Rejecting The Wolf In Sheeps Clothing

Rejecting Paul

Courtesy of Yahowah Beryth
– by James Bowen

Primer

The goal of this article is to show beyond reasonable doubt that Saul of Tarsus, AKA the Apostle Paul, did not speak for the God of the Torah, Prophet’s and Psalms. I would like to start by pointing out that the burden of proof should be on Paul, and those that claim Paul spoke for God, and not on those that claim he did not. If I were to come to you and claim that God has revealed a message to me and that you should listen to me, you would ask me to prove it before you listened would you not? Today people take Paul’s letters as the word of God simply because they were canonized into a book called the bible. Few have asked themselves or others, “How do we know Paul spoke for God?” Ask yourself that now, and see if you can come up with an answer.

Let’s start by examining the facts surrounding Paul and his claims.

1. Yahowsha was Yahowah in human form, and according to Yahowchanan Yahowsha was “The Word” made flesh, “The Word” meaning God’s Word meaning the Torah.
2. Yahowsha spent somewhere around 33 years on Earth, 3 of which He was actively engaged and teaching.
3. During those 3 years Yahowsha hand selected 12 men who he personally taught one on one.
4. These 12 were selected from various parts of Israel in and around Jerusalem.
5. Paul was in and around Jerusalem at this time, studying under Gamaliel.
6. Yahowsha never sought out, conversed with or even mentioned Paul.
7. Paul never sought out, or conversed with Yahowsha.
8. Paul never cites anything that Yahowsha said during this time.
9. 11 of the 12 disciples were alive after Yahowsha’s sacrifice.
10. These disciples were present at the festival of Shabuwah when the set apart spirit of Yahowah descended upon them and empowered them to share Yah’s Word with everyone.
11. These disciples were engaged in teaching others Yahowah’s Word, as they were instructed.
12. Yahowsha specifically warned that men would claim to see Him, but not to believe them because when he returned all the world would see it.

Mat 24:23  “If anyone then says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or ‘There!’ do not believe.

Mat 24:24  “For false messiahs and false prophets shall arise, and they shall show great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the chosen ones.

Mat 24:25  “See, I have forewarned you.

Mat 24:26  “So if they say to you, ‘Look, He is in the desert!’ do not go out; or ‘Look, He is in the inner rooms!’ do not believe.

Mat 24:27  “For as the lightning comes from the east and shines to the west, so also shall the coming of the Son of Aḏam be.

13. After Yahowsha’s death Paul became a persecutor of any and all who would follow the teaching of Yahowsha and His disciples, even overseeing if not participating in the murder of many.
14. 4 years after Yahowsha’s sacrifice Paul claims to encounter Him on the road to Damascus.
15. Paul was with two other men, who we have no evidence of ever telling this story to anyone, who may or may not have heard what the voice said (See acts 9:7 and 22:9 for Paul’s contradictory telling of the story). For the record the whole world did not see Him here as He said they would when He returned.
16. Then in the only time Paul will ever quote Yahowsha he claims that Yahowsha said, “It is difficult to kick against the goads.”
17. This line is plagiarized from Euripides’s play, The Bacchae where it is spoken by the pagan god Dionysus. So the only time he cites Yahowsha he claims that Yahowsha spoke words attributed to a pagan god.
18. Paul is knocked to the ground, injured and blinded by the spirit that he encountered. He is said to be trembling and afraid.
19. This is completely different from every time Yahowah has ever approached anyone who He desired to speak for Him. In every instance in the Torah, and Prophets we see Yahowah qara (call out, invite and meet with) those He wishes to engage with. He then asks them to of their own volition to engage in tasks, and they are free to reject it. Take Moshe for example, Yahowah called out to him, and invited him to come near, then explained who He was and what He wanted of Moshe. Moshe at first declines, but after some negotiation agrees. Moshe was not afraid of Yahowah, he was not injured or attacked by Yahowah. The same is the case with Abram, and Noah. The same is the case with everyone Yahowah approaches.
20. One person in the town, Ananias, is said to have been visited by Yahowsha as well and told to heal Paul. We again have no evidence of Yahowah or Yahowsha speaking to this man, and he is never heard from apart from this story.
21. Paul then claims that he is an Apostle of Yahowsha and begins his teaching.

For the time being we will end there, we will examine his teaching as it relates to the disciples, Yahowsha and Yahowah’s later.

 

Based solely on the facts, feel free to correct me if I have left any out, let’s examine rather or not Paul spoke for Yahowah.

 

The first and most important question to ask here is how do we go about determining if someone who claims to speak for Yahowah actually does? Muhammad, Paul, and Joseph Smith all claim to speak on behalf of the God of the Torah. As a Christian you would agree with me that Muhammad and Joseph Smith did not speak for the God of the Torah, the question is why do you reject them and why do you accept Paul? What criteria do you use that eliminates Joseph and Muhammad, but not Paul? This is probably the most important question as it relates to this discussion. Thankfully Yahowah gave us a criteria which we should use to make this determination. Yahowah knew that many would claim to speak for Him, and that people would need a way to determine if that person truly spoke for Him or was a false and deceitful liar leading men astray. So let’s examine what Yahowah had to say on the matter.

 

Deu 18:20  ‘But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in My Name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other mighty ones, even that prophet shall die.’

Deu 18:21  “And when you say in your heart, ‘How do we know the word which יהוה has not spoken?’ –

Deu 18:22  when the prophet speaks in the Name of יהוה and the word is not, or comes not, that is the word which יהוה has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

 

Or more fully amplified:

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

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

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

In (ba – with) arrogance and presumptuousness (zadown – with an inflated view of himself, self-willed and self-motivated, this morally flawed, disrespectful, imprudent, insulting, and shameless individual has taken great liberty while overstepping all due bounds in contempt of the established authority), the prophet(ha naby’ – the one claiming to be issuing inspired statements from God) has spoken and written (dabar – he has conceived and presented his message (piel perfect – he has completely and deliberately sought to influence)).

You should not respect or revere him nor conspire to rebel with him (lo’ guwr min – you should not fear him, join him, congregate or live with him either).”(Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:21-22)

 

From this we can see that there are 6 criteria that must be met for someone who claims to speak on behalf of Yahowah to be true.

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 Paul, he unequivocally claimed to “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, someone who arrogantly pretends to know, who insults others and is disrespectful, displaying pride in the pursuit of personal recognition and acclaim while despising and demeaning perceived competitors, someone 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.
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?
5. Does the person dabar ba shem ‘aher ‘elohym: speak in the name of gods other than Yahowah?
6. Are the individual’s written and spoken statements consistent with that which ishayah: existing and established, instituted by God, and with the test of time, does what this person says bow’: come to accurately reflect what has happened in the past, and what will transpire in the future?

 

A failure on any of these 6 eliminates the person from speaking on behalf of Yahowah. Prophecy, accurately and consistently describing what will happen and having it come to pass, is Yahowah’s signature, it is how he proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that He is God and that the person speaking is speaking on behalf of Him. So while we will address all 6 points of this test as it relates to Paul, let’s start with the latter half of point six (though as you will come to see Paul misses the first half as well).

 

Did Paul give prophecy and did that prophecy come to be? Paul has but one single prophecy in all of his letters, let’s examine it and see what it says and rather or not it was fulfilled.

 

Paul’s prophecy comes in 1^st Thessalonians chapter 4 starting at the 15^th verse:

1Th 4:15  For this we say to you by the word of the Master, that we, the living who are left over at the coming of the Master shall in no way go before those who are asleep.

1Th 4:16  Because the Master Himself shall come down from heaven with a shout, with the voice of a chief messenger, and with the trumpet of Elohim, and the dead in Messiah shall rise first.

1Th 4:17  Then we, the living who are left over, shall be caught away together with them in the clouds to meet the Master in the air – and so we shall always be with the Master.

 

This is clearly speaking of the return of Yahowsha, an event still in our future thus making it a prophecy. Some will be quick to argue that since this event is still in our future we cannot know rather it will come to pass or not. But if you carefully consider what Paul says here you will see that we can indeed determine if it is true or not. Notice that Paul uses the word “we” several times here. “WE” is inclusive of the speaker, meaning that Paul will be among this group when this event occurs. Since we have already established that this event is in our future, and Paul is long dead at this point he cannot be among “we, the living”.

 

Now I can already hear what you are saying, I have had this discussion with many many people just like you. “He didn’t mean himself, but Christians in general.” Here is the problem with that, the words that he wrote do not allow for that interpretation. First Paul expressly includes the word “WE” in his text. This may seem unimportant in English where we include we all the time, but Greek like many languages does not need to include the word “WE”. Many people are familiar with Spanish which uses the same style as Greek in this regard. In Spanish you don’t have a word to say “I”, or “We”, you modify the verb to include it. So the word “go”, Va, would be VOY to say I go, and Vamos to say we go. The same is true for Greek. There is a word for “we” in Greek, but it is used only to add emphasis. The word used in 1Thessilonians 4:15 and 17 is hemeis, and if you look simply to Strongs G2249 you find that it is:

hēmeis
hay-mice’
Nomitive plural of G1473; we (only used when emphatic): – us, we (ourselves).

 

It’s root G1473 is a word that most everyone who speaks English will recognize and know the meaning of, it is EGO (I). So the word that Paul used, that he didn’t need to but choose to use to add emphasis, is the plural form of I.

 

The Dictionary of Biblical Languages gives us the following insight for ego, the basis of hemeis as well as hemeis itself:

1609 ἐγώ (egō): prn. (personal, in the 1st pers.); ≡ Str 1473 & 1691 & 1698 & 1700 & 2248 & 2249 & 2254 & 2257 & 3165 & 3427 & 3450; TDNT 2.343—LN 92.1 ἐγώ (egō), (subjective) I (Mt 3:11); ἐμοῦ (emou), ἐμοί (emoi), ἐμέ (eme), (objective) me (Mt 5:11; 11:6; 18:6); (in relationship) my; ἡμεῖς (hēmeis), (in plural subjective) we (Mt 6:12); ἡμῶν (hēmōn), ἡμῖν (hēmin), ἡμᾶς (hēmas), (objective) us (Mt 1:23; 3:15; 6:13); (in relationship) our.

 

Furthermore hemeis in 1Thess4:17 is written in the first person, which we see from the above when in the 1st person it is not just a pronoun, but a personal pronoun. So we have an unneeded word, used only to convey an emphasis being the first person, plural form of the personal pronoun I.

Had Paul not included hemeis here then the christian interpretation might have some validity as ho zao the two words preceding it can mean those living, and thus would not necessarily include the speaker, but when preceded with hemeis it is “WE the living….”

Furthermore the two verbs directly after hemeis, zao and perileipomai, which are being ascribed to hemeis are in the present tense.

Based on all of this there is no way to exclude Paul from this group, and since this event did not occur in Paul’s lifetime then Paul was wrong, in a game where 1 strike is you are out.

 

That alone is enough for Paul to fail Yahowah’s test, and should be all the evidence you need to reject Paul. But I will continue to examine each of the other points of the test.

 

Next let’s examine the first part of the sixth point. Did Paul accurately portray the past? Let’s examine just one of the many times where Paul’s history doesn’t line up.

The timeline Paul provided in Galatians, delineating the number of years which transpired between his conversion and the Jerusalem Summit is too great. According to Paul’s testimony in Acts 9, he spent a considerable period of time in Damascus amazing the locals while confusing the Jews after his conversion. (Acts 9:22-23) Let’s assume this took 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 where the story changed and he claimed to be fleeing a government official under the Arabian King Aretas who died in 40 CE) He then went to Jerusalem to meet with Shim’own/Simon Peter and Ya’aqob/James. (Galatians 1:18-19) His travelogue continues through Syria and Cilicia, a journey which collectively transpired over the course of a year. (Galatians 1:21) However, in Acts nine, Paul adds that he went to Caesarea, bypassing Syria, and then to Tarsus. (Acts 9:30) But then Paul tells us that he was summoned to the Jerusalem ekklesia/called-out assembly “after the passage of another fourteen years.” (Galatians 2:1) That’s a total of nineteen years.

Dark years, as it would transpire, because we don’t have a record of any sermon or any letter from Paul during the decade after his alleged conversion. 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 Jerusalem Summit is well documented. It is dated to 50 CE. So, if you subtract nineteen years, Paul’s abuse at the hands of the prodding spirit on the road to Damascus would have occurred in 31 CE, two years before Yahowsha fulfilled Passover. And if that weren’t sufficiently incriminating, according to Paul, he had spent additional time building an international reputation as persecutor and murder of Yahuwdym before the meeting with the risen Yahowsha could have occurred – thereby pushing it back to 29 CE, a year before Yahowsha chose His Disciples. That also means that his pursuit of the ekklesia would have begun four or five years before it was conceived.

 

Speaking of the Jerusalem summit a careful examination of Acts and Galatians shows that Paul got that history wrong as well, but we won’t delve into that here.

 

Now that we have demonstrated Paul failed both parts of the 6^th portion of Yahowah’s test let’s jump around a bit and examine how he fails the 4^th point.

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 one seems like a pretty clear test, if someone is claiming to speak for Yahowah and contradicts what Yahowah has already said then that person does not speak for Yahowah. Yahowah is unchanging, He is consistent throughout all of time. This is what makes Him trustworthy and reliable. Were Yah to be capricious we would not be able to steadfastly rely on Him, it is why Yahowah says His Torah is for all people, in all places and all times, and that His word never changes. It’s why His chosen language, Hebrew, is outside of time having no tenses, it was true, is true and will always be true. So if Paul contradicts Yahowah’s word in any way whatsoever then he cannot speak for Yahowah.

 

I will give just one glaring example of how Paul contradicts Yahowah, and there are many. This issue is especially important to me because it was the issue that finally made me realize I was wrong defending Paul. With most of Paul’s contradictions of Yah’s word you can “interpret” and twist what Paul wrote to be consistent with Yahowah, it takes effort but it can be done, but on this issue there is no reconciling the two. The issue is what Yahowah told us in Habakkuk, when he condemned Paul by name, would be Paul’s issue. Circumcision. Paul and Yahowah’s view on circumcision cannot be reconciled. Let’s start by examining Yahowah’s view.

 

While I could talk for hour, and have including examining every single verse related to it, on Yah’s view on circumcision I’m going to do a cursory overview here. In Genesis 17:9-14 Yahowah instructs that every male be circumcised, and goes on to state that any male who is not circumcised has parar violated and broke, disassociating themselves from His covenant, nullifying the agreement, revoking it’s promises, tearing asunder and thwarting it’s benefits, splitting away and injuring themselves in the process. The most common argument given here is that this is ONLY speaking of the descendants of Abraham and therefore does not apply to gentiles. Read the words. The instruction was given to Abraham, but the instruction includes the words EVERY MALE and says ANY MALE who is not. Furthermore Yahowah tells us that there is but one Torah (teaching and instruction) for the Jews and for the Gentiles. There is but one way to Yahowah and it is the same regardless of you heritage.

 

Furthermore Yahowah tells us in Exodus 12:43-51 that no male who is uncircumcised can participate in or benefit from Passover. You may say big deal Passover is a Jewish holiday, well if that is your attitude then you might as well stop here and go do some research. Passover is one of Yahowah’s 7 moed miqray, set apart and appointed times for meeting. Yahowsha said narrow is the door which leads to eternal life and few there are that will find it, the door He is speaking of is Passover. It is the first step on the journey to Yahowah’s home, and you cannot take any other step until first taking this one. Passover deals with the consequence of sin, Death, without benefiting from Passover you cannot live eternally in Yah’s home.

 

There are many other examples of Yahowah speaking about circumcision, do a search sometime. Yahowah says that condemns Israel for letting the uncircumcised into the temple. Ezekiel 28:10 Yahowah tells the prince of Tsor that he will suffer The Deaths of the Uncircumcised. There are two thoughts as to what this phrase means. One that it means an ignoble death, and two that it means a physical and eternal death. The plural form of muwth would support the latter. In Ezekiel 32 ten times Yahowah equates the grave, the pit and the below region to the place of the uncircumcised. Not once in all of the Torah, Prophets and Psalms is being uncircumcised referenced as a good thing, it is exclusively used derogatorily.

 

No let’s see what Paul ad to say on the matter.

Gal 5:1  In the freedom with which Messiah has made us free, stand firm, then, and do not again be held with a yoke of slavery.

Gal 5:2  See, I, Sha’ul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Messiah shall be of no use to you.

 

So from Yahowah saying that any many who is uncircumcised has broken and nullified His covenant to Paul saying that if you are circumcised that Yahowsha is of no use to you.

 

Gal 5:3  And I witness again to every man being circumcised that he is a debtor to do the entire Torah.

Gal 5:4  You who are declared right by Torah have severed yourselves from Messiah, you have fallen from favour.

Gal 5:5  For we, in Spirit, by belief, eagerly wait for the expectation of righteousness.

Gal 5:6  For in Messiah יהושע neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any strength, but belief working through love.

Gal 5:7  You were running well, who held you back from obeying the truth?

 

This is particularly damning in light of Yahowsha’s statement in the 5^th chapter of Matthew:

Mat 5:17  “Do not think that I came to destroy the Torah or the Prophets.¹ I did not come to destroy but to complete. Mat 5:18  “For truly, I say to you, till the heaven and the earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall by no means pass from the Torah till all be done.

Mat 5:19  “Whoever, then, breaks one of the least of these commands, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the reign of the heavens; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the reign of the heavens.

 

That should be game over right there. If that alone does not make you reject Paul I hold little hope for you.

 

Gal 5:8  That persuasion does not come from Him who calls you.

Gal 5:9  A little leaven leavens all the lump.

Gal 5:10  I trust in you, in the Master, that you shall have no other mind. And he who is troubling you shall bear his judgment, whoever he is.

Gal 5:11  And I, brothers, if I still proclaim circumcision, why am I still persecuted? Then the stumbling-block of the stake has been set aside.

Gal 5:12  O that those who disturb you would even cut themselves off!

Gal 5:13  For you, brothers, have been called to freedom, only do not use freedom as an occasion for the flesh, but through love serve one another.

Gal 5:14  For the entire Torah is completed in one word, in this, “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.”

Gal 5:15  And if you bite and devour one another, beware lest you be consumed by one another!

Gal 5:16  And I say: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not accomplish the lust of the flesh.

Gal 5:17  For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh. And these are opposed to each other, so that you do not do what you desire to do.

Gal 5:18  But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under Torah.

Gal 5:19  And the works of the flesh are well-known, which are these: adultery,¹ whoring, uncleanness, indecency, Footnote: ¹Only Textus Receptus contains adultery.

 

So here we have Paul saying circumcision is counterproductive when Yahowah said that any many who was not circumcised had violated and nullified His covenant. And Paul saying that if you are not observing the Torah you are “running well” and Yahowsha saying that whoever breaks the least of the Torah teaching and teaches others to do so would be called the least in the kingdom of heaven (Side note the Greek for least means lowly and little, the name Paul means lowly and little). Yet another strike against Paul in a game where one strike is game over.

 

 

Let’s look at the 5^th point of the test now. Does the person speak in the names of gods other than Yahowah. This one requires a bit of linguistic knowledge to examine, but for brevities sake I will let you know and you can feel free to check it out yourself. Christians routinely speak of salvation through grace, a concept rooted entirely in Paul’s letters. Grace in the original Greek was Gratia the name of three Grecian Goddesses of charm, beauty, nature, human creativity and fertility.

 

Moving on:

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 Paul, he unequivocally claimed to “naby’.”)

As a screening codicil Paul fits. Paul claimed a unique revelation, a unique encounter and gave prophecy. Paul definitely wanted to be viewed as a naby’.

1. 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, someone who arrogantly pretends to know, who insults others and is disrespectful, displaying pride in the pursuit of personal recognition and acclaim while despising and demeaning perceived competitors, someone 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.

Well I would consider contradicting Yahowah and Yahowsha as overstepping their bounds and speaking presumptuously. How about you? As for prone to rage, seething with anger, often furious, overbearing, rude and conceited, well read Paul’s letters carefully and see if that don’t fit him to a T.

1. 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.)

No denying Paul is among the most read and influential people of all time, so he fits this criteria too. At this point I’m left to ask, what possible argument could be made for Paul being not only selected by Yahowah to speak for Him, but authorized to change that which Yahowah said is eternally unchanging?

 

I could go on and on exposing Paul, but the goal of this article was to condense what has already been written in Questioning Paul, and at 11 pages I think it is long enough.

 

If you are still not questioning Paul at this point then you never will. If you are starting to question, but perhaps not convinced yet then please read Questioning Paul, it available free online at www.questioningpaul.com In it you will find many more examples of Paul’s contradictions (with himself and with Yah), you will find Yahowah called out Paul by name in Habakkuk calling him the plague of death. You will be presented with a thousand more nails in Paul’s coffin.

 

If you have come to recognize Paul for the false and deceitful liar that he is, congratulations feel free to use anything in this document as though it were your own to try and awaken others. And I would encourage you to read Questioning Paul as well.