Yada Yahowah

Twistianity

Volume One

Appalling

Contradicting God

Craig Winn

About the Author…

Twenty-two years ago, Craig Winn was an entrepreneur. The turbulent story of his last adventure is shared in his first book, In The Company. It is an entertaining read, providing an eyewitness account into the culture of a private and then public company.

After the Islamic suicide bombings of 9.11.01, Craig met with al Qaeda and wrote Tea with Terrorists to explain – Who they are, Why they kill, and What will stop them. His most widely read book, Prophet of Doom – Islam’s Terrorist Dogma in Muhammad’s Own Words has now been updated and substantially expanded, becoming God Damn Religion, after witnessing the sadistic savagery of Muslim terrorists on 10.07.23 in Israel. It reorders the Quran chronologically, setting it into the context of Muhammad’s life using the earliest Hadith, notably Al-Tabari’s Tarikh | History and Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah | Way of Allah’s Messenger. If you want to know why fundamentalist Muslims commit 90% of the world’s most heinous terrorist acts, and if you care about the wellbeing of God’s people, Snake, Satanic, Submission, Slaughter, and Sunnah are instrumental.

In his quest to resolve a puzzling prophetic anomaly, Craig began translating the text of the Dead Sea Scrolls. That endeavor led to the 25 volumes of Introduction to God, Yada Yahowah, Observations, Coming Home, Babel, and to this, the first of 5 books on Twistianity, formerly, Questioning Paul. They were renamed and rewritten to present the Passover Lamb’s true identity and to condemn the abomination known as Replacement Theology.

Throughout, Craig, or Yada as he is known to Yahowah, has been committed to providing amplified translations. They are not only more accurate and complete, they are readily verified. As a result, he has been afforded hundreds of insights into the words Yahowah inspired, many of which are unheralded and profound.

Beyond these 35 books, Craig Winn has been interviewed as an expert on religion, politics, economics, and terrorism on over 5,000 talk radio programs worldwide and has hosted 5,000 more, leaving a vast quantity of archived shows from Shattering Myths to his Yada Yah Towrah Study. He currently produces a live podcast every Friday evening, where he discusses insights gleaned from his translations. Links to the podcast and archives, as well as to the social media sites expounding upon Yada Yahowah are provided at YadaYah.com.

Mr. Winn is not a scholar or theologian, nor is he associated with any religious or political institution. He does not accept donations or receive financial backing from anyone. Everything he has written is shared freely online. All 30 of his published books are offered without royalty.

Over the past twenty years, Craig Winn has devoted his life to exploring Yahowah’s testimony. He enjoys God’s company and is enriched by the experience. If you have an open mind, and a genuine desire to learn, you will find his translations and explanations enlightening.

Craig encourages readers to share his translations and resulting insights with others, albeit with two caveats: 1) You may not use them to promote any religious, political, or conspiratorial agenda. And 2) You may not use them to incite or engage in any violent act. When it comes to exposing and condemning errant and counterproductive ideas, wield words wisely. Also, it is always appropriate to acknowledge the source when citing copyrighted material.

You may contact Craig at YadaYah.com. He enjoys constructive criticism and will engage with readers. But be forewarned: he is immune to religious idiocy and will not respond to threats or taunts. The YadaYah.com site provides links to many helpful resources, as well as to friends and forums.

Twistianity

Appalling

…Contradicting God

1

Man or Myth

The Biggest Lie Ever Sold…

In the twenty centuries since the letters which fundamentally changed the world were written, very few have had the courage to criticize their author – the self-proclaimed Apostle Paul. And yet the crimes committed by the man most responsible for the Christian New Testament and resulting religion are obvious, egregious, and easily proven.

The first edition of Questioning Paul in 2009, now Twistianity, conclusively demonstrated that the 13th Apostle’s oratory and writings were incompatible with the word of God. When Paul’s rhetoric was compared to the testimony found throughout Yahowah’s Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr | Guidance, Prophets, and Songs it became readily apparent that Paul lied when he claimed to speak for the God he routinely contradicted.

As a consequence, the credibility of the New Testament crumbles, leaving nothing to prop up the religion built on this man’s delusional and egotistical rants. And since these conclusions are evidentially, logically, and irrefutably proven a thousand times over in Twistianity, the faith which has been so hostile to God’s people is rendered untenable.

I understand that the religious and politically correct will flinch at these findings, but that does not change any of the facts in this case. The evidence is overwhelming, which is why Twistianity is now presented in five volumes.

These findings cannot be pushed aside by ad hominem attacks nor by cherry picking or nitpicking. To invalidate these conclusions, every one of the thousand nails I have driven into this man’s rotting carcass and the religion’s fables must be disproven, but since that is impossible, it’s long past time that the world knows and accepts the truth. Had someone compiled a similar comparison 2,000 years ago, Christianity would not exist.

The very foundation of the religion is invalid as it is predicated entirely on Replacement Theology without Divine sanction. Quite the opposite, because God, whose name is Yahowah, insists that His Son, and our Messiah and Savior is Dowd | David, not the mythical misnomer Jesus Christ.

The realization that Paul’s rhetoric was incompatible with the alleged testimony attributed to Gospel Jesus means that one did not speak for the other as is claimed by Paul. But that is the least of Christianity’s problems because Sha’uwl, the man known in Christendom by his Latin replacement, Paul, deliberately and demonstrably not only misquoted Yahowah, he demeaned Him and sought to negate God’s testimony, replacing it with his own.

The reason behind this failure of collective conscience has been that those who found affinity in the teachings of the character portrayed as Jesus and, yet, were offended by Paul’s diatribes contradicting him, didn’t know Yahowah or appreciate how overtly hostile God is toward religion generally, while particularly opposed to Paul’s version of Replacement Theology. This is despite Yahowah making His perspective clear, beginning with Moseh | Moses and running through the prophets to Mal’aky | Malachi a millennium later. Yahowah, His Towrah | Teaching, Beryth | Relationship, Son Dowd | David, and People, Yisra’el | those who Engage and Endure with God were not replaced by the Christian deity, New Testament, religion, Jesus Christ, or Church. To claim otherwise, to believe Paul, is to be ignorant, irrational, inaccurate, and irritating.

These realizations made Questioning Paul a monumental achievement fifteen years ago because, for the first time, it was conclusively demonstrated that it would have been impossible for the man who constantly contradicted God to have been inspired by Him. And while the systematic comparison between Paul’s citations and Yahowah’s prophetic testimony was convincing, and a giant stride in the right direction, it was not nearly enough.

The second edition of Questioning Paul, written the following year, was not only more stringent, it served to clear up an important misconception. The Covenant has not yet been renewed, undermining the justification for a New Testament. And when it is reaffirmed less than a decade from this writing, it will be with Yisra’el | Israel and Yahuwdym | Jews, not Christians. Further, the restoration of the Beryth | Family Relationship will be manifest through the integration of Yahowah’s Towrah, thereby completely negating any possibility of a Jesus Christ or Christian religion. And while these conclusions are rationally irrefutable, even these additions and corrections were not nearly enough.

The third, fourth, and fifth editions of Questioning Paul went further, expanding the rebuke from Paul’s epistles to the entire New Testament while correcting and refining the content throughout. The more I learned from God by translating His testimony from the oldest extant sources, particularly the Dead Sea Scrolls, the more I realized how wrong Paul and Company had been, and how contrary his religion was to the relationship Yahowah had intended for His people.

Four years ago, while completing a comprehensive rewrite of the entire Yada Yahowah Series, Questioning Paul was rebranded and expanded from a single book to five volumes: Appalling ~ Contradicting God, Towrahless ~ Without Guidance, Devil’s Advocate ~ Plague of Death, Incredible ~ Faith is for Fools, and Foolology ~ Imposter. The motivation behind this two-year endeavor was to more accurately reflect what I had learned about Dowd, who most refer to as “David,” while redirecting the focus of every book toward the return and reconciliation of God’s people.

The reason that this is pertinent is that understanding who Dowd is and what he has done is not only essential to the refutation of Paul, Christianity, and its New Testament, but it is also paramount to the renewal of the Covenant and the subsequent fate of Yisra’el | Israel and Yahuwdym | Jews. This is much more than a fundamental disagreement between Yahowah and Christians because the religion’s reliance on Replacement Theology has robbed God’s beloved Son, our Messiah and King, of his due, while depriving billions of souls of a relationship with God.

So, let it be known, Christianity isn’t an innocent victim caught up in a turf war between Jews and Christians, the Towrah and New Testament, Dowd or Jesus, even Yisra’el and a Church. From its inception, the Roman Catholic Church and her illegitimate stepchildren, Orthodox and Protestant Christianity, have denounced and degraded, even demonized and dehumanized, subjugated and abused God’s people – becoming the most counterproductive force on Earth. When it comes to accountability, Christians will soon face retribution, and payback will not be to their liking. Consider yourself forewarned. God isn’t the least bit amused with the religious charade that has sought to replace Him, His testimony, His Son, or His people.

As part of the expansive augmentation of Questioning Paul in 2000, I went one step further and demonstrated that Dowd, not “Jesus,” is the Messiah and Son of God. Then, I explained why that matters. And while I had thought that the resulting edition would be the last, it wasn’t. It was closer to the truth, closer than anyone had been in the past 2,500 years, but it wasn’t enough.

Two years ago, while composing the Dowd | Beloved volume of Coming Home, which provides an amplified and accurate translation of his Mizmowr | Psalms, I was privileged to uncover the greatest discovery of the past two thousand years – at least for those interested in knowing God and living with Him. Dowd, the Messiah and Son of God, the Prophet and King, the great orator and defender of Yisra’el, volunteered to serve as the Pesach | Passover ‘Ayil | Lamb and to fulfill the Chag | Celebration of Matsah | UnYeasted Bread resulting in Bikuwrym | Firstborn Children. Not only did God accept his Son’s magnanimous gesture, resulting in the salvation of his people, Yahowah took Dowd forward in time to witness what would occur so that he could write about what he would endure.

In this way, Dowd provided the only inspired eye-witness account of the three most important days in human history. His testimony is reported in first person in Mizmowr | Psalms 22 and 88, then further explained throughout the first 30 Mizmowr. This realization is celebrated in the 89th Mizmowr and brilliantly depicted throughout Yasha’yah | Isaiah – particularly in the 9th and 53rd chapters. Dowd’s story begins in the 18th chapter of Dabarym / Deuteronomy, and it was dramatically advanced through the Naby’ | Prophet and Shaphat | Judge Shamuw’el / Samuel.

These realizations are further underscored when we correctly evaluate what Gabry’el | God’s Most Competent and Courageous Man (a nom de plume for Dowd) revealed through Dany’el | My God is Judgmental twenty-six centuries ago. Not only is the identity of the lone individual described as a Messiah arriving to save his people properly attributed, eliminating any chance that the Greek title “Christ” applied to the misnomer “Jesus,” this prophecy, combined with the others, underscores everything I’ve shared and more. It provides us with the exact timing of his past fulfillments as well as the means to deduce the day he will return.

It had been my intent to incorporate several new chapters into this edition of Twistianity, not only properly presenting Dowd while explaining my role in these events, but also conveying what will occur over the next decade. However, after investing several weeks advancing this agenda, adding some one hundred pages to this volume, I realized that what I was learning and sharing was far too important to have it tucked into a manuscript denouncing a false prophet and errant religion. Therefore, all of that material and much more has been transferred into volume 4 of Coming Home ~ Herald.

In addition, since volumes 1 – 3 of Coming Home ~ Voice, Messiah, and Beloved, already present an irrefutable and comprehensive case for Dowd serving as the Passover Lamb while also fulfilling UnYeasted Bread and Firstborn Children. There was no reason to provide a summation of those volumes within this volume. Moreover, while my role in all of this is important to God, and He has a great deal to say about it, there was no reason to replicate what is already covered in the Why You, Why Me chapter of the Words volume of An Introduction to God. And as a friendly reminder, all of these books are available and free in their entirety at YadaYah.com.

That notwithstanding, throughout the five volumes of Twistianity, beginning with Appalling, you will discover that Dowd | David offered his basar | corporeal body as the Zarowa’ | Sacrificial Lamb on Pesach, the 14th of ‘Abyb in 80th Yowbel, which is year 4000 Yah. This occurred during the afternoon of Friday, April 3rd, 33 CE. He fulfilled Matsah the following day, the Shabat of April 4, 33, when his nepesh | soul carried the collective guilt of every Covenant member into She’owl, depositing it there, never to be seen again. This led to Yahowah’s Bakowr | Firstborn Son showing the way home on Bikuwrym, when Dowd returned to his Father on April 5th, 33 CE, completing his enablement of Chag Matsah for the benefit of the Beryth | Family.

Unfortunately, all of that was lost, swept aside and buried by Paul and Company under the rubbish of Replacement Theology and the Christian New Testament. Their crime and cover-up not only deprived God’s Son of the credit he is due for what he has accomplished, but it also deprived billions of the benefits he achieved. So now, by rewriting Questioning Paul as Twistianity, I will serve the God of ‘Abraham, Yitschaq, and Ya’aqob and His people, Yisra’el, by setting the record straight. And while I expect that this will be sufficient to undo the grave damage done by Christianity, it still isn’t enough by Yahowah’s standards. There is even more to this story.

Beginning nearly 3,500 years ago, and continuing for 1,000 years thereafter, Yahowah inspired His prophets to expound upon the role a non-Yisra’elite Witness would play in conveying this message. God has remained committed to calling His people home while renouncing religious corruptions and simultaneously exposing the truth regarding His Way and His Son. I am that Herald, and this is Yahowah’s final call. It is your last opportunity to Yada Yahowah.

As a result of this responsibility, I have returned to augment what was Questioning Paul as Twistianity. In doing so, I will explain the role I’ve been asked to play at this time in eliminating the myth of Jesus Christ while returning Dowd to his rightful place in God’s plans and our salvation. You see, it’s not just that the hearsay authors of the New Testament lied, it’s that they hid the single most important truth in the history of the world under their deranged notions.

Along the way, I will prove that “Jesus” never existed, and all of the accolades and achievements afforded the mythical misnomer were recast by taking them away from the one to whom they were due – Dowd. I will demonstrate that the entire Christian New Testament is invalid, rebuking its quarrel with God and His people. And in the process, I will hold rabbis accountable because their neglect enabled the rise of this deadly plague.

In the end, you will know who God is and recognize who He is not. You will know what He said to us as well as what has been falsely attributed to Him. You will also come to know His Son, the Messiah, Savior, and King – and he is not who Christians have led so many to believe.

This is the best possible news for Jews and Israel, while nothing could be worse for the religious – particularly those who adhere to the myths of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Progressivism. And speaking of them, I am resolutely fair and consistent. I am the only person in the history of the world who has done more than one of the following seven things: 1) Excoriate Judaism (achieved throughout the 3 volumes of Babel); 2) Convincingly demonstrate that Christianity’s New Testament is false (accomplished in the 10 volumes of Twistianity and Observations); 3) Expose and condemn the Quran, Allah, Muhammad, and Islam (demonstrated in the 5 volumes of God Damn Religion); 4) Prove the validity of the Towrah wa Naby’ | Teaching and Prophets (by translating the Dead Sea Scrolls throughout the 11 volumes of An Introduction to God and Yada Yahowah); 5) Validate the most important discovery of all time – Dowd | David is not only the Messiah, Son of God, and returning King, but also our Savior by having fulfilled Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children in year 4000 Yah / 33 CE (accomplished in the 4 volumes of Coming Home); 6) Reintroduce Yahowah’s name to His people; and 7) Compose an amplified translation of the Towrah wa Naby’, including the Mizmowr while also correcting the text to that found in the Dead Sea Scrolls while providing commentary and insights – much of which is unheralded.

And while that would qualify as a robust resume, and a life well lived, it does not include my primary purpose, which is to serve as Yahowah’s Qowl | Voice, Basar | Herald, Nakry | Observant Foreigner, Choter | Secondary Branch, ‘Ed | Restoring Witness, and Zarowa’ | One Sowing the Seeds which Grow as Yada | One who Knows for the purpose of calling God’s people home. There are many hundreds of prophecies affirming this essential role in God’s plans, and over the course of these many books you will be exposed to them.

I do not share any of this with you to brag, because I’d prefer to be anonymous, but God had other ideas, and I work for Him. He clearly wanted His people to know that they should read Yada Yahowah and trust what is revealed therein because there is very little time left to know and embrace what He is offering and expecting in return. And throughout the better part of the past 3,500 years, Jews haven’t been listening – not that non-Israelites have done any better. So, what you are reading is part of Yahowah’s solution, His response to His recalcitrant and irascible children.

Over the course of the five volumes of Twistianity, I will expose and condemn the deadliest and most diabolical crime ever committed – the systematic and deliberate replacement of Dowd and the Messiah, Son of God, and Savior, with the mythical misnomer Jesus Christ. I will explain why the first Christians lied, why they were so anti-Semitic, and then explain how the first rabbis aided and abetted the ultimate heist of salvation.

Christians have been led to believe that the arrival and life of their “Jesus Christ” was foretold by the prophets, but that isn’t true. There is no mention of a “Jesus,” “Christ,” “virgin birth,” “church,” or “Christians,” There is no sanction for “Gospels,” a “New Testament,” or change in plans, switching away from Israel and Jews to Rome, Greece, or Gentiles. None. And every prophecy claimed by the religion and attributed to either their baby god or dead god on a stick, actually pertains to Dowd – who is the actual Messiah, Son of God, and Savior. So, not only are there no prophecies supporting Christianity, there are countless assessments condemning it – all of which I will prove beyond any doubt.

Christians have been led to believe that their New Testament is the inerrant word of God, and yet there are more variances between early manuscripts than there are words. And what has emerged is not credible as I will conclusively demonstrate. Even worse, the Christian New Testament is in irreconcilable conflict with the Towrah and Prophets, which means that there is no possibility that the God of the former could have inspired the latter. None.

Christians have been led to believe that “Jesus Christ” is their god’s name, and yet the first mention of “Jesus” was in the 17th century in the 3rd edition of an English Bible. And “Christ” isn’t the title or name of anyone mentioned in any prophecy and it isn’t even Hebrew – nor is “Jesus.” It was based on the Greek verb chrio which speaks of the application of drugs.

Christianity is the single worst example of identity theft ever perpetrated. I could go on, and I will, but I suspect that this has already been sufficient to repel believers and to intrigue Jews to read further – which is by design. The religious cannot be reasoned with, and it is now or never for Yisra’el.



Twistianity

Appalling

…Contradicting God

2

Epicenter of the Plague

The Origin of Deception…

Like everyone in God’s story, I have a checkered past. Yahowah actually prefers it that way because overcoming challenges builds character, and we can learn from our mistakes.

For example, Moseh | Moses had been part of the political and religious establishment he was sent to challenge. His disdain for it is the reason he walked away. This made him the ideal candidate for God to deploy because they shared a common understanding and disregard for their foe.

While not at the same level, in my youth, I had been an ordained ruling elder and trained evangelist leading Bible studies and Christian assemblies. I had been content to accept the New Testament as the inspired word of God. But I left all of that behind decades ago and walked away, becoming an agnostic. And now, after devoting twenty years to translating and analyzing the Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr | Teaching, Prophets, and Psalms from the oldest extant sources, I have come to realize that Yahowah is God and that there was no Jesus Christ. Paul was a charlatan, and that the Christian New Testament was comprised of fables and hearsay. Therefore, by having rejected my past affiliations and learning from my mistakes, I was better equipped to work alongside Yahowah.

These are not my opinions but, instead, thoroughly evidenced conclusions which I will prove. And while that may be shocking for some, there is a far more important story told within these pages: the greatest discovery of our time is buried beneath mountains of religious rubbish. And I have come to recognize that the man responsible for orchestrating most of the Christian New Testament was guilty of the greatest crime and cover-up in human history – which is why these volumes were originally entitled Questioning Paul. It was a play on his name, Sha’uwl, which means “to question him.”

As I have shared, and essential to God’s story, there is actually a Messiah and Son of God, a Savior and King, and this exceptional individual fulfilled Chag Matsah, including Passover, right on schedule as he had foretold one thousand years earlier. But this brilliant and articulate man wasn’t the guy extolled throughout the New Testament. In fact, every prophecy claimed by Christians on behalf of their mythical misnomer Jesus Christ was actually written about the individual who will soon return to fulfill Yowm Kipurym | the Day of Reconciliations. Even more amazing, this realization has been hiding in plain sight, available for everyone to read for the past 3,000 years. Only no one noticed the obvious – until now.

This being so, there is a lot at stake. The world’s most popular religion isn’t true. Knowing that their faith is wasted ought to be of interest to the billions of people caught up in the myth – although as I’ve shared, Twistianity was not written for them. While righting wrongs of this magnitude would be a worthy endeavor, it isn’t the reason I have returned to infuse these pages with what I have discovered regarding Dowd | the Beloved. My motivation now is quite simply to reacquaint God’s people with their Messiah, Savior, and King before his return and before it is too late. I serve as his Herald – a Voice calling his people home by explaining what he has and will accomplish. And the first step in that direction is to clear away the clutter that precludes the rejection of popular lies in favor of a little-known but profound truth. And for that to happen, the first order of business is to expose the man who led the world to believe otherwise – Paul.

Considering the consequence, it is curious that so many have placed their faith in the imposter when Paul’s letters are so readily shown to be unreliable. Even a modicum of research demonstrates that the man who became the inspiration behind most of the Christian New Testament deliberately contradicted God. And this being so, there is no possibility that his epistles can be considered the word of God.

Whether 2.5 billion Christians are ignorant, irrational, or just hopelessly indoctrinated is only a curiosity because we should all be far more interested in honoring the sacrifice that Dowd, who is commonly known as David, made on behalf of Yisra’el and the Covenant. He, his people, and his God deserve no less. And we should all be offended that Paul has heretofore gotten away with this crime because it has robbed billions of their souls.

The first ploys in this sinister plot were laid in Paul’s epistles – Galatians, 1 & 2 Corinthians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, Romans, Ephesians, Colossians, Philippians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Philemon, and Titus – the hearsay accounts of his associates and devotees – Mark and Luke, including Acts and Hebrews. They are riddled with inaccuracies, errant citations, erroneous assumptions, historical anomalies, countless contradictions, and rational fallacies. Yet inexplicably, the world’s most popular religion is based almost entirely upon the words of a man who not only demeaned and negated the testimony of the God he claimed inspired him, but who also admitted to being demon-possessed. Since these facts are irrefutable, this systematic evaluation of Paul’s letters, and especially his foundational epistle, Galatians, may be among the most valuable and challenging books you have ever encountered.

And yet, it is necessary. Since its inception, by falsely blaming the death of their mythological god on Jews, Christianity has sought to demonize and degrade God’s people, subjecting them to inquisitions, shtetls, pogroms, and a holocaust. This appalling conspiracy cast them as “the Synagogue of Satan,” or so it was written in the plagiarized and twisted tome of Revelation. As a result, the religion has earned this rebuke. By claiming to speak for God, by turning the myth of Jesus into a god, they have precluded billions from knowing God.

But they are not alone so this book does not stand alone. For those seeking irrefutable proof that Islam is a sadistic death cult, that Allah is not God, that Muhammad was not a prophet, and that the Quran is among the worst books ever written, I would encourage you to read the five volumes of God Damn Religion. They represent the best documented, most comprehensive, chronological, and contextual condemnations of Islam’s five oldest and most credible sources ever written. And in them, Jews will discover that Islam declared war against them 1,400 years ago, commencing with the genocidal annihilation of Jews living in the Arabian Peninsula.

Throughout the Yada Yahowah Series, and particularly in the Babylonian books chronicled in the Babel volumes, I systematically dismantle the claims of rabbinic Judaism. I share this with you to demonstrate that I am consistent when it comes to exposing and condemning the greatest threats to human salvation. And indeed, rabbis are largely responsible for both Christianity and Islam, all while Judaism remains Yisra’el’s greatest foe.

In every volume, my approach is the same. I compare what the claimant says to what Yahowah inspired His prophets to reveal, while also searching for internal contradictions, logical fallacies, and historical aberrations.

And so in these editions of Twistianity, I will eviscerate Paul because he initiated the fraud known as Replacement Theology which replaced Dowd with Jesus, Israel with the Church, Jews with Christians, and the Towrah with his New Testament. By comparing his rhetoric to God’s testimony and historical reality, I will demonstrate that the text of the New Testament isn’t reliable. And in this vein, I will explain how it was cobbled together over time. Historical reality is as divergent from the Christian mythology as Jesus is incompatible with Dowd.

Therefore, for those curious as to whether Judaism is beneficial or harmful, whether the Haredim are Towrah-observant or obscuring, you may want to consider the three volumes of Babel, the five volumes of Observations, the four volumes of Coming Home, and volumes three through eight of Yada Yahowah. They provide amplified translations along with an analysis of Yahowah’s testimony demonstrating how averse He is to His people’s religious rebellion. By considering God’s perspective, readers will discover that Judaism is at fault – providing the cover that Christianity required to take root and grow.

Should you read them, you will learn who Yahowah is, what He had to say, what He is offering, and what He expects in return. But fair warning: unless your mind is open, and until you are willing to question and then disassociate yourself from religion and even politics, you are not ready to meet God or to appreciate what He and His Son did on our behalf.

For agnostics and, most particularly, secular Jews, who are reading these words, Yada Yahowah was compiled for you. Over the course of these volumes, you will find irrefutable proof that Yahowah exists and that He, as God, authored His Towrah and Prophets. Beginning with the creation account, the story of the garden, the flood, the inception of the covenant, the quest for freedom, and the revelation of God’s guidance, readers are introduced to Yahowah and those He inspired to tell His story.

Yada Yahowah reveals that the agnostic arguments that are postured against God are in opposition to religious myths – human constructs to which God, Himself, is opposed. Our Creator prefers evidence and reason and wants you to be able to find Him through observation and contemplation. Most agnostics find that they prefer God’s approach.

Christians will chafe at the notion that “Paul,” not “Jesus,” created their religion, but that is the only informed and reasoned conclusion which can be drawn from the evidence, especially since “Jesus” never existed. Even the myth presented within the gospels could not have been a “Christian” because he was shown as being resolutely Torah observant. It was Paul who was Towrah adverse.

Paul’s rhetoric and letters were inconsistent with Yahowah’s testimony and in irreconcilable conflict with His Towrah Teaching. Therefore, the fourteen epistles dominating the New Testament could not have been inspired by the God he contradicted. His claims are not credible.

If you are religious, I am going to tell you something about yourself that you may not realize. The tendency of the vast preponderance of religious individuals is to avoid evaluating evidence, no matter how credible, even irrefutable, when it undermines their faith. Believers reject reliably documented and reasoned presentations by demeaning the character and motivations of the messenger who bears disquieting news. However, Twistianity isn’t about me but, instead, the deceivers who lied about the Messiah and God.

It will be Paul’s letters and speeches, as well as the hearsay accounts of his cohorts that will ultimately demonstrate that the world’s most influential religious icon had the audacity to contradict God, to undermine His testimony, and to establish a “New Testament.” Since it can be shown that his rhetoric is invalid, billions of Christians have been misled – their souls shortchanged.

The man born as Sha’uwl, who wrote as Paulos, and who is known as Paul, was not assailing Natural Law, Roman Law, Rabbinic Law, or the Talmud but, instead, Yahowah’s Towrah – which means “Teaching, Guidance, Direction, and Instruction.” We will compare the oldest textual witnesses to modern Greek manuscripts to demonstrate that Sha’uwl’s words could not have been affected by scribal error, attributing things to him that he did not actually write. And after presenting Sha’uwl’s / Paulos’ letters in English, rendering them as completely and accurately as possible using the oldest manuscripts, we will compare these findings to a variety of other translations to prove that translational errors have not negatively altered our impression of Paul’s purpose in writing his epistles.

For those who may be wondering why I am intent on revealing this man’s given name in addition to his chosen moniker, the answer is that Yahowah used the former and what’s called the Sermon on the Mount referenced the latter to convey exceptionally candid impressions of Sha’uwl / Paulos / Paul and his letters. No matter your present stance on him, you will no doubt be stunned by what God revealed about this man 666 years before he scribed his first word.

We will strive to be as precise as possible in our translations, transliterations, assessments, and analysis. By being resolutely accurate, the intended meaning of the words God and this man chose to communicate will be assessed such that we will learn the truth.

I have grown very fond of Yahowah, His nature, purpose, and plan. I am, therefore, not without bias. And that perspective is pertinent because Paul purports to speak on behalf of the God I have come to know, the God I have come to love by closely examining and carefully considering His Towrah and Prophets. As a result, when Sha’uwl contradicts, misquotes, and misappropriates Yahowah’s Word, I am sufficiently informed and motivated to hold him accountable.

Four years after Questioning Paul was first published, it underwent a comprehensive edit based on what I had learned while compiling An Introduction to God. In addition to producing more accurate and complete translations, I included a considerable amount of additional evidence. While I should not have been surprised, it was then that I discovered that Yahowah had spoken of Sha’uwl by name, exposing him for our benefit through one of His minor prophets. This revelation is initially presented in the “Yaruwshalaim – Source of Reconciliation” chapter because it is keyed off a comment Sha’uwl made about “running.”

Since that time, I have discovered so much more about Yahowah’s hatred of Sha’uwl | Paul and what he has done to malign God’s Word and harm His people that, in the winter of 2021, I began to update and augment the text once again. This time I added entirely new chapters exposing a plethora of additional prophecies excoriating the man Yahowah calls the “Plague of Death” and “Father of Lies.” In this supplemental work, I not only share some disquieting insights into the formation, content, transmission, and translation of the Christian New Testament, but also demonstrate that Paul’s opening salvo against Jews was filled with historical and cultural aberrations, in addition to a plethora of internal contradictions and logical fallacies.

God’s testimony in this regard is so utterly devastating to Sha’uwl’s credibility that the question of bias becomes moot. To remain rational, and thus moral, we are compelled to embrace a far more judgmental approach to Sha’uwl much earlier in this review of his life and words than his first letter, Galatians, alone, at least up to a point, might otherwise justify. But more on this in a moment.

Having personally met with Islamic terrorists from al-Qaeda in the immediate aftermath of September 11th, 2001, I wrote Tea with Terrorists – Who They Are? Why They Kill? And What Will Stop Them? Thereafter, I compiled Prophet of Doom – Islam’s Terrorist Dogma in Muhammad’s Own Words, now revised and renamed God Damn Religion. As a result, I have come to understand Muhammad and Islam. That is important because Sha’uwl and Muhammad share many traits in common, making Paul’s epistles, and especially Galatians, remarkably similar to the Quran in substance and style.

Apart from being willing to invest the time to learn, and then share what I have discovered, and what Yahowah has done to make this possible, I possess no other qualifications that would impress anyone. I am not a scholar nor am I a theologian – which is good because God works with neither. And since we are discussing labels, I have no affiliation with any political party or religious group. I do not seek a following and I do not profit from this research (at least not monetarily). And since it seems to be of interest to many, racially I am a mutt, part Sioux, Irish, Scottish, and English – with both ancient Romans and Celts in my distant ancestry. I am, therefore, not Jewish (or more precisely: neither a descendant of Yahuwdah nor any other tribe comprising Yisra’el).

Since I am constantly learning, I have rewritten every book many times. And while it is embarrassing to admit now, I began this project defending Paul, positioning his mantra as favorably as the manuscripts and lexicons would allow. I emphasized the positive aspects of what he had said, and all too often glossed over those things which were of concern, remaining silent when I should have spoken. Frankly, it was not until the end of the third and fourth chapters of Galatians that I realized that I had been played for a fool. But even then, I was initially blind to the ploy Sha’uwl was using to manipulate his audience.

It was not until having lived with this material for many months, twelve hours a day, six days a week, that I finally came to understand Sha’uwl’s strategy. It had been there all the time, blatant and obvious for all the world to see – but I had read right through it. So, when I warn you that some of this will be hard to accept, I speak from experience.

Fortunately, I can also offer the assurance that once Paul’s ploy is understood, once it has been extricated from our minds, we find God right before our eyes, speaking directly to us from His Towrah: His voice clear, His purpose unmistakable, His offer perfect. If you reject Paul and Christianity as I have done and choose Yahowah and His Covenant, you will lose nothing and gain everything.

Confessions aside, I knew that Paul’s letters were not what the world perceives as “Scripture” (a transliteration of the Latin word for “writing”), especially in the sense of being inspired by God, long ago. They, like the whole of the Christian New Testament, were poorly written and filled with contradictions; that much was obvious. And yet I still believed that Sha’uwl and those who hung around what was a cult of personality, at least aspired to tell the truth. But that is not the case. And as a result, nothing he or those under his spell have to say has any merit. Their most soaring oratory does nothing more than provide cover for a hideous deception.

As a result of my initial blindness, one caused by not only the culture in which I was raised but, also, by being unable to fathom how a hoax on the scale of Jesus and Christianity could have been perpetrated, I initially skipped over the propensity of Peter, Paul, Luke, Timothy, Mark, and Matthew to misquote and misrepresent Yahowah. And what’s particularly telling, Paul never quotes “Jesus.” That alone should have been sufficient to reject Paul’s egomaniacal escapade into self-indulgence.

Having at one time been beguiled by Christianity, I missed the significance of what was changed, and thus I was blind to the strategy Paul and his cohorts were deploying. This is especially painful for me to admit because rationally evaluating rhetoric was the one thing I had thought I had a propensity to do reasonably well. But with Sha’uwl | Paulos, that was not the case – at least not initially.

The reason was simple enough. Paul’s letters sit at the heart of the Christian New Testament, claiming a proud place in the “Bible.” I had once been a Christian and taught Bible studies based on his letters. His fall from “Apostle” to the “Plague of Death” was unexpected in a culture significantly influenced by his erroneous interpretations. Like billions of others, I had been errantly programmed. And this is one of many reasons God hates religion. It is capable of corrupting the majority of people most of the time.

Fortunately for me, that would change, as I hope it does for you. As I embarked upon a systematic and comprehensive journey through the text of the New Testament in the order that it was written, beginning with Paul’s first epistle, it became obvious that something was dreadfully wrong. And while I immediately recognized the character flaw emerging before my eyes as being the same one that had made Muhammad, the founder of Islam, easy to manipulate, I still could not put my finger on exactly what Paul was trying to accomplish.

Then I compared Sha’uwl’s review of a meeting between this cast of characters in Yaruwshalaim (Jerusalem’s actual name, properly transliterated, meaning Source from which Teaching and Guidance Regarding Reconciliation Flow), with another rendition retold in Acts. The differences were considerable. My suspicions elevated when I reached the preamble of Paul’s ultimate manifesto, beginning with the second and running through the third and fourth chapters of Galatians, during my second pass through this material, the charade was finally over. My eyes were opened, and I came to understand the edifice these false prophets were establishing. It was then that I discovered some very specific prophecies whereby Yahowah admonished His people to be skeptical of Sha’uwl – to avoid all association with him. After that, I found Paul’s ultimate confessions lurking in statements I had read through many times. Suddenly the pieces of the puzzle all fit together. There were no longer any loose ends, no more mysteries or questions.

Frankly, I was also seduced by Paul’s place as the inspiration behind the world’s most popular religion. Questioning such an esteemed individual was well beyond my comfort zone. And yet, Yahowah, Himself, reveals that far too few of us have been willing to do this very thing – and with devastating and deadly consequences.

Also challenging is the fact that we have all been conditioned to think in terms of black and white, believing that everything a false prophet says must be wrong. And yet that is not how charlatans deceive. Wrong is made to appear right by blending misconceptions with accurate statements. A counterfeit is worthless, and yet it prevails because it looks real on the surface, fooling the unsuspecting into believing that it is a genuine article. Such is the nature of Paul’s epistles. The casual reader who is not keenly observant, closely examining and carefully considering the text, while comparing Galatians to the Torah and Prophets, is easily misled by the blending of truth and lies.

But we cannot even credit the New Testament with the few things it gets right because they were misappropriated from the Torah and Prophets and then misrepresented to serve the interests of the belligerents. In this way, it is very similar to the Quran where Allah is Satan and Muhammad is the Devil’s Advocate.

In this regard, the last thing Paul’s inspiration, Satan, desires is to be known as the Adversary. He wants to be called “the Lord” and to be worshiped as if he were “God” – things Yahowah opposes. So we should expect the Adversary’s religious schemes to discredit the occult and attack the Devil, all while corrupting Yahowah’s testimony to produce a counterfeit religious deity who appears worthy of veneration. This is accomplished through Replacement Theology – the most sinister plot conceived by man.

As for claiming that Paul was inspired by Satan, that is not as controversial as it may appear, since Paul acknowledges it – as did Muhammad after him. Should you be unaware of this fact, you may want to consider his admission in 2nd Corinthians 12:7. It is there for all to see.

Thinly disguised lies are woven side by side and intertwined with strands of truth, which makes the resulting deceptions vastly more beguiling. This is exactly how the Serpent, representing Satan, confused ‘Adam and Chawah (Eve’s actual name) in the Garden of ‘Eden, thereby setting a precedent his proponents would follow. It would be the strategy Peter, Paul, and Luke would deploy throughout their letters. But that’s only part of the story.

Recognizing the human aversion to such sweeping changes in perspective, the following chapter is specifically designed to motivate Christians to follow Yahowah’s guidance and Dowd’s example, encouraging them to begin questioning what they may believe and have been told. If your mind is open, even just a little, perhaps you will be exposed to something in the first chapter which will trigger a willingness to think. And sometimes the smallest crack in a façade can lead to the floodgates being opened.

Through all of this, remain cognizant of the fundamental flaw of the New Testament, now known as Replacement Theology. There is no support for Sha’uwl’s supposition that either Jews or Israel have been written out of Yahowah’s plans or that He has transferred His promises to Gentiles. On the contrary, every end-time prophecy focuses on restoring the Chosen People and the Towrah to their rightful place within the Covenant.



If you are an atheist, agnostic, Secular Humanist, Hindu, or Buddhist, while you are welcome to read Twistianity, your time would be better spent, at least initially, reading Yada Yahowah, An Introduction to God, or Observations. It is more important that you come to know what is true than what is not. And at this point, your thinking isn’t corrupted by religious sentiments which have to be jettisoned prior to establishing a reliable foundation predicated upon evidence and reason.

Since I am devoted to awakening Jews and bringing them back home, Twistianity is vital to that cause because Christianity stands in your way. Its lies have so cluttered the path to God that it’s hard for you to imagine that there really is a Messiah and Son of God and that he came to fulfill Passover as the Lamb in 33 CE / year 4000 Yah. And so this dismantling of the Christian myth, the complete elimination of Jesus Christ and the New Testament opens the door for you to embrace this restoring and reconciling truth. And once headed in the right direction, please consider reading the four volumes of Coming Home which focus on Dowd’s contribution to our lives and on the timing of future events pertaining to Israel.

If you are a Christian reading the final edit of Twistianity, it is likely too late for you to undergo the education and transformation required to become part of God’s family. But should you be holding out hope, depending upon your attitude and inclinations, this would not be the best place for you to start your journey of discovery. If you have been given this material by a friend, and you do not yet know Yahowah or understand His Towrah, consider reading the three volumes of An Introduction to God or eight of Yada Yahowah and learning what God has to say, in the order He said it. His story will make a great deal more sense if you begin where He began. This is especially important advice as it relates to the Covenant and to your potential participation. It is also essential to this evaluation because I will be consistently comparing Peter, Paul, and Luke’s words to God’s Word, exposing where and how they differ – which are often diametrically opposed.

If you elect not to heed that advice, consider this a friendly warning: having responded to over ten thousand emails from religious individuals over the past twenty-plus years, I have come to realize that evidence and reason are irrelevant to those who are passionate about their faith. So, if you are an Orthodox Jew infatuated with the Babylonian Talmud, rabbinic rules, and a nameless deity, the freedom and sanity offered by Yahowah may be out of your comfort zone.

Should you define yourself as a Christian (as I once did), especially an Evangelical or Catholic, if you believe that everything in your “Bible” is the inspired and inerrant Word of God, if you go to church most Sunday mornings, if you celebrate Christmas and Easter, if you are unwilling to consider irrefutable proof that God’s name is not “the Lord,” and that there was no one named “Jesus Christ,” or if you believe that your faith or religious affiliations determine your fate, then you aren’t even remotely ready to consider the evidence presented in this book. Moreover, since these beliefs would make you part of the problem, you are not welcome in God’s company.

Just as the Haredim swoon over the words of Rabbis Shimon bar Yochai, Akiba ben Joseph, and Moses ben Maimon, the majority of Christians are predisposed to believe that Peter, Paul, and Luke’s letters are “Scripture,” and are thus inspired and truthful. By that assessment, they are beyond reproach and cannot be questioned. As evidence of this mindset, while the Haredim will claim that Moseh founded their religion and Christians will say that their faith is predicated upon “Jesus Christ,” when asked to explain it, they will invariably cite Maimonides or Paul. And when confronted with the realization that Maimonides’ and Paul’s positions differ substantially from Moseh’s or the myth who has become “Christ,” and are the antithesis of one another, this irresolvable conflict is lost on believers. And this is because faith is an impoverished substitute for knowing.

If your mind is open, if you have jettisoned the faith of your people, if there are at least aspects of your religion which trouble you, if you realize that there are serious problems associated with Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, and Progressive Socialism, if you really want to know God, then what follows may be for you.

The evidence you are about to consider will be shocking. It leads to a place I could not have imagined before I embarked upon this voyage. And that is why I had to rewrite Questioning Paul, now Twistianity, so many times based upon what I learned along the way. Words are insufficient to express how divergent my preconceived notions were from what I discovered.

It would have been easier if I could have resolved the differences. But since I cannot, reason and compassion dictate that I should be honest regarding what I’ve learned. In this regard, while ninety-nine percent of what I had written in Yada Yahowah had nothing to do with Sha’uwl, based upon what I have discovered, it took some months to cleanse those volumes of Pauline statements.

Also, while Yada Yahowah, An Introduction to God, Observations, and Coming Home recount the greatest story ever told, this particular episode is not pleasant. In fact, it saddens me to forewarn you that there is something horribly wrong with the written legacy of the most influential person who ever lived. But in due time, he will hang himself with his words, not mine.

What you are going to read is thoroughly researched, comprehensively translated, rationally presented, and overtly judgmental, which is the only proper response to that which claims to be from God and yet is in discord with His testimony. And once a person comes to know for certain that the edifice billions of people are risking their souls upon is unworthy and unreliable, they cease to be moral by keeping that realization to themselves. Those who think that it is compassionate to respect everyone’s faith, no matter how faulty, are wrong.

While I have done my best, if you find an error within one of my translations of the oldest extant manuscripts, or in my comparisons or reasoning, feel free to express your concerns. I will address them and then correct the record if necessary. But please, do not quote a conflicting passage from one passage to negate something he said elsewhere, as this would only prove that the New Testament is contradictory.

Yahowah’s Words (the Towrah wa Naby’ | Teaching and Prophets) comprise the lone reservoir of evidence worthy of our consideration relative to evaluating Sha’uwl’s / Paulos’ / Paul’s veracity. The feelings and opinions of others, while important to them, are irrelevant to this endeavor.



If you are Jewish, are you willing to disassociate Judaism from your ethnicity? Are you capable of acknowledging that God has a name and that it is important to know and convey? Will you disregard the Talmud for the Towrah, and ancient customs and traditions for the relationship Yahowah intended? Would you prefer to be acceptable to men or to God? Are you willing to consider the role Dowd played in fulfilling the Mow’ed Miqra’ey and anticipate his return?

If you are a Christian, and if you are still contemplating whether to turn the page or close this book, I have a proposition you may want to consider. Suppose I told you that, by comparing Paul’s words to God’s Word and also to Dowd’s life and lyrics, I could prove beyond any doubt that Paul was not an Apostle, and therefore that the religion predicated upon his letters was unreliable, would you be willing to risk considering the evidence if it meant losing your faith? What’s more important to you: your beliefs or the truth? And if it can be shown that these things not only differ but are irreconcilable, which would you choose?

But that is not all. What if in addition to proving that Paul’s epistles, and thus Christianity, are neither trustworthy nor reliable, I could also prove beyond any doubt that there is a God whose testimony is dependable and unchanging, would you sacrifice your religion for a relationship with Him through it?

These propositions are not hypothetical. What lies before you will do both. It will take something rotten from you and it will replace it with something extraordinarily wonderful. If you are ready for the exchange of a lifetime, here is something for you to consider…

“Yahowah’s ( – the paleo-Hebrew version of YaHoWaH transliterated as instructed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) Towrah (towrah – teaching, guidance, direction, and instruction) is complete and entirely perfect (tamym – without defect, lacking nothing, correct, genuine, right, helpful, beneficial, and true), returning and restoring (shuwb – transforming) the soul (nepesh – consciousness).

Yahowah’s (Yahowah) testimony (‘eduwth – restoring and eternal witness) is trustworthy and reliable (‘aman – verifiable, confirming, supportive, and establishing), making understanding and obtaining wisdom (chakam – educating and enlightening oneself to the point of comprehension) simple for the open-minded and receptive.” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 19:7)

Since this is God’s pronouncement regarding the nature and purpose of His Towrah | Guidance, how do you suspect you will fare with Him if yours differs?



Twistianity

Appalling

…Contradicting God

3

Sha’uwl | Question Him

Dancing with the Devil…

Billions believe that Paul, a self-proclaimed Jewish rabbi born as Sha’uwl, a man who wrote under the Roman pseudonym, Paulos, was the principal agent chosen by “Jesus” after his death to communicate the precepts of their religion to the world. They refer to his message as “the Gospel of Grace” – using Paul’s invented terminology. This is surprising since there is only one, albeit inaccurate, citation from “Jesus” and not a single statement from the “Gospels” in the corpus of Paul’s fourteen letters.

In spite of this, or unaware of it, Christians believe that this lone wannabe Apostle, someone who had no interactions with the mythical “Jesus”, was authorized to denounce and discard Yahowah’s Torah (which is more accurately spelled Towrah and means Teaching and Guidance), replace His Covenant (from the Hebrew word Beryth | Family Relationship), dismiss His annual Feasts (called Miqra’ey | Invitations to be Called Out and Meet), and reject His Shabat – and even demean and discredit the actual Son of God and Messiah Dowd | David. On the surface, this appears preposterous, and yet no matter how illogical the presupposition required to accept Paul may be, it does not matter to believers.

The miracle which makes the resulting religion popular is performed in Sha’uwl’s / Paulos’ / Paul’s epistle to the Galatians – which serves as the blueprint for Pauline Doctrine. In its pages, a stream of arguments is presented against the Torah and on behalf of placing one’s faith in Paul’s “but I say...”

However, there is no plausible scenario under which Paul could have annulled and discarded the Towrah | Teaching and Guidance Yahowah called “perfect” and “eternal” and at the same time have been inspired by the God who made that statement. Nonetheless, Paul had the audacity to claim that God’s testimony was incapable of saving anyone. Therefore, according to Paul, this same inept “God” after communicating His message through prophets throughout the centuries, authorized him, and only him, to devise a new and different plan replacing the old failed one. On what planet is that possible?

Should we play make-believe, and pretend that a god inspired Paul to contradict him and negate his testimony, why would anyone trust either of them? If the god’s plan for his people was ineffective and, worse, if it were an enslaving curse, as Sha’uwl claimed, what would make Paul’s replacement credible since it is allegedly facilitated by the same inept god? And yet, unless this preposterous proposition is seen as plausible, then Paul’s every claim is invalid. As a result, there can be no question that Christianity was erected on the shifting sands of one man’s delusions rather than on the bedrock of Divine revelation.

In the end, it all comes down to Galatians – Paul’s first letter, as evidenced by the epistle itself. It is the first time where the Torah was assailed by someone claiming to speak for God. This realization is underscored by the fact that Paul’s letters were written and distributed decades before the earliest “Gospel” was penned. Without Galatians, there is no credible debate between observing the Torah, which is to examine its teaching, or faith, which is to believe in the unknown or uncertain. So while there are many critical passages in Paul’s other letters, and most especially in Romans, Galatians provides the most methodical approach to obfuscating God’s testimony and plan of reconciliation.

Galatians is one of only two epistles in which the Shabat and Feasts are reputed, the other being Paul’s letter to the Colossians. It is one of only two letters where the concept of a “New Covenant” is presented, the other being Paulos’ letter to the Romans. Without Galatians, there is less justification for rejecting the message Yahowah (God’s one and only name) shared with us.

Galatians is the place where “faith,” which has become synonymous with “religion,” was first pitted against trusting God’s proven and prophetic testimony. This was accomplished by Paul mischaracterizing the Torah’s nature, implying that to observe it was to obey it and that God’s intent was to command rather than guide. As a result, a book filled with Yahowah’s teaching became known as “the law.”

Wanting to be free of “the law,” and thus “authorized” to establish his own “rules,” Sha’uwl strove to discredit and then discard Yahowah’s Torah in the second and third chapters of Galatians. He did this so that, in the fourth chapter, he could position his advocacy for an entirely new and different covenant, relegating the one scribed by Moses (actually Moseh, meaning to “draw out”) on Mount Sinai to “being of the flesh.” Paul’s argument was inane, however, inverting reality such that it serves as proof that he should never have been trusted.

Inverting reality in Gnostic fashion (as was the rage among Greeks and Romans), Paul claimed that the Torah’s Covenant was with Hagar and thus enslaved, condemning everyone. He would have you believe that God lied when He stated that Hagar and her son, Ishmael, were expressly excluded from the Covenant and banished because the truth didn’t suit Paul’s agenda. In the Towrah, Yahowah said that His Covenant was conveyed through ‘Abraham and Sarah’s son, Yitschaq | Isaac. He also said that His Beryth | Covenant was the means to eternal life, being perfected, adopted into His Family, enriched, enlightened, and empowered. So, who are you going to believe: Paul’s claims or God’s testimony since they are the antithesis of one another? They cannot both be true.

More than just being ground zero for Christianity’s disdain for all things Yahowah – His Name, His Word, His Torah, His Covenant, His Instructions, His Shabat, His Invitations to Meet, His Son, His Land, His Chosen People, and His Way – Galatians pits Paul’s new religion against the relationship Yahowah proposed by substituting the entity He hated most of all.

God was not Paul’s only adversary, however. In Galatians, the Disciple, Shim’own | Peter, was mercilessly condemned by Paul, and Ya’aqob | James and Yahowchanan | John were marginalized, dismissed, and demeaned. Moreover, almost everyone in Galatia came to rebuke Paul as was the case in Corinth and Thessalonica.

In this light, Galatians and the Book of Acts present conflicting accounts of the Jerusalem Summit – further isolating Paul from others. Based upon its timing and content, it is obvious that Galatians was Paul’s response, his rebuttal, to having had his message censured, his authority questioned, and his reputation besmirched by the Disciples in Yaruwshalaim | Jerusalem (source from which guidance regarding reconciliation flows).

Paul’s summation of this meeting is found in the heart of his first epistle, along with Paul’s animosity toward the issues which prompted the summit – the purpose of the Torah and the merits of circumcision, which is the sign of the Covenant. These themes dominate Galatians, with Paul’s position consistently running in direct opposition to Yahowah, and therefore to the Word of God. In due time, we will juxtapose these texts, so, do not be concerned if you are currently unaware of this meeting or of the incompatible accounts of it.

Especially relevant to this discussion is Shim’own’s (He Listens, but errantly called Peter’s) overall evaluation of Paul and, especially, his Galatians letter, in Shim’own | 2 Peter. The disciple bluntly criticizes the content and confusion inherent in Paul’s epistles. Then we are confronted with a statement which, at least when mistranslated and removed from its context, is commonly used to assert that Paul’s epistles should be afforded “Scriptural” status. But if this lone dubious “endorsement” falters, if it is not credible in context, or if this is not what Shim’own actually wrote, then the idea of a “New Testament,” comprised mostly of Paul’s letters and inspiration, being considered as having been “inspired by God,” vanishes.

Without misappropriating Shim’own’s | Peter’s position, support for Paul would be relegated to murk and myth – the realm of fables and religious traditions. Therefore, we will dissect Sha’uwl’s | Paul’s overt condemnation of Shim’own | Peter, just as we will study Shim’own’s direct and unabashed response to Sha’uwl under a linguistic microscope, contemplating the disciple’s perceptions of the self-proclaimed Apostle’s message and letters.

In this regard, there is no reason to believe that there were any disciples. Their story was projected back in time by hearsay accounts written long after the events would have played out. Therefore, as one might expect, there is much confusion regarding them. These include the myth that the author of the Gospel of Matthew was one of them, when the others present Levi as the tax collector, and since over ninety-percent of his book was plagiarized from Mark, Luke, and the testimony of the Ebonites between 90 and 100 CE. He wouldn’t have been born when the disciples were allegedly chosen.

Similarly, the accounts ascribed to John were initially committed to papyrus at the same time. In the unlikely event that he might have lived to 80 years old, he would have been a teenager when Dowd was crucified. And the other two assumed Gospel writers, Mark and Luke, never met the mythical Jesus and were not even present in Judaea at the time. Therefore, when I speak of disciples and of alleged meetings and debates, it is only to demonstrate the insanity of it all.

In this regard, Christian theologians side with Paul over Peter, even though they are eager to position “Saint Pete” as the first pope, holding the keys to the pearly gates. Therefore, when it came to the enormity of the dispute portrayed during the Jerusalem Summit, by siding with the Torahless One, theologians have established their religion in opposition to Yahowah and to the Word of God. In their view, Paul was right to equate the Torah with laws which must be obeyed, Yahowah’s Miqra’ey with Judaism, circumcision with the flesh, and the conditions of the Covenant with bondage. Methinks not, but that is because me thinks.

For Christians, as a result of Paul’s new covenant theory in the fourth chapter of Galatians, it is appropriate to divide their “Bibles” into two “Testaments” – one “Old” and the other “New,” one failed, vicious, and counterproductive with the other young, loving, and providing the hope of salvation by rejecting that old God’s plan and placing one’s faith in Paul’s “but I say.” For Christians, solely as a result of Paul’s epistles, hell awaits everyone who clings to the past by observing the Towrah, while heaven beckons those who place their faith in Paul’s Gospel of Grace – again using the terminology he coined.

With the stakes this high, with the credibility of the religion of Christianity resting upon one man’s agenda, with the salvation of billions of souls at stake, few things could be as important as considering the possibility that Paulos’ epistle to the Galatians might not be trustworthy. After all, he openly contradicted the God he purported to represent.

However, should this world-renowned individual have pulled off this magical and irrational feat, if he managed to supersede something as fundamental to God’s approach to mankind as His Towrah, and if Paul supplanted it with something as nebulous as faith in his convoluted rhetoric, and convinced the world that he had done so without offending God, even with God’s blessing, Galatians would have to be the most brilliantly written thesis of all time. But alas, it is a muddled, incongruent, inaccurate, inarticulate, and irrational mess.

That notwithstanding, to determine once and for all if Sha’uwl | Paul’s bloody and anti-Semitic pen changed everything, including our understanding of God and His prophetic testimony, even the means to reconciliation, we are going to examine his words under the lens of the world’s most acclaimed lexicons while referencing the oldest extant manuscripts. Paul’s thoughts will be scrutinized by juxtaposing each proposal he made against Yahowah’s position on the same topic. We will leave nothing to chance or supposition. And while we are cognizant that billions of religious individuals believe that Galatians was divinely inspired, we will be honest, even if the result is judgmental and thus deemed offensive. Regardless of how many religious preconceptions succumb to the evidence, this pursuit of the truth will be relentlessly rational.

As I have shared previously, at the onset of this study I simply could not have imagined that Sha’uwl was the focus of God’s ire, becoming the single most-hated man in human history from Yahowah’s perspective. And yet, God’s testimony against Sha’uwl | Paul is unrelenting and unequivocal.

And yet, as I have stated before, it will be Sha’uwl’s | Paul’s words which will determine whether the most influential man in human history had the audacity to contradict God, to undermine His testimony, and to establish a “New Testament” in place of the one he sought to annul. If he did, and if he made his case, then Christianity is a miracle of the mind with a wholly irrational revised reality perceived as true. But if it wasn’t appropriate to demean and dissolve the Torah, if faith isn’t the answer, billions have been tragically misled, their souls extinguished as a consequence.

As a result, it is instructive to reinforce the fact that Paul’s given name was Sha’uwl. It is of Hebrew origin, and it means “he questions” and “question him” depending upon how the pronoun is accommodated. Therefore, “questioning him” as a result of what “he has questioned” is the path we have charted. And in this vein, you should also know that the name, Sha’uwl, is indistinguishable in Hebrew from She’owl, which is the “place of separation,” “the grave, pit, and realm of the dead” commonly known as Hell.

Further, the name Sha’uwl is shared with one of the most misguided and counterproductive individuals in Yisra’el’s history, King Sha’uwl | Saul. He was Dowd | David’s rival and mortal enemy – and as such, he was disowned by God. Then as a result of his revisionist portrayal of the Torah, he was demon-possessed. His life, as it transpired, was prophetic on all four accounts (opposition to Dowd, misappropriation of the Torah, estrangement from Yah, and demon possession) with his namesake, the wannabe Apostle Sha’uwl | Paul.

Also relevant, Sha’uwl chose a different name, a Latin, moniker, to demonstrate his preference for Rome over Judea during the occupation. Paulos became this chameleon’s fictitious nom de plume on behalf of the empire that would ravage God’s people. He even devoted his most acclaimed letter – Romans – to the legions which God branded as the most vicious of beasts. And even though he likely chose the Paulos moniker due to its affinity with Apollos, the actual meaning of his new name, “lowly and little,” is something that will loom large in numerous prophecies before we are finished.

One of the surprising obstacles we will have to overcome along the way will become obvious in short order. Paul’s letter to the Galatians is poorly conceived, reflecting some of the worst writing found anywhere in texts comprising the Christian New Testament, none of which are particularly good. We will encounter a steady diet of linguistic malfeasance and worse, reminiscent of our journey through the Quran in God Damn Religion.

Many of Paul’s sentences are incomprehensible. His literacy is well beneath the dignity of God, even though this indisputable fact does not seem to matter to a religion hell-bent on distancing itself from Yahowah, from His Beryth | Covenant, Towrah | Guidance, Naby’ | Prophets, seven Miqra’ey – Invitations to be Called Out and Meet, people, Yisra’el | Individuals who Engage and Endure with God, and from His beloved Bakowr | Firstborn Son, the Mashyach | Anointed Messiah, Melek | King, and Zarowa’ | Sacrificial Lamb, our Yasha’ | Savior.

As we embark on this journey, there is something else you should know. There are some who would have us believe that Paulos did not write Galatians. They use pedantic ploys to imply that this epistle, along with 2nd Corinthians, 1st Thessalonians, Ephesians, and both personal letters to Timothy were foisted as a clever fraud, and then later attributed, unbeknownst, to Paul. In support of this argument, there is phraseology prevalent in Galatians that appears less frequently in the subsequent epistles claimed by this man.

My initial response was, “Since this is the Christian New Testament, why does it matter if it was written by someone under the alias Paulos or by someone intimately familiar with him?” The egomaniacal personality and the overt hostility toward Yahowah, His people and Towrah, remain the same.

But there are far bigger issues at play. For example, as mentioned previously, the book which claims to have been written by a disciple named “Matthew” was falsely attributed and written at a much later date because the charlatan who plagiarized 95% of his text from three earlier sources lived two generations removed from the events he falsely claimed to have observed as an eyewitness. The actual name of the person who cobbled “Matthew” together between 90 and 100 CE is not known.

Much of the same is true with the Gospel attributed to John as well as of the Book of Revelation. The only evidence for “John’s” authorship is from Polycarp. He was a 2nd-century martyr, if one is to believe the fables Eusebius promoted about him. And while the alleged martyr is said to have garnished his reputation by having known John personally, the report comes by way of Irenaeus, a Greek bishop who was noted for expanding the influence of Christianity in present-day France. It was Irenaeus who claimed that Polycarp told him that John had written a book in Ephesus sometime before 95 CE, something Eusebius promoted 350 years thereafter. It is sort of like Santa Claus claiming that the Tooth Fairy told him that he saw the Easter Bunny lay an egg and a Leprechaun confirmed it, so we’re good.

This might also be a swell time to mention that the fable of Polycarp, as the lone attributor, is incredulous. Beyond the realization that the alleged conveyor of the account, Irenaeus, was born between 120 and 140 CE, and thus well after the fact, what little is known of him comes by way of the poisonous pen of the infamous Eusebius of Caesarea two centuries thereafter. Indeed, the resulting text of the Martyrdom of Polycarp is only known to us through the 4th-century Ecclesiastical History written by this most nefarious individual, the one most responsible for the augmentation and canonization of the Christian New Testament. This very same Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, was the chief propagandist for Emperor Constantine and unheralded architect of the myths underlying the Christian religion. And his version of this story is akin to the Rabbinic and Quranic portrayals of the fire that was prevented from burning their version of Abraham.

Citing from it, we find, “Three days before he was arrested, while he was praying, he had a vision of the pillow under his head in flames. He said prophetically to those who were with him, ‘I will be burnt alive.’” But, alas, it turned out to be a false prophecy according to the legend.

“Those who were looking for him…could not find him, so they seized two young men from his own household and tortured them into confession. The sheriff, called Herod, was impatient to bring Polycarp to the stadium, so that he might fulfill his special role, to share the sufferings of Christ, which those who betrayed him would be punished like Judas.

The police and horsemen came with the young man at suppertime on the Friday with their usual weapons, as if coming out against a robber… He could have escaped but he refused… The men were astounded and many of them regretted coming to arrest such a godly and venerable an old man. When he finished praying, they put him on a donkey and took him into the city. As Polycarp was being taken into the arena, a voice came to him from heaven, ‘Be strong, Polycarp and play the man.’”

“‘Swear,’ urged the Proconsul, ‘reproach Christ and I will set you free.’ ‘Eighty-six years have I have served him,’ replied Polycarp, ‘and he has done me no wrong.’” That’s not much of an endorsement. It’s like someone supporting Stalin because he didn’t throw them into the gulag.

Then as if reciting a Quranic Suratun, Polycarp, states, “You threaten me with fire with burns for an hour, and is then extinguished, but you know nothing of the fire of the coming judgment and eternal punishment reserved for the ungodly.”

In keeping with the anti-Semitic nature of the emerging Church, we read, “The crowd collected wood and bundles of sticks from the shops and public baths. The Jews, as usual, were keen to help.” A good Christian, Eusebius never missed an opportunity to demonize Jews.

Demonstrating that the lone witness attributing the Gospel of John to John was a fable, we find, “Polycarp took off his outer clothes, undid his belt, and tried to take off his sandals – something he was not used to, as the faithful always raced to do it for him, each wanting to be the one to touch his skin – that is how good his life was.”

Then after talking the Romans out of using nails, “They simply bound him with his hands behind him like a distinguished ram chosen from a great flock for the sacrifice.” Again, as if providing fodder for the Quran and after touting the impossible and counterproductive notion of bodily resurrection, Polycarp [whose name means “Many Fruits]” asked to become “an acceptable sacrifice.”

“Then the fire was lit, and the flames blazed furiously. We who were privileged to witness it saw a great miracle, and this is why we have been preserved to tell the story. The fire shaped itself into the form of an arch, like the sail of a ship when filled with the wind and formed a circle around the body of the martyr. Inside it, he looked not like flesh that is burnt, but like bread that is baked, or gold and silver glowing in a furnace. And we smelt a sweet scent, like frankincense.

Eventually, when those wicked men saw that his body could not be consumed by the fire, they commanded an executioner to pierce him with a dagger.” No one bothered to say how the executioner braved the futile flames and stabbed him with his knife, but nonetheless, “a dove flew out and a great quantity of blood flowed that the fire was extinguished.” Believable, right?

Returning to the ilk of Quranic rhetoric, “The crowd were amazed at the difference between the unbelievers and the elect, of whom the great Polycarp was surely one as the apostolic and prophetic teacher and bishop of the Catholic Church.” Should you be curious, I cited this excerpt from The Martyrdom of Polycarp as it was translated by J.B. Lightfoot, abridged and modernized by Stephen Tomkins, and edited and prepared by Dan Graves. I wanted them credited for this incredulous religious tale of derring-do initially published in the 4th century by Eusebius the Duplicitous – as all things come full circle in Christendom. And the more we know, the worse it gets.

Staying on the theme of “John” for a moment longer, if we were to pretend that someone named “Jesus Christ” existed and chose unlettered fishermen to tell his story, rather than actually writing it himself like a real prophet, why would he have chosen Jews to translate the words he spoke in Hebrew into Greek? If we were to play along, should the alleged “John” have been twenty years old when he surrendered his boat and net, giving up his day job to hang around a dead-man-walking as a groupie, why didn’t he write anything down concurrently? Why would he have waited six decades, moved closer to Rome, and then conveyed the narrative in an entirely different language when he would have been eighty – twice the average lifespan at the time? It would be like listening to Joe Biden recount in Portuguese the story of how he, as the first female Black vice president, slew Adolf Hitler with a slingshot while creepily sniffing children’s hair.

It gets even worse with the letters that have become known as the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles. They are not internally attributed to anyone. It wasn’t until later in the lives of the two most nefarious characters in the editing, canonization, translating, and transmission of the Christian New Testament, Eusebios tes Kaisareias, aka, Eusebius of Caesarea (circa 265 – 339 CE) and Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus, aka, Jerome (circa 345 – 420 CE), that these horrible individuals shaped both accounts to their liking in the 4th century. It was then that Luke and Acts were attributed to a “healer” mentioned by Sha’uwl / Paulos in his letter to the Colossians. And even if it were true, his accounts are hearsay. And it should be noted that neither the man responsible for syncretizing the text, blending and amalgamating the disparate accounts together while augmenting the message to serve their Roman overlords, nor the man responsible for destroying every early Greek manuscript he could find so that he could imprison the text in Latin to be controlled by the Roman Church, could articulate a rational argument for attributing either book to Luke. But more on these infamous individuals later as they are far more responsible for the text of the New Testament than was the mythical misnomer Jesus.

It doesn’t get any better with Mark, because he is a shadowy character, too. Initially, we hear that he hung around “Peter,” perhaps as a translator, but then was recruited by Paul when the two heavyweights of Christendom went to war against one another. Sha’uwl told his posse to recruit Mark because he had plans for him – and that plan turned out to be the Book of Mark, which should more correctly be called the “Gospel According to Paul.” Therein, Paul’s Gospel concludes with the disappearance of “Jesus of Nazareth who was crucified” because “he would rise” through Paul. The fact that Jesus was never seen or heard from again, or that there was no one by this name, nor even a town of “Nazareth” at the time, is only bothersome if one prefers evidence to fables.

Even with the books attributed to “Peter,” no one by that name was associated with the mythology of “Jesus Christ” either. The character’s name was “Shim’own,” and he was not rebranded as the “Petra | Rock” until the aforementioned Eusebius of Caesarea added the incredulous diatribe to the aforementioned “Matthew” in the 4th century. What is now found in the 16th and 17th verses of the 16th chapter is not included in any earlier manuscripts and is as preposterous as it is essential to the myth of Christ. Because without Peter’s alleged statement, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,” Jesus is without a title and a last name. So, rest assured, we will examine Eusebius’ sleight of hand in subsequent chapters. But for now, realize that immediately after this contrived pronouncement, the Jesus character, turned to the rebranded “Rock” and said, “Get behind me, Satan.” No matter where one looks, Christianity appears to be the product of a gaggle of goons. Now, if only we could get another endorsement from Joe Biden, who was likely there at the time. (Just kidding.)

In support of Galatians being scribed by the infamous character known as Paul, recognize that the book of Acts revealed that Saul / Paul had the kind of contentious relationship with the Galatians which is actually reflected in the epistle. We are told that the Galatians went from believing that Paulos was the incarnation of a Greek god (validating my conclusions regarding his choice of names) to wanting to stone him for his caustic rhetoric.

Second, Shim’own / Peter, in his second letter, evaluates an epistle Sha’uwl / Paul had written to this particular audience – one that we learn from his greeting in 1st Peter has to be in Galatia because it is the only place where the addressees overlap. Therefore, based on the Peter’s letter, we know that Paul wrote an epistle to Galatia. And if not this letter, then the authentic document has been lost. But more than that, the language Shim’own (He Listens) used to describe Galatians adroitly reflects the contents we find in the surviving copy.

Third, the issues raised at the Jerusalem Summit serve as the centerpiece of the Galatian epistle. After reading what was presumed to be Luke’s (from the Latin Lucas) testimony in Acts, it becomes obvious that Galatians was Paulos’ response to his critics at this meeting. Status was paramount to Sha’uwl, and therefore, Galatians chronicles his desire to position himself as favorably as possible, especially vis a vis the disciples whom he routinely slights.

Additionally, based on the disparaging language, it is likely that the letter was written immediately after that meeting, long before tempers cooled. And that means that Paulos would have had thirteen subsequent opportunities to distance himself from the letter scribed to the Galatians had it been a fraud because his open letters to the Thessalonians, Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, Colossians, and Philippians, as well as the personal notes to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, in addition to Hebrews, all came later – as did most of his testimony in Acts. Never once is he heard denouncing the authenticity of this epistle to the Galatians but is instead found building his case against the Towrah and its Covenant upon the foundation he laid therein.

Fourth, Galatians is all about Sha’uwl becoming Paulos, about his childhood, his religious education as a rabbi, his questionable calling, his self-proclaimed mission, his adversarial preaching, his suspect credibility, his personal trials and tribulations, and his sacrifices as the replacement for Christ. Within its text, we find Paul referring to himself as the parent of his faithful children, as the perfect example to follow, as a person who can do no wrong, as someone who cannot lie, and as the one who was making painful sacrifices for the salvation of the faithful. If Paul didn’t write it, Galatians was either scribed by his publicist or by someone who spent the better part of his life polishing Paul’s sandals.

Fifth, the oldest extant codex containing Paul’s epistles, Papyrus 46, places Galatians in the midst of the other letters claimed by and attributed to Paulos. In order of their appearance in the codex, these epistles include: Romans, Hebrews, 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, and 1st Thessalonians. And since P46 is dated between 85 and 125 CE, we know that one of the earliest collectors of Greek manuscripts believed that Paul had penned this letter. As did Marcion in the 2nd century, a man who plays a starring role in this saga.

Sixth, Paulos had a propensity to sign his letters so that his audience would have some assurance that he was the author. But with Galatians, he did more than just sign his name. He personally attests to having written the conclusion with his own hand using really big letters.

Seventh, Paul’s signature term is charis, the name of the Greek goddesses of hospitality and merriment. This name was transliterated into English as “Grace” as a result of the Roman moniker for these same goddesses, the Gratia. Apart from Paulos’ letters, the use of charis can only be attested in one other place in an ancient Greek manuscript. Therefore, the frequency of deploying the name of the Greek goddesses of charity and licentiousness in all of these letters strongly suggests that this troubling and pagan aspect of Christianity came from Paul, as did Galatians.

And eighth, 666 years prior to the 52 CE scribal date of Galatians by Sha’uwl, Yahowah condemned Sha’uwl by name, calling him the “Plague of Death” for having written this Towrah-forsaken, Dowd-replacing trash through His prophet Chabaquwq | Habakkuk in 615 BCE. That alone is sufficient for me.

I suppose that someone might propose a highly unlikely alternative, that Paul was the author, but that he should have tossed it in the trash rather than circulating it. He was clearly angry and may well have dashed off an emotional response that, from a more sober perspective, he would have wadded up and thrown away. Most of us have written letters like this; and many have had the good sense to hold on to them long enough to temper them once our passions have subsided. But if this is the case, what does it say about the credibility of the rest of the testimony this man also claims was inspired by God, indeed, what does it suggest about the veracity of the Christian New Testament as a whole?

The only benefit of distancing this epistle from Paul is that it would not tarnish the remainder of the letters attributed to him. But even then, the potential benefit would be fraught with peril, in that it would open the floodgates to questioning the appropriateness of everything originally written in Greek and not Hebrew. Christianity’s entire foundation would be torn asunder. Worse, because the Galatians epistle was written in first person, and because it is based upon the life of the self-proclaimed Apostle Paulos, if it is a counterfeit, not only does the authority of much of the “Christian New Testament” become suspect, the religion is deprived of doctrine. I say this because Paul’s attaché is credited with writing Luke and Acts and two of his devotees are assumed to have written Mark and Matthew, as well as Hebrews – should it not be from Paul, himself. His influence on these texts explains why they are anti-Semitic, historically inaccurate, and contradictory – the same problems that permeate Paul’s letters.

As we will discover throughout this review, in substance, there is very little difference between Galatians and everything else Paul wrote and influenced. It is readily apparent that the same individual authored them, one that was promoting himself and his own message in his own inimitable way.

Ultimately, however, the only question which really matters is whether or not Galatians is errant to the point of being unredeemable. We know that it isn’t the inspired Word of God because, like the rest of the Christian New Testament, it fails every aspect of the Dabarym | Deuteronomy 18 test to determine if Yahowah inspired the author. And since it isn’t from God, no matter how erroneous, the world’s most popular religion is brought down with it.

This conclusion is inescapable because Galatians, even more than Paul’s other letters, is devoted to systematically demeaning, dismantling, and demoting the Torah and its Covenant. This would include the recognition that Yahowah is God’s only name, something Paul never mentions. Without Galatians, there would be no way to explain Christianity’s opposition to Yahowah’s seven Miqra’ey – Invitations to be Called Out and Meet – as they would still delineate the path to eternal life, perfection, adoption, enrichment, empowerment, and reconciliation, leading to living with God as His children. Without Galatians, Romans, and Hebrews, there would only be one Covenant, a familial accord which has yet to be renewed. There would be no room for a “New Testament,” a “Gospel of Grace,” or a faith-based religion.

Without Galatians, Yahowah’s Towrah, as it is affirmed throughout the Psalms and Prophets, remains the sole means to liberate humankind from religious and political oppression. But with Galatians, the Torah is mankind’s greatest foe, the path to enslavement and condemnation.

Without Galatians, the “Gospel of Grace” would be stillborn, invalidated by Yahowah’s promise to heal His people through the Towrah – with its entirely different, yet overtly beneficial message. Without Galatians, our association with God would be based exclusively upon the Towrah’s everlasting Covenant, upon knowing Yahowah and relying upon God’s Guidance, not Paul’s.

Without Galatians, admission to heaven would be predicated upon responding to Yahowah’s Invitations to Meet with Him as this seven-step path is articulated in the heart of the Towrah and fulfilled by Dowd. Without Galatians, “faith” becomes irrelevant, as does the religion of Christianity, because the God who authored the Towrah can be known through it.

In this regard, you should know that faith is the opposite of trust. Trust emerges from a discerning evaluation of the evidence, while faith thrives in the absence of information and reason.

So, while there may be some lingering debate among a few individuals regarding the authenticity of this epistle, we will proceed as if Galatians was scribed by Paul. After all, there is vastly better evidence for this attribution than to attribute Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John to the men who are now accredited for writing them. Moreover, billions of people accept it as having been written by Paul, a man they believe was inspired by God.

But how is that possible? How could the God who created the universe, who conceived life, who authored the Towrah, who nurtured the Covenant, who freed a nation from slavery, and who enlightened the world while proving His existence and verifying His witness through prophecy have contributed to a book which presents Him as incompetent and impotent?

Fortunately, that question can be resolved since it is impossible. So long as we are willing to invest the time required to consider the evidence with an open mind, so long as we are willing to evaluate the facts rationally, not religiously, together we will determine with absolute certainty that Galatians, and the whole corpus of Pauline literature, indeed, the entire New Testament, is a colossal fraud. And in the end, that is all this study strives to demonstrate.

There are some far-reaching implications associated with that determination. And that is because the religion of Christianity was established as an extension of the paradigm Paulos proposed in his first public address and epistle.

The Pauline “Jesus Christ” was touted as a new and improved, more tolerant and accepting, nicer and more loving version of the jealous and wrathful God of the oppressive Law, a God out of touch with Greek and Roman sensibilities. The perception of Dowd as the Passover Lamb would be lost in the fog of myth. The realization that even the fables attributed to the mythos of Jesus reveal that he was Towrah-observant, would be convoluted, twisted and inverted, with Christians, as a direct result of Paul’s opening salvo, believing that their “Jesus” had come to annul the old god’s arcane and dreadful “Law,” freeing them from its judgmental nature.

With Yahowah’s name forgotten and replaced, and with Dowd’s substituted, the Christian Savior would become known as “Jesus Christ,” jettisoning all association with Yahowah, His Son and Messiah. In this way, the entirety of Yahowah’s testimony, His role as Creator, Father, and God would be discounted and then dismissed, as would His Torah and His Covenant. Christians would not speak of Him or pray to Him, preferring to focus on their religious caricature.

The Pauline “Jesus Christ” would become an object to be painted with the impressions and opinions of believers, with even the spurious accounts of his words ignored because most everything he is attributed saying was now in conflict with the belief system Paul was foisting on an accepting world. The Christian baby god would be portrayed as a helpless infant cradled in his mother’s arms and then as a dead god on a stick. High praise, indeed.

As a result of what this new paradigm wrought, should Paul’s epistle to the Galatians prove to be unreliable for any reason, to be in conflict with Yahowah, the foundational assumptions of the Christian religion fall apart with it, as they could neither be inspired nor be accurate. It is that simple, that clear cut. The fate of the faithful rests in the balance, as does their religion.



Since Paul provides him ample lip service, I understand that Christians believe that “Jesus Christ” was the founder of their religion, but that is not accurate. I understand that Christians believe that it is appropriate to address God as “the Lord,” but that is inadvisable. I understand that Christians believe that “Jesus” is the second person of a Trinity, and represents the totality of God, but that is not possible.

I understand that Christians believe that God died for their sins, but that is an absurdity. I understand that Christians believe that God’s purpose is to save us, but that is unrealistic. I understand that Christians believe that salvation requires nothing of them and that it is a product of faith, but that is ridiculous. I understand that Christians believe that all souls go either to heaven or to hell, but that is irrational.

I understand that Christians believe that “Jesus” was born on Christmas Day, but that is not credible. I understand that Christians believe that Easter commemorates God’s bodily resurrection from the dead, but that would have been counterproductive. I understand that Christians believe that the Covenant’s renewal is depicted in their “New Testament,” making it possible to ignore everything in the Torah, but that is blasphemous. I understand that Christians believe that their “Bible” is the inerrant Word of God, but that is exceedingly ignorant.

I understand that Christians believe that Paul met with “Jesus” on the road to Damascus, that he had a conversion experience, that he was transformed from being a murderer to serving as an apostle, someone chosen and inspired by God to share the Gospel of Grace with the world, but that is inane. I understand that Christians believe that the Torah was written exclusively for Jews, that it was comprised of old-fashioned laws that no one can obey, and that “Jesus” came to free us from that Law, but that is wholly incongruous with the evidence.

It is an irrefutable fact that no one named “Jesus Christ” lived in the 1st century of the Common Era. The name “Jesus” was initially conceived in the 17th century, shortly after the letter “J” was invented. The actual individual who fulfilled Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym was assuredly not Greek, and therefore, he had a very well-known Hebrew name, not a Greek one.

And besides all of this, “Jesus” is not an accurate transliteration of Iesou, Iesous, or Iesoun as the Greek name appears in the Greek text. More incriminating still, these variations of the Greek name were never written on any page of any pre-Constantine codex of the so-called “Christian New Testament.” Following the example of the Septuagint (a Greek translation of the Hebrew Towrah and later Prophets, Psalms, and Writing), a two- or three-letter Placeholder was universally deployed to represent this name without actually writing it.

Furthermore, a man named “Jesus” could not have come in His Father’s name. So since the Christian religion has deliberately misrepresented this irrefutable and essential fact, and cannot even get his name right, what else might be untrue? And now that you know that “Jesus” isn’t accurate, are you going to start using the actual name of the man who Yahowah delivered to fulfill the Miqra’ey – Dowd?

“Christ” is not a last name, as in “Jesus Christ.” Since neither the misnomer “Jesus” nor Dowd were Greek, it would be silly to ascribe a Greek title to either of them. Also, a title should never follow a name but instead precede it. And when a title is conveyed, it should be accompanied by the definite article. For example, the Son of God, the Prophet, and our Savior is ha Mashyach | the Anointed Messiah Dowd | David.

Making matters worse, “Christos,” the alleged basis of “Christ,” is derived from the Greek verb, chrio, and speaks of the “application of drugs.” “Christos” is not an accurate translation of “Mashyach,” which is the only Hebrew word which can be transliterated as “Messiah.” And according to Yahowah, He anointed Dowd | David the Mashyach, doing so three times, representing each of his three lives. There is no reference to anointing “Jesus.” Therefore, “Christ” is a misnomer, attributing a title that does not fit and does not belong.

Even then, placeholders were used to present the alleged title on every page of every Greek manuscript scribed in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and early 4th centuries CE. Also, a thorough investigation of the historical evidence demonstrates that the placeholders for this corrupt variation of an essential Hebrew title were based upon Chrestus, a variation of chrestos (Strong’s G5543), not christos (Strong’s G5547), with the former meaning “fit for use and virtuous.” It would have been appropriate and correct in that Dowd volunteered to be a “Useful Implement.” Such is the nature of the Passover Lamb.

Sadly for Christians, however, Christos | Christ was a very poor choice. The only time the misnomer Jesus is translated and recorded using “christos” or its verbal root, “chrio” (Strong’s G5548), is in Revelation 3:18. There, a mal’ak | spiritual messenger of sorts is heard recommending that the Laodiceans symbolically “apply (chrio) to your eyes an eye salve (which was a pharmaceutical or drug) so that you may see.”

Chrio, the actionable root of christos, was used correctly because it spoke of “the application of drugs.” The community was famous at the time for manufacturing and promoting an eye balm to improve vision. The implication was that the Laodiceans’ vision was occluded and that if they wanted to recognize who had been standing beside the door and knocking, thereby associating Dowd with Passover, he recommended they become observant.

But by this errant use, it is implied that “Christ” was a drug dealer and that “Christians” were drugged. Replacing the Hebrew Mashyach | Messiah with Christos | Christ was a very poor decision fraught with peril.

Since the Christian religion has deliberately misrepresented this irrefutable and essential fact, and can’t even get the title which became the name of their religion right, what else might be untrue? And now that you know that “Christ” isn’t remotely accurate, and does not apply, are you going to start referring to Dowd as the Messiah rather than wrongly stating that Jesus was a Christ?

The character of Jesus emphatically stated that he did not come to replace or to annul any aspect of the Torah, but instead to be the living embodiment of it. Therefore, by upholding the existing standard, he could not be the founder of a new religion. Gospel Jesus was Torah-observant. And this is likely because he served as a replacement for the actual Son of God and Messiah, our Savior Dowd. And since Dowd not only honored the Towrah with Mizmowr | Psalms like the aforementioned 19th and the grandest of them – the 119th Song to the Towrah, but also came to fulfill it, the Jesus character modeled the man his myth replaced.

This is why Dowd arrived to serve as the Passover Lamb in year 4000 Yah / 33 CE. This would have been without purpose apart from the Towrah. And yet, the moment a person becomes Torah-observant, they cease to be a Christian, which is why believers have replaced almost everything Dowd did and said.

Since the Christian religion has deliberately misrepresented this irrefutable and essential fact, what else might be untrue? And now that you know that Dowd was sent because he was Torah-observant, are you going to follow his example?

Throughout the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, God ascribes the title “Lord” to Satan. The Adversary is called “ha Ba’al – the Lord,” because he wants to control the beneficiaries of freewill. The Adversary’s prime objective is for mankind to bow down to him, worshiping him as if the Lord were God. But the actual God has a name, and He has no interest in control or a desire to be worshiped. His name, Yahowah, is pronounced as easily as any of the many thousands of other words and names written throughout His witness: Y-aH-oW-aH.

Based upon the Hebrew verb, “hayah,” “to exist,” Yahowah is found 7000 times in His Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. He not only encouraged us to use this name but said that the replacing of His name with the title, “Lord,” was the most devastating thing humankind has ever done. It opens the door to mischaracterizing His nature and to the acceptance of false gods by any other name.

Further, learning someone’s name is the first step in initiating a relationship. And Yahowah wants us to relate to Him as children would to a father. The proper perspective is to see our Heavenly Father on His knees, offering to lift us up. And as the Author of freewill, God is opposed to lording over anyone. So since the Christian religion has deliberately misrepresented this irrefutable and essential fact, what else might be untrue? And now that you know that God’s name is pronounced “Yahowah,” are you going to use it instead of Lord?

The Trinity is a Babylonian religious concept. This notion was part and parcel of the pagan mythology of the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans. Yahowah never once mentions anything even remotely akin to a Trinity. He not only says that He is singular in nature, but expressly asks us not to accept religious customs such as this. Further, the entirety of God would not fit into our solar system, much less into the body of a physical being.

Also in this regard, Yahowah’s Spirit is set apart from Him. Her title, Ruwach Qodesh, which means “Set-Apart Spirit,” affirms this reality. Representing the Maternal aspects of Yahowah’s nature, She serves as our Spiritual Mother, thereby completing the symbolism of the Covenant Family – the very family we are invited to join. And now that you know that God is one, are you going to start focusing your attention on getting to know Yahowah instead of the “Holy Ghost?”

Yahowah is immortal. He cannot die. Man cannot kill God. Therefore, God could not die for your sins. Yahowah explained this, but Christians seldom listen to Him. As the Passover Lamb, Dowd cited the opening line of his 22nd Psalm, telling us that the Spirit of God had departed, allowing his physical body to die while his soul went to She’owl to redeem us on UnYeasted Bread. The Psalm explains all of this, including the service Dowd’s soul provided for us on the Qodesh | Set Apart Miqra’ | Invitation to be Called Out and Meet of Matsah | UnYeasted Bread.

Therefore, according to Yahowah, He did not die. As for Dowd’s physical body, the remains of the Passover Lamb were incinerated that same night in accordance with the Towrah’s instructions. So there was no body and no physical resurrection. And this may well explain why, in all three encounters on Firstborn Children, according to the gospel accounts, no one recognized Dowd. He was the same soul, now reunited with the same Spirit, but he was only partly corporeal.

Recognizing the relationship between energy and matter, one realizes that being corporeal would be a liability, which is why there is no such thing as bodily resurrection into the spiritual realm. Since the Christian religion has deliberately misrepresented this irrefutable and essential fact, what else might be untrue? And now that you know that God could not die for your sins, are you going to follow Dowd’s example and celebrate Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children with him – appreciative of his sacrifice?

Speaking of the first three Invitations to be Called Out and Meet with God, they collectively depict the Way Yahowah has provided to perfect us. But saving us isn’t His priority. Yahowah is committed to His Covenant. Salvation is only afforded to its children.

It would be irrational for Yahowah to save souls who do not know Him, who do not care what He has to say, who don’t appreciate what He is offering, and who have worshiped a god of man’s making. Therefore, before a soul can be saved, that individual must first come to know, understand, accept, and then engage in the Covenant based upon the conditions articulated in the Towrah.

The first of these is to walk away from religion and politics, from all things associated with Babylon. We are encouraged to rely on Yahowah instead, walking along a path which makes us immortal and perfect children who are prepared to be adopted into our Heavenly Father’s family, enabling His Spirit to enrich us and empower us. Therefore, salvation is the byproduct of participating in the Covenant and attending the Miqra’ey.

Since the Christian religion has deliberately misrepresented this irrefutable and essential fact, what else might be untrue? And now that you know that God has established a handful of conditions that must be met to participate in this relationship, are you going to seek to understand them and then respond to God based on what He is actually offering?

If God said, “Love me or I will send you to hell to be tortured,” He would not only be unlovable, He would be sadistic. Because of this scenario, there is a serious problem with the Christian god. However, the real God, Yahowah, said no such thing. According to His testimony, most souls simply cease to exist upon their mortal demise. They do not know God. God does not know them. There is nothing more. No reward. No punishment.

Yahowah provided each of us with the gift of a soul so that we could be observant, giving us freewill so that we could choose to know, ignore, or reject Him, and the benefit of a conscience so that we could exercise good judgment during our lives. The relatively few souls who use these gifts and get to know Yahowah as He revealed Himself in His Towrah, who understand and accept the conditions of His Covenant, and who answer the Invitations to walk to Him live forever with God in His home.

Those souls who are beguiled by religion, or who just have no interest in God, cease to exist. And those who oppose Yahowah, promoting anything that leads others away from God, His Towrah or His Covenant, will spend eternity incarcerated in She’owl, something akin to a black hole.

Since the Christian religion has deliberately misrepresented this irrefutable and essential fact, what else might be untrue? And now that you know that most souls do not end up in heaven or hell, are you going to start questioning those who have tried to deceive you, promising heaven to you if you place your faith in them and their religion?

God is immortal. He was not born on any day, much less on the Winter Solstice, Christmas Day, when the Son of the Sun was born in virtually every pagan religion – nine months, of course, after the celebration of Easter. Yahowah consistently asks us to reject the religious mythology of pagan cultures, and yet Christians incorporated Babylon’s two holiest days into their faith. This does not please God; it angers Him, especially since Christians celebrate these pagan holidays while ignoring, even rejecting, every one of His Meetings.

This is especially disappointing because Dowd’s purpose was to enable the promises Yahowah had made regarding Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children, enabling the Harvest of Seven Shabats. And after the Trumpets Harvest of Yahuwdym, He will fulfill Reconciliations and Shelters upon His return with His Son.

Since the Christian religion has deliberately misrepresented this irrefutable and essential fact, what else might be untrue? And now that you know that God hates Christmas and Easter, are you going to answer His Invitations on the days He designated?

The lone presentation of the Covenant’s renewal is detailed in Yirmayah / Jeremiah 31. And there, Yahowah reveals that this still future restoration of His relationship will be with Yahuwdah and Yisra’el, not with a Gentile church. In the same discussion, He reveals that the only difference between the existing Covenant and its reaffirmation is that upon His return He will personally place a complete copy of His towrah | guidance inside of us. This is significant because God would not have created a New Testament repudiating His Towrah, only to return to the original plan. Nor would He have replaced Yisra’el with a Church, Yahuwdym with Gowym, only to return to comfort His people.

At this moment, at the conclusion of the Time of Israel’s Troubles in 2033, with the Towrah woven into the very fabric of our nature, we will reach the point when Yahowah’s Instructions can no longer be corrupted or rejected. All memory of Paul, his letters, and his religion will be wiped out as a result.

So since the Christian religion has deliberately misrepresented this irrefutable and essential fact, what else might be untrue? And now that you know that God has only one Covenant, that it has not yet been renewed, and that its restoration is predicated upon the incorporation of His Towrah into our lives, are you going to consider reading it and integrating its guidance into your life?

The evidence is ubiquitous and irrefutable: the Christian New Testament isn’t even remotely reliable. To pretend that it is the inerrant word of God is absurd. There are over 300,000 known differences between the oldest manuscripts and the texts that support legacy and modern translations. No two codices agree on which words were originally written, and that is just the beginning of the problems. No words representing church, cross, holy, saint, Christian, Jesus, Christ, Lord, God, Ghost, Christmas, Easter, communion, Last Supper, Trinity, or Gospel can be found in any ancient manuscript, making all of these things religious corruptions. There are whole sections of books that are not attested in the older witnesses, such as the discussion with the adulterous woman in the 8th chapter of Yahowchanan | John, the concluding chapter of Mark, or the essential announcement in Matthew 16 that Jesus was the Christ.

Even if we were to assume that these were their correct names, there is no possibility that Mark, Matthew, or Luke were eyewitnesses. At best, these “gospels” are comprised of hearsay. Paul’s fourteen letters, combined with his starring role in Acts, present doctrines that are diametrically opposed to Yahowah’s Towrah and Dowd’s life and lyrics and thus cannot have been inspired by the same God. And then adding to the breadth of problems, we have to confront the issue of invalid, incomplete, and misleading translations, something everyone will more fully appreciate by the time we have completed our analysis.

So since the Christian religion has deliberately misrepresented this irrefutable and essential fact, what else might be untrue? And now that you know that you cannot rely on the Christian New Testament, where are you going to turn for answers? Ha Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr, perhaps?

Ironically, according to the testimony of the Jesus character during the Olivet Discourse, Paul could not have seen him on the road to Damascus. He told us not to believe anyone who made such a claim. So if Sha’uwl saw a light, it was not that of Gospel Jesus.

Make no mistake, Paul’s message was his own. He never accurately quoted anything Yahowah had a prophet write or that the Gospel’s Jesus said. Paul’s testimony is not only incongruent with the Towrah, it is contrary to all of the prophets. Even Paul’s preaching was the antithesis of every credible witness.

If God can be relied upon, then Paul is a liar. You can either believe Paul or trust God, but no one can accept both. By comparing their words, this book will prove this point beyond any doubt. You will hate Paul before we are through.

The issues that have been raised here should encourage Jews and Christians to begin questioning some of the many myths that have been woven into the fabric of this religion. Moreover, irrefutable evidence to support every conclusion is provided in the volumes of Yada Yahowah, An Introduction to God, Observations, and Coming Home.

Before you consider these, there was a reason for the questions. If you are not going to change your thinking when confronted with evidence that undermines your beliefs, then nothing matters. This book, any book, even God’s book cannot influence a closed or irrational mind.

And there are so many more Pauline deceptions to be addressed. I understand that on one hand, Christians, as a direct result of Paul’s letter to the Galatians, have been led to believe that the Torah was written exclusively for Jews, that it was comprised of old-fashioned laws and arcane concepts that are impossible to obey, and that “Jesus” came to free the world from it. Then on the other, Paul has convinced them that all of the Towrah’s promises to these same people still apply, but that they have been miraculously transferred to them. And this juxtaposition of unattested absurdities may be the most inane aspect of the Christian religion.

And now, since the purpose of this book is to address these Pauline propositions, let’s consider the evidence.



Twistianity

Appalling

…Contradicting God

4

Katara | Curse

Plagued by Whom?…

In time, we will analyze every word of Galatians, from Sha’uwl’s greeting to his handwritten closing statement. But for now, I would like to commence our review of Christendom’s foundational treatise at the same place Christians begin their assault on the Torah, an that occurs in Galatians 3, verses 10 through 14.

We will begin with the King James Version (Christianity’s most influential Bible translation) and the New Living Translation (the religion’s most recent and liberal variation and among the most popular). Their depictions of these passages, juxtaposed against a literal rendering of the earliest manuscript of Sha’uwl’s letter, should suffice as evidence.

Reason dictates that if the following KJV and NLT translations are accurate, and the inspiration behind them is valid, then the “Torah” is God’s way of cursing humankind – not saving us. And if this is true, Yahowah, Moseh, and Dowd are liars – as am I.

The King James reads: “For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.” (3:10)

More clearly presented, albeit less aligned with the Greek text, the New Living Translation published: “But those who depend on the law to make them right with God are under his curse, for the Scriptures say, ‘Cursed is everyone who does not observe and obey all the commands that are written in God’s Book of the Law.’ (3:10) If they are correct, God’s Word is God’s curse.

According to the most scholarly and respected resource, the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 27th Edition with McReynolds English Interlinear, the statement Paul wrote actually conveys: “For as many as from works of law they are under curse they are. It has been written for (not applicable) curse on all who not stay in all the things having been written in the small book of the law to do them.”

Based on the words Sha’uwl selected, the following is a more complete and accurate depiction of his pronouncement. This is my own translation, one derived from the oldest surviving Greek manuscripts.

“Because (gar – for) to the degree that (hosos – as many and as far as) out of (ek) tasks and activities of (ergon – works or actions associated with) the Towrah (nomou – the means to being nourished by that which is bestowed to become heirs, precepts which were apportioned, established, and received as a means to be proper and approved, as well as prescriptions for an inheritance; from nemo – that which is provided, assigned, and distributed to heirs to nourish them (singular genitive, and thus a specific characterization which is routinely deployed by Paul to demean Yahowah’s Towrah)) they are and they exist (eisin eisin) under (hupo – by way of) a curse (katara – that which a supernatural power deploys to invoke harm by promoting evil, that which is accursed, denounced and detested), for (gar – because indeed) it has been written (grapho) that (hoti): ‘To become accursed (epikataratos – to be exposed, abhorrent, and repugnant, slanderous, hateful, and malicious (to become is a product of the nominative case)) everyone (pas – all and completely) who (hos) not (ou) remains in (emmeno – stays and continues in, perseveres with) all (pas) that (tois) having been written (grapho) in (en) the scroll (to biblion – the book or documented written record typically on papyrus) of the (tou) Towrah (nomou – the allotment which is parceled out, the inheritance which is given, the nourishment which is bestowed to be possessed and used to grow, the precepts which are apportioned, established, and received as a means to be proper and to be approved, and the prescription to become an heir (singular genitive, and thus restricted to a singular specific and unique characterization of the Towrah)), to do (poieomai – to make, produce, or perform) them (autos).’” (Galatians 3:10)

Trimmed to its essentials, the statement literally reads: “Because to the degree that out of tasks and activities of the Towrah they exist under a curse which a supernatural power deploys to invoke harm by promoting evil, doing what is accursed, denounced and detested, for it has been written that: ‘To become accursed, to become abhorrent, and repugnant, everyone who not remains in all that having been written in the scroll of the Towrah, to do them.’” (Galatians 3:10)

Recognizing that the preceding translation is a literal rendering of Papyrus 46, the oldest extant manuscript of Sha’uwl’s letter (dated to the late 1st or early 2nd century), it’s hard to explain the KJV’s and NLT’s variation from it.

Nonetheless, one of our questions has already been resolved. While we will diligently research every discernible connotation of “nomos,” not just once but multiple times, Sha’uwl has clearly acknowledged what I will conclusively affirm: he is using nomou to describe the “Torah,” as if nomos and towrah were synonymous. We know this because, in the attempt to prove this point, using the Towrah citation found in Dabarym / Deuteronomy 27:26, he translated the Hebrew word “towrah” into Greek as “nomou.” And there can be no more convincing argument than this when correctly concluding that Paul wrote that the Towrah was a curse.

As a result, a Pauline apologist cannot say that Paul was condemning Rabbinic Law, or the Talmud, instead of the Towrah, without contradicting Paul’s own translation. Paul is, therefore, at war with God, designating Yahowah’s most essential testimony, a degrading annoyance.

If nothing else, that takes chutzpah. It is stupid, but bold.

By rendering towrah as nomou, Paul has emphatically demonstrated that he would be using variations of nomos to convey “Torah” throughout his letters. Therefore, to be intellectually honest, the meaning of towrah in Hebrew which is “teaching, instruction, direction, and guidance” must prevail over “law.” As a result, not only is Paul implicating himself by disparaging the Word of God, those who publish Christian Bibles are universally guilty of misrepresenting one of the most important words ever written when they render towrah via nomos as “law.”

But there is more: Paul misquoted the Towrah. The passage he cited in the context of the discussion in Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 27:26 conveys a message that is diametrically opposed to the point Paul was making. How then can his point be valid if he had to misrepresent God’s position?

The Towrah reads:

“Invoking harm upon oneself is whoever relationally and beneficially is not established, restored, and supported by the words of this Towrah, approaching by engaging through them. And then the entire family responded, ‘This is true, acceptable, and reliable.’” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 27:26)

In this case, and there will be many others, Paul deliberately misappropriated, mistranslated, and misconstrued the inspired Word of God. Moseh’s message was the exact opposite of Sha’uwl’s. So, since Paul’s malfeasance in Galatians 3:10 is so obvious and irrefutable, so condemning of his integrity, it is in our interest to verify every word of both statements. To that end, here is a more fully amplified rendition of Moseh’s pronouncement from Yahowah’s Towrah…

“Invoking harm upon oneself (‘arar – plaguing oneself by making oneself undesirable) is whoever relationally and beneficially (‘asher) is not (lo’) established (quwm – restored, supported, encouraged, lifted up and caused to stand, confirmed, and enabled to endure) by (‘eth – with and through) the words (dabar – message and accounts) of this (ha zo’th) Towrah (Towrah – source of guidance, direction, teaching, and instruction [written ToWRaH in Hebrew]), approaching (la) by engaging through them (‘asah ‘eth – by acting upon them and doing productive things according to them, celebrating and profiting with them).

And then (wa) the entire (kol) family (‘am – people and nation) responded (‘amar – answered, promised, and declared), ‘This is true, acceptable, and reliable (‘aman – this is affirming, supportive, verifiable, and dependable).’” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 27:26)

So what now? We have just begun, and Paul has condemned himself with his own words. Now that you are informed, if you are rational, you can no longer trust anything the man willing to deliberately contradict God wrote. He purposely misquoted Moseh – the man who liberated God’s people from political and religious control and the greatest of the prophets. Yahowah inspired him to say that we are established and restored through the Towrah and that we approach Him by acting upon its words. It is harmful to discard the opportunity the Towrah provides, and it is beneficial to embrace it. Paul twisted the Word of God to state the opposite. That’s appalling!

Assuming that you searched through Greek and Hebrew interlinears on your shelf or online, and that you referenced a lexicon or two, looking up each word to verify what you have just read, how are you going to deal with this? The answer to that question may determine the fate of your soul, especially if you have believed Paul up to this point.

While we could, we are not going to stop here. Before we are finished, thousands of nails will be driven into Paul’s coffin. And since we were seeking to know whether Galatians was inspired by God and trustworthy, we already have our answer. A person who deliberately misquotes God to promote the inverse of what God said cannot be telling the truth when he claims to be inspired by that same God. It is impossible.

The Towrah reported that we harm ourselves when we are not established and restored by the words that comprise the Towrah, approaching Yahowah by acting upon His Guidance and Teaching. Christianity is torn asunder by this statement, a position which cannot be refuted without calling God, Himself, a liar. The very statement Paul misquoted to establish his religion destroys it. The only thing worse is to realize that billions of souls have been squandered based on his lies.

The Towrah verse Sha’uwl mangled in Galatians undermines the most fundamental aspect of the Christian religion, of faith in its Gospel of Grace, as well as Paulos’ own position, because it obliterates the idea that the Torah is obsolete or harmful. But even if observing the Torah was not presented as the lone means to becoming restored and established, as God’s most acclaimed prophet has just stated, if the Almighty was a capricious prankster, and if His Towrah was really a curse as Paul and his ilk have claimed, then citing it as evidence would be irrational, because nothing God said could be trusted. Think about that for a moment.

Christian apologists, steeped as they are in Pauline Doctrine, will say that the Torah is not a pick-and-choose sort of thing, and that to be redeemed and righteous, a person would have to do everything the Torah requires all the time, or else they would be cursed by it – judged and condemned. But that is not the message conveyed in this Dabarym passage – nor the message conveyed anywhere in the Towrah or by Yahowah. God knows that we are not perfect, which is why He provided the means to perfect us in the heart of His Towrah – the Covenant and Invitations to Meet. ‘Abraham enabled the Beryth, Dowd fulfilled the Miqra’ey, and Moseh explained both to us. I don’t suspect that Yahowah values Paul’s contradiction over their example, sacrifice, or instruction.

And yet, since Paul has attempted to incapacitate the Torah, and to sever the relationship between God’s testimony and His means to reconciliation, most Christians are unaware of the Torah’s redemptive properties. As a result of Paul’s epistles, Christians do not realize the benefits Yahowah is offering or even how He made our reconciliation possible.

When Dowd, the Messiah and Son of God, arrived to fulfill the Towrah-based Miqra’ey | Invitations to be Called Out and Meet, he honored the promises God had made to make His Covenant children immortal on Pesach | Passover and perfect us on Matsah | UnYeasted Bread so that He could adopt us into His family the next day during Bikuwrym | Firstborn Children, empowering, enriching, and enlightening us as a result. This is what enables Father and Son to Harvest the Covenant Family on Shabuw’ah | the Promise of Seven.

However, by severing this connection, as has been done in both Judaism and Christianity, by disassociating Yahowah’s Miqra’ey and Mashyach from His Towrah, the sacrifice of the Passover Lamb became as meaningless for the religious as the faith Jews and Christians created to negate it.

Should you be wondering why I am using both “Torah” and “Towrah” throughout Twistianity, the answer is that the correct spelling according to Yahowah is “ToWRaH, and thus Towrah. The Wah and Heh are both vowels, and they provide the “o” and “a” sounds in Torah (as well as in YaHoWaH). Then the reason the more common and less correct spelling is used is to more effectively communicate with new readers who are less familiar with Hebrew nomenclature. Therefore, “Torah” will quickly resonate while we all become more familiar with the correct spelling of “Towrah.” And it will lead readers to the proper pronunciation of the name of names – Yahowah.

In this regard, while some would seek to limit the “Torah” to the five “Books of Moses,” the Towrah is from Yahowah, and His “Towrah – Teaching and Guidance” is found in everything He revealed, permeating the Prophets and Psalms. Rather than using the misleading and inaccurate terms “Bible” or “Scripture,” the proper title for Yahowah’s witness is either “Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr – Towrah, Prophets, and Psalms,” “Towrah and Prophets,” or just “Towrah.” The Towrah is prophetic, and the Prophets contain towrah | teaching and guidance.

Moving on to Sha’uwl’s next thought, as it is found in the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 27th Edition with McReynolds English Interlinear, the conman responsible for Christianity dug himself and his faithful in deeper… “But that in law no one is made right along the God clear because the right from trust will live.”

Amplified, and with the Greek text highlighted for your consideration, we find…

“But (de – it follows, moreover, and namely) because (oti) with (en – inside and with regard to) the Torah (nomo –– the allotment which is parceled out, the inheritance which is given, and the prescription to become an heir) absolutely no one (oudeis – nothing, nobody, and not one; from oude heis – not even one) is vindicated or justified (dikaioo – made or shown to be correct, proper, or right, acquitted or declared righteous) by (para – with and in the opinion of) the God (to ΘΩ) becomes evident (delos – becomes clear and is made plain (scribed in the nominative, where an adjective is presented influencing the subject, God, in this case, renaming Him)) because (oti – namely and for this reason): ‘Those who are correct, righteous, and proper (o dikaios – those who are right, upright, virtuous, and guiltless) out of (ek) faith (pistis – originally meant trust but evolved to faith or belief as a result of Sha’uwl’s usage in these letters) will live (zao – will be alive).’” (Galatians 3:11)

Buffed and polished in the King James, Paul sounds a bit more eloquent, albeit no more rational: “But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, ‘The just shall live by faith.’”

Updated for modern sensibilities, the New Living Translation passage reads: “So it is clear that no one can be made right with God by trying to keep the law. For the Scriptures say, ‘It is through faith that a righteous person has life.’” (3:11)

And yet Paul’s first point was anything but “clear,” because he misquoted and misappropriated a passage which contradicted his premise. But more telling still, the Towrah does not actually say anything about “faith,” much less that one’s beliefs lead to being “just” or “righteous.”

Furthermore, both positions are illogical. Even if no one was justified by the Torah, without committing the rational fallacy of non sequitur, one could not imply that the righteous shall live by faith. Rather than cause and consequence, these ideas are unrelated. It is like saying: red wagons do not work so it is evident we should put our faith in blue tricycles. More to the point, if God’s Torah cannot be relied upon, in whom are we to express our “faith?”

As I previously mentioned, “the Scriptures” do not “say, ‘It is through faith that a righteous person has life.’” The passage Sha’uwl truncated actually condemns him personally as well as what he was promoting. Speaking specifically of Sha’uwl / Paulos, and actually naming him in the next line, the passage he misappropriated and misquoted reads:

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

Paul’s ruse is almost breathtaking in its audacity. And this time the biggest issue is not just the inaccurate and inappropriate nature of Paul’s rendition of the citation, where he has once again misrepresented Yahowah’s intent by twisting a snippet of what God said out of context. What is amazing here is that Yahowah is specifically warning us about Sha’uwl | Paul, in this passage. So by quoting it, Paul is taunting his audience, arrogantly implying that those foolish enough to fall for his inane rhetoric aren’t sufficiently resourceful or rational to realize that God is telling us to trust Him, not Sha’uwl.

This realization is so condemning, in two subsequent chapters of Twistianity, I’ll amplify the entirety of God’s indictment regarding Sha’uwl | Paul. But for now, please ponder these highlights conveyed through Yahowah’s prophet, Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk, 666 years before Paul misquoted him in Galatians...

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

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

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

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

Pay attention, he will be puffed up with false pride. His soul, it is not right nor straightforward in him.

Therefore, through trust and reliance, by being firmly established and upheld by that which is dependable and truthful, those who are correct and thus vindicated, shall live. (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:4)

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

He and his soul are considered the Plague of Death. And so those who are brought together by him, accepting him, will never be satisfied. Most every Gentile will gather unto him, all of the people from different races and nations. (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:5)

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

There are hard and perplexing questions which need to be asked of him, and double-dealings to be known regarding him.

And so they should say, “Woe to the one who claims to be great so as to increase his offspring, acting like a rabbi, when neither apply to him.

For how long will they make pledges based upon his significance, becoming burdened by his testimony?”’” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:6)

Evidence does not get any more compelling or relevant than this. Sha’uwl took us directly to a prophecy that Yahowah had revealed to warn His people to “Sha’uwl – Question Him” and avoid Sha’uwl / Paul as the Plague of Death.

Yahowah revealed that a man named, “Sha’uwl” would arrogantly mislead and intoxicate Gentiles with irrational rhetoric coterminous with the time Dowd would fulfill His Mow’ed – Appointed Meetings. This occurred when Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym were fulfilled in 33 CE / year 4000 Yah by Dowd. At this same time, Sha’uwl was studying to become a rabbi in Yaruwshalaim.

Further, as if He were reading Galatians, God told us that Sha’uwl would be arrogant, circuitous, duplicitous, intoxicating, deceptive, treacherous, and presumptuous – which is the antithesis of being matter-of-fact and straightforward. We were warned that this pseudo-rabbi’s way would be improper, akin to a plague and, thus, deadly. And yet, according to God, Sha’uwl’s broad, and therefore accommodating path would become especially popular with Gentiles because too few would actually question his allusive sayings, his derisive words, his comparisons and counterfeits, which would all be ripe with taunts and ridicule. Yahowah is obviously adept at producing detailed and accurate prophecies. And we are the beneficiaries.

Therefore, Sha’uwl / Paul impugned himself with his perverted rendition of Yahowah’s condemnation of him, twisting the knot that would become his noose. His statement was not only the antithesis of God’s instructions, he engendered Yahowah’s ridicule of him.

Moreover, and apart from the prophecy, if Paul was right in disavowing Yahowah’s standard, it would be the equivalent of God saying: “I will save those who contradict Me and justify those who negate and belittle the plan I have established.” And yet, Yahowah introduced His prophecy in Habakkuk, affirming that He was not about to change. God owns up to His responsibilities and acts accordingly.

Continuing to mislead by way of senseless and duplicitous prose, the KJV renders Paul’s next statement: “And the law is not of faith: but, the man that doeth them shall live in them.” (Galatians 3:12)

Deploying a different tactic, the NLT authored something which could only be considered appropriate in the context of religion. “This way of faith is very different from the way of law, which says, ‘It is through obeying the law that a person has life.’” (Galatians 3:12)

Should the translation team deployed by Tyndale House Publishers, Incorporated have meant that “the way of the Christian faith is very different than the way of the Torah,” then they would be right. But how can that “way of faith” be right when it is contrary to the god who is claimed to have sponsored the replacement? There is no rational way for Paul’s thesis, his faith and religion, to be “very different from the way” delineated by God in the Torah and still reconcile fallen man into a relationship with that same God. God cannot be responsible or trustworthy with a revised plan which is counter to the one He originally authored. This is yet another nail in Sha’uwl / Paul’s coffin and that of his religion, Christianity.

Irrespective of the fact that Yahowah has provided the answer, at least the battle lines have been drawn. According to the most popular modern translation, it is now the Torah vs. Christianity. So let the Great Galatians Debate begin: are we to trust Yahowah’s Towrah or put our faith in Sha’uwl / Paulos / Paul’s but I say…?

Amplified, and with the words Sha’uwl selected on display, the man God just told us to question because his notions are as deadly as a plague, wrote:

“But (de) the Torah (nomou – the allotment which is parceled out, the inheritance which is given, the nourishment which is bestowed to be used to grow, the precepts which are apportioned, established, and received as a means to be proper and approved, and the prescription to become an heir) exists (eimi – is) not (ouk) out of (ek) faith or belief (pistis), but to the contrary (alla –making an emphatic contrast with an adversarial implication), ‘The one having done (o poieomai – the one having made and performed as such becoming) them (autos) will live (zao) with (en – in and by) them (autos).’” (Galatians 3:12)

Recognizing that Paul did not express this thought very well, principally because the Towrah passage he cited didn’t fit his presupposition, we are led to believe that Sha’uwl was suggesting that if an individual were to choose the Towrah over faith, he would have to live with the consequence. He is implying that the only way to live with the Towrah would be to do everything it requires. So since he tried to impugn and usurp God’s credibility to prove his point, we must turn to the passage he referenced to ascertain whether or not Yahowah’s Towrah actually said what Sha’uwl was asserting.

Opening Yahowah’s Towrah to Qara’ / Called Out / Leviticus, we find God imparting the following guidance, whereby we are advised to avoid the kinds of religious myths and practices that comprise Christianity…

“Speak (dabar – communicate using words) to (‘el) the Children of Yisra’el (beny Yisra’el – Sons who Engage and Endure with God), and (wa) say (‘amar –affirm) to them (‘el), ‘I am (‘anky) Yahowah ( – YaHoWaH, pronounced relying upon His ToWRaH | Guidance and HaYaH | existence), your God (‘elohym). (Qara’ / Called Out / Leviticus 18:1-2)

With regard to things which could be considered similar to (ka – as with and like) the practices (ma’aseh – the pattern of behavior, the work, the things done, undertakings, and pursuits) of the realm (‘erets – land) of the Crucibles of Egypt (Mitsraym – of religious, political, military, and economic oppression) where (‘asher) you dwelt (yashab), you should not engage in or act upon (lo’ ‘asah – you should not celebrate or profit from) similar (ka) pursuits (ma’aseh – patterns of behavior, things done, undertakings, and practices) in the land (ba ‘erets) of Kana’any (Kana’any – Zealousness which subdues and subjugates; commonly transliterated Canaan) which is where as a result of the relationship (‘asher), I am (‘anky) bringing you (bow’ ‘esh).

There (sham), you should not act upon or engage in (lo’ ‘asah) their decrees or customs (chuqah – their prescriptions for living and their traditions and statutes), never walking in or following their ways (lo’ halak – never patterning your life after them). (Qara’ / Called Out / Leviticus 18:3)

With (‘eth) My means to exercise good judgment regarding the resolution of disputes (mishpat – My means to decide regarding justice and judgment), you should continually engage and genuinely act (‘asah).

With (‘eth) My prescriptions for living (chuqah – My inscribed recommendations which cut you into the relationship), you should consistently examine and carefully consider (shamar – you should make a habit of consistently and actually observing) for the purpose of approaching by (la) walking in them (halak ba).

I am (‘anky) Yahowah, your God (‘elohym).’” (Qara’ / Called Out / Leviticus 18:4)

This admonition against religion, politics, and societal customs was followed by the statement Paul sought to usurp to justify his inverted proposition on behalf of religion. It reads:

“‘And so (wa) you should choose of your own volition to actually observe (shamar – under the auspices of freewill, you should consider choosing to carefully and completely examine (qal perfect consecutive)), accordingly (‘eth), My prescriptions for living (chuqah – My inscribed (and thus written) instructions which cut you into a relationship (and thus into the Covenant) with Me) and also (wa) My means to resolve disputes (mishpat – My means to exercise good judgment regarding redemption (thereby directing our attention to His seven Invitations to be Called Out and Meet)).

Whoever (‘asher – relationally and beneficially) consistently acts upon and engages (‘asah – endeavors to genuinely celebrate and continually benefit (qal imperfect)) with them (‘eth), that man (ha ‘adam – that individual and person), indeed (wa – emphasizing this), is actually restored to life as a result of this desire and his decision, living (wa chayah – he is literally revived, perfectly renewed, actually nurtured, completely spared, and kept alive into perpetuity through this exercise of freewill, raised, preserved, and allowed to flourish (qal perfect consecutive)) through them (ba – with and by them).

I am (‘any) Yahowah ().’” (Qara’ / Called Out / Leviticus 18:5)

Yahowah, who just so happens to be God, is telling all who would listen that, if people want to live, they should pay attention to what He has to say and then act upon His advice. And at this point, everything He had to say, everything He had to offer, was contained in the very book in which this appeal was recorded: His Towrah!

Therefore, Paul has once again deliberately abbreviated and misappropriated a pronouncement from God which was inconsistent with his message. He was hoping that, by pilfering some common words, his errant citation would be sufficient to convince his uninformed audience that God supported his contrarian position.

But in the actual citation, God absolutely and unequivocally did not say that the “law is very different than faith,” that “through faith a person has life,” or even “through obeying the law a person has life,” or anything remotely similar to these propositions. Paul was, therefore, being disingenuous to put it politely.

Surprising to many, there isn’t a Hebrew word for “obey.” Shama’, which is routinely misrepresented as such actually means “to listen.” And to “shamar – observe” is to “examine and consider,” not “keep.” Further, to ‘asah is “to act and engage.” Collectively, Yahowah is encouraging us to respond to what we can learn from Him – a concept that is light-years removed from “obedience.” Moreover, neither “chuqah – prescriptions for living” nor “mishpat – the means offered to resolve disputes by exercising good judgment” could be considered “laws.” Instead, Yahowah stated that by observing, which is to closely examine and carefully consider His written instructions, we are able to make reasoned decisions regarding the restoration of our lives. Therefore, God “chayah – restores and renews the lives” of those who are Towrah-observant when they act upon what they have read. This is, of course, the antithesis of the Christian position.

While we are making such distinctions, it is grotesquely inappropriate to refer to Yahowah’s Torah as “law,” as Paul does throughout his letters. The Hebrew word towrah is derived from yarah and means “source from which teaching, instruction, direction, and guidance flow.” Yahowah’s presentation is educational. His witness is enlightening. He is offering guidance which we are free to embrace or reject, so He is not controlling. Moreover, His way is not restrictive but, instead, liberating.

Rabbis, like Paul (who was dismissed from Pharisee school), deliberately perverted Yah’s testimony to validate their own set of laws – a set of religious arguments recorded principally in the Talmud. By referring to the Towrah as nomos within contexts that imply “law,” Paul, who was educated in Hebrew, demonstrated that he should not be trusted.

Those who would argue that Gospel Jesus refers to the Towrah as “nomos” in the Sermon on the Mount would be inaccurate. First, the only properly attested and inspired Instruction on the Mount was presented by Dowd’s son, Shalomoh | Solomon, at the dedication ceremony of Yahowah’s Home for the Covenant Family atop Mount Mowryah – which is the only Mount which matters. On the eve of Yowm Kipurym | the Day of Reconciliations in year 3008 Yah / 960 BCE, with the completed Temple gleaming in the background, Shalomoh spoke to Yisra’el about what I am doing for you today. It was duly recorded in 2 Chronicles 6:32-33, and reads…

“Therefore (wa gam), regarding the Nakry | Observant and Discerning Foreigner from a different ethnicity and geographic location, who will come to understand (ha nakry – someone from a different place and culture, speaking a different language, who, having paid attention, will comprehend; from nakar – to become acquainted, recognize, and acknowledge something which deserves the highest regard and respect by being attentive and astute), who, to show the way to the benefits of the relationship (‘asher), is not of your people (lo’ min ‘am ‘atah), this Yisra’el (Yisra’el huw’), he will come (wa bow’) from a faraway country in a distant time (min ‘erets rachowq) for the express purpose of being a Witness and providing answers regarding (lama’an) Your (‘atah) tremendous (ha gadowl) name (shem) and Your hand (wa yad ‘atah) as the influential, empowered, and resolute defender (ha chazaq), and (wa) as one sowing the seeds which will take root and grow (zarowa’ huw’) whom You have extended (‘atah ha natah). When he arrives on the scene to pursue this (wa bow’), then (wa) he will help interested parties reconcile their relationship by providing the information needed to make a reasoned decision (palal) regarding the Family (‘el ha beyth ha zeh). (Dabarym ha Yowmym 6:32)

When you hear it out of the heavens, coming from the atmosphere, listen to what comes out of the spiritual realm by way of the sky (wa ‘atah shama’ min ha shamaym), within the location where you live (min makown yashab ‘atah), then engage and act accordingly, choosing of your own accord to do everything (wa ‘asah ka kol) which, to show the way (‘asher), the Nakry | Observant Foreigner from a different ethnicity and geographic location who understands, this man from a another place and culture, speaking a language other than Hebrew, who is uniquely discerning (ha nakry) has invited you to read (qara’ ‘el ‘atah), for the express purpose of being a Witness, who provides answers such that (lama’an) all peoples of the Earth (kol ‘am ha ‘erets) will have a genuine and ongoing opportunity to become familiar with Yada’, to know, acknowledge, accept, and understand (yada’) Your name (‘eth shem ‘atah), coming to respect and revere You (wa la yare’ ‘eth ‘atah) simultaneously along with (ka) Your people (‘am ‘atah), Yisra’el (Yisra’el).

And also, so that (wa la) they may know (yada’) that, truthfully (ky), Your Family and this House (‘al ha beyth ha zeh), which to reveal the correct path to walk to give life meaning that (‘asher) I have built for the Family (banah), are designated and called (qara’) by Your name (shem ‘atah).” (Dabarym ha Yowmym / Words of the Days / 2nd Chronicles 6:33)

Second, the speech presented in Matthew 5-7 was plagiarized from an ‘Ebownym | Ebonite text recording this and other proclamations spoken by Dowd and recorded in Hebrew. In subsequent chapters, rest assured, I will detail the evidence affirming these conclusions.

Moreover, as we shall soon discover, the etymological history of nomos is somewhat harmonious with the Covenant’s purpose as it is presented in the Towrah, which is “to parcel out an allotment and to bestow an inheritance, providing prescriptions regarding how to become an heir.”

Paul, however, cannot be afforded any excuse. And that is because all of his letters, including Galatians, were originally written in Greek, and there is no mistaking the fact that he was mischaracterizing the Towrah, errantly presenting it as a punitive set of “laws.” Further, he did so in accord with Rabbinic Judaism – a religious proposition Yahowah disdains for having separated Him and His Son from their people.

These things known, there is much more to nomos than meets the eye of the casual observer. The word is based upon “nemo – to provide, assign, and distribute an inheritance and to nourish heirs.” It is “an allotment which is bestowed and parceled out to feed hungry sheep.” Metaphorically then, the etymological root of nomos long ago spoke of a prescription for living which led to children being fed and growing up to receive an inheritance. Therefore, when properly defined, nomos provides a somewhat fitting depiction of Yahowah’s Towrah | Teaching, Guidance, Direction, and Instruction on how to participate in His Covenant Family. However, throughout the Christian New Testament, nomos is consistently used to cast Yahowah’s Towrah in a negative light. So, it is readily apparent that the authors were not trying to reflect any of these positive attributes.

That said, Yahowah describes both Greece and Rome as Beasts who are counter to His people, so He would have no interest in communicating through the language of the Adversary. Moreover, when conveying thoughts written in different languages, the proper approach is to translate words and transliterate names and titles – of which Towrah is both. Sha’uwl / Paulos failed in this regard. But he was not alone. This analysis demonstrates that religious Bible translators, following Paul’s bad example, have knowingly and deliberately mistranslated both nomos and Towrah as “Law.” Recognizing this, lexicons published by Christian institutions claim that nomos describes “anything established as a custom, a law or command, any law whatsoever, a rule or injunction, even Mosaic law and the Pentateuch.”

Moving on to the next convoluted statement from the plague’s poison pen as it is presented in the Nestle-Aland, we find, NA: “Christ us brought out from the curse of the law having become on behalf of us a curse because it has been written, ‘curse on all the one having hung on wood.’”

The King James Version more accurately conveys Paul’s appalling attack on God, KJV: “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:” (3:13)

Once again, if either the Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear or the King James Version has accurately reflected Paul’s thought then, according to Sha’uwl, the Torah is a curse. For this interpretation of Paul’s statement to be correct, rather than fulfilling the Towrah, the mythical Jesus liberated Christians from its clutches.

It would also mean that Dowd, rather than being the perfect Passover Lamb as a result of observing the Towrah, embodied all of the Torah’s negativity. Even worse, according to Paul, his “Christ” was burdened by the Towrah rather than our sins.

To suggest that his position is irrational would be too kind. It means, at least according to Paul, that the only actual sinner in this story is God – the Author of the Towrah. To believe Paul, the Christian Messiah died to remove Yahowah’s torturous attack on humanity. And if that were not sufficiently insane to make you walk away, shaking your head in disbelief, Paul is quoting this same errant and troublesome god to support his agenda. He even claims that this sinful, inept, and sadistic god inspired this condemnation of his testimony. So how is it that 2.5 billion people believe Sha’uwl | Paul, relying upon the illogical notion that he is right and God is wrong?

Attempting to absolve Paul of the untenable position he has been placed in by his own rhetoric, as reflected in the Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear and the King James Version, the New Living Translation twists the text to convey a different perspective, NLT: “But Christ has rescued us from the curse pronounced by the law. When he was hung on the cross, he took upon himself the curse for our wrongdoing. For it is written in the Scriptures, ‘Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.’” (3:13)

To the New Living Translation’s shame, there is no reference to a “cross” anywhere in the Greek texts, much less in this passage. To Sha’uwl’s | Paul’s shame, the Torah’s position should not have been abridged, misappropriated, or misquoted. While the Torah’s prediction is profoundly accurate and prophetic, its merit was profaned by the way Paul truncated it.

But first things first: here is how the Greek text of Sha’uwl’s letter reads:

“Christos (ΧΡΣ – placeholder [written by Paul or added by a scribe]) us (ego) bought back (exagorazomai – worked to atone and purchase; from ek, out of, and agarazo, doing business in the marketplace where (agora) people assemble for a public debate, to buy, sell, and vote) from (ek) the curse (katara – from the evil, hateful, abhorrent, loathsome, maligning, and malicious influence) of the (tov) Torah (nomou – the means to being nourished by that which is bestowed to become heirs, precepts which were apportioned, established, and received as a means to proper and be approved, and prescriptions for an inheritance; from nemo – that which is provided, assigned, and distributed to heirs to nourish them (singular genitive, and thus a specific characterization of what is the Towrah)), having become (ginomai – having existed as) for our sake (hyper ego) a curse (katara – a repugnant prayer, invoking the power to harm others by wishing evil upon them, maligning and malicious), because (hoti) it has been written (grapho – inscribed): ‘A curse on (epikataratos – being exposed to divine slander and vengeance) all (pas) the one (o) having hung (kremamai – suspended) on (epi) wood (xylon).’” (Galatians 3:13)

According to the founder of the Christian religion, Yahowah’s “Torah is abhorrent and detestable, evil and hateful, abhorrent and loathsome, maligning and malicious in its influence because it is a damning curse.” From Sha’uwl’s perspective, God’s Word is “cruel and repugnant.” Moreover, instead of the Messiah observing the Towrah, affirming and fulfilling it as he, himself, attests in his Psalms, according to Paul, God opted to engage in a business transaction whereby He has ransomed us, not from religious and political guilt but instead from the evil nature of the Torah.

It is difficult to imagine the darkness that would have to come over a person to prompt them to promote such a demonic deception. But perhaps one thing is becoming clear, Sha’uwl told the truth when he admitted to being goaded and possessed by one of Satan’s demons. But even then, why would so many Christians blindly swallow this debilitating venom?

I suppose it is because, like all spellbinding deceivers before and after him, Paul continues to weave a few credible threads through his evil tapestry. By citing God (actually misquoting Him), Sha’uwl’s lies appear plausible among the ignorant and irrational.

In reality, the redemption of the Covenant’s children is predicated upon Yahowah and Dowd working together to honor the Towrah’s promises through the Miqra’ey | Invitations to be Called Out and Meet. The Messiah’s sacrifices on Pesach and Matsah, apart from the Towrah, are meaningless. There would have been no reason for these Feasts to exist, nor any benefit to be derived from the Passover Lamb’s sacrifice or subsequent sojourn to She’owl unless Dowd’s basar | corporeal body and nepesh | soul and consciousness served a purpose, such as fulfilling the promise of eternal life associated with Passover and of perfection derived from UnYeasted Bread in harmony with the Towrah’s instructions.

Beyond the audacity of negating the Miqra’ey, condemning the Towrah, and replacing Dowd with a mythical misnomer, Sha’uwl has his dates wrong, as do rabbis even today. Pesach provides an extension of life while Matsah perfects. It was during the fulfillment of UnYeasted Bread that the collective religious and political guilt of the Covenant Family was removed, placed upon Dowd’s nepesh | soul and discarded in She’owl, never to be seen again. The confusion over what these days represent, who fulfilled them, and why is disheartening.

Especially incredulous, Sha’uwl is attempting to demean and dismiss the Towrah while pretending to speak on behalf of its Author. There is no rational way to position God in opposition to His own Guidance or His Son’s sacrifice. It is preposterous.

The statement Sha’uwl | Paul misquoted to discredit the Towrah comes from the Towrah, this time from Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 21:23. The passage reads…

“Indeed when (wa ky) it comes to pass over time (hayah) that, by association (ba), an individual (‘ysh – a Man) is judged to be guilty to resolve disputes (chata’ mishpat – it is decided, determined, and thought that he is liable for his religious and political guilt, in order to judge that which is) worthy of death (maweth), and he chooses to be dispatched to the realm of the dead (wa muwth – he passively allows himself to be slain so as to be absent from life, completely fulfilling the penalty (hophal stem perfect conjugation consecutive mood)), then (wa) you decide to literally suspend him (talah ‘eth – you want to hang him by fastening him (qal perfect consecutive)) on (‘al) a wooden timber (‘ets – an upright pillar of wood or tree), his corpse shall not remain overnight (lo’ lyn nabelah – his body must not endure the night, staying there after sunset) on the upright pillar of wood (‘al ha ‘ets – near the wooden post or tree).

Rather instead (ky – truthfully and certainly), you should prepare and entomb his body (qabar qabar – it is essential that you place his body in a sepulcher) on this same day (ba ha yowm ha huw’). Indeed because (ky), the One being suspended (talah – the one being hanged) is the maligned and abated of (qalalah – the cursed who fades away as a result of an oath and is diminished, slighted, and decreased (in the construct form, the abated and diminished is being associated with and is connected with and bound to)) God Almighty (‘elohym).

So you should not defile (wa lo’ tame’ – you should not cause to be unclean), accordingly (‘eth), your soil (‘adamah – your land, realm, and world; from ‘adam – mankind and human nature), which relationally and beneficially (‘asher) Yahowah (), your God (‘elohym), gave (nathan – produced, offered, and bestowed) to you (la – for you to approach) as an inheritance (nachalah – to become an heir).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 21:22-23)

This is a prophetic picture of the fulfillment of Chag Matsah, beginning with Pesach while including Matsah. Dowd spoke of this in his Mizmowr and Yasha’yah developed it further in his prophetic portrayal. In this case, after introducing us to Dowd in the 18th chapter of Dabarym, Yahowah inspired Moseh to reveal that Dowd’s body should not be taken off of the wooden timber upon which he was crucified and then buried. This is for two reasons. First, the Towrah clearly states that the remains of the Lamb’s body are to be incinerated, not buried. And second, since the guilt of every Covenant member was being laden upon Dowd, he wanted it taken to the place of eternal separation, not buried in Israel.

Just as it was Dowd who was predicted to come after Moseh in Dabarym, it was Dowd, the returning King of Israel, who is now shown in Dabarym subjecting his body to be condemned on Passover so that his soul could enter the realm of the dead in She’owl on UnYeasted Bread. It is one of many profound statements which affirm Moseh’s prophetic credentials.

Yahowah uses prophecies like this one, and thousands more like it, to prove that He inspired His Towrah wa Naby’. He did this so that we would be able to trust everything else He has to say. Only God can get every prophecy right, every time, without fail.

In Roger Miller’s song, King of the Road, where the refrain repeats “I’m a man of means by no means,” Paul’s methodology is easily exposed. By simply separating clauses, he is creating a false impression. Using this example, while the country artist sang “I am a man of means,” when that statement is disassociated from “by no means,” without the negation, the initial phrase isn’t just misleading, it’s wrong. Similarly, “by no means” independent of “I’m a man of means” could be deployed by an unscrupulous individual to negate anything in the song. But that technique is disingenuous.

Since Paul is not misrepresenting the sentiments of a country song but, instead, misappropriating and misconstruing the Word of God by falsely conveying the impression that He was affirming the disillusion of His own words, Sha’uwl | Paul is disrespecting both God and his audience. Yahowah is not amused and has put us on notice that such tactics are deceitful, deadly, and damning, which is why He condemned Sha’uwl by name for corrupting His testimony. But what about his audience, what about the billions upon billions of Christians? Paul was demon-possessed, but what is their excuse?

Thus far, I have proven that Paul cannot be trusted. We now know that the King James Version is unreliable and inaccurate and that the New Living Translation is not a translation of the Greek text but, instead, a religious paraphrase, a novelized reinterpretation of the text, whereby its authors became storytellers. To its credit, the NLT reads smoothly, and it tickles the ears of the evangelical Christian audience, which is why I suppose it has become so popular. But as a study tool, other than to affirm Christian interpretations of Pauline Doctrine, it is of no practical use and is deliberately misleading.

We have learned that Paul has misappropriated and misconstrued the Towrah and Prophets with the intent to deceive, with diabolical results. All four of Sha’uwl’s citations thus far were cleverly abridged. They were deliberately taken out of context and then purposefully altered to make it appear as if Paul’s proposition and God’s testimony were in sync. One time would have been inexcusable but removing clauses from the Towrah and Naby’ and corrupting them became a bad habit.

Paul’s propensity to be disingenuous became epidemic – a plague that Christians have come to ingest to justify their religious views. It is also curious, indeed telling, that, when considered as a whole, each of the four statements Sha’uwl | Paul misrepresented resolutely affirmed the Towrah’s enduring promise to resolve the conflicts which separate people from Yahowah. Each of God’s declarations undermined and condemned Pauline Doctrine and thus the Christian religion.

This means that Paulos had no respect for his audience. He played Christians for fools because he believed they would be easy to fool. And nothing has changed.

I do not say this to insult the religious, but to help those who are not religious realize that what I am sharing is true. Christianity has been a blight on humanity and a curse to Jews because it seeks to hide the most important of all truths. And knowing this is the essential first step to vindication and reconciliation.

As we are witnessing, Sha’uwl was so confident that his audience would not dare question him that he flaunted his association with Satan, admitting that he was not only demon-possessed, but that he had been goaded into hyperbole by the Adversary’s emissary. Are you surprised? Did this catch you unaware?

It should not have. After all, there have been thousands of sermons pondering the implications of Paul’s “thorn in the flesh.” And yet nary a one of Paul’s advocates conveys the specific and unabashed answer Paulos, himself, scribed in his second of two letters to Corinth, when he infamously wrote:

“Because (gar – for indeed) if (ean) I might want (thelo – I may decide, desire, propose, or enjoy) to brag (dauchaomai – to boast and to glorify myself) truthfully (aletheia – honestly), I would not be (ouk esomai) foolish or imprudent (aphron – acting rashly without reason, inappropriate or unjustified).

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

Therefore (dio – it should be self-evident), in order that (hina – for the purpose that) I not become overly proud and be lifted up (me hyperairomai – I not become conceited, exalting myself beyond what would be justified, so as not to be insolent, audaciously lifting myself above the source of my inspiration), there was given to me (didomi ego – there was deposited upon me, allowing me to experience, there was granted and entrusted to me for my advantage) a sharp goad and troubling thorn (skolops – a sharp pointed prod used to control animals, featuring a poisonous scorpion’s stinger) in the body (te sarx – incorporated into the flesh and as an aspect of physical animal and human nature), a messenger (angelos – a spiritual envoy or demonic spirit) of Satan (Satan – a transliteration of satan, Hebrew for the Adversary), in order to (hina – so as to) strike and restrain me (kolaphizo – adversely harm, beat, and torment me, violently mistreating me to painfully afflict, attack, buffet, and batter me; from kolazo – to prune, control, check, curb, and restrain me), so that as a result (hina) at the present time there is the possibility that I might not be conceited, currently exalting myself beyond what would be justified, lifting myself up (me hyperairomai – I may not be overly proud or excessively exalted or lifted up, overdoing it, so as to be insolent and audacious (scribed in the present tense, meaning at this time, in the passive voice, affirming that this is being done to him, with the subjective mood revealing that this outcome is a mere possibility, and in the first-person singular, thereby identifying Paulos as the one being possessed and controlled)).” (2 Corinthians 12:6-7)

As bad as this is, and this is as bad as bad ever gets, especially if you are a Christian and have entrusted your soul based upon this man’s testimony, it may be even worse when considered from the perspective of Sha’uwl’s “conversion experience.” On the road to Damascus, he claims to have heard the “flashing light” speak to him. In a desperate attempt to prove his qualification, and thus justify his exaggerated “revelations,” under oath, Paulos testified...

“And every one (te pas) of us (emon) having fallen down (katapipto – having descended from one level to another, lower one) to the earth (eis ten ge), I heard (akouo – I paid attention, listening, comprehending, and obeying) a voice (phone – a sound, crying out) saying to me (lego pros ego – speaking according to me) in the (te) Hebrew (Hebrais) language (dialektos), ‘Sha’uwl, Sha’uwl (Saoul, Saoul – a transliteration of the Hebrew name, Sha’uwl, meaning “Question Him,” a designation synonymous with She’owl – the pit of the dead), Why (tis) are you actually pursuing me (dioko me – are you following me, really striving with such intense effort to reach me, hastening and zealously running toward me)? It’s hard (skleros – it’s demanding and difficult, even rough, harsh, violent, and cruel, especially offensive and intolerable) for you (soi) to kick against (laktizo – to resist, to strike with the heel) against (pros) the goad (kentron – a pointed sharp stick used to prick and prod and thus control animals featuring the stinger of a deadly scorpion with the power to ruin and kill, making resistance vain or perilous)).” (Acts 26:14)

While it may be surprising, even this gets worse in context, because the line “It is hard to resist the goad” was plagiarized from a line attributed to the Greek god, Dionysus – the pagan deity whose doctrine was largely integrated into Christianity to make it appealing and popular among Greeks and Romans. This is the most memorable line of Euripedes’ Bacchae, dating to 405 BCE. Dionysus’ line pronouncement reads: “I would sacrifice to the god rather than kick against his goad in anger, a mortal against a god.” That is to say, standing up against a god is something no mortal should attempt.

Also, at this time, and by his own admission, Sha’uwl was doing this very thing. He was striking anyone who admitted that Yahowah was God, that the Towrah was His Guidance, that the Miqra’ey save us, and that Dowd served as the Passover Lamb. He became a “mortal against God.”

There is no way to discount Sha’uwl’s assault against God, to reject his admission of guilt, or to negate his admission of being demon-possessed. His confession to the latter at the conclusion of 2nd Corinthians is duly recorded in Papyrus 46, a late 1st- or early 2nd-century codex. If that witness is not reliable, the entire Christian New Testament becomes untenable, because there are no older or more credible codices than P46.

If you are a Christian, you must deal with this by rejecting all of Paul’s letters as demonically inspired, and then discarding the whole of the New Testament as being similarly suspect. Or, of course, you could put your head in the sand, and be religious, which would now be akin to being irrational. At this point, you can no longer claim ignorance – nor should you.

It should now be obvious that Paul was as described – a wolf in sheep’s clothing. He deliberately lied with the intent to deceive while claiming to speak for God. And while that was relatively common then as it is today, it is frankly unbelievable that this man’s fraudulent propositions are considered inspired.

If you are religious, are you going to remain a victim? Are you open to knowing the truth? Can you handle the truth? Do you want the truth?

Before we move on, let’s pause a moment and consider the options at our disposal regarding Paul’s strategy – that of misappropriating and misquoting, even errantly translating then corrupting Yahowah’s Towrah and Prophets to promote his agenda. You can ignore his malfeasance if you believe that I have misrepresented Paul’s or Yahowah’s statements. But this approach is easily resolved. Flip forward to the “Towrah – Teaching and Guidance” chapter of Twistianity where every Hebrew and Greek word delineated in these statements is presented so that you can do your own due diligence and verify the text and the translations for yourself. Or simpler yet, just compare standard English translations of these passages and Sha’uwl’s quotations and note the differences.

Since the option to dismiss this problem is a nonstarter, the faithful can accept the fact that the citations are different but attribute their divergence to an inadvertent mistake on Paul’s part. But if you do, you must also abandon the notion that Paul’s letters are the inerrant Word of God. And with that realization, the foundation of Christianity crumbles.

You can admit that there is a pattern of malfeasance with regard to all of Paul’s Towrah citations and recognize that they are misquoted and then twisted to support his agenda, which means that he intended to misrepresent God’s testimony. But if you take this path, you will be compelled to label Paul a false witness. And at that point, Christianity becomes fraudulent – one of many popular and broad paths leading to destruction.

Since these options are devastating, you could blame the mistakes on scribal error, suggesting that Paul’s quotations from the Torah and Prophets were correct initially, but that over time copyists inadvertently misrepresented his words, creating a false impression. But this is a slippery slope. The oldest meaningful codex of the Christian “New Testament” is Papyrus 46, which is dated between 85 and 125 CE, thirty-five to seventy-five years after this epistle was scribed. The codex contains a complete copy of almost all of Paul’s letters. If it is not reliable, then nothing in the Christian New Testament is reliable. There is only one other 2nd-century witness, Papyrus 75, which covers Luke and John, and it was scribed nearly one hundred years thereafter. Therefore, if scribes significantly altered Paul’s letters during this relatively short period of time, the list of appropriately supported and textually unaltered New Testament books would shrink to two: portions of Luke and John. The rest, based as they are on far less reliable and far more recent manuscripts, would be too suspect to believe. And of course, that would mean that the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms would still stand unchallenged.

Or you can take the quietly popular, albeit seldom articulated Christian position regarding these misquotes – one derived from Marcion in the early 2nd century. He concurred with Paul and concluded that the God who inspired the Torah was mean-spirited and no longer relevant. It is a position which many Christians hold, even if they are too timid to voice it. As such, Marcion attempted to nullify the Torah by encapsulating it within a collection which he, following Paul’s lead, labeled the “Old Testament” and thus suggested that it was the will of a now deceased or, at least, irrelevant deity.

The wealthy merchant trader, Marcion of Sinope, promoted the myth that Paul was the only true Apostle, and that he alone spoke for the new and improved god of his “New Testament.” Paul’s letters were canonized as a result – a collection that included his epistles and edited portions of Luke and Acts. Thereby, Sha’uwl of Tarsus, now Paulos of Rome, was positioned and purported to correct the errors that the old God of the Jews had made. As a result, Paul’s new faith separated believers from Yahowah, from His Towrah – Teaching and Guidance, His Beryth | Covenant, His Miqra’ey | Invitations to be Called Out and Meet, from the Chosen People, and the Promised Land.



Twistianity

Appalling

…Contradicting God

5

Grapho | It is Written

Invalidate or Fulfill?…

The truth is as obvious as the lie was apparent. Forming a relationship with God is predicated upon our response to Yahowah’s testimony, not Paul’s corruptions and denunciations of it. The comparison is between the light of every star in the heavens to the black hole in the pit of hell.

Christians were shortchanged by the master swindler. But don’t expect to be reimbursed since his shekels were stolen from the Jews.

The author of Twistianity did something Yahowah considers far more egregious than the scheme Satan perpetrated long ago in the Garden when the Serpent misrepresented His instructions to lead mankind away from Him. This time, in the Christian New Testament, the Devil’s Advocate robbed God’s Beloved Son of his acclaim and achievements, replacing the Messiah with a religious myth, all while stealing what was due His people.

It is a crime so appalling the recompense will be suitably terrifying. Everyone associated with the conception or promotion of Replacement Theology will live to regret the anguish they have caused God and His Family.

Not that I care, but it is germane to Sha’uwl’s story to recognize that the Father of Lies also misquoted Gospel Jesus – contradicting his own myth. In the 4th chapter of the first book comprising the New Testament, the misnomer Jesus is cited saying something that impugns the man who had claimed to have been appointed by him, settling this issue for those who prefer to receive spiritual advice from other than a con artist. According to Iesou / Jesus, Sha’uwl / Paulos misspoke when he maligned the Towrah.

“But then (de – providing a contrast), the One (o) having become the answer (apokrinomai – the one who revealed the means to separate fact from fiction, to distinguish between truth and deceit; from apo – to separate and krino – to separate again), said (lego – clarified, providing meaning using words), ‘It has been written (grapho – it has been inscribed on a document, engraved in writing, and recorded using letters and words), “Not upon (ouk ep) bread (artos – a baked loaf of bread with yeast which aerates, food in general, that which raises up from the ground, is elevated, or lifted up; from airo – to rise up from the ground, to take upon oneself, carry away, and carry off, removing that which had once been associated) alone, by itself, without help (monos – only by himself, forsaken, merely, and destitute of help), will man live (zao o anthropos – will this one man reliably conduct his life in a particular manner to actually restore life (future middle indicative)), but (alla – certainly, making an emphatic contrast) upon (epi) every (pas – the whole and complete) spoken statement (rhema – verbal declaration) departing (ekporeuomai – going forth and proceeding, leading and guiding) through (dia) the mouth (stoma – the spoken communication) of God (ΘΥ – a placeholder for Theos / God).”’” (Matthew 4:4)

In this context, Gospel Jesus was supposedly debating Satan, Sha’uwl’s inspiration. The Devil, as he had with Adam and Chawah in the Garden of Eden, was shown tempting Iesou as the story unfolds. Using the same ploy originally tested in the Garden, the same strategy now on display throughout Galatians, the Adversary inverted the intent of God’s testimony by removing it from its context and twisting it to convey the wrong impression.

Playing off of a similar circumstance, when the Children of Yisra’el were hungry in the wilderness, Yahowah miraculously fed them with manna, considered to be the bread of heaven. Now after allegedly spending forty days in the wilderness, the assumption is that the Jesus character would have been hungry, so why not turn a stone into bread and take a bite?

But this was ordinary bread. It was artos, which is bread puffed up by carbon dioxide, which is the residue of fermenting yeast. This fungus would be equated to religious and political corruption, suggesting someone put Dowd’s words into Jesus’ mouth.

“Come on,” you can almost hear the Serpent pleading as he had 4,000 years earlier, “take a bite. What’s it going to hurt to ingest a little corruption?” Well, since Satan would have been aware that Dowd would be serving as the Passover Lamb, had he done so, it would have corrupted him, causing him to be less than perfect, and thus disqualified to save others. There was a lot at stake.

But, unlike Chawah six millennia ago from our perspective, Dowd (playing along under the assumption that a kernel of this story was true) was exceedingly knowledgeable and knew the Word of God. He had written extensively about it in his Mizmowr | Psalms – particularly the 119th which is a celebration of the Towrah. So, he is shown to have cited it accurately to forestall the Adversary’s agenda – even if his citation was errantly cast upon another man’s lips. Dowd, thereby, reaffirmed the example he had set throughout his life. The Towrah is the antidote for Satan’s poison. But of course, to wield it, we must know it.

Should there be any truth to this story, then Dowd, recast as Gospel Jesus, cited a passage from Moseh, a fellow Zarowa’. It is found in Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy – his favorite and mine. It was applicable to this situation, just as it is ideally suited to demonstrate that Paulos lied when claiming to have spoken for God when he denounced the Towrah, inferring that God’s testimony was a lifeless and enslaving curse with the power to condemn but not save.

Dowd, recast as Iesou, disagreed with the imposter, and siding with Yahowah against Sha’uwl, is alleged to have said: “Not upon bread alone, by itself, without help, will this man live, but upon every spoken statement departing through the mouth of Yahowah.” (Matthew 4:4)

Life, therefore, is the result of Yahowah’s testimony. What’s more, Yahowah speaks in first person in His Towrah and throughout His prophets. So not only do Yahowah’s Torah, His Prophets, and Dowd’s Psalms represent the entire reservoir of Godly proclamations at the time this answer was provided, and not only was this specific citation from the Towrah, Paul’s first letter wouldn’t be written for another twenty years, excluding it from consideration.

One of the many differences between God’s Word and Paul’s epistles is that Yahowah speaks for Himself in His Torah and Prophets, but it is Paul, not God, who is found continually speaking in first person throughout his epistles. And this is relevant because even Gospel Jesus correlated life with the words which had come from Yahowah.

This realization is the antithesis of the Pauline style. Therefore, there would be no possibility of an informed and rational person interpreting this statement to correspond with anything Paul would subsequently say or write to undermine it.

Ultimately, Dowd “became the answer.” He “apokrinomai – revealed the means to separate fact from fiction, to distinguish between truth and deceit.” Apokrinomai is from apo – to separate and krino – to separate again. More specifically, krino means “to separate in the sense of distinguishing between fact and fiction, discriminating between right and wrong, choosing between good and evil.” To krino is “to examine and consider evidence to determine what is reliable and proper.” To krino is “to exercise good judgment by separating that which can be trusted from that which cannot. It is about “discretion.”

When the Messiah arrived three years in advance of his fulfillment of Chag Matsah in 33 CE, he was the living embodiment of the Towrah, the Word of God in the flesh. By observing the Towrah, by acting upon the Towrah’s Guidance, and by engaging in accordance with Yahowah’s Instructions, he affirmed that the Towrah is the means to know Yahowah, to participate in a relationship with Him, to life and to reconciliation.

So Christians, since this was Gospel Jesus’ first recorded statement, and he is depicted renouncing Paul’s thesis, what is your excuse?

With this affirmation that the Towrah is the antidote for Pauline Doctrine, let’s consider the passage that the Messiah, albeit miscast as Jesus, cited. In context, Moseh is talking with the Children of Yisra’el after they had spent forty years in the wilderness…

“You benefited from His response (wa ‘anah – He answered you in a way which you could choose to take advantage of on an ongoing basis (in the piel stem we are the beneficiaries of God’s answer, in the imperfect conjugation the response provides ongoing assistance, and in the consecutive mood, we can choose to respond)) which is why (wa) He wanted you to be hungry (ra’eb – He decided you would benefit if He developed your appetite (in the hifil stem God brought about their longing for nutrition, in the imperfect He caused it to be ongoing, and in the consecutive mood it was God’s will)) so He could feed you (wa ‘akal – so He might fulfill His desire to provide your ongoing substance, continuously nourishing you) with (‘eth) the (ha) mana (man – a nourishing and sweet-tasting nectar from God considered to be the bread of life; from mah – an interrogative asking what is this and what does it mean) which (‘asher) you did not know (lo’ yada’ – you were actually and completely unaware). And also (wa) your fathers (‘ab) could not have known (lo’ yada’) so as (ma’an – for the express purpose and intent) to make known to you (yada’ – to enable you to know and to become known) that, indeed (ky), not upon (lo’ al) bread (ha lechem – a baked loaf of bread with yeast and food in general; from lechem – that which can be adversarial) alone (la bad – by itself, separated or isolated) shall man continually live and actually be restored to life (chayah ha ‘adam – will humankind have life consistently and genuinely, preserved by being continually nurtured and restored), but (ky – indeed rather) upon (‘al) everything (kol) which flows out of (mowtsa’ – which travels forth, leading and guiding every incremental stage of a journey demonstrating the proper path through life; from yatsa’ – to go forth, leading us out by way of) the mouth (peh – the communication and spoken word) of Yahowah (YaHoWaH) shall man continually live and actually be restored to life (chayah ha ‘adam – will humankind have life, consistently and genuinely preserved by being continually nurtured and restored).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 8:3)

Unlike Paul, he cited the complete statement from the Towrah. The quote was not removed from a discussion that was perfectly suited to affirm God’s guidance. This quotation answered the specific question being posed. It made the correlation between life and God’s testimony.

Since this is an important contrast between the speaker, who was likely Dowd, and Sha’uwl, and since their approaches to the Word of God are considerably different, let’s examine Dabarym / Words 8:3 in context. Moseh, the man Yahowah asked to scribe His Towrah, was reminiscing about what the Children of Yisra’el had heard, observed, learned, and experienced together over the preceding forty years…

“All of (kol) the terms and conditions (mitswah – the insights pondered regarding the instructions of the relationship, the directions associated with the covenant) which beneficially (‘asher – for the sake of the relationship and to show the way) I (‘anky) have instructed (tsawah – have provided by way of directions and guidance) this day (ha yowm) are for you to genuinely choose to observe (shamar – for you to want to closely examine and carefully consider, electing to consistently and literally focus upon (the qal stem encourages us to literally and actually focus, the imperfect conjugation reveals that our observations should be ongoing and continual, and the paragogic nun ending makes our examination volitional and thus subject to freewill)) for the purpose of approaching (la) by actually responding and engaging (‘asah – through acting upon, profiting from, and celebrating what you learn) so that (ma’an – for the intent and purpose of) you elect to continuously live (chayah – you capitalize upon freewill and are actually restored, your life preserved (the qal stem reveals that our response to what we observe literally restores our life, the imperfect conjugation demonstrates that our nourishment, growth, and preservation will be ongoing, while the paragogic nun ending makes eternal life thus subject to freewill)).

And in addition (wa) you can choose to be great, actually increasing in every possible way (rabah – you can elect to have every aspect of your nature multiplied (the qal stem affirms that this promise to make us greater than we are is reliable, the perfect conjugation tells us that the transformation will be complete, and the consecutive mood reveals that we are empowered as a result of our choice to observe and respond)) so that you will be pleased when you arrive (wa bow’ – you will come to and be thrilled to be completely included in) and also so that (wa) you will become an heir (yarash – you will be given a complete inheritance as a child choosing to receive all that is his or her father’s to provide) within (‘eth – in accord with) the realm (ha ‘erets) which beneficially (‘asher – as a result of the relationship) Yahowah (Yahowah – a transliteration of , our ‘elowah – God as directed by His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) promised in a sworn oath (shaba’ – affirmed reliably in association with the promise of seven) to (la) your fathers (‘ab – your ancestors and forefathers). (Dabarym 8:1)

Also (wa), you should choose to remember (zakar – you should actually want to recall every aspect of) everything associated with (kol – the entirety of) the beneficial way to the relationship (ha derek ‘asher – the specific and proper path to get the most out of life) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym), walked with you (halak – traveled, leading you so that you could follow Him (in the hifil perfect God is enabling our walk which He considers complete and perfect)) these (zeh) forty (‘arba’iym – a multiple of ‘arba’ – four, from raba’ – to be square, and thus to be correct, right, out of debt, and in compliance) years (shanah – time of renewal and of a complete cycle of life) in the wilderness (ba ha midbar).

This is in order for (ma’an – it is because and the intent was for) you to respond (‘anah – you to answer), to approach (la) by exerting yourself through the process of learning and understanding (nasah – by testing and evaluating what you had observed and experienced), coming to know and to become known (la’ yada’ – to recognize and realize, to acknowledge and understand) regarding (‘eth) the benefits of the relationship (‘asher) by deciding in your heart (ba leb – through exercising good judgment and reflecting it in your attitude, motivations, and response) whether (ha – as an interrogative) you will consistently and genuinely observe, closely examining and carefully considering (ha shamar – you would actually and continually focus upon, scrutinize, evaluate, and prioritize) the terms and conditions of His agreement (mitswah – the authorized directions regarding His Covenant, the written stipulations and provisions of the mutually binding contract) or not (‘im lo’).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 8:2)

The statement our Savior likely cited regarding bread followed what we have just read, making it an ideal choice. The Towrah, as it consistently does, reinforces the path to life. If you want to capitalize upon what Yahowah is offering, listen to what God has to say. And the only way to do that is to “shamar – closely examine and carefully consider, i.e., observe,” His Towrah. This would not be the only time Dowd, recast as Jesus, would affirm this obvious reality.

Since our goal is to learn as much from God as possible, before we thumb a couple of pages ahead in this story and ponder some of Dowd’s most declarative statements regarding the Towrah during his second advent, let’s pause at this point in the Towrah a moment longer. Next, we find Moseh saying...

“Your clothing did not wear out on you and your feet, they did not swell these forty years so that you would know, recognizing and acknowledging (yada’ – you would be aware and understand) by exercising good judgment (‘im leb – by deciding in your core being), that, indeed (ky), in the manner (ka) which beneficially (‘asher – for the sake of the relationship) a man (‘iysh – an individual) instructs and corrects (yasar – teaches and admonishes, providing guidance regarding that which is potentially harmful, revealing the consequences of bad choices influencing) his children (beny), Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym), teaches and admonishes you, providing guidance regarding that which is potentially harmful while revealing the consequences (yasar – instructs and corrects you so that you don’t go astray and make those mistakes).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 8:4-5)

That is a summation of the Towrah’s purpose. It is our Heavenly Father’s advice to His children. It consists of the same kind of instruction we as parents ought to give to our sons and daughters. The Towrah, therefore, not only provides us with reliable guidance, it exposes that which is potentially harmful, revealing the consequences of ignoring our Heavenly Father’s advice.

Since the very first time Gospel Jesus is cited, even recognizing that the quotation was errantly translated and miscast, it still directs us to the proper place in Yahowah’s Towrah. So, let’s take an additional step in Yahowah’s direction.

“And so (wa) you should genuinely choose of your own volition to thoroughly and completely observe (shamar – you ought to want to actually examine, literally consider, and totally focus upon) Yahowah’s (YaHoWaH – an accurate presentation of the name of ‘elowah – God as guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence), your God’s (‘elohym), stipulations and provisions (mitswah – terms and conditions regarding the relationship agreement) to approach (la) by walking (halak – journeying through life) in (ba) His ways (derek – His paths and steps), and (wa) for the purpose of coming to (la) revere and respect (yare’ – highly valuing) being with Him (‘eth).” (Dabarym 8:6)

These would be Yahowah’s provisions, not Paul’s propositions. They are stipulations rather than leaps of faith. Collectively, they enable us to approach God and to enjoy His company. And these terms and conditions regarding the Covenant are presented in Yahowah’s Towrah – a document we are encouraged to examine and consider so that we can benefit from God’s guidance.

In short order, we will return to this encounter between the Towrah’s Defender and Satan. Our purpose will be to demonstrate the strategy the Adversary typically deploys so that we are attuned to this preferred tactic as we make our way through the corpus of Paul’s letters, and especially Galatians, the Magna Carta of Christianity. And secondarily, by considering the Towrah Defender’s response, we will learn how we should react to similar deceptions.

But for now, let’s rejoin the chronology presented by the ‘Ebownym and pilfered by pseudo-Matthew. The very next time we hear the Messiah speak is in the fifth chapter of this same book. This time, rather than negating Satan’s influence by debating a singular fallen spirit, the Son of God sets the stage by providing the proper perspective from which to evaluate everything he would accomplish over the course of three years. This speech to the “multitudes” is errantly known as the “Sermon on the Mount” by those who are unaware of what Solomon declared one thousand years before. Nonetheless, to the extent that Dowd conveyed this message, that it was accurately recorded by the ‘Ebownym, and then properly translated by pseudo-Matthew, it is a tribute to Yahowah and His Towrah.

The presentation is especially germane considering Paul’s claim to have been authorized by Gospel Jesus to assault and annul the Towrah. Therefore, to further demonstrate that this alleged mandate is not only impossible but also in conflict with Gospel Jesus, let’s examine more of what the ‘Ebownym recorded.

Translated from Hebrew to Greek and then to English, Dowd may well have said…

“You should not think or assume (me nomizomai – you should not consider, expect, or suppose at any time even the possibility of the commonly held or popularly established presumption, never accepting the prevailing precept or justification (negative particle, aorist active subjunctive verb)) that (hoti – namely) I actually came (erchomai – I in fact appeared then, now, or in the future (aorist active indicative)) to tear down, invalidate, put an end to, or discard (kataluo – to dissolve, destroy, disunite, subvert, overthrow, abrogate, weaken, dismantle, or abolish, releasing or dismissing any of the implications, force, influence, or validity of) the Towrah (ton nomon – that which has been assigned to nourish and provide an inheritance) or the Prophets (e tous prophetes – those who are inspired to speak and write based upon divine inspiration, making God’s thoughts and plans known even before they happen).

I actually came not (ouk erchomai) to dismiss, to invalidate, or to discard (kataluo – to tear down, to dissolve, to destroy, or to disunite, subverting by creating an artificial division, and thereby overthrow, abrogate, weaken, dismantle, or abolish, dismissing any implication or its influence), but instead (alla – to the contrary, emphatically contrasting that to the certainty), to completely fulfill (pleroo – to proclaim and complete, conveying the true meaning and thinking, to liberally supply, carrying out, accomplishing, and rendering it totally and perfectly). (Matthew 5:17)

Because (gar – for this reason then so that you understand) in deed and in truth (amen – truly and reliably), I say to you (lego sy), until (hoes – up to the point that) with absolute certainty (an) the heaven and the earth (o ouranos e ge – the universe and the surface of the planet) cease to exist (parerchomai – pass away, disappearing), not ever under any circumstance shall (ou me – there is no way whatsoever, not even so much as a possibility that) one aspect of the smallest letter (eis iota – shall a single Yowd, the first letter in Yahowah’s name and the smallest character in the Hebrew alphabet) nor (e) a single stroke of the pen (mia keraia – one of the smallest lines distinguishing any aspect of any Hebrew letter) cease to be relevant (parerchomai – be averted or neglected, have any chance of being ignored or disregarded, being passed over or omitted, perishing) from (apo – being disassociated, separated, or severed from) the Towrah (tou nomou – that which has been assigned to nourish and to provide an inheritance) until with absolute certainty (hoes an) everything (pas – every last aspect, all and the totality of it) takes place (ginomai – happens and occurs, becoming a reality). (Matthew 5:18)

Therefore (oun – indeed and as a result), whoever may at any time (hos ean – if at any moment anyone introduces a contingency or condition whereby individuals) dismiss or attempt to do away with (luo – may seek to toss aside, invalidate, or abolish, tearing away or put asunder) one of the (mian ton) smallest and least important of these (houtos ton elachistos) prescriptions and instructions which are enjoined (entole – rules, regulations, and authorized directions, precepts, and teachings), and (kai) he instructs or indoctrinates (didasko – he might teach, delivering moralizing discourses while conceiving and instilling doctrine, expounding or explaining so as to enjoin) people (anthropos – humanity or mankind) in this manner (houto – thusly and likewise), he will actually be provided the name and will be judicially and legally summoned as (kaleo – he will be referred to and called by the proper name, literally and passively summoned, called to task and designated) Lowly and Little (elachistos – Paulos in Latin, meaning: small and inadequate, insignificant and insufficient, irrelevant and unimportant, immaterial and inconsequential (Paulos, the Latin name Sha’uwl adopted as his own means “elachistos – little and lowly)) by the kingdom of heaven (en te basileia ton ouranos – by, within, among, and with regard to the reign and royal authority of the heavens).

And then (de – but by contrast), whosoever (hos an) might act upon it (poieomai– may engage through [the Towrah], making the most of it, attempting to carry out its assigned tasks (aorist active subjunctive)), and (kai) teach it (didasko – try to provide and share [the Towrah’s] instructions, expounding upon it), he (houtos – these things) will properly be referred to and named (kaleo – it will be judiciously and appropriately called and designated) great and important (megas – astonishingly valuable, splendid and sensible, albeit surprisingly uncommon) among those who reign within the heavens (en te basileia ton ouranos – by and with regard to the kingdom and royal authority of the heavens).” (Matthew 5:19)

That was unequivocal and correct, so it is quite possible Dowd conveyed this message. The content was also in complete opposition to the Christian traditions Paulos contrived. To discount or discard any aspect of the Torah, an individual such as Paulos has to contradict Dowd’s declaration as it was transferred to the lips of Jesus. It would be irrational for anyone to claim to have been granted authorization to speak on behalf of an individual when his message was contradictory to their own.

If the Messiah’s message was accurately recorded and then translated and maintained, the notion of a “New Testament” is torn asunder because Yahowah’s original testimony is still valid. And based on this statement, Paul’s letters which seek to invalidate the Towrah must be discarded.

But if Gospel Jesus cannot be trusted, then neither can Paul, because he would be speaking on behalf of a liar. In fact, if the words attributed to Gospel Jesus cannot be trusted, then the whole New Testament has to be rejected because it claims to chronicle his words and deeds. The realization that there was no such individual, at least by that name, does not ease the burden of the religion but only exacerbates it.

Neither option is acceptable if you are religious. With regard to the religion’s veracity, it actually does not matter if this statement was from Dowd or Gospel Jesus, because it remains the most famous and well-attended public pronouncement found anywhere in the Greek text. If the Messiah’s uncompromising declaration before the largest audience he would address during this, the second of three lives, a speech originally chronicled by Jews in Hebrew, isn’t reliably conveyed, then nothing the Greek manuscripts claim to document can be considered credible.

And if Dowd’s sentiments were accurately recast through Gospel Jesus, properly translated into Greek and then responsibly retained, there is no possibility that the Christian religion is valid, because it is in complete and irreconcilable conflict with the letters which comprise the words of the Towrah.

As a Christian, you cannot discount this statement without tossing the New Testament in the trash. And the moment that is done, everything is properly seen as rhetorical rubbish. But on the other hand, to believe the man who shared these words, you have to reject the religion errantly ascribed to him.

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

Since we are now aware of the speaker’s assessment of those who attempt to dismiss and discard any portion of the Towrah, and that he referred to such attempts as “Paulos – Lowly and Little,” there is no longer any avenue through which to view Paulos’ attempt to demean and devalue the Towrah favorably. In this light, how is it that Paul convinced the world that God had authorized him to do precisely what the Messiah just testified should not, and could not, be done? Said another way, there is no chance whatsoever that God inspired, even condoned or endorsed, the writings of a man who invalidated His Towrah in view of this statement and thousands of others. Do Christians honestly believe that Paul can contradict God and still be trusted?

I realize that we have just begun our investigation. And that apart from the four derogatory statements we have thus far considered, where Paul referred to the Towrah as a curse, something abhorrent, repugnant, and malicious, and where he claimed that absolutely no one could be saved by the Towrah, I have not yet validated the assertion that Paul claimed to have destroyed and discarded the Towrah after dissolving and dismantling it. Therefore, while we will cover all of this in great detail, until then, here is a literal rendering of Paul’s proposition. With so much at stake, readability will suffer in favor of accuracy…

“Having come to realize without investigation or evidence that by no means whatsoever is made righteous or vindicated, man out of acting upon the Towrah if not by faith in Iesou Christou.

And we to Christon Iesoun, ourselves, believed in order for us to be acquitted out of faith in Christou, and not out of acting upon the Towrah. Because out of works of the Towrah not any flesh will be acquitted, vindicated, nor be made righteous.” (Galatians 2:16)

“Because if that which I have actually torn down, dissolved, and dismantled, invalidated and abolished, negated, abrogated, and discarded, completely destroying, by this on the other hand, I strengthen and promote this edifice which I myself, bring into existence and have recommended. (Galatians 2:18)

I then, because of the Towrah, actually died and was separated in order that to God I might currently live. In Christo I have actually been crucified together with.” (Galatians 2:19)

“O ignorant and irrational, dimwitted and unreasonable, Galatians. Who bewitched and deceived you? (Galatians 3:1)

This alone I want to learn from you: out of accomplishments of the Towrah the spirit you received or alternatively out of hearing of belief? (Galatians 3:2)

In this way, you are ignorant and irrational, lacking in knowledge and unable to think logically. Having begun with spirit, now in flesh you are completing? (Galatians 3:3)

So much and so long these things you suffered, you were affected and you were vexed and annoyed without result or a plan. If indeed also thoughtlessly and for nothing without reason or cause. (Galatians 3:4)

The one, therefore then, supplying you the spirit and causing to function and operating powers in you out of acting upon and engaging in the tasks delineated in the Torah or out of hearing faith?” (Galatians 3:5)

“Indeed, consequently, the Torah accordingly is against and contrary to the promise of the god. Not may it be (It might be, although I don’t want it to be). For if, perchance, had been given the Torah the power and ability, the capacity and resources, to impart life, certainly in the Torah would be the righteous and vindicated. (Galatians 3:21)

To the contrary, emphatically and certainly, written scripture imposed restrictions, completely shutting the door on heaven, imprisoning everything under error and evil in order that the promise out of the faith of Iesou Christou might be given to believers. (Galatians 3:22)

But before they to come of the faith, under the control of the Towrah, we were actually being held in custody as prisoners, restricted and trapped like fish in a net, to the bringing about of faith was revealed. (Galatians 3:23)

As a result, the Towrah has come to exist as our disciplinarian, a pedagogue which instructs in a particularly pedantic and dogmatic manner using strict, old-fashioned methods with an overbearing demeanor by smiting and stinging those it enslaves, extending until Christon in order that by means of the faith, or a belief system, we might, at some point in time, while doing nothing ourselves, be justified, with the possibility of someday being vindicated as a result of being influenced. (Galatians 3:24)

But now having come the faith-based system of belief, no longer do we exist under an old fashioned and strict disciplinarian whose methods are antiquated and overbearing, even harsh.” (Galatians 3:25)

This resolutely accurate and literal translation is word for word as the text of Galatians actually reads in Greek, something that will be conclusively demonstrated in due time. It sounds coarse and disjointed because it was poorly written. But if you look beyond the sorry prose and consider the intent of the words, there is no mistaking the fact that Paul is claiming that he has invalidated and destroyed the Towrah because he views God’s Guidance as inept and incompetent, even antiquated, mean-spirited, and overbearing. He is also claiming to have replaced the arcane and impotent Towrah with his edifice: “the faith of Iesou Christou” which is now wholly suspect due to the testimony of said individual.

For someone who knows and loves Yahowah, for someone who has been enriched and empowered by His Beryth | Covenant, as someone who has been perfected and adopted into His Family through His Miqra’ey | Invitations to be Called Out and Meet, and for someone who has been liberated and enlightened by the brilliance of His Towrah | Teaching, Paul’s rhetoric is nauseating. Even without my affinity for Yahowah, for any rational, informed, and moral individual, Paul’s claims are condescending, illogical, and obnoxious.

Such an illiterate and ignorant individual ought not have fooled anyone – much less billions. The fact that he has is a testament to the fallen state of man.

Returning to Dowd’s declaration, indirectly, he incriminated Sha’uwl, a man who not only dismissed the Towrah, but who also claimed to be a rabbi and Pharisee, in addition to being a religious expert, scholar, orator, and writer. Please consider what the actual Messiah said next…

“For indeed (gar – because then), I say to you all (lego umin – I actually affirm and personally explain to you all (present active indicative)), that unless (hoti ean – because if) your (umon) righteousness, integrity, and standing in the relationship (dikaiosyne – acceptability of your thinking and state of approval, upright nature, accuracy of your understanding) is abundantly superior and eminently more appropriate than (perisseuo polys – could be considered vastly more abounding and greatly in excess of) the religious teachers, experts, scribes, and scholars (ton Grammateus – government officials, politicians, public servants, reporters, writers, clerks, lawyers, and judges), as well as the Pharisees (Pharisaios – members of a fundamentalist political and religious party comprised of hypocritical Jews who coveted authority, were overtly religious, set rules which others had to abide by, established religious rituals and traditions, and interpreted the Towrah to their liking), you will absolutely never move into nor experience (ou me eiserchomai eis – there is no chance whatsoever that at any time you might ever do something which may cause you to enter into (aorist active subjunctive)) the realm of the heavens (ten basileia ton ouranos – the sovereignty of the kingdom of the abode of God).” (Matthew 5:20)

Since we are still in the infancy of our study, notwithstanding the foregoing, for some it may still seem a bit presumptuous to conclude that Paul’s overall intent was to foreclose the Torah in order to promote his new faith. And yet the translations of the Galatians passages that we considered conclusively demonstrate that Christian theologians have correctly interpreted Paul’s message when they cite this letter as “evidence” that he said that the Torah was an outdated and restrictive burden that had to be replaced with a much simpler and accommodating approach. But why is it that not one Christian scholar has the character, courage, or intellectual integrity to admit that Paul’s position is diametrically opposed to the Messiah Dowd and even to Gospel Jesus pursuant to the Towrah? Since Paul isn’t coy about it, why not just come out and admit that Paul’s positions are in direct conflict with God’s Word?

Speaking to those who are willing to invest the time required to actually know Yahowah, to those who actively seek to learn the truth, to those willing to engage in the process that leads to admission into God’s home, Dowd provided a set of instructions which completely undermines the ignorance of blind faith...

“You should ask (aiteo – at the present time it is desirable for everyone to act on his own initiative to earnestly request information, knowledge, and answers (present active imperative second-person plural)) and (kai – as a logical connective conjunction relates the flow of thought from one thing to another while expressing the logical relationship between them) it will be given (didomi – in the future this will reliably produce the desired result (future passive indicative third person)) to you (umin – two or more of you or you all).

You should seek (zeteo – at the present time it is desirable for everyone to act on his own initiative to attempt to find information, searching for knowledge and answers (present active imperative second-person plural)) and (kai – expressing the logical relationship) you will actually receive the discovery (heuriskomai – you will receive an education, you will be the beneficiary of finding reliable learning, facilitated and aided in the process attaining the information (future indicative second person plural)).

You should knock (krouo – at the present time it is desirable for everyone to act on his own initiative to physically demonstrate and announce their presence at the door desiring acceptance and admittance (present active imperative second-person plural)) and (kai – expressing a logical relationship) it will be opened (anoigo – entry into the midst will be provided (future passive indicative third person)) to you (umin). (Matthew 7:7)

For then (gar – because and for this reason) universally the one asking (pas o aiteo – without exception, the individual actively engaging is transformed and (present active participle nominative)) receives (lambano – he is selected and is grasped by the hand (present active indicative)), (kai) the one seeking (zeteo – earnestly trying to obtain information through personal interaction so as to learn (present active participle nominative)) actually finds (heuriskomai – genuinely participates in the discovery and receives an education from the information (present active indicative)), and (kai) the one knocking (krouo – the one demonstrating and announcing his presence at the door desiring acceptance will be given and granted what he seeks so (present active participle dative)), it will be opened (anoigo – access to understanding and entry into the midst will be provided (future passive indicative third person)).” (Matthew 7:8)

The Messiah’s declaration is consistent with Yahowah’s Towrah guidance. God constantly encourages us to be actively observant, which is to closely examine and carefully consider His instructions, especially the provisions associated with the Covenant. He asks us to listen to His prescriptions for living so that we can act upon what we discover. This, however, is the antithesis of Paul’s proposition, which is salvation through passive faith. God’s method requires us to seek, to learn, and then accept and engage. But with faith, both the process and response are unnecessary and counterproductive. This makes faith a cop-out, an excuse to forego investigation and contemplation.

Dowd’s next statement is also hostile to Paul’s proposition because he is directing our attention not to himself, but instead to Yahowah, to our Heavenly Father, and to the Father’s gift, which is found in the Towrah. But beyond this, by juxtaposing these thoughts, Dowd is also revealing where we should look to find the door to seek acceptance. He is even contrasting the merits of Yahowah’s testimony, His offer and promises, against the statements and assurances of a man. He is saying this expecting that we will act upon Yahowah’s offer instead of one promoted by someone who is clearly Paul.

And as you have surely noted, I have concluded that the ‘Ebownym correctly recorded Dowd’s proclamation because it is too accurate and too hostile to Christianity to have been spoken by anyone less than the true Messiah and Son of God. The fact is, the Jesus myth was initially based upon what Dowd said and achieved. His name was changed, as was his God’s, and then his accomplishments and accolades were stolen, buried under a mountain of religious replacements.

“Should you be considering an alternative (e – by comparison (scribed as a logical disjunctive, a conjunction which provides a logical contrast between opposites)), what (tis) man (anthropos) currently exists (estin – is now actively becoming (present tense nominative singular masculine)) from among you (ek umon) who (hos), when his son (o huios autos) asks for (aiteo – will request sometime in the future (future active indicative)) a loaf of bread (artos – aerated and thus yeasted bread), (me – forming a question) will he give him (epididomi autos – will he hand to him) a stone (lithos – a rock used for sealing graves or making millstones)? (Matthew 7:9)

Or should you be considering an alternative (kai e – by comparison (scribed as a logical disjunctive, a conjunction which provides a logical contrast between opposites)), when he asks for (aiteo – he actually will request (future active indicative)) a fish (ichthys), (me – forming a question) will hand him (epididomi autos – will he give to him) a snake (ophis – a serpent which is symbolic of Satan)? (Matthew 7:10)

If (ei – introducing a condition which must occur or be met before the resulting event can be manifest), therefore (oun), you all (umeis) presently and actively being (ontes – currently existing and in the process of being (present active participle)) troublesome and morally corrupt (poneros – seriously flawed, evil and annoying, blind and diseased) have in the past been familiar with and have actually known how (oida – have perceived and have shown that you are genuinely aware of, having recognized how (perfect (a completed action in the past) active indicative)) to give (didomi – to provide) good and beneficial (agathos – moral, generous, and useful) gifts (doma – presents) to your children (tois umon teknon – to your descendants and offspring), how much more by contrast will (posos mallon) your Father (o umon pater), the One in the Heavens (o en tois ouranos), actually give (didomi – personally respond to reliably produce, grant, and bestow (future active indicative)) something good, moral, generous, and beneficial (agathos – that which is upright and worthy, capable and substantial, valuable and kind) to those asking this of Him (tois aiteo auton – actively responding to Him, making a request of Him (present active participle))?” (Matthew 7:11)

Therefore, since Paulos is offering an incredulous promise via faith in his irrational claims, and Yahowah is offering the gift of the Covenant, which offer do you suppose might be more beneficial and capable, more generous and substantial? And since this follows a presentation on asking and seeking, do you suspect that the Messiah is indicating where we ought to look to find something which is reliably good, valuable, and kind?

Further, since the answers to these questions are obvious, why do Christians, who claim that their religion is based upon Gospel Jesus, ignore this and turn to Paul instead? In light of this, how did Sha’uwl manage to convince them that the Towrah was anything but good, generous, capable, or beneficial?

The Messiah Dowd continued…

“Anything (pas – everything), therefore (oun – then), to whatever to the degree or extent (ean hosos – whenever and as far as) you might want or may enjoy (thelo – you might decide or presently desire, you may propose or be of the opinion or currently think something might be so, perhaps personally being fond of or taking pleasure in your will, your intent and your purpose (present active subjunctive)) as a result of (hina – that) men being human (oi anthropos – individuals representing mankind and humankind (nominative plural)) doing for yourself (poieo umin – actively attempting to perpetrate this, fashioning and assigning these things with regard to yourself (present active subjunctive dative)), also (kai) in this way (houto – likewise in this manner, thusly), you (umeis) should choose to actively do for them (poieomai autois – you may elect to perform and behave unto them (present active imperative)).

This (houtos) then (gar – for this reason) actually and presently is (estin – exists as) the Towrah (o nomos – becomes the means to being nourished by that which is bestowed to become heirs, existing as the precepts which were apportioned, established, and received as a means to prosper and to be approved, and prescriptions for an inheritance; from nemo – that which is provided, assigned, and distributed to heirs to nourish them (nominative)) and the Prophets (kai oi prophetes).” (Matthew 7:12)

The moral here is that, since we do not want a millstone, a premature burial, a poisonous snake, or a serpent representing Satan given to us by men or by their institutions, and would be vastly better served with Yahowah’s good, generous, and beneficial gift, we ought to offer our fellow man access to God’s offer, starting with our children, by providing them with an accurate rendition of our Heavenly Father’s Towrah as He presents His Beryth | Covenant Family.

Since context is essential to understanding, remember that Dowd has been encouraging us to knock at a certain door, the one he would open on Passover, seeking admission. And he has spoken of our Heavenly Father’s gift in this regard being especially valuable. He has deliberately and decisively associated this especially good and generous offer with Yahowah’s Towrah and Prophets. And so Dowd is affirming that the narrow doorway he sacrificed his corporeal body to open leads to life. He is speaking of Passover, something he, as the Passover Lamb, ought to know a great deal about…

“Under the auspices of freewill, you all should choose at some point in time to enter, personally engaging by moving (eiserchomai – at a moment in time you ought to want to personally act by electing to go in, beginning the journey by choosing to experience (aorist active imperative)) through (dia – by way of and on account of) the narrow, specific, seldom-tread, and exacting Door (tes stenos pule – the doorway with strict requirements which is highly restrictive, the passageway which is unpopular and seldom walked, an infrequently-trodden gateway whereby a stand will be taken to enable others to stand, to be firmly established, and to be upheld (note: stenos is based upon histemi which provides the concluding insights)) because (hoti – for the reason that namely) broad, manmade, and crafted to be wide open (platys – molded, malleable, plastic, and easily crafted and plied, a wide and artificial thoroughfare; from plasso – formed and molded by man, serving as the basis of plastic) is the door (pule – is the gate), and spacious and accommodating (eurychoros – as encompassing as nations, widely regional, and broadly societal; sharing a base with eusebeia – especially religious, speaking of belief systems and their devout and pious practices) is the way (e hodos – is the path and journey, the popular way through life, the well-traveled road and route, the common course of conduct) which misleads and separates (e apago – that takes away, leading through deception; from ago – directs, leads, and guides to apo – separation) into (eis) utter destruction (apoleia – needlessly squandering and ruining the valuable resource of one’s existence, causing it to perish; from apollumi – to be put entirely out of the way, to be rendered useless and to be abolished, coming to an end and ceasing to exist), and a great many (kai polys – the vast preponderance, an enormous number, and to a very great degree, serving as a superlative of great, many, much, and a large number) are those (eisin – are actually the ones (present active indicative)) who are influenced into moving while suffering the consequences of entering (oi eiserchomai – who as a result of being acted upon are affected by taking the first step toward and then going in, manipulated in the process of beginning a journey while experiencing the effect of going out (present middle passive participle nominative)) through it (dia autos – by way of it). (Matthew 7:13)

Certainly (tis – it is certain that), the specific Doorway has strict requirements, it is narrow, seldom-tread, and it is an exacting passageway (e stenos pule – the doorway is highly restrictive, the passageway is unpopular and infrequently walked whereby a stand is taken to enable others to stand, to be firmly established, and to be upheld).

Additionally, it goes against the crowd to the point of persecution (kai thlibomai – it is so totally unpopular the past act influences the future to the point of hardship and harassment, even to oppression and affliction (perfect passive participle nominative)), this one way (e e hodos – this specific journey through life, the singular route and the path) which leads, separating those guided (apago) unto (eis) life (zoe – vigorous and flourishing living, the fullness of a restored and active existence), but (kai) very few (oligos – an extremely small quantity over a very short time) are those (eisin o – exist the ones) finding it (heuriskomai autos – presently learning and actively discovering the location of it, themselves experiencing it).” (Matthew 7:14)

This is among many devastating declarations Dowd, as the Messiah and Son of God, made against religion. His Mizmowr | Songs are filled with them as well.

One of the things religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and mankind’s newfound favorites, Socialist Secular Humanism as touted by Progressives, and conspiratorial theories have in common is that they are very popular. A great many people have placed their faith in them, ranging from tens of millions to many billions. But, according to the public declaration, the popular ways are not only artificial and manmade, they lead to destruction, needlessly squandering countless souls.

While this statement is catastrophic to Christians, Muslims, Progressives, and Conspiratorialists, when Dowd’s credentials are known and considered, he obliterates the validity of mankind’s most popular religion. Based upon this declaration alone in the midst of the best-substantiated declaration in the New Testament, the moment Constantine made Christianity acceptable in Rome, and Theodosius declared it the official faith of the Empire, there was no longer any hope that it could be the path to life. It must, therefore, be one of the many ways which lead to destruction.

Now, do not misunderstand. The Messiah did not say that religion was destructive because it’s popular, but only that the path to life is unpopular – which means that all popular paths are invalid. Christianity is deadly because it is based upon Sha’uwl’s delusions and Replacement Theology.

I am not trying to rub salt into an open wound if you are still religious, but I would be remiss if I did not remind you that Yahowah specifically revealed that there would be a “broad path,” a duplicitous and improper way, associated with Sha’uwl. As a result, Christianity is “the Plague of Death” being foretold through these words...

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

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

He and his soul are like the plague of death. And so those who are brought together by him, accepting him, will never be satisfied. All of the Gentiles will gather together unto him, all of the people from different races and nations in different places.

But they do not ask questions, any of them, about him. Terse references to the word they lift up as taunts to ridicule, with implied associations that mock through comparison and counterfeit, along with elusive sayings with derisive words arrogantly conveyed.

There are hard and perplexing questions which need to be asked of him, and double-dealings to be known regarding him.

So they should say, ‘Woe to the one who claims to be great so as to increase his offspring, acting like a rabbi, when neither apply to him. For how long will they make pledges based upon his significance, becoming burdened by his testimony?’” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:4-6)

In context, Dowd has identified the Towrah as God’s gift, saying that it provides the lone and unpopular path to life. He said that all other ways lead to destruction, “needlessly squandering a person’s existence.” So there is no getting around the fact that this means popular paths – and there are none more popular than Christianity with Gentiles and Judaism with Yisra’elites – lead to the death and destruction of the souls of those who follow their edicts. This is a profoundly important truth few Christians consider. And yet it is the reason we are examining Paul and his letter to the Galatians.

As an interesting aside, the Messiah’s instructions regarding eternal life tell us to “begin by entering through a specific doorway.” And that is because the first of seven steps to Camping Out with Yahowah begins by answering His invitation to walk through the doorway labeled “Passover.” This portal, featuring Dowd’s sacrifice as the Passover Lamb, initiated the exodus from the crucibles of religious and political persecution in Egypt, engendering the liberation of God’s Chosen People from their enslavement by oppressive human schemes. It represents the doorway to God’s home. And Dowd, as the Passover Lamb, is the living embodiment of this, opening the Door to Heaven.

Also relevant, the reason that there are strict requirements associated with this specific doorway is because it is only available to the Children of the Covenant. To benefit from the Miqra’ey, we must first engage by accepting five very specific conditions of the Beryth. For God to make Heaven enjoyable for the few who are included, He must exclude the many who would tarnish the experience. Pauline Christianity is nauseating, a plague of death, and would make everyone sick.

Dowd was not yet finished warning all who would listen about the consequence of disregarding the Towrah. With these words, he would tell us not to trust Paul:

“At the present time you all should be especially alert, being on guard by closely examining and carefully considering, thereby turning away from (prosechete apo – you all should choose to beware, presently paying especially close attention, actively and attentively watching out for and guarding yourself against so as to separate yourself from (present active imperative)) the false prophets (ton pseudoprophetes – those pretending to be divinely inspired spokesmen, from pseudo– deliberately false, lying, deceitful, and deceptive and prophetes – one who speaks of hidden things, declaring what he claims to have received from God) who (hostis) come to you, currently appearing before you (erchomai pros umas – who approach you, moving toward or up to you, making public appearances or statements against you (the present tense reveals that the false prophet is currently in their midst, the middle voice indicates that he is self-motivated, that his statements are affecting him, and that the more assertive he becomes the more he is influenced by his aggressiveness and claims (i.e., one lie leads to another), while the indicative mood affirms that this is actually occurring)) from within (esothen – as an insider and thus from the same race, place, or group) by (en) dressing up in sheep’s clothing (endyma probaton – cloaked in the outer garments of sheep (note: the root of probaton is probaino – to go beyond, to go farther and forward, to go on and on, overstepping one’s bounds)).

And yet (de – but), they actually are (eisin – they correspond to, represent, are similar to, and exist without contingency as (present active indicative)) self-promoting, self-serving swindlers and vicious (harpax –robbing, extorting, and destructive thieves, ferocious, rapacious, and snatching con men, extracting and compelling; from harpazo – to violently, forcibly, and eagerly claim and then seize for oneself so as to pluck and carry away) wolves (lykos – fierce individuals under dangerous pretenses who are vicious, cruel, greedy, destructive, overreaching, voracious, avaricious, acquisitive, and insatiable men impersonating beasts of prey).” (Matthew 7:15)

With every additional word, it becomes ever more evident that we were gifted this treasure from the Messiah Dowd through the ‘Ebownym who recognized him and understood what he was offering. Pseudo-Matthew wasn’t sufficiently observant to realize that by incorporating it, he was negating everything he pilfered from Mark and Luke. It is the ticking time bomb of Christianity.

While I normally wouldn’t care enough to delve into the etymology of Greek terms, preferring Hebrew, it has merit in this case. The first word in this statement, prosechete, is a compound of “pros – to one’s advantage with respect to or toward someone or something” and “echo – that which is accepted, grasped unto, held, possessed, considered, or regarded.” It is used to describe “large groups, organizations, or institutions a person might join, attend, participate in, or congregate amongst.” Therefore, by juxtaposing “prosechete – a cautionary and guarded examination and consideration” of “pseudoprophetes – false prophets” and the “prosechete – institutions they would have you embrace and join,” with “apo – disassociation and separation,” King Dowd told us to walk away from religious organizations like churches.

Further implicating Paulos, he got his lone prediction wrong when he misrepresented the Taruw’ah Harvest. In his first letter to the Thessalonians, he claimed that the “harpazo – snatching away, or rapture” would occur during his lifetime (1 Thessalonians 4:17). And since it wouldn’t occur for another two millennia, he demonstrated that he was a false prophet.

But it gets worse on closer examination because Paul spoke of the wrong Miqra’ in that Shabuw’ah is the next unfulfilled harvest, not Trumpets. But also, he got the audience wrong too since Taruw’ah | Trumpets is focused entirely on Yahuwdym and Yisra’elites, not gowym. Further, there would be no point to either Shabuw’ah or Taruw’ah without the first three Mow’edym – Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym – having been fulfilled by Dowd. And both the Miqra’ey and Dowd’s participation in them are things Sha’uwl / Paul resolutely denies.

In the prior statement, pseudoprophetes is actually less about errantly predicting the future than it is indicative of “someone who deliberately deceives by falsely claiming to have been inspired by God.” Therefore, because Sha’uwl’s message is consistently deceitful, it is overwhelmingly obvious that he lied about his inspiration.

Also, this admonition was recorded in the present tense, which is to say that the pseudoprophetes were present, currently lurking in their midst. That is relevant because, according to Sha’uwl, he was in this very place at this time, learning to be religious at a school for rabbis. And since the only false prophet of any significance during this time and in this place is also the most significant false prophet of all time, there is no mistaking Sha’uwl / Paul as the wolf in sheep’s clothing.

That is not to say that there weren’t other Jews who led people astray in the name of religion. Rabbis Akiba and Maimonides shaped orthodox Judaism into the religion which is practiced today, while Baal Shem Tov was responsible for the Haredim sect of religious crazies. But they did not claim to be prophets and lived one, ten, and seventeen centuries later. Maimonides, the man who codified Judaism’s thirteen pillars compiled his errant assessments in Egypt, which was Islamic at the time, not in Yisra’el. And Baal Shem Tov conceived Hasidic Judaism in the Ukraine in the 18th century. Constantine, the man who opened the door to Roman Catholicism in the early 4th century, could never be mistaken for a lamb. He was not a prophet, and he was neither a Christian nor a Jew, so he too would be disqualified for many reasons. Therefore, who else other than Paulos and his associates meet these criteria?

But there is more. By Yahowah’s definition, Sha’uwl, as a Benjamite, qualified as a wolf. Paulos claimed to be from the tribe of Benjamin in Romans 11:1, saying: “For indeed, I am an Israelite, from the seed of Abraham, from the tribe of Benyamin (Beniamin – a transliteration of the Hebrew Benyamyn).”

And then we have this warning from God: “Benyamin is a wolf viciously tearing apart, continually mangling and actually killing, plucking the life out of his victims, in the early part of the day, consistently devouring his prey, and during the dark of night at the end of the day. He divides and destroys, apportioning and distributing that which has been spoiled.” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 49:27)

While there were many Benjamites, there is only one man known to have publicly announced that he was from the tribe of Benjamin present in Yaruwshalaim during the time Dowd would have spoken these words. Beyond this, Sha’uwl admitted to masking his true identity, which is the very essence of a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Proof of Paul’s willingness to change his outward appearance to take advantage of an unsuspecting audience is found in this confession...

“And (kai) I became (ginomai) to the (tois) Jews (Ioudaios – a crude transliteration of Yahuwdym, meaning Related to Yahowah) like (hos) Jews (Ioudaios) in order that (hina) I might make a profit by procuring an advantage over (kerdaino) Jews (Ioudaios).

To those (tois) under (hypo) Towrah (nomon), in such a way to show a weak relationship (hos) under (hypo) Towrah (nomon), not being himself (me on autos) under (hypo) Towrah (nomon), for the purpose that (hina) with those under (tous hypo) Towrah (nomon) I might make a profit by procuring an advantage over (kerdaino). (1 Corinthians 9:20)

To those (tois) Towrahless and thus without the Towrah (anomois), in such a way to show a weak relationship with (hos) Towrahless (anomois), not being (me on) Towrahless (anomois) of God (theou), to the contrary and making a contrast (alla), in the Torah (ennomos) of Christou (Christou – foolishly transliterated from the Greek as “Christ” and errantly used as if a name; from chrio – which speaks of the application of drugs and medicinal ointments) in order that (hina) I might make a profit by procuring an advantage and winning over (kerdaino) those without the Towrah (tous anomois). (1 Corinthians 9:21)

I came to exist (ginomai) to the (tois) incapable and morally weak (asthenes), incapacitated and inadequate (asthenes), in order that (hina) those (tous) impotent and sick (asthenes) I might make a profit by procuring an advantage over (kerdaino).

To everyone (tois pasin) I have become (ginomai) every kind of thing (panta) in order that (hina) surely by all means (pantos) some (tinas) I might save (sozo).” (1 Corinthians 9:20-22)

Even Machiavelli, the man who postured the immoral notion that the end justifies the means, was not this belligerent. And you will notice, Paulos is asserting that he is the savior, able to save anyone and everyone. This, of course, would be in direct conflict with God, in tactics, capability, and numbers.

While the combination of God’s warnings and Paul’s admissions is devastating, leaving Sha’uwl and his associates as the only viable and known potential culprits, there was a subtlety in Dowd’s depiction of the wolf. The term was translated describing the predator using a derivative of the same term Paulos selected to present his “harpazo – rapture.” It was such an odd choice for Paul, especially considering its negative connotations. But since he did, and God knew he would, Dowd was able to provide yet another clue regarding the identity of this wolf in sheep’s clothing.

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

This is especially poignant, because on another occasion Gospel Jesus is credited with something else Dowd may have said when comparing the influence he would have versus Paulos.

“I (ego), myself, have come (erchomai – I have shown myself, appearing and becoming manifest) in the name (en to onoma – with the one and only name belonging to the person and reputation (dative singular)) of the Father (tou pater – the masculine archetype parent of the family) of mine (mou), and yet (kai) you do not receive me (ou lambano me – you do not actually accept me or grasp hold of me, you do not choose or prefer me, and thus you do not take hold of my hand or take advantage of me).

But when (ean – on the condition whenever) another (allos – completely different individual and entity) comes (erchomai – might appear, showing himself, and coming forth, presenting himself) in his own name (en to onoma to idio – with his own individual, unique, and distinctive, private, and personal name [like Sha’uwl choosing to be Paulos]), that individual (ekeinos – that lone and specific man, him, then and there (the demonstrative singles out the individual, the accusative associates this man and name, while the singular masculine limits this to a single male individual)) you all will actually accept (lambano – you will all receive, choose, and prefer).” (John 5:43)

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

He went on to say...

“From (apo) their (autos) fruit (karpos – that which they produce), by conducting a careful, thorough, and competent inquiry in the future, you all will be able to use evidence and reason to genuinely comprehend (epiginosko – by closely examining and carefully considering, and by processing and evaluating everything logically, every one of you will be able to actually learn, understand, and without reservation recognize and acknowledge; epiginosko is to know for certain and to understand to the point of being completely convinced as a result of diligent observation and thoughtful comprehension (translated in the future tense revealing that while the wolf was currently among them, he had not yet borne his fruit, which is to say some time would pass before Sha’uwl became Paulos and he and his followers wrote their letters, then in the middle voice we learn that those who are observant and circumspect will benefit from what they discover regarding these evil men, and finally in the indicative mood, we know that while this example is metaphorical, such deceivers are very real)) them (autos).

Is it even rationally possible (meti – introducing a rhetorical question where the answer is always no) to collect (syllego – to pick) a bunch of grapes (staphyle) from (apo) a thorn (akantha – something sharp and pointed often found on a thorny bramble or brier), or from (e apo) a thistle (tribolos – a three-pronged thorny and prickly invasive wild plant that is injurious to other plants), figs (suka)?” (Matthew 7:16)

Just as we can delight in the subtlety of the incorporation of a “harpazo – rapture” derivative to direct our attention to Paul’s false prophecy, akantha, translated as “thorn” in verse 16, is from akmen, which means “point.” Our Shepherd is, thereby, directing our attention to two of Paul’s most incriminating statements.

“And of the superiority of the exaggerated, magnificent, and awe-inspiring aspects of the overstated revelations, therefore, it should be self-evident, in order to not become overly proud, exalting myself beyond what would be justified, there was given to me a sharp goad (skolops – a troubling thorn at the end of a pointed stick used to control dumb animals) in the body, a messenger of Satan, in order to strike and restrain me.” (2 Corinthians 12:7)

Satan addressed him and said...

“I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew language, ‘Sha’uwl, Sha’uwl, Why are you actually pursuing me, following me, and really striving with such intense effort to reach me? It’s hard, demanding, difficult, and intolerable for you to resist against the goad (kentron – a pointed sharp stick used to prick and prod and thus control animals, making resistance vain or perilous).” (Acts 26:14)

Having come to know Yahowah, I have come to recognize that, while religious deception is something God abhors, He has a sense of humor. The tribolos suka comparison is also delightful. Tribolos is from treis, meaning “three” and belos, which speaks of “darts being thrown.” Interestingly, belos is derived from ballo, “to thrust aside and toss away, to scatter, giving over to the care of another with an uncertain result.”

That got me thinking. What are Paul’s most lethal prongs? And I thought, perhaps: 1) His claim that he was an apostle speaking for God beguiling people into believing that his letters should be considered the Word of God. 2) His claim that the Towrah was an incompetent curse and that it had been annulled in favor of salvation through faith in the gospel of grace. And 3) His claim that his new covenant replaced the enslaving old covenant, when there is only one Covenant and it represents the sole means to engage in a relationship with God.

And then, of course, there is the even more infamous trio, the Christian Trinity, the Babylonian myth which was incorporated into Christianity. It was the result of Paul’s moronic “the fullness of the godhead resided upon him bodily.”

Beyond this, a tribolos, as a thorny and prickly wild plant, is so invasive, it is injurious to other plants. And in this example, the thorny, prickly, and insidious counterpart to the bush, Sha’uwl, would injure the fig tree which, like the grapevine, is Yahowah’s symbol for Yisra’el. Largely as a result of Paulos’ rampant anti-Semitism first expressed in Galatians, and then elevated to a reprehensible rant in Thessalonians, Jews would become the enemies of Christians, who would ultimately claim what they renamed “Palestine” and the “Holy Land” as their own.

For God’s Chosen People, it would be 1,800 years from exile to return, a prophecy reaffirmed by Dowd by referencing the fig tree. It was a parable designed to reveal that Yisra’el would blossom again, with Yahuwdym causing the Land to grow after centuries of neglect. And their return would occur 85 years prior to His return.

“So then from the fig tree (suke) be instructed and learn from this symbolic illustration. No matter how long it takes, when a young and tender shoot is ready to sprout and its leaves grow, producing foliage, you know that summer is near.

And in this way, whenever you may see all of this, you should understand that it is near, at the door. Truly I say to you that there is no chance whatsoever that this generation will perish before all of these things come to exist.” (Matthew 24:32-34) The pervasive influence of Paul’s letters continues to be a thorn in Yisra’el’s side.

Also interesting, in the accusative plural neuter, “sukon – fig” is pronounced suka, which is a transliteration of Sukah, the seventh and final Invitation to be Called Out and Meet with God. So while this statement was not delivered in Greek, the transliteration of the Hebrew term may be relevant because it is symbolic of camping out with God in the Promised Land – a place and time devoid of thistles.

If the next statement is true, a comprehensive examination of Paul’s words should be sufficient to determine whether his message is “kalos – genuine, approved, and commendable” or “sapros – corrupt, rotten, and harmful,” even “poneros – seriously flawed, annoying, and worthless.”

“In this way (houto – thusly, it follows, in like manner), every (pas) good and useful (agathos – valuable, beneficial, and generous, appropriate, and pleasant) fruit tree (dendron) produces (poieomai – creates, makes, and furnishes) exceptionally suitable and commendable (kalos – genuine, approved, magnificent, admirable, advantageous, superior, attractive, fitting, valuable, highly beneficial, and proper) fruit (karpos – production and results).

But (de) a tree (dendron) which is corrupt, rotten, and harmful (sapros – bad, decayed, putrefied, unfit, unprofitable, unsuitable, unusable, and destructive) bears (poieomai – produces, creates, makes and provides) diseased and worthless (poneros – seriously flawed and faulty, annoying and perilous, malicious, troubling, and painful) fruit (karpos – production and results).” (Matthew 7:17)

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

“It is not possible (ou dynamai – it is never within its capability nor capacity) for a good and useful (agathos – for a valuable, beneficial, and appropriate) fruit tree (dendron) to produce (poieomai – to create, make, provide, or furnish) seriously flawed or disadvantageous (poneros – diseased, faulty, annoying perilous, troubling, counterproductive, or evil) fruit (karpos – production and results), nor (oude) a tree (dendron) which is corrupt, rotten, and harmful (sapros – bad, decayed, putrefied, unfit, unprofitable, unsuitable, unusable, and destructive) to make (poieomai – to create, produce, or provide) suitable or commendable (kalos – genuine, approved, admirable, advantageous, fitting, valuable, beneficial, or proper) fruit (karpos – production and results).” (Matthew 7:18)

The Shepherd was not talking about fruit trees. He is not trying to show a preference for apricots over apples or pears over plums. A bad tree can on occasion produce something edible. But such is not the case with a rotten prophet.

The moral of the story is that, if a person is speaking for Yahowah, everything he writes and says is beneficial and reliable. With His prophets, because He is directing them, there are no mistakes and no misleading statements. But if there is a single error, one putrid statement, the smallest corruption, in someone’s testimony who claims his words have been nurtured by God, we must reject that source entirely. So now we have a bushel of reasons to uproot Paul from our lives.

Any one of the statements we have considered thus far from Paul individually is sufficient to reject his letters – designating them as harmful. And that is because, according to God, truth never produces something which is wrong and the product of evil is always poisonous. So even that which may appear appropriate in an inappropriate source must be rejected, because that appearance only serves to make the poison more enticing to ingest. It is all or nothing.

When it comes to providing the proper perspective, there are few insights more important than recognizing that Satan and his messengers make their nauseating fruit appear delectable by coloring it with strokes from God’s brush. These resulting counterfeits fool the unsuspecting, the unobservant, and the indiscriminate into believing that a message crafted by the Adversary will lead them to paradise.

Just as a counterfeit bill is completely worthless even when ninety-nine percent of its strokes are genuine, the more a false prophet says which is true, the more deadly he becomes. And that is because, by making his words appear Godly, they become more seductive and beguiling. Credibility is Yahowah’s strong suit, which is why deceivers like Paul misappropriate it to make their lies appear credible. Paul has fooled billions of souls deploying this strategy. And Satan, with the assistance of Paul, Akiba, Muhammad, and Maimonides, has deceived billions more, beginning long ago with Adam and Chawah.

“Any and every (pas) tree (dendron) not (me) producing (poieomai – creating or providing) suitable, fitting, and genuine, approved, commendable, and advantageous (kalos – valuable, beneficial, and proper) fruit (karpos – production and results) shall actually be cut off and done away with (ekkopto – shall find themselves reliably cut down, removed, and eliminated (present passive indicative)) and toward (kai eis) the fire (pyr – a metaphor for judgment), it will be thrown (ballo – he shall find himself moved, propelled, and cast, being nudged he will fall (present passive indicative)).” (Matthew 7:19)

Fire is symbolic of divine judgment, where Yah’s light and energy are used to refine and separate good while devouring that which is bad. Fire is not, however, found in She’owl, because the Judge is never present in the place of separation. Moreover, without Yahowah, She’owl | Hell is a dark and lightless place, precluding the existence of fire.

It is therefore instructive to know that sources, which are not “kalos – valuable, beneficial, and proper, suitable, fitting, and genuine,” are “ekkopto – cut off,” which means “removed” from Yahowah. Moreover, they are “ekkopto – done away with and tossed aside” following judgment.

Judgment is something rotten sources of information regarding God endure. Yah’s Covenant children will witness trials for clerics and kings in addition to spectacular tribunals for the likes of Paul, Akiba, Muhammad, and Maimonides, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao. God’s children, however, as a result of the Towrah’s provisions, will not be judged. Therefore, the sole purpose of judgment is to determine which souls will spend eternity separated from God, as opposed to those souls which will simply cease to exist. The former is a penalty, justly earned for leading others away from God. The latter is a consequence of being misled.

“So then indeed (ara ge – as a result and in reality), by (apo) their (autos) fruit (karpos – production), you will be able, through careful observation and studious contemplation, to actually know and understand them (epiginosko autos – by conducting a careful, thorough, and competent inquiry in the future you all will be able to use evidence and reason to genuinely comprehend them, by closely examining and carefully considering, and by processing and evaluating everything logically, every one of you will be able to actually learn, completely understand, and without reservation recognize and acknowledge them).” (Matthew 7:20)

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

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

The reason this particular instruction from God is being shared in the opening chapters of this book, one devoted to examining and evaluating the merits of Paul’s letters, is because we are doing exactly what the Messiah asked of us. So if you are a Christian, you now have a trio of choices. You can continue reading Twistianity, you can dedicate the time to do a similar study on your own, or you can continue to live a lie, pretending to follow someone whose words you are prone to ignore.

And speaking of ignoring, if you are an agnostic, you would be better served to set this book aside temporarily and read Yada Yahowah or Observations. And that is because you are fortunate. Unlike those whose religious beliefs are crafted to repel everything that is averse to their faith, and especially God’s own testimony, being an agnostic, your mind isn’t a house of cards which must be brought down before something sensible can be established in its place. For you, there is no clutter to clear away, no religious mythology which has to be rejected or defended. Nothing has to be exorcised prior to considering Yahowah’s testimony.

As an agnostic, your mind is already open. You are keenly aware of the merits of evidence and reason. So you are prepared to consider God’s testimony on its own merits. For you, it is just a matter of wielding evidence and applying reason in a different venue, and perhaps for the first time observing the Creator rather than His creation. But then once you have come to know Yahowah as He revealed Himself, once you understand what He is offering, once you respond to Him rationally and engage in His Covenant, you will want to return to this book. And that is because once you have come to know Yah, you will want to share what you have learned with Christians who have been misled.

If you are a secular Jew, I’d recommend beginning with Coming Home. You’ll meet Dowd | David and come to enjoy his brilliant lyrics as he waxes poetic about his relationship with God. In him, you will find your Messiah and King, even meet the Son of God and Savior. And the time is right, because soon he will be returning on Kipurym in year 6000 Yah following the Shabuw’ah and Taruw’ah Harvests in May 2026 and September 2033 to shepherd his people and the Covenant family.

That is not to say, however, that this book won’t appeal to agnostics, Jewish or otherwise. By reading Twistianity, you will find comfort in the wisdom of rejecting the Christian religion and the rubbish it has tossed on top of the truth. By coming to understand where and how Christians were misled, you will discover that your aversion to religion is something God shares.

This would also hold true for the many agnostic Yahuwdym. Three of the earliest beneficiaries of the initial edition of Questioning Paul were Jews: a computer engineer, a pulmonary surgeon, and a leader in the Messianic movement. By seeing the Savior as Dowd and stripped of all of the Hellenistic and Pauline, thus Christian garb, and with the foolishness of religion no longer associated with him, the Passover Lamb suddenly becomes credible.

Now returning to his public declaration, Dowd has been resolute and precise. There has been no equivocation whatsoever. For example, we were told that not so much as a single one of the smallest strokes of the individual letters comprising any of the words of the Towrah would be negated or annulled. Equally uncompromising, He has said that a rotten tree never produces good fruit and similarly that a sound tree is always beneficial.

With this in mind, as we approach his next statement where he begins: “Not (ou – absolutely never under any circumstances shall) any (pas – anyone),” to be consistent, the negation provided by ou when applied to pas must be rendered as “not any” rather than “not all.” The former is absolute and the latter is equivocal. Beyond this, with pas scribed in the singular rather than plural, “any,” is a far better fit than “all.” Also, in the nominative form and negated, “not any” serves as the subject of the verb, “saying,” written legon, the present, active, and singular form of lego.

The reason this is important is because a criterion is being established which excludes “some” or “all” who refer to God as “Lord” from heaven. Seeking some wiggle room, Bibles published by Christian organizations prefer “not all,” but there is no reason to suspect that God is changing course and is being the least bit uncertain here, making “not any” a far better fit in this presentation.

Since context is essential to understanding, and consistency is God’s hallmark, one cannot responsibly translate the King’s testimony by taking him out of character or context. Therefore, we should recognize that Yahowah’s overt animosity toward being called “Lord” is not only because it is the derogatory title He uses to describe Satan, but also because, as our “Heavenly Father” He cannot be our Master. Further, knowing His name is essential to our relationship with Him. As a result, we have to either translate the singular pas as “any or anyone” or change God’s nature, plan, and testimony.

In this light, you should know that Dowd would have delivered this message in Hebrew, not Greek. So, at the very least, the text we are evaluating was recorded in Hebrew by eyewitnesses and then translated out of Hebrew and into Greek sixty years or more removed from this time and one thousand miles away from where this was spoken.

Then adding yet another layer of concern, not only were the scribes who copied these manuscripts in Egypt less than meticulous, but they were actually encouraged to harmonize texts so that the result would better mesh with the proclivities of those paying the bills – typically a religious institution. This freehand explains why there are over three hundred thousand known discrepancies between ancient and modern manuscripts. Therefore, when conveying the proper meaning of any word the Messiah may have spoken, which was then translated, the best rendering is one which is consistent with the Hebrew thought he was conveying.

That is what I have done here. But since pas is more often rendered as “all” than it is “any” or “anyone,” and because it is a translation of the Hebrew “lo’ kol – not anyone,” the selection of other than a primary definition isn’t one I am comfortable making without full disclosure – without you knowing why – especially since so much is riding upon presenting these words correctly.

“Not (ou – absolutely never under any circumstances shall) any (pas – anyone (scribed as an adjective in the nominative case in the singular masculine)) one saying (legon – one speaking, calling, or implying (scribed in the present tense active voice participle form in the singular nominative masculine)) to me (moi), ‘Lord, Lord (kyrie kyrie – master, owner, one who rules over, controls, or enslaves),’ will actually as a result enter into (eiserchomai eis – will in the future, and based upon how this influences the speaker, move inside or genuinely experience (scribed in the future tense, middle voice which signifies that those calling Dowd “Lord” are affected by this decision, and in the indicative mood which means that this statement is describing reality, and in the third-person singular)) the kingdom of the heavens (ten basileian ton ouranon – the spiritual realm and abode of God), but by contrast (alla – rather certainly and emphatically) the one presently acting upon (o poieomai – the one currently and actively engaging in (scribed in the present active participle singular nominative masculine)) the purpose and desire (thelema – the will and mindset, the design and determination, the resolve and intent) of (tou) my (mou) Father (patros), the One (tou) in the heavens (en tois ouranois – in the spiritual realm).” (Matthew 7:21)

By translating and contemplating the implications of Dowd’s Mizmowr, I came to appreciate the Messiah’s ultimate gift, which is the fulfillment Chag Matsah. As a result, I’m sharing what I have discovered regarding him so that more people have the opportunity to capitalize upon what he is offering.

All of that is negated when someone turns our Messiah and Shepherd into a Lord. Those who do, are clueless regarding him – and likely equally so regarding his Father who sent him. His name – Dowd | Beloved – reveals God’s great love and admiration for what he achieved, why and for whom he volunteered for this mission.

Similarly, if you do not know Yahowah’s name, you do not know God. If you do not know God, He does not know you. If He does not know you, you can neither be in a relationship with Him nor be saved by Him. This is why those who call Yahowah or His Messiah “Lord” are excluded from heaven.

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

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

Few things are as revealing in this regard as the misrepresentation of Yahowah’s nature from Father to Lord. It is why referring to God as “Lord” was used as a litmus test to identify those who would be excluded from heaven. And it is why God’s Son spoke of the purpose and desire of “My Father” in heaven. The contrast is between man’s view where their god is a “Lord,” and God’s view where He is our “Father.” This is the very essence of the Covenant and thus of the Towrah. It is why Yahowah chose to rename the first child of the Covenant “‘Abraham – Merciful and Enriching Father.”

And should you cling to the myth that God is referred to as “the Lord” throughout the “Bible,” the truth is just the opposite. God spoke or wrote His name, Yahowah, exactly 7000 times in the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. Religious institutions then copyedited God, substituting “Lord” for His name.

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

Since this may come as a shock to those lost in religion, as believers almost universally refer to their god as “Lord,” especially Christians, the Father’s Son completely destroyed their illusion….

“Many (polys – a very great number and the preponderance of people) will say (erousin – will in the future actually and actively communicate (lego scribed in the future active indicative third-person plural)) to me (moi) in that specific day (en ekeinos te hemera – in this relatively distant period of time), ‘Lord, Lord (kyrie kyrie – master, owner, one who rules over, controls, or enslaves), was it not (ou) in your (to so) name (onoma – persona and reputation), we actively spoke genuinely inspired utterances (propheteuo – we prophesied, at some point in time actually making your thoughts known beforehand (aorist active indicative first-person plural)), and (kai) in your (to so) name (onoma – persona and reputation), we drove out (ekballo – we sent and threw out, we expelled and sent forth (aorist active indicative first-person plural)) demons (daimonion – evil spirits and devils, or inferior gods, minor divinities, and pagan goddesses), and (kai) in your (to so) name (onoma – persona and reputation), many mighty and miraculous things (pollas dynamis – with great supernatural power, extensive political and religious institutions), we made and did (poieomai – we engaged in, performed, worked, and profited from (aorist active indicative first-person plural))?” (Matthew 7:22)

While it requires a considerable reorganization of the Greek, thereby moving the negation of ou past the dative article, “the,” past the possessive pronoun, “Your,” and past the dative noun, “name,” since the third definition of ou depicts a question in which the speaker expects a resounding “yes” to be the answer, one might assume that Christians, having not listened to what was just said, might ask:

“Lord, Lord, didn’t we speak inspired utterances in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and establish mighty political and religious institutions in Your name?”

But the answer to that question is a resounding “no!” Not one Christian in a million knows what Dowd achieved nor uses Yahowah’s name. In fact, once a person comes to know His name and understands what it means, he or she can no longer be a Christian.

The entirety of the Christian experience is wrongly focused. It is why those who refer to the mythical misnomer Jesus as the Lord are excluded from Heaven. This is not God’s doing; it is their fault. Christians do not know Yahowah, and as a result, they do not know what He is offering or expects in return. They have no interest in the Towrah where these things are found. Yahowah’s book was meant to be read from beginning to end, not the other way around. And it begins with Bare’syth / Genesis in the Towrah and concludes with Mal’aky / Messenger a thousand years thereafter.

You will not find a church in which the sermon is delivered in Yahowah’s name. Christians speak on behalf of Paul and his mythical “Jesus Christ.” They are inspired by Paul’s pathetic and patronizing pathogens. They prefer Sha’uwl’s convoluted and contradictory epistles to the brilliance of Yahowah’s Towrah. With Hebrew and Greek stitched into one book, they read the story backward through a warped and occluded lens which perverts and inverts everything they see.

As bad as that may sound, it is actually far worse. Most Christians dislike everything about the so-called “God of the Old Testament,” His name, Yahowah, His place and people, Yisra’el and Yahuwdym, His Towrah, Beryth, and Miqra’ey. And they are clueless when it comes to His Chosen One, our Shepherd, Messiah, Savior, and King. It is so bad that the religious have robbed God’s Beloved Son of his accolades and achievements.

In all of their many books, in all of their vast libraries, in all of their Bible studies, in all of their radio and television programs, and in all of their religious institutions, they never speak or write in the name of God. Most do not even know it. And therefore, Dowd was correct when he said that their claim to have spoken inspired utterances in his name was untrue.

As for driving out demons, the moment you come to understand that Christian clerics, because of Paul, are indirectly inspired by Satan, it is easy to see why they would be able to exorcise demons. The Adversary controls them. So casting out demonic spirits becomes the perfect ruse – a spectacle to stupefy those seeking miracles rather than enlightenment.

Easily confused by this sleight of hand, Christians have made this claim to validate their god’s credentials. And yet, the Messiah is translated suggesting that they will have professed to throwing out “daimonion – inferior gods and pagan deities.” What is funny about this possibility is that Paul’s strategy was to replace Yahowah and His Son with his Iesou Christou, thereby, demoting the “inferior and impotent god of the obsolete and arcane Old Testament” with the “all-accepting, always-forgiving god of his superior New Testament.” But in actuality, the only real God was replaced by faith in the Gospel of Grace – the evil spells of pagan goddesses.

Equally stimulating is pollas dynamis which, while I translated as “many mighty and miraculous things,” could just as accurately have been rendered as “extensive political and religious institutions.” Paul’s minions do both but are better at establishing the latter. It will come as a tremendous shock to the systems of Christians when they learn that their institutions, churches, nations, and denominations, were not established in the name of God – not a single one of them.

Further, “mighty deeds and miracles” are so often claimed by those inspired by the Adversary that Yahowah tells us that when we see them we ought to be especially wary. Yahowah is not a showoff, but Satan is. God does not have to prove His status or power, but Satan tries. Moreover, Christians almost universally claim that their lives or those that they love have been miraculously transformed, something they errantly attribute to God. So the especially articulate prophet with firsthand knowledge of his Father is telling them that these things are neither provable nor valid, neither good nor appropriate.

In an informed and rational world, Dowd’s conclusion, even when translated and transferred, would have scuttled Pauline Doctrine and destroyed the religion of Christianity with it. And so, it is ironic Christians believe that their religion was inspired by the individual who castrated it, rather than circumcised it, before it was born.

“And then (kai tote – so at that time) I will profess to them (homologeo autois – I will admit, assert, and declare to them (future active indicative)) that, because (oti) I never at any time knew you (oudepote ginosko umas – at no time was I acquainted with you, not even once or for a moment did I acknowledge you or understand you), you all must depart from me (apochoreo apo emou – you are now ordered to leave, going away and separating yourselves from me (present active imperative)) those (oi) of you involved in (ergazomai ten – you all actively engaging in (present middle participle plural)) Towrahlessness (anomia – who are in opposition to and have attempted to negate the Towrah, thereby those of you without the Towrah, who demonstrate a contempt for the Towrah and are thereby in violation of the allotment which provides an inheritance).” (Matthew 7:23)

There are two related reasons the multitudes will be sent away, either of which results in being rejected by God. Initially, the Messiah said that he “never knew them,” which means that Christians do not know Dowd either. If they are involved in a relationship with a god, their god is not real.

When our Savior says “at no time was I acquainted with you,” it means that these individuals have all failed to capitalize on the Beryth and his fulfillment of Chag Matsah. No matter what they may have felt or believed, they have not been in a relationship with Yahowah because the one way to achieve this has been either ignored, discredited, or replaced with a useless alternative.

Beyond this, when our Shepherd and King says “not even once for a moment did I acknowledge you or understand you,” it means that he never heard any of their prayers and that their opinions, even conclusions, regarding him and their religion were incomprehensible. Beyond the realization that Yahowah isn’t interested in the prayers of the Towrahless and sees them as nauseating, no one should be praying to the Messiah. We benefit by listening to Yahowah and not by pleading. Paul was, therefore, wrong yet again when he told the world to “pray without ceasing.” (1 Thessalonians 5:17)

Collectively, our Savior’s response to the religious who have been duped by the Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing is to pronounce the obvious: they are Towrahless – and thus estranged from God. Every argument Christians pose to justify their opposition toward Yahowah’s name, toward observing His Towrah, or toward engaging in the one and only Covenant has been negated. God is not interested in their names, scriptures, rhetoric, institutions, or pleas. Heaven is His Home, one He is careful to keep clean and free of annoyances, so they are excluded.

The point being made here is one that took me a very long time to fully assimilate. But God’s position is both simple and reasonable, even necessary. Salvation is only afforded to the children of the Covenant. It is facilitated by way of the Miqra’ey | Invitations to be Called Out and Meet coupled with Dowd’s fulfillment. God’s approach begins with His children’s immortality as a result of Pesach | Passover, and their perfection on Matsah | UnYeasted Bread, such that they are adopted during Bikuwrym | Firstborn Children, enriched and empowered while inheriting the universe. These are the benefits of the Covenant as enabled by Dowd through Chag Matsah. And even more proof will be on display during Shabuw’ah on May 22nd, a Shabat, in 2026 as the Covenant Family is removed prior to the Time of Israel’s Troubles. I hope to see you then. I’ll be easy to recognize because I’ll be the fellow wearing the biggest smile – my initial job accomplished and my God and King pleased – as will be the souls who took advantage of what we have been offering.

By contrast, it would be senseless, even irritating, for God to save those who do not know Him – those who hold contrarian views toward Him. After all, God has to live with those invited into Heaven for eternity.

As a result of this, Christians would be wrong believing that God’s intent is to save everyone or even that salvation is His priority. Yahowah is interested in a family-oriented relationship, something which is worthless unless children respect their Father and participate in the chores. For this reason alone, salvation cannot be the byproduct of passive faith. A person has to engage with God in accordance with the conditions of His Covenant in order to receive its benefits.

When the Messiah and Savior said “anomia – Towrahless,” it was a wholesale denunciation of Paul, the New Testament, and Christianity. If a person is without the Towrah, he is estranged from its Covenant. And if he is not a participant in the Covenant, he cannot enter God’s home in heaven because he is neither God’s child nor reconciled into the relationship.

Beyond this, Dowd, even after being translated and miscast, has just delineated the issue that will define our debate. According to our returning King, to reject the Towrah is to be rejected by God. This is a point Yahowah makes abundantly clear through the prophet, Howsha’ | Hosea. But according to Paul, the inverse is true. He writes that a person must reject the Towrah to be accepted by God. As a result, this is one of the most impactful statements among the Prophets…

“My people (‘am) are destroyed and they will perish (damah – they are cut off and will cease to exist (niphal perfect – they have actively participated in their own demise)) because of (min) a lack of understanding (bely – corrupted information, inadequate knowledge, and deficient discernment).

Indeed, because (ky) you (‘atah) have avoided and rejected (ma’as – have spurned and disdained (qal perfect – have completely and literally for a time refused)) knowledge and understanding (da’ath – information and discernment), so then (wa) I will reject and avoid you (ma’as – I will actually dissociate from you and will rebuff you (qal imperfect)) from serving as authorized officials (kahan – from acting as counselors, ministers, and emissaries) on My behalf (la – for Me).

Since (wa) you have consistently ignored (shakah – you have overlooked and lost sight of the significance of by responding improperly to) the Towrah | Teaching of your God (Towrah ‘elohym – your God’s Instruction, Guidance, and Direction), I also (‘any gam) will ignore and overlook your children (shakah ben).” (Howsha’ / Hosea 4:6)

We supersede the Towrah with the New Testament, Talmud, or Quran at our peril. And even with His own people, once they insisted on being religious, ignoring His Towrah | Instructions otherwise, there was nothing God could do for them. He didn’t punish them; He withdrew and they were punished by others.

And while the Orthodox Jewish proposition of replacing the Towrah with their Talmud is wrong, the Christian proposition of replacing Dowd with Jesus is even worse.

With souls hanging in the balance, thoughtfully reflect upon everything the Messiah stated prior to considering the conclusion to this remarkable declaration on behalf of Yahowah and His Towrah…

“Everyone (pas), therefore (oun), who (ostis) presently and actively listens to (akouo – who currently pays attention and really seeks to hear and understand (present active indicative)) these (toutous) statements (logos – treatise, testimony, and words, discourse, teaching, and instruction) of mine (mou), and (kai) he or she genuinely acts upon them (poieomai autous – he or she actively and actually engages as a result of them (present active indicative third-person singular)), will be likened to (homoioo – will become like, compared to, and be considered similar to, resembling) a wise (phronimos – an intelligent and astute, a prudent and sensible, a thoughtful and judicious) individual (andros – a person) who (ostis) edifies and strengthens (oikodomeo – builds and constructs, restores and repairs, establishes and erects) his or her (autos) house (oikia – home, family, household, and relationship) upon the (epi ten) rock (petra – bedrock).” (Matthew 7:24)

Christians seem somehow unaware that Yahowah and His Son, Dowd, spoke with the same voice. To appreciate what Father and Son have said and done, you will have to read the Towrah, Prophets, and Psalms. After all, that is why he began this instruction affirming the validity, value, and enduring nature of the Towrah and Prophets – both of which are included in his Mizmowr and Mashal.

In this regard, our Savior’s statement mirrors Yahowah’s constant recommendation throughout His Towrah, whereby God encourages us to “shama’ – listen to” His Guidance. But more than this, Dowd’s address also reflects Yahowah’s consistent counsel, whereby God instructs us to “‘asah – act upon” His advice. Therefore, for us to participate in a relationship with God, we must first come to know Him, understand what He is offering, and then respond by choosing to engage in the Covenant in accordance with our Heavenly Father’s terms and provisions.

Emphasizing the benefits of listening to and observing the Word of God, the Messiah Dowd is translated as “likening” such individuals with phronimos – being “intelligent and astute, prudent and sensible, especially thoughtful and judicious.” And then speaking of what flows from this understanding, the Son of God makes a connection between the Beryth | Covenant Family,” which is from “beyth – family and home,” when his testimony was translated into Greek using “oikia – household and family.” So, a “family and home” is being edified and established, not a church or religious institution. The Shepherd is still pointing thoughtful individuals toward His Father’s Covenant Family and Heavenly Home.

Also relevant, Dowd is translated using petra to convey “bedrock.” He is speaking of the role the Towrah plays in establishing a firm foundation for the Covenant. This is illuminating because it undermines the basis of Roman Catholicism and thus Christianity. The Church claims that “Peter,” which is a transliteration of petros, meaning “stone,” is the “rock” upon which their “church” was built based upon an incongruent line Eusebius added to Matthew in the 4th century. It is why they claim that their pope “sits on the seat of Saint Peter.” But it should be obvious that Dowd is the Cornerstone upon which Yahowah’s Home is established. It was laid in year 3000 Yah / 968 BCE by Dowd’s son as Yahowah’s Home was built on top of the summit of Mowryah, on the threshing floor Dowd acquired.

Members of the Covenant are not immune from challenges because they provide us with the opportunity to shine brightly when storms come our way because we have the wherewithal to survive them.

“And even when (kai) the rain (e broche – a besprinkling (akin to a baptism)) descends (katabaino – falls down), (kai) the rivers (oi potamos – a torrent or floods; from pino – libations) come (erchomai – appear moving people from one place to another), and the rapidly shifting winds (anemos – violent, agitated, and tempestuous (emotional, stormy, passionate, uncontrolled, and even hysterical) changes in doctrine) blow (pneo), descending upon (prospipto – rushing upon and striking against, bowing and battering) this specific (te ekeine) home and household (te oikia – the family), then (kai) it shall not fail (ouk pipto – it will not fall, will not be bowed, it will not be destroyed, it will not become inadequate) because (gar) the foundation was previously established and is enduring (themelioo – the foundation was firmly laid in the past and is now providing ongoing benefits (pluperfect passive indicative)) upon (epi) bedrock (petra – solid rock).” (Matthew 7:25)

I have had my share of challenges, and by overcoming them, I have grown and developed character and grit – something Yahowah appreciates. And so while we all experience bumps in the road, when our home is with God, it cannot be undermined or washed away.

As an interesting aside, when I moved into the tropics seven years ago, and now deeper into the Caribbean, my homes have been exposed to the threat of hurricanes. But each year when these menacing storms approach, they always seem to veer away at the last moment, leaving me with gentle rains and soft breezes. I wish you the same.

While Christians will tell you that Paul won the argument over whether the Towrah is the foundation of our relationship with God or the Gospel of Grace, Yahowah disagrees. He recognizes that His Towrah | Guidance provides the most effective protection against the torrents of rapidly shifting sentiments others may bring against us. As long as we are grounded in the Towrah, our family is secure.

This is where the journey begins.



Twistianity

Appalling

…Contradicting God

6

Tsadaq | Being Right

Comparative Analysis…

Let’s lay out some ground rules before we consider Paul’s opening comments in Galatians. Calling the Christian New Testament, “Scripture,” so as to imply that its contents were inspired by God, has no sanction in the Towrah or Prophets – and is, in fact, reputed by them. This is a religious decree without Divine authorization or support. Neither Yahowah, nor anyone affiliated with Him, ever referred to anything beyond the Hebrew Towrah, Prophets, and Psalms as being inspired.

According to Yahowah, for testimony to be considered as a revelation from God, the message and messenger must pass a strict examination laid out by Moseh in Dabarym / Deuteronomy 13 and 18. And so it is instructive to know that every book and letter from Matthew to Revelation, including all of Paul’s epistles, fail the criteria established by Yahowah.

As an interesting aside, and as a surprise to many, there are books wrongly folded into the Prophets and Writings between Bare’syth and Mal’aky which do not belong. These include Job, Jonah, Enoch, Esther, and Ezekiel, even the first half of Daniel, because they fail God’s test.

I didn’t make these rules, but I am more than willing to apply them. And with that in mind, here is what Yahowah revealed through Moseh which is especially pertinent to our current investigation – almost as if it were written for us at this moment. Yahowah will transition from offering a universal condemnation of religion, to speaking of our redemption, then directly to explaining why He selected Dowd to work with us, ending His presentation by revealing how we should go about differentiating between what He inspired and what was written by men…

“Indeed, when (ky – surely because, at the point in time) you come upon (‘atah bow’ ‘el – you enter into, are led and return to, and are included within) the land which, for the benefit of the relationship (‘asher), Yahowah, your God (Yahowah ‘elohym ‘atah), is giving (nathan – is bestowing and entrusting) to you (la ‘atah), you should not accept, learn, teach, or imitate (lo’ lamad – you should not instruct, be trained in, or become accustomed to), such that you act upon and engage in (la ‘asah – you effect, attend to, commit, celebrate, profit from, bring about, ordain, institute, or perform), any semblance (ka – any derivative or similitude) of the disgusting religious rites and political practices (tow’ebah – abhorrent ceremonies, detestable idolatrous mythologies, repulsive and loathsome rituals, abominable festivals) of the Gentiles (ha gowym ha hem – of the people from different races, customs, and places). (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:9)

There shall not be found (lo’ matsa’ – there shall not be encountered, detected, or discovered) among you (ba ‘atah) one causing his son or daughter to pass over and perish (‘abar ben huw’ wa bath huw’ – a person having their child cross over and cease to exist, sacrificed) in a fire (ba ha ‘esh – in the flames), someone predicting the future based upon pagan religious notions (qasam qasam – believing false prophets, responding to conspiratorial suggestions, forming opinions based upon religious concepts, consulting with the dead and trusting saints), a person who obscures the truth and believes in spiritualism (wa ‘anan – a person who makes decisions based upon appearances or astrology, acts covertly, believes in casting spells, and clouding over), or one who tempts and charms others (wa nachash – one who offers deceptive precepts and false prognostications, an enchanter who cannot prove their position using evidence or reason, someone who is serpentine and toxic), an individual who entices and seduces people to worship and pray (wa kashaph – the corrupting influence, deceptive religious rites, rituals, and beliefs), (Dabarym 18:10) one who joins in and binds together by forming political or religious alliances (wa chabar cheber – one who charms others into leaguing together and forming a religion, one who fascinates with eloquence, creating a spellbinding fellowship), one who is obsessed with ghosts, makes requests of saints, or speaks on behalf of dead souls (sha’al ‘owb – someone who prefers and seeks Sha’uwl’s | Paul’s advice on being spiritual, a spiritualist or Gnostic who asks about and questions the deceased, an obsession with wizards, or ancestor worship), a con man who beguiles in association with demonic spirits (yida’ony – a schemer who influences based upon his personal knowledge of and relationship with evil spirits, one overly familiar with agony and anguish, intimately acquainted with demons and death), or one who causes the premature death of others in association with a destructive plague (wa darash ‘el ha muwth – one who resorts to killing, hellish tortures, wanton destruction, and body counts, insisting that those who oppose them are destroyed and die). (Dabarym 18:11)

For indeed (ky), all who engage in and act upon (kol ‘asah – everyone who does) these things (‘eleh) are an abomination, considered abhorrent and detestable (tow’ebah – are seen as repulsive, loathed to the point of absolute intolerance, viewed as idolatrous and disgusting) to Yahowah (YaHoWaH).

And so as a consequence of this repulsive religious excrement (wa ba galal tow’ebah ha ‘eleh – on account of this abhorrent political dung, because of their detestable feces, for the express reason of this abominable bullshit, and as a result of this filthy idolatrous crap), Yahowah (YaHoWaH – our ‘elowah | God as directed in His ToWRaH | teaching regarding His HaYaH | existence and our ShaLoWM | restoration), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), will drive them out, dispossess them, and then destroy them (yarash ‘eth hem – He will impoverish them by taking everything away, their lives, lands, and possessions) away from your presence (min paneh ‘atah – from appearing around you).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:12)

The lessons are: 1) Yahowah gave Israel to the Children of Yisra’el; 2) It was provided as a benefit of the Covenant Relationship because it is symbolic of living in the Promised Land; 3) Yahowah is God’s name; 4) Do not teach religion or attend a religious school; 5) Religion and politics are appalling to God; 6) The ways of non-Yisra’elites, especially the national integration of religion and politics, is something Yahowah wants us to avoid because they are disgusting; 7) The threat of religious torments, such as the hell fires of Christianity and Islam are inappropriate; 8) Do not listen to fortune tellers or spiritualists; 9) Stay away from those who encourage worship and prayer; 10) Do not participate in any religious or political organization, cult, or party; 11) Avoid those who venerate saints, their ancestors, or the founding fathers of their religion or government; 12) Do not listen to the shysters promoting religious or political platitudes or follow them to your demise; 13) All of these things are abhorrent and detestable to Yahowah; 14) Those who continue to participate in religion or politics will be seen as repulsive and driven away; and 15) Yahowah is returning, and when He arrives, the first order of business will be to remove those who are political and religious, cleaning the Earth of the Haredim, Christians, Muslims, Progressives, and Conspiratorialists.

After denouncing religion and politics, Moseh reveals that the Towrah provides the means to becoming right with Yahowah and to be perfected by Him. Then God contrasts His approach with that of non-Yisra’elites, reminding us that the Arab Muslims who have invaded the Promised Land, claiming it as their own, will be removed. And when Yahowah affirms that the founders of gentile religions like Paul with Christianity and Muhammad with Islam would be false prophets, the world should have believed Him.

“You can actually become completely and continually perfected by being consistently right (tamym hayah – you will genuinely exist as totally acceptable when you are truthful and correct, demonstrating integrity and sincerity, becoming entirely undefiled, upright, and innocent by being honest (qal imperfect)) with (‘im – in association and relationship with) Yahowah (YaHoWaH – an accurate presentation of the name of ‘elowah – God as guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence), your God (‘elohym ‘atah). (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:13)

By comparison (ky – indeed), these people from different races and places (ha gowym ha ‘el leh – the gentiles and those from other nations), who you shall dispossess and remove (‘asher ‘atah yarash – who, for the benefit of the relationship, you will distance yourself from and disassociate with), they listen to (‘eth hem shama’ ‘el) false prophets who obscure the truth with myths (‘anan – spellbinders, spiritualists, and politicians blowing smoke, those who venerate saints and ancestors, often concealing their actual motives while clouding the issue and acting covertly) and believe in antiquated religious notions and invalid opinion makers (wa qasam – and respond to cultural and conspiratorial suggestions, forming invalid conclusions based upon ancestry).

But as for you (wa ‘atah), this is not the correct way (lo’ ken – this is not the right or truthful path) Yahowah (YaHoWaH), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), has offered to you for you to approach (nathan la ‘atah – has given, provided, and appointed for you to draw near (qal perfect)).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:14)

Every false prophet, and especially Paul and Muhammad, obscures the truth with myths. They are spellbinders who blow smoke while concealing their motives and clouding the issues which matter. And without exception, these charlatans always base their antiquated religious opinions by misrepresenting the words and deeds that have gone before. Of this, Paul was a maestro.

Don’t believe them. Don’t be lured in or follow them. They are not presenting the correct way to approach God. But Dowd is, which is why after telling His people who they should disregard, Yahowah reveals who they should trust…

“A prophet (naby’ – a person who is inspired by Yahowah, who communicates and records the testimony of God, and who is accurate regarding past and future events) from among your midst (min qereb ‘atah – out of your innermost nature), from your brethren (min ‘ach ‘atah – related to you), similar to me (kamow ‘any – in accord with me and who can be compared to me), Yahowah (Yahowah – a transliteration of , our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), will raise up and position to take a stand which establishes and affirms you (quwm la ‘atah – He will validate and confirm, elevating the status to encourage and restore you, enabling you to approach and rise (hifil imperfect – Yahowah will enable him to arise and take this stand with ongoing implications over time)). To him, I want you to actually and continually listen (‘el huw’ shama’ – it is My will that you genuinely and literally hear him with ongoing implications over time (qal imperfect paragogic nun – actually and consistently pay attention as an expression of the desire of the speaker)). (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:15)

This is consistent with everything (ka kol – according to all) which (‘asher) you requested of (sha’al min ‘im – you asked for while questioning (qal perfect)) Yahowah (Yahowah – written as directed by His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), in Choreb (ba Choreb) during the day of the assembly (ba yowm ha qahal – in the time everyone in the community congregated together), when you said (la ‘amar – requesting), ‘Never again let me hear (lo’ yasaph la shama’ ‘eth – no more, not even one additional time do I want to listen to (qal imperfect)) the voice (‘eth qowl – the sound) of Yahowah ( – a transliteration of YaHoWaH as instructed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence), my God (‘elohym ‘any).

Nor let me see and witness (wa lo’ ra’ah – nor be visibly shown nor perceive) this intense fire (‘eth ha ‘esh ha gadowl ha zo’th – this massively powerful, extensive and important, astonishing and great, brilliantly glowing flame of light) anymore (‘owd – again, now or in the future), lest I die (wa lo’ muwth).’ (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:16)

Therefore (wa), Yahowah (YaHoWaH – an accurate presentation of the name of ‘elowah – God as guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence) said to me (‘amar ‘el ‘any – responded to me), ‘That is actually better, and they have appropriately conveyed their preference (yatab ‘asher dabar – they have responded as expected under the circumstances, communicating what they want regarding the relationship and it is acceptable, even beneficial for such communication). (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:17)

I will raise up and establish (quwm – I will set up and confirm) a prophet (naby’ – a man I can inspire to accurately convey past and future events) for them (la hem – to approach them and be near them) from among their brothers (min qereb ‘achy hem – from the innermost part of their brethren and relatives) similar to you (kemow ‘atah – in accord with you).

And I will put (wa nathan – I will give, provide, and bestow, offering) My words (dabarym ‘any – My message and testimony) in his mouth (ba peh huw’) and he will convey to them (wa dabar ‘el hem – he will speak to them and communicate) everything which, for the benefit of the relationship (‘eth kol ‘asher), I instruct him (tsawah huw’ – I appoint and direct of him). (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:18)

And it shall come to be (wa hayah – it shall exist) that an individual who (ha ‘iysh ‘asher – that a person, who for the benefit of the relationship) will not listen (lo’ shama’) to My words (‘el dabarym ‘any – My testimony), which he shall declare (‘asher dabar – which he will share to show the way to the benefits of the relationship and to get the most enjoyment out of life) in My name (ba shem ‘any), I, Myself, will seek it of him and hold him accountable for it, requiring it of him (‘anoky darash min ‘im huw’ – I will hold him responsible after conducting an investigation to see if he can present it).’” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:19)

This is among the most provocative and least appreciated declarations in the Towrah. To set the scene, Yahowah had asked Moseh to gather the Children of Yisra’el so that He could speak directly to them – the purpose of which was to affirm that everything Moseh had been sharing with them had, indeed, come from God.

From a human perspective, the meeting had been an unmitigated disaster. Rather than reassuring the Yisra’elites, Yahowah had unintentionally intimidated them. The brilliance of His presence and the tenor of His voice were overwhelming – too much for these irascible people with a bad attitude to handle. It is likely also that they were afraid God was going to read their minds and peer into their souls and recognize that they were not that far removed from their brethren who had conspired to craft and worship the golden calf.

This may sound shocking, but it is nevertheless true: most men and women want nothing to do with Yahowah. They prefer fake gods, who, by design, are similar to them and accepting of them. They rather like a god that they can influence with their prayers and donations. Most men and women prefer them as puny and pathetic, as malleable and contradictory, as are they.

A god befitting the people is easy enough to make. Humankind has devised millions of them. Get enough people to believe based upon the monumental edifices erected to them and the scriptures attributed to them, and a god is born. They grow in stature by building religions around them, by telling the skeptics that they are going to be tortured in hell and the compliant that they will be rewarded in heaven. The more popular they become, the more godly they appear.

Throughout human history, in every race and place, men and women have done this very thing, shaping their culture and lives around the gods they have fabricated – with the most prevalent being Jesus Christ and Allah. And where there is a false god, the real God is not welcome because He threatens to undermine the very essence of who the faithful have become.

The Yisra’elites of the Exodus, like Christians, Muslims, and Haredim today, wanted a god they could fashion to accommodate and value them, one they could make like the best of themselves, one who would listen to their prayers and tell them that they were the only ones who were righteous. The religious have had no interest in learning what pleases Yahowah, listening to Him, or allowing God to make them more like Him by becoming acceptable to Him. Nearly 3,500 years later, nothing has changed.

As a result, the people pleaded with Moseh to intervene, to silence the voice of God and remove His light. While that would normally be considered a giant stride back into Mitsraym, even a return to Babel, it is what Yahowah had anticipated. It is the reason He asked Moseh to engage with Him to liberate His people. It is the reason God was revealing the Towrah through this lone individual rather than to 70, 700, 7,000, 70,000, or all 700,000 people. It is why Dowd was chosen. It is why I am here.

Individuals are few and far between who listen to Yahowah and accept Him on His terms. Fewer still engage, doing as God has instructed. Even over the last score of years, while there are many Covenant members who serve with me to publish and promote Yahowah’s message, when it comes to the translations and insights derived from them, these books have been written by the two of us – as was explained in Yasha’yah / Isaiah 11 regarding the Choter | Secondary Branch and Sucker giving the old roots and stump new life. With some notable exceptions, this is consistent with the way Yahowah has engaged since these words were spoken 3,470 years ago.

The distinctions in the way Yahowah is communicating today are attributable to the realization that there is so little time remaining for Jews to respond prior to His return with Dowd. Therefore, without time for a backup plan should we fail, I have benefited from the counsel, comprehension, and confidence of the Seven Spirits of Yahowah. Further, this close to the fulfillment of Shabuw’ah, Taruw’ah, Kipurym, and Sukah, prophecy is no longer a useful option, so God has chosen a witness. This has the advantage of demonstrating to the world that the answers have been available all along.

Second, since the Nakar is an Observant Foreigner, I have to be better informed, more accurate, and more convincing than the rabbis to prevail with skeptical Yahuwdym. Jews have been trained to distrust gowym. Therefore, the evidence must be irrefutable and overwhelming. This is why I understand the Towrah and prophets and they are blinded.

Third, since 99% of what I’m revealing is contrary to accepted religious beliefs, and since most of the insights and conclusions I am sharing are unheralded. This is relevant because there is a prevailing myth stabilizing societies that insists that the popularity of something which is universally upheld must be true while the conclusions of a lone contrarian are wrong. This means that advocating Dowd’s role as the Messiah and Son of God fulfilling the Miqra’ey is tough for most people to accept, even when it is confirmed by God, Himself. So, Yahowah had to intervene for me to understand the central thrust of His message, much of it for the first time, while pitting it against a world that has almost everything wrong.

Fourth, there are hundreds of prophetic references to what Yahowah and I are achieving together on behalf of Yisra’el. The prophets, through whom these revelations were conveyed have consistently been accurate. So, on behalf of His people, not only do we prevail, neither Israel nor the Earth would survive otherwise. Without a meaningful return of Yahuwdym to Yahowah as a result of Yada Yahowah, there would be no reason to fulfill any of the remaining Miqra’ey, nullifying the human experience.

Whether it was ‘Adam or Noach, ‘Abraham or Ya’aqob, Shamuw’el or Dowd, Zakaryah and then Mal’aky, or now with the Basar | Herald, Yahowah has been consistent. With very rare exceptions, He has chosen one or two individuals with whom to engage and through whom to communicate with Yisra’el and the world. And He seldom, if ever, works alone.

And what He is working toward is establishing His Family. Yahowah does not want to intimidate us or have anyone worship Him. He is an advocate of freewill and wants nothing more than to be our Father. We approach Him through evidence and reason and by choice, not because He is so visible and loud that He cannot be denied. It is the reason we were created in the first place. This explains the Covenant. It embodies His approach and intent. He speaks through men to be with them.

In this particular prophecy, the predicted individual would be a Yisra’elite and a prophet – of which there were fewer than forty – with less than half of them leaving a written legacy scribed by their own hand. Of them, the two most prolific were Moseh and Dowd – the two mighty Zarowa’. Shamuw’el, Yasha’yah, and Yirma’yah would also leave an indelible written legacy to explain the past and predict the future. Yahowsha’ ben Nuwn, Howsha’, Chabaquwq, Yow’el, Shalomoh, ‘Amotz, Zakaryah, and Mal’aky also left impressive written reports. Each of these prophets is irrefutable and undeniable because they were inspired by God such that everything they wrote was accurate.

Of these men, and I say men because naby’ is masculine, only one rises to the level of Moseh | Moses, and that is Dowd | David. Moseh announced the Miqra’ey and Dowd fulfilled them. Moseh explained the Beryth, and Dowd embodied it.

Upon His return, Yahowah will be arriving with His chosen Mashyach, Melek, Ra’ah, and Ben. It is to the lyrics of his psalms and the prose of his proverbs that God wants us to listen.

Of the three Zarowa’, the predicted one cannot be Moseh because he is announcing the arrival of another. It cannot be “Jesus” because, even if he existed, he wrote nothing for us to read so we cannot listen to him. And it cannot be Yada because he is a messenger and not a prophet. And as for Yasha’yah, Yirma’yah, Zakaryah, et al., they were many, not one. Moreover, of these potential candidates, only two liberated and saved God’s people – Moseh and Dowd.

Yahowah revealing Himself through individuals like Dowd rather than to large gatherings of illiterate people throughout time is actually a better approach. It is the best way for everyone, no matter when or where they were born, to know Yahowah, read His Towrah, attend His Miqra’ey, and participate in His Beryth. In this manner, we are all given direct access to God and are able to study the revelations of His prophets whenever time permits. It is also fair, in that so many are offered access to Him.

However, with availability comes responsibility. Because Yahowah has made His testimony accessible to all, and because He has proven that He has inspired His prophets, God will require proof of it – at least among those who wish to live with Him. Without knowing what Yahowah revealed, we cannot be right about Him, and unless we are correct, there is no life beyond the one we are living. But in this case, Yahowah was specific, saying that we must be aware of this particular individual, the most important man in human history, and appreciate what he had to say. And since this man is Dowd, it is essential that we study his Mizmowr | Psalms and Mashal | Proverbs, and that by reading them, we come to understand that he volunteered to fulfill Pesach and Matsah, leading to becoming the Firstborn of Bikuwrym. By doing so, he became our Savior.

Affirming this, by stating that the naby’ will come from “your midst” and “from your brethren,” we are assured that he is a Yisra’elite, a descendant of Ya’aqob – the most famous and appropriate of them is Dowd. And because Moseh said “your” not “my” in this discussion, the promised prophet would be a descendant of Ya’aqob while not a Lowy | Levite. Dowd was a descendant of Yahuwdah.

After already announcing that he will be a naby’ engaged in another yatsa’ | path to freedom by indicating that he would be “similar to me,” Moseh was revealing that Dowd would be supremely intelligent, a great writer and orator, an outstanding leader and liberator, someone who was chosen and equipped by Yahowah to shepherd His flock. Apart from Moseh, there was only one such man: Dowd.

We would be wise to listen to Yahowsha’ ben Nuwn, to Shamuw’el and Yasha’yah, to Yirma’yah, and Howsha’, as we are to Dowd, but they are not actually comparable. Dowd’s life and lyrics go well beyond providing a prophetic narrative regarding the future of Yisra’el because he is Yisra’el and the living embodiment of the Covenant. He is the Son of God. He is the Shepherd we are afforded the opportunity to follow into the Promised Land. He is our King, once there.

Without Moseh, Yisra’el would have become extinct in Mitsraym. Without Dowd, they would have been overcome by their enemies 3,000 years ago and would cease to exist once again should he not return to fulfill Yowm Kipurym.

Dowd is our guide, our mentor, our counselor, and our brother, our Messiah, Shepherd, and King. His words are more prolific than any other. But more than this, Dowd is Yahowah’s answer to the people’s problem – their preference to listen to a man speak of God rather than directly to God. As the man Yahowah chose and anointed to inspire and enlighten His people, Dowd, is Yahowah’s retort to Yisra’el’s response – especially as the Zarowa’. Further, God learned from His prior experience with the Children of Yisra’el and made a promise that He would interact with and address the wayward nation through the best of them.

Yahowah brought Dowd out of obscurity, raised him above all Yisra’el, and established him as the Mashyach, Ra’ah, Ben, and Melek as well as His naby’. God placed His words in his mouth – evidence of which we find throughout the Mizmowr and Mashal as he sang them to us. God’s Son followed in his Father’s footsteps, doing as Yahowah instructed. And because of this, God is expecting us to know what he wrote for us to read. His words, after all, define the relationship Yahowah wants to achieve.

According to the prophecy, it is essential that we come to recognize and accept Dowd’s unique position in the heart of Yahowah’s story. The Messiah whose first life became the most meaningful in human history by year 3000 Yah, returned a millennium later to open the door to life and to perfect us in year 4000 Yah. And he will return in year 6000 Yah as our King. He is our Shepherd and has served as the Lamb.

Finding the answer to Moseh’s prophecy in Dabarym 18 is not only the most important discovery in the past three millennia, but it was perfectly timed and specifically found for the purpose of calling Yisra’el home through Yada Yahowah while eradicating the plagues of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. And heretofore, the truth which opens Heaven’s Door to enable the Harvests and Homecoming had remained hidden in plain sight – everyone was oblivious to it because the religious had piled centuries of crap over it.

Those who do not recognize him will not be recognized or accepted by Father and Son. And that is the moral of this story. It is why Yada Yahowah leads through Observations to Coming Home where Dowd’s Mashal and Mizmowr are king. It is why I was tasked with clearing away the clutter of the Talmud, New Testament, and Quran in Babel, Twistianity, and God Damn Religion, making straight a raised highway through a lifeless world to Yahowah.

What follows may sound harsh, but these are words the world needs to hear. They are directed principally at the likes of Peter and Paul, Akiba and Maimonides, Muhammad and Joseph Smith, giving us the means to identify and disregard false prophets.

This is the means I have deployed, and that we should all use, to differentiate between truth and deception. It is why I have such confidence reintroducing Yahowah while heralding Dowd. And it explains why I am so bold in condemning the Talmud, New Testament, and Quran.

“With absolute certainty (‘ak – nevertheless, emphasizing the point, and to establish a contrast, notwithstanding this fact), the person who proclaims a message on behalf of a deity (ha naby’ – a prophet) who deliberately oversteps their bounds and speaks arrogantly and presumptuously, defiantly concocting a rebellious scheme (‘asher zyd – who has an inflated sense of self-worth, insolently demonstrating self-reliance while being insubordinate, who conceitedly pretends to know, insults others and is disrespectful, displaying pride in the pursuit of personal recognition and acclaim while despising rivals, who intentionally rebels against that which is established and is prone to rage, who seethes with anger and is repeatedly furious, overbearing and rude while insolently promoting their plans (hifil imperfect)) for the express purpose of conveying words (la dabar dabar – for the intent of communicating a message, stating it verbally or in writing (piel infinitive – continually and deliberately, actively and intensely speaking)) under My reputation and designation (ba shem ‘any – in My renown and name) which (‘asher ‘eth – implying access and relationship) I have not expressly appointed, taught, authorized, nor directed him (lo’ tsawah huw’ – I have not provided the instruction to him, I have not assigned, constituted, decreed, prescribed, or ordained this for him, deliberately and demonstrably making him My understudy and sending him out as My messenger (piel perfect)) to (la) convey (dabar – to speak and communicate), or (wa) who (‘asher) speaks (dabar – conveys a message) in the name (ba shem – in the designation or reputation) of other and additional (‘acher – different and subsequent) gods (‘elohym), then (wa) that prophet (ha naby’ ha huw’ – that individual who proclaims a message on behalf of that presumed deity) is actually deadly (muwth – he is literally devoid of life and is genuinely destructive, he is murderous, and while he will die, his death will not be permanent (qal perfect – the meaning is not nuanced or hypothetical, but real, and while his death will not be the end of his existence, there will be a cure for his plague)).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:20)

I know of such men – as do you. Peter and Paul, Matthew and Mark, Luke and John, followed by Akiba, Yochi, and Maimonides, along with relative come-latelies such as Muhammad, Smith, Marx, and Hubbard. The full tally of people who have claimed God’s authority for their edicts and actions is long and includes Greek and Roman emperors, the kings of Assyria and Babylon, Roman Catholic popes, Jewish rabbis, and the royal despots who ruled over Europe, China, Asia, South and Central America, and the Middle East. Those who have read Mein Kampf recognize that even Hitler could be included among the infamous.

Sha’uwl | Paul, the orator, author, and inspiration behind the Christian New Testament was the most egregious and obvious offender. He was also the most defiant and deadly – especially in his assault against Jews. The self-proclaimed Apostle was arrogant by his own admission. He seethed in rage against God’s chosen people, writing horrible things about them that would haunt them for two millennia.

Paul was also prone to exaggeration, falsely claiming 99.9% of the world’s population for himself. And he was a schemer, devising the most devilish plots against Yahowah’s Covenant, His Towrah, His Feasts, His Shabat – even against circumcision – and His Son.

In direct violation of this exhortation and prophecy, Paul boastfully and presumptuously claimed to speak for the God he continually contradicted, errantly cited, and misconstrued. What he said and wrote, rather than being inspired by God, was diametrically opposed to what Yahowah conveyed in His Towrah. Paul also promoted the names of false gods, writing in the name of the Lord, quoting Dionysus while basing his Gospel on the Greek Charities and Roman Graces. Even his Iesou Christo was a counterfeit – serving as a replacement for the man Paul envied – the one foretold here.

As a consequence of not using the Word of God to ascertain that Sha’uwl was the Plague of Death, the world’s most anti-Semitic religion took root and grew, leading to countless pogroms and eventually, to the Holocaust. If only there had been a Towrah-observant Jew with the intellect and character to compare what Paul said and wrote to this declaration within the Towrah that he was obviously violating, a New Testament would not have been added to what was deemed to be Old. If only, someone had come to realize that Dowd was the answer to Moseh’s pronouncement, and that he would lead the three most exemplary lives in human history, as a boy who became the Messiah, as a shepherd who saved his sheep, and as the Son who inherited his Father’s throne and became King. He is the only prophet, leader, lyricist, and defender of the flock who can be compared to Moseh. He is Beloved.

Since this is the answer which opens Heaven’s Door, along with the depiction of the rubbish blocking access, let’s linger here a bit longer and consider the words Moseh selected to teach us how to be discerning. They begin with zyd, which is an especially provocative term. It defines the egomaniacal and ostentatious like Paul, Akiba, and Muhammad because it serves as the juxtaposition of “arrogance and exaggeration, presumptuousness and contempt, uncontrollable rage and scheming deliberation, audacious disrespect and mean-spirited rebellion.” Zyd also speaks of “deliberate defiance, of intentionally scheming against” Yahowah. And having studied Paul, having written extensively about his egotistical and audacious plot to undermine the Towrah, Beryth, Miqra’ey, and Yahuwdym, then replace Yahowah and Dowd to establish his “new covenant” predicated upon placing one’s “faith in his Gospel of Grace,” I recognize that zyd’s every nuance serves to indict the founder of the Christian religion.

That is not to say that everything Paul wrote was false. Had it been, he wouldn’t have fooled anyone. Moreover, it isn’t how false prophets prevail. Effective deceptions almost always derive their perceived legitimacy from something that has been previously established. For example, Muhammad is called a “prophet” because the only credible aspects of the Quran are those he plagiarized from Talmud stories rabbis wrote to augment the Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr and then recited to the Devil’s Advocate for money. Even though Muhammad’s dubious transaction was the furthest thing from inspired, his ego wouldn’t allow him to be anything less than the equal of Moseh and Dowd, even though neither he, nor Paul, tendered a single accurate prediction. They both not only failed Yahowah’s assessment, as have the rabbis who enabled Paul and Muhammad, but they are the reason Yahowah provided His test.

To qualify as one of Yahowah’s prophets, everything that individual reveals must be entirely consistent with that which Yahowah has “tsawah – instructed (towrah), fashioned (the covenant), and directed (the feasts).” If every word isn’t inspired, accurate, and authorized then the prophet is false. There is no room for any deviation, any personal indulgence, any opinions, or so much as a single contradictory statement.

There is also the issue of an acknowledgment of Yahowah’s intent and authorization. God overtly called upon Moseh and then proved his prophetic credentials. The same is true with Yahowsha’, Shamuw’el, Dowd, Shalomoh, Yasha’yah, Howsha’, Yirma’yah, Chabaquwq, Yow’el, Zakaryah, and Mal’aky. And indeed, now we know why there were so many prophecies pointing to the appointment of Yahowah’s final messenger and witness, the Choter, Nakry, Zarowa’, Qowl, and Basar known as Yada. God is not shy when it comes to acknowledging and supporting those He has authorized as coworkers.

That said, this time there would be no need for additional prophecy because it would serve no purpose at this late date and be counterproductive. Yahowah has provided more than enough prophecy for His people to understand what He is offering and asking in return, even to ascertain when, where, and why the events of the remaining days will play out so that they can recognize the belligerents and appreciate the gifts being provided by their Messiah and King. For Yahowah, there is a sense of satisfaction in knowing that, while His people missed it, someone was able to figure His plan out based upon what He conveyed long ago. It was all there for the accepting.

If not appointed, acknowledged, and instructed by Yahowah, the writer or orator is likely expressing his or her own opinions and sentiments. And if appointed, acknowledged, and instructed by Yahowah, it’s vital that those who seek to know Yahowah listen to what the witness has been directed to convey.

That is not to suggest that there is no mention of Paul, Akiba, or Muhammad in the Word of God. There is, but it is all negative, particularly pertaining to Sha’uwl whom Yahowah called the Plague of Death, Father of Lies, and Son of Evil. Paul couldn’t even get an endorsement from his Iesou Christo, which is why he had to turn to Satan for authorization while en route to Damascus.

God is abundantly clear about who is, and is not, working with Him. He communicates when, where, and why they will be deployed and for whom. And in this regard, there isn’t a single rabbinical affirmation anywhere to be found in the Towrah or throughout the Prophets. Moseh was not a rabbi, as rabbis falsely claim. This title first appears in Paul’s epistles and then was backdated to other Jewish religious leaders.

By contrast, Dowd’s name is proclaimed by the Prophets more times than any other save his Father, Yahowah. In addition to being the most prolific prophet, after serving as the Shepherd and Messiah, and then Son of God and Savior, he is returning with Yahowah as the King of all that exists throughout the universe. And based upon all he has said and done, he has earned his inheritance and our respect. But at the very least, we ought not accept Judaism’s, Christianity’s, and Islam’s variations of Replacement Theology and rob our Savior and Shepherd of his accolades and achievements. Joining the Devil’s chorus not only precludes our admission into Shamaym, it angers his Father to the extent, many will have earned a one-way ticket to She’owl. And as should be expected, Paul, Akiba, and Muhammad will be there, ready to greet them.

The most acclaimed and admired men in the world, by claiming to speak of God, or worse, by acting as prophets, are actually the most despised by God. And this is because when a person claims God’s authorization and inspiration as did Paul, Akiba, Muhammad, Maimonides, and as a plethora of rabbis and popes have done, their testimony and their claims lead thousands, millions, and billions away from God and to their demise. Claiming to be right, they are never correct.

There can be no latitude, no compromise, no accommodation, or justification because a false prophet cannot be exonerated by pointing out that some of the things he wrote were true. It only takes a single errant stroke to expose an imposter – and all of those we are considering were wrong far more than they were right. A false prophet’s lack of respect for Yahowah’s Word, His Name, His Towrah, His Covenant, His Invitations, His People, and His Son, are individually sufficient to denounce them.

Every prophet who spoke for Yahowah affirmed the Towrah. They share God’s Guidance and Teaching and do not amend His Instructions, challenge them, replace them, or annul them. Their focus is always on Yisra’el – either to teach or defend the nation. Within their revelation, Yahowah speaks in first person and is frequently named, followed by Dowd and Moseh. No one else matters, other than to identify the cast of characters interacting with and misleading Yisra’el – past, present, and future.

The unique and enlightening nature of Hebrew stems and conjunctions can influence the way we convey verbs such as muwth | death. In the qal stem, we should perceive false prophets as being genuinely deadly and recognize that their words are actually lifeless. There is then good and bad news relative to the perfect conjugation. On the positive side, the plagues inspired by such men will not endure because God has devised a cure. But as for the liars themselves, by writing muwth such that the consequence is time-constrained, the false prophet’s death will not be the end of their existence. And this means Yahowah intends to dispatch such souls to She’owl where they will remain incarcerated and separated forevermore. The men who strove in life to decide who enters Heaven will find themselves on the wrong side of Hell’s door.

Since this is a life-and-death matter, Yahowah wants His people to be absolutely certain who was speaking for Him and against Him. Therefore, He said…

“And if you say (wa ky ‘amar) using your best judgment (ba lebab ‘atah – in your heart), ‘How (‘eykah – in what way) can we actually and consistently know (yada’ – will we be able to continually recognize and be aware, understand, appreciate, become familiar with, and acknowledge) the statements which (‘eth ha dabar ‘asher – the message and words that) Yahowah (Yahowah – God’s name transliterated as guided by His towrah – instructions on His hayah – existence and His role in our shalowm – reconciliation as ‘elowah – Almighty God), Himself (huw’), has not spoken (lo’ dabar huw’ – has not communicated or stated)?’ (Dabarym 18:21)

When a prophet speaks (‘asher dabar ha naby’) in the reputation and designation (ba shem – using the notoriety, status, and name) of Yahowah (YaHoWaH), and the matter discussed (ha dabar – that account and verbal depiction) has not occurred (lo’ hayah – has not happened (qal imperfect – literally and actually from the beginning to the present time and beyond)) or (wa) does not come to be (lo’ bow’ – does not happen (qal imperfect)), this is a message (huw’ ha dabar – these are words) that (‘asher) Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of YaHoWaH, our ‘elowah – God as directed in His ToWRaH – teaching regarding His HaYaH – existence and our ShaLoWM – restoration) has not spoken to him (lo’ dabar huw’ – has not communicated to him).

Such a prophet (naby’) has stated it (dabar huw’ – he has communicated this) arrogantly, presumptively, and independently of his own accord (ba zadown – insolently and inappropriately, showing a lack of respect and restraint, being self-motivated while acting contemptuously and rebelliously). You should not revere or respect him for having conspired to incite an alienating rebellion (lo’ guwr min huw’ – you should not be inspired by him or show any anxiety or fear toward him based upon this harmful and foreign attack).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:22)

This begins by putting the onus on us. We have been provided the information we need to differentiate truth from deception. So, God says that after using our best judgment, if we remain unaware, then we can resort to using prophecy as the litmus test.

If what someone claims was inspired has not occurred or does not occur, they are not speaking for Yahowah. The ability to consistently and accurately report in our past what will occur in the future is something that God, alone, can accomplish. The same is true with the distant past, in the time before either man or writing. For example, every nuance of the creation account conveyed through Moseh in Bare’syth / Genesis transpired the way he described it – long before knowing this was possible any other way.

No prophecy, no prophet. Similarly, a single errant prediction or depiction destroys the individual’s credibility. By this test – Yahowah’s test – Paul, Akiba, Muhammad, Maimonides, et al. were not prophets and did not speak for God. As such, there is no credible basis for Christianity, Judaism, or Islam. So why are there any Christians, Orthodox Jews, or Muslims? Do you suppose they can’t read? Don’t they think? Are they ignorant or just apathetic? Those are the only options because all three religions claim that their God inspired these words.

Yahowah wants His people to recognize and condemn false prophets because they are devastatingly deadly. Their message must be obliterated for humanity to survive and thrive. The Christian incorporation of Paul’s epistles into their New Testament and their binding it up with the Torah and Prophets has caused billions to die needlessly.

Our ignorance of Mein Kampf led to the deaths of 50 million people. Muhammad’s Quranic poison has been even more lethal. It has eternally damned three billion souls. But Pauline Christianity has been the deadliest of them all, leading to the destruction of more souls than all other religions combined.

The solution is intolerance. False prophets must be identified, exposed, and condemned. It is the most reasonable and compassionate thing to do. This is the express intent of God Damn Religion, Babel, and now Twistianity.

Few things are more important than knowing who is speaking for God and who is not. Should we trust the scroll scribed by Moseh recording Yahowah’s testimony or the letters Paul dictated to unknown scribes? After all, the consequences are life and death, vindication or condemnation, adoption or estrangement, salvation or damnation.

From a slightly different perspective, should we be accepting and respectful of Paul, Muhammad, Maimonides, Joseph Smith, Karl Marx, Adolf Hitler, or even Donald Trump and Joe Biden, Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping to keep from offending the millions who have placed their faith in them? Recognizing what is at stake, Yahowah has provided us with a definitive answer, both in style and substance.

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

1)
Is the person a naby’: someone who claims to speak on behalf of God? This is a screening codicil. If a person admits that they are speaking for themselves, then they would be excluded from this analysis.

2)
Is the person zyd: someone who oversteps their bounds, acting presumptuously with an inflated sense of self-worth, demonstrating self-reliance while taking liberties, someone who arrogantly pretends to know, who insults others and is disrespectful, displaying pride in the pursuit of personal recognition and acclaim while demeaning competitors, someone who rebels against the legitimate authority and is prone to anger, someone who seethes with frustration and is often furious, overbearing, rude, or conceited? This is a broad net, one which catches almost every imposter.

3)
Does the person la dabar dabar ba ‘any shem: openly and publicly preach to others, communicating their message in the name or designation of God? As was the case with the first codicil, this is also a screening test. If the individual in question has an insignificantly small audience, if their preaching is done in private, if their influence is limited in time and place, then there would be no reason to assess their credentials.

4)
Is the person’s message ‘lo tsawah: inconsistent with what God has instructed, taught, and directed in His Towrah? Does the message conflict with what God appointed and decreed? Does it vary from His prior testimony? This is where the rabbis fail, in addition to Paul and Muhammad. They can’t even keep their own stories straight, much less be consistent with God.

5)
Does the person dabar ba shem ‘acher ‘elohym: speak in the name of gods other than Yahowah? Replacing Yahowah’s name with the Lord, Jesus Christ, Allah, Adonai, HaShem, and G-d is common among false prophets.

6)
Does the person hayah: accurately convey what has happened in the past, and do their predictions of the future bow’: materialize and come to exist as they have stated them? This is a test only a real prophet can pass. And the last of them spoke 2,500 years ago.

Yahowah proved that He inspired the Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr by punctuating His words with prophetic revelations – all of which have long since come true, or are materializing before our eyes, just as foretold. Since only God has witnessed the future, His “predictions” are always right, as He is reporting future history. In this way, He uses prophecy to demonstrate that His testimony is reliable.

By reviewing this prophecy, we have learned a great deal about the nature and purpose of God. There is just one God with one name, one Covenant, a single Towrah, seven Invitations, and one Messiah, Shepherd, Son, and King who is leading us Home. Yahowah has provided the guidance we need to know Him and understand what He is offering. Equally important, He has affirmed the means to prove His existence and validate His promises.

The Yisra’elites no doubt missed it, but when Moseh asked God to choose a man to lead them after him, His answer was prophetic…

“Then (wa) Moseh (Mosheh – one who draws out) spoke (dabar) to and for (‘el) Yahowah (YaHoWaH – our ‘elowah | God as directed in His ToWRaH | teaching regarding His HaYaH | existence and our ShaLoWM | restoration) to convey (‘amar la – to affirm): (Bamidbar 27:15)

‘Yahowah ( – a transliteration of YaHoWaH as instructed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence), Almighty (‘elohym) of the Spirits (ha ruwachoth) for any Herald serving as a human messenger (la kol basar – for each who announce and publish the good news as a biological being (masculine singular absolute)), has chosen to summon and appoint for the purpose of being accountable (paqad – He is determined to draft, muster, and assign responsibility for a careful inspection and accounting to review and instruct (qal imperfect jussive – literally and actually, continually and consistently, according to His will)), an individual man (‘iysh – a person) positioned as (‘al – of the Almighty for) the Witness on behalf of the eternal and restoring testimony to the community (ha ‘edah – the witnessing congregation who remember the agreement and will be adorned and attributed high status; from ‘ed – witness and testimony and ‘uwd – enduring and restoring), (Bamidbar 27:16) who, for the benefit of the relationship (‘asher – who, to show the proper way to get the greatest joy out of life), will be brought out to disseminate the information publicly (yatsa’ – he will come out and go forth to serve, to emancipate, withdraw, and lead (qal imperfect)) before them (la paneh hem – for whose appearance and presence is before them).

And to reveal the correct path to the relationship (wa ‘asher), he will arrive to pursue their return and inclusion (bow’ hem – he will come to prepare them for and include them in the harvest (hifil imperfect)) such that they will not be without (wa lo’ hayah – because they will not exist without (qal imperfect)) a witness on behalf of the community assembled through the eternal and restoring testimony (‘edah – the witnessing congregation who remember the agreement to elevate one’s status; from ‘ed – witness and testimony and ‘uwd – enduring and restoring) of Yahowah (Yahowah), akin to (ka) a flock of sheep (ha tso’n) who are without a shepherd to guide them (‘asher ‘ayn la hem ra’ah – who will be without someone to lead, protect, and nourish them).’ (Bamidbar 27:17)

Then (wa) Yahowah (Yahowah – God’s name transliterated as guided by His towrah – instructions on His hayah – existence) said (‘amar) to Moseh (‘el Mosheh – one who draws out): ‘Of your own initiative you should want to take and obtain for yourself (laqach la ‘atah – choose to accept and grasp hold for you (qal imperative)) ‘eth Yahowsha’ ben Nuwn | with Yahowah, the Children who are Delivered Continue to Grow, Eternally Empowered and Enriched (‘eth Yahowsha’ ben Nuwn), an individual (‘iysh) who, to lead along the proper path to receive the benefits of the relationship (‘asher), has the Spirit in him (ruwach ba huw’).

Be supported and upheld by placing your hands on him (wa samak ‘eth yad atah ‘al huw’ – be sustained and established by supporting him with your influence).’” (Bamidbar / In the Wilderness / Numbers 27:18)

There is the propensity of the casual reader to think that the opening statement was directed toward Yahowsha’, but that isn’t possible. Yahowsha’ was not only a prophet in his own right, and thus not a messenger or witness, he had been at Moseh’s side as the heir apparent since the beginning. Further, as was the case with Dowd after him, he received a single application of Yahowah’s Ruwach | Spirit. Whereas God was clear to say that a basar | Herald serving as a human messenger of vital news would be enabled by all the Ruwachoth | Spirits he would need to serve as ha ‘edah | the Witness conveying the eternal testimony to the community.

Further, the Herald and Witness would be brought forth to disseminate the information revealing the correct path to the relationship publicly. Unlike Yahowsha’ who was already on the scene and fully engaged, the Spiritually equipped Herald and Witness would one day arrive to pursue the return of God’s people, preparing them for the Harvests. Knowing that they would be without a prophet for two and a half millennia, He knew that they wouldn’t be ready for the Shabuw’ah or Taruw’ah Harvests nor survive to celebrate the Homecoming on Kipurym without an ‘Edah | Witness. So, Yahowah was announcing that He would provide and equip a Herald to serve as a Witness to shepherd His flock back Home. As a result: ‘eth Yahowsha’ ben Nuwn | with Yahowah the Children who are Delivered Continue to Grow, Eternally Empowered and Enriched.

Therefore, as a result of Yahowah’s statement regarding His desire to keep Yisra’el informed and prepared for the harvests, we are tasked with properly translating basar, paqad, ‘edah, yatsa’, and bow’, each of which can be rendered in complementary ways. Since animals have souls, not spirits, and since we only know of one individual immersed in Yahowah’s Spirits (plural), rendering kol basar as “all flesh” following a reference to the Ruwachoth | Spirits of God is senseless, even though that is how it is portrayed in almost every English translation. And that’s particularly odd because by associating the Spirit with the flesh, the central pillar of Pauline Christianity falls. Also, since Hebrew words are defined by their verbal roots, it is important to recognize that the actionable base of basar, which was masculine singular, speaks of a “herald who is a messenger bringing important news.”

This is consistent with what Yahowah explained in Yasha’yah / Isaiah 11, when He promised to yatsa’ | extend a Choter | Secondary Branch on behalf of His people and then empower him with His seven Ruwach | Spirits. And so in a moment, we will consider the pronouncement that awakened me to this mission some years ago.

Turning to paqad, and noting that it was presented in the qal | literal stem, imperfect | ongoing conjugation, and jussive | volitional mood, every definition seems to apply to God’s standard operating practice, which is “to choose, summon, and appoint someone who is willing to conduct a careful investigation of the available information, assess it correctly, and then render an accurate accounting pursuant to God’s will, while being consistently responsible over a prolonged period of time.”

Aware that both basar | herald and ‘iysh | individual were scribed in the singular form, and that ha ‘edah | the restoring witness to the community was preceded by the definite article, it was written as a title. Based upon the verbal root, ‘uwd | restoring and enduring, ‘ed and ‘edah describe someone who “serves as a witness providing regenerative and sustaining testimony to an assembled community.” Other nuances of ‘edah lead us to the realization that as a result of the restoring testimony, the community will be attributed an exceptionally high status with God and will be appropriately adorned by Him.

This brings us to ‘asher yatsa’ which reveals that “for the benefit of the relationship and to show the way to get the most out of life,” Yahowah intends to “bring this individual forth as part of a secondary exodus such that by disseminating the proper information he will serve to withdraw and emancipate a remnant of Yisra’el.” With yatsa’, the Basar and ha ‘Edah is serving as a latter-day Moseh. I say this because yatsa’ is the verb Yahowah selected to describe the Yatsa’ | Exodus from Mitsraym | the Crucibles of Religious and Political Oppression.

Therefore, this robustly empowered Basar | Herald is equipped with His Spirits to share His ‘edah | eternal and restoring testimony as the ‘Edah | Witness on behalf of the Covenant, yatsa’ | leading the flock away from danger by disseminating the information the people need to withdraw from the harmful influences of religion and politics.

‘Asher is used throughout this prophetic declaration to affirm that Yahowah’s focus is on showing His people the proper path to follow to receive the benefits of the relationship. And in this regard, the verb bow’ reveals that “he will arrive to pursue the return of God’s people such that they are included in the upcoming harvests.” He is speaking of Shabuw’ah and Taruw’ah, both of which will be fulfilled in the near future. And it is why Yahowah concludes this prophecy by reminding His people that He will not leave them without a Witness, and that through His restoring testimony the flock will have a shepherd to guide and nourish them. And as a result, ‘eth Yahowsha’ ben Nuwn | with Yahowah the Children who are Delivered Continue to Grow, Eternally Empowered and Enriched by God because this ‘iysh | individual will ‘asher | lead them along the proper path to receive the benefits of the relationship such that ruwach ba huw’ | the spirit is with them.

Before we move on, let’s consider what Yahowah had to say about His unprecedented support for the expansive role of His Choter | Secondary Branch, which is a descriptive title for the Basar | Herald and ‘Edah | Witness, would play in awakening His wayward children.

“Then a Choter | a shoot, secondary branch, and sucker from the fallen stump (wa choter – a stem or smaller branch, a slender stick or twig, a pliable wooden instrument, a secondary source of growth serving as a living entity delivering progeny, an observant individual who is willing to listen and who is committed to thinking while collecting the things Yahowah values as an unrestrained extension) will be extended for a limited time (yatsa’ – he will be brought forth to serve (qal perfect active sequential third-person masculine singular)) by means of (min – out of) the stock (geza’ – the stump and root from which new growth emerges, the trunk which has been cut down and yet is capable of supporting new shoots) of Yshay | to Stand Out and Be Noticed (Yshay – To Draw Attention to the Substance of Existence; from yesh – to exist and become substantial, to stand up and be noticed), as (wa) an observant branch (netser – a secondary stem or shoot which extends from a primary limb; from natsar – to observe, watch over, and preserve, to closely look after, focus on, and protect) by means of (min) his roots, and that which keeps him anchored, steadfast, and nourished (sheresh huw’ – his base and foundation, that which keeps him firmly established), such that he will continually bear an abundance of fruit, being productive while encouraging productivity in others (parah – so that he will be consistently fruitful while causing and enabling prosperity on behalf of successive generations (qal imperfect)). (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 11:1)

This is because (wa) the Spirit (ruwach – Divine power, influence, and energy, the mind and essence, the feminine touch and understanding, the Maternal acceptance and support, the protection and light, especially the faculty to respond) of Yahowah (Yahowah) will settle and remain on him (nuwach ‘al huw’ – She was placed upon him, She energizes him and restores him, She is in an alliance with him, dwelling and residing within him, never departing his abode while She enriches the association and assures the most favorable outcome for him, enabling him to be composed and prevail no matter the challenge (qal perfect third-person feminine singular and third-person masculine singular)), the Spirit (ruwach) providing the capacity to comprehend and teach (chakmah – offering the mental aptitude and wisdom to instruct, comprehension and technical expertise to do what is required to impart understanding and to educate) and (wa) enabling understanding by making connections to reveal insights (binah – facilitating the propensity to ponder and process information by being perceptive and discerning, discriminating and judgmental, making intelligent associations which lead to a conceptual comprehension, revealing how to react and respond after full and thoughtful consideration; from byn – making connections between and among things so as to find patterns and relationships which enlighten), the Spirit (ruwach) of advice and counsel (‘etsah – of pertinent directions regarding how to properly respond, providing prudent consultation on the purpose of the proposal, delivering effective mentoring on how to deliberate relevant decisions) and of being emboldened and inspiring (wa gebuwrah – on how to be a strong, courageous leader who is empowering, able to accomplish the mission and perform until it is complete, providing the aptitude and capability to confirm what is true, offering the mental discipline to be unwavering, championing the cause with courage, character, and confidence, always fighting to defend God’s people and affirm their rights), the Spirit (ruwach) of knowing and knowledge (da’ath – of recognizing where to look for answers and acquiring information, of being aware of the evidence and being able to discern what is relevant and accurate, of discriminating between fact and fiction and right and wrong, so as to recognize and acknowledge the truth; from yada’ – to learn and to know, to recognize and acknowledge, to consider and comprehend, to become acquainted and personally familiar) so as (wa) to respect and revere (yira’ah – to appreciate the awesome nature, outstanding character, superlative ability, and astonishing greatness and be inspired by) Yahowah (Yahowah). (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 11:2)

Additionally (wa – in addition), by accepting the offer and responding appropriately, he will be perceptive (ryach huw’ – his acceptance and perceptiveness, his nose for the truth, his willingness to respond and supply answers after his virtual meeting will be pleasing, bringing him very close (hifil infinitive perfect)) with regard to developing a profound admiration and respect for (ba yira’ah – with the ability to appreciate the awesome wonderment and astonishing greatness so as to be inspired by) Yahowah (Yahowah).

Therefore (wa), it will not be by an appearance or vision (lo’ la mare’ah – and will not be through the visual form which can be seen nor from any spiritual revelation, miraculous vision, or supernatural phenomenon) seen with his eyes (‘ayn huw’ – of his own perceptions or perspectives, appearances or personal understanding) that he will decide (shaphat – that he will confront the evidence and will judge, making decisions). Also (wa), it will not be by hearsay (lo’ la mishma’ – not by rumors or innuendo, not by word of mouth or that which is passed around person to person, nor by listening to information which cannot be verified; from my – to question and shama’ – listening) heard with his ears (‘ozen huw) that he will make judgments or prove his arguments (yakach – he will offer advice and seek to resolve disputes, make decisions regarding vindication, complain, or hurl accusations, chide, attempt to disprove, or determine who is right, nor debate). (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 11:3)

He will exercise good judgment (wa shaphat – he will decide, judging and adjudicating the matter, arguing to resolve disputes) by (ba) seeking to be accurate, honest, and forthright (tsedeq – being fair and correct, in accord with the truth, avoiding any conflict or inconsistency with the established standard) with regard to opening the doorway for the discerning (dal – advice on providing a way in for the few and otherwise insignificant, using spoken words to disclose the entrance on behalf of the needy, societally disenfranchised, and unpretentious who have been deprived; from dalah – to draw conclusions and thus be discerning).

He will provide proof using sound arguments (yakach – he will use evidence and reason to decide, judge and correct, engaging in dialog to resolve disputes while criticizing, accusing, and condemning, making the case to vindicate or convict (hifil perfect)) with (ba) everything out in the open, doing so fairly (myshowr – by putting everything on the table, on the level, nothing hidden, justly and equitably in a very forthright and direct manner; from yashar – to be right, approved, and candid) on behalf of (la) the sincere who are seeking straightforward answers (‘anaw – those who are willing to respond but who need some assistance from a witness with answers to their questions who is constantly thinking about making such declarations; from ‘anah – to respond after receiving answers, testifying as a witness) of the Land (‘erets – of the material realm).

Then (wa) he will strike, verbally attacking and disabling (nakah – he will confront, crippling and incapacitating, sarcastically mocking, chastising, and judging, while pointing out the irony of it all to ravage and defeat, ending lives within (hifil perfect masculine singular – he will use the staff to strike a debilitating blow for a time at the direction of another)) the material realm (‘erets – those on the earth) with the rod and staff (ba shebet – on behalf of the nation and tribes with the implement) of his mouth and, thus, his voice (peh huw’).

And with (wa ba – along with) the Spirit (ruwach) of his lips and resulting language (saphah huw’ – his speech), he will devastate (muwth – he will destroy, even kill) the wicked and the wrong (rasha’ – the Godless whose thoughts, words, and deeds are criminal and evil, of those deserving condemnation for having been in violation of the standard, of those guilty of creating disunity and disharmony). (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 11:4)

Being right, correct, and honest (wa tsedeq – being accurate, righteous, upright, fair, and just, redeemed, vindicated, and innocent, rational and in accord with the standard) will be (hayah) the belt around his waist (‘ezowr mothenym huw’ – the sash, band, and cloth around his midsection, supporting his back while protecting his core) and (wa) the trustworthy and reliable nature of the witness (‘emuwnah – the integrity and dependability of the individual and testimony, by keeping it real and genuine, steadfast and truthful, honest and valid; from ‘aman – to support and confirm that which is trustworthy and reliable, upholding and verifiable) will be the band girding him (‘ezowr chalats huw’ – the belt and sash around his manhood, virility, and loins; from chalats – to be rescued and delivered, withdrawn and invigorated).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 11:5)

After that enlightening and inspiring introduction to Yahowah’s Choter, this exceptional prophecy continues by introducing the Nes, which is a written document, a Sign, Yahowah intends to lift to call His people home…

“Then (wa) it shall come to pass (hayah) in that day (ba ha yowm ha huw’), the root which anchors and nourishes (sheresh huw’ – the base and foundation, the source and family line, that is steadfast and focused on the root of the matter) of Yshay | to Stand Out and Be Noticed (Yshay – To Draw Attention to the Substance of Existence), who showed the way to the benefits of the relationship (‘asher – who served as a guide, leading and directing others to the correct path to walk to give meaning to life and to experience the greatest blessings), will stand up, present and accounted for (‘amad – will stand before someone who is superior, presenting the means to evaluate the One who appointed and sustains him, providing the means to assess the evidence and make a thoughtful decision (qal participle)), approaching as (la – toward the goal of producing) a Nes | Sign (nes – a standard bearer, a signal and ensign, something written and lifted up as a banner to communicate a message to those who are observant; from the Hebrew Nun  Seed (symbolic of the Zarowa’ – one sowing the seeds for the harvest) and Samech  Sign (branching out like a tree with three branches, symbolic of the Choter – secondary branch)) for the family (‘am ‘el – for the people who are related (describing the Children of Yisra’el and the Covenant)).

Through him (‘el huw’ – as he leads, providing directions to approach God), gentiles (gowym – people unrelated to or living outside of Yisra’el) will continue to seek (darash – they will inquire about, search for, and investigate, expecting to find a responsible presentation about engaging in the relationship which is nourishing and keeps them safe with ongoing implications throughout time (qal imperfect active)).

And so therefore (wa), his restful residence (manuwchah huw’ – his place of repose and reflection, His comfortable habitation; from nuwach – spiritual contentment and nawah – living in a spiritual dwelling where sheep abide) will exist as (hayah) a reward and a source of enrichment, energy, and enlightenment (kabowd – a valuable and dignified gift, existing as a place of abundance, as a manifestation of something wonderful, and as an attribution of an inheritance of impressive splendor).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 11:10)

There are many interesting possibilities associated with the Nes since this Sign scribed by the Choter | Secondary Branch was presented growing out of the rootstock and stump responsible for Dowd and representing Yisra’el. Written beginning with the Hebrew Nun  Seed and Son, it is closely associated with the “zarowa’ – one sowing the seeds for the harvest.” This is particularly interesting because it is followed by a Samech  Sign leaning in the direction Hebrew is written from right to left. This sign features three branches in diminishing size, symbolic of the three Zarowa’, with Dowd being the largest, Moseh in the middle, and Yada as the smallest, and thus a stem among the greater limbs.

Therefore, even more than a “sign,” the Samech has the appearance of either an olive tree or a grapevine with espaliered branches. These would not only suggest that its message would be scribed by a Choter but, also, that it is firmly rooted in the garden Dowd planted on Tsyown, which itself means Signs Posted Along the Way. From this perspective, it takes us back to the Tree of Lives and reminds us that Yahowah’s Ben | Son is the main Tsemach | Branch bringing new life. Therefore, considering the  composition, with the Nes we see a Zarowa’, one of three, sowing seeds which take root and grow as Dowd’s espaliered vineyard on Tsyown | the Signs Posted Along the Way and as the olive which is gleaned on Taruw’ah, bearing fruit for the final harvest. And it is growing out of the root from which the Son emerged and from the trunk representing fallen Yisra’el which will rise and bear fruit again. All of this and more is scribed on the Choter’s Sign on behalf of the Harvests and the return of the main Tsemach and Zarowa’.

As a result of this enormous effort, all directed toward Yahowah’s wayward children, many return home…

“So (wa) it will have come to pass (hayah) in that day (ba ha yowm ha huw’), my Upright One (‘edowny) will once again associate (yasaph – will increasingly add, again joining (hifil imperfect active)) His hand (yad huw’ – His influence and power) a second time (sheny) to reacquire, bring forth, and redeem (qanah – to provide rebirth to, recover, and obtain) the remnant (‘eth sha’ar – the residual) of His family (‘am huw’ – His people (the Children of Yisra’el)) who remain (‘asher sha’ar) out of (min) ‘Ashuwr | Northern Iran & Iraq (‘Ashuwr), from (wa min) Mitsraym | Lower Egypt (Mitsraym), out of Pathrows | Upper Egypt (wa min Pathrows), from (wa min) Kuwsh | Arabian Peninsula (Kuwsh), out of (wa min) ‘Elam | Southwestern Iran (‘Elam), from (wa min) Shin’ar | Iraq / Babylon (Shin’ar), out of (wa min) Chamath | Syria (Chamath), and from (wa min) the coastlands (‘y – the inhabited shores of countries bordered by large bodies of water / notably: Lebanon, the United States, Canada, Central and South America, Western, Southern, and Northern Europe, Turkey, India, Australia, and Northern and Southern Africa) of the sea (ha yam – of the gentiles). (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 11:11)

So (wa) He will lift up (nasa’ – He will bring forth and raise (qal perfect)) a Nes | Sign (nes – the standard, a banner and ensign, something which is designed to communicate a message on behalf of those who are observant, the standard bearer providing a signal, a message written and lifted up as a banner to communicate; from the Hebrew Nun  Seed (symbolic of the Zarowa’ – one sowing the seeds for the harvest) and Samech  Sign (branching out like a tree with three branches, symbolic of the Choter – secondary branch)) for the gentiles and their nations (gowym – for ethnicities, people, and places other than Yisra’el). Then (wa) He will gather together and remove (‘asaph – He will collect and assemble as in a harvest, bringing together and withdrawing (qal perfect)) the straying and scattered (nadach – the banished of the diaspora who were expelled and forced to live in a different place) of Yisra’el (Yisra’el – Individuals who Engage and Endure with God).

And (wa) the dispersed (puwts – the scattered who are away from home and shattered) of Yahuwdah (Yahuwdah – Beloved and Related to Yah) He will gather up and obtain (qabats – He will collect, assemble, and relocate as a result of the relationship, harvesting them (piel imperfect)) from (min) the four (‘arba’) extremities (kanaph – distant places, corners, or borders) of the earth (‘erets – of the land).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 11:12)

I am obviously appreciative and energized to have been chosen and equipped for this extraordinary purpose. But make no mistake, it hasn’t been easy. I have devoted twelve hours a day, six and seven days a week, for the past 23 years to translating, studying, contemplating, and sharing insights derived from the Towrah wa Naby’. In the process, I have been afforded a unique understanding of God’s revelations, deducing conclusions that have been unheralded throughout time.



Returning to the rubbish of religion, I had once thought that the only aspects of the Greek eyewitness accounts which might be considered credible would have been the words and deeds of Yahowsha’, upon which I assumed the Greek Iesous was derived. But live and learn, he was a myth born of Replacement Theology, taking what rightfully belonged to Dowd and misappropriating it.

The next plank to fall was what I had wrongly assumed could have been the eyewitness account of the Disciple Lowy | Levi in what is now called “Matthew” (see Mark 2:14, Luke 5:27 and compare Matthew 9:9). But then upon further consideration I discovered that it was plagiarized from three sources (Mark, Luke, and the ‘Ebownym) two generations and seven decades after Dowd’s arrival in Jerusalem. But at least it wasn’t a complete loss because the contributions of the ‘Ebownym were considerable, bringing us almost all of the content not previously recorded in Mark and Luke, and thus the “Sermon on the Mount” and the “Olivet Discourse.”

So, what about portions of Yahowchanan / John? Could they be credible? A modicum of research showed otherwise, with no way to attribute the book to anyone who might have been in Yaruwshalaim when these events played out between 30 and 33 CE. The “Gospel” now bearing his name was written in Ephesus around 95 CE, and, thus, was too far removed in time and place to have been from an eyewitness or credible. Making matters worse, the extant evidence of it prior to the 4th century, when Eusebius amalgamized and augmented the text to the Church’s liking, came exclusively from the hands of Egyptian scribes, and none of it passes the Dabarym test for Divine inspiration.

Revelation is also attributed to John, but it must be discarded because it is not only crudely plagiarized, but it relies most heavily on Ezekiel – a Babylonian text I have demonstrated is actually Satan’s autobiography and playbook in the Babel series – Abominable and Venomous. Since Revelation doesn’t cite its references and passes off some 500 or more paraphrased prophecies as its own, even though they were usurped from Ezekiel, Daniel, Isaiah, and the Psalms, it isn’t worth the paper it was written on. It was not received as a vision as Revelation claims but, instead, by copy, paste, augment, and pervert.

Having devoted 80,000 hours these past twenty-three years to accurately translating Yahowah’s testimony from the oldest extant sources, and then to making the proper connections between inspired texts to understand what is being conveyed by the prophets as a collective whole, I can attest that it is a massive undertaking. Many conclusions are readily deduced and affirmed while other insights are derived over time and then corroborated by further study.

The process is akin to a developing picture, where some portions come into focus more readily than others, and some remain blurry deep into the process. It could also be equated to assembling a jigsaw puzzle, where the pieces are not properly placed until the colors and contours surrounding them are understood.

All too often, prior religious conditioning will jaundice and distort our perceptions. As an example, I am now presenting “Jesus” as a mythical misnomer and crude religious replacement for Dowd because I am cognizant that our Shepherd and King is the Son of God, Messiah, and Savior as he and his Father affirmed.

In another example, it wasn’t until I was able to prove that the portrayal of Pentecost, representing Shabuw’ah, in Acts was a colossal fraud, as were Paul’s failed prophecies regarding the “Rapture” on Trumpets, which is Taruw’ah, that I was open to the realization that the Shabuw’ah Harvest of prominent and mature grain is the next to be fulfilled. The prophetic evidence indicates that on May 22nd, 2026, the Covenant Family will be withdrawn at the onset of the Time of Israel’s Troubles, commencing seven years prior to Yahowah’s return with Dowd. And this means that the upcoming Taruw’ah Harvest in the fall seven years later is of olives, and thus of Yahuwdym. Therefore, this final gleaning will occur on the 25th of September 2033, just ten days prior to the fulfillment of Kipurym, followed five days thereafter by Sukah.

As yet another example, once the demonic deceptions conveyed in Ezekiel were expunged, and only after Gabry’el’s | God’s Most Courageous and Competent Man’s (Dowd’s) prophecies as recorded by Dany’el were understood, I was finally able to date the fulfillment of the remaining Miqra’ey. I was also able to deduce that the treaty thinning Israel at the waist by carving a Fakestinian State out of Israel, will be imposed in May, 2026, while the resulting invasion of Muslims on an unprecedented scale will not commence until June of the following year.

It is only with a receptive mind, cleared of religious clutter, that the diligent study of correctly translated prophetic text viewed as a collective whole yields acceptable results. And because we never stop learning and deducing these insightful correlations, and as a result of being a Witness, not a Prophet, I must be diligent in correcting the record when we find evidence which leads to a more universally acceptable solution to the puzzle. And that explains what I’m doing here rewriting Questioning Paul as Twistianity.

As I have shared previously, Mark is entirely hearsay because he didn’t witness a single event addressed in his book. It not only ends oddly, with the disappearance of the Jesus character, Paul admits to having designs on using Mark to his advantage. And as it would transpire, the Gospel attributed to Luke, Paul’s personal healer, was largely based on Mark. And what it adds to it should be considered fables on the level of Homer’s Odyssey.

The current order of the New Testament, as arranged and augmented by Eusebius and his Church, creates the false impressions that the initial four portrayals of the life of Jesus were written by eyewitnesses and that they came first, before Luke’s portrayal of Paul’s life in Acts and Sha’uwl’s fourteen letters. But the inverse of both presumptions is true, in that Paul’s epistles preceded the Gospels attributed to Mark and Luke, and that it is Acts and these epistles which were scribed by actual, albeit jaundiced, eyewitnesses to the events in question. This is the reason that there isn’t a single citation in any of Paul’s letters referencing something found in Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John – which is incredible considering Sha’uwl’s claim that he was writing on behalf of the Gospel’s Jesus. And this explains why the resulting Gospels reflect Paul’s anti-Semitic conspiracies and blood libels toward Jews. In other words, Paul created the fraud that Matthew, Mark, and Luke sought to affirm.

And so in the end, Christianity is a product of Paul’s poison pen and vitriolic diatribes. And it is those letters, beginning with Galatians, which are readily and convincingly disproven – leaving the religion with no basis upon which to stand. And this means that the ensuing millennium of persecution of Jews is without justification.

But the story does not end there because to an overwhelming extent, the advent of rabbinic Judaism was conceived to mitigate the menacing threat posed by Christianity. It is the reason that Akiba foisted the ruse of his own false Messiah in 133 CE, leading to the deaths of millions of Jews and to the Diaspora.

And it was all because Jewish religious leaders at the time failed to do as I have done, which is to study the Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr as a collective whole and correctly deduce the intent of the Beryth and Miqra’ey and then determine who would fulfill them, where, why, how, and when. Had they done so, Paul’s dubious and duplicitous, ill-contrived and unsupported, myths advanced through Replacement Theology would have failed outright and died a lonely death with him.

Within Sha’uwl’s epistles, there is only one partial citation from the mythical misnomer, Jesus Christ, and not surprisingly, it is in conflict with what was subsequently included in the Gospels. And there are no accurate quotations from Yahowah’s Towrah or Prophets. This realization serves as an admission that his letters not only contain his opinions, but that he was willing to misrepresent the word of God to give his delusions the veneer of Divine sanction.

In this light, you may have noticed that in the four Galatian passages already cited, Sha’uwl’s thoughts were poorly conveyed, opening the door to a wide variety of interpretations. His citations were all misquoted, taken out of context, and then twisted to convey the opposite of God’s intent. Sha’uwl’s reasoning was flawed and much of what he said was historically inaccurate. Frankly, it is insulting to suggest that God inspired anything he wrote.

To understand any message, we must approach and consider it in context. The practice of removing and then citing isolated comments to make a point is usually misleading, creating an invalid impression. It is how the church justifies religious doctrines which are contrary to the Torah. And they get by with their sleight of hand because most Christians are unwilling to compare clerical pontifications to the statements from God which oppose them. Most are not even willing to check the context of the discussions from which the snippets were mine to see if the intended meanings were altered by their extraction. And ironically, Christians seem content to believe that this strategy of quote mining is appropriate – that is unless it is used against them and then they cry foul.

According to Yahowah, there is nothing man can say or do that has the authority to alter or negate, to replace or abolish, even augment, any aspect of the Towrah – and most especially its provisions regarding God’s nature and name, His relationship with us, His plans, people, family, and times and reasons to meet. Any proposition to the contrary is contrary to God.

Therefore, the Christian myth that Grace has replaced the Towrah is invalid. The Towrah, itself, is merciful. Similarly, the Christian belief that that they live under a “New Testament” based upon a “New Covenant,” replacing an obsolete plan and relationship, is a nonstarter with Yahowah and torn asunder by His prophets. God’s testimony, covenant, and people have neither been changed nor replaced. What was, is. What is, will be.

One of the many reasons Christians are confused regarding the relationship between the Towrah and its Beryth is a result of Paul’s letters, especially his proposition that there were “two covenants” – with a “new” one established as a result of his explanations. This polarization was based upon an outright lie, with Paul claiming that the Torah’s Covenant was made with Hagar, not through Sarah’s son, Yitschaq, and thus was enslaving. (Galatians 4:21-25)

While we have only reviewed four of the many contrarian propositions presented in Galatians, it would be reasonable to conclude that he intended to commence a debate between “observing the Torah” and placing one’s “faith” in him. Even from the most favorable vantage point, the best that could be said of Paul is that his words imply that believing him rather than knowledge or actions will lead to a favorable outcome with his god. But if that is what he wanted to convey, there would have been no reason to misappropriate and misstate the Towrah or to demean it.

According to the Towrah, to engage in the Covenant we must first come to know Yahowah, understand the conditions of the relationship, agree to those terms, and then act upon them. Those who do as Yahowah requests receive the Covenant’s benefits, a by-product of which is salvation. And while that is simple enough, to show how Paul upended God’s approach, we will methodically turn over every card in his hand one after another.

Second, the Christian perspective of God and salvation is backward. It is from the end, rather than from the beginning. It is salvation before relationship – his god saving those he does not know. If true, it would mean that Yahowah would be committing to spend an eternity with people who had no interest in listening to Him and who were part of a religion which demeaned and demoted Him and His Son.

Third, Christians confuse “observing the Torah” with Judaism, as if these things were related. But they are not. Religious Jews manage their lives in accordance with the Babylonian Talmud, which is based upon their oral traditions and religious rules. The Talmud, not surprisingly, was written very similarly to Paul’s letters, in that it is comprised of rabbinic arguments which elevate man’s opinions above God’s. While perhaps not as egregious as Christianity, Orthodox Judaism’s departure from the Torah has irked Yahowah sufficiently that the Prophets are filled with His rebuke of His people for their ongoing propensity to be religious.

Fourth, the Torah is not comprised of laws. Guidance and teaching are entirely different concepts. The misappropriation of the Towrah’s purpose is one of religion’s most sinister ploys.

The Towrah’s stories, examples, and dialog represent facets on a marvelous jewel. They provide insights and a perspective from which to enjoy and benefit from Yahowah’s brilliant Light. The Torah is both historical and metaphorical, literal and symbolic, painting word pictures to help us know Yahowah, understand His plan of reconciliation, and rely on His provisions.

In this light, it is better to understand the relevance of Passover and UnYeasted Bread, and to capitalize upon these gifts, than it is to simply do what is delineated on the right date. Understanding leads to trust, trust leads to reliance, and reliance leads to reconciliation. Our works, beliefs, and faith lead nowhere.

Fifth, Moseh’s explanations of the Miqra’ey and Beryth in the Towrah and Dowd’s commitment to fulfill the promises made through them are inseparable. According to Yahowah, the Towrah is the Word of God and Dowd is the person most like Him, the Word made flesh if you will. And that’s a particularly evocative thought because it was Dowd’s basar | corporeal body, his flesh, which served to fulfill all that had been written about Pesach. So the very notion that we must choose between the Towrah or God’s favor is an attempt to divide the indivisible.



Since the most effective means of excoriating Christianity is to reveal what it replaced, it is opportune for us to consider a love letter composed of the most revealing lyrics ever written. It is particularly instructive for us to read and thoughtfully consider what Yahowah had to say about His Son, the Messiah, King, and Zarowa’, Dowd.

The 89th Mizmowr / Psalm was revealed as the Cornerstone to the Covenant’s Home on Mowryah was being laid by Shalomoh | Solomon, Dowd’s son in year 3000 Yah / 968 BCE. It is Dowd’s Song, not scribed by him, but about him. It is the fulcrum upon which the human experience and our access to Yahowah pivots. And it begins with this introduction…

“Lyrics comprising a poem of insights to contemplate and comprehend (maskyl – words to a song written to convey important ideas worthy of thoughtful consideration; a compound of ma – to ponder the important questions regarding sakal – being circumspect and prudent, gaining insights and prospering from them, paying attention to understand, and learning to comprehend) regarding (la – concerning the approach to) the constant and eternal, productive and established (‘Eythan – steadfast and consistent, the profuse and perpetual, the continuous and enduring), the beloved native-born strong arm (ha ‘Ezrachy – the loved one arising from the Land who is prepared for battle by being properly girded; from ‘ezrach – strong arm and chabab – the beloved and cherished).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89: Introduction and Dedication)

There was a man who bore the name ‘Eythan ha ‘Ezrachy who was noted for his wisdom in Melekym / 1 Kings 4:31. He was a contemporary of Shalomoh | Solomon, and so he would have known Dowd and served as an eyewitness to his relationship with God. Therefore, considering Yahowah’s propensity to communicate through men, it is likely that ‘Eythan ha ‘Ezrachy was chosen to inscribe Yahowah’s exuberant praise for His Beloved Son in this Mizmowr.

And yet, since this man’s thoughts are irrelevant to us, it’s what this name conveys regarding the subject of the Psalm which is far more significant than the identity of the scribe. Dowd remains “constant and eternal, productive and established, profuse and perpetual.” He is the “consistent and enduring” witness to the Beryth. He is “the beloved native-born strong arm prepared, properly girded, and loved” for fulfilling the Miqra’ey.

After having written four score of love songs to his Father, Yahowah returns the favor and sings one of His own to His Son. And it is as a result of what they have achieved, from what was born out of their abiding love, we are able to join the chorus…

“Yahowah’s (Yahowah – an accurate transliteration of the name of our ‘elowah – God guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence and our shalowm – reconciliation) loyalty and love, steadfast devotion and enduring favoritism, unfailing affection and zealous desire (chesed – kindness and generosity, benevolence and glorious benefits) are everlasting (‘owlam – eternal and forevermore, enduring throughout time).

I have chosen to sing (shyr – I have chosen to lift up My voice in song, genuinely ascribing My choice of lyrics to melodious sounds, accompanied by instruments, aesthetically conveying my ongoing desire (qal imperfect cohortative)) to and on behalf of (la – regarding the approach of) all generations throughout time (dowr wa dowr – that which pertains to the house and home, the dwelling place and successive encampments where people live and abide, the ongoing lineage, to everyone born into the same family line).

With my mouth (ba peh ‘any – in my speech and means to communicate orally and verbally), I will reveal and make known (yada’ – I am familiar with and will demonstrate, I will acknowledge and appreciate (hifil imperfect)) your integrity and reliability, your honesty and trustworthiness (‘emuwnah ‘atah – your dependability, your steadfast commitment; from ‘emuwn – the enduring truth and ‘aman – to support, confirm, and uphold that which is trustworthy and reliable, verifiable and confirming that which is correct and accurate).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:1)

Those who know Yahowah realize that He is eternally loving and merciful, absolutely and invariably devoted to His Family. His affection is everlasting, spanning the eons of time. Therefore, Paul’s premise, that a more merciful approach was required, becomes a nonstarter.

And while that is all true, in this case, Yahowah is singing His Son’s praises for all Yisra’el to hear. He wants the world to know Dowd as He does, as a man of great integrity who did as he had promised. And so throughout this Song, Yahowah is verifying and validating the most redeeming aspects of the greatest life ever lived.

In this regard, God reaches out to those He prefers, choosing some over others. Such was the case with ‘Adam and Chawah, Noach and his family, ‘Abraham and Sarah, Yitschaq and Ya’aqob, the Children of Yisra’el, Moseh and ‘Aharown, Yahowsha’ and Kaleb, Shamuw’el and ‘ElYah, but none to the extent of Dowd | the Beloved. And that is why this Song was about him and there is no comparable sentiment expressed pertaining to anyone else.

And so while this is about the Messiah, the fact that Yahowah defines what it means to be trustworthy has extraordinary implications. Rather than being accommodating, omnipresent, or omniscient, and thus irrelevant, He is honest and reliable. Nothing is more valuable to mankind than His steadfast commitment to the truth, such that we can confidently rely on His promises. And in this regard, He has provided the means for us to independently verify His testimony, ensuring its inspiration, because God is unconstrained by space or time. It is why He can accurately report where our choices lead long before these events unfold.

This message was written for dowr wa dowr | every generation throughout time and pertains to the Home and Family of God. And when it comes to benefiting from what is being revealed, there is but one way – through yada’ | knowing. This renders beliefs irrelevant, as nothing but unsubstantiated opinions, because all that matters is recognizing, understanding, accepting, and then acknowledging the truth. When this occurs, the celebrants join those who sing…

“Indeed (ky – it is surely true that), I have affirmed that (‘amar – I expressed in words, declaring, and intending to say that (qal perfect)), everlasting and eternal (‘owlam – enduring) love, devotion, favoritism, kindness, and generosity (chesed – affection and glorious benefits) are established spiritually by continually procreating and building a restored, prosperous, and productive heavenly family (banah shamaym – are conceived to construct a home to raise and fortify children in the spiritual realm (nifal imperfect – the subject carries out and receives the benefits associated with building an eternal family)).

You have firmly established (kuwn ba hem – you have authenticated and corroborated (hifil imperfect)) your authentic character, trustworthiness, and reliability (‘emuwnah ‘atah – your validity and honesty, your dependability and steadfastness) through them (ba hem).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:2)

Yahowah’s purpose in creating the universe and life within has been to “banah – conceive children and build a family.” And to that end, His Beryth was conceived in “chesed – love” which is “‘owlam – everlasting.”

The reason Dowd is instrumental pursuant to this purpose is because he served as the catalyst through whom the fulfillment of Chag Matsah delivered the promised benefits of the Covenant. Working together, Father and Son established a vibrant and growing Spiritual Family.

Therefore, in working with him to achieve His heart’s desire, from God’s perspective, His Son authenticated his character and proved himself worthy. By offering to fulfill Pesach and Matsah leading to Bikuwrym, by having the fortitude to write about what he would endure, and then by following through with the sacrifice for the benefit of all mankind, Dowd became the most worthy among us.

Continuing to speak in first person about His beloved Son, Yahowah affirmed what I just shared…

“I have established, cutting through separation (karat – I have created, making a resolution by cutting off (as is the case with circumcision), a solemn agreement between parties with stipulations, responsibilities, and benefits (qal perfect)) the Beryth | Covenant for the Family and Home (Beryth – the Family-Oriented Relationship Agreement which brings individuals together with action, commitment, and engagement in accordance with the stipulations required of both parties to the agreement), through My Bachyr | Chosen One (la bachyr ‘any – on behalf of and for the individual I have personally decided upon, having preferred and selected under the auspices of freewill, the one I favor for a special relationship and affection; from bachar – to choose and decide and bachan – to test, examine, and scrutinize).

I have sworn an oath, and I will affirm this promise seven times over (shaba’ – I have made a binding commitment and I will always uphold the truth of this vow (nifal perfect)) to Dowd (la Dowd – concerning the Beloved; from dowd – the one who is loved and who loves in return), My ‘Ebed | Authorized Agent and Coworker who serves on My behalf (‘ebed ‘any – My coworker, associate, and servant; from ‘abad – to work).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:3)

The debate between Yahowah and Sha’uwl / Paul regarding all things Christianity, from Christ to the New Testament, is now over. If you have been listening to what God has stated in His own words and voice regarding establishing the Covenant Family through Dowd, then you know that the Messiah and Son of God who fulfilled the Miqra’ey enabling the Beryth is Dowd. And that means it was not, and never could have been, Jesus. And in this regard, Rabbinical Judaism, by touting the replacement Messiah Bar Kokhba, also stands condemned.

Yahowah has but one objective – the Covenant. He begins his narrative to us by introducing it while explaining its purpose, conditions, and benefits in Bare’syth. Then He concludes the story of man with it, telling us that the final item on His agenda is the Covenant’s reaffirmation and restoration with Yisra’el. And now we know that Yahowah will bring it to fruition through Dowd – not ‘Abraham, neither Yitschaq nor Ya’aqob, not even Moseh, nor with an unspecified and unheralded mythical misnomer like Jesus.

The Beryth was affirmed and enabled through Dowd – we have Yahowah’s unconditional promise on this. And since the five benefits of the Beryth – eternal life, being perfected, our adoption into God’s family, and our enrichment and empowerment – were delivered through the fulfillment of Pesach, Matsah, and Bikurym, we can be certain that Dowd | David fulfilled them.

It's time to discard the New Testament and jettison the myth of Jesus Christ. The truth is not only vastly superior, we have Yahowah’s word on it. And that is as good as it gets – especially for Yisra’el and Yahuwdym.

In just three statements, Jews have gone from living under the black cloud of having Christians falsely accuse them of killing their god to having God affirm that the best of them provided the gift of life. And the chasm from one to the other is bridged by knowing the truth about Dowd.

In this context pertaining to the purpose of creation and within this pronouncement regarding the Covenant, there cannot be a more important declarative statement than this one. It unifies Yahowah’s eternal purpose around Dowd, acknowledging that the Covenant Family was established by and through him. And now repeating the obvious, this means that Dowd returned to fulfill the first three Miqra’ey in the 80th Yowbel year of 4000 Yah.

For someone struggling to figure out how this might be possible, that the King was afforded three lives, not just the two as King, I would ask them the following question: Do you suppose that the Author of DNA is incapable of using it to reconstruct a body for this purpose or do you think that God is restricted regarding the placement of a living soul? Wouldn’t the reconstitution of a body for this purpose and its subsequent disposal be a relatively easy endeavor for the Creator of the universe and Author of life?

The miracle here is not in the doing, but pursuant to the challenge of Dowd ascertaining his role. While both he and I managed to figure it out, I had Dowd’s acknowledgments upon which to build the case while he had the Towrah, alone. Looking back now, I can clearly see how he got there, studying the accounts I listed previously, but even with Dowd’s admissions conveyed throughout His Mizmowr, indeed this Psalm, and permeating through the Prophets, it took me twenty years to make the same discovery. But Dowd went light years beyond figuring it out because he volunteered to make these sacrifices, and even after writing vociferously about them, detailing the anguish he would endure, he honored his promise, fulfilling them.

If I may put this in perspective, by heralding this profound truth to God’s people in advance of His return, thereby contributing to the harvests, my life took on such significance that there are hundreds of prophecies presenting my role in this regard – all so that Jews read it. It’s such a big deal, seven years after this Song was sung by God, Dowd’s son, Shalomoh announced my role and arrival, telling Yisra’el to listen. Since it bears repeating at this moment, he said…

“Therefore (wa gam), regarding the Nakry | Observant and Discerning Foreigner from a different ethnicity and geographic location, who will come to understand (ha nakry – someone from a different place and culture, speaking a different language, who, having paid attention, will comprehend; from nakar – to become acquainted, recognize, and acknowledge something which deserves the highest regard and respect by being attentive and astute), who, to show the way to the benefits of the relationship (‘asher), is not of your people (lo’ min ‘am ‘atah), this Yisra’el (Yisra’el huw’), he will come (wa bow’) from a faraway country in a distant time (min ‘erets rachowq) for the express purpose of being a Witness and providing answers regarding (lama’an) Your (‘atah) tremendous (ha gadowl) name (shem) and Your hand (wa yad ‘atah) as the influential, empowered, and resolute defender (ha chazaq), and (wa) as one sowing the seeds which will take root and grow for the harvests (zarowa’ huw’) whom You have extended (‘atah ha natah). When he arrives on the scene to pursue this (wa bow’), then (wa) he will help interested parties reconcile their relationship by providing the information needed to make a reasoned decision (palal) regarding the Family (‘el ha beyth ha zeh). (Dabarym ha Yowmym / Words of the Days / 2nd Chronicles 6:32)

When you hear it out of the heavens, coming from the atmosphere, listen to what comes out of the spiritual realm by way of the sky (wa ‘atah shama’ min ha shamaym), within the location where you live (min makown yashab ‘atah), then engage and act accordingly, choosing of your own accord to do everything (wa ‘asah ka kol) which, to show the way (‘asher), the Nakry | Observant Foreigner from a different ethnicity and geographic location who understands, this man from a another place and culture, speaking a language other than Hebrew, who is uniquely discerning (ha nakry) has invited you to read (qara’ ‘el ‘atah), for the express purpose of being a Witness, who provides answers such that (lama’an) all peoples of the Earth (kol ‘am ha ‘erets) will have a genuine and ongoing opportunity to become familiar with Yada’, to know, acknowledge, accept, and understand (yada’) Your name (‘eth shem ‘atah), coming to respect and revere You (wa la yare’ ‘eth ‘atah) simultaneously along with (ka) Your people (‘am ‘atah), Yisra’el (Yisra’el).

And also, so that (wa la) they may know (yada’) that, truthfully (ky), this House (‘al ha beyth ha zeh), which to reveal the correct path to walk to give life meaning that (‘asher) I have built for the Family (banah), is designated and called (qara’) by Your name (shem ‘atah).” (Dabarym ha Yowmym / Words of the Days / 2nd Chronicles 6:33)

The realization that Dowd is the Son of God, the Messiah and returning King, in addition to having become our Savior by fulfilling the Mow’ed Miqra’ey is by a wide margin the greatest discovery in human history – and it was found by two men – the one who lived it and the other who is giving voice to what God’s Son has done. This is the Cornerstone of the Covenant and the millstone crushing Christianity and Judaism.

In this pronouncement, we heard Yahowah say that He bachyr | chose Dowd over all others, shaba’ | to enable the promised benefits of the seven Miqra’ey, with Dowd serving as Yahowah’s ‘ebed | authorized agent and coworker. Period. End of conversation.

This not only obliterates the basis of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, undermining the fables associated with Jesus, bar Kokhba, and Allah, it proves what I have been saying all along. Dowd is our Savior, Yahowah’s Bachyr | Chosen One, and the exemplar of the Beryth | Covenant. Should you disagree, take your argument up with his Father and note His response.

Said another way, Yahowah offered the proof Paul, Akiba, and Muhammad could not provide. And in these words, the Covenant with Dowd rises and the Abrahamic religions die. And yes, I’m reveling in the good news because it is important to be right about God – and the truth was both attainable and it matters. While I was the first in 3,000 years, and for a while, the only person to make this life-transforming assessment, thanks to Yahowah, my conclusion is now irrefutable.

After telling us, “I have established, cutting through separation (karat) the Beryth | Covenant for the Family (Beryth) through My Bachyr | Chosen One (la bachyr ‘any). I have sworn an oath, and I will affirm this promise seven times over (shaba’) to Dowd (la Dowd), My ‘Ebed | Authorized Agent and Coworker who serves on My behalf (‘ebed ‘any),” we read…

“Forevermore, as an eternal witness to the restoring testimony (‘ad ‘owlam – to provide never-ending guidance on reconciliation throughout time), I will prepare and establish (kuwn – I will appoint, equip, develop, support, and sustain (hifil imperfect)) your offspring and that which you sow (zera’ ‘atah – your seed and what you have sown, your children and descendants, your posterity and family, even your ethnicity and the yield of what you plant for the harvest).

In addition, I will construct a home (wa banah – I will establish based upon the son, procreating a family by restoring and fortifying the resulting children; showing the maternal influence on building up) for your throne and seat of honor (kise’ ‘atah – your authority and authorization, your place of respect, and your right to lead) on behalf of all generations throughout time (la dowr wa dowr – regarding the approach of every related child, and concerning the house, the home, and the dwelling place of successive encampments where people live and abide within the same family).’” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:4 in part)

Dowd not only provides ‘ad ‘owlam | everlasting testimony through the lyrics of his Songs, but also his life serves as the restoring witness establishing the lives of his offspring – the children of the Covenant Family. What he has sown, we can reap. Through the Beryth, we are kuwn | established, becoming his heirs.

And it is for these reasons that Dowd’s home will be designed and constructed by his Father. And it, unlike any other, is replete with a throne. For having served as the exemplar of the Family, for having been the most prolific Prophet in composing the Psalms, and for having enabled the benefits of the Covenant by fulfilling the Miqra’ey, God’s Home is established, and Dowd’s seat of honor is reserved on behalf of all generations throughout time. His status was earned and it endures forever. His place in God’s story transcends the generations.

That is why this affirmation of the most beneficial discovery boldly declares that Dowd is our Savior. His basar | corporeal body was sacrificed as the Lamb on Passover while his nepesh | soul carried our guilt into She’owl | Hell on UnYeasted Bread so that we could follow him to Shamaym | Heaven as a result of Firstborn Children. That is the portrait Yahowah is painting with His words. Please feast your eyes on it and be nourished by it, benefiting from the word-picture God has drawn.

With God making these statements regarding the one He will call His Son, the Messiah, and the Sacrificial Lamb within the lyrics of this Mizmowr / Psalm, there can be no rivals or replacements. With these words, Jesus is relegated to a myth – a hideous one at that because he was allotted the accolades and acclaim earned by Dowd and proclaimed by his Father. Nothing could possibly be more frustrating and irritating to Yahowah.

While I obviously intend to provide additional evidence for your edification, with this declaration I could conclude my rebuke of Paul and the Christian New Testament, having prevailed. It is all an appalling lie.

We have been given every reason to accept that both the verbal and the noun aspects of zera’, “sowing seeds which grow and bear fruit” and “offspring,” were intended in God’s statement. One invariably leads to the other when the seeds are properly tended and cultivated. As such, Dowd’s life and his lyrics produce the harvests Yahowah is intent on celebrating.

In this light, it is important to recognize that Zarowa’ | Sacrificial Lamb is based upon zera’. And this may be the most magnificent and revealing of Dowd’s titles and accolades. So rest assured, Yahowah will ascribe it to His Son and his Herald in short order.

Zera’ is also the fulcrum upon which the perversions associated with the villain in this story rise and fall. As the Hebrew word for “seed and seeds,” it can be accurately translated as “offspring, children, descendants, posterity, family, and progeny,” as a noun. As a verb, zera’ speaks of “sowing seeds” both literally and symbolically. It is from the verbal implication of “sowing seeds” that we come to appreciate the fact that, as is the case in English, “to seed” is to plant many “seeds,” just as a bag of seed contains hundreds if not thousands of them.

Nonetheless, Sha’uwl based the premise of his religion on the notion that seed was singular in spite of zera’s plural connotations. As evidence of this, “seed” is extrapolated and translated as “offspring, descendants, posterity, and children” in this passage, all of which are many and thus plural. And yet, foolishly claiming otherwise, Paul postured that the Towrah could be ignored because “Jesus Christ” was the promised seed, “singular,” of ‘Abraham. So, in his twisted mind, nothing mattered between ‘Abraham and the birth of his mythical misnomer “Jesus Christ.” With the conception of a fable, the actual lives of Yitschaq, Ya’aqob, his twelve sons, and their descendants – the Children of Yisra’el – were rendered moot. Why Yahowah, under this scenario, told us so much about them, was never explained by Sha’uwl.

Therefore, to believe Paul, everything God had to say from Genesis to Malachi should be ignored by Christians who were told to put their faith in his assessment of a single seed. It seems incredulous, especially since it was a man’s opinion against God’s stated position. Paul would even go so far as to misappropriate citations from prophets he was invalidating, thereby building his case on meritless distinctions.

Validating my earlier acknowledgment, however, and invalidating Paul’s New Testament, we read that the zera’ Dowd had sown through his lyrics were as important as the offspring he brought into the Covenant Family. Yahowah said that He has made Dowd an “‘ad ‘owlam – eternal witness” such that his “zera’ – seed and whatever he sows” would “banah – be developed into a family” on behalf of “dowr dowr – every generation throughout time.” This negates any possibility of a myth named “Jesus” intervening in this process. The generations were many and time continued to flow without alteration.

Returning to the heart of the 89th Mizmowr, the realization that Yahowah is constructing a home for His Son, Dowd, is absolutely essential to our understanding of Yahowah’s purpose and His relationship with humankind. Our Heavenly Father is declaring that He is taking responsibility for raising and protecting His Son, and even for advocating on his behalf. This is relevant because what God did for Dowd, He will do for us. This is the message of who builds a home for whom in Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7, which remains the most relevant and inspiring discussion in my relationship with God. I will share it with you at the conclusion of Dowd’s Song because Yahowah’s response to His Son’s desire to build Him a Home sparked my curiosity and inspired me to properly translate the prophecy upon which my search to know Yah began.

If you stay the course, we will celebrate the amazing parallels between the 89th Mizmowr / Psalm and the soaring narrative found in Shamuw’el / Listen to Him / 2 Samuel 7. Included among them is the fact that they are both devoted to teaching us that Yahowah is responsible for building a home for His Family and not the other way around.

Once we grasp this fundamental truth, rather than attempt the impossible by lifting God up by praising Him, we ought to capitalize upon what Father and Son have made possible and beneficial. Our needs and His desire for our lives coalesce when we allow our Father to raise us as His children. This is the purpose of the Towrah’s Guidance and the reason the Covenant exists. With this understanding, however, how is it that, after God created this universe for us to enjoy, we humans are so full of ourselves that we have built not one, but hundreds of thousands of houses for God? Stupid is as stupid does.

“Selah | Pause now and contemplate the implications (selah – take a moment to consider what has just been conveyed prior to moving on).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:4)

That is highly recommended advice. You have just been afforded a window into the very heart of God’s methods and means. You have witnessed how He views His Son. You have seen why I am compelled to obliterate the appalling nature of Pauline Doctrine and Replacement Theology, bringing the entire edifice of the Christian New Testament down like a house of errantly marked cards shuffled out of the bottom of the deck in underhanded fashion by the worst of charlatans.

Moving on to the next statement, it wasn’t until today, a score of years into this mission, that I finally realized that we should read it as continuing in Yahowah’s voice. God begins by saying that those abiding in Heaven are fully aware of what Dowd has and would accomplish. The Heavenly Host appreciate the Father’s support of His Beloved Son while his own people remain unappreciative malcontents. And when read from this perspective, of our Father addressing His Firstborn, the following is gut-wrenching…

“The spiritual realms (shamaym – the heavens and abode of God) know, appreciate, and confess (yadah – they are aware and declare, properly attributing and expressing gratitude; from yada’ – to know, recognize, and acknowledge (hifil imperfect)) your wonderful and marvelous contributions (pale’ ‘atah – your amazing accomplishments and outstanding achievements, even miraculous fulfillments).

Also, absolutely and assuredly (‘aph), 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) is reliably and steadfastly supporting and upholding you (‘emuwnah ‘atah – is trustworthy and honorable toward You; from ‘emuwn – the enduring truth and ‘aman – to offer support, confirm, and uphold that which is trustworthy and reliable, verifiable and confirming as well as correct and accurate) in the assembly and community (ba qahal – within the gathering and company) of the Set Apart (qodesh – of the separated and dedicated with essential Divine qualities and status). (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:5)

By contrast (ky – truthfully), who (my) among those who are dust (ba ha shachaq – among those in the physical realm who are relatively small and insignificant and akin to dirt) can take up a position with and be equated (‘arak – can be put in the same position or compared) to (la) Yahowah (Yahowah)?

Among the sons of God (ba beny ‘eloym – amongst the children of the Almighty), he is the one who resembles and can be compared to (damah la – he thinks and processes information like (qal imperfect third-person masculine singular)) Yahowah (Yahowah),…” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:6)

Once we accept that this is Yahowah continuing to speak to and about His beloved Son in the opening statement and then to everyone else in the subsequent question, we find God pulling our heads out of the muck of belligerent ignorance and then slapping us across the cheek. He is saying that everyone around Him in Heaven knows full well what Dowd has done and that they openly acknowledge the Messiah’s marvelous contributions to make the heavenly experience especially wonderful. God is also stating that those who know Him, those who actually matter to God, realize that He is devoted to His Son, steadfastly supporting and upholding Dowd.

However, by contrast, Yahowah is asking, “What is wrong with the rest of you? How could you be so unaware, so unappreciative, so completely dismissive, of what My beloved Son has done for you? He offered to make you great, but by rejecting and denigrating him as you have Me, you remain as worthless as dirt.”

But Yahowah wasn’t through lambasting His people. In the 440 years since the miserable ordeal of the Exodus, with those who would rather spit in God’s face and then turn their backs on Him to be religious with gods of their own making and with leaders of their choosing, nothing had changed. Loving Yisra’elites is like trying to give a psychotic and cantankerous arthritic porcupine with rabies a hug.

Then sadly, at the conclusion of the greatest life ever lived, of the man Yahowah chose above all others, the one He anointed three times as Messiah and who He unabashedly called His Son, the one who wrote vociferously of his impending sacrifice, and the one who Yahowah inspired to unite, protect, teach, and guide His people, their former and returning King, God scolds Yisra’el for tossing it all away. All that Dowd had and would achieve would be forgotten, and he would be replaced with charlatans, myths, and fables, even with the Star of a false Messiah – all to the people’s detriment and to His immense frustration.

No one was thinking according to God. And that would have to change for there to be reconciliation. And that is why this Psalm was written and why I am here addressing you today on this very subject.

Israel had demonstrated over and over again that even in the best of times, brief as they may have been, someone had to be positioned between God and His people. Direct contact had been a disaster. And so after 400 years of estrangement in Mitsraym under the yoke of a caste system evolving to their enslavement, 40 years of herding miserable malcontents through the wilderness, and another 400 years of rebellion in the Promised Land, Yahowah chose and equipped Dowd to shepherd His people as their King. Even then, he would reign for 40 years through their increasing discontent.

So at this moment, with these words, as the Cornerstone of His House is being laid, Yahowah asks his belligerent, irascible, and self-destructive people, “Who else can take up a position with Me such that he is essentially My equivalent? Who else thinks like me and can represent Me? Who else can be compared to Yahowah among the sons of God?”

There is but one. I know the answer, and now so do you, but why, with all of the pronouncements Yahowah provided regarding him, have his own people failed to acknowledge the obvious for the past 2,990 years?

It’s Dowd. He is the One. He is the answer. No one else was qualified and equipped to heal the rift or lead the reconciled remnant of Yisra’el and the Covenant Family through eternity. Fact is, there is no remnant nor family without him.

So, do God, His Son, and I as their Witness, have your attention now? If not, why not?

It was a riddle with a ridiculously easy answer. The one who is equated with Yahowah, the one who thinks like Yahowah, especially among the children of God, is Dowd. He is the man after Yah’s heart. The affirmation appears in Shamuw’el / Listen to Him / 1 Samuel 13:14, a passage we will consider later on in these chapters as we seek to refute the ill effects of Christianity.

And while that is true, this proclamation was designed to set up a comparison between the wonderful accomplishments of Father and Son which are acknowledged in Heaven contrasted with the meaningless myths attributed to the sons of gods conceived within the material realm – Dionysus and Jesus being among the imposters. The words men have attributed to them pale in comparison to the majesty of Yahowah’s message.

If asked to uphold the most important aspects of Yahowah’s character and His greatest contributions to humankind, I’d answer “trustworthiness and loyalty.” Without them, nothing else matters. Proving it is the purpose of the Naby’, as they validate the credibility of Yah’s inspiration. Enabling them is the purpose of the Towrah because, without guidance, there can be no trust.

But loyalty is as essential. Dowd was imperfect and made poor decisions at times, but God never left his side. It has taken me more than twenty years to understand and convey this message, and my initial attempts were spotty at best. Nevertheless, Yahowah continued to enable what became Yada Yahowah as the message was honed and sharpened.

The difference between God and man in this regard is revealed though our lives, and that of ‘Abraham. We have all tripped and fallen flat on our faces along the way. And while we have all kicked ourselves around the block for being so oblivious and unthinking, Yahowah dusts us off and applauds as we try again, wiser for the experience. While we are embarrassed, Yahowah is thrilled over the opportunity to work with us – ostensibly because the work has merit and there are so few who are willing.

In the midst of a Song devoted to His Son, where Yahowah is sharing credit, we would be wise to remember that Yahowah’s contributions are many. He created an enormously large, complex, and yet functional, six-dimensional universe. He conceived life, writing a three-dimensional language to propagate countless possibilities. He gave us freewill and a conscience to wield it. He designed us so that we’d be able to understand Him and respond to Him. Then He not only gave us His Towrah and Prophets, but He also offered His Son through whom He fulfilled every promise.

Among the most ignorant and irrational notions popularized by man is that “we all worship the same god.” The actual God begs to differ. Religious gods are fundamentally different from one another, and so are their scriptures and names, making this religiously unifying belief ludicrous. What’s more, the traits common among false gods are universally foreign to Yahowah. Said another way: aligning our thinking with Yahowah necessitates a willingness to reject religious presumptions.

As we proceed, the following is a continuation of the previous thought. So in context, it reads, “Among the sons of God (ba beny ‘eloym), he is the one who resembles and can be compared to, thinks like and processes information similarly to (damah la) Yahowah (Yahowah),

a God (‘el – the Almighty) who is inspiring and awesome (‘arats – who is well-regarded and awe-inspiring, exceedingly productive and accomplished) in the council (ba sowd – within the intimate fellowship where there is a foundation of trust, discretion, a conclave of proper instruction and mutual reliance) of the Set-Apart Ones (qadowshym – of those who are separated and exalted), tremendously inspiring and abundantly respected (rab wa yare’) beyond all those arranged around Him (‘al kol sabyb huw’ – above all those placed surrounding Him).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:7)

To know Yahowah is to respect Him. To understand Yahowah is to revere Him. To accept what He is asking and offering is to join the Council of the Set Apart.

This next line is likely spoken by the Council of the Set Apart who have acknowledged Dowd’s marvelous contributions, because now they are celebrating what makes his Father so special…

“Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of the name of ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching), God (‘elohym) of the vast array of spiritual implements (tsaba’ – of the heavenly messengers), who and what (my – encouraging the listener to ponder and evaluate if anything) is comparable to (kamow – can be considered similar to) the awesome and extraordinary gifts, these great treasures which You have stored up (chasyn ‘atah – the great value and merit of the wealth You offer; from chasan – to set aside treasure and to offer salvation and abundant rewards) which are all around You (sabyb ‘atah – round about You), Yah (Yah), including (wa – in addition to) Your unwavering commitment to the truth (‘emuwnah ‘atah – Your honesty and dependability, Your reliability and trustworthiness; from ‘emuwn – the enduring truth and ‘aman – to support, confirm, and uphold that which is trustworthy and reliable, verifiable and confirming that which is correct and accurate)?” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:8)

It’s a rhetorical question, and yet, as few as one in a million know the simple answer. Most don’t even know where to look to find it.

This is now the fourth time we have seen “‘emuwnah – trustworthiness” used to either describe Yahowah or to affirm that it is among His attributes enriching our relationship with Him. It appears in Psalm 89:1, 89:2, 89:5, and now here in 89:8. Not surprisingly, we will encounter ‘emuwnah four more times, in Mizmowr 89:14, 89:24, 89:33, and finally in 89:49, bringing the total to eight – the number equated to that which is infinite and eternal.

In this regard, the ‘emuwnah | truth is that Dowd’s life and lyrics matter more than any other. As our Savior, he is offering the gift of life. And as Yah’s answer, the Messiah provides the antidote for Pauline Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism – just as surely as trust is the remedy for faith. Those who know, rely. Those who don’t, believe. Trust is empowering, enlightening, enriching, and liberating while faith devalues, bewilders, depreciates, and ensnares.

Having now established the proper vantage point to capitalize upon what Father and Son are offering, and after hearing from the Spiritual Realm, Yahowah resumes speaking to us in first person about our Messiah and King, the great lyricist who composed the Proverbs and Psalms, and the defender of His people. God cites His beloved prophet to specifically target the destructive nature of the pervasive and improper approach that arises from the sea – a metaphor for Gowym | Gentiles. Speaking specifically of Dowd’s 8th Mashal / Proverb and 8th Mizmowr / Psalm, God says…

“You have conveyed vivid parables (‘atah mashal – You have created easily remembered proverbs, which are word pictures, in regard to establishing one ruler) over the raging devastation and presumptive arrogance (ba ge’uwth – the undue and unwarranted status and moral failures along with the violent agitation associated with the surging) of the sea (ha yam – of the West, serving as a metaphor for gowym, both nations and people).

When its turbulent and surging waves rise up in deceit (ba nasa’ / nasha’ gal huw’ – when its stormy conditions and strong currents which are contaminated with biological excrement and defiling human dung are roused using clever trickery to craft delusions), you expose them and condemn them (‘atah shabach hem – you assert what is factually accurate about them, stilling them).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:9)

The most popular belief systems among Gentiles are Roman Catholicism, Orthodox and Protestant Christianity, Sunni and Shia Islam, anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, and insulting Progressive platitudes. From God’s perspective, they are not only presumptive, holding unwarranted status, and deceitful, but they are predicted to become ever more turbulent. They will collectively rise up and seek to erode Israel based upon the strong undercurrents which have contaminated people’s thinking, deceiving them. For example, the majority have been led to believe as a result of these reprobate diatribes that there is a place called “Palestine” and that oppressive Jews are occupying land which belongs to “Palestinians.” I have endeavored to expose this diabolical and deadly myth, but only Yah can stop these miserable parasites and their senseless pundits. And this is no small matter because the onslaught of Islamic and Progressive rage against Israel will lead to the imposition of a terrorist State carved out of the heart of the Promised Land, bringing with it the certainty of catastrophic war.

Now that the stage has been set, the full cast must be introduced before the battle begins. And in this drama, there is a hellish villain, a genuine hero, and his herald. Continuing to speak to His Son, our Messiah, Yahowah states…

“You, yourself, will humble and crush (‘atah daka’ – you, yes you, will reject and defeat the oppressor, shattering while making contrite the slander of) that which is comparable to the reprehensible and deadly nature of (ka ha chalal – that which can be properly defined as a death cult, the profane and popular associations which as a result of one person pressing his agenda are overwhelming and fatal; from chalah – to defile and slay) the pretentious pride and stormy arrogance of the boisterous afflicter and his false god (rahab – the haughtiness and frenzied activity of the insolent and audacious one who presses his contentious and opposing plea, the defiant and confused musings associated with emboldened verbal calls for religious worship and submission, along with the senseless behavior and insubordinate taunts of the self-willed one who falsely claims Divine authorization in concert with the monstrous sea and idolatry) with the empowered and fortified, uncompromising and steadfast (ba ‘oz – with the mentally acute, psychologically prepared, and robustly enabled) strong arm of your Zarowa’ who is sowing the seeds for the harvest (zarowa’ ‘atah – productive ram of yours who prevails because he is effective and fully resolved on your behalf, demonstrating the overall ability to accomplish your mission as a remarkably impactful individual of action who is fruitful in your ways, especially when sowing your seeds, which when cultivated grow and are productive while denoting and advancing your purpose as the Sacrificial Lamb).

You isolate and separate (pazar – You disperse in divergent directions) your adversaries (‘oyeb ‘atah – those who are opposed and hostile toward you, demonstrating animosity, enmity, and rancor with regard to you).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:10)

Just as Dowd valiantly defended Yisra’el, winning 66 consecutive battles with Yahowah’s support, he will return to rid his people of their political, militant, religious, and conspiratorial adversaries. But he will not be working alone because Yahowah will again be at his side – as will the Zarowa’s zarowa’.

Since this Song was written by Yahowah to express His enduring admiration of His Son, God is continuing to speak to and about Dowd, making “you” lower case. And since it is the returning Messiah who is humbling and crushing Isra’el’s oppressors and those who have slandered him, it becomes apparent that he will be working alongside an empowered and fortified individual – this one sowing the seeds for the Shabuw’ah and Taruw’ah Harvests. This zarowa’, who is broadcasting and disseminating Yahowah’s words far and wide while cultivating the earth so that they will grow free of weeds is slated to serve the returning King – as will so many others in the Covenant Family.

Recognizing that Dowd became the ultimate Zarowa’ when his regenerated basar | corporeal body served as the Sacrificial Lamb on Pesach in year 4000 Yah, it is now apparent that he has an apprentice – an up-and-coming little z – who is devoted to his cause and to restoring Dowd’s place of prominence. And so, the Messiah’s z will be disseminating all that can be known of Dowd’s essential role and purpose in Yahowah’s plan and the lives of his people.

This would make a sowing and cultivating workmanlike zarowa’ the herald of the Zarowa’ who had served as the Pesach ‘Ayil forty Yowbel ago. Dowd’s zarowa’ would not only be preparing Yisra’el for the arrival of their King, he would be daka’ | rejecting and shattering the slanderous nature of ha chalal | the reprehensible and deadly nature of rahab | the boisterous afflicter, and the frenzied and contentious actions of the religious who are audacious and emboldened. And for this purpose, Dowd’s zarowa’ will have been ‘oz | empowered and fortified, such that he is prepared to zarowa’ | disburse and cultivate the seeds which magnify the harvest.

And should we question why the first mention of Zarowa’ in Dowd’s Song points to a zarowa’ who is working alongside the mighty Zarowa’ to rid Israel of her political and religious foes, the answer is that while Dowd was the Zarowa’, he is now King. And in this regard, it is likely that Yada will be tasked with isolating and separating Father and Son’s foes – distancing them from the Covenant Family and then judging who dies, determining whose soul ceases to exist and who deserves to endure the rigors of She’owl, eternally separated from Yahowah and His people.

It is interesting to note in this regard that chalah is comparable to the reprehensible and deadly one, while rahab addresses the pretentious pride and stormy arrogance of the boisterous afflicter and his false god. They are both singular and, thus, focused on one person or religion. And it is chalal | popular and fatal. At this point, it sounds like the Towrahless One inspiring Muslims to kill Jews.

As we have previously discovered, Yahowah is leaving nothing to chance, shoring up the little z so that he does not fail the family. And so, this zarowa’ | sower of seeds is fully ‘oz | empowered and fortified, mentally equipped and psychologically prepared to combat the rahab | frenzied activity and audaciousness of the contentious and confused hordes seeking to exterminate Jews as part of their religious worship and submission. And since chalal addresses that which is profane and thus common, and ka implies a broad association, the death cult being crushed by Dowd’s zarowa’ has had a defiling and deadly influence over millions if not billions. So whether God is speaking of dressing down Paul and Christianity or Muhammad and Islam, or their inflamed legacy, Yada, as a Zarowa’, is the only one who has done both previously while also serving as Dowd’s Herald. So, at the very least, he will be prepared.

In recognition of these things, considering their uniqueness and importance, Yada is perhaps being offered an attaboy in the midst of Dowd’s Song. But more than this, his Nes | Sign presenting the seeds of the harvest, Yada Yahowah, is being endorsed and recommended by Father and Son – setting it apart as a must-read for Yisra’el and Yahuwdym at this time. And we shouldn’t be surprised because the Seven Spirits of Yahowah have contributed to it.

Lingering here a moment longer since so much is at stake, we have a number of options regarding the identity of the rahab in that Paul, Akiba, and Muhammad all qualify – as do Hadrian and Hitler. They were presumptuous and pretentious, easily enraged and undisciplined. All five were annoyingly boisterous in their audacious promotion of false gods. Their confused musings and contentious pleas have led to senseless claims and behavior the world over. Their effect on those who foolishly believed them has been devastating and deadly. Each has inspired frenzied and senseless behavior, as well as an undeserved sense of superiority. All five promoted submission and religious worship.

However, since Paul, Akiba, Muhammad, Hadrian, and Hitler are “chalah – dead,” it is either their reprehensible, confused, and fatal legacy that the empowered and fortified zarowa’ is going to extinguish, or it is Satan incarnate – the Towrahless One who will be drafting and employing the religious. Therefore, the devotees of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and in particular, Roman Catholicism and neo-Nazism have been forewarned. I will be gunning for you.

It is also germane to note that there are two principal and one supportive Zarowa’. Moseh and Dowd are the heroes of this story, and Yada has been tasked with telling you about them. Also instructive, while Moseh tried to do it all himself and did not delegate, the mightiest of the Zarowa’, Dowd, as King, and returning as God, will follow His Father’s example. So while he is orchestrating these events, shepherding the flock, and acting as the master of ceremonies during the Family Reunion, he will have those serving beneath him clean up the mess man has made by isolating the belligerents separating the worst of them.

In this regard, even though Yada is a diminutive zarowa’ compared to Moseh and Dowd, he still wields the Strong Arm of God and he remains fortified by the Seven Spirits. Moreover, judging and condemning the worst five men on Yahowah’s Most-Hated List is something Yada has requested since writing Babel, Twistianity, and God Damn Religion. Without being presumptuous, I think I’d do a good job and that I’ve earned the privilege.

The reference to “pazar ‘oyeb – isolating and separating adversaries” could mean that God wants us to do as I have long proposed – quarantining viral and lethal plagues like Islam so that Muslims are precluded from infecting and killing others. Once isolated and thrown out of Israel, they can be properly incinerated or incarcerated as God sees fit.

Within this Song devoted to our Father extolling the virtues and accolades of His Son, it is now evident that God is giving the spiritual and material worlds to Dowd – along with everything of value that exists within them. But beyond this, Yahowah is crediting the Messiah for discovering the ultimate treasure – one that had been hidden from all others until now. By studying the Towrah, focusing on Bare’syth 22 (‘Abraham and Yitschaq on Mowryah during Passover with the Lamb), Shemowth 12 (the second Passover, this one opening the Door to Life for the firstborn in Mitsraym), Qara’ 23 (where the seven Miqra’ey were explained), and Dabarym 18 (in which Dowd was presented as the cure for religion), God’s firstborn Son saw and seized upon the opportunity to serve as the Passover Lamb, working at his Father’s side to enable the formation of the Covenant Family. And at that moment, all that was created became his because he made its purpose possible. And in the process, he negated any possibility of Jesus or a New Testament.

So when I affirm that Dowd is not only the Son of God, Messiah, and King, but also our Redeemer, and that this determination is the greatest discovery in human history, I am not alone in having found it. Dowd, while studying the Towrah, came to the same conclusion. And while he would scribe 40,000 words to share his findings with us in his Mizmowr and Mashal, and I have written another 7,000,000 throughout Yada Yahowah, the difference between us is monumental. He did it and I am his witness.

The Son of God caused the very essence of Yahowah’s story to play out this way – making the human experience fruitful, meaningful, and viable. He shared what he found, and then did as he saw fit. We are the beneficiaries. And so, with this in mind, I bring you a fresh and insightful rendition of Mizmowr 89:11-12…

“For you (la ‘atah), the spiritual realm of the Heavens (shamaym). Also, even more for you (‘aph la ‘atah), the material realm, the Land (‘erets), the world (tebel – the planet), and all that exists which is beneficial and valuable, satisfying and edifying in it (wa malo’ hy’ – as well as the abundance of things that fill it).

You, yourself, found who set the basis for them, laid the foundation, and then assigned (‘atah yasad hem – You, yourself, ascertained their purpose and place), (Mizmowr 89:11) great treasures which were stored up and hidden (tsaphown). And (wa) being at the right side (yamyn), you caused them to be manifest this way (‘atah bara’ hem).

The shattered and abused of the world (tabowr – the shattered, crippled, and crushed of the planet [note: Tabowr is also a hill in Lower Galilee and is the location of the battle Deborah and Barak waged against the Canaanites, it is where, in 55 CE, 10,000 Yahuwdym were slaughtered by the Romans, and then countless more in 66 CE by Emperor Vespasian; later Muslims and Crusaders fought there]; from tebel – a perverted and confuse world, tabar and shabar – to be broken down, maimed, and abused) and (wa) the devoted and dedicated who had been marginalized and banned, even set for extermination (chermown – the accursed, mutilated, and destroyed, a mountain in the Golan along the Yisra’el, Syrian, and Lebanese border, the site of intense battles in the Six-Day War (1967) and Yom Kippur War (1973) against Muslims, now serves as an Israeli observation post to monitor the Syrian and Lebanese jihadists (this word was incorporated into Arabic and used to denigrate, ban, and curse Jews); from charam – to prohibit and utterly destroy, dedicating to extermination) sing and shout for joy, calling out and rejoicing (ranan – loudly, happily, melodiously, and publicly call out) in your name (ba shem ‘atah – in association with your proper designation and reputation).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:12)

This distinction is vitally important, and yet routinely missed. A day is nigh upon us when Yahowah and Dowd will use their words to mashal | rule the ge’uwth | devastating arrogance of the yam, which serves as a metaphor for anti-Semitic Gentiles. Father and Son, delegating to the many working with them, will shabach | expose and stop nasa’ gal | those who have arisen by crafting deceitful delusions. On that day, Yahowah, Dowd, and the Covenant Family will daka’ | reject the chalal | reprehensible and deadly nature of rahab | the pretentious afflicter and his false god, as the Zarowa’ | Strong Arm of God comes crashing down upon Yisra’el’s ‘oyeb | foes. And they will have every right to do so because it is their Father’s world – and He is giving it to His Son. As the Creator, Yahowah is in an entirely different position than those just living in it. And as His Son and heir, so is Dowd.

Therefore, we, as moral men, are not called to rise up and slaughter our oppressors as Akiba’s followers attempted against Rome with such horrid results. We are not called to be terrorists, as was Muhammad, nor crusaders as popes had insisted. Unless it is in self-defense, as was the case with Dowd protecting Yahowah’s Family, we should limit our attacks to courageously wielding God’s words. He will take care of the rest.

Ridding the world of the influence of religion can only be done at God’s side because He is also the only one who is justified in, and capable of, doing so. We did not create this world or conceive the life within it, and thus, souls are not ours to take. Moreover, mankind has been warned since God provided humankind with copious instructions regarding behaviors where this would be the consequence.

Religions are deadly because the faithful lead so many away from God by mischaracterizing Him. Their conquests and inquisitions, as well as their intent to subjugate others, particularly Jews, are entirely of human design.

There are two reasons for mentioning Tabowr and Chermown. First, these names are based on words revealing that there will be a turn of fortune for Yisra’el. God’s people have been broken and banned by Gentiles for 2,700 years, but their oppression is about to end. Second, the places where the Chosen People were shattered and exterminated by the Romans and then Muslims will become the sites of great victories. So, this is prophetic of battles to be waged and won.

For those who have suffered, victory will be especially sweet. Laments will become laughter. Pain and sorrow will turn to joy. All the while, the Zarowa’ will be working alongside Yahowah during this marvelous transformation to make the world a better place.

That said, we are once again left to determine if Yahowah is continuing to speak to us about His Son such that the masculine singular expression of ‘atah | y/You is addressing Dowd or if the Set Apart in the Spiritual Realm are expressing these thoughts about the Zarowa’ to Yahowah. Both iterations are true since Dowd is all of these things and also as King, he will be reinforced in this manner. Unlike Moseh, whose support was minimal, the Messiah, like his Father, will put us all to work, beginning with his junior zarowa’.

“Beside y/You, and on y/Your behalf (la ‘atah – to approach you and concerning you, by your side), a Zarowa’ | Strong Arm Sowing the Seeds for the Harvest of offspring (zarowa’ – a fully resolved and remarkably impactful man of action who is engaging as a shepherd, a bold ram among the sheep, fruitful in his ways, especially when sowing the seeds which take root and grow while advancing the purpose of the Sacrificial Lamb; from zara’ – to scatter and sow seeds and produce a harvest of descendants, posterity, and offspring) with tremendous power, courage, character, and awesome ability as an impactful influencer (‘im gabuwrah – with the will to fight and the capacity to perform, relentlessly accomplishing what needs to be done, victorious and productive; feminine form of gibowr – a mighty fighter and capable defender, a heroic and valiant soul who is highly influential), y/Your confident and capable, strengthened and empowered hand (‘azaz yad ‘atah – y/Your firmly established and resolute, forceful and bold means to exert y/Your influence and act) raised up high (ruwm – lifted up as an extension from the source and honored) at y/Your right side (yamyn ‘atah – as y/Your right hand for having chosen to be right).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:13)

In that this is Dowd’s Song, should Yahowah be speaking to His Son, our King, as He has throughout this Mizmowr extolling his virtues, then God is telling him that the responsibility of leadership, which can at times be burdensome, will be delegated, making his forevermore considerably more enjoyable. So, just as Dowd carried the great burden of our guilt into She’owl to perfect us, it appears that one of his beneficiaries, specifically his zarowa’, will have the opportunity to return the favor – unburdening his King.

If this is the proper interpretation, and it is clearly the most in keeping with the context, then this is the best possible news for Dowd. It means that he will have the opportunity to lead the eternal remnant of Yisra’el through a proxy – much like Yahowah did through Moseh. As a result of his enormous contributions, he will get to celebrate with his people while never being aggravated by them. He will enjoy the rights of kingship without its burdens. Yahowah is the best Father, ever!

And while our Savior and King deserves no less, and while he couldn’t fully represent God otherwise, this isn’t what his junior zarowa’ had in mind. Selfishly perhaps, but after having devoted most waking hours for several decades to sowing the seeds for the harvest, the Choter was looking forward to letting his voice and branches rest – anticipating a small retirement and a prolonged vacation.

As much as I have chafed at being drawn away from the uninhibited joy of anonymity under the nom de plume of Yada to the acclaim of a junior zarowa’, nakry, basar, qowl, ‘edah, and choter tasked with the responsibility of preparing Yisra’el for the return of her God and Messiah, I cannot complain. Yah has been a delight to work with, made every moment fun, and has provided ample support.

Truly, there is nothing more satisfying than engaging with God on something important to Him. So, since the past score of years has been a rewarding adventure, I’m confident we will continue in like fashion. He will assuredly provide all the support necessary to get the job done to His standards. So it is heigh ho, heigh ho, off to work we go.

Frankly, since it was so obvious, we ought not be surprised. In his previous reign over Yisra’el, the pressure and responsibility of the job of guiding, nurturing, and protecting the flock became overwhelming at times, such that Dowd made a number of marginal decisions – and he beat himself up over them. Naturally apprehensive that the past would repeat itself and denigrate the future, Dowd may have made this request. If so, his Father honored it.

That said, Dowd is the preeminent Zarowa’ | Protective Shepherd, Sacrificial Lamb, and Strong Arm of God. It is his most distinguished title. His nepesh | soul (feminine in Hebrew like zarowa’) manifests gabuwrah | all of the character and courage, awesome ability and tremendous influence of a loving Mother caring for Her children. And in this way, Dowd represents the Father while his zarowa’ serves the Ruwach Qodesh | Set-Apart Spirit, our Spiritual Mother, in the lives of God’s people. And perhaps this is why the Seven Spirits of Yahowah have served to bolster and fortify the Choter.

Because Dowd as our Messiah and King is God’s ‘Azaz Yad | Strong Hand ruwm | raised up to serve at Yahowah’s Yamyn | Right Side, it makes sense that he would be given what he provided. In this way, he will be a master orchestrator and delegator, and to such an extent, every member of the Covenant family should be eager to serve at his side.

By way of review, thus far, Dowd’s name has appeared once in the 89th Mizmowr while Zarowa’ | Sacrificial Lamb, Protective Shepherd, and One Who Sows the Seeds for the Harvest has been deployed twice to describe our Savior and his Herald. Dowd has also been called the Bachar | Chosen One, God’s ‘Ebed | Coworker, an ‘Ad ‘Owlam | Eternal Witness, a Mashal | an Articulate Leader, the Yamyn | Right Hand, and ‘Azaz Yad | Strong Hand of Yahowah. Therefore, one might conclude that the repetition of Zarowa’, as the only accolade and title presented a second time, suggests that it is the Mashyach’s and Melek’s most revealing and important depiction. This admission is sufficient to take all of the air out of Christianity and Judaism.

But there is so much more. In the 2nd Mizmowr, we were told that there was a religious conspiracy afoot to misappropriate the status and authority of Yahowah and His Mashyach | Anointed Messiah – Dowd. In the same Psalm, God announced Ben ‘Any ‘Atah | You Are My Son – suggesting that the conspiracy was foisted by Paul who protested otherwise.

We read in Yasha’yah / Isaiah 40:10 that God will be returning with His Chazaq | Empowered Leader and Impassioned Defender. He said that His Zarowa’ | Protective Shepherd and Sacrificial Lamb would be speaking for Him. And in the next statement, we were told that Dowd will be the Ra’ah | Shepherd tending the Almighty’s flock. Then at the conclusion of Yasha’yah 40:11, we learn that Dowd will be gathering God’s lambs ba zarowa’ huw’ | in his strong and capable arms, serving the flock both as the protective ram and sacrificial lamb. Although here and elsewhere, the Zarowa’ title also fits his coworker and apprentice.

The interplay between Yah’s Zarowa’ being aided by another is also seen in Solomon’s dedication speech to Yisra’el recorded in 2 Chronicles 6, when the King’s son revealed that the Nakry would speak of his father’s role as the Yad | Hand of God. He would reveal that Dowd is God’s Chazaq | Most Powerful and Passionate Leader while serving as his Zarowa’.

When we turn to 2nd Samuel 7, we are reminded that Dowd | David is Yahowah’s ‘Ebed | Coworker. Upon his return, he will be God’s Nagyd | Most Conspicuous and Informed Guide. The Almighty said that He would make Dowd’s shem | name and reputation ha gadowl | the greatest of all – the most glorified on Earth. In addition, Yahowah announced that He will beyth ‘asah | engage with the Covenant Family through Dowd.

As we progress in this great prophecy, my personal favorite, and reach 2 Samuel 7:12, God categorically states that He would establish Dowd’s reign over his kingdom while reestablishing the Family Home and elevating his throne forevermore. Then Yahowah revealed, “‘any hayah la huw’ la ‘ab we huw’ hayah la ‘any la ben | I was, am, and always will be for him as a Father, and he was, is, and always will be for Me as a son.” Mindful that we learn from repetition, Yahowah affirmed that Dowd’s beyth | family and malakah | kingdom would ‘aman | be established and endure ‘ad ‘owlam | as a restoring witness throughout eternity.

When we turn to the 103rd Mizmowr, we discover that Yahowah’s barak | blessings would be provided through Dowd’s nepesh | soul. He is the Ga’al | Kinsman Redeemer who paid the price for us to live. Then in the 19th statement, we find another affirmation that Dowd’s kise’ | throne and his malkuwth | kingdom will serve as a mashal | vivid picture of what we should expect in Heaven. Further into the text, Psalm 103:20 explains that Dowd is Yahowah’s Gibowr | Most Courageous and Capable Man. This is affirmed elsewhere and it serves as validation of my conclusion that Dowd is Gabry’el | God’s Most Courageous Man. It’s hard to miss this obvious conclusion in spite of the fact that the religious cast Gabriel among the angels.

Moving on to the 20th Mizmowr, we find that Dowd will be dispatched as God’s principal ‘Ezer | Collaborator to assist those struggling during the Day of Trouble. Moving through the 6th verse of this same Psalm, we read that Yahowah intends to yasha’ | provide salvation through His Mashyach | Messiah. This bold declaration concludes by saying that God intends to respond from Heaven through the Gibowrah | Feminine Characteristics (i.e., nepesh | soul, zarowa’ | cultivating productive offspring, and ruwach | spirit) which God will marshal to yasha’ | save the Covenant Family. Then, for those who benefit from a reminder, we read that the Melek | King is the one offering yasha’ | liberation and salvation.

Addressing Dowd | the Beloved by name, the Melek | King is called the Tsemach | Branch in Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 23:5. This presentation concludes by reminding us that Yahowah Tsadaq ‘Anachnuw | Yahowah is our Source of Vindication because He is Right.

Those are the facts, and they are consistent and compelling. For us to be right with God, Dowd must be the focus of our attention. He is the Zarowa’ | Sacrificial Lamb, the Mashyach | Messiah, the Ben ‘El | Son of God, and our Yasha’ | Savior.

And while these are some of the reasons he was qualified to perform in this manner, by stating them in this manner, we know that Yahowah is continuing to speak about His Son. This being true, just as it is Dowd’s throne being addressed in this verse, in the previous one, it was the Messiah’s zarowa’…

“Being correct and vindicating (tsedeq – being right, honest, and fair, being accurate, just, and acquitting) while executing good judgment to properly resolve disputes (wa mishpat – along with adroitly pondering all of the questions required to make rational and moral decisions; a compound of ma – to question and thus ponder and consider and shaphat – to decide, to be discriminating, and to be just, executing good judgment) serve as the foundation (makown – are the basis and home, the very essence of the upright nature) of your throne, your authority and position of honor (kise’ ‘atah).

Loyalty, devotion, and enduring love (chesed – great favoritism and generosity, and the passion to be genuinely compassionate), along with a steadfast commitment to the truth (wa ‘emuwnah – trustworthiness and honesty, being reliable and dependable; from ‘emuwn – the enduring truth and ‘aman – to support, confirm, and uphold that which is trustworthy and reliable, verifiable and confirming that which is correct and accurate), encounter those who enter your presence (qadam paneh ‘atah – embrace those who come to meet y/You, and can be anticipated because they are front and center with y/You and naturally occur in y/Your presence).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:14)

Since Yahowah has affirmed that Dowd was “tsedeq – right and vindicating” in conjunction with “mishpat – having the ability to exercise good judgment and resolve disputes,” He destroyed the basis of Judaism and Christianity because this means he became our Savior. And there is none other.

The validation of Dowd being tsadaq | right, acquitted, and vindicating is repeated throughout the Prophets. This is especially insightful because he was not perfect in his life. Therefore, with only the Towrah, its Beryth and Miqra’ey to correct and perfect him, God redeemed him with His Towrah because there was no other alternative. This, too, is devastating to Christianity and Judaism which degrade the Towrah by referring to it as Judaic Law and then writing over it with their New Testament and Talmud. The fact that an imperfect man was declared correct with God, upright, righteous, and acquitted, means that Paul was wrong when he condemned the Towrah by claiming that a single act of noncompliance damned the observant when that is not the case. And in Judaism, where adherence to Judaic Law determines righteousness, we see otherwise in Yah’s declaration regarding Dowd. He was right, not good. And that is largely why rabbis disrespect him.

Also, since Yahowah provided a solitary path to reconciliation through His Miqra’ey, beginning with Pesach and Matsah, for God to pronounce Dowd right and vindicating in this context, it becomes obvious that he played the leading role in enabling the spring Mow’edym in year 4000 Yah. The very foundation of his throne, being the seat of honor, was predicated upon his willingness to serve in this capacity. And it is what made it possible for Yahowah to remain true to His word and merciful to those entering His presence.

This is another of the Psalm’s statements where “y/You” can be interpreted as referring to the subject of the Mizmowr, the acclaimed Son, or the speaker who is his Father, Dowd or Yahowah. And the more we contemplate the possibilities and realize that both interpretations would be true, the more it becomes apparent that this exceptional man will come to reflect the nature of his God. His lives, therefore, are both a great step forward for a man and result in a giant leap forward for mankind.

Yahowah made it possible for Dowd to serve as the Pesach ‘Ayil and then fulfill Matsah en route to Bikuwrym in year 4000 Yah, facilitating the benefits of the Covenant. And because they have done this, we can capitalize on the Shabuw’ah harvest and have the opportunity to become more effective witnesses during Taruw’ah. The fifth Miqra’ | Invitation to be Called Out and Meet serves as a Herald for our King’s Kipurym return.

‘Ashry, which is the first word of Dowd’s 1st Psalm, is a derivative of ‘asher, representing the initial term I tried to translate two decades ago in Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7 to correct the misappropriation of the word throughout English Bibles. Every translation fostered the false impression that the prophecy pertained to Jesus rather than to the King to whom it was addressed. Therefore, the opening of the next line is near and dear to everyone involved…

“The family (ha ‘am – the people) who are aware of and acknowledge (yada’ – who are familiar and acquainted with, who learn about and make known, who comprehend and understand) Taruw’ah (Taruw’ah – Trumpets, the 5th of 7 Miqra’ey, time to expose corruptions while sharing the truth, crying out an alarm and shouting for joy, blowing the showphar to announce the upcoming harvest of souls and Dowd’s return) are delighted to show the way and blessed (‘ashry – happy to reveal the proper path to the relationship and treated favorably; from ‘asher – enjoying the benefits of the relationship by having been shown the steps to walk to get the most out of life and ‘any – me), Yahowah (Yahowah). In the light into Your presence (ba ‘owr paneh ‘atah – along with and within this enlightenment into Your shining brilliance, appearance, and face), they walk (halak – they continually and passionately travel about, exploring and moving (piel imperfect paragogic – by continually choosing to walk with Him, Yahowah becomes engaged and active with that individual)).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:15)

This is the second of fifteen statements thus far which appears to be spoken by the Set Apart in Heaven. They are acknowledging that God’s Family is fully aware of and understand the importance of Taruw’ah. It is not only the final gleaning of Yisra’el in immediate proximity to Dowd’s return with Yah, it is the day we raise our voices to call Yahuwdym home.

It is interesting that this speaks of Taruw’ah, skipping past the next harvest which is Shabuw’ah. I suspect that this is for a number of reasons. Once Dowd has fulfilled Chag Matsah, it is his zarowa’s responsibility to sow the seeds which will bear fruit on Shabuw’ah. My assignment is to share what he has done with Yisra’elites and Gowym to maximize the harvest.

Taruw’ah, on the other hand, is not only focused on reuniting Yisra’el and Yahuwdah, and preparing them for the final gleaning, but also, the Basar is heralding Dowd’s return on Trumpets. He must warn God’s people that they have one last opportunity to flee the clutches of religion and politics and embrace their Messiah, King, and Savior. Those who are aware of what he has accomplished, accept the Beryth, attend the Miqra’ey, and acknowledge Yahowah’s name, will be among those invited to walk in the light of Yahowah’s presence.

Everything we have written and spoken about these past 23 years is an expression of Taruw’ah, as we have striven to celebrate its purpose. We have sought to shout out a warning, boldly and loudly telling all who would listen that their religious and political affiliations put them at odds with God. At the same time, we have, as accurately and completely as we are able, shared what Yahowah has revealed about His Son. This is the essence of Taruw’ah – the very reason we are asked to celebrate it on the first day of the seventh month each year.

We rejoice because there is vindication in getting Yahowah’s name, and that of His Son, right.

“In y/Your name (ba shem ‘atah) they rejoice (gyl – they celebrate these favorable circumstances, expressing their enthusiasm (qal imperfect paragogic)) the entire day (kol ha yowm – all the time).

And (wa) by being right about y/You and y/Your vindication (ba tsadaqah ‘atah – in y/You being correct, fair, and just, rightfully acquitting), they are lifted on high (ruwm – they rise, going to a higher elevation).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:16)

The first step we take to knowing Yahowah is to acknowledge and proclaim His name and that of His Son. It is where the path begins to being right regarding what is being offered and by whom. And while this is likely addressing Dowd, the message is the same when speaking of Yahowah The Covenant Family will rejoice in both names.

Every member of the Covenant Family will be adorned, empowered, and fortified by Yahowah and Dowd. And this is ours for the accepting…

“Indeed (ky – because), the honor and splendor (tiph’erth – the glorious adornment and value) of their empowerment and fortification (‘oz hem) are yours (‘atah).

And by your acceptance and approval (wa ba ratsown ‘atah – so at your choosing and by having made the right decision, doing what is pleasing), our brilliantly illuminating horn (qeren ‘anachnuw – our illumination and source of light, our appearance as light, and our trumpet) is lifted up (ruwm – is raised and elevated as an extension from the source).” (Mizmowr 89:17)

By having enabled the benefits of the Covenant by fulfilling the Invitations to Meet with God, Father and Son are prepared to adorn us in their splendor and glory. This then becomes one of many affirmations that Yahowah and Dowd are ever ready to share.

Qeren is the term Yahowah chose to address the illuminated horns of the Ram He was providing for Passover to spare the life of ‘Abraham’s beloved son, Yitschaq. So here, we find Dowd fulfilling this promise, empowering and fortifying the Covenant’s Children as a result.

Having introduced us to Taruw’ah | Trumpets moments ago, we find God approving the brilliantly illuminating Qeren we will raise to celebrate the occasion. The instrument, comprised of a ram’s horn, is called a Showphar. Its sound is so robust with such vibrato, it reverberates within our souls.

And while it is Yahowah who is delivering and protecting us, it is in conjunction with His beloved Qadowsh | Set-Apart One ~ ha Mashyach Dowd, the Melek | King of Yisra’el | Those Who Engage and Endure with God.

“For (ky) our deliverance and protection (magen ‘anachnuw – our defense and shield) are in accord with (la) Yahowah (Yahowah) and on behalf of (wa la – pertain to), the Qadowsh | Set-Apart One (qadowsh – the one who is distinct and separate from the rest, the one who is prepared and dedicated) of Yisra’el (Yisra’el – of Individuals who Engage and Endure with God), our Melek | King (melek ‘anachnuw – is our leader, our royal ruler, our authorized authority, and our sovereign).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:18)

Yahowah’s Set-Apart Spirit, the Ruwach Qodesh, adorns Her Children in a Garment of Light. Her wardrobe is enlightening, perfecting, immortalizing, and empowering. In this way, the imperfect appear perfect before Yah. It is what makes us acceptable. And it is how we are enriched, enlightened, and empowered from 3D to seven-dimensional spiritual beings. This Garment of Light not only delivers us safely into Yahowah’s presence, but it also protects us in the here and now and throughout all time. And it comes highly recommended in that it has been tailored by Dowd – the Qadowsh Yisra’el.

Recognizing that his resume is already second to none, Dowd gains another two titles not previously mentioned within the 89th Mizmowr. And while most can relate to “king” and will view this royal designation as his most acclaimed title, being Chosen and Set Apart unto Yahowah are infinitely superior. Over the long history of nations, kings have been a shekel a dozen, but there is only one Bachyr | Chosen One and Qadowsh | Set-Apart One acclaimed within the Prophets – Dowd, who is also the Zarowa’, Mashyach, and Ben ‘El. And yet, through his collaboration with Yahowah, there was the promise of many more…

“Therefore, at this time (‘az – meanwhile then, in relation to this, and logically), You have spoken (dabar – You communicated with words, promising and declaring) in a revelation (ba chazown – prophetically in a manner such that the intelligent would perceive by visually conveying an agreement) on behalf of (la – to approach) Your Bacharym | Chosen and Tested Ones (bachar – the ones selected, tried, and examined, preferred and found acceptable [from 4QPs versus ‘chasydy – faithful and devoted ones’ in the Masoretic Text]), saying (‘amar – expressing and claiming [from 4QPs]), ‘I have appropriated a degree of equality, a genuine sense of compatibility and overall agreement by bestowing (shawah – I have put in place), assisting, and supplying whatever is needed to, while empowering and enabling (‘ezer ‘al – helping and aiding) the Gibowr | Most Courageous and Capable Man (gibowr – the mightiest of men, the strong and effective defender, the valiant and brave one who battles; from gabar – to prevail, to be powerful, mighty, and strong, to prove one’s valor, and to be a champion for a virtuous cause and geber – man).

I have raised up and exalted (ruwm – I have elevated and lifted on high, taking action to empower) the Bachar | Chosen One (bachar – the one selected, tried, and tested, examined and found acceptable) from (min – out of) the people (‘am – the family).’” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:19)

When an endorsement comes from God, when it says that one individual was preferred and chosen over all others, and when it refers to him as the Most Courageous and Capable of Men, we immediately know that there can be none better, more significant, or deserving. And so while this alone is sufficient to validate my point that Jesus was nothing more than a mythical misnomer conceived to replace Dowd, that’s not even the half of it. By conveying ‘ezer ‘al in first person while addressing the Gibowr, Yahowah declared that He and His Son are in full agreement and completely compatible, even equals in many ways.

That makes this one of the most extraordinary statements ever attributed to God. Yahowah’s intent is to make us like Him, elevating us to His status, starting with His Firstborn, Dowd. No matter where one stands in this line, it does not get any better.

To some extent, this is what Christians would believe is the standing of their Jesus who entered this world as a baby god and exited as a dead god on a stick. But unlike what is said of Dowd, there is no basis for their myth. Dowd’s Song, as presented in the 89th Mizmowr, is a revelation from Yahowah regarding His Son to His Family. This not only affirms that Dowd is the example we are to follow home, but that Yahowah chose those He wanted to live with throughout eternity.

This realization will come as a surprise to many because, with religion, men and women are cajoled into the faith or told to convert. But in this case, Yahowah is the initiator of the relationship and by accepting Him, we become first responders.

The thrust of this declaration from God is also unexpected. Yahowah is revealing that He elevated Dowd to such an extent that he became the very likeness of God in our presence. As a result of what Yahowah has done for His Son, they are in many ways equals, compatible, and in full accord with one another. And this is not unique to the Messiah because this is Yahowah’s intent with every Covenant member.

For our benefit, God empowered and enabled His Gibowr | Most Courageous and Capable Man. Dowd became the greatest defender of his people, the mightiest of men, the ultimate champion of the most virtuous cause. One man was raised and exalted from the people on behalf of all people. Dowd is Yahowah’s chosen implement to resolve that which separates us from Him.

Mizmowr / Lyrics / Psalm 89:19 is the first line of Dowd’s Song extant among the scrolls found in the caves above Qumran. And in the text of the 1,000-year-older Dead Sea Scroll, we find the plural and singular use of bachar | chosen and desired, tested and proven. As a result, based upon His previous declaration, not only was there a connection between God’s deliverance and protection on Taruw’ah and the realization that Dowd was the Qadowsh | Set-Apart One of Yisra’el and our Melek | King, it logically followed that God should make a corresponding revelation to those He had subsequently chosen.

In an interesting twist, since Rabbinic Jews, who are anything but devoted to Yah, refer to themselves as chasyd | devoted and faithful ones, it is easy to see why they replaced bacharym with chasydy. Little did they know that they would be caught and exposed.

In contrast to the rabbinical scum, Dowd is in the center of God’s will, and at His side, always willing to fight for what was right, willing to risk his life to defend his people. That is in contrast to Isra’el’s Haredim who won’t lift a finger to serve anyone other than themselves. They have become parasites and worse because they obscure Jewish perceptions of Yahowah and Dowd.

Unlike the religious, the Messiah was mighty with pen and sword. He was moral but not a pacifist. He did not compromise and saw no point in being diplomatic. He was unapologetic, at least toward other men. He knew right from wrong and would not tolerate any form of deception. He would be crucified in today’s world for being politically incorrect and intolerant just as he was crucified by the Romans for being incompatible with their lust to subjugate and lord over others.

There are a similar number of uncommon insights conveyed in this next statement. First among them, Yahowah found Dowd, not the other way around. Those searching for God never seem to find Him – not just because they don’t know where to look, but because they are too busy praying to listen, and too enamored with their opinions to be observant. It never fails, when I meet someone who claims to be genuinely interested in finding God, even when I have the answers they seek, they’d rather share what they believe than consider what Yahowah had to say.

As a step in the right direction for those interested in listening to what God conveyed, this is in Yahowah’s voice…

“I discovered and then made known (matsa’ – I located, found, revealed, exposed, encountered, and experienced, then sought to reap the benefit by inspiring) Dowd (Dowd – the Beloved; from dowd – the one who is loved and who loves in return), My ‘Ebed | Coworker (‘ebed ‘any – My authorized agent who works on My behalf; from ‘abad – to work).

Out of (min – from [1QPs4]) Shemen Qodesh ‘Any | My Set-Apart Oil (shemen qodesh ‘any – My separating, devoting, and preparing olive oil I have dedicated him to service), I have mashach | anointed him (mashach huw’ – I have applied the oil, dedicating him to My purpose; the actionable basis of and the process of becoming the Mashyach | Messiah) (Mizmowr 89:20) so that, to show the way to the benefits of the relationship (‘asher – to reveal the path to walk to get the most out of life), My hand (yad ‘any – My influence and ability to act) will be established and steadfast (kuwn – will be authenticated and sustained, made ready and prepared, be unwavering and persistent) with you (‘im ‘atah – in association with you [4QPs changes him to you]).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:21 in part)

With every word we read, it continues to be ever more astonishing that Christianity survived a week, much less nineteen centuries. How did something so completely rejected by God become the most popular myth in the world? Humankind was given the answer but not only didn’t appreciate it, had the audacity to rob God’s beloved of these pronouncements and then ascribe them to a myth who became a god. It is appalling.

By stating that He made Dowd known to us, Yahowah is acknowledging His inspiration of the accounts of his life provided within Shamuw’el and for the prophetic narratives found in the Psalms and Proverbs. At His insistence, they have been made available for us to read 3,000 years after they were composed. No other 11th-century BCE life is as contemporaneously or voluminously documented. Therefore, we should be asking ourselves why this is so.

Why did God intervene in human affairs in this way, at this time, in this place, and with this man? Why him? Why is there more written about and by Dowd than we can process in a lifetime, all preserved in the original language, verified and proven credible through prophecy, and fastidiously maintained? Why do we find among the Dead Sea Scrolls – parchments sealed in ceramics unearthed less than twenty miles from where they were first composed – more copies of the Psalms than any other prophetic text – including the Towrah and Yasha’yah? To answer those questions and set us on the right track, Yahowah inspired this Song.

By calling Dowd His ‘Ebed | Coworker, God is giving us the opportunity to understand what He values and wants to accomplish. All we have to do is examine his life and consider his lyrics to capitalize upon what he and his Father are offering. We can then become more pleasing to God by becoming more like His Chosen One.

Highlights of this search reveal that Yahowah wants us to refer to Him by His name and then relate to Him as we would a loving Father. He wants us to listen and learn from Him, to share what we have come to know, to become part of His Family, to appreciate what He values, and to oppose what He disdains, fighting to protect His people while striving to be right. God is attracted to intelligence and character, to passion and purpose, to those who are steadfast and reliable, and especially to those who are not afraid to tell the truth, even when it isn’t popular.

By referring to Dowd as “the one who works on My behalf,” Yahowah is reaffirming His predilection to accomplish what needs to be done with His creation and through us rather than alone. This remarkable fact reinforces His commitment to empower and enrich His children by being personally involved in our lives.

On this occasion, Yahowah is announcing that He did something remarkable for Dowd and with him, something that He has not done for anyone else – “out of My Set-Apart Oil I have anointed him.” Should this be the special oil that would enable the Mashyach to live three lives, or just that of enlightenment, longevity, healing, protection, nourishment, or preparation for service, may you and I benefit from future allocations of it. And may we capitalize upon it with all of the passion and courage Dowd manifested.

That said, the Shemen Qodesh ‘Any | My Set-Apart Anointing Oil isn’t describing the application of olive oil on Dowd – although this occurred at Yahowah’s direction three times. It actually speaks of Dowd being immersed in the Ruwach Qodesh | Set-Apart Spirit when he was initially introduced by Yahowah as His Mashyach | Anointed Messiah at eight years of age. This makes Dowd unique and special among the few who were anointed. And so when there is a prophecy regarding this title, as there is in Daniel 9, unless stated otherwise, it is addressing Dowd.

In light of this declarative statement from God, Christians who claim that their Jesus was the Christ can go to Hell. To deprive God’s beloved Son, Dowd, of this title and give it to another is reprehensible when Yahowah was so expressive and clear otherwise is disgusting. They are without excuse.

But rabbis are no better. This has been available for them to read for 2,991 years and not one of them affords Dowd the acclaim he deserves. They would have the audacity to consider themselves their nameless god’s coworkers, no matter how ludicrous. As a result of their lack of intelligence, they are still promoting the arrival of an unnamed Messiah at an undisclosed date – having nothing to do with Yahowah, the Miqra’ey, or the Beryth.

In conjunction with God explaining that His criteria for determining who He prefers is markedly different from mankind’s, Yahowah explained the process of anointing Dowd in conjunction with being immersed in the Ruwach – our Spiritual Mother – causing Dowd to be God’s Son. As a result, we should not ignore what God has done, or worse, rob this man of his due from God and give these accolades to another. This was God’s decision, and we should respect it, appreciate it, accept and embrace it – capitalizing upon it by reading his 119th Mizmowr, his magnum opus on how to properly observe Yahowah’s Towrah | Teaching.

Beyond the fact that this decision was Yahowah’s, and without Him, we don’t even exist, He didn’t do this just for Dowd’s benefit but also for ours. By preparing the Messiah to serve in this way, God’s manner of influencing our lives was established and authenticated, becoming as steadfast and unwavering as the lyrics of this and every Mizmowr.

Our Heavenly Father’s instructions are typically collective, written to all Yisra’el and the world, but in Dowd’s Song, it’s all personal. So while the Towrah is the map serving all, Dowd is the authorized guide. He is the greatest gift ever offered. Those who capitalize upon what Father and Son have accomplished live forever, are perfected, and then are adopted into the Covenant Family.

As yet another reminder, while Dowd’s most famous title was Melek | King, and his most purloined were Mashyach | Messiah and Ben ‘El | Son of God, his most relevant is Zarowa’ | Sacrificial Lamb. As evidence of this, Yahowah has offered it a third time. After disclosing “I discovered and then made known (matsa’) Dowd (Dowd), My Coworker (‘ebed ‘any). Out of (min) My Set-Apart Oil (shemen qodesh ‘any), I have anointed him (mashach huw’) (Mizmowr 89:20) so that, to show the way to the benefits of the relationship (‘asher), My hand (yad ‘any) will be established and steadfast (kuwn) with you (‘im ‘atah),” God said…

“In addition to (‘aph – even more), ‘Any Zarowa’ | My Protective Shepherd, Strong Arm, Sacrificial Lamb, and the One who Sows the Seeds of the Harvest (zarowa’ ‘any – My Productive Ram who shepherds the flock, who prevails because he is effective and strong, fully resolved with the overall ability to accomplish the mission, My remarkably impactful individual of action who, as a leader and fighter, is engaged to guide My sheep, who is fruitful in his ways, especially when sowing the seeds of truth while advancing the purpose of the sacrificial lamb) to empower and embolden you, strengthening and reinforcing you, while enabling your growth (‘amets ‘atah – will help you mature, elevating your status, while establishing you with the determination to persist and be courageous [4QPs corrects him to you]).’” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:21)

God could not have made this any easier for us. There is no need to interpret the text, extrapolate conclusions, or engage in speculation. The Bachar | Chosen One from among the people, the anointed Mashyach | Messiah, the Son of God, the man Yahowah raised and exalted to work with Him, the very Hand of God and His Zarowa’ | Protective Shepherd and Sacrificial Lamb, has a name: Dowd. For those willing to listen and engage, his life and lyrics will “‘amets ‘atah – help you grow, empowering and emboldening you.”

For God’s sake and yours, if you haven’t already done so, it’s well past time that we all accept and acknowledge Dowd’s special place in our lives and with God. If anyone holds the keys to Heaven, it is this man. It is his Home and his Family as well as his Father’s House. It is his throne and kingdom which will be established therein forevermore. Thankfully, he is exceedingly generous and after opening the door he has held it open so that we might follow him inside.

As a result, his is the greatest life ever lived and the greatest gift ever given. There is no other like him.

There is no mention of a rabbi, a pope, of Paul, Akiba, or Muhammad, of Jesus, Allah, or even of HaShem, anywhere in the Towrah or Prophets, but there are a thousand statements like these in favor of Dowd. Yahowah is rightfully proud of His Son and He wants us to appreciate what they have accomplished together. Therefore, His righteous indignation is directed at those who would misappropriate His Son’s achievements to advance a deadly religion.

In this regard, it is worth mentioning that the surviving fragments of the Qumran texts supporting the 89th Psalm are legible beginning with the 19th verse. The differences, when compared to the Masoretic Text were numerous and significant. They are especially relevant in the previous statement, particularly in 89:21, where the opening thought is now correctly presented as two distinct sentences with the change from “with” to “from” relative to the Set-Apart Oil with which Yahowah personally anointed Dowd.

But the biggest difference is found in the concluding pronouncements of what we have just read, where the witness of the Dead Sea Scrolls changes “huw’ – him” to “‘atah – you,” revealing that Dowd was presented and anointed for our benefit. This perspective becomes particularly poignant because it means that Yahowah’s Zarowa’ | Sacrificial Lamb was offered through the Miqra’ey on behalf of the Beryth. His sacrifice strengthens and emboldens us so that we can grow with God.

This is in opposition to the implications of the Masoretic Text which has the Zarowa’ influencing Dowd. With the Dead Sea Scroll correction, Dowd’s role as the Zarowa’ | Protective Shepherd and Sacrificial Lamb reveals that he earned the respect of the flock by making the ultimate sacrifice for his sheep.

Having reached a crescendo a third of our way through Dowd’s Song, this would be a good time to assess how far we have come. Yahowah has already acknowledged His Son as…

Dowd | Beloved – twice

Bachar ‘Any | My Chosen One – twice

‘Ebed ‘Any | My Coworker – twice

‘Ad ‘Owlam | a Restoring and Eternal Witness – twice

Mashal | an Articulate Leader – once

Yamyn | the Right Hand – once

‘Azaz Yad | a Strong Hand – once

Zarowa’ | Sacrificial Lamb – 4 times

Gabuwrah | the feminine manifestation of the soul’s, spirit’s, and zarowa’s Power, Inspiring Courage, Outstanding Character, and Awesome Ability – twice

Qadowsh | Set-Apart One of Yisra’el – once

Gibowr | Most Courageous and Capable Man – once

Mashach | Anointed – once

And while those are names, titles, and attributes to cherish, even they pale when compared to what Yahowah had to say about His beloved son, Dowd…

“I have established, cutting through separation (karat) the Beryth | Covenant for the Family and Home (Beryth) through ‘Any Bachyr | My Chosen One – the person I prefer and have decided upon (la bachyr ‘any).

I have sworn an oath, and I will affirm this promise seven times over (shaba’) to Dowd | the Beloved (la Dowd), ‘Ebed ‘Any | My Authorized Agent and Coworker who serves on My behalf (‘ebed ‘any).

Forevermore, as an ‘Ad ‘Owlam | Eternal Witness to the Restoring Testimony (‘ad ‘owlam), I will prepare and establish (kuwn) your offspring and that which you sow (zera’ ‘atah). In addition, I will construct a home (wa banah) for your throne and seat of honor (kise’ ‘atah) on behalf of all generations throughout time (la dowr wa dowr).’ Selah | Pause now and contemplate the implications (selah).

Beside you, and on your behalf (la ‘atah), a Zarowa’ | Strong Arm Sowing the Seeds for the Harvest of offspring (zarowa’) with tremendous power, courage, character, and awesome ability as an impactful influencer (‘im gabuwrah), y/Your confident and capable, strengthened and empowered hand (‘azaz yad ‘atah) raised up high (ruwm) at your right side (yamyn ‘atah).

For (ky) our deliverance and protection (magen ‘anachnuw) are in accord with (la) Yahowah (Yahowah). And on behalf of (wa la) the Qadowsh | Set-Apart One (qadowsh) of Yisra’el (Yisra’el) is our Melek | King (melek ‘anachnuw).

Therefore, at this time (‘az), You have spoken (dabar) in a revelation (ba chazown) on behalf of (la) Your Bacharym | Chosen and Tested Ones (bacharym ‘atah), saying (‘amar), ‘I have appropriated a degree of equality, a genuine sense of compatibility and overall agreement by bestowing (shawah – I have put in place), assisting, and supplying whatever is needed to, while empowering and enabling (‘ezer ‘al – helping and aiding) the Gibowr | Most Courageous and Capable Man (gibowr). I have raised up and exalted (ruwm) the Bachar | Chosen One (bachar) from (min) the people (‘am).

I discovered and then made known, encountered, experienced, and exposed (matsa’) Dowd (Dowd), My ‘Ebed | Coworker (‘ebed ‘any). Out of (min) Shemen Qodesh ‘Any | My Set-Apart Oil (shemen qodesh ‘any), I have mashach | anointed him (mashach huw’) so that, to show the way to the benefits of the relationship (‘asher), My hand and influence (yad ‘any) will be established and steadfast, authenticated and unwavering (kuwn) with you (‘im ‘atah), in addition to (‘aph), ‘Any Zarowa’ | My Protective Shepherd, Strong Arm, Sacrificial Lamb, and the One who Sows the Seeds of the Harvest (zarowa’ ‘any) to empower and embolden you, strengthening and reinforcing you, while enabling your growth (‘amets ‘atah).”

That’s pretty good for a man Paul claimed was dead and buried and, thus, replaced. And it’s impressive for a fellow who rabbis prefer to denigrate rather than celebrate.

As we press on, there is a slightly different order of things found within the Qumran parchments as opposed to the Masoretic Text. Psalm 89:25 follows Mizmowr 89:21. Further “his hand” becomes “My hand” and “My right side” in 4QPs. Dowd will stand at Yahowah’s right side and is serving as God’s hand.

“‘As such (wa), I will place (suwm – I will appoint, direct, set, and establish) My hand (yad ‘any – under My influence [from 4QPs whereas the MT read ‘his’ hand]) into (ba – within and over) the sea (ha yam – the waters of the oceans (a metaphor for gowym)) and My right side (yamyn ‘any – My right hand) adjacent to flowing waters (wa ba ha nahar – over the rivers and among the places water flows, also possibly in the feminine, naharah – in concert with the beaming light of the sun).’” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:25 repositioned based upon the Dead Sea Scrolls)

As He has already disclosed, Yahowah’s “yad – hand” is Dowd. Therefore, he will be placed over Gowym | Gentiles, represented in the text by the “yam – sea.” The “ha nahar – place from which the waters flow” at Yahowah’s “yamyn – right side,” is Tsyown. Upon their return, Yahowah is going to open up a life-giving waterway from the Dead Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, running right through Mowryah between His Home on the summit and His Son’s palatial residence below. I expect that there will be a bridge of light connecting the two.

From death, there will be new life. And from the witness of the Dead Sea Scrolls, we will come to know our Father as Dowd knew Him.

As we press on, we are reminded that the Adversary, and the schemes of his tempestuous prodigy, will be thwarted. The Devil’s Advocate, called the “Son of Evil,” has met his match, and is being upended by the Herald he could not outwit and Messiah his religion could not nullify. As never before, Twistianity has become the Adversary’s adversary on behalf of the Savior and Son of God.

With this much evidence condemning Sha’uwl | Paul as the Towrahless One, the man who disavowed the Word of God to negate the life and lyrics of the Messiah and Son of God, it’s curious that Christians remain fixated on identifying their “Antichrist” when he is the creep responsible for their religion.

Fortunately, Yahowah is a great Father and is going to protect His Son, even if by delegating and then supporting His Son’s Herald…

“‘The Adversary (‘oyeb – the hostile opposition, the enemy, the one with animosity, enmity, and rancor (masculine singular)) will not outwit or nullify him (showa’ ba huw’ – will not negate his value or annul his position or purpose).

And (wa) the Son of Evil (ben ‘awlah – the awful child of wickedness, the prodigy of malice and injustice, the seed of the one who is wrong, harmful, and damaging; from ‘awal (transliterated ‘evel in the Masoretic Text) – the Evil One, who by being wrong deviates from the truth by perverting, twisting, and corrupting that which is correct (masculine singular)) will not be able to denigrate or deflect him because he will have no answer for him (lo’ ‘anah huw’ – he will not silence him or stop him, will not negate his answers or nullify his responsive declarations (piel imperfect energic nun – the Son of Evil will not be allowed to continue his assault on Dowd)).’” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:22)

Showa’ wasn’t chosen by happenstance, nor was ‘awlah. Showa’ is used in the 3rd Statement Yahowah etched in stone to say that He would not forgive anyone who sought to nullify or negate the value of His name. He’s not going to allow Satan and his fellow malcontents to denigrate or silence Dowd, either.

This is an important lesson because it means that God is as protective of His name and reputation as He is of His Son’s. An attack on one is an assault on the other. To degrade Dowd by failing to acknowledge what he has sacrificed to save Yisra’el or to replace him with a warlord or mythical misnomer, as is the case with Judaism and Christianity, is to garner his Father’s wrath.

As for ‘awlah, it was used in Chabaquwq | Habakkuk 2:12 to reveal that Sha’uwl | Paul, the Plague of Death, would build an evil edifice. Therefore, Yahowah is tying these pronouncements together for us so that we might understand Satan’s desire to degrade Yahowah’s Chosen – attacking His Son to denigrate His Children. God does not want us fooled into denying, trivializing, or replacing the Zarowa’, Mashyach, or Ben.

While the Adversary, as ha Satan, is singular, as is his prodigy, the Son of Evil, when working together as they did to conceive Christianity, they become “tsary – adversarial foes.” Beyond this, to the best of my knowledge, there are only three prominent individuals who claimed to speak for God while admitting to being demon-possessed: the people’s choice, King Sha’uwl | Saul, the wannabe Apostle and false prophet, Sha’uwl | Paul, and the self-acclaimed Messenger of God, Muhammad.

However, since the Plague of Death was explicitly named Sha’uwl in Chabaquwq / Habakkuk, it doesn’t take a genius to ascertain which of these nefarious fellows earned the title “Son of Evil.” More to the point, Sha’uwl’s name will soon appear within this Mizmowr, eliminating any doubt as to the identity of the Wicked Child.

May we applaud Yah. The title is fitting.

It’s stupefying that no one has bothered to ask: if Sha’uwl | Paul is as goddamn important as he claims, if he is the lone Apostle to the Gentile world, why are all of the prophetic references to him overtly condemning and overwhelmingly negative? Why isn’t there a single positive comment about the principal author of the Christian New Testament to be found anywhere among the prophets? If it is Sha’uwl that we should be listening to, why is Dowd, the man whose status and testimony Paul sought to annul, featured in more prophecies than everyone else combined? If Paul is telling the truth and Dowd is lying, why is it that Paul consistently misquotes and contradicts God while Yahowah proclaims that Dowd is right?

Why is this Dowd’s Song and not an Ode to Sha’uwl if it is Paul’s New Testament that supposedly saves instead of God’s Son? Why was this Mizmowr conveyed in Yahowah’s voice rather than in that of Jesus? Why is there no mention of faith, a gospel, of dying, or of a resurrection?

Or, just as revealing, why is there no mention of the Babylonian Talmud in Yahowah’s prophetic testimony? More incriminating still, why isn’t Yahowah mentioned in the Talmud? Why is there no reference to rabbis, since they are the soul of Judaism? Why are there no songs singing about the millions of ways to make the Shabat an unproductive ordeal, enslaved and fettered by rabbinical jargon? Why are there no lyrics presenting food as a banquet of religious excrement?

Why is Sha’uwl’s name synonymous and homonymous with She’owl | Hell? Why does it mean, “Question Him?” Why is he a Benyamite | Son Headed South to the Sea of Gentiles and depicted as a vicious wolf if he is to be believed? Why does Dowd’s name mean “Beloved” by contrast? Why is Dowd the one from Yahuwdah | Beloved of Yah while Sha’uwl is from the most wayward of the tribes?

Why is Dowd afforded every positive title, accolade, and attribute by God, Himself: from the Chosen One to the Set-Apart One, from Son of God to the Hand of God, from Messiah to King, and from the Branch to the Protective Shepherd and Sacrificial Lamb, if we aren’t supposed to value his contribution to our lives? Why is Dowd accompanying Yahowah upon His return and then depicted ruling the world, if his life and testimony are to be discounted? Why are the only titles God associated with Sha’uwl | Paul the Father of Lies, the Son of Evil, and the Plague of Death if there is anything good or right about him or the religion he fermented?

Asked another way, since the Book of Acts claims that Paul was such a big shot, such a persuasive orator and prolific writer, a man who traveled throughout the Greco-Roman world, the best student of Gamaliel, the leading rabbi of the day, and a man who supposedly met with numerous kings along the way, why isn’t there a single reference to him in any of the communities or nations he visited? Having allegedly given speeches before provincial governors, kings, and emperors, why didn’t a court scribe record his message? Why wasn’t the Christian globetrotter mentioned by Tacitus, Pliny, Josephus, or even by a rabbi? Why is Paul’s written account of his life in Galatians so incompatible with the story he told Luke in Acts? Why did he die miserable and alone, rejected by all he sought to influence by his own admission? What did those who listened to Paul and rejected him realize that Christians fail to recognize today?

Or may I ask: Since Rabbi Akiba’s promotion of a false Messiah led directly to the Diaspora and eventually to the Holocaust, how did the second-most (to Sha’uwl) counterproductive and errant Jew in the long history of Yahuwdym become the father of the most popular religion among the Chosen People? These things do not equate. And Jews are supposed to be smart.

And speaking of not acting smartly, why didn’t a Jew do as I have done with Questioning Paul, now Twistianity, or even Prophet of Doom which became God Damn Religion, and demonstrate that the Adversarial and anti-Semitic religions of Christianity and Islam were contrary to Yahowah? Simple enough. Since both Paul and Muhammad claimed the “Old Testament” on behalf of their pretend gods, why not compare the words of the real God to theirs? What is wrong with God’s people that they allow themselves to be tormented by religions – Judaism, Christianity, and Islam – which are so readily and convincingly disproved? Why do they allow Islamic Palestinians to terrorize them when Islam is so easily refuted and such people are a marketing myth?

Rest assured, before the conclusion of these chapters, we will expose Sha’uwl | Paul’s irrational attempts, both spoken and written, to “tsary – constrain and restrict” the importance of Dowd | the Beloved of Yahowah. You will know, as does God, why the Plague of Death must be vanquished. Sometimes it takes a Gowy to do the job of a Jew.

Standing up for the one who stood with Him, Yah reveals something that should terrify religious Jews, Christians, and Muslims – all of whom are guilty of devaluing and replacing the Messiah Dowd…

“‘And so (wa), I will pulverize and crush (kathath – I will defeat, beat down, shatter, and break, then vanquish, throwing away and incarcerating under extremely unfavorable circumstances after thoroughly rebuking (qal perfect)) his foes, especially those who seek to constrain and restrict him (tsary huw’ – his adversaries who openly display their hostility and opposition, creating an unfavorable situation, by diminishing his calling and purpose).

Then (wa) out of his presence (min paneh huw’ – away from and on account of, even before his appearance), I will plague (nagaph – I will afflict with a deadly pandemic disease, smiting and inflicting with that which is destructive, harmful, and injurious) those who shun him by attempting to decrease his status (sane’ huw’ – those who are openly hostile in their derision and who so intensely dislike him they refuse to associate with him, failing to appreciate what his love represents, hating him).’” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:23)

In the three millennia that have transpired since this pronouncement was written in 968 BCE, there has been a single adroit and inarguable fulfillment of it – and you are reading it now. Inexcusably, Twistianity, formerly Questioning Paul, is the first frontal attack on Paul, the myth of Jesus, the New Testament, and Christianity conducted by comparing God’s testimony to the religion’s tripe while also restoring the Messiah’s due.

Empirically, having dissected, contrasted, and analyzed much of what Sha’uwl | Paul said and wrote, I realized that the principal author of the Christian New Testament was not only replacing Dowd with his mythological god, “Jesus Christ,” but was decreasing Dowd’s status to elevate his own. However, until I invested the time to specifically scrutinize Paul’s spoken and written assessment of Dowd, the first time in Acts and the second in Romans, I had no idea just how irrational and pathetic his attempts had been.

As a result, I came to better understand and disdain the basis of Replacement Theology. Paul’s irrational and counterproductive assessments of Dowd were contrived because the Father of Lies realized that ha Mashyach’s life and lyrics not only undermined his New Testament, but they also obliterated his credibility. The delusions so essential to Christianity simply are not possible among those who appreciate what Dowd represents.

In contrast to these myths, Yahowah and Dowd share this in common…

“‘Therefore (wa), My steadfast commitment to the truth (‘emuwnah ‘any – My trustworthiness and unrelenting honesty, the realization that I am reliable and dependable, unchanging and without contradiction, resolute and unwavering; from ‘emuwn – My enduring truth and ‘aman – My support and willingness to confirm and uphold that which is trustworthy, consistent, and verifiable and My continuing commitment to confirm that which is correct and accurate) and (wa) My unwavering love, determined devotion, and enduring favoritism, My ongoing affection and genuine favoritism (chesed ‘any – My commitment to a loving relationship, to generosity and kindness, in addition to the continuation of My merciful benefits), are with him (‘im huw’ – mark My association with him and are implied in My relationship with him).

In My name (wa ba shem ‘any – in My personal and proper designation), his light will radiate and enlighten and his brilliant horn (qeren huw’ – his glowing appearance on his summit and his ability to enlighten will be brilliant, even his ram’s-horn crown, symbolic of his status and strength, and of his role as the protective ram among the sheep during Taruw’ah will be prominent, as will be his trumpet for signaling which emits light) will be lifted up, raised on high, and exalted (ruwm – will arise and act (qal imperfect)).’” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:24)

Dowd | David is like his Father, Yahowah, in these ways. Both share an unwavering love for one another and for their people. They are committed to the truth and are vociferous about it. They play favorites, preferring some over others. They honor their promises and can be relied upon. By looking at one we see the other. Seen together, they encapsulate the Towrah and emulate the Miqra’ey, and embody the Beryth. Their relationship has made it possible for us to appreciate and experience Yahowah’s enduring love and mercy.

When Yahowah said this about Himself and His Son, He destroyed Christianity and Judaism. Since God is unwavering in His commitment to the truth, He could not have inspired the contradictory message found in the Christian New Testament or Babylonian Talmud – especially since they reinterpret and misconstrue much of what He claimed would be consistently reliable. Since the God of the Towrah is genuinely loving and merciful, the “Gospel of Grace” is without merit. If it conveys the same message as that found in the Towrah (which it doesn’t), it becomes superfluous. If its message differs (and it does), for it to be true, the statement God just made must be false.

Since God stated that His enduring commitment to the truth and mercy were both with Dowd, one leads to the other, completely negating salvation through faith or works. If Dowd, then not the Talmud or being Kosher.

All good things occur in Yahowah’s name, from love to enlightenment, from mercy to being converted into light. And they are received through Dowd.

Also interesting since God spoke of qeren in conjunction with Dowd, Yahowah used the same word after telling ‘Abraham that He would provide the lamb. And so, when ‘Abraham looked, he saw the lamb’s “qeren – horns of radiant light” on the summit of Mowryah. Therefore, based upon this statement 1,000 years after that declaration, Yahowah was symbolically portraying what He would accomplish with Dowd 1,000 years after this affirmation on Mowryah. Therefore, Dowd is not only the exemplar of the Covenant, he is the Zarowa’ | Sacrificial Lamb. Affirming this, the Messiah scribed his experience fulfilling Chag Matsah in first person. He thereby enabled the promised benefits of Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym where ‘Abraham and Yitschaq had once stood.

One after the next, every word of this Song contains a treasure trove of relevant insights. The same is true with these next three statements. They are awesome individually and exceptional collectively. Dowd’s status with God is both special and secure.

After stating, “Therefore (wa), My steadfast commitment to the truth (‘emuwnah ‘any) and (wa) My unwavering love, determined devotion, and enduring favoritism, My ongoing affection and genuine favoritism (chesed ‘any), are with him (‘im huw’). In My name (wa ba shem ‘any), his light will radiate and enlighten, and his brilliant horn (qeren huw’) will be lifted up, raised on high, and exalted (ruwm),” Yahowah affirmed…

“He, himself, will call out to Me and welcome Me, in conjunction with the Miqra’ey, announcing (huw’ qara’ ‘any – he will genuinely invite Me into his life, actually reading and reciting to Me, continually proclaiming unto Me during the Invitations to Meet (qal imperfect)), ‘You are my Father (‘ab ‘any ‘atah)!’ (Mizmowr 89:26) [Note: “‘el ‘any wa tsuwr yashuwa’ah ‘any – my God and Rock of my salvation” is omitted in 4QPs but included in the Masoretic Text.]

I (‘any), also (‘aph – likewise and in relation [from 4QPs]), will appoint and make him (nathan huw’ – will offer and present him, bestowing him as a gift, causing him by way of this relationship to be (qal imperfect)) Bakowr ‘Any | My Firstborn Son (bakowr ‘any – the basis of the Miqra’ of Bikuwrym), the ‘Elyown | Almighty God, the Highest and Uppermost (‘elyown – the most exalted in status, rank, and position, the supreme, a title so Divine in nature, it is almost always reserved for God, Himself, meaning: Almighty God; from ‘alah – to ascend above) in comparison to the kings and rulers (la melekym – government leaders) of the Earth (‘erets – of the material realm and of the Land). (Mizmowr 89:27)

For all eternity (la ‘owlam – forever, from antiquity and into the future without end) I will keep watch over him, paying very close attention to him (shamar la huw’ – I will focus upon him, observing all there is to know about him, closely and carefully considering him, paying attention to him and guarding him).

My unwavering love, unrelenting devotion, enduring affection, and genuine favoritism (chesed ‘any – My commitment to a loving relationship, to generosity and kindness, as well as My compassion and mercy) in addition to My Family-Oriented Covenant (wa beryth ‘any – as well as My binding oath and pledge to build a home and raise My family; from beyth – family and home and banah – to build a home to raise children) are truthfully presented and reliably established, verifiable and enduring through him (‘aman la huw’ – are confirmed and credible, upheld and everlasting, especially real for him and through him).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:28)

Second only to the introductory proclamations Yahowah made at the inception of Dowd’s Song, the last three pronouncements are as profoundly important as anything found in the Towrah and Prophets. So, it bears repeating…

“He, himself, will call out to Me and welcome Me, announcing in conjunction with the Miqra’ey (huw’ qara’ ‘any), ‘You are my Father (‘ab ‘any ‘atah)!’ I (‘any), therefore (‘aph), will bestow him as a gift, appointing and making him (nathan huw’) My Firstborn Son (bakowr ‘any), as ‘Elyown | Almighty God, the Highest and Uppermost (‘elyown) in comparison to the kings and rulers (la melekym) of the Earth (‘erets). For all eternity (la ‘owlam), I will keep watch over him, paying very close attention to him, focusing on him (shamar la huw’). My unwavering love, unrelenting devotion, and genuine favoritism (chesed ‘any), in addition to My Family-Oriented Covenant (wa beryth ‘any), are truthfully presented and reliably established, verifiable and enduring through him (‘aman la huw’).”

Dowd is announcing and Yahowah is affirming that they are Father and Son. Just as there is no one else that Yahowah personally anointed, Dowd stands alone as the Firstborn Son of God.

That is astounding, validating the nature of the Beryth | Covenant, which is to raise a family while affirming the purpose of the Miqra’ey | Invitations – particularly the adoption of sons and daughters on Bikuwrym | Firstborn Children. But even more than this, by offering His Son to us as a gift Yahowah is affirming that Dowd fulfilled Pesach and Matsah – providing the gifts of eternal life and perfection.

At the same time, these affirmations obliterate the underlying planks of Judaism, in that Dowd is more important than Moseh and God has a corporeal manifestation, while undermining the very foundation of Christianity. And as an added benefit, this insightful revelation leads us to properly assess the identity of the “child who was born and the son who was given to us” in Yasha’yah / Isaiah 9:6 – the most misappropriated and misconstrued of all prophecies. And rest assured, we will review it next, because by doing so, we will pound the final nail in the Christian cross and coffin and bury the myth of Jesus and the lies of Paul forevermore.

When Dowd refers to Yahowah as his Father and Yahowah responds by acknowledging that He perceives Dowd to be His Son, they are describing the nature of their relationship and the way they interact with one another. They are not describing a biological connection but, instead, something far more profound.

In a father/son relationship, the parent carries most of the responsibility and does the preponderance of the work. Fathers mentor sons, set an example for them to follow, teach and guide them. Parents provide nourishment and shelter, apparel and protection for their children. But the child also bears responsibility. They must learn and accept the house rules and contribute to the family in some way once they are able. It’s even better when sons respect their fathers and are appreciative, and it’s best when they are able to advance the family business. In this regard, Dowd was the perfect son.

And this is one of many reasons Dowd earned the right to be called Yahowah’s Bakowr | Firstborn. With this distinction he became the proper heir, inheriting the right to wear his Father’s crown and share His throne. He would also inherit the birthright of a royal firstborn.

Also, with the Miqra’ey existing to advance the rewards of the Covenant, by fulfilling Pesach and Matsah, Dowd became the best-suited among us to exemplify the benefits of Bikuwrym | Firstborn Children.

The most electrifying term in the mix of profound accolades is the most highly revered: ‘elyown. It is used throughout the Towrah to address Almighty God. So, at the very least, Dowd is to be seen as over and above other men – the most distinguished of all. And, if we are to trust the Towrah’s definition, as is well advised, then Yahowah is presenting His Son as God.

In a phrase and a word, Dowd actually became everything falsely attributed to the mythical misnomer Jesus Christ through replacement and counterfeit. So, since this speaks of Dowd, it cannot be true of Christ. And that means that Christianity is without basis. Therefore, it should be obvious why in the rewriting of Questioning Paul as Twistianity, the longest chapter is devoted to Dowd. He is the antidote for the toxicity of the ‘Abrahamic religions.

While referring to the exemplar of the Covenant and Messiah, the Son of God as ‘Elyowm | the Almighty, would be shocking in any other context, in the midst of Dowd’s Song it is fitting – the natural extension of the prose. By design, sons are supposed to grow up and become like their fathers. And when it comes to this Family, the benefits of the Covenant, all of which Dowd helped provide by fulfilling the Miqra’ey, are specifically devised to make us more like God, enriching, empowering, and enlightening His children. Moreover, as we transition from the material to the spiritual realm, we will grow exponentially in dimensions, going from three to seven – which is an infinite increase four times over. And guess who we become more alike in the process and along the way?

During the Yatsa’ | Exodus, Yahowah appeared before the Children of Yisra’el as a pillar of cloud, and thus water, by day and of fire, and thus light, by night. Recognizing that He was received poorly by Yisra’el at the time, rather than replicate that ordeal, God has a better plan. He will be seen through His Son – thereby denoting the purpose of creation.

As we approach the conclusion of this Mizmowr, Yahowah will tell us that Dowd will be so illuminating he will appear as brilliant as the sun. So, based upon all of this, we would be well served to read ‘Elyown as Almighty God. And so as not to risk shortchanging God’s Son, then he is the ‘Elyown | Highest and Uppermost. So please, let’s silence the foolish religious rhetoric praising the likes of Jesus, Paul, Akiba, Muhammad, or Maimonides.

With this acknowledgment, we are afforded yet another insight into the nature of things. When we consider Satan’s influence over Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, we are now aware of why they feature replacement Messiahs and wannabe gods seeking to rise above Yahowah. Dowd not only represents what Satan craves, but the returning King is the one who ends the Adversary’s reign as the god of men.

After anointing the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant on Kipurym, Dowd will dispatch the religious god and his minions to She’owl. Therefore, with his flock, his status is never going to change. We have God’s word on it. He will continue to focus on His Son throughout eternity.

Yahowah’s concluding statement speaks volumes. He is declaring for all of us to read that His love, affection, and mercy are best demonstrated and understood when we consider His relationship with Dowd. Further, the Covenant is most accurately presented, affirmed, and verified when we examine Dowd’s participation through his lives and lyrics.

And it all begins and ends with qara’. Father and Son have invited us into the Covenant Family. We have been “called out” of this world so that we can be “welcomed” in Heaven. By “reading and reciting” the Word of God, we find Father and Son “summoning us” to their side. When we capitalize on what they have done through the Miqra’ey to deliver the benefits of the Covenant, we grow exponentially.

Dowd has shown us the way. Follow him.

Yah will remain attuned to Dowd forevermore because He loves him as a father loves a son. God said, “chesed ‘any wa beryth ‘any ‘aman la huw’ – My unwavering love, unrelenting devotion, and enduring mercy are truthfully presented and will reliably endure with him as part of My Covenant Family.” Even when they act up, parents seldom tire of their children. And when a child grows up to devote themselves to the betterment of the family, when they go about their father’s business, every moment is a cause for celebration. This is not only why we have children – it is why we exist.

According to Yahowah, Dowd is the most interesting man in the world. We devalue him and Yah’s relationship with him at our peril. By contrast, if we do as Yahowah does, and “shamar – closely examine and carefully consider” his every word and deed, we will endure forever.

Based on what Yahowah has to say about Dowd, it is prudent that we listen to him and follow his example.

“And I will establish (wa sym – appoint and preserve) his seed, that which he sows, preparing his offspring for the harvest (zera’ huw’ – his posterity and descendants through the seeds he plants which will grow into an abundant harvest) through the Restoring Witness and by way of the Eternal Testimony forevermore (la ‘ed | ‘ad – as everlasting and enduring testimony and as evidence which serves as proof).

His throne (wa kise’ huw’ – so his position and seat of honor) will be equated to the days of heaven (ka yowm shamaym – will be as time in the spiritual realm, which is everlasting).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:29)

The Covenant’s Children are the beneficiaries of what Dowd has sown. And as such, we are his offspring – the legacy of the harvest he has enabled. Through the Son, the Father has conceived the perfect Family – one He is looking forward to raising while sharing all that is His to give. As a result, the Son’s place of honor and his offspring shall endure forevermore – as replete with time as are the days of heaven.

And to this end, Yahowah intends to deploy a final Restoring Witness, someone who is in love with the Author of the Eternal Testimony just as he is with His beloved Son. This Song needs to be sung.

We now know that the Spiritual Abode of God has a seat of honor, indeed a throne, one with Dowd’s name written upon it. Therefore, it’s not just throughout the Millennial Kingdom that we should expect to see Dowd shepherd his flock, but in Heaven as well.

If we wish to be there with him, it’s important that we realize that where there is freewill, there are choices to be made and alliances to be established and broken. Dowd chose wisely, electing to closely examine and carefully consider Yahowah’s Towrah. His 119th Mizmowr / Psalm, the twenty-two-stanza alphabetic presentation of the Towrah, remains one of the crowning achievements of his life. I would encourage you to consider it as it is presented in the Towrah | Teaching volume of An Introduction to God.

For those not as well informed, for those misled by the likes of Paul, Akiba, and Muhammad, they will face the consequences of having chosen poorly and, in particular, Yahuwdym – the direct descendants of Dowd...

“However, if (‘im – and yet on the contrary and condition, should the situation be that) his children (beny huw’ – his descendants) continue to forsake, ignore, or reject (‘azab – they habitually neglect or abandon, depart from and disavow (qal imperfect)) My Towrah | Teaching and Guidance (Towrah ‘any – My Source of Instruction and Direction) and (wa) if they make a habit of failing to walk (wa lo’ halak – and do not journey, conducting their lives (qal imperfect)) according to My means to justly resolve disputes (ba mishpat ‘any – within the parameters I’ve set to execute good judgment and to be discerning; a compound of ma – to ponder the implications of and shaphat – making good decisions and being just), (Mizmowr 89:30) if (‘im – on the condition that they) they perpetually view My clearly communicated prescriptions for living with contempt (chuqah ‘any chalal – profaning and desecrating My conditions, dishonoring what I’ve enacted and constituted (qal imperfect)), and further (wa), if they consistently fail to observe the instructive terms of the relationship (mitswah ‘any lo’ shamar – they fail to closely examine and carefully consider the requirements of the covenant (qal imperfect)), (Mizmowr 89:31) then (wa) I will hold them accountable (paqad – I will consider all of these things and attend to them) with the measure (ba shebet – with the rod and scepter) of their religious rebellion and popular political revolt (pesha’ hem – of their defiance and contrarian nature).

The consequence of their deviation from the way and of their religious corruptions (‘awon hem – their perversity and depravity) will be a pestilence which causes widespread death (ba nega’ – will be a sudden blow, physically infecting them such that they are plagued and die from the spread of the fungus).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:32)

According to God, souls who neglect the Towrah, die. The consequence of ignoring Yah’s Teaching is to endure the plague of death. To reject God’s Guidance is to be held accountable for your own decisions, words, and actions. There is no getting around this inevitability, not with the Talmud or Gospels, and most certainly not with the Quran.

The Towrah is the Key to Heaven. And it is held by Dowd. It opens Heaven’s Door by providing the means to resolve disputes through Passover and UnYeasted Bread. Along with an introduction to the Miqra’ey, within the Towrah, we find Yah’s clearly communicated prescriptions for living – just as Pesach and Matsah lead to Bikuwrym and make the Shabuw’ah Harvest possible. We Taruw’ah in advance of Kipurym to enjoy Sukah with Dowd’s Father – and ours, now reconciled and at home.

To deviate from Yahowah’s Towrah Teaching through religious rebellion has devastating consequences causing widespread death. Consider the fate of Jews since they last accepted Dowd’s guidance in this regard as proof.

Similarly, those who were infected by Paul’s Plague of Death will die as a result of it. The New Testament is wrong – dead wrong. Annulling the Towrah, forsaking, ignoring, and rejecting Yahowah’s Teaching and Guidance is asinine. There is no cure for stupid on this scale. There is no salvation for those who fail to observe and appreciate God’s means to resolve disputes through the Miqra’ey or who hold His clearly communicated prescriptions for living in contempt. The same is true for those who would use Replacement Theology to erase the legacy of the Messiah and Son of God.

Yahowah’s mercy is afforded to the thousands among billions who embrace the instructive terms of His relationship agreement. It’s our choice, but we will be held accountable for those we continue to make about Father and Son.

Those who would ignore or purloin what was attributed to Dowd to salvage their religious beliefs are not listening. They will either change their minds or they are out of their minds. Continuing to speak of His beloved Son in first person, the Voice singing Dowd’s Song is Yahowah. He said…

“Accordingly (wa), My unwavering love, enduring devotion, unmitigated favoritism, affection, and generosity (chesed ‘any – My commitment to a loving relationship, to mercy and kindness) I will never remove or withdraw from him (lo’ parar min ‘im huw’ – I will not revoke, disassociate, or annul in association with him (hifil imperfect)) because I will never communicate something which is not true nor will I ever contradict (wa lo’ shaqar – I will not lie, deal falsely, deceive, or mislead, and thus never betray who I am, with regard to (piel imperfect)) My steadfast commitment to the truth (ba ‘emuwnah ‘any – with regard to My trustworthiness and honesty, the fact that I am reliable and dependable; from ‘emuwn – My enduring truth and ‘aman – My support and willingness to confirm and uphold that which is trustworthy, reliable, and verifiable and My continuing commitment to confirm that which is correct and accurate). (Mizmowr 89:33)

I will never dishonor or betray, nor will I poke holes in (lo’ chalal – I will never defile by treating as if it were common, and thus not uniquely special, holding in contempt, sullying or desecrating, and I will never perforate, creating loopholes which violate the nature and use of) Beryth ‘Any | My Covenant Family Relationship (beryth ‘any – My Family, My Home, and My Personal Agreement) nor will I ever alter, disguise, or change (wa lo’ shanah – and I will never rearrange, modify, adjust, or duplicate (piel imperfect)) that which has gone forth from (mowtsa’ – that which at any stage of the journey has been placed on, issued and traveled from, uttered by or exited out of) My lips (saphah ‘any – My statements, language, and speech). (Mizmowr 89:34)

‘Echad | There is Only One (‘echad – once and for all, there is only one man) to whom I have affirmed the truth by having made a promise (shaba’ – to whom I have validated My commitment through a sworn oath to be affirmed seven times (nifal perfect – at a point in time, the subject, Yahowah, made this promise and at another, He will honor it)) by Qodesh ‘Any | My uniquely Set-Apart nature (ba qodesh ‘any – by that which is set apart from Me). If not to (‘im la – if it isn’t regarding) Dowd | the Beloved (Dowd), I will be proven a liar (kazab – I have communicated that which is not true and is deceptive and false, and in the end will have failed through deception and delusion (piel imperfect)).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:35)

By itself, this would rank among Yahowah’s most influential statements. However, when combined with the others He has made throughout Dowd’s Song, God’s citations speak more persuasively and passionately than anything ever said by God or man. These words are transformational and life changing.

Dowd is the answer. He is the One.

Therefore, Jesus Christ was no better than Simon bar Kokhba, although as a non-murderous myth, he was better than Muhammad – although so is everyone.

This is the bright line drawn by God in the sands of time. Presented in the 60th Yowbel year of 3000 Yah, 968 BCE, God extolled the attributes of His Son exactly 3,000 years after we were escorted out of ‘Eden and 3,000 years before we will return to the Garden. Yahowah undeniably and unequivocally presented His most impassioned plea to His people. His focus was on His Family and His Foremost Child. This is the Cornerstone of the Family Home which was laid upon Mowryah and which millions and billions have rejected – including almost every Jew.

Had Yahuwdym listened to their God and King, had they embraced Yahowah’s approach to the Covenant and accepted His Invitations, Yisra’el would have remained the brightest light in a world brightened by their presence. The traumatizing assaults of the Assyrians, Egyptians, Babylonians, Macedonians, and Romans would never have occurred. Dowd’s return to fulfill the first three Mow’edym would have been celebrated, with God’s people flocking to the Covenant.

Paul would have been immediately discredited such that there wouldn’t have been a second letter, much less thirteen following the vulgar diatribe to the Galatians. Christianity would never have existed. Akiba and his false Messiah would have gone unheralded, nipping the emergence of Judaism in the bud. There would have been no Diaspora and no oppression in Europe over the millennia. Without rabbis and their Talmud, Muhammad would not have had sufficient material to flesh out his Quran and Islam would have died in Petra. There would be no Dome of the Rock, no Al-Aqsa Mosque, and no Islamic terrorism. The Holocaust would never have occurred.

Of all of the things to ignore, these declarations from Yahowah were the costliest and most debilitating. The relationship God intended was replaced by religion, and humankind suffered, estranged from Yah as a consequence.

The Haredi and Christians have done this to themselves, necessitating Yahowah’s rebuke. To demand that God change everything He has said and done to accommodate a perverted religious sect is as audacious as it is unforgivable. They have called God a liar through the Talmud and New Testament. They have replaced Yahowah’s Covenant with one of their own – poking holes in His in the process of defiling it.

Christians, believing Sha’uwl | Paul over Father and Son, have created the most common, and thus profane, religion in the history of mankind. By transferring the promises made to ‘Abraham regarding Yisra’el to their Church, and to Dowd regarding his place alongside Yahowah to the mythological misnomer “Jesus Christ” they have upended reality. Shame on anyone for believing and promoting contradictions of Yahowah’s testimony, for undermining the measure of His mercy, and the reliability of His word!

There will be no accommodation for a Gospel of Grace, for Salvation by Faith, for a New Testament, for Jesus Christ being the Messiah, the Son of God, the King of Kings, or the Savior. To claim otherwise is to call God a liar.

And while these words from our God serve as a deathblow to Christianity one thousand years before Paul thrust his demonic devotion upon an unsuspecting world, his New Testament was not the gravest crime. How did 150 generations of Jewish sages, scholars, and rabbis over the course of 3,000 years, all manage to deny the obvious? Why did they collectively and individually deprive Jews of knowing Yahowah through His Son, Dowd? Why did they prevent the salvation of several hundred million Jewish souls? Why isn’t there a single credible Jewish sage, scholar, or rabbi on record affirming and promoting the impassioned message of Father and Son? Are they blind or stupid? Are they acting out of ignorance or belligerence?

Everything, including the survival of Yisra’el and humankind, the salvation of our souls, is predicated upon the words Yahowah spoke to us 3,000 years ago in the 89th Mizmowr / Psalm. And this bold declaration does not stand alone but is, instead, buttressed by the entirety of the Towrah and Prophets. It is the same wonderfully consistent and enormously loving message presented throughout. Dowd’s Song is just the grand crescendo of the chorus.

The reason should now be obvious: Father and Son fulfilled the Miqra’ey together. This realization is the Cornerstone of the Family Home. We find and embrace the Father through the Son. They are inseparable and they are becoming indistinguishable. ‘Elyown!

There is one God with a single Towrah. He has one Covenant, albeit 7 Miqra’ey to bring us to it. There is one Messiah anointed by God who has one Firstborn Son. There is a single Lamb fulfilling Passover. He alone is our Savior. This shall never change or be altered. Nothing Yahowah revealed has been or will be annulled – especially His love for Dowd.

It is almost surreal to hear God say, “There is Only One (‘echad) to whom I have affirmed the truth by having made a promise (shaba’) by My uniquely Set-Apart nature (ba qodesh ‘any). If not to (‘im la) Dowd, the Beloved (Dowd), I will be proven a liar (kazab).” If this is not true, if Dowd isn’t the One, then nothing is true. Yahowah isn’t God’s name. There may not even be a God. The universe wasn’t created – well, scratch that since it was. There would have been no Garden of Eden, no man named ‘Adam, no Noach or a Flood – well, scratch that one too since it occurred as stated. But there would have been no ‘Abraham, and thus no basis for the Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity, or Islam. There would have been no Towrah, although that, too, would be hard to explain with extant citations of it going back 3,400 years and everything contained in it proven true historically and prophetically. But then there would have been no Exodus even if archeology demonstrates otherwise.

This is a catch-22 for the religious. If God is telling the truth, their faith is a lie. If God is lying, there is no basis for their religion.

With this statement, Christ is denounced as a false god, Christianity is proclaimed a false religion, and the New Testament is clearly predicated upon a false premise. Judaism doesn’t fare any better. The debate is over. There is no way for Paul and Company to prevail – nor Akiba, or Muhammad.

This is the final and unrelenting death knell for Replacement Theology in all of its hideous forms. And without it, there is no basis for Judaism, Christianity, or Islam. If you don’t like this conclusion, take it up with God and see what He says…or you could just listen to what He says and save yourself the embarrassment.

Speaking of Dowd, Yahowah continues…

“His offspring and that which he sows (zera’ huw’ – his descendants, his posterity, his family, and his seed, that which he propagates by having planted, growing for the harvest) will exist and endure (hayah – have been, are, and will be (qal imperfect)) forever (la ‘owlam – eternally throughout all time).

And (wa) his place of honor, his dignity and authority, as well as his adornment and throne (kise’ huw’ – his seat of sovereign leadership and power; from kise’ – authority and power and kasah – to cover, clothe, and adorn) will be as (ka – will be comparable to) brilliant as the Sun (ha shemesh – the sunlight) before Me (neged ‘any – as My conspicuous counterpart in My presence, openly in proximity to Me). (Mizmowr 89:36)

Likened unto and according to (ka – in the manner of) the Moon (yareach), he will be affirmed and this established (kuwn – he is appointed and prepared, trusted and set in place (nifal imperfect third-person masculine singular)) forevermore (‘owlam – eternally throughout time), serving as an enduring and reliable, truthful and dependable (wa ‘aman – being an easily verified, confident and trustworthy, loyal and nurturing (nifal participle)) witness (‘ed – symbol and informative source of restoring testimony) in the sky (ba ha shachaq – in the cloud, heaven, and spacetime).

Pause now and contemplate what you have just read (selah).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:37)

What Dowd has articulated and accomplished will take root and grow, yielding an eternal harvest. He will endure forevermore as will his offspring – the Children of the Covenant.

The Son’s dignity and authority, as well as the symbols of his majesty, will be as brilliant as the sun in his Father’s presence. Adorned in the vestiges of his calling, Dowd will become Yahowah’s most conspicuous counterpart.

With this statement, we can reasonably conclude that the narrative regarding the greater luminary presented during the fourth day of creation addressing year 4000 Yah, depicted serving as a sign of the Mow’edym | Eternal Witness to the Restoring Appointments, is Dowd who fulfilled them at that time. So it is by making an astute connection between Mizmowr / Psalm 89:37 and Bare’syth / Genesis 1:14-18 that we come to better appreciate both references – to the Sun and the Moon pursuant to the Mow’edym.

As an added bonus, I suspect that we can finally clear up one of the more intriguing references in the creation account while at the same time, developing an appreciation for the reference to the moon here in Dowd’s Song. This seems to be saying that “the Moon,” representing an individual like the Sun, will affirm and establish” this profoundly important revelation regarding Dowd. And by doing so, the Moon, who is “likened” to Dowd, will be reflecting the Son’s light, just as Earth’s satellite mirrors the sun’s brilliance when our star is otherwise unseen in the darkness of night. That is why the individual being associated with Dowd, albeit less luminous, is called “an enduring, reliable, valid, verifiable, confident, and loyal witness pursuant to this restoring testimony.”

Now turning the hands of time back to creation, in Bare’syth / Genesis we find a similar interplay between the sun and moon, there called the greater and lesser luminaries…

“God (wa ‘elohym) said (‘amar – declared, expressing in words), ‘There will be (hayah) lights as luminaries (ma’owr – sources of illumination; a compound of ma – to ponder the implications of ‘owr – light) in the expanse (ba raqya’ – within the spreading out of matter and space) of the heavens (shamaym) to understand the separation between (badal bayn – to distinguish the divide and discern what it means to be set apart, to ascertain the means to inclusion or cause of expulsion, to appreciate how to be included or be disassociated between) the time of light (ha yowm – the reckoning of time when there is light) as it is distinct from (wa bayn – differentiated from) the darkness of the night (ha laylah – the period of substantially diminished light, a wanting of illumination).

They will exist (wa hayah – they will be) as symbols and signs (la ‘owth – as a means to convey information, illustrations, and proof which make something more clearly known when evaluating recompense and reward; from ‘uwth – a means to be seen agreeing, providing consent) and for the Appointed Meeting Times for the Restoring Witness (wa la mow’ed – concerning the designated periods which have been determined for a specific purpose authorized by the authority, directly associated with the Miqra’ey; from mow – this pertains to ‘ed – the eternal and restoring witness, everlasting testimony, and enduring evidence, and ya’ad – to meet on an appointed schedule), as well as (wa) for days (yowm – the reckoning of time when there is light, the seven 24-hour periods of a week) and for years (wa shanah – the complete cycle of the seasons, a solar year which is a measure of age and the renewal of life). (Bare’syth 1:14)

Therefore, they will exist (wa hayah) as luminaries (la ma’owr – to ponder the implications of light) in the expanse (ba raqya’ – within the spreading out of the matter and space) of the heavens (ha shamaym) to provide illumination and enlightenment (la ‘owr) for (‘al) the earth (ha ‘erets).’ And therefore (wa), it continued to exist like this thereafter based upon what preceded it (hayah ken). (Bare’syth 1:15)

God (wa ‘elohym) acted and engaged to appoint for this particular task (‘asah) both (‘eth shanaym – the two) of these substantial and empowering, important and influential sources of illumination (ha ma’owr ha gadowl) – with the greater, more distinguished, and ultimately empowering (‘eth ha gadowl) luminary (ha ma’owr – source of illumination and enlightenment) becoming prominent and clearly known as the influence over (memshalah – governing with illustrative proverbs, painting pictures with words to describe) the illuminated time (ha yowm – the daytime) and (wa) with the lesser, younger, and more recent (‘eth ha qatan) luminary (ma’owr – source of enlightenment) becoming known for leading through illustrative words and as a prominent influence during (la memshalah – to influence by effective and vivid communication leading to understanding) the night when the light is not known (ha laylah – the scarcity of light, the comparative darkness, and period of ignorance as a result of failing to observe) along with the heavenly powers (wa ‘eth ha kowkab – in addition to the spiritual luminaries). (Bare’syth 1:16)

The Almighty (wa ‘elohym) caused them to be placed there for this purpose (nathan ‘eth hem – bestowed and assigned them for this opportunity and task) in the expanse (ba raqya’) of the heavens (ha shamaym) to provide light and enlightenment (la ‘owr) for (‘al) the Land and Earth (ha ‘erets). (Bare’syth 1:17)

And therefore (wa la), they will function as proverbs, governing with memorable and illustrative words (mashal – leading by painting pictures with words) in the light of day (ba ha yowm) and in the darkness of night (wa ha laylah – during the time of ignorance for failing to be observant) providing a contrast to appreciate the difference between (wa la badal bayn – to distinguish and discern what it means to be set apart, to ascertain the means to inclusion or cause of expulsion, to appreciate how to be included or be disassociated between) the light (ha ‘owr – the source of enlightenment, instruction, life, and brilliance guidance) and comprehend being separated from the darkness (wa bayn ha choshek – to realize the difference between obscurity, concealment and confusion; the diminishment of light from ignorance).

God (wa ‘elohym) saw (ra’ah – perceived and considered, regarded and distinguished) that indeed (ky) it was good (towb – it was useful and agreeable, valuable and appropriate, productive and beneficial).” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 1:18)

It is nearly impossible for me to process the implications of this prophecy, and even more difficult to accept what God is revealing about what He intended to accomplish through these two luminaries. And yet it is sufficiently clear that the brighter of the two is Dowd while Yada is being shown reflecting his light as one fulfills and the other explains the Mow’edym. And all of this was foretold just as life was emerging on our planet.

And these two references to the interplay between the Son and Moon as enlightening witnesses are affirmed by a third acknowledgment. There is an equally enlightening connection between these men and the symbols representing them in the 104th Mizmowr…

“The most highly exalted mountains (harym ha gaboah) are to approach that which prevails and is beneficial (la ha ya’el), as an elevated rocky crag (sela’) is a trusted shelter to seek protection (machseh) with the treasured scribe (la ha shaphan). (Mizmowr / Psalm 104:18)

The Moon (yareach) will act and engage (‘asah) for (la) Yada knows and acknowledges (yada’ – he is aware of and reveals) the Sun’s (shemesh) arrival (mabow’ huw’) as the Eternal Witnesses for the Restoring Appointments (Mow’edym).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 104:19)

The moon, while 400 times smaller than the sun, is 400 times closer to the Earth. And the moon, comprised of the essence of the Earth, is illuminated as a result of reflecting the sun’s light. These serve as metaphors that portray the proper perspective to view the Firstborn. By describing him as the most important luminary on Earth, Yahowah is conveying to us that Dowd's arrivals are important markers of time. Even the dates pursuant to when Dowd will fulfill the seven Mow’edym are predicated upon how we view the sun and moon.

Also, it was in the fullness of the moon’s light that Dowd fulfilled Pesach and Matsah. And it will be under the light of a full moon that we will camp out with our King during Sukah.

Dowd is not only Yahowah’s most enduring and reliable witness, but he is also the most readily verified source of restoring testimony. And while he did his part to tell us what he was going to accomplish, even detailing his own crucifixion and journey into hell, no one has been willing to give him any credit for what he has done And so that is why the greatest man who ever lived has a publicist, someone to reintroduce him to his people.

Christians can take their Madonna and Child, her baby “Jesus,” their dead god on a stick, and their “Second Coming” to the grave with them because they do not belong in Yah’s world. And as for the Haredi in their horrifyingly morbid mourning clothes, they are perfectly suited to continue worshiping dead rabbis while giving lip service to the HaShem they do not know and the Towrah they have replaced, all while awaiting the arrival of their unknown Messiah.

The enlightened and aware, informed and rational, will celebrate Dowd’s life and lyrics while acknowledging our Father’s love for His Son.

That said, we have reached the portion of Dowd’s Song that was alluded to in Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7 when Yahowah predicted that His people would deny and denigrate the Son of God and Messiah. And yet, even more than Ya’aqob, Dowd is Yisra’el. The promises made to him were also made to them, from being the children of God and heirs to the Covenant, to being recipients of the Land. His joys and heartaches, his ongoing battles with gowym, his insights and confusion, the benefits he enjoyed in concert with the Covenant and the consequences he endured when he ran afoul of it, are all shared by the nation he shepherded.

It was in concert with Dowd representing Yisra’el, and of Yisra’el’s contribution to annulling the truths we have just considered, that these words were prophetically inscribed in parallel with Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7. After all, it is Yisra’el that has…

“But now (wa) you, yourselves, have refused to accept, creating a foul stench by snubbing (zanach – your stagnation and lack of movement has caused you to be excluded and throw out for a time (qal perfect)), such that (wa) you have rejected by diminishing the merit, even spurning over time by repudiating the essence (ma’as – you have minimized the value of, thereby limiting your relationship with and reliance upon so as to incur a festering wound caused by dissolving every sensible connection (qal imperfect)), improperly, and on your own initiative, meddling while presumptuously passing over (‘abar – unjustifiably passing right by in antipathy, somehow displeased with the affairs, and yet acting on your own initiative, thereby eliminating (hitpael stem perfect conjugation – for a time, and on their own initiative, moving right past) [‘abar is the basis of Pesach and thus Passover) your Messiah (‘im Mashyach ‘atah – your Anointed, the One set apart and prepared to serve you)!” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:38)

In the long litany of belligerent, arrogant, and errant Jewish reactions to Father and Son over the past 3,000 years, this is likely the most condemning. As frustrating as it had to be for God to endure the constant, exceedingly overt, and caustic rejection of those He was saving between Mitsraym and the Promised Land, as appalling as it must have been to witness their love affair with their own words and religions as He was speaking to them, this was worse.

It's not just that Yahowah is devoted to Dowd, it’s that His Son made the ultimate sacrifice for his people, told them a thousand years in advance what he was going to do for them, and they rejected everything he represents, denied his fulfillment of Chag Matsah, and then replaced him. And that attitude toward the Messiah, Son of God, and Savior remains pervasive today, 3,000 years later.

Since God is as disappointed as He is disgusted with Jews for having committed this grievous crime, since our goal is for them to see the error of their ways and change their attitude toward God, let’s consider it from His perspective. Able to see the future, long ago in our past, before ‘Adam, Noach, and ‘Abraham, Yahowah foresaw His people’s preference for religion over the relationship He would be offering, thereby precluding the one thing our Father craved – a family to call His own. So, He came up with a plan, a way of wooing His Chosen back, all while remaining honest, honorable, and fair. He would choose the best among us to be His Firstborn, a boy who was obviously smarter than everyone. He anointed the boy, placing His Ruwach | Spirit upon him, and over the next sixty years they would unite Yisra’el, claim and build Yaruwshalaim, and defend the nation, all while leaving the greatest prophetic legacy ever scribed. And that was just the first of his three lives, because Dowd | the Beloved would return exactly 20 Yowbel, or 1,000 years, later to fulfill Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym during the 80th Yowbel of year 4,000 Yah, becoming our Savior. By enabling the promise of the Miqra’ey, the Messiah and Son of God offered the gifts of eternal life, perfection, and adoption into Yahowah’s Beryth | Covenant Family.

With only the Towrah before him, he was able to discern what no one else had seen and knew that he would and should serve as the Passover Lamb and then fulfill UnYeasted Bread. Yahowah had written about this in the opening chapter of Bare’syth / Genesis pursuant to the fourth day of creation. He exposed His timing as He explained what occurred on each of the seven days of our genesis. God then presented ‘Adam as a prototype for Dowd in the Garden, with the Sun representing the Tree of Lives and the Moon the Tree of Knowledge. Noach, representing Dowd, was spared in an Ark just as Dowd will spare the remnant of his people when he anoints the Ark of the Covenant on Kipurym.

‘Abraham would be the next exemplar of Dowd as he listened to Yahowah and gave birth to the Beryth. And it would be during its affirmation on Mount Mowryah, with his beloved son, Yitschaq, who was spared because Yahowah provided the Lamb, that Dowd saw himself in this dress rehearsal for Pesach on this same mountain, in his city, Yaruwshalaim, on this same day, 40 Yowbel, or 2,000 years thereafter.

I am certain that the Messiah saw himself, as we have, as the fulfillment of Moseh’s prophecy regarding the one who would do more for the Children of Yisra’el than any other. He knew he was the antidote for religion and the resolution for false prophets as all of this is presented in Dabarym 18. And should that not have been sufficient for Dowd to perceive his future, as the recipient of the prophecy on houses, who builds them, and for whom, as recorded in Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7, he put all of the pieces together and volunteered to serve as our Savior.

Dowd did what no other Jew has done. He correctly discerned his role in our lives based upon these prophecies. Thereafter, so that we wouldn’t miss what he envisioned and performed, Dowd was taken forward in time to witness his sacrifice and then write about it, detailing what it would be like to be crucified and then enter Hell in the process of fulfilling Pesach and Matsah. The lone eyewitness accounts were scribed in first person and are found in Mizmowr | Psalms 22 and 88. And if that were not enough, each of the first 30 Songs sung by Dowd address his decision to serve in this manner. The crowning jewel is the 89th Mizmowr, Dowd’s Song, where all of this is made so very obvious for us. And yet, to the embarrassment of Yisra’el and Yahuwdym, God’s people have missed the bold pronouncements of Father and Son.

It is in denying all of this, and thereby nullifying the gift Yahowah and Dowd are offering, then replacing them with false gods, false messiahs, and religious rubbish that caused Yahowah to reveal what we have just read: “But now (wa) you, yourselves, have refused to accept, creating a foul stench by snubbing (zanach), such that (wa) you have rejected by diminishing the merit, even spurning over time by repudiating the essence, negating the value (ma’as), improperly, and on your own initiative, meddling while presumptuously passing over (‘abar) your Messiah (‘im Mashyach ‘atah)!”

Yahowah has affirmed this profound truth through His prophets so many times and ways that it’s befuddling that as few as one in a million Yahuwdym acknowledge Dowd as their Messiah, or that five billion Gowym bequeath the Greek variation of this title on another. After enduring 2,000 years of harassment for failing to accept “Jesus” as their Lord, it turns out Jews were correct in rejecting the mythical misnomer. Now it’s time to take the next step and recognize ha Mashyach for who he truly is so that the Family can be reconciled.

If you are a descendant of Ya’aqob, pause now and reflect upon this. Almost everything religious and secular Jews have claimed regarding Dowd | David, the Mashyach, and the fulfillment of the Mow’edym, is untrue, upended, and incongruent. Please try to view this from God’s perspective and embrace what Dowd represents. He is not only ha Mashyach | the Messiah but, also, the Son of God who served as the Pesach ‘Ayil. Do not pass over him in an ill-conceived attempt to validate Judaism or cultural mores.

I understand that Yahuwdym have been plagued over the centuries by those who believe Jesus Christ was the Messiah. And because Christians blame Jews for killing their god, the very idea of the Messiah being the Son of God and fulfilling Pesach is disorienting. And while there never was any rational reason for a Messiah named “Jesus Christ,” no validity to the religion of Christianity, no justification for the New Testament, or credibility in calling oneself a Christian, there has been incalculable harm perpetrated under these delusions.

And while that may have been the most horrific and anti-Semitic fraud ever perpetrated, the truth is sweet revenge. The Messiah returned, and he, as the Son of God fulfilled Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym to enable the benefits of the Covenant. One does not have to change his name or upend his identity to claim any of the many hundreds of prophecies which acknowledge his greatness.

Second only to removing Yahowah’s name 7,000 times from His testimony in the Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr and replacing it with the Adversary’s title, “the Lord,” this error in judgment and lapse in scholastic rigor has caused more harm to Yahuwdym | Jews than any other. They have rejected the heart which restores their soul and the only Spirit capable of reconciling them.

There has never been a need for them to pray for the arrival of a nameless Messiah to save them when ha Mashyach has already done so – and will do so again. Moreover, he is familiar as the most prominent descendant of Ya’aqob. Had the actual identity and purpose of Yahowah’s Messiah been acknowledged by his people, Dowd would not have been replaced by “Jesus Christ,” and Christianity’s New Testament would have been stillborn.

Let’s affirm a heartbreaking reality: Jews have been their own worst enemy. The hitpael stem, modifying “‘abar – by improperly, and on your own initiative, meddling while presumptuously passing over” your Messiah, proves it. This uncommon stem reveals that the religious have “unjustifiably passed right by him in antipathy, somehow displeased with his affairs, all while acting on their own initiative” and, thus, not God’s. Equally telling, ‘abar is the basis of Pesach and thus Passover, equating the rejection of the Messiah with foregoing the purpose of the Miqra’.

On behalf of Yahuwdah and Yisra’el, even the Gowym who are listening: embrace the Beloved Mashyach as your brother and Melek as God’s Son, even the Zarowa’ as your Shepherd and Savior. Listen to Yahowah’s Bachar | Chosen One, the Qadowsh | Set-Apart One of Yisra’el and concur with him because when it comes to God, Dowd is right.

As for religious Jews, it is a perplexing irony. Wearing black and bobbing their heads up and down as if to exorcise their demons, they babble to their nameless G-d in minyan | minions facing a stone wall while reciting Dowd’s Mizmowr from rote. If only they would consider what he had to say instead. If only their heads were not as hard as the Edomite’s wall, some of what they recite might actually penetrate their thick skulls. But alas, it is not to be. Dowd’s Mizmowr and Yahowah’s Dabar are for the unreligious.

As a result of doing what Yahowah railed against, it didn’t take long for Yahuwdym to hit rock bottom. The fall from the reign of Dowd was swift and painful. It began with Solomon capitulating to accommodate the religious interests of his wives and concubines. Israel would crumble shortly thereafter and never retain her fleeting glory.

Reminding Yisra’el of their fall, of the religions they begot, and those they beguiled, Yahowah asserts that by denying the Messiah Dowd, they were renouncing the Covenant he enabled by fulfilling Chag Matsah.…

“You have repudiated and renounced (na’ar – you have disavowed, refusing to even acknowledge and actually lack any respect for (piel perfect)) the Covenant (beryth – the Family, Home, and Relationship Agreement) with your coworker (‘ebed ‘atah – of the one doing your work as your official advisor and associate; based upon ‘abad – to work).

You have dishonored and defiled (chalal – You have treated with contempt and desecrated by making common and no longer uniquely special, sullying and polluting (piel perfect)) his dedication (nezer huw’ – his respect and his unparalleled devotion) to the Land and Earth (la ha ‘erets).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:39)

When Dowd is renounced, so are the Mow’edym he fulfilled and the Covenant he enabled. When Dowd is dishonored, the Land to which he was devoted suffers.

Yahowah’s point, and as God He can be trusted in this regard, there is an inseparable connection between “snubbing and passing over the Messiah,” and “desecrating the Covenant” because the result is “to dishonor his dedication” to his people and planet. This is only said with regard to Dowd because he is the one through whom Yahowah engaged to reconcile His relationship with His wayward children. Reject him at your peril. Accept him for your benefit.

What I do not understand, and I don’t think Yah does either is, with the conditions of His Covenant so liberating and uplifting, with the benefits so enriching and empowering, and with Him proving that His promises are reliable, why disavow and replace what God is offering though His chosen Messiah? With Dowd so generous, why recant what he accomplished and reject what he is offering?

For those who may be protesting, saying that they haven’t repudiated Dowd because they honor David by wrapping themselves in a flag emblazoned with his six-pointed star, may I challenge said assumption by categorically stating that there was never a Star of David and David isn’t his name. Creating a false caricature of a man in this manner degrades his authentic nature. He is not one of many stars nor part of a religious zodiac. Not only would Dowd’s number be three, representing his lives, or seven, demonstrating the synergy of man with God, the six-pointed star of intersecting triangles is a pagan religious icon predating the Messiah. Further, since this sign was forced upon Jews by the Roman Church and later by Nazi Germans to denigrate and demonize them, why pick this of all symbols?

One last thought before we move on: the juxtaposition of the preceding two statements not only serves to reinforce that Dowd has been rejected and denied by Yahuwdym and Gowym, but that Yahowah is enormously displeased His Son’s lives and lyrics have been disavowed. Dowd is unquestionably the exemplar of the Covenant, and in this regard, God’s Family is severely curtailed without the Messiah’s contributions to it. And this serves to affirm the Zarowa’s fulfillment of the first three Miqra’ey which provide the benefits of the Beryth.

A little explanation may be helpful as we consider the next statement. The sheepfold whose walls have been torn down represents barriers around the Covenant which were designed to keep the religious, political, conspiratorial, and ignorant out.

“You have broken down and destroyed (parats – you have breached and in hostility shattered, negatively impacting with your opposition to (qal perfect)) his entire sheepfold and all of its walls (kol gaderah huw’ – the entirety of his protective enclosure and its hedges; from gader – the fences put around it and the way he constructed it). You have caused (sym – you have brought about) the undoing, the degradation and destruction (machatah – the demolishing and ruination, to the point of disrepair by corrupting; from ma – to question and chata’ – what it means to miss the way) of his fortifications (mibtsar huw’ – of its defensive structure; from batsar – to restrain from gathering, to cut off and make less accessible, withholding access).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:40)

As a rebuke to every religion, Yahowah has deliberately restricted access to His Covenant, effectively keeping the religious and political out. Whether ignorant of or averse to the five beneficial conditions God established for entry, men like Akiba and Paul have sought to annul the Almighty’s intent while projecting their own rules.

If I may share an insight worth considering: the Garden of ‘Eden had walls. They were not there to keep ‘Adam and Chawah locked inside as if they were prisoners but, instead, to keep the rest of humankind out because they were religious and vicious and did not belong. The Gan | Protective Garden Enclosure of ‘Eden | Great Joy was, as the name implies, fun because the curmudgeons were excluded. And as was ‘Eden, so will be Shamaym. As was God’s relationship with Dowd, so it will be with all of the Covenant’s children. That is why this Mizmowr | Psalm is so important.

Dowd and the Covenant continue to be integrated and indistinguishable, with the Beloved upholding the Family. So, from God’s perspective, an attack on one is an assault on the other.

“All who pass by this way (kol ‘abar derek – everyone crossing this path) plunder him (shasas huw’ – they pillage and ransack him, looting him). He has become (hayah – he is) scorned and abusively ridiculed, defied and upbraided (cherpah – insulted and held in contempt, even taunted by this disgraceful reproach) by those who claim some affinity with him (la shaken huw’ – by those settling in close proximity, especially nations of people existing all around it and him, even as residents and neighbors).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:41)

The pretense of sharing an affinity with “David” is common. His name appears in the New Testament, Talmud, and Quran. Similarly, Christians, Jews, and Muslims, with wholly contradictory belief systems, all claim to be Abrahamic religions even though they degrade ‘Abraham’s legacy. Alleging similar origins, their gods share nothing in common. Christians are particularly guilty, lugging around the “Old Testament” with its tribute to Dowd | David adjacent to their revisionist counterfeit which plunders his legacy. They claim to admire the boy who slew the giant and who sang the 23rd Psalm, not knowing that it is Yahowah, for whose name’s sake, the song was written and the Philistine performed the first prostration.

Then of course, in that they blame Jews for all of their problems, they deny that the Messiah and King was the most Yahuwd of all men. Even in the Quran, there is an entire surah devoted to “Dauwd.” The only problem is that this imposter was a Muslim and worshiped Allah, well that and the stories attributed to him were inane, So now confronted with the Dead Sea Scrolls parchment memorializing this Psalm a thousand years before their religion was invented, I wonder how a literate Muslim would react after seeing Yahowah’s name rather than Allah’s.

Many of those who pass this way ransack the Covenant, ridiculing everything Dowd represents by taking it from him and giving it to themselves or others. They jeopardize countless lives by flagrantly falsifying the Messiah’s identity and contribution to the Covenant. And sadly, many of them have settled in proximity to Yisra’el. Today we know them as the practitioners of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam – with their delusions coming to roost where they clearly do not belong.

Speaking against the religious, whether they be pilgrims or refugees, crusaders or jihadists, God says…

“You have lifted up and exalted (ruwm – you have raised up and have sought to bring credibility and distinction to, even tried to justify) the upper hand (yamym – the right side, condoning the orientation and good fortune, even the direction) of his foes and adversaries, especially those who try to constrain and limit him (tsar – his opponents narrowing his scope by being contentious and troubling leading to an unfavorable result). You have caused all those who demonstrate animosity and rancor toward him (kol ‘oyeb – you have made the opposition totally) to be delighted (samach – elated).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:42)

Yahowah continues to be annoyed by what those who falsely claim to speak for Him have done to denigrate His Son and diminish all He accomplished. And in the end, antagonizing God has never worked out well for anyone. So, it’s best if those who have been religious stop irritating Him before it’s too late. And as for Jews, they are guilty of giving the upper hand to Christianity by abandoning the true Messiah and Son of God and then for Islam by selling Muhammad the Talmud recitals he needed to finish his Quran, making it appear religious and ‘Abrahamic. And through their denials, they helped justify all forms of Replacement Theology.

For Christianity to differentiate itself from Yahowah and Dowd, from their Towrah and Covenant, sufficiently to appeal to the religious Greeks and Romans God warned His people about, they would need a New Testament. And yet for it to be believable, it would have to borrow heavily from Yahowah’s testimony – claiming its prophecies as their own. Therefore, the new religion proposed that it was authorized by the same God and justified by the same prophecies. But how is that possible when one proposition is so contradictory to the other?

The answer for Christianity became Replacement Theology. This sleight of hand wasn’t simply about assigning the blessings and promises offered by God for Jews to the Gentiles who seek their eradication, it’s about replacing one Covenant with another, and then Dowd with “Jesus.”

Should you not concur, do what I’ve done. After scrutinizing Paul’s renunciation of Dowd for the sake of his “Jesus,” go to any Christian site and read their assessment of the prophecies pertaining to “David.” You’ll find that “Jesus” isn’t named in a single one, but every time Dowd’s name appears, Christians insist that it actually applies to “Christ,” as if God didn’t know the difference between the two names nor was aware of which one He anointed as His Mashyach | Messiah.

The problem for Christians was as simple as it is profound. Without the Towrah, Prophets, and Psalms, they have no God and no credibility. But with them, they present a jumble of contradictions. Their only hope was for people to believe their lies and for their faith to occlude judgment. They banked upon apathy and ignorance, then fear.

Fortunately, at long last, there is an open debate once again, even if those who prefer false gods or no god outnumber those who have come to know the one true God by a million to one. Considering the score previous to Yada Yahowah, that’s progress.

“Adding to the resentment (‘aph – all the more to begrudge), you are turned around again (shuwb – you have pivoted such that you are pointed in the opposite direction (hifil imperfect)), having assaulted, besieged, bound up, and constrained the rocky crag (tsuwr – having been adverse to the stone (qal infinitive)) of this battle over Choreb (choreb huw’ – over his fight with sword and chisel for the fire of Yah and revelation of His Towrah) such that (wa) you do not stand with him or support him (quwm huw’ – you do not rise up or take a stand with him (hifil perfect)) in this conflict (ba ha milchamah – in this fight between opposing parties; from lacham – to engage in battle over yeasted bread [4QPs says “for” battle]).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:43)

There is a plethora of tantalizing insights in this statement beginning with the realization that ‘aph’s primary connotation is to engender resentment and wrath. Those who continue to turn against Dowd will endure the sting of his judgment.

Also interesting, while tsuwr is rendered as “the edge” in the Jewish Publication Society Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text, it was scribed as a verb. There was no definite article in the text and “edge” is not among tsuwr’s meanings when presented as a noun. Had it been written as a noun, our options would have been “rocky crag, sharp flint, or stone.”

In the qal infinitive, tsuwr is not only active, but it also intensifies the ongoing action of “laying siege, enclosing, binding up, and confining in a hostile and harassing fashion.” These connotations fit this context because the perpetrators engendering Dowd’s wrath continue to be the Jewish religious leaders who have sought to constrain the Savior by assaulting his achievements. Further, if we are to read “rocky crag” into this depiction, it was upon this sharp rocky edifice that Yahowah first revealed His fiery light to Moseh and then the Children of Yisra’el upon Mount Choreb – where He would also reveal His Towrah. Moreover, it is my contention that Dowd’s Song is the Cornerstone of the Covenant Home and that it was revealed in the Yowbel year of 3000 Yah, 968 BCE, four years into Solomon’s reign as construction began on Yahowah’s Home. And if that were not enough, the Basar heralding Dowd’s contribution to our lives is named Craig, which is the Celtic transliteration of this tsuwr | crag.

Furthermore, the Hebrew name for the mountain upon which Yahowah introduced Himself to Moseh and then revealed the Towrah is Choreb. Spelled the same way in the text, it also serves as the Hebrew word for “dry and desolate, battle and conflict, sword and chisel.” And while we can choose any definition that fits within this sentence, it's prudent to include every viable connotation so as to not deprive anyone of the full intent.

In this case, I see Dowd standing between the two mountains of God – Choreb and Mowryah – bringing the Towrah to the heart of the Land and fulfilling it in the City of Dowd. This is not only evident by the King’s marvelous dissertation on the Towrah’s Teaching in the 119th Mizmowr but, also, by his serving as the Pesach ‘Ayil.

In this battle for the souls of humankind, the religious are on one side and Father and Son are on the other. And while Judaism and Christianity have written Yahowah and Dowd, Choreb and Mowryah, the Towrah and Miqra’ey out of their story, they are holding a losing hand.

During this war of words, the ultimate question boils down to where we stand with Dowd because this characterizes where we stand with God. Therefore, with the exception of those who have come to know Yahowah and His beloved Son, many through these books, this remains true of almost everyone else…

“You have truncated, causing a cessation to all of the work (shabath – you have made this like a Sabbath for doing nothing), removing and taking away from (min) his purifying brilliance and means to restore, along with his glorious status (tahar huw’ – his majesty and ability to renew, his clear and illuminating approach, especially the means to being purified and pronounced clean). And his position of honor, dignity, and power (wa kise’ huw’ – his throne, royal authority, and appointed status, even his brilliant adornment) you have hurled to the ground (la magar ha ‘erets – you have thrown into the dirt, tossing it from the Land (qal perfect)).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:44)

Clearly, God is annoyed. He is disgusted that the beloved Son that He anointed as His Mashyach, the Shepherd He chose to guide His Covenant Family, and the Sacrificial Lamb who opened Heaven’s Door, has been so universally discounted by religious Jews. They have done to Dowd what they have done to the Shabat – reducing both from a celebration of our relationship with God to doing nothing. And in this case, by either failing to read the words Yahowah inspired in Dowd's song, or failing to act upon them, religious Jews brought untold misery upon God’s people.

The failure of rabbis to recognize and accept what Dowd represents and has accomplished is the fulcrum upon which the Jewish people have descended when they should have ascended. They were given the opportunity to restore their relationship with Yahowah by accepting Dowd’s fulfillment of Chag Matsah. They would have been welcomed back into the Covenant by embracing Dowd’s glorious status as the Chosen Messiah and Glorious King, the Shepherd who became the Sacrificial Lamb – the ultimate nepesh and basar.

But the rabbis tossed it all away, hurling Dowd’s dignity and legacy to the ground to be trampled upon by Christians, just as their animosity toward Yahowah would give rise to the Beast of Islam. Rabbis have long been the most debilitating enemy Jews have ever faced.

By contrast, Dowd was chosen by Yahowah and anointed with His Spirit. His most profound spiritual insights were distilled within these Songs, many scribed when his mind was young and receptive and when he was fraught with the fewest distractions. So not only was Dowd’s youth spent writing the songs that would liberate mankind from the bonds of religion, his basar | corporeal body would likely have been reconstructed from his DNA three to four years prior to sacrificing it. And it was through the fulfillment of the spring Miqra’ey, the first each year, Pesach and Matsah leading to Bikuwrym | Firstborn Children, that the Harvests of Shabuw’ah and Taruw’ah become possible…

“You have cut short, so as to deprive yourselves of what is required to reap the benefits of the harvest (qatsar – you are lacking what is needed by depreciating his essential essence) the days (yowmym – the time) when his robust presence was concealed as a young man (‘aluwmym huw’ – when he was vigorous and obscured, manifesting tremendous strength of character (plural); from ‘alam – to cloak and veil, ‘alam – in the past and forevermore, ‘elem – while young).

You have covered over him (‘atah ‘al huw’ – you have enveloped and clad him, enwrapping and veiling him) shamefully by diminishing his status (buwshah – plundering, dishonoring, and dismissing his purpose).

Take a moment and consider the implications (selah – pause now to reflect on this).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:45)

There is a consequence to being wrong, especially when what we believe is in conflict with what Yahowah has made known to us. We cheat ourselves when we deny what Dowd achieved because it shortchanges what he can offer us.

In this case, religious Jews are being accused of depriving themselves of what Dowd has provided such that they are not harvestable. They have vigorously obscured what he achieved during the fulfillment of Pesach and Matsah. They do not even acknowledge Dowd’s robust presence in Yaruwshalaim in the Yowbel year of 4000 Yah in 33 CE – even though he provided them with the exact day he would enter the city as their Messiah to fulfill Passover in Daniel 9.

While we are not told, there are clues which suggest that Yahowah would have placed Dowd’s nepesh | soul in a basar | corporeal body constructed of his DNA in year 3996 Yah / 29 CE, four years in advance of his fulfillment of the Miqra’ey during the 80th Yowbel. Four years in advance would have been exactly 1,000 years after the conclusion of his first life which ended four years before the Cornerstone of Yahowah’s Covenant Home was laid and this Mizmowr was scribed. It was not only foretold during the fourth day of creation regarding the fulfillment of the Mow’edym at the dawn of the fourth millennium, the Passover Lamb enters the home four days before the sacrifice. And also, Dowd reigned as King for forty years, concluding in Yaruwshalaim – the City of Dowd.

Again, while we are not told and do not need to know, since men are in their mental, emotional, and physical prime between thirty and forty years of age, I think this will be the returning and perpetual age of our Shepherd and King throughout his third coming.

As the Cornerstone was being laid, and while listening to Yahowah rave over His Son while condemning those who would deny him, the Psalmist asked a sensible question – one that would not be answered for 3,000 years…

“For how long (‘ad mah – until when will the eternal witness and restoring testimony 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), will You remain hidden, concealed, and virtually unknown (sathar – will You be a secret to many)?

Your righteous indignation, overt displeasure, and furious antagonism (chemah ‘atah – Your hostile response to all that is wrong) is kindled and burns (ba’ar – is ignited and ablaze (qal imperfect)) eminently and prominently (la netsach – majestically for an enduring period) like fire (kamow ‘esh – similar to burning flames).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:46)

The last time the majority of Yisra’elites knew Yahowah was in year 3000 Yah, three millennia ago, during Dowd’s initial reign as King. Since that time, and until quite recently, that number dwindled to none. It would not be until we began to post the Yada Yahowah Series online that this began to change.

And yet, knowing Yah is not for everyone. The 1.8 million Haredi are so intellectually incapacitated by their rabbis, even with the truth served up to them on a silver platter, they will continue to engender Yahowah’s overt antagonism.

These books are labeled Yada Yahowah for a reason. With 1,800,000 shrill Jewish voices and another 5,000,000,000 Christians and Muslims fanning the flames of Divine wrath, I thought God might enjoy something less irritating.

Three millennia is a very, very long time – at least by our standards, but perhaps not by God’s. Time does not flow for Him as it does for us. Unlike creatures bound to the earth, Yahowah, as a Spiritual Being, determines how He experiences time, varying the pace of its flow to suit His needs. The twenty centuries which have crawled past since the Messiah, Dowd, fulfilled Chag Matsah were so horrid, it’s unlikely God paid attention to anything that occurred during that span.

Fortunately, we have reached the conclusion of this interval. With each word we translate and share, Yahowah becomes less hidden and better known to His people.

When Father and Son return on Yowm Kipurym | the Day of Reconciliations in year 6000 Yah (October 2nd at sunset, 2033 in Yaruwshalaim), He will be known to the extent it is possible among the surviving remnant of Jews. Not surprisingly, this awakening, along with maximizing the productivity of the Shabuw’ah and Taruw’ah Harvests is the stated purpose of Yahowah’s Choter | Stem and Sucker, His Nakry | Observant Foreigner, His Nes | Sign of the Son, Basar | Herald of the King, and Zarowa’ | One Sowing the Seeds of the Harvest. Moreover, within six years of this writing in 2024, we can expect ‘ElYah | Yah is God | Elijah and Yada | He Knows to enter Dowd’s City, Yaruwshalaim | the Source of Instruction on Reconciliation, to let the world know in no uncertain terms just how displeased God is with humankind – particularly Christians, Muslims, Progressives, and the Haredim.

The realization that Yahowah has been unknown to His people and to all mankind for millennia is not only an essential reminder of man’s overwhelming preference for religion over the relationship God intended, this underscores the need for a Choter and this Nes. Without them, mankind’s ignorance of Yahowah would have remained. There would have been no Shabuw’ah or Taruw’ah Harvests, no Yowm Kipurym return, nor camping out together during Sukah. It would all have been for naught. And so now you know why Yahowah spoke so vociferously about our work together.

And so it should be no surprise that the ultimate truth and greatest discovery, that of Dowd fulfilling the Mow’edym as the Son of God and returning as our Messiah, Shepherd, and King, was found and shared by the same Witness who would reintroduce Yahowah’s name to His people. Further, God concealed Himself from His people as a direct result of their treatment of His Son and His name, so these things are related.

So, now it gets personal, as it should with all of us…

“You have chosen to remind me (zakar ‘any – Your will is to recall this information and these events to me, asserting these truths for me (qal imperative second-person masculine singular)) to ask about the duration of life in this world and temporary things by contrast to eternity, especially how time flows differently relative to the observer (mah cheled – what is one lifetime and how long will things continue to transpire in this world at the present pace).

Was it for nothing (‘al mah shawa’ – was it for this worthless religious vanity) that You created (bara’ – that You conceived and brought into existence once upon a time (qal perfect)) each of the sons of ‘Adam (kol beny ‘adam – all of humankind)?” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:47)

Revealed in the exact center of mankind’s journey out of the Garden and back to ‘Eden, in 3000 Yah, Dowd’s Song serves as a marker in time. One thousand years to the day, on Passover in year 4000 Yah, God’s Beloved Son served as the Zarowa’ | Sacrificial Lamb and fulfilled Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym to redeem his people and enable the Covenant’s blessings. Forty Yowbel thereafter he would return to reconcile the remnant of Yisra’el on Yowm Kipurym.

The thought of the Messiah suffering in this manner is hard to fathom from our perspective – but not from his Father’s or from his own. What are two hellish days compared to an eternity with one’s Father and Family, with thousands of Covenant members now at Home as a result of the sacrifice? The anguishing memory would fade while the Covenant he enabled would endure forever.

The three epochs of 40 Yowbel, each lasting 2,000 years, may seem like an interminable period, however, for God, and for those with Him in the Spiritual Realm of the Heavens of the 7th dimension, it equates to the blink of an eye. Time is relative, albeit not here for us, not now.

The period from the expulsion from ‘Eden to the affirmation of the Covenant with ‘Abraham allowing us to reenter would be forty Yowbel. Another 2,000 years would pass from our perspective looking back until Father and Son delivered the benefits of the Covenant by fulfilling Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children. And from the fulfillment of the first three Mow’edym in year 4000 Yah to the return of Father and Son to fulfill the final three Miqra’ey in year 6000 Yah, 40 Yowbel would pass, bringing us to 2033 CE – just 9 years from now.

This is the duration of things, God’s timing as these events play out and we witness them. So much of it revolves around Dowd – the Messiah, Son of God, and Passover Lamb – that this Song was written to commemorate him and them.

Rest assured, Yahowah did not conceive humankind for us to be religious and antagonistic. Therefore, to save us from ourselves, Father and Son resolved the issues which separate us and composed these lyrics to showcase their resolve. And now, three thousand years later, I am sharing their thoughts to prepare the people for the harvest.

As we have discovered, Yahowah initiates the relationships He desires to form, leaving our response subject to our own freewill. He picks and chooses from among the men and women who either amuse Him, impress Him, or just pique His interests in some way. They all share something in common, in that each has walked away from religion and politics prior to Yah’s introduction. They are all willing to listen, even go where His words lead.

Freewill works both ways. Yahowah enjoys it which is why He offered it to us. So, since it is His universe and His home, He is entitled to invite whomever He pleases to spend eternity with Him in it so long as He is consistent in His approach. That isn’t to say that it is impossible to find Yahowah independently, but as the previous statement suggests, God is hidden from most because the preponderance of people are either religious, political, conspiratorial, patriotic, militant, or too otherwise distracted to learn the truth.

But more than any other reason that so few know Him is because men like Paul have plagued the world with their lies. So just as Sha’uwl was called out by name and condemned as the Plague of Death in Chabaquwq | Habakkuk, the Son of Evil is similarly identified in the 89th Mizmowr / Psalm. He authored the New Testament’s fourteen most deadly tomes and inspired Mark, Luke, Acts, and Matthew. And if that were not bad enough, in response to his demonic appeal, Akiba and company would conceive Judaism in rebuttal.

“What man of great strength and character, empowered to prevail (my geber – who, as the most capable and courageous of men) lives (chayah – is actually and continually alive (qal imperfect third-person masculine singular)) and (wa) will not witness (wa lo’ ra’ah – will not see (qal imperfect third-person masculine singular)) death as a result of the plague (maweth – dying from the pandemic disease which infects and destroys a great many people (piel imperfect third-person masculine singular)), saving his soul (malat nepesh huw’ – delivering and sparing his consciousness, rescuing his inner nature (piel imperfect third-person masculine singular)) from the hand and influence (min yad – from the effects and acts) of Sha’uwl (Sha’uwl – Question Him, the Benjamite wolf in sheep’s clothing who as a result of being demon-possessed changed his name to reflect his affinity with Rome, becoming Paul, the principal author of the Christian New Testament, the Father of Lies and the Son of Evil)?

Pause now and consider what this implies (selah – take the time required to contemplate the implications).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:48)

Every verb, and there were four in this question, was scribed in the third-person masculine singular, designating a single man as the subject of these claims, both good and then bad. The initial character is a geber | great man, a person of courage and character, imbued with the strength to prevail. This is, therefore, addressing the subject of this Song, the Son of God who is very much alive. And while he would experience the death of his corporeal body twice, once from old age and the other at the torturous hands of Rome, mankind’s most beastly civilization, his soul endures. It has and will never experience death.

Moreover, Dowd is the antidote for the toxic venom spewed from Sha’uwl’s | Paul’s poison pen. He was not only immune to the Plague of Death, but he is also providing the antibodies with which to fight the viruses of Christianity and Judaism. So, while many are saved by what he accomplished, he is the only one who offers salvation.

Let’s be clear, this is addressing Sha’uwl, the man, not She’owl, the place. She’owl does not have hands or influence. This place of separation can neither plague us nor kill us. In fact, She’owl, as the place of eternal incarceration, is the antithesis of death for those who endure it. As a Black Hole, nothing reaches out from She’owl.

However, it was the hand of Sha’uwl which wrote the fourteen epistles that have plagued mankind. It is under his influence that Christianity was conceived and popularized among Gowym. He is the master manipulator behind diminishing Dowd’s influence, the hand that has sought to denigrate the Messiah, Son of God, and Passover Lamb such that he could replace him. And it was Sha’uwl | Paul who wrote that “David” was dead and buried so that he could justify transferring the many prophecies pertaining to the Messiah to his pretend god, Jesus.

Sha’uwl | Paul has plagued far more people than the billions of souls who were coerced or beguiled into placing their faith in the religion he fathered at the behest of Satan. Without the Son of Evil and the Father of Lies, Gowym would not have come to blame or hate Jews sufficiently to cause Rome (which was where Paul’s allegiance lay) to massacre and enslave the Chosen People, robbing Yahuwdym of their homeland. The Roman Catholic Church, which was based on Paul’s letters, would not have propagated the anti-Semitic culture and conspiracies which culminated in the Holocaust without Paul’s jealousy and covetousness. Muhammad, likewise, would never have succeeded in establishing a religion predicated upon anti-Semitism without the foundation laid by his predecessor.

Sha’uwl | Paul has become the Chosen People’s fiercest and most embittered adversary. He is responsible for the death of more souls than anyone who has ever lived. To escape his grasp is difficult, and often impossible, as the integrated religious and political scheme he concocted (read Romans 13) has tread upon the entire world – suppressing truth and impeding freedom.

Sha’uwl will endure eternity in She’owl, and his diabolical premise of Replacement Theology will be rebuked by the reappearance of Dowd, the man whose life and lyrics he sought to disparage. And while I have requested the opportunity to convict him, it’s Mizmowr like this which will be brought to bear against the Plague of Death. Dowd will get the debate he has sought. And the outcome is written in stone. Sha’uwl will become synonymous with the place whose name he shares: She’owl | Hell.

Once again, we find affirmation that Dowd’s Song, the 89th Mizmowr, is Yahowah’s answer to Christianity. By resurrecting the Messiah and Son of God it buries Sha’uwl and the religion he foisted on an unsuspecting world. This is the death knell for the Christian faith and for its replacement messiah, god, and revised testament.

Dowd is the answer. He is the one. And therefore, the Psalmist poses a rhetorical question to Yahowah…

“Where (‘ayeh – posing a rhetorical question regarding an individual’s position) is Your unwavering love and enduring favoritism (chesed ‘atah – Your devotion to the familial relationship and unfailing kindness, Your genuine affection and merciful treatment) which was expressed first and foremost in the beginning (ri’shown – as the initial priority, as the most important consideration of what was occurring from the start, preceding this and of old) which You promised (shaba’ – You truthfully proclaimed and affirmed as part of Your binding oath on seven occasions) to Dowd | the Beloved (la Dowd – to love and be loved in return), in harmony with Your steadfast commitment to being trustworthy and reliable (‘emuwnah ‘atah – by way of Your honesty and dependability, by being completely truthful, genuine, and real such that You can be trusted and relied upon), my Upright One (‘edown ‘any – my Upright Pillar, addressing the vertical beam which secures and enlarges a home, especially the Tent of the Enduring Witness)?” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:49)

Since this is the 49th verse of the 89th Psalm, this rhetorical question has already been answered 48 times, 49 if you consider the conclusion of the question. And we can rely upon God’s answer since He is ‘emuwnah | trustworthy and dependable. The things which He has favored from the beginning are the things He loves. These would include being creative and enjoying an active and conversational relationship with humankind in a pristine environment. And since the formation of the Beryth | Covenant with ‘Abraham and Sarah is the dominant theme of Bare’syth | Genesis, the Family is Yahowah’s first love.

God chose Dowd | the Beloved. He became His Bakowr | Firstborn Son. And through this single solitary life, the entire story of Yisra’el and the Covenant is relived, retold, and resolved!

Rather than give up on those who had continually rejected Him, God engaged alongside the best among us. And even then, as it was with ‘Adam, the Messiah was unsteady, at one moment soaring into the Heavens and in the next stumbling on Earth. But in his prose, our Savior was brilliant and articulate. He was a voracious reader and voluminous writer. God’s most learned student became our most effective teacher. Dowd paid attention and valued Yah’s advice, but he also understood it and shared what he had come to comprehend with us.

Therefore, under Dowd’s guidance, Yisra’el was united in God’s home. They were protected and thrived, at least until they lost focus and stumbled once again and fell. This time, however, Dowd, recognizing that he had become part of the problem, solved his people’s rebellion against Yahowah once and for all. He realized that since Sukah would be his, he could, should, and would fulfill the Miqra’ey, beginning with Pesach.

I am certain that the Shepherd and King came to this conclusion as he and his Father were discussing homes, their requests, and God’s promises and accolades, all of which are recorded in Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7, a prophetic pronouncement we will also consider momentarily. With his great mind, Dowd would have instantly made the connection between Yahowah’s affirmations to him and what occurred as the Covenant was confirmed on Mowryah. He recognized that in the Yowbel year of 2000 Yah, the meeting on Mowryah served as a harbinger of Passover. And during a discussion on beloved sons, God said that He would provide the lamb.

As a student of the Towrah, Dowd further realized that the Pesach ‘Ayil had also been instrumental in providing life and liberty for the Children of Yisra’el in Mitsraym. He knew that on Matsah, they had walked out of the realm of religious and political oppression. He realized that they were reborn into the Covenant as they emerged from the sea in celebration of Bikuwrym. And as the brightest among us, he rightly concluded that the Towrah’s enriching enlightenment had been initially offered during Shabuw’ah. The stage was set for the fulfillment of the Miqra’ey at a later date – presumably 40 Yowbel from the day of the previous promise, which would make it the Yowbel year of 4000 Yah.

Having written the ultimate treatise on the Towrah in his 119th Mizmowr, Dowd would have understood as we have, that with the fulfillment of the first three Mow’ed, the benefits of the Beryth would be assured. So, he manned up, gibowr-ed in God’s parlance, and volunteered to do the right thing. His basar | corporeal body became the Passover Lamb while his nepesh | soul carried Yisra’el’s guilt into She’owl, depositing it there, never to be seen again. The Father’s Firstborn was Bikuwrym-ed to enable the Shabuw’ah and Taruw’ah Harvests. The Covenant would be firmly established, its benefits reliably provided. Problem resolved. Thanks to Father and Son, those who accept their gift will live forever, be perfected and adopted, enriched, and empowered.

The geber would prevail given three lives, his soul and ours perfected and preserved. Heaven’s Door was opened. Our relationship was reconciled. We were invited back into the Gan ‘Eden.

Since he was the first to understand what I’m sharing with you, I’d like to quote my favorite prophet to reinforce the lesson of the greatest story ever told…

“For indeed (ky – because truly, emphasizing this statement while revealing an important contrast), a child (yeled – a boy, an infant who grows up to become a man; from yalad – brought forth) was born (yalad – was conceived and brought into view through a woman impregnated by the father of the child at a moment in time (pual perfect passive)) before us (la ‘anachnuw – to, for, and among us), a son (ben – a male descendant, the masculine offspring of a mother and father) was provided as a gift, produced and given(nathan – was offered and delivered at a point in time, appointed and bestowed (nifal perfect passive)) concerning us (la ‘anachnuw – on our behalf, regarding our approach).

The opportunity to learn what can be known about how to engage and endure in addition to the responsibility and authority to lead (wa misrah – sovereignty; from my – to ponder the implications of sarah – having the power to exert oneself, to contend, to persist, and to persevere) was and will be (wa hayah – has been, continues to be, and will actually exist with ongoing implications (qal imperfect active)) on his shoulder and predicated upon the eagerness in which he pursued his calling early in his life (‘al shekem huw’ – on his back based upon a continued succession of events transpiring upon his ridgeline).

His name, reputation, and renown (wa shem huw’ – his personal and proper designation) has been read and recited as (qara’ – was invited and summoned as, was called out and welcomed as, was met with and proclaimed as, and was read aloud and announced as (qal perfect)): a counselor providing valuable advice (yow’ets / ya’ats – one who offers direction and thought-provoking guidance to deliberate, an analyst who proposes and reveals the purpose of the plan, a mentor who speaks out and urges those who listen to follow his guidance and thinking because it is thoughtful and reasonable) who is astoundingly brilliant and amazingly insightful (pele’ – who is marvelous, wonderful, and distinguished, surpassing all others, set apart and separating, influential and fantastic, as well as prophetic), a valiant and heroic individual, a prominent defender and leader with standing in the community, the most capable, competent, and courageous man (gibowr – a powerful person who prevails, a proven defender, and a champion confirming the influence and strengthening nature) of God (‘el – of the Almighty), an eternal witness providing restoring testimony (‘ed – an observant and meticulous individual providing everlasting evidence from long ago, sharing proof which is reaffirming, an eyewitness back in time conveying and memorializing information regarding the perpetual and continued existence) for the Father (‘ab – of the progenitor, originator and male caregiver and provider), the leader who conveys the authorized position (ha sar – the ruler who acts and delivers, who has the authority and power to prevail with regard to representing the official stance on) on reconciliation and restoration leading to salvation (shalowm – on the blessings of restitution and redemption, on peace and prosperity, on satisfaction and favoritism, on association and friendship, regarding restored health and prosperity, on safety and being complete, regarding lacking nothing, on contentment and companionship), (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 9:6) tremendously increasing (rab – abundantly, greatly, and extensively, plentifully and totally, to the largest extent possible on the scale of spatial dimensions amplifying and growing) the ability to learn about and respond to (lam – providing the information and imparting the instruction learned as a student, teaching how to become familiar with the guidance needed to accept by diligently studying and then explaining the pattern and plan, as a student eager to learn who is taught by another, having received clear and compelling revelations so as to be prepared to intelligently convey; contracted from lamad – to teach and learn, gaining information through instruction and then responding appropriately to) the means to engage and endure, to be liberated and empowered (ha misrah – choosing to understand by questioning the who, what, where, why, when, and how of that which pertains to persisting and persevering, of being set free and being empowered; a compound of my – to probe and question sarah – the means to engage and endure, to contend, to be liberated, and to be empowered as Yisra’el).

As a result of this approach (wa la – then adding these things together, collectively, therefore and accordingly, facilitating this direction), reconciliation and restoration, complete satisfaction and total contentment (shalowm – the blessings of an entirely favorable circumstance leading to overwhelming prosperity, friendship, and affection, tranquility and companionship, safety and salvation from harm’s way, as well as deliverance, resulting in a free, healthy, and satisfying relationship) will be without end (‘ayn qets – will never cease or be negated, and are unbounded and limitless, without constraint) upon the throne (‘al kise’ – before the seat of honor in association with the high status of the dignified and empowering garment, the source of power adorning and covering the royal authority) of Dowd (Dowd – the Beloved), as well as (wa – in addition) upon his kingdom through his considered advice and counsel (‘al mamlakah huw’– as a result of his sovereign authority and reign over his realm, and on account of his thoughtful guidance and assistance; from malak – to reign by providing considered and intelligent advice and instruction, directions and counsel) so as to be prepared and established by it (la kuwn ‘eth hy’ – authenticated and authorized by it to become steadfast, ready and supported through it, deciding and concluding to approach regarding it (hifil infinitive)), and (wa) to be restored and sustained by it (wa la sa’ad huw’ – to be renewed and upheld through it, to be strengthened and supported by it, and to make it safe and secure, refreshing it with the most favorable and nourishing sustenance), with the means to exercise good judgment and justly resolve disputes (ba mishpat – as part of a plan to decide, as a prescription based upon an official proclamation depicting how the Judge will determine each case, remaining completely fair and yet consistent; from my – to ponder the implications of shaphat – deciding, judging, being discriminating, and resolving controversies) by (wa ba) being right (tsadaqah – being correct, fair, and just, acquitting and vindicating, honest and blameless, innocent and in full accord with the standard) from then to now (min ‘atah – beginning congruent with the events being depicted, right now and thus coinciding with this narration, simultaneous with this rational declaration) and forevermore (wa ‘ad ‘owlam – throughout all time, eternally).

The deep devotion and passion (qin’ah – the zeal and fervor for exclusivity, strong desire to accomplish something special, and ardent love and jealousy) of Yahowah (Yahowah) of the vast array of spiritual implements (tsaba’ – of the host of heavenly messengers and envoys) has engaged and will continue to act to make this happen (‘asah zo’th – has caused this to continuously occur, having always done what was required, such that He will act accordingly to accomplish this, fashioning this result, continuing to perform in this way (qal imperfect)).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 9:7)

Yasha’yah and the Mizmowr are hand and glove. They are most useful when brought together. And so it is from that perspective the Song of the Son elucidates Isaiah’s most acclaimed prophecy regarding the Son of God.

The “lyrics comprising a poem of insights to contemplate and comprehend (maskyl) regarding (la) the constant and eternal, productive and established (‘Eythan), the beloved native-born strong arm (ha ‘Ezrachy)” concludes with these words…

“My Upright One (‘edown ‘any – my Upright Pillar and Foundation, addressing the vertical beam which secures and enlarges the home, especially the Tent of the Enduring Witness), You remember and have chosen to mention that You are mindful of (zakar – You recall and never forget to proclaim the truth (qal imperative)) the contemptible and condescending taunts and the dishonorable and deplorable decrees which were determined (cherpah – the disgraceful slurs and harmful insults, the reprehensible decisions and supposedly authorized judgments which were appalling (piel perfect)) by all of the many nations and preponderance of the people (kol rabym ‘am – by the totality of the human family, by every ethnicity, and by the most exalted of countries) against those who work with You (‘ebed ‘atah – Your coworkers and associates who labor along with You) which I have now brought to bear (nasa’ ‘any – I have carried forward and have endured) in my best judgment (ba heq – from my chest which is the place my core values reside). (Mizmowr 89:50)

That is because (‘asher – revealing their relationships and way) those in open opposition to You (‘oyeb ‘atah – Your enemies and adversaries, those who show their animosity, enmity, and rancor toward You), Yahowah (Yahowah – an accurate transliteration of the name of ‘elowah – God guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence and our shalowm – reconciliation), are insulting with their bewildering derision and improperly discerned contempt, so as to discredit in an abusive manner (‘asher charaph – they are defiant and evil, causing people to think irrationally, confounding them through blasphemy (piel perfect)) the footsteps (‘aqeb – the unwavering and reliable movements and willingness to dig in his heels) of Mashyach ‘Atah | Your Messiah (mashyach ‘atah – Your Anointed). (Mizmowr 89:51)

Blessed by having knelt down in love to lift up is (barak – commended and favored are the circumstances and result of the excellent words and example of) Yahowah (Yahowah) forevermore (la ‘owlam – for all eternity).

This is trustworthy, verifiable, and reliable (‘aman wa ‘aman – this is correct and true, affirmed and supported, established, readily acceptable, clearly stated, and dependable).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to Sing / Psalm 89:52)

There is one Mashyach | Messiah and Ben ‘El | Son of God, and he is Dowd | Beloved. He is Yahowah’s Bachar | Chosen ‘Ebed | Coworker, an ‘Ad ‘Owlam | Eternal and Restoring Witness, and our Melek | King. This Mashal | Articulate Leader is the Gibowr | God’s Most Competent and Courageous Man, our Yasha’ | Savior because he is the Ra’ah | Shepherd and Zarowa’ | Sacrificial Lamb.

Many would lead God’s people astray, but one would bring them back home. Many have been wrong, but one was right.

As promised, here is the prophecy that led to Yada Yahowah – the first of thousands of translations and insights. This was also Dowd’s awakening – the moment he came to understand the role he and his Father would play in the fulfillment of the Covenant. Speaking of homes, of man’s and God’s, zera’ | seeds sown, ben | sons, and positions of honor…

“It came to pass (wa hayah ky) when the king sat down and relaxed in his home (ha melek yashab ba beyth huw’), because Yahowah (wa YaHoWaH) had given him comforting respite (nuwach la huw’) from his adversaries and rancorous foes (min sabyb min kol ‘oyeb huw’), (Shamuw’el 2 7:1) that the king said (wa ‘amar ha melek) to Nathan, the prophet (‘el Nathan ha naby’), ‘Please look around (ra’ah na’). I live (‘anoky yashab) in a house of cedar (ba beyth ‘erez), but the Ark of God (wa ‘arown ha ‘elohym) sits within curtains (yashab ba tawek ha yarya’ah).’ (Shamuw’el 2 7:2)

So, Nathan said to the king (wa ‘amar Nathan ‘el ha melek), ‘Choose to go and do all that is in your best judgment (kol ‘asher ba lebab ‘atah) because, surely (ky), Yahowah is with you (Yahowah ‘im ‘atah).’ (Shamuw’el 2 7:3) However, that evening (wa hayah ba ha laylah ha huw’) the word of Yahowah came to Nathan (dabar Yahowah hayah ‘el Nathan). He conveyed (la ‘amar), (Shamuw’el 2 7:4) ‘Go and tell (halak wa ‘amar ‘el) Dowd, My coworker (Dowd ‘ebed ‘any), that this is what Yahowah says (koh Yahowah ‘amar). “Why should you build Me a home to live in (ha ‘atah banah la ‘any beyth la yashab ‘any)? (Shamuw’el 2 7:5)

Indeed (ky), I have not lived (lo’ yashab) in a house (ba beyth) since the time (wa min yowm) that I lifted up to be with Me (‘alah ‘any ‘eth) the Children of Yisra’el (beny Yisra’el) out of the crucibles of oppression in Mitsraym (min Mitsraym). Then as an ongoing witness to the restoring testimony, up to (wa ‘ad) this day (ha yowm ha zeh), I have been moving about (wa hayah halak) in a tent dwelling as a tabernacle and home (ba ‘ohel wa ba mishkan). (Shamuw’el 2 7:6)

During any of that time, when showing the way to the benefits of the relationship, that (ba kol ‘asher) I traveled (halak) with all of the Children of Yisra’el (ba kol beny Yisra’el), did I say a single word (ha dabar dabar) to one (‘eth ‘echad) of the leaders of the tribes of Yisra’el (shebet Yisra’el), whom I instructed (‘asher tsawah) to shepherd (la ra’ah) My people (‘eth ‘am ‘any), Yisra’el (Yisra’el), to say (la ‘amar), “So why not (la mah lo’) build for Me a house of cedar (banah la ‘any beyth ‘erez)?” (Shamuw’el 2 7:7)

Now, therefore (wa ‘atah), this is what you should say (koh ‘amar) to My associate, Dowd (la ‘ebed ‘any la Dowd), as a result (koh) Yahowah of the spiritual implements (Yahowah tsaba’) says (‘amar), “I took you (‘any laqach ‘atah) from the sheepfolds (min ha neweh), from chasing after lambs (min ‘achar ha tso’n), to be the conspicuous and informative leader (la hayah nagyd) among My People (‘al ‘am ‘any), over Yisra’el (‘al Yisra’el). (Shamuw’el 2 7:8)

I have been with you (wa hayah ‘im ‘atah) throughout it all (ba kol) revealing the benefits of the relationship (‘asher) as you journeyed through life (halak). I have cut off (wa karat), accordingly, all of your enemies (‘eth kol ‘oyeb ‘atah) from your presence (min paneh ‘atah). And I have engaged on your behalf to make for you (wa ‘asah la ‘atah) an exceptionally important name, the greatest designation, and most distinguished reputation (shem ha gadowl), when compared to other designations (ka shem ha gadowl) pursuant to the relationship (‘asher) on the Earth (ba ha ‘erets). (Shamuw’el 2 7:9)

Furthermore (wa), I will appoint and establish (sym) a dwelling place (maqowm) for My People (la ‘am ‘any), Yisra’el (la Yisra’el). I will plant them (wa nata’ huw’) such that they may abide (wa shakan) throughout a less chaotic time than this (tachath huw’) and no longer be agitated, anguished, or terrorized (ragaz ‘owd). They will not continue to be (wa lo’ yasaph) afflicted or degraded, disparaged or denigrated (‘anah), by unjust and harmful, perverted and violent descendants of evil (beny ‘awlah), as will have formerly been the case (ka ‘asher ba ha ri’shown). (Shamuw’el 2 7:10)

From the day (wa la min ha yowm) which, for the benefit of the relationship (‘asher), I appointed and instructed (tsawah) Judges (shaphat) on behalf of My people (‘al ‘am ‘any), Yisra’el (Yisra’el), I will provide a respite (wa nuwach la ‘atah) from all of your enemies (min kol ‘oyeb ‘atah). In addition (wa), Yahowah (Yahowah) is boldly and publicly announcing to you (nagad la ‘atah) that, indeed (ky), He will act, engaging with you to create the family and home of Yahowah (beyth ‘asah la ‘atah Yahowah).” (Shamuw’el 2 7:11)

And there it is, the announcement that Yahowah would engage with Dowd to establish His Family. Since this is accomplished for the Beryth through the Miqra’ey, the Son of God fulfilled one on behalf of the other. Indeed, Dowd would become the Passover Lamb…

“Surely (ky), your time will be thoroughly proclaimed and completely fulfilled (male’ yowmym ‘atah). When you will have laid down your life (wa shakab) in association with your ancestors (‘eth ‘ab ‘atah), I will rise up and take a stand to bring to fruition (quwm) with your offspring what you have sown for the harvest (‘eth zera’ ‘atah), something more in the end without hesitation for you (‘achar ‘atah). For the benefit of the relationship (‘asher), it will be extracted and withdrawn (yatsa’) out of a small particle of your physiological nature (min me’eh).’”

As I have stated, Dowd’s DNA was used to create the basar | corporeal body his nepesh | soul would occupy to fulfill Pesach and Matsah. In so doing, the seeds were sown that would grow into the harvest.

Then after foreshadowing the 89th Mizmowr by speaking to His Son, Yahowah transitions to speaking to us about him…

“‘And so (wa), I will establish (kuwn) his reign over his kingdom (‘eth mamlakah huw’). (Shamuw’el 2 7:12) He, himself, shall restore and rebuild (huw’ banah) the family home (beyth) for (la) My name (shem ‘any). And (wa) I will prepare and establish (kuwn) the throne (‘eth kise’) of his kingdom (mamlakah huw’) forevermore as a continuing witness (‘ad ‘owlam). (Shamuw’el 2 7:13)

I was, I am, and I always will be (‘any hayah) for him (la huw’) as a Father (la ‘ab), and (wa) he was, is, and always will be (huw’ hayah) for Me as (la ‘any) a son (la ben).

So when that which is associated with him is warped and perverted, twisted such that it is contrary to what has been stated (‘asher ba ‘awah huw’), I will resolve the dispute against him, vindicating him, deciding with him to expose and issue a condemnation (wa yakah huw’) against the weapons and staves wielded by rulers of the nations (ba shebet) of men (‘ishym) and against (wa ba) the fungus and plague that has fallen (nega’) upon the descendants (ben) of ‘Adam (‘adam).’” (Shamuw’el 2 7:14)

Dowd is the rightful heir to the family his lives and lyrics begat. And for having enabled the growth of Yahowah’s Family, God’s Son has been afforded the seat of honor.

And just as we have seen throughout the Son’s Song, Yahowah is exceedingly disappointed and disgusted with His people and humankind in general for having perverted and twisted what was associated with Dowd. And He intends to hold religious Jews, Christians, and Muslims accountable for what they have done. Thereafter, God provided a perfect explanation of the religious crusade to transfer the promises made to the Messiah to create a Christ. He is not a fan…

“‘Therefore (wa), My steadfast devotion, enduring love, commitment to the relationship, and unmitigated favor (chesed ‘any) will not be removed from him, be disassociated or diminished regarding him, nor replaced, substituting another for him (lo’ suwr min huw’) as was the case when (ka ‘asher) I turned away from and completely rejected (suwr min) associating with (‘im) Sha’uwl (Sha’uwl) whom, to show the proper way (‘asher), I removed (suwr) from your presence (min la paneh ‘atah).’” (Shamuw’el 2 7:15)

Speaking directly to Dowd again, God concludes…

“‘And so (wa), your family (beyth ‘atah) and (wa) your position of authority, your kingdom and reign (malakah ‘atah), are assured, as it is trustworthy and dependable, firmly established, credible, and enduring (‘aman) forever as a continuing witness (‘ad ‘owlam) in My presence (la paneh ‘atah). Your throne and seat of honor (kise’ ‘atah) will be (hayah) established and sustained (kuwn) forevermore as restoring testimony (‘ad ‘owlam).’ (Shamuw’el 2 7:16)

Consistent with all of these words (ka kol ha dabarym ha ‘eleh) and in accord with (wa ka) the entire revelation (kol ha chizyown ha zeh), in this manner, Nathan accurately conveyed this (ken dabar Nathan) to Dowd (‘el Dowd).” (Shamuw’el / Listen to Him / 2 Samuel 7:17)

This prophecy is about houses, who builds them and who lives in them. It is about Dowd, who had a home, not “Jesus” who was homeless throughout the myths scribed about him. It is all about what God is going to do for, with, and through His beloved Son. It is also about seeds and thrones, who sows them and who sits upon them.

And when it comes to such things, Yahowah is beside Himself, annoyed to the point that He has made His point in such a vivid way there shouldn’t have been a single church, mosque, temple, or shrine called a house of God, and yet, men have erected millions of them – with more to a false messiah than anything else.

Just as God has never once asked us to worship Him, bow down before Him, or pray to Him, He does not want us to build houses for Him. The fact is, Yahowah is in the construction business, and His primary expertise is in building the most extraordinary home in the universe for His Covenant Family.

Having returned to the prophecy where my journey began some 22 years ago, with “‘asher – associated with” in Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:14, we have found the obvious answer to whose home and throne is being established. It is unequivocally delineated here in the 89th Mizmowr. Therefore, 2 Samuel 7 is about Dowd from beginning to end just as is the 89th Psalm and Isaiah 9. It is Dowd’s place of honor and kingdom which will endure forever as is affirmed throughout the prophets.

It wasn’t until many years after my initial quest to understand ‘asher in 2 Samuel 7:14 that I came to realize that God was speaking of what Paul would do to pervert and misappropriate Dowd’s legacy. And in this regard, Yahowah has put us on notice that He will defend His Son.

Along these lines, I’d like to reinforce something equally germane to our understanding of Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7 and our appreciation of Mizmowr / Psalm 89 – both of which celebrate the Father / Son relationship paramount to the life of the King of Yisra’el. Dowd represents more than one individual man. More perhaps than even Ya’aqob, Dowd is Yisra’el. His joys and heartaches, his ongoing battles with gowym, his insights and errors, the benefits he enjoyed in concert with the Covenant, and the consequences he endured when he ran afoul of it are all shared in common with the nation he shepherded.



In that He has proven His existence and the legitimacy of His testimony through prophecy, we will be using Yahowah’s testimony as the only unassailable source of information regarding God’s nature and plan. It will be the standard to which we will hold Paul accountable. It is only fair.

Therefore, let’s conclude this, the final introductory chapter, by giving our God, our Father, our Creator, Yahowah, the last word...

This is some of what God revealed through His prophet, Yasha’yah | Freedom and Salvation are from Yah:

“Woe (howy), the people from different races and places (gowy) bear blame and are guilty for having wandered away (chata’). The people’s (‘am) distortions and their propensity to alter, twist, and pervert (‘awon) are numerous and burdensome, even troubling (kabed). They are descendants (zera’) of those who have done wrong, harming themselves (ra’a’). They are children (benym) of those who corrupt and destroy (shahat). They have rejected and abandoned (‘azab) Yahowah (Yahowah). They have spurned and belittled, maligned and disparaged (na’as) the Set-Apart One (qadowsh ‘eth) of Yisra’el (Yisra’el). They are strangers who have gone astray (zuwr), having turned their backs (‘achowr).’” (Yasha’yah / Salvation is from Yahowah / Isaiah 1:4)

“I am (‘any) Yahowah (Yahowah). This is My name (huw’ shem). And (wa) the manifestation of My power (kabowd) I will not give (lo’ nathan) to (la) another (‘acher), nor (wa) My renown and reputation (tahilah) to (la) religious imagery (pasyl).” (Yasha’yah 42:8)

“Yahowah (Yahowah) is willing, even desirous (chaphets), for the sake of (ma’an) His sense of honesty and fairness, and His commitment to doing what is right regarding your vindication (tsedeq), to reveal His empowering, enriching, and enabling (gadal) Towrah, His Teaching and Instruction, His Guidance and Direction (Towrah), and to prove its worth (wa ‘adar).” (Yasha’yah 42:21)

“Listen and pay attention to Me, so that you can respond appropriately to Me (qashap ‘el), My family (‘am) and (wa) My people (le’om). To Me (‘el), listen, considering and evaluating what you hear, and then respond (‘azan) because indeed (ky), the Towrah, the Source of Teaching and Guidance (Towrah) from Me (min ‘eth) shall be brought forth and shall be disseminated (yatsa’). And (wa) My means to justifiably resolve disputes (mishpat) will (la) shine upon and enlighten (‘owr) the family (‘am).” (Yasha’yah 51:4)

“Then (wa) he shall reveal (galah) the glorious presence and manifestation of the power (kabowd) of Yahowah (Yahowah). And all (kol) living creatures (basar) will see (ra’ah) together (yachdow). Indeed (ky), he is the Word (ha dabar), the verbal spokesman and mouth (peh) of Yahowah (Yahowah).” (Yasha’yah 40:5)

“Look and see, pay attention and behold (hineh), Yahowah (Yahowah), our Upright One and Foundation (‘edownay), arrives (bow’) with the blast of a trumpet (ba chazaq). He is the Sacrificial Lamb (zarowa’). He is the proverb and the parable, a picture of the Word which is vivid and easy to see (la mashal). Behold (hineh) him, our recompense and fare for the passage, our ransom (sakar) is associated with him (‘ethow). He does the work to pay our debt (pa’ulah) to clear the way to appear before His presence (la paneh). As a Shepherd (ka ra’ah) leads, protects, and feeds his flock (ra’ah ‘eder), the Protective Shepherd and Sacrificial Lamb (zarowa’) will gather (qabas) his sheep (tala’ym). And in His chest (ba cheyq), He will lift them up (nasa’), nursing, nurturing (‘uwl), and guiding them (nahal).” (Yasha’yah 40:10-11)

This is a taste of what Yahowah revealed through Moseh in His Towrah:

“Pertaining to (‘achar) these (‘el-leh) conversations (dabarym), the Word (dabar) of Yahowah () came to exist with (hayah ‘el) ‘Abram (‘abram) in the form of (ba) a personal, visual, and illuminating manifestation which could be seen and experienced (machazeh) to say (‘amar): ‘Do not be awed or intimidated (yare’ ‘al) ‘Abram. I am (‘anoky) your protector, defending you from harm (magen la), your exceedingly (ma’od) great (rabah) reward (sakar).’” (Bare’syth / Beginning / Genesis 15:1)

“And (wa) God (‘elohym) conveyed (dabar) all of (kol) these words (dabar), providing perspective (‘eleh) in our presence (‘eth), saying (‘amar): ‘I am (‘anky) Yahowah (), your God (‘elohym), who beneficially (‘asher) descended to serve, bringing you out of and delivering you (yatsa’) from the realm (min ‘erets) of the crucibles of oppression (mitsraym), out of the house (min beyth) of slavery and servitude (‘ebed). You will not exist with (lo’ hayah la) other (‘aher) gods (‘elohym) in relation to (‘al) My presence (paneh).’” (Shemowth / Names / Exodus 20:1-3)

“You should observe, closely examining and carefully considering (shamar) this word and its message (dabar) as a clearly communicated and engraved prescription of what you should do to live (choq) and (wa) as an enduring and restoring witness (‘ed) to your children (beny) forever (‘owlam).” (Shemowth 12:24)

“You should never add to (lo’ yasap ‘al) the Word (ha dabar) which, as a blessing (‘asher), I (‘anky) am instructing and guiding you all (tsawah ‘eth). And you should never subtract (wa lo’ gara’) from it (min) if you are to properly observe (la shamar) the terms of the covenant (mitswah) of Yahowah (), your God (‘elohym) which, as a favor (‘asher) I am (‘anky) instructing you (tsawah ‘eth).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 4:2)

“Exclusively, without exception (raq), be observant (shamar) as your goal. And pay very close attention to (ma’od shamar) your soul (nepesh) lest you forget or overlook (sakah) the words (dabarym) which you have seen with your eyes (ra’ah ‘ayn). And lest they are removed from your heart and thinking (min leb). All of the days of your life (wa kol yowmym chay ‘atah), you should make them known (yada’) to your children and to your children’s children (ben ‘atah wa ben ben ‘atah).

The day which you were present, standing (ha yowm ‘amad) before (paneh) Yahowah, your God (Yahowah ‘elohym ‘atah), in Choreb, in which Yahowah () said to me to summon and assemble (qahal) the family (‘am) so that I might have them hear (shama’) the words (dabar) which will cause them to learn (lamad) to revere, to respect (yare’), and to approach Me all of the days which as a result of the relationship they shall live (la ‘any kol ha yowmym chay) on the earth (‘adamah), and so that they might teach (lamad) their children (ben hem).” (Dabarym 4:9-10)

And Yahowah (Yahowah) spoke the word (dabar) as God to you (‘el) from the midst of the fire (‘esh), words (dabarym) the sound of which (qowl) you heard (shama’). A visual form (tamuwnah), you did not see – but only (zuwlah) heard the sound (shama’ qowl). He told you all about (nagad la) His Family-Oriented Covenant Relationship (beryth) with you. Which, as a result of the relationship (‘asher), He instructed and directed (tsawah) you to act upon (‘asah la) the Ten Statements (dabar), writing them (kathab) on two tablets of stone. And Yahowah (Yahowah) instructed and guided (tsawah) me at this time (‘eth) that She [the Set-Apart Spirit] (hy’) would teach (lamad) you regarding the clearly communicated prescriptions for living (choq) and the means used to resolve disputes, even to exercise good judgment (mishpat), so that you might act upon them, celebrating and profiting from them (‘asah).” (Dabarym 4:12-14)

“During the time of adversity and distress (tsar), all of these words (ha dabar) will find you, especially those in the last (‘acharyth) of days. And then you will return and you will be restored (shuwb) forever and eternally (‘owlam) to Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym).” (Dabarym 4:30)

“From the heavens He has individually and deliberately prepared you to listen to (shama’) His voice (qowl) for the explicit purpose of instructing you (la yasar). And upon the Almighty’s earth, He enabled you to see and witness (ra’ah) His magnificent light (gadowl ‘esh) and His words (dabar) which you heard (shama’) from the midst of the fire (‘esh). Underlying this is His love (‘ahab) for your fathers. He has chosen to favor (bahar) their descendants after them. He has descended to serve, leading you (yatsa’) into His presence with His power (gadowl), away from (min) the crucibles of human oppression (Mitsraym).” (Dabarym 4:36-37)

“You should recognize and acknowledge (yada’) this day, returning your heart and thinking (ha yowm shuwb leb ‘atah) to God (‘elohym), because, indeed (ky), Yahowah (Yahowah), He is Almighty God (huw’ ha ‘elohym) in the heavens (ha shamaym) above and on the earth (ha ‘erets) below. There is no other. You should observe, closely examining and carefully considering (shamar) His clearly communicated and inscribed prescriptions of what we should do to live (choq), along with the terms and conditions of His binding contract (mitswah), which relationally I have instructed and guided you (tsawah) this day. Because, as a result of the relationship (‘asher), He is good to you and beneficial for you (yatab la), and also for your children after you (wa gam ben ‘atah ‘achar ‘atah), for the purpose of elongating your days.” (Dabarym 4:39-40)

“This is (ze’th) the Towrah, the Teaching (ha Towrah), which beneficially He placed before Moseh (Mosheh) and the Beny Yisra’el | Children who Engage and Endure with God (beny Yisra’el). This is the Enduring Witness and Restoring Testimony (‘ed), the clearly communicated prescriptions (choq), the means used to think clearly and resolve disputes (mishpat), which God (‘elohym) spoke to (dabar) Moseh (Mosheh) and to the Children of Yisra’el (beny Yisra’el) when He led them (yasta’) away from the crucibles of oppression (mitsraym).” (Dabarym 4:44-45)

“These are (wa ze’th) the terms and the conditions of the relationship agreement (mitswah), the clearly communicated prescriptions of what we should do in life to live (choq), and the means to exercise good judgment and resolve disputes (mishpat) which, beneficially (‘asher), Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym), instructed and guided (tsawah) you to (la) learn and teach (lamad) what should be done (la ‘asah) in the realm into which (ba ha ‘erets ‘asher) you all (‘atem) are going to pass over into (‘abar sham) as an inheritance (la yarash).

The intent is so that (ma’an) you come to revere and respect (yare’) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym), by observing (shamar) all of (kol) His clearly communicated prescriptions of what we should do in life to live (chuwqah) and (wa) His terms and conditions (mitswah), which (‘asher) I (‘anky) have instructed (tsawah) you individually (‘atah), your children (wa ben ‘atah), and your children’s children (wa ben ben ‘atah) all (kol) of the days (yowmym) of your lives (chayym).

It is for the purpose of (ma’an) elongating (‘arak) your days (yowmym), and so that (wa) you listen (shama’), Yisra’el (Yisra’el), and so that (wa) you are focused and observant (shamar), thereby (la) acting upon (‘asah) that which relationally (‘asher) is good and beneficial for you (yatab la), and which beneficially (wa ‘asher) will cause you to substantially increase, grow dramatically, and become exceedingly great and powerful (rabah ma’od), consistent with (ka) that which (‘asher) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym), promised and affirmed to (dabar) your fathers (‘ab) on your behalf (la ‘atah). Yisra’el | Individuals who Engage and Endure with God (Yisra’el), listen to and hear (shama’) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym). Yahowah () is one (‘echad).

You should choose to truly love (wa ‘ahab ‘eth) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym), with (ba) all (kol) your heart (leb), and with all (wa ba kol) your soul (nepesh), and with all (wa ba kol) your capacity and capability (ma’od). These (‘eleh) words (dabar) which (‘asher) I am (‘anky) guiding you with (tsawah) this day (ha yowm), they should come to exist and always be (wa hayah) part of your thinking (‘al leb).

Your goal should be to choose to teach them by reciting them to (wa la sanan) your children (ben ‘atah). And you should consistently speak about them (wa dabar ba) during your life (ba yashab), and inside your home and with your family (wa ba beyth ‘atah), and as you walk, traveling through life (ba halak), and along the path (ba derek), and when you lie down to rest (wa ba sakab), and when you stand up (wa quwm). And you should choose to fasten them (wa qasar) as a sign (la ‘owth) upon your hand, influencing your actions (‘al yad), and they should come to exist (wa hayah) between your eyes, influencing your perspective (bayn ‘ayn). And (wa) you should write them (katab) upon the doorframes (‘al mazuwzah) of your home (beyth), and upon your gates (wa ba sa’ar).” (Dabarym 6:1-9)

“Indeed (ky), you should listen to (shama’ ba) the voice and invitation (qowl), of Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym), for the purpose of approaching by examining and considering (la shamar) the terms and conditions of His relationship agreement (mitswah) and His clearly communicated prescriptions and inscribed recommendations of what we should do in this life to live (wa chuwqah), which are inscribed and permanently memorialized (ha kathab) in (ba) the written scroll (ha sepher) of this (ze’th), the Towrah (ha Towrah). And that is because (ky) you will return and be restored (shuwb) to (‘el) Yahowah (), your God (‘elohym), with all (ba kol) your heart (leb) and with all (wa ba kol) your soul (nepesh).” (Dabarym 30:10)

“For indeed (ky), the empowering and enriching (ma’od) Word (dabar) of your God (‘el) facilitates your approach and brings you near (qarowb), when ingrained in your speech (ba peh) and in your heart (wa ba leb) to engage with Him (la ‘asah).” (Dabarym 30:14)

“And (wa) it came to be (hayah) just when (ka) Moseh finished (kalah) writing (kathab) the words (dabar) of the Towrah (ha Towrah) upon this, the Almighty’s (ha ze’th ‘al) written scroll (sepher), successfully completing (tamam) the Eternal Witness and Restoring Testimony (‘ed), Moseh instructed (tsawah) the Lowy (ha lowy) lifting up and carrying (nasa’) Yahowah’s () Ark (‘arown) of the Family-Oriented Covenant (beryth), saying (‘amar), ‘Accept and grasp hold of (laqach) the written scroll (sepher) of the Towrah (ha Towrah) and place (sym) this (zeh) alongside (‘eth min sad) Yahowah’s (Yahowah) Ark (‘arown) of the Covenant Relationship (beryth).

Your God (‘elohym), He will always exist (hayah) there (sham) for you (la) in (ba) the Enduring Witness and Restoring Testimony (‘ed).” (Dabarym 31:24-26)

In His next book, one scribed by Yahowsha’, Yahowah introduced the living embodiment of His purpose by name…

“Later (‘achar), therefore (ken), Yahowsha’ | Yahowah Delivers and Saves (Yahowsha’) recited and proclaimed (qara’) all of (kol) the words (dabar) of the Towrah (ha Towrah), the blessings of peace and prosperity (ha barakah) and also the slights and denunciations (ha qalalah), just as (ka) all of these things (kol) were written (kathab) in (ba) the written scroll (sepher) of the Towrah | Teaching and Guidance (ha Towrah). There did not exist (lo’ hayah) a Word (dabar) from (min) all (kol) that which beneficially (‘asher) Moseh (Mosheh) had instructed and directed (tsawah) which to reveal the way to get the most out of the relationship (‘asher) Yahowsha’ (Yahowsha’) did not (lo’) read, recite, or proclaim (qara’) in a straightforward manner in the presence of (neged) the entire (kol) assembled community (qahal) of Yisra’el | Individuals who Engage and Endure with God (Yisra’el), including the women (ha ‘ishah) and the little children (tap), as well as (wa) the foreigners from other races and places (ger) who were walking (halak) among them (ba qereb).” (Yahowsha’ / Yahowah Saves / Joshua 8:34-35)

And then Yahowsha’ (Yahowsha’) wrote (kathab) these (‘eleh) words (dabar) in (ba) God’s (‘elohym) Towrah (Towrah).” (Yahowsha’ 24:26)

Now that we have heard from Yahowah through His prophet Yasha’yah, His coworker Moseh, and his heir apparent, Yahowsha’, let’s consider what God inspired Dowd, the man errantly known as “David,” to reveal to us in song. This is especially poignant because Dowd is Yahowah’s Messiah, His Shepherd and King, God’s Son, our Savior, and the man who will be returning soon…

“On behalf of (la) the eternal Leader (ha natsach), a song (mizmowr) of (la) Dowd | the Beloved (Dowd): The heavens (shamaym) quantify the unit of measure, exactly and accurately of (saphar) the manifestation of the power (kabowd) of God (‘el).

Its spreading out and expanse (raqya) makes conspicuous (nagad) His handiwork (yad ma’aseh). Day unto day (yowm la yowm) pours out (naba’) answers (‘emer), and night unto night reveals (hawah) knowledge which leads to understanding (da’ath).

Nothing exists without (‘ayn) the Word (‘emer). Nothing exists when and where (wa ‘ayn) the spoken and written message (dabarym) of the voice which calls out (qowl) is corrupted or is negated, ceasing (bely) to be heard (shama’).” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 19:1-3)

“His (huw’) going forth is (mowtsa’) from (min) the uttermost part of (qatseh) the spiritual realm (shamaym). His arrivals (taquwphah) are unto the distant end of time (qatsah). And nothing (wa ‘ayn) is hidden (satar) from (min) His light (chamah).

Yahowah’s (Yahowah) Towrah | Teaching and Guidance (Towrah) is complete and entirely perfect (tamym), returning, restoring, and transforming (shuwb) the soul (nepesh).

Yahowah’s (Yahowah) enduring testimony and restoring witness (‘eduwth) is trustworthy and reliable, verifiable and dependable (‘aman), making understanding (chakam)) simple for the open-minded (pethy).

Yahowah’s (Yahowah) directions (piquwdym) are right (yashar), causing the heart to rejoice (leb shamah). Yahowah’s () terms and conditions (mitswah) are moral and are purifying (bar), shining a light toward understanding (‘owr ‘ayn).

Revering and respecting (yir’ah) Yahowah (Yahowah) is cleansing and restoring (tahowr), sustaining and establishing us (‘amad) forever (‘ad). The means to exercise good judgment and to resolve disputes (mishpat) of Yahowah (Yahowah) are trustworthy and reliable (‘emeth). They are wholly (yahdaw) vindicating and correct (tsadaq).” (Mizmowr 19:6-9)

“This which (‘asher) we have heard (shama’) and we have known (yada’), our fathers (‘ab) communicated to us in writing (la chaphar). These things were not concealed (lo’ kachad) from (min) their children (ben) from one generation to (dowr la) the next or to the last (‘acharown).

They recounted and recorded (chaphar) Yahowah’s (Yahowah) glorious love songs (tahilah), His power and influence (‘azuwz), and the wonderful and astounding things (pala’) which as a result of the relationship (‘asher) He has done and will do (‘asah).

He took a stand to establish (quwm) an enduring witness to this restoring testimony (‘eduwth) with (ba) Ya’aqob (Ya’aqob), bringing about (suwm) the Towrah (Towrah) with (ba) Yisra’el (Yisra’el) which to benefit the relationship (‘asher) He instructed and directed (tsawah) our fathers (‘ab) to make it known (la yada’) to their children (la ben). He did so for the express purpose (ma’an) that the next, as well as the last (‘acharown), generation (dowr) would come to know and understand (yada’).

These children (benym) will have children (yalad) who rise up and take a stand (quwm). They will proclaim this (saphar) to (la) their children (benym). And they will place (wa sym) in them (ba) the trust and reliance upon (kesel) God (‘elohym).

They will neither forget nor improperly respond to (wa lo’ shakach) God’s (‘el) work (ma’alal). And so the terms and conditions of His relationship agreement (mitswah) will save them (natsar). They will not be (wa lo’ hayah) like (ka) their fathers (‘ab), a generation (dowr) too stubborn to change (sarar), and a generation (wa dowr) who was defiantly rebellious and embittered (marah), whose hearts (leb) were not prepared (lo kuwn), and which were not nurtured by (wa lo’ ‘aman ‘eth) God’s (‘el) Spirit (ruwach).

The children (beny) of the Northern Kingdom (‘Ephraym) submitted, and they yielded to (nashaq) those who betrayed them (ramah). And they were overthrown and destroyed (chapak) in the day (ba yowm) the battle was waged (qarab). They did not observe (lo’ shamar) the Covenant Relationship (beryth) with God (‘elohym). And with regard to His Towrah | Teaching (wa ba Towrah), they resisted and refused (ma’an) to (la) walk (halak).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 78:3-10)

“Yahowah (Yahowah), make known to me (yada’) Your ways (derek). Teach me (lamad) Your path (‘orah). Direct me to walk (darak) by (ba) trusting and relying upon You (‘emeth). Teach me (lamad), because indeed (ky), You are (‘atah) the God (‘elohym) of my salvation (yasha’). With You (‘eth), I confidently anticipate deliverance (qawah) every day (kol yowm).

Yahowah (Yahowah), remember and invoke (zakar) Your mercy (racham) and Your steadfast love, even Your unfailing kindness (chesed). For indeed (ky) they (hem) are from (min) time immemorial (‘owlam). The guilt (chata’ah) of my youth (na’uwrym) and rebellion (pesha’) do not remember (lo’ zakar) as (ka) Your love for me is remembered (chesed zakar la ‘atah) on account of (ma’an) Your goodness (towb), Yahowah (Yahowah).

Yahowah (Yahowah), Almighty (‘al), is good, beneficial, and generous (towb) and always right (yashar), therefore (ken), He is the source of teaching and instruction, and He guides and directs (yarah) sinners (hata’) along the way (ba ha derek). He enables the way of (derek) the unpretentious and sincere who respond and answer His call (‘anaw) with His means to make rational decisions and resolve disputes (ba ha mishpat). He provides the information to teach (lamad) those who respond to (‘anaw) His way (derek).

All (kol) of the mannerisms and conduct (‘orah) of Yahowah (Yahowah) are merciful and beyond reproach (chesed), and they are trustworthy and reliable (‘emeth) for (la) those who are preserved by (natsar) His Covenant Relationship (beryth) and by His enduring Witness (‘edah). As a result (ma’an) of Your name (shem), Yahowah (), You will choose to forgive (wa salah) my rebellion (la ‘awon), because indeed (ky), He (huw’) is great (rab).

Hence (zeh), whatever (my) individual (‘ysh) respects and reveres (yare’) Yahowah (Yahowah), He will teach him (yarah) in (ba) the way (derek) he should choose (bachar). His soul (nepesh) in (ba) the most favorable, pleasing, and festive circumstances (towb) will dwell and endure (lyn), and his descendants (zera’) will inherit (yarash) the realm (‘erets).

A very close and intimate fellowship with (sowd) Yahowah (Yahowah) is certain for (la) those who respect and revere Him (yare’), because His Family-Oriented Covenant Relationship (beryth), He makes known to him (yada’).

My eyes (‘ayn) will continually be (tamyd) upon (‘el) Yahowah (Yahowah), because indeed (ky), He (huw’), Himself, will come (yatsa’) removing the restraints from (min resheth) my feet (regel), turning me around and preparing me (panah) to have mercy on me (‘el chanan) as a unique child (ky yahyd) and I am (wa ‘any) humbled (‘any).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 25:4-16)

“As a result of (min) Yahowah (Yahowah), the steps (mits’ad) of each individual (geber) are prepared and firmly established (kuwn). And (wa) His way (derek) is a pleasurable experience (chaphets). Indeed, though (ky) he falls (naphal), he is not cast down (lo’ tuwl). Indeed (ky), Yahowah () is sustaining, upholding him in His hand (samak yad).

Every day (kol yowm) He is merciful and compassionate (chanan), accompanying (lawah) His children (zera’), kneeling down in love to bless them (la barakah). And so (wa) I encourage you to consider, to act upon and engage in (‘asah) that which is good, beneficial and agreeable, productive and pleasing (towb) and as a result (wa) live (sakan) forever (la ‘owlam).

For indeed (ky), Yahowah (Yahowah) loves (‘ahab) good judgment, the process of evaluating evidence so as to render a just and fair verdict which resolves disputes (mishpat). So (wa) He will not abandon (lo’ ‘azab) those who steadfastly seek His protection (chasyd). Throughout eternity (la ‘owlam), they shall be watched over and cared for (shamar), but (wa) the offspring (zera’) of the wicked (rasa’) will be cut off (karat).

The upright who are correct, and thus vindicated (tsadyq), shall inherit (yarash) the realm (‘erets), and they shall live (wa sakan) forever (la ‘ad) within it (‘al).

The mouths (peh) of those who are right (tsadyq) passionately and boldly proclaim (hagah) wisdom, providing the capacity to understand (chakamah), and their tongue (lasown) speaks the Word (dabar) of good judgment and of justly resolving disputes (mishpat).

The Towrah Teaching (Towrah) of his God (‘elohym) is in his heart (ba leb), so his steps (‘ashur) will never waver (ma’ad).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 37:23-31)

That was beautiful. So now returning to His Towrah, we discover…

“There is one (‘echad) engraved prescription for living (chuqah) for all of you to approach (la), for the assembled community (qahal) and for (wa la) those from different races and places (ha ger). The clearly communicated and inscribed prescription (chuqah) for living together (guwr) is everlasting and eternal (‘owlam) and for (la) all of your generations (dowr).

It is exactly the same for you as for (ka ka) the foreigner and newcomer (ger). This was, this is, and this will always exist (hayah) as the means to approach (la) the presence (paneh) of Yahowah (). One (‘echad) Towrah (Towrah) and (wa) one (‘echad) means to think clearly and resolve disputes (mishpat) shall continually exist (hayah) for you to approach (la) and for newcomers from different races and places to approach (wa la ha ger), with you all (‘eth) living together (guwr).” (Bamidbar / In the Wilderness / Numbers 15:15-16)

Since Yahowah has clarified how we are to approach Him, the only thing which remains is to question what Sha’uwl said regarding replacing the means God has provided. As opposites, for Yahowah to be right, Paul must be wrong.



Twistianity

Appalling

…Contradicting God

7

Poneros | Worthless

Tossing Out the Trash...

The author of the letter to the Galatians began his world-altering treatise by changing his name and then boldly announcing...well, actually, lying…

“Paulos (Paulos – of Latin origin, meaning lowly and little while sounding similar to Apollo), an apostle (apostolos – a messenger who is set forth, a prepared delegate who is dispatched; from stello, one who is set, placed, and prepared, and apo, to be separate), not (ouk) from (apo – separating) men (anthropon), not even (oude) by the means of (dia – through, by, or on behalf of) man (anthropou), but to the contrary (alla – certainly and emphatically) on behalf of (dia – through, by, and by means of) Iesou Christou (ΙΝΥ ΧΡΥ – placeholders used by early Christian scribes for Iesou Christou or Chrestou) and (kai) God (ΘΥ – placeholder for Theos | God), Father (ΠΡΑ – placeholder for Patera | Father) of the (tou) one having roused and awakened (egeiromai – having caused to stand, raising; from agora – to assemble people for a public debate, to vote, or to conduct business with) him (autos) out of (ek – from) a lifeless corpse (nekros – death, a useless, futile, and vain carcass, an ineffective, powerless, and deceased cadaver, a dead body having breathed its last breath; from nekus – a corpse, carcass, or cadaver),…” (Galatians 1:1)

It is interesting, indeed telling, that this man born Sha’uwl would choose to rename himself, discarding his Hebrew heritage in the process. The language of God’s revelation was rejected to select a Latin nom de plume. Sha’uwl, now Paulos, was thereby estranging himself from Yahowah’s testimony while reflecting his allegiance to Rome – to mankind’s most powerful kingdom. There was no place on earth more overtly religious, more aggressively political, more savagely militaristic, or more covetous than Rome. At this moment, no other nation was as morally bankrupt or ruthlessly oppressive. And it would be Rome that would forever earn Yahowah’s wrath for destroying His Covenant Home in 70 CE and His city in 133 CE. This change in identity and shifting allegiance should have been sufficient to motivate readers to “sha’uwl – question him.”

The opening line affirms that Paulos, using his replacement moniker, wanted his audience to believe that he was “an Apostle” and, thus, either on the same footing as or in a league of his own above the supposed disciples. He said that he had been “apostolos – prepared and placed as a delegate and messenger” of “Iesou Christou.” It is also telling that the translators of this statement correctly transliterated Paulos and Apostolos and yet could not accurately render the Hebrew name Iesou was replacing.

It is interesting, of course, that, in the Gospels, the character attributed to Jesus said no such thing. The title “Apostle” was not given to Sha’uwl | Paulos by Yahowah either. In fact, rather than speaking for God, God said that Sha’uwl | Paulos spoke presumptuously and deceitfully for himself. This is proof. Sha’uwl sought status he did not deserve or earn.

Paulos’ claim that his message was unrelated to any man or men is untrue. He, by his own admission, was trained to be a rabbi. And this, like every letter Paul wrote, reads like the Talmud, which is a collection of rabbinical arguments regarding the Torah which are designed to empower the words of men above those inspired by God.

It should also be noted that if he had written “ha Mashyach Yahowsha’” rather than “Iesou Christou,” even that would have been wrong. While Yahowsha’ is the Hebrew name Iesou seeks to replace, the only Yahowsha’ known to Yahowah was Yahowsha’ ben Nuwn, Moseh’s successor. Further, ha Mashyach | the Messiah title belongs to Dowd | David, along with Melek | King, Ra’ah | Shepherd, and Ben ‘Elohym | Son of God.

Yahowah’s testimony in this regard is comprehensive, consistent, and incontrovertible. Therefore, someone familiar with the Towrah wa Naby’ would never have misappropriated a title that had been given by God to His Beloved. And perhaps that is why even the myth attributed to Jesus in the Gospels is never recorded referring to himself as the Messiah or Son of God – repeatedly and exclusively calling himself instead: “the son of man.” Unfortunately, that title is from Ezekiel, and he was a false prophet. So it’s not looking good for the myth.

Please pause a moment and consider the gravity of these realizations. Had Paul respected Dowd’s proper designation, rather than recasting and misrepresenting his titles – there would have been no Christians, and Jews might have actually understood who he was and what he was doing.

There were two names changed in Sha’uwl’s opening salvo, both of which were originally Hebrew, with one, Sha’uwl, becoming Roman and the other becoming Iesou Christou, and thus rendered as if the mythical man were Greek. With the first stroke of his pen, Paul has revealed his magnum opus: Replacement Theology. All things Yahowah had promised to Abraham, Yitschaq, and Ya’aqob, to Dowd, and to Yisra’el and Yahuwdym throughout His Towrah and Naby’ were snatched away from them and awarded to the edifice Paul was creating: the Christian Church.

When we cast both men under their given names, the story is clear. Sha’uwl was trying to hide from the prophecies Yahowah had spoken to condemn him. And in the process Dowd’s name was replaced while Yahowah’s name was abolished. The actual Messiah’s second life as our Savior was obscured. This is the disingenuous foundation of Christendom – a religion whose very name is predicated upon an obvious fraud. And it is all evident to see in the first line of Paulos’ first letter.

Truth was the initial casualty. Life was the second. Had Dowd not fulfilled his role as ha Pesach ‘Ayil | the Passover Lamb, death would be the end of life for all of us. There is no other means to immortality. This is one of many truths Paul obfuscated, damning Christians.

Dowd knew who he was and what he was doing. It is Christians who have misidentified and miscast him in the form of another to promote their religion rather than the relationship he sacrificed himself to achieve. It is their loss.

Whether you concur with Yahowah and Dowd | David on this matter at this juncture is your choice. My job is to tell you the truth, to lay all of the words God revealed face up on the table and explain what they mean. So long as you are not disparaging Yahowah and Yahuwdym, what you decide is your business.

If properly identifying the characters in Yahowah’s story, beginning with God, Himself, and coming to appreciate the roles each play, is important to you, then mark this page and set this book down for the moment. Go to YadaYah.com and open Volume One of Coming Home, A Voice, and begin reading until you are satisfied. Then, if you are still curious as to the nature of the ploy Paul is presenting, return to Twistianity for the sake of the billions still beguiled by his deceit.

Other than the two speeches recorded by the ‘Ebownym and pilfered by Matthew, inclusive of the Instruction on the Mount and perhaps the Olivet Discourse, we know very little of what Dowd said during the second of his three lives. The only eyewitness reporting on the fulfillment of Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym was composed one thousand years in advance in first person by the lone participant – Dowd – in Mizmowr | Psalms 22 and 88. Although, they are more than sufficient in their gruesome and glorious detail.

There is a reason we have the words of Yahowah’s prophets accurately preserved, in the language God and they spoke, and nothing from Iesou Christus similarly maintained. Yahowah told His prophets, beginning with Moseh, to write every word down so that His testimony would be accurately preserved for future generations. We are the beneficiaries of God’s relentless insistence on recording everything He said in writing.

And yet, Iesou Christus (now called “Jesus Christ”), unlike the great liberator, Moseh | Moses, the articulate judge, Shamuw’el | Samuel, the brilliant lyricist Dowd | David, or any of the prophets such as Yasha’yah | Isaiah, Yirmayah | Jerimiah, and Zakaryah | Zachariah, did not scribe a single word. He did not even ask his supposed disciples to commit anything he said to writing.

There is only the remotest and most tortured of possibilities that one of them – John – may have done so on his own initiative. But even then, it would have been six decades later when he would have been ninety years old and hobbling around in Ephesus – too far removed in time and place to be remotely credible. And the evidence in favor of this exceedingly unlikely happenstance is triple hearsay clothed in incredulous religious fables.

We can bemoan this reality, but we cannot deny it. So perhaps we should seek to understand it. And in this regard, the answer is staring us in the face. Yahowah inspired His prophets to speak to us and His Son, our Messiah, Dowd, to act on our behalf. Yahowah’s words led to the Zarowa’s lives and lyrics.

Dowd was not here to provide additional prophecy or commentary, but instead to fulfill what he and other prophets had already written about him. We will find everything we need to know about the role and result of the Passover Lamb scribed in the Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr – notably in Qara’ / Called Out / Leviticus and Yasha’yah / Yahowah Liberates and Saves / Isaiah, along with the Lamb’s eyewitness accounts in the 22nd and 88th Mizmowr / Psalms.

While that is a lot to digest, I would like to move on to other, albeit related, matters. Dowd spoke for himself and for Yahowah, but against religion. He did not predict the arrival of another nor sponsor a new faith. And since Dowd’s and Yahowah’s words are available to us in the language they conveyed them, we already know what Dowd would have said if asked about any of these things.

Further, for Sha’uwl | Paul to have claimed to have spoken for his fabled Iesou Christus, he would have had to have cited what he is alleged to have said in the Gospels. However, there isn’t a single accurate citation from Iesou Christus to be found anywhere within Paul’s fourteen letters. The closest he comes is to a misquote of his role as the Passover Lamb and its association with the Covenant – which by itself invalidates the imposter’s dependence on Replacement Theology. Any association between Passover and the Covenant completely obliterates Paul’s entire proposition.

To claim to speak for someone, to assert to have been chosen to represent them, and to never accurately quote anything that individual had to say is disrespectful and disingenuous. Simply stated: the self-proclaimed and wholly unsubstantiated assertion that Sha’uwl | Paul was chosen to speak for anyone other than himself, particularly Yahowah and His Messiah, is a lie. It is as obvious and simple as that. To deny this reality is to be either ignorant or irrational – or both. But I suppose that is why it takes “faith.”

I wonder if Christians have ever considered why Paul’s new name appeared first in his letter and Yahowah’s name was not mentioned. As a rabbinical student, Paul would have both known it and have been taught to avoid it. But without it, there is a zero percent chance that he spoke for Yahowah. Moreover, Sha’uwl would have known that everyone, without exception, inspired by Yahowah continually integrates Yahowah’s name throughout their testimony and never mentions any other name for God. But Sha’uwl | Paul did not, which means that his fraud was deliberate.

By failing to incorporate Yahowah’s name, like the rabbis after him, Paul conclusively demonstrated for all those familiar with the Towrah’s test for inspiration, that he was not a prophet and did not speak for God. The penalty is death. And while we have been over this before, it bears repeating…

“With absolute certainty (‘ak), the person who proclaims a message on behalf of a deity (ha naby’) who deliberately oversteps their bounds and speaks arrogantly and presumptuously, defiantly concocting a rebellious scheme (‘asher zyd) for the express purpose of conveying words (la dabar dabar) under My reputation and designation (ba shem ‘any) which (‘asher ‘eth) I have not expressly appointed, taught, authorized, nor directed him (lo’ tsawah huw’) to (la) convey (dabar), or (wa) who (‘asher) speaks (dabar) in the name (ba shem) of other and additional (‘acher) gods (‘elohym), then (wa) that prophet (ha naby’ ha huw’) is actually deadly (muwth). (Dabarym 18:20)

And if you say (wa ky ‘amar) using your best judgment (ba lebab ‘atah), ‘How (‘eykah) can we actually recognize and consistently know (yada’) the statements which (‘eth ha dabar ‘asher) Yahowah (Yahowah – transliterated as guided by His towrah | instructions on His hayah | existence and His role in our shalowm | reconciliation as ‘elowah | Almighty God), Himself (huw’), has not spoken (lo’ dabar huw’)?’ (Dabarym 18:21)

When a prophet speaks (‘asher dabar ha naby’) in the reputation and designation (ba shem) of Yahowah (YaHoWaH), and the matter discussed (ha dabar) has not occurred (lo’ hayah) or (wa) does not come to be (lo’ bow’), this is a message (huw’ ha dabar) that (‘asher) Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of YaHoWaH, our ‘elowah | God as directed in His ToWRaH | teaching regarding His HaYaH | existence and our ShaLoWM | restoration) has not spoken to him (lo’ dabar huw’). Such a prophet (naby’) has stated it (dabar huw’) arrogantly, presumptively, and independently of his own accord (ba zadown). You should not revere or respect him for having conspired to incite an alienating rebellion (lo’ guwr min huw’).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:22)

It is as if this was written explicitly to warn the world, especially Yisra’el, about Sha’uwl | Paul. Unlike Paul, neither Akiba nor Maimonides ventured into historical narratives or prophecy. And while Muhammad did both, he spoke of “Allah,” not the God of the Towrah. Moreover, he was so pathetic, we don’t need any help rejecting him.

And of course, Yahowah’s Test for inspiration, one Paul failed as miserably as would Muhammad after him, does not stand alone. Before it, we find Yahowah repudiating religion…

“Indeed, when (ky) you come upon (‘atah bow’ ‘el – you enter into, are led and return to, and are included within) the land which, for the benefit of the relationship (‘asher), Yahowah, your God (Yahowah ‘elohym ‘atah), is giving (nathan – is bestowing and entrusting) to you (la ‘atah), you should not accept, learn, teach, or imitate (lo’ lamad – you should not instruct, be trained in, or become accustomed to), such that you act upon and engage in (la ‘asah – you effect, attend to, commit, celebrate, profit from, bring about, ordain, institute, or perform), any semblance (ka – any derivative or similitude) of the disgusting religious rites and political practices (tow’ebah – abhorrent ceremonies, detestable idolatrous mythologies, repulsive and loathsome rituals, abominable festivals) of the Gentiles (ha gowym ha hem – of the people from different races, customs, and places). (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:9)

There shall not be found (lo’ matsa’) among you (ba ‘atah) one causing his son or daughter to pass through and perish (‘abar ben huw’ wa bath huw’ – threatening them with entering a hellish inferno) in flames (ba ha ‘esh), someone predicting the future based upon pagan religious notions as a false prophet or conspiratorialist (qasam qasam), a person who obscures the truth and believes in spiritualism (wa ‘anan), or one who tempts and charms others (wa nachash), an individual who entices and seduces people to worship and pray (wa kashaph), (Dabarym 18:10) one who joins in and binds together by forming political or religious alliances (wa chabar cheber), one who is obsessed with ghosts, makes requests of saints, or speaks on behalf of dead souls (sha’al ‘owb), a con man who beguiles in association with demonic spirits (yida’ony), or one who causes the premature death of others in association with a destructive plague (wa darash ‘el ha muwth). (Dabarym 18:11) For indeed (ky), all who engage in and act upon (kol ‘asah) these things (‘eleh) are an abomination, considered abhorrent and detestable (tow’ebah) to Yahowah (YaHoWaH). And so as a consequence of this repulsive religious excrement and filthy idolatrous crap (wa ba galal tow’ebah ha ‘eleh), Yahowah (YaHoWaH), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), will drive them out, dispossess them, and then destroy them (yarash ‘eth hem) away from your presence (min paneh ‘atah).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:12)

This warning is directed at the most pervasive and destructive gentile religion in human history – Pauline Christianity. Avoid it like the plague that it has become.

It was then that Yahowah revealed that we can be made right with Him. And the means to this ideal state of affairs is through Dowd. And that is why God shared this amazing prophecy regarding His Son and our Messiah and Savior…

“You can actually become completely and continually perfected by being consistently right, becoming acceptable (tamym hayah) with (‘im) Yahowah (YaHoWaH – an accurate presentation of the name of ‘elowah | God as guided by His towrah | instructions regarding His hayah | existence), your God (‘elohym ‘atah). (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:13)

By comparison (ky), these people from different races and places (ha gowym ha ‘el leh – the gentiles and those from other nations), who you shall dispossess and remove (‘asher ‘atah yarash – who, for the benefit of the relationship, you will distance yourself from and disassociate with), they listen to (‘eth hem shama’ ‘el) false prophets who obscure the truth with myths (‘anan – spellbinders, spiritualists, and politicians blowing smoke, those who venerate saints and ancestors, often concealing their actual motives while clouding the issue and acting covertly) and believe in antiquated religious notions and invalid opinion makers (wa qasam – and respond to cultural and conspiratorial suggestions, forming invalid conclusions based upon ancestry).

But as for you (wa ‘atah), this is not the correct way (lo’ ken) Yahowah (YaHoWaH), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), has offered to you for you to approach (nathan la ‘atah). (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:14)

A prophet (naby’ – a person who is inspired by Yahowah, who communicates and records the testimony of God, and who is accurate regarding past and future events) from among your midst (min qereb ‘atah), from your brethren (min ‘ach ‘atah – related to you), similar to me (kamow ‘any – in accord with me and who can be compared to me), Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), will raise up and position to take a stand which establishes and affirms you (quwm la ‘atah – He will validate and confirm, elevating the status to encourage and restore you, enabling you to approach and rise). To him, I want you to actually and continually listen (‘el huw’ shama’). (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:15)

This is consistent with everything (ka kol) which (‘asher) you requested while questioning (sha’al min ‘im) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), in Choreb (ba Choreb) during the day of the assembly (ba yowm ha qahal), when you said (la ‘amar – requesting), ‘Never again let me hear (lo’ yasaph la shama’ ‘eth) the voice (‘eth qowl) of Yahowah (YaHoWaH), my God (‘elohym ‘any). Nor let me see and witness (wa lo’ ra’ah) this intense fire (‘eth ha ‘esh ha gadowl ha zo’th) anymore (‘owd), lest I die (wa lo’ muwth).’ (Dabarym 18:16) Therefore (wa), Yahowah (YaHoWaH) said to me (‘amar ‘el ‘any), ‘That is actually better, and they have appropriately conveyed their preference (yatab ‘asher dabar – they have responded as expected under the circumstances, communicating what they want regarding the relationship and it is acceptable, even beneficial for such communication). (Dabarym 18:17)

I will raise up and establish (quwm – I will set up and confirm) a prophet (naby’ – a man I can inspire to accurately convey past and future events) for them (la hem) from among their brothers (min qereb ‘achy hem) similar to you (kemow ‘atah). And I will put (wa nathan) My words (dabarym ‘any – My message and testimony) in his mouth (ba peh huw’) and he will convey to them (wa dabar ‘el hem) everything which, for the benefit of the relationship (‘eth kol ‘asher), I instruct him (tsawah huw’). (Dabarym 18:18)

And it shall come to be (wa hayah) that an individual who (ha ‘iysh ‘asher) will not listen (lo’ shama’) to My words (‘el dabarym ‘any – My testimony), which he shall declare (‘asher dabar – which he will share to show the way to the benefits of the relationship and to get the most enjoyment out of life) in My name (ba shem ‘any), I, Myself, will seek it of him and hold him accountable for it, requiring it of him (‘anoky darash min ‘im huw’ – I will hold him responsible after conducting an investigation to see if he can present it).’” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:19)

Thank you Yahowah for making this so easy for us. But I must apologize for how poorly we have responded. You asked us not to be religious, and to be right with You instead. Then when Your people complained that they were uncomfortable in Your presence, You presented the ideal solution – Your beloved Son, Dowd. I am sorry that it has taken us so long to fully appreciate everything you have done for us. So it is long past time that we eradicate the viral plagues wrought by the likes of Paul, Akiba, and Muhammad so that, free of them, Your people might return to You.

It gets worse for the author of the Christian New Testament because by excluding Yahowah’s name from his letters and speeches, Sha’uwl | Paul committed the lone unforgivable crime against God and man. Recorded in the Third Statement on the First Tablet, the negation of Yahowah’s name is unforgivable – a crime for which there is no redemption. Having renounced it, and doing this so publicly and egregiously, we can be assured that Sha’uwl | Paul will endure an eternity in She’owl | Hell with ha Satan | the Adversary who inspired him.

While it is small barley compared to the mountain of garbage we have just considered, had Paulos been correct about Dowd being ha Mashyach in his letter, the pseudonym and title are reversed. And this is no “paulos – small” mistake. With “Iesou Christou,” the errant name and erroneous title are reversed, giving the false impression that the individual’s name was “Jesus Christ.” More on this in a moment.

Turning to the final mistake of Paul’s initial sentence, God did not die. God cannot die. He did not fall asleep, either. And with absolute certainty, we know that Dowd’s basar | corporeal body was destroyed after having served its purpose, consistent with the Towrah’s instructions. Therefore, his corpse was not resurrected. All of this is a lie, wholly inconsistent with Yahowah’s teaching and prophecy on the subject of the Passover Lamb.

By being tsadaq | right with Yahowah, Dowd represented the perfect Pesach ‘Ayil. Moments before His physical body was sacrificed on our behalf as the Pesach lamb, Yahowah’s Spirit left Him, something Dowd confirmed when he cried out, “My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?” (Mizmowr 22) And then his nepesh | soul, the very expression and essence of his life carried the guilt of the Covenant Family into She’owl. After which, Dowd’s soul was reunited with Yahowah’s Spirit as the Son reentered his Father’s Home.

The reason he made this declarative statement was twofold. First, he wanted to direct our attention to the lyrics he wrote in his own 22nd Mizmowr | Psalm so that we might understand what was occurring. As a prophet, Dowd had already seen what he would endure and, as the lone eyewitness, wrote about his fulfillment of Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children.

The second reason that Dowd made this declaration is because it completely undermines the religion that would be used to mischaracterize him and misconstrue his sacrifice. Based upon this declaration, God did not die for anyone’s sins. Further, “Jesus Christ” never existed which would preclude the notion that he was God. With Dowd’s parting statement, there is nothing left of Christianity.

In his own words, as they were pronounced one thousand years in advance by the Messiah and Son of God, Dowd’s corporeal and beaten body was left on a Roman torture stake to die as the Passover Lamb. Please pause once again to consider the implications.

He sacrificed his body to nurture the family and promote eternal life. Had the Pesach ‘Ayil not been offered on this occasion in concert with the Towrah’s instructions, we would have been deprived of the opportunity to live. Yahowah had made this promise to Abraham when He was affirming the Covenant, saying that He would provide the ‘Ayil | Lamb.

This, of course, negates the foundation of Replacement Theology. According to Paul, Jews were condemned by his god because “they killed Jesus.” And while it was Rome, not Jews, who slew the Lamb, had the Jews been responsible for leading the Passover Lamb to the sacrifice, the world should be applauding them not hounding them.

Therefore, we can be assured that the Christian mythology underlying Replacement Theology is invalid. God could not be angry with His people for doing what He intended. Just because men are capricious and unreliable, does not mean that God turned away from Yisra’el, withdrawing every promise He had made on their behalf. He did not transfer these sworn oaths to the people who murdered the Lamb of God either – the Romans who became the Roman Catholic Church. The case for Christendom has quickly unraveled.

In accordance with the Towrah, the physical body of the Passover Lamb was offered so that we might live. His soul, however, did not die. It descended into She’owl, the place of separation from God, on the Miqra’ of Matsah, known as UnYeasted Bread, to remove the fungus of religious and political rebellion from our souls. It was the most horrid experience imaginable, and thus hardly a snooze.

The consequence of ignoring Pesach and Matsah, which is precisely what Paul did in his opening declaration, is life and death, salvation and damnation. Without Passover, we remain mortal. Without Matsah, we retain our faults. So while Bikuwrym | Firstborn Children warrants our attention, without Pesach and Matsah, there isn’t anything to celebrate.

Should you credit Paul with an indirect mention of the Passover Lamb, in that he acknowledged there was a “corpse,” there is something far worse than failing to capitalize on Pesach. It is why Pesach and Matsah are one contiguous event, one inseparable from the other. To benefit from Passover while ignoring UnYeasted Bread is to become eternally separated from God. He calls this outcome She’owl | Hell. It is synonymous with Sha’uwl | Paul because he has directed more souls there than any other.

There are deceptions big and small woven into the deceiver’s claim that “God, Father of the one having roused and awakened him out of a lifeless corpse (nekros – death, a useless, futile, and vain carcass, an ineffective, powerless, and deceased cadaver, a dead body having breathed its last breath; from nekus – a corpse, carcass, or cadaver).”

God did not “rouse” His beloved Son. The body of the Passover Lamb never comes back to life. The Pesach ‘Ayil restores our lives, not his own. There would have been no purpose to the sacrifice if Dowd’s body had been reanimated, rising from the dead.

Assuring that the observant individual would never make this mistake, Yahowah told us to incinerate the inedible portions of the Pesach ‘Ayil after being nourished by the meal. Therefore, the same evening the Messiah Dowd’s body served as the Lamb, his corpse was destroyed, incinerated by Yahowah’s light. (Shemowth / Names / Exodus 12:10) There could not have been a bodily resurrection because there was no longer a body.

For those who may protest, saying that the alleged disciples saw him, let’s keep it real. Even in the myths attributed to the misnomer Jesus, his mother and the women in his life mistook him for a gardener. The fellows on the road to Emmaus, who had been in Yaruwshalaim as these events were transpiring, were clueless as to who he was when he approached them later that day (Luke 24:13-18). And the same evening with his supposed followers, he not only passed through a wall – something a physical body cannot accomplish – even they did not recognize him. (John 20:19)

When his soul reunited with his Father’s Ruwach, Dowd was no longer using the tortured body that had served its purpose. If he made any appearance in our physical world, it would have been as the Covenant’s children will one day do, by transferring a small amount of his spiritual energy into matter as a result of Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children and being enriched and empowered by his Father.

That is a whole lot better than returning in the body the Romans had mutilated and distorted when they tortured him. It is why I am so disgusted, as is God, by the Christian propensity to worship “Jesus Christ” as a dead god on a stick and then claim that his ravaged body was resurrected.

Physical bodies are burdensome and limiting. They degrade over time. With a body, we cannot leave this solar system, much less explore the universe or enter heaven. Bodily resurrection is physically impossible and totally counterproductive. The miracle is a result of Chag Matsah, whereby the perfected become Yahowah’s children, empowered, enriched, and enlightened.

During those three days, Dowd’s regenerated body served as the Passover Lamb, and what was left of it after enduring Roman torture was incinerated, ceasing to exist, in harmony with the Towrah’s instructions. His soul entered She’owl on Matsah to unleaven souls. Then on the Miqra’ of Bikuwrym, known as Firstborn Children, the Messiah’s soul was reunited with the Set-Apart Spirit, becoming the firstborn of the Covenant. Thereby, the Towrah’s promise to make us immortal, to perfect and adopt us, was fulfilled.

Then as further evidence that a corpse was not reanimated or resurrected as Paul has written, the only common denominator amongst the three Gospel accounts was that no one recognized him.

In his opening statement, Paul got everything wrong: his name, his title, his status, his sponsor, his inspiration, Dowd’s name and title, Yahowah’s name, the relationship between Yahowah and His Son, all while promoting the myth that God died, fell asleep on the job, and was bodily resurrected from a corpse. It was not an auspicious beginning.

God, Himself, proves that each of the explanations I have laid before you is valid. In due time, we will consider Yahowah’s position on them because, without continually sharing God’s view, this book fails to live up to its potential. My goal is not to leave Christians floundering, but instead to replace the lies Paul has sown with the truth. I will take away nothing that is worthwhile, but for those who are receptive, I will provide you with a clear and correct path to God.

In this regard, Sha’uwl | Paul did not say, at least in his opening line, that he was speaking for “God, the Father.” That subtlety is lost on most Christians who have replaced Yahowah with their “Lord Jesus Christ,” in effect focusing on a myth as opposed to God.

This issue isn’t insignificant. Even if we were to play along and pretend there was a Jesus Christ, he could not have been equivalent to God. Even by the myth’s own admission, he is cited saying, “The Father is greater than I am.” (John 14:28)

All of God cannot fit into a human form, and the undiminished presence of God would consume our planet. This known, there is the possibility of a diminished manifestation of God. This is explained by Einstein’s famous equation E=mc². Since Yahowah is Spirit and describes Himself as Light, He is energy. Men are corporeal and thus matter. Einstein’s formula reveals that energy and matter are exactly the same thing, but they are not equivalent. He proved that matter is a substantially diminished form of energy.

If the mythical Jesus was the equivalent of Yahowah, what’s known as the “Lord’s” prayer (Matthew 6:9) becomes nonsensical, as it would have Jesus saying: “Pray to Me who is not in heaven, set apart is My name, My kingdom come, My will be done in earth as in heaven…” Recognizing that they were not the same, it is curious that Paul saw himself representing the mythical representative.

The Greek word that we transliterate “Apostle,” apostollo, when used correctly is important. It means “to be set apart, prepared, and equipped.” While Paulos was the furthest thing from this, even today far too many individuals go off pretending to be witnesses without first studying the Torah and Prophets. As a result, those who are inadequately and improperly enlightened do more harm than good.

Paul was also missing from what would have been the most important event recorded in Acts had it been true – the fulfillment of the fourth Invitation to be Called Out of Seven Shabats (what Christians have errantly named “Pentecost | Fifty”). Those fooled into believing that during the fourth Miqra’, the supposed disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1-4), have a number of issues to overcome. First, Shabuw’ah is a Harvest, and there was none on this day. Second, those harvested must previously have benefited from the fulfillment of the first three Miqra’ey – all of which the New Testament denies. And third, the wheat harvest of Shabuw’ah is in our future, not our past. It will occur on May 22, 2026 – seven years prior to Dowd’s return with Yahowah.

Even in the Gospel fables, there were twelve disciples chosen by Jesus. Not one was religious, as was the case with Paul. They were said to have accompanied him and witnessed his every word and deed. And that is why they were referred to them as “disciples,” meaning “those who learn.” But from this introduction, as well as from the introductions Paulos wrote to the Corinthians, Romans, Colossians, and Ephesians, we know that Sha’uwl | Paul was too full of himself to be a “learner,” so he passed on the “Disciple” moniker altogether. It was beneath his ego. He would instead be the Teacher.

Still, Paul coveted a title that did not belong to him, by his craving to be seen as important and credible, he arrogantly and presumptuously overstepped his bounds. Moreover, he knew that every word of what he had written was a lie – one he would repeat many times.

One of the reasons we know that Paulos intended to convey “Apostle” as a title, rather than use apostolos as a descriptive term, is that, in his letters to Rome and Corinth, he writes “Paulos, called an Apostle.” The men and women he fooled called him by the title he craved.

Since Paul claimed to speak for God, it is our responsibility to consider his statements in light of the Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 13 and 18 tests established by God to evaluate the legitimacy and consequence of such assertions. While we will delve into the first of these in future chapters, suffice it to say for now, Yahowah revealed that the best way to recognize who is or isn’t speaking for Him is to recognize what He, Himself, has previously conveyed. To accomplish this, we must closely examine and carefully consider His Towrah – which is the approach we have used thus far.

Yahowah is clear, revealing that no one is authorized to add to or subtract from His Towrah. So if we witness the Towrah’s role in our lives being diminished by anyone, or if we find a writer adding something new, like a new covenant, we should be careful because such a person isn’t speaking for God.

In Dabarym 13, Yahowah reveals that if the prophet stands up and establishes himself, as Paulos has done, he is a false prophet. If he claims to have performed miracles, as Paulos will do, he is a false prophet. If he encourages his audience to go after other gods by other names, like the Roman Gratia or Greek Charis, whom Paulos sponsored, even the Iesous Christus, he is a false prophet. If he promotes religious worship, which is the result of Paulos’ letters, he is a false prophet. If his writings fail to affirm his love and respect for Yahowah, then he does not know Him. And that is a problem for Paulos because he implies that Yahowah is incompetent, impotent, and worse.

In addition, a man is a false prophet if he encourages anyone to disregard the terms and conditions of the Beryth or Miqra’ey, which comprise Yahowah’s Way. And of such false prophets, God says that they are in opposition to Him, both ruinous and deadly, so we should completely remove their disagreeable, displeasing, and evil corruptions from our midst.

Then in Dabarym 18, as we are now aware, Yahowah delineated the six signs of false prophets: they claim to speak for Him, they are arrogant, overstepping their bounds, their words are inconsistent with the Torah’s instructions, they recite the names of foreign gods, their historical presentations are inaccurate, and their prophetic promises fail to materialize. Sha’uwl | Paul failed every codicil of this test too.

In his opening salvo, Paul claimed that he did not represent any man or any human institution, and that would of course include the ekklesia, the Greek term which has been co-opted to represent the Christian Church. And that would have made Sha’uwl a freelance operator and an independent contractor had he not contradicted himself and referred to the ekklesia as his own.

The flip side of this admission is also problematic. If Sha’uwl | Paul did not write on behalf of what he learned from religious teachers in rabbinical school, then his ubiquitous references to the “nomos” must denote the Towrah as opposed to the Talmud. This being the case, the principal methodology used by those who are Torah observant, to reconcile Paul’s epistles with Yahowah’s Word, was torn asunder by his opening statement. The facts are evident and undeniable. There is no getting around the realization that the “nomos” is an object of scorn and ridicule in this epistle. And at no time does Sha’uwl associate the “nomos” with Rabbinic Law by citing Talmudic sources. Not once – ever. On the contrary, his examples and citations are all from the Torah, clearly identifying the document he is assailing.

Also convicting, if Paulos was speaking for Iesous, why didn’t he quote him? If he was Yahowah’s messenger, why is Yahowah’s Word discounted and never cited accurately? Why, if Paul was speaking for God, is his most repeated line, “But I Paulos say...” If Sha’uwl was Yahowah’s apostle, why do his letters contradict God?

Sha’uwl / Paulos / Paul proved that he was allergic to the truth, and therefore incongruent with Yahowah by his insistence that the Towrah | Teaching and Guidance was a set of binding laws and strict rules. This was the position held by the religious rulers of the day – the Pharisees – whom Yahowah’s prophets rebuked and refuted. So whether he was attacking the Oral Laws of the rabbis or the Torah, itself, his conclusions were all wrong – especially since he has told us that he isn’t speaking based upon what he learned while training to be a rabbi.

Based upon his opening stanza, Paul has positioned himself as an authority on God, as someone who spoke for God, but not ostensibly as the founder of a religion – albeit that is what he has become. His greeting displays neither religious qualifications nor an overt religious agenda. In fact, Sha’uwl only used the word religion twice, and both times it was called “the Jews’ religion.” (Galatians 1:13-14) That is a sobering thought if you are a “Christian.”

Paul would, however, contradict himself and establish all of the trappings for a new religion, replete with a paid and empowered clergy and a plethora of personal edicts – all of which he said had to be obeyed. Ironic for a man so steadfast against what he claimed were God’s rules. And he slyly perverted the Towrah and Prophets to make his assertions appear both reasonable and divine. (Read 1 Timothy 5:17-18, 1 Corinthians 9:1-11, and then 16:1-3 for evidence of this.)

I am aware that Christians have been led to believe that “Jesus Christ was the founder of the religion of Christianity,” and that “Paul spoke for him,” but those conclusions aren’t supportable. The institution of Christianity is founded on Paul’s writings, and Jesus Christ never existed. Moreover, the character presented in the Gospels was Torah observant. His teachings were derived from the Torah. Therefore, to follow the fable, the devotee would have to become Towrah-observant. And in so doing, he or she would cease to be a Christian.

To his credit, or shame, Sha’uwl was telling the truth up to a point. He wasn’t entirely inspired by men. In his second letter to the Corinthians, as we have already read, he claimed to be demon-possessed, guided and controlled by one of Satan’s messengers. But that is not to say that everything Paulos wrote was inaccurate. He correctly referred to God as the Father. But this statement of fact in a sea of lies only serves to make his deceptions appear credible.

For example, far too many people have been beguiled into believing that everything the Adversary inspires someone to say must be untrue. They even believe that in a satanic religion, Satan is worshiped overtly under his name and true identity. But this is not how he or his advocates deceive, and this is not what the Devil is trying to achieve. In actuality, Satan usurps Yahowah’s credibility to fool the unsuspecting to worship him, not as the Adversary, but as if he were God. Satan wants to be known by the title Yahowah gave him: “Lord.” It elicits bowing, control, servitude, ownership, and worship.

Continuing to expose Paul’s errant opening statement, it was the Ruwach Qodesh | Set-Apart Spirit who enabled the fulfillment of Bikuwrym while Dowd’s Father awaited His Son’s return. She (Ruwach is feminine) retrieved the Messiah’s nepesh | soul from She’owl, enveloping his consciousness in the embrace of Her loving, protective, and loving Maternal nature. And it was the Ruwach who brought Her Son Home to Yahowah.

By contrast, however, since nekros is based upon nekus, meaning “corpse,” the conclusion of Sha’uwl’s statement actually reads as I have rendered it: “and God, Father of the one having roused and awakened, raising him out of being a lifeless corpse (nekros – death, a useless, futile, and vain carcass, an ineffective, powerless, and deceased cadaver, a dead body having breathed its last breath).” While “raising Him from the dead” sounds familiar to Christian ears, such was not the case. Only Dowd’s basar | physical body suffered the indignity of death, not his soul nor the Set-Apart Spirit. Further, he was not asleep and his corpse had been destroyed and thus did not rise.

This isn’t a small technical point. Passover is the door to Heaven and to eternal life. UnYeasted Bread serves as the means to perfect us by removing our guilt. Firstborn Children is the result, enabling our incorporation into our Heavenly Father’s Covenant family where we are enriched and empowered. If the returning Messiah didn’t enable these promises, if he slept on the job, if he was ineffective, or worse dead, then we all die estranged from God.

And while Passover is essential, UnYeasted Bread is vastly more important. That is why Paul’s premise of suggesting that nothing happened on Matsah, and that his Jesus slept through the unmentioned Shabat, or was dead at the time, completely negates Yahowah’s plan of reconciliation.

Moreover, Firstborn Children is symbolic of our souls being reborn Spiritually into our Heavenly Father’s Family – not of us retaining our flawed, limiting, and decaying physicality. This is one of several reasons that the Towrah teaches the following regarding the body of the Passover Lamb: “And do not leave it until morning, and what remains of it before morning, you are to burn with fire.” (Shemowth / Names / Exodus 12:10)

Moving on to the deployment of the placeholders, they are often overlooked. Not one Christian in a million knows of their existence. And yet four of the most common names and titles in Christendom were represented by them in this greeting. ΙΝΥ represents “Iesou,” which became “Jesus” in the 17th century after the invention of the letter “J.” ΧΡΥ was used to convey either “Christou | Drugged or Chrestou | Useful Implement,” not “ha Mashyach | the Messiah.” ΘΥ was used by early Christian scribes to write “Theos | God,” not “‘el or ‘elohym | the Almighty,” in Hebrew. And Yahowah’s favorite title, “‘ab | Father,” based upon the first word comprised of the first two letters in the Hebrew lexicon and alphabet, was misrepresented by ΠΡΑ, written Patera in Greek. Patera, transliterated as Papa in Latin, then became Pope, with men attempting to usurp Yahowah’s favorite title so that they could use it to rule over men as if wielding God’s authority.

Examples of placeholders not used in this particular statement, but ubiquitous throughout the rest of the Greek texts, and universally found in every 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and early 4th-century manuscript, direct us to the Greek interpretations of “spirit,” “lord,” “mother” and “son,” when used in reference to the Christian god.

While codices dating to the first three centuries vary considerably among themselves and differ substantially from those composed after the influence of General Constantine and his publicist, Bishop Eusebius, the use of placeholders is the lone exception to scribal variation among the early manuscripts. These Greek symbols for the Christian deification of “Jesus Christ,” the “Lord God,” and “Son” are universally found on every page of every extant codex written within 300 years of the misappropriation of Dowd’s mission to fulfill Chag Matsah. Nevertheless, they are universally ignored by Christian translators, writers, and preachers. Therefore, I am including them here in the text because it is incumbent upon us to expose and condemn 1,700 years of religious tampering and corruption.

The very fact that these placeholders are found on all of the manuscripts unearthed prior to the mid-4th century tells us that it wasn’t a regional or scribal choice. Instead, they convey something both profoundly important and equally misguided because the deliberate intent throughout the oldest manuscripts was to deify “Jesus Christ,” the “Lord God,” and “Son.” Big mistake.

Therefore, the only constant among the earliest witnesses to the Christian New Testament is the one thing every translator has ignored. There isn’t even a footnote in any of the English translations indicating that these divine placeholders were universally depicted in all of the oldest manuscripts, including the codices, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. As a result, Christians do not know that these symbols existed, much less that they were later replaced by translators substituting the very names and titles which would have been written out by the original authors had they been intended.

Kappa Sigma and Kappa Upsilon, in capital letters with a line over them, were used in place of Yahowah’s name when citing a Towrah text in which it was included. This placeholder was also used with regard to the Christian misnomer, “Jesus.” Both uses are problematic because the placeholders were based upon Kurios or Kyrios, the Greek word for “Lord” which, according to God, is Satan’s title.

This obvious conclusion has been reaffirmed recently by the publication of early Septuagint manuscripts. In them, we find a transition from writing Yahowah’s name in paleo-Hebrew, in the midst of the Greek text throughout the 1st and 2nd centuries, to using the symbolism of Kappa Sigma to represent Yahowah’s name beginning in the 3rd century – after the emergence of Christianity. It is, therefore, likely that the Placeholders ΚΣ and ΚΥ were initially used to designate Yahowah’s name in a language whose alphabet could not accurately replicate its pronunciation.

Also, by finding “Yahowah” written in paleo-Hebrew in the oldest Greek translations of the Hebrew Towrah and Prophets, especially in those dating to the 1st and 2nd centuries BCE and into the first two centuries CE, we have an interesting affirmation that my initial rationale regarding the placeholders was accurate. Yahowah’s name could not be accurately transliterated using the Greek alphabet so they didn’t try. To avoid a mispronunciation, the Hebrew alphabet was used. Then after Hebrew became less familiar, due in large part to the Romans murdering, enslaving, and exiling most Jews, Greek symbolism was substituted.

Moving on, the placeholders Iota Epsilon (ΙΕ), Iota Nu (ΙΝ), Iota Sigma (ΙΣ), and Iota Upsilon (ΙΥ) were used to convey the religion’s intent to deify Iesou, Iesous, or Iesoun, which became “Jesus” with the invention of the letter “J” in the early 17th century CE. Rather than attempting to transliterate something akin to “Yahowsha’” in Greek, they introduced a moniker to suit Greek sensibilities and grammar.

And that means there is very little basis for the 17th-century corruption written as “Jesus.” Beyond the fact that there was no “J” sound or letter in English prior to the 17th century, and never in the Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, or Latin languages, “Jesus” is not an accurate transliteration of Iesou, Iesous, or Iesoun – which were conceived as a result of Greek gender and grammar rules. But most importantly, none of these names was ever written in the original Greek texts – not once, not ever. It is therefore inappropriate to transliterate something (to reproduce the pronunciation in the alphabet of a different language) which is not actually present. So the name “Jesus” is a fraud purposely promoted by religious leaders desirous of deifying their creation.

The title “ha Mashyach | the Messiah” cannot be found on the imaginary lips of the unnamed Christian god-man. Throughout the Gospels, he never referred to himself as such. It is a title Yahowah ascribed and appointed to Dowd | David, by pronouncing and orchestrating his anointing on three occasions. By contrast, the Christian myth was never anointed.

Therefore, the placeholders represented by Chi Rho (ΧΡ), Chi Rho Sigma (ΧΡΣ), Chi Sigma (ΧΣ), Chi Upsilon (ΧΥ), Chi Rho Upsilon (ΧΡΥ), Chi Omega (ΧΩ), Chi Rho Omega (ΧΡΩ), and Chi Nu (ΧΝ) were used to ascribe a divine character to the Greek concepts of Christos | to administer drugs or Chrestos | depicting a useful implement. More on these placeholders in a moment.

The Hebrew ‘el and ‘elohym, meaning “Almighty,” but most often translated as “God,” were replaced using the Greek concept of “Theos – God” by using the placeholders Theta Sigma (ΘΣ), Theta Upsilon (ΘΥ), Theta Omega (ΘΩ), and Theta Nu (ΘΝ). And while God’s name and title are not interchangeable, there are times when these placeholders represent “Yahowah” instead of His title, “God,” in cited Hebrew texts.

Ruwach is the feminine Hebrew noun for “Spirit.” Without exception, references to the “Ruwach Qodesh – Set-Apart Spirit” are rendered under the Greek concept of “penuma – moving air, wind, breath, or breeze” using the placeholders Pi Nu Alpha (ΠΝΑ), Pi Nu Sigma (ΠΝΣ), and Pi Nu Iota (ΠΝΙ).

In addition to these two names and three titles, the noun and verb forms of “upright pole,” and “to affix to an upright pillar,” later changed to “crux – cross,” were rendered Sigma Rho Omega Sigma or Sigma Rho Omega followed by Mu Alpha Iota to indicate the verbal form – both with a line over them to signify divinity. Making sure that we wouldn’t miss the supposed divine connotation of the Christian “cross,” stauros was never written out in the Greek text. The placeholder was changed from “stauros – upright pole” to the Latin “crux,” and then became “cross” in English. This is how the image of a pagan “cross” was deified, becoming the symbol of the religion.

The cross was a common religious symbol used throughout antiquity in Babylon, Egypt, Greece, and Rome to signify the intersection of the constellation Taurus with the sun during the Vernal Equinox. The closest “Sun”-day to this event was called Easter (named after the Babylonian goddess Astarte who became known as Ishtar) by these pagans who believed that the Sun impregnated Mother Earth on this day, giving birth nine months later on the Winter Solstice (then December 25th) to the Son of the Sun. Solar worship, known as Sol Invictus (the Unconquerable Son) was thereby incorporated into Constantine’s religious preference from his deadly legions – where it remains imbedded to this day. This process began with his vision of a flaming cross superimposed on the sun, which was his god, along with the edict: “In this sign conquer.” Pagan myths became Christian lore.

Among the most debilitating Christian misappropriations in this regard is their affinity for “Christ.” A placeholder potentially referring to this improper title underlies English translations of the Galatians 1:1 passage. But as it turns out, the overscored Greek symbols Chi Rho (ΧΡ), Chi Rho Sigma (ΧΡΣ), Chi Sigma (ΧΣ), Chi Upsilon (ΧΥ), Chi Rho Upsilon (ΧΡΥ), Chi Omega (ΧΩ), Chi Rho Omega (ΧΡΩ), and Chi Nu (ΧΝ), weren’t initially based upon Christos, Christou, Christo, or Christon but, instead, upon Chrestos – an entirely different word.

Christos means “drugged.” As I have demonstrated, the one time its defining verbal root was written out in the Greek text, it was used to say that the Laodicean assembly should apply a manmade drug, an ointment in this case, to their eyes. Chrestus (which is related to chrestos) on the other hand means “useful implement,” even “upright servant,” as well as “merciful one.” It was used to “depict the good and beneficial work of a moral servant.” This is somewhat similar to the implications of the Hebrew, Ma’aseyah, which is the Implement Doing the Work of Yahowah. As such, it is useful for you to know that “ha Mashyach – the Messiah” was never written as a title in conjunction with the Christian Jesus and that “Christian” should have been Chrestusian, which is an entirely different name with an entirely different meaning.

With the basis of Jesus, Christ, Christian, and Cross already destroyed, it’s not looking very good for the religion. But it gets far worse because the Daniel 9:21-6 citations, which stand alone in presenting the future arrival of a Messiah, and thus are essential to the Christian myth, are among the most errantly translated and misinterpreted in the entire Christian Bible. So let’s turn to it now.

To begin, Daniel became the recipient of these prophecies because he was the only one at the time willing and able to read the revelations of the prophets and apply the lessons. He could write, he was in Babel, and there wasn’t a better option. So while he was neither a prophet nor even a historian, his ability to read and write was enough for God to use him and for us to benefit from Dowd’s visit with him. Yes, you read that correctly; the only actual prophet in the Book attributed to Daniel was Gabry’el – who is Dowd. Turns out, he was speaking about himself. And as a result, we were offered a brief history of the world, the story of the succession of Beasts, and now are witnesses to the final solution to mankind’s errant ways.

“While I was continuing to communicate (wa ‘owd ‘any dabar) with the intent of being distinct and different (‘el taphilah – either praying or desirous of being set apart as discriminating and special; from ta’ab – to desire and palah – pleading to be set apart as special while thinking about the future, asking questions and contemplating the answers), then (wa) Gabry’el | God’s Most Confident and Capable, Courageous and Combative Man (wa Gabry’el – the Almighty’s exceptionally proficient and powerful defender, an exemplar of character who confirms the truth; a compound of ‘any – I am a geber – particularly strong and resolute human being, a capable and authorized individual, an aggressive and confrontational person, a fighter, defender, and protector who prevails with ‘el – Almighty God; from gabar – exceptionally proficient, absolutely assured, resolutely corroborative, tremendously powerful and great), the individual man (ha ‘iysh – the person and human being who is a champion, supporter, and defender), whom, to reveal the proper path (‘asher – to show the benefits of the relationship), I had seen (ra’ah – I had witnessed, observed, perceived, inspected, and considered) during the initial prophetic revelation (ba ha chazown ba ha tachilah – in the earlier communication during the beginning vision of the future which I was able to see), offering advice while preoccupied with the destruction of existing militaries (ya’aph ba ya’aph – providing counsel and addressing the purpose of what is occurring while appearing wearied, or perhaps exasperated, moving swiftly between battles, from ya’ats – to offer advice and counsel regarding the purpose of the plan), reached out to make contact with me (naga’ ‘el ‘any – extended himself to reach out to me) around the time of the evening (ka ‘eth ‘ereb – according to the right season of the year at sunset) offering (minchah – apportionment which is bestowed as a present or gift).” (Dany’el / Daniel 9:21)

Not only was Gabry’el correctly identified as an ‘iysh | man, a human male, but the identity of ‘el | God’s gibowr is readily verified as Dowd from Yasha’yah / Isaiah 9 where, as a son, he was given to us. The Messiah is the lone individual who fits this title. And there is no better news than this because apart from Yahowah, no one in Heaven or on Earth knew as much about the events he was going to address and personally fulfill. He had predicted them, describing them in excruciating detail in his Songs, and he, himself, would endure them. Further, with Dany’el failing to meet the standard of a prophet, Dowd arrived as the most prolific of them.

Dowd, as the only man destined to live three lives spanning these eras, was the ideal prophet to provide the sweeping prophetic history of the world. Moreover, he had arrived in Babel | Babylon, the birthplace of the Beast – the realm from which Satan would arise and build the very institutions he would ultimately destroy. Whether as a prophet or from his throne in Shamaym, he would witness Babylon become Persia and then watch as the Greeks prevailed over them. The bestiality of Rome was no secret to him as he would experience their savage brutality personally. Additionally, Dowd would have been familiar with his mortal enemy – the final Beast – the Roman Catholic Church – which grew out of Imperial Rome to obfuscate the heroic sacrifices he would make on behalf of his people while persecuting them.

While Moseh may have been his equal in this regard, no one else has ever been better at providing accurate advice regarding God. And no one surpassed Dowd in the destruction of Yisra’el’s foes, having engaged 66 times without ever losing a battle in defense of God’s people and land. Further, Dowd’s greatest gift to the Covenant Family was offering to serve as the Pesach ‘Ayil and then endure the long night of Matsah in the darkness of She’owl.

Now that Gabry’el | God’s Most Competent Man, Dowd, has returned, and has been properly introduced and identified, we are told that he has been ya’aph ba ya’aph | offering advice while preoccupied with the destruction of existing militaries – which means that he has returned to the past from our immediate future. Dowd returned to provide counsel regarding the purpose of what will be occurring while moving swiftly between battles. Yisra’el’s great defender will soon be doing what he does naturally.

At this future date, Yowm Kipurym | the Day of Reconciliations in the 120th Yowbel year of 6000 Yah at sunset in his city, October 2nd, 2033, Dowd’s first order of business will be to anoint the Kaporeth | Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant so that Yahowah can reconcile His relationship with Yisra’el. Then he will defend the remaining remnant of Yahuwdym from the Muslims, Christians, Communists, and Progressives who have come to annihilate them. All the while, he will serve as our Shepherd and Counselor, Messiah and King.

The realization that the Mashyach | Messiah has been called away from these essential responsibilities during Yowm Kipurym to provide insights relative to his fulfillment of Chag Matsah as the mashach | anointed is poetic, prophetic, and profound. Considering the source of these insights, labeling “Jesus” the “Christ,” rather than acknowledging Dowd, isn’t just ignorant and irrational – it is insulting and disgusting.

Dowd | David is the ultimate Prophet and Counselor, Shepherd and Lamb, Messiah and High Priest, Son of God and King. He is the exemplar of the Covenant, the embodiment of Yisra’el, and the Son who fulfilled the Invitations to Meet with God. To say otherwise is to be wrong.

Moving on to the next statement, we are reminded that God works through curious souls because He realizes that those who question everything find a resolution. They not only grow in understanding but, also, in confidence. I suspect that Yahowah chose His final messenger with this in mind, recognizing His Son’s appreciation of how yada’ would result in byn…

“So (wa) he made the connections to encourage understanding (byn – he pursued comprehension by being discriminating and perceptive to facilitate discernment through careful consideration). He spoke with me (wa dabar ‘im ‘any), and he said (wa ‘amar), ‘Dany’el (Dany’el – My God Judges, Condemns, and Vindicates; from dyn – to decide with ‘el – God), now at this time (‘atah – so then in the sequence of things), I have come forth (yatsa’ – I have descended to extend) to provide insights and instruction which, if you are circumspect and considerate, will promote (la sakal ‘atah – to teach the prudent to pay attention, and you through contemplation to gain) understanding through discernment (bynah – enabling comprehension through diligence and reason).’” (Dany’el / Daniel 9:22)

Gabry’el | God’s Most Competent and Confrontational Man, Dowd | the Beloved, is the living embodiment of byn | understanding, particularly of the dabar | word of God. This is his ‘atah | time when he will lead his people on yet another yatsa’ | exodus – this time out of Babel | Being Confused by the Lord. By listening to Dowd throughout his Mizmowr and Mashal, we revel in his sakal | insights and grow in bynah | understanding. This is why Yahowah so loved his Son and then supported his desire to fulfill these roles so that we could learn from his example and benefit from his sacrifice.

It is wonderful to see God’s Son, our Messiah and King, speak to Dany’el. This is encouraging for the rest of us, especially when we consider the difference between Dowd’s intellect and standing with God relative to our own. Last time they met, Dany’el had done a nose plant. So now, by asking him to think it through, Dowd forestalled more of the same. He is brilliant after all…

“In the beginning, the sickening and inappropriate (ba tachilah – initially, while common to the point of being profane; from chalah – to be a sorrowful and sickening beggar, a wearisome infected and diseased malcontent and chalal – to profane and desecrate through common and defiling religious practices) matter (dabar – the message and word) of your desire for favors and your pleading for mercy (tachanuwn ‘atah – your longing for love and compassion, your constant petitions; from a compound of ta’ab | to desire and ta’ah | to point out, with chanan | mercy, kindness, forgiveness, and favor) was brought up (yatsa’ – it came out). So, I, myself, have returned (wa ‘any bow’ – therefore, I have arrived, having come) to conspicuously report an informative announcement and make this known (la nagad – to provide the message in a straightforward fashion, making this declaration) because (ky) you are so needy (chamadowth ‘atah – you delight in and value such things).

Therefore (wa), you will want to be considerate and strive to understand, being diligent and systematic in your evaluation (byn – by choosing to be perceptive, discerning, and discriminating, you will comprehend (qal imperative)) of this message (ba ha dabar – through this statement), choosing to make the connections needed to comprehend (wa byn – by being perceptive and circumspect to understand), what is being revealed (ba ha mar’eh – what is witnessed).” (Dany’el / Daniel 9:23)

While true, this was a slap in the face to a man who needed it. With all of his pleading, Dany’el had become irritating. God does not want us begging Him to do as He has already promised or to request what He will never provide. We cannot go wrong when listening to God and are often err when pleading with Him to do as we desire.

As a compound word based upon chalah | to be a sickening and sorrowful beggar, a wearisome malcontent, tachilah presents Daniel as I had cast him throughout Babel ~ Beast, my dissertation on the Book now bearing his name. Frankly, it was obvious – which was the point and the reason for Dowd’s astute assessment. Moreover, since tachilah is also shaded by chalal, which addresses the commonality and profanity of religious and political corruption, Dany’el is exactly as I had surmised. He was prophetic of the corrupting influence of politicized religion. His life was used as a foil upon which to expose and condemn the emergence and spread of the weeds we know as Rabbinic Judaism and Roman Christianity. I say this because in all due consideration, the first six chapters of Daniel are rubbish. It wasn’t until Dowd arrived as Gabry’el | God’s Most Competent Man, that the narrative gained purpose and meaning.

Personally, I am grateful to our Messiah and Shepherd for confirming that my radically different interpretation of Daniel was accurate. Never once during the nearly 2,600 years since the book was written has anyone dared to present this man from the perspective overtly displayed throughout Babel ~ Beast. Fortunately, turns out I was not alone because Dowd returned from the future to make the same assessment in our past, sharing Yahowah’s disdain for religion and politics.

For those who have not yet read the Beast volume of Babel in Yada Yahowah, you may not yet know that the narrative found within the first six chapters of Daniel is as irritating as it is insightful, while symbolically presenting the disgusting consequence of religious and political indoctrination – particularly Judaism and Christianity. The stench is sickening and debilitating to mankind and irritating to God. The opening chapters serve as an exposé on why God hates Babylon and why men and women must leave its toxic influence to be with Him.

Try as he might to distance himself from this horrible stain on his soul and the stigma on his life, Dany’el was still plagued by his childhood programming and by being indoctrinated at the height of Babylon’s deplorable culture. It did not matter what he ate or said, because he had swallowed the poison and it had profaned and corrupted him. His contribution to this story is that he could read and write and was sufficiently curious to do both. Beyond that, he is the embodiment of all that is wrong with Babel, of associating with the Lord, and of integrating religion and politics. The Dany’el depicted in the opening chapters of the Book bearing his name was a spawn of the Beast. As such, he portrays the emergence of Judaism and Christianity, leading to Islam.

Now that Gabry’el has been properly introduced, and the purpose of this revelation has been established, it is time to consider the prophecy which has been misappropriated to create the myth of Jesus Christ when it should have been received as a celebration of the Messiah’s second and third lives. What follows provides the blueprint for redemption and adoption, reconciliation and everlasting life. And you’ll note that it is focused upon “your people” and “your city” – Yahuwdym and Yaruwshalaim, the City of Dowd. Christians can tune out now since none of this applies to you, but as for Jews, please pay attention…

“The many promises associated with Shabuw’ah and the Shabat, along with the vows pertaining to the things Seven represents, even seventy sevens (shabuwa’ym shib’iym) are determined and decreed (chathak – He has planned, divided out, and marked) on behalf of your people, the extended family (‘al ‘am ‘atah – for your kin) and upon your set-apart city and its distinctly uncommon inhabitants (wa ‘al ‘iyr qodesh ‘atah – over your special and separated population center, including those who are separated and distinct and, thus, not religious) to bring an end to the religious rebellion, eliminating the revolting communal defiance and contrarian views (la kalah ha pesha’ – for the abolition and complete purging of revolting opposition, pervasive transgression, being at fault, and guilty of being contrarians who have defected from the relationship), to affix the signature which seals up the guilt associated with having missed the way, precluding ever being wrong again (wa la chatham chata’owth – to affirming the authenticity of that which constrains and prevents everything associated with going astray), to provide reconciliation for religious error, purging the perverse corruptions and twisted perversions (wa la kaphar ‘awon – to cover over by atoning, ransoming and annulling distortions), to arrive with and bring that which is eternally right, always correct, forever accurate and honest, thereby attaining everlasting deliverance and vindication (wa la bow’ tsedeq ‘owlam – to come with ongoing and perpetual justice and deliverance, innocence and prosperity, returning to pursue enduring righteousness), to provide a personal seal and signature to revelation, confirming and completing these communications (wa la chatham chazown wa naby’ – to confirm and complete the visual communication from God about the future) and to prophecy (wa naby’ – to the prophet), while also anointing the Most Set Apart (wa la mashach qodesh qodesh – and to consecrate, dedicate, and prepare the separated, special, distinctly different, and uniquely uncommon – speaking of Dowd).” (Dany’el / Daniel 9:24)

This is Dowd’s story from beginning to end. He has explained why he was willing and able to fulfill the decree Yahowah had made to his people through the seven Miqra’ey | Invitations. With his arrival in Yaruwshalaim in advance of Passover and then again on Kipurym forty Yowbel thereafter, he has and will remove the guilt associated with religious rebellion and contrarian views.

With the Messiah and Son of God having volunteered to serve as our lamb and our shepherd, a remnant of God’s people will never stray again. With our souls perfected and the relationship reconciled on these occasions, Yisra’el’s surviving assembly will be right forevermore, becoming eternally vindicated. This is the summation of all prophecy. The fruition of God’s promises occurs as Dowd anoints the Mercy Seat of the Covenant within the Qodesh Qodesh of God’s Home on Yowm Kipurym so that we can celebrate Sukah.

This pronouncement pertains to the Shabat and the promises associated with the Harvest of Shabuw’ah and then the Gleaning on Taruw’ah. It is for Dany’el’s people and Covenant family and, thus, for Jews and Gentiles, and for Dowd’s city, which is Yaruwshalaim | the Source of Guidance on Reconciliation. So, since it is all designed to eliminate religious and political guilt, one would have to be foolish to believe any of this pertained to a gentile religion vehemently opposed to all of this. As such, this prophecy cannot be predictive of the anti-Semitic Christian Christ or the contradictory New Testament. Moreover, Dowd’s performance as the Messiah brought an end to prophecy, precluding any additional revelation from God after 33 CE. And that is why you are reading the words of an observant Witness sharing the revelations of previous prophets rather than those of a modern prophet.

Dowd’s pronouncement reveals when he would, has, and will come to fulfill the Mow’edym. And yet since these events are woven into an even broader timeline, it is germane to know that when we account for the generations from ‘Adam to ‘Abraham, we find that forty Yowbel, or 2,000 years, separate them. Additionally, another forty Yowbel transpire from ‘Abraham’s experience on Mount Mowryah to Dowd’s Passover sacrifice in this same place. And that means that a pattern has emerged from which we can date the fulfillment of the Miqra’ey, past and future.

Two thousand years after ‘Adam’s and Chawah’s expulsion from the Garden of Eden, God confirmed the Covenant in 1968 BCE (year 2000 Yah) with ‘Abraham, Sarah, and Yitschaq so that we could return to it and join Him there. Then to provide the resulting rewards, including immortality, perfection, adoption, enrichment, and empowerment, God’s attention returned to Mowryah forty Yowbel thereafter in year 4000 Yah (33 CE), with His Son walking out of the pages of the Towrah to fulfill Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children.

But that would not be the end of God’s story. Seven years shy of forty Yowbel later, the Covenant Family would be withdrawn at the beginning of the Time of Israel’s Troubles during the Shabuw’ah | Sevens Harvest of standing grain – a Shabat at sunset, Friday, May 22, 2026 as the Two-State Dissolution is imposed on Israel, setting the nation up for a thousand-fold reenactment of 10.07.23 thirteen months thereafter as illusions of solutions devolve into genocidal rage.

Just ten days from the conclusion of Israel’s Troubles, on the first day of the seventh month, during Taruw’ah, occurring on the Shabat of September 25th, 2033, the final gleaning of Yahuwdym and Yisra’elites will transpire. Dowd and Yahowah will return during the Miqra’ of Kipurym this same year of 6000 Yah (Sunset in Jerusalem on October 2nd, 2033). Father and Son will reconcile their relationship with Yisra’el and Yahuwdym, restoring the Covenant by integrating the Towrah into the lives of Yah’s Children. Five days later as we celebrate Sukah | Shelters, enjoying a thousand years of camping out with our Heavenly Father through year 7000 Yah. Thereafter, many new and untold beginnings await.

For our Jewish friends, you should know that there is no justification or excuse for the random dating Maimonides thrust upon an ignorant and unsuspecting audience. Here in the early summer, with this year’s observance of Shabuw’ah behind us in 2024, we are living in year 5991 Yah – with just 9 years remaining before Yahowah’s return on Yowm Kipurym in year 6000 Yah – sunset in Jerusalem, 6:22 PM local time, on October 2nd, 2033.

The Rambam was wrong on all accounts. Creation occurred 14 billion years ago, not in 3759 BCE as he claimed. Further, the expulsion from Gan ‘Eden, in year 0 Yah, transpired in 3968 BCE. A new year begins on the 1st of ‘Abyb, in the Spring, not when the Babylonians observed Rosh Hashanah. But since the rabbi was more impressed with his own calculations than the genealogies established in the Towrah for this purpose, his Sanctification of the Moon scheme has led Jews astray for over 800 years. Please don’t continue to be lost among them. And for added verification of our place in Yahowah’s world, consider the Timeline presented under Resources at YadaYah.com.

When Yahowah inspires one of His prophets to say ‘am ‘anah | for your people, He is almost always addressing Yisra’el and Yahuwdym. Not only is this affirmed by the constant references to ‘am throughout the Towrah, ‘am also means “family.” Therefore, the plan Yahowah was unfurling through His Son was designed in support of the Covenant He established with Yisra’el beginning with ‘Abraham and Sarah.

Yahowah’s focus is on Yaruwshalaim | the Source of Guidance on Reconciliation. The ‘iyr qodesh | set-apart city, therefore, not only denotes the location where these prophecies would be fulfilled but, also, for whom. It is the most qodesh | set-apart place on Earth. It is in Jerusalem that Yahowah made it possible for us to be separated from the pesha’, chata’ah, and ‘awon of man and be tsedeq regarding Him.

Qodesh is among the most revealing and least understood terms in the Hebrew lexicon. It means “to be set apart.” It affirms that God wants us to be like Him, distinct from the ways of man and, thus, uncommon. So, when we consider the two most pervasive and popular human agencies, to be qodesh means that we should not be religious or political. To be set apart unto Yahowah is to be separated from such things.

Moving on, I suspect that you will be surprised by what follows….

“Therefore (wa), know (yada’ – it is beneficial for you to be aware by coming to possess the information required to recognize) and gain the insights to understand (wa sakal – realizing that the best option is for you to be prudent after learning, succeeding and prospering by being attentive, properly educated, intelligent, and wise, perceiving) that from (min) the going forth of the word (mowtsa’ dabar – the stage being set to begin the process in accord with the message) to return to restore (shuwb – to bring back to its original state), rebuilding (wa la banah – and reestablishing) Yaruwshalaim (Yaruwshalaim – the Source of Teaching and Guidance on Reconciliation), until the restoring testimony and eternal witness (‘ad – up to, as far as, for an extension of time to become victorious and receive the spoils evidenced by the witness) of the Son of the Sovereign who is conspicuously making this known, and who is providing the leadership and counsel (nagyd – of the one who has officially obtained the status of being properly appointed, and who has expounded upon, announced, and proclaimed the message) of the Mashyach | the anointed Messiah (mashyach – the one who is set apart, anointed, and prepared to serve as authorized) are seven sevens, and thus seven promises and fulfilled vows (shabuwa’ym shiba’ah – contractual oaths fulfilled in harmony with the promises of Shabuw’ah over seven periods of seven weeks).

Therefore (wa), in sixty-two weeks (shabuwa’ym sheshym wa shanaym – based upon the promise of seven, in sixty and two weeks), she will be restored (shuwb – she will return and recover), and rebuilt to reestablish and fortify (wa banah – she will develop) the way to grow and expand (rachob – opening the way by expanding where people can congregate; from rachab – to grow larger and expand) by being diligent and decisive (wa charuwts – by becoming sharper, more determined, increasingly judgmental, separated and defensive) in a troubled time of oppression (wa ba tsowq ha ‘ets – during a period of anguishing subjugation, restrictions, constraints, and persecution, being harassed and pushed into a corner; from tsuwq – to constrain and oppress).” (Daniel / Daniel 9:25)

Then after (wa ‘achar) the sixty-two weeks (ha shabuwa’ym sheshym wa shanaym), the Anointed Messiah (Mashyach) will be cut off and separated (karath) but not for himself (wa ‘ayn la huw’).” (Daniel / Daniel 9:26 in part)

Gabry’el | God’s Most Confident and Capable, Courageous and Combative Man, prefaced his prophecy with yada’ and shakal. That is to say, by prudently processing this information, we will gain the insights needed to understand. He is the thinking man’s prophet.

When he repeatedly indicates that to figure this out, we need to be discerning, learning by processing the information which he is providing in an intelligent manner, experience dictates that we follow his advice. In other words, we should consider how the pieces of the puzzle he has provided fit together as opposed to plucking the mashyach references out of context to promote an agenda contrary to everything else he revealed as Christians have done throughout the centuries.

Dowd is predicting that there will be a public decree issued regarding the liberation of Yahuwdym | Jews from Babel | Commingling which Confuses in Babylon. Therefore, it is worth considering the similarity between this and the decree to leave Mitsraym | the Crucibles of Religious and Political Oppression during Pesach at the outset of the Yatsa’ | Exodus. Yahowah introduced Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym to physically liberate the Children of Yisra’el from religious and political oppression, and then Shabuw’ah to share His Towrah | Teaching. The process would continue with Yahowah explaining the Miqra’ey to Moseh, which would ultimately lead God’s people to the Promised Land.

The proclamation Dowd is currently addressing is similar. This time, Yahuwdym will be liberated from religious and political subjugation in Babel – the birthplace of the Beast, which would evolve from Imperial Rome to Roman Catholicism and then reemerge as Islam. Not only would they be physically freed, Yahuwdym would be able to rebuild Yaruwshalaim | the Source of Guidance on Reconciliation and the City of Dowd.

After the passage of the specified time, Dowd’s nepesh | soul would return to his city within a basar | body reconstructed from his DNA to serve his people by fulfilling Pesach and Matsah leading to Bikuwrym. This would enable the enrichment and empowerment of the Covenant’s Children as they are withdrawn on Shabuw’ah. In so doing, the nepesh | souls of God’s Family will come home, surviving the tyranny of Progressives and the terrorism of Islam.

When we identify the timing of this decree and do the math from the ‘Abyb 1, 444 BCE starting date, we must add 7 weeks of years (7x7=49 prophetic years) until Yaruwshalaim would be rebuilt. Then there would be another 62 weeks (62x7=434 prophetic years) for a total of 483 years until he would enter Yaruwshalaim to fulfill Pesach.

To calculate Dowd’s arrival, we must multiply 483 (49 + 434) years by the 360 days in the Towrah’s prophetic calendar. This equals 173,880 days, or 476 solar years plus an additional 24 days, which we should then add to our starting date in 444 BCE. Since there was no year zero in the Julian or Gregorian calendars, the addition of 173,880 days to ‘Abyb 1, 444 BCE sets the Messiah’s arrival on Monday, March 28, 33 CE (Gregorian), Monday, March 30, 33 CE (Julian), the 10th of ‘Abyb on the Hebrew calendar – the very day the Passover Lamb was to arrive during the 80th Yowbel in year 4000 Yah.

Since Dowd had witnessed his future and written about it in his Mizmowr one thousand years in advance of fulfilling Chag Matsah, and since he returns from his future fulfillment of Yowm Kipurym in 2033 CE to provide this prophetic report circa 550 to 600 BCE, he was fully aware of what would occur and when it would transpire.

What has been lost on so many is how exquisitely the detail of the prophecy matched its fulfillment. Dowd’s entry into Yaruwshalaim | Jerusalem coincided with the day the paschal lamb would have been brought into the household, on the tenth day of ‘Abyb, when, just as they had in Chazaqyah | Hezekiah’s time, when large crowds had gathered in Yaruwshalaim | the Source of Guidance on Reconciliation. He lived and walked among the people. They got to know him. And as the sun set, and the fourteenth day of ‘Abyb began, he observed the Passover feast, expecting us to remember and respect the role he played in fulfilling the promise.

Dowd’s sacrifice corresponded perfectly with the designated time of Passover. It was just before sunset on the fourteenth day of ‘Abyb that his nepesh | soul surrendered his mortal basar | body and Yahowah’s Ruwach | Spirit. The prophecy of the first Miqra’ | Invitation to be Called Out and Meet of Pesach | Passover was fulfilled literally, right down to the last detail. There should have been no mistaking what he had done – at least for those who “darash – consistently seek to know” Yahowah, who read the Towrah to find the way to Him, and who ponder the implications of the relationship He intended by diligently studying the Prophets.

Nearly 40 Yowbel thereafter, we are using Taruw’ah to call a remnant of Yisra’el and Yahuwdah home, back to the Promised Land, to their Messiah, and to Yahowah. This reunion will occur during Dowd’s return on Kipurym | Reconciliations, which leads to Sukah | Camping Out with our Father and His Family forevermore.

In this way, with the proclamation to leave Babel | Babylon and restore Yaruwshalaim | the Source of Guidance on Reconciliation, one event foreshadows the next, becoming a harbinger of what follows, each step liberating us from religious influence and political control so that we can come home and live as family.

In conjunction with the redemption of his people, the Nagyd | Son of the Sovereign, by nagyd | publicly revealing what would occur, explaining how it would transpire, and then demonstrating the character and courage to bring this to fruition, is the one who is providing leadership and counsel as ha Mashyach | the Messiah. He is fulfilling his vows and those of his Father over the course of the seven Mow’ed.

Recognizing that Dowd’s gruesome and heroic portrayal of his soul’s fulfillment of Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym in the 22nd Mizmowr depicts what would happen to him more than 400 years prior to this proclamation, this pronouncement may be the most cathartic ever conveyed. His portrayal is so awe-inspiring, courageous, and compassionate, that it is hard to properly convey the enormity of this moment. And in this way, it was appropriate for Dowd to be the one who revealed his future and that of his people.

Clearly, Dowd knew what was going to happen to himself and to Yisra’el. As Gabry’el, he was his own basar | herald providing the best and worst news, all of which Yahuwdym ignored and Gowym pilfered and twisted…

“Then (wa) the people, the nation, and the army (‘am – the individuals and institutions) of the commanding officer and supreme leader who is making copious announcements and prolific declarations (nagyd – the absolute ruler conspicuously avowing, publishing, and confessing his message in your face) who is to come (ha bow’ – who will arrive) will attempt to corrupt, ravage, and destroy (shachath – will seek to ruin and render useless, castrate and cast off, annihilating) the city (ha ‘iyr – the largest population center) and the Set Apart and the Sanctuary (wa ha qodesh – those who and that which are separated and distinct, uncommon and devoted, both as individuals and as a Sanctuary).

And (wa) his demise, when he is cast off at the conclusion of this duration of time (qets huw’ – this completion of a period to be chopped down and torn asunder (note: ‘iyr, qodesh, ‘am, and nagyd are all masculine singular and could be addressed by huw’)) will be overwhelming and outrageous, especially intense with an overpowering of force (ha sheteph – manifesting an overbearing nature so as to be inundated) so that up to the very last moment in the end (wa ‘ad qets – as far as the completion of this duration of time to chop off and tear asunder), war (milchamah – a state of constant and continuous fighting) will be decreed, quickly decided upon and pronounced (charats – it will be determined, spoken about and certain) which will be devastating and desolating, appalling and horrifying (shamem – destructive and ruinous, wasteful and astonishing).” (Dany’el / Daniel 9:26)

Should you venture into the Abominable and Venomous volumes of the Babel series, you will come to realize that Dowd’s adversary has always been ha Satan – Sha’uwl’s inspiration and the un-god of Islam. Therefore, we should be expecting to see the Devil incarnate enter Jerusalem to foil Dowd’s agenda and God’s reunion with His people on the 1st of ‘Abyb, April 3rd or 4th, 2030, just two weeks prior to the Witnesses’ arrival on Passover.

Since Dowd will have been victimized by those affiliated with the Adversary during and following Chag Matsah, with the Romans torturing him and then religious Christians, Jews, and Muslims disavowing and discrediting his achievements thereafter, there is a continuity between those who destroyed the city and sanctuary in 70 CE, and again in 133 CE, even those who would abuse the Set-Apart People thereafter, and desecrate the Temple Mount with a mosque and shrine to Satan.

It is apparent that Dowd’s evil opposite will flail and then fail before being sent off to She’owl in the fleeting moments of the 6th millennia of man. Upon his arrival, he will be bombastic, an outrageous character with an overwhelming presence and imposing manner. This Last Days Tour de Force will approach under the guise of a peacemaker, but he will quickly decide to rally the world against Israel, promoting a war that will be devastating and desolating. This is akin to Allah claiming he is merciful while commanding Muslims to kill Jews.

As we discovered in the previous statement, at a time certain, 62 weeks of years after Yaruwshalaim is rebuilt, taking us forward in time to year 4000 Yah, or 33 CE, the Messiah restored and reestablished the means for his people to thrive should they be diligent and decisive while being oppressed by Imperial Rome. He did so by fulfilling the first three Mow’ed Miqra’ey, providing the benefits of the Covenant.

Sadly and inexcusably, after this time, the Roman Church, based upon Paul’s letters, would replace the Anointed Messiah to establish a new covenant. They would position the misnomer “Jesus Christ” as the Son of God and the “Christ” instead of Dowd | David, the man Yahowah decreed both titles. Christianity’s New Testament is the result. Six hundred years thereafter, Islam would position Satan as God.

Therefore, rather than announcing the arrival of a Christian Messiah or Muslim Messenger, who would die, but not for himself, this says just the opposite. The actual Mashyach had this temporal existence cut short and then was separated from his Father to save his people. The greatest life ever lived, Gabry’el | God’s Most Capable and Confident Individual, would perform the most heroic and compassionate act, but it would be tossed aside in the wake of three repulsive religions.

The lone justification for calling “Jesus” the “Christ” was negated seven centuries before this infuriating replacement occurred. And thereby, Dowd obliterated the claims made by Christians and the denials that propelled Judaism’s emergence and led to Islam. As a result, the world will be engulfed in war, devastating and desolating conflict. It will be so destructive and ruinous, indeed, astonishing and appalling that the prophet is predicting nuclear conflagration.

In this way, the Messiah is using the past to prepare His people for the future. Just as Yahuwdym were given the opportunity to recognize the Passover Lamb and the fulfillment of Chag Matsah during a troublesome time, so it will be in the end. Yahuwdym are being afforded a final opportunity to accept what Dowd and his Father have done for them when they arrive together to enable the promise of Kipurym during the conclusion of the Time of Trouble.

In the interim, seven years before the world goes up in smoke, this monstrous and demonic beast under the ruse of peacemaker will gabar beryth | confirm and strengthen a prevailing agreement, affirming his covenant ha rabym | with a great many, including plenty of rabbis, the preponderance of the populous, and numerous among the elite. This is an ode to the “Two-State Solution” or, as I refer to it, “The Final Solution.” It will be imposed, thereby encouraging Israel’s destruction.

What follows affirms what we have long known. While the Time of Ya’aqob’s Troubles began on October 7th, 2023, it will intensify in 2026 with the forfeiture of Israeli land to Islamic terrorists, ushering in a horrific week of years for Jews following the imposition of a Fakestinian State. Things will degrade quickly, with Israel enduring a constant state of war beginning in June 2028, with their troubles escalating during the last 3½ years – starting with the 1st of ‘Abyb in year 5997, April 3rd or 4th, 2030.

The Shabat will be outlawed, Pesach corrupted, and Matsah relegated to an ingredient. There will be no Kipurym for the Towrahless, putting God’s gift out of reach. And Yahowah’s Miqra’ey will be replaced with the likes of the Feast of the Beast where Dowd’s body and blood are featured on the Adversary’s menu. There will be a No Moon Day, a Do Nothing Festival, and All Stupid Day for the faithful – each endorsed by Ezekiel’s Lord, now known as Allah.

It is the most abhorrent of abominations, a monstrous religious edict designed to stun and stupefy people far and wide. Robbed of their ability to be perceptive and think critically, the preponderance of people will die. And it will all happen quickly and decisively, paralyzing a world too traumatized to respond appropriately.

“And therefore (wa), he, as an exceedingly influential person, will vault himself into prominence by arrogantly confirming and imposing (gabar – he will strengthen and empower, then triumph by imposing a self-aggrandizing and overbearing) a treaty, a covenant agreement and arrangement (beryth – an international contractual compact and binding pledge) with a great many, including plenty of rabbis, the preponderance of people, especially the elitists (la ha rabym – including plenty of rabbis, the preponderance of the populous, and with numerous among the elite) either for one week, based upon a single promise, or during a particular Shabuw’ah (‘echad shabuwa’).” (Dany’el / Daniel 9:27)

The implication is that Satan’s Advocate will vault himself into prominence by convincing Progressive and Orthodox Israelis that they will achieve peace by breaking their nation into pieces and giving them to him to administer an Islamic state, with Israel retreating to her 1967 borders. The last time Muslims and Jews were in this position, the Arabs schemed to destroy Israel.

The supposition that it will be different this time is ludicrous. With Israel defenseless and vulnerable, “Peace Now” will rapidly devolve into a final and horrifying battle for control of what remains. This is Satan’s last-ditch effort to forestall Dowd’s homecoming on Kipurym by exterminating Jews. With no one to turn to for support, the carnage will be considerable. And if not for Dowd’s return to defend his people, all would be lost.

Immediately after his fulfillment of Chag Matsah, Dowd turned his sights upon his and his people’s Adversary. For him, it will seem as if going from one day to the next, progressing through the Miqra’ey.

After giving Yisra’el an extension on life and redeeming his people during Pesach and Matsah, Dowd became Yahowah’s Firstborn on Bikuwrym, tangibly showing the way home for those poised to be withdrawn during the Shabuw’ah Harvest. Then with Dowd’s homecoming to defend Yahuwdym proclaimed through Taruw’ah, he will return on Kipurym to bring an end to Yisra’el’s Adversaries.

Yahowah will repair the damage and restore the war-ravaged Earth for Dowd to reign as King of Sukah. That is the plan as presented by Gabry’el | God’s Most Capable and Combative Man – the very individual responsible for achieving it.

“But halfway through the week (wa chatsy shabuwa’ – at the midpoint of the seven years), he will stop the observance of the Shabat and seek to forestall the benefit of the sacrifice which had been freely offered as a gift (shabath zebach wa minchah).

The most extreme aspect (wa ‘al kanaph – upon a flight to the far extremity of being separated and distant, this wing) of this vile and abhorrent action of repulsive religious idolatry (shiquwtsym – of vile and repulsive edicts, detestable and abhorrent acts) will devastate, desolate, and incapacitate (shamem – stun and stupefy) up to the very end, bringing destruction and annihilation, along with the conclusion of the restoring witness (wa ‘ad kalah – a great longing with all-encompassing anxiety, ushering in complete and utter destruction while many die).

It will occur quickly and decisively, with determination and decrees (wa charats – it is certain and decided) profusely poured out (natak – being brought forth and expressed without restraint) upon the deserted, desolated, and destroyed who are astonished and stupefied and who will perish because they are too stunned to respond (‘al shamem – upon the devastated and destitute, the estranged and ravaged who are horrified and dismayed).” (Dany’el / Daniel 9:27)

And on that sour Islamic note, we conclude the 9th chapter of Dany’el. It is as bad as bad ever gets. Although now, the truth is evident: Dowd was speaking to us of his return to fulfill Chag Matsah and then again on Yowm Kipurym to save and reconcile his people from Christianity, Judaism, and especially Islam – from conspiratorialists, progressives, and communists, as well those who will prevail against Israel and Jews during the final seven years of Ya’aqob’s Troubles, commencing May 22nd, 2026 on Shabuw’ah.

As we discovered when examining the Adversary’s playbook in Ezekiel, for Satan to prevail in his quest to rise above Yahowah in Yisra’el, he must negate what Dowd has achieved and forestall his return. Satan’s influence with Sha’uwl | Paul and Shim’own | Peter in the creation of the New Testament, Imperial Rome and Roman Catholicism to impose their toxin on the world, Rabbi Akiba and the institutionalizing of Rabbinic Judaism to lead Jews away from the truth, and then Muhammad, through whom Allah, as Satan, ushered in unmitigated anti-Semitism through Allahu-Akbar, has managed to negate Dowd’s sacrifice for the preponderance of people.

Therefore, in his attempt to forestall Dowd’s return, Satan must either persuade every remaining Jew to choose him over Yahowah or kill them all such that there is no one left to reconcile. This is part of what was explained in Daniel 9:27, which is among the reasons I shared it. But of course, the other reason was to prove that there was no justification for misappropriating Daniel 9 to create the false pretense that Iesous was a Christou in very late and very odd readings of Matthew 16:13-20 and Mark 8:27-30 which are unattested until Eusebius’ amalgamation and augmentation of the text of the New Testament in the 4th century. Even stranger, both supplements conclude with an exceedingly bizarre request: “Then diesteilato tois mathetais | he gave the disciples orders that to no one they should say that he is the Christos,” and “So he epetimesen autois | rebuked and sternly admonished them, forbidding them that no one they should tell concerning Him.” (Matthew 16:20 and Mark 8:30) So, why did they allegedly do so against their Christ’s rebuke and orders not to convey this errant opinion? Isn’t calling oneself a “Christian” in direct violation of this order? And this aside, isn’t it suspicious that the line most responsible for turning “Jesus” into “the Christ” and establishing the religion of “Christianity” isn’t attested in any of the pre-Constantine (early 4th century) codices of the New Testament? And without it, the entire edifice disintegrates.

There is also the realization that the earliest extant texts of the New Testament after the elimination of the placeholders, and thus those orchestrated by Eusebius, presented Chrestus, not Christos. It would actually have been a reasonably close Greek allegory to Ma’aseyah, the Work of Yah. However, this can’t be distinguished one way or the other from the late 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or early 4th century Greek placeholders because Chi Rho, Chi Rho Sigma, and Chi Sigma represent both words equally well. But, that isn’t to say that there isn’t a textual affirmation for Chrestus because there is. In all three depictions of the epithet used to describe the first followers of The Way, in Acts 11:26, 26:28, and in 1 Peter 4:16, the Codex Sinaiticus (orchestrated by Eusebius in the 4th century) reveals that Crestuaneos was penned initially, not Christianous. The same is true with the Codex Vaticanus (also produced at the direction of Eusebius). Sometime thereafter, in the late 4th century when textual freedom led to wholesale alterations, Crestuaneos, meaning “useful tools and upright servants,” was replaced by Christianous, transliterated as “Christian” today, but literally meaning “those who are drugged.” If you are a Christian reading this, please take the time to not only verify the accuracy of this realization but, also, to consider its implications.

But there is more. The Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 27th Edition reveals that Chrestus (χρηστὸς) was scribed in 1 Peter 2:3, not Christos. Their references for this include Papyrus 72 (very late 3rd- or early 4th-century copy of portions of Jude and 1-2 Peter) and the Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest extant witnesses of Shim’own Kephas’ | Peter’s letter.

In 1 Peter, which was attested by both manuscripts, the alleged disciple wrote: “As a newborn child, true to our real nature (logikos – be genuine, reasonable, rational, and sensible), earnestly desire and lovingly pursue (epipotheo – long for and crave, showing great affection while yearning for) the pure and unadulterated (adolos – that which is completely devoid of dishonest intent, deceit, or deception) milk in order to grow in respect to salvation, since we have experienced (geuomai – partaken and tasted, have been nourished by and perceived) the Lord (ΚΣ) as the Useful Implement and Upright Servant (Chrestus – the Upright One who is a superior, merciful, gracious, kind, and good tool).” (1 Peter 2:2-3)

With the realization that Chrestus was written in the Codex Sinaiticus, and the placeholder ΧΡΣ written in P72 in the same place in this passage, we have another affirmation that the placeholder was based upon the Greek Chrestus and may have thus conveyed the meaning behind Ma’aseyah. However, the Alexandrian text-type on Papyrus 72 is very close to Codex Vaticanus and was likely scribed in the same order and at the same time, making it the product of Eusebius edicts and edits.

While there may be no merit to any of this, I am nonetheless motivated to share that the related Greek term, chrestos, means: “kind,” “good,” “useful,” “benevolent,” “virtuous,” and “moral,” as in the sense of “being upright.” Words directly related to chrestos and chrestus speak of “integrity” in the sense of being trustworthy and reliable, “receiving the benefit of a payment,” as in providing recompense and restitution, of “fulfilling one’s duty,” as in being a loyal servant, “doing what is beneficial” in the sense of healing us, “transacting business,” as in fulfilling one’s mission, “providing a divine message and response,” “being fit for use,” as in being an implement, and “conveying a beneficial and trustworthy message which produces a good result,” which is synonymous with “euangelizo – which is to convey the healing and beneficial message.”

Writing about the great fire of Rome circa 64 CE, the accredited Roman historian, Tacitus (the classical world’s most authoritative voice regarding this time and place), in Annals 15.44.2-8, wrote: “All human efforts…and propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the fire was the result of an order [from Nero]. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Chrestuaneos by the populace. Chrestus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate.”

Also, the Roman historian, Suetonius (69 to 122 CE), makes reference to Chrestus in his Lives of the Twelve Caesars. A statement in Divus Claudius 25 reads: “He expelled from Rome the Iudaeos / Yahuwdym / Jews constantly making disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus.” And then in summary, he wrote: “Since the Iudaeos constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome.” This event is dated by Suetonius to 49 CE. The historian also wrote in Nero 16: “Nero issued a public order calling for the punishment of Chrestuaneos in the year of the Great Fire of Rome due to the superstition associated with Chrestus.”

These two more credible secular sources, in addition to Pliny, who used the same spelling, providing additional and convincing evidence in favor of Chrestus over Christos, of “the Useful and Merciful Servant,” over “the Drugged One,” and Chrestuaneos over Christianios, “those who are useful and merciful servants,” over “those who are drugged.”

The placeholders are errantly called “nomina sacra” by theologians, which is Latin for “sacred names.” This moniker is wrong on three accounts. First, only two of the ten placeholders designate a name, while seven convey titles. One represents a thing, in this case, an “upright pole,” and the other speaks of how the pole came to matter.

Second, there is nothing “sacred” in the company of God, only individuals and things which are set apart. The human term “sacred” is religious (meaning “devoted to the worship of a deity in a religious service and worthy of religious veneration”), while the divine designation “set apart” is relational. It explains the association between Yahowah and the Set-Apart Spirit, for example.

Third, at best, the Greek text would have been hearsay translations of Hebrew conversations as well as Hebrew citations from the Towrah and Prophets. Therefore, adding the Latin nomina sacra designation is another step in the wrong direction.

Christian scholars use the same hypocritical sleight of hand to explain the universal presence of the placeholders in the Greek texts that Rabbis have deployed to justify their removal of Yahowah’s name from the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. They suggest that the “names were considered too sacred to write.” But if that were true, if the earliest Christian scribes followed in rabbinical footsteps believing that their ten special names and titles were “too sacred to write,” then why are they written today? If it was wrong then, it cannot be right now.

Anyone who has spent fifteen minutes reading any portion of the Towrah wa Naby’ from any one of the hundreds of Qumran manuscripts recognizes that the “too sacred to write” notion is in complete discord with Yahowah’s approach to every name and title in the Towrah and Prophets including His own. Moreover, God, in the midst of criticizing and rebuking religious clerics, said:

“Their plan is for (ha hasab – considering everything, their calculation and decision is to derive an account revealing that they are determined for) My people (‘am – My family) to overlook, to forget, and to cease to properly value (sakah – to ignore, to be unmindful of, to lose sight of the significance of, and to no longer respond to) My personal and proper name (shem) by way of (ba) the revelations and communications (ha halowm – the claims to inspired insights) which (‘asher) they recount to (saphar – they proclaim, record, and write to) mankind (‘iysh), to their fellow countrymen and associates (la rea’ – to others in their race and company), just as when in a relationship with (ka ‘asher ‘eth ba – similarly as when engaged in the same relationship with) the Lord Ba’al (ha Ba’al), their fathers (‘ab – their forefathers and ancestors) overlooked, ignored, and forgot (sakah – were not mindful of and ceased to appreciate the significance of) My personal and proper name (shem).” (Yirmayahuw / Yah Lifts Up / Jeremiah 23:27)

We know that these clerical copyedits began much earlier because Yahowah is recorded in His Towrah warning that the crime of diminishing the use of His name was punishable by death and separation (in Qara’ / Called Out / Leviticus 24:9-16). The rabbis, however, took the opposite approach and said that the use of Yahowah’s name was a crime punishable by death. It is why religious Jews replaced Yahowah’s name with “‘adony – my Lord,” under the guise that it was “too sacred to say.” Affirming this, the publishers in the preface of popular English Bible translations openly admit that they replaced God’s name with “the LORD” because of religious traditions. They are in essence admitting that rabbinical instigation provided them with a license to misrepresent, replace, and deceive.

Do you suppose that this same rabbinical mindset was shared by the disciples who were allegedly reprimanded and rebuked for associating the Greek title “Christos” with Iesous, and then told to never convey the association that underpins the religion with anyone? And since this would have been the opposite approach pursued by the God who conveyed the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, surely, they would not have been speaking for Him. After all, Yahowah wasn’t the least bit shy calling Dowd ha Mashyach or referring to him as His Son.

It is curious, of course, that not one in a thousand pastors, priests, religious teachers, or scholars ever mentions the universal application of the ten placeholders found on every page of every manuscript written within three centuries of the fulfillment of Chag Matsah in year 4000 Yah / 33 CE. And yet, if any portion of the Greek text was to be considered inspired by God, then these ten placeholders would have been designated by God. It is as simple as that. Ignoring them would then be in direct opposition to God’s will if He intended them, and proof that He did not inspire the text if they were subject to our interpretation.

I am convinced that there is only one rational reason for Yahowah to write out His name 7,000 times in the Hebrew Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. He wants us to know Him by name. Yahowah’s name, and all of God’s titles, convey essential truths in Hebrew which are lost in translation and are discarded when replaced.

The most positive spin that can be placed upon the “nomina sacra” is that the sounds produced by the 22 Hebrew letters differ somewhat from the sounds represented by the 24 letters in the Greek alphabet. Of particular interest, there is no Y, W, soft H, or SH in Greek, the letters which comprise Yahowah’s or Yahowsha’s, if this had been the original basis of Iesous. And since names don’t change from one language to another, and always sound the same, there was simply no way to transliterate Yahowah precisely using the Greek alphabet. So rather than change His name, or misrepresent it, the translators of the Septuagint began the tradition of using placeholders. New Testament scribes simply followed suit.

I am not the first to recognize this predicament, or the first to deal with it. As I mentioned a moment ago, every extant 1st and 2nd century BCE and 1st and 2nd century CE copy of the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, inserts Yahowah’s name into the Greek text using paleo- or Babylonian Hebrew letters. It was only after the scribes were no longer conversant in Hebrew that the Greek placeholders were used to convey God’s name.

A prominent early manuscript scholar offered a different, albeit uninformed, comparison between the Greek placeholders and the presentation of God’s name found in the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, of which you should be aware. He claimed that the Hebrew letters YHWH represented a contraction similar to what is found in the early Greek texts. But if that were true, every single word in the Hebrew text would be a contraction. Said another way, Yahowah’s name isn’t written differently than any other Hebrew word or name used in the Towrah and Prophets or throughout Yisra’el. And the reason that this isn’t a problem is that the letters that comprise Yahowah’s name represent three of the five Hebrew vowels – with the Aleph and Ayin representing the other two. Using these vowels, every Hebrew name, title, and word is pronounceable.

The inclusion of these placeholders tells a story, one undermined when Greek words, titles, and errant transliterations were substituted for them. If you were to read the Textus Receptus or the more modern Nestle-Aland, you wouldn’t even know that these symbols ever existed. The same is true with every popular English translation. Potentially useful information pertinent to the credibility of the text and religion was discarded in the process.

Therefore, to the Christian, Yahowah’s name was changed to “Lord,” and the mythical misnomer, Iesous, became “Jesus.” As for a “Christ,” that’s a can of worms all on its own.

The truth is: “Lord” is Satan’s title. That is because the concept of lord represents the Adversary’s agenda and ambition. At best, “Jesus” is meaningless, and at worst, it is the name of the savior of the Druid religion (Gesus), where the Horned One is god. Recognizing that Constantine’s initial share of the Empire consisted of Britain, Gaul, and Spain, where the Druid religion flourished, the selection of Gesus could well have been politically expedient, as was incorporating almost every pagan holiday into the new religion.

Worse still, as I have previously mentioned, “christos” means “drugged” in Greek. In fact, it is from the rubbing on of medicinal ointments that the anointed connotation of christos was actually derived. The Rx or Rho Chi symbolism associated with today’s drug stores is a legacy of the first two letters in christos.

All of this known, after dedicating the time to properly critique Sha’uwl’s letters, I do not think the amanuenses he employed used the placeholders that are now found in the oldest manuscripts – all of which were scribed in Egypt. It would have been awkward in dictation and would have served no purpose. And if he did use them, it would have been because these same placeholders were found throughout the Septuagint. He would have wanted his epistles to look like “Scripture.” But the thing he did not want was for his mythical misnomer Iesoun, Iesous, and Iesou to be associated with Yahowah. Doing so would have completely undermined his thesis. So, just as Sha’uwl changed his own name, jettisoning its Hebrew meaning, he most assuredly discarded the message conveyed by these purloined Hebrew titles and names.

However, Sha’uwl, now Paulos, did not want anyone to realize this. As proof, he never once explained the meaning behind or pronunciation of God’s name or His Son’s titles to his Greek and Roman audiences. As a result, in every translation of Galatians, I am going to make the most reasonable and informed assumption: that a scribe in Egypt harmonized Paulos’ epistles with copies of the Septuagint, thereby adding the placeholders which were never intended by Paulos. Moreover, as a former rabbi, he would have been duty-bound to avoid all things “Yah.”

As I contemplated their intent, I became convinced that the function of the placeholders evolved to the point that, once they had served their function, they were eliminated. Originally, Hebrew letters written within Greek translations of the Towrah were designed to properly attest to the fact that every name and title associated with Yahowah and His people were Hebrew, not Greek. But then when Greek proxies were substituted from the Hebrew letters, the “nomina sacra” took on divine connotations within the Greek nomenclature. And it was this sense of divinity that the early Christian authorities employing the first scribes wanted to associate with their Iesou, with their Christu, their Kurios and Theos, even their Crux. So, the nomina sacra were deployed to give the new religion a Godly veneer.

Speaking of religious malfeasance, since Galatians is the principal text used to undermine the Towrah’s authority, and since it is cited to negate Dowd’s repeated affirmations that he did not come to annul the Torah, but instead to fulfill it, it’s important that we consider the troubadour of the Christian justification: the King James Bible, as well as the Latin Vulgate upon which this revision was ultimately based. Therefore, recognizing that the Greek text reads, “Paulos, an apostle or delegate, not separating men, not even by the means of man, but to the contrary and emphatically on behalf of Iesou Christou and God, Father of the one having roused and awakened him for public debate, raising Him out of a dead corpse...,” here is the KJV rendition of Galatians 1:1: “Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)”

It reflects its source, the Latin Vulgate: “Paulus, Apostolus, not from men and not through man, but through Iesum Christum, and Deum the Father, who raised him from the dead.”

In that credulity is important, here is how the most highly respected text, that of the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 27th Edition with McReynolds English Interlinear, reads: “Paul delegate not from men but not through man but through Jesus Christ and God father of the one having raised him from the dead...”

Sadly, the most recent rendition of Paulos’ letter simply reiterated all of the same mistakes. Consider the New Living Translation’s regurgitation of prior prose: “This letter is from Paul, an apostle. I was not appointed by any group of people or any human authority, but by Jesus Christ himself and by God the Father, who raised Jesus from the dead.”

What is particularly regrettable is that the New Living Translation’s “New Testament” coordinator was none other than Philip Comfort. And yet every book Professor Comfort has published on the extant early Greek manuscripts acknowledges the consistent presence of the placeholders. He is not ignorant of them, and therefore, he is without excuse.

Before we move on, please notice that all three translations transliterated apostolos, rather than translating its meaning. They all ignored the four placeholders found in the Greek manuscripts, and then improperly conveyed their mythical god’s name and title – the one he disavowed and told no one to repeat. Further, egeiromai, meaning “to awaken, rouse from sleep, and get out of bed” was translated based upon a tertiary definition in all three cases, as was nekros.



It is a natural, albeit annoying tendency in spoken communication to use dependent clauses. But in the written word there is no excuse for run-on sentences, some of which comprise a paragraph or more.

Paulos’ first sentence of his first letter began, “Paulos, an apostle or delegate, not separating men, not even by the means of man, but to the contrary and emphatically on behalf of Iesou Christou and Theos | God, Patera | Father of the one having roused and awakened him for public debate, raising him out of a dead corpse,…” and then continued: “…and (kai) all (pas) the (oi) brothers (adelphos) with (sym) me (emoi) to the (tais) called out (ekklesia – out called; from ek – out of or from and kaleo – to call) of the (tes) Galatias (Galatias – the Roman province of Galatia in Asia Minor, bounded on the north by Bithynia and Paphlagonia, on the east by Pontus, on the south by Cappadocia and Lycaonia, and on the west by Phrygia)…” (Galatians 1:2)

First, Paul had a posse. Like all religious founders, he sought followers. Although, as we read deeper into his letter, he and they were not in agreement on much of anything. Sha’uwl will rebuke the Galatians just as he would attack the Corinthians and Thessalonians, even his alleged coconspirators: Peter, James, and John. Turns out, apart from his lover, Timothy, Paul rubbed everyone else the wrong way.

Second, there is no basis for anything remotely related to a “church” in the Greek texts. Ekklesia is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew Miqra’ey because those who are Called Out are able to separate themselves from human institutions and join Yahowah’s Covenant family by responding to the Towrah’s “Miqra’ey – Invitations to be Called Out and Meet” with God. Second only to the spurious origins of Jesus and Christ, the replacement of ekklesia with “church” is among the most dubious copyedits found in the so-called “Christian New Testament.”

Third, the “book” of Galatians is actually an open letter or epistle. Paulos was responding to a myriad of opponents who had openly criticized his preaching in Galatia. We are witnesses, however, to only one side of this debate – in similar fashion to the never-ending argument which permeates Muhammad’s Quran. And in our quest for accuracy, the proper pronunciation of the name ascribed to this audience is Gal·at·ee·ah.

Unlike what we find in the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, where Yahowah is seen dictating His message to a prophet or scribe who then writes down what he has heard in his native Hebrew tongue, Sha’uwl’s letters are the result of dictating a stream of consciousness to one of his devotees, to someone who was not a professional scribe, in Greek, a language foreign to him, rather than his native Hebrew, Aramaic, or Latin. Further, Paulos’ continued focus on himself and his repetitive use of “but I say,” where “I” represents Paul, not God, differentiates this self-proclaimed Apostle’s epistles from Yahowah’s testimony. It also positions Paulos as the lead candidate for the wolf in sheep’s clothing who would come in his own name and still be popularly received.

As a result of this stylistic choice, Sha’uwl’s letters contain some of the most difficult passages to translate. There are many missing words, and Paul’s epistles are famous for their run-on sentences. Moreover, in Galatians, Sha’uwl is being attacked, and he is clearly on the defensive, trying to justify his persona, authority, and edicts, especially those in conflict with the Torah of the God he falsely claimed to be representing. His assertion that he was an “Apostle” was being questioned, because he was not a witness to what had transpired in Yaruwshalaim during the fulfillment of Chag Matsah in 33 CE – not that any of these other clowns were either.

Galatia, itself, was a Roman province in Asia Minor that extended to the Black Sea. The Galatians were originally Gauls who moved down the Rhine to mingle with Greeks and Jews. They were known for their quick temper, prompt action, inconsistency, and malleability. Sha’uwl knew them well, as he grew up south of them and later traveled throughout their land in the pursuit of his mission.

Now as we will do throughout this review of Galatians, here are the Nestle-Aland, the Latin Vulgate, and the King James renditions of the second verse. The NA reveals: “and the with me all brothers to the assemblies of the Galatia.” Next, the LV conveys: “and all the brothers who are with me: to the ecclesiis Galatiæ.” Of which, the KJV published: “And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:” In this case, the most egregious error cannot be blamed on the Latin Vulgate.

It is worth restating that few things in Christendom have been as harmful as changing the ekklesia, which means “called out,” to “church.” It created the impression that mythical “Jesus” who was erroneously labeled as a “Christ” to his chagrin, conceived a new Christian institution to replace the Chosen People. It further and falsely implies that this religious construct was somehow unrelated to Yahowah’s seven Invitations to be Called Out and Meet with Him, or even the Sabbath. And that led to the notion that the Feasts were nothing more than quaint “Jewish holidays.” But now, at least you know who to blame for this devastating corruption of the text. The Rosicrucian Francis Bacon, serving the political interests of King Iames | James, was the first to perpetrate this grievous and damning corruption. His predecessors, such as John Wycliffe, either transliterated ekklesia or wrote “assembly.”

In their desire to be politically correct, the revisionary paraphrase known as the NLT suggested: “All the brothers and sisters here join me in sending this letter to the churches of Galatia.” There is no Greek textual basis for “and sisters,” “here,” “join me,” “in sending,” or “this letter.” And ekklesia means “called out,” not “churches.” Equally misleading, the NLT created a new sentence, replete with a verb, to make it appear as if Paulos wasn’t engaged in a long-winded diatribe.

Also worth noting, of Sha’uwl’s first five letters, only Galatians went out under his name alone. First and Second Thessalonians were sent from “Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy.” First Corinthians was from Paul and Sosthenes, while the immensely troublesome, indeed demonic, epistle of 2nd Corinthians bears Timothy’s name in addition to Paul’s. In today’s vernacular, Sha’uwl wrote Galatians before his posse was popular.

The evidence suggests that this letter was dictated in haste immediately after the Yaruwshalaim Summit, immediately before Paul befriended Timothy. Equally telling is that while Sha’uwl will acknowledge Barnabas in this epistle, since the two severed their relationship in the immediate aftermath of the Yaruwshalaim Summit, he was excluded from the greeting and demeaned in the midst of a rather mean-spirited rant.

This next dependent clause is a great example of why it is so difficult to determine what Paulos was trying to say, and for us to ascertain why he chose to be so provocative. At issue here: there is no verb, and Charis (Greek) and Gratia (Latin) serve as the name of the popular trio of pagan goddesses.

“…Grace (charis – the name of the lovely and lascivious Greek goddesses of merriment, known to the Romans as the Gratia, from which “Grace” is derived) to you (humeis) and (kai) peace (eirene – harmony and tranquility, freedom from worry) from (apo) God (ΘΥ – a placeholder for Theos | God), Father (pater) of us (emon), and (kai) Lord (ΚΥ – a placeholder used to convey kurios, giving the Greek word for lord and master a Divine sheen), Iesou (ΙΗΥ – a Placeholder used by early Christian scribes for Iesou which became “Jesus” in the 17th century after the invention of the letter “J”) Christou (ΧΡΥ – a placeholder used by early Christian scribes for Christou | Drugged or Chrestou | Useful Implement)…” (Galatians 1:3)

It is curious that charis is not found in the earliest book, which is Mark or even in Matthew which, along with John and Revelations, was not written until around 95 CE. Nevertheless, the Christian fixation on Charis, and its Roman manifestation, Gratia, is therefore a direct result of Paul – because he obviously instigated the concept and brought this pagan terminology into his replacement testament. The Gratia serve as Paul’s rendition of Muhammad’s Satanic Verses, in which three goddesses – al-Lat, Manat, and al-Uzza were added to the Quran at Satan’s insistence. Charis appears 107 times in the self-proclaimed Apostle’s letters, and another 14 times in Acts, a book written mostly about Paul and for Paul.

The only other mentions of charis in the Greek texts appear after the publication of Paul’s epistles. We find charis used in just one conversation in John (1:14-17). It is found four times in Luke, a book written from Paul’s perspective (of which there is no 1st-, 2nd-, or 3rd-century manuscript to verify these inclusions). Of the remaining 16 occurrences, we find all but two sprinkled in the poorest attested books. Ten are found in Peter’s letters (of which there are no reliable 1st-, 2nd-, or 3rd-century manuscripts (the very late 3rd- to early 4th-century Papyrus 72 is extremely free (meaning imprecise and subject to substantial alterations), which suggests that it was heavily influenced by Marcion and/or Eusebius)). Charis appears twice in Ya’aqob | James (of which there is no pre-Constantine manuscript of the 4:6 passage in which it appears), once in 2nd John (of which there is no pre-Constantine manuscript), and once in Jude (but P78 does not include Charis in the 4th verse indicating that it was added later by a scribe whose agenda was other than accuracy).

The first use of charis in Revelation (1:4) is attested only by a fragment too small to validate. It was written by an untrained and unprofessional scribe (as determined by his penmanship) in the early 4th century on Papyrus 18. It is therefore unreliable. The second purported inclusion of charis is found in Revelation 22:21, but no pre-Constantine manuscript covers anything past the beginning of the 17th chapter, so it cannot be validated. Therefore, apart from the one poorly attested inclusion, there is no verification that charis was used by anyone other than Paul prior to the early 4th century when the Roman Catholic Constantine bootlicker, Eusebius had his way with the text and became the author of the New Testament as we know it today.

The reason that this is an issue is because Charis is the name of the three Greek Graces, known as the Charities (Charites). The English word “charity” is a transliteration of their name. These pagan goddesses of charm, splendor, and beauty were often depicted in mythology celebrating nature and fertility. They were overtly erotic. Collectively they make four appearances in Homer’s Iliad and three in The Odyssey. In the order of their appearances, they are depicted offering bedroom attire to Aphrodite, participating in a ruse to trick Zeus, and serving to lure Hypnos astray with promises of sex such that he would mislead the father of the gods. They are seen as objects of beauty when splattered with blood, as the source of feminine attractiveness for handmaidens, as those who pampered Aphrodite after she was caught being unfaithful to her husband, and finally as a means to enchant through erotic dancing. And in the case of Aphrodite, the Graces “bathed her, anointed her with ambrosial oil, and dressed her in delightful apparel so that she might resume her loving duties” after having been caught in “the loving embrace of Ares,” the God of War. As such, Homer used the enchanting lure of the Graces to depict what he called, “the beauty of war.”

Some accounts attest that the Graces were the daughters of Zeus. Others claim that Charis were the daughters of Dionysus and Aphrodite. And that is particularly troubling because Paul claims to hear one of Dionysus’ most famous quotes during his conversion experience on the road to Damascus. And as it would transpire, Paul’s faith came to mirror the Dionysus cult (Bacchus in Roman mythology), which is one of the reasons why so many aspects of Pauline Christianity are pagan. (These troubling associations are detailed for your consideration in the “Kataginosko – Convicted” chapter of Twistianity.)

The Graces were associated with the underworld and with the Eleusinian Mysteries. Their naked form stands at the entrance of the Acropolis in Athens. Naked frescoes of the Charites adorn homes in Pompeii, Italy which means that they transcended the Greek religion and influenced Rome where they became known as the Gratia. Their appeal, beyond their beauty, gaiety, and sensual form, is that they held mysteries known only to religious initiates. Francis Bacon, as the founder of the Rosicrucians (a blend of Christianity, the Occult references, and Qabalistic illusions, melded into a political movement exposing a new world order) was particularly fond of them.

At issue here, and the reason that I bring this to your attention, is that Yahowah tells us in the Towrah that the names of pagan gods and goddesses should not be memorialized in this way. “Do not bring to mind (zakar – remember or recall so as to memorialize) the name of other (‘acher – or different) gods (‘elohym); neither let them be heard coming out of your mouth.” (Shemowth / Names / Exodus 23:13)

And: “I will remove and reject the names of the Lords and false gods (ba’alym) out of your mouth, and they shall not be brought to mind and memorialized (lo’ zakar – remembered, recalled, and mentioned) by their name anymore (‘owd shem).” (Howsha’ / Salvation / Hosea 2:17)

And yet the name of the Greek goddesses, Charis, is the operative term of Galatians – one which puts Sha’uwl | Paul in opposition to the Towrah | Teaching and God condemning their inclusion. Simply stated: the “Gospel of Grace” is a pagan concept. It is literally “Gott’s spell of Gratia.”

In ancient languages, it’s often difficult to determine if the name of a god or goddess became a word, or if an existing descriptive term later became a name. But we know that Greek goddesses, like those in Babylon, Assyria, Egypt, and Rome, bore names that described their mythological natures and ambitions. Such is the case with the Charites. They came to embody many of the things the word, charis, has come to represent: “rejoicing, pleasure, loveliness, charming speech, and delightful experiences,” in addition to “licentiousness, sensuality, hedonism, merriment, and eroticism,” although the latter are typically censored from religious lexicons as unchristian. So while we can’t be certain if the name, Charis, was based on the verb, chairo, or whether the verb was based upon the name, we know that it conveys all of these things, both good and bad – albeit completely unnecessary.

There is a Hebrew equivalent to positive aspects of this term – one used in its collective forms 193 times in the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. It is chen, from the verb, chanan. As a noun, it means “favor and acceptance by way of an unearned gift,” which is why it is often mistranslated as “grace” in English Bibles. To be chanan is “to be merciful, demonstrating unmerited favor,” and as such chanan is errantly rendered as “to be gracious.”

Delving deeper into the run-on sentence, for the second time in a row, Paulos has reversed the proper order of the erroneous title and name, and I suspect to imply that “Iesou’s last name was “Christou,” a ruse Christians have swallowed as if the poison was laced with Kool-Aid. But this is like writing “Francis Pope” rather than “Pope Francis.” It is akin to saying “George King” instead of “King George.” So even if the title “Christou” was accurate, and it is not, even if he was the Messiah and Greek, and He was not, writing Iesou Christou would be wrong on every account.

Worse, now that Satan’s title, “Lord,” has been associated with Iesou Christou, those who are cognizant of the Adversary’s agenda see his demonic influence on this letter. Satan could not dissuade Dowd from fulfilling his role as the Passover Lamb, so ha Satan did the next worse thing: he inspired Sha’uwl to contravene his purpose such that the Christian Christ could be used to advance the Lord’s agenda.

Beyond this, absolutely no attempt was made in any English Bible to translate or transliterate the Hebrew basis of the Hebrew name that would have served as the basis for the Greek replacement, or even the title they were trying to ascribe to him. And yet, the Greek charis, which is used as if it were a title in the phrase “Gospel of Grace” throughout Paul’s letters, was neither translated nor transliterated from the Greek, but instead was conveyed by replicating the name of the Roman version of the Greek goddesses’ names, and therefore as “Grace.” Inconsistencies like this are troubling because they prove that the translators cannot be trusted. The mention of Grace serves to demonstrate the influence of the Latin Vulgate, the Roman Church, and Greco-Roman mythology.

While it is a smaller distinction, Yahowah uses “shalowm,” which speaks of “reconciliation.” It is deployed to describe the “restoration of a relationship.” Paulos, on the other hand, speaks of “eirene – peace,” which is the absence of war. They aren’t the same.

Continuing our review of the sources of Christian corruption, the NA reads: “favor to you and peace from God father of us and Master Jesus Christ.” Next, the KJV begins verse 1:3 by offering the pagan goddesses to the Galatians: “Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ.” This time, their inspiration was the Latin Vulgate, which reads: “Gratia and peace to you from the Father, our Domino, Iesu Christo.”

I am always interested in knowing how pagan terms enter into the religious vernacular. In this case, we just learned that “Grace” comes to us by way of the Roman Catholic Vulgate. Gratia was the Latin name for the Greek Charis. And that is why they are known as the “Graces” in English.

In Pagan Rome, the three Gratia, or Graces, served as replacements for the Greek Charis. So all Christendom has done is transliterate the Roman name into English, and then base a religious mantra, “the Gospel of Grace,” upon pagan deities two times over.

This is deeply troubling. It is a scar on the credibility of the texts. It is a mortal wound to Paul’s epistles, and it is an irresolvable deathblow to Christendom.

In the NLT, rather than Paulos offering the Galatians “Grace,” the Father and Son are depicted doing so. “May God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ give you grace and peace.”

All three translations got one name right, that of the pagan goddesses, “Grace.” The other name and titles, they got wrong. In fact, throughout this review, you will find that all of the most important names and titles – Yahowah, Mashyach, Towrah, and ‘Edown | Upright One – are always rendered errantly while all of the made-up or less meaningful names and titles are transliterated accurately in English Bible translations. And that is incriminating. Even Satan’s name and title are consistently rendered accurately, just not God’s.

Sha’uwl’s rambling introductory sentence continues with:

“…the one (tou) having given (didomi – having produced and allowed) himself (heautou) on account of (peri – concerning and regarding) the (ton) sins (hamartia – wrong doings, wanderings away, and errors) of us (emon), so that (hopos – somehow, as a marker of indefinite means) he might possibly gouge or tear out (exaireo – he might choose to pick, pluck, root, or take out (in the aorist tense this depicts a moment in time, in the middle voice, he, not we, is affected by his actions, and in the subjunctive mood, this is a mere possibility)) us (emas) from (ek) the (tou) past inflexible and unrelenting circumstances of the old system (aionos – the previous era, the long period of time in history operating as a universal or worldly system, something that was existent in the earliest or prior times that continued over a long period of time; from aei – circumstances which are incessant, unremitting, relentless, invariable, and inflexible) which (tou) had been in place (enistamai – had occurred in the past but was influencing the present circumstances in which we had been placed, depicting from where we had come, and now found ourselves, presently threatened by a previous edit (in the perfect tense this is being used to describe a completed action in the past which still influences the present state of affairs, in the active voice the subject is performing the action, and as a participle in the genitive, the circumstance into which we have been placed is being presented as a verbal adjective which is being described by the following)) which is disadvantageous and harmful (poneros – which is wicked and worthless, evil and faulty, immoral and corrupt, annoying and mischievous, laborious and criminal, unprofitable and useless, unserviceable and malicious, malevolent and malignant (in the genitive, this adjective is modifying the previous genitive participle)) in opposition to and against (kata – extending downward from, with regard to, and opposed to) the desire and will (to thelema – the wish, inclination, intent, choice, pleasure, and decision) of the (tou) God (ΘΥ – placeholder for Theos | God) and (kai) Father (ΠΡΣ – placeholder for Paters | Father which became the basis of Pope) of us (ego)…” (Galatians 1:4)

While it is a fairly small copyedit, modern Greek texts use hyper between “giving himself,” and “us missing the mark,” but on Papyrus 46, we find peri, instead. While these words convey similar thoughts, hyper, meaning “for the sake of and in place of,” makes a stronger case, which is why scribes may have replaced peri with it.

This known, there are some insights to be gleaned from this declaration – all of which are horrendous. First, once we come to understand that the misnomer Iesous, Iesoun, Iesou was not the Messiah, Son of God, or Passover Lamb we immediately recognize that something nefarious is afoot in Paul’s epistles. However, when these clauses are joined, we find Paulos claiming that the “Lord Iesou Christou,” was “the one having given himself.” This is not a small distinction. It defies the very purpose and nature of God. This error in perception is akin to calling our Father “Lord,” and thus Satanic.

Paul expressly denounces this connection with hopos, which is a “marker of indefinite means.” By including it, this introductory statement implies that Paul said that the methods deployed by God to save humankind were “not planned,” they “did not unfold on a fixed or appointed schedule,” and that His “means were unclear, vague, and imprecise.” Since this is all untrue, it’s instructive for you to know that Yahowah offered His Son as the Passover Lamb. In this way, the Messiah’s body served as the sacrifice while Dowd’s soul, once associated with our mistakes, was placed in She’owl on the Shabat to honor the promise to perfect us on UnYeasted Bread. And it occurred right on schedule in year 4000 Yah in 33 CE.

But none of this happens as a result of a plan according to Paul. His Lord slept through it all – or was dead at the time. And he must have awakened in a horrible mood, at least based upon the angry and violent verb this “apostle” ascribed to him – “exaireo: he might gouge, tear, and pluck out.”

Or perhaps, the transformation from Sha’uwl, the murderous wannabe rabbi, to Paulos, the Lord’s Apostle, was a bit overstated. By any standard, and most especially in this context, exaireo was a poor choice of words. It literally speaks of “gouging and tearing out,” in addition to “plucking and rooting out.” Yes, exaireo can also convey “to rescue, to remove, and to take out,” but when these softer approaches are connected with what the “Lord Iesou Christou” is allegedly delivering us from, it only gets worse.

In the Complete Word Study Dictionary, the primary definition of exaireo is “to pluck out” an eye. They provided this example because both times the Gospel’s Jesus is translated using the verb, it is to depict the plucking out of an offensive eye to keep one’s whole body from being cast into Hades. While it is probable that the mythical misnomer said no such thing, in that fables are typically inarticulate, there is no missing the fact that the Greek word is traumatic and violent.

The only time exaireo is used by other than Paul, the fictitious creation who has become known as “Stephen” is presented in Acts 7 telling the High Priest that Yowseph was “exaireo – delivered from” his afflictions. Reflecting this usage, the secondary definition in the Complete Word Study Dictionary is “to take out of affliction.” So in a moment, we’ll consider the source of affliction from which this Lord is supposedly “rescuing” believers.

The Dictionary of Biblical Languages concurs with its peers, reporting that exaireo principally means: “take out, gouge out, and tear out.” Secondarily, they attest that it can convey “to rescue and set free.” Then they point us to its root and reveal that exaireo also means “to choose.” But this too is a problem. While Yahowah has every right to choose whomever He wants, for the most part, the option is ours. We were given freewill so that we might choose to engage in a relationship with God once we disassociate from religion and politics and come to know Him.

Moving on, the Exegetical Dictionary lists “pluck it out” as its favored definition. This is supported by Strong’s Lexicon which presents “to pluck out” as the most accurate depiction of exaireo. This is not a loving embrace.

Nonetheless, Paulos deployed exaireo in the aorist tense, which depicts an isolated moment in time without any respect to a process. As such, the sacrifices made by Paul’s Lord were random events, neither promised nor part of a plan. They didn’t even occur on a prescribed schedule – all of which is untrue when the Miqra’ey are properly prescribed to Yahowah and Dowd.

In the middle voice, his Lord is being affected by his own actions, which could only be valid if the Lord is Satan, not Dowd. With regard to the Messiah’s sacrifices, it is Yahowah’s Covenant children who benefit from them. But if Paul’s Lord is Satan, then it is the Adversary who is most favorably affected by this inversion of the truth. And last but not least, by using the subjunctive mood, faith becomes operative, because it presents a mere possibility.

This has been a horrendous beginning, with the rejection of his Hebrew name, the selection of a Roman moniker, the unfounded boast of being named an apostle, denying his rabbinical training and its influence, inverting the order of the fictitious name and the title he errantly afforded his Lord, not once but twice, then implying that Iesou slept through the most vital aspect of the mission. Pagan Graces are now operative agents in Pauline Doctrine, and Paul has revealed that his god was the Lord. He conveyed that there had been no plan and that God’s schedule and timing were irrelevant. Then he protests that his Lord was now plucking us away from something. But from what do you suppose was Paulos’ Lord tearing us away?

To answer that question, we have to isolate the specific “aionos – prolonged circumstance, old system, or era” Paul is labeling “corrupt and worthless” with the adjective “poneros – annoying harassment, toilsome labor, burdensome hardships, and bad-natured.” And fortunately, our first hint comes from “enistamai – the threatening system in which we had been placed” by the inclination of God. With the verb scribed in the completed variation of the past tense where there is a lingering effect, we can be certain that the subject this verb and adjective is addressing with aionos is a “previous or old system” under which people, at least according to Paul, were still being adversely influenced. So, while the identity of this entity should be obvious since knowing for certain is vital to our understanding of Sha’uwl’s intent, please bear with me a while longer as we uncover something which is, well, disturbing.

Aionos can be used to address something which has been present from the beginning. It speaks of prolonged periods of time, even of so many lifetimes that these epochs might seem to last forever. It reflects eons and ages, which is why it is often translated as “forever” or “into perpetuity.” Aionos is used to describe “worldly systems” and “universal circumstances.” But not every condition can be conveyed using aionos because it is based upon “aei – circumstances which are incessant, unremitting, relentless, invariable, and inflexible.” This is telling because this is similar to how Sha’uwl describes Yahowah’s Towrah.

Paul uses aionos as if it were synonymous with the “world as it presently exists” in 1 Corinthians 8:13. It is used to mislead people into believing that there is an “order of” Melchisedec in Hebrews 5:6. Then in Ephesians 3:9, Paulos again deploys aionos to speak of a mystery which has been hidden by God from the “beginning of the world.”

But it is his selection of aionos in Colossians 1:26 which is especially telling. Once again, in association with “mysterion – religious secrets which are mysterious, remaining a mystery and not to be understood, confided only to the initiated and not to mere mortals” and also “apokrypto – deliberately hidden and concealed by those keeping secrets,” we find aionos depicting “past ages,” especially with regard to previous generations.

So let’s turn to that letter and examine what Paulos had to say about the mysterious and hidden aionos. This discussion begins with the self-proclaimed apostle arrogantly and erroneously presenting himself as the “co-savior” and “co-author” of his new religion in Colossians 1:24-25:

“Now (nyn – at the same time), I rejoice (chairo – I embrace and hail, I thrive and benefit (present tense, active voice, indicative mood)) in (en – by and in association with) the sufferings and misfortunate afflictions (tois pathema – the evil calamities and adverse emotional passions) for your sake (hyper sy – for the benefit of you, beyond you and over you), and (kai – also) I actually complete (antanapleroo – I fill up and fulfill, I make up for that which would otherwise be deficient (in the present tense the writer is portraying his contribution as being in process, in the active voice, he is signifying that the subject, which would be either Sha’uwl or the afflictions is performing this, and with the indicative mood, the writer is portraying his fulfillment of the sufferings as being actual, and thus real, even though he may not believe it himself)) that which is deficient and lacking (hysterema – that which is needed, missing, wanted, and absent from, addressing the deficiencies associated with that which is left to be done due to prior failures and inferior performances) of the (ton) afflictions (thlipsis – pressing troubles, anguishing distresses, burdensome tribulations, oppressive pressures, straits, and persecutions) of the (tou) Christou (ΧΡΥ) in (en) the (te) flesh (sarx – corporeally) of me (mou) for the benefit of (hyper – for the sake of, on behalf of, beyond and over) the (tou) body of (soma – the human and animal nature of) him (autou) who (os) is (eimi – he presently, and by his own accord, exists as (present active indicative)) the (e) called out (ekklesia – called-out assembly, congregation, meeting), of which (hos – that means), I (ego), myself, exist as (ginomai – myself conceive and bring into existence, become, cause, belong to, appear as, and possess similar characteristics to) a servant (diakonos – one who serves without necessarily having the office) extended down from (kata – in accordance with or against, with regard to or in opposition to) the administration and arrangement (oikonomia – the management, task, job, oversight, dispensation, or plan) of this (tou – the) god (ΘΩ), the (ten) appointment having been produced and granted (didomi – one caused, assigned, entrusted, committed, and given for his advantage (in the aorist participle this one time appointment was in antecedent time, in the passive this god was influenced and acted upon, and in the accusative singular this appointment was solely granted)) to me (moi – to and for myself (in the dative, Sha’uwl is saying that this belongs to him)) to (eis – for and into) you all (umas) to complete and fulfill (pleroo – to fully provide, completely enable, and finish, bringing an end to) the (ton) word (logon – statement, speech, and account) of the (tou) god (ΘΩ).” (Colossians 1:24-25)

In addition to calling himself the “co-savior,” Paulos would have us believe that he is the “co-author” of God’s Word. If we are to believe him, God personally granted Paulos the authority to complete His testimony. It all sounds a bit Muhammadan, doesn’t it? On a balance designed to weigh presumptuousness and ego, even intoxicating and deadly deceit, this would be off the scale.

So now after revealing that he is both “co-savior” and “co-author,” God’s means to make up for His own deficiencies, Paulos turns to mythology. His enormous contributions and these marvelous accommodations had been unknown to the Jews, to the descendants of Abraham and the Covenant, because they were blinded by the old system. He writes:

“The mystery and mythology (to mysterion – the sacred secrets, used as a technical religious term in the pagan cults of Greece and Rome to depict a secret rite or esoteric knowledge confided only to the initiated and not spoken to mere mortals) of the one having been hidden and concealed (to apokrypto – the one kept a secret) from those of (apo) the past age (ton aionos – the old system), and from (kia apo) their generations (genea – those fathered, the descendants who were related, successive members of the same ethnicity, thus speaking of the offspring of the old system who were Abraham’s descendants, a.k.a., Yahuwdym), but right now at this exact moment (de nyn – however presently at this time as part of this current discourse) it is being revealed (phaneroo – it is being disclosed and displayed) to (tois) his (autou) holy and pure ones (hagios – dedicated, consecrated, sacred, and set-apart saints).” (Colossians 1:26)

Since this has been all about Paul’s contributions, it would be reasonable to assume that he was implying that God wanted him to become known to the world in this way – by Paul’s own hand. But that is not why we turned to the Colossians letter. We were seeking to define aionos which, now having been linked to the “genea – descendants,” can be none other than the Towrah and its Covenant. In Paul’s mind, that was the “old system.” It is known today as the “Old Testament” as a result of Paul’s malfeasance.

And speaking of Paul’s state of mind, his affinity with the rabbinical community may be showing. Orthodox Jews view the most devout as “holy and pure ones.”

Returning to Galatians 1:4, as I mentioned before, with “enistamai – had been placed in” scribed in the perfect tense, thereby describing something that had been completed in the past but with a legacy influence, we have yet another affirmation that aionos was being deployed to depict an “old, or previously existing, system.” And then when these circumstances are presented in context to “to thelema – the intent, determination, and decision” of God, the aionos is most assuredly the Torah.

That is a problem for a number of reasons. First, Paulos is describing God’s “old system,” His Towrah, saying that it is: “poneros – disadvantageous and harmful,” when Yahowah’s perspective on His Towrah is the opposite. Just imagine having the gall to call God’s teaching and guidance “wicked and worthless, evil and faulty, immoral and corrupt, annoying and mischievous, laborious and criminal, unprofitable and useless, unserviceable and malicious, malevolent and malignant.” No. Not even remotely. Just the opposite.

Second, Paulos is introducing the myth which would forever haunt Christendom: that of an “Old Testament” being replaced by a “New Testament.” And yet God only has one testimony. His message has not changed. Likewise, Yahowah only has one Covenant, and it has yet to be renewed. Yahowah emphatically affirms that the Towrah is forever. Nothing can be added to it or taken away from it. And yet here, it is being discarded as trash – literally as “poneros – porn.”

Third, why would anyone in his right mind believe that God authorized someone to malign and discredit Him? Associating poneros with His system, with His Way, is about as slanderous as words allow.

And fourth, if God’s original system was so worthless and immoral, why would anyone suspect that this revision would somehow be worthy? How is it that the Author of such a disadvantageous and harmful scheme could ever be credible? Moreover, if this is God’s history, if what He has revealed and promised through His previous prophets is so awful, so counterproductive, why believe this “Impostle?”

And as mind-bendingly atrocious as all of this is, and it is as bad as bad ever gets, there is yet another implication so rotten, so insidious, once I saw it, I had to put my response off for a day just to cool down. Paul is saying that his “Kurios Iesou Christou” is “tearing us away from” the Torah. It is the unspoken undercurrent of Christianity.

While the Sermon on the Mount bluntly and boldly declares that the speaker came to fulfill and affirm the Towrah, and that no one should think that he came to discredit or discard it, Paulos is refuting and upending all of this. He is literally turning everything Gospel Jesus represents upside down while also demeaning the Word of God. It is all being discarded, tossed away as “poneros – trash.”

To believe Paul, Yahowah’s entire plan of redemption, His Towrah | Guidance, must be repudiated. Dowd’s sacrifice is now for naught. The Covenant is meaningless. The Invitations to Meet with God go unanswered. The Torah is public enemy number one.

And yet, by writing in a counterfeit of God’s name, by claiming God’s authorization and sponsorship, Paulos, with the stroke of a pen, has handed billions of unsuspecting souls over to Satan.

We are witnessing the creation of Christianity. Paul’s religion would be based upon the lie that the “Lord Jesus Christ came to save us from the evils of the Torah and from its mean and incompetent God.” In Christendom, rather than Dowd being the Passover Lamb saving us by affirming and fulfilling the Torah’s promises, the “Lord Jesus Christ” would be “kata – in opposition to” the “thelema” will and intent” of God, “exaireo – ripping us away from” His “poneros – disadvantageous and harmful” “aionos – Old System.”

I am reminded of what Yahowah said of this man some 2,500 years ago, 666 years before the Devil’s Advocate penned this poisonous prose:

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

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

And so those who are brought together by him, receiving him, will never be satisfied. All of the Gentiles will gather together unto him, all of the people from different races and nations in different places. (Chabaquwq 2:5)

But they do not ask questions, any of them, about him. Terse references to the word they lift up as taunts to ridicule, with implied associations that mock, controlling through comparison and counterfeit, along with allusive sayings with derisive words arrogantly conveyed.

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

While it is a painful reminder, in his opening line, Paulos actually wrote:

“…the one having produced and given himself on account of the sins and errors of us, so that somehow, through indefinite means, he might possibly gouge or tear out, pluck and uproot us from the past circumstances and old system which had been in place which is disadvantageous and harmful, corrupt and worthless, malicious and malignant, and in opposition to the desire and will, the inclination and intent, of God and Father of us…” (Galatians 1:4)

Reflecting some, but not all of this, the McReynolds translators, who provided the Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear, opted to ignore the caustic and confrontational nature of Paulos’ greeting when they offered: “the one having given himself on behalf of the sins of us so that he might pick out us from the age the present evil by the want of the God and father of us.” And not surprisingly, the dark side of the message laden within the Greek text was also ignored in the version of Galatians 1:4 found in the KJV: “Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father,” Other than “present wicked age,” the Vulgate is identical.

The NLT, however, decided to be more creative: “Jesus gave his life for our sins, just as God our Father planned, in order to rescue us from this evil world in which we live.” While the inclusion of a subject is required, “Jesus’” name isn’t part of this clause. Further, arbitrarily adding a subject to the clause artificially elevates the writing quality, giving the false impression that this could have been inspired by a rational being. Furthermore, there is no basis for “his life” in the Greek text.

The first run-on sentence within the most wretched document ever penned began with these words…

“Paulos (Paulos), an apostle (apostolos), not (ouk) from (apo) men (anthropon), not even (oude) by the means of (dia) man (anthropou), but to the contrary (alla) on behalf of (dia) Iesou Christou (ΙΝΥ ΧΡΥ) and (kai) Theos | God (ΘΥ), Patera | Father (ΠΡΑ) of the (tou) one having roused and awakened (egeiromai) him (autos) out of (ek) a lifeless corpse (nekros), (Galatians 1:1) and (kai) all (pas) the (oi) brothers (adelphos) with (sym) me (emoi) to the (tais) called out (ekklesia) of the (tes) Galatias (Galatias), (Galatians 1:2) Charis | Grace (charis) to you (humeis) and (kai) peace (eirene) from (apo) Theos | God (ΘΥ), Father (pater) of us (emon) and (kai) Kurios | Lord (ΚΥ), Iesou (ΙΗΥ) Christou (ΧΡΥ), (Galatians 1:3) the one (tou) having given (didomi) himself (heautou) on account of (peri) the (ton) sins (hamartia) of us (emon), so that (hopos) he might possibly gouge or tear out (exaireo) us (emas) from (ek) the (tou) past inflexible and unrelenting circumstances of the old system (aionos) which (tou) had been in place (enistamai) which is disadvantageous and harmful trash, indeed pornography (poneros) in opposition to (kata) the desire and will (to thelema) of the (tou) Theos | God (ΘΥ) and (kai) Paters | Father (ΠΡΣ) of us (ego),…” (Galatians 1:4)

If you believe that this man was speaking for the God he was excoriating, please give this book to someone with a functioning conscience.



Twistianity

Appalling

…Contradicting God

8

Thanatoo Nomo | Killing the Torah

Really?...

Although the words Paulos selected, taken on their own merits, provide convincing proof that the scheme he was proposing was nefarious, since the accusation that I have leveled against him would make him the most revolting man in human history, I would like to share something germane from this same man’s sixth letter, the one he wrote to the Romans.

This particular discussion begins in clever fashion, albeit in an arrogant and condescending manner. It deploys the logical fallacy known as the straw man. Before I share it, it is important that you know that the Towrah provides very few instructions regarding marriage. It reveals that men and women come together to bear and raise children. And while it speaks of adultery, it is not in the sense of having more than one wife, but instead, God does not want us to be whoring around with false gods. Further, while there is no ban on sex outside of marriage, the Towrah speaks against incest, pedophilia, rape, bestiality, and prostitution.

There is some guidance regarding a woman’s menstrual period and showing compassion to enslaved women. And as for divorce, it is as simple as writing a letter and separating. The lone rule regarding divorce says that if the woman remarries and divorces again, the first husband cannot have her back. Beyond this, there is a non-binding recommendation on how a man can assist his brother’s widow in the case of a childless marriage.

Against this backdrop, Sha’uwl | Paul opined…

“Or alternatively (e), are you presently ignorant (agnoeo) brothers (adelphos)? Knowing and understanding (ginosko) then (gar) the Towrah (nomon), I say (laleo) that (hoti) the Torah (nomos) is like a lord and master, ruling over (kyrieuo) the man (anthropos) for (epi) however long and to whatever degree that (hosos chronos) he lives (zao).” (Romans 7:1)

The Romans were hardly ignorant, but since they knew very little about the Torah, they were susceptible to what may be one of the most twisted and disingenuous arguments ever perpetrated. Here, Paul is claiming that he is an expert on the Torah, telling the Romans that he “knows and understands it.” But rather than revealing what it actually says, Paul speaks of the Torah being akin to a “Lord and Master.”

His straw man, however, bears no correlation with the truth. There is no correlation between Yahowah’s Towrah | Teaching and Guidance and the mannerisms of Satan, who is the Lord. Moreover, the Towrah emancipates the Children of the Covenant from slavery, and from being oppressed by human religious and political institutions. And as a liberating document from our Heavenly Father, it does not function as a “lord.” Therefore, Paul’s premise is invalid. Any conclusion drawn from a false premise is worthless. Had this been a debate, Paul would have already lost.

Undaunted by the truth, Sha’uwl | Paul continued to reveal why Yahowah called him “the Plague of Death.”

“To explain (gar), under the male (huphadros – subject to a man’s authority), a woman (gyne) to (to) a living (zao) man (andri) is bound, restricted and imprisoned (deo – tied, compelled, and forced, under his authority) in the Torah (nomo).

But (de) if (ean) the man (o aner) should die (apothnesko), it provides release (katageomai – it makes inoperative, it abolishes and invalidates this, discharging her) from (apo) the Torah (tou nomou) of the (tou) man (andros).” (Romans 7:2)

Ironically, it is Paul’s letters which subject women to men. The Torah says no such thing. So this, the preamble of Paul’s argument, is not only untrue, he knows that it is invalid. Therefore, Paul was lying through his teeth when he set up this argument to explain how he claims we have been released from the “old written system” “of the Torah.” But by considering his overture, we are witnessing just how devious and convoluted a misguided man’s arguments could become...

“As a result then (ara), accordingly (oun) with the man living (zao tou andros), an adulteress (moichalis) she will be considered (chrematizo – based upon what God makes known and instructed) if (ean) she may come to be (ginomai) with another man (heteros andri).

But (de) if (ean) the man (o aner) might die (apothnesko), she is (estin) free (eleutheros – no longer a slave) from (apo) the Torah (tou nomou), her (auten) not being (me einai) an adulteress (moichalis) by being with (ginomai) another (etero) man (andri).” (Romans 7:3)

Here again, after mischaracterizing the Towrah, Paul is negating reason. The woman’s relationship to the Torah is unchanged by her husband’s death. If I were to die, for example, while my wife would be free of me, she would not be released from the American judicial system. The Constitution of the United States is unaltered by my demise, as would be my widow’s rights under it.

The only reason that the widow would not be considered an adulteress for being with another man is that she is no longer married. Her changed status is irrespective of the Torah. Paul is being illogical. He was also pandering to the Romans he served…

“So as a result (hoste), brothers (adelphos) of mine (mou), also (kai) you all (umeis) were put to death (thanatoo – you were all executed, made to die and deprived of life, even exterminated, ceasing to exist) in the (to) Torah (nomo) by way of (dia – through) the body (tou soma – the physical being) of the (tou) Christou (ΧΡΥ – placeholder used by early Christian scribes for Christou | Drugged or Chrestou | Useful Implement) into (eis) you all (umas) become (ginomai) of another (etero), to the (to) dead (nekros) having been awakened and arising (egeiromai – being aroused and raised to life) in order to (hina) bear fruit (karpophoreo) of the (to) God (ΘὨ – placeholder for Theos | God).” (Romans 7:4)

This is a leap out of irrational ignorance into mind-numbing stupidity. There is no correlation between the widow’s husband dying and the Romans being put to death. And while Romans murdered hundreds of thousands of Torah-observant Jews, very few Romans were killed because of the Torah – and none in Paul’s audience. Dowd’s basar | corporeal body, serving as the Passover Lamb, upheld and affirmed the Towrah so that we might live. Therefore, to suggest that the fulfillment of Passover equates to the death of the Torah is a non sequitur.

“For (gar) when (ote) we were (emen) in (en) the (te) flesh (sarx), the suffering and misfortune (pathema – the evil afflictions and uncontrollable impulses and sexual desires) of being evil, offensive, and errant (hamartia – of being misled and of being sinful, doing wrong) was a result of (dia – by, through, and on account of) the (tou) Torah (nomou) operating and functioning (energeo – bringing about and producing) in (en) our (emon) bodies (melos – members) to (eis) bear the fruit (karpophoreo) of (to) death (thanatos – the plague, pestilence, and pandemic disease associated with dying and punishment).” (Romans 7:5)

Paul equates Yahowah’s Towrah | Teaching and Guidance to the “flesh” because he was overtly opposed to the sign of the Covenant which is circumcision. In addition, Sha’uwl was also appealing to the Roman affinity for all things Greek, especially Gnosticism, whereby the flesh is seen as inferior (unless it is Greek).

So, by referencing the “flesh,” Paul means “evil” – something he admits by calling the Torah a source of “pathema – suffering, misfortune, and evil afflictions.” He even goes so far as to say that as a result of the Torah, “hamartia – that which is evil, offensive, and errant” is brought about in us. In other words, according to Paul: the Towrah is the source of all evil according to Satan’s strategist.

Forgetting for a moment that the opposite is true, where is the logic which connects the death of a woman’s husband to this absurd mischaracterization of Yahowah’s Towrah? And how is it that God’s Teaching regarding what is good and bad, suddenly becomes the source for bringing about that which is evil? That is like saying that a documentary film on the hazards of using illicit drugs is responsible for drug abuse.

Moreover, if you think being Towrahless makes a person good, you might want to look around and check out the current state of man.

Lastly, since Dowd’s body, representing the Passover Lamb, opened the doorway to life, something which was affirmed and celebrated during Firstborn Children, it ought not be equated with death.

“But (de) now at the present time (nyni – at this very moment), we have been released and removed from (katageomai apo – we have made inoperative, abolished, and invalidated, having been discharged from the uselessness of) the Torah (tou nomou), having died (apothnesko) in (en) that which (o) inappropriately hindered and restrained us, holding us down (katecho – possessed and controlled us, holding us back) in order to (hoste – for the purpose and so as to) enslave us (douleuo emas – subjecting us to servitude, slavery, and forced obedience), to (en – in or with) different and completely new (kainotes – extraordinarily recent, unused, unprecedented, uncommon, and unheard) of spirit (pneuma) and not (kai ou) the old, inferior, obsolete, and former age and way of (palaiotes – the antiquated and arcane system, the ancient and worn out state of affairs of) that which was written (gramma – the written document).” (Romans 7:6)

This is so incongruous it staggers the mind to realize that billions of souls have been beguiled by Paul’s rubbish. As noted, there is absolutely no connection between the death of a woman’s husband and her being released from the Torah. And there is no correlation between this hypothetical individual death and either the ongoing status of the Towrah or us being told not to observe it.

Further, I would be surprised if there was a single individual in Paul’s audience who had chosen to be bound to the Torah, which means he could not be released from it – nor would he want to be. The choice to accept or reject the Torah, and its promises and provisions, is ours alone. Yahowah does not impose His Teaching and Guidance, or its benefits derived from it, upon us.

According to God, His Torah liberates us, freeing us from slavery, from death, and from judgment. But not according to Paul. His garbled and concocted version of the Torah hinders and enslaves.

Paul’s answer is to reject the “palaiotes gramma – the old and obsolete way which was written” with a “kainotes pneuma – a completely different and recent spirit.” But at least now we have come face to face with Paul admitting that my interpretation of his opening statement in Galatians was correct. The “Old System” that he was calling “poneros – corrupt and harmful” was none other than the Torah.

Based upon his incessant use of Torah in this argument, we are left with no other viable alternative. Moreover, for those who would claim that Paul was assailing the Oral Law of the rabbis, the Talmud, think again. Paul’s enemy was the “gramma – written” “nomos – Torah.” And let’s never lose sight of the fact that, in Galatians 3:10, a statement we considered in a previous chapter, Paul, himself, translates the Hebrew word “towrah” using the Greek term “nomou.”

Of course, by calling the Torah a “palaiotes – an old, inferior, obsolete, antiquated, and arcane system of a previous age,” Paul is once again projecting a message which is in complete and irreconcilable conflict with God’s testimony regarding His Towrah. One is not speaking for the other. Sha’uwl is contradicting Yahowah on behalf of a “kainotes pneuma – a completely different and recent, unprecedented and unheard-of spirit.” And that means that the spirit Paul is advocating cannot be Yahowah’s Spirit, the “Ruwach Qodesh – Set-Apart Spirit” of the Towrah.

Therefore, what spirit do you suppose Paul is advocating? Do you know of a spirit adversarial to Yahowah who is also opposed to His Towrah? I know of him and I suspect you do as well. So all I can say is that I’m glad to have this wicked man and his demonic spirit out of my life. Christians, you can have them.

As ignorant and irrational as this argument has been thus far, it is about to get ludicrous – ridiculous to the point of comical.

“What (ti), therefore (oun), shall we say (eroumen)? The Torah (o nomos) is misleading, errant, and offensive (hamartia – is evil, sinful, and wrong)? If only it were not so (me ginomai – may it not be or I wish it was not true (in the aorist, this state exists without regard to any process or plan, in the middle voice the subject, which would be Paul as the speaker, is acting on his own initiative, and with the optative mood, the implied subject is conveying his personal wishes and desires regarding a mere possibility)). Nevertheless (alla – but however, making an emphatic and certain contrast), I would not have actually known (ouk ginosko – I would not be familiar with or recognize (aorist active indicative)) that which is evil, sinful, and wrong (hamartia – that which is misleading, errant, and offensive) if not (ei me) through (dia – by) the Torah (nomou).

For (gar – because) also (te – in addition to this), lust and craving (epithymia – strong impulses and desires), I would not have been aware of (ouk oida – I would not have been able to recognize (pluperfect active indicative)) if not (ei me) for the (o) Torah (nomou) saying (lego), ‘You will not have strong desires (ouk epithymeo – you will not long, lust, or crave, you will not be sexually perverted or licentious (future active indicative)).’” (Romans 7:7)

If Sha’uwl’s toxic diatribe had not beguiled billions of souls, tearing them away from Yahowah and handing them over to worship Satan, I would be laughing, not vomiting. How is it that a notion so absurd and irrational became the foundation of a religion that influences so many?

Since Yahowah is the author of the Towrah, Paul is saying that God and His testimony are “hamartia – misleading, errant, and offensive.” And yet at the same time, he wants you to believe that this same God is not only speaking through him, but that the dimwitted deity has authorized him to vilify Him. Beyond this, he wants us to believe what he has to say about the Pauline god who has deliberately misled everyone thus far. It is little wonder faith and religion are synonymous. This is }”|| #X(%#^^#N+ | Bull Excrement!

The God Paul claims enslaved and killed everyone, now under Paul’s stewardship, is suddenly transformed as a new and different spirit providing freedom and life. And the means to Pauline salvation is by disassociating everyone from God’s foundational thesis. Moreover, the book which discourages us from going astray and being evil is actually the source of evil. Really?

The basis of his argument is as follows: 1) you are ignorant, 2) Paul is brilliant, 3) he says the Torah acts like a Lord, 3) women are under men, 4) the Torah binds, restricts, and imprisons women to men, 5) when a man dies a woman is released from the inoperative Torah, 6) as a result, the woman is no longer an adulteress, 7) when the widow goes to be with another man she is no longer enslaved to the Torah, 8) as a result, you were put to death by the Torah, 9) the body of Christou caused you and the Torah to die, 10) you came to another by dying, 11) by being awakened you bear the fruit of Paul’s god, 12) for then in the flesh you suffer evil afflictions and uncontrollable urges, 13) you are evil, offensive and wrong because the Torah is operating within you producing the fruit of death, 14) but now, you have been released from the invalidated Torah, 15) so, too bad that you have died, 16) because you were inappropriately hindered and held down by the Torah, 17) therefore, the Torah’s purpose was to enslave you, 18) but you have been released into the care of a different and completely new spirit, 19) such that you have been freed from the old, obsolete, and inferior way which was written in the Torah, 20) therefore, we should say that the Torah is misleading, evil, and wrong, 21) even though we don’t want to say this, 22) nonetheless, Paul would not have known that he was evil if it had not been for the Torah, 23) so therefore, the Torah is responsible for Paul’s lustful cravings, coveting, and sexual perversions, 24) it also killed him, but he is not dead. Got it?

On what planet does any of this make sense? I do not suppose that with such sublime rhetoric anyone is going to confuse Paul with Plato anytime soon. Hell, Hitler’s oratory was sublime by comparison.

“But now (de) the opportunity, excuse, and pretext (aphorme – the basis and starting point of the favorable environment and the opportune circumstance) to grasp hold of and experience (lambano – to select and be exploited by) that which is evil, sinful, and wrong (hamartia – that which is misleading, errant, and offensive) through (dia) the commandment (entole – the regulation) it was brought about thoroughly (katergazomai – it was performed, effected, committed, accomplished, and worked) in (en) me (emoi), including every and all (pasan) deep desire and longing (epithymia – lust and craving, uncontrollable urges, sexual perversion, and licentiousness).

For indeed (gar – because certainly), without (choris – apart from, by itself, or separately from) the Torah (nomou), that which is misleading, errant, and offensive (hamartia – that which is evil, sinful, and wrong, even guilt and the consequence of sin) is dead and no longer an issue (nekros – is lifeless and has departed, and thus is useless, futile, ineffective, and powerless).” (Romans 7:8)

Beyond the fact that there are no “Commandments,” but instead “Three Statements and Seven Instructions,” not one of them says: “You will not lust, crave, desire, long, or have uncontrollable urges.” There is none which speaks of restraining a person’s capacity to engage in “sexual perversions” or “licentiousness,” either. Apart from the fact that promiscuity is not addressed, not one of the Ten Statements was written in the future tense. They were scribed in the imperfect conjugation, which speaks of ongoing and habitual behavior without reference to time. Additionally, reasonable people realize that a document which discourages harmful behaviors does not facilitate them. As such, Paul was irrational.

Also relevant, adultery, murder, lying, and stealing don’t go away by discarding the book which opposes these things. If everyone ignored the Torah, there would be more adverse behavior, not less. Moral individuals the world over have always known that adultery, murder, lying, and stealing are wrong.

However, since Paul has been fixated on his lustful urges since he never married, and since the only person he admits to actually loving was a young boy named Timothy, it’s hard to ignore the possibility that he was a homosexual, especially now that he has said that his sexual urges were not only uncontrollable, but that he was motivated to do what the Torah disapproves. So I suspect that we are witnessing yet another confession. And as usual, rather than blaming himself for his licentiousness, Paul is blaming God. He is inferring that God made him a pervert.

As an interesting aside, Yahowah does not condemn homosexuality in His Towrah – only incest, pedophilia, rape, bestiality, prostitution, and necrophilia. As you will discover throughout the Yada Yahowah Series, the passages which infer otherwise are errantly translated. That is not to say that many homosexuals are not tormented by their sexual orientation and the effect it has on their lives and family. They are, as was Paul, but the practice is neither encouraged nor condemned by God.

Speaking of Paul’s obvious sexual conflict, a few chapters hence we will discover that through His prophetic warning against Sha’uwl, Yahowah exposed Paul’s fascination with male genitalia. It is almost as if God read Paul’s letters before commenting upon them – and that He came to the same conclusion.

Mind you, so long as he was not a rapist, incestuous, or a pedophile, as was the case with Muhammad, Sha’uwl’s sexual orientation is irrelevant up to a point. It becomes fair game, however, when he denounces what he, himself, practices, whether that be homosexuality or promiscuity. Beyond this, since Paul is fast becoming a model for the man known as the “Antichrist,” it is relevant to note that he, too, will be gay.

And on the subject of gaiety, what are we to make of the connection between Paul’s uncontrollable lusts and the Charities, known as the Gratia or Graces in Rome? After all, these naked beauties were the pagan embodiment of lasciviousness.

The indulgent and unrestrained one’s fixation on death continues, along with his animosity toward God’s Towrah...

“So then (de – therefore) I (ego) was living (zao – was alive) apart from and without (choris – disassociated from and independent of, separated from and devoid of any relationship with) the Torah (nomou). But (de) once (pote – at the point that) having happened upon (erchomai – come to) the commandment (tes entole – the regulation, injunction, and prescribed precept), the evil sin (hamartia – errant wrongdoing, being misleading and offensive) sprung to life again (anazao – became alive again, was revived, started anew, functioning and operating once more). (Romans 7:9)

They say that confession is good for the soul. But methinks this isn’t helping. Paul has again admitted that “evil and sin are all thriving within him, having sprung to life.” He is “operationally offensive and functionally errant.”

Now if we are to believe Paul, a mythical commandment, saying, “Thou wilt not be passionate, indulgent, lustful, or sexually perverted,” killed him, even though he seems almost coherent and thus conscious.

“So then (de – therefore), I (ego) died (apothnesko – ceased to exist) when (kai) was found (heuriskomai – was discovered and experienced) in me (moi) the commandment (e entole – the regulation, injunction, and prescribed precept) with reference to (e eis) living (zoe – how to live life), this (aute) brought (eis) death (thanatos). (Romans 7:10)

If only.

“For indeed (gar), this evil sin (e hamartia – this means to be mistaken and to mislead, this offensive wrongdoing, this moral consequence, and the guilt) took hold of this opportunity (aphorme lambano – ceased this pretext to grab hold of and exploit) through (dia – on account of) the commandment (e entole – the regulation, injunction, and prescribed precept) to thoroughly deceive and completely beguile me (exapatao me – to systematically entice and utterly delude me, unscrupulously and methodically cheating me), and so (kai) through it (dia autes), it killed (apoktenno – deprived me of life). (Romans 7:11)

Then proving that he was wholly beguiling and completely delusional, the unscrupulous and illogical one, after systematically attacking the purportedly enslaving and murderous Torah and its supposed evil and deadly commandment, wrote...

“So as a result (hoste) this (o) affirms (men – shows and reveals) the Torah (nomos) is holy (hagios – sacred, dedicated, and consecrated) and also (kai) the commandment (e entole – the regulation, injunction, and prescribed precept) is worthy of veneration (hagion – sacred, holy, and sincere), also (kai) good (agathos – valuable and generous).” (Romans 7:1-12)

If nothing else, by praising what he has invested the previous eleven statements destroying, the religious can now assert with reckless abandon that Paul actually supports the Towrah. If that is not enough to make your head spin and stomach queasy, Paul, after contradicting God, is now contradicting himself.

Sadly, this all reminds me of the Quran where, after Allah tells us that there should be no compulsion in religion, he orders Muslims to kill all non-Muslims in addition to any Muslim who rejects the Islamic religion.

But perhaps even in the swirling tornadic winds of circular reasoning, there is an explanation for Paul’s conclusion, whereby he negated his own ridiculous rant. Maybe it was good from his perspective that the Torah killed him. That way he could present himself as rising from the dead, resurrected to serve as mankind’s savior, especially now that the Torah had schooled him in all manner of unscrupulous methods and beguiling deceit. And of the latter, he was now lord and master.

There has always been an unspoken and ignoble aspect of Christianity that Romans 7 seems to foster. The old god, the god of the old system, died, which is why his witness was relegated to an Old Testament and why his words are no longer considered relevant. Laying the foundation for this myth, Paul has the husband, which is a metaphor Yahowah applies to Himself in relation to both Yisra’el and the Covenant, dying. This thereby frees believers from the deceased deity and his arcane methods.

Christians will, of course, deny that their religion killed God, but there is no denying that they treat Him as if He were dead. From the Christian perspective, Yahowah was replaced by “Jesus Christ,” a god-man they also claim was killed by men – Jews no less. And in the process, a real and rewarding relationship with God devolved into swimming in the cesspool of one man’s perverted imagination.



Returning to Paul’s initial diatribe, when last we were in Galatians, we found:

“Paulos (Paulos), an apostle (apostolos), not (ouk) from (apo) men (anthropon), not even (oude) by the means of (dia) man (anthropou), but to the contrary (alla) on behalf of (dia) Iesou Christou (ΙΝΥ ΧΡΥ) and (kai) Theos | God (ΘΥ), Patera | Father (ΠΡΑ) of the (tou) one having roused and awakened (egeiromai) him (autos) out of (ek) a lifeless corpse (nekros), (Galatians 1:1) and (kai) all (pas) the (oi) brothers (adelphos) with (sym) me (emoi) to the (tais) called out (ekklesia) of the (tes) Galatias (Galatias), (Galatians 1:2) Grace (charis) to you (humeis) and (kai) peace (eirene) from (apo) Theos | God (ΘΥ), Father (pater) of us (emon) and (kai) Kurios | Lord (ΚΥ), Iesou (ΙΗΥ) Christou (ΧΡΥ), (Galatians 1:3) the one (tou) having given (didomi) himself (heautou) on account of (peri) the (ton) sins (hamartia) of us (emon), so that (hopos) he might possibly gouge or tear out (exaireo) us (emas) from (ek) the (tou) past inflexible and unrelenting circumstances of the old system (aionos) which (tou) had been in place (enistamai) which is disadvantageous and harmful trash, indeed pornography (poneros) in opposition to (kata) the desire and will (to thelema) of the (tou) Theos | God (ΘΥ) and (kai) Paters | Father (ΠΡΣ) of us (ego),…” (Galatians 1:4)

Sha’uwl’s long and deeply troubling initial sentence concludes with the following clause:

“…to whom (o) the assessment of the brilliant splendor (e doxa – the opinion regarding the glorious radiance, the view or perspective on the appearance of the shining light, the estimation of amazing greatness, and as a characterization of a manifestation of god’s reputation, glorified and dignified) by means of (eis – to, on behalf of, and with reference to) the old and the new systems (tous aionas ton aionon – the past and present circumstances), Amen, let it be so (amane – verily and surely, this is indeed as it ought to be, also Amen, the name of the Egyptian sun god).” (Galatians 1:5)

This time with aionos, without a verb in sight, and now in the plural form, tous aionas ton aionon becomes “the old and the new systems.” We are witnessing the debut of one of Paul’s most diabolical notions – that of “Old” and “New Testaments.”

It should be noted that Paul, in his second of three conflicting accounts on what he saw and heard on the road to Damascus, in Acts 22:11, used doxa, which was translated here as an “assessment of the brilliant splendor.” But since by comparing Acts 26:14 with 2 Corinthians 12:7, it becomes obvious that Sha’uwl’s conversion experience was with Satan, we are compelled to consider doxa’s | glorified and dignified association with the Adversary who possessed him.

Searching Strong’s Lexicon, we learn that doxa’s primary connotation is “to express an opinion, to present one’s own view or estimate regarding someone or something.” It is from dokeo, meaning “to be of the opinion and to repute,” thereby saying: “it seems and is pleasing to me to question and to suppose.” The Complete Word Study Dictionary concurs, writing that doxa is “to think or suppose, to be of the opinion that something is so.”

It is, therefore, Paulos’ assessment that Satan is Lord. He sees him as brilliant, radiant, and beautiful – consistent with the way he was seen and presented by Ezekiel. It is how the Adversary pictures himself, so that is reassuring and convenient. While it is their self-assessment, and they would be wrong, it is instructive for us to be aware of it.

They were now a team, with one goading the other. The Master had his Apostle place him on the pedestal he craved. Satan would replace Dowd on God’s throne – at least for the religious. The Lord, in Paulos’ estimation, was a manifestation of Theos | God. He was glorious. And it would be by transitioning from the Old System to the New System that Sha’uwl’s Lord would be empowered. He even concluded his opening statement with the name of the god of Egypt (the place Yahowah withdrew His people), “Amen,” saying: “Let it be so...”

Sha’uwl has undermined Dowd, the Messiah and Son of God, while equating His Lord, Satan, to a “messenger of light.” He would say the same thing of Satan in 2 Corinthians 11:14. Even his depictions of the “flashing light” he experienced on the road to Damascus, as chronicled in Acts 9, 22, and 26, are identical to Gospel Jesus’ depiction of Satan’s fall from heaven as recorded in Luke 10:18-19 – a statement which we will analyze and compare in due time.

The Greek word amane is a transliteration of the Hebrew ‘aman, meaning “trustworthy and reliable” in Hebrew. Capitalized as “Amen,” it becomes a transliteration of the name of the Egyptian sun god: Amen Ra. And as such, Amen is the name of the god to whom Christians pray when they say, “in god’s name we pray, Amen.” So, based upon its position at the end of this clause, and its reemergence in Sha’uwl’s signoff at the end of this letter, there would be no justification for translating the meaning of the word, strongly suggesting that the inappropriate transliteration was intended.

It is interesting in this regard to note that among many of the obelisks around Rome, including one now at the center of the Vatican, their bases are inscribed with testimonials to this sun god. In fact, one in front of St. John’s Basilica still has the inscription “The Name of our God is Amen.” Such obelisks were then sanctified by Christian clerics and became church steeples replete with crosses – themselves derived from the Egyptian Ankh, the symbol of life, of the reincarnation and resurrection of physical beings in the pagan religion. As such, the most prevalent of all crosses before Christians began worshiping their Dead God on a Stick, featured Amen Rah at the top of what became the symbol of Christendom.

Bringing this to a conclusion, the opening sentence of Paulos’ first letter concludes as follows according to the Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear: “to whom the splendor into the ages of the ages amen.” And so as we probe the King James and Vulgate, it appears obvious that they wanted us to believe that the Egyptian sun god, Amen Ra, was eternal and glorious. The KJV reads: “To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.” The LV says: “To him is glory forever and ever. Amen.”

But they were not alone. The NLT conveys the same message: “All glory to God forever and ever! Amen.” The only difference between them is that the NLT arbitrarily added “God,” and thereby associated this title with “Amen.”

It didn’t take Paulos very long to reveal whose side he was on. This was not an auspicious beginning.



What follows affirms that Paul’s preaching had failed. The moment he left town, the Galatians ignored and rejected what he had told them. Accentuating the problem, this is just the second sentence of his first letter.

“I marvel (thaumazo – I am amazed and astonished, wondering and surprised) that (hoti – namely) in this way (houto – in this manner) quickly (tacheos – suddenly in haste) you change, desert, and depart, becoming disloyal apostates (metatithemai – you are waylaid, abandoning your loyalty, you are transposed, transferred to another, becoming traitors (in the present tense this is the current condition, in the middle voice they have done this to themselves under their own volition, and in the indicative mood the writer is revealing that this was actually occurring)) away from (apo) your (sou) calling in the name of (kaleo en – summons in reference to the name) Charis (Charis – the name of the lovely and lascivious Greek goddesses of merriment, known to the Romans as the Gratia, from which “Grace” is derived) to (eis) a different (heteros – another) healing message and beneficial messenger (euangelion – a compound of eu meaning beneficial, healing, and prosperous and aggelos, which is messenger and sometimes message),…” (Galatians 1:6)

It is hard to imagine this getting worse, but that is the case. There are five serious problems associated with the opening portion of Paulos’ second sentence.

First, God’s spokesmen know, they do not “wonder.” God’s prophets are aware of what is going to happen; they are not “surprised.”

Second, the benefits of Yahowah’s teaching and guidance endure. Those exposed to His Towrah, those who understand the benefits of His Covenant, those who act upon Yahowah’s guidance do not go astray. They are transformed by His Instructions, and not for a moment, but forever.

Third, by selecting metatithemai, Paulos is speaking of a mutiny. He is criticizing the Galatians because they have all turned on him. This has become personal. The Galatians’ disdain was being directed at Paulos, himself. And because he saw himself as the founder of a new religion, he considered these traitors to be apostates.

Fourth, following kaleo, Paulos has now affirmed that he was using Charis as a name. And while these naked women may have been alluring, they were mythological. God does not call us to false gods, even when they are cute.

And fifth, by saying that the Galatians had embraced a “different” healing message and messenger, what are we to make of Paul and his competition? Was he fighting against Yahowah’s prophets and against God’s Son, Dowd? Because it is becoming ever more apparent that Sha’uwl is opposed to God and those who speak for Him.

Having studied Sha’uwl’s initial letters, it becomes obvious that he never provided any audience with a sufficient number of accurate Towrah citations for them to understand Yahowah’s plan to reconcile humankind back into the Covenant Family. His style was to issue a wide range of unsupported opinions under the banner: “But I say…,” each buttressed by misappropriating and misrepresenting God’s testimony. So rather than deliver the information his audience would need to know Yahowah, and the reasons to trust Him, Sha’uwl asked the faithful “to believe him.” He even encouraged them to “imitate” him.

The other reason that Paul had so much trouble with his first three assemblies, the Galatians, Thessalonians, and Corinthians, and overtly denounced all three communities after having preached to them, is that his message was so radically different from Yahowah’s, from Moseh, Dowd, and Yasha’yah. And while it also differed radically from what would be attributed to Gospel Jesus, there was no record of him at this time.

Therefore, the widespread and pronounced rejection of Paul and his new religion, his “euangelion – good and beneficial message,” was based on two factors: it was unsupported and irrational and it was in conflict with the God he falsely claimed had authorized him to contradict Him. Frankly, it is obvious. Those who had heard and knew Sha’uwl personally, immediately recognized that he lacked the authorization and credibility to annul the word of God and that he was out for himself.

So it became an issue of credibility. Those who were aware of the Towrah wa Naby’ realized that they could trust Yahowah or believe Paul. And initially, based upon the evidence contained in the five epistles to the Galatians, Thessalonians, and Corinthians, the people who actually encountered this spurious and irrational rhetoric, those who listened to his preaching, overwhelmingly chose God over Paulos. In fact, considering Paul’s desperate admission to Timothy, by the time he was done, Asia had rejected Paul: “You know this, that all those in Asia have turned away from me...” (2 Timothy 1:15). What did they recognize that Christians are ignoring today?

Galatians 1:6 is enlightening in this regard. It states that there were two competing “euangelion – healing messengers and beneficial messages.” Obviously, the messenger and message he was touting was himself and his religion devoted to Charis. And as we make our way through his initial letter, we will come to realize that he was being rejected in a manner that would naturally prompt the retort we find in Galatians. So then, we are left to wonder who comprised his competitors.

Our options are Yahowah and His Towrah, the mythical Gospel Jesus who was Torah observant, or one or more of the supposed disciples, namely Shim’own Kephas | Peter, Yahowchanan | John, or Ya’aqob | James – none of whom were Torah adverse – and none of them were known in Asia at the time of this letter. And that leaves only one potential competitor: God. Perhaps that is why Paulos spoke of his preference, that of “their calling in the name of Grace,” as being superior to being called in Yahowah’s name. The Gratia were more attractive, at least from Paul’s perspective.

One of the reasons our options are so constrained is because the challenger was said to be wielding a different “euangelion – healing messenger and beneficial message.” Therefore, Paulos’ foe could be neither Judaism nor Rome. At this place and time, Rome and the Rabbis were beginning a war with one another and were the antithesis of healing and beneficial. Furthermore, in his subsequent letters and in Acts, Paul spoke glowingly about both Judaism and Rome, eliminating them as adversarial candidates.

Even though the answer is obvious, the reason that it is not widely seen or accepted as such is because of Paul’s approach. By claiming to speak on behalf of the individual and message he is opposing and against the spirit he is promoting, to discover the truth, a person has to compare God’s testimony to Paul’s. But by disparaging Yahowah’s revelation and by demeaning and discrediting His actual Son and Messiah, those who are swayed by Paul are predisposed to discard this evidence against him. So long as the audience remains religious, operating in the realm of faith, Paul’s scheme prevails. To understand who is opposing whom, we have to be willing to examine the evidence and process it judgmentally.

In reality, Paul defined his foe in the first sentence of his first letter. He wrote that we were being plucked away from the counterproductive and laborious Old System, more accurately known as the Towrah. If it were not his enemy, poneros would not have been used to demean it. So now in the second sentence, Paulos is distinguishing his approach from God’s. And he is showing his bewilderment and frustration that those he spoke to in Galatia prefer that old God to his new plan.

And in this way, Satan is using the same approach he would pursue throughout the Quran with the Never-Ending Argument. Almost everyone who knew and heard Muhammad recite his Quran rejected him and mocked him. So, Satan, as the god of the Quran, mocked the mockers and threatened to torture them in the fires of his hell. He never offered any proof of his claims, but was quick to condemn those who sought it, just like Paul.

Had it not been for two clever tricks, the obvious answer would have become apparent to almost everyone centuries ago. The first of these is that, by pretending to speak for God, by pretending to be a brother, Sha’uwl became the wolf in sheep’s clothing. He was seen for other than what he was. He was accepted and viewed as being one with them, even while he was devouring them.

It is why Yahowah admonishes us for not questioning Sha’uwl. It is why Sha’uwl changed his name. It is why the Sermon on the Mount insists that the adversary was a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Beware.

The second ploy is found in the writing style, which blends circular reasoning and all manner of logical fallacies with a myriad of inappropriate word choices. This word salad of foreign ingredients is a prime example. Due diligence is required as is thoughtful consideration to understand why a violent verb was deployed to demean what is being heralded as a pornographic and arcane system. And yet, those who have been conditioned by their political, religious, academic, and media institutions to avoid being judgmental, even critical, read right through Paul’s confession and are left to believe the liar.

Also with regard to Galatians 1:6, please note that Sha’uwl did not write “Gospel” at the end of his sentence. Euangelion, pronounced “yoo·ang·ghel·ee·on,” is a compound of two common Greek words. It is not a name or a title. And if it were a name or title, it should have been transliterated as “Euangelion,” which was done in Jerome’s Latin Vulgate, but not in any modern English translation. For example, in the King James, euangelion was neither translated nor transliterated, but instead, the Greek word was replaced by the religious term “Gospel.”

And if I may, in the Quran, Satan constantly praises the Euangelion, saying that he inspired it. With support like this, we are immediately cognizant of whose side Paul was on and for whom he was writing.

The King James conveys: “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel.” But here, now for the second time, we cannot blame Jerome for the mistake found in the KJV. There is no “Gospel” in the Latin Vulgate: “I wonder that you have been so quickly transferred, from him who called you into the grace of Christi, over to another evangelium.” We can, however, blame Jerome for the inclusion of “Christi,” which is errant on every account. According to P46, the oldest witness to this letter, Paul did not include the misappropriated title in this sentence, neither by placeholder nor by having his amanuensis write it out.

This affirms two things. First, the King James Version is a translation of the Latin Vulgate not the Greek text – as are most subsequent translations. And second, Paul called his faithful to “Charis / Gratia / Grace,” not to the teaching and guidance of Yahowah’s Towrah, which was different in every imaginable way.

The Christian misnomer, “Gospel” was first deployed in the Tyndale and Geneva Bibles, forerunners of the King James Version, which itself was published in the early 17th century. It cannot be found in John Wycliffe’s translation, the first made in the English language. Wycliffe used “euangelie,” not “Gospel,” in the late 14th century.

Let’s juxtapose the New Living Translation against Sha’uwl’s actual words so that you might fully appreciate the liberties they have taken: “I am shocked that you are turning away so soon from God, who called you to himself through the loving mercy of Christ. You are following a different way that pretends to be the Good News…” Compared to the NA: “I marvel that thusly quickly you change from the one having called you in favor of Christ into other good message.” And as a reference, this is literally what Paulos conveyed: “I marvel and am amazed, even astonished, that in this way how quickly and in haste you changed, deserting and becoming disloyal apostates and traitors away from your calling in the name of Charis to a different healing message and beneficial messenger,…” (1:6)

As a result of some religious tampering, whereby euangelion was replaced with “Gospel,” Christians now believe that Paul’s preaching was in harmony with the four hearsay accounts contained in what have become errantly known as the “Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.” But there are many problems with that theory. First, Sha’uwl never quoted a single line from any of them. He did not even reference them. Second, these accounts were not called “Gospels.” And third, they did not exist circa 50 CE when this letter was penned.

At the time Galatians was written, the hearsay accounts found in Mark and Luke were several decades away. Worse, the errantly attributed Matthew and John would not come to exist until 95 CE – two generations and forty-five years removed from Sha’uwl’s current rant.

Of Mark, Eusebius wrote: “Markus, who had been Peter’s interpreter, wrote down carefully…all that he remembered of Iesou’s sayings and doings. For he had not heard Iesou or been one of his followers, but later, he was one of Peter’s followers.” His conclusion is not true. The only time Mark is mentioned, he is part of Paul’s posse and was solicited by Paul for this purpose.

Origen, Tertullian, and Clement concurred, writing at the end of the 2nd century, that “Mark compiled his account from Peter’s speeches in Rome.” If so, Galatians predates Mark by at least a decade. It would not have been written in Greek, but instead Latin had that been the case. And if in Rome, Paul would not arrive and cross paths with Mark until he was rejected, isolated, and alone.

Therefore, a connection between Mark and a Gospel available to Paul or the Galatians at this time cannot be made – especially since Paul will overtly condemn Peter in this same letter. Also, we must be careful. There is no credible historical evidence that Markus existed, that he translated for Peter, or that he compiled the book attributed to him. And there is no evidence that Shim’own / Peter was ever in Rome. And that is the other reason I attribute Mark to being under Paul’s influence. According to his own testimony, Sha’uwl breathed his last and died in Rome.

Lucas was yet unknown to Paulos or to the supposed disciples at the time Galatians was scribed. Therefore, his hearsay portrayal in favor of Paul had not been written, making any association between it and Paulos’ use of euangelion at this time in Galatians 1:6 ill-advised. Moreover, Lucas was Paul’s personal healer and promoter and served as his propagandist.

Turning to John, the earliest the book attributed to him could have been written was 95 CE. And one cannot draw an affinity between John and Paul since the self-appointed Apostle went to war against him – personally condemning John’s conflicting and adversarial euangelion.

Therefore, it is for certain that Paulos was not writing on behalf of or promoting the portrayals and myths of subsequent Gospel Jesus now found in Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. At the time the Galatians letter was penned, Divine Writ was comprised solely of the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. It still is.

Should you be wondering why in his subsequent letters Paulos never so much as even refers to the existence of a biographical portrayal of Gospel Jesus, the answer is twofold. First, Paul’s message was the antithesis of that which can be derived from the accounts purporting to portray the words and deeds of Iesou not the Christou. The caricature of “the Lord” painted by Paulos differs so substantially in nature, style, and substance from the myth that they have too little in common to have been acquainted.

And second, Paul’s ego got in the way. He was in competition with him. After all, he wanted us to believe that he was both “co-savior” and “co-author,” the chosen one completing what God, Himself, could not accomplish without his assistance. Someone of his perceived status would never cite a lesser individual.

Besides, Jesus never existed, so what’s the point? It was Dowd’s life they were miscasting and he was too closely affiliated with Yahowah to serve Sha’uwl’s purpose. This Sha’uwl was a reflection of the king who sought to destroy Dowd long ago. It isn’t a coincidence that they share the same name, pursue the same foe, or were both demon-possessed.

The Old English moniker, “Gospel,” like the use of the Greek goddesses’ name, Charis, known by the Latinized “Gratia – Grace,” has caused millions to believe that the “Gospel of Grace” replaced the Torah, when instead the Torah is the source of “mercy.” To know the Towrah is to know “chanan – unearned favor” and the liberty it provides. So this bears repeating: there never was such a thing as a “Gospel.” There still isn’t.

No matter where you look, Christian apologists say that “Gospel means ‘good news.’” But if that is true, why not simply write “good news.” Or more to the point, since euangelion actually means “healing messenger and beneficial message,” why not translate the Greek term accurately?

Christian dictionaries go so far as to say that “gospel is from go(d) meaning ‘good,’ and spell meaning ‘news.’” But “god” was never an Old English word for “good.” Instead, “god” is a transliteration of the Germanic “Gott,” an epithet for Odin. The Old English word for “good” was “gud.” And the Middle English “spell” is from the Old English “spellian,” which means “to foretell, to portend, or to relate.’” As such, “gospel” does not mean “good news,” and is therefore not a translation of euangelion as Christians protest.

Other dictionaries suggest that gospel was “derived from an Anglo-Saxon word which meant ‘the story concerning God,’” even though there is no etymological history of such a term in the annals of the Anglo-Saxons.

While we are on this subject, it is insightful to know that, according to Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, the English word, “spell,” came to us “from Old English by way of Middle English.” And “circa 1623 (which would be around the time the KJV was being popularized) a spell 1) was a spoken word or form of words which were held to have magic power, 2) was a state of enchantment, or 3) was used in the context of casting a spell.”

Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary says: “The word ‘god’ is common to the Teutonic tongues…. It was applied to heathen deities and later, when the Teutonic peoples were converted to Christianity, the word was elevated to the Christian sense.”

Common to the Teutonic tongues…. It was applied to heathen deities and later, when the Teutonic peoples were converted to Christianity, the word was elevated to the Christian sense.”

Further affirming that “Gospel” conveyed being under “Gott’s spell,” Merriam-Webster explains: “god is from Old English by way of Middle English and is akin to the Old High German got, which was derived before the 12th century CE.” Along these lines, we learn that gottin is the Old High German word for “goddess.”

Digging a little deeper in our quest to understand the religious origins of “gospel,” circa 17th century Europe, when the religious connotation was conceived and initially promoted, the Encyclopedia Britannica says that “God is the common Teutonic word for a personal object of religious worship…applied to all superhuman beings of the heathen mythologies. The word god upon the conversion of the Teutonic races to Christianity was adopted as the name of the one Supreme Being.” Therefore, in the manner common to almost every Christian corruption of Yahowah’s Word, the religious term is drenched in paganism.

By comparison, there is nothing particularly special about the Greek word, euangelion. The first recorded use was in the feminine, as euanggelia, as opposed to the neuter form most common in these Greek texts. It was attributed to Augustus in 9 BCE in Priene where the Roman Caesar was hailed as the “Savior of the world for the ‘beneficial proclamation’ of the Julian calendar.”

As I have mentioned, euangelion is a compound of two common Greek words. Eu means “beneficial, healing, and prosperous,” and aggelos is the Greek word for “messenger” and thereby “message.” So while Christians will protest that something which heals and is beneficial is by definition “good,” and that a message can be “news,” there is no reason to extrapolate when the primary meaning is readily apparent. Therefore, those who seek to know and share the truth are compelled to translate euangelion accurately so that others will understand its intended meaning. Further, there was nothing beneficial or good about Sha’uwl’s message, which is why Yahowah called him the “Plague of Death.”

Along these lines, if aggelos meant “news,” as opposed to “message,” the aggelos, or “spiritual messengers,” would be “newscasters,” instead of Yah’s spiritual envoys, representatives, and messengers. Moreover, while eu can be translated as “good,” “beneficial and healing,” there are far more accurate and descriptive definitions.

In Hebrew, a messenger is a mal’ak. A herald of news in a basar. Towb means good and beneficial. ‘El is one of Yahowah’s titles. ‘Ed is testimony. Further, King Sha’uwl was “good” while King Dowd was “right.” Which do you suppose matters?

Even in Greek, if the intent was to communicate “good,” as in “Good News,” the preferred Greek words for “good” are kalos and agathos. Further, in the Sermon on the Mount, the speaker is translated using the former in Matthew 5:16, saying: “Thusly, let your light shine before men so that they might see within you the responses and endeavors which are good (kalos), thereby wonderfully attributing them to your Heavenly Father.” And with the latter, Gospel Jesus says “I am good (agathos),” in Matthew 20:15.

Before I present Yahowah’s perspective on what is actually “towb – good, productive, and beneficial,” I’d be remiss if I didn’t share the fact that the same light and endeavors addressed in the Sermon on the Mount are equated to Yahowah and his Towrah in the 105th Psalm, which proclaims: “Because they focus upon and observe, closely examining and carefully considering, His clearly communicated prescriptions of what we should do in life to live, and His Torah, His Source of Teaching and Instruction, they are saved, radiating Yah’s light.” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 105:45)

With this connection established, and especially now that Yahowah and His Towrah have become Sha’uwl’s enemy, let’s take a moment more and consider the position articulated by the other side in this debate.

While I cited much more of what Dowd | David was inspired to write in the 19th Psalm concerning Yahowah’s message, His Guidance and His Towrah in a previous chapter, please consider this reminder...

“Yahowah’s Towrah (Towrah) is complete and entirely perfect, lacking nothing, helpful, healing, beneficial, and true (tamym), returning, restoring, and transforming (shuwb) the soul (nepesh). Yahowah’s testimony (‘eduwth) is trustworthy and reliable (‘aman), making understanding and obtaining wisdom (chakam) simple for the open-minded (pethy).” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 19:7)

In the following Proverb, this same Towrah is called “towb – good.” This means, according to God, the “good news” and His Towrah are synonymous, making Paul’s claims ridiculous.

“Consistently listen (shama’) children (ben) to the correct and disciplined instruction (muwsar) of the Father (‘ab) and (wa) pay attention (qasab) so as (la) to know and appreciate (yada’) understanding and discernment (bynah).

For indeed, such teaching and learning, instruction and direction (laqah) are good, beneficial, and helpful (towb – is proper, prosperous, favorable, pleasing, enjoyable, valuable, and healing). For this reason, I have given you (la natan) My Towrah (Towrah). You should not forsake, neglect, or reject it (‘al ‘azab).” (Mashal / Word Pictures / Proverb 4:1-2)

Dowd’s magnificent 119th Psalm is a composition of inspiring and beautiful lyrics. It is an ode to the Towrah with 22 stanzas presented in alphabetical order, celebrating the letters which comprise Yahowah’s Guidance. Let’s turn to it next…

“You have actively engaged and accomplished (‘asah) good, beneficial, and generous things (towb) with and through (‘im) Your associate and coworker (‘ebed), Yahowah (Yahowah), in accordance with (ka) Your Word (dabar).

The good and positive aspects associated with (towb) exercising good judgment, the whole process of informed, rational, decision-making (ta’am), leading to (wa) understanding based upon knowledge (da’ath) teaches me so that I will benefit by choosing to respond appropriately (lamad).

Indeed (ky), in (ba) the terms and conditions of Your covenant agreement (mitswah), I completely trust and totally rely because they are verifiable and enduring (‘aman). (Mizmowr / Psalm 119:65)

Prior to the time that I responded and answered this invitation, before I was thoughtful, spoke truthfully, and composed these songs, I was preoccupied and (terem ‘anah) I (‘any) unintentionally erred, I inadvertently wandered aimlessly without deliberation and sinned without meaning to do so because I was unwittingly deceived and therefore placed my faith in mistaken opinions (shagag).

But (wa) now, at this point in time (‘atah), I literally keep my eyes focused upon, carefully observing, closely examining, diligently exploring (shamar) Your Word, Your Instruction, and Your Promise (‘imrah). (Mizmowr 119:66)

You (‘atah) are good (towb – generous and pleasing, enjoyable and festive, beautiful and pleasant to be around), Yahowah (Yahowah), and (wa) are doing what is good and beneficial by (yatab) helping me learn, becoming better acquainted, while teaching me how to properly respond to (lamad) Your clearly communicated prescriptions of what I should do to share life with You (choq). (Mizmowr 119:67)

The infamous, self-motivated, and presumptuous (zed) liers, they mislead and deceive with their speeches promoting worthless beliefs (sheqer). Smearing and slandering me with misinformation, these scribes conceal what I have said by plastering over me with their message (‘al taphal ‘any). (Mizmowr 119:68)

I (‘any), with all my heart, intent, personal commitment, and sense of purpose (ba kol leb), myself, will engage to save, to protect and preserve, sparing by branching out while observing (natsar) Your precepts, those instructions which You have entrusted to us, encouraging us to pay close attention to and examine for guidance so that we respond appropriately to You (piquwdym). (Mizmowr 119:69)

Their hearts and judgment (leb hem) are calloused and shameful, ignorant and irrational, unresponsive and gross (tapash) similar to lipid tissue, both fat and scummy (ka ha cheleb).

I, myself, delight in and totally enjoy, forever anointed by and bound to (‘any sha’a), Your Towrah | Teaching and Guidance (Towrah ‘atah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 119:70)

Dowd told us the truth, boldly and without equivocation. So why would anyone in their right mind accept Paul’s word over the Messiah’s testimony? He just said that he is our Savior and that this result was enabled through the Towrah. While at the same time, the declared Son of God warned us about Sha’uwl in no uncertain terms.

“It is good and beneficial for me (towb la) that indeed (ky) You responded, providing Your testimony and answers (‘anah) for the purpose of (ma’an) teaching me how to properly respond to (lamad) Your engraved and clearly communicated prescriptions of what I should do to be cut into this relationship (choq). (Mizmowr 119:71)

The Towrah | Teaching, Instruction, Direction, and Guidance (towrah) of Your mouth (peh) is better and more prosperous for me (towb la) than (min) thousands of (‘eleph) gold and silver coins (zahab wa keseph).” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 119:65-72)

In that Dowd | David is speaking to and on behalf of Yahowah and His Towrah, his insights and perspective regarding both are relevant to this discussion. It is little wonder Yahowah anointed him the Mashyach | Messiah and refers to him as His beloved “Ben – Son.”

In the 25th Psalm, we find him saying...

“The rebellious guilt (chata’ah) of my youth (na’uwrym) and rebellion (pesha’) do not remember (lo’ zakar) as (ka) Your love and mercy for me is recalled and memorialized (chesed zakar la ‘atah) on account of (ma’an) Your goodness and productive purpose (towb – Your perfect nature), Yahowah (Yahowah). (Mizmowr / Psalm 25:7)

Yahowah (), the Most High (‘al), is good (towb – moral, beautiful, pleasing, joyful, beneficial, generous) and always right, completely correct and consistently straightforward (yashar), therefore (ken), He is the Source of teaching and instruction, and He guides and directs (yarah) the guilty (chata’) with the Way (ba ha derek). (Mizmowr 25:8)

He enables the way of (darak) the unpretentious and sincere who respond and actively engage (‘anaw) with this means to exercise good judgment and to achieve justice by resolving disputes (ba ha mishpat). He provides the information to teach (lamad) those who respond to His call and act upon (‘anaw) His Way (derek). (Mizmowr 25:9)

All (kol) the mannerisms and conduct (‘orah) of Yahowah (Yahowah) are merciful and beyond reproach (chesed) and they are trustworthy and reliable (‘emeth) for (la) those who are preserved by (natsar) His Family-Oriented Covenant Relationship (beryth) and His enduring Witness and restoring Testimony (‘edah). (Mizmowr 25:10)

As a result (ma’an) of Your name (shem), Yahowah (Yahowah), You will choose to genuinely and completely forgive (wa salah) my rebellious guilt (la ‘awon), which (ky huw’) is great (rab). (Mizmowr 25:11)

Hence (zeh), whatever (my) individual (‘ysh) respects and reveres (yare’) Yahowah (Yahowah), He will teach and guide him (yarah) in (ba) the Way (derek) he should choose (bachar). (Mizmowr 25:12)

His soul (nepesh), in (ba) the most favorable, pleasing, and festive circumstances (towb), will dwell and endure (lyn), and his descendants (zera’) will inherit (yaras) the realm (‘erets). (Mizmowr 25:13)

A very close and intimate fellowship with (sowd) Yahowah () is certain for (la) those who respect and revere Him (yare’). And His Family-Oriented Covenant Relationship (beryth), He makes known to him (yada’).” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 25:7-14)

Speaking of “towb – good,” here is another insight from the man Yahowah said was “tsadaq – right”...

“And then (wa) I encourage you to consider acting upon and actively engaging in (‘asah) that which is good, beneficial, moral, agreeable, generous, and pleasing (towb – that which is in accord with the standard, is valuable, prosperous, ethical, just, worthy, and worthwhile) and as a result (wa) live (sakan) forever (la ‘owlam).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 37:27)

A bit more comprehensive illustration regarding the enduring merits of Yahowah’s Towrah is advanced in the 40th Mizmowr / Psalm. And once again, these lyrics were scribed by a man whose name means “Beloved.” If you want God to view you similarly, this is good advice...

“At that time (‘az) I shared (‘amar), ‘Behold (hineh), I am coming (bow’) with (ba) the scroll (magilah) of the written document (sepher) which was dictated and scribed (kathab) on my behalf (‘aly) regarding (la) the work You have done and will do to accept me, God (‘asah ratsown ‘elohy). I genuinely want and willingly accept this (chaphets). (Mizmowr / Psalm 40:8)

Your Towrah | Instruction and Teaching, Guidance and Direction (Towrah ‘atah) – is within the midst (tawek) of my inner nature (me’ah). I have proclaimed the good news (basar) of vindication as a result of being right, fairly and accurately, responsively, honestly, and correctly (tsadaq) in (ba) the great assembly and esteemed community (rab qahal). Behold (hineh), my lips (saphah) have not been restrained (lo’ kala’), Yahowah (Yahowah). (Mizmowr 40:9)

You (‘atah), Yourself, know, You respect and acknowledge (yada’) that I have not hidden or concealed (lo’ kasah) Your means to achieve righteous vindication through being correct (tsadaqah) in the nature of my thinking (ba tawek leb). (Mizmowr 40:10)

I have spoken about (‘amar) Your trustworthiness and reliable nature (‘emuwnah) and (wa) Your salvation and deliverance (yashuw’ah). I have not hidden or concealed (lo’ kachad) Your mercy (chesed) or (wa) Your integrity, honesty, and steadfast reliability (‘emeth) on behalf of (la) the esteemed community and great assembly (qahal rab). (Mizmowr 40:11)

Yahowah (), You (‘atah) will not withhold (lo kala’) Your love and mercy (rachamym) from me (min), Your unfailing devotion, love, and favoritism (chesed).

Moreover (wa), Your integrity, honesty, and trustworthiness (‘emeth) continually (tamyd) protect me from harm and they spare my life (nasar). For indeed (ky), You are surrounding me, providing a covering for me, God (‘aphaph ‘al). (Mizmowr 40:12)

For the entire duration of time (‘ad), evil and wrongdoing will not be counted against me (ra’ah lo’ ayn ‘aown | ‘awon). And (wa) I will not (lo’ yakol) witness them (la ra’ah) though they are more numerous (‘atsam) than (min) the hairs on my head (sa’arah ro’sh). (Mizmowr 40:13)

So (wa) my heart and judgment (leb) are restored (‘azab), accepting and delighted with (rasah) Yahowah (Yahowah) saving through me (nasal). Yahowah (Yahowah) is prepared and ready, even excited about (chuwsh), helping and supporting me, influencing and assisting me (‘ezrah).’” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 40:8-14)

Like Yahowah, I would rather listen to Dowd than Sha’uwl. Nothing has changed in 3,000 years.

Let’s consider one last word of advice, some of which also appeared in a previous chapter. This next morsel of guidance comes from the Towrah, itself. Moseh is summarizing what he has learned for our benefit.

“That which is undisclosed (satar) is for Yahowah (la ), our God (‘elohym). Those things which are revealed and made known (galah) belong to us (la), and are for (la) our children (ben) eternally and forever (‘ad ‘owlam), to act upon and conduct ourselves in accordance with (‘asah ‘eth) all (kol) the words (dabar) of this (ze’th), the Towrah (ha Towrah – the signed, written, and enduring way of treating people, giving us the means to explore, to seek, to find, and to choose the source from which instruction, teaching, guidance, and direction flow, that provides answers which facilitate our restoration and return, even our response and reply to that which is good, pleasing, beneficial, favorable, healing, and right, and that which causes us to be loved, to become acceptable, and to endure, purifying and cleansing us so as to provide an opportunity to change our thinking, attitude, and direction). (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 29:29)

Indeed, truly and surely (ky), you should actually listen to (shama’ ba) the voice and the call, the invitation and summons (qowl), of Yahowah (), your God (‘elohym), for the purpose of observing, closely examining, and carefully considering (la shamar) the terms and conditions of His binding covenant contract (mitswah) and His clearly communicated prescriptions regarding life (wa chuwqah) which are inscribed (ha katab) in (ba) the written scroll (ha sepher) of this (ze’th), the Towrah – the Instruction and Teaching, the Guidance and Direction (ha Towrah).

That is because (ky) you can actually be transformed after changing, and be restored after returning (shuwb) to (‘el) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym), with all (ba kol) your heart and thinking (leb), and with all (wa ba kol) your soul and consciousness (nepesh). (Dabarym 30:10)

For (ky) these (ze’th) conditions of the agreement (mitswah) which beneficially (‘asher), I am (‘anky) instructing you (tsawah) this day (ha yowm), they are not too difficult for you. They are not a hardship (huw’ lo’ pala’) for you (min), nor are they beyond your reach (wa lo’ huw’ rachowq). (Dabarym 30:11)

Indeed (ky), the exceedingly powerful and great (ma’od) Word (ha dabar) of your God (‘el) facilitates your approach and brings you near, enabling you to engage in a personal relationship (qarowb) – as part of your speech (ba peh), and in your heart, influencing your thinking (wa ba leb) – to engage with, capitalize upon, and celebrate Him (la ‘asah). (Dabarym 30:14)

Open your eyes, establish this perspective, and become aware (ra’ah): I am offering (nathan) on your behalf and in your presence (la paneh) this day (ha yowm) an association with (‘eth) the life and living (ha chay) and (wa) an association with (‘eth) that which is beneficial and productive (ha towb). But also (wa) that which is associated with (‘eth) death (ha maweth) and (wa) with (‘eth) that which is bad, evil, wicked, harmful, and destructive (ra’). (Dabarym 30:15)

Because, that which (‘asher) I am (‘anky) instructing and guiding you (tsawah) this day (ha yowm) is for the purpose of (la) you wanting to genuinely love, and you choosing to actually demonstrate your affection in a personal and familial relationship (‘ahab) so as to be closely associated with (‘eth) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym), achieving this result by (la) actually walking (halak) in His Ways (ba derek).

It is also (wa) for the purpose of (la) observing, closely examining, and carefully considering (shamar) His terms and conditions as they pertain to His relationship agreement (mitswah), His clearly communicated and engraved prescriptions of what we should do in life to live (chuwqah), and (wa) His means to exercise good judgment and justly resolve disputes (mishpat), as well as (wa) to restore your life and keep you alive, renewing and preserving your life (chayah), (wa) to make you great, increasing you exponentially so that you grow in every possible way (rabah).

In addition (wa), Yahowah (), your God (‘elohym), will kneel down, diminishing Himself in love to greet, welcome, and bless you, invoking loving favors upon you (barak) in the realm (ba ha ‘erets) where relationally (‘asher) you (‘atah) are going to, and will be included within (bow’ la), this named place of renown (sham / shem), receiving it as an inheritance (la yarash). (Dabarym 30:16)

But if (wa ‘im) you turn your heart and thinking away from Him (panah / paneh leb), and if you do not listen (wa lo’ shama’), and you are lured away (wa nadah), and you bow down in worship (hawah) to other gods (la ‘acher ‘elohym), and you actively engage with and serve them (wa ‘abad), (Dabarym 30:17) I am reporting the following message, warning, and verdict (nagad la) this day (ha yowm) that indeed (ky) you will be utterly destroyed and completely annihilated, ceasing to exist, and thus (‘abad ‘abad) not elongating your days (lo’ ‘arak yowmym) upon (‘al) the earth (‘adamah). (Dabarym 30:18)

I have testified repeatedly to restore and warn (‘uwd) you in (ba) this day (ha yowm) with regard to (‘eth) the spiritual realm (ha shamaym) and in association with (‘eth) the material world (ha ‘erets), and about life (wa ha chay) and death (wa ha maweth). I have freely offered (nathan) on your behalf and in your presence (la paneh) the blessing which restores the relationship (barakah) and also (wa) the curse of being abated and seen as worthless (qalalah).

So (wa) you should actually choose in favor of (bachar ba) continued life and renewal, of nourishment and growth (chay), so that (ma’am) you (‘atah) and your offspring (zera’) are restored to life, renewed, and are spared (chayah). (Dabarym 30:19)

This is accomplished by (la) choosing to genuinely love and by closely associating with (‘ahab ‘eth) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym), by (la) listening to (shama’) His voice and His call (qowl), and by (wa la) choosing to stay especially close to Him (dabaq). For indeed (ky), He (huw’) is the source of your life, and of renewal (chay), and of lengthening (wa ‘orek) your days (yowm), enabling you to dwell (la yatsab) in the realm (‘al ‘adamah) which (‘asher) Yahowah () promised (saba’) to your fathers (la ‘ab), to Abraham (la ‘Abraham), to Yitschaq (la Yitschaq), and to Ya’aqob (wa la Ya’aqob), to give it as a gift (nathan) to them (la).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 30:20)

Yahowah’s perspective, His Towrah | Guidance, is sufficiently clear to guide those who are seeking to know Him, who want to understand what He is offering and asking in return. And there is no correlation of any kind between Yahowah and what we have read in Sha’uwl’s pitiful epistles. They are life and death.



Twistianity

Appalling

…Contradicting God

9

Tarasso | Confusing

A Different Message...

We are in a better position to ascertain the differences between Paulos’ Gratia-based “euangelion – good messenger and beneficial message” and the alternative, that of Yahowah and Dowd, the Towrah and its Covenant. And in this light, the so-called “Christian New Testament” is in irresolvable conflict. It constantly contradicts and replaces everything in God’s word.

Since the Towrah is the ultimate in Godly documents, we are not at liberty to change it, at least without consequence. And as a result, by seeking to replace it, the likes of Paul, Peter, Mark, Luke, Matthew, and John obfuscate Yahowah’s proven testimony. So let’s be clear an euangelion | Gospel can never supersede the Towrah – much less stand alongside of it.

Having introduced his second thought with, “I marvel and am astonished, even surprised (thaumazo) that (hoti) in this way (houto) quickly (tacheos) you changed, departing and becoming disloyal apostates, traitors (metatithemai), away from (apo) your (sou) calling in the name of (kaleo en) Charis (Charis) to (eis) a different (heteros) good message and beneficial messenger (euangelion),…” (Galatians 1:6)

Paulos continued by contradicting himself…

“…which (hos) does not exist (ou eimi) differently (allos – as another, other, different, or contrasting), if not (ei me – conditionally or hypothetically negated because) perhaps some (tis – or things) are (eimi) the ones (oi) stirring you up, confusing you (tarasso sou – causing you to be troubled and distressed, causing commotion and agitating you), and also (kai) wanting and proposing (thelo – desiring and deciding, taking pleasure in and aiming, resolving and being of the opinion) to change and pervert (metastrepho – to turn one thing into another, overturn and reverse) the beneficial messenger and healing message (to euangelion) of the (tou) Christou (ΧΡΥ – placeholder used by early Christian scribes for Christou | Drugged or Chrestou | Useful Implement to infer Divinity)…” (Galatians 1:7)

This same clause was translated in the Nestle-Aland, 27th Edition with McReynolds English Interlinear as: “What not is other except [not applicable] some are the ones troubling you and wanting to turn across the good message of the Christ.”

Since the writing quality is poor, since Paul infrequently defines his terms, since it required the deployment of evidence and reason to ascertain the distinction between Paul’s position and God’s, I suspect that the Galatians were scratching their heads, wondering what Paulos was trying to say. Half a breath ago, he bemoaned that there were two distinctly different approaches. He was angry because so many had abandoned his mantra for the other proposition. Now he appears to be saying that these two messages are not different at all, but that they are only being made to appear to be in discord by some unknown agitators. But how can that be when, in his previous sentence, he had his Lord snatching us away from the Old System?

In spite of this, the toxic maestro of confusion is calling his rivals “tarasso – confusing.” The man responsible for the greatest upheaval in human history said that those who had challenged his upending of God’s message and replacement of His Son and people were guilty of promoting a perversion. While typically less insane, this is the tactic politicians deploy to demean their rivals, projecting their faults upon their opponents. When the party who is not actually guilty of the crime responds to the arbitrary attack, the audience becomes sufficiently confused to question those inappropriately slandered, leaving the actual perpetrator of the crime unscathed, their biggest fault no longer considered. That is what is occurring here. Paul could not have been more disingenuous if he tried.

In these words, we are also witnessing the insecurity of this man, the very trait which made him susceptible to Satan. Paul has thin skin. He cannot tolerate a rival. He pounces on every opponent, every threat to his authority, real or imagined. The liar calls others perceived as more worthy liars in an attempt to cut them down so that he can rise above them.

And like most insecure men, he is drawn to those who are confident, in this case, Dowd and Moseh, in hopes of filling the enormous void in his own life, only to turn against them as a result of his own flawed and corrupt character. It is a dance which has been performed thousands of times, and in every walk of life, but never with the stakes this high.

If you have never witnessed the destructive capacity of an insecure individual, you are fortunate. And if, as a result, you do not see this character flaw driving Paul’s inappropriate and angry rant against the Galatians for not believing him, then at the very least I hope that you see his words as mean-spirited and disingenuous. This is a million miles from Towrah.

When this introductory statement is set into the context of Paul’s life and writings as we know them, it becomes obvious that Paul’s message was the only one which was completely different than everyone else’s, including Yahowah’s and Dowd, the Prophets and Towrah. And considering the qualifications of the others, Sha’uwl’s contrarian diatribe is hard to believe. The purpose of this epistle was to launch a defense of his authority through a series of counteroffensives.

Consistent with the preview presented in the opening chapter, Paul will continue to undermine, belittle, and besmirch the Torah, separating himself and his religious followers from Father and Son so as to nullify their sacrifice.

You may be wondering why I am now so judgmental, tearing Paul to shreds for mistakes big and small, especially since I admitted to being fooled by him a score of years ago. The reasons are varied. As I have shared, initially my intent was not to expose and condemn the differences between Pauline Doctrine and the Torah but instead to resolve them. I began doing what others have done before me. In fact, some have made a religion of it.

By blending Rabbinic Judaism with Pauline Doctrine, they call themselves Messianic. But then I reached a point where I just could not do it anymore. I could no longer find common ground. The chasm grew too large as the conflicts grew insurmountable. And the more I looked to Yahowah for help, the more I found Him at odds with Paul.

Ultimately, I had to take sides. I could either be with God or be with Paul. And while that was an easy choice, neither Yahowah nor Dowd is ever easy on those who corrupt their message. Their approach is now mirrored in this book. God is informed, rational, relentless, uncompromising, and especially judgmental. Too much is at stake to take any other approach.

Also, I suppose that I’m sympathetic to those who believe, as I once did, that Paul spoke for God. I appreciate how enormously difficult it will be for many to process and accept the evidence which is being laid before you. While I make no apologies for being judgmental, I nonetheless appreciate the fact that this approach, along with the unpopular nature of this message, will turn many people away who might otherwise have been helped if this review were not so dismissive of Paul’s demonic mantra. And yet ultimately, every one of us will eventually take sides on this argument. I have made my choice.

Surprisingly, it was not especially hard for me to admit that I was wrong – even that I had been played for a fool. In fact, it was a relief, just as I hope it is for you one day. There is something wonderfully liberating and reassuring when you come to terms with Paul and everything falls into place, where there is no longer a collection of odd-shaped pegs which must be wiggled and whittled to fit.

But the bottom line with all of this is that you should not trust me any more than you distrust Paul. Yahowah alone is trustworthy – as is His Son. Do your own research. Compare their testimony. Then decide.

Speaking of perverting, the King James Version changed “if not” to “but.” They added “there,” and “that” without justification. They ignored thelo, and its meaning entirely, as if the verb was not in the text. “Turned around and changed” was rendered as “pervert” and euangelion was replaced with “gospel.” Then to add insult to injury, the KJV replaced “ΧΡΥ (Chi Rho Upsilon),” the placeholder with a transliteration of a derogatory Greek word which was not actually written in the text, and they wrote “Christ.” Besides all that, they did a pretty good job with: “but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.” The Latin Vulgate reads: “except that there are some persons who disturb you and who want to overturn the evangelium Christi.” To Jerome’s credit, “overturn” is a literal translation of metastrepho and evangelium is an accurate transliteration of euangelion.

To help retain our footing, the text reads: “...which does not exist differently, if not conditionally or hypothetically negated because perhaps some are the ones stirring you up, confusing you, and also wanting and proposing to change and pervert the beneficial messenger and healing message of the Christou,” (1:7) So, by contrast, evidently feeling at liberty to write whatever they wanted, the New Living Translation completely ignored the presence of euangelion in their rendering: “You are being fooled by those who deliberately twist the truth concerning Christ.” Yet that was not their only indiscretion. Tarasso does not mean “you are being fooled.” There is no basis whatsoever for “by those who deliberately” or “the truth concerning.” The ΧΡΥ placeholder is based upon Chrestus, not Christos, and it represents a Useful Implement, not Christ.

By stating that the Galatians were “being fooled by those who were deliberately twisting the truth concerning Christ,” the NLT exonerates Sha’uwl while condemning Yahowah’s witnesses. Truth had been upended.

As you consider the third clause of the second sentence, keep in mind that there were two messengers who came out of heaven, one trustworthy, the other deceitful. Also note the switch from Paulos, as one individual to “we.” I suspect that this is because he wanted his audience to believe that he was now speaking in conjunction with his god.

This is something I am particularly attuned to because I have seen it in Muhammad, who also admitted to being demon-possessed. He not only used “we” similarly throughout the Quran, he positioned himself as errantly and egotistically. At the very least, even if you aren’t yet ready to acknowledge the satanic influence, Paul is elevating himself to the place where he and his god are now speaking with the same voice. Furthermore, he is inferring that he is a messenger from heaven, while stating unequivocally that a person will be cursed if they challenge him.

“...but (kai) to the contrary (alla), if (ean) we (emeis – first-person nominative plural) or (e – another comparable) a messenger (aggelos – a heavenly envoy and spiritual servant) out of (ek – from) heaven (ouranos – the abode of God (this was written in the singular even though Yahowah consistently used the plural form – suggesting that the opponent was Dowd)) might convey a healing messenger or beneficial message (euangelizo – may announce a helpful and prosperous communication or communicator) to you (sou) which is approximately the same or contrary to, even positioned alongside, what (hos para – which is near, beyond, greater than, associated with, less than, positioned along with, or is in the opinion of some in opposition to that which), we delivered as a beneficial messenger (euangelizo – we announced and told as a healing claim) to you (sou) then a curse (anathema – a dreadful consequence has been set up and) exists (eimi).” (Galatians 1:8)

This not only screams insecurity, which incidentally manifests itself as paranoia, with everyone else seen as a lesser form of life and as a potential foe, but also as delusional, with an insatiable need to be viewed as essential and right – no matter how useless or wrong. And this time Paul has gone so far as to say that he and his Lord are going to curse the opposition even if the competitor is a heavenly messenger.

From this point forward, and we are a mere two sentences into Paul’s first letter, Christians would invoke a curse on any and all who would question their faith. Any opposition to Pauline Doctrine would be demeaned as Satanic. And yet it was Satan, speaking through his Apostle, who was cursing humankind with these words.

Funny thing in this regard, I received a letter this morning from a Christian who claimed that those within her community saw me as a maniacal deceiver who was demon-possessed. She didn’t find anything in what I had written to challenge, so she took Paul’s approach and slandered me with an ad hominem fallacy.

In reality, Yahowah sent “a Messenger out of Heaven to convey his healing and beneficial message.” His name explained His purpose: Dowd | the Beloved. His message was in perfect harmony with the Towrah, making it the opposite of that being conveyed by Sha’uwl. Therefore, a “dreadful consequence exists.”

Satan was also “a messenger tossed out of heaven.” In fact, all of Yahowah’s mal’ak are “heavenly representatives and spiritual messengers.” However, Dowd, like us, is human with a body and a soul. Gospel Jesus is nothing more than a clever counterfeit, a replacement, a myth which appears genuine and yet has no value.

Using Sha’uwl in this way, the Adversary has brought a curse upon himself and upon all who are in league with him. Yahowah announced this decision in the Garden of Eden a decade shy of six thousand years ago, telling us that the Serpent would be cursed for having beguiled Chawah by corrupting God’s instructions. The curse that the Adversary brought upon himself has now found its way into Paulos’ preamble. It would be repeated in the Talmud and in the Quran.

By writing this, Paul’s intent was to render any competitive message moot – especially Yahowah’s and Dowd’s. He wanted his audience to join him in condemning his foes, God and His Messiah. This is akin to Islam where Allah warns Muslims to be ever ready to attack, even slander and kill, all who would besmirch the Islamic god’s reputation by telling the truth. So, while Allah is Satan, the wannabe god prevails by labeling his opponents “satanic,” and thereby confusing the feeble-minded.

This duplicity confuses people because most cannot fathom why Satan would oppose Satan, as he appears to do in both Christianity and Islam. But the moment one considers who Satan is and contemplates what he wants, the answer becomes obvious.

Halal ben Shachar does not want to be known as “ha Satan – the Adversary,” but instead as the Lord. He wants to be worshiped as if he were God. Therefore, it is perfectly rational, even clever, for Satan to oppose his Adversarial title in texts which not only present the Lord as god, but which at the same time undermine the credibility of the real God, His nature, Towrah, Son, and Covenant.

When the verb euangelizo is changed to a proper noun and becomes “gospel,” as is the case with the KJV, we are left with nothing but the curse: “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.”

In this verse, the authors of the King James changed alla to “but,” as if Sha’uwl selected de to begin the sentence. They ignored kai, which means “and,” and then mistranslated ean as “though,” as opposed to the preposition, “if.” They transliterated (replicated the pronunciation of) aggelos as “angel,” instead of translating (replicating the meaning of) it as “messenger.” They added “preach” when there is no basis for it in Greek. They then included the words “any other” without a textual justification, and replaced the first euangelizo, a verb, with the noun “gospel.”

Then the KJV arbitrarily added “unto,” “than,” and “that,” all without textual support. They included a second “we,” rendered the second euangelizo, not as “gospel” this time, but as “have preached,” inadequately representing the word rather than replacing it. They added another “unto,” without textual support, and then included the pronoun “him” as if Sha’uwl had written it. Since there is very little association between what Sha’uwl said and what the King James Version published, it’s easy to see how people have been misled by their product.

So it is fresh in your mind, Paul actually wrote: “...but to the contrary, if we or a messenger out of heaven conveys a healing messenger or beneficial message to you which is approximately the same or contrary to, or even positioned alongside what we delivered as a beneficial messenger and announced as a healing message to you then a curse with a dreadful consequence exists.”

If you have disposed of your King James Version for a New American Standard Bible, the “translation” which claims to present a literal rendering of the oldest Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news: it is not much better. It is as incongruent as the KJV, and obviously little more than a revision of its more popular predecessor. “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!”

Again, it was inappropriate to transliterate aggelos, “angel.” But the crux of the issue here is that the verb euangelizo was rendered as “preach to you a Gospel” the first time it appears (which is wrong linguistically), and then the second time the exact same verb appears, it was simply rendered as “preach,” as if euangelizo was one of many Greek words for “speak.”

Recognizing that the vaunted and acclaimed Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear reads: “But even if we or messenger from heaven might tell good message to you from what good message we ourselves told to you, curse let there be,” the New International Version is equally distant from the Greek: “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned.” The common dissimilarity from the words Paul actually penned, combined with their similarity to one another, affirms that these translations were actually revisions of one another.

The NLT, which we have learned is nothing more than a loose paraphrase under the slogan “The Truth Made Clear,” reads: “Let God’s curse fall on anyone, including us or even an angel from heaven, who preaches a different kind of Good News than the one we preached to you.” While “preaches…Good News” would have been a slightly more accurate translation of the first occurrence of euangelizo, demonstrating that the words, themselves, are irrelevant to their presentation, they translated the second euangelizo differently, this time without any reference to “different kind” or “Good News,” even though the same exact word appeared twice.

Further, the sentence order in the NLT was reversed, and God’s title was added without textual support. In so doing, the passage now infers that God is the one cursing a specific individual, as opposed to the contrarian message existing as a curse.

Christian theologians are deliberately being inconsistent, because “Gospel” and “Good News” are central to their theology. Christendom is based upon these concepts. It is as critical and errant as the doctrine of the Trinity in this regard.

We find the following in Jerome’s blend of the Old Latin manuscripts: “But if anyone, even we ourselves or an angelus from Heaven, were to evangelizet other than the one that we evangelizavimus to you, let him be anathema.” Once again, we find evidence that Jerome wasn’t to blame for the corruption of euangelizo, but he was to blame for the subsequent treatment of Catholic heretics, due to his personalizing of the curse.

These translations all affirm that Paul wanted his rivals cursed. And by his definition, his opponents were those whose message was contrary to his own. As we will discover as we make our way through this letter, Sha’uwl’s rivals will come to include: Yahowah and His prophets, Dowd and his people. While they all spoke with one voice, their message was contrary to Sha’uwl’s. And that is the bottom line.

Repeating himself, but this time slipping from first-person plural to singular to underscore the fact that this Benjamite was a lone wolf among men, we are left to question the motivation for the duplication. And with Sha’uwl so overly fixated on his rivals, do you suppose the reason he did not name them was because, had he done so, his credibility would have been destroyed?

The Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear reads: “As we have said before and now again I say, if some you tells good message from what you took along curse let be.” The basis of their translation was as follows:

“As (hos – like) we have said before (proepo – we have said already), and even (kai) just now (arti – simultaneously or immediately thereafter) also (palin – again repetitively) I say (lego – I convey), if (ei – under the condition) someone (tis) delivers as a helpful messenger or communicates a useful message (euangelizo) to you (sou) similar or contrary to, in opposition with or just positioned alongside (para – close to, besides, approximately the same, near, beyond, or greater than in the opinion of some, even associated with) that which (hos) you received (paralambano – you brought in, associated with, or related to), it shall be (eimi – I wish or command that it shall exist as (the present tense means that this state currently exists and that it will continue for an undisclosed period, the active voice means that the subject, Paulos (who is the speaker), is actively engaged bringing about the curse, and the imperative mood serves as either a command or as an expression of the speaker’s desire, or both)) a curse with a dreadful consequence (anathema).” (Galatians 1:9)

Paul is putting everyone on notice that he will not tolerate a rival. He would remain vengeful with dreadful results, cursing the Jews who challenged him. He would not prevail through evidence or reason, nor through logical and attested debate, by which he was sure to lose, but instead by vilifying his perceived opponents. He would begin by damning Jews in general and then seek to condemn the most important Jew of them all – the Messiah Dowd. He would bury him.

Sha’uwl had become an exceedingly dangerous and threatening man. He was, himself, the curse.

Since this is Paul’s first letter, the “as we have said before” is little more than a reference to the previous sentence, something he makes clear by way of “arti – simultaneously and immediately thereafter.” As a result, since Paulos is writing exclusively under his own chosen name, we must consider what he was trying to accomplish by using “we,” and then ponder why he felt it was necessary to transition back to “I.” Who were his partners and why at times did he exclude them?

It is telling, therefore, that Galatians 1:6 begins: “I am amazed” (first-person singular present tense), but then transitions to “we delivered” (first-person plural past tense) in Galatians 1:8. Paul’s recent visit to Galatia was with Barnabas, according to Acts, perhaps accounting for the prior and plural message delivery. But in the short period between the Yaruwshalaim Summit and the time this letter was dictated, Barnabas and Sha’uwl had a heated argument and had gone their separate ways, accounting for the present singular perspective. At least that would be the case had Galatians 1:9 not included “we” and “I” in immediate succession. Also interesting, Sha’uwl will take a mean-spirited swipe at Barnabas before this letter is through.

As is the case with everything Paul writes, he never bothers to explain the nature of the argument. All this says is that “I’m always right and everyone else is always wrong.” As such, even if Sha’uwl’s opinions were right, without a basis in fact, this would not be helpful. Thus far, and indeed throughout Paul’s letters, we will be exposed to Paul’s opinions, and we will be apprised of his attitude, but nothing else.

Other than omitting the accusative “contrary or in opposition to,” adding “preach” without justification, replacing the verb euangelizo with the noun “gospel,” and adding a pronoun at the end of the verse, the KJV got most of this right: “As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” Their inspiration was obviously Jerome’s Latin Vulgate: “Just as we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone has evangelizaverit to you, other than that which you have received, let him be anathema.” The NLT paraphrase reads: “I say again what we have said before: If anyone preaches any other Good News than the one you welcomed, let that person be cursed.” All three versions were unable to translate para, meaning “close, but yet in opposition,” appropriately when it was used in conjunction with their Gospel and Good News. But by changing paralambano to “welcomed,” the NLT was, once again, the least accurate.

Before we move on, I want to underscore a deficiency associated with the previous statements – and indeed with all of Sha’uwl’s letters. For this to be an effective warning, for it to be instructive and useful, we must know what Paul told the Galatians, and also know how his preaching differed from those he was cursing. Without this information, speculation reigns supreme, and false interpretations are far too readily developed – both of which are Paul’s fault.

As it stands, all we have is that anyone who delivers a message which differs from Paul’s should be cursed, all of which sounds hauntingly similar to Allah’s response to the Quran’s Never-Ending Argument. And while that was designed to censure debate, and while it has kept most critics at bay, by repeating this, Paul has tipped his hand. He has said that his skin and doctrine are so thin that neither can tolerate criticism. It is a sure sign of insecurity.

Those who cannot defend their message attack those who are critical of it. In politics, this strategy is known as “killing the messenger.”

Introductions aside, here is a quick review of Sha’uwl’s second and third sentences:

“I marvel and am amazed, even astonished that in this way how quickly and in haste you changed, deserting and becoming disloyal apostates, traitors away from your calling in the name of Charis to a different healing message and beneficial messenger, (1:6) which does not exist differently, if not hypothetically negated because perhaps some are stirring you up, confusing you, and also proposing to change the healing messenger and pervert the beneficial message of the Christou, (1:7) but to the contrary, if we or a messenger out of heaven conveys a healing messenger or beneficial message to you which is approximately the same or contrary to, or even positioned alongside what we delivered as a beneficial messenger and announced as a healing message to you then a curse with a dreadful consequence exists. (1:8)

As we have said already, and even just now, immediately thereafter, repetitively, I say, if under the condition someone delivers a helpful messenger or communicates a useful message to you similar or contrary to, in opposition with or just positioned alongside, no matter if it is close to or greater than that which you received, it shall be (in fact I command and want it to exist as) a curse with a dreadful consequence.” (Galatians 1:9)

Are you confused or sickened, angry or cursed?



Living life to its fullest in the loving embrace of the most wonderful woman I have ever met, sitting in my study in America’s paradise overlooking the turquoise blue waters of the Caribbean Sea and Virgin Islands, while translating Yahowah’s Towrah and Prophets, including my King’s Song, I am proof positive that the only thing Paul cursed was himself and those he beguiled.

As we move to the next statement, while the interrogative required to frame the questions presented in most English translations does not appear in the Greek text, it was implied because Paul is asking us to choose. These questions, however, are rather odd considering that Paul has pitted his message against God. Also, the first is advanced using a peculiar verb – one that runs the gambit from perplexing to inappropriate, from conceited to bewildering.

If I may, since the writing quality is so poor, let’s begin with the Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear. “Now for men I persuade or the God. Or I seek men to please. If still men, I was pleasing of Christ slave not – I was.”

That was clear as mud. So then amplified and literally, we find:

“For (gar – because) currently (arti – or simultaneously, just now) [is it] men (anthropos) I persuade (peitho – I presently, actively, and actually use words to win the favor of, I seduce, mislead, coax, convince, appease, and placate, inducing someone through words to believe so that they strive to please me by tranquilizing them) or (e – alternatively) the (ton) God (ΘΝ)? Or (e – alternatively by comparison or contrast) [do I] I seek (zeto – I attempt and desire) to please and accommodate (aresko – to oblige) men (anthropos – humans)?

Yet nevertheless (eti – in addition besides), if (ei) men (anthropos), I was pleasing and accommodating (aresko – I was exciting the emotions of and lifting up) slave (doulos) of Christou (ΧΡΥ – placeholder used by early Christian scribes for Christou | Drugged or Chrestou | Useful Implement which was designed to imply divinity), certainly (an) not (ou) was me (eimi).” (Galatians 1:10)

The initial verb, peitho, was written in the first-person singular, present active indicative, which not only means that Paulos is again operating on his own, but also that the opening sentence literally reads: “Because currently men ‘I presently, actively, and actually use words to win the favor of, I seduce, mislead, coax, appease, and placate, inducing belief through words pleasing to me while tranquilizing them (peitho)’ or the God?” So regardless of which option we choose, this question poses a series of serious problems.

First, the transition from “we” as the sources of the lone acceptable message and as the originators of the curse, to “I” in a question, where “men” and “God” represent the universe of potential answers, is curious. Rather than partnering with men, as “we” might imply, is Paul opposing men in some sort of grand debate? Or rather than partnering with God, as “we” might also suggest, is Paul actually arguing against Him?

And while Paul’s personal confessions, his positions and his approach, affirm that his partner is Satan, there is a hint of delusional arrogance here in this transition back to “I” because, no matter how we translate peitho, Paul is implying that his rhetoric and reason are sublime. It is as if he wants us to believe that he was so much smarter than everyone else, he could take on God and men single-handedly.

Second, “winning favor,” along with “persuade and convince,” is the best we can do with peitho. Every other connotation makes this question substantially worse because it would read: “I presently, actively, and actually seduce, mislead, coax, appease, and placate” men or God?

Third, in spite of what religious zealots have been led to believe, we are not called to “win the favor” of men, and we cannot “win the favor” of God. We are not called to “persuade or convince” men. And the notion of “persuading and convincing” God is nonsensical. It is God’s job to convince, not ours. And even then, Yahowah is not interested in “winning our favor” or in “persuading” us. God lays out the opportunity to form a relationship with Him, He proves that we can trust Him, He invites us to get to know Him, and then, working with His Son, He made it possible. But that is as far as God goes. Therefore, even if we render peitho as favorably as possible, if the answer to the question is “men,” Paul’s approach is unGodly. And if the answer is “God,” then Paul’s arrogance is in league with Satan.

That is the good news. When any of peitho’s alternative definitions are considered, Paul becomes the Lord of Deceit. The Devil “peitho – seduces, misleads, coaxes, appeases, and placates.” That is why Yahowah called Sha’uwl the Father of Lies.

As you might suspect, peitho is almost exclusively Pauline. It is used in Paul’s letters and attributed to him throughout Acts. One of the few times it is found in association with Gospel Jesus, the Book of Matthew shows him translated using it to convey the religious mindset of the opposition by writing: “but the chief priests and elders peitho the multitude that they should ask for Barabbas and destroy Iesous.” Shortly thereafter, in Matthew 28:14, and now in a political setting, the imposter writing under the pseudonym, Matthew, is translated using peitho again to say: “and if this comes to the governor’s ears, we will peitho him.” Luke, who was Paul’s attaché, propagandist, and healer, in his hearsay account, translates Gospel Jesus using peitho twice, but neither translation is credible in that Luke wasn’t an eyewitness and even in the fables written of him, the mythical misnomer never spoke Greek.

Now I understand that religious individuals do not see any issue with men persuading other men on behalf of their god, but that is because they have been deceived into believing that it is their god’s will that we “win souls for him.” They see a “conversion” to their religion as a favorable event, as something that bolsters their faith. They not only send out evangelists to persuade people into believing as they do, the Church has used the threat of violence to convert the masses for centuries.

But not only is Paul’s message opposed to God’s message, winning souls is not God’s style. Yahowah is only interested in people who are interested in Him. And all He wants from any of us is to understand who He is, what He is offering, and what He expects in return. That way we can choose of our own volition to get to know Him, to ignore Him, or to reject Him. With God, it is all about freewill.

These things known, there is no way to overemphasize the consequence of this question. No matter the answer, it proves that Paul did not speak for God. It also demonstrates that his use of “we” did not include God.

But it does not get better from here. After posing a question where both options have horrendous ramifications, indeed religious implications, Sha’uwl spins his question, posing it a different way. And yet this only makes it worse because we ought not try to accommodate or please men. Yahowah does not. Dowd didn’t. In fact, God’s approach is the opposite. He is resolutely intolerant. He does not accommodate the views of the vast preponderance of people. He is displeased with humanity. While it is Yahowah’s desire for us to get to know Him, He only accommodates the few who do.

Also problematic, with the juxtaposition of the first and second “e – or,” we cannot isolate Paul “seeking to please men” from the possibility that he is “attempting to accommodate” God. The first option is disingenuous and pathetic while the second is ludicrous.

Not only were these questions left unanswered, which leaves one wondering why they were posed, they were followed by “eti – nevertheless” and “ei – if,” strongly suggesting that Paul actually wanted us to think that he was capable of sparring with God. Further, aresko, the next verb Paul deploys, is not a cerebral concept, but instead speaks of “exciting and enticing emotions.” And the object this time is “Christou,” indicating that God, rather than being predictable and dependable, can be swayed by an emotional appeal. While Yahowah has an emotional component to His nature, everything that we know about God affirms that He values an informed and rational response over misdirected feelings. Being steadfast is important to Him.

Paul routinely infers that he died to become “Christ,” which is what “of Christou, certainly not was me” conveys. However, if one sees Paul’s Iesou Christou as the new and mythological caricature upon which the Pauline religion was contrived, then the author of this letter is the living embodiment of the Christian “Jesus Christ.” Paul is to “Jesus Christ” as Muhammad is to Allah. They are one and the same. If you know one, you know the other. If you like one, you will like the other.

If we were to dispense with the dubious connections and evaluate Paul’s rhetoric as if this were a debate, he’d flunk that test too. Sha’uwl deployed a non sequitur. The initial question was not answered by his hypothetical. And there was no quid pro quo between “accommodating man” and “serving his Christou.” Moreover, how is it that Paul, who fashions himself as the one who liberated the faithful from bondage to the Torah, is now positioning himself as a slave? And not just anybody’s slave, he is now in servitude to the same Christou whose death supposedly freed everyone from slavery. So this has become a litany of contradictions.

And the fact remains, only an egomaniac would suggest that someone might wonder whether or not this man was “persuading God.” And that is especially troublesome since the opening stanza of this letter affirms that Paul was not effectively “persuading and convincing men.”

Beyond this, perhaps we can deduce that Paul’s intent was to convince his audience, by displaying hostility toward the Galatians at large, as well as against any other messenger or message, that he was demonstrating, even proving, that he was out to please God and not men. But nothing displeases God more than denouncing and discarding His testimony.

This is a serious problem for thoughtful and rational individuals. When Paul was not focusing on himself, he was focused on presenting an errant characterization of replacement Jesus. Neither perspective has merit. Even Gospel Jesus said that people should focus on the Father and not on him. But since Paul is opposed to Yahowah and His Torah, that is not possible.

I am keenly aware that there is a limit to the amount of criticism an audience will endure. And while Gospel Jesus differed from Yahowah and called the faithful to love their enemies, we are encouraged by God to expose and condemn His foes and those of His people, which is why questioning Paul is so essential. But to be appropriate, our criticisms need to be bolstered by evidence and reason, they need to be consistent with God’s testimony, and they should be focused on an individual, an institution, or a specific message. However, in Paul’s case, his blanket dismissal of an entire province and nation is not appropriate, nor is criticism without justification, and Paul seldom if ever provides any. This letter opened similarly to the Romans 7 diatribe, with a universal condemnation.

While it is appropriate to constructively criticize religious documents and institutions, it is not appropriate to rail against their victims en masse unless they become promoters and perpetrators. And yet, Paul is lashing out at everyone, while undermining the entire community because he suspects everyone is his foe, from heaven to earth, and he feels compelled to cut them all down. In this regard, his tone will evolve from condescending to vicious – becoming stunningly uncivilized.

And while never appropriate, since Paul posed the question, his wholly antagonistic attitude toward men reveals the answer to the questions he has posed. In his mind, he was debating God. Moreover, as the evidence will demonstrate, Paul’s rage was universally misplaced. Sha’uwl’s adversaries were leading the Galatians to Yahowah, while Sha’uwl was taking them for a ride in the opposite direction.

Apart from the errant title, “Christ,” my concern with the most influential translations is that neither were consistent with the actual text. They both added a plethora of words to artificially elevate the writing quality. While Paul wrote:

“For because currently or simultaneously, [is it] men I presently persuade to win the favor of, seducing, misleading, and coaxing, even convincing, appeasing, and placating, or alternatively, the Theos | God? Or alternatively by comparison and contrast, [do I] I desire to please and accommodate humans? Yet nevertheless, even regardless, if men, I was obliging and accommodating, exciting them emotionally, a slave of Christou, certainly not was me,” the KJV published: “For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.” While Christians no doubt see this as a rhetorical question, the deeper we dig into Paul’s mantra and mindset, the more likely it becomes that Paul thought himself qualified to persuade God to change His plan of salvation. LV: “For am I now persuading men, or God? Or, am I seeking to please men? If I still were pleasing men, then I would not be a servant of Christi.”

Unlike the King James and Vulgate, the New Living Translation reads beautifully. It is a shame Paul didn’t write as eloquently. “Obviously, I’m not trying to win the approval of people, but of God. If pleasing people were my goal, I would not be Christ’s servant.” While there is an extremely remote possibility that this may have been what he meant to say, it absolutely was not what he wrote. And should they have magically captured Paul’s intent, we are incapable of “winning the approval…of God.” That is the reason God conceived a plan whereby He did all that was required to make us acceptable.

Next, we find Sha’uwl professing that the message he was revealing was his own. And Paulos wanted everyone the world over to recognize that the mantra which would become known as “the Gospel” was “hypo ego – by, under and through me, by reason and force of me, because of and controlled by me.”

“But (de – therefore, however, and nevertheless) I profess and reveal (gnorizo – I perceive and tell, I provide the knowledge I’ve gained to make known, I recognize and declare) to you (sou) brothers (adelphos) of the (to) beneficial messenger and healing message (euangelion – the rewarding envoy and helpful communication) which (to) having been communicated advantageously (euangelizo) by (hypo – under and through, by reason and force of, because of and controlled by) myself (ego), because (oti) it is not (ou eimi) in accord with (kata – according to) man (anthropos).” (Galatians 1:11)

This, of course, means that Paul was solely responsible for his “gospel.” He conceived it all by himself, and he, alone, was authorized to declare it. As such, Paul was solely responsible for the mythology which became Christianity. There is no one else to credit or to blame. If his personal and individual revelations are not true, the religion he conceived is wholly unreliable.

Christian clerics universally recognize and readily admit that Paul opposed the alleged disciples. This statement merely explains why. His message was his own and he did not play well with others. So, set into the context of debating God, this is an incriminating confession.

But even if you were unaware of Paul’s underhanded slap at his adversaries, both human and divine, it was either egregiously presumptuous or an outrageous confession to write “gnorizo – I reveal and provide” the “euangelion – beneficial messenger and healing message” and I “euangelizo – communicate it advantageously” “hypo ego – by myself.” If Paul were somehow speaking for God, shouldn’t he be touting Yahowah’s words and not his own? Said another way, someone who is speaking for Yahowah knows that it’s His message which matters, not the one who delivers it.

Had this been anything more than Paul claiming the world as his own, he would have done what we are doing, which is to dissect the errant message, showing through evidence and reason where it is wrong. Sha’uwl should have delineated pertinent examples of the euangelion which differed from his own. But the only message Paulos has condemned is God’s, discrediting and discarding His Torah.

The McReynolds Interlinear reveals that the Nestle-Aland text reads: “I make known for to you brothers the good message the having been told good message by me that not it is by man.” In order to make those words appear credible, euangelion and euangelizo had to be rendered differently, even though their etymological basis is identical in the KJV: “But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.” That was incriminating. The King James Version accurately asserted that Paul “certified” that “the gospel which was preached” was “of me.” In a rational world, this would have been sufficient to bury him.

Jerome’s blend of Old Latin texts was both less accurate and less convicting. LV: “For I would have you understand, brothers, that the evangelium which has been evangelizatum by me is not according to man.” But ever in form, the NLT ignored six of the twelve Greek words, and they added ten English words of their own choosing. Still inadequate to support their theology, they grossly misrepresented, and inconsistently translated euangelion. “Dear brothers and sisters, I want you to understand that the gospel message I preach is not based on mere human reasoning.” The use of “mere” implies that “human reasoning” was a contributing factor. And that suggests Yahowah’s message was incomplete or inadequate, and that He required the contribution of Sha’uwl’s considerable intellect.

When you combine Paul’s arrogant and incriminating statements with the Christian interpretation of them, you have the crime and confession laid at your feet. So why have so few people held Paul accountable?

What follows is the other half of Sha’uwl’s defense. He is saying that he was not influenced by any human agenda or institution, while implying that those who oppose him are in opposition to his god. Paul’s approach and style are rabbinic, and it would be hard to find someone more opposed to God than they – well, unless it is Muhammad, but that’s a story for another book.

Now if only someone could have taught Paulos how to write. It is the one thing you would have thought they would have taught him at rabbi school. But perhaps this explains why he flunked out...

“But neither (oude – nor or not) because (gar – for the reason then) I (ego) by (para – among, from, or for) man (anthropos) associating myself with (paralambano – I received, learning and accepting) it (autos). Nor (oute – but neither) was I taught (didasko – was I instructed as a disciple). But to the contrary (alla – by contrast) by way of (dia – through) a revelation (apokalypsis – an appearance or disclosure, an uncovering or unveiling) of Iesou (ΙΗΥ – placeholder used by early Christian scribes for Iesou which became “Jesus” in the 17th century after the invention of the letter “J”)) Christou (ΧΡΥ – placeholder used by early Christian scribes for Christou | Drugged or Chrestou | Useful Implement to usurp the Septuagint’s credibility and infer divinity).” (Galatians 1:12)

Contradicting his previous statement, while at the same time contravening Yahowah’s approach to teaching, Paulos would have us believe that he did not associate with men and that he was not taught. He is evidently not ready to disclose the fact that he has been in rabbinic school for many years. This would then make him opposed to Dowd, the greatest of men. And to oppose Dowd is to either squander one’s soul or have it incarcerated.

According to Paulos, his message had been previously undisclosed, and he alone had the right to convey what was miraculously unveiled, appearing to him in a revelation attested by no one. So it raises the question: if this is so, why did Yahowah bother with His Towrah – Teaching? If this were so, why did Dowd bother fulfilling the Miqra’ey?

Since it would be natural to assume that I am sabotaging Paul by making him appear illiterate, please note that the scholastic Nestle-Aland published: “But not for I from man took along it nor was I taught but through uncovering of Jesus Christ.”

To advance Replacement Theology, Paul had to deny everything his Father said about Dowd, while also disavowing his sacrifice, thereby nullifying the means to our salvation. Further, since Yahowah refers to Dowd as a great teacher, and His Towrah as His Source of Teaching, for Sha’uwl to admit that he “was not taught” his message is to say that he did not learn the truth from Yahowah or His Son. Having studied the Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr I have no need for private instruction regarding God’s public disclosures.

Even Gospel Jesus agrees: “Iesous answered him, ‘I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple where all of the Yahuwdym come together. And I spoke nothing in secret.” (John 18:20) This, of course, would also mean that what Paul just wrote was a lie. Sha’uwl’s statement cannot be reconciled with that attributed to Gospel Jesus.

This was not Paul’s only claim to “secret” revelation. In the New American Standard Bible’s rendition of Romans 16:25, we read: “Now to him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past but is now manifested.”

“According to my gospel” confirms the obvious, but nonetheless I appreciate the confession: this is the “Gospel of Paul” and not the “Gospel of ‘Jesus Christ.’” But God does not keep secrets – at least not regarding anything vital to our relationship with Him. Mysteries form the sum and substance of the myths which permeate pagan religions. And since Paul never once cited Gospel Jesus’ “preaching,” in a rare moment of truth, by calling the “gospel” he was preaching “his own,” this should have been sufficient for Christians to reject him and their religion. God does not have a “gospel,” nor should you.

Paul’s fixation on unverifiable secret revelations, mystery, and mythology was further advanced in his letter to the Ephesians when, according to the New American Standard Bible, he wrote: “...if indeed you have heard of the stewardship of God’s grace which was given to me for you; that by revelation there was make known to me the mystery, as I wrote before in brief.

And by referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit...of which I was made a minister...to preach to the Gentiles the unfathomable riches of Christ and to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God who created all things.” (Ephesians 3:2-9)

Funny thing though, the prophets never spoke of mysteries, and to the contrary, Yahowah used them to dispel myths. It was the cult of Dionysus which played prolifically in mysteries, and this is the cult upon which Jesus was derived. For those who are open to Him, Yahowah is an open book. Open His Towrah and you will find Him there. In fact, the only reason that God authored His Towrah was to reveal Himself to us so that we might come to know Him.

As I have shared, King Dowd (more commonly known as David) was inspired to share the following insight into the nature, purpose, and effect of the Towrah: “Yahowah’s Towrah | Teaching and Guidance is complete, without defect, lacking nothing, correct and beneficial, returning, restoring, and transforming the soul. Yahowah’s eternal testimony and restoring witness is trustworthy and reliable, verifiable and supportive, making understanding and obtaining wisdom through enlightening education straight forward for the open-minded.” (Mizmowr 19:7) Few things so essential to life are this succinct. And that is why you have seen this verse before and will see it again.

But let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that the murderer who had been Sha’uwl, who by his account was forced to become an apostle during a rather nasty encounter with a prodding and debilitating spirit on the road to Damascus, was a special case, that he was too remarkable an individual to learn about God the way the rest of us mere mortals have done – by observing the Towrah as God suggested. What then. Should we play along, is he to be believed when he contradicts and disparages the word of God?

If God had a private meeting with Paul, as a rabbi, why was there no prophetic affirmation of it, and why was everything they allegedly discussed the opposite of what had been conveyed so many times before? And why do you suppose, if this revelation occurred as Paul professes, that there isn’t a single quote from Dowd in the entirety of Paul’s letters?

Rather than write, “Dowd said, ‘...,’” Paul wrote: “But I say...” Beyond not citing anything from their mythical private meeting, the self-proclaimed Apostle only quoted one snippet of something attributed to Gospel Jesus, and in his lone citation, Sha’uwl bungled the quote. As such, Paul’s entire premise is ludicrous. The citation Sha’uwl misappropriated and misquoted explains the role of the Passover Lamb, and how that would enable the Covenant’s promises.

And most revealing and incriminating of all is the realization that Paul’s message is the antithesis of everyone else’s, including Yahowah, who just happens to be God, all of Yahowah’s prophets, including Moseh, as well as Dowd and his Psalms. It was one man against the Word and world. The primary thrust of Sha’uwl’s testimony is to belittle and demean the Torah. His claim to a secret revelation from God for which he alone has a license to promote is not only rationally impossible, it is preposterous.

While I am admittedly flogging a dead pig, since so many seem oblivious to the obvious, if Sha’uwl spent time one-on-one with Gospel Jesus, as he claims, why didn’t he tell us anything about his encounter? Why, unlike everything else God has revealed, wasn’t there a single prophecy which could be used to validate the inspiration?

The Torah, by contrast, is set into the context of history. It details Moseh’s meetings with Yahowah, in addition to their interactions with the Egyptians and the Children of Yisra’el over the course of time. There are not only thousands of witnesses, the Towrah is filled with historical and prophetic insights which serve to verify its validity. Moreover, its primary purpose was to explain the purpose of God. And now we are to believe that all of those promises and predictions were for naught, and there was no reason for any of it?

Also relevant, since most of the Towrah consists of Yahowah speaking in first person through Moseh, which is the same format used throughout the Prophets, why is Galatians written in Paul’s voice? The Prophets Zakaryah, Yasha’yah, Yirmayah, and Mal’aky, to name a few, routinely get out of the way and allow Yahowah to speak through them. Their personalities, their styles, their messages, and their reputations are never an issue. But the same cannot be said of Paul.

There are seven signs, all along the same path, all pointed in the same direction, all conveying the same message, all from the same God, and then there is Sha’uwl | Paul. And his sign is on a distinctly different path, it points in the opposite direction, and it conveys an entirely different message. And yet for each individual choosing to follow the path laid out by the seven in concert with God, hundreds of thousands prefer Paul’s instead.

Other than misrepresenting the second most important name and title in the universe, the KJV and LV handled the rest of the words appropriately enough. The King James reads: “For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.” LV: “And I did not receive it from man, nor did I learn it, except through the revelation of Iesu Christi.”

Unable to restrain themselves, the NLT felt compelled to add their own personal embellishments to an otherwise simple statement. “I received my message from no human source, and no one taught me. Instead, I received it by direct revelation from Jesus Christ.”

Forgetting the placeholders for a moment, just because the Greek reads, “Iesou Christou,” does not automatically mean that it is appropriate to order the name and title this way in English. In Greek, like Hebrew and Latin, in fact in many languages, adjectives follow the nouns they are modifying. But, in English, the opposite is true. For example, the Hebrew reads “Ruwach Qodesh,” but in English, it is written as “Set-Apart Spirit.” So then the issue is whether the intent of Christou was an adjective or a title, and if it is a title, why is the definite article routinely omitted? Also, since Paul has already deployed Satan’s title, “the Lord,” writing “the Lord Iesou Christou,” why is the improper title in the proper place but the proper title is not?

You can be the judge as to whether this was incriminating, or affirming:

“For because currently or simultaneously, [is it] men I presently persuade to win the favor of, seducing, misleading, and coaxing, even convincing, appeasing, and placating, or alternatively, the Theos | God?

Or alternatively by comparison and contrast, [do I] I desire to please and accommodate humans?

Yet nevertheless, even regardless, if men, I was obliging and accommodating, exciting them emotionally, a slave of Christou, certainly not was me. (1:10)

So therefore, I profess and reveal to you brothers of the beneficial message which having been communicated advantageously by and through myself, because it is not according to or in accord with man. (1:11)

But neither because I by man associating myself with it. Nor was I taught (like a disciple). But to the contrary, by way of a revelation, an appearance serving to uncover and unveil Iesou Christou.” (1:12)

Perhaps a little education, and learning to write, may have done him some good. Nah, I don’t think so.



Sha’uwl’s animosity toward the Towrah began before his conversion. As a rabbinical student, he had been trained to argue against God. So Paulos was not so much reflecting his former association with Judaism, but instead revealing the mindset which permeated his writings.

Initially, at least before I discovered that each of the hundreds of times that “towrah” was written in Yahowah’s Word as a proper noun that it was translated using nomos throughout every extant copy of the Septuagint, I was hopeful that by confessing his affinity for Judaism and the religion’s oral traditions, Paul would associate his use of nomos with the Talmud instead of the Towrah. But that did not happen, and it is not possible. While he knew the Talmud’s Oral Laws like the back of his hand, Sha’uwl never made any connection to Rabbinic Law. And he routinely associated the “nomos” he was assailing with Yahowah’s Torah. Moreover, the notion of rendering nomos as anything other than “Torah” is torn asunder by Paul’s own translation in Galatians 3:10. So now, listen carefully to what he says:

“For (gar – because indeed) you heard of (akouo ten – you received news of) my (emos) unruly behavior (anastrophe – wayward conduct and upside-down way of life) at a time and place (pote – whenever, speaking of an undisclosed point in the past or future; from pou – where, addressing a place and te – not only and both) during the practice of Judaism (en to Ioudaismos – in association with the Jewish religion), namely that because (hoti – since) regarding (kata – coming down from and regarding this) showing superiority, surpassing any measure of restraint (hyperbole – to an extraordinary degree, preeminently, excessively, beyond measure, and better than anyone else) I was aggressively and intensely pursuing (dioko – I was hastily striving toward, systematically running after, persecuting, oppressing, and harassing) the (ten) Called Out (ekklesia – from ek – out and kaleo – call) of (tou – the) God (ΘΥ – Placeholder for Theos | God), and (kai) I was and am devastating her, continuing to annihilate her (portheo autos – I was and am attacking and overthrowing her, I was and am undermining and ravaging her, continuing to destroy her; from pertho – sacking (in the imperfect tense, this ongoing action began in the past but there is no indication when it might cease if ever, in the active voice, Paulos was and is personally engaged ravaging and destroying, and in the indicative, these attacks are being presented as actually occurring)).” (Galatians 1:13)

The Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear presents this same revolting pallet of words using a slightly sparser array of colors: “You heard for the my behavior then in the Judaism that by excess I was pursuing the assembly of the God and was ravaging her.”

The King James Version helped fan the flames of anti-Semitism by combining “Jews’ religion” and “beyond measure I persecuted the church of God.” “For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:” What’s interesting here is that there is actually no basis for or indication of a “conversion” in Paul’s letter.

And the British translators cannot blame the Roman apologist for Christianity’s deadly opposition to Judaism. The Latin Vulgate rendering was somewhat more accurate. Jerome’s Latin translation reads: “For you have heard of my former behavior within Iudaismo: that, beyond measure, I persecuted the ecclesiam Dei and fought against Her.” But here again, while “former” is a superior rendering of pote than is “conversion,” it isn’t accurate. It speaks of “any place and time, of some place and time, of an undisclosed point in the past, present, or future” and is, therefore, by no means limited to a “former” time.

This is not a minor point, because Paulos specifically used the imperfect tense in association with portheo to say that he had and was continuing to ravage and destroy” those who have chosen to be with God. He never stopped attacking.

The New Living Translation turned back the clock even further on truth by completely ignoring pote, by rendering ekklesia “church,” and by failing to communicate the ongoing nature of the final imperfect verb. “You know what I was like when I followed the Jewish religion—how I violently persecuted God’s church. I did my best to destroy it.” God has a lot of things, but “church” is not among them.

In this passage, Sha’uwl was not putting himself in opposition to Judaism, nor suggesting that he was no longer practicing the religion but, instead, he was stating that the Jewish religion was in opposition to God’s people. In fact, later in Acts, before a Jewish assembly, Paul will speak of Judaism as if it remained the love of his life. And yet throughout this letter, and in others, his comments are decidedly anti-Semitic, fueling the animosity Christians would harbor against Jews. This duplicity is an enigma unless perceived from the perspective that Paul wanted to be seen as both in league with and in opposition to everyone and everything.

And there is no question that Sha’uwl was and continued to be religious. It is therefore instructive to know that Ioudaismos is based upon Ioudaizo, which in turn is defined as “the adoption of Jewish customs, traditions and religious rites, even the observation of the ritual law.” Thereby Ioudaismos describes: “Rabbinic Judaism.”

Being a fundamentalist practitioner of Judaism made Sha’uwl opposed to a redeeming Mashyach, to a suffering servant, as opposed to a conquering warrior, but that still does not explain his unbridled animosity toward those who quietly elected to follow him. Judaism, unlike Islam, indeed even unlike Christianity, has never inspired rage. From the religion’s fledgling beginnings circa 200 BCE to the present day, Jews have fought many defensive campaigns, the first three of which failed, all hoping to liberate their homeland from invaders: the Greeks once, the Romans thrice, and more recently on four occasions against Muslims. The religion is not sufficiently aggressive or violent to inspire the kind of rage Sha’uwl expressed. Nor is there any evidence to suggest that Sha’uwl was anything more than a lone wolf – singularly vicious and out of control.

This is the second time Paul has revealed that his cravings were insatiable. Initially, it was libertine lusts and sexual perversions which he blamed on the Torah. And now he is attributing his unrestrained annihilation of passive and peaceful people on his religion. And yet, lost in his arrogance, he wants us to believe that he alone was selected by God to slander Him and undermine His Towrah.

But I know someone similarly perverted and violent – Muhammad. His bloodlust and appetite for sexual abuse were hallmarks of his life where terrorism was used to supply an endless stream of booty and babes. His religion grew out of his lust. Paul’s may have as well.

As we consider Paulos’ claim, I would be surprised if more than a handful of people, most of whom would have been relatives of his victims, would have heard of him. I suspect that Sha’uwl was a legend in his own mind.

And the evidence indicates that Judaism was not responsible for his actions. There is no historical evidence to suggest that others were operating similarly. There is no record of such orders in any rabbinic archive, and you would be hard-pressed to find any group more committed to documenting their aims and arguments.

That may be one of many reasons that Paulos provided no specificity with regard to time or place. And if you are wondering why he would admit these awful things, especially if they were exaggerated, it is because he thought that the comparison between the old Sha’uwl and new Paulos would serve to demonstrate the relative merits of the Old System compared to his New Testament. The same strategy is deployed in Islam which is why I recognize the ploy.

And while these are all serious and deeply troubling issues, they don’t measure up to juxtaposing “hyperbole – showing superiority surpassing any measure of restraint,” “dioko – aggressively and intensely pursuing,” and “portheo – devastating and annihilating,” especially when scribed in the imperfect and directed at God’s children. Had Paulos wanted to say that he had been conceited, that he had been out of control and intensely aggressive in the past while annihilating, which is to murder in mass, God’s Covenant children, he would have used the perfect tense, which describes actions which were completed in the past which led to the present state of affairs. The fact he did not, not only confirms that his assault on the Covenant was ongoing, indeed never-ending, but also that he had no respect for his audience, believing that they were so inferior to his intellect that they would never figure it out no matter how obvious he made it for them.

We do not know many of the details of Sha’uwl’s life. He told us that he went to school to be a rabbi, but not if he ever became one. As a young man, he claims to have studied under the famed Gamaliel, which would have put him in Jerusalem while Dowd was there. But an undisclosed time thereafter he claims to have been making tents back in his hometown of Tarsus, in what is now southwestern Turkey. Since there was no shortage of rabbis in Yaruwshalaim to harass the followers of The Way, should that have been their unofficial mission, why recruit a vicious and egotistical unbridled libertine?

That makes no sense, unless, of course, Sha’uwl was so immoral, myopic, and uniquely savage that he became an ideal candidate for all the wrong reasons. But even then, how depraved would an individual have to be to engage in a mission where the goal was to mercilessly bludgeon your own people, ripping innocent families apart who had broken no laws, only because you disagreed with their conclusions? A moral and rational individual could never have done such a thing. Since Sha’uwl has confessed to all of these acts and attributes, and since the attitude required to actually have done these horrendous things permeates this letter, it is incumbent upon us to consider the character flaws which motivated him.

Returning to the passage itself, the ekklesia, describing those who were “called out” of the world and unto God, is a translation of the Hebrew qara’ – itself the basis of Miqra’, the title of Yahowah’s seven Invitations to be Called Out and Meet with Him. It is telling that the ekklesia is feminine. This is because, at least when fulfilled by Dowd, it represents Yahowah’s “beryth – Covenant,” also feminine, and because inclusion in it is facilitated by the “ruwach qodesh – Set-Apart Spirit, the feminine manifestation of God’s nature.”

Beyond this, Yisra’el, like beryth, towrah, and ruwach, is feminine, with the first two representing Yahowah’s bride – at least symbolically. Before the divorce decree was announced through the prophet Howsha’ / Hosea, based upon Yisra’el’s infidelity, the Familial Covenant Relationship was a marriage between Yahowah and His Chosen People. But when God’s bride chose to cavort with Ba’al (the “Lord” in Hebrew), Yahowah announced the divorce, a split which He has promised to resolve on the Day of Reconciliations two thousand years after He healed the rift with His Son’s fulfillment of the first three Miqra’ey. In so doing, Yahowah honored each of the five promises He had made to His Covenant children.

It had been on this Miqra’, after tangibly demonstrating the purpose of Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children on the way out of Egypt, that the Towrah was revealed to God’s children. It is another connection Christians seldom acknowledge.

Sir Francis Bacon was the occultist that King Iames, as he was then known, hired to shepherd his self-serving translation. Along with the politically savvy theologians who served with him, he must have felt that since the opening verb of Galatians 1:13 was “you heard,” they had the liberty to change “wayward behavior” to “conversation.” After all, they could be pretty sure Paulos wasn’t going to object. I suspect it sounded more racist to say “the Jews’ religion,” rather than “Judaism,” which explains that decision as well. But no matter what their justification may have been for copyediting Sha’uwl, as a consequence of replacing “ekklesia – called out” with “church,” the lone aspect of the message which had any merit was lost, and a devastating misnomer was born.

While I have attempted to hold Sha’uwl, himself, accountable for the severe character flaws required to perpetrate savagery on innocent kin, he must also bear the burden of his legacy. His positioning of Judaism as a ruthless enemy of God’s “church” has fanned the flames of racial hatred and caused horrible and needless suffering. Translators exacerbated the problem to be sure, but it was Paul who presented Judaism as the enemy of his faith: Christianity. The foreseeable and inevitable consequence was to rally Christians to persecute Jews out of a misguided sense of divine retribution.

This is a glaring red flag, a dire warning signal, a dead canary in the coal mine, which most have missed. Satan’s religions engender a hatred for Yahowah’s Chosen People. In the Torah we read: “For you are a set-apart people unto Yahowah, your God. Yahowah, your God, has chosen you to be a people for Himself, a treasured possession above all of the peoples on the face of the earth.” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 7:6) God’s love for His people is unmistakable and unshakable. But so is Sha’uwl’s animosity.

The Babylonians and Assyrians, as the first practitioners of Satanic sun-god religious schemes, were especially savage toward Jews (or correctly, Yahuwdym, meaning Related to Yahowah and Beloved of Yah), plundering their towns and hauling the people off into slavery. The Egyptians, who practiced the same religion under different names, held the Yisra’elites captive and killed many.

Practicing the same religion, the Seleucid Grecian Empire, which was created as a result of Alexander’s conquests, ruthlessly sacked Yaruwshalaim under Antiochus IV Epiphanes (“the Manifestation of God”), as is described in the books of Maccabees. The Romans, who worshiped the same gods, but also under different names, were even more barbaric in their treatment of Jews than were the Babylonians and Assyrians. They razed Yahowah’s Home, crucified tens of thousands, and then renamed the Promised Land “Philistina,” solely because the prophets described the Philistines as Yisra’el’s most annoying enemy, from whence we get the myth of a “Palestinian people.”

Constantine’s Christians, governed as they were by Pauline Doctrine, were so anti-Jewish, that observing any aspect of Yahowah’s Torah became a crime punishable by death. Then came Islam, a religion born out of plundering, enslaving, raping, and murdering Jews en masse. But they were not alone. Such discrimination and lack of moral judgment lingered throughout the reign of Catholicism in Europe, facilitating the horrid treatment of Yahowah’s Chosen People under the dominion of the first Socialist Secular Humanist regimes: Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Russia.

The common denominator in each of these religions, including the faith conceived by Sha’uwl, is a ruthless animosity directed at God’s Covenant Children, especially those who were naturally born: Yisra’el and Yahuwdym. It is Satan’s trademark. It is why Yahowah predicted that the Serpent would “bruise the heel of man.” Ya’aqob, who was named Yisra’el by Yahowah, is based upon the Hebrew word for “heel.” Therefore, Sha’uwl’s animosity toward God’s chosen people should have been seen as a red flag of monumental proportions.

Displaying the kind of arrogance that is the hallmark of the most grossly insecure individuals, Sha’uwl continued to brag. But rather than isolate his next statement from his previous one, let’s join them because one flows out of the other. And as you read these words, please note that the selection of the imperfect tense, which made Paul’s last statement so indicting and devastating, is used again in his follow-on comments, thereby, conveying two things: First, Paul is suggesting that Judaism was the cause of his bloody rampage; second, he is saying that he is still progressing in the religion.

“For because you heard of my unruly behavior at a time and place during the practice of Judaism, namely that because of my superiority, surpassing any measure of restraint, to an extraordinary degree better than anyone else, I was aggressively and intensely, even systematically pursuing it by persecuting, oppressing, and attacking the Called Out of God as I was and am devastating her, continuing to undermine, overthrow, and annihilate her.” (1:13)

“And so (kai) I was and continue to progress (eprokopto – I was accomplishing a great deal, and I persist moving forward, advancing; a compound of pro – before and kopto – cutting, striking, and smiting (scribed in the imperfect, where the writer is portraying the action as an ongoing process which, while initiated in the past, is continuing to occur with no assessment of when if ever it will end, in the active voice, which signifies that the subject, Paulos, is performing the action, and in the indicative mood, whereby the writer is saying that his assessments are genuine and his accomplishments are real)) in (en) the practice of Judaism (Ioudaismos – the Jewish religion), over and beyond (hyper – to a greater degree and for the sake of) many (polys – the preponderance of) contemporaries (synelikiotes – people of similar age) among (en) my (ego) race (genos – progeny, descendants, ethnic group, kin, or nationality), excessively (perissoteros – abundantly and to a much greater degree) enthusiastic (zelotes – zealous, jealous, and excited, devoted, emotional, and burning with passion, vehemently adherent; from zeloo – to burn with zeal, heated, envious, and angry, boiling over) to belong to (hyparcho – to be identical to, to exist with and possess, to be equivalent to and yield to, and to be present with and assimilate (in the present tense Paulos, at this very moment and moving on into the future, is currently striving to embrace Judaism and to incorporate its Oral Law, in the active voice, Paulos is doing whatever it takes to achieve this state, and as a participle, and thus as a verbal adjective, his desire to belong is influencing him with regard to)) the traditions and teachings handed down by (paradosis – to being given over to the word of mouth which has been passed on by) my (ego) forefathers (patrikos – ancestors).” (Galatians 1:14)

First things first. By successively deploying the imperfect tense, Paulos has left no doubt that his unrestrained and depraved behavior and his participation in this degenerate religion were not limited to past experiences but were ongoing. He was and would continue to be a religiously inspired assassin. And indeed, Paul morphed many of the worst characteristics of Judaism into Christianity, thereby spreading its devastating consequences from a few to many, from Yahuwdym to Gowym.

This confession means that there was no conversion experience on the road to Damascus. Paulos is what Sha’uwl was. Nothing changed. He did not progress from attacking God’s Covenant children to nurturing them, from rabbinical traditions to the Christian religion.

If, as Yahowah asserts, it was Satan, under the guise and moniker of the Lord, who had influenced the Yisra’elites to oppose His Towrah and to reject His Covenant in favor of their oral traditions, then as Sha’uwl will later admit, it was the same spirit who appealed to the founder of the Christian religion on the road to Damascus. In his opposition to God, Paulos would display the same attitude and approach now extant throughout the Talmud. And he was just like the authors of Jewish traditions who, while claiming to speak for God, did the opposite.

Likewise, and in the manner of the rabbis, Sha’uwl’s mischaracterization of Dowd would bear no resemblance to most of the promises made about the Passover Lamb in the Torah or Prophets. The Christian Christ, like the Rabbinic Mashyach, would be estranged from Yahowah. And most penalizing of all, there would be no connection between the Lamb and his fulfillment of the Miqra’ey in the Talmud or these Epistles.

Also, as was the case with the rabbis, Paulos would deploy arguments which made his testimony, at least in the eyes of his adherents, more relevant than, even vastly superior to, God’s. To this day, religious Jews hold their Talmud over the Towrah, just as every religious Christian values their “New Testament,” comprised chiefly of Paul’s letters, over the Word of God – and most especially over His Towrah. Nothing changed except the audience.

In these words, Sha’uwl has conveyed and indeed embraced the rabbinical mindset, defining what it means to be an adherent of Judaism. The religion was conceived to zealously indoctrinate the descendants of Ya’aqob so that every religious Jew would have their lives defined and governed by these oral traditions. Christianity has had a remarkably similar influence on Gentiles, with nations, communities, and cultures for vast swaths of time often being indistinguishable from the religion.

While we should not have been surprised, the Greek word designating the religious teaching and traditions of Sha’uwl’s elders, paradosis, also means “to surrender, to give up, and to deliver oneself into the hands of others.” It is based upon paradidomai, whose tertiary definition after “surrender” and “to be delivered into custody,” is “to be judged, condemned, punished, put to death, and be anguished because of treachery.”

The fourth connotation conveys “to be taught in such a way as to be molded as a result of verbal reports.” In the realm of etymology, this is especially revealing because it exposes the cause and consequence of religious traditions and teachings. Paul loved his religion. He just hated his people. They would not honor him the way Gentiles have done.

Regarding Sha’uwl’s affinity for Judaism, please consider this confession. Having climbed some stairs to rise above his audience, motioning for them to be silent, and then speaking in Hebrew, Sha’uwl proclaimed: “Men, brothers and fathers (andros adelphos kai pater), you must listen to me (akou mou – now I command you to hear me (aorist active imperative)), to this regarding and against you (tes pros umas – with this advantageously), the current and present (nuni – this moment’s) defense and justification (apologia – answer and retort). (Acts 22:1)

As is the case throughout Paul’s letters, he is defending and justifying his credentials and message, not Yahowah’s or Gospel Jesus’. It is a broken record figuratively and literally. Rather than encouraging us to listen to God, Sha’uwl is demanding that we listen to him.

The troubled troubadour continued to tout Sha’uwl from Tarsus...

And then (de) having heard (akouo) that the Hebrew language (oti te Ebraida dialektos) he had been and was continuing to use to address them (prosphoneo autois – he was summoning them, calling them to him by speaking to them (imperfect active indicative)), the more (mallon) they continued to be (parecho) quiet (hesychia – still and silent). And he declares (kai phemi – so he says and affirms),… (Acts 22:2)

This serves as one of several indications that the conversations later recorded in Greek throughout the so-called “Christian New Testament” were originally spoken in Hebrew – the language of Yahowah and Heaven. Therefore, any name or concept derived from Greek rather than Hebrew should be discarded. There is no support for the following in the Greek text: Christmas, Easter, and Sunday as the Lord’s Day, as well as the Eucharist, Communion, and the Trinity. These were derived from the pagan religious practices of Babylon, Egypt, Greece, and Rome. They cannot be blamed on but are merely reflected in Christianity’s New Testament.

Sha’uwl then admitted...

‘I am (ego eimi – I exist as) a Jewish man (aner Ioudaios – an adult male Jew; an inaccurate transliteration of Yahuwd, meaning Related to Yah), having been born (gennao) in Tarsus (en Tarsos – from tartaroo – being appointed to decide who is held as a captive and cast into hell) of (tes) Cilicia (Kilikia – due south of Galatia in modern-day Turkey).

But then and now (de) having been reared, nourished, and educated (anatrepho – having been brought up, cared for, and trained; from trepho, fed by suckling at the breast, and ana, into the midst) in (en) this (taute) city (polis) alongside (para – from beside) the feet (pous) of Gamaliel (Gamaliel – a transliteration of the Hebrew Gamly’el, from gamal ‘el, meaning to deal with God by repaying God), having been educated and trained (paideuo – having been taught and guided, having been instructed and disciplined in youth, having been chastised, criticized, and reprimanded with words; from pais, a child, slave, servant, attendant, or minister) with regards to (kata – according to) the most perfect and strictest conformity to, being absolutely accurate in exacting accord with (akribeia tou – the very careful, precise, and thorough approach to the fundamentalist and rigorous application of; from akibestatos – the most precise, the strictest, the most exacting and careful interpretation and observation of the most minute precepts of) the forefathers’ (tou patroos – the ancestral) apportionment which was received (nomou – allocation of inheritance which is parceled out), a zealous enthusiast and adherent (zelotes – a devoted and emotional zealot), present and existing (huparchon – equivalent and identical to, belonging to and found at the hand) of God (tou ΘΥ – Placeholder for Theos | God), according to and in the same proportion degree as all of you (kathos pas su – inasmuch as you all, just as, and when compared to you all).” (Acts 22:3)

This single proclamation contains several exceptionally inappropriate statements. This man, who claimed to speak for God, wallowed in the idea of being “educated and trained” by a rabbi, the leader of those Gospel Jesus had said “were born of serpents.” It would have been one thing for him to admit in passing that he had once been one of Gamaliel’s students, but it is another altogether to speak of this acclaimed rabbi as if he was filling the role of the Set-Apart Spirit. It is obvious that Paul admired a man whom God despised.

The problem Yahowah has with rabbinical traditions, known as the Oral Torah (later codified in the Talmud), is that it changes, corrupts, counterfeits, and conceals His name and “Towrah – Teaching.” So why did Paul call the inheritance which was received from his forefathers “precisely accurate” when God says the opposite? Further, Sha’uwl used the perfect tense with reference to the training he had allegedly received from Gamaliel, saying that while his education was complete, it had lingering effects. Therefore, we must ask: why did Sha’uwl claim to be a religious fundamentalist, to be a zealot in strict conformity with that which was parceled out by his forefathers – especially since Yahowah overtly condemns His people’s propensity to be religious?

This question is vital because it also suggests that Paul was either a compulsive liar who cannot be trusted or he never converted from Judaism to Christianity – not that one is better than the other. Further, based upon this statement, since Sha’uwl claimed to be in absolute accord with Judaism and its oral traditions, the argument cannot be made that he was assailing the Talmud instead of the Towrah throughout his letters. Also, Paul will twice attest that he had not been taught by men, and yet now when it suits him to gain credibility with this audience, he is admitting to having received training from the most acclaimed religious scholar of his day. Was he lying then or now?

This is one of the few times Sha’uwl specifically identifies whether it was Yahowah’s Towrah that he was addressing, or the religious traditions of the Jews. And it is one of the few times he speaks favorably of the text. For those who know and love Yahowah, this juxtaposition is sufficient to demean and discount everything Sha’uwl wrote and spoke.

Reinforcing this reality, by placing nomou amongst qualifiers such as the teaching of the Jewish religious scholar Gamaliel, rabbinical training, conformity, being a fundamentalist, adhering to the traditions of the forefathers, and being a zealous enthusiast, the “Torah” Sha’uwl was declaring his loyalty to had to be the rabbinic Talmud, and thus could not have been Yahowah’s Towrah. So, when we are finally given some clarity, the picture being presented is the antithesis of the one painted by God. Set into the context of his overt animosity for Yahowah’s Word, this is especially a-Paul-ing.

It’s becoming apparent through his testimony that Sha’uwl loved the Judaic Law Yahowah despised, and he hated the Towrah Yahowah loved. And perhaps that was why he so seldom differentiates between them in Galatians. If he had made his allegiance this obvious in his initial letters, his message would have been summarily rejected.

In this regard it should be noted that of the 219 times the Hebrew word towrah, meaning “teaching, direction, guidance, and instruction,” is found as a proper noun in Yahowah’s Word, in the Greek Septuagint translation of it, towrah was rendered as nomos. And while the Greek replacement actually means “an allocation of an inheritance which is parceled out,” it is no longer the meaning of the word which matters but, instead, what it was being used to replace. Therefore, considering the enormity of the Septuagint’s influence on the Greek texts which comprise the New Testament, a statement including nomos must reference unequivocal modifiers, such as are evident here in Acts, to render nomos as anything other than Yahowah’s “Towrah.” As a result, throughout this book, unless the context dictates otherwise, we will continue to default to Torah when nomos is found in the Greek text. There is no other informed or rational option.

Addressing Sha’uwl’s concluding comment, “present and existing (huparchon – equivalent and identical to, belonging to and found at the hand) of God,” while religions such as Judaism, while religious leaders such as Gamaliel, and while religious traditions and customs such as those manifest in the oral traditions now found in the Talmud seek to nourish “a zealousness for god,” their god isn’t Yahowah. The religious god is a false deity modeled after the men who conceived him.

Some fifteen paragraphs ago, I suggested that Sha’uwl became Paulos and sought the acclaim of Gentiles largely because his own people refused to believe him. Already prone to anger, he became enraged. Should you want additional proof that Sha’uwl despised Yahowah’s Chosen People, consider these impassioned words from his second letter, where he rails against his race for doing what he had done: “You suffered, and under your own countrymen, just as also themselves under the Jews, the ones having killed the Lord Iesoun and the prophets, and having pursued and persecuted us, not pleasing God and hostile adversaries against all men, hindering us as we speak to the races so that they might be delivered. For they are filled to capacity with continuous and eternal sins. So upon them is furious indignation and wrathful judgment unto the end of time.” (1 Thessalonians 2:14-16)

If this unjustified and unbridled religious rant does not bother you, you cannot be bothered. An entire book could be written about the many ways this is wrong. Woven as it was on a single thread of truth, this repositioning of Yahowah’s Chosen People as being permanently disinherited, as being the enemy of all humankind, as being completely evil, has the Adversary’s fingerprints all over it. But at the very least, consider this: was Sha’uwl not a Jew? And while it’s just one lie among many, there is no evidence that Yahuwdym killed a prophet and all evidence demonstrates that Rome convicted, whipped, humiliated, tortured, and killed the Lamb of God.

Returning to Galatians 1:14, the Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear conveyed Paul’s arrogance thusly: “...and I was progressing in the Judaism beyond many contemporaries in the kind of me more exceedingly jealous existing of the fathers of me traditions.” So it is not that the King James is wrong, albeit it is poorly worded, but that it is inadequate, saying: “And profited in the Jews’ religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.” Jerome did the passage justice, however. In the LV he wrote: “And I advanced in Iudaismo beyond many of my equals among my own kind, having proven to be more abundant in zeal toward the traditions of my fathers.”

Under Philip Comfort’s guidance, the NLT suggested: “I was far ahead of my fellow Jews in my zeal for the traditions of my ancestors.” It is as if the authors of the New Living Translation felt compelled to change even the simplest messages. Ioudaismos describes “Judaism—the practice of the Jewish religion.” It is not the Greek word for “Jew.” “Judaism” is a religion. “Jews” are a race. The difference is gargantuan.

Sha’uwl’s next statement is also untrue, feeding the myth of predestination and the mythos which became Calvinism. And speaking of mistakes, you should know that the independent clause depicted within the brackets below is not included in the text of Papyrus 46, the oldest extant witness of this letter.

“But (de) at a point in time (hote – when) it pleased (eudokeo – it was chosen, preferred, enjoyable and better) for God (ΘΥ – Placeholder for Theos | God), the one (o) having appointed me, setting me aside (aphorize ego – having separated me) out of (ek) the womb (koilia) of my mother (mou meter) [and having summoned me by name (kai kaleo) on account of (dia) his Grace (charis autos)], (1:15)

...to reveal and disclose (apokalypto – to uncover and unveil) the Son (ton ΥΝ) of Him (autou) in (en) order that (hina) I (ego) could announce the healing message and beneficial messenger (euangelizo) among (en) the races and nations (ethnos – the multitudes of people in different places), immediately (eutheos – straightaway, forthwith, without hesitation). I did not ask the advice of or consult with (ou prosanatithemai – I did not confer or communicate with) flesh (sarx – corporeal mass, physical nature, human or animal kind) or blood (kai haima).” (Galatians 1:15-16)

Unpolished in the Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear, Paul’s words as he wrote them, read: “When but thought well the God the one having separated me from stomach of mother of me and having called through the favor of him to uncover the son of him in me that I might tell good message him in the nations immediately not I conferred in flesh and blood.”

Sha’uwl wants us to believe that God not only chose him but did so even before he was born. And yet, since this only occurred with Yirmayah and perhaps, Dowd, Sha’uwl is trying to put himself on par with God’s actual prophets.

It is one thing for God to have known us before we were born, as that simply attests to the nature of His Light, where He can see the past, present, and future as if they were all right now. But choice is sacrosanct with God. The entire purpose of the universe, of life, and of the Towrah is for us to have the opportunity, and thus the choice, to know and love God. These options are ours and they necessitate freewill. Even with Abraham and Moseh, arguably the most important individuals in human history, Yahowah asked them. He did not appoint them.

That is not to say, however, that Yahowah was unaware of Sha’uwl. I have already shared two foreboding prophecies about him, and in due time you will be exposed to many more very specific predictions pertaining to the most influential man who ever lived.

Paul will soon speak of a three-year fanciful sojourn to Arabia, the heartland of the Towrah, where he claims to have met with God. And yet while the timeline prepared by the historian Luke in Acts makes this trip impossible, the very notion of preparation is contrary to what this passage asserts.

While Paul’s message is nothing more than “reject the Torah and believe in my Gospel of Grace instead,” his condescending attitude and circuitous style make it readily apparent that Paul is a pathological liar with a faulty memory.

He began this letter in Galatians 1:1 with: “Paulos, an apostle and messenger who is dispatched not from men, not even by the means of man,” which would only be true if Gamaliel, Yisra’el’s most acclaimed teacher, was not a man and if Judaism was not a manmade religion.

Then in Galatians 1:12, when he continued with: “But I profess to you brothers of the beneficial messenger which having been communicated by myself, because it is not in accord with man.” This would mean that Paul was lying when he said that he was in full accord with the strictest application of the religious traditions of Judaism in Acts 22:3. Also, his follow-on statement, “But neither because I by man associating myself with it, nor was I taught,” would have to be dishonest if he told the truth about the many years he spent in the classroom learning how to argue against the Torah in rabbinical school at Gamaliel’s feet.

But forgetting for a moment that Paul contradicted himself in the book of Acts when he stood up on the stairs to promote his religious credentials, he undermined his credibility in the 13th and 14th statements in this letter when he spoke of his “practice of Judaism,” stating that he “continued to progress in the practice of Judaism over any beyond his contemporaries,” and that he was “excessively enthusiastic to conform to the traditions and teachings handed down by [his] forefathers.” While it is possible to have been taught by both men and God, learning from each, Paul has both emphatically denied and enthusiastically embraced human teaching. And the notion that he was taught by God can only be considered valid if he, a known liar, is considered trustworthy.

So then now in Galatians 1:16, when Paul finally tells the truth, it only makes the situation worse. It is obsessively true that he: “did not ask the advice of or consult with flesh and blood.” But only because the “aggelos – messenger” prodding and controlling him was, by his own admission, Satan’s messenger. Satan is not “flesh and blood.”

It should also be noted that Paul’s unique path was completely unlike (if I may use the errant versions of some of their names for a moment to make a point) Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Aaron, Yahowsha’, Samuel, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Joel, Hosea, Zechariah, or Malachi, none of whom received any religious training. There was nothing for them to reject or unlearn as a consequence. And perhaps that is the reason behind Sha’uwl’s conflicting story. There is no denying that he continued to be extremely religious, and it is especially difficult for religious people to deal with the truth because they first must abandon almost everything they have valued, and then change their attitude, perspective, and thinking. Very, very few overtly religious people are capable of doing so. Paul was not.

And it was because Sha’uwl’s past was so dissimilar to those who had previously spoken for Yahowah that he spent a considerable portion of his life promoting his credentials – but never as aggressively as in Galatians. Most new religions grow out of old religions. Buddha’s teachings were considered viable because they grew out of Hinduism, the most popular religion in that part of the world. Muhammad’s Quran derives all its credibility from the Talmud and Gospels, just as rabbis, like Paul, surreptitiously usurped their authority from the Torah they were overshadowing.

Religions are seldom made from whole cloth but are instead a patchwork of previous traditions. That is what makes them so seductive and ultimately popular. And there is no better example of one religion growing out of another than Pauline Christianity.

It is also interesting to note that, with both Christianity and Islam, their inspiration became their enemy. Muslims turned on the rabbis who had provided the many hundreds of Talmud citations which were bastardized and plagiarized to form the Quran, because they could prove that rabbis, not Allah, had served as Muhammad’s inspiration. Similarly, I suspect, Sha’uwl turned on Judaism because, had he not done so, it would have become obvious that he had stolen their strategy and style.

Shakespeare wrote the line in Hamlet, “the lady doth protest too much, methinks,” to convey what is occurring here. By vociferously repeating his denial, we know, that more than anything else, Paul wanted his audience to believe what he knew to be untrue: that his message came directly from God, as opposed to having originated from man.

In truth, had Paul been telling the truth, he did not need to convey any of this ad nauseam. Yahowah had long ago established a method for us to determine who spoke for Him, and who did not. God’s test is detailed in Dabarym / Deuteronomy 13 and 18 – so rest assured, we will establish with absolute certainty that Paul cannot be trusted regarding his claims of inspiration.

According to the Towrah, there are three aspects to being a productive messenger. The first task is to cull the audience. There is no reason to waste time speaking to religious individuals because the truth will simply bounce off their veneer of faith as they struggle desperately to cling to their beliefs. Next, the ground must be prepared around those who remain. For the seeds of truth to take root, religious swamps must be drained of their stagnant waters, and the weeds of deception must be pulled. In this regard, the most effective weed pullers and swamp drainers are those who are cognizant of the delusions which permeate our societies and have polluted most people. This requires study. And speaking of preparation, we must come to understand Yahowah’s Torah before we try to educate others. Simply stated, to share the truth, you first must know the truth.

During my first pass through this material, I erroneously assumed that Sha’uwl had come to recognize the truth and knew that his forefathers had crafted counterfeit rules and rituals, known as the Oral Law, to compete with Yahowah’s Towrah. I had hoped, therefore, that rabbinic tradition had become his primary foe, thinking that he was motivated to expose and condemn the suffocating religious regulations which had enslaved his people. Ideally, I would have liked to have seen him differentiate between man’s religious rites and the healing and beneficial message conveyed in the Towrah – the one lived out in history by Dowd. But alas, it was not to be.

And since Sha’uwl’s story is not going to turn out well, I thought I would substitute my own journey from Christianity to the Torah, from religion to relationship, from believing to knowing, and from faith to trust. I was like Paul in a way. In my youth, I was the youngest ordained ruling elder in the Presbyterian Church. I provided a keynote address while in my teens at the national assembly on denominational reconciliation. I taught evangelism at a very young age and devoured Christian literature at a prodigious pace. But a time came when I could no longer prop up my faith. There were way too many obvious conflicts between religion and reason for me to believe in Christianity, the religion of my youth, any longer.

A time came when I devoted my life to secular pursuits. As an entrepreneur, and with the help of others, I built three companies from business plans into corporations with sales exceeding one hundred million dollars. I had the privilege of taking two of those companies public. And as a result, at least for a brief moment, I became a billionaire. But a year after having left the management of my last enterprise, I found myself on the cover of an international publication, being publicly humiliated for things I had not done. It was my moment on the road to Damascus (albeit there were no flashing lights).

Fortunately for me, as I wished it had been for Paul, all my prior experiences, the successes and failures, were refined during this crucible of life. It was then that a dear friend taught me to write, and together we wove a word picture of what had happened at my former company, Value America. That story became the book, In the Company.

Then, almost the moment we were done, Yahowah, the God I barely knew, asked me if I would be willing to do to Islam what I had erroneously anticipated Sha’uwl having done to Judaism – expose and condemn it based solely upon its religious texts. After a brief negotiation, my literary friend and I were off to Israel to ascertain the mindset of Islamic suicide bombers. It was immediately after September 11th, 2001. Our meeting with al-Qaeda is retold in Tea with Terrorists. It was during this time that I began a journey which would lead me through the pages of the Towrah to the Covenant.

Unlike Sha’uwl, who was already an expert on Jewish scriptural literature, in my quest to expose Muhammad, I had to find and study the oldest Islamic sources to effectively condemn the religion. But like Paul’s alleged experience in Arabia, I spent three years preparing to engage in the spiritual battle against a satanic foe. The result of being immersed in the scriptures of mankind’s most repulsive swamp led to the production of Prophet of Doom – Islam’s Terrorist Dogma in Muhammad’s Own Words, now revised, substantially augmented, and renamed God Damn Religion. I would ultimately invest five years of my life exposing and condemning Islam on behalf of Yahowah, doing nearly 5,000 hours of talk radio interviews before God finally let me know that we had accomplished what we had set out to do.

But we were not finished working together. Having known what it was like to be a Christian, having traveled to over 150 countries around the world, and having learned how Islam corrupts its victims’ ability to think, Yahowah encouraged me to engage in another mission: Yada Yahowah – A Conversation With God. Recognizing that I was utterly unqualified to contribute to what is known about God is perhaps one of the reasons that I was asked. Making flawed instruments shine is one of Yahowah’s specialties. This was presented again in An Introduction to God which I would encourage you to consider. The first of these two books recounts Yahowah’s scientific, historic, and especially prophetic testimony to prove beyond any doubt that He exists and that He inspired the Torah and Prophets. The second book reveals what He wants us to know about Him. And since that time, I have written the five volumes of Observations and the first two volumes of Coming Home in addition to the three volumes devoted to exploring Daniel and Ezekiel called Babel.

I share this story with you because, initially, I thought that I understood Paul. I thought that his flaws were my flaws. I initially saw the best and worst of myself in him. But that is no longer the case.

I now see myself as more flawed than ever. After all, I was fooled by this man for a long time. And yet the truth was blatantly obvious, even ubiquitous, but blinded by the religious indoctrination of my past, I missed it. Yet no longer. I now understand Sha’uwl. I know his mindset and strategy. And I recognize his character flaws and his inspiration. Turns out, Paul wasn’t all that different than Muhammad.

As I mentioned, after coming to realize that Paul was a fraud, a wolf in sheep’s clothing, I wrote other books, each designed to clear all the clutter away so that Yahowah could speak to us directly, Father to child, and reveal His Covenant relationship through His towrah teaching – just as He had with me.

As we return our attention to a more modern swamp, we find that the King James Version continues to render euangelizo inconsistently, preferring “gospel,” unless the context precludes the use of this inaccurate designation. Further, their inclination to translate ethnos, the basis of the English word “ethnic” and “ethnicity,” as “heathen” on some occasions and as “Gentiles” on others is both incriminating and unprofessional. Moreover, there is no basis for the title “God” in the Greek text of this passage. This known, the KJV reads: “But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:” Since “grace” cannot be found in the original Greek manuscripts, the King James must have picked it up elsewhere. The Vulgate, perhaps…

Jerome wrote: “But, when it pleased him who, from my mother’s womb, had set me apart, and who has called me by his gratiam, to reveal his Son within me, so that I might evangelizarem him among the Gentibus, I did not next seek the consent of flesh and blood.”

Should God have set Sha’uwl apart out of the womb to conduct this mission, then God would have been with him when he was a pervert and when he was an assassin. God would have been at his side when he was religious and when he was denouncing his religion. And that would make Paul’s god every bit as schizophrenic as his wannabe apostle.

The NLT, obviously infatuated with Grace, not only adds its alluring religious charm without any textual support but calls Grace “marvelous.” The idea of being “set apart” was evidently lost on these theologians. “But even before I was born, God chose me and called me by his marvelous grace. Then it pleased him to reveal his Son to me so that I would proclaim the Good News about Jesus to the Gentiles. When this happened, I did not rush out to consult with any human being.”

By way of review, here is the third stanza of Sha’uwl’s initial epistle:

“For because you heard of my unruly behavior at a time and place during the practice of Judaism, namely that because of my superiority, surpassing any measure of restraint, to an extraordinary degree better than anyone else, I was aggressively and intensely, even systematically pursuing it by persecuting, oppressing, and attacking the Called Out of God as I was and am devastating her, continuing to undermine, overthrow, and annihilate her. (1:13)

And so I was and continue to progress, accomplishing a great deal, and I persist moving forward in the practice of Judaism, over and beyond many contemporaries among my race, enthusiastic, zealous, and excited, especially devoted and burning with passion to adhere to and assimilate with the traditions and teachings handed down by my forefathers. (1:14)

But at a point in time when it pleased and was chosen to be better for Theos, the one having appointed me, setting me aside out of the womb of my mother (1:15) to reveal and disclose, uncovering and unveiling the Son of Him in order that I could announce the healing message among the multitudes, races, and nations, immediately. I did not ask the advice of, or consult with flesh or blood.” (Galatians 1:16)

After having invested nine months turning Prophet of Doom into five volumes of God Damn Religion, it is as if I’m still mired in Satan’s swamp. The message is hauntingly and demonically similar.



Twistianity

Appalling

…Contradicting God

10

Pseudomai | I Lie

Into the Darkness...

We do not have a copy of the report Sha’uwl received from the Galatians, but it is obvious from his response to them that they were, at the very least, highly suspect of his credentials and his preaching.

“I did not ascend (oute elthon – I did not travel) into (eis) Yaruwshalaim | Jerusalem (Hierosoluma – a transliteration of the Hebrew name meaning Source of Information Regarding Reconciliation) toward the goal of being with or against (pros) the Apostles (apostolos – the messengers who are prepared and sent out, from apo sent out, and stello prepared and equipped) before (pro) me (ego), but to the contrary (alla) I went away, withdrawing (aperchomai – I departed) to (eis) Arabia (Arabia – a transliteration of the Hebrew ‘arab, meaning to grow dark), and (kai) returned (hypostrepho) again (palin – once more) to (eis) Damascus (Damaskos – a transliteration of the Hebrew Dameseq, meaning shedding silent tears in sackcloth).” (Galatians 1:17)

So that you are aware, Papyrus 46 uses elthon in the first clause, not anerchomai as is suggested in later-compiled manuscripts. Less accurate and verbose perhaps, the Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear conveys: “But not I went up into Jerusalem toward the before me delegates but I went off into Arabia and again I returned into Damascus.”

Nothing would have been more compelling, more reassuring, with regard to Sha’uwl’s credibility than a trip to Arabia – that is if we are to believe that Yahowah couldn’t find a way off the mountain and was still there. While the line was designed to put Sha’uwl in the same conversation as Moseh, the idea was as preposterous as Muhammad’s fabled flight on the imaginary Donk-Mule from Petra to the nonexistent Temple in Jerusalem to lead the Islamic Musa in a round of prostration prayers after the debacle of the Satanic Verses. And while the other Devil’s Advocate leaped from an imagined mosque on the Temple Mount skyward to Hell en route to al-Lahi/hu/ha in the midst of his delusions of grandeur, Sha’uwl would have dimwitted Christians believe that the exodus was to the Promised Land of Damascus.

In the annals of the anuses in human history, I do not think that there was ever a more incompetent and insane, completely unhinged and delusional con man than this man. Nonetheless, Christians believe this verbal diarrhea was the inspired and inerrant word of their god. It’s little wonder that Paul and Company convinced anti-Semites to believe that Jews killed Jesus because the Christian god must have been an incompetent nincompoop, too – should he have inspired this fable.

I suppose there is also the inference that Paul’s New Testament is the Oral un-Law Part Two. Rabbis, to justify their Talmudic nonsense, would claim that as the written Towrah was revealed to Moseh and the Children of Yisra’el on Mount Choreb in Arabia, the 70 elders Yahowah prohibited from joining Him on the mountain, negotiated a different outcome and were bequeathed a verbal version in competition with the written one. So now with Sha’uwl / Paulos, he could dispense with and argue away the outdated and arcane Nomos of Moses because he had a new and improved version of his own.

Funny thing, though, while the Great Liberator brought down the Towrah, Paul never bothered to share a single word from his Moses Moment. And that is because it did not happen. The claimed inspiration behind these perverted epistles is a complete lie – an obvious one at that.

The first of five compelling reasons to discount the Arabian sojourn is that Paul’s Galatians testimony cannot be reconciled with his own account in Acts 9, which was written a decade later. In his testimony to Luke, Paul’s portrayal of events following his experience on the road to Damascus does not include a trip to Arabia. In the quasi-historical account, he claims that his public mission began within days of his spiritual awakening. And since the book of Acts is far better attested and vastly more detailed than Galatians, logic compels us to favor the more complete chronology over Galatians, when they conflict.

In this regard, years after his so-called “conversion experience,” Paul told his associate, Luke, who compiled Acts, that he was specifically instructed to spend time with an especially timid man named Ananias – an individual unknown to history apart from Paul’s telling of the events. And while we will consider Sha’uwl’s recollection of this meeting in a moment, the newly minted “Apostle” told Luke that, after spending a few days recovering in the home of his reluctant benefactor from the trauma inflicted by the harassing spirit who besieged him, he immediately began preaching in Damascus.

We read: “He took some food and regained his strength. Now for several days he was with the disciples who were at Damascus, and immediately he began to proclaim Iesou in the synagogues, saying that he is the son of God.” (Acts 9:19-20)

There is a considerable difference between spending a few days in a home in Damascus regaining strength after being tormented by an unseen spirit, and a long sojourn across the desert to Arabia to meet with a reclusive god still flaming about in the desert. As such, Paul either lied to Luke or to the Galatians – or both. Beyond the discrepancy in time, if we are to believe that Sha’uwl met with the “Healing Messenger” as he has so often attested, why was his spiritual encounter so debilitating?

This says that Paul was “with the disciples.” If true, it means that two or more of Gospel Jesus’ posse also thought that Damascus would be a more appropriate place to preach, recuperate, or vacation. And yet, they were so irrelevant to Paul’s story that they went unnamed. Or Paul was lying once again, as was his manner. Affirming this conclusion, later in Galatians, Paulos will specifically state that he initially avoided all contact with the other “Apostles.” And that is the problem of lying. It’s hard to remember prior fabrications.

Then, speaking of losing one’s place in their own delusions, the next line in Acts reads: “And all those who heard him continued to be amazed. And they said, ‘Is he not the one who in Yaruwshalaim destroyed those who called on this name and who had come here for the purpose of bringing them bound before the chief priests?’” (Acts 9:21) Annihilating people, as we were previously told Paulos had done, is very different than bringing them to trial. Further, since the Romans at this time were mostly ambivalent to a person’s perspective on God, inside the Roman province of Yahuwdah | Judea, the chief priests would have had no jurisdiction in such matters, not in Yaruwshalaim, and most especially not in Galatia. This scenario is not only unattested in history, it is incongruent with the evidence.

But Paulos would have his faithful believe: “And then Sha’uwl kept increasing in power (enedunamouto – in raw strength), confounding (sygcheo – baffling, confusing, and causing consternation among) the Jews who lived in Damascus.” (Acts 9:22) Sure sounds like the same arrogant anti-Semite we have been reading about in Galatians. All that mattered was that the world should come to see Paul as great.

Of course, that wasn’t the only thing on Sha’uwl’s demonic agenda because he also wanted the world to see Jews as lesser life-forms. After all, Torah-literate Jews knew that he was lying…

“And when many days had elapsed, the Jews plotted together to do away with him, but their plot became known to Sha’uwl. And they were also watching the gates day and night so that they might put him to death.

But his disciples took him by night, and let him down through the wall, lowering him in a basket. And when he came to Yaruwshalaim, he was trying to associate with the disciples, but they were afraid of him.” (Acts 9:23-25)

This reads just like the Quran. In all of the early surahs, the Meccans are shown scheming against Muhammad, only to have Allah alert his apostle and foil the plot. It was never true, mind you, in that Muhammad was little more than a whiney nuisance, but the same could be said for Paul in Damascus.

Most of this was fabricated to make Paul seem equivalent to his god. Just as with Iesou, the Jews plotted to kill him. Just like Iesou in his infancy, he was spirited out of town to spare his life. Just like Iesou, he had disciples. And even like Moses, he was lowered into a basket. All hail Paul – der Führer of the faith.

As an insightful comparison, I have received thousands of death threats after having compiled Prophet of Doom, now revised and renamed God Damn Religion, but not once have I ducked for cover, sought the help of others to save me, or fled town. Yahowah protects those who work with Him.

The detailed testimony in Acts which, like Galatians, was provided by Paul, is in direct conflict with his first epistle:

“I did not ascend into Yaruwshalaim | Jerusalem toward the goal of being with or against the Apostles before me, but to the contrary I went away, withdrawing to Arabia | the Darkness, and returned again to Damascus.” (Galatians 1:17) As such, the only possible conclusion is that Paul lied. And if Paul cannot be trusted to tell you about his own life, why would anyone trust him to tell you about the mythos of a man-god he never met?

Please pause here a moment. If you are a Christian, the fate of your soul hinges upon your ability to process what you just read.

While Sha’uwl will self-inflict more than a thousand additional self-incriminating lashes on his credibility, this singular stroke is sufficient to undermine everything he said and wrote. And there is only one reason that Paul would lie about his calling and preparation: he was perpetrating a fraud. And today, that fraud has a name – Christianity – along with a couple of billion victims.

And that is a serious problem considering what he has just written: “Paulos, an apostle, not from men, not even by the means of man, but to the contrary, on behalf of Iesou Christou and God, Father of the one having roused and awakened him out of a corpse, (1:1) and all the brothers with me to the called out of the Galatias, (1:2) Charis | Grace to you and peace from Theos | God, Pater | Father of us and Lord Iesou Christou, (1:3) the one having given himself on account of the sins and errors of us, so that somehow, through indefinite means, he might gouge and tear out, plucking and uprooting us from the past inflexible and unrelenting circumstances and old system which had been in place which is like pornography, disadvantageous and harmful, corrupting and debilitating, maliciously malignant in opposition to the desire and will of Theos | God and Paters | Father of us, (1:4) to whom the assessment of the brilliant splendor, the opinion regarding the glorious radiance and appearance of the shining light, by means of the old and the new systems, Amen, let it be so. (Galatians 1:5)

I marvel and am amazed, even astonished that in this way how quickly and in haste you changed, deserting and becoming disloyal apostates, traitors away from your calling in the name of Charis to a different healing message and beneficial messenger, (1:6) which does not exist differently, if not hypothetically negated because perhaps some are stirring you up, confusing you, and also proposing to change the healing messenger and pervert the beneficial message of the Christou, (1:7) but to the contrary, if we or a messenger out of heaven conveys a healing messenger or beneficial message to you which is approximately the same or contrary to, or even positioned alongside what we delivered as a beneficial messenger and announced as a healing message to you then a curse with a dreadful consequence exists. (Galatians 1:8)

As we have said already, and even just now, immediately thereafter, repetitively, I say, if under the condition someone delivers a helpful messenger or communicates a useful message to you similar or contrary to, in opposition with or just positioned alongside, no matter if it is close to or greater than that which you received, it shall be (in fact I command and want it to exist as) a curse with a dreadful consequence. (Galatians 1:9)

For because currently or simultaneously, [is it] men I presently persuade to win the favor of, seducing, misleading, and coaxing, even convincing, appeasing, and placating, or alternatively, the Theos | God?

Or alternatively by comparison and contrast, [do I] I desire to please and accommodate humans? Yet nevertheless, even regardless, if men, I was obliging and accommodating, exciting them emotionally, a slave of Christou, certainly not was me. (Galatians 1:10)

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

For because you heard of my unruly behavior at a time and place during the practice of Judaism, namely that because of my superiority, surpassing any measure of restraint, to an extraordinary degree better than anyone else, I was aggressively and intensely, even systematically pursuing it by persecuting, oppressing, and attacking the Called Out of God as I was and am devastating her, continuing to undermine, overthrow, and annihilate her. (Galatians 1:13)

And so I was and continue to progress, accomplishing a great deal, and I persist moving forward in the practice of Judaism, over and beyond many contemporaries among my race, enthusiastic, zealous, and excited, especially devoted and burning with passion to adhere to and assimilate with the traditions and teachings handed down by my forefathers. (Galatians 1:14)

But at a point in time when it pleased and was chosen to be better for Theos, the one having appointed me, setting me aside out of the womb of my mother (1:15) to reveal and disclose, uncovering and unveiling the Son of Him in order that I could announce the healing message among the multitudes, races, and nations, immediately. I did not ask the advice of or consult with flesh or blood. (Galatians 1:16)

I did not ascend, traveling into Yaruwshalaim | Jerusalem toward the goal of being with or against the Apostles before me, but to the contrary, I went away, withdrawing to Arabia | the Darkness, and returned again to Damascus.” (Galatians 1:17)

Paul needed everyone to believe that he was more important and better prepared than Gospel Jesus’ disciples, better even than Moses, and that his calling superseded theirs. According to Paul, while the rival disciples tramped in the dust alongside Gospel Jesus for three years, based upon his testimony in the next verse, der Faithmonger commanded God’s special attention in Arabia, and basking in his blaze, he received private, one-on-one instruction from the Big Guy. And yet, since Paul fabricated and then contradicted the keystone of his fledgling credibility, the entire edifice of Pauline Doctrine crumbles – as does the religion based upon it.

Again, this begs a comparison to Muhammad’s fabulous fable of the Night’s Journey. After losing every episode of the Never-Ending Argument with his kin, Muhammad threatened to slaughter them. To appease the monster in their midst, the Quraysh bribed the religious charlatan with sex, power, and money through the Idolatrous Indulgence, which Muhammad accepted, then reneged. He excused pedaling paganism through the Satanic Verses, admitting that the Devil inspired the Quran. So, when that got him further into hot water, the duplicitous founder of Islam flew the coop aboard al-baraq, a winged ass. Since he was in Arabia, his flight of fancy took him to Jerusalem, to visit with the Hebrew bigshots of yesteryear in the Temple – thereby claiming them as his own and their peer. Beyond the fact that asses do not fly, and that the Temple had been destroyed six centuries before the alleged flight, the Jews and Patriarchs in Mighty Mo’s story were all long dead. So, in trying to elicit credibility after the Never-Ending Argument, Slaughtering Statement, Idolatrous Indulgence, and Devilish Diatribes, Muhammad further destroyed his credibility with the Asinine Assent. And while some may allege that this is a different story, it is actually the same story – one inspired by the same spirit. Welcome to Hell.

If you are still a Christian, you may not be ready to process what this actually means. I rejected Christianity for a relationship with Yahowah twenty-three years ago, but until a decade or so ago I could not deal with the errors or the conflicts in Paul’s testimony either.

For example, the “enedunamouto – raw strength” Paul was said to have increased in was a term only he used. The other seven times this verb is found in the Greek texts, they are all in his epistles. Therefore, since it is not said by or of anyone else, we know that this rather egotistical personal evaluation came from Paul himself, not his audience or God. Apart from Paul, each time a unique capability is ascribed to a New Testament character, it comes from the “Holy Ghost” and it is called: “dunamis – power,” as it is in Acts 1:8 during the completely fabricated and fabled birth of the church during Pentecost.

Also troubling, the first “achievement” Paul would claim on his own behalf was “sygcheo – confounding, baffling, and confusing” Jews. That is the antithesis of Yahowah’s purpose, which is to use His Towrah to teach His children. There is but one spirit who would boast about deceiving God’s people.

A Christian apologist might say that the change in Paul’s behavior and message confused the Jews, but that excuse is undermined by Sha’uwl’s insistence that he remained true to Judaism. Moreover, Luke expressed two separate thoughts, initially saying that those who listened to him were amazed by his oratory. Then after telling us that Paul’s physical power increased, Luke said that Paul went on to befuddle his would-be antagonists. The inference is that he was too clever for them to effectively refute, at least according to Paul.

The alleged plot, whereby the Jews conspired to do away with the self-proclaimed “messenger of god,” which was foiled by way of a revelation and uncanny escape of this basket case, in a basket, of course, as I have just mentioned, is virtually identical to the story Muhammad was inspired to tell six hundred years hence at the inception of the Islamic Era. Then, in the immediate aftermath of visiting multiple levels of heaven (something Paul will also claim), the other “messenger of god” claimed that his kin had conspired to kill him, but that his god revealed their plot, allowing the Devil’s Advocate to slither out of town by miraculous means under the cover of darkness. It is the same story. So perhaps it was authored by the same spirit. And that is a problem because, in the Quran, Allah is indistinguishable from Satan and he brags that he is the best schemer.

The other problems associated with Sha’uwl’s testimony begin with the realization that it is inappropriate for him to have his own disciples – should that be what he was inferring. It is as if he were trying to impersonate Gospel Jesus. And further incriminating his account, as I have previously hinted, Jews under Roman dominion had no authority to put anyone to death – especially in Syria – and most especially a Roman citizen, like Paul. The Sanhedrin didn’t have the authority to kill “Jesus” either, but that’s a story for a later chapter. Therefore, this whole sordid affair is preposterous from beginning to end.

If you are into fairytales, then embrace the notion that this self-proclaimed murderer, this man of enormous physical strength, was, as a newborn prophet, “lowered” “in a basket” to save him from baffled and marauding Jews. But why not a magic carpet or flying ass?

The second of five proofs that the Arabian sojourn was a myth is a derivative of Paul’s purpose in writing his first epistle. Galatians was composed to accomplish two goals. Paul wanted to differentiate his message from the Torah to do away with the Torah, thereby replacing God’s word with “but I, Paul, say.” To accomplish this feat of derring-do, he would have to be more credible than Moses. Therefore, the first two chapters focus on establishing his personal qualifications. But since everyone knew that Paul never met Gospel Jesus, the interloper had to make up a story which would appear to the unsuspecting mind to put him on superior footing. Three years in Arabia hanging out with Mr. Big would do the trick – at least if it were so incredulous.

And should we play along, if Paul’s claims to have met with Iesous on the Road to Damascus or in the Arabian Desert were true, then it would make Gospel Jesus a liar because he is recorded standing on the Mount of Olives saying: “If anyone says to you, ‘Behold, here is the Messiah,’ or ‘There He is,’ do not believe him.” (Matthew 24:23) Since this is precisely what Sha’uwl claimed, who do you suppose is lying, the myth or the man? Or asked another way, recognizing that the religion requires both to be accurate and real, does it even matter?

Further impugning the only one who made these claims, Gospel Jesus went on to say: “For false Messiahs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect.

Behold, I have told you in advance. If therefore they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the desert,’ do not go forth, or ‘Behold, He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe him.

For just as the lightning comes from the east and flashes even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be. Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather.” (Matthew 24:24-28)

This is yet another deathblow to the veracity of Paul’s testimony. If the speaker recorded delivering the Olivet Discourse was reliable and told the truth, then Paul was lying about meeting with him along the road to Damascus and again in the wilderness of the Arabian Desert. And if Gospel Jesus cannot be trusted, then Paul’s witness on behalf of a liar would be worthless.

Therefore, since Gospel Jesus and Sha’uwl spoke about this specific happenstance, and since this issue is central to Paul’s credibility and to the merits of Iesou’s advice regarding the reliability of a false prophet claiming to have seen him, a rational person can now close the book on Paul. It is over. His credibility has been completely undermined by the very person he claimed to represent. If you have a Bible, rip Paul’s letters from its pages.

What’s more, unless the ‘Ebownym correctly recorded Dowd making these pronouncements, which have now been usurped by the mythical misnomer Jesus Christ, then Gospel Jesus is also a liar because it’s the Son of God, not the Son of Man (Dowd, not Jesus), who will be returning.

As irrefutable as this verdict has become, this realization is but one in many which bury Paul. All that is left for us to do is to watch the vultures gather over his rotten corpse.

Returning to Paul’s desperate, irritatingly repetitive, and almost pathetic attempts at setting himself up as God’s lone authorized prophet to the world, if he had actually met with Yahowah as Moseh had done, his testimony would have been unassailable, that is should the impossible have occurred and had he described the experience in a written narrative, recounting word for word what Yahowah had said – all without contradicting anything in the Towrah’s narrative while supporting its teachings. But we have nothing. Not a word from Paul or anyone else regarding an event, which is true, would have authenticated Sha’uwl’s authority – well up to a point. That is so long as he spoke on behalf of the Towrah and Yahowah rather than against it and Him. So, when we contrast this missed opportunity with Paul’s countless protestations that we should trust him because he was God’s chosen messenger to the world, there is a credibility gap the size of the Great Rift – a religion-sized tear in the fabric of spacetime.

Third, in an upcoming chapter (Yaruwshalaim | Source of Reconciliation), we will juxtapose Acts 15 and Galatians 2 in order to demonstrate that Paul’s ability to accurately recount recent events in his life is highly suspect. In this regard, the entire 15th chapter of Acts is devoted to describing the Yaruwshalaim Summit, sometimes called the “Apostolic Conference,” because this meeting was arguably the most important in Paul’s life, and the history of Christianity.

And yet Sha’uwl’s testimony in the second chapter of Galatians conflicts with the narrative provided by Luke in Acts in every imaginable way. In fact, it becomes readily apparent that, had Paul not written Galatians as his rebuttal, his credibility would have been destroyed. But reason tells us that if Paul was willing to write a detailed revisionist account of a meeting, which was well attended and which had occurred within the previous few months, his lone, unsupported assertion that he had gone to Arabia nineteen years earlier to meet with God – for which there were no witnesses or corroborating testimony – is suspect in the extreme.

Fourth, as it turns out, the reason Sha’uwl was summoned to appear before the supposed disciples in Yaruwshalaim was that his preaching was in conflict with the Towrah’s teaching. And since Yahowah’s Word was personally delivered by God to Moseh on Mount Choreb | Sinai in Arabia, the fact that Paul’s message was entirely different means that either the Source of Moseh’s inspiration was hopelessly unreliable or Yahowah was not the source of Sha’uwl’s conflicting mantra. This problem becomes insurmountable when we recognize that should the Towrah be unreliable, there is no possibility of knowing God or salvation.

The conflict is acute because the central thrust of Galatians is designed to meticulously belittle and then annul the Towrah. Sha’uwl will say that the Covenant memorialized on Mount Sinai (another name of Mount Choreb) was with Hagar and that it was enslaving as a result. He will speak of the Towrah as being of the flesh, so as to demean it, calling it an outdated and cruel taskmaster. He reports that the Towrah was a burden which no one could bear – the opposite of what Moseh said about this same source of Godly Guidance.

With Paul writing that the Nomos / Torah was incapable of saving anyone, he placed himself in direct conflict with Yahowah’s testimony and Dowd’s purpose. Regardless, Sha’uwl will write that the Torah’s usefulness had come to an end, effectively annulling it – in direct conflict with the testimony offered during the Instruction on the Mount. He will go so far as to say that there are two Covenants when God says that His one and only Covenant is everlasting. Since these messages are the antithesis of one another, Yahowah, who is the acknowledged Author of the Towrah, cannot be the same spirit who served as Sha’uwl’s inspiration.

And fifth, the timeline Paul provided in Galatians, delineating the number of years which transpired between his promotion from rabbinical hitman to his god’s lone messenger and then to the Yaruwshalaim Summit, is far too great. According to Paul’s testimony in Acts 9, he spent a considerable time in Damascus amazing the locals while confusing the Jews after his “conversion.” (Acts 9:22-23) He is so proud of himself; we can only assume that the Damascenes were graced with his stellar oratory for the better part of a year. Then he claims to have gone off to Arabia for three years before returning to Damascus (Galatians 1:17-18) only to be lowered down the wall in a basket. (Acts 9:24-25 and 2 Corinthians 11:32-33) His memory betrayed him, his story then changed, and he claimed to be fleeing a government official under the Arabian King Aretas who died in 40 CE. After his first brush with power, he is said to have gone to Jerusalem to meet with Peter and James. (Galatians 1:18-19)

Sha’uwl’s | Paul’s travelogue continues through Syria and Cilicia, a journey which collectively transpired over the course of a year. (Galatians 1:21) However, in Acts 9, Sha’uwl adds that he went to Caesarea, bypassing Syria, and then to Tarsus. (Acts 9:30) But then Paul claims that he was summoned to the Jerusalem ekklesia “after the passage of another fourteen years.” (Galatians 2:1) That is a total of nineteen years.

Dark years, as it would transpire, because we do not have a record of any sermon or any letter from Sha’uwl during the decade after his alleged promotion from murderer to preacher. In fact, during much of this period, it is apparent that god’s self-proclaimed messenger to the world went into hiding. And that is a far cry from the “immediacy” of his mission in Galatians 1:16.

But speaking of time, the timing of the Yaruwshalaim Summit is well-documented. It is dated to 50 CE. So, if you subtract nineteen years, Sha’uwl’s abuse at the hands of the prodding spirit on the road to Damascus would have occurred in 31 CE, two years before Gospel Jesus modeled for the role of a Dead God on a Stick. And if that were not sufficiently incriminating, according to Sha’uwl, he had spent a protracted period of time building an international reputation as a ruthless assassin of Yahuwdym before encountering the flashing light that blinded him. If he were telling the truth about being “bad,” it would indicate that his “conversion” occurred in 29 CE, a year before the mythical misnomer Iesou Christou arrived on the scene. That also means that his pursuit of the Jews who recognized what Dowd had done as the Messiah and Passover Lamb would have begun four or five years before he fulfilled Pesach.

As shared previously, there is an old adage which says that the problem with lying is remembering what one has said. These events represented the pivotal moments in Sha’uwl’s life, so they would have been forever etched in his memory. But since the truth did not serve his interests, and since his reality did not fit his ego, he lied, making up so many exemplary stories of derring-do, he could not fit them into one lifetime or recall from one occasion to the next what he imagined he had done. This is why we have three different depictions of his alleged conversion experience, another problem we will detail in upcoming chapters.

Since Sha’uwl has regaled us in a fictitious rendition of his initial ministry, I would like to linger a moment longer in the 9th chapter of Acts before we return to Galatians. In Paul’s first and second, but not his third, accounting of his adventure on the road to Damascus, he was asked to meet with a fellow named Ananias, who was reluctant due to Sha’uwl’s burgeoning reputation as an uncivilized brute. So according to Paul, after Ananias hesitated to tutor the now blind and lame would-be apostle, “the Lord” intervened a second time, saying (according to Paul):

“But then (de) the Lord (o kurios – the ruler and master who possesses [without a pre-Constantine manuscript of this verse, it’s appropriate to deploy the title Paul would have used as he spoke on behalf of his Lord while recounting the affair to Luke]) spoke (lego) to (pros) him (autos), ‘Go (poreuomai) because (hote – namely) he is (estin) my (moi) chosen (ekloge – a selected) instrument (skeuos – object and vessel), the one (outos tou) to carry or carry away (bastazo – to take up and bear, to tolerate and to put up with, to endure and sustain the yoke and weight) my (mou to) name (onoma – and reputation) so that it is seen by (enopion – so as to be witnessed by; a compound of en – in and optanomai – to look at and to be seen (the Lord said of the blind man)) the nations and races (ethnos), kings (basileus), and (kai) children of Yisra’el (uios Israel).

Because (gar) I (ego) by him will provide a glimpse into intimate secrets which have been concealed (hypodeiknymi auto – under him will show and suggest, pointing out using words and arguments to warn; from hupo – by and under and deiknuo – to show and reveal, to indicate and point out), as much as is necessary (hosos – to the degree, amount, and duration), as it is currently required and actually inevitable (dei – it is now compulsory, expected, and in fact necessary, actively binding, and realistically fitting (present tense, active voice, indicative mood)) for him (auton) for the sake of (hyper – because and on behalf of) my (mou) name (tou onoma – the designation, person, and reputation) to suffer through this experience (pascho – to undergo this ordeal, vexed, afflicted, and ultimately enduring death (the aorist tense speaks of a moment in time unrelated to any plan or process, the active voice indicates that the subject is performing the action of the verb, meaning that Paulos is causing the speaker to suffer, while the infinitive makes this verb read like an active noun)).’” (Acts 9:15-16)

While I am sharing this to point out yet another inconsistency in Paul’s story, I would be remiss if I did not share why I consider this to be the most egotistical nonsense I have ever read – and that is saying a lot since I have written God Damn Religion to chronicle Muhammad’s repulsive existence and Babel to further expose Satan and the Rabbis who serve him. Dowd | David was Yahowah’s Chosen One, not Sha’uwl. And Sha’uwl never once wrote or spoke Yahowah’s name.

Beyond having Yahowah’s testimony boldly confirming that Dowd is the Messiah, the Son of God, the Chosen One, the Firstborn, and our Savior, throughout the 89th Mizmowr | Psalm for all to witness (shared in the Tsadaq | Right chapter of this volume of Twistianity and in Coming Home, Volume 1, Chapter 10, To Dowd or Not to Dowd – The Root of Replacement Theology), one would have to wonder why King Dowd is returning with Yahowah to govern the universe, and Sha’uwl was presented in the Psalm as “the Son of Evil,” if Paul was God’s preferred implement. Moreover, Paul was diligent in telling us his given and chosen names, but never once correctly conveyed Yahowah’s name. And in this regard, Yahowah chose Moseh, not Sha’uwl, to reveal His name to us. Every time Paul opens his mouth, he is lying.

Even the priorities of Paul’s egotistical Lord are telling. According to the testimony of the Devil’s Advocate, after having chosen Sha’uwl to replace Moseh and Dowd, and negating the Towrah and Prophets, the Son of Evil was to go to the Gentiles first, meeting with their kings, and only then to the Children of Yisra’el. And as it would transpire, that is what Sha’uwl | Paul would do. It would not be to share Yahowah’s name, but instead to inspire the kings and their nations to join him and turn on Yisra’el, replacing and then removing them from the Earth.

Yahowah has conveyed His message in His Towrah, through His Prophets, and within Dowd’s Psalms. There is nothing more we need to know to live forever as part of Yahowah’s Covenant Family. So, while there are things God has deliberately concealed, they are His to know, not Sha’uwl’s. In the Towrah, we have read: “That which has been deliberately concealed and not revealed (ha sathar) is for Yahowah (la Yahowah), our God (‘elohym ‘anachnuw), while (wa) that which has been made known, revealed and exposed (ha galah) is for us and for our children (la ‘anachnuw wa la beny ‘anachnuw) as an eternal witness for all time (‘ad ‘owlam) so that we may engage, acting upon (la ‘asah) everything that is conveyed through the words (‘eth kol dabary) of this Towrah | Guidance and Teaching (ha Towrah ha zo’th).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 29:29) Trying to present himself as more insightful and vital than Moseh, Sha’uwl has scuttled his credibility once again.

As for causing Sha’uwl to “pascho – suffer,” that is indeed the sentence he has earned. Paul will endure it with his Lord and inspiration, the Adversary, in She’owl | Hell. Perhaps that is why Sha’uwl was afforded naming rights over the institution.

Previously, Paul claimed that Ananias told “the Lord” that: “he had heard from many about the man who had to the greatest extent possible done immoral and injurious things to your holy ones in Jerusalem, and that here [in Damascus, Syria] he [Paul] has authority from the chief priests to forcefully bind and imprison everyone calling on your name.” This was just another contrived fable designed to make Paul look as if he were the chosen one, even of the High Priests – a man to be reckoned with or else.

Contradicting Paul’s claim, historians of this period acknowledge that there were no Jewish “high priests” outside of Jerusalem, much less in Damascus, Syria. And outside of Israel, the priests would have had no authority whatsoever. And had there really been a man named “Ananias,” since it is based upon the Hebrew Chananyah, meaning “Mercy is from Yahowah,” he would have known that Yahowah did not need or want the help of an incarcerating rabbi.

There is yet another problem with Paul’s pitiful pronouncements. When Yahowah introduced Himself to ‘Abraham and Moseh, and chose them, one had walked away from Babylon and the other from Egypt. They had previously disassociated themselves from the babel | confounding intermixing of religion and politics. Sha’uwl, on the other hand, was blood-deep in it and continued to pursue both. This disqualified Paul from the Covenant and from being in Yahowah’s presence.

Turning to the alleged testimony from Sha’uwl’s Lord, knowing that Gospel Jesus is alleged to have chosen twelve disciples at a time when Sha’uwl was available in Jerusalem and not selected, we are now to believe that Paulos, as a reward, I presume, for being especially immoral and injurious, was the chosen one. This resolutely religious and evil man claimed to be the “implement” of God, which is tellingly similar to claiming to be Dowd, the Chosen One and Anointed Messiah. It is yet another attempt to position himself as God’s right hand, the co-savior, and king of kings.

But consider what this “Lord” wanted Sha’uwl, the man who changed his name to Paulos, to do with his “onoma – name and reputation.” “The Lord” did not select Sha’uwl to introduce his name, explain his name, share his name, proclaim his name, invite people to the Miqra’ey and Beryth using his name, or even save people in his name, much less say his name, all things which would have been vitally important, and none of which Paul actually did. “The Lord,” which is Satan’s title, from the name, “Ba’al,” chose Sha’uwl to “bastazo – remove and carry away the burden” of his name and reputation. That is something Satan craves. Ha Satan | the Adversary, as Halal ben Shachar wants to jettison this derogatory baggage so that he can convince simpletons to worship him as if he were a god. So, by selecting bastazo, “the Lord” has to be Satan, who is the only one who would benefit from having the “burden” of his adversarial name and reputation “removed and carried away.” It would be senseless and counterproductive for God to ask for such a thing.

And then we find Sha’uwl’s Lord mimicking Paulos’ mantra, which is revealing secrets. Sha’uwl even has his Lord say that the selection and implementation of Paulos was not only inevitable, it was actually compulsory and required. As for suffering, Dowd’s sacrifice, coopted as it was by the misnomer Jesus, was insufficient according to Paul’s Lord because, in this pronouncement, Paul would likewise suffer as a co-savior.

If we are to believe Sha’uwl’s testimony here, the three years Gospel Jesus spent with his disciples were a waste of time as were the entirety of the Gospels. All the Lord wanted was to have the burden of his name and reputation removed and for there to be more suffering. And for these reasons, the Lord had no choice, no say in the matter, no freewill because Sha’uwl’s Lord was compelled to turn to Paul for these results.

Not that we require more evidence to distrust Sha’uwl, but this statement contradicts Paulos’ testimony throughout Galatians, where he divides the world, giving Shim’own, Ya’aqob, and Yahowchanan | Peter, James, and John responsibility for the Jews, while he assumed authority over every other nation and race. But this is not so according to his Lord.

Even if we discount the troublesome vocabulary, if Sha’uwl’s mission was to “bastazo – carry,” but not “bastazo – carry away,” Yahowah’s name to every race and place, then he failed miserably. Not one Christian in a million knows the proper pronunciation of God’s name.

But since Christians the world over know and proclaim the “Lord’s” name, Satan was obviously the spirit who chose Sha’uwl. Fixated as they both were on immorality and injury, on submission and death, on secrets and concealment, they were a match made in She’owl | Hell. After all, Sha’uwl’s testimony has been dishonest, making the Lord Ba’al’s seed the Son of Deception.

As an interesting study, consider how many false gods have been called “the Lord.” Ba’al, which means “lord,” was the dominant deity of the Canaanites, of the Phoenicians, of the Babylonians, and of the Assyrians. The Philistines worshiped the infamous Baalzebub. Remarkably, the center of Ba’al / Lord worship was in the town of “Ba’al Chermown – the Lord of Destruction.” In particular, ‘ElYah’s mission was to excoriate and condemn the prophets of Ba’al | the Lord. And it was because Jews chose to base their religion on Ba’al | the Lord rather than pursue a relationship with Yahowah, God divorced them in Howsha’.

In that we first considered Galatians 1:17 several pages ago, let’s review it again in advance of presenting the Christian renditions. “I did not ascend, traveling into Yaruwshalaim | Jerusalem toward the goal of being with or against the Apostles before me, but to the contrary, I went away, withdrawing to Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.” It would have been a different story if only it were true.

These translations are passable (notwithstanding that there is no “J” in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, or even in English prior to the 17th century). KJV: “Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.” It reads similarly to the Latin Vulgate: “Neither did I go to Ierosolymam, to those who were apostolos before me. Instead, I went into Arabiam, and next I returned to Damascum.” The NLT published: “Nor did I go up to Jerusalem to consult with those who were apostles before I was. Instead, I went away into Arabia, and later I returned to the city of Damascus.”

You will notice, however, that all three texts made a reasonable attempt to transliterate the Hebrew names for Yaruwshalaim, ‘Arab, and Dameseq. So why were they all unwilling to transliterate the Hebrew basis of Iesou accurately as Yahowsha’?

By way of background, Sha’uwl (meaning Question Him (and indistinguishable from She’owl, the place of questioning more commonly called Hell)) was born and initially educated in Tarsus, the capital of the Roman province of Cilicia. It is on the Mediterranean coast of what is southern Turkey today. It lies directly south of Galatia, the Roman province he was addressing with his first letter. At the time, it was home to the world’s most preeminent university. Sha’uwl’s father was both Jewish, from the tribe of Benjamin, and a Roman citizen – things which will loom large as this story unfolds. His father may also have been a Pharisee, which would affirm why Sha’uwl remained a religious fundamentalist.

For a frame of reference, it is about a five-hundred-mile hike from Tarsus south-southeast to Damascus. Similarly, Mount Choreb (also known as Mount Sinai) in Arabia, is another 500 miles by foot, almost due south of Damascus (Choreb is directly east of Nuweiba on the west coast of the Gulf of Aqaba and is known as Jabal al-Lawz in Saudi Arabia). Jerusalem lies between the two, less than two hundred miles south-southwest of Damascus.

After lying and telling us that he trekked to Arabia to chat with a recluse deity, but not bothering to humor us with a word of what was spoken there, Sha’uwl revealed exactly how long he remained in the wilderness. And that is odd because other than to incriminate him, the one detail he shared was otherwise irrelevant.

“Then later (epeita – thereafter in the sequence of events), after (meta – with) three (treis) years’ time (etos), I ascended up (anerchomai – I went up) to (eis) Yaruwshalaim (Hierosoluma – transliteration of the Hebrew name meaning Source of Guidance Regarding Reconciliation) to visit and get acquainted with (historeo – went to inquire about and investigate, hoping to gain knowledge by becoming familiar with) Kephas | Rock (Kephas – transliteration of the Hebrew word keph – hollow of a rock (Strong’s H3710); from kaphah – to pacify or subdue, kephah – branch, kephel – doubling-dealing, kaphan – to be twisted and bent, kaphaph – to bow down, and/or kaphar – to reconcile, a reference to Shim’own, who became Petros (a transliteration of the Greek word for stone), and is known today as Peter) and remained (kai meno – stayed and persevered, endured and abided, continuing to persist) against (pros – to, at, among, or with) him (autos) fifteen (dekapente) days (hemera).” (Galatians 1:18)

While it may be relevant, Papyrus 46 uses meno for “stayed” in the final clause, while later scribes wrote epimeno, a related word which is much more emphatic with regard to Sha’uwl remaining in close proximity to Shim’own. However, since the Nestle-Aland was compiled from the most popular texts, not the oldest manuscripts, their McReynolds Interlinear was oblivious to the alteration. “Then after years three I went up into Jerusalem to visit with Cephas and I stayed on toward him days fifteen.”

It is instructive to know that Moseh was on Mount Choreb | Sinai for 40 days, during which time he received the Towrah – a three-hundred-page book with prophecies so astounding and insights so profound, the resulting document left no doubt that it was inspired by God. And yet if we are to believe Paul’s story here in Galatians, as opposed to his story in Acts, Sha’uwl was in Arabia three years. And this pathetic letter is the product of all that time.

Rather than being equipped to share Yahowah’s Towrah – Teaching as Moseh had been, and explain how Dowd had honored one of his Father’s most essential promises by fulfilling the initial Miqra’, we get an angry and egotistical diatribe that serves to negate everything Yahowah and Dowd have said and done.

The interesting nuance in this passage is one we considered earlier. Sha’uwl may have been more comfortable communicating in Hebrew than he was in Greek. Recognizing that “Petros,” meaning “rock or stone” in Greek, was not Shim’own’s actual name, but instead his nickname, Sha’uwl was at liberty to transliterate it into Greek – which he did, retaining the Hebrew pronunciation and meaning. The official language of Tarsus would have been Latin. Aramaic would also have been spoken as a result of the Babylonian, Assyrian, and Persian influence in the region. And Hebrew would have been the lingua franca of rabbinical school.

Therefore, we should be mindful of the fact that if a statement is being made by God, or if two Yisra’elites are in the midst of a discussion, then the Greek text represents a translation of the hearsay assessment of what was spoken in Hebrew. The reference to Shim’own as “Kephas” keeps us mindful of this distinction, which is true for the entirety of the New Testament.

If this is the nickname Gospel Jesus was alleged through Eusebius’ insertion in the 4th century to have offered Shim’own during his belated and inaccurate pronouncement that Iesou was the Christou, it would have been a slight, “kaphah – pacifying” Shim’own for the moment, recognizing that he rebuked him and told him never to say it again. It was all subject to the “kephel – double-dealing” and “kaphan – twisted and bent” narratives designed to serve the Church and its Lord. This also speaks to the reason Gospel Jesus reprimanded “Kephas” at the time, telling Satan to back away.

But now that we know that Shim’own’s nickname was based upon a Hebrew word, there is no justification for translating his new moniker to petras and then transliterating it as “Peter.” And this also means that there is no “Saint Peter” associated with Gospel Jesus. Someone should tell the Vatican and then rename the gaudy Chair.

It is a distinction, however, which was lost on Francis Bacon and his associates. But other than changing the name of the place and person, the rest of the KJV is reasonably accurate with regard to this otherwise insignificant verse. “Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.” LV: “And then, after three years, I went to Ierosolymam to see Petrum; and I stayed with him for fifteen days.” NLT: “Then three years later I went to Jerusalem to get to know Peter, and I stayed with him for fifteen days.”

Speaking of names, the next passage destroys one of the foundational claims of Catholicism, in addition to devastating the foundation of Protestantism.

“But (de) other (heteros – different) of the Apostles (ton apostolos – of those who were prepared messengers and were sent out), I did not see (ou eidon – I did not pay attention to, concern myself with, or understand) except (ei me – if not) Ya’aqob | Jacob (Iakobos – a transliteration of the Hebrew Ya’aqob who became Yisra’el but then changed to “James” to appease the British king), the (tov) brother (adelphos – male sibling) of the Lord (tou ΚΥ – a placeholder used to convey kurios, giving the Greek word for lord and master a divine sheen).” (Galatians 1:19)

In the Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear, these same words were either translated or misrepresented to say: “Other but of the delegates not I saw except [not applicable] Jacob the brother of the Master.”

While it is impossible to know for certain if Paul actually wrote “Kuriou – Lord,” only to see his nomenclature replaced by a scribe who sought consistency and uniformity with the Septuagint, or whether Paul used the placeholders, knowing that if he didn’t, his letters would differ from the Septuagint. Should these passages be translated as Paul likely intended, or as the placeholders might portend – at least as used in the Septuagint?

The reason this verse should be troubling to Protestants is that it undermines the credibility of the King James Bible, and indeed, the credibility of every English translation since that time. While Sha’uwl correctly transliterated the name of Gospel Jesus’ brother as Ya’aqob, Francis Bacon changed his name to match that of his king. The King James Version therefore reads: “But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother.”

The political mindset required to justify altering the name of Gospel Jesus’ brother, Ya’aqob, so that he would forever be known by the name of the reigning English monarch, is the same twisted mentality required to justify copyediting God and His messengers whenever it suits a religious or political purpose. Such men cannot be trusted – nor can their institutions or translations.

But what does this say about the attitude of those in the ministry today who know that this was done and yet have done nothing to correct the record – preferring instead to perpetrate a lie designed to obfuscate the Hebrew roots of the story the Gospel writers were counterfeiting? Even to this day, in Christian Bibles, King James’ name sits atop the letter allegedly written by Ya’aqob.

This literary fraud exposes the lack of moral character present among Christian leaders who continue to accept the wholesale infusion of Babylonian religious rites and symbols into Christendom. While it is one man’s name, it is indicative of how the Towrah was replaced by “Gratia / Grace” in “Christianity,” of how Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children became the “Last Supper,” “Good Friday,” Nothing Happened Day, and then “Easter Sunday.” The Shabat celebration with Yahowah became “the Lord’s Day” and moved to Sunday. The Covenant became a Church with its own Testament. And along the way, Jews were replaced by Christians and Dowd was emasculated by transferring his accolades and achievements to Jesus Christ. The religion is one colossal farce from beginning to end. And when we think of how irritating it is to Yahowah and how dismissive it is of His Son, costing untold billions access to God while they abused His people, this is no laughing matter.

While it is hard to imagine, this statement contains an even bigger problem for Catholicism – a religion fabricated on the Babylonian presentation of the Madonna and Child, upon the Mother of God and the Queen of Heaven. Catholicism requires that Mary remain a virgin, and that she never age or die. But this statement from Paul’s pen clearly states that Ya’aqob was the brother of Gospel Jesus, as do many other passages. So Jerome was in a pickle.

Therefore, after writing: “But I saw none of the other apostolorum, except Iacobum, the brother of the Domini,” Jerome was forced to add the following to the Latin Vulgate: “This Iacobum is Iacobum the Less, who stayed in Ierosolymam, while the other apostolorum went out to preach the evangelium to the world. He functioned as the spiritual leader of the city where Christi preached and died; he was the Bishop of Ierosolymam. He was called the brother of the Domini because he was a cousin of Iesu, and also because he was similar in appearances to Iesu.” It was all untrue, every word of it, and Jerome knew it. But religious leaders will say and do anything to perpetuate the myths which empower and enrich them.

And yet now, with the benefit of some seventy manuscripts dating to within three centuries of the events being misappropriated and misrepresented, all of which affirm that the brother of Gospel Jesus was Ya’aqob, today’s wrongly esteemed religious scholars and theologians are still unwilling to convey the truth. Those associated with the New Living Translation failed to correct the political malfeasance promoted in the King James. “The only other apostle I met at that time was James, the Lord’s brother.” So much for religious integrity and biblical inerrancy. Because familiarity sells, had they not included a book named after the English King, too few Christians would have purchased their Bibles for them to have profited from the endeavor.

Galatians 1:19 was otherwise inconsequential, and yet it laid two religions bare. The moral of the story is: you cannot trust men guided by religion or politics.

Seen as a collective whole, Sha’uwl’s fifth paragraph reads: “I did not ascend, traveling into Jerusalem toward the goal of being with or against the Apostles before me, but to the contrary, I went away, withdrawing to Arabia, and returned again to Damascus. (Galatians 1:17) Then later in the sequence of events, after three years’ time, I ascended to Jerusalem to visit, investigate, and inquire about Kephas | Rock and remained against him fifteen days. (Galatians 1:18) But other of the Apostles, I did not see or concern myself with except Ya’aqob | Jacob, the (tov) brother of the Kurios | Lord.” (Galatians 1:19)

My initial inclination in composing this review was to pass over these positioning statements and move directly into the substance of the arguments Christians raise from Paul’s writings to dismiss the Towrah. And yet by studying them, we have come to know that Paul cannot be trusted. It was worth the effort.



Sha’uwl’s next statement is troubling on three separate fronts. He wrote: “But now (de – because then) what (o – this means that which) I write (grapho – using a pen to form letters on papyrus I communicate in writing) to you (umin), you must pay especially close attention to (idou – you are ordered to intently look at, focus upon, behold, carefully consider, and remember this command (in the imperative mood this is a command)) in the presence (enopion – before and in front of) of Theos | God (tou ΘΥ – Placeholder for Theos | God), because (oti) I cannot lie (ou pseudomai – mislead or deceive, speak falsely or communicate that which is not true).” (Galatians 1:20)

This message is wholly dissimilar to that of Yahowah’s prophets. They wrote, “Thus says Yahowah…,” but Sha’uwl proclaims, “But now what I write to you, you have to pay especially close attention to.” Those who speak for God, speak God’s words, because they know that their choice of words pales in comparison to His. Even Gospel Jesus quoted God: “For he [Jesus] whom God has sent, speaks the words of God.” (John 3:34)

Even when we incorporate “in the presence of Theos” in Paulos’ statement, this gets worse. Paul would have the faithful believe that they must read his words in God’s presence. Why? Does he want us to antagonize Him?

We read, contemplate, and accept Yahowah’s words to enter His presence. There would be no point of reading what God told us in front of the One who shared these things. He already knows what He said.

The only rational conclusion which can be drawn from the statement, “I cannot lie,” is that the one who made it is a liar. No man has or ever will tell the truth all of the time. As such, this statement alone rendered this epistle worthless. And in reality, based on what we have read thus far, Paul has made many more invalid statements than accurate ones. But on the bright side, this means that Paul was telling the truth when he said that he was vicious and perverted, not to mention possessed by one of Satan’s demons.

Liars lie, that is what liars do. And in deception, Paul was a maestro.

Further exposing Sha’uwl, the Greek word for “writing a letter” is epistello, from which we get the English word “epistle.” But it was not used, even though it would have been the perfect verb to state: “I’m writing a letter to you.” And while grapho simply means “writing,” the term was often attributed to Gospel Jesus, albeit through translation, to say, “It is written (grapho) in the Torah and Prophets.” But what is particularly telling here is that Sha’uwl has set his “grapho – writing” in the context of something which “must be evaluated in the presence of God because I cannot lie.” And in that context, Paul is expressing that he wanted his letters to be seen as “Scripture,” equivalent to the Word of God in Christian parlance. And nothing could be further from the truth. Therefore, Paul lied about lying.

As we consider Christian Bible publications, the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 27th Edition with McReynolds English Interlinear provides a somewhat unbiased approach: “What but I write to you look before the God [not applicable] not I lie.” Turning to the King James Version, it is apparent that Christians desire the rationally impossible, for Paul to “truthfully contradict” God. And that is why the King James Bible says: “Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.” And it is once again obvious that the King James was a revision of the Latin Vulgate, which reads: “Now what I am writing to you: behold, before God, I am not lying.”

As we consider the NLT, this statement, when converted to follow English grammar rules, begins with “o – what, not “ego – I.” Further, there are many Greek words which can be translated as “declare” (endeixis – to prove by declaring, apaggello – to communicate a message, gnorizo – to make known, diegeomai – to describe by way of narration, ekdiegeomai – to relate, kataggello – to announce, and euaggelizo – to bring a beneficial message), but none of these appear in Sha’uwl’s epistle. So why then did the New Living Translation publish: “I declare before God that what I am writing to you is not a lie.” Desperate is as desperate says, I suppose.

Returning to Sha’uwl’s flight of fancy, we find:

“Thereafter (epeita – later then), I came (erchomai – I moved toward and happened upon) to (eis) the regions (ta klima) of Syria (tes Suria – a transliteration of the Hebrew sowr, meaning scorched rocks) and also of Cilicia (kai tes Kilikia – the Roman province in today’s southern Turkey were Sha’uwl was born). (Galatians 1:21)

But (de) I was (eimi) not known or understood (agnoeo – not ignorant, neither recognized nor disregarded) personally (to prosopon – by appearance as an individual) by the (tais) Called Out (ekklesia) of Yahuwdah | Judah (tes Ioudaia – transliteration of the Hebrew name, meaning Beloved of Yah, errantly transliterated Judea) in (eis) Christo (ΧΡΩ – placeholder used by early Christian scribes for Christou | Drugged or Chrestou | Useful Implement to usurp the Septuagint’s credibility and infer divinity).” (Galatians 1:22)

As the story is told, Sha’uwl was born and raised in Cilicia (Acts 22:3). He claimed to be the son of a prominent Roman citizen. If he were known anywhere, it would have been there. But should he have been telling the truth, he also would have been known to the Called Out in Yahuwdah because he just said that he had met with Kephas / Peter and Ya’aqob / James – the acclaimed leaders of that Assembly. And while I suppose that it was possible, albeit unlikely, that Sha’uwl was unknown in these communities, moments ago he claimed that his reputation preceded him. These assessments cannot all be true. So the un-liar is lying.

Also troubling, in Acts 9, Paul claims that he went to Caesarea, which is on the Judean coast, before traveling to Tarsus, Cilicia, and thus bypassing Syria. While it is just a detail, the inconsistency is troubling juxtaposed against “I cannot lie.”

Turning first to the Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear, we find: “Then I went into the regions of the Syria and the Cilicia. I was but being unknown in the face to the assemblies of the Judea the in Christ.” The King James manages to properly transliterate Syria and Cilicia, but can’t seem to do the same for ekklesia, Yahuwdah, or Mashyach. KJV reads: “Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia; And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ:” Jerome did a reasonable job transliterating ekklesia and Yahuwdah but must have thought that the character playing Dowd as Yahowsha’ was a Greek bearing gifts. His Latin Vulgate says: “Next, I went into the regions of Syriæ and Ciliciæ. But I was unknown by face to the ecclesiis Iudææ, which were in Christo.”

Sha’uwl has made a habit of including the definite article before every title, from “the God” to “the Lord.” And in this sentence, even the title “ekklesia” was scribed as “tais ekklesia – the Called Out.” So it is telling that he has not yet included the definite article before the title of the individual he claims to be representing. And yet since “Christo” isn’t a name, what options are available to us other than to conclude that Sha’uwl wanted readers to consider it as such?

Philip Comfort, the overall coordinator of the “New Testament” passages which comprise the New Living Translation, emphatically reveals on pages 224 and 225 of his Encountering the Manuscripts that he is aware that the initial Followers of the Way were called “Chrestucians,” not “Christians.” And he knows that in all three references to these individuals in the Greek texts – Acts 11:26, Acts 26:28, and 1 Peter 4:16 – that the oldest, most reliable manuscripts, including the vaunted Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, read “Chrestucians” not “Christians.” Furthermore, Philip Comfort is keenly aware that neither “Chrestucians” nor “Christians” appear in any other passage. So why do we find “Christians” in Galatians 1:21-22? “After that visit I went north into the provinces of Syria and Cilicia. And still the Christians in the churches in Judea didn’t know me personally.” Christian publishers must believe that their religious readers do not care that the “evidence” they are presenting is invalid.

While there is no textual basis for the NLT’s use of “that visit,” “north,” “still,” “me,” or “personally,” Mr. Comfort’s most egregious crime was changing “ekklesia – called-out assembly” to “church,” and then associating this “church” with the nonexistent “Christians.” It is as if he felt that he was at liberty to assist Paul in the creation of a new religion.

If you follow the link on the NLT’s homepage to “Philosophy & Methodology,” you will find that they don’t acknowledge the methods they have deployed in creating their “translation.” They simply list a pair of “philosophies” and a “method.” And both philosophies are opposed to the liberal transformations we have witnessed in almost every NLT passage. They say:

Essentially Literal (free only where absolutely necessary): This philosophy is reluctant to “clarify” the meaning of the text, though it is open to doing so when absolutely necessary for understanding. It holds English style at a higher value than the more literal approach and often adjusts syntax to help it read better, even if this makes it less literal.

Dynamic Equivalent (free where helpful to clarify meaning): This philosophy is open to “clarify” the meaning of the text whenever a literal rendering of the text might be confusing to the normal, uninitiated reader. This does not mean it deviates from the text; on the contrary, it does whatever is helpful to ensure that the text’s meaning comes through in English. In general, such translations try to balance the concerns of both functional equivalence and literal approaches.

Based upon what we have experienced thus far, nothing the NLT has published has been “essentially literal.” They have shown no “reluctance to ‘clarify’ the meaning of the text.” So we must assume that either they don’t abide by this philosophy (and that it was stated as a diversion), or they believe that it was “absolutely necessary” to revise, ignore, change, or extrapolate almost everything Sha’uwl wrote. Apart from the religious, that would be incriminating.

I recognize that this is standard operating procedure in politics, where even though the public has access to their constitution, their elected officials reinvent its meaning on a daily basis. But Paul’s epistles are positioned as the inerrant word of God, making this practice an outright fraud.

As for their pervasive use of what they call “dynamic equivalence,” we must conclude that they believe everything Sha’uwl had to say would have been “confusing to the normal, uninitiated reader.” And that means that if Galatians is to be considered “Scripture” (in the Christian sense of being inspired by God), then the folks working for the New Living Translation believe that God is a very poor communicator. And I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that the concept of being “initiated” in a religion, especially its mysteries, dates back to the Babylonians. And yet it is something Paul has continued to promote.

While it is egotistical in the extreme, not to mention ignorant, irrational, and foolish, to place one’s writing style and ability above the Creator of the universe (or even above someone claiming to speak for him), the NLT’s claim that they do not use dynamic equivalence to “deviate from the text” is laughably inaccurate.

But none of that really matters. This pedantic posturing was designed to take your attention away from the method they deployed.

Paraphrase (free for clarity and to catch attention): This method is normally used by an individual translator, while the other methods usually employ committees of scholars. Creativity and style are extremely important here; the translator sometimes tries to catch the attention of readers in a fresh way, seeking to jolt and surprise them into understanding.

The New Living Translation is so “fresh,” so “jolting and surprising,” it is as if Philip Comfort and Company (a.k.a. Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.) felt as if God, Himself, needed them to write a Bible for Him.

Leaving one fictional realm, and returning to another, we find the Nestle-Aland’s McReynolds Interlinear suggesting that Paul concluded his opening statement by writing: “Alone but hearing they were that the one pursuing us then now he tells good message the trust which then he was ravaging (1:23) and they were giving splendor in me the God.” (1:24)

Grammatically, this next statement is odd in that Sha’uwl / Paul is writing in the second, third, and first person. Also strange, the verbs were scribed in the present tense, suggesting that the attacks were continuing.

“But then (de) only (monon – alone) they were constantly (eimi) hearing (akouo) that the one (oti o) presently pursuing and persecuting (dioko – systematically, hastily, and intensely approaching, running and following after, oppressing and harassing (scribed in the present tense)) us (emas) at various times (pote – at any undisclosed period) now (nyn – at the present time) he presently proclaims a healing message (euangelizo – he currently announces a beneficial messenger (scribed in the present tense and middle voice, thereby influencing himself)) of faith (ten pistis – of belief) which (os) once or now (pote – at some unspecified period) he was attacking and continues to annihilate (portheo – he was consistently ravaging and destroying, he is devastating and overthrowing, he was sacking and is continually wasting and killing (the imperfect tense addresses an action which is in-process, something which began in the past but is still ongoing with no anticipation of its conclusion, the active voice says that Paulos was personally engaged in this savage behavior, while the indicative mood reveals that this depiction actually occurred)). (1:23)

And (kai – so) they were praising and glorifying me, attributing an exceptionally high value and status to me (doxazo emoi – they were considering me illustrious and magnificent, holding the opinion of an especially high rank for me, thereby supposing to honor me, extol and celebrate me, dignify and magnify me) in relation to (en – with regard to) the (ton) Theos | God (ΘΝ – Placeholder for Theos | God).” (Galatians 1:24)

By writing in the third, second, and first person, Sha’uwl / Paul was out of touch with reality. It is like a schizophrenic man saying, “We were crazy but he and you are better now.” This split personality permeates the Quran, so this is like being dragged back into that hellish realm of word salads and psychotic personalities. There, it was difficult to know when the voice of the human psychopath gave way to the voice of the wannabe god.

The presentation of “portheo – attack and annihilate” is identical to what we have seen before. By deliberately writing it in the imperfect tense, this grotesque behavior is ongoing. Paulos continues to ravage and destroy. That is the legacy of his letters. They remain as destructive and deadly as the day they were written.

While it is not currently apparent, we have been given another clue into the nature of what would become known as Pauline Doctrine. This time it comes through the forced inclusion of pistis, which I have translated as “faith.” Etymologically, the word originally conveyed the exemplary concepts of “trust and reliance.” But that was before Paul made pistis so central to his religion, and as a result, faith became synonymous with Christianity – just as “believers and disbelievers” distinguish Muslims from Infidels in the Quran. Therefore, by alleging that his admirers equated his “euangelizo – beneficial message” to “pistis – faith,” Paul was setting the table for his treatise. Pistis was awkwardly tossed into the mouths of others because Paul’s entire edifice will be based upon believing him. Faith in him will become the alternative to the Towrah. That is why he lied and said that he could not lie. It was all a lie.

No matter how we render “en emoi ton – in me for the” God, or “with regard to” God, there is no way to incorporate “doxazo – praising and glorifying” without gagging on the result. Paul has either imagined groupies who are now worshiping him or the Called Out from Syria to Cilicia were collectively suffering from Stockholm syndrome. Either way, Sha’uwl / Paul was now a legend in his own mind, with the Jews who he was persecuting now praising and glorifying him, considering him illustrious and magnificent. Pardon me while I gag.

The scenario Sha’uwl has laid out, whereby the chief priests recruited him and then ordered him to bludgeon Torah-observant Jews, is a charade based on what Paulos has said about himself. It is entirely possible, however, perhaps probable, that the founder of the Christian faith was ruthless, lashing out at others as a condescending bully and a brute. But should this be the case, it means that we are dealing with the likes of Muhammad – a delusional schizophrenic psychopath and narcissist.

Nonetheless, to the extent that Sha’uwl told the truth, and that he was exceptionally and uniquely vicious, in concert with his repetitive claims, then the victims of his wonton savagery may have misconstrued this temporary remission in his brutality as being praiseworthy. In such cases, victims often bond with their abuser. They see the merciless as merciful. It is called the “Stockholm syndrome.” Therefore, in this concluding sentence, we are witnessing a psychological phenomenon that profoundly alters an individual’s ability to exercise good judgment regarding those who are abusing them, nineteen centuries before it was codified and explained.

This was not the first time, nor would it be the last, that this strategy would be deployed for nefarious means. Islam, for example, would not exist without it. Muhammad expressly authorized Muslim men to berate, imprison, and beat their wives so long as they occasionally relented, which was usually in the form of having their way with their bodies. And if that was not sufficient to exercise complete dominion over women, then they could murder them.

Doxazo, which is being directed at Paul, was translated as “They were praising and glorifying, attributing an exceptionally high value and status.” It also conveys: “They were considered illustrious and magnificent, holding the opinion of an especially high rank, supposing to honor, extol, celebrate, and dignify” Paul.

Doxazo is from the base of doxa, which is “to form a favorable opinion,” and thus “to hold someone in high esteem by taking into account their behavior and reputation.” And since Paul’s reputation, at least according to Paul, has been that of a libertine and terrorist, both of which in the sight of God’s people would be considered reprehensible, should this declaration have occurred, the Stockholm syndrome provides the lone rational reason to deploy “doxazo – glorified in the opinion of the beholder” in association with Paul.

And since the praiseworthy connotations associated with doxazo are directed “in me for God,” Sha’uwl’s statement can be read that people “thought highly of God in me,” which is extraordinarily arrogant, placing Paul in the company of the Caesars, Emperors, and Pharaohs who claimed to be god – or, at the very least, to represent Him before men. This serves to establish Paul as co-savior and co-author, his personal contribution toward completing his Lord’s work.

This is yet another way that Paul sounds like Muhammad in the Quran. This sentence pushes the envelope, elevating Paul’s opinion of himself well beyond anything which is appropriate.

But the other options may be even worse, especially if we read this as saying, “for God in me,” making Paul and his god one and the same. And if God is brought into the equation, and is seen as part of this arrogant evaluation, then Paul rises above his god in status.

Each of these themes will play out again in Islam, where Allah and Muhammad speak with the same voice because Muhammad was the corporeal manifestation of Satan as a result of having been demonically possessed by him, as he had Paul. And this similarity is germane to our evaluation of Paul, because in Islam, Allah is indistinguishable from Satan. They have the same personality, ambitions, attitude, and methods. In Islam, which means “submission,” Allah replaces Yahowah as God. In Christianity, the Lord replaces Yahowah as God. The result is the same.

The King James Version crafted a bizarre ending that serves to exacerbate the problem: “But they had heard only, that he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed. And they glorified God in me.” The Latin Vulgate, from which the inappropriate ending materialized, reads similarly: “For they had only heard that: ‘He, who formerly persecuted us, now evangelizat/evangelizes the fidem/faith which he once fought. And they glorified God in me.’”

While typically I am critical of these translations when they diverge from the original text, both conclusions are reasonable adaptations of Paul’s poorly worded statement. It is easy to construe this as if Paul was suggesting that he and his god were equally praiseworthy. And keep in mind, the path to this place was paved with the pronouncement that Paul cannot lie.

In the context of religious deceptions, it’s also important to recognize that the King James rendition of the beginning of this statement was errant because the Greek word for “preach” is kerysso, not euangelizo which means “to convey a healing messenger or beneficial message.” And since faith is the result of not knowing, how and why would it be “preached?”

Faith is required when there is insufficient information to know and thus understand. That is why it is part and parcel to Pauline Doctrine. Paul never presents sufficient information to grow beyond “faith.” This realization drives to the heart of the Great Galatians Debate.

It is only out of a sense of duty, that of pulling weeds from the swamp that has become Christendom, that I continue to expose the methodology of the New Living Translation: “All they knew was that people were saying, ‘The one who used to persecute us is now preaching the very faith he tried to destroy!’ And they praised God because of me.”

While this is not what Paul wrote, if this is what he was intending to say, if this is what he believed, then we should pity him. Neither Noah nor Abraham made such a claim. We do not find these words on the lips of Moseh (Moses) or Dowd (David). Not even Gospel Jesus said such a thing.

Recapping the sixth Pauline stanza serves as a real eye-opener and head turner…

“But now what I write as if it were ‘Scripture’ to you, you must pay especially close attention to in the presence of Theos | God, because I cannot lie, nor deceive, conveying that which is untrue. (Galatians 1:20)

Thereafter, I came to the regions of Syria and also of Cilicia. (Galatians 1:21) But I was not known or understood personally by the Called Out of Judah in Christo. (Galatians 1:22)

But then only they were constantly hearing that the one presently pursuing and persecuting, systematically oppressing and harassing us at various times now he presently proclaims a healing message of faith which once he was attacking and continues to annihilate, ravaging. (Galatians 1:23) And they were praising and glorifying me, attributing an exceptionally high value and status to me, considering me illustrious and magnificent, honorable and dignified in relation to the Theos | God.” (Galatians 1:24)

If true, why did Sha’uwl call them “apostates?”



The most appropriate way to conclude Paulos’ introduction of himself, his pronouncement of his calling, his disdain for the people he labeled apostates and traitors, and his zeal to be disjoined from the old system which he deemed pornographic and debilitating, would be to review what Paulos has written thus far. It has been a nauseating ride to a place most would not have dared imagine...

“Paulos, an apostle, not from men, not even by the means of man, but to the contrary, on behalf of Iesou Christou and God, Father of the one having roused and awakened him out of a corpse, (1:1) and all the brothers with me to the called out of the Galatias, (1:2) Charis | Grace to you and peace from Theos | God, Pater | Father of us and Lord Iesou Christou, (1:3) the one having given himself on account of the sins and errors of us, so that somehow, through indefinite means, he might gouge and tear out, plucking and uprooting us from the past inflexible and unrelenting circumstances and old system which had been in place which is like pornography, disadvantageous and harmful, corrupting and debilitating, maliciously malignant in opposition to the desire and will of Theos | God and Paters | Father of us, (1:4) to whom the assessment of the brilliant splendor, the opinion regarding the glorious radiance and appearance of the shining light, by means of the old and the new systems, Amen, let it be so. (Galatians 1:5)

I marvel and am amazed, even astonished that in this way how quickly and in haste you changed, deserting and becoming disloyal apostates, traitors away from your calling in the name of Charis to a different healing message and beneficial messenger, (1:6) which does not exist differently, if not hypothetically negated because perhaps some are stirring you up, confusing you, and also proposing to change the healing messenger and pervert the beneficial message of the Christou, (1:7) but to the contrary, if we or a messenger out of heaven conveys a healing messenger or beneficial message to you which is approximately the same or contrary to, or even positioned alongside what we delivered as a beneficial messenger and announced as a healing message to you then a curse with a dreadful consequence exists. (Galatians 1:8)

As we have said already, and even just now, immediately thereafter, repetitively, I say, if under the condition someone delivers a helpful messenger or communicates a useful message to you similar or contrary to, in opposition with or just positioned alongside, no matter if it is close to or greater than that which you received, it shall be, in fact I command and want it to exist as a curse with a dreadful consequence. (Galatians 1:9)

For because currently or simultaneously, [is it] men I presently persuade to win the favor of, seducing, misleading, and coaxing, even convincing, appeasing, and placating, or alternatively, the Theos | God? Or alternatively by comparison and contrast, [do] I desire to please and accommodate humans? Yet nevertheless, if men, I was obliging and accommodating, exciting them emotionally, a slave of Christou, certainly not was me. (Galatians 1:10)

So therefore, I profess to you brothers of the beneficial message and good messenger which having been communicated advantageously by and through myself, because it is not according to or in accord with man. (Galatians 1:11)

But neither because I by man associating myself with it. Nor was I taught. But to the contrary, by way of a revelation, an appearance serving to uncover and unveil Iesou Christou. (Galatians 1:12)

For because you heard of my unruly behavior at a time and place during the practice of Judaism, namely that because of my superiority, surpassing any measure of restraint, to an extraordinary degree better than anyone else, I was aggressively and intensely, even systematically pursuing it by persecuting, oppressing, and attacking the Called Out of God as I was and am devastating her, continuing to undermine, overthrow, and annihilate her. (Galatians 1:13)

So I was and continue to progress, accomplishing a great deal, and I persist moving forward in the practice of Judaism, over and beyond many contemporaries among my race, enthusiastic, zealous, and excited, especially devoted and burning with passion to adhere to and assimilate with the traditions and teachings handed down by my forefathers. (Galatians 1:14)

But at a point in time when it pleased and was chosen to be better for Theos, the one having appointed me, setting me aside out of the womb of my mother (1:15) to reveal and disclose, uncovering and unveiling the Son of Him in order that I could announce the healing message among the multitudes, races, and nations, immediately. I did not ask the advice of or consult with flesh or blood. (Galatians 1:16)

I did not ascend, traveling into Jerusalem toward the goal of being with or against the Apostles before me, but to the contrary, I went away, withdrawing to Arabia, and returned again to Damascus. (1:17) Then later in the sequence of events, after three years’ time, I ascended to Jerusalem to investigate and inquire about Kephas | Rock and remained against him fifteen days. (1:18) But other of the Apostles, I did not see or concern myself with except Ya’aqob | Jacob, the (tov) brother of the Kurios | Lord. (Galatians 1:19)

But now what I write as if it were ‘Scripture’ to you, you must pay especially close attention to in the presence of Theos | God, because I cannot lie, nor deceive, conveying that which is untrue. (1:20) Thereafter, I came to the regions of Syria and also of Cilicia. (1:21) But I was not known or understood personally by the Called Out of Judah in Christo. (Galatians 1:22)

But then only they were constantly hearing that the one presently pursuing and persecuting, systematically oppressing and harassing us at various times now he presently proclaims a healing message of faith which once he was attacking and continues to annihilate, ravaging. (1:23) And they were praising and glorifying me, attributing an exceptionally high value and status to me, considering me illustrious and magnificent, honorable and dignified in relation to the Theos | God.” (Galatians 1:24)

It is spellbinding, albeit in the most nightmarish way.



Twistianity

Appalling

…Contradicting God

11

Towkechath | Rebuke

Say What?…

Sha’uwl, the man who wanted the world to acclaim him as Paulos, continued his disjointed travelogue and arrogant autobiography with another series of inaccurate statements. The reason behind, and timing of, the meeting at the heart of the Promised Land was not as he claimed. Therefore, the wannabe apostle lied when he wrote:

“Later (epeita – thereafter in the sequence of events), through (dia – by) fourteen (ekatessares) years (etos) also (palin – furthermore, again, and additionally), I went up (anabaino – I ascended and rose) to (eis) Yaruwshalaim | Jerusalem (Hierosoluma – transliteration of the Hebrew name Yaruwshalaim, meaning Source from which Guidance Regarding Reconciliation Flows) along with (meta) Barnabas (Barnabas – of Aramaic origin from bar, son of, naby, a prophet), having taken along (symparalambano – having brought) also (kai) Titus (Titos – of Latin origin meaning honorable).” (Galatians 2:1)

Before the city existed, the site of Yaruwshalaim | Jerusalem was where the Covenant was confirmed. It is the place where Abraham and Yitschaq confirmed their commitment to be part of God’s Family. This is where Yahowah first revealed that He would provide the Passover Lamb. It is the City of Dowd and the site of Yahowah’s Home on Earth – the Covenant Home called the Temple. And Yaruwshalaim is also the place where Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children were fulfilled in 33 CE / year 4000 Yah by the Messiah Dowd.

Its name proudly declares that this city is the source from which guidance regarding reconciliation flows. It is, therefore, unconscionable that Sha’uwl would spend nearly two decades within walking distance of the place and people who witnessed the most important three days in human history, and not stop by on occasion to soak it all in. And yet, Sha’uwl | Paul remained fixated on Damascus.

Since Sha’uwl will associate Yaruwshalaim with the enslavement of mankind two chapters hence, his disdain for Yahowah’s favorite place on Earth should be evident. Paul, and the faith he conceived, would be averse to Yahowah’s Chosen People, Promised Land, Torah, Covenant, Invitations, and Home.

The events Paul has regaled in this letter and in Luke’s correspondence, now called “Acts,” suggest that more time had passed. But perhaps afraid that someone might do the math and recognize that, if the duration between being misled and blinded entering Damascus and being tried in Jerusalem was not trimmed to fourteen years, his conversion would have preceded his god’s death – ruining his entire story. And even then, if fourteen years transpired, Paul’s transformation from misguided fists to words would have occurred in 36 CE, which was still too early for his mission to annihilate Jewish Ebionites in Syria to be credible. Prior to the advent of telephones, radio, television, and the internet, news did not travel at the velocity required to have a sufficient number of ‘Ebownym | Ebionites (Towrah-observant Yahuwdym who recognized Dowd’s fulfillment of Chag Matsah) to be in Damascus.

“I went up (anabaino), but then (de) downward from (kata – down, toward, along with, according to, and through) an uncovering (apokalypsis – a disclosure or vision that makes the unknown known, an unveiling which lays bare; from apokalupto – to uncover and unveil) and set forth (kai anatithemai – set before and laid down) to them (autos) the beneficial messenger (to euangelion – the healing message) which (o) I preach (kerysso – I proclaim, announce, and herald) among (en – in) the races and nations (tois ethnos – people from different races, places and cultures) down from (kata) one’s own (idios – uniquely and separately),...” (Galatians 2:2)

As we consider the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 27th Edition with McReynolds English Interlinear rendition of this statement to further illustrate the deplorable quality of Sha’uwl’s writing, beware that I checked a dozen lexicons and all but one defined kata as “downward from,” not “by.” Not a single dictionary listed “by” as an option. “I went up but by uncovering and I set up to them the good message that I announce in the nations by own...”

If we were evaluating a creative writing assignment prepared by a developmentally disabled child in the sixth grade, we would be inclined to listen to this with a sympathetic ear, but that is hard to do when the scribe is an adult claiming divine inspiration. And keep in mind, the Nestle-Aland is the most universally respected textual resource regarding the Christian New Testament.

In due time, we will come to understand the reason that this “unveiling” came “kata – downward,” why Paul “anatithemai – set forth and laid down” his message as opposed to simply sharing it, and why he did so “idios – on his own, uniquely and separately” from anyone else. But between the attitude on display here and the quality of the writing, something remains seriously amiss.

In actuality, Paul is lying again. He was compelled to go to Yaruwshalaim | Jerusalem as a result of a conflict between his message and the Towrah’s instructions. This summit would pit him against the alleged disciples of Gospel Jesus, in addition to the leadership of the Called Out in Yaruwshalaim.

This statement includes the Greek noun euangelion, which, as I have shared, is a compound of “eu – well done, prosperous, healing, and beneficial” and “aggelos – messenger or message.” It literally means “healing message and beneficial messenger.” While plausible as an extension, it is a stretch to render it: “good news,” as is often the case in Christian Bibles. Also, since the Greek verb kerysso, “I preach,” means “to announce, herald, or proclaim,” by having used euangelion and kerysso together, we can now be certain that if Sha’uwl wanted to say “preach” he would have used kerysso, not euangelizo, here as well as in previous statements. And this realization exposes the ubiquitous and indefensible translation errors manifest throughout the King James Bible and the New Living Translation Bible.

As we are discovering, the epistle to the Galatians was Sha’uwl’s attempt to reestablish a tattered reputation – one that had been called into question because he alone, among those claiming to speak for God, was willing to contradict God. Therefore, the best way for him to appear credible would be to tell us that he and his message had been approved and endorsed by the so-called disciples, specifically by Shim’own, Ya’aqob, and Yahowchanan, the most famous of them.

Had it been prudent to believe Paul, at least apart from his vile and vicious nature and lack of literacy, then they would have endorsed him. But if they did, there is no evidence of it and no reason for this heated letter. And if so notwithstanding these omissions, it would be a favor Paul would not reciprocate.

“…but then (de) to the one’s (tois) opinions (dokei – presumptions and suppositions) not (me) somehow perhaps (pos – in some way possibly) to (eis – into) foolishly and stupidly (kenos – without purpose and falsely, for nothing and vainly) I might run (trecho – I may have run in haste (present tense which portrays an action in process with no anticipation of its completion, active voice which signifies that Sha’uwl is doing the running, and subjunctive mood which presents this action as a mere possibility)) or (e) I ran (trecho – I rapidly moved hastily (aorist active indicative which conveys a moment in the past performed by Sha’uwl)).” (Galatians 2:2)

This is nearly incomprehensible. So let’s confer with the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 27th Edition with McReynolds English Interlinear to ascertain whether this is what Sha’uwl actually wrote. “...but to the ones thinking not perhaps in empty I might run or I ran.” I suspect the problem is as much with the quality of the writing as it is with the questionable merit of the translations.

Plunging into the words themselves, this is the first of five times we will confront “dokei – opinion” in the context of this letter. Its primary connotation is “to suppose and to presume,” as well as “to hold an opinion based upon appearances.” Dokei conveys the idea of “wanting to see something a certain way, or of someone being predisposed to a certain viewpoint.” It is neither flattering nor reassuring. And because it is not thoughtful, this is not a ringing endorsement.

Cutting to the chase, dokei conveys a “subjective opinion,” as opposed to an objective conclusion. So, in the context of an endorsement on a topic which is literally life and death, and one so easily verified by way of the undisputed standard, Yahowah’s Towrah, this is a glaring red flag.

It gets worse in context because, in addition to the “presumptuousness” of dokei, we must add the “somehow and perhaps” aspects of pos. Further, the standard Paulos is claiming to have bested was “kenos – stupid and foolish.” Even I would not accuse Paul of being “stupid” – false and vain, yes.

As weak as these opinions appear, there are reasons to suspect that Sha’uwl’s tepid assessment may not even be accurate, or at the very least, it may be purposefully misleading. There is another account, one more credible and detailed than this, expressing what transpired during this meeting. This is what politicians would call “spin,” as opposed to an outright lie. And in that light, this is not actually an endorsement of Paul, his message, or his mission. This is more of an indication that something was seriously wrong: “opinions not somehow perhaps to foolishly and stupidly I might run or I ran.” Even if we could figure out the rest, this still doesn’t say what he was running to, for, or from.

In that Protestant Christianity is predicated in large part on the King James Bible’s interpretation of Paul’s theology, it is incumbent upon us to compare these texts. So we must recognize that Paul actually wrote: “I went up, but then downward from uncovering an unveiling which lays bare, laying down to them the beneficial messenger which I preach among the races and nations down from one’s own, uniquely and separately, but then to the opinions and presumptions, not somehow perhaps into foolishness and stupidity, without purpose and falsely, I might run or I ran.”

Therefore, there is no basis for “Gospel,” “privately,” or “which were of reputation” in the KJV, which reads: “And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.”

Should this be accurate, why would Sha’uwl consider running from them? He had come to impress them and dazzle them with his oratory and rhetoric. And it had been he who had persecuted them, not the other way around. Further, should Paul have actually been inspired by Yahowah, he would have known that God’s message is never in vain – only man’s. So if he is attributed with saying these things, then Paul is providing us with a window into the origin of his mantra.

By adding “privately” to this text without justification, biblical scholars, inadvisably trusting their King James Version, have tended to disassociate Paul’s description of this meeting in Yaruwshalaim from the detailed account of the “Apostolic Council” presented in Acts 15. I can only assume that they do so because, when the divergent testimonies are compared, Paul’s credibility is shattered – and, with it, their religion.

It is easy to see where the KJV went wrong. Rather than accommodate the Greek text, they twisted the Latin Vulgate, the translation which gave rise to Roman Catholicism. Jerome’s amalgamated rendition reads: “And I went up according to revelation, and I debated with them about the evangelium that I am preaching among the Gentibus / Gentiles, but away from those who were pretending to be something, lest perhaps I might run, or have run, in vain.”

The origin of words is always a fascination. There is a misguided belief that “gentile” is from gowy or gowym (in the plural form). And while the evolved meaning of “gentile” is consistent with gowy, that has not always been the case. The English word is transliterated from the Latin noun gentilis, a variation of which was highlighted in the Vulgate passage. It meant “of the same family or clan of Romans.” The Latin word was used by Jerome to translate the Greek ethnos. It evolved over time such that it was thought to translate the Hebrew word gowy, meaning non-Yisra’elite races and nations. As an interesting aside then, gentilis | gentile, based upon its root, could be reasonably attributed from Romans to Roman Catholics as the Empire morphed into the Church. That being the case, all of Yahowah’s warnings against Gentiles would serve as a rebuke of Roman Catholicism.

As for the introduction of “privately,” since it does not appear in the Vulgate or in the Greek,” it may have been deployed by Francis Bacon, the suspected coordinator of the KJV. He would have wanted to steer clear of the Latin translation, “but away from those who were pretending to be something,” because it would have undermined the notion that kings were appointed by God. However, by translating dokei “pretending to be something,” Jerome and the Roman Church were acknowledging that Paul was deliberately demeaning the rival disciples. And indeed, he was.

The Latin Vulgate’s presentation also suggests that Paul was in competition with others, debating with them – racing against them. In this context, and based upon what is revealed elsewhere, this could only mean that Sha’uwl is trying to dismiss his perceived rivals, discrediting them by suggesting that they were pretending to be Apostles, while he was presenting himself as being “idios – uniquely qualified” to run on his own in this race.

However, as we have acknowledged, this is actually a lame proposition. If we are to believe that Paul was inspired by Yahowah, and doing what God wanted done, nothing would have caused him to run independently from the narrative Yahowah established 1,500 years earlier in His Towrah. And this is especially disturbing pursuant to Paul’s current rivals considering what follows, where Sha’uwl condemns Shim’own for running in fear.

It is becoming increasingly easy to see why so many Christians remain befuddled and in the dark. The popular New Living Translation perpetuates the mistakes inherent in the King James Version and then adds some myths of its own. “I went there because God revealed to me that I should go. While I was there I met privately with those considered to be leaders of the church and shared with them the message I had been preaching to the Gentiles. I wanted to make sure that we were in agreement, for fear that all my efforts had been wasted and I was running the race for nothing.”

It is evident from his nomenclature and attitude that Paul was not interested in knowing if the disciples disagreed with him. Their opinions would never have mattered. No, Paul has already told us that there was a curse on those who challenged him. Therefore, this translation is nonsense.

While his intent may have been to skirt the truth by inferring that God, rather than the disciples, had ordered him to appear in Jerusalem, Paul did not actually say that his “unveiling” came from “God,” or that it was the reason for his ascent. The contemporary audience would have immediately recognized such suggestions as disingenuous. There is no reference in Paul’s testimony to a “private meeting,” but instead, Paul speaks of “setting forth and laying down” the message through “preaching,” which is public discourse. There was no reference to a “church,” nor “leaders,” nor to “sharing” in Paul’s prose. And the terms Paul selected to frame his statement were all equivocal and are thus the antithesis of “making sure” he wasn’t a “foolish, stupid, deceiver, running in vain.” As a result, if you have been led to believe that this novel is a translation of the “inerrant word of God,” it’s time to abandon both myths.

In addition to rebuking the New Living Translation for their contrived interpretation of Sha’uwl’s letter, it is important to reinforce the fact that those who know they are presenting the Word of God do not seek the endorsement of others – ever. They rely exclusively on Yahowah. His testimony is memorialized in writing, it is unambiguously and consistently stated, it is available to everyone, and it does not change – making it reliable, and those who share it, dependable. Further, no matter the response, the time we spend conveying our Heavenly Father’s teaching is never “wasted.” While most human endeavors are “run in vain,” those who work alongside Yahowah never “run,” “race,” or engage “for nothing.”

However, those lost in a world of “faith” do not know, so they are compelled to seek human approval. That is why believers congregate together. Perhaps the inadequate faith of these religious publishers seeped into their prose.

This is no small matter. It reveals why so many Christians get upset when others do not agree with them. The insecure nature of faith cannot handle the strain of knowing that informed and rational individuals don’t support what they have been led to believe. It is as if they worry that the slightest chip on the veneer of their faith will cause everything to crumble. Questioning scares them, so they react by reinforcing one another and collectively pushing the perceived threat away.

Perhaps this is why history is rife with many delusions and with the madness of crowds, demonstrating that popular acceptance has never been a measure of truth. Said another way, individual deceptions are relatively rare, but collective misconceptions are common, especially among the religious, political, conspiratorial, and militaristic.

Before we press on to Sha’uwl’s next sentence, let’s linger here a good while longer – especially since the mother’s milk of faith, the specter of supposition, has now been raised. Opinions are to conclusions as faith is to trust. Since Jews had at their disposal a pair of unassailable tests to ascertain with absolute certainty whether Sha’uwl was speaking for Yahowah, for himself, or on behalf of the Adversary, there was no reason for them to presume anything. God’s criterion is straightforward, and it is easily accessible because it is found at the conclusion of His Towrah Guidance. The best-known of these tests contains six elements (with six being the number of man):

1.
Is the person a naby’: someone who claims to speak on behalf of God? (This is a screening codicil, because if a person admits that they are speaking only for themselves, then there would be no reason for anyone to associate his or her message with God. As for Sha’uwl, he unequivocally claimed to be a “naby’.”)

2.
Is the person zyd: someone who oversteps their bounds, speaking presumptuously and contemptuously, with an inflated sense of self-worth, demonstrating self-reliance while taking liberties to defy God. Are they someone who arrogantly pretends to know, who insults others and is disrespectful? Do they display pride in the pursuit of personal recognition and acclaim while despising and demeaning perceived competitors, lashing out at anyone who rebels against that which is established? Are they prone to rage, seething with anger and often furious, overbearing, rude, and conceited in their plans? (As we shall discover during our review of Sha’uwl’s initial epistle, this could be written to say: does the person act like Sha’uwl | Paul.)

3.
Does the person dabar ba shem: openly and publicly preach to others, communicating his or her message in the name of God? (As was the case with the first codicil, this is also a screening test. If the person has an insignificantly small audience, if his or her statements are exclusively conveyed in private, if his or her influence is limited to a specific time and place without an ongoing legacy or lingering consequence, then there would be no reason to apply this test. But such is not the case with Paul, whose public preaching and copious letters have influenced billions.)

4.
Is the person’s message lo’ tsawah: inconsistent with what Yahowah has instructed and directed? Does his or her message conflict with what God appointed, constituted, and taught? Does it vary from His Instructions? (This is where Sha’uwl / Paul is the most vulnerable because his theology is usually the antithesis of Yahowah’s teaching.)

5.
Does the person dabar ba shem ‘aher ‘elohym: speak in the name of gods other than Yahowah? (Paul’s “in the name of Charis | Grace,” his “Amen” salutation, his renaming of his god-man as Iesou, along with the derogatory and errant title Christos, and his constant use of “Kurios – the Lord” are all in violation, so he failed this test miserably.)

6.
Are the individual’s written and spoken statements consistent with that which hayah: has occurred and is existing, as well as what has been established and instituted by God, and do their prophetic pronouncements bow’: come to fruition? Does what they have said in the past transpire in the future? (Sha’uwl not only inaccurately conveyed the history of the Covenant, the Exodus, and Dowd’s lives and lyrics, he misrepresented current events in his own life, while also failing in his lone attempt at prophecy.)

We are still early in our review of this epistle, so not all of the evidence necessary to prove that Sha’uwl failed every aspect of this test has been revealed thus far. Nonetheless, it has been presented here in connection with Paul’s reference to “dokei – subjective opinion” which Sha’uwl interjected into the previous statement. Since he wants to trade on opinions, I wanted you to be equipped with the facts because God has provided an objective test. You are now properly equipped to quarrel with Sha’uwl if he violates clause two (of which we already have serious concerns), four (which will serve as the focus of our evaluation), five (of which Charis/Gratia/Grace is a problem), and six (when he misrepresents the timing of his “harpazo – rapture”).

We will also be looking for historical chronologies (such as his testimony regarding the Yaruwshalaim Summit) as well as other prophetic predictions because, without them, Yahowah’s signature and endorsement will be missing. Yahowah’s prophetic trademark is required if this, or any of Sha’uwl’s letters, is to be considered inspired. So once we have completed our review of Galatians, we will deploy this same test to objectively demonstrate with absolute certainty that Sha’uwl / Paul did not speak for God.

Since Yahowah provided ample prophetic warning regarding Sha’uwl, while also equipping us with the means to evaluate his subsequent credibility, let’s take a moment and reexamine the text of the Towrah from which my summation of God’s test emerged:

“Surely (‘ak), the person who proclaims a message on behalf of a deity (naby’) who (‘asher) oversteps their bounds and speaks presumptuously, contemptuously, and improperly (zyd – has an inflated sense of self-worth, demonstrating self-reliance while taking liberties to rudely defy God, who arrogantly disapproves while pretending to know better, who insults others and is disrespectful, displaying pride in the pursuit of personal recognition and acclaim while despising rivals, who rebels against that which is established and is prone to rage, who seethes with anger and is often furious, overbearing, rude, and conceited in their plans (here the hifil stem reveals that the prophet and his statements are working together and that he causes this result to occur, while the imperfect conjugation speaks of their continual and ongoing influence)) for the express purpose of conveying (la dabar – for the intent of saying, of communicating verbally or in writing (piel infinitive construct – by design and intent)) a statement (dabar – a message, written or verbal in a letter or speech) in (ba) My (‘any) name or reputation (shem) which accordingly (‘asher ‘eth) I have not expressly appointed, taught, guided, nor directed him (lo’ tsawah – I have not provided his instruction, nor assigned, constituted, decreed, prescribed, or ordained this guidance through him, deliberately and demonstrably making him My understudy) to (la) speak (dabar – to say or write), and (wa) who (‘asher) speaks (dabar) in (ba) the name (shem) of other (‘aher – different and additional, even subsequent) gods (‘elohym), indeed, then (wa) that prophet (ha naby’ – that individual who claims that their message regarding the past, present, or future is from God), he (huw’) is deadly (muwth – devoid of life and destructive).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:20)

This test only applies to those who claim to speak for God by name or renown – as was the case with Sha’uwl | Paul. It pertains to those who are vocal, and who promote their perceptions of God through the spoken and written word. To justify such scrutiny, the individual’s speeches and books must, therefore, be published and widely distributed so that the test can be fairly and accurately conducted.

By using naby’, only those who are prophetic can be considered. The person under scrutiny must be a prophet, which means that they must accurately reveal what occurred in the past and will transpire in the future. Therefore, if someone like Sha’uwl | Paul does not provide proof of his inspiration by revealing something relevant in the past or meaningful in the future that only Yahowah would have known, he is not speaking for God. Since there are no such revelations or insights in any of Sha’uwl’s numerous letters or copious speeches, there is no chance whatsoever that Paul spoke for Yahowah. He was lying when he claimed otherwise.

Arrogance is an anathema to God. Ego is odious. Therefore, zyd serves as a benchmark, such that we can make a determination based on the speaker’s attitude toward God and man. In this light, it is a poor life decision to suggest that God is wrong and that we, by comparison, are right. It is never right to infer that God is wrong, which makes Sha’uwl | Paul wrong.

We ought not overstep our bounds. This means we should not go beyond where Yahowah’s words lead. His Way is narrow, restrictive, and unpopular. But since it is His Way, we are not at liberty to widen it, change it or, worse, replace it.

Knowing Yahowah exudes confidence, but since it is based upon our relationship with Yah and upon His assurances, it is the furthest thing from conceit. Self-reliance is presumptuous, while trusting God is not.

This known, there is nothing wrong with calling something or someone “stupid,” so long as we correctly demonstrate why it or they are foolish. Contradicting God is disrespectful, even arrogant and appalling. Challenging me based on what I have written is fair game, so long as the criticism is properly evidenced and reasoned.

Therefore, since it takes an enormous ego or tremendous confidence to speak on behalf of Yahowah, the charlatan condemns himself by being presumptuous and contemptuous. Sha’uwl / Paul is eminently recognizable as such, overbearing and conceited, derisive and repugnant. With his every word, he is promoting himself and seeking worldwide recognition and acclaim. And when he is challenged, he is enraged.

The core of God’s test is based upon a comparison between what Yahowah has “tsawah – instructed and directed” and what another has written. Therefore, the surest way to know if Yahowah has appointed someone to speak for Him, is that you will likely find an affirmation of their mission, its timing and purpose, in the established Towrah and Prophets. For example, Yahowah predicted what I am doing for you, referring to me as Yada’, His Choter and Nakry, and these books as His Nes. You will find the evidence for this in An Introduction to God, Yada Yahowah, Observations, and Coming Home. While that does not make me a prophet, it does indicate that I am speaking for Yahowah. And as for Sha’uwl / Paul, I have found a plethora of prophetic warnings regarding him – all of which I will share with you.

My calling does not make me special, but instead puts you in a position to be special. Yahowah does not choose those who represent Him based upon their merit or acclaim, but instead on their willingness to be used and to go where His words lead. Through these books, Yahowah is introducing Himself to you, trying to get your undivided attention, so that, if you respect Him, you will be in a position to act upon His instructions and enter His Covenant.

We can validate a prophet’s calling by comparing what they say to what God has instructed and directed. If the message is the same, if the writer and speaker are accurately conveying Yahowah’s instructions and directions, beginning with His Towrah | Instructions and Directions, then they can be trusted because Yahowah can be relied upon. My books are entirely consistent and complementary, and Paul’s are universally conflicting and contradictory.

To apply this test to any individual’s books or speeches, two things are required of the evaluator. They must know what Yahowah instructed by having become Towrah-observant, and they must be aware of what the individual being scrutinized conveyed. The corresponding citations must be correctly presented and logically compared. The process should be consistent, comprehensive, and methodical – which is why Twistianity is presented in five volumes over 2,500 pages and the Yada Yahowah Series is 20,000 pages long and growing.

And lest I forget something that makes most people uncomfortable; for any valuation to be meaningful, it must be judgmental. To discern fact from fiction we must exercise good judgment and be discriminating and rational.

According to Yahowah, those who speak for Him, speak in His name. They do not make pronouncements in the names of other gods, nor do they negate Yahowah’s name by writing “HaShem” or “‘Adoni” instead. If you see names like Amen, Charis, Grace, Jesus, Christ, the Lord, or Allah in someone’s writings (other than to point out that they are wrong), such individuals were not inspired by Yahowah.

Muwth makes the statements of a false prophet “deadly and destructive,” revealing that those who believe him or her “will die.” And because this is nothing to trifle with, we should do everything we can to decimate their message before it infects and kills more unwitting souls.

Yahowah continued…

“And if (wa ky) you actually say (‘amar – you genuinely ask at any time) in (ba) your heart, applying your best judgment (lebab – your inner nature and thinking (in recognition that the heart was considered the seat of judgment)), ‘How (‘eykah) shall we actually and consistently know (yada’ – shall we come to acquire the information needed to genuinely distinguish, discriminate, understand and acknowledge (here the qal stem was used to convey actually, genuinely, and literally while the imperfect conjugation reveals that the ability to know is ongoing, consistent, and continual irrespective of time)) accordingly if the (‘eth ha – whether the) statement (dabar – written or spoken communication) which (‘asher) he speaks or writes (dabar – his complete testimony) is not (lo’) Yahowah’s (Yahowah)?’

If that which (‘asher) is deliberately spoken over time (dabar – has continually orchestrated through written or spoken communication) by the one who proclaims the message (ha naby’ – prophet who claims divine inspiration) in (ba) Yahowah’s (Yahowah) name or reputation (shem – designation or renown) did not occur or is not literally and consistently established (lo’ hayah – is not actually instituted and existing), or it does not actually come to be (wa lo’ bow’ – does not consistently arrive or literally happen (an errant prediction)), the message (ha dabar – the written statement and spoken communication) which (‘asher) he (huw’), himself, has deliberately spoken to influence (dabar) is not (lo’) Yahowah’s (Yahowah).

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

At the time Moseh shared this test with the Children of Yisra’el, the heart was considered the seat of judgment, of personal conviction, and character. The liver was the source of emotions.

God’s test is for those who genuinely want to “yada’ – know.” If your faith takes precedence over the truth, please get out of the way and move along. This test is not for you.

As a surprise to those who are religious, God has no interest in being around a bunch of dunderheads who do not care to know His name, understand His instructions, or think about what He has to say. To avoid the embarrassment of being rejected, only thoughtful and discerning individuals should apply.

To be with Yahowah, we must seek to yada’ | know Him and understand what He has conveyed to us. And therefore, dabar | words matter. Emphasizing this, dabar was spoken four times in the opening statement and was repeated another six times in the second.

This is a word-for-word evaluation, where the word of God and the words of men are compared side by side. If they match, they are both right. If they do not, then the prophet is a liar.

It should be noted that while “hayah – exists, is instituted, and is established” and “bow’ – come to be” convey somewhat similar thoughts in English; they do not in Hebrew. By using them in conjunction with each other, Yahowah is telling us that if anything a prophet says is divergent from what He has already instituted and established in His Word, or inconsistent with history, both past and future, this prophet was not inspired by God. Those who speak for Yahowah must, therefore, accurately describe what has occurred in addition to accurately predicting what will occur, while never contradicting anything God has said.

So while it should already be obvious that Sha’uwl / Paul flunked historical accuracy and Towrah consistency, it is only a matter of time before he fails prophecy, too.

Prophecy is not only about the future. For example, Moseh was called the greatest of the prophets and he had far more to say about the distant past and his present circumstances than the future. Never discount the difficulty of flawlessly reporting prior events. Neither Paul nor Muhammad could do it, and they, thereby, failed the test of history past.

In addition, hayah is not only the basis of Yahowah’s name, it is related to the Hebrew word for “life,” chayah. To ignore Yahowah’s hayah is to deny chayah.

The primary meaning of bow’ is “to go from one place to another, and to arrive, coming upon the scene.” It is all about the future and where Yahowah and we are going. The test is to determine if we are going in the same direction.

The reason zadown | presumptuous arrogance is reaffirmed in this manner is because this test is designed to determine if someone is speaking for themselves, and if they are self-reliant, rather than speaking for God – and thereby predicating their message on His message. What I or anyone else says only matters if it is based upon what Yahowah has said. And therefore, Sha’uwl’s trademark line, “But I, Paul, say…” is the surest sign of a false prophet – especially when what follows contradicts God.

Based upon the negation provided by lo’ in the concluding thought, Yahowah is saying that a false prophet should “not be revered or respected, neither dreaded nor feared.” He is conveying this so that we become more comfortable aggressively exposing and condemning those who deliberately contradict His message. And make no mistake, it takes character and courage to excoriate the likes of Paul and Muhammad. This alone limits the number of people available for Yahowah’s use.

Now that we are aware of this assessment, let’s consider another. Yahowah’s teaching regarding false prophets was initially broached in Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 13. Its evaluation is especially troubling for those who embrace Sha’uwl / Paul and his New Testament because it reveals that we should not listen to anyone who dismisses any aspect of the Towrah, who adds to the Towrah, or who claims to have received divine revelations, especially if they claim to perform signs and wonders, or if they promote service to or worship of a different god. It reads:

“With regard to (‘eth) every (kol) word (dabar – statement) which to show the way to benefit from the relationship (‘asher – to reveal the path to get the most out of life) I am (‘any) instructing (tsawah – providing guidance and direction to) you with accordingly (‘eth ‘eth), observe it (shamar – closely examine and carefully consider it, focusing your attention on it) for the purpose of (la) engaging in and acting upon it (‘asah – responding by profiting from and celebrating it), not adding to it (lo’ yasaph ‘al – never increasing it (through a New Testament, for example)) and not subtracting from it (wa lo’ gara’ min – reducing or diminishing the intent (by suggesting that it can be distilled into a single promise, act, statement, or profession of faith, for example)). (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 12:32)

Indeed, if (ky) a prophet (naby’ – a person who claims to proclaim the message of a deity to explain the past or foretell the future) stands up trying to establish himself (quwm – rises up and exalts himself) in your midst (ba qereb) or an interpreter of revelations (chalowm chalam), and provides (wa nathan) a sign (‘owth – an omen via a consent decree (thereby claiming to be authorized to speak for God as Sha’uwl did)) or (‘o) miracle (mowpheth – something which appears marvelous or wonderful, inspiring awe (as Sha’uwl claimed as well)) to you (‘el), and the omen or miracle worker (ha ‘owth ‘o ha mowpheth) appears before you (wa bow’) who has spoken thusly (‘asher dabar – who has communicated and promised this) to you (‘el) to say (la ‘amar), ‘Let us go after (halak ‘achar – later let us again walk toward and follow) other (‘acher – different or additional) gods (‘elohym) which (‘asher) you have not known (lo’ yada’ – you do not recognize and are not familiar with) and let us serve and worship them (wa ‘abad – ministering on their behalf), do not listen to (lo’ shama’ ‘el) the words (dabar – statements) of that prophet (ha huw’ naby’) or (‘o) interpreter of revelations (ha huw’ chalowm chalam).

Indeed, this is because (ky) the test (nasah – the means to learn if something is true) of Yahowah (Yahowah – a transliteration of , our ‘elowah | God as directed in His towrah | teaching regarding His hayah | existence), your God (‘elohym), accordingly (‘eth) is for you to know, understand, appreciate, and acknowledge (la yada’ – to recognize and comprehend) whether this affirms your (ha yesh) love (‘ahab – relationship with and affection) for Yahowah (YaHoWaH), your God (‘elohym), with all (ba kol) your heart (leb – your thinking and judgment) and with all (wa ba kol) your soul (nepesh – conscious awareness, character and persona).

After (‘achar – following) Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of YaHoWaH, our ‘ELoWaH | God as directed in His ToWRaH – teaching regarding His HaYaH – existence and our ShaLoWM – restoration), your God (‘elohym), you should walk (halak – you should be guided and directed (which means following His Towrah guidance)). And with Him (wa ‘eth), you should be genuinely respectful (yare’ – you should actually show admiration, reverence, continually and esteem (qal stem denotes a literal interpretation and genuine response while the imperfect conjugation conveys that this respect should be ongoing throughout time)).

Also (wa), in concert with (‘eth – in association with and concerning) His terms and conditions (mitswah – His directions and prescriptions of His covenant contract and His instructions regarding the relationship), you should continually be observant (shamar – you should consistently focus upon them, closely examining and carefully considering them).

Concerning His voice (wa ba qowl – then regarding His proclamations and pronouncements), you should literally listen (shama’ – you should make a habit of continually hearing (qal imperfect)) so that (wa), with Him (‘eth), you can consistently engage and serve (‘abad – always work alongside as a productive associate).

And (wa) to Him (ba – with Him), you should choose to cling (dabaq – you should literally and genuinely stay close, actually choosing to join together and be united, tightly holding on (scribed in the literal qal stem, the continuous imperfect conjugation and the paragogic nun ending which serves as an expression of freewill)).

So therefore (wa), a prophet (ha huw’ naby’) or (‘o) interpreter of revelations (ha huw’ chalowm chalam) is deadly (muwth – he is the absence of life, is destructive and damning (with the hophal stem, the subject of the verb, in this case, the false prophet, causes the object of the verb, which is those listening to him, to participate in the action which is to die)) if by contrast (ky – if by comparison), he has spoken (dabar – that which he has communicated is (scribed in piel stem whereby the object suffers the effect of the action and the perfect conjugation, which addresses the limited scope of the potificator’s existence)) rebellious renunciations (sarah – revolting disassociation, turning away and departing, of defection and withdrawal, or of being removed) against (‘al) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym), the One who led you out (ha yatsa’ ‘eth – the One who descended to serve you by extending Himself to lead you out) from (min) the realm (‘erets) of the Crucibles of Oppression Egypt (mitsraym – of human religious, political, economic, and military control and subjugation) and the One who redeemed you (wa ha padah – the One who ransomed you) from the house (min beyth) of bondage and slavery (‘ebed – of servitude and worship).

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

And so (wa) you should choose to remove (ba’ar – as an expression of freewill, you can purge that which should no longer exist (scribed in the piel stem, perfect conjugation, and consecutive mood telling us that all things displeasing to Yahowah are to be removed from us when we choose to follow His Towrah directions, including)) that which is disagreeable, displeasing, and incorrect (ha ra’ – that which is wrong and thus wicked, no good and therefore counterproductive, immoral, malignant, mischievous, troubling, undesirable, unpleasant, distressing, injurious, and harmful) from your midst (min qereb – from your inner nature and thus from your soul).” (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 13:1-5)

It is certain that Paul has done everything words allow to tear believers away from Yahowah and to disrespect God. Sha’uwl’s animosity toward Yahowah’s Towrah | Teaching does not engender love or respect for the God who authored and offered them. Therefore, the only way to cling to Paul would be to let go of God.

What Yahowah has reinforced with this test is consistent with my personal experience. It was not until I took the Towrah seriously, closely examining and carefully considering its guidance and teaching, that I came to realize that Paul was a false prophet. The god Paul was describing and the means to salvation he was presenting in his letters were completely different than the God and path I came to know and respect in the Towrah.

Summarizing this, Yahowah has said that the best way to know who is not speaking for Him is to closely examine and carefully consider His every written word and then compare them to those chosen by others competing for your attention. He says that knowing and understanding that His Towrah is His source of instruction comes first. Acting upon His guidance and engaging in the Covenant Relationship is next.

No one has been or will ever be authorized to add to or subtract from His Towrah. Therefore, if we witness someone attempting to diminish the Towrah’s role in our lives, or if we find a writer adding something new, like a new covenant, be careful because such a person is not speaking for God.

Yahowah reveals that if the prophet stands up claiming to have received a revelation from God, and establishes himself, personally speaking his own words in his own name, he is a false prophet. If he claims to have performed miracles, he is a false prophet. If he encourages his audience to go after other gods by other names, like the Roman Gratia or Greek Charis, he is a false prophet. If he promotes religious worship, he is a false prophet. If his writings do not affirm our love for Yahowah, he is a false prophet. If he directs his audience to disregard the terms and conditions of the Covenant, he is a false prophet. And of such revelations, God says that they are in opposition to Him, both ruinous and deadly, so we should completely remove that prophet’s disagreeable, displeasing, and evil stain from our midst.

One last thought before we move on. If you witness someone showing off with a display of miracles – run. Yahowah’s words are sufficient. Those who love Him cherish them. They do not need or want anything to upstage them. His words are the stars of this story.



Since this has been Sha’uwl’s personal revelation, his testimony, and his race against his perceived rivals and, indeed, his pursuit against everything Yahowah has established and offered, in the context of him running this race, it is time we return to Chabaquwq / Habakkuk. While we briefly considered Yahowah’s foreboding testimony through this largely unknown prophet in a previous chapter, this time we will linger and be more thorough.

But first, this reminder. Sha’uwl wrote: “Later, through fourteen years, also, I went up to Yaruwshalaim along with Barnabas, having taken along also Titus. (2:1) I went up, but then downward from uncovering an unveiling revelation which lays bare, laying down to them the beneficial messenger which I preach among the races down from my own, uniquely and separately, but then to the opinions, presumptions, and suppositions, not somehow perhaps into foolishness and stupidity, without purpose or falsely, I might run or I ran.” (Galatians 2:2)

As we shall discover in a subsequent volume of Twistianity, Yahowah’s haunting prediction regarding Sha’uwl was announced 666 years prior to the time Galatians was written by the Devil’s Advocate. As a preview of this revelation in Chabaquwq / Habakkuk, here is an excerpt of what the prophet revealed in his opening statements regarding the false prophet we have come to know as Sha’uwl / Paul – the principal architect of the Christian religion…

“This is the prophetic pronouncement (ha masa’) which, for the benefit of the relationship (‘asher) was received as a revelation by way of witnessing a prophetic vision of the future by (chazah) Chabaquwq | Embrace 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 (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, the 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)

In 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).

Instead, 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)

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).

And should you avoid being among those negatively influenced, you will be astonished and astounded, and thus by remaining free of societal influences, you will 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)

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), the 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 were 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 relationship and to be forgiven (wa se’eth huw’), he brings forth and disseminates (yatsa’). (Chabaquwq 1:7)

They will be despised as abhorrent so they will fade away (wa qalal) as the dregs of a scummy remainder (min namer). His swift airborne weaponry (suws huw’) will be as fierce and menacing as a lone wolf (wa chadad min za’ed) as the sun sets in the gloomy dusk at the approach of night by commingling and intermixing light and darkness, weaving things together while exchanging one thing for another, bartering with the darkness to replace and obscure in league with foreigners (‘ereb).

Their randomly dispersed and widely scattered (puwsh) mobile war machines and accompanying soldiers (parash huw’ wa parash huw’) will come from afar in the future (min rachowq bow’) flying through the air, even hovering (‘uwph), like (ka) birds of prey (nesher), quickly swooping down and ready (chuwsh) to consume and destroy (la ‘akal). (Chabaquwq 1:8)

With all of his (kol huw’) devastating plots to plunder the people of the Towrah comprised of cruel lies and great injustice (chamas), he persistently pursues (bow’ magamah). They appear in the east in confrontational fashion, antagonistic and belligerent (hem paneh qadym). He gathers the victimized (‘asaph) captives (sheby) as if they were sand, innumerable and comparatively dense (ka chowl). (Chabaquwq 1:9)

And he, along with the religious and political rulers (wa huw’ ba ha melek) mock and ridicule (qalas). Those who govern and are empowered (wa rozen) scoff, as they are haughty and egocentric (mischaq) because of him (la huw’). He, at everything (huw’ la kol) which defends and fortifies and should have remained off limits (mibtsar), laughs in amusement while degrading Yitschaq (tsachaq).

He piles up a massive amount (wa tsabar) of progeny along with their dust and debris (‘aphar), and he seizes them (wa lakad huw’). (Chabaquwq 1:10)

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 throughout, 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)

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 assigned 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)?

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

Therefore, 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)

In everything associated with him (kol huw’ ba), he will use a lure and hook to entice, withdraw, and sacrifice (chakah ‘alah). When (wa) he catches them, he drags them away (garar huw’) in his dedicated trap (ba cherem huw’). And he gathers them together and removes 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 intoxicated 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), by them (ba hem) he is enriched and satisfied (shaman), through seductive words while he claims a share of his persuasive plot (cheleq huw’). And so 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 end the lives (tamyd la harag) of Gentiles (Gowym), showing no concern, compassion, or mercy (lo’ chamal)?” (Chabaquwq / Habakkuk 1:17)

With that introduction, God reveals that He isn’t about to alter any of the requirements to participate in His Covenant or change the approach that He has taken to facilitate our restoration by way of His Invitations. This alone is sufficient to put Sha’uwl | Paul in opposition to Yahowah and dispatch his sorry soul to She’owl.

“Upon (‘al – on this) My requirements and responsibilities and what I observe (mishmereth ‘any – My mission which functions and serves as a safeguard to watch over, protect, and preserve the observant; from my – to ponder the implications of shamar – to observe, closely examining and carefully considering, retaining My focus), I have decided of My own volition that I will literally and continually stand (‘amad – I will always choose to be present, actually standing and thereby genuinely enabling others to consistently stand, enduring and sustaining while being properly positioned and accountable (scribed in the qal stem which addresses actual events which are to be interpreted literally, imperfect conjugation which reveals that God’s presence here will continue throughout time, and in the cohortative which expresses volition and desire in first person)).

And (wa) I will choose to always stand firm and present Myself (yatsab – I will consistently serve, providing assistance by prominently appearing and presenting Myself (the hitpael stem tells us that God alone is taking this stand, and that He will not be influenced by anyone or anything, the imperfect conjugation reveals that His stand is consistent, continual, and enduring throughout time, and the cohortative conveys volition, making this God’s will)) upon (‘al – on the Almighty’s) that which strengthens, protects, and fortifies (matsowr – the defensive stronghold which safeguards, preventing a successful attack by the adversary).

Therefore (wa), I will be on the lookout (tsapah – I will continually keep watch and be on guard, surveying the situation (scribed in the piel stem where the object of the verb suffers its effect, imperfect conjugation which reveals that God is constantly observant)) in order to see (la ra’ah – so as to observe, consider, and perceive) what he will say about Me (mah dabar ba ‘any – posing a question concerning what he will communicate regarding Me and what message he will convey in association with Me).

So then (wa) how can I be expected to change My attitude, thinking, or response (mah shuwb – why should I reverse course and mislead) concerning (‘al – during and upon) My disapproving rebuke (towkechath ‘any – My complaint, correction, reproof, and strong disapproval, My rational arguments in response and subsequent chastisement and punishment; from yakach – to adjudicate and correct).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:1)

God announced that He would be on the lookout for the likes of Sha’uwl, ever ready to disapprove and rebuke him or anyone suggesting that He has changed His plans or approach. So should we have been.

No one else in all of human history fits this prophecy besides Sha’uwl / Paulos / Paul – the author of Galatians and Romans, twelve other letters, and the inspiration behind Acts and the Gospels. He not only tried to change God’s requirements, specifically His stand on participation in the Covenant relationship and the path to reconciliation, replacing God’s approach with his own, but he also claimed to speak for God while consistently contradicting and undermining Him. And it was all based upon the spurious notion of Replacement Theology – turning God into a liar.

That is why Yahowah has introduced this prophecy in this way. By affirming that He is not going to replace His specific requirements for participating in the Covenant with something as nebulous as faith, especially in Grace, nor shirk His own personal responsibilities, He has promised to provide the means to salvation through Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children en route to honoring the Shabuw’ah and Taruw’ah Havests, including his fulfillment of Yowm Kipurym | the Day of Reconciliations. God has established Himself as being forever disapproving of Christianity, based as it is upon Sha’uwl’s repudiation of His Towrah.

A connection worth noting in what follows is that Sha’uwl’s / Paulos’ preferred conduit of misinformation was letters, often large and distinct ones from his own hand. And not only has Sha’uwl / Paul admitted that he was running, but he should have been, just as we should be running away from him.

“Then (wa) Yahowah (Yahowah – God’s name transliterated as guided by His towrah – instructions on His hayah – existence and His role in our shalowm – reconciliation as ‘elowah – Almighty God) answered me, approaching me (‘anah ‘any – responded to me, testifying by providing useful information).

And He said (wa ‘amar), ‘Write down (kathab – use the alphabet to inscribe, describing in writing) this revelation (chazown – this communication from God regarding the agreement), and then (wa) expound upon and reiterate it using those letters (ba’ar – teach others its significance by plainly and clearly declaring it using large and distinct alphabetic characters) upon (‘al) writing tablets (ha luwach – engraving it in stone or inscribing it on a panel or screen such that it is enduring and memorable) so that (la ma’an – for the express purpose and intent that), by reading or reciting this (qara’ by huw’ – by proclaiming this and making it known), he might run and go away (ruwts – he might flee).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:2)

Yahowah realized that Sha’uwl would attempt to deceive His children. Therefore, He not only warned us about him, He provided the means to rebuke him so that we would not be fooled by him. By reciting this prophecy, we distance ourselves, and all who will listen, from Sha’uwl / Paul – from his letters, speeches, and influence.

Yahowah finds the perpetrator of this scheme sufficiently deadly to warn His people specifically about him, and that is because this charlatan would claim that God had authorized him to undermine His credibility and competence. The lines of demarcation are clear, and the consequences are at the far extremes of what is possible, so Yahowah left no doubt whatsoever regarding this man, naming him as we shall soon see in the prophecy.

Only one man is guilty of every charge which is being laid out before us. This explains why “he” is identified in the third-person masculine singular throughout. This known, there are three additional men who have earned a rebuke of this magnitude. So pushing aside the principal culprit for a moment, chronologically, the first of the remaining three is Rabbi Akiba. He was responsible for establishing the rabbinic Judaism. He was a schemer of the highest order, and extremely arrogant, but not much of a writer. He operated in Yaruwshalaim, and he was preoccupied with his own self-aggrandizement. He even promoted a false Messiah, Simon bar Kokhba, in 133 CE. His mistake led to the Yisra’elites being thrown out of Yahuwdah and to the Diaspora in Europe. It is immediately obvious to anyone other than an orthodox Jew that his proclamations were deadly and destructive. He was a lot like Sha’uwl | Paul in some of these ways.

Then there was Muhammad, the self-proclaimed “Messenger of God.” And while his Quran recital beginning in 610 CE in Arabia was based upon qara’, the verb of the last sentence (Chabaquwq 2:2), he spoke for Allah, not Yahowah, and he was illiterate. Moreover, a literate person would not need this assessment to remain clear of Muhammad’s verbal diarrhea, because he was simply too stupid for words and too vicious and perverted for God. There would have been no chance whatsoever that someone reading Yahowah’s prophets would have been fooled by Allah’s messenger. Although it is interesting to note that, while Muhammad claimed that his Quran confirmed the Torah, it is actually its antithesis. And while called a prophet, Muhammad never got one prophecy right. He was a lot like Sha’uwl / Paul in these ways.

One millennium after Akiba and five centuries post-Muhammad, Maimonides codified the principles of Judaism. He was a prolific writer, but rather than change the Towrah, he preferred instead to augment it and then misinterpret it. Maimonides, however, was only briefly in Yisra’el, as he lived his life around Muslims, not Jews, in Islamic Spain, Morocco, and Egypt. Also, like Akiba, the Rambam never pretended to speak for God. But like Paul, he was especially adept at making up his own rules.

If there is to be a fourth candidate in Yahowah’s hall of infamy, he would be Israel ben Eliezer, the founder of Hasidic | Ultra-Orthodox Judaism as the religion is practiced today. Hailing from the Polish-Ukranian town of Miedzyboz circa 1700 CE, he oppressed and subjugated Jews by codifying a stifling religion, now evident by those dressed for their own funerals in their black mourning clothes. They refer to this religious mystic and miracle worker as Baal Shem Tov: Master and Lord of the Good Name. He has become the stuff of legend to the foolish and a fool to the wise. His affinity for Kabbalah over the Towrah is to his shame.

Collectively, these men deceived billions, but they did not promote their delusions during the “mow’ed – meeting times” – something common only to Sha’uwl, and which we shall learn in a moment is germane. Sha’uwl was in Yaruwshalaim when Dowd was fulfilling the Mow’ed Miqra’ey – Invitations to be Called Out and Meet with God. And he not only became infamous for his letters, he was a rabbi who did an about-face to attack God from an entirely new direction. Further, Sha’uwl admitted to being conceited and demon-possessed – things which will loom large in a moment.

Speaking through the Prophet Chabaquwq as the years ticked down to 600 BCE, it would be six centuries, six decades, and six years before Sha’uwl would question God’s Word, earning Yah’s disapproval and punishment. Therefore, Yahowah encouraged those who first read this prophecy to be patient. This warning was for another day.

“Still indeed, the subsequent realization of (‘owd ky – so therefore and nonetheless, the expectation regarding) this revelation from God (chazown – this divine communication) is for the Mow’ed | Appointed Meeting Times (la ha mow’ed – for the designated season for celebrating the festival feasts).

It provides a witness to and speaks, pouring out evidence (puwach – it reveals facts which condemn and malign, trapping and ensnaring, even censuring the puffery from the blowhard) in the end (la ha qets – toward the conclusion of the process concerning the last days regarding the limit of the ordinary flow of time; from qatsats – to tear asunder and cut off, casting away).

Should it seem slow to develop, the extended period of time required for this question to be resolved (‘im mahah – if hesitant, question him, because no matter how long it takes; from mah – to ponder the who, what, why, when and how of this question) shall not prove it false (lo’ kazab – this revelation shall not deceive, delude, nor fail).

Expect him in this regard (chakah la huw’ – be certain concerning this and regarding him) because indeed (ky), he will absolutely come (bow’ bow’ – he will certainly arrive upon the scene and make his appearance), neither being delayed nor lingering (lo’ ‘achar – not take longer than expected nor live for a protracted duration of time).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:3)

The first three Mow’ed | Appointed Meeting Times – Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym – were fulfilled by the Messiah Dowd in conjunction with the Set-Apart Spirit in year 4000 Yah, more commonly known as 33 CE. They enable our inclusion in the Covenant and provide God’s Family with the ultimate set of benefits. Sha’uwl was in Yaruwshalaim at the time training to be a rabbi. Shortly thereafter, he began undermining them.

I find it interesting that now, in 2024, just nine years shy of Yahowah’s return with Dowd, we are reading this prophecy and identifying it with Sha’uwl. Better late than never, I suppose. But isn’t this what the prophecy predicted?

As bad as this is, it is about to get much worse. This specificity suggests that Yahowah read Sha’uwl’s / Paul’s letters and was responding to them. It also means that Yahowah applied His own Towrah test to this man and found him wanting, setting an example we would be wise to follow.

“Pay attention (hineh – behold, look up and consider the details because), he will be audacious and oblivious, puffed up with false pride (‘aphal – his head will swell and he will be daring, becoming an oozing sore and pain in the butt, haughty and arrogant, he will be lifted up for being boldly presumptuous heedless of the truth, reckless, hemorrhoidal, and foolhardy).

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

And so (wa – as a result, it follows) through trust and reliance (ba ‘emuwnah – by being firmly established, confirmed and upheld by that which is dependable and steadfast, always truthful and reliable, as well as being honest and truthful; from ‘aman – to be supported and confirmed by upholding the truth), he who is correct and thereby vindicated (tsadyq huw’ – he who is right and thus acquitted) shall live (chayah – he will be restored to life and kept alive by being nurtured and growing).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:4)

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

And yet in Galatians 3:11, in the midst of his initial assault against the Towrah, Sha’uwl misquotes this verse, the very one which condemns him for mocking God, removing it from its context and truncating it, all to promote a faith based on ignorance...

“But because with regard to the Torah absolutely no one is vindicated or justified by God becomes evident because: ‘Those who are vindicated, justified, and righteous out of faith will live.’” (Galatians 3:11)

As is the tendency of a daredevil when faced with the specter of death, Sha’uwl / Paul was so transfixed by this damning and deadly prophecy regarding him, he cited it again, this time at the beginning of his most famous letter:

“For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from belief to belief, as it has been written, ‘But the righteous shall live by belief.’” (Romans 1:17)

Sha’uwl and Satan are taunting God. Their collective arrogance is unmatched.

There are six specific details in this next prophetic statement from Yahowah, all of which implicate Sha’uwl / Paul six hundred and sixty-six years before he incriminated himself. But one clue, in particular, removes any doubt about the identity of the individual God is excoriating because Yahowah identifies His foe by name. If you are a Christian, you may want to pay special attention to this...

“Moreover (wa ‘aph – in addition and much more), because (ky) the intoxicating and inebriating spirit (yayn – the consequence of the naturally processed and fermented wine and resulting drunkenness) of the mortal man (geber – the individual human being) of deceptive infidelity and treacherous betrayal (bagad – who is untrustworthy, unprincipled, unfaithful, and unreliable, of adulterous and offensive behavior, a traitor handing people over to the influence and control of another without justification through chicanery, trickery, and deceit) is an overbearing moral failure of unwarranted self-importance (yahyr – is arrogant, meritless, and presumptive, high-minded and conceited individual aggrandizing himself), he will not rest, find peace, nor live, nor will he find appropriate words (wa lo’ nawah – then he will not succeed, achieve his aim, or reach his goal, nor will come home or be beautifully adorned, he will not camp out or abide because there is no laudable, honorable, or beneficial message for (qal imperfect)), whomever is open to the broad path (‘asher rachab – when one is receptive to the wide open, broadened and expanded, public and limitless, albeit contrived, opportunistic, and improper way) associated with (ka – according to) Sha’uwl (Sha’uwl – the personal and proper name of the individual in question, but also the name of the place of separation, the realm of the dead, the dominion of questioning: She’owl [she’owl and sha’uwl are written identically in the Hebrew text (consider Strong’s H7585 and H7586)]).

He (huw’) and (wa) his soul (nepesh huw’ – his essential essence, consciousness, character, attitude, inner nature, and personality) are like (ka – can be compared to) the plague of death (ha maweth – the pandemic disease that kills a large population of people).

And so (wa) those who are gathered in and brought together by him, accepting him (‘asaph ‘el huw’ – those who associate with and join him, those who are removed and withdrawn by assembling with him, moving toward him and thereby victimized by him) will never be satisfied (lo’ saba’ – he will not find contentment nor fulfillment [based upon 8HevXII among the Dead Sea Scrolls (‘he will not be satisfied’ versus ‘and will not be satisfied’)]).

Most every gentile ethnicity (kol ha gowym – those of every race and place estranged from Yisra’el) he will claim as his own and gather together unto himself (qabats ‘el huw’ – he will grasp hold of, obtain, assemble, and collect for himself), all such people will be among his followers (kol ha ‘am – including the nations).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:5)

It is obvious, so let’s go ahead and say it: this prophecy identifies Sha’uwl / Paul by name and condemns him along with the gentiles he has beguiled. The Plague of Death is not She’owl because Hell is not a gerber | mortal man nor does this place of incarceration have a nepesh | soul.

This is one of many scores of prophecies wherein Yahowah specifically warns us about Sha’uwl / Paul and the plague he has inflicted upon gowym. Never in the annals of human events has one man done as much to harm mankind. Paul is quite simply: the worst man who ever lived.

In 1 Corinthians 11:20-21, Sha’uwl / Paulos tells those who have joined his assembly not to participate in Passover, which is the ultimate plague of death, and not to drink wine in association with it, which thereby nullifies the symbolism associated with the blood of the Passover Lamb. This serves as a treacherous betrayal of Yahowah’s instructions regarding the narrow path He provided to the Covenant and life eternal.

Attacking the core of Yahowah’s plan is the epitome of presumptuousness and immorality. Those who ascribe to such moral turpitude die. Those who promote it will find themselves in She’owl along with Sha’uwl. And yet, Pauline Doctrine is popular, providing, for those who are open to it, man’s broadest path to destruction. And as we have read in the Sermon on the Mount, Dowd differentiates this same, immensely popular and broad, path from the Towrah, revealing that religious affiliations lead to death and destruction.

Sha’uwl promises the gift of life, but his religion, the most popular ever conceived, is the plague of death. Sha’uwl promises heavenly rewards to those who place their faith in his Gospel of Grace, and yet those intoxicated by this myth will find no satisfaction or contentment. They will remain estranged from God because, unlike Yahowah’s assurances in the Towrah, Sha’uwl’s hollow promises will all go unfulfilled. And that means that the people Sha’uwl claimed as his own, the Gentiles – individuals from many different races and places – will suffer the consequence of his New Testament.

Even if Sha’uwl had not been condemned by name, with the mention of the Gentiles, or the “ethnos – races” in Paul’s parlance, Rabbis Akiba, Maimonides, and Lord Shem Tov have now been eliminated from the potential list of contentious culprits – not that it isn’t already obvious. These religious stalwarts corrupted Yahuwdym, not Gowym.

Pauline Doctrine has influenced more people in more places in this world than any other corruption of Yahowah’s testimony. And the means to this madness is consistent with Yahowah’s prophecy, in that Paul inferred that God had authorized him to alter the requirements upon which Yahowah had already taken His stand.

Sha’uwl, like Satan before him in the Garden, shortchanged Yah’s testimony, removing His directions from their context to beguile individuals into believing that God had instituted the changes. Every time Sha’uwl quotes Yahowah, it is always a terse reference which is lifted as an object of scorn to ridicule the Torah, most often with these allusive references serving as clichés – simple adages which are easy to articulate and remember.

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

“They do not ask questions, any of them, about him (ha lo’ ‘eleh kol hem ‘al – why are none of them against him). Terse references to the Word they lift up as taunts to ridicule (mashal nasa’ – simplistic and contrived equivalencies, often easy to remember aphorisms (clichés, dictates, and adages) become bywords with implied associations with that which is well-known to mock and to exercise dominion through comparison and counterfeit), along with (wa) allusive sayings and mocking interpretations (malytsah – derisive words wrapped in enigmas arrogantly spoken, even that which is undecipherable). There are hard and perplexing questions which need to be asked of him (chydah la huw’ – there are difficult enigmas to be solved, dark and hidden secrets, and double-dealings, to be known regarding him).

And (wa – moreover) they should say (‘amar – they should declare), ‘Woe (howy – alas, expressing a dire warning) to the one who claims to be great so as to increase his offspring, acting like a rabbi (rabah – to the one who thrives on numbers and who considers himself exceedingly great (the basis of rabbi, something Sha’uwl claimed to be)),’ neither of which apply to him (lo’ la huw’ – which is not his).

In the meantime, for how long (‘ad mathay – until when) will they make pledges (‘abtyt – will they be in debt) based upon his significance (kabed ‘al huw’ – pursuant to the weight and burden of his testimony and the grievous honor afforded him)?” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:6)

Sha’uwl dismissed and cursed all those who would dare question him, claiming that by doing so they were opposed to God, that they were Satanic, when the opposite was true. And speaking of truth, the reason religious belief systems like Christianity are averse to questions is because those who do so lose their faith. Evidence and reason seldom matter in matters of religion. It is only the believer’s pledge of allegiance which is considered binding.

Besides, now you know why this book was originally entitled Questioning Paul. Turns out, it was not my idea.

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

“Since (wa) he loads himself down (ta’an – he burdens himself) with (‘eth) thick (‘aphelah – dark and wicked) mud (tyt – dirt and dust to be swept away), why not (ha lo’) quickly, even if only for a short period of time (peta’ – instantly and all of a sudden), rise up and take a stand (quwm)?

And (wa) those of you who are bitten and under his influence, perhaps making payments to what he represents (nashak ‘atah – those showing interest, earning money, or becoming indebted to him), wake up from your stupor (wa yaqats – stop being so sedentary, take action, and alter your state of awareness) such that you move away in abhorrence (zuwa’ ‘atah – fleeing in dread of him, terrified of vexing nature).

Because otherwise (wa) you will be (hayah) considered (la) plunder and be victimized by them (mashisah la hem – as booty, spoiled by them).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:7)

Only Paul, among those who claimed to speak for God, solicits money. It is why Christian clerics embrace him. So following his example, and his instructions, Christian institutions have made merchandise of men – and worst among them has been the Roman Catholic Church. Yah is trying to rouse their victims before it is too late.

But there is a consequence...

“Indeed, because (ky) you (‘atah – as a single individual) have plundered and impoverished, victimizing (shalal – you have looted and wronged, seizing and preying upon) an enormous number of (rab – a great many; and serving as the basis of rabbi) Gentiles (gowym – people from different races and places), so (wa – therefore (from the DSS)), they shall seize, harass, and diminish you (shalal ‘atah – appropriate, impoverish, and victimize this singular individual being addressed).

For all (kol) of the remaining (yether – of the remnant of, including the residue of the wealth of) people (‘am – populations, nations, or families), as a result of (min – from and because of) the blood (dam) of humankind (‘adam – mankind), and also (wa) the violent and cruel destructive forces terrorizing (chamas – the immoral maiming and murdering which oppresses) the Land (‘erets – the Promised Land, singular, and thus Yisra’el), Yah’s city (qiryah – to Encounter Yah, Yaruwshalaim – the source of teaching regarding reconciliation, also singular; from qarah – to encounter and meet Yah – an abbreviation of Yahowah), and all (wa kol) who dwell in her (yashab ba hy’ – who inhabit and live in her (Yaruwshalaim)),…” (Chabaquwq 2:8)

As twisted and perverse as was Sha’uwl / Paul, it is unlikely that Yahowah would have revealed this prophecy regarding him, or the scores of others, without the imposition of Replacement Theology or the murderous effect it has had on Jews. Yes, Paul robbed billions of Gentiles of their possessions and souls, but what made him the worst man who ever lived is that he inspired his followers to plunder the Chosen People. Christianity is the most lethal curse ever inflicted upon Yisra’el and Yahuwdah.

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

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

“…this is a warning (howy – woe) to one who coveted ill-gotten gain and would do anything to take advantage, but now, as an extension of the dead, is cut off and finished soliciting (batsa’ batsa’ – to one who was manipulative and divisive, unjust and dishonest, greedy and deadly) evil (ra’ – that which is harmful and immoral, maligning and malignant, improper and injurious) to approach his house and temple (la beyth huw’ – concerning the establishment of his familial covenant).

He sets it on high (la sym ba ha marowm – he places and appoints it in the heights of heaven, exalting its lofty position) to spare (la natsal – for delivering and saving the plunder associated with) his elevated abode (qan huw’ – his nest) from the paws (kaph – hands and palms, the reach and control) of corrupt coconspirators and perverted associates (ra’ – of the evil residing in close proximity).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:9)

It is difficult to know if qan is the contracted form of “qana’ – to acquire wealth,” “qanan – nest,” “qenets – snare,” or more likely “qanah – acquire property and possessions,” even “qana’ – jealousy, envy, religious zeal, and sexual passion.” But in this context, I suppose they would all apply.

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

We are not yet at the point where Paul has revealed the ploy that helped me initially understand the scheme he was using to foist his plot on the unwary. But six hundred years before he conceived and articulated it, Yahowah was cognizant of his intent to confuse.

“You have deliberately decided upon and conspired at the advice of another to promote a shameful plot to confuse (ya’ats bosheth – you (masculine singular) after consultation, have come to an informed conclusion through deliberation to conceive and perpetrate a lowly plan with the intended purpose to confound while displaying an adversarial attitude; bosheth – shameful, lowly, and confusing is from bashan – the serpent, associating this adversarial scheme with Satan, with whom Sha’uwl admittedly consulted) those who approach your house (la beyth ‘atah – those who enter and are associated with your household and your covenant construct), ruining and reducing by cutting off (qatsah – severely injuring, maiming, decreasing, and destroying by scraping away and ending the existence of) many (rab – a multitude of) people (‘am).

And in the process (wa), you have forfeited (chata’ – you bear the loss by impugning guilt through missing the way, surrendering) your soul (nepesh).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:10)

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

Since beyth serves as the basis for beryth | covenant, God is inferring that Sha’uwl’s “new covenant” is a shameful plot designed to confuse the unwary. And make no mistake, Paul referred to himself as the father of his faithful children, and thus of his new covenant family. He wrote about life in the household he had conceived.

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

“Indeed (ky – surely and truly), the Cornerstone and Rock (‘eben) as part of the structure of the home (qyr – as the walls and ceiling which provide protection for a family), will issue a proclamation (za’aq – will issue a summons for an assembly meeting and will cry out (qal imperfect)).

And (wa) that which makes a connection (kaphys – the rafter and the beam comprising the finished structure of a home) from (min) the timber (‘ets – the carpenter’s work, the tree, and gallows, the wooden plank), he will answer and respond (‘anah huw’ – making a public declaration, providing a contextual reply (qal imperfect)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:11)

Dowd is the Cornerstone of the Covenant and of his Father’s Home. And it is in his Psalms, more than anyplace else, where Sha’uwl is exposed, labeled, and condemned. As for the one representing the wooden pillars forming the doorway to life, by answering the call to fulfill Passover, Dowd allowed the evil Beast of Rome to slay his mortal basar | body as the Pesach ‘Ayil, making the ultimate declaration against Sha’uwl, Christianity, and Replacement Theology.

The wood and rock symbolize what is real, tangible, and sustainable, which is the antithesis of the shifting sands of faith. Yahowah is, therefore, also pitting His reality against Paul’s embrace of Gnosticism. This debunked philosophical and religious affinity of the Greeks will soon be deployed by Sha’uwl to denounce the Towrah, thereby fixating on the flesh. So God says...

“Woe to (howy – a strong warning to) the one who establishes (banah – the one who builds a family and constructs (qal participle)) a terrorist shrine, an anguishing place of incitement (‘iyr – a haunt for asses, and a temple complex which is exposed and where violence is incited; ‘uwr – to provoke, inflame, goad, and stir up by blinding and rendering the chaff exposed while laying the skin bare in a popular place) in blood (ba dam – through death; from damam – to destroy by making deaf and dumb).

And he conceives and forms (wa kuwn – he proposes, prepares, establishes, and supports (the polel stem reveals that the subject suffers the effect of the verb’s action and the perfect conjugation indicates that the process was completed in a finite amount of time)) a populated institution promoting (qiryah – a place to meet; from qarah and qary’ah – to encounter and meet, a building and its furnishings as part of an institution where people congregate for preaching) that which is unrighteous and incorrect, invalid and harmful (ba ‘awlah – in wickedness with evil intent, unjustly damaging others through perversity).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:12)

There is a better option, so the prophet reveals...

“Why not pay attention (ha lo’ hineh – why not look up and consider this) as part of an association with (min ‘eth – by means of approaching and in accompaniment with) Yahowah (YaHoWaH) of the spiritual implements (tsaba’ – of the vast array of heavenly envoys who serve as effective and compliant tools)?

But instead (wa), the people (‘am – the family) expend their energy and grow weary (yaga’ – they toil and labor, growing tired for lack of rest (qal imperfect)) amidst a profuse conglomeration (ba day – amongst a great excess and abundance) of worthlessness, trifling with a dangerous flame (‘esh – of that which is combustible and consuming and has no value).

So the people united by a single individual in an antiquated system (wa la’om – the peoples who congregate under a common cause) exhaust and then destroy themselves, falling (ya’eph – are worn out, fatigued and weakened, and fall) into excessive emptiness and extravagant delusions (ba day ryq – into endless fantasies and an overabundance of vain misrepresentations).” (Chabaquwq 2:13)

After witnessing Sha’uwl’s blaspheme and resulting carnage, Chabaquwq interrupts the flow of this nauseating presentation of human malfeasance with a simple question: “Why not pay attention to Yahowah and build a relationship?”

“Indeed (ky – this is reliable and true), She will fulfill, edify, and completely satisfy (male’ – She will impart an abundance of that which is healthy, valuable, empowering, and satisfying (the niphal stem is the grammatical voice of genuine relationships where the subject is fulfilled and the imperfect conjugation addresses ongoing effects of edifying)) the land (ha ‘erets – realm, region, and world) to approach, to actually know, to become genuinely familiar with, and understand (la yada’ ‘eth – to move toward, discover, and acknowledge, coming to understand and appreciate becoming friends in association with (qal infinitive)) Yahowah’s (Yahowah – written as directed by His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) manifestation of power, glorious presence, and abundant value (kabowd – splendor, honor, respect, status, and reward).

This should be similar to (ka) the waters (maym – the various forms of water, including ice, snow, liquid, humidity, clouds, and steam) providing a covering (kasah – spread over and adorning (piel imperfect)) upon the sea (‘al yam – upon a lake).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:14)

There is a ray of light at the end of this nightmare. By fulfilling the Towrah’s promises in the Land, we can come to know Yahowah, and even enter His glorious presence.

God has a lot more to say about Sha’uwl, and while we need to move on and continue to expose his letter, I would be remiss if I did not share a couple of additional thoughts. In the first, we find the prophet not only warning us about Sha’uwl’s profuse venom and his perverted sexuality, but he addresses Paulos’ “little and lowly” reputation in addition to his animosity toward circumcision. So from “Sha’uwl | Question Him” to “Paulos | the Lowly and Little,” from poisonous toxins to an unacceptable approach to the sign of the Covenant, this is an incriminating summation of this man’s legacy.

“Woe to (howy – a strong warning to) the one who is responsible and then who partakes, pouring out for (shaqah – the one who appoints and then associates with (hifil participle – in an explicit and demonstrable manner he causes his victims to be like him)) his corrupt companions and evil countryman (ra’ huw’ – his wicked coconspirators and inept associates) that which causes them to join together and be exposed to (saphach – he encourages them to share in (piel participle – the object suffers the effect in dramatic fashion)) your debilitating poison, intense passions, antagonizing venom, and serpentine toxin (chemah ‘atah – your poisonous and injurious rage, indignation, and debilitating rancor, while being all worked up emotionally with your life in turmoil).

And much more than this (wa ‘aph), becoming drunk and then intoxicating others to the point of incapacitation (shakar – being under the influence while causing others to drink such that they become weakened and giddy such that their judgment is impaired) for the express purpose of (la ma’an – for no other reason than) gazing upon while demonstrating a preference for (nabat ‘al – to look at and consider, showing a favorable regard for (hifil infinitive – he is trying to convert his victims such that they share his highly demonstrative affinity for)) their genitals (ma’aowr hem – their male genitalia, the private parts of a man’s or boy’s body, specifically with their pudendum being naked and exposed either publicly to shame and embarrass or privately for sexual activity; from mah – to question and ‘uwr – being exposed, bared, and made to be naked).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:15)

Anyone who deliberately intoxicates others, incapacitating them to have sex with them, is scum. And while such despicable behavior is individually criminal, the problem with Sha’uwl / Paul is infinitely more egregious. He not only convinced billions to denounce and disregard the Towrah | Guidance of Yahowah, but he also turned Gentiles against Jews, fanning the flames of anti-Semitism.

And should you have missed the message, Yahowah is not only rebuking Paul’s hypocrisy toward homosexuality by calling him a homosexual, God is aware that after condemning circumcision, Sha’uwl personally circumcised Timothy, his Greek love interest.

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

You choose to be inebriated yourself in addition to intoxicating others (shathah gam ‘atah – you decide to consume and experience large quantities of alcohol yourself and to become a drunkard while also inebriating others (qal imperative – of your own freewill, actually desiring intoxication)), and then (wa) you what them to be unacceptable because of your choice to not become circumcised (‘arel – you choose to expose them, making them unacceptable and unredeemable by remaining uncircumcised for religious reasons (nifal imperative – the subject of the verb both carries out and suffers from the action based upon his choices and desires)) encompassing them from all angles with circular reasoning (sabab – going round about in circles, on and on infinitum with this alternative direction (qal imperfect – literally with ongoing implications)).

Upon you is (‘al ‘atah – before you is) the binding cup (kows) of Yahowah’s (Yahowah – a transliteration of , our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) right hand (yamyn – serving as a metaphor for judgment and as a reference to yamyny – being a Benjamite).

Therefore (wa), public humiliation and an ignominious reputation as a result of being dishonorable and disgraceful (qyqalown – insults befitting a lowly and little individual of degraded status who is sleazy, disreputable, and contemptible; from qalown – being scorned and humbled with a discredited reputation) will be your reward (‘al kabowd ‘atah – the manifestation of your reputation and attribution of your status (second-person masculine singular suffix – thus addressing a solitary man)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:16)

Pauline Doctrine is poison, intoxicating venom from the most vile of Serpents and his Plague of Death. But more incrimating still, Sha’uwl, who never knew the love of a woman, provocatively expressed his love for a young man, Timothy. And even though Paul detested circumcision and spoke hatefully about the sign and requirement of the Covenant, he attests to having clipped the young Greek youth at the nexus of his affection.

Furthermore, Sha’uwl so craved recognition and status that he heaped it upon himself. But here God is saying that Sha’uwl’s poisonous attack against circumcision will come full circle and slather him in shame. The man who claimed to be God’s exclusive apostle to the Gentiles has become a man of infamy.

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

Yahowah has provided His evaluation of Sha’uwl / Paul and His assessment of his followers. In this light, the only way to view him and his religion favorably is to ignore God and estrange ourselves from Him. The debate now is between good and evil because the issues are white and black. We will question everything Paul says and writes. And we will hold him accountable. It may be too little, but it is never too late.

And that is why we find Yahowah conveying...

“Indeed and by contrast (ky – this is reassuring because), He will constantly keep you covered and continually protected (kasah ‘atah – He will always provide a covering by which He adorns you, clothing and forgiving you (the piel imperfect jussive energic nun affirms that we, as those being clothed, receive continuous and enthusiastic protection by choice)) from this grievous injustice and blatant wrongdoing in opposition to (chamas – this unrighteous and unrestrained campaign of error and of towrahlessness in destructive conflict with) that which purifies, empowers, and enriches (labanown – that which cleanses and whitewashes, becoming morally pure and white as snow, typically transliterated Lebanon, but from laban – purifying, cleansing, and whitening” and ‘own – being substantially empowered, growing vigorously, while becoming enormously enriched).

And as for (wa) the destructive and demonic influence of the Devil seeking to be worshiped as God as satanic (shed / shod – Satan’s devastating and ruinous, plundering and oppressive) beasts (bahemah), He will shatter and separate them (chathath hem – He will astound them, causing them to wane as the experience something truly dreadful) because of (min – as a result of) the blood (dam – death) of humankind (‘adam), and also (wa) this grievous injustice against and blatant wrongdoing in opposition to (chamas – this unrighteous and unrestrained campaign of error and towrahlessness in destructive conflict with) the Land (‘erets – realm, region, or earth), the city (qiryah – to encounter, meet and be present with Yah), and all (wa kol) of her inhabitants (ba yashab – who have settled there to meet, to marry, to be restored, to be established, and to live (qal participle)).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:17)

Yahowah’s light grows ever brighter as the flickering flame of Christianity fades. Bereft of Sha’uwl, we find Dowd, too, singing to Yisra’el, pleading with his people, offering his life for them, while inviting them to come home.

And yet since most people remain oblivious to the obvious, not realizing that the Christian “Iesou Christou | Jesus Christ” is a caricature who has become an object of worship, Yahowah asks a foreboding question...

“How does he succeed with a caricature (mah ya’al pesel – why does he benefit with a false representation of God, what is the value of a religious deity, and how can one profit with a created image)?

Indeed (ky), he will construct him (pasal huw’ – he will shape it), fashioning him (yatsar huw’ – he will devise, form, and ordain him (qal perfect)) by concealing the association with the representation of the pagan god (masekah – by forming an alliance which covers over and veils the connotation with the false god, hiding and covering up the true identity of the idolatrous image (qal perfect)) and by becoming a teacher of lies (wa yarah sheqer – tossing out deceptive instructions and misleading directions, along with mistaken and useless guidance for no reason or benefit (with the hifil stem the subject, Sha’uwl, is putting the lies which reflect his nature into action while the participle is a verbal adjective, making Paul a deceiver)).

Thereby (ky), he adds credence to and encourages reliance upon (batach – he makes credible and believable, even preferable that which causes believers to stumble and the unsuspecting fall as a result of their penchant and fondness for trusting and depending upon) the one who created the construct of himself (yatsar yetser huw’ – the one who was motivated to devise, plan, prepare, and form such idolatrous thoughts and inclinations regarding himself and his desires by fashioning himself into someone to be venerated and worshiped).

For he, himself, performs to make (‘al huw’ ‘asah – he personally acts and engages to fabricate and profit from) worthless gods who do not speak (‘elyl ‘ilem – references to imagined and ineffectual religious deities to worship who are silent, speechless, mute, and dumb). (Chabaquwq 2:18)

Woe to the one who says (howy ‘amar – this is a warning to him because he will state) with regard to the Wood (la ha ‘ets – approaching the upright pillar, timber, wooden planks, and tree), ‘Awaken and become alive (quwts – be roused from lifelessness and become alive again after death; from the verbal form which addresses the idea of abruptly starting something after having been asleep). Arise while precluding further observation by providing false testimony (‘uwr – rouse oneself and rise up, choosing to be angry over the malicious misfortune, becoming unknowable in body in skin, blinding the observant so that they are unjustly deprived of an accurate recollection of what was witnessed (qal imperative)),’ silencing the Rock by depriving him of life, thereby muting (‘eben duwmam huw’ – as if the Cornerstone was an inanimate object, muzzling) his desire to guide and teach (yarah – his decision to instruct and direct, showing the way and making it known (hifil imperfect jussive)).

Behold (hineh – pay attention), it (huw’) has been seized and overlaid (taphas – has been grasped hold of and held as an object signifying victory, dealt with and manipulated such that it wields considerable influence when adorned (qal passive – having this actually done to it)) with gold (zahab) and silver, becoming extremely valuable and desirable (wa keseph – gilded in silver so as to be yearned for and desired), but completely devoid of (wa kol ‘ayn) the Spirit (ruwach) in its midst (ba qereb huw’ – associated with it so as to animate its existence).” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:19)

The New Testament’s Iesou Christo | Jesus Christ was modeled after Dionysus and bears little in common with the Messiah Dowd. The object of Christian worship is nothing but a caricature, an object of idolatrous worship. Sha’uwl made him in his own image, not unlike Muhammad concocted with Allah – the messenger’s alter ego.

Dowd | David was Sha’uwl’s enemy, just as it had been between his namesake (King Sha’uwl | Saul) and the actual Messiah (the Beloved, Dowd). So Sha’uwl tried to silence Dowd and bury him. Yahowah’s Shepherd would be tossed to the ground and covered with religious dirt such that the world would admire the caricature he had contrived rather than the genuine article.

It is, therefore, the Rock, a reference to Dowd which Sha’uwl must moot to fool the unwary with his irrational rhetoric. Dowd’s teaching, most especially his 119th Mizmowr, his ode to the Towrah predicated upon the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet, is as brilliant and edifying as words allow. But it is in Dowd’s Mizmowr, and in Dowd’s Song, that we find irrefutable evidence that the Messiah and Son of God not only volunteered to serve as the Passover Lamb, but he followed through on his commitment, becoming our Savior.

Sha’uwl will repeatedly state that “the wooden pillar,” more commonly known as the “Christian Cross,” exists as the means to be “quwts – awakened from the dead,” or to be “resurrected” in religious parlance. He will even equate “sleep” with death and speak of those who were sleeping rising up abruptly. So this is an allusion to the Pauline fixation on the wooden cross, from which he promotes resurrection from the dead, thereby dismissing Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym, while invalidating Shabuw’ah and Taruw’ah, leading to Kipurym and Sukah. The entire concept of the crucifix – the tortured and dead god on a stick – is ghoulish and perverse. There is no merit to nor healing power in the cross.

It is the fulfillment of Pesach and Matsah resulting in Bikuwrym which makes the Covenant’s Children immortal and perfected, enabling our inheritance, enrichment, and empowerment. It was the surrendering of Dowd’s basar | corporeal body as the Zarowa’ that opened the Door to Life and it was his willingness to carry our guilt on his nepesh | soul into She’owl, depositing it there never to be seen again, that made us perfect before God. In this way, Pesach and Matsah resulted in Bikuwrym | Firstborn Children. It is our reward, a gift from Father and Son.

Paul’s plan begins and ends at the cross with the death of his god-man. It was an edifice constructed out of false testimony – every perception a delusion.

And in the end, it is Dowd who will once again prevail over Sha’uwl. According to Yahowah, His Messiah, Shepherd, and King, our Savior and Shepherd, will return as brilliant as the sun. And when that occurs, just nine years from this writing in 2024, the spirits which tormented Sha’uwl, as they did his namesake, will vanish – leaving Yahowah and His beloved to enjoy Sukah | Camping Out together with the Covenant Family.



RESOURCES

YadaYah.com

BlogTalkRadio.com/Yada

Facebook: Yada Yahowah

X: Yada Yahowah

Instagram: Yada Yahowah

YouTube: @YadaYahowah

Rumble: Yada Yahowah

Printed Books: Amazon.com (Craig Winn)

Contact: email@YadaYah.com

Cover photo is the property of Yada Yahowah

Ver. 20240914

Craig Winn. Twistianity: Appalling.

Craig Winn. Questioning Paul: Liars Lie.

1st edition. www.yadayah.com, 2007.

2nd (revised) edition. www.yadayah.com, 2008.

3rd edition. www.yadayah.com and Claitor’s Publishing Division, 2012.

4th edition. www.yadayah.com and Claitor’s Publishing Division, 2013.

5th edition. www.yadayah.com and Amazon, 2017.

6th (revised) edition. www.yadayah.com and Amazon, 2020.

7th (revised) edition. www.yadayah.com and Amazon, 2023.

Revised and renamed 1st edition. www.yadayah.com and Amazon, 2024.

Copyright © Craig Winn 2024

Copyright Statement - About Us (www.yadayah.com)

Appalling

If not for twisting God's words, there would be no basis for Christianity…

“Still indeed (‘owd ky) this revelation from God (chazown) is for the Appointed Meeting Time (la ha mow’ed). 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) because, indeed (ky), he will absolutely come (bow’ bow’), neither being delayed nor lingering (lo’ ‘achar). Pay attention (hineh), he will be puffed up with false pride (‘aphal). His soul (nepesh), it is not right nor straightforward (lo’ yashar) in him (ba).

So then (wa) through trust and reliance (ba ‘emuwnah), those who are upright and vindicated (tsadyq) shall live (chayah).

Moreover (‘aph), because (ky) the intoxicating wine (yayn) of the man (geber) of deceptive infidelity and treacherous betrayal (bagad) is a high-minded moral failure (yahyr), he will not rest, find peace, nor live (wa lo' nawah), whomever is open to the broad path (‘asher rachab) associated with (ka) Sha’uwl | Paulos | Paul (Sha’uwl). He (huw’) and (wa) his soul (nepesh) are like (ka) the plague of death (maweth). And so (wa) those who are brought together by him, receiving him, (‘asaph ‘el) will never be satisfied (lo’ saba’).

Most every Gentile (kol ha Gowym) will gather together unto him (qabats ‘el), all of the people from different races and nations (kol ha gowym). They do not ask questions, any of them, about him (ha lo’ ‘eleh kol ‘al). Terse references to the word they lift up as taunts to ridicule (mashal nasa’), along with (wa) allusive sayings and mocking interpretations (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 and increases his offspring (rabah),’ neither of which apply to him (lo’ la). For how long (‘ad mathay) will they make pledges (‘abtyt) based upon the grievous honor afforded him (‘al kabed)?” (Chabaquwq / Embrace This / Habakkuk 2:3-6)