said when he was alone at Gethsemane? What is the meaning of the mysterious naked boy at Jesus’ arrest? Why does Mark never once mention Mary Magdalene, or the other two women at the crucifixion, or even Joseph of Arimathea, until after Jesus has died? Why is the temple veil specifically torn top to bottom at Jesus’ death? Why is Joseph of Arimathea able to procure the body of a convict so soon from Pilate? Why do we never hear of Joseph of Arimathea again? Why does Jesus die so quickly? Why do the women go to anoint Jesus after he is buried? Why do they go at dawn, rather than the previous night when the Sabbath had already ended? All these mysteries are explained by the same, single thesis. This is a sign of a good theory. With one theoretical concept, not only countless parallels are identified, but numerous oddities are explained.”

Richard Carrier would conclude…“MacDonald’s book is built like a crescendo: as one reads on, the cases not only accumulate, they actually get better and better, clearer and clearer. In the story of the Gerasene swine (Mark 5), MacDonald finds that 18 verses have thematic parallels in the Odyssey, 13 of those in exactly the same order! And even with some of those out of order, the order is not random but is inverted, and thus a connection remains evident.

“In the story of Salome and the execution of John, MacDonald finds seven thematic parallels with the Murder of Agamemnon, all of them in the same order, and on top of that he details two other general parallels. And the two food miracles, forming a doublet in Mark, contain details that match a similar doublet of feasts in the Odyssey, and contain them in the same respective order: ‘Details in the [first] story of Nestor’s feast not found in the [second] story of Menelaus appear in the [first] feeding of the five thousand and not in its twin,’ while ‘details in the [second] 67story of Menelaus not found in the [first] story of Nestor appear in the [second] feeding of the four thousand and not in the first story,’ so that ‘the chances of these correspondences deriving from accident are slim.’”

“MacDonald finds more than 11 parallels between Mark’s account of the crucifixion and the death of Hector, all but one of those in the same order (and that one exception is in inverted order), and 11 more parallels between Mark’s account of the burial of Jesus and Homer’s account of the burial of Hector, all in the same order. It is notable that resurrection [anastasis in the Greek epic] was a theme in the Iliad: the concept appears three times, twice in declarations of its impossibility, once in a metaphor for Hector’s survival of certain death. It thus contained a fitting challenge that Mark was happy to answer with a simple prose epic that everywhere flaunted the fact that anastasis was, indeed, possible and real. While Hector, Elpenor, and Patroclus were all burned and buried at dawn, the tomb of Jesus was empty at dawn; while the Iliad and Odyssey were epics about mortality, the Gospel was an epic about immortality.”

Homer served as the textbook for primary Greek education. Students were taught to imitate his style and prose, and many could cite his fables from memory. He advanced the ideals of Greek heroism along with the integration of politics and religion as influential individuals vied for position and power among the gods. In this light, much of Mark’s account, which later became the basis of Luke and then Matthew, was designed to present Jesus as a superior alternative to Odysseus. And in this light, we ought not be surprised to find that several of the oldest codices of the Gospels were written over much older and faded texts of the Iliad and Odyssey.

Returning to the errant portrayal which led us to explore the similarities between the Iliad and Odyssey and early Christian literature, I had objected to Luke’s 68contention that Sha’uwl had “encountered a certain magician, a Jewish false prophet whose name was Bar-Jesus.” (Acts 13:6) Written Iesous in the Greek text, this name was systematically used by Christians to replace Yahowsha’. Further, bar is the Aramaic variation of ben | son in Hebrew. Therefore, Sha’uwl was being linguistically dyslexic, calling the Yahuwdy | Jew, who allegedly confronted him, “Son of Yahowsha’.” However, if neither Sha’uwl nor Luke could write Yahowsha’s name correctly the many hundreds of times they replaced it with Iesou, Iesous, or Iesoun, what is the likelihood that they accurately conveyed the Cypriot’s name?

But it gets worse, because the self-proclaimed apostle further depreciated his credibility by claiming, “But Elymas the magician (for thus his name is translated) was opposing them, seeking to turn the proconsul away for the faith.” (Acts 13:8)

“Elymas” is not a translation of Yahowsha’, which means “Yahowah Saves.” In Hebrew, ‘El is God’s title and the “y” following it makes it “my God.” Ma’as, transliterated simply as mas, means “to reject, despise, and abhor, finding loathsome.” So rather than being a translation of Yahowsha’ | Yahowah Saves, ‘Elymas conveys “my God despises and rejects,” thereby serving as Paul’s epitaph, telling all who would actually bother to “translate” it that Yahowsha’s “God rejected, despised, and abhorred” Paul. And that may explain why Paul was opposed to Bar Yahowsha’, also known as ‘Elyma’as | my God loathes and rebuffs you.

Sha’uwl announced in the closing chapter of 2^nd Corinthians that the spirit which possessed him was from Satan. And that means that his spirit was “choly – diseased, afflicting, and sickening,” not holy.

“But Saul, who was also Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, fixed his gaze upon him, and said, ‘You who are full 69of all deceit and fraud, you son of the Devil, you enemy of all righteousness, will you not cease to make crooked the straight ways of the Lord?’” (Acts 13:9-10)

Yahowah will identify Sha’uwl as the Son of Evil and the Father of Lies in the 89^th Mizmowr / Psalm. And through the prophet Chabaquwq / Habakkuk, God revealed that Sha’uwl would be fraudulent and deceitful. Aware of Yahowah’s assessment, Sha’uwl not only changed his name to escape scrutiny, the Son of Satan concocted this story to direct attention away from his identity and failings at the commencement of his ministry.

As is the case with all narcissists, Sha’uwl projected his faults on his opponent. He is casting his own deceitful and fraudulent nature on Yahowsha’. The newly-minted Paul wants his audience to view him as God’s miracle worker while disassociating the promise of salvation from Yahowsha’ | Yahowah Saves. Paul even tossed in a little “John the Baptist” folklore with his twisted variation of the “make crooked the straight ways of the Lord.” It was, of course, his Lord, the Devil, who inspired the story.

Paul’s speech preceded the Gospel of Mark by a decade or more. The reason this is relevant is because it explains why Mark would later misappropriate an errant portrayal of this prophecy: “make straight ways of the Lord.” Although Yasha’yah | Isaiah predicted it of Dowd upon His return, Mark would wrongly attribute it to “John the Baptist” to announce the arrival of the Christian “Jesus Christ.” But it did not apply to the Passover Lamb. There was no “John the Baptist.” And to the degree baptism existed at the time, it was part of the Sibylline Oracles and had nothing to do with Yahowsha’, Yahowah, or Yisra’el. The invention of “John the Baptist” was also Paul’s idea, as we will learn in a moment.

It is also telling that the dividing line between Dowd and Sha’uwl in the Mizmowr and Mashal is that the Son of 70God was “tsadaq – right and thus righteous” and the Son of Evil was “ra’ – wrong.” Therefore, Paul is attempting to preempt the criticism and circumvent such comparisons.

Just as Paul routinely misappropriated Yahowah’s testimony to invert the truth such that it would serve his agenda, the same tactic is at play here. Paul was the one who was full of deceit and a fraud. Further, by giving him the Son of Evil moniker, God views Sha’uwl as the Son of the Devil. And as the Father of Lies, Sha’uwl was the enemy of all things right.

It is further telling that Paul’s Lord would treat this man, should we believe the legend, the same way he had treated Saul on the road to Damascus. “And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon you, and you will be blind and not see the sun for a time.” (Acts 13:11) For those paying attention, for those not similarly blinded by their faith, for those who can see the light, this serves as the perfect introduction to what follows. The consummate liar was calling the truth “incorrect.”

And speaking of lies and liars, I checked a score of Christian sites to see how they explained the obvious error in Acts 13:6-8, where Elymas was called a translation of Bar-Jesus. Without exception, they lied to their audience and wrote “Elymas is the Aramaic translation of Jesus.” It is a case of the deceptively dishonest deceiving on behalf of their duplicitous founder to keep their disingenuous faith from being dismissed as deceitful.

The plethora of deliberate deceptions presented in conjunction with the announcement that Sha’uwl would write and preach under a different name would have caused the religious to question their faith if they were rational. The fact that Luke’s introduction to Paul, one which serves as the preamble to his first public address, is so obviously riddled with inaccuracies that it should have been sufficient to still the faith before it began.

71A methodical and thoughtful review of the absurdity of these introductory comments affirms that Paul and Luke were in cahoots, and that their intent was to mislead. Yahowsha’ has been cast as the adversary, as a deceitful and demonic figure, who is now under the watchful eye and debilitating control of Paul and his Lord.

While this encounter never occurred, it was concocted by the Devil’s Advocates as a preemptive strike. It was designed to disarm Sha’uwl’s foes and present Paul as the new sheriff in town. He, without listening to a word, had the ability to peer into a man’s soul and the authority to judge him. And he had the power to block the sun, which is to forestall life and preclude enlightenment. Moreover, he could accomplish all of this by weaving a web of lies in conjunction with his Lord and no one would be the wiser.

This, and almost everything which follows, is so rife with deliberate dishonesty, so utterly invalid and irrational, it is as if Satan and his Apostles are thumbing their collective noses at God. They are in essence declaring: These people You have created are so senseless and gullible we can rob them of their souls and they will condemn You and praise us in the process. Give up on them. Let us toy with them because they are not worthy of Your attention. They will revel in our lies and worship us.

The story of his initial sermon, as Paul regaled it to Luke, begins: “From Paphos, Paul and his companions sailed to Perga in Pamphylia, where John left them to return to Jerusalem. (Acts 13:13) From Perga they went on to Pisidian Antioch. On the Sabbath they entered the synagogue and sat down.” (Acts 13:14)

Antioch had once been part of Midas’ Phrygian kingdom before the territory was integrated into the Macedonian Empire. By this time, it was included within the Galatian province of Rome. The city of Pisidian was founded by Caesar Augustus. As a result, the Temple of 72Augustus rose high above the community whose ruins now lie within central Turkey.

During Sha’uwl’s “First Missionary Journey,” the local population worshiped Cybele as the goddess who governed every aspect of a Roman’s life (fertility and castration, immortality and self-mutilation, while serving as a protectress and healer), along with Dionysus, the prototype for the Pauline “Iesou Christo – Jesus Christ.” This known, you would never find Yahowsha’ in such a place – one that would be renamed Hadrianopolis – after the most anti-Semitic and murderous of all Romans. There is no doubt that Paul influenced the city in his typical malignant fashion – as his toxic stench still permeates the region.

A question, however, lingers. Why would Sha’uwl enter a synagogue after agreeing to limit his preaching to the uncircumcised, giving the circumcised to “Peter?” Either Paul’s written assurances in Galatians were untrustworthy or Sha’uwl was there to pick a fight. And if his word wasn’t reputable, why would anyone trust his letters?

In addition, why is Paul observing the Shabat? Was this so early in his ministry that he had not yet begun to rail against the Towrah? And if so, then wouldn’t Paul’s position against the Towrah be one that evolved over time as a reaction to his antagonists, instead of as a result of Divine inspiration as he claimed?

“After the reading from the Law (actually: Towrah | Teaching) and the Prophets, the leaders of the synagogue sent word to them, saying, ‘Brothers, if you have a word of exhortation for the people, please speak.’” (Acts 13:15)

“Standing up, Paul motioned with his hand and said: ‘Fellow Israelites and you Gentiles who worship God (actually: those who know Yahowah understand that He does not want to be worshiped), listen to me! (therein is the 73problem: Paul wanted everyone to listen to him).’” (Acts 13:16)

Like Muhammad and Hitler, Paul was a self-loathing Jew. He hated his people, and yet he wanted them to accept him. This condition was likely the result of his father spurning him and then of him failing in rabbinical school. He had a chip on his shoulder and a hole in his heart as big as all Yisra’el. And it was when his people rejected him, that he turned against them, becoming a psychopath.

Unfortunately for Sha’uwl, most Jews were typically smarter and better informed than him, which irritated Paul immensely. It is why he used logical fallacies to degrade them, including a constant profusion of ad hominem assaults. It is also why he turned his attention to “Gentiles.” They were ignorant of the Towrah, and they were thus much easier to fool. And that is the purpose of this little adventure.

Trying to keep it real, those considered “Gentiles” have always been few and far between in Jewish religious circles. Even today, Gowym conversions are frowned upon and typically demeaned and disregarded. Religious Jews are a horrible lot, as lost as was Paul. Their endorsement would have been meaningless even if it had been offered.

Moreover, had there been a gowy or gowym in the synagogue, they would have chafed at being called “Gentiles.” Gentilis is a Latin word, and thus Roman nomenclature to describe “men of family, persons belonging to the same kin and country.” It was used to address “pagans who were not Romans.” Based upon the Latin meaning, it was actually the Yisra’elites who were “Gentilis – not of Rome.” Paul was, therefore, seeking to distinguish between that which had no distinction.

As a direct result of Paul’s first public address here in Acts, the Roman Catholic | Universal Church assumed that they were now Yisra’el with regard to every promise and 74prophecy. According to Paul and the Church, Rome had become Yisra’el and Yisra’el had become the Gentilis. Such is the nature of Replacement Theology.

I typically translate gowy and gowym as “ethnicities estranged from and nations distinct from Yisra’el comprised of pagan peoples” and sometimes add, “who are dead men walking.” But should you wonder why I have included “gentile” within translations on occasion, it is because the word has evolved to mean “not of Israel.” But at the time Paul wielded it before this audience, that was not what it meant. And so, it is important that we ponder the reason he created this distinction.

In typical fashion, Sha’uwl blended right with wrong… “The God of the people of Israel chose our ancestors; he made the people prosper (actually: they were impoverished as slaves) during their stay in Egypt; with mighty power he led them out of that country.” (Acts 13:17)

Yahowah is so vested in Yisra’el, He refers to Himself as the “God of Yisra’el” and as the “God of ‘Abraham, Yitschaq, and Ya’aqob.” He does not, however, refer to Himself as “the God of the people of Israel.” With Yahowah, Yisra’el is comprised of people, making the statement verbose. Further, in addressing an audience, Yahowah’s example and preference are to use His name – something Sha’uwl | Paul would never do.

How was it even possible for Paul to get this wrong? During their “stay in Egypt,” the Yisra’elites were tortured and abused, many murdered. They were as impoverished as they would be under the influence of the Roman Catholic Church.

Furthermore, Yahowah led His people out of Egypt with Moseh – a broken-down elderly shepherd. Moreover, the event which finally shattered Pharaoh’s resolve was Passover – the Miqra’ Sha’uwl never mentioned and 75seemed to loathe.

“For about forty years he endured their conduct in the wilderness (while accurate, this was intended to be demeaning); (Acts 13:18) and he overthrew seven nations in Canaan (neither accurate nor relevant), giving their land to his people as their inheritance (a statement which is in direct conflict with Replacement Theology).” (Acts 13:19)

If Yisra’el was given to the Chosen People by God, then how is it that the people who took it from them, the Romans, were said to be authorized by God? Is Paul’s god as unreliable as was Sha’uwl?

“All this took about 450 years (actually: 30 to 40 years as guests of Egypt, 400 as slaves, and 40 years leaving Egypt). After this, God gave them judges until the time of Samuel the prophet.” (Acts 13:20)

All of this took 480 years. Yahowah, unlike Sha’uwl, is precise. There is meaning to the number 40 which Christians fail to consider.

Shamuw’el was actually the last of the Judges. It was through him, and during the transition away from Divine oversight to human governance, that Yahowah overtly condemned the political systems Paul claimed were Godly in Romans.

Recognizing that Shamuw’el was also a prophet, the fact that his testimony and Paul’s statements regarding government are totally opposed to one another, Paul’s claims are thereby rendered invalid. Also telling, after Yisra’el made the wrong choice, and after Sha’uwl proved to be as rotten as God has predicted, Yahowah asked Shamuw’el to anoint Dowd as His Mashyach | Messiah – something Paul failed to mention because it voids his argument.

“Then the people asked for a king, and he gave them Saul the son of Kish (actually: the people rejected 76Yahowah when they chose Sha’uwl), of the tribe of Benjamin, who ruled forty years.” (Acts 13:21) It was audacious for this Sha’uwl, to mention that Sha’uwl because the king’s conflict with the Towrah, his testimony, name, tribe, and demon possession were prophetically presented to condemn Sha’uwl | Paul – the self-proclaimed apostle to the world. Further, Sha’uwl was King for 24 years, not 40 years.

The story of King Sha’uwl | Saul is a harbinger of the Apostle Sha’uwl | Saul. They have the same name, are from the same tribe, and are both Towrah-averse, demon-possessed, and deadly. And both Sha’uwl’s sought to disparage Dowd, Yahowah’s son and Messiah.

Keep in mind that the transition away from the Judges to a king was among the most cathartic episodes in the Towrah and Prophets. God stated that, by choosing to do so, the people were rejecting Him. And yet there is not so much as a hint of the anguish underlying this transition in Paul’s oratory. He did not even bother to mention that King Sha’uwl took his own life, committing suicide before being beheaded by the Philistines.

The following statements regarding Dowd | David are untrue. Yahowah chose Dowd 22 years before removing Sha’uwl. Further, one of the many reasons that Dowd serves as the embodiment of the Covenant and the antidote for Sha’uwl’s religion is because he did not do everything Yahowah wanted. In this way, Dowd proved that a person does not have to “obey” every aspect of the Towrah to be saved.

“After removing (actually: rejecting) Saul, he made David (more correctly, Dowd) their king. God testified concerning him: ‘I have found David son of Jesse, a man after my own heart; he will do everything I want him to do.’” (Acts 13:22)

That is a whopper of a deception, so typical of Paul. 77He began by blending truth and lies and then added his own deceptive embellishments. Keeping in mind that King Sha’uwl is prophetic of the Christian Sha’uwl, the text actually reads:

“So Shamuw’el said to Sha’uwl, ‘You have acted foolishly. You have not observed the conditions of the relationship of Yahowah, your God, which He appointed for you.’” (Shamuw’el / Listen to Him / 1 Samuel 13:13) “‘So now your kingdom shall not stand.

Yahowah has sought for Himself a man whose inclinations and judgment are similar to His own. And Yahowah has appointed him leader over His people because you have not closely examined nor carefully considered that which, to reveal the benefits of the relationship, Yahowah established for you.’” (Shamuw’el / Listen to Him / 1 Samuel 13:14)

Shamuw’el’s inspired testimony is a far cry from: “he will do everything I want him to do.” It was not a careless mistake. Shamar, which means “closely examined and carefully considered,” is the same word Christians misrepresent as “keep” when directed toward the Towrah, creating the false impression that it is comprised of “Laws” which must be “obeyed.” And while it is a small point among big issues, while Dowd was the son of Yshay, it was not stated in conjunction with this conversation, nor relevant to it, and thus was inappropriately and incorrectly cited.

In truth, Yshay | Jesse was a dunderhead. He did not contribute anything of value to the story. Sha’uwl was using him to imply that “David” had inferior parentage compared to his Iesou | “Jesus,” who he errantly presented as God’s son, inverting their roles.

“From this man’s descendants God has brought to Israel the Savior Jesus (actually: the title “Savior” is afforded to Dowd, not Yahowsha’, by Yahowah), as he 78promised.” (Acts 13:23) Yahowah made no promises regarding Yahowsha’, much less “Jesus.” Neither name is mentioned in prophecy – ever!

From Paul’s perspective, Dowd’s lone contribution to Yahowah’s plan was sperm. That is about as demeaning as it gets. Moreover, having revisited the prophetic pronouncement in Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7, to which he is inferring, we now know that Yahowsha’ was neither mentioned, identified, nor promised in the text. Paul has misrepresented the facts ten times and has now lied thrice.

While it is a gnat among camels, Yisra’el did not exist at the time, only Yahuwdah. The ten tribes comprising the Northern Kingdom had been taken from the land and enslaved by the Assyrians six hundred years earlier. Further, Yahowsha’s affiliation with Dowd was through Yahuwdym | Jews – the very people this Benjamite wants to destroy.

“‘Before the coming of Jesus (actually: Yahowsha’ (and His name is vitally important)), John (actually: Yahowchanan if he existed at all) preached repentance and baptism (actually: he didn’t preach baptism and he did not speak of repentance) to all the people of Israel (at the time the ten tribes comprising Yisra’el were long gone).’” (Acts 13:24) When someone claims to speak for God, accuracy is paramount. Paul is consistently careless and routinely incorrect.

This statement is the first indication of a person named “John the Baptist.” It is also the first time baptism is mentioned in association with Christianity. It is the initial introduction of “repentance” in conjunction with “Jesus” as well. These are all Paul’s ideas, and they are all wrong. Paul is wholly culpable to the extent they are repeated in Mark, Luke, and Matthew.

Let’s start at the beginning. There was no one named “Jesus.” The notion of Yahowsha’ “coming” is irrational. 79He was born like any other Jewish boy with no fanfare of any kind. There was no “away in a manger,” no “wise men,” and no “star of Bethlehem.” For that matter, there was no “Nazareth” either. He was not born on the winter solstice, and thus not on Christmas. He had lived in Yahuwdah for the better part of 30 years before he announced his purpose. He was not baptized by John or anyone else. The Set-Apart Spirit did not fly down in the form of a dove. There was no voice from heaven announcing pride in a son – although according to Paul, his god was plenty chatty – so was Constantine’s.

All of this was concocted by the Devil’s Advocate and his pals to replace Dowd with Jesus, to make it appear as if Jesus were God, to replace circumcision with baptism, and then replace “all of the people of Israel” with Gentiles.

This speech was coterminous with the inscriptions found in Galatians, Paul’s first letter, one written shortly after the Jerusalem Summit in 50 CE. Mark, whom Paul would co-opt to compose the first “Gospel” was a decade away from being under his spell. Luke, Paul’s other coconspirator, would write next, incorporating fifty percent of Mark’s material into his work of fiction. And in this regard, one of the most expansive retellings between one and the other revolves around developing a narrative surrounding “John the Baptist” that would have made a Greek god proud. He would have God, Himself, assisting in his mother’s conception, angelic announcements, family ties with Iesou, and babies seeing through their mother’s wombs to bounce with joy during an embryonic embrace. It’s enough to make one’s heart flutter.

So, what are we to make of Paul’s introduction of baptism here in this public address and then again in Galatians (3:27-29)? Since he has not thus far demonstrated much creativity, how did he come upon the idea of replacing circumcision with baptism? He did not get it from the Towrah – that’s for certain.

80The answer is found in the Sibylline Oracles. They were Greek prophetesses who uttered revelations concerning the machinations of the Greek pantheon while intoxicated. The originals were lost in a fire on the order of Roman General Flavius Stilicho in the 4^th century CE. Two hundred years later, in the 6^th century, a new edition was published, presenting an odd pastiche of Hellenistic and Roman mythology interspersed with Jewish, Gnostic, and early Christian legends – some foreshadowing the Book of Revelation. As such, the Sibylline Oracles are considered to be among the best sources of information regarding the origin of Christian beliefs in the 1^st century, especially as they were flavored by Hellenistic Jewish myths and Gnostic notions. They were preserved, cherished, and copied by Christian writers in Alexandria – which not-so-coincidentally is the same place every extant codex of the Christian New Testament was scribed from the late 1^st through early 4^th centuries – without exception. They were initially written by Jews deploying the motifs of Homer and then adapted to Christian purposes. Sound familiar?

Affirmation of their existence at this time, their popularity, and thus their availability to Paul, was provided by the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus in the late 1^st century. Christian apologist Athenagoras of Athens (perfect name for a Christian) cited the Oracles in writing A Plea for the Christians to Marcus Aurelius circa 176 CE, inclusive of references to Homer and a litany of Roman gods. Christian Church Fathers, the likes of Justin Martyr (ca. 150), Theophilus, the Bishop of Antioch (ca. 180), Clement of Alexandria (ca. 200), Lactantius (ca. 305), and St. Augustine in the City of God (ca. 400), not only quoted from them, but were all willing to Christianize them, inserting the phrase “the Son of God” in the place of the gods of Greek and Roman mythology.

The Oracles began with Jews blending stories from the Towrah with Greek mythology, but grew to become 81Christian propaganda. It should also be known that both Theophilus and Clement claimed that the Sibyl prophetess was inspired in the manner of the “Old Testament” prophets. Their claims should not be surprising because there is a tremendous affinity between Mark and the Sibylline Oracles and an even greater one with Matthew.

The Sibylline Oracles were likely the wellspring from which Paul’s anti-Semitism was perceived as credible. The responsibility for the scourging is explicitly stated: it is Israel: “Then indeed Israel, with abominable lips and poisonous spitting, will give this man blows.” (Sib Or 1:365–366) This anti-Semitic rhetoris appears earlier, in lines 360–361: “And then Israel, intoxicated, will not perceive, nor yet will she hear, afflicted with weak ears.”

In Book 1 (pp 362–363), the Sibyl announce that “when the raging wrath of the Most High comes upon the Hebrews, it will also take faith away from them.” Paul will say the same thing in this very speech. Then in an accusation intended to heighten animosity against Israel: “Impiously, smitten in breast, and heart with an evil craze, not seeing with their eyes, more blind than blind rats, more terrible than poisonous creeping beasts, shackled with heavy sleep.” (Sib Or 1:360–371) In Book 6 we find: “For you alone, land of Sodom, is destined calamity. For you were malicious, and did not recognize your own God when he came with mortal eyes. But you crowned him with acanthus / thorns, and terrible gall you mixed for insult and drink. That will cause you calamity.”

Then this, from the Sibyls to Paul: “For it has been again revealed that there would no longer be obedience to a temple nor to a secret law hidden behind the illusions of the world, once the eternal sovereign has come down to earth.” (Book 8 v. 307–309)

It is in these Oracles that the very phrases from “Jesus” and “John the Baptist” emerge. In particular, Book 4 of the 82Sibylline Oracles insists on “baptism as a prerequisite of salvation” along with the “rejection of the Temple cult,” providing Paul’s inspiration for both.

The line Paul cited, the one applied to “John the Baptist,” is introduced in Book 1, line 408-415, along with the first reference to baptism: “But when a voice shall through the desert land, it will come bearing tiding to men, and to all shall call to make straight paths, and cast wickedness out and illuminate with water all the bodies of mankind, that being born again they may no longer go astray from what is righteous.” It is literally right out of his first speech and letter. Paul plagiarized the Sibylline Oracles.

This is followed by: “And on it shall the Hebrew people stumble.” And: “But when the maddening wrath of the Most High shall come upon the Hebrews, and take faith away from them, because they slew the Son of the Heavenly God. Then also with foul lips shall Israel give him cuffs and spittle drugged. And gall for good and vinegar unmixed for drink will they with evil madness smitten…more blind than moles, more terrible than crawling poisonous beasts.” (Book 1 v. 440-45) We will read these lines later in Paul’s sermon.

A few verses later: “So then also shall the Temple of Solomon come to an end as a mighty sign for men, when he shall go to the house of Hades, proclaiming resurrection for the dead. But when in three days he shall come again, unto the light, and show his form to men. And teach all things, ascending in the clouds, unto the house of heaven shall he go, leaving the world a Gospel Covenant.” (Book 1 v. 455-64) Yikes!

In Book 4, line 214: “Wash your whole body in perennial streams, lifting up your hands to heaven seeking a pardon for former deeds and expiate with praise bitter impiety, and God will give repentance.” And this became 83the basis of Paul’s mantra on the connection between baptism and salvation.

Then this from the opening line of Book 6 of the Sibylline Oracles: “Preexistence, incarnation, and baptizo | baptism of the Son of God…the great Son of the Immortal, from whom there is a throne to be held fast given by the Father. He was brought forth, then He raised him up according to the flesh given, washed at the mouth of the River Jordan…at first he shall see God’s sweet Spirit descending with the wings of a white dove.” Sound familiar? He would even take the throne away from the Messiah Dowd and give it eternally to Iesous. Rest assured, we’ll consider God’s assessment of this in the next chapter.

From Book 7, beginning on line 110: “As the Father did beget Thee, the Word, Father, I sent forth a bird, swift messenger of words, with holy waters, besprinkling thy baptizo | baptism, O Word, through which Thou didst make thyself manifest.”

In Rome at the time, no prophetic oracle was more important or famous than the Sibyl. Under the inspiration of Apollo, a procession of Sibyls prophesied the future of Rome. They were memorialized in Virgil’s Aeneid and later in Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel beside murals depicting the prophets of the “Old Testament.”

Based upon this, and our review of the Iliad and Odyssey, it’s not looking good for Pauline inspiration. But then again, I was never fond of the dunderhead god underlying Paul’s claims.

“As John was completing his work, he said: ‘Who do you suppose I am? I am not the one you are looking for. But there is one coming after me whose sandals I am not worthy to untie.’” (Acts 13:25) It is telling that Paul omitted the one relevant citation attributed to the mythical Yahowchanan, the one we will examine from Yasha’yah / Isaiah 40. It was the closest analog to the Sibylline Oracles’ 84pronouncement, of a “voice calling out” “in the desert” “making straight the ways.” The actual prophecy, coincidently, correctly points to Dowd, not Yahowsha’.

The story of “John the Baptist” was contrived to model Iesous | Jesus as a superior alternative to the ultimate Greek hero Odysseus and to usurp the credibility associated with the Sibylline Oracles. Paul needed a Muse to bring his characterization of God unto center stage. And make no mistake, this myth was inspired by Paul, not Mark or Luke, who later embellished their Apostle’s delusions. With “John the Baptist” he would kill three birds with a single stone. Jesus would be proclaimed the Son of God. He would be anointed by way of a dove. And he would be baptized with no mention of circumcision.

“Fellow children of Abraham and you God-fearing Gentiles (actually: God does not want anyone to fear Him), it is to us that this message of salvation has been sent.” (Acts 13:26) Actually: Yahowah’s message of salvation was sent through actual prophets like Moseh and Dowd, and indeed, Yasha’yah | Salvation is from Yahowah. Paul brought death, not restoration.

Then citing the Sibylline Oracles, Paul proclaimed…“The people of Jerusalem and their rulers did not recognize Jesus.” In actuality, many recognized Yahowsha’ as the Passover Lamb, and those who did, Paul sought to kill. Soon enough we will consider the ‘Ebyownym as a prime example. If not for them, the Sermon on the Mount and Olivet Discourse, both exceedingly anti-Christian narratives, would be unknown.

“Yet in condemning him (in actuality, the Romans, not Jews, condemned Yahowsha’) they fulfilled the words of the prophets that are read every Sabbath.” (Acts 13:27) The only “prophecies” fulfilled in this regard were attributed to the Sibyl. Christians, desperate to validate their faith, began to write for the Sibyl and created a plethora of 85“prophecies” which were written after the events they “predicted.”

There isn’t a single prophecy from Yahowah regarding Jews condemning or killing Yahowsha’ – not one. Therefore, nothing was fulfilled in this regard that could have been read on any Shabat, much less during every Shabat. It is a bold-faced lie, one of the most egregious and costly in history.

Sometimes lies take on a life of their own. Such is the case with this one propagated by Paul. Judea was under Roman control and only the Romans had the authority to condemn someone in one of their provinces. Even the spurious and conflicting Christian accounts found in the New Testament acknowledge this reality. Had Jews judged and condemned Yahowsha’ to die, he would have been stoned, not crucified – which was Rome’s special way of sharing their disregard for gentilis.

More to the point, it was Yahowah who judged Yahowsha’ as the Passover Lamb. It was the Lamb’s express purpose to be condemned and die. Whatever the Jews may have done to facilitate this outcome should be embraced with gratitude. Had the Pesach ‘Ayil not fulfilled his purpose on this day, death would be the end of life for everyone.

There are three very specific prophecies which explain the fulfillment of Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym, two by Dowd (Psalms 22 and 88) and one in Yasha’yah (Isaiah 53). Nothing is said about Jews condemning anyone in conjunction with their fulfillment as it would have invalidated the prophecies.

This is the beginning of the greatest deception ever sold. It lies at the heart of the Christian myth. It is the reason Christians would degrade, harass, rob, torment, and murder Jews by the millions over the millennia. It is the basis of the bogus bill known as Replacement Theology. 86Jews would be called “Christ killers,” thereby justifying the unjustifiable.

No lie has been as debilitating or as hateful. It is why Yahowah condemned Paul, calling him the Father of Lies in the 89^th Psalm.

As a consequence of Paul’s disingenuous premise, of fraudulently attributing his delusion to God, of him falsely accusing God’s People of a crime Paul’s people actually committed, and of the Roman Catholic Church believing the liar and condemning Yahuwdym for what they had not done, the Son of God and Messiah will avenge these crimes. Upon Yahowah’s return with Dowd, every trace of Christianity will be obliterated with its leaders incarcerated in She’owl | Hell.

If you may recall, while stupefied by the idiocy of Sha’uwl’s claim, Chabaquwq’s | Habakkuk’s retort was: “But God, You are eternal. We do not die.”

While Romans ignorantly and savagely condemned the Passover Lamb to die, they did not kill God. This reality is brilliantly explained in Dowd’s 22^nd Mizmowr, which is why Yahowsha’ cited the Psalm at this very moment.

The symbolism of the Christian cross and crucifix, of a dead god having been tortured by the Romans, is the single most repulsive and appalling graven image man has ever contrived – and yet it is the primary symbol of mankind’s most popular religion.

It appears that my assessment of Satan’s thoughts were correct: These people You have created are so senseless and gullible we can rob them of their souls and they will condemn You and praise us in the process. Give up on them. Let us toy with them because they are not worthy of Your attention. They will revel in our lies and worship us.

And the Father of Lies is as Yahowah foretold: a habitual and prolific liar…

87“Though they found no proper ground for a death sentence, they asked Pilate to have him executed.” (Acts 13:28) In truth, we have no credible records of what happened in public much less behind closed doors.

The Romans, who detailed every important decision and event in writing, did not document anything in this regard. Recognizing that this was a huge affront to their credibility, Christians would later fabricate the missing evidence, putting words in the mouths of Roman authorities that were incredulous.

Jewish authorities were also meticulous in their documentation – and nothing was more cathartic for them than what occurred at this time. And yet there isn’t a single line in all of their records about a person named Yahowsha’ or a trial on these grounds.

Further, none of those who would eventually speak or write about these events were witnesses. Paul was clueless as to what the Sanhedrin may or may not have said or done. Neither Mark, Luke, nor Matthew was even in Judea at the time. And Yahowchanan, as an uneducated fisherman, would not have been invited into the inner circle of the Jewish religious and political elite.

Everything, every word, motive, and act was projected back upon the people Paul wanted to denigrate. The problem wasn’t Jews judging, rejecting, and condemning the Christian Jesus, but instead of them judging, rejecting, and condemning Paul.

Even having flunked out of rabbinic school, Paul would have known that the Sanhedrin, had they sought to judge Yahowsha’, would have found reason to kill him based upon their Talmud. It is likely that he spoke Yahowah’s name – which was a religious crime punishable by death. However, should a trial have been held and a verdict reached, the Sanhedrin would have been powerless to carry it out. Furthermore, the notion that the Sanhedrin 88would have gone to Pilate to plead with him to carry out a religious sentence is absurd. They despised him and he them.

If we are to believe the Christian New Testament, it was Rome that found no proper ground for a death sentence but killed him nevertheless. That said, we must tread with caution because very little of what Christians wrote in their “Gospels” regarding the events which played out before Pilate is historically valid or internally consistent. Later, in a subsequent chapter, we will study the origins of the “Gospel of Matthew” to ascertain how it came to reflect Paul’s anti-Semitic sentiments.

Paul has already made seventeen claims which are demonstrably inaccurate and has deliberately lied on nine occasions. It was an inauspicious beginning to the most reprehensible and deadly speech ever recorded.

“When they had carried out all that was written about him (In actuality: apart from what Dowd wrote in Mizmowr 22 and 88 and what Yasha’yah wrote in 53, very little was written about Yahowsha’. More importantly, “they,” as in the Jews, did not carry this out. It was the Romans who crucified Yahowsha’. Jews did not stone him.), they took him down from the cross and laid him in a tomb (The concept of a “cross” is both an errant portrayal of how crucifixions were conducted and a pagan symbol. And his body, not his soul, was taken to a tomb).” (Acts 13:29)

Let’s be clear: there isn’t a single prophecy about a person named Yahowsha’ in the entirety of God’s Word. And almost every prediction Christians have ascribed to Iesou Christo to buttress their faith was actually written about Dowd | David. Moreover, the few things said of this unnamed individual pertain to his role as the Passover Lamb – which Christians ignore.

Word by word, Paul is laying the foundation for the 89Christian Faith, forming it out of lies. And with his next sentence, he would condemn believers.

“But God raised him from the dead.” (Acts 13:30) In reality, only Yahowsha’s physical body, representing the Passover Lamb, suffered that indignity. His soul, Yahowah’s nepesh, went on to fulfill Bikuwrym after enabling the promises of Matsah. And his body, as the Passover Lamb, was destroyed, literally incinerated, at the conclusion of Pesach by Yahowah in concert with His Towrah | Instructions. It could not have been raised since it no longer existed.

However, that is not the biggest problem with Paul’s oratory. He not only failed to explain the connection to Passover, shutting the Doorway to Life while closing the Entrance to Heaven, his omission was far worse. Paul said nothing of Matsah | UnYeasted Bread, jumping from death to life without benefit or purpose. As a result of ignoring Matsah | UnYeasted Bread, Pesach | Passover became counterproductive and salvation was now impossible. Pesach without Matsah is eternal life without perfection, necessitating incarceration in She’owl | Hell. Sha’uwl would take believers home – to his eternal abode.

Such is the essence of Christianity. Yahowsha’s death as the Lamb apart from Passover renders the sacrifice useless, foreclosing on the possibility of eternal life. And Passover, even if understood, without UnYeasted Bread, would leave a soul eternally imperfect, forever laden with the fungus of religious and political contamination. Such souls are eternally separated from God, incarcerated forever in She’owl | Hell.

If that were not bad enough, by condemning Jews in the midst of his debilitating diatribe, blaming them for what he had done, Yahuwdym naturally and responsibly rejected everything associated with the Christian Iesou Christo. And in the process, they also missed what Paul missed: 90Yahowsha’s role as the Pesach ‘Ayil and Yahowah’s fulfillment of Matsah, provided the means to Bikuwrym – and life in the Covenant. For that, more than anything else, Sha’uwl was afforded naming rights to Hell.

There is no historical record of what follows, and had it occurred, it would have been the biggest news ever recorded in the Roman Empire and among Jews. The fact that there isn’t a single eyewitness account speaks volumes regarding Paul’s credibility.

“And for many days he was seen by those who had traveled with him from Galilee to Jerusalem. They are now his witnesses to our people.” (Acts 13:31)

Should you wonder why such stories were added to the “Gospel” account, either by the imposter writing under the pseudonym Matthew at the conclusion of the 1^st century, or two centuries later by Eusebius for the Roman Church, you now know. It was done to harmonize Paul’s testimony with the Christian myth he conceived.

This was also a backhanded slap at the Disciples Paul was trying to discredit and demean. It is likely that the post-Bikuwrym Yahowsha’ revealed himself to those he had personally chosen. But since he did not reveal or explain himself to Sha’uwl, the Disciples were degraded to nameless “travelers.” However, they would have seen him in Yaruwshalaim, not while en route from Galilee to Jerusalem.

Of course, Paul had a problem. If he managed to convince the world that Jews killed God, then God is dead and we ought to be worshiping Jews. So, he had his dead god come back to life specifically to condemn the Jews who allegedly killed him. If Iesou Christo cannot be shown renouncing his people and then accepting others who are unrelated, based upon the myth of the former’s complicity in his death, then there is no basis for Christianity.

91And yet, how pathetic does god have to be such that he can be killed by men? And don’t Christians know that “Jesus” was a “Yahuwd – Jew?”

Whether it was the ignorance or immorality of his audience, Paul’s revisionist history and absurd depictions have haunted Jews and beguiled Gentiles for the past two thousand years. These words would lead to genocide against the Jewish people in their homeland and throughout Roman Catholic and Christian Europe.

Religious myths die hard, so let’s be blunt. Crucifixion was a widely used, torturous, and public form of execution developed by Rome to suppress rebellion. Consider Spartacus. He and his fellow slaves were all crucified. Had the Jews killed “Jesus,” they would have stoned him.

Paul makes no mention of Yahowsha’ being the Lamb of God even though he realized that this was how he was presented by Yasha’yah | Isaiah. And unlike Dowd in the Psalms, Paul completely ignored what occurred on the Shabat of Matsah. For this, there would be horrendous consequences and no excuse. The crime against humanity was deliberately inflicted.

And according to Paul, that was good news…

“We tell you the good news: What God promised our ancestors (Acts 13:32) he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm: ‘You are my son; today I have become your father.’ (Acts 13:33)

There was no promise made to “raise up Jesus.” There wasn’t even a promise made to “raise up Yahowsha’.” The very thought of it is absurd. The Passover Lamb does not have an encore. It is not sacrificed to restore its own life, but instead so that those capitalizing upon Yahowah’s promise through the Miqra’ might endure.

This is the signature act of Paul’s religion and he got 92it wrong. The truth matters and the fact remains Yahowsha’s body, as the Passover Lamb, was incinerated that same night. His body was not raised or reanimated. His soul, or more likely Yahowah’s nepesh, was sent to She’owl and then released.

As for Paul’s evidence of such a claim, his statement was wrongly cited, errantly attributed to the 2^nd Psalm, mistakenly applied to Yahowsha’, and irrelevant to the point he was making. These mistakes drive right to the heart of the matter, proving Yahowah’s point that Paul sought to degrade and nullify Dowd. Moreover, this was not difficult. Yahowsha’ actually cited the Psalm which applied to him and to this situation. It is the 22^nd, not the 2^nd.

In context, Dowd wrote the following in the 2^nd Mizmowr / Psalm: “I, myself, have offered leadership by pouring out guidance, providing counsel through my governance upon Tsyown / the Signs Posted Along the Way, my Set-Apart Mountain. (Mizmowr 2:6)

I will choose to account for, proclaiming in writing, the prescription for living of the Almighty which Yahowah said to me, ‘You are My son. This day I bring you forth as your Father. (Mizmowr / Lyrics to be Sung / Psalm 2:7)

Feel free to ask questions about this, seeking to learn the answers because, literally out of Me, and from Me, there will be an inherited share of the land of the gentile nations that will be given to you and unto successive generations, even unto the distant reaches of the earth, with the material realm becoming your property.’” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to be Sung / Psalm 2:8)

Paul is a lousy liar. This was obviously, undeniably, and unequivocally said of Dowd | David, not Yahowsha’ | Iesous. Further, it says nothing about bodily resurrection. But his incessant need to misappropriate something 93positive regarding Dowd and Yisra’el, and then wrongly attribute it to “Jesus” and “Gentiles” that has led billions away from God and has cost them their souls. The questions are: why lie about the things of God, especially when the truth is so clearly presented, readily available, and easily verified. And why, under these circumstances, would anyone believe him?

For those keeping count, that’s 21 errors of fact and 14 intentional lies, with three of these grossly misrepresenting Yahowah’s testimony. God does not take kindly to such dishonesty, especially regarding those who deliberately deceive by twisting His words such that He is made to appear untrustworthy regarding His son and Messiah.

This next statement is a brazen affirmation of Paul’s villainy, as it blatantly states that “God” disavowed His solemn oath and promise to Dowd…

“God raised him from the dead so that he will never be subject to decay. As God has said, ‘I will give you the holy and sure blessings promised to David.’” (Acts 13:34)

Since there are no prophecies in which Yahowsha’ is mentioned by name, Paul consistently misappropriated those in which Dowd was designated and then claimed that they applied to someone else as if God didn’t know the difference between one name and the other. It is like saying that every time Yahowah said something about Yisra’el, He actually meant to say Rome. With Paul, names were clearly interchangeable, including his own. It was a ludicrous proposition, one that presents God as a disingenuous idiot.

Bodily resurrection would prolong decay not retard it. The reason we are transformed from physical beings to spiritual ones is to avoid this problem. And yet Paul would have Iesou | Jesus go from flesh to flesh, accomplishing nothing.

94To say that Christianity was religion brought to us by the village idiot would be too kind. Stupidity was the least of Paul’s problems.

Unfortunately for Christians, what Sha’uwl claims “God has said” regarding a transfer of “blessings” from “David” to “Jesus” never occurred – therefore annulling Sha’uwl’s entire proposition. Theologians not sufficiently smart to recognize that there was no validity to Paul’s assertion, claim that their apostle was citing Isaiah 55:3, but nothing of the kind appears in the text. As with everything else Paul used to “validate” Replacement Theology, he had to be deceitful and cunning.

By transferring this prophecy away from Dowd, by removing it from the discussion in which it was presented, by misquoting and then misapplying it, the only thing Paul actually proved is that he was a con man who cannot be trusted. It also speaks to his conceit, and to his utter disdain for those he has played for fools. If that is what you are looking for in a spiritual guide, you have found your man.

Personally, I prefer Dowd, as does Yahowah and thus Yasha’yah. The 55^th chapter of Isaiah opens with Yahowah speaking to us. He is openly refuting the Pauline and Roman Catholic notions that men should seek to have their thirst quenched and be nourished by men and that the faithful should pay such men for what they are offering by giving them their money.

As we proceed, please be aware that everything which follows was presented under the auspices of freewill. It is our choice, your choice…

“Of your own accord, come (wa halak – actually choose to literally walk (qal imperative)) without money (ba lo’ keseph – without monetary reimbursement, without coins, gold, or silver, without possessions, belongings, or property, nor anything of value) and without compensation or fee (wa ba lo’ machyr – without any 95portion of your earnings, without a price to be paid for receiving the service, nor any monetary equivalent or barter), and acquire grain which has been properly prepared (shabar – selecting ground grain, that which has been observed and scrutinized as nourishing (qal imperative)), wine (yayn – the juice of crushed and fermented grapes) and the finest and most beneficial milk (wa chalab – the bountiful food provided by mothers which is the best way to nourish young children, providing an abundance of benefits).” (Yasha’yah / Yahowah Rescues, Liberates, and Saves / Isaiah 55:1)

If people stopped paying ministers and no longer made donations to their church, they would no longer be fed lies. But as it is, the faithful are paying for their own demise. For proper nourishment, consume the word of God.

It is uncommon to see this succession of verbs all scribed in the qal stem and imperative mood, denoting that all of this is actually and quite literally our choice, a genuine expression of our desire and ours alone. We ought not be swayed by the religious or political, no matter their popularity or pressure.

Rather than paying the devil his due or look to men for scraps of rotten food tossed from their table, rather than leaving a donation at the church while participating in Communion or the Eucharist, go directly to God, instead. Unlike men, what He provides is both free and satisfying.

It is ironic that the Roman Catholic Church was funded on indulgences and that Protestant ministers proclaim that “Salvation is the Gift of God” and yet expect to be paid for the pronouncement. When I told the late Jerry Falwell that everything he was saying about God was untrue, the multi-millionaire televangelist agreed, but then bemoaned, “If I were to reveal this publicly, those who sit in the pews of my church and make donations, and the letters which arrive each day in the mail to support my university, would cease. 96And if you do so, they will label you a kook.”

As a result, Yahowah asks the religious…

“Why (la mah – for what reason) do you consistently spend your money (shaqal keseph – do you habitually contribute a calculated portion of your money, continuing to offer shekels of gold and silver, always engaging in a financial transaction with regard to your property and possessions (qal imperfect)) on that which is not bread (ba lo’ lechem – with that which isn’t actually food or a provision for anything) and then (wa) labor (yaga’ ‘atah – you work for and acquire) for that which is neither fulfilling nor satisfying (ba lo’ la saba’ah – for that which is never sufficient or satisfactory; from soba’ – satisfy and fulfill)?

You should choose to listen diligently to Me and actually hear what I have to say (shama’ shama’ ‘el ‘any – of your own freewill, you should want to make the decision to literally pay attention and hear what I, as God, am saying to you, listening very closely to Me (qal imperative infinitive absolute)) and (wa) elect to consume, being nourished by (‘akal – choose of your own accord and freewill that which should be eaten), that which is beneficial and good (towb – pleasant and pleasing, generous and useful, valuable and proper, favorable and functional such that you prosper) and then (wa) acting on your own initiative, unaffected by outside influences, continuously take great pleasure in (‘anag ba – delight and indulge in the exquisitely joyous (hitpael imperfect – consistently acting on your own recognizance and not misled by any individual or institution, unencumbered by societal, religious, or political pressure, continually enjoy pampering)) the best of what is produced and offered, the most enriching and fulfilling things (deshen – the most beneficial and productive things to be consumed, that which is the choicest and most delightful, and that which pertains to an 97anointing) for your soul (nepesh ‘atah – the essence of your life, your consciousness, your attributes, attitudes, and proclivities, your inner nature and core of your being, your ability to be observant and respond).” (Yasha’yah / Yahowah Rescues, Liberates, and Saves / Isaiah 55:2)

It is our choice: we can freely receive that which is good for us from Yahowah or we can make donations to the men and institutions who are selling poison.

We should be thoroughly annoyed by Paul’s bombastic arrogance by now. He thinks so little of those he is deliberately misleading, he believes he can pluck out and then pervert prophetic statements which, when considered in context, destroy his credibility, without getting caught or being held accountable. Even so, the religious are unwilling to question the basis of their faith, even when their own “Scriptures” are shown to be invalid.

Christian clerics throughout the ages, searching the Towrah and prophets, have concluded that Paul was quoting Isaiah 55:3 in Acts 13:34 as I have attested. But when they discovered that it did not read as Paul had claimed, not one sought to condemn Paul as a charlatan. Worse, when they came to realize that his citations were grossly inaccurate and totally misleading, often conveying the opposite of what the self-proclaimed apostle was claiming, no one seemed to care. There is no record of any of the “Church Fathers” acknowledging the obvious, that Paul was contradicting God while claiming He had authorized him – which is a rational impossibility. And not one exhibited the initiative to do what we have done, which is to consider the context of what was being revealed to determine what God actually had to say on this or any other matter.

This unwillingness to be rational drives to the very core of what is wrong with Replacement Theology. These spurious citations and irrational arguments explain why 98Paul not only started attacking and demeaning Jews who knew better, but had to turn to Gentiles to prevail. While the people to whom the Towrah was given knew that Sha’uwl was lying through his rotten teeth, Gowym, unlike Yahuwdym, were clueless regarding the revelations Sha’uwl was misappropriating.

By recasting the Chosen People as “scheming genocidal liars,” Paul unleashed a religious genocide against them. He could falsely claim, albeit now with his own “Scriptural” justification, that God so hated Jews that He would disavow all His promises to them. Sure, it is demeaning and preposterous, and yes it makes God out to be untrustworthy and petulant, but the Greeks and Romans lapped up the conspiratorial plot that Jews had schemed to kill God as if it were being served by Aristotle and Plato, Homer and Virgil, while it might as well have been Romulus and Remus.

Yahowah, stated otherwise…

“Incline (natah – choose to extend) your ear (‘ozen ‘atah – your ability to hear) and walk to Me (wa halak ‘el ‘any – then choose to move toward Me). Elect to listen (shama’) and your soul (nepesh ‘atah) shall live (chayah – will be restored).

I will establish (karat – I have decided to cut) an everlasting (‘owlam – an eternal and never ending) Covenant (beryth – family-oriented relationship (construct singular – bound to what follows)) for you (la ‘atah), based upon My verifiable and established (ha ‘aman – enduring and everlasting, trustworthy and reliable, readily confirmed) unending love and unfailing devotion (chesed – steadfast mercy and genuine affection) for Dowd (Dowd – Beloved and Adored).” (Yasha’yah / Yahowah Rescues, Liberates, and Saves / Isaiah 55:3)

In a rational world, this alone is sufficient to reject Paul, discard the Christian New Testament, and forego the 99religion of Christianity. It is by listening to Yahowah and then walking to Him guided by His testimony that our soul is restored and endures. There is only one Covenant and it is everlasting. It is readily verified and reliable. And it was established based upon Yahowah’s steadfast and unfailing love for Dowd.

Choosing to listen to Paul, Luke, Mark, or Matthew instead of Yahowah, since they contradict God, would be a mistake with deadly ramifications. Believing that there is a New Covenant, and thus a New Testament, following Yahowah’s declaration that His existing Covenant is everlasting would be to disregard and disrespect God and then expect Him to value your decision and soul nonetheless. To worship “Jesus” and believe that he is your savior when Yahowah said that His mercy, the restoration of our soul, and entry into the Covenant was predicated upon His unending love for Dowd | David, would be irrational.

Yahowah’s promise is the opposite of what Paul claimed “God said.” Yahowah asked us to listen to Him, not Paul. This had nothing whatsoever to do with “him,” as in “Jesus,” but was instead written of Dowd. It was not about “never being subject to decay,” nor being “raised from the dead,” but instead about our souls continuing to live. Instead of God “giving holy and sure blessings promised to David,” to “you,” whomever “you” may represent, whether that be Paul, his church, or gentiles through a new covenant, Yahowah said no such thing.

Yahowah’s position and Sha’uwl’s proposition are in irreconcilable conflict. Any attempt to justify transferring the promises God made to Dowd to someone else through a New Testament is contrary to the evidence and without justification. Every rational and informed individual who compares Yasha’yah | Isaiah 55:3, “Incline your ear and walk to Me. Elect to listen and your soul shall live. I will establish an everlasting Covenant on your behalf based 100upon My verifiable and trustworthy unending love and unfailing devotion for Dowd,” with “God raised him from the dead so that he will never be subject to decay. As God has said, ‘I will give you the holy and sure blessings promised to David,’” in Acts 13:34, will immediately recognize that Paul was deliberately misquoting and misappropriating the Word of God. It is that obvious. It is that clear-cut.

To his shame, Paul gutted Yahowah’s promise, completely passing over the declaration that the Covenant was everlasting and that His promises were verifiable and trustworthy. He deliberately failed to mention the connection between Dowd and the Covenant, and between the Covenant and Yahowah’s desire to be loving and merciful. The truth didn’t fit with his agenda. He also seemed to miss the part about listening to God and living as a result.

In his fallacious attempt to rationalize the errant notion that faith saves and the Towrah condemns, Paul has yet to acknowledge anything God has said that would, if accurately presented, save anyone. He has deliberately and consistently misrepresented what God revealed, taking it out of context, misquoting it, and then stating the opposite of what God intended. He has done it so obviously and often, it is a wonder there are so many Christians.

Since we all benefit when we listen to Yahowah, let’s consider more of what He had to say about Dowd 300 years after his first tenure as king…

“Behold (hen – pay attention), I have given him (nathan huw’ – I have bestowed and offered him, producing him) as an eternal witness (‘ed – to provide restoring testimony forever) to the people of the nations who are governed by antiquated philosophies (la’om – the populations congregating under obsolete cultural, social, political, or religious notions), a worthy leader 101(nagyd – an authorized official capable of governing, as a prince among the people) to instruct (tsawah – to guide and direct) the nations mired in the past (la’om – the people besieged by outdated and obsolete notions gathering under archaic ideas).” (Yasha’yah / Yahowah Rescues, Liberates, and Saves / Isaiah 55:4)

As a gift from God and as an eternal witness who both leads and instructs, Yahowah is saying that we would be wise to read Dowd’s Mizmowr and Mashal. As the Messiah, he unified, established, protected, led, inspired, and taught Yisra’el. And now Yahowah is saying that he will return to also serve the people of nations mired in the past and governed by antiquated philosophies. Therefore, God’s existing message through Dowd will endure, even for those living outside of Yisra’el, lifting them out of the mire and enlightening them.

When we study the Mizmowr and Mashal and then consider what has been revealed through the prophets, it becomes readily obvious that Yahowah has made Dowd an eternal witness on our behalf. He is amazingly articulate and his insights are brilliant. He is everything Paul is not, including right. Dowd has been afforded every meaningful credential, from Son of God to Messiah, from Shepherd to King. He was a poet and a prophet, a fighter and a lover, cerebral and emotional, and as such, Dowd was the exemplar of the Covenant and Yahowah’s perception of an ideal man. He was not perfect and yet he was vindicated because he was right. Dowd knew the truth and shared it openly and accurately.

With Dowd engendering God’s love and inspiring His compassion, what is to be gained by robbing Yahowah’s beloved son of what our Heavenly Father has given to him – for our benefit. Why base a religion on the oratory and pen of a man who would take from Dowd what Yahowah has offered?

102This prophecy says nothing about Yahowsha’, being “holy,” or “blessings.” Not a word of it or any other prophetic statement hints at transferring what God gave to Dowd to Yahowsha’, to Sha’uwl, to the Church, or to Gentiles. In fact, to my ear, this actually seems more like Paul was jealous of Yahowah’s enduring love for Dowd and tried to negate the fact that Yahowah presents Dowd as what Paul was claiming for himself: as God’s witness to the nations.

Beyond the obvious, let’s consider what was not said but was implied, nonetheless. God is not showing any devotion to or compassion for Yahowsha’ as the Passover Lamb because such love would be misplaced. He is not asking us to listen to Yahowsha’ either because the role of the Passover Lamb is a non-speaking part. God is not calling Yahowsha’ a teacher or leader because these are the responsibilities of a prophet and shepherd, not the sacrificial lamb.

Should you disagree with this assessment, ask yourself why we have nearly 100 Psalms and 25 Proverbs from Dowd, most meticulously preserved among the Dead Sea Scrolls, and not a single word Yahowsha’ wrote with his own hand or even shared verbally in the language he spoke? There are more surviving copies of Dowd’s writing than any other among those preserved in Qumran, along with the entire text of Yasha’yah who just spoke of him. Through the testimony of Shamuw’el we know intimate details of Dowd’s life, what he said and did, all proven reliable with the inclusion of prophecy. And yet with Yahowsha’, we have little more than the nitwits who have made a career of twisting Yahowah’s testimony to tell us about him. Do you suppose this is by accident or intent? Was Yahowsha’ incapable of writing as Dowd had done? Was Yahowah unable to accompany Yahowsha’ with a credible prophet as was the case with Shamuw’el for Dowd? Or, as Yahowah has stated through His prophet 103Yasha’yah, was His intent all along for us to listen to Him speak of His Covenant through Dowd?

It speaks of Paul’s audacity that he would continue to go to the very places where Yahowah destroys his credibility – to Chabaquwq, Yasha’yah, and to the Mizmowr. Desperate to find phrases he could take out of context and twist such that God’s words would be misinterpreted and seen as endorsing his contrarian views, Paul became reckless. He established a paradigm by which the only way to believe him was to remain ignorant and irrational.

This is the ultimate dilemma for Christians. Without Paul’s letters there is no Christianity because Yahowsha’ was a Towrah-observant and affirming Yahuwd who fulfilled Passover. With Paul’s letters the religion is a grotesque lie from its inception to its execution. There is no excuse.

It is one thing to do as I am doing, which is to endeavor to more accurately and completely translate Yahowah’s testimony from the oldest extant sources while sharing insights derived from what God revealed through His prophets. It is another to claim, as Paul has done, that he was inspired and authorized to be God’s witness to the world. I can and do err from time to time – although I’ll work tirelessly to correct my mistakes so no one is misled.

Paul, based upon his claims, cannot be afforded such latitude. He has now purposely and grossly misrepresented Yahowah’s testimony four times during his First Missionary Journey, and on each occasion, he has led his audience into believing the opposite of what was actually inspired and written. He would write 14 letters, and give many more speeches, but never once corrected anything he had erroneously stated. That is a crime worthy of She’owl in accordance with the Third Statement Yahowah etched in stone.

104Christian theologians, for selfish reasons, will try to exonerate Paul by suggesting that he was quoting from the Septuagint. But that monkey doesn’t have wings. That would be like me misrepresenting the Towrah, which was inspired and scribed in Hebrew, and is extant among the Dead Sea Scrolls, by citing a Medieval Latin translation while claiming direct Divine inspiration.

Paul boasted of being Gamliel’s best student in rabbinical school, where he would have studied under Hebrew scholars. He could have read what we are reading and could have gotten it right had that been his intent.

Beyond this, there is very little in Paul’s self-acclaimed accounting that rings true. His testimony has been a profusion of lies from beginning to end, from the completely fabricated account of authorizing the killing of “Steven the Martyr,” to meeting “Jesus” on the road to Damascus. His accounts are not only contradictory, they contradict the God he falsely claimed authorized and inspired him.

While we have more than enough evidence to conclusively demonstrate that Paul was deliberately deceptive in his desire to replace and negate Dowd, and that Paul was a false prophet, once again validating Yahowah’s condemnation of him, there is more to the prophecy that I did not expect. Here are the next two statements for your consideration.

Speaking to His People, and to those willing to listen to Him, Yahowah, Himself, revealed…

“Behold (hen – pay attention), you shall be called out, invited, and summoned (qara’ – you will be asked to read and then meet, even welcomed) by a Gowy | non-Yisra’elite (gowy – a by a ‘gentile’ who is not ethnically Jewish) you do not know (lo’ yada’ – you do not recognize, acknowledge, or understand).

105And further (wa), a Gowy | ‘Gentile’ (gowy – an individual of a different ethnicity than Yisra’el) not known (lo’ yada’ ‘atah – not recognized, acknowledged, nor understood) by you (‘atah ‘el) shall chase after you (‘atah ruwts – shall relatively quickly and intensely focus directly upon you) on account of (la ma’an – for the benefit of) Yahowah (Yahowah – an accurate transliteration of the name of ‘elowah – God guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence and our shalowm – reconciliation), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), and also (wa) on behalf of the Set-Apart (la qadowsh – to enable the approach of the separated) of Yisra’el (Yisra’el – to Engage and Endure with God).

For indeed in truth (ky – surely, correctly, and reliably), he will lift you up and endow you with honor (pa’ar ‘atah – he will distinguish you, making you the object of these revelations, affording you a very high status). (55:5)

Choose to seek (darash – opt to inquire about, learning information regarding, looking to) Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of the name of ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah existence and our shalowm – restoration) while He may be found (ba matsa’ huw’ – while He can be discovered and known).

Choose to call upon Him (qara’ – elect to invite Him and meet with Him, read about Him and welcome Him) while He is near (ba hayah huw’ qarowb – when He exists close by and is offering an intimate association and personal relationship).” (Yasha’yah / Yahowah Rescues, Liberates, and Saves / Isaiah 55:6)

Each time the expressions gowy and yada’ were referenced in the Great Isaiah Scroll, they were masculine singular. According to Yahowah, there is a Gowy engaged in Yada’ who is not only summoning God’s People to read 106what Dowd has to say and what Yasha’yah revealed, but who is seeking to reendow Yisra’el and Yahuwdah with the honor and status Paul usurped. He is working on behalf of God to reintroduce Yisra’el to Yahowah. He is doing for God’s People the opposite of what Paul attempted – seeking to undo the damage of Christianity.

Since he is not doing this for himself, but instead for Yahowah, and on behalf of the Chosen People, you are invited to benefit from what he has come to know. Join him in seeking to know Yahowah before it is too late.

Unlike Dowd and Sha’uwl, both of whom were mentioned by name, this man is a nameless Gowy whose merit is based solely on what he knows and on whose behalf he is working. And yet, based upon Yahowah’s frequent prophecies about him and the work he is doing, it would be unwise to discount his findings. Said another way, I would not advise labeling him a “kook.”

Since there are no statements to be found in the whole of the Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr which read as Sha’uwl | Paul has claimed, and since it only takes a matter of moments to prove that Paul not only misquoted God, but promoted the opposite of what God was revealing, why hasn’t a single Christian held him accountable – telling the world that the basis of their religion has been fabricated? This realization is material, obvious, and undeniable.

Frankly it is pathetic and appalling…“So it is also stated elsewhere: ‘You will not let your holy one see decay.’” (Acts 13:35) Once again, Paul is usurping what was said of Dowd and applying it to his “Jesus,” thereby discrediting the Son of God and Messiah. This is a citation from the 16^th Mizmowr / Psalm, where Dowd is the sole author, subject, speaker, and beneficiary.

It begins: “An engraving of Dowd. Keep Your focus upon me and be circumspect, closely examining and carefully considering what I’m doing, because in You, 107God, I confide and rely, placing my trust.” (Psalm 16:1)

The Song continues: “I will commend Yahowah who provides me with advice and counsel, keeping me informed so that I can think properly. Even during the night, my inner nature where I discern between right and wrong instructs and corrects me. (16:7)

I have continually and intensely desired to set Yahowah before me, seeking to be like Him, because by me being right, I shall never waver nor fail. (Psalm 16:8)

As a result, my judgment is sound in uplifting the significant distinction and honorable reward associated with me which is ecstatically delightful. My body, and the good news I proclaim, shall abide and remain, enduring confidently while securely established. (Mizmowr 16:9)

Therefore, You will not abandon my soul to Sha’uwl. Neither will You permit Your Trusting and Devoted One to witness the prison of corruption and decay. (Psalm 16:10)

You have revealed and made known to me such that I understand the path to an abundant and joyful life in Your presence, being found agreeable and acceptable at Your right side forever.” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to be Sung / Psalm 16:11)

That is a brilliant and endearing summation of the 89^th Mizmowr. It tells us to follow Dowd to God. He knows the path and has revealed the way for our benefit.

Nowhere in it does it say: “You will not let your holy one see decay.” It does not convey anything about Yahowsha’. But what it does say affirms that Dowd’s life and lyrics matter while Paul remains the Father of Lies. It is baffling that billions chose to believe Paul over Dowd. They readily discount the life of Dowd to follow Paul. In a statement we know that Yahowah personally inspired, 108Dowd wrote: “You have revealed and made known to me such that I understand the path to an abundant and joyful life in Your presence, being found agreeable and acceptable at Your right side forever.”

A “decaying” Dowd whose value was limited to a single generation – it is the stuff of Satan’s dreams…

“Now when David had served God’s purpose in his own generation, he fell asleep; he was buried with his ancestors and his body decayed. (Acts 13:36) But the one whom God raised from the dead did not see decay.” (Acts 13:37)

According to Sha’uwl, Dowd served a purpose which ended a thousand years earlier. He fell asleep, was buried, and what was left of him has decayed, but that was not the case with “the one.” The problem with that, of course, is that Yahowah said that Dowd served as an eternal witness and that as the King of Kings he would return to rule the earth. His is an eternal throne in Heaven. God even said that Dowd would appear as brilliant as the sun in His presence – which is pretty much the antithesis of decay.

We know better, and so did Paul, and that’s the point. As the Passover Lamb, Yahowsha’s body was incinerated right after having fulfilled its purpose. He was, therefore, neither “raised from the dead” nor bodily resurrected. Decay is the eventual result of every physical body – which is one of many reasons they are not resurrected. It would be counterproductive.

All of this was designed to make Dowd, the Son of God and the Messiah, inferior to the man-god Paul was promoting. Instead of protecting Jews, Paul’s god deplored them. And make no mistake, Paul wasn’t speaking on behalf of nor serving Yahowsha’. He not only twisted and perverted everything the Lamb stood for, he never once accurately quoted anything Yahowsha’ said – not once in 14 Epistles. This was all about Paul seeking to promote 109himself over Dowd, over Yahowsha’, over his Disciples, over Moseh, and indeed, over Yahowah. That is audacious, even for Satan’s Advocate.

According to Yahowah, Dowd’s purpose will endure forever. He will always be at Yahowah’s right side, which means he will be executing judgment. When he returns he will also serve as the Shepherd of God’s people. For all time, he will remain Yahowah’s Messiah and King of Kings. He is God’s beloved son and Chosen One who will forcefully demonstrate this by obliterating every myth associated with “Jesus.” Therefore, in the 3^rd Psalm, the one Sha’uwl was twisting to serve his agenda, we read:

“Yahowah, what is the extent of the increasing number of my adversaries, and of the unfavorable situation my enemies have managed to perpetrate, especially with the overtly hostile attempts at diminishing my significance?

The majority of people rise up, many of whom are established, exalted, and powerful, standing fast against me. (3:1) Many are saying of my soul, ‘There is no salvation for him or through him with God.’ Pause and consider this. (Mizmowr / Psalm 3:2)

You, Yahowah, are a shield all around me and my source of deliverance. You have provided the gift of protection for me, surrounding me such that others may benefit by the same directions and path.

You are my manifestation of power and attribution of status, everything I value and respect, and the One raising my prominence from the beginning. (Mizmowr / Psalm 3:3)

I communicate audibly by calling out to Yahowah and He answers me, providing testimony and evidence for me on account of His Set-Apart Mountain. Pause and consider this as well. (Mizmowr / Psalm 3:4)

110I will relax and fall asleep. When I awake, I will be revived and productive, passing through the summer, roused and alive, taking action and bearing fruit because Yahowah sustained and supported me, steadfastly focusing upon me such that I can lean on Him for whatever is necessary. (Mizmowr / Psalm 3:5)

I will not revere, respect, nor fear the great multitude of people from all around who have taken positions on the perimeter and have set themselves up in opposition to me. (Mizmowr / Psalm 3:6)

I want You to take this stand, Yahowah. Your desire is to assist me and save me such that You enable me to be helpful in the same way, causing me to become an expression of Your will while becoming ever more like You, a savior, my God.

For indeed, You will strike, verbally afflicting and then crippling, all of those who are averse to me, against those demonstrating animosity and rancor toward me, shattering the jaws of the unrighteous and unjust, the troubling and vexing. (Mizmowr / Psalm 3:7)

Approach and draw near Yahowah for the salvation of your family and for your benefit. Take a moment and reflect upon this.” (Mizmowr / Psalm 3:8)

The Mizmowr demonstrates that Paul was wrong about Dowd because it says that he will rise again and return with Yahowah. But the line which most effectively undermines Sha’uwl and the religion he fathered is “Many are saying of my soul, ‘There is no salvation for him or through him with God.’”

This is contrasted by… “I want You to take this stand, Yahowah. Your desire is to assist me and save me such that You enable me to be helpful in the same way, causing me to become an expression of Your will while becoming ever more like You, a savior, my God.

111For indeed, You will strike, verbally afflicting and then crippling, all of those who are averse to me, against those demonstrating animosity and rancor toward me, shattering the jaws of the unrighteous and unjust, the troubling and vexing.” (Mizmowr 3:7)

Once we become cognizant of what Paul is trying to accomplish, we know that this abysmal deception lies at the very heart of Christian mythos due to Paul’s claim that the Towrah cannot save. Sha’uwl would have Christians believe that, rather than the Towrah providing Yahowah’s means to reconcile our relationship with Him and enter Heaven as part of His Covenant, it condemns those who violate its “commandments.” Dowd, however, is proof otherwise. He was a flawed man who was right about God and was therefore vindicated. Dowd’s life tears asunder Paul’s justification for replacing the Towrah with Salvation by Faith and Grace.

Yet again, Sha’uwl has plucked a passage out of context, misapplied and misquoted it. Rather than proving his point, he has demonstrated that he cannot be trusted. After having been deliberately deceptive in the same way countless times, one would have thought that at least one Christian might have noticed his self-incriminating pattern.

Having established a false premise, and having lied in the process, Sha’uwl | Paul, the Son of Evil, said to those he would soon condemn… “Therefore, my friends, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. (Acts 13:38) Through him everyone who believes is set free from every sin, a justification you were not able to obtain under the law of Moses.” (Acts 13:39) And there you have it. Paul’s plan saves and God’s does not.

“Umm, excuse me,” one of those being addressed by Paul said anxiously, raising his hand, astonished at what he had just heard. “This is a non sequitur. Misrepresenting 112promises Yahowah made to Dowd has no bearing on your conclusion, which therefore leaves it completely unsupported. Far worse than this, the Psalm you cited to prove your point said just the opposite, that Dowd was the Savior and that he reveals the way to God. You, sir, are a liar!” he said to Paul.

It would take a while, but at least someone finally saw through Paul’s deception and had the courage and compassion to denounce Sha’uwl publicly. Yes, he was late, but unfortunately after all this time it still needed to be said clearly and bluntly. Ignore it at your peril.

If you were wondering why Yahowah concluded His prophetic announcement in the 55^th chapter of Yasha’yah with the following reference, now you know…

“Behold and pay attention (hen), you shall be called out, invited, and summoned, be asked to read and then meet, even being welcomed (qara’) by a Gowy | a non-Yisra’elite (gowy) you do not know, recognize, or acknowledge as Yada (lo’ yada’).

And further (wa), a Gowy | ‘Gentile’ (gowy) not known or understood (lo’ yada’ ‘atah) by you (‘atah ‘el) shall chase after you, focusing directly upon you (‘atah ruwts), on account of (la ma’an) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), and also (wa) on behalf of the Set-Apart (la qadowsh) of Yisra’el (Yisra’el). For indeed in truth (ky), he will lift you up and endow you with honor, making you the object of these revelations (pa’ar ‘atah). (Yasha’yah 55:5)

Choose to seek and inquire about, learning information regarding (darash) Yahowah (Yahowah) while He may be discovered and known (ba matsa’ huw’). Choose to call upon Him, inviting Him into your life, welcoming Him by reading about Him (qara’) while He is offering an intimate association and personal relationship (ba hayah huw’ qarowb).” (Yasha’yah / 113Isaiah 55:6)

Yahowah has made it abundantly clear that the opposite of what Paul has postured is true. “Jesus” did not proclaim the forgiveness of sins. In fact, apart from the Towrah’s presentation of Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym, His sacrifice is irrelevant. And speaking of irrelevant, so are beliefs. What is it that Christians are called to “believe:” that Paul can be relied upon, but God cannot be trusted, that the Towrah | Torah cannot save but that faith can?

How does one “believe” “Jesus” when so little of what he said and did is known? How can one accept the notion that “Jesus” was in opposition to the Towrah when in the Instruction on the Mount he said the opposite? How can anyone “believe” Paul when it is so obvious that he is lying?

How does “Jesus” save: By dying? By allowing people to kill him? By hanging from a Roman cross so as to create a religious icon? Are we to believe that the Roman cross was imbued with magical powers? How does torture lead to peace? Were the Romans who opposed Yahowah’s people and land conscripted to work on behalf of the God they denied?

Was God such an ineffective communicator that He was relegated to annulling His message and then replacing it such that salvation would be achieved by placing one’s faith in the very man He called the Plague of Death. Is anyone paying attention? While Paul’s unsupported assertion and logical contradiction is the central tenet of the Christian Faith, it is asinine.

If the God who sent Yahowsha’ to fulfill Passover as the Lamb cannot be relied upon, how can the misnomer Iesous | Jesus be any better? If we are to believe that “Jesus” is the “Son of God,” the Messiah,” even “God in the flesh,” wouldn’t he be the same as the God Paul is saying cannot be trusted?

114And speaking of Paul’s Iesous | Jesus, since no one existed by that name, how are we to go about believing someone whose actual name we do not know, whose ethnicity we are asked to abhor, whose statements we must negate, and whose stated purpose has to be annulled? If faith in this person is all that matters, then why didn’t Paul quote anything he said?

If Yahowsha’ is not the Passover Lamb, then the prophecies announcing him are either wrong or Paul is fingering the wrong person. And if Yahowsha’ is the Pesach ‘Ayil, then the means to salvation he is facilitating emanates from the Towrah.

In His Towrah | Guidance, first in Shemowth | Exodus and then in Dabarym | Deuteronomy, Yahowah delineated a sin which He said was unforgivable – denying and denigrating the merit of His name. Paul, and all of those he has misled, are guilty of committing the unpardonable act, negating the value of Yahowah’s name by erroneously calling Yahowsha’ | Yahowah Liberates, Rescues, and Saves, “Iesous Christos – Jesus Christ.”

Further, there is no “law of Moses.” The Towrah | Teaching is Yahowah’s and it is His source of Guidance and Instruction. It is also God’s lone means to save. As proof, consider Dowd’s 19^th Mizmowr / Psalm:

“On behalf of the eternal and glorious One, a Mizmowr | Psalm of Dowd | the Beloved: The heavens quantify the unit of measure, exactly and accurately of the manifestation of power, glorious presence, and overall significance of God. Its expansion and expanse make conspicuously known His handiwork. (Mizmowr / Psalm 19:1)

Day unto day pours out a proliferation of answers with words and their intent. Night unto night reveals knowledge which leads to understanding. (Mizmowr / Psalm 19:2)

115Nothing exists, and everything is senseless, without the Word, without these answers and promises. Nothing matters or survives when and where the spoken and written message of the voice which calls out is corrupted or negated, when it becomes nameless and is no longer heard, regarded, or understood.” (Mizmowr / Psalm 19:3)

“Yahowah’s Towrah, His Teaching and Guidance, is complete and perfect, restoring and transforming the soul. Yahowah’s testimony is trustworthy and reliable, making understanding relatively easy for the open-minded. (Mizmowr / Psalm 19:7)

Yahowah’s directions are correct, promoting the right attitude while facilitating good judgment. Yahowah’s instructive conditions of His relationship agreement are purifying, illuminating the proper perspective. (Mizmowr / Psalm 19:8)

Revering and respecting Yahowah purifies and perfects forever. Yahowah’s just means to resolve disputes are reliable and vindicating.” (Mizmowr / Psalm 19:9)

This is music to my ears. The words of a true prophet are so much sweeter than the sour chords struck by Sha’uwl.

Since Paul has acknowledged that “David” served God’s purpose, even if for a single generation, and since Dowd’s words and Paul’s are wholly incompatible, indeed the antithesis of one another, there is no rational way to construe Paul as having told the truth. Pause now and think about that.

The Father of Lies was so arrogant that he would often insult his audience, believing that, no matter how obvious he made it, no one would bother to fact-check his citations and thus recognize that he was an imposter. And yet the 116prophecy he would cite next from Chabaquwq / Habakkuk to intimidate and cower his audience so that they could be coerced into believing him was expressly written to do the opposite.

As we now know, 666 years before Sha’uwl presented this speech and then penned his first letter in 52 CE, in 615 BCE (recognizing that there was no year 0 between BCE and CE), Yahowah chose a man named “Chabaquwq | Embrace This” to expose and condemn an individual named “Sha’uwl | Question Him.” God’s concern was that this heinous individual would lure billions of souls back to Babylon by negating His Towrah and replacing His Covenant. And yet, like a moth drawn to the fire, Paul could not seem to leave it alone. The prophet he most often cited is the one who called him out by name, labeling Sha’uwl the “Plague of Death,” while at the same time renouncing everything he would come to represent.

“Take care that what the prophets have said does not happen to you: (Acts 13:40) ‘Look, you scoffers, wonder and perish, for I am going to do something in your days that you would never believe, even if someone told you.’” (Acts 13:41)

Now that is arrogant or, more correctly, psychotic and delusional. The seldom-considered prophetic witness the Son of Evil has just upended to cast aspersions on his audience was actually written to warn an unwary world about Sha’uwl | Paul. The prophecy the Devil’s Advocate misappropriated and misquoted is found in Chabaquwq / Habakkuk 1:5. In context, God’s warning began with these words...

“This is the prophetic pronouncement (ha masa’) which, for the benefit of the relationship and to show the way to get the most enjoyment out of life (‘asher), was received as a revelation by way of witnessing a prophetic vision of the future by (chazah) Chabaquwq | 117Embrace This (Chabaquwq), the prophet who proclaims the message of God (ha naby’). (Chabaquwq / Habakkuk 1:1)

For how long and to what extent (‘ad ‘an), Yahowah (), shall I plead for relief during this desperately horrible and dangerous situation (shawa’) because (wa) You will not actually listen for a prolonged period of time (lo’ shama’) to my anguished appeal and summons (za’aq)?

Toward and against You (‘el ‘atah) there is a devastating plot comprised of cruel lies regarding being Towrahless, plundering of people without moral restraint (chamas), and as a result (wa) You must continuously withhold salvation (lo’ yasha’). (Chabaquwq 1:2)

For what reason, for whom and why (la mah) are You having me witness (ra’ah ‘any) this grotesque corruption and deliberate fraud (‘awen) along with (wa) the distressing misery and abysmal situation being inflicted that (‘amal) You are having me consider (nabat)?

The demonic spirit seeking to be worshiped as God, who is exceedingly malicious and oppressive, the Devil, himself (shod / shed), is a destructive force, completely Towrahless and lacking moral restraint (wa chamas), and yet he is conspicuously before me, publicly conveying this message right out in the open (la neged / nagad ‘any).

He has been and continues to be (wa hayah) contentious and conflicting, taunting and quarrelsome, harboring in hostile opposition a different perception regarding the proper standard (ryb). He brings forth and continuously advocates (nasa’) dissension regarding condemnation and vindication (wa madown). (Chabaquwq 1:3)

118In this regard (ken ‘al), he will consistently seek to incapacitate, invalidate, and paralyze the purpose of, striving to nullify, while bringing an end to (puwg) the Towrah | Teaching and Guidance (Towrah).

Therefore, he will never disseminate or carry forward (wa lo’ yatsa’) the everlasting and eternal approach (la netsah) to vindicate by justly resolving disputes or to exercise good judgment by making informed and reasoned decisions regarding the adjudication of relational issues (mishpat).

By contrast (ky), wickedness is invasive and injustice encompasses (rasha’ kathar) the means to be right and become innocent (‘eth ha tsadyq).

For this reason, that which (‘al ken) he brings forth and disseminates (yatsa’), perverts, distorts, and convolutes (‘aqal) the way to make informed and rational decisions regarding judgment (mishpat).” (Chabaquwq 1:4)

I tear up every time I read this, sad that after Yahowah went to this extent to expose and condemn Sha’uwl | Paul for our benefit, by a ratio of a million to one, men and women have chosen to believe the Father of Lies and Son of Evil over the word of the Creator.

This brings us to the passage in the 5^th verse which the principal author of the Christian New Testament used to taunt his audience in 52 CE. It is Yahowah’s warning to His people to be observant such that they are forewarned regarding the irrational means Sha’uwl would deploy to corrupt gowym with Christianity – and haunt them as a result.

“You can witness this (ra’ah) among the Gentiles (ba ha gowym) if you care to be consistently observant, carefully considering and evaluating (wa nabat).

So, you should avoid being among those negatively 119influenced. You should be astonished and astounded, and thereby remain free of these societal influences. You should independently exhibit an exceptionally negative reaction, bewildered and dumbfounded, wondering how it was even possible (wa tamah tamah).

Indeed, it is true that (ky) a considerable undertaking will transpire (po’al pa’al) in your days (ba yowmym) which you will not find credible in spite of it being truthfully and reliably verified (lo’ ‘aman), even when it is properly assessed, written down, and he is held accountable (ky saphar).” (Chabaquwq 1:5)

Yahowah’s prophetic warning, encouraging His people to reject what they were hearing on this day, was twisted by the deceiver God was warning them about, intending for them to cower. How about you?

As we are aware, Yahowah would also encourage…

“For this reason (ky), look to Me, and pay attention (hineh ‘any), being upright while taking a firm stand (quwm) regarding (‘eth) the Chaldeans and the religious influence of Babylon (ha Kasdym), this population of Gentiles (gowy) who are disagreeable and embittered (mar), impetuous and hasty (wa ha mahar).

Through the vast expanses of the region (la merchab ‘erets) he makes his way (ha halak) acting as if it was his inheritance, taking possession of (la yarash) inhabited places that are not his to own (mishkan lo’ la huw’). (Chabaquwq 1:6)

He is (huw’ min) terrible and repugnant, exceedingly distressing and terrorizing (‘aym), as well as intimidating while demanding to be venerated (wa yare’).

And yet his decisions and judgment, his plans and means to resolve disputes (huw’ mishpat), are his alone (huw’). His proposals on being accepted into the 120relationship and to be forgiven (wa se’eth huw’), he brings forth and disseminates (yatsa’).” (Chabaquwq 1:7)

Taking us further into the future, the prophet describes how the airborne weapons of this menacing lone wolf would be brought against God’s people in their darkest hour, perpetrating a great injustice at the behest of cruel lies. His victims will be innumerable and dense, and include both religious and political leaders, all attacking and degrading ‘Abraham, Yitschaq, and Ya’aqob, and thus the fulfillment of the Covenant with Yisra’el.

“Then at that time (‘az), he will actually go with a new and completely different spirit, discarding the Spirit, sweeping Her aside, and actually exchanging the existing Spirit for a totally dissimilar spirit (chalaph ruwach).

And he will arrogantly travel about, intoxicating and alienating based upon an unjustified opinion of himself, sacrificing an inheritance while revoking the prospect of salvation by repealing Passover (wa ‘abar).

He will be wrong, incur guilt, and will genuinely suffer punishment for his acknowledged offenses (wa ‘asham). For this is (zuw) his influence (koach huw’) on behalf of his god (la ‘elowah huw’).” (Chabaquwq 1:11)

And then this admonition renouncing Sha’uwl’s most recent claim…

“Yahowah (YaHoWaH), my God (‘elohym ‘any), my Set-Apart One (qodesh ‘any), are You not eternal, from an unlimited duration of time (ha lo’ ‘atah min qedem)? Yahowah (Yahowah), we will not die (lo’ muwth) as the means to decide guilt or innocence (la mishpat).

You have actually appointed for him (sym huw’), accordingly (wa) the Rock (tsuwr) which You have 121assigned and positioned to argue against and rebuke him (la yakach yasad huw’). (Chabaquwq 1:12)

Too flawless (tahowr) are eyes to witness (‘ayn min ra’ah) such malignant and displeasing evil (ra’). You cannot endure nor prevail when (lo’ yakol) looking upon or responding to (wa nabat) such a perverse and grievous undertaking (‘el ‘amal).

For what reason would (la mah) You look at or consider (mah nabat) the betrayal of an offensive and deceitful trickster and traitor engaged in chicanery (bagad)?

Therefore, You will enable an implement to write against this plot, facilitating an inscribed response by composing an effective demarcation. Otherwise, You will remain silent and unresponsive, taking no other action for a prolonged period (charash) concerning that which is befuddling and confusing besides countering it with effective communication, thereby devouring (ba bala’) the wicked (rasha’) more accurate and righteous than him (tsadyq min huw’). (Chabaquwq 1:13)

You act and engage with (wa ‘asah) humankind (‘adam) in a manner which could be compared to (ka) fish (dag) of the sea (ha yam), similar to (ka) creatures which move freely about (remes) without anyone ruling over them or seeking to control them (lo’ mashal ba huw’). (Chabaquwq 1:14) And yet with everything associated with him (kol huw’ ba), he will use a lure and hook to entice, to withdraw and then sacrifice (chakah ‘alah). When (wa) he catches them, he will drag them away (garar huw’) in his dedicated trap (ba cherem huw’). And he will gather them together and remove them (wa ‘asaph hem) in his dragnets by kindling his victims’ yearnings while emotionally agitated and mentally dysregulated (ba mikmereth huw’).

And yet, concerning this (‘al ken), he is elated, being 122intoxicated with himself (samach), and he is glad, shrieking and shouting over this outcome (wa gyl). (Chabaquwq 1:15)

So therefore, in this way (‘al ken), he sacrifices and slaughters (zabach) his devotees as they approach his net and are ensnared in his trap (la cherem huw’). And he blows smoke to make illicit worship seem pleasant (qatar), ensnaring his victims while remaining emotionally agitated and unstable (la mikmereth huw’).

For indeed (ky), through them (ba hem) he is enriched and satisfied (shaman), through seductive words while he claims a share of his persuasive plot (cheleq huw’).

In this regard, what he devours (wa ma’akal huw’) is contrived, newly fashioned and artificial, recently created, entirely new, and synthesized, comprised of circumstances and conditions which have been amalgamated (barya’). (Chabaquwq 1:16)

So how is it (ha ‘al ken) that he continues in vain to advocate such worthless fantasies and delusions from so far away, promoting that which is unreal and has never existed, doing so without any benefit, only to disgorge into oblivion (ryq) believers from his trap (cherem huw’), thereby (wa) eternally and intentionally ending the lives (tamyd la harag) of Gentiles (Gowym) while showing no concern, compassion, or mercy (lo’ chamal)?” (Chabaquwq / Habakkuk 1:17)

By his own admission, Sha’uwl | Paul was demon-possessed. His Lord became the Christian god as a result. Through the Son of Evil, the Adversary would achieve his goal of being worshiped above the Most High by the preponderance of people, rising above the Almighty through religion, while turning Gowym against Yahuwdym.

123Let’s take a moment and compare what was actually written in Chabaquwq / Habakkuk 1:5 with what was alleged in Acts 13:41 such that we are reminded of Sha’uwl’s propensity to pervert and twist the Word of God to suit his purposes. It is remarkably similar to the way Satan deceived Chawah in the Garden.

“Take care that what the prophets have said does not happen to you: ‘Look, you scoffers, wonder and perish, for I am going to do something in your days that you would never believe, even if someone told you.’” (Acts 13:40-41)

“You can witness this among the Gentiles if you care to be observant. So, you should avoid being among those negatively influenced. You should be astonished and astounded, and thereby remain free of these societal influences. Independently exhibit an exceptionally negative reaction, wondering how it was even possible.

Indeed, it is true that a considerable undertaking will transpire in your days which you will not find credible in spite of it being truthfully and reliably verified, even when it is properly assessed, written down, and he is held accountable.” (Chabaquwq 1:5)

Trying to get the Jews in the synagoge to believe him, Sha’uwl | Paul directed their attention to Yahowah’s warning against him. So why are we the first to notice?

Since Sha’uwl chose to corrupt Chabaquwq to infer that those listening would perish if they scoffed at him, let’s turn the tables by revealing what Yahowah had to say about the Father of Lies.

“Upon (‘al) My requirements and responsibilities, My mission which functionally serves as a safeguard to watch over, protect, and preserve the observant (mishmereth ‘any), I have decided of My own volition that I will literally and continually stand (‘amad).

124And (wa) I will choose to remain firm and prominently present Myself (yatsab) upon (‘al) that which strengthens, protects, and fortifies, preventing a successful attack by the adversary (matsowr). Therefore (wa), I will be on the lookout (tsapah) in order to see (la ra’ah) what he will say about Me (mah dabar ba ‘any).

So then (wa) how can I be expected to change My attitude, thinking, or response (mah shuwb) concerning (‘al) My disapproving rebuke and subsequent chastisement and punishment (towkechath ‘any). (Chabaquwq / Habakkuk 2:1)

Then (wa) Yahowah (Yahowah) answered me, responding by approaching me and providing additional testimony (‘anah ‘any). And He said (wa ‘amar), ‘Write down (kathab) this revelation (chazown), and (wa) expound upon it, reiterating it using letters to teach others its significance (ba’ar) upon (‘al) writing tablets, inscribing it on a panel or screen such that it is enduring and memorable (ha luwach), and so that (la ma’an) by reading this (qara’ by huw’), he might run and go away (ruwts). (Chabaquwq 2:2)

Nonetheless, the subsequent realization of (‘owd ky) this revelation from God (chazown) is for the Mow’ed | Appointed Meeting Times (la ha mow’ed).

It provides a witness to and speaks, pouring out evidence, censuring the puffery from the blowhard (puwach) in the end, addressing those who are cut off and cast away (la ha qets). Should it seem slow to develop, the extended period of time required for this question to be resolved (‘im mahah) shall not prove it false (lo’ kazab).

Expect him in this regard (chakah la huw’) because, indeed (ky), he will absolutely come (bow’ bow’), neither being delayed nor lingering (lo’ ‘achar). (Chabaquwq 2:3)

125Pay attention because (hineh) he will be audacious and oblivious, puffed up with false pride, heedless of the truth and thus reckless and foolhardy, a genuine pain in the butt (‘aphal).

His soul, attitude, and personality, especially his character (nepesh huw’) is neither right nor straightforward in him because he does not consider anything appropriately, he is circuitous in his reasoning, wandering away by twisting and convoluting the teaching, such that nothing is on the level with him (lo’ yashar ba huw’).

As a result, it follows (wa): through trust and reliance, by being firmly established and upheld by that which is dependable and steadfast, always truthful and reliable (ba ‘emuwnah), he who is correct and thereby vindicated (tsadyq huw’) shall live (chayah). (Chabaquwq 2:4)

Moreover (wa ‘aph), because (ky) the intoxicating and inebriating spirit (yayn) of the mortal man (geber) of deceptive infidelity and treacherous betrayal, this traitor who is untrustworthy, unprincipled, and unreliable (bagad) is an overbearing moral failure of unwarranted self-importance, aggrandizing himself (yahyr), he will not find peace nor live, nor will he find appropriate words to achieve his goal of coming home (wa lo’ nawah), whomever is open to the broad path, the expanded and improper way (‘asher rachab) associated with (ka) Sha’uwl (Sha’uwl).

He (huw’) and (wa) his soul (nepesh huw’) are like (ka) the Plague of Death, a pandemic disease that kills a large population of people (ha maweth). And so (wa) those who are gathered in and brought together by him, accepting him (‘asaph ‘el huw’) will never be satisfied (lo’ saba’).

Most every gentile ethnicity (kol ha gowym) he will 126claim as his own and gather together unto himself (qabats ‘el huw’), many such people will be included among his followers (kol ha ‘am). (Chabaquwq 2:5)

They do not ask questions, any of them, about him (ha lo’ ‘eleh kol hem ‘al). Terse references to the Word they lift up as taunts to ridicule, simplistic and contrived equivalencies, clichés and adages which become bywords to exercise dominion through comparison and counterfeit (mashal nasa’), along with (wa) allusive sayings and mocking interpretations, derisive words wrapped in enigmas arrogantly spoken (malytsah).

There are hard and perplexing questions which need to be asked of him (chydah la). And (wa) they should say (‘amar), ‘Woe (howy) to the one who claims to be great so as to increase his offspring, acting like a rabbi, to the one who thrives on numbers and who considers himself exceedingly great (rabah),’ none of which applies to him (lo’ la huw’).

In the meantime, for how long (‘ad mathay) will they make pledges (‘abtyt) based upon his significance, pursuant to the weight and burden of his testimony, and the esteem afforded him (kabed ‘al huw’)? (Chabaquwq 2:6)

Since (wa) he loads himself down (ta’an) with (‘eth) thick (‘aphelah) mud (tyt), why not (ha lo’) quickly, even if only for a short period of time (peta’), rise up and take a stand (quwm)?

And (wa) those of you who are smitten and under his influence, perhaps making payments to what he represents (nashak ‘atah), wake up from your stupor (wa yaqats) such that you move away in abhorrence (zuwa’ ‘atah). Because otherwise (wa) you will be (hayah) considered (la) plunder and be victimized by them (mashisah la hem).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / 127Habakkuk 2:7)

In light of what Yahowah revealed through Chabaquwq, in recognition of Paul’s propensity to twist and pervert the Word of God to promote his insidious religion, it’s a wonder there is a single Christian who believes him. And yet there are over 2.3 billion believers. Shame on you! And shame on Yahuwdym for allowing this cancer to metastasize in your midst.

Although I have little doubt that Sha’uwl told his Greek coconspirator, Luke, to write it like this, it didn’t actually happen this way. What this proves is not that “devout converts to Judaism followed Paul,” but that Sha’uwl was a delusional and manipulative narcissist and psychopath. Any correlation between reality and Paul is an illusion.

“As Paul and Barnabas were leaving the synagogue, the people invited them to speak further about these things on the next Sabbath. (Acts 13:42) When the congregation was dismissed, many of the Jews and devout converts to Judaism followed Paul and Barnabas, who talked with them and urged them to continue in the grace of God.” (Acts 13:43)

This was a very tense time in the Roman Empire. Corrupt men, each more depraved than his predecessor, vied to be worshiped as Emperor. The only common thread, other than their conniving duplicity, moral depravity, and vicious barbarism, was the degrading manner they treated non-Romans, the Gentilis. And as evidenced by the carnage Rome would inflict upon Judea, the most vulnerable were Jews.

As such, there were no “devout converts to Judaism.” For good reasons, Jews had been conditioned over the centuries to avoid the abusive and genocidal tendencies of the Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks, and now Romans. They did not and do not seek converts. The more 128devout the Jew, the less they support the notion of accommodating foreigners.

Moreover, devout Jews religiously avoid saying the names of false gods. The Gratia, from which “Grace” is derived, were Roman goddesses of hospitality and merriment. They would have been repulsed by them.

Further, the steps of orthodox Jews are counted on the Shabat, and thus severely limited, such that they could not have followed Paul and Barnabas. If the alleged gentiles in the synagogue were accepting of what Sha’uwl is reported to have said about “Jesus,” they would no longer be devout converts to Judaism. And more to the point, if these Jews were fervent, they would have known that Sha’uwl had misappropriated and misquoted their Tanakh.

Along these lines, when we compare what Yahowsha’ did when he went into a synagogue, and what was occurring in this one while Sha’uwl stood to speak, we notice something which differentiates Paul from those who actually know Yahowah. They recite Yahowah’s Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr to listen to what God has to say. Paul insisted upon his audience listening to him.

Moving to Paul’s next lie, keep in mind that this was a Roman city, a place soon to be called, Hadrianopolis, where Caesar Augustus was worshiped as god along with Dionysus and Cybele. Jews represented an infinitesimal percentage of the people in this place, and the “Gentiles” who lived here worshiped their Lords on the Lord’s Day, Sunday, not on the Shabat. Therefore, this could not have occurred…

“On the next Sabbath almost the whole city gathered to hear the word of the Lord. (Acts 13:44) When the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy. They began to contradict what Paul was saying and heaped abuse on him.” (Acts 13:45)

129Gentiles would not have gathered on the Shabat because doing so would have put them at odds with Rome and their religion. The “Lord” is Satan’s title, something of which Sha’uwl would have been keenly aware. Under the control and influence of Rome, Jews would never have reacted jealously to the emergence of large crowds of Gentiles.

They would have gone into hiding, knowing that they would likely be victimized and abused – the opposite of the way Paul is portraying them. And last we checked, these Jews were in the habit of gathering together inside of their tiny synagogue on the Shabat, such that they would not have been outside, contradicting Paul.

While we are on the subject, as has been the case with Christianity and Islam, Christians and Muslims have expressed great pride in building their churches and mosques directly over the places most revered by Jews. A tiny synagogue was recently found buried beneath the floor of the church the locals constructed directly above it. Muslims, of course, subsequently tore the church down to build a mosque.

If this event had occurred, what the Jews were accused of doing would have been the correct response. Without exception, those who are informed, rational, and compassionate are inspired to contradict what Paul has said. The correct response is to heap massive amounts of derision upon him. It is the compassionate rejoinder to the Father of Lies.

It is unlikely that Barnabas said much of anything in Paul’s presence. And the fact is, Barnabas would soon walk away from Paul, taking Mark with him, disgusted by his contradictions and duplicity. In fact, according to Paul, at the end of his life everyone abandoned him except Timothy – whom he solicited to manipulate Mark. His fraud was paper-thin, and with the slightest effort, he is shown to be 130an imposter.

Rather than speak the Word of God as he claims, Sha’uwl twisted and contradicted Yahowah’s testimony to annul it and promote his own. Paul’s mantra was designed to repudiate and denigrate Jews, inciting Gentiles to rise up against them. He was serving Satan, after all.

After transferring the promises Yahowah made to Dowd to Iesous, this was the next card to be played in the house of cards known as Replacement Theology. The Jews who rejected Paul had to be replaced with those who were ill-equipped to criticize the wolf preying upon them.

“Then Paul and Barnabas answered them boldly: ‘We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles. (Acts 13:46) For this is what the Lord has commanded us: “I have made you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.”’” (Acts 13:47)

It was the epitome of evil, Satan’s crowning achievement. According to Sha’uwl | Paul, the Jews were not worthy of eternal life. So, the Devil’s Advocate turned to the Gentiles, those whose familiarity with the Towrah and Prophets was so limited, he could lie with impunity. And they in turn would come to value him, believing that, by putting their faith in the man his own people, and indeed God, Himself, had repudiated, they would be saved.

This time the Son of Evil has returned to citing the prophet, Yasha’yah | Isaiah. The statement he has misappropriated, and errantly as well as arrogantly attributed to himself, is found in Isaiah 49:6. It was not a command, but instead a question presented as a request. It was not written of Paul and Barnabas but is instead in the voice of the Prophet Yasha’yah. And it was not composed to spurn Yisra’el, replacing Jews with Gentiles, because it was written to call the Chosen People home.

131Recognizing that context is the mother’s milk of understanding, let’s begin listening to Yahowah’s prophet at the beginning of the chapter. He asks…

“Why not listen to me (shama’ ‘y ‘el ‘any – it’s a pity you don’t choose to hear what I have to say to those of you living along the sea, those surrounded by water dwelling on the coastlines of continents; note: ‘y can convey coastlines, serve as a negation, express a woe, or pose a where or why question (qal imperative – genuinely of our own accord)) you people of different nations and cultures, those of you who are still influenced by antiquated philosophies (la’om – populations congregating under obsolete cultural, social, political, or religious notions)?

And those who remain alienated, living a great distance away (min rachowq – who are separated and distant, far away from the source and thus estranged), come to your senses and pay attention (qashab – choose to be alert and attentive, accepting this information so that you can respond appropriately to it [from 1QIsa] (hifil imperative)).”

Excellent question and outstanding recommendation. Why not? What do you have to lose to listen to God?

In a world swimming in lost souls, other than ethnic Yisra’el and Yahuwdah, for whom Yahowah is always calling, precious few others are going to prequalify themselves for inclusion into the Covenant. At issue is walking away from religion and politics as well as the growing fascination with conspiracy and globalism to warrant an invitation. And without an invitation, Covenant membership is not likely. It is God’s Home, His Family, and He is wise enough to be selective. He reaches out to those He finds interesting…

“Out of the womb (min beten), even from the body of my mother (min me’ah ‘em), Yahowah (Yahowah – an 132accurate transliteration of the name of ‘elowah – God guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence and our shalowm – reconciliation) called out to me, inviting me (qara’ ‘any – called me, summoned me, and designated me by name, encouraging me to read and then recite aloud, announcing this opportunity to meet, to be greeted and welcomed), by proclaiming and memorializing the truth with my name (zakar shem ‘any).” (Yasha’yah / Yahowah Rescues, Liberates, and Saves / Isaiah 49:1)

His name was Yasha’yah. It is comprised of yasha’ and Yah, with Yah being the familial form of Yahowah. The value of yasha’, however, is stunted when we relegate it to “salvation.” That is its fourth connotation or, more correctly, the result of the other three. Yasha’yah actually means that Yahowah is willing to assist those prepared “to be delivered from harm’s way.” That is to say He will engage “to rescue” us if we, like the Yisra’elites of old, show a willingness to answer His Miqra’ey | Invitations to be Called Out and Meet while walking away from Mitsraym | the Crucibles of Religious, Political, Militaristic, and Economic Oppression.

Yasha’ is a call to “freedom.” It is only once we are delivered from man’s harmful ways, once we are prepared to be rescued in the manner Yahowah has prescribed, that we can celebrate our newfound freedom in the fullest sense of the word. Those who trust and rely upon Yahowah, His Towrah, Miqra’ey, and Beryth to be yasha’ in this way are then “saved.” That is what the prophet’s name reveals. And interestingly enough, his name, therefore, discredits Sha’uwl’s claim that they could not be saved by the Towrah.

“He caused my mouth (wa sym peh ‘any) to be like a sharp sword (ka chereb had – and akin to an effective chisel). In the recesses of His hands (ba tsel yadym huw’ – set between the object and the source of light such that 133His hands were modeled after and resemble the light in fewer dimensions [from 1QIsa]), He kept me safe because He loves me (chaba’ ‘any – He cherished our relationship and therefore protected me).

He chose for me to be like a purging and purifying missile (wa sym ‘any ka la chets barar – He is responsible for causing me to become comparable to a brilliant and shining cauterizing arrow, one designed to remove and cleanse, severing some while separating others, especially those who have been chosen and who then choose for themselves by having examined, probed, and tested the means to purification [from 1QIsa]) in His arsenals (ba ‘ashphah huw’ – within His quiver and home [1QIsa]). He covered and concealed me (sathar ‘any – He hid me from view, veiling what I have revealed).” (Yasha’yah 49:2)

The reference to one’s mouth becoming a sharp sword leads us to a conclusion Yahowah has long advocated: our most effective weapons are neither fists nor knives, neither bullets nor bombs, but instead words wielded wisely. Like a cauterizing arrow, they can go right to the heart of the matter, piercing even the most cherished lies, stopping the hemorrhaging in the process.

To appreciate why God concealed His prophet, recognize that Yasha’yah | Isaiah, the most prolific of the prophets was, by his own admission, an abject failure during his lifetime. He did not “yasha’-yah” anyone! So, why do you suppose Yahowah would veil the most extraordinary and comprehensive revelation of all time?

The answer is twofold. His people, Yisra’el and Yahuwdah, were not ready for the prophet’s message and He knew that the remaining Gowym | Gentiles would do as Sha’uwl | Paul has done and misappropriate it, claiming it for themselves. It would not be until Sha’uwl’s fraudulent embezzlement was systematically exposed and condemned, freeing His people from this plague’s deadly 134intent, and concurrent with His desire to call His people home, that His prophet’s words would be unveiled.

“Then He said to me (wa ‘amar la ‘any), ‘You are My coworker (‘ebed ‘any ‘atah – you and I can work together as), Yisra’el (Yisra’el – One who Engages and Endures with God), through whom by revealing the way to the benefits of the relationship (‘asher ba ‘atah – with you and by way of the proper path to get the most out of life) I will make glorious declarations (pa’ar – I will explain My desire to raise up and beautifully adorn, honoring and exalting (hitpael imperfect – acting on My own initiative without any outside influence I will continuously expound upon the reasons behind My means to beautification and glorification)).’” (Yasha’yah 49:3)

Yasha’yah was one of the forty prophets Yahowah worked through to reveal Himself to His people – all descendants of Ya’aqob. It is through Yisra’el that has made His glory known. To demean them, as Sha’uwl had done, is to silence the voice of God. This is one of many reasons the Christian Church is lost.

“I said (‘any ‘amar), ‘I have labored (yaga’ – I have devoted enormous time and energy to the task, working to the point of becoming weary (qal perfect)) ineffectually without result (la ryq – unproductively and in vain), having nothing beneficial to show for it (tohuw – such that it has produced nothing), making me comparable to the brevity of breath passing out of my mouth (hebel – making it appear meaningless and futile during this fleeting moment in time).

And yet I have used my potential to my fullest capability (koach ‘any kalah – deploying my strengths and abilities, qualifications and resources, to completion and exhaustion).

Even so (‘aken), my judgment is right (mishpat ‘any – my sense of what is true and false, beneficial and 135counterproductive, and my decisions on the means to justly resolve disputes are valid) with regard to (‘eth) Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of the name of ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah existence and our shalowm – restoration).

And that is the reward I have for what I have done (pa’ulah ‘any – as are my compensation and labor) with my God (‘eth ‘elohym ‘any).” (Yasha’yah 49:4)

The lack of a result was not Yasha’yah’s fault. He had devoted his life to sharing what Yahowah had revealed through him. Unfortunately, no one listened, at least not back then. But we are listening now!

The Great Isaiah Scroll reads “the One who fashioned and formed ‘you’” rather than ‘me,’ as is the case with the Masoretic Text. It is the enduring legacy of Yasha’yah’s words, not the man, himself, that would be deployed by Yahowah to call Ya’aqob home such that Yisra’el might be gathered for His harvest.

“And at this moment (wa ‘atah – simultaneously), Yahowah (Yahowah – an accurate transliteration of the name of ‘elowah – God guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence and our shalowm – reconciliation) spoke, making an announcement (‘amar – expressed and declared): the One who fashioned and formed you (yatsar ‘atah – who conceived you [you in 1QIsa and me in the MT]) within the womb (min beten – in gestation) to be His coworker (la ‘ebed la huw’ – to serve as His associate and work with Him) will cause Ya’aqob to come back to Him (la shuwb Ya’aqob ‘el huw’ – will change by turning around so as to facilitate and effect the return of Yisra’el to Him, thereby restoring His people (polel infinitive – using a verbal noun to effect this result)) such that Yisra’el (wa Yisra’el – those who engage and endure with God) might be 136gathered for His harvest (‘asaph – to be collected and removed, withdrawn to His place).”

This cannot be Sha’uwl | Paul because he declared the opposite intent. Remember: “Then Paul and Barnabas answered them boldly: ‘We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles.’” To the contrary, it remains Yahowah’s purpose, His prime objective, “to call Ya’aqob back to Him such that Yisra’el might be gathered for His harvest.” Therefore, by unveiling Yasha’yah’s words prior to the harvest on behalf of Yisra’el, this is exactly what will be accomplished.

I think Yasha’yah recognized this too, which is why he said…

“I have merit and am honored (kabed – I have significance and a worthy distinction) in the eyes (ba ‘ayn – in the sight) of Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of the name of ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah existence and our shalowm – restoration). My God (wa ‘eloah ‘any) has been, is, and always will be (hayah – exists as) the One who assists me and the reason that I’m capable, always helping me (‘azaz ‘any – the One aiding and abetting me, the source of my mental and physical capabilities [from 1QIsa]).” (Yasha’yah / Yahowah Rescues, Liberates, and Saves / Isaiah 49:5)

This intimate portrait of the life of an extraordinary prophet and his love for his people, indeed, his desire to call Yisra’el home, takes us to the statement Paul raped from its context and then abused to infer that he was serving at the command of God who made him “a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.” That’s a hell of a boast for the maniacal @%?!*&^> who was the Father of Lies and the Plague of Death.

137“And then He said (wa ‘amar – He expressed in words), ‘It is far from trivial (qalal min – it is out of the relatively swift and easy manner which is far from insignificant) that you have become (hayah ‘atah – that you will be) the one I approached to work through (la ‘any ‘ebed – to serve as My coworker and associate) to raise up and reestablish (quwm – to take a stand, elevating and honoring) the tribes (‘eth shebet – the major subdivisions of the nation, the closely related family groups, the clan and people) of Yisra’el (wa Yisra’el – those who have engaged and endured with God [1QIsa whereas the MT reverses the order of Yisra’el and Ya’aqob]), those of Ya’aqob (Ya’aqob – Trustworthy and Beneficial Footsteps, the patriarch of the Covenant and forefather of Yisra’el; from ‘aqab / ‘eqeb – to be rewarded as a consequence of unwavering and reliable movements and a willingness to dig in one’s heels when it comes to being steadfast, honest, and dependable along with the recompense and reward of being trustworthy) who will be preserved for a subsequent purpose at a later time (natsyr – pertaining to those who remain, and who have been kept safe in dangerous times so that the cause may continue), such that they might be brought back and restored (shuwb – transforming them, changing their direction, so that they can return home).

And so (wa) I will offer you (nathan ‘atah – at this moment in time I will provide you as a gift, causing you to be) as a light to illuminate (la ‘owr – for the purpose of enlightening) the nations (gowym – the confluence of ethnicities, countries, cultures, and places outside of Yisra’el) such that My deliverance (yashuwa’ah ‘any – My rescue from danger and resulting freedom leading to My salvation) may come to exist (la hayah – will occur and come to pass) as an eternal witness unto the far extremities (‘ad qatseh – as enduring testimony as far as the outskirts [1QIsa plural (as is the case in the LXX) while singular in the MT]) of the earth (ha ‘erets – the Land 138and/or material realm).” (Yasha’yah / Yahowah Rescues, Liberates, and Saves / Isaiah 49:6)

While God did speak of “a light for the Gentiles,” the verb, hayah, meaning, “to exist as,” not “bring,” follows “yashuwa’ah ‘any – My deliverance.” Therefore, rather than saying “that you may bring salvation,” God said “such that My deliverance from danger may come to exist.”

It is by causing His prophetic light to shine as a witness throughout the Gentile world that Yahowah will finally be able to rescue Yisra’el. It is Ya’aqob, and thus Yisra’el, who is being saved. Without Yahowah’s light, which shines so brightly through Yasha’yah, Yisra’elites would remain in the darkness of the nations, unaware that Yahowah is calling them home.

Once again, the inverse of what Paul cited is what God actually said. He neglected to acknowledge that Yahowah’s preceding statement made the purpose of providing this light the opposite of the point he is trying to make. Yisra’el was indeed worthy of salvation. Further, he inferred that “you” was Paul, not Yasha’yah – fraudulently usurping the role of a prophet. Then he somehow forgot to mention that yasha’ was prefixed with the preposition ‘any | My, likely because Paul’s target audience and means to salvation were the opposite of Yahowah’s.

We are all free to form and share our own opinions, but not to misrepresent the Word of God – at least without consequence. By pulling Yahowah’s revelation to Yasha’yah out of context, by ignoring what God had just said and would say, and by misquoting Him in the process of misappropriating His intent, Sha’uwl became the Father of Lies and the Plague of Death. It is little wonder he didn’t share what God revealed next…

“Now this is what is being conveyed (koh ‘amar – thusly it is communicated) by my Upright One (‘edown ‘any – my Upright Pillar who enlarges and secures the Tent 139of the Witness [from 1QIsa]), Yahowah (Yahowah – an accurate transliteration of the name of ‘elowah – God guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence and our shalowm – reconciliation), Your Redeemer, who delivers and saves you (ga’al ‘atah – the One who rescues you by removing you from a dangerous situation, your kinsman who will buy you back, redeem and avenge you [from 1QIsa which adds “‘atah – your” to ga’al]), Yisra’el (Yisra’el – Individuals who Engage and Endure with God), and ‘His Set-Apart One (wa qadowsh huw’ – along with the one who is special and separated unto Him (based upon Mizmowr 89, this would be Dowd)), regarding the Despised and Despicable Soul (la bazah nepesh – to the contemptible individual and disgraceful thief who pillages and plunders without merit, who is lowly and little and held in contempt, the one scorned and ridiculed for dividing everything into two parts (read: “Old” and “New” Testaments, who, based upon Mizmowr 89, would be Sha’uwl)) for the repulsive and abhorrent behavior (la ta’ab – for the vile manners and shameful tendencies, because of the abomination, the detestable contempt and appalling rejection [plural in 1QIsa]) of Gowy | of the Confluence of Ethnicities, Cultures, Religions, and Governments (Gowy – of the Gentiles and their nations and institutions), along with those who exercise authority and serve this narrative (‘ebed mashal – to those who work for and with governments and associate with those in control, who strive to assert authority over others and have become objects of scorn in this vivid portrayal),

‘Governmental heads of state and institutional leaders (melek – kings along with those embodied with political, military, or religious power) shall be seen rising up (ra’ah wa quwm – will be witnessed rising and will be looked upon to take a stand) along with their high-ranking officials (wa sar – and also their commanders and captains who are military officers, royalty and chieftains, 140and all manner of overlords and authority figures [this wording is from 1QIsa]), but (wa) because of (lama’an – in deference to, in response to, and in view of) Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of the name of ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah existence and our shalowm – restoration), they will bow down, prostrating themselves, while seeking to explain themselves (chawah – bowing low, they will announce their position by actually displaying it) to the One who, to show the way to the benefits of the relationship (‘asher – who reveals the correct path to walk to get the most out of life), is truthful, trustworthy, and reliable (‘aman – is honest and accurate, correct and right, easily verified and readily confirmed), the Set-Apart One (qadowsh – the One who is unique and separated, wholly unlike that which is popular or common) of Yisra’el (Yisra’el – Individuals who Engage and Endure with God), the One (ha ‘echad) who has chosen and prefers you (bachar ‘atah – who selected you and who desires you).’” (Yasha’yah / Yahowah Rescues, Liberates, and Saves / Isaiah 49:7)

God’s words tell a different story than the one Sha’uwl | Paul is trying to foist upon an unsuspecting world. Yahowah is Yisra’el’s savior, the one who will redeem His people from the Christians Paul has poisoned. Rather than Gentiles deserving salvation and Jews not, it is the other way around. This realization further reinforces our previous conclusion, that the reason the light provided by the prophet Yasha’yah is now manifest within the nations is to serve as a homing beacon. It is being presented among the Gowym because there are Yahuwdym being mistreated in their midst. Indeed, God is calling His people home, away from Gentiles, so that He can save them.

It appears that Sha’uwl | Paul has been afforded yet another title: Bazah Nepesh | the Despised and Despicable Soul. That is to say, while Paul isn’t the star of this story, 141as the principal villain, he gets sixth billing behind Moseh, Dowd, Yahowsha’, Yahuwdah, and Yisra’el.

According to God, the driving force behind the Christian New Testament, the character with the largest speaking role is the “Bazah Nepesh – Despised and Despicable Soul, the contemptible individual and thief who pillaged and plundered without merit, the lowly and little one held in disrespect, the one scorned and ridiculed for dividing everything into two parts (read: “Old” and “New” Testaments)” responsible “la ta’ab – for the repulsive and abhorrent behavior, the shameful and appalling rejection” of the “Gowy – the Confluence of Ethnicities, Cultures, Religions, and Governments.”

I guess we should thank Paul for taking us to yet another brush with infamy. I am only sorry that it took this long to call him out.

It is rather obvious that God vehemently disagrees with what Paul has said and done. He knows His people are worth saving…

“Now, therefore, thus says (koh ‘amar – accordingly declares) Yahowah (Yahowah – an accurate transliteration of the name of ‘elowah – God guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence and our shalowm – reconciliation), ‘During the Time (ba ‘eth – in the particular and proper period, after the passage of considerable time, and in the right time, the occasion) of Acceptance (ratsown – of favorable choices, of approval, and of fulfilling one’s will and desires, of goodwill; from ratsah – being favored, accepted, and pleased) I will respond to you (‘anah ‘atah – I will answer you, as I am thinking about you and will become preoccupied with you, concerned and worried about the affliction you are suffering [from 1QIsa which changes the perfect in the MT to the imperfect]).

And (wa) in the Day of Salvation (Yowm 142Yashuwa’ah – the Day of Deliverance, Rescue, and Liberation, the time of freedom from danger), I will assist and support you, increasing everything about you (‘azar ‘atah – I will help you, providing everything that is necessary, including the power to accomplish the task [from 1QIsa which changes the perfect (completed) in the MT to the imperfect (ongoing)]). And I will protect you (wa natsar ‘atah – I will spare you and preserve you, keeping you safe, developing a watchful and observant relationship with you).

To raise (quwm – to establish and confirm, to take a stand with, honor, and keep) the Family (‘am – for the people), I have offered you (wa nathan ‘atah – I have given, allocated and provided you (qal imperfect)), accordingly (la), the Covenant (Beryth – the Family and Home as a Familial Relationship Agreement).

Therefore, the Land (la ‘erets – as a result, the earth and material realm) which was ravaged and became appalling (shamen – that was devastated, depopulated, and ruined, becoming a wasteland for horrifying terrorists) will be reapportioned, repossessed, and maintained (nachal – will be reacquired and received, bestowed and preserved by legitimate standards to heirs) as an inheritance (nachalah – giving successive generations ownership and control over the property).” (Yasha’yah / Yahowah Rescues, Liberates, and Saves / Isaiah 49:8)

So much for the notion of a “New Covenant” with Gentiles inheriting God’s promises to His people. That clearly has not occurred, nor will it ever happen. So much for the Twistian and Fakestinian claims to the Land of Yisra’el as well as their “Two-State Solution.” According to Yah, the ultimate Tsyown | Zionist, His plan is to remove the appalling Gentiles and restore the Promised Land to Yisra’el.

With a single puff, Yasha’yah extinguished Paul’s 143claim to have been sent out as a light by God to save the Gentiles. They will be depopulated to protect Jews from them.

We have been right all along. A Benjamite Sha’uwl became the Roman Paul, switching allegiances to condemn Jews while claiming to save Gentiles. He did so because he recognized the former were too well-informed to believe him while the latter were sufficiently steeped in pagan lore, anti-Semitism, and covetousness to lap up his theoretical and theological toxin as if it were their mother’s milk…

“When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored with the word of the Lord; and all who were appointed for eternal life believed. (Acts 13:48) The word of the Lord spread through the whole region.” (Acts 13:49)

He told them what they wanted to hear, and they believed him. For all practical purposes, Paul had become their Messiah and god. He would inspire and write their “Scriptures.”

By telling those who were estranged from God that they had become the Chosen People, that salvation was free, and that all they had to do was believe him, Paul’s faith became popular. While he had to lie through his teeth to make these claims, it would not matter because the Christian religion would be based upon faith and didn’t require believers to do as Dowd had done to be right.

It was not enough for Sha’uwl to dupe the Gentiles. Since the Jews were sufficiently informed to realize Sha’uwl was perverting their Towrah and Prophets, those who knew the truth would have to be repudiated and discredited. It was the only way for his contradictory and unGodly message to prevail. From this moment on, any Yahuwd who exposed Paul as the liar he had become, who pointed out the obvious and copious conflicts between his words and those of God, would be dismissed and abused by the mythical moniker: “Judaizer.”

144“But the Jewish leaders incited the God-fearing women of high standing and the leading men of the city. They stirred up persecution against Paul and Barnabas and expelled them from their region. (Acts 13:50) So they shook the dust off their feet as a warning to them and went to Iconium. (Acts 13:51) And the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 13:52)

And thus ends the reading of Christianity’s version of the Satanic Verses with Paul’s disciples filled with joy at their Lord’s warning to the dastardly Jews. Anti-Semitism would flourish in the resulting cesspool of ignorance.

It is telling that this Despised and Despicable Soul consistently establishes himself and his Lord as adversarial to the Chosen People. According to the Father of Lies and Plague of Death as “the word of the Lord spread through the whole region” “the Jewish leaders incited the God-fearing women of high standing and the leading men of the city,” “stirring up persecution against Paul,” “expelling him from their region.”

It is obvious that Sha’uwl was busy spreading the word of his Lord. So, the rest of this is a lie – one crafted to divide the world such that Gentiles would come to justify their hatred of Jews. There would be two covenants and two testaments, one old, one new, the ineffectual one for the Jews and Paul’s Gospel of Grace for the rest of the world. And in the confusion, not a single solitary soul would engage in the Covenant with God over the course of nearly two millennia.

Before we delve into the root cause of Christian anti-Semitism, let’s be honest about Yahuwdym. Their relationship with Yahowah was strained during Dowd’s reign, and it’s only grown worse since that time. They assimilated into Greek culture and lost sight of almost everything which had made them special. Then they became a house divided against Rome on three occasions.

145The first of these is not as well-known as those which occurred in 70 and 133, destroying the Temple and then the Land, so let’s take a moment and see how Jewish infighting boiled over into a civil war. This occurred after the death of Queen Alexandra Salome. Infighting between her sons, Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II, caused them to vie for the prestigious and lucrative titles of Chief Priest and King. With the conniving Antipater the Idumaean in the mix, the resulting chaos and military alliances became unsettling for Rome. After his deputy worsened the problem by accepting bribes, the Roman general, Pompey, intervened and commenced a brutal three-month siege on Jerusalem in 63 BCE, ending Yahuwdah’s independence. In the process of becoming a tributary province of the Roman Republic, twelve thousand Jews were slaughtered by Pompey’s forces.

Having gained access into the city by building ramparts from the north unto the Temple Mount, and deploying battering rams constructed in Tyre, the pompous Roman immediately desecrated the “Holy of Holies” within the Temple. The Kingdom of Judea was then dismembered, forced to relinquish the coastal plain, depriving it access to the Mediterranean, as well as much of Samaria, greatly diminishing the state. Greek assimilation had been bad, but not nearly as debilitating as Roman subjugation.

The unified ranks between Jewish religious and civil leaders portrayed by Paul and throughout the “Gospels” was not true. The Pharisees, for example, were completely intolerant of Rome. When they heard that Pontius Pilate would be bringing his army from Caesarea to Jerusalem, they encouraged thousands of religiously conservative Jews to walk seventy miles to Caesarea and lay prone around Pilate’s house for five days, all in objection to the effigies of Emperor Augustus emblazoned on the standards of his infantry. The Sadducees, however, wanted to coexist 146with the occupiers, in opposition to the Pharisees.

Things got especially tense when Gessius Florus accepted bribes from robbers to release them from prison – allowing them to continue their thievery as long as they shared their stolen loot with the Roman overlord. Making matters worse, because the bribes and share of the booty proved insufficient, Gessius began acting like a Roman Catholic pope and started robbing the Temple Treasury.

When the people protested, Gessius marched his troops into the city and turned them loose to plunder and kill its inhabitants. The Zealots responded in kind and began killing Romans and their collaborators. Then at the Temple, itself, Jews stopped the twice daily offering of a sacrificial bull to show their submission to Rome. Fearing that another revolt would have devastating consequences, as a house divided the most affluent of Judea requested more Roman troops be brought in support of Gessius and his stooge, Agrippa II, grandson of Herod. In September 66 CE he sent 2000 cavalry into the city.

After seven days of carnage on both sides, Agrippa’s forces were driven from the city. The Zealots, after taking Masada, returned to Jerusalem with an arsenal of weapons. Further demonstrating that Jews were more divided than united, on the Shabat they burned the palace of the High Priest in the south, Agrippa’s palace toward the east, and stormed the fortress Antonia north of the Temple, killing the Roman cohort. They set upon Herod’s palace in the west and massacred his garrison. It was a full day of mayhem. Then, even among the Zealots, there was conflict, with the larger faction driving the Sicarii out of the city and killing their leader, Menahem.

In response, the Roman general, Cestius Gallus, marched from Antioch, the capital of the Syrian Province of Imperial Rome, with Legions comprising 18,000 men. They destroyed every Judean town that did not capitulate. 147They entered the city as the Zealots retreated to the Temple. But the Romans began undermining its foundation while setting its gate ablaze. Inexplicitly, Gallus cowered, snatching defeat from the hands of victory. Seizing upon the opportunity, Jews chased the retreating Roman army, inflicting heavy damage. By the time they had reached Bezetha, Jews had killed 6,000 Roman soldiers, forcing Gallus to abandon his weapons and possessions.

Prominent Jews fled Jerusalem to escape the inevitable Roman retaliation, while others stayed to defend their country from this oppressive regime. And as further evidence of a house divided, a priest named Joseph ben Mattathias, whom posterity would know as Flavius Josephus, trained a Jewish army said to number 65,000 based on the Roman model. In opposition to him was the wealthiest Jew of the day, John of Gischala, who held a monopoly on kosher oil. He saw the priest-turned-general as a threat, and thus as a traitor.

All the while, Nero ordered his most acclaimed general, Vespasian, to suppress the uprising. He assembled an army of 60,000 troops to raid the same Galilean towns, readily defeating the priestly Josephus – at least until he and his remaining troops took refuge in Jotapata, where the tide of the war nearly turned. But it was not to be, because after a forty-seven-day attack with fifty-foot armored siege towers and one hundred sixty siege engines, its walls were breached – but not until a Jewish deserter told Vespasian when the inhabitants would be most vulnerable.

Josephus and forty other leaders hid out in a cave and made a suicide pact. As they drew lots and began killing one another, Josephus somehow arranged to be the last man standing. He then surrendered to a Roman officer who took him to Vespasian. Rather than die, he convinced the Roman that he was a prophet by telling the general that he would someday be emperor.

148Meanwhile, with Josephus out of the way, John of Gischala entered Jerusalem and lied, telling the Zealots that the High Priest Ananus and his associates were about to hand the city over to the Romans. So, the Zealots brought in a mercenary army from Idumaea, which backfired. When they entered the city, the Idumaeans went berserk, such that the city and Temple were covered in blood. Now aware of the hoax, the oil tycoon broke with the Zealots and formed a rival party.

At the same time in Rome, Nero took his life, giving Vespasian the opportunity he sought to become emperor. He left his son, Titus, to finish his dirty work. Josephus, the priest-turned-general then prophet, was now a Roman and free. He became a traitor and accompanied Titus, providing advice on how to most easily enter the city. It would not take much, as it was already engulfed in a three-way civil war, destroying itself. As some factions sued for peace, others attacked the Roman positions on the Mount of Olives – inflicting heavy casualties.

However, the Romans were vastly superior militarily to the people they had subjugated for the past 130 years, and as Josephus pleaded with Jews to surrender, Titus turned one wall after another to rubble. And yet, in one last great act of rebellion, a remnant managed to undermine and torch the Roman siege engines. In response, Titus built a five-mile-long wall around the city in order to starve the inhabitants to death.

Even then there was disunity, with many fleeing the city to surrender to the Romans. However, before some left, they literally swallowed their wealth, devouring gold coins that they expected to extract from their excrement. It backfired, because when the first was spotted picking coins out of his poop, the Syrians and Arabs serving the Romans gutted every Jewish escapee. It was so barbaric, Titus objected, and made the impromptu surgery a capital offense.

149It was a lost cause. The Temple was slowly being consumed by fire as a consequence of the Jewish attack on Roman siege engines and battering rams surrounding it. The final insult occurred when a Roman soldier threw a torch through a window and the Temple was destroyed.

Simultaneously, the Romans set the lower city ablaze. The remaining rebels hid in the sewers, only to be dragged out and killed. The city was razed. Titus took tens of thousands of Jewish prisoners along with the Temple’s treasures, even its Manowrah, to Rome. The leader of the Zealots was chained through the nose, dragged to Rome, and then executed in the Forum.

The notion of a unified crowd of Jews, of Chief Priests, civic leaders, and ordinary people, chanting in one accord and chanting with one voice to kill Yahowsha’, is preposterous. It was all contrived to create a conspiracy to abuse and murder Jews.

If you want ten opinions, argue with a single Jew. Not much has changed over the years, although a homecoming is now in the offing.

Jews have long been too smart for their own good, they have not always come when called, and they have been stubborn to a fault, but these challenges are resolvable. The problem was Paul. He was the Jew who dared argue with God. Considering his claims and where they are presented, he is the deadliest of men.