Yada Yahowah

Questioning Paul

Volume Four

Incredible

Testing Faith

Craig Winn

About the Author…

Twenty years ago, Craig Winn was an entrepreneur. The turbulent story of his last adventure is shared in his first book, In the Company of Good and Evil – From Zero to $3 Billion and Back Again. 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 9.11.2001, 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 reorders the Qur’an 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 | Life of the Messenger of Allah. If you are interested in knowing why fundamentalist Muslims commit 90% of the world’s most heinous terrorist acts, this book will answer your questions.

In his quest to resolve a puzzling prophetic anomaly, Craig began translating the text of the Dead Sea Scrolls. That endeavor led to Yada Yahowah, An Introduction to God, Questioning Paul, Observations, and now to Coming Home. Throughout, Mr. Winn has been committed to providing amplified translations, which are not only more accurate and complete, they are readily verified. As a result, he has been afforded hundreds of unique insights into the words Yahowah inspired, many of which are unheralded and profound.

Beyond his books, Craig Winn has been interviewed as an expert on religion, politics, and economics 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 Yada Yah Radio. He currently produces a live podcast every Friday evening, where he discusses insights gleaned from his translations.

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. Even his printed books are offered without royalty.

Over the past twenty years, Craig Winn has devoted ten hours a day, six days a week, to exploring Yahowah’s revelations. 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.

Mr. Winn encourages readers to share his translations and resulting insights with others, albeit with two important 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 someone’s work.

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 his other books, to Yada Yah Radio, to many of his audio archives, as well as to friends and forums.

Lastly, Craig has a bias and an agenda. He knows and respects Yahowah, and he has devoted his life to advancing God’s primary objective: which is to call His people home.

Questioning Paul

Incredible

…Testing Faith

1

When Love is Wrong

The Contrarian…

Some years ago, while translating what Yasha’yah / Isaiah foretold would befall the modern manifestation of Mow’ab for the concluding volume of Observations, I noticed some interesting parallels between it and what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 13. As a result, it seems fitting to commence this concluding volume devoted to shredding Paul’s credibility at the very place the Plague of Death is most esteemed, the Love Chapter of First Corinthians, especially since the prophecy depicts Christianity’s demise.

Yasha’yah / Isaiah is warning Yisra’el about the ultimate consequence of what Sha’uwl / Paul will spawn as the Questionable father of modern Mow’ab. The 16th chapter of Yasha’yah opens with an interesting twist, by using a vivid and easy-to-remember word picture, that of a battering ram. It was deployed to encourage us to shatter the pithy quotes and disrespectful taunts of the powerful politicians and distinguished clerics associated with the modern manifestation of Mow’ab.

“You all should choose to send (shalach – of your own freewill dispatch) a battering ram (kar – a ram as in an individual or a device which can be used to break down walls and smash undesirable impediments) into the memorable quotes, disrespectful taunts, and popular sayings espoused by those who govern (mashal – of the rulers pontificating political parables and religious proverbs including the moral maxims and situational ethics underlying the control mechanisms of the establishment) the earth (‘erets – of the realm or land), assessing and then repudiating by tossing aside after contemplative reflection (min selah – pausing to weigh such things in the balance and then make light of them, ridiculing that which should be thoughtfully rejected of [from 1QIsa while the MT has sela’ – lofty places and strongholds]) the lifeless who question the word (midbar) on behalf of (‘el – for the benefit of) the daughters (bath – the female offspring and surrounding environs) of Mount (har) Tsyown | the Signs Posted Along the Way (Tsyown).” (Yasha’yah / Salvation is from Yahowah / Isaiah 16:1)

God is encouraging us to be judgmental rather than accepting, to speak out against religion and politics rather than respect either. It is a shame that so few people are prepared or willing to follow God’s advice. If those in authority were held accountable, if their lies were repudiated, the world would be a nicer, safer, and better place for everyone.

The reason “selah – to reject and repudiate” on the Great Isaiah Scroll was changed to “sela’ – stronghold or rocky crag” in the Masoretic Text was likely to prevent Yisra’elites from being observant and thinking for themselves. The rabbis responsible for the copyedit did not much like the idea that they would be rejected by those who took the time to carefully consider what they were promoting.

“And so it shall be (wa hayah) like (ka) birds (‘owph) fleeing (nadad) the nest (qen).

The daughters (bath) of Mow’ab | Who is this Questionable Father – those whom Political Correctness, Socialist Secular Humanism, Multiculturalism, and especially Pauline Christianity have Caused to have Questionable Allegiances (Mow’ab – who is unthinking, belligerent and confrontational, multicultural and religious, espousing a political culture akin to the insanity of Sodom, whereby the Hebrew writings were twisted and intermixed with pagan lore to form Christianity, the place where the Towrah’s voice died) will be (hayah) scattered (shalach) at the fords (ma’barah) of ‘Arnown | the piercing cries of an intense outburst (‘Arnown).” (Yasha’yah / Freedom is from Yahowah / Isaiah 16:2)

They had been beguiled into believing that their Lord was God. And now, cast out and banished from his nest, they are confronted with a reality so incongruous with their beliefs that all they can do is scream, emitting an ear-splitting, soul-penetrating, and anguished cry.

But it need not come to this. There is a better choice. There is a real God and He is knowable, likable, supportive, and approachable…

“You should choose of your own volition to pursue (bow’) counsel, seeking the right advice (‘etsah – consider the proper course of action and then reveal the right plan after being observant and studying every option). Choose to act upon and engage in (‘asah) thoughtful decision-making (palylah – exercising good judgment while forming considered conclusions).

Of your own freewill, present (shyth) your likeness (tsel ‘atah) such that it is in contrast to (ka – similar to) the darkness (ha layl)….” (Yasha’yah / Deliverance is from Yahowah / Isaiah 16:3)

The “counsel” we should pursue is found throughout the Towrah and Prophets, in addition to the Psalms and Proverbs. Consider it all Fatherly advice.

There are seven profoundly important insights which can be gleaned from Yahowah’s next statement. First, those who choose to live hospitably among Yahuwdym rather than attack them, and particularly those who question the forefathers of the world’s most pervasive religious and political schemes which have turned against Yisra’el, will be protected from this Adversary. This drives to the heart of one of Yahowah’s most inspiring promises – to bless those who favor Yisra’el and the Covenant.

Second, since these men and women described as “guwr – invited guests,” and yet from Yah’s perspective are considered “Mine,” this affirms that God initiates contact with those He realizes will eventually choose to engage in His Covenant, providing for them in advance of the relationship. He is protecting them prior to their adoption. And while this is wonderful news, very few souls will avail themselves of this opportunity. Very few will risk questioning the status quo sufficiently to disassociate from religion and politics while, at the same time, choosing to know and trust Yahowah.

Third, the Adversary is as we have learned: “shadad – demonic.” He wants “to be worshiped as if he were God.” Satan is “shadad – an evil spirit, ruinous and destructive,” a “ha mets – oppressive extortioner.” He’s not just an “authority figure,” and thus the power behind “political and religious leaders,” he “is the reason the chaff is susceptible to being blown away.”

Satan “mets – subjects others to undue pressure such that they capitulate and obey him.” He separates many from God through “extortion, coercion, and blackmail.” This means that Satan presents himself as the god of religion and uses human authority figures, religious and political leaders, to do his bidding.

Fourth, even the Adversary has a purpose. He makes the choice of participating in a religion instead of developing a relationship with our Heavenly Father appear sufficiently credible to be believed – especially to those who are neither open-minded, thoughtful, nor observant.

Fifth, once Satan’s reason for existing is fulfilled, he “kalah – will be restrained, removed, and imprisoned, eliminated from the realm of the living.” Headed to the lightless prison of She’owl, he “will be confined” with those he used.

Sixth, we are being afforded the opportunity to make an important connection between the Adversary and the final beast presented in Dany’el / Daniel. This is the destructive force which emerges from Imperial Rome, and is, therefore, the Roman Catholic Church. This connection is facilitated by “ramas – the one who treads upon and tramples down” the “kol ‘erets – all the earth.” It is one of many links between international and political Christianity and Mow’ab.

And seventh, there will be some, a precious few perhaps, thousands among billions, who will come out of Mow’ab to be part of the Covenant. I am one of them and I know many more. As is the case with almost every gentile who comes this way, their lives are transformed by Yahowah’s words. Once mired in Mow’ab, they are freed from Christianity and Multiculturalism.

We all begin by questioning our religious and political affiliations. And then we follow Yah’s words home, to the Beryth, through the Towrah, answering the Miqra’ey, to Yisra’el and to Yahuwdah, then ultimately to Tsyown and to Dowd through the Naby’ wa Mizmowr. We came out of her (Mow’ab) and became His people, grafted into the Family.

Yahowah is making this simple for us by revealing that the Lord uses human authority figures, and thus religious and political leaders, to elicit obedience. This demonic spirit presents himself as God, and most especially, the Lord Jesus Christ of Roman Catholicism, and thus Christianity – the world’s most popular religion.

“Allow those who choose to gather together and dwell, these foreigners who are invited guests congregating (guwr) with you (ba ‘atah), those driven away from Me who are Mine (nadach ‘any) of Mow’ab | of Political Correctness, Socialist Secular Humanism, Multiculturalism, and Pauline Christianity who have had Questionable Allegiances (Mow’ab – those who were indoctrinated in the amoral morass of Sodom, influenced by the Hebrew writings which they have acknowledged were twisted and intermixed with pagan lore to form Christianity, those who have questioned the father of the place where the Towrah’s voice died), to exist (hayah – becoming (qal imperative active)), sheltering them (sether la hem) from (min) the presence (paneh) of the destructive demon who seeks to be worshiped as God (shadad – of the ruinous demonic one who is an evil spirit, the ravaging and devastating destroyer, of the oppressive and violent demon who plunders with overpowering injustice; from shed – the evil demonic spirit who seeks to be worshiped as if he were God).

For indeed (ky), the oppressive extortioner (ha mets – the authority figure who subjects others to undue pressure to capitulate and obey through extortion, coercion, and blackmail) will be no more (‘aphes).

This demonic spirit seeking to be worshiped as God (shed) is finished, his purpose complete, and he will now be imprisoned, forever restraining (kalah) the one who treads upon and tramples down (ramas – the one who claims to be authorized while aggressively engaged in conquest and subjugation of) the whole of the earth (min ha ‘erets).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 16:4)

This is so significant in its implications it bears repeating: this was written of the Beast, which was predicted in Dany’el to grow out of Imperial Rome, none other than the Roman Catholic Church. He had foretold that it would “ramas – tread upon and trample down” the entire world. And now we know that Satan is the driving force and god behind the religious institution that proudly displays their dead god on a stick. Moreover, modern Mow’ab has a name: Christianity. But now as the prophet turns the page to tomorrow, the religion and its maker are finished.

Imagine a world without religion...

“Then genuine mercy and enduring love (wa chesed – unfailing kindness and affection in a mutually beneficial and giving relationship which is faithful and passionate) will be established and sustained (kuwn – enduring) on the seat of honor (kise’).

And upon it (wa ‘al huw’ – on account of it) he will be restored and live (yashab – he will be renewed and abide within the relationship, he will sit and abide) in (ba – with and by means of) reliable truth (‘emeth – that which is trustworthy, right, and correct, valid, certain, and dependable, constant and enduring, never-changing) within (ba) the brilliant dwelling and home (‘ohel) of Dowd | the Beloved (Dowd) by exercising good judgment (shaphat – by correctly deciding what is right by being judgmental in defending the truth) while (wa) seeking and then considering (darash) the means to appropriately resolve disputes (mishpat – to make informed and rational decisions regarding vindication and condemnation), becoming expeditious, experienced, and effective (wa mahyr) regarding that which is right and vindicating (tsedeq – in what is correct, honest, accurate).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 16:5)

This is as it should be. After revealing the consequence of ignoring and rejecting Him, Yahowah conveys the benefits associated with trusting Him.

God is merciful to those who strive to sit alongside Dowd | David, to those who seek the truth so as to be restored. For that, our focus must be on making informed and rational decisions which make us right with God.

In this light, and resolutely rational, we should see the Pauline Epistles as the uncircumcised Goliath doing battle against Dowd’s Mizmowr / Psalms. The sling provides the skill to accurately project the word of God, represented by the stone which killed the perceived giant of a man. Paul’s Greek letters and Dowd’s Hebrew lyrics are adversaries on opposing sides, one representing Satan and the other, Yahowah.

It has been said that religion is the leading cause of death on earth. But I suspect that the same could be said of governments and empires. From the first human civilization to the last, it has been an unending stream of carnage. And it all flows downward from the immoral and arrogant despots, from the self-aggrandizing who claim a Divine sanction to rule, to the brutality they have inspired.

Sha’uwl’s masterpiece of deception was his political and religious ode to the Romans. It gave birth to the culture which encouraged Rome to destroy Yahuwdah | Judah. He was, by his own admission, exceedingly proud of having set all of this into motion. No one has more negatively affected the lives of God’s Chosen People than Paulos – the master of deception. He is the author of the most heinous anti-Semitic cult ever conceived.

Clearly, Paul was presumptive and unreasonable in his attribution of status to the manifest destiny of his new covenant. He was prone to immoral outbursts and angry attacks, all motivated out of an inflated sense of superiority. His protestations, which were never warranted or supported by God, historical reality, prophecy, or reason, were little more than senseless braggadocio. He took Greeks and Romans into battle against God and His people, silencing the voice of the Towrah in the process. Billions of beguiled souls would die. He, and the demonic spirit inspiring him, would remain Yahowah’s mortal enemy to the bitter end – concluding with the demise of Mow’ab.

As we continue to consider what Mow’ab represents today, there should be no mistaking Sha’uwl’s / Paul’s influence as the Questionable Father of Christianity in this prophetic portrait. He has made modern Mow’ab as religious as it is political, as multicultural as it is anti-Semitic. Ancient and modern Mow’ab would share this in common: rhetoric and alliances supportive of Yisra’el while engaged promoting armed insurrections against God’s people. And as the torch is passed from the billionaire narcissist to the senile socialist, Israel is about to be dealt a devastating blow.

“We have heard (shama’) of the violent agitation and arrogance (ga’own – of the moral depravity, undeserved status, and pompous rhetoric) of Mow’ab | those of a Questionable Father raised as Pauline Christians and immoral secularists (Mow’ab – this unthinking and combative, multiethnic religious and sectarian culture indoctrinated in the irrational aspects of Sodom, having squandered the benefits of the Hebrew writings because they were twisted and intermixed with pagan lore, taking them to the place where the Towrah’s voice died).

He has become exceedingly proud, self-aggrandizing and self-promoting (ge’ me’od – self-important while utterly overstating and overhyping his current status and past, especially his perceived triumphs), along with his delusional projection of himself as magnificent and moral while inspiriting animosity (ga’awah huw’ – glorifying his prior achievements).

In addition (wa), his presumptive and unreasonable attribution of merit and status, even manifest destiny (ga’own huw’ – his self-infatuation and sense of preeminence), and (wa) his improper and immoral outbursts which occur far and wide, displaying an inflated sense of superiority (‘ebrah huw’ – his vicious behavior, uncontrolled anger, all without a legitimate basis while influencing the world around him), are not right (lo’ ken – are improper, dishonest, delusional, and without merit, invalid and demonstrably inaccurate) nor is his bragging and boasting, most especially his prideful speech which is not warranted (bad huw’ – his unrealized predictions and pronouncements in the name of a false god, speaking of things which do not come true, his propensity to invent alternate realities, weaving them into a web of lies).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 16:6)

If we were to institutionalize the arrogance of Mow’ab, extrapolating it from its Questionable Father to nations, there are aspects of this which could otherwise have applied to Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon, to Greece, Sparta, Carthage, and Rome, to the Mayas, Incas, and Aztecs, and to Imperial Japan, the Soviets, and Nazis. But they did not survive long enough to be touted as realistic candidates for the Mow’ab of prophecy.

As we listen to the prognostications, there are strokes which appear applicable to the unGodly mix of Trump’s self-serving boasts of America first. Consider his saber-rattling and propensity to build an ever-larger military to position the nation as the guardian of world commerce. It is seen in the boisterous extrapolation of America’s false sense of Manifest Destiny, its propensity to govern through political parties, the country’s obtrusive federal agents and police along with its belligerent military. The United States has a propensity for agitating and arrogant diatribes. The nation’s fatal flaw remains its collective inability to see things in context, and thus to understand the consequences of its impulsive and intrusive use of force. The problem is intrinsic to America’s mindset and is only going to get worse. In politics, the Shitym always rises to the top!

If you think that this assessment may be presumptuous, compose a list of other potential candidates, looking for a nation similarly influenced by Christianity and Multiculturalism, which is equally arrogant and militaristic, and compare their views on Manifest Destiny to Yahowah’s predictions. Even if you can, you may want to show some reserve, at least long enough to hear what Yahowah has to say about these people, their proclivities and consequences, in the 17th and 18th chapters of Yasha’yah / Isaiah – where God is very specific.

Beyond religions, governments, and militaries, there are, of course, glimpses of Satan in all of this. He prefers death to life, violence to peace, pompous rhetoric to the unpretentious truth. The Adversary has always been immoral, overstating his status by projecting himself as politically correct and enlightened, even as God, hoping that the masses acknowledge his desire for preeminence.

As the most infamous man Satan would possess, this all reads like Paul’s letters. He continually bragged of his self-importance, of his signs and wonders, while boasting, “But I, Paul, say…” Throughout his litany of fourteen epistles and his diatribes throughout Acts, his unrealized predictions and assertions remain in conflict with the facts. His was always an alternate reality, something we call Replacement Theology. He wove a web of lies to promote his Lord as god and himself as his lone authorized agent to the world.

It is in Paul’s letters that the Torah died. It is in Paul’s letters that hatred and violence against Jews become a religious obsession. Paul was indeed the Questionable Father of Christianity.

In upcoming chapters, we will consider what Dowd | David had to say about Sha’uwl | Paul. In the process, we will come to understand why Yahowah calls him the Son of Evil and the Father of Lies.

If you are a Yahuwd | Jew and have been somewhat put off by the propensity to expose and condemn Sha’uwl | Paul and the religion he perpetrated throughout Questioning Paul, if you think that my critique of him over the rabbis who begot Judaism does not pertain to you, I appreciate your concerns. It is entirely my fault. While I came to realize that Paul was anti-Torah more than a decade ago, and while I wrote Questioning Paul to prove it, it was not until quite recently that I became sufficiently aware of the implications of Replacement Theology as it pertains to Dowd, the Son of God and Messiah, as well as its effect on Jews and Israel.

I am no longer naïve in this regard. Long before you have completed Volume 4 of Questioning Paul, considered Observations, and then read Coming Home, you will see Sha’uwl | Paul and the religion he conceived through Replacement Theology, as the principal reason Jews have suffered more than any other people these past two thousand years. You may even come to despise Paul more than our Creator.

Paul has done more to harm Jews than Akiba and Maimonides, Vespasian and Hadrian, Muhammad and Hitler, combined. If it were not for Paul, they would have all failed. If not for Paul, Jews would have come to recognize Yahowsha’ as the Passover Lamb. But because of Paul, Yahuwdym have come to despise everything about the Dionysian deity, ‘Jesus Christ,’ that he popularized. And because of Paul, the stage was set for hatred and conflict. Blame the Jews has become the central spoke of conspiracy – the world’s fastest-growing religion. There is no one God despises more than this solitary soul. There are more dire warnings regarding the founder of Christianity than anyone else.

Now for this tantalizing tidbit, one I did not foresee coming. Sha’uwl / Question Him / Paul was not just the Questionable Father of Christianity, he also laid the foundation for Multiculturalism and Political Correctness, the core tenets of Socialist Secular Humanism. Yahowah has connected the dots for us, equating Mow’ab with the Multicultural and Politically Correct, the immoral and irrational mantra of Sodom, and now also with Sha’uwl / Question Him / Paul.

For those duped into believing that God is a Lord who wants to be worshiped and obeyed, for those who have no concept of what our Heavenly Father is actually like, much less is offering and expects in return, sorrow awaits. But based upon the Dead Sea Scrolls, Yahowah is not interested in listening to their morbid musings. He knows that those lost in modern Mow’ab have brought this upon themselves.

The question becomes, how are we to think of those caught up in modern Mow’ab? Should we pity them and seek to help them? Or should we keep our distance from them? Perhaps the answer is somewhere in between, sympathetic toward those who have been misled and yet open to the truth, while remaining overtly critical of Mow’ab’s political and religious leadership, especially their societal platitudes, military adventurism, and religious rites. The masses have been duped – indeed played. They are trapped in an irrational web of faith and belief.

Those things considered, here is Yahowah’s answer…

“Therefore, since this is so, let not (la ken lo’ –indeed in concert with a logical interpretation of the facts with regard to the sequence of events, what has happened and will occur, do not allow [“not” is from 1QIsa]) Mow’ab / the Questionable Origins of Political Correctness, Multiculturalism, Socialist Humanism, and Christianity (Mow’ab – Who is your Father, Lowt’s | Lot’s son by his eldest daughter, an unthinking, confrontational, multicultural, religious and political society indoctrinated from within and defined by Sodom, those who have squandered the benefits of the Hebrew writings because they were twisted and intermixed with pagan lore to take them to the place where the Towrah’s voice died; from ma – to question the who, what, and why of ‘ab – the father, related to mowba’ and mow’al – a path which leads in the opposite direction) cry out in sorrow (yalal – howl and wail like a distressed animal in a lifeless place; note: yalal is one of two verbs defining Satan’s name – Hylel) for Mow’ab | on behalf of the Questionable Origins of Political Correctness, Multiculturalism, Socialist Humanism, or Christianity (Mow’ab – for this religious and political culture indoctrinated within and defined by Sodom, who have squandered the benefits of the Hebrew writings because they were twisted and intermixed with pagan lore to take them to the place where the Towrah’s voice died).

Instead, each and every individual (kol huw’) should express sorrow, lamenting (yalal) the unknown masses (la ‘ashysh – the unaffiliated and thus unknown populations existing in proximity to one another who are under great pressure and depressed and offered to pagan gods) of Qyr Charas | the Destructive and Divisive Lure of the Lyrics Inscribed by Malevolent Schemers (Qyr Charas – that which was molded of clay to be contentious).

Ponder the serious implications associated with this message (hagah – give considerable thought to this material, speaking to those willing to listen) among (‘ak) the afflicted who are unmercifully abused (naka’).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 16:7)

The answer to our question is blunt and direct. He does not want to hear Mow’ab, today’s multicultural and politically correct, Christians or Socialists, complain about how they were misled and ended up in the wrong place at the wrong time. However, Yahowah does want us to lament the fate of the unknown masses, those not yet defined by Mow’ab, ‘Amown, ‘Esa’ow, Yisra’el, or Yahuwdah. In election parlance, these are the independents.

While Yah wants us to feel sorry for them, which suggests that we should try and help them, He is not explicitly asking us to reach out to them because it may be too late. Moreover, with the fate of the Chosen People hanging in the balance, they may not be worth the effort. Lost in their political and religious delusions, and wayyyyyy too defensive of their beliefs, we are unlikely to find even the smallest crack for the truth to take root or grow.

Yahowah has defined the unknown masses as “qyr charas – disparaging and divisive, molded to be contentious.” They are a “formed and fragile earthen altar” to the ways of man. They have been “qyr charas – baited and lured away, ensnared behind a smokescreen of homage to the lifeless and fabricated natural things of the earth, becoming little more than shards of broken pottery and fractured earthen vessels that men have made and then destroyed.”

Those under the influence of Mow’ab are unknown to Yahowah because they have been “qyr charas – infected with an eruptive disease derived from too much exposure to the sun, by blasphemy through defiant taunts.” In the end, they will be “cut down while gnashing their teeth as a result of the decisions they have made regarding man’s decrees, suffering birth pangs while being fettered and charred, burned by the sun, pursuant to an evil plot schemed up by those associated with the occult who conspired in secret.”

As we transition to the next statement, the progenitor of the way of Mow’ab is “Sha’uwl – Question Him,” the Plague of Death and father of the religion that will bewilder and mislead many, keeping them from being known to God. It is hard to miss Pauline Christianity’s love affair with the substitute wine and round wafers of Communion and the Eucharist – both ancient pagan substitutions for Pesach and Matsah.

Roman Catholicism is the mother of Christianity, a religion that was fathered by Sha’uwl | Question Him. It grew out of Imperial Rome, and is the final Beast, making it the religious manifestation of Babylon. The Roman Church is also the offspring of ‘Esa’ow and thus the modern incarnation of ‘Edowm.

Therefore, from an expansive view, this particular “Questionable Father” could also be referencing the last in a long line of revolting and pompous popes, the “Holy Father.” After all, Pope Francis is politically, morally, and economically a Multicultural and Politically Correct Socialist Humanist – I would dare say Communist based upon his liberal rhetoric.

In Howsha’ / Hosea 3:1, the “‘ashyshah – cakes of dried and shriveled grapes mixed with old grape juice and offered to pagan gods” was presented in association with ‘Asherah, the progenitor of Orthodox Christianity’s and Roman Catholicism’s “Virgin with Child, Mother of God, and Queen of Heaven.” They have been burnt by overexposure to the sun – Satan’s favorite guise, the author of Sunday, Christmas, and Easter observances.

“Indeed (ky), the cultivated fields and expansive growth (shedemah) of Cheshbown | of the Schemers and their Weapons at this time of reckoning (Cheshbown – of the evil plans of the snipers and their intent to kill, and of those who throw stones based upon their own accounts and reasoning) will shrivel up and wither away as a result of being indecisive and lacking the will to make the right decision (‘amal – will languish as they are weakened for choosing poorly, having no personal discipline, and being overly fixated on satiating their sexual desires).

The twisted vine and moral poison (wa gephen – the bent tendril of corruption once associated with Sodom) of Sabamah | of those who are Overly Affluent and Satiated with Alcohol (Sabamah – of those with abrasive wealth, some of whom are odiferous while others are obnoxiously sweet, satiated with excess, gluttonous, and hedonistic), those who own and control (ba’al – the masters and rulers, the lords who possess) the gentile nations (gowym – the pagan peoples who are culturally, geographically, and ethnically estranged from Yisra’el), will strike out in an inebriated and destructive manner (halam – will be incapacitated because they are intoxicated, all while trampling and beating down their befuddled and drugged victims).

Their shoots (sarowq hy’ – their choicest vines and their selected tendrils) will continually (‘ad – will serve as prey for the predators, even as eternal plunder and an everlasting spoil) reach and entangle, infecting and plaguing (naga’ – extending to and inflicting, organically spreading as a fungus to traumatize biological life as a pandemic, sickening), Ya’azyr | the Empowered who are Disrespectful and Emboldened (Ya’azyr – the ferocious, vicious, and overly aggressive and those who support them who are barbarous, insolent, and rude, the vicious and audacious, the violent who are brutal and cruel along with their coconspirators), misleading them, causing them to err and go astray (ta’ah – deceiving them by promoting faith in that which is invalid such that they are confused and stagger aimlessly around) to a wasteland where the word is questioned (midbar – to a desolate place without sufficient water and nutrients to sustain life, a place without the word and that which has been spoken).

But their shoots (sheluchowt hy’ – her wild and untrained tendrils emerging from the same trunk) will be rejected and forsaken (natash – will be abandoned, cast off, and left behind, disassociated and excluded from association or relationship) as they are passed over in intoxicating (‘abar) seas (yam – the oceans serving as a synonym for Gentiles estranged from the Land).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 16:8)

Since this is addressing the militaristic and bombastic propensity of the modern incarnation of Mow’ab, it is going to come as quite a shock to those who have been led to believe that their god is blessing them. However, the inability to think as a result of being besieged by Political Correctness, and its consequence, the tendency to be indecisive, lacking personal discipline while being unrestrained and irresponsible, naturally leads to this eventuality. Those who are uninformed, and lack the will to make rational decisions, will be led to their demise.

Apart from the Roman Catholic Church, there is no institution in our world other than the United States capable of influencing the preponderance of Gentiles and their nations. And when one adds “gluttony, hedonism, and intoxication” to the mix, they stand together, exposed and alone. This is not only modern Mow’ab, but also religious and political Babylon.

The conclusion of this statement is reminiscent of the Pope being granted the opportunity to speak to a joint session of Congress in 2015, with the superpower and universal faith working together to mislead the world – turning the eyes of the unsuspecting away from the Word.

America is the land of “shedemah – cultivated fields” and “expansive growth.” It is the land of “Cheshbown – schemers and snipers” and of “weapons and siege machines.” It is the nation most prone to “throw stones based upon its own accounts and reasoning.”

Modern Mow’ab will “‘amal – shrivel up and wither away as a result of being indecisive.” Paralyzed by Political Correctness, its people “lack the will to make the right decision and for having no personal discipline.” Like Sodom, they are “overly fixated on satiating sexual and sensory desires” many of which are counterproductive.

Rome’s long shadow over Europe, and its seed in the New World has cultivated “sabamah – affluent cultures satiated with alcohol.” It has produced a culture which is both “sweet-sounding and yet odiferous.” At the epicenter of modern Mow’ab, Americans are “gluttonous and hedonistic, the model of excess.” And no other nation, not since Carthage or Rome, has “ba’al – owned or controlled” more of the “gowym – gentile world,” or been more prone to “halam – strike out in an inebriated and destructive manner.”

America’s shoots have entangled the world economically, politically, and militarily. And yet the world’s lone “ya’azyr – superpower is as disrespectful of the rights of others as it is emboldened to ferociously, aggressively, and audaciously project its influence and tentacles.” It is the land of Gentiles across the sea.

Before we press on through the text, we are confronted by a seldom considered reality. The Yisra’elite who copied the text of Yasha’yah from one scroll to another, creating the Great Isaiah Scroll, was not perfect. Yasha’yah 16:8-9 serves as proof. The eye of the scribe of 1QIsa apparently skipped from Sabamah in verse 8 to Sabamah in verse 9 and omitted everything in between. His omission is affirmed in the LXX and MT. Inadvertent errors, while the most common on the Dead Sea Scrolls, are still rare. Hebrew copyists have been conscientious throughout the ages, with the DSS differing from the Masoretic Text (prior to the subjective application of their diacritical markings) by as little as one word in fourteen – most of those being minor aberrations. The opposite, however, is true with the scriptural text underlying today’s Mow’ab: the Christian New Testament. There are twice as many known variants between the oldest manuscripts and the current amalgamized text as there are words in those books.

Yahowah takes no pleasure in the loss of life that has besieged our planet. But before we jump to any conclusions and extend such sympathy beyond where it is deserved, realize that Ruth, an amazing, intelligent, and courageous woman who spoke on behalf of Yahowah, was the great grandmother of Yahowah’s beloved, Dowd. She was Mow’abite. Her story reflects her quest to faithfully follow her mother-in-law back to Yahuwdah after her husband’s death. She engages in a relationship with Yahowah along the way, declaring to Naomi: “Where you go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will be my people, and your God, my God.” (Ruth 1:16) It is the same declaration this exile from modern Mow’ab makes every day.

“Therefore (‘al ken), I express sorrow for the loss of life (bakah) associated with (ba) the emotional anguish and expressions of sorrow (beky) among (ba) Ya’azyr | the Empowered who are Disrespectful and Emboldened (Ya’azyr – the overly aggressive and those who support them, the empowered who are insolent and rude, the vicious and audacious who are brutal and cruel).

The moral poison of the bent vine (gephen – the corruption associated with that which has grown, spreading far and wide from Sadom | Sodom and from elevated individuals, those in the highest places with individual status) of Sabamah | of those who are Overly Affluent and Satiated with Alcohol (Sabamah – of those with abrasive approach to wealth, some of whom are odiferous while others are obnoxiously sweet), I will drench you (rawah ‘atah – I have had more than enough of you so you will experience being saturated) in My tears (dim’ah ‘any – discharge from an open wound which is raw and sore).

Cheshbown | at a Time of Reckoning for the Grand Schemes and their Weapons (Cheshbown –accounting for inappropriate decisions, misguided reasoning, and the improper devices of the instigators and their military armaments, of those who throw stones based upon their own accounts and perceptions) and (wa) ‘El’aleh | where Allah is Exalted as a God (‘El’aleh – from ‘el – God (akin to the erroneous rendering of Allahu-Akbar as ‘God is Great’), ‘alah is also a burnt offering as in a holocaust), indeed (ky) because of (‘al) your summer fruit (qayts ‘atah – that which you produce during the warmer months when you are awakened from your stupor) and (wa) concerning (‘al) your intended harvest (qatsyr ‘atah – your attempt to reap what you have sown), your exuberant shouts (hedad – your euphoric cheering and clamorous chanting, even boisterous jeering and celebratory taunts) shall diminish, dissipate, and die (naphal – will fall prostrate and go away, ceasing forever).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 16:9)

Thankfully for those of us who realize that “Allahu Akbar” is the Islamic Prayer of Fear, and that it was established by Muhammad in his failed attempt to impose his god’s superiority over the God of the Yahuwdym / Jews, we will not have to hear it again. Allah is the Adversary and Yahowah is God.

But one thing has become abundantly clear: in the end, Muslims will be no better off than Christians or Secular Humanists. It matters not if you believe that Allah or Jesus is God, or think that there is no God, because each approach is wrong.

When Yahowah states that He will “bakah – express sorrow for the loss of life” among “ya’azyr – the Empowered, Disrespectful, and Emboldened who are ferocious and overly aggressive as well as those who support them.” He is also saying that, while He values life, they will die. Then with a telling reference to Sodom, God reveals that “sabamah – the overly affluent who are satiated with alcohol and known for their excess,” represent the “gephen – moral poison of the corrupt and bent vine rooted in Sodom which has grown, spreading far and wide.”

Yahowah places Cheshbown and ‘El’aleh, America and the Islamic nations it has enriched and armed, in the same hideous pot – a poisonous and corrupting concoction which will be neutralized. As for the “summer fruit,” consider this the last hurrah for the escalation of strife between Islamic jihadists and the U.S. military before both succumb during the fall of man – during the time when their exuberant chanting and boisterous jeering of the patriotic and religious will dissipate and die.

Reaffirming that Yahowah has heard far too many people scream “Praise the Lord” and “Allahu-Akbar,” He prophetically reveals…

“Then (wa) their jubilation as an expression of their religious devotion (simchah – their exuberant worship and exaltation of their god) and (wa) their joyous shouts and shrieks (gyl – their superior attitude and terrorizing expressions) will cease to exist (‘asaph – shall be taken away and removed).

From (min) the fertile land (ha karmel – that which is cultivated including orchards) and in (wa bin) the vineyards (ha kerem – where grapes are grown (a reference to Yisra’el and thus to the so-called “Palestinians”)) there will be no loud or rhythmic public proclamations (lo’ ranan – there will be no summons to worship or calls to prayer), no shouts of impending triumph (lo’ ruwa’ – no lurid or brash chants, no call to invade or to battle, no warning, and no good news). Wine (yayn) in (ba) the presses and vats (ha yeqeb) will no longer flow out (lo’ darak).

Those who trample and tread (ha darak – those who walk over others, directing others, causing them to march off to battle and shoot their weapons), exuberantly shouting and euphorically crying (hedad – singing hymns as an act of worship, reciting prayers of thanksgiving, or vocally supporting their troops), I will put an end to on the Shabat (shabat – I will stop them and then eliminate them, causing them to disappear so that I can celebrate the Shabat).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 16:10)

There will come a time in which God, working through Dowd | David, will put an end to all forms of religious devotion – from its terrorizing expressions to its irritating hymns, from every summons to worship to calls to prayer and fiery sermons, even to patriotic platitudes in support of a nation’s troops. It is among the best things a loving and protective Father can do for His children.

There is yet another allusion to Roman Catholicism which should be acknowledged. It was the Beast emerging from Imperial Rome which was predicted in Dany’el to “darak – trample and tread” upon the whole world. Moreover, it was the Roman Catholic Church, in absolute defiance of Yahowah’s instructions, that outlawed the observance of the Shabat in deference to their Lord.

“Therefore (‘al-ken), this is My innermost and anguished response (me’ah ‘any) to (la) Mow’ab | those with a Questionable Heritage who are Politically Correct, Socialist Secular, Multicultural Humanists, and especially Pauline Christians (Mow’ab – the unthinking, belligerent, multi-ethnic, religious and political societies indoctrinated within and defined by the legacy of Sodom who have squandered the benefits of the Hebrew writings because they were twisted and intermixed with pagan lore by Paul to take them to the place where the Towrah’s voice died, leading them in the wrong direction).

They are like (ka) the loud, disturbing, intoxicating, and haunting groaning (hamah – the distressing, disquieting, and reverberating lament, even the uninhibited, angry, and drunken snarl, the distracting and confusing, maddening and disquieting way) of a lyre (ha kinowr), engendering (wa) My visceral and apprehensive reaction (qereb ‘any – My innermost and anguished response) toward (la) Qyr Charas | the Destructive and Divisive Lure of the Lyrics Inscribed by Malevolent Schemers (Qyr Charas – that which was molded of clay to be contentious, that which is broken and will be thrown away as adversarial and destructive vomit, disparaging and divisive, lured away and ensnared behind a smokescreen by those who envision and write malevolent schemes, conceiving cults in such a way that the writer’s actual motives are concealed so as to silence critics in concert with an eruptive disease from too much exposure to the sun in association with the occult and conspiratorialists).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 16:11)

The modern manifestation of Mow’ab was predicted to sound like an irritating rendition of the same instrument Dowd played so brilliantly. But they would be out of tune with David’s narrative, dancing to an entirely different melody and lyrics. What God had enjoyed was now insufferable, the loud roar of maddening confusion designed to distract from His message and melody of life. That is to say that God finds the rhetoric and sermons, the platitudes and prayers, the secular songs and sectarian hymns, of Mow’ab, of Secular Humanists and Pauline Christians, to be akin to the belligerent outbursts of an obnoxious drunken man and the snarl of an angry beast.

Having invested considerable time contemplating the implications of Qyr Cheres, I have come to see it as evidence of the deplorable and lamentable attribute of Mow’ab, likely even the appalling lyrics of the people’s songs. Qyr is a “wall which separates and divides.” Related words convey: “adversarial, smokescreen, a decree given at the end of a spear, a funeral dirge, to spew out vomit then cover up the smell with perfume and incense, to pluck away, to trivialize and render meaningless, even insignificant, and to slaughter, slay, and kill.”

An accurate depiction of Cheres is developed by doing a modicum of digging. Cheres is vocalized according to the Masoretes’ diacritical markings (which were added in the 11th century CE) by the addition of a dot on the left side of the Shin (rather than the right), converting it to a Sin. It is translated as “earthen or earth, potsherd or pottery, vessel or shard.”

Since God is not agonizing over broken pots, the observant will find that cheres is an amalgamation of words. This begins with “cheres – an eruptive disease contracted from excess exposure to the sun.” It is promoted by those who “charaph – defy and jeopardize through blasphemy,” so as to “chereph – to pluck away,” by “cherpah – acting shamefully,” while “charats – decisively maiming and mutilating” those who are otherwise Sodomites. They are thus “charar – scorched and burned” by “charash – the imagined and inscribed evil plots of magicians, those who use religious magic tricks to lure in and silence the stupefied masses.”

The root of cheres, which is differentiated from cheresh in the modern lexicon by the placement of the diacritical markings, means “to envision and write malevolent schemes, to conceive and engrave plans which cut those who read them into the resulting cult, in such a way that the writer’s actual motives are concealed so as to silence critics.” It speaks of the “artificers and illusionists who deploy ruses to fool the foolish.”

It must sadden God that His creation has not only sought to end the life He conceived but, adding insult to injury, has chosen to worship false gods in the process, perverting everything He had intended. And since we now know that Mow’ab represents the questionable father of Christianity and Multicultural Socialist Secular Humanism, we are being made aware that this demonic beast will become visible, accepting human form to pull off his last charade.

“And it will come to exist (wa hayah), therefore, that (ky) Mow’ab, the Politically Correct, Multicultural Socialist Secularists and Pauline Christians (Mow’ab), will present themselves and be seen (ra’ah – will be revealed and properly viewed, he and it will be shown for what he and it actually represents) because (ky – marking the point in time) he and it will become incapacitated (la’ah – he and it will fail, lacking the capacity to achieve his ambitions, lacking the capacity to respond) upon the most elevated places of worship (‘al ha bamah – upon and before its pagan shrines and sacred religious centers, battlefields, and memorials).

When he comes to (wa bow’ ‘el) his sanctuary in his temple, his shrines and holy places (miqdash huw’), to provide justification and pray (la hitpalal – to plead for intercession and arbitrate, arguing on his behalf, requesting conciliation having foreseen where this was all headed), he will fail, neither prevailing nor comprehending what is happening (lo’ yakol – he will accomplish nothing and be powerless, he will not be able to process what’s occurring, grasp the consequence, or attain what he desires).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 16:12)

The first part of this requires the subject to orchestrate his own fate and then endure it. To his credit and shame, Paul took ownership of his pronouncements but not his inspiration.

I’ve long recognized that the Towrahless One, known to Christians as the Antichrist, will be indistinguishable from Sha’uwl / Question Him / Paul. He will convey the same message replete with all of the character flaws. And this prophetic presentation of the corporeal manifestation of Mow’ab seems to affirm that I was right.

Along with Sha’uwl, Satan will be incapacitated in the very place he garnered his power and influence: the most elevated places of worship. It is Divine justice. To the very end, he will justify his ambitions, pleading the case for his religious and political ideals. He will be like the men he has possessed, arbitrating and arguing for conciliation.

The Towrah will prevail and they will not. They will have accomplished nothing, except to prevent billions from knowing God. Having sought to influence, they will be powerless. Having claimed to know, they will be clueless.

It is also telling that Satan, without a “neshamah – conscience,” does not understand what’s about to befall him or even why it will occur. This reduces the Adversary to the status of an implement – a tool.

It is little wonder Satan’s religious schemes are so similar, and that they are all counterfeits. Rather than composing a strategy of his own, Satan twists Yahowah’s plan to suit his agenda. Such is the case with Paul’s manifesto.

At this point the prophet reminds us that he is simply the messenger and that the words we are reading were spoken by our Creator, Yahowah. Further, Yasha’yah reveals that this prophecy regarding Mow’ab would be for another time – our time.

“This is (zeh) the Word (ha dabar – the message and communication) which, to reveal the correct way to the most beneficial relationship and to get the most out of life (‘asher), Yahowah ( – the pronunciation of YaHoWaH) spoke (dabar – communicated using words) concerning (‘el) Mow’ab, the Politically Correct, Multicultural Socialist Secularists and Pauline Christians of Questionable Parentage (Mow’ab – Who is Your Father, the unthinking and warlike religious and political culture indoctrinated in the immoral cesspool of Sodom, having squandered the benefits of the Hebrew writings because they were twisted and intermixed with pagan lore to take them to the place where the Towrah’s voice died), as a logical and temporal expression of the future revealed in the past (min ‘az – regarding this time).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 16:13)

I will remain grateful for the influence of ‘asher. It, more than any other word, led me to Yah. And over the years I have been enriched by it, coming to realize that it speaks of “a beneficial relationship which is achieved by walking along the correct and narrow path which gives meaning to life.” It provides special meaning in this context, positioned as it is between “ha dabar – the Word” and Yahowah’s name.

As we ponder the future implications of the concluding statements in the 16th chapter of Yasha’yah, we would be wise to travel through time, if only in our minds, to ascertain when, if ever, these events transpired. The reason for doing so is to underscore the realization that this “min ‘az – logical and temporal expression of the future revealed in the past” speaks of our world today. Ancient Mow’ab no longer exists and, therefore, to understand the prophecy we must evaluate the clues we have been given and apply them to the present time.

Modern Mow’ab is noted for its “expansive growth,” “cultivated fields,” and their “weapons” during the “time of reckoning,” which is likely upon Yahowah’s return to judge the world. These people pride themselves in having “deadly snipers” while “throwing stones at others based upon their own accounts and reasoning.” In spite of these things, this future manifestation of Mow’ab is “going to shrivel up and wither away” as a result of “being indecisive” while “lacking the capacity and will to make the right decision.” They will be “morally corrupt and fixated on satiating all manner of sexual desires,” which must be “perversions” considering the association with Sodom.

Mow’ab’s demise is partly attributed to “alcoholism and drug abuse,” and will occur in spite of the nation’s “abrasive display of wealth” and “gluttonous use of resources.” Each description appears to point to America, specifically, and Europe and Roman Catholicism, more generally, especially in the aftermath of the debilitating response to the Coronavirus. Further, the realization that modern Mow’ab has been attempting to “lord over and control the gentile nations” reinforces the likelihood that God is condemning the United States, Europe, and the Roman Catholic Church – political and religious Babylon.

These people have “incapacitated” themselves in the process of “striking out” against others “in a destructive manner.” Such is the case with the invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. With the largest military in human history, America is “emboldened” to use it, and has become “ferociously aggressive and audacious,” especially in the “desert wastelands” of the Middle East “where Allah is Exalted as God.”

Whether Yahowah is addressing what has already occurred, or what is about to befall humankind as a result of Mow’ab’s | America’s weapons and its will to deploy them, God is “lamenting the enormous loss of life.” Millions have already succumbed, but billions more will die.

In the process, Mow’ab’s “voice will be silenced.” Her “propensity for religious devotion” and “boisterous protests” “will dissipate.” The “shouts of victory will subside.” The nation and institution “treading upon the earth” will be “stopped dead in her tracks.” Those of “divisive rhetoric” and “malevolent schemes” will be no more, “incapacitated at the highest levels of political power and religious authority.” Their “prayers and pleas” will go “unanswered.” Neither the people nor their leaders “will comprehend what is happening to them or understand why they are powerless to stop it.”

As we press forward in the prophecy, we are confronted by a “tedious and perfunctory” period of “three years’ time,” replete with “obligatory servitude” and “menial and monotonous work” in “pursuit of provisions, fame, and fortune.” It is a time known for viewing “wealth and status” as “contemptible and condemnable.” We are seeing shades of this in the socialistic Black Lives Matter protests. And while the religious, political, and military elite have been despicable and disreputable for all of human history, previously the masses have coveted their rank and wealth. Further, there were no protests because the few who dared oppose the hierarchical structure were ostracized and tortured. Speaking against the religious, military, and political establishment was not done in ancient Mow’ab and it is just now becoming sustainable in an Islamic kingdom and Communist nation.

The signs are so pervasive, they are hard to miss. American and European governance is predicated upon the entitlement mentality of socialism which promotes the redistribution of wealth. We justify as progressive, governments taking possessions from those who earned them and giving their assets to those who have voted to tax them away from those they disdain.

It is the underlying current of the Arab Spring which precipitated the greatest migration of displaced people in human history – one that will turn an ignorant and irrational world into a lazy and uninspired one with countless anti-Semites. Fact is, anti-Semitism is largely based upon this very notion that Jews have somehow conspired to enrich themselves by robbing the masses, thereby justifying the conspirator’s actions against them.

“So now (wa ‘atah – then henceforth, this being so, and from now on) Yahowah (Yahowah – a transliteration of , our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) has spoken (dabar – has communicated using words, expressed Himself verbally in speech, and conveyed His message with words), saying (la ‘amar – to answer, declare, promise, and convey),

‘In (ba) three (shalosh) years’ time (shanah), like (ka – akin to) the years (shanah) of a day laborer performing a perfunctory, tedious, and repetitive menial job on an hourly basis (sakyr – of a short- or long-term contract worker without status or property who is hired to serve another in an obligatory and monotonous fashion and who is compensated for his effort based strictly on the time they are at the jobsite working, especially an unthinking mercenary who is committed to fight for a prescribed period, usually measured in years, in the cause of another rather than for patriotism, fortune, or fame; from sakar and karah – to earn wages by hiring oneself out, bargaining to trade one’s labor for some other benefit, especially during a feast when bargaining over its provisions), the attribution of power and status (wa kabowd – the abundant wealth and dictatorial rulers, the vast property and extravagant possessions of those with high status and rank) will be seen as contemptible and will be disdained and condemned (qalah – will be viewed as degraded, even despised as loathsome and shameful, precipitating a shriveling up and withering away in ignominy) as it pertains to Mow’ab, the Politically Correct, Multicultural Socialist Secularists and Pauline Christians (Mow’ab – Who is Your Father; from ma – to question the who, what, and why of ‘ab – the father, the unthinking and warlike religious and political culture indoctrinated in the irrational and immoral cesspool of Sodom, having squandered the benefits of the Hebrew writings because they were twisted and intermixed with pagan lore to take them to the place where the Towrah’s voice died).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 16:14 (in part))

It is exciting to ponder the possibilities. When does this long, seemingly endless, three years commence and conclude? The internal clues suggest that we should attribute it to the final three to four years of the Time of Ya’aqob’s Troubles, more commonly known as the “Tribulation.” This would have it begin in the Summer of 2029 and conclude in the early Fall of 2033.

Encouraged by anti-Semitic Christians and by the liberal multiculturalists and socialists behind the increased levels of mindless and mundane employment, then armed and angered by America, Islamic Jihadists will flood into Israel at this time. Equally troubling, in the midst of this, the world will be incapacitated by global depression and carved into warring factions. Sunni Muslims will be aided and abetted by the United States and Europe while the Shia will be fighting on behalf of the Russians and Chinese. The assault against the Promised Land will be horrific, but Yisra’el will prevail as a result of Yahowah’s intervention. But as for the rest of the world, we would be wise to expect a nuclear confrontation which will be devastatingly deadly.

As we progress, it becomes ever more obvious that Yahowah isn’t speaking about the ancient kingdom of Mow’ab or even Jordan, on whose territory it once resided, but instead the Gentile nations, institutions, and peoples aligned with the Lord Ba’al, a.k.a., Satan through Paul’s influence.

“In all (ba kol – even with the totality) of its great (ha rab – its expansive, numerous, large, excess, and massive) wealth and agitated multitude, even its enormous military (hamown – riches and riotous people, possession-craving and noisy population, excessive troops and weapons, disgruntled and confused masses, most of whom are enraged and clamorous, disquieted and troubled, boisterous and chaotic, crying out loud and mourning), those who remain (wa sha’ar – the bodies and souls of those who are left, the residue and remnant, those still clinging to life who have been left behind) will be worthless and de minimis (ma’at – limited in number and easily countable, also feeble and diminished), lowly and little (miz’ar – of no value (serving as a synonym for Pauline Christians based upon the Latin name Paulos chose for himself, meaning “Lowly and Little”); from ze’yet – to exist for a short time, dwindling to nothingness thereafter and of no significance), the antithesis of enriched and empowered (lo’ kabyr – their lives ended, impoverished and without merit, estranged from the Almighty, powerless and incapacitated, contracted, diminished, and impoverished, ceasing to exist).” (Yasha’yah / Freedom is from Yahowah / Isaiah 16:14)

As a direct result of immorality and ignorance, greed and arrogance, as well as a heavy dose of general stupidity, Islamic fiefdoms are superbly armed by Christian and secular nations. But the militants will be no match for Yahowah who will destroy them and their weapons of war in the midst of their crusade against Yisra’el.

However, God will not intervene to protect America, Europe, Russia, or China. They, along with their Christian and Communist ideals, will be decimated. The enriched will be impoverished and the empowered will be incapacitated. Their collective political, economic, and military might will be vanquished. The resulting carnage will leave the world bereft of life.

The few worthless souls who remain, those who are still under the spell of Paulos | the Lowly and Little, will be left to wonder what ever happened to the promises their Lord made to them in their New Testament. What happened to the American Dream, Manifest Destiny, the allure of anti-Semitic conspiracies, and the enlightened rhetoric of Multicultural Political Correctness? It will be ashes to ashes and dust to dust as they are all consumed in the atomic conflagration.

And while you may not yet concur with this extrapolation from the text, rest assured, Yahowah has a great deal more to say about the United States, Christianity, and Socialist Secular Humanism. He is about to issue a warning regarding their assault on His people and the ensuing war. And we will not have to wait long to hear it because this is the subject of Yasha’yah / Isaiah 17 and 18, which commence with His next word. As has been the case with every world power, no matter the size of their army nor their accumulated wealth, they eventually come crashing down – especially those who trifle with Yisra’el.

This has been a marvelously clear presentation of cause and consequence, of the nature of the modern manifestation of Mow’ab and what will befall them. Mow’ab represents a vast swath of people living without regard for Yahowah, including the Politically Correct, Liberal Socialists, Multicultural, Secular Humanists, and Pauline Christians. And while being political and religious is not recognized as a crime among humans, God cannot ignore what their ilk has done to harass Yisra’el and lead so many away from Him.



At this time, I would like to flesh out a tantalizing tidbit that I perceived not long ago. Paul was not just the Questionable Father of Christianity, Sha’uwl also laid the foundation for Multiculturalism and Political Correctness, the core tenents of Socialist Secular Humanism. And that is why Mow’ab is equal parts secular and sectarian, a blending together of the immoral and irrational mantra of Sodom with Christianity.

There are a number of reasons that I have drawn this conclusion. First, Paul’s most defining and beloved prose is presented in the “Love” chapter of 1st Corinthians. Sha’uwl’s “love conquers all” has become the heart and soul of those who disdain hate as part of the Liberal, Multicultural, Politically Correct, Socialist, Secular Humanist agenda so prevalent in the West today.

But it is more than just the immoral attitude of indiscriminate love without an aversion to that which is wrong, or the irrational notion of loving before knowing – even though both permeate Western society. We must turn off our brains to love Sha’uwl | Question Him. Even in the detailed strokes of his most beloved presentation, this man became the Questionable Father of modern Mow’ab, which reveals his duplicity. So, let’s review 1 Corinthians 13, one Pauline claim at a time.

Foreshadowing the Politically Correct influence on Multiculturalism and Liberalism, Sha’uwl’s lone and failed attempt to compete against Dowd | David, Yahowah’s Beloved, became little more than a hypocritical contradiction in the end. Most of Paul’s letters, including those he wrote to the Galatians, Corinthians, Philippians, Ephesians, Thessalonians, and Hebrews opened with Sha’uwl disparaging those communities for turning against him. It is, therefore, incongruous and hypocritical for him to speak of being the paradigm for unconditional love. The same is true of liberals who march in the streets today, carrying signs and shouting slogans such as “Love trumps hate,” “Love! Not hate! Make America great!” or “No justice! No Peace!” while they, themselves, hate those who are critical of their ridiculous notions. They are more hateful than those they oppose.

As is the case with the me-myself-and-I self-centered attitude of modern Mow’ab, even Paul’s “love chapter” is self-centered. From beginning to end, he keeps the focus on himself. He did not state that his followers should love, but instead:

“If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love (charity in the KJV), I am only a resounding (sounding brass in the KJV and noisy in the ESV and NLT) gong or a clanging cymbal.” (1 Corinthians 13:1 NIV)

The most rational explanation for this self-justifying approach is that Sha’uwl’s “love chapter” is actually his mea culpa, his plea to have his shortcomings and abject failures overlooked. Just as the pretense of love is a smokescreen for many of the most hateful and envious of the Politically Correct and Liberal Multiculturalists today, this was also so with Paul.

I have occasionally wondered why Sha’uwl | Question Him chose such an obscure metaphor with the “clanging cymbal” and why he replicated it with the “noisy sounding brass gong.” Having found the answer, it affirms my theory. From beginning to end, the wannabe apostle Sha’uwl was in competition with Dowd, Yahowah’s Beloved son, the man God actually mashyach | anointed as His Messiah to lead and instruct His people.

In the lyrics of his first Mizmowr / Psalm, Dowd | David declared that Yahowah’s Towrah was the love of His life, and that everything worthwhile about him was a result of thoughtfully considering and sharing God’s Towrah | Teaching and Guidance. By contrast, Sha’uwl | Paul committed his life to silencing the Towrah’s voice.

Dowd’s concluding Mizmowr / Psalm is the 150th. It begins: “You should choose to shine a light of appreciation (halal) on Yah (Yah).”

It concludes: “You should, of your own freewill, proudly commend Him (halal huw’) with a loud announcement which can be heard coming from (‘al shema’) a clanging cymbal (tsaltsal).

Decide of your own freewill to clearly acclaim His worthiness (halal huw’) with a resounding alarm and shout for joy upon (taruw’ah ‘al) a percussive brass gong (tsaltsal).

Let every (kol) soul with a conscience, with the ability to understand (neshamah), literally and continually, clearly and proudly, celebrate and announce one’s appreciation (halal) for Yah (Yah).

You should choose to shine luminously, brightly showing the enlightening and commendable nature (halal) of Yah (Yah).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics / Psalm 150:5-6)

And now we know. As it was with the wannabe King Sha’uwl, since Dowd was right, Sha’uwl was wrong. It was obvious, and he knew it, so this was nothing more than a cheap swipe at the man God actually chose to reveal His nature and purpose to all mankind. Taking that which was proclaimed by and was given to Dowd, and repositioning it to serve his twisted agenda, is the heart and soul of what made Sha’uwl | Paul so malicious and malignant.

Usurping Dowd’s prose was just the beginning. Sha’uwl would misappropriate David’s Messianic title and his calling as the Son of God. He did so because Dowd was afforded the titles which were needed to justify Sha’uwl’s claims regarding Iesou Christo. The many hundreds of prophecies pertaining to Dowd had to be shifted in favor of the Christian god to give Iesou Christo a divine veneer. A new religion could not be based upon the Passover Lamb, so Dowd’s God-given identification as the Son of God and Messiah, King of Kings and Shepherd, the Chosen One and Cornerstone, the Right Hand of God and Prophet, the one whose life would be restored and who would be returning, were usurped and erroneously given to Sha’uwl’s Lord. It was the most egregious heist in history.

Dowd was plundered by Sha’uwl for yet another reason. David epitomizes the realization that Paul’s opposition to Yahowah’s Towrah was without merit. Dowd, as a flawed man, was made right with God and was vindicated as a result of the Towrah. God’s Teaching did not condemn him – it saved him.

Pursuing the conclusion of his initial point, and wholly unlike those in the Covenant who benefited from Shabuw’ah, Paul could not speak in the tongues of men. He needed interpreters and also scribes because the quality of his writing was deplorable and his reasoning deficient. Even with them, the text of his letters has to be revamped and rehabilitated to appear credible. Even his public pronouncements were so appalling, almost every community in which he spoke rejected him. And his predilection to revisionist history renders everything he claimed suspect. It would all serve as a harbinger for modern Mow’ab, the land of texts and tweets, a time when the language is impoverished and logic is dead.

“And if I have prophetic powers…” (1 Corinthians 13:1 ESV) Unlike all of Yahowah’s actual messengers, Sha’uwl | Question Him was not a prophet. In his lone attempt – the “Rapture” – he got everything wrong, including the violent nature of being snatched away and the timing, which he missed by nearly twenty centuries.

Therefore, Paul knows that for the foolish to believe him, they will have to overlook this glaring deficiency. Likewise, today, few preachers or pundits bother to authenticate his or her work. They neither appreciate the value of context nor understand the lessons from the past which explain the present and shape the future. And even with God telling us what is going to happen, they remain clueless as to who is returning (Yahowah, not Yahowsha’), when (Yowm Kipurym 6000 Yah [10.02.2033]), why (to reconcile His relationship with Yisra’el), or with whom (Dowd to serve as King).

And speaking of being wrong, there is no such thing as “prophetic powers.” There is no “gift of prophecy,” either. Paul was mistaken on both accounts. It is Yahowah who has the power to reveal the future in our past, not the men or women through whom He reveals this information. Moreover, being a prophet is anything but a gift. Speaking for God irks far more people than it pleases.

“And if I…can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith…” (1 Corinthians 13:2 NIV) Paul needed his audience to overlook the fact that he could not contribute to our ability to understand man’s purpose, our opportunity, or responsibility. Nor could he credibly demystify God’s nature, distinguishing Yahowah from the religious gods men had made.

This was, of course, the opposite of what we find among Yahowah’s prophets, where God, who is set apart, becomes knowable, and, therefore, understanding eliminates the need for faith. Those of us who read what Yahowah revealed so long ago are enlightened and enriched by an unending array of brilliant insights – not even a whiff of which is found in Sha’uwl’s fourteen epistles.

This is also reminiscent of modern Mow’ab, a time of great scientific achievement in the midst of an explosion of information, when scarcely one in a million contributes to what can be known and understood about Yahowah, who He is, what He is offering, and what He expects in return. In fact, today, most people not only don’t care, like Paul, they are averse to His message because it is counter to their own.

Paul’s insistence that love trumps knowledge and understanding is not only incongruous with everything we have learned from Yahowah, it is emblematic of today’s Politically Correct and Multicultural society. Truth is universally rejected when it is in opposition to the irrational concept of accepting, even respecting, mutually exclusive and wholly incompatible ideas as being equally valid.

Sha’uwl’s fallacy has, therefore, come to underpin the debilitating notion that opinions are entitlements which should never be challenged by evidence or reason. The Christian makes no distinction between the things of God and Babel, which makes his polytheistic faith so luxuriant. As a result of indoctrination and intoxicants, man’s world has become such an unmitigated and counterproductive web of lies, socially, politically, religiously, militarily, economically, and conspiratorially, like Pauline Doctrine, without blind faith, it would all come crashing down.

Speaking of faith, the amount of it is irrelevant. A modicum of faith in that which is true will prevail, while all manner of faith in that which is unreliable is useless, even counterproductive.

“…but have not love, I am nothing…” (1 Corinthians 13:2 NIV) Okay, let’s admit it. Paul got that one right. He was nothing, of less value than navel lint.

“If I give away all I possess…” (1 Corinthians 13:3) In breach of God’s instructions, Paul was never charitable, and then demanded it from others, especially when he was the beneficiary. Moreover, our charity does not impress God. Being good does not matter either. With God we are assessed on a single condition: being right. In this regard, Sha’uwl and Dowd were opposites.

The Pauline approach to giving is similar to today’s Mow’abites who are unwilling to work and yet demand that those who have been successful surrender their wealth to them. Those who are the least charitable pretend to be moral and enlightened when they condemn the most philanthropic. Given their way, those who have been productive would have to surrender all they have earned to those who have failed to accomplish anything with their lives. Punishing success while rewarding failure is even touted as enlightened, compassionate, progressive, and fair.

“…and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.” (1 Corinthians 13:3) This is wrong every which way. Human sacrifice has always been the most hideous expression of religion. The reason Yahowah turned the Mow’abites over to the whims of Yisra’el is that King Mesha sacrificed his own son and then burned ten thousand men, women, and children alive to appease his Lord. From God’s perspective, it was akin ridding His home of the plague. There is nothing loving about human sacrifice. It is always wrong. Self-immolation is the worst of the worst.

But the author of this pathetic claim was in competition with Yahowsha’. Sha’uwl | Question Him bragged about all of the physical hardships he endured, actually fabricating almost all of them. He would claim that his sacrifices were actually required to finish the job Yahowsha’ inadequately fulfilled.

Then, when he was challenged by the Yahuwdym | Jews who listened to his speeches and recognized that he was contradicting the very words of the God he claimed inspired him, Paul responded with an ad hominem attack, calling his opponents “Judaizers.” Then engaging in another fallacy, Paul played to his audiences’ sympathies, suggesting that they ought to believe a man who would take a beating for his beliefs. If that were true, we should all be honoring suicide bombers.

This misguided notion of personal sacrifice would reverberate throughout the ages into its current expression in today’s Politically Correct, Multicultural, Socialist Secular Humanist, and Pauline Christian societies. Patriots are told to admire the sacrifices of those who gave their lives fighting for their country in the misguided notion that warriors are responsible for the freedom, security, and prosperity of a nation. This myth is part of the putrid glue which binds modern Mow’ab together, and it is a myth which is embraced by the religious right and political left.

Incidentally, other than adulation and fame, neither of which is appropriate among those serving with Yah, what was Sha’uwl | Question Him seeking to gain? Even when our message accurately reflects Yahowah’s testimony, we gain nothing by sharing it because it is for the benefit of those who are willing to listen. Even our personal enrichment and enlightenment, our liberation and empowerment, our sense of confidence and courage, are all unaffected by our love. They are the result of observing and considering, not emotional feelings.

Moreover, we are not giving anything to anyone. The benefits of the Covenant are not ours to bestow, but instead Yahowah’s to offer. So, unless Sha’uwl wants the faithful to believe that he is the source of salvation, the extent that he is considered loving is irrelevant.

“Love does not envy; it does not boast; it is not arrogant…” (1 Corinthians 13:4) This gave birth to the hypocrisy the modern manifestation of the Mow’abites would manifest, because the man who wrote these words was the most envious and braggadocious individual to ever claim Divine inspiration. To read Paul’s letters, and particularly the confession found at the conclusion of his second epistle to Corinth, and then compare it to these words, leaves us with a single acceptable conclusion: Paul lied.

Sha’uwl was not only a conceited and bombastic hypocrite, the only person he actually loved was the one man he circumcised, Timothy. At the very least, based upon this act and his confession in Romans 7, Paul was confused over his sexual orientation. Today in modern Mow’ab, social arrogance is prolific. The preponderance of liberals boast about their social and political views while conservatives brag about their sense of patriotism, in their military and on behalf of their religion.

And of course, in modern Mow’ab, sexual mores are exceedingly disorienting, with all manner of abnormal behaviors being considered praiseworthy. Perversions prevail.

Incidentally, in this context, the only appropriate definition of “envy” would be “to want to be loved in return.” As such, Paul is wrong. Love always seeks its own. It is best when reciprocated and worst when rebuffed.

“…or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful.” (1 Corinthians 13:5 ESV) It is hard to read these words and type at the same time, because I am shaking my head in wonder. Second only to his admitted arrogance, Paul is best-known for “insisting on his own way.” Anyone who disagreed with “but I Paul say” was viciously attacked and condemned – they still are.

As for irritable, resentful, and rude, read what Paul has to say about Yahowsha’s Disciples “Peter,” “John,” and “James,” as well as his critics, the alleged “Judaizers.” He called the Galatians “traitors” as well as “stupid.” And while Sha’uwl was often enraged, even violent by his own admission, his greatest crime was denouncing and demeaning Yahowah, His Towrah, His Covenant, and His prophets. He did so for a single reason: to be seen as superior to all – even the chosen.

And that makes a mockery of the NIV translation of these same words: “It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered.” (1 Corinthians 13:5 NIV) Sha’uwl was the living embodiment of everything he said he opposed. It is little wonder She’owl was named after Sha’uwl. He offered his soul for the naming rights.

“…It keeps no record of wrongs.” (1 Corinthians 13:5 NIV) Paul wrote these words as a smokescreen, knowing that he had been wrong about everything. It was also conveyed to dismiss what was written in the Towrah, Prophets, and Psalms – wherein Yahowah holds His people and others accountable, consistently differentiating between right and wrong.

A society with social amnesia, as is the case with ours today, that keeps no record of wrongs is assured of never learning – always getting worse, never better. This is not only emblematic of the unwillingness to admit the cause of 9/11 or holding Islam accountable, for example, but it is also a core element of Political Correctness, and thus of modern Mow’ab. Another example would be Black Lives Matter seeking to blame Whites for killing Blacks when the opposite is true. When a Black man or woman is murdered, 93% of the time, the perpetrator is also Black. And in interracial crime, in which the victim and assailant are of different ethnicities, 80% of the time the offender is Black. The record of wrongs proves that they are wrong.

Similarly, the liberal response to the spread of the Covid 19 virus has been to deprive everyone of their liberty and livelihood. Even when it was demonstrated that the lockdowns made no difference in the spread of the disease, and that they were counterproductive, causing severe psychological problems while greatly exacerbating domestic abuse, suicide, drug addiction, and economic devastation, the response was to expand the degree of government control over people’s lives. Worst of all, the “fear porn” promoted in the media caused the preponderance of people to capitulate, willingly surrendering their freedom.

A number of years ago, I began a collection entitled Observations by bluntly stating that “Hate is a virtue.” The problem isn’t a deficiency in love, but instead a failure in knowing what and how to hate. We ought to despise Sha’uwl for the hell he has unleashed upon God’s People. Likewise, we should disdain rape and rapists, murder, incest, and pedophilia, kidnapping, bribery, and blackmail, along with those who deprive people of their freedom, livelihood, and dignity.

While they would not use “delight” or “rejoice,” this is something we would expect to hear from politicians presenting their political agenda while demeaning their opponents: “Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.” (1 Corinthians 13:6 NIV)

Paul, like today’s Christian preachers and Secular politicians, defines “evil” as anything that was counter to his own mantra. And truth became relative, whereby it was true if he said it and false if it came from a contrarian source, even if that source was God. Today, in modern Mow’ab, as was the case in ancient Sodom, truth is defined by what is acceptable and popular, and thus Politically Correct – even when wrong.

And speaking of Multicultural and Politically Correct rubbish, this could be the byline of many liberal Socialist Secular Humanist organizations: “Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.” (1 Corinthians 13:7 ESV) It is also mistaken from beginning to end.

To love, we must reject, even oppose, those who would harm our family. The Multicultural notion that we should endure and embrace religions like Islam when Muslims perpetrate 99% of all terrorist acts, abuse hundreds of millions of women, and are intolerant of everyone else is irresponsible and suicidal.

To be rational, we must reject what is untrue. Believing all things is absurdly stupid, because most religious, political, military, and conspiratorial pontifications are false. But that is what Paul and the Politically Correct he inspired must have the masses conditioned to accept, otherwise those who dare exercise good judgment would destroy their credibility.

There is nothing good that comes from false hope. It placates believers to the point that they become too complacent to search for that upon which they can confidently rely. It is the public’s placebo, something they swallow and then hope for the best. But in being placated by it, they spurn remedies that would actually prevail.

At its heart, the Multicultural and Politically Correct mantra of liberal Socialist Secular Humanism expounds the preposterous notion that “love never fails.” (1 Corinthians 13:8)

If that were true, then God does not love. And if Christians were rational, they would reject their religion on this basis alone, because they believe in an all-loving god. Moreover, Socialist Secular Humanists would forego their assemblies because, in the long history of man, love has never prevailed over might.

By placing his words, “but I Paul, say…,” above the words of the Most High, and in lockstep with the arrogant spirit who possessed him, Sha’uwl would convey the antithesis of what Yahowah has communicated to us. He wrote: “But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away.” (1 Corinthians 13:8 NIV) This is utter nonsense. And yet it must be accepted as true for one to respect Paul and be a Christian.

Just because Paul was a false prophet, does not bring closure to prophesy. Even in eternity, what Yahowah has said will ring true. Moreover, God’s prophecies run the gamut of time, meaning that they are also accurate historically. Paul, and those he inspired in modern Mow’ab, may prefer revisionist history and replacement theology, but the truth never goes out of style.

As for tongues, Paul’s interpretation of babbling like idiots has never been good or Godly. That which was never sanctioned would have no reason to be stilled. During forever, we will speak in the language of Yahowah – Hebrew.

Knowledge is the enemy of Faith, just as is light for darkness. One cannot exist in the presence of the other.

Rather than knowledge passing away, it is what will get us into heaven and what will occupy and excite us while we are there.

If I may quote Yahowsha’ on this issue, He said: “Do not assume that I have come to weaken, invalidate, or abolish the Towrah or the Prophets. I have not come to do away with it, but instead to completely fulfill it.

Truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one jot, the smallest letter in Hebrew, nor tittle, the strokes comprising Hebrew letters, shall pass away or be disregarded from that which was established in the Towrah until the time and place it all happens.

Therefore, whoever dismisses or invalidates the least of these terms and conditions, or teaches people to do the same, they will be called ‘Lowly and Little’ in the kingdom of heaven.

And whoever acts upon them, and teaches them, they will be called ‘Significant’ in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:17-19)

Communication between Yahowah and His creation is about to become much more prolific, and our ability to know and understand will grow exponentially, especially as we receive His towrah | guidance. According to the prophecy in Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 31, a time is quickly approaching when Yahowah will place a copy of His Towrah | Teaching inside of His Covenant’s children. It will serve to guide us throughout eternity as we explore the universe.

It is, however, truly amazing that even bolstered by scientific advancements, lightning-fast computers, a proliferation of knowledge, and instant worldwide communication, man can’t seem to predict the consequences of invading Afghanistan, of giving Iraq to Iran, initiating the Syrian war, of coddling Islam such that women continue to be abused, or of selling Islamic nations American weapons.

He would even write, “for now we see only a reflection as in a mirror.” (1 Corinthians 13:12 NIV) It was a reference to the Sophist philosophy of Socrates.

“Mirroring” became known as the Socratic Method, or “Method of Elenchus,” which Socrates applied to examine the key moral concepts such as Good versus Evil, as well as Truth and Justice. Socrates, by turning his hypothetical “mirror” upon himself, was seen as “modern man,” as a philosopher placed in a world that did not yet understand him. And like Sha’uwl, Socrates was a very religious man who was guided by his demon. And Socrates, like Paul, thought that only he, and those who accepted his philosophy, were qualified to impose their will on others. Even more interesting, Socrates wrote that communal love was superior to anything the Athenian gods had to say, making him an interesting individual for Paul to emulate.

I do not concur with Paul’s assessment. I have been translating Yahowah’s Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr, while sharing the insights derived from God’s Word, since 2002, often devoting ten hours a day, six days a week to this endeavor. The truth is the antithesis of Paul’s occluded and inverted view. Yahowah’s message is straightforward and clearly presented. The closer we look, the more we learn.

There is, however, a vivid contrast between an unencumbered observation and the twisted perversions we would expect from a carnival mirror. This is attested by comparing any one of Dowd’s Psalms with Paul’s epistles. The resulting contrast is enlightening versus intoxicating, brilliant verse obscured, and logical rather than absurd.

The reference to a mirrored reflection was likely Sha’uwl’s way of justifying his convoluted prose. The observant will also recognize that what we are gazing upon when we read his letters is the same bizarre figure he witnessed when looking in a mirror. We are seeing Paul, himself, reflected in his words.

Paul would conclude his ode to his pagan trinity with: “And now these three remain: Faith, Hope, and Love. But the greatest of these is Love.” (1 Corinthians 13:13 NIV) Faith and Hope are the same things. Neither has any evidential value.

For a passenger aboard the Sinking Ship of Christendom, the SS Paul, all the faith in the world will not keep it afloat. It will be scuttled upon Dowd’s return, with the officers escorted to She’owl. You can hope that God will save you, but it isn’t going to happen. It is, therefore, wasted energy and counterproductive, keeping the faithful and hopeful from choosing and pursuing a viable option.

Faith in something as worthless as Pauline Christianity provides nothing other than false hope. It is cruel. As for love, like faith, its value can be no greater than the object of its attention, which is why it is more often debilitating than enabling. We humans tend to love what we should hate and hate what we should love. Like religion, the emotion often incapacitates an individual, blinding them to the truth while precluding them from dealing with reality.

What is left in the end is truth. And what remains credible and reliable is Yahowah, His Towrah, and His Covenant.

Pistis was the Greek god of Faith. He was known as Fides in Latin, denoting a belief that drove to the heart of Greco-Roman, and now American, culture. Pistis became one of Paul’s favorite Greek words, permeating his letters. In fact, Paul’s Salvation by Faith was extrapolated from this goddess’ name and borrowed from the rhetorical notions of Greek Gnosticism and mythology.

In Greece at the time, the priests and philosophers alike viewed pistis | faith as a pervasive approach to elliptical thinking where the focus was on the effect rather than the truth. This notion has been swallowed wholesale by both Christians and Socialist Secular Humanists. It is the underpinning of Political Correctness.

During Paul’s day, as the Roman Republic transitioned into Imperial Rome, faith was broadly expressed by the slogan, Pia Fidelis. It was first used to show the Roman Legions’ loyalty to the Emperor by placing the image of the pagan goddess, Minerva, on their standards. The Legio I was even named after the goddess and was consecrated by and fought alongside Julius Caesar. Minerva, in her Greek manifestation, Athena, was the model for the Statue of Liberty, from which the ultimate expressions of Multiculturalism are celebrated.

In that it is interesting, the XI Legion was awarded the cognomen of Pia Fidelis six times. It was wielded by Julius Caesar in his campaign against the Helvetians in 58 BCE. It was deployed again against Caesar’s rival, Pompey the Great, in 49 BCE when Julius invaded Italy. Reconstituted under Octavian, it was used by the Second Triumvirate against Brutus and Cassius in the battle of Philippi – the location of Paul’s letter to the Philippians. Later, Octavian would deploy Legio XI Claudia to gain supremacy over the Mediterranean world, renaming himself, Augustus. Then just as Paul was writing these words, the XI Legion was again awarded the Pia Fidelis by Claudius to suppress an internal rebellion. But that’s not the end of the story.

The Legion Fidelis sided with Vespasian, the man responsible for destroying the Temple in Yaruwshalaim. And during the reign of Hadrian, a unit carved out of the XI Legion was sent to Judaea to suppress the messianic revolt of Rabbi Akiba and Simon Bar Kokhba in 133 CE – one of the most brutal engagements Rome ever fought.

The acceptance of an institution, for which there is no credence, is a matter of faith. As church fathers wrote in defense of Paul’s faith-based, knowledge-deprived, doctrine: “Faith is neither the submission of reason, nor the acceptance, simply and absolutely upon testimony, of what reason cannot achieve. Faith is being able to cleave to a power of goodness appealing to our higher and real selves, not our lower and apparent selves.” (From Literature and Dogma 1873)

Elpis was the personification of Hope in Greek mythology. Considering Paul’s affinity for acclaim, it is telling that she was the mother of Pheme – the goddess of fame and renown.

Aphrodite was the Greek goddess of Love. She was worshiped as Venus in Rome and considered the Morning Star. Her cult was centered in Cyprus and Corinth, the place from which Paul had just come and the very place he wrote this ode to Love. She was the Greek version of ‘Astarte, also known as Ishtar – from whom Pauline Christians find their devotion to the Madonna and Child, the Queen of Heaven, the Mother of God, and for Easter. According to Paul, to the Greeks, and to the Babylonians before them, she is the greatest of all.

But alas, Sha’uwl lied, not only contradicting God but also himself. For with him, and based upon his letters, these three remained: the Charities, Satan, and Paul. And the greatest of these was Paul.

In addition to his Politically Correct and Multicultural essay on love, Paul is responsible for the Christian amalgamation of Church and State. This is firmly established in the letter Paul devoted to the Romans. In what could have been entitled, “Heil Caesar,” Paul claimed that all governments, especially Rome’s, were Divinely authorized and that men should be subservient to them.

As we survey what Paul promoted in the 13th chapter of Romans, we should remain cognizant of the fact that Yahowah, through the prophet Dany’el | Daniel, called Imperial Rome the most vicious Beast to grow out of Babylon. Also, since context and perspective are essential to understanding, keep in mind that Imperial Rome humiliated, whipped, and crucified Yahowsha’ – torturing him to death. It was Imperial Rome that destroyed Yahowah’s Temple. Rome used what they stole from it to build their Colosseum – a site where the worst of human behavior was celebrated in the name of religion, politics, and militarism.

It was Imperial Rome that returned sixty years later to bludgeon the Chosen People and destroy the Promised Land. They would rename Yahuwdah after the now extinct Philistines as their way of saying that Rome was more influential than Yisra’el, Yahuwdym, or Yahowah. And lest we forget, it was Imperial Rome that evolved into the final Beast, the Whore of Babylon, that has tread upon the whole world – the Roman Catholic Church. Mankind has known no greater menace nor more unGodly institution. And yet according to Paul, their torturous Inquisition was God’s will.

Those looking to identify the modern manifestation of Mow’ab need look no further than what grew out of the integration of Paul’s Multicultural and Politically Correct Love Story and his endorsement of Roman authority. Emperor Theodosius implemented the result, as Imperial Rome became the Roman Catholic Church beginning in 400 CE. For the next 1400 years, cleric and king would impose their will over Europe, effectively enslaving the serfs.

Consistent with the priests of Babylon, Egypt, Greece, and Rome, and wholly incompatible with Yahowah’s prophets, Sha’uwl | Question Him blended religion and politics together and wrote glowingly of man’s most abusive regime. They have become modern Mow’ab.

On the Secular side of this equation, the Socialists behind Political Correctness and Multiculturalism strive to impose government control over every aspect of people’s lives – including what they believe in, hope for, and love. The more intrusive and controlling the better. They trust the government and depend upon it. They view government service as man’s highest calling.

And now with the onslaught of Covid 19, liberals have seized upon the opportunity to control everyone’s lives along with their livelihoods, shuttering business and depriving freedoms. But little do they know that their ignorance will bite everyone in the end, with their authoritarian response to the virus becoming vastly more costly and deadly than the disease itself. God is right; mankind is a plague upon this planet.

If that were not enough, we must also be mindful that to be included in Yahowah’s Covenant, we must do the opposite of what Paul has written – which is to walk away from one’s country. As you read these words and consider the vicious history of nations and empires, contemplate how it is possible that anyone believed Sha’uwl | Question Him after he claimed his God authorized the following...

“Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted. And those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good.

But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment, but also a matter of conscience.” (Romans 13:1-5)

In the long litany of putrid prose that flowed from Paul’s poison pen, this bogus bill, second only to his pathetic attempts to negate the Towrah and replace its Covenant, was the deadliest and debilitating. It is how the beast that was Imperial Rome morphed into the ultimate monster – the Roman Catholic Church. It is how cleric and king managed to enslave Europe and conquer lands for millennia.

In this regard, the deadly and debilitating consequence of King Sha’uwl foreshadows the self-proclaimed Apostle Sha’uwl. Both were pro-government and claimed God’s authority and authorization. And yet both were disowned by Yahowah because of their dismissal and perversion of His Towrah Instructions. And thereafter, both were demon-possessed. Both were Benjamite wolves who devoured the unsuspecting. Both were resolute adversaries of Dowd, Yahowah’s beloved. And both led all who followed them to their demise.

Speaking of government, Paul, like the embodiment of Mow’ab which would follow, was socialistic. His version of the church was predicated upon from each according to their ability and to each according to their need. It was all about donating, I mean, sharing the wealth.

Paul was multicultural, claiming the entire world of nations and ethnicities estranged from Yisra’el for himself. He was yesteryear’s globalist. And he embraced the cultures and religions of other nations. After being struck blind and lame, he began his crusade in Damascus, a place Yahowah clearly detests. Then he sailed off to Cyprus, where Paul consulted with Bar-Yahshua’ – a sorcerer. In Corinth he met with Aquila who had just come from Rome during the time Rome was banishing Jews. He even sailed with him across the Aegean to Ephesus to meet Apollos – a man named after the king of Greek gods. He would then appeal to Caesar during his meeting with Governor Porcius Festus, which led to an audience with the Roman-appointed Edowmite king over the Roman province of Yahuwdah. He would write Romans in Greece, and Hebrews in Rome.

Paul was Politically Correct. He said what his Greek and Roman audiences wanted to hear, even when what he was saying was incorrect. Truth was relative, and contradictions were always acceptable. If he were alive today, at times, his oratory would find favor among conspiratorialists who are fixated upon inventing theories which enable them to blame others for their miserable lives. Given the chance, his antics would be amazingly popular among the patriotic neocons devoted to a fellow narcissist, Donald Trump. And yet ever the chameleon, much of what Paul touted would resonate with the socialist dunderheads marching in the streets today demanding something for nothing based upon one fictitious premise or another. He, like the spirit inspiring him, offered bait in many flavors.

Paul tried, albeit pathetically, to present himself as enlightened and philosophical, incorporating Gnosticism, the religious philosophy of Greece, into his speeches and letters. Promoted by the likes of Socrates and Plato, Gnosticism was manifest as progressive, intellectual spirituality predicated on the presumption of enlightenment. Today it underlies the philosophy of liberal Socialist Secular Humanists. However, let it be known, like the Politically Correct, the Greeks were wrong about most everything.

Similar to liberals today, Paul was eager to debate, believing that his platitudes would prevail as evidence after rational parameters were discarded. Likewise, Paul recognized that people prefer the ease of offering opinions to the challenge of forming an enlightened and considered conclusion.

Paul was forgiving of everything and everyone with the exception of those who challenged him. Toward them he was hateful and slanderous. This too is mirrored in modern liberalism. Those who march as protestors despise those who disagree with them while pretending to denounce hate. They are a living contradiction.

In this vein, Paul, like most modern liberals, is allied with diverse audiences by stoking anti-Semitic rhetoric. He would be right at home promoting the mythology of the so-called “Palestinians” while advancing their irrational and immoral Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement.

In keeping with the most acclaimed pastors and politicians, Paul presented himself as man’s savior. He was Akiba and Bar Kokhba, Vespasian and Hadrian, Constantine and Theodosius, Muhammad and Hitler, Lenin and Mao, all before their time.



Questioning Paul

Incredible

…Testing Faith

2

Anti-Semite

Worse than his Writing…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Iliad 24:

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

Mark 15:42-16:2:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And according to Paul, that was good news…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

As a result, Yahowah asks the religious…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Yahowah, stated otherwise…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“This is the prophetic pronouncement (ha masa’) which, for the benefit of the relationship and to show the way to get the most enjoyment out of life (‘asher), was received as a revelation by way of witnessing a prophetic vision of the future by (chazah) Chabaquwq | 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 (), shall I plead for relief during this desperately horrible and dangerous situation (shawa’) because (wa) You will not actually listen for a prolonged period of time (lo’ shama’) to my anguished appeal and summons (za’aq)?

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

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

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

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

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).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

As we are aware, Yahowah would also encourage…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You have actually appointed for him (sym huw’), accordingly (wa) the Rock (tsuwr) which You have 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)?

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

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

And yet, concerning this (‘al ken), he is elated, being 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), through them (ba hem) he is enriched and satisfied (shaman), through seductive words while he claims a share of his persuasive plot (cheleq huw’).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



Questioning Paul

Incredible

…Testing Faith

3

Dowd

Yahowah’s Great Love…

It is, of course, telling that so many have shown animosity toward Dowd’s status with God, preferring to see Jesus, Akiba, Paul, or Muhammad in his place serving as the messenger or Messiah. And yet, we are best served when our perspective on this man at the center of Yahowah’s witness is consistent with God’s presentation of him.

According to the Almighty, Dowd | David represents everything that is towb | productive, pleasing and tsadaq | right. He is the beloved son, the branch from which everything worthwhile grows, the prophet who explained the past and revealed the future, the lyricist who sang the songs God most loved to hear, the shepherd of our Father’s sheep, the king of God’s people, the man who taught us how to observe the Towrah. He is the living exemplar of the Covenant, Yahowah’s Chosen One, His Right Hand, and Messiah.

Dowd was brilliant and articulate beyond comparison. He was a fighter and a lover, both courageous and compassionate. He was cerebral and emotional.

Dowd | David is living proof that the Towrah not only instructs and guides, but indeed saves, nullifying the basis of Christianity. As such, his foes are those who have chosen to ignore all of this and establish political institutions and religious doctrines in conflict with his life and lyrics – beginning with Sha’uwl, known as the Apostle Paul today.

Should you think that I am being presumptuous in presenting such an intimate correlation between Dowd and the Towrah, and between the Towrah and being right, please consider the Beloved’s first Love Song. The 1st Mizmowr | Psalm begins…

“Joyful and blessed in the relationship, along the straightforward path which gives meaning to life, is the individual who is favored through the association, taking the proper strides to live a productive, prosperous, and joyful life.

He does not walk in the counsel of those who are religious and incorrect or among those who are authority figures, leading people astray, and who have missed the way.

He does not sit in the company of the ruling socio-religious influences of those who babble, confounding by ridiculing, presumptuously interpreting and arrogantly deriding. (Mizmowr / Psalm 1:1)

Instead, he genuinely desires and delights in Yahowah’s Towrah | Teaching. On His Towrah | Guidance, he meditates, giving serious thought and consideration to the information, thinking intently before he decides and speaks day and night. (Mizmowr / Psalm 1:2)

Its uplifting branches, even the smaller stems which grow up and leaf out, will never wither and he will never lack understanding.

He will never be played for a fool nor be held in contempt. He will never lose heart nor be concerned, regardless of the circumstances. He will never be considered foolish because he will always have the capacity to think and comprehend.

In everything that he engages in, with all he does, that he acts upon and endeavors to accomplish to show the way to the benefits of the relationship, he will succeed and prosper, successfully accomplishing the mission while consistently winning the argument, consistently proven correct. (Mizmowr / Psalm 1:3)

This is not true, nor even remotely similar, with those who are incorrect, with those who will be condemned for leading others astray and for misrepresenting God’s character. They are rather instead like the chaff which is driven away and refuted by the Spirit. (Mizmowr / Psalm 1:4)

Therefore, based upon this reasoning, those who are misleading and incorrect, having led others astray by misrepresenting God’s character, will not stand upright nor be restored during the Judgment when justice is administered. So it will be for those who are wrong and who have missed the way before the enduring community of witnesses of those who are upright and correct, valid and vindicated. (Mizmowr / Psalm 1:5)

Indeed, because Yahowah knows, He acknowledges and respects the way and journey through life of those who are upright and correct, valid and vindicated.

However, those whose path is incorrect, those whose way is opposed to the standard, and whose journey leads others astray, they will perish and be blotted out, exterminated and expelled.” (Mizmowr / Psalm 1:6)

Dowd observed Yahowah’s Towrah and was blessed with knowledge and understanding. Through it he became productive, validated, and vindicated, always correct on the issues which matter most.

Those who believe man’s mantras, whether they be political or religious, conspiratorial or militaristic, will remain confounded and confused. They will be judged and found to be wrong, exterminated and expelled.



We have just begun. Let’s turn the page and see where this all leads. Clearly neither Dowd nor Yah are partial to the preponderance of people and their proclivity for religion and politics.

Beyond providing an affirmation of His stance against the religion of the Gentiles, and therefore, Christianity, in these words Yahowah introduces us to the Messiah and Son of God. And lo and behold, it is Dowd, not Iesou Christo.

“For what reason, and toward what end, one should ask, do noisy and confused throngs of scheming and rebellious Gentiles gather together to conspire in open defiance, attempting to be noticed and gain attention through their contrived plots, erupting like an open wound, swirling around and churning things up for the moment as part of an unrestrained cult of worshipers promoting clandestine conspiracies, all while becoming hardened and unreachable?

The people of these nations, who are transformed while massing under an antiquated and unifying religious, political, and conspiratorial leader, choose to plot and speak such that they are driven away by their choices and utterances.

Having wrongly decided after selectively searching, they mutter their musings aloud, growling their imagined grievances and intrapersonal beliefs, all formed after perusing highly selective information to scheme against and expel the people who are the focus of their complaint, doing so in vain.

Deluded in their fantasies, they reflect their unfulfilling and empty lives and their dissatisfaction with their situation. It is all done to their disadvantage.” (Mizmowr / Psalm 2:1)

The rulers, the governmental, religious, societal, and military leaders of the Earth, solely on their own initiative, continually set themselves up, prominently presenting themselves without justification or authorization.

Those who govern and who claim primacy of authority conspire and rebel altogether in a united fashion against, even over and above, Yahowah and against His Mashyach | Anointed Messiah. (Mizmowr / Psalm 2:2)

Let us choose of our own volition to break, tearing away their bonds which ensnare and control, their religious tethers and political restraints, rejecting their twisted interwoven threads which bind and immobilize. (Mizmowr / Psalm 2:3)

He who establishes His dwelling place in the spiritual realm of the heavens holds them in contempt and will pulverize them without concern.

This is because He disrespects and disdains them. Yahowah ridicules their foreign behavior and mocks their unfamiliar language while disparaging their unintelligible stammering. (Mizmowr / Psalm 2:4)

Then at the right time and place, He will express Himself toward them, showing His frustration and resentment. And in His burning indignation, He will overwhelm and bewilder them. (Mizmowr / Psalm 2:5)

I, myself, have offered leadership, exercising my authority by pouring out guidance, providing counsel to ponder and consider Tsyown | the Signs Posted Along the Way on my Set-Apart Mountain. (Mizmowr / Psalm 2:6)

I will choose to account for, proclaiming in writing, the decree, the thoughts and prescription for living, which cuts us into the relationship with the Almighty.

Yahowah said to me, ‘You are My son. This day, at this time, and in the light of this day, I am bringing you forth as your Father. (Mizmowr / Psalm 2:7)

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

You shall break up their evil nature and shatter their mistaken ways, tearing asunder their proclivity to mislead, with an iron staff and scepter, as if they were a potter’s vessel, just another means to contain and control.

And then You will shatter and separate them while breaking up their fragile and brittle objects, destroying them. (Mizmowr / Psalm 2:9)

Therefore, political and religious leaders, military and government officials, choose to be prudent and circumspect. Ponder the implications and consider this principled explanation, and as a result, choose to heed this warning. Demonstrate some personal responsibility and discipline and choose to accept this correction, exercising good judgment so as to make the rational decision to defend the Land. (Mizmowr / Psalm 2:10)

With reverence and respect, work with and serve alongside Yahowah and rejoice to the point of quivering. (Mizmowr / Psalm 2:11)

Reach out and make contact as a sign of affection, and demonstrate some mutual adoration for the relationship with the son, so as to eliminate any apprehension that he might become indignant and displeased and you perish, squandering your opportunity by wandering away in this manner. For indeed, his righteous indignation can be kindled for relatively few and comparatively little.

Joyful and blessed, in the relationship, stepping along the straightforward and correct path which gives meaning to life, are all who put their trust in him, finding the safe place he provides.” (Mizmowr / Psalm 2:12)

This guidance for our day is so monumental, it takes our breath away. God has not only explicitly renounced the religion and politics of the Gentiles, He also has told them that He will renounce their claims of authority and will break the bonds that they have established to ensnare and control the masses. Yahowah disrespects and resents Christians, and He is righteously indignant toward them.

Rebuking the Christian claims while affirming His perspective, Yahowah reveals that Dowd | David is the Messiah and Son of God. Those who concur will inherit the Earth, while the Land is cleansed of those who have been led to believe otherwise.

Moreover, it is Dowd who will be tasked with cleaning house, removing the stain of religion from the Earth. As a result, Yahowah is encouraging us to change our thinking in this regard before it is too late. He wants us to show Dowd, His Son and Messiah, his due. And that isn’t just because Yahowah is a proud and pleased Papa, but also because, by putting our trust in Dowd, what he has said and done will lead us to the safe place he is providing through his life and lyrics.



Here now are the Lyrics of the 3rd Mizmowr. Yisra’el: listen to him and come home. Yahuwdah: celebrate his return. For all others, come to realize that there is salvation through Dowd because he was not only right, but because he was forthright, sharing God’s word with all who would listen.

“Yahowah, what is the extent of the increasing number of my adversaries, and of the unfavorable situation those who oppose me have managed to perpetrate, especially with the overtly hostile narrowing of my purpose?

The majority of people rise up, many of whom are established, exalted, and powerful, standing fast against me. (Mizmowr / Psalm 3:1)

Many are saying of my soul, ‘There is no salvation for him or through him with God.’ Pause and consider the implications of this. (Mizmowr / Psalm 3:2)

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

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

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

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

I will not respect or fear the great multitude of people who from all around have taken positions on the perimeter and have set themselves up against me. (Mizmowr / Psalm 3:6)

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

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

Approach and draw near Yahowah for the salvation of your family and for your benefit. Pause and consider this.” (Mizmowr / Psalm 3:8)

This proclaims the Second Coming of Dowd. Will you be there celebrating his return?



Reconciled with Yahowah and satisfied with his life, lacking for nothing, Dowd’s spirit was willingly put into a state of suspended animation. He knows, as should we, that he will be awakened and live again, eternally restored. With absolute confidence we can trust Yahowah to reestablish Dowd’s home, renewing it such that this man and his God may live together as Father and Son. Consider this declaration your invitation to join them.

May we all benefit from these inspiring words because it is by coming to appreciate the relationship Dowd established with Yahowah, and how he went about doing so, that will protect us from harm’s way and lead us to this same place. Confusion over who Dowd is and what he represents in the grand scheme of life opened the door to the myths which became Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

“With regard to my announcement to be called out, to be invited and welcomed while reading and reciting aloud, answer me, providing the information I seek, especially as I sing, Almighty God of my vindication and of me being right.

In the event of trouble, when the area in which I live is narrowed and constrained, during unfavorable circumstances before especially hostile enemies, You have provided a breadth of opportunities for me, including vastly expanding my dwelling place along with providing ample relief, offering more than enough room for me to live and maneuver, expanding every spatial dimension for me along with building my confidence.

Choose to be merciful to me and supportive of me by Your own initiative. And choose to listen to my reasonable request and adoring communication. (Mizmowr / Psalm 4:1)

Sons of men, for how long shall my significance and value, my positive influence and gift of overwhelming riches, my overall respect and status, be depreciated and devalued, errantly considered as a source of confusion, confounding many?

Will you choose to continually love, prefer, desire, and romanticize, showing such affection for vain delusions which have no basis in fact, worthless myths, and empty lies, seeking after the irrational fables, the deceptive things and misconceptions associated with pagan deities which are untrue and will disappoint? Will you allow yourself to be betrayed and worship falsehood by believing liars? Pause now and contemplate this knowing that you were ransomed from this. (Mizmowr / Psalm 4:2)

Of your own volition, know and understand, acknowledging and then making known that, truly, Yahowah will deal differently with the steadfastly loyal, set apart, realistic, and authentic, drawing them unto Himself. Yahowah listens when I call out while I read, even upon mentioning and proclaiming His name to Him. (Mizmowr / Psalm 4:3)

Be provoked to anger, even enraged, showing intense displeasure, without being wrong. Choose to speak with regard to your conscience, based upon your intellect, and thus from the heart exercising good judgment, continuing to do so until you go to bed, then be quiet, still, and silent. Pause and contemplate this, reflecting upon the lyrics so as to reject and repudiate that which is errant. (Mizmowr / Psalm 4:4)

Extend appropriate sacrifices the correct way, seeking to be innocent and to prosper, and put your confidence and trust in Yahowah. (Mizmowr / Psalm 4:5)

A great many will ask, ‘Who will choose to reveal to us such that we can behold, observe, and consider something good, something useful and beneficial, something of value which is mutually agreeable, something suitable and desirable, something which makes sense and which is enriching and empowering?’

We genuinely want You to choose to lift up the prominent and enduring light of Your presence upon us, Yahowah. (Mizmowr / Psalm 4:6)

You have provided great joy, a sense of appreciation. I have a yearning to celebrate in my heart, such that it is integrated within my ability to exercise good judgment. This desire exceeds the time when the enhancing nature of the grain as well as the new wine abundantly increases by tens of thousands. (Mizmowr / Psalm 4:7)

Reconciled and in peace, saved and satisfied, complete and lacking nothing, having been treated fortuitously and now content, in friendship and tranquility, the relationship harmonious and affirmed, together and as one with Yah and completely alike Yah, I will lie down and be at rest, inactive for a bit, and then fall asleep for a long while.

Of my own volition, I consent to be put into an altered state of awareness one of these years of old until a new event in another time.

Indeed, this is because of You alone, uniquely, to the exclusion of all others. You are the only One who matters and are in a class by Yourself, Yahowah.

With absolute confidence, without risk or vulnerability, trusting and relying, totally secure, without any concern, You will cause and enable me to live, eternally restored, establishing in Your dwelling a place for me such that we will meet again and live together forevermore.” (Mizmowr / Psalm 4:8)

That was a treat for the eyes, ears, and mind. There should be no doubt that Dowd is our prophet, our Messiah, and the means for us to become sons and daughters of the Father.



It is with heightened anticipation and enthusiasm that we press on to the 5th of Dowd’s brilliantly illuminating Songs. There is so much we can learn.

And in the end, it all boils down to this: who do you trust? Is it Rabbi Akiba, the Apostle Paul, Muhammad, your president, prime minister, or king, your government, military, police, teachers, or economy? Or is it the man Yahowah trusted with His message, His name, His Covenant, and His People?

Was all of this hyperbole or was this man special…

“A Mizmowr Song of Dowd, the Beloved, to the enduring Leader and eternal Director, accompanied by stringed instruments.

I am encouraging you to choose to diligently listen and to thoughtfully consider, so that, of your own freewill, after paying attention and coming to understand by weighing each word, testing its veracity, and pondering its implications, you give serious thought to every nuance.

This is because I really want you to respond appropriately after rationally analyzing my message, each meaningful phrase and promise, these lyrics from the branch, even the shortest of them, and especially my most expressive and evocative statements.

It is in our mutual interests to make all of the proper connections so that we fully comprehend everything there is to know about Yahowah, considering the information with our full attention such that we become well-informed regarding my thought process, even my meditations, musings, and mutterings, my considered statements and fervent deliberations. (Mizmowr / Psalm 5:1)

I want you to choose to listen attentively, as I am desirous of you accepting what you hear as true, and then be inclined to respond accordingly. Our choices and desires should be in sync.

Let us be receptive to the sound of my urgent and significant request of my King and Advisor, my Leader, Counselor, and the Authority I consider, my God. Indeed, because exclusively unto You and for You I intervene and intercede, making requests and furnishing justification, persuading others to Your point of view. (Mizmowr / Psalm 5:2)

Yahowah, in the early part of the day when it is best to attend to and consider the acquisition of information, You hear the sound of my voice.

At daybreak, I make arrangements and prepare myself for You such that I’m competent and correct.

I pattern myself after You, making orderly preparations such that I’m ready for You to deploy me. I am properly positioned to be valuable and, therefore, worth using, such that I can engage quickly and thoughtfully, taking immediate action on Your behalf. Thereafter, I remain watchful and focused. (Mizmowr / Psalm 5:3)

For You are not a God who is willing to accept that which is wrong, who will waver or is swayed by that which is fraudulent, who is willing to endure injustice, or who is inclined to view the malicious and malevolent favorably.

That which is counterproductive and harmful cannot congregate or dwell together with You. It is completely alien to Your nature. (Mizmowr / Psalm 5:4)

Neither the arrogant nor the foolish, neither those who slander nor the irrational, neither the thoughtless nor the celebrated and renowned, can appear or stand before Your presence.

You abhor and are hostile to, shunning while never showing any compassion toward those who are engaged in, practice, or advance that which is deceitful and corrupt, twisted and perverted, encouraging worship which is damaging to the relationship and idolatrous. (Mizmowr / Psalm 5:5)

You destroy those who lie, especially those who promote false gods, along with anything which is contrary to reality, misleads, or disappoints.

Bloodthirsty individuals and deliberately deceitful men, especially those who use guile while pretending to be truthful, Yahowah sees as repulsive, viewing them as an abhorrent abomination. (Mizmowr / Psalm 5:6)

But as for me, through the abundance of Your mercy and steadfast love, even familial favoritism, I will arrive and have chosen to enter, while also guiding and directing others toward Your home.

I have chosen to convey an informative announcement, explaining this verbally, making it known. It is the purpose of Your family and my desire to continually speak about my reverence and respect for Your set-apart residence. (Mizmowr / Psalm 5:7)

May it be Your will and desire to lead me such that we continue to learn additional reasons to trust one another, choosing to guide me, creating opportunities to direct me to a favorable outcome, relying upon and trusting each other, learning ever more in the process.

Yahowah, You acknowledge what is right and vindicating, prosperous, honest and true, with regard to responding to those who, acting as if an authority, are adversarial and opposed to me, including the empowered who govern in a manner which is inconsistent with what I represent, especially those who contentiously lord over others.

You want to engage with me such that Your way is straightforward and right, positioning me such that I become like You and Your path is considered correct and on the level in my presence.” (Mizmowr / Psalm 5:8)

To be like Dowd is to be like God.

Now if I may, here is the conclusion of the magnificent Song which will lead us to some amazing discoveries. First among them: Paul did not work alone. He had coconspirators…

“For truthfully, there is nothing that is firmly established or trustworthy in their mouths, nothing that is reliable, enduring, or steadfast among their words, literally nothing secure or settled in their speech.

Their inner nature is psychologically predisposed to be destructive with their malicious speech which is counterproductive with devastating consequences, as they are relentless liars.

Their throat is an open grave. They flatter, and are deceitfully seducing smooth-talkers who consistently mislead, providing false hope through tantalizing opinions which are inaccurate and divisive. (Mizmowr / Psalm 5:9)

Hold them accountable and make them suffer the consequences because they remain liable, God. They have fallen of their own accord, having chosen to bring this on themselves, through their advice and counsel, customs and traditions, proposals and practices, especially their conspiracies and religion, which have taken countless others to where they, themselves, are headed.

Cast them out and banish them along with the great abundance and widespread nature of their revolting rebellions which are contrary to the way because, indeed, they have been contentious in their defiance against You and have bitterly opposed You, anguishing and provoking You. (Mizmowr / Psalm 5:10)

So now let all who take refuge in You, letting everyone who places their trust in You, relying upon You to keep them safe, rejoice and be glad.

Forevermore, let them choose to sing uplifting and joyful songs. Cover and clothe them such that those who love Your name will rejoice in having chosen You. (Mizmowr / Psalm 5:11)

Yes, indeed, You commend, favor, and bless, getting down on Your knees to lovingly and beneficially lift up those who are right and therefore innocent, correct and thus vindicated, Yahowah.

You provide a protective covering for the entire individual, enveloping and surrounding him such that You can accept him, favoring him by restoring the relationship.” (Mizmowr / Psalm 5:12)

Even for the worst of all problems – religion – there is a remedy.



In the Mizmowr | Psalm which follows, one written with tired eyes and an old hand, Dowd is predicting that those who have chosen to promulgate religious or political ideologies will be humiliated by God. He is specifically addressing Sha’uwl, who is named within this text.

In our quest to better understand the life and lyrics of Yah’s exemplar, we have turned to this Song because the King is acknowledging that he has done all he can do at this time. He is eager to transition into the next phase of his life when the question of religion will be resolved.

Serving as Yahowah’s son and student, messiah and king, shepherd and leader, prophet and teacher, while exhilarating, comprised more responsibility than any one man has ever endured, especially over a lifetime. Moseh | Moses was 80 when he began working with Yahowah. Dowd | David was 8.

As he grew old, his soul, mind, heart, eyes, and body wore down. He needed to be recharged and renewed. It is only natural, and in his 6th Mizmowr | Psalm he was keeping it real. And that is something we should all appreciate about this man and his relationship with God. Dowd is not a legend which has been sugarcoated but instead the very essence of life.

Yahowah’s choice of Shepherd, Messiah, and King never met a threat to his people that he did not strive to resolve. Knowing Yahowah intimately, he was anguished by every slanderous statement and slight. And there were lots of them because it was and remains a very dark world.

After having lived much of his life in the center of Yah’s will, with Yahowah inspiring his thoughts and words, we find Dowd wanting to move on and fulfill the next chapter of his life. This Song is also one of many examples of Dowd being Dowd, of him exposing and condemning the knuckleheads while celebrating his relationship.

He would write…

“Yahowah, You consistently prove Your case through me with persuasive arguments which vindicate me using evidence and reason, and by engaging in rational dialogue with me, making decisions which resolve disputes, demonstrating that You and I are right, without animosity or hostility.

Your instructions enable me to be correct, and Your willingness to improve me, to teach and guide me, makes me stronger. You are never antagonistic, doing so without consternation. (Mizmowr / Psalm 6:1)

You clearly want to be kind and merciful toward me, Yahowah, for I am comparatively weak. So please restore me, making me acceptable, Yahowah, because my essential essence and human nature is ready to complete the process. (Mizmowr / Psalm 6:2)

In addition, my soul is enormously eager, wanting to hasten the departure of that which is troubling and dismaying. So Yahowah, in this regard, how long will it take for You (6:3) to return, coming back again to renew and restore?

Yahowah, I want You to remove me, choosing to take my soul away, because it is my overwhelming desire that You choose to do everything possible to properly equip my soul to be withdrawn. Just as it is Your desire to save me so as to provide a witness to Your unwavering and unfailing love. (Mizmowr / Psalm 6:4)

For indeed, and by contrast, there is no remembrance or mention of You in the plague of death, within the pandemic disease that causes entire populations to die, perishing and then dispatched on a massive scale.

In She’owl and with Sha’uwl, who will come to know You, expressing their appreciation for You? Who will recognize and acknowledge You, choosing to make public announcements regarding their familiarity with Your eternal attributes? (Mizmowr / Psalm 6:5)

I have done my part, expending the time and energy to the point of exhaustion. I have been productive but have become weary for the moment, having labored extensively, striving to fulfill my job to the extent of my capability such that I sigh, expressing my frustration, a bit exasperated.

With the pervasiveness of the darkness, I swim upon a bed of twisted tears, causing me to weep. My couch, serving as my place of examination and testing of such things, is drenched. (Mizmowr / Psalm 6:6)

My eyes no longer function properly, because my sight is failing from this distressful situation, this mockery and provocation, the annoying taunts and errant perceptions of me. And the condition is deteriorating with all of my adversities and troubles, with the constraints being placed on me by all of those besieging me, with all of the distressful things that are being done to diminish my significance, along with the constant attempts to silence me. (Mizmowr / Psalm 6:7)

Get away from me those of you who are rejected and forsaken as you will be taken away and abolished, all of you who devise and carry out that which is corrupt and deceitful, fraudulent and religious, harmful and misleading, because Yahowah has heard my lament and the expressions of my consternation. (Mizmowr / Psalm 6:8)

Yahowah has listened to my request. Yahowah has received and accepts my thoughtful and judgmental plea for intervention, my diligent assessment which warrants a responsible reaction. (Mizmowr / Psalm 6:9)

Every one of my enemies, those who have shown animosity toward me, shall, as a result of their own choices, be humiliated. Having pursued disparaging ambitions and having chosen poorly, they are mistaken, and at long last they will be found guilty. They will be terrified and agonized beyond comprehension, receiving what they have chosen to perpetrate. They will tremble.

Once again, as a result of their own choices and have turned away, they will be continually embarrassed as a result of their shameful ambitions.” (Mizmowr / Psalm 6:10)



While it is common for Dowd to dedicate his Songs, it is highly unusual for him to title them – as he has done in the 7th Mizmowr. This is also the only occasion where Dowd has designated his rival.

This Psalm is uniquely instructive, providing Yahowah’s evaluation of and answer to Pauline Christianity…

About Erring and Going Astray as well as the Consequence of Ignorance.

By Dowd, which, to show the way to the benefits of the relationship, he sang to Yahowah in opposition to the words and accounts of the infamous and afflicting. This was written to test and evaluate, then discard, the lowly and little Benjamite. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7: Title & Dedication)

Yahowah, my God, in You, I find a trusted and safe place, with You saving me based upon the proper relationship, appropriately delivering me from all my pretentious pursuers, especially the boisterous who are verbally contentious against me. You will preserve me for a later time. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:1)

Because otherwise, in the manner of a fiercely destructive beast in search of prey, he, to satiate his own cravings, will rip apart, negating and mangling, everything I represent, the essence of my life, my attributes, attitude, and ambitions, snatching it away and shredding it, while taking what it represents for himself in defiance. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:2)

Yahowah, my God, if I have caused this, if there is anything wrong on my hand, (7:3) and if I somehow deserve this disparaging consequence, if I have inappropriately taken something away from this adversary trying to limit and constrain me, (7:4) then let my rival confront me, boldly pursuing a debate. Let my adversary attempt to best my life in a verbal exchange.

Let’s engage and confront one another. Let him try to tread upon the purpose of my life, especially with respect to the Land, thereby settling my overall relevance and significance with regard to the natural world. Let’s contemplate what has been brought before us. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:5)

You and I both want to take a stand, Yahowah, in Your righteous indignation. It is Your desire to rise up against the insolent and arrogant outbursts of the troublesome rival trying to limit and constrain me.

You want me to be alert and ready for action, eager to expose him on our behalf for Your benefit and mine by directing me to achieve this goal for You.

I will do so by encouraging instruction and good judgment regarding the means to resolve disputes with disciplined analysis using legitimate evidence and persuasive arguments. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:6)

Let the people of distinct geographical, political, and religious affinities, and the assembly of witnesses, surround You, turning to You of their own volition as a result of this, returning, changed and restored, to approach the heights of heaven. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:7)

Yahowah, it is Your decision. You can contend with or defend the family. And Yahowah, You have chosen to execute justice, to lead and adjudicate, through me based upon the realization that I am right, correct and vindicated, a man who is consistent, with integrity and character. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:8)

Therefore, let’s see to it that those who are harmful and troubling, those who are incorrect and misleading, cease to exist.

As a result, You may establish that which is enduring for those who are correct, for those who are observant and thoughtful, for those who test and assess, validating the accuracy and validity of Your testimony using evidence and reason. Exercising their head and their heart, they will logically process this information and reach an accurate conclusion regarding the God who is right, fair and trustworthy, vindicating and acquitting. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:9)

My defense and protection are before God, the Savior of the right-minded who execute good judgment. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:10)

God judges and decides, He sentences and vindicates, executes justice, leads and governs, adjudicating between the parties to determine what is right and wrong, thereby correctly acquitting or condemning.

Accordingly, God angrily denounces, expressing His extreme indignation, using words throughout time. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:11)

If there is no turning around, changing one’s thinking and behavior, reestablishing the relationship, He will forge His chisel. His bow, as a symbol of His power and influence, will be taken out and shaped such that it is established and ready. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:12)

He has prepared weapons against the plague – implements equipped to confront the pestilence. His divisive missiles will be used to cut off and separate. They perform, carrying out the mission, by kindling a blazing fire, hotly pursuing and incinerating. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:13)

Pay attention, because he will conceive that which is extraordinarily evil. He will demand an offensive pledge. He uses false testimony in the gestation of that which is deceitful and ruinous. And he destructively indebts with broken promises and unfavorable circumstances. What he enthusiastically promotes is completely untrue and religiously idolatrous.

He chose to give birth to and has actually conceived that which results in oppression and misery, leading to subjugation. It is laborious and financially restrictive, requiring grievous toil with no reward.

He willingly became the father of deceptions and lies, promoting a faith which is mistaken, misleading, and utterly false. His beliefs are predicated upon that which is vain and futile, a betrayal which has no merit or reason for existing. He is a complete fraud. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:14)

He has dug a prison, seeking to confuse and discredit through it. So, into the slime pit of corruption and decay that he has devised and prepared, he will fall as he is cast down, going to a lower dimension. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:15)

This toilsome misery and unfulfilling experience of his, as well as his effort to gain notoriety, will come back unto him because he was the source and beginning of such things.

And upon the crown of his head, that which is wrong and destructive about him, his violent injustice, errant beliefs, and oppressive nature, along with his cruel demeanor and unrighteous character, will descend and he will be brought down. (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:16)

Having chosen to know, I will express my understanding publicly, appreciating while acknowledging the attributes of Yahowah in a manner which is accurate and appropriate, honest and vindicating.

I will sing, putting lyrics to the melody while accompanied by musical instruments, to the name of Yahowah, the Most High. He exists above and beyond everything, awe-inspiring and reigning supreme.” (Mizmowr / Psalm 7:17)

It is the reason Yahowah adores him, the reason he became His beloved son. It was for this reason that Dowd was anointed as Yahowah’s Messiah and chosen to be His people’s shepherd and king. This is what made Dowd the Branch and a prophet. It is the reason he became the basis upon which Yahowah will judge the world, the man in whose words there is redemption, restoration, and salvation.

Dowd was not only intolerant of Sha’uwl, he was prepared and ready to debate the imbecile who conceived the contrarian religion, promoting it over the relationship Yahowah intended. Knowing both men, when this occurs, right will obliterate wrong, with those of us in the Covenant, cheering for our leader.

At times, it may appear as if Dowd is bragging, but it is not hubris when it is true. More to the point, it would be the height of arrogance, indeed selfishness, to know these things, to have been given this authority, and to have kept all of it to himself.



I would like to jump ahead to the 103rd Mizmowr so that we get a better appreciation of what Yahowah meant to Dowd. Then when we are done, we will turn to the 89th Psalm to witness what Dowd meant to Yahowah.

“This is of concern to Dowd (la Dowd) because my soul (nepesh ‘any), and all that is within me (wa kol qereb ‘any), appreciates and acclaims the blessings and benefits of (barak) its association with (‘eth) Yahowah (Yahowah) and His set-apart (qodesh huw’) name (shem). (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:1)

My soul (nepesh ‘any) commends and adores the marvelous nature of (barak) my relationship with (‘eth) Yahowah (Yahowah).

I will never overlook (wa ‘al shekach) anything He has done nor the kindness He has shown (kol gemuwl huw’). (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:2)

Who (ha) forgives, removing your culpability, freeing you (salach) from all of your errant thinking, wrongdoing, erroneous statements, and distorted opinions (la kol ‘awon ‘atah)?

And also (wa), who heals and restores, promoting restoration for (rapha’) all of your impairments and disabilities (la kol tachaluwym ‘atah)? (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:3)

Who (ha) redeems and delivers your life from the incarceration, facilitating your ability to remain alive and at liberty (ga’al chay ‘atah) from the dungeon in the slime pit of corruption, the prison of decay and decomposition associated with She’owl (min shachath)?

Who (ha) envelops and crowns (‘atar) you (‘atah) in loyal and steadfast love and unfailing kindness (chesed) in addition to compassion and mercy (wa rachamym)? (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:4)

Who (ha) abundantly satisfies, fulfilling the vow to enrich and empower (saba’) you with that which is good, beneficial, and pleasing (ba ha towb ‘ady) so that you are restored and renewed (‘atah chadash), becoming similar to (ka) a perpetual youth, with all of the vitality and freedom of a child without the adult responsibilities (na’uwrym), like a winged-being ready to take flight (nesher)? (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:5)

Yahowah (Yahowah) does what is right, engaging honestly and fairly (‘asah tsadaqah), showing good judgment in executing justice (wa mishpat) on behalf of (la) all who are unjustly exploited and contentiously mistreated (kol ‘ashaq).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:6)

Dowd’s association with Yahowah was multidimensional. It was intellectual and emotional, engaging and conversational, inspiring and pragmatic, enlightening and enriching. He was a brilliant and receptive student studying under the perfect teacher. And everything he learned, he shared – never overlooking or omitting anything with respect to his life with Yah.

With so much at stake, it is vital that we are absolutely clear. Dowd was saved because he could answer these questions correctly, not because he was good – because he was not. The same conditions apply to us. When it comes to establishing a relationship with God and to our salvation, being good will not do us any good. Being correct will make everything right.

Dowd understood the secret of life because he was Towrah observant. His 119th Mizmowr | Psalm reveals how we can do as he has done, making it, second only to the Towrah of Moseh, the most important document ever written. It is through the Towrah and on behalf of His people, that…

“Yahowah (Yahowah) is compassionate (rachuwm) and merciful (wa chanuwn), longsuffering and loyal, slow to anger (‘arek ‘aph), and abounding in goodness, overwhelmingly kind, and steadfastly loyal, all while showing great favoritism and passionate love (wa rab chesed).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:8)

It is also consistent with His Towrah and on behalf of His children, that…

“He will not continually quarrel with someone, enduring taunts, insults, and unending arguments (lo’ la netsah ryb) nor will He eternally (wa la ‘owlam) serve as a frustrated caretaker, tending to the needs of those who routinely displease and frustrate Him (natar). (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:9)

It is not according to (lo’ ka) the ways we are misled (cheta’ ‘anachnuw) that He acts and engages with us (‘asah la ‘anachnuw), nor according to our errant thinking, erroneous statements, or invalid opinions (lo’ ka ‘awon ‘anachnuw) that He deals with us (gamal ‘al ‘anachnuw). (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:10)

Indeed, for (ky) just as (ka) the heavens and spiritual realm are elevated in scale and dimensions beyond our comprehension (gabah shamaym), above and beyond the material realm (‘al ha ‘erets), so too is His steadfast and enduring love, His unfailing generosity, and mercy (chesed huw’) toward those who respect and revere Him (‘al yare’ huw’). (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:11)

As far as (ka rachaq) the sunrise in the east is from (mizrach min) the setting sun in the west where darkness follows (ma’arab), so far removed from us (rachaq min ‘anachnuw) are our revolting and rebellious behaviors (‘eth pesha’ ‘anachnuw). (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:12)

As a father (ka ‘ab) shows tender affection, genuine love, and forgiveness (racham) for his children (‘al benym), Yahowah (Yahowah) forgives and genuinely loves, openhandedly favoring (racham) those who respect Him (‘al yare’ huw’).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:13)

Here and elsewhere Dowd insinuates that he was cognizant that there were dimensions beyond his frame of reference and that the spiritual realm was four dimensions beyond the three he had experienced. This perspective on light and dimensionality goes a long way to explain who we are in relationship to God and what He is going to do to mitigate our differences. Dowd also understood that light is the best way to resolve the darkness in our lives, because in its presence, mankind’s unenlightened machinations cease to exist, and we not only appear perfect, but are perfect.

“It is for certain (ky) He is cognizant of (yada’) our inclinations and frame of reference, even the purpose for which we were created (yetser ‘anachnuw), remembering that we are indeed (zakar) quite literally comprised of naturally-occurring earthen matter (‘aphar). (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:14)

Mortal man’s (‘enowsh) days (yowmym huw’) are like (ka) an abode of dried grass (chasyr).

Like (ka) the flowery nature of an engraved plaque on a shining memorial (tsyts) in the open and broad way (ha sadeh), it therefore reflects the light and the scene around it, glistening like the reflection in a mirror (ken yatsyts). (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:15)

Yet truthfully, when (ky) the Spirit (ruwach) passes over it (‘abar ba huw’), then it is no more (wa ‘ayn huw’). And its place (wa maqowm huw’) is no longer recognizable or remembered (lo’ nakar huw’ ‘owd).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:16)

Yahowah gave us our mortal existence, freewill, a conscience, and the opportunity to know Him. While marvelous, our lives are fleeting, especially when focused on personal achievements.

The perspective being conveyed is that even man’s most cherished memorials, the flowery engraved plaques placed upon the graves of the dearly departed and upon trophies commemorating seminal achievements, will not stir memory or sentiment. To be gone is to be forgotten. And that is the way it must be for those who move on to live happily ever after. To be anguished over the loss of loved ones, or too tormented by mankind’s abusive conduct, would take the joy out of living.

There will, however, be some constants as we turn the page from mortal to immortal. Yah’s enduring love, our continuing respect, His commitment to doing what is right, and our devotion to the Covenant family, among them. Closely examining and carefully considering the directions Yahowah has provided regarding the instructive conditions of His Covenant, and responding appropriately, will be something we will all share.

“The steadfast and enduring love, the unfailing generosity and mercy (chesed) of Yahowah (Yahowah) are forever and ever, enduring eternally and without end (min ‘owlam ‘ad ‘owlam) for those who respect and revere Him (‘al yare’ huw’) with His vindication and righteousness (tsadaqah huw’) prevailing on behalf the children’s children (la ben ben) (103:17) of those who observe (la shamar) His Covenant (beryth huw’) and who remember (wa la zakar) to act upon and engage in (la ‘asah hem) His directions and instructions (piquwdym huw’). (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:18)

Yahowah (Yahowah) has prepared and established (kuwn) His throne (kise’ huw’) in the spiritual realm of the heavens (ba ha shamaym) with His influence (wa malkuwth huw’) serving as a proverb, to reveal what He and it is like by drawing pictures with words (mashal) in everything and everywhere (ba ha kol). (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:19)

His heavenly messengers and spiritual implements (mal’ak) have been commanded to convey your support for the benefit of (barak) Yahowah (Yahowah), especially on behalf of the courageous who lead and protect (gibowr huw’) using His authority (koach), acting upon (‘asah) His Word (dabar huw’) by actually listening to (la shama’) the sound (qowl) of His speech (dabar huw’). (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:20)

All of His spiritual implements and heavenly representatives (kol tsaba’ huw’) consistently convey your support and appreciation for (barak) Yahowah (Yahowah), attending to and serving Him (sharath) by working to achieve (‘asah) His will (ratsown huw’).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:21)

Although I am fortunate to be in the company of a woman whose appearance and attitude are angelic, the mal’ak are not pretty girls with wings. They are neither loving nor sexual. As energy-based beings, however, they are enormously powerful when they project the force of the spiritual realm. Yahowah refers to them collectively as tsaba’ – which denotes an efficient and effective organizational structure used to achieve the will of the one deploying them.

Recognizing the nature and purpose of the mal’ak, Dowd will likely be giving them directions during his millennial kingdom. And in this statement, he may well be explaining how they operate so that we might better understand how to deploy them should that be necessary. They are tools, serving Yahowah and His Family.

“Choose to appreciate and acclaim (barak) everything Yahowah has done and will do ( kol ma’aseh huw’) in all of the places (ba kol maqowm) His influence is felt and He is clearly known (memshalah huw’).

My soul (nepesh ‘any – my consciousness) commends and adores (barak) its association with (‘eth) Yahowah (Yahowah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 103:22)

One of Yah’s most strident criticisms of mankind is that very few of us are aware of what He has done on our behalf. His work is so seldom considered that if you were to ask random individuals to list His most important deeds, most would not recognize His name, and fewer still would be aware of what He has achieved. That is ironic because those who seek to worship God, and who claim to know Him, haven’t invested the time to listen to anything He has to say.

By contrast, Dowd’s words resonate throughout time because he came to know before he professed his admiration. He was right and genuine, even appreciated, where the faithful are not. If the places where Yahowah was known and His influence was felt were many, what a wonderful world it would be.

That said, Dowd did not write, and we should not speak, to the world at large. There is no reason to strain our voices or dissipate our effect. We, and that would include, Dowd Yahowah, and His prophets, seek to convey His testimony to receptive ears and open minds.



The Psalm we are about to consider is the most relevant revelation for our time – especially because Yahowah is calling Yisra’el and Yahuwdah home. The Mizmowr presents Dowd as the Chosen One, as the Son of God, as the Messiah, as the King of Kings, as the embodiment of the Beryth | Covenant, and as someone so uniquely Qodesh | Set Apart, he will become as brilliant and enduring as the sun in God’s presence.

It is the story of a Father’s love for His son and how He can be trusted to bring all He has promised to fruition. What has been, will be.

For this to occur, their common foe must be incapacitated and eliminated. Therefore, this Mizmowr | Psalm was written to expose and excoriate Sha’uwl | Paul, the principal author of the Christian New Testament. It will condemn Dowd’s rival by name, depicting him as the most deceitful and damning soul in human history. The 89th Psalm, like the prophecy it parallels and augments in Shamuw’el, and those presented throughout the first seven Mizmowr, calls the demon-possessed founder of the Christian religion: the “Son of Evil.”

Therefore, this is a referendum between good and evil, right and wrong, the Covenant and Christianity. One is the source of life while the other leads to death.

What we will learn in this remarkable prophetic Psalm is that God is annoyed, indeed angry, that so many have come to believe Sha’uwl | Paul when he deliberately, presumptuously, and erroneously transferred every promise He had made to His beloved son, Dowd | David, to the misnomer, “Iesou Christo – Jesus Christ.” And so, while celebrating every nuance of the 89th Mizmowr | Psalm, we are going to bring it all together, properly positioning the son while vilifying Paul’s pathetic attempt at Replacement Theology.

Here now is the love story which foretells the future through the past.

“A Poem of Insights to Contemplate and Comprehend (maskyl) by (la) ‘Eythan | that which is Continuous and Everlasting (‘Eythan) the ‘Ezrachy | the Native-Born Person and Strong Arm (ha ‘Ezrachy).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89: Introduction and Dedication)

There was a man who bore this name, an individual explicitly noted for his wisdom in Melekym / 1 Kings 4:31. He was a contemporary of Sha’lomoh | Solomon, and thus someone who would have known Dowd, serving as an eyewitness to his relationship with Yahowah. ‘Eythan ha ‘Ezrachy was inspired by God to compose this Mizmowr. And yet today, I suspect that it is what his name conveys to us that is more significant than his identity: “the Everlasting Native-born Strong Arm” of God.

This revelation should be on every lip and echoed throughout all time…

“I have chosen to sing (shyr) about the loyal love, steadfast devotion, enduring favoritism, unfailing affection, and genuine mercy (chesed) of Yahowah (Yahowah), doing so forever (‘owlam) on behalf of (la) all generations throughout time (dowr wa dowr).

With my mouth (ba peh ‘any), I will acknowledge and make known (yada’) Your trustworthiness and dependability (‘emuwnah ‘atah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:1)

Yahowah is eternally loving and merciful, absolutely and invariably devoted to His Family. His affection is everlasting, spanning the eons of time.

Yahowah is also trustworthy. It is such a simple concept with such extraordinary implications. Rather than being all-loving, omnipresent, or omniscient, and thus irrelevant, He is honest, and thus reliable. Nothing is more valuable to mankind than His steadfast commitment to the truth, along with the tools He has provided for us to independently verify that His words were inspired by a being unconstrained by space or time. If this were not true, it would not matter what else He had to say.

While you may not see it as such at this time, since I know where this is going, and appreciate why it was written, we would be wise to view this as a broadside attack on Paul and Christianity. For the Father of Lies to have told the truth, and for Christianity to be valid, Yahowah must be perceived as a liar and His promises must be invalidated. If not, then the Towrah remains central to our lives, there is only one Covenant, Dowd is the Messiah and Son of God, and Yahowsha’ is nothing more, or less, than the Passover Lamb. And the reason they all exist is because Yahowah is genuinely merciful, devoutly loyal, and eternally loving.

Agreed…

“Yes, indeed (ky), I say (‘amar), ‘His eternal and everlasting (‘owlam) love, devotion, and genuine mercy (chesed) will be built up and developed to conceive children and construct a home (banah).

You will develop (kuwn) authenticate, establish, and sustain Your trustworthiness and reliability (‘emuwnah ‘atah) within the spiritual realms (shamaym ba hem).’” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:2)

Yahowah’s purpose in creating the universe and conceiving the life within it has been to “banah – conceive children and build a family.” His “chesed – devotion to it and love” for those destined to live in His home is “‘owlam – everlasting.”

When Yahowah says that He “‘emuwnah – will establish and authenticate His trustworthiness and reliability” in the Spiritual Realms, He is telling us that we can count on Him delivering on the promises He has made through the Beryth | Covenant and Miqra’ey | Invitations to Meet, as well as His Towrah | Teaching and Naby’ | Prophets.

What follows is in Yahowah’s voice. God is providing a narrative on the Psalms we have just read in addition to explaining the prophecy He revealed preceding this through Shamuw’el. The juxtaposition of these insights is among the most important we will ever consider.

It equates Dowd | the Beloved with the Beryth | Covenant, and unequivocally states that Dowd is “la Bachyr – the Chosen One.” It affirms that Yahowah “shaba’ – swore an oath” to Dowd because he is God’s “‘ebed – coworker.” Also important, Yahowah never reneges on a promise – a realization He will make irrefutable in a moment.

One last thought before we move on. At the time this was written, Dowd 1.0 was gone. His son, Solomon was on the throne. Therefore, it is speaking of Dowd 2.0, the returning Messiah and King. It is then that Yahowah will reestablish His Covenant with His Chosen One: His son, Dowd. As He has in the past, God will work through Dowd to usher in and govern eternity. This, of course, means that neither the torch nor the scepter have been passed to anyone else, not to Paul, not to Jesus, not to a pope or the Church.

“I will cut and establish (karat) the Beryth | Covenant Home for the Family (Beryth) with My Chosen One (la bachyr ‘any).

I have sworn an oath, making a binding promise to always affirm the truth (shaba’) regarding Dowd (la Dowd), My authorized agent who works on My behalf (‘ebed ‘any).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:3)

Sorry Christians, Yahowah did not say that He was going to switch teams, creating a second, new, and different covenant with Paul or Jesus. He did not say that He was going to work through Paul or Jesus – or that either of them was His authorized agent. If He meant to convey such a thing, He would have done so, but did not.

Sorry, Orthodox Jews. Yahowah did not say that He was going to authorize rabbis either, nor make a Star of David. His Covenant will be restored based upon His promises, not your arrogant arguments.

Yahowah has affirmed the purpose of creation and the reason for our existence. God wants to enjoy life’s greatest blessing, raising a family and interacting with His children. Our Heavenly Father’s gift to us is also His reward. From this perspective, everything Yahowah says and does makes perfect sense, including elevating the status of Dowd | David over Yahowsha’ | Yah Rescues, Liberates, and Saves (errantly known as ‘Jesus’) – the Passover Lamb.

Freewill works both ways. Yahowah can choose whomever He wishes to be part of His family just as we are free to express our desire to be adopted, therein. In harmony with this paradigm, our Heavenly Father is reinforcing something about the relationship we have long known but few appreciate: in almost every case God initiates contact, choosing the individuals He wants to be part of His family. How we respond to Him determines our future.

Dowd is God’s favorite son. He was off tending sheep in Bethlehem and walked to Shamuw’el when called, leaving his father’s house just as ‘Abraham had walked away from the cultural, religious, and political milieu of Babylon. Therefore, those seeking an introduction should be aware of what they must do as a prerequisite for it to occur.

This is the same Covenant, with the same conditions and benefits, that Yahowah presented in Bare’syth | Genesis, devoting much of its text to how it was developed with ‘Abraham. It is the same Covenant Yahowah codified, designating His stipulations and allowances through Moseh in the rest of the Towrah. It is the same Covenant that was affirmed with Yitschaq and Ya’aqob. And most importantly, this is the same Covenant Yahowah is restoring upon His return as is foretold by Yirma’yah | Jeremiah in the 31st chapter.

Our Heavenly Father is acknowledging that Dowd holds a special place within the Covenant family – His Family. Dowd not only personifies the qualities He values in a son; the King is God’s choice as the administrator of forever. As a result, we can enhance our standing with God, indeed our value to God, by applying what Dowd wrote to our lives.

Continuing on this theme, the following promise is not only related to the previous one, it was stated to obliterate Paul’s premise while welcoming His children into His home. The fulcrum upon which souls are lifted up or go down is how we interpret zera’ and ‘ad ‘owlam.

If we were to translate zera’ as “seed” singular, and then render it “offspring” as in one, or as “descendants,” plural, and then translate ‘owlam as “forever” while ignoring “‘ad – eternal witness,” we would be left with either an invalid or an incomplete conclusion. If “offspring” singular, then the Passover Lamb could not have died, leaving Pesach unfulfilled. And when we include “‘ad – eternal witness,” Yahowsha’ would have had to have written his testimony down, memorializing it in Hebrew for it to survive and for us to benefit from it. But that did not occur.

However, should we see zera’ as expansively speaking of all of Dowd’s “descendants” then the prophecy would be inadequate. Dowd was one of many in the tribe of Yahuwdah and Yahuwdah is but one of twelve families representing Yisra’el. And it is the restoration of Yisra’el upon Yahowah’s return with Dowd that all of this is leading. Moreover, Yahowah’s Home, and Dowd’s seat of honor within it, will be for all generations, not just those of this man.

The solution, then, is to render zera’ ‘atah as “that which you sow.” The lyrics to Dowd’s Songs, his words, ideas, and insights, comprise what is being established as “‘ad – an eternal witness” “‘owlam – forevermore.” Dowd was more than a prolific writer and inspired prophet because he is the one Yahowah chose to shepherd His sheep throughout the fabric of time.

“I will establish (kuwn) that which you sow (zera’ ‘atah) as an eternal witness forevermore (‘ad ‘owlam).

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 future implications (selah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:4)

Zera’ is 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 “offspring, children, descendants, posterity, family, and progeny” as a noun. As a verb, zera’ speaks of “sowing seeds” both literally and symbolically as words and ideas. It is from its verbal implications that we come to appreciate that, as is the case in English, “to seed” is to plant many “seeds,” including a “profusion of words and ideas,” just as a bag of seed contains many of them.

Nonetheless, in Galatians, Sha’uwl predicated his faith on the notion that seed was singular. This misconception was cultivated into a full-blown plot. In spite of the obvious implications, Paul claimed that the Towrah could be ignored because his Iesou Christo was the promised seed, “singular,” of ‘Abraham and thus, by implication, Dowd. In his twisted mind, nothing mattered before, during the interim, or since “Jesus Christ” was born. According to Paul, everything God had to say and did could be ignored by those who put their faith in this assessment – one that grew out of a singular seed.

And yet to counter this, not only is the Covenant affirmed through Dowd, not Sha’uwl, everything Dowd would sow through a proliferation of inspired insights and ideas would serve as an eternal witness for all generations. The words which comprise his Mizmowr and Mashal are where those seeds were sown and forever grow, bearing fruit.

Culturing an appreciation for what Dowd wrote while developing an understanding of his place in God’s unfolding story is transformative. Once we accept the realization that Dowd is the Shepherd and Yahowsha’ is the Lamb, that Dowd is the Son of God, the Messiah, the King of Kings, and the Chosen One who will return to bring judgment at Yahowah’s Right Hand, serving as God’s coworker to govern eternity, we can grasp the full intent of the Covenant. Through Dowd we witness the fulfillment of the Towrah and know where the Miqra’ey lead. And with Dowd, Sha’uwl’s delusions are incinerated in a blast of blazing light.



One of the best explanations of Yahowah’s return with Dowd to reestablish the Covenant is included in a prophecy shared by Shamuw’el | Samuel. Written just before Dowd’s passing, it is readily understood in connection with Mizmowr / Psalm 89:3-4.

Since Christians, uplifting Paul rather than Dowd, would claim that the narrative included in Shamuw’el | 2 Samuel 7 was prophetic of their “Jesus,” I would ask why his name was not mentioned alongside Dowd’s. And why doesn’t any of it apply to Yahowsha’ while it fits Dowd like the genes of a plant which are identical to the seed from which it was sown? Further, why do Christians have to mistranslate ‘asher in Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:14, as we shall soon see, to transfer what follows away from the Shepherd to the Lamb?

Since religious myths die hard, let’s consider the prophecy to which Yahowah was alluding in Mizmowr / Psalm 89:3-4. As is the case with this prophecy, Dowd’s name is prominent and Yahowsha’s is missing.

Not surprisingly, this is the story of homes, one for Dowd and another for Yahowah. Which do you suppose the Father prioritized?

“It came to pass when the king sat down and relaxed in his home, because Yahowah had given him comforting respite from his adversaries, (7:1) that the king said to Nathan, the prophet, ‘Please look around. I live in a house of cedar, but the Ark of God sits within curtains.’ (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:2)

So, Nathan said to the king, ‘Choose to go and do all that is in your best judgment for Yahowah.’ (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:3)

But then that evening it came to be that the word of Yahowah came to Nathan. He conveyed, (7:4) ‘Go and tell Dowd, My coworker, that this is what Yahowah says. “Why should you build Me a home to live in? (7:5) Indeed, I have not lived in any house since the time that I lifted the Children of Yisra’el out of the crucibles of oppression in Mitsraym, even to this day. I have existed going about in a tent dwelling. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:6)

Anywhere along the way that I have journeyed with the Children of Yisra’el, did I say a single word to any of the tribes of Yisra’el, My people, Yisra’el, whom I fed, asking, ‘Why not build Me a house of cedar?’ (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:7)

Therefore, say to My associate, Dowd, this is what Yahowah of the spiritual implements says, “I took you from the sheepfolds, from chasing after sheep, to be the leader over My People, over Yisra’el. (7:8) And I have been with you wherever you traveled. I have cut off all of your enemies, removing them from your sight, and I have made your name great, comparable to the names of the greatest on earth. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:9)

Furthermore, I will appoint a place for My People, Yisra’el. And I will plant them there such that they may dwell in this place of their own and never have to move again. Neither shall the Son of Evil afflict them any more as will have been the case. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:10)

And since the time that I instructed the Judges in conjunction with My People, Yisra’el, I have created for you a respite from all of your enemies.”’”

Tellingly, mid-prophecy, Yahowah briefly slips into the third person to announce a change of scene. He is no longer talking about the past, but instead what He is going to accomplish with His son moving forward. Yahowah is publicly announcing that, upon His return, the Covenant will be centered around Dowd – just as He has promised elsewhere. This is the very “seed” Yahowah had sown in the midst of the lyrics Dowd has already written and we have just read.

As God’s voice returns to first-person, He briefly changes from the second person to the third person when addressing Dowd through Nathan – doing so for the same reason. There is a shift in time. Therefore, “his kingdom” is not Solomon’s kingdom, but instead represents the Millennial and Heavenly Kingdom of Dowd.

We know this because, upon Sha’uwl’s death, Dowd inherited a kingdom that had existed for a score and four years. This means that God did not erect Solomon’s kingdom either. But Yahowah will personally engage to establish the Millennial Kingdom He has promised His son. And at that time, they will work in concert to reestablish the family which bears Yahowah’s name. It will be an eternal family, as will be his kingdom. This Father and His son will be together forevermore.

This is not only the key to understanding the things we have discussed, but most especially what comes next. It has taken me twenty years to finally understand it, so we can wait a moment longer before I explain what God is promising.

“Moreover (wa), Yahowah (Yahowah) is boldly and publicly announcing (nagad – is reporting this openly before you, providing this information at this time in the presence of another) for you (la ‘atah) that, indeed (ky- truthfully, reliably, and emphatically), He will act, engaging with you to create (‘asah ‘atah – He will personally perform for you in this manner to bring about (qal imperfect – actually expending considerable effort and energy on an ongoing basis to make out of that which already exists of you and for you)) a family and home (beyth – a house and household).” (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:11)

Normally, Yahowah uses ‘amar for “says” or dabar for “speaks the word.” But here, we find nagad, which is a “bold public pronouncement.” God then uses ‘asah to proclaim that “He will be directly involved, engaging to create, and expending the energy and effort to fashion and form from existing stock” the Beyth | Family Home. That did not occur the first time around with Dowd, later with Solomon, nor remotely with Yahowsha’, because the second iteration of a manmade Temple was deconstructed.

I will continue to amplify God’s terminology because every nuance is essential to our understanding. Continuing to speak through Nathan to Dowd, Yahowah conveyed male’ using the imperfect conjugation, denoting an ongoing, and thus uncompleted action. Unconstrained by time, it cannot address the completion of his life which would be final. Moreover, male’, in addition to “being fulfilled” means “being proclaimed.”

Dowd’s purpose is being fulfilled now, and this will continue forevermore. But things are about to get really interesting because Yahowah is going to “quwm – rise up and take a stand to bring to fruition at a moment in time, confirming and validating” “‘eth zera’ – with your seed and through what you have sown” “‘asher – the means to enjoy the benefits of the relationship,” doing so in a subsequent time. Listen…

“Surely when (ky – indeed, emphasizing this statement while making an exception at the point in time when) your days (yowmym ‘atah) are being proclaimed and fulfilled (male’ – are being told and completed (qal imperfect – are literally full and ongoing)), and you rest with your fathers (wa shakab ‘eth ‘ab ‘atah), then (wa) I will rise up and take a stand to bring to fruition (quwm – I will arise to confirm, validating the honorable nature of (hifil perfect – Yahowah will enable Dowd to take this stand along with Him at this moment in time)) with your seed and with what you have sown (‘eth zera’ ‘atah – in conjunction with what you have propagated which has taken root and grows) in a subsequent time after you (‘achar ‘atah – then at that later period which speaks of an additional and extra time for you), which, to provide the way to the benefits of the relationship (‘asher – to reveal the proper path to get the most out of life), shall be brought forth (yatsa’ – will be produced as an extension of the source (qal imperfect – literally with ongoing implications)), extracted from a small piece of your physiological nature (me’ah ‘atah – derived out of an elementary particle or tiny piece from which your body and its internal organs were comprised).” (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:12)

It would not have been a miracle, nor much of a “nagad – bold public pronouncement,” nor even worth acknowledging, if we are to interpret this as Dowd becoming a distant sperm donor 40 to 50 generations removed from Yahowsha’. With his DNA being halved every step along the way, over the generations his distant descendant would only have 0.00000000000001 of Dowd’s genetic material. And while sperm is pretty miraculous stuff, it was not brought forth by Yahowah nor does it reveal the proper way to get the most out of life.

This brings up an interesting conundrum for those who would ignorantly and irrationally consider the “Gospel of Matthew” to be the inerrant word of God. Luke lists 42 generations from Dowd to Yahowsha’ while Matthew lists just 27. These lists differ so significantly that there is virtually no overlap. They even present different names for Joseph’s father, “Ya’aqob” vs. “Heli.” The Christian explanation is that Matthew follows the lineage of Joseph while Luke pursues the lineage of Mary. That, however, is impossible because both commence their lineage through Joseph and only include male names. Furthermore, while 42 generations is within the realm of possibility, 27 is a flight of fancy.

The average life expectancy during the period circa 500 BCE was 28 years, with a range between 20 to 35 years. This is based upon a tombstone study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences. This lifespan would be for the most elite within the Greco-Roman sphere of influence, with subjugated people living shorter lives. Therefore, for there to be only 27 generations on average, the first child would have to have been born 9 years after the father’s death.

The following research attests to an average of 25 years per generation: Moisio et al. (1996), Thompson and Neel (1996), Varilo et al. (1996), Labuda et al. (1997), and Kettles et al. (1998). These studies found that an average generation was just 20 years: Comas et al. (1996) and Slatkin and Rannala (1997). Generational timelines have increased more recently, as evidenced by research conducted of regional populations beginning in 1850 CE, but they are not applicable to the time between 1000 BCE and 2 BCE.

When we translate me’ah literally, the bold statement is that when Dowd is reconstituted to be King of Kings, he will be thoroughly and completely Dowd – body, soul, and spirit. The “me’ah – small elementary piece of his physiological nature” that Yahowah is going to “yatsa’ – produce as an extension of the source” is Dowd’s DNA. And in his case, at this time, he will actually need his body for a thousand years because his Millennial Kingdom will be here on Earth.

Continuing to amplify this portion of the prophecy so that we might appreciate what God is promising, we find Yahowah continuing to speak of Dowd and that kingdom...

“And so (wa) I will produce (kuwn – I will form and fashion, bringing into fruition, proving and establishing (hifil perfect – authenticating so as to enable at this time)) his reign over his kingdom (mamlakah huw’ – his royal authority and government). (7:12)

He, himself, shall reestablish and restore (huw’ banah – he, himself, will rebuild and procreate, returning as a son with a maternal influence (qal imperfect – literally and continually)) a home (beyth – family) for My name (la shem ‘any – on behalf of My personal and proper designation).

And (wa – then in association with this), I will fashion and form (kuwn – I will produce and provide (polel perfect – the result of this act will be realized by the throne)) the place of honor (‘eth kise’ – that which is associated with the throne) of his kingdom (mamlakah huw’ – his royal authority, government, and sovereignty) as an eternal witness forever (‘ad ‘owlam – to provide ongoing testimony throughout time). (7:13) I, Myself, will be (‘any hayah – I, Myself, will literally and continually exist as (qal imperfect)) a Father for him (la huw’ la ‘ab – approaching him as a parent) and he shall be (wa huw’ hayah – and then he, himself, will actually and continually exist as (qal imperfect)) My son (la ‘any la ben – approaching Me and drawing near as My child).”

It’s always a poor idea to wrongfully demean a son before his father, but that is especially so when the son is Dowd and the Father is Yahowah.

“When that which is perverted and twisted is associated with him (‘asher ba ‘awah huw – with regard to the one leading an upright life who is revealing the benefits of the relationship, if something is wrongly connected to him, referenced directly or indirectly with charges which are incorrect and invalid against him, with perverse and irritating claims being made against his nature (hifil infinitive – causing that which is associated with him to be changed by someone who is demonstrably corrupt and highly agitated)), I will correctly reciprocate and argue on his behalf, deciding with him to chastise (yakach huw’ – I will prove his case by leveling accusations to correct the record regarding him, rebuking and punishing (hifil perfect – God will enable Dowd to reciprocate and decide, chastising at this moment in time)) with the individual’s scepter (ba shebeth ‘ysh – with the man’s staff on behalf of his people), and by assaulting so as to end the lives of (wa ba nega’ – then through striking, afflicting, plaguing, and traumatizing so as to defeat and destroy) the children of ‘Adam (ben ‘adam – the sons of man).” (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:14)

‘Asher, the first word in this portion of the prophecy, is where this all began for me twenty years ago. English Bible translations typically render the phrase ‘asher ba ‘awah huw as “when he sins.” Then in their footnotes, they attribute it to “Jesus,” implying that the Passover Lamb was imperfect and was beaten by God as a result. And even though Dowd was flawed, Yahowah did not punish him, especially with his scepter. Moreover, this prophecy is a commendation, not a condemnation.

So, let’s see if we can make sense of it by examining the words God used to convey this prophecy. ‘Asher, as a relative pronoun, “makes a connection or an association.” ‘Asher is also used to “reveal the benefits of the relationship and to present the correct path to walk to get the most out of an upright life.” Ba means “with, by, or against” and huw’ is “him.” And that leaves ‘awah, which in the hifil infinitive speaks of that which is “perverted and twisted” being vividly perpetrated against” Dowd. ‘Awah was not prefixed in the third person, so the subject isn’t the perpetrator but instead the victim.

Wrongly robbing Dowd of all of the prophecies, promises, titles, and attributes Yahowah has ascribed to him, including writing His son out of this sweeping prophecy, was “‘awah – wrong, invalid, and incorrect, indeed, perverse and depraved.” As a consequence, yakach huw’, when scribed in the first person singular hifil perfect reveals that Yahowah is going to engage with Dowd to argue on his behalf. Together, Father and son will deride and chastise those who have perverted God’s testimony to invalidate His relationship with His Chosen Messiah. Yahowah will prove his case by leveling accusations to correct the record regarding him, rebuking and punishing those who remain opposed to what this prophecy represents, even up to the point He is reestablishing His Covenant upon His return.

The punishment will fit the crime. Christians have dethroned Dowd to accommodate “Jesus,” so God will wield the Messiah’s scepter on behalf of the King’s people. Further, those who have plagued God’s people will be plagued in return, their lives destroyed. The timing is even correct, because this is will occur as all of these other things are happening.

Recognizing that Yahowah is still addressing His son, Dowd, we find Him reinforcing His love for him while revealing His disdain for his adversary, Sha’uwl.

“So then (wa) My steadfast love and enduring mercy (chesed ‘any – My unfailing devotion, affection, and kindness) shall not be taken away from him (lo’ suwr min huw’ – will not be turned aside or removed from him (qal imperfect)) in the manner that (ka ‘asher – in a manner similar the reasons) I rejected it being associated with (suwr min ‘im – I opposed it being corrupted by and thus forsook any connection with the degenerate (hifil perfect)) Sha’uwl (Sha’uwl – Question Him, the name of the wannabe king Saul and self-proclaimed apostle Paul; indistinguishable in the Hebrew text from She’owl | Hell), whom, to show the way to the benefits of the relationship (‘asher – to reveal the correct and restrictive path to get the most out of life), I removed, abolishing (suwr – rejected and cast away, cutting off and forsaking the corrupt degenerate (hifil perfect)) before your appearance (min la paneh ‘atah – from and out of your presence and prior to your approach).” (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:15)

The battle for human souls in general, and for the wellbeing of Yisra’el specifically, is being waged between Dowd | David and Sha’uwl | Paul. Yahowah loves Dowd and has rejected and opposed Sha’uwl. Dowd is the recipient of God’s eternal mercy and Sha’uwl has been forsaken in She’owl | Hell. One is upright, the living embodiment of the way, and the other is a corrupt degenerate.

For those who may claim that this speaks of the former king, then there is a problem. He took his own life. His only legacy is his namesake. God forsook him but did not abolish him. Moreover, Dowd was not a witness to King Sha’uwl’s demise. But Sha’uwl | Paul’s legacy is not only degenerate and corrupt, it will be abolished and removed concurrently with Dowd’s return. The Psalms and Prophets are in one accord.

Yahowah’s concluding comments relative to His son, Dowd, were reassuring…

“Moreover, your house (wa ‘aman beyth ‘atah – in addition, your family, household, and home) will remain established, verified and true (‘aman – trustworthy and reliable, steadfast and enduring) and your kingdom and reign (wa mamlakah ‘atah – your sovereign authority and government, your kingship) will exist forever as an eternal witness (‘ad ‘owlam – will provide ongoing testimony forever) in association with My presence (la paneh ‘any – before Me and to approach Me at My appearance). Your throne and place of honor (kise’ ‘atah – your seat shall be afforded the highest status and be that of the one in charge with the authority to govern and your royal dignity) shall exist and be established (hayah kuwn – shall be authenticated and affirmed, lasting) forevermore (‘ad ‘owlam – to provide testimony throughout time).”’ (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:16)

Consistent with all of these words and everything within this revelation, Nathan correctly conveyed them to Dowd.” (Shamuw’el / Listen to Him / 2 Samuel 7:17)

This prophecy was about houses, who builds them and who lives in them. It was about Dowd, who had a home, not “Jesus,” who was homeless. It is all about what God is going to do for, with, and through His beloved son.

When it comes to houses, Yahowah is beside Himself, annoyed to the point that He has made His point in such a vivid way there should not have been a single church, mosque, temple, or shrine called a house of God, and yet men have erected millions of them.

Just as God has never once asked us to worship Him, bow down before Him, or pray to Him, He does not want us building 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.

Dowd’s job was hardly done as Paul protested. He has not been replaced. He is the King of Kings forevermore. And this prophecy, which has been focused entirely on Dowd from beginning to end, obliterates the prospect of Replacement Theology. And if that were not enough, consider what follows…

Then King Dowd came, and he sat and remained in the presence of Yahowah. He said, ‘Who am I, Yahowah, my Upright One, and what is my home and family, that You have come with me all this while and brought me here, to this place, now and forever? (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:18)

And yet this was a small thing in Your eyes, Yahowah. You have also given Your Word, speaking of Your coworker’s household and family for a very long time now, beginning in the distant past.

And yet, Yahowah, it is consistent with the Towrah | Instruction and Guidance which Teaches mankind. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:19)

What more beyond this can Dowd communicate for You, Yahowah? You are well-acquainted with and know Your associate. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:20)

For the sake of Your Word and on behalf of this message from You, and consistent with Your judgment, Your character and conscience, You have engaged and acted with regard to all of these extraordinary things for the purpose of enabling the one who works with You to become aware of it, to actually know and understand this, and then to reveal it. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:21)

Therefore, the most rational response is to acknowledge Your importance and magnificent ability to empower, expand, and grow, Yahowah, my foundation and support.

For there is no one and nothing that exists like You, and there is no God besides You, according to all that which we have listened to and heard with our ears. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:22)

And who is like Your people, Yisra’el – the one nation on Earth, whom, to lead us along the proper path, God walked to ransom His people, establishing His name and reputation by engaging with them, doing awesome things for Your Land in the presence of Your people whom You redeemed for Yourself from the Crucibles of Oppression in Egypt, from those people and their gods? (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:23)

As a result, You formed and fashioned, establishing for Yourself, Your people, Yisra’el, to be Your family, having related ethnicity, forever as an eternal witness. And You, Yahowah, have been and will remain their God. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:24)

Now, at this time and henceforth, Yahowah, Almighty, it is Your will to establish and eternally confirm as an enduring witness, having decided that it will come to fruition, the Word which leads to the benefits of the relationship that You have communicated concerning the one who has worked with You, serving with You, and with regard to his family and household.

You have decided to act because You actually want to engage, doing exactly as You have said. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:25)

Additionally, Your name will be honored as a reflection of our freewill, and this will continue forever because our eternal witness is to declare, ‘Yahowah, of the vast array of spiritual implements, is God over Yisra’el | Before the Individuals who Engage and Endure with the Almighty.’ Therefore, the family and household of Your coworker, Dowd, has been and will always be established before Your presence. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:26)

That is because You, Yahowah, of the heavenly messengers, the God of Yisra’el | Individuals who Engage and Endure with the Almighty, have communicated this revelation, making it known to the ear of Your associate, saying, ‘I will reestablish for you a home, household, and family.’

As a result, the one who works with You has discovered that which was not previously acknowledged, and through learning has acquired the judgment, character, and conviction to make this declaration to You after considered contemplation, (7:27) ‘Based upon all that has occurred, Yahowah, You are God Almighty. Your words have been, remain, and always will be reliable, trustworthy and true. And You have consistently stated these good and beneficial things to the one working and serving with You. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:28)

Now, it is Your desire to confidently and boldly, and with great determination, kneel down to lift up the household and family of Your associate such that it exists and he endures forever in Your presence.

For indeed, You, Yahowah, have spoken, and with Your favorable treatment and support, the family and household of Your servant shall be lifted up, adored, and blessed forevermore.’” (Shamuw’el / Listen to Him / 2 Samuel 7:29)

The promise to Dowd, and through him to Yisra’el, is unequivocal, non-transferable, non-negotiable, and eternal. It is Yahowah’s decision, and His Word is always reliable. Since this declaration is trustworthy and dependable, there is but one way to enter Yahowah’s Home and to become part of His Family – and that is to follow Dowd to this place.

There should be no doubt: Yahowah is going to honor the promises He has made to Dowd and Yisra’el. There is no possibility whatsoever that His commitment to them has changed such that He has taken these promises away and given them to a gentile church.



After this brief intermission, one instructed by the text of the Mizmowr, we return to the voice of the psalmist. This portion of the song was written to counter the absurd notion that the gods of men, such as “Adony,” “the Lord,” “HaShem,” “Allah,” and “Jesus,” are somehow analogous with and comparable to Yahowah. Mankind’s gods were either modeled after the men who created them, were afforded characteristics which were sufficiently fearsome to command obedience, or were compiled by blending a plethora of seemingly plausible, yet irrational, notions.

“The spiritual realms (shamaym) know and appreciate (yadah) Your wonderful contributions (pale’ ‘atah), Yahowah (Yahowah), and also (‘aph) Your trustworthiness (‘emuwnah ‘atah) in the community (ba qahal) of the Set Apart (qodesh). (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:5)

Indeed (ky), who (my) in the heavens (ba ha shamaym) can be equated (‘arak) to (la) Yahowah (Yahowah)? Who is similar to or thinks like (damah) Yahowah (Yahowah) among the children of God (ba ben ‘el)?” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:6)

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.

Yahowah’s contributions are many. He created an enormously large, 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 would be able to understand Him and respond. Then, He not only provided His Towrah and Prophets, He fulfilled His own promises. And in Heaven, He has been preparing His home for our arrival.

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. Furthermore, the traits common among false gods are universally foreign to Yahowah. Said another way: aligning our thinking with Yahowah necessitates a willingness to reject all religious presumptions.

“He is an inspiring and awesome, a productive and accomplished (‘arats), God (‘el) in a conclave of proper instruction and mutual reliance, an intimate fellowship based upon a foundation of trust (ba sowd) with the Set-Apart Ones (qadowshym), tremendously great, while inspiring reverence and respect (rab wa yare’) beyond all those around Him (‘al kol sabyb).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:7)

To know Yahowah is to respect Him. To understand Yahowah is to revere Him.

“Yahowah (Yahowah), God (‘elohym) of the vast array of spiritual implements (tsaba’), who and what if anything (my) is comparable to Your (kamow ‘atah) awesome power and extraordinary gifts (chasyn) which are all around You (sabyb ‘atah), Yahowah (Yahowah), including (wa) Your unwavering commitment to the truth (‘emuwnah ‘atah)?” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:8)

It’s a rhetorical question, and yet as few as one in a million know the simple answer. Most do not 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 gifts to us. It appears in 89:1, 89:2, 89:5, and now here in 89:8. Not surprisingly, we will encounter ‘emuwnah four more times, in 89:14, 89:24, 89:33, and finally in 89:49, bringing the total to eight – which represents that which is infinite and eternal. Just as Dowd’s life and lyrics provide the antidote for Pauline Christianity, trust is the remedy for faith. Those who know, rely. Those who do not, believe. Trust is empowering, enlightening, and liberating while faith devalues, bewilders, and ensnares.

Having now established the proper vantage point to appreciate Yahowah, the Psalmist specifically targets a pervasive and improper approach, one whose destructive nature arises from the sea – a metaphor for Gowym | Gentiles.

“You have conveyed vivid parables (‘atah mashal) over the raging devastation and presumptive arrogance (ba ge’uwth) of the sea (ha yam). When its turbulent and surging waves rise up in deceit (ba nasa’ / nasha’ gal huw’), You will expose them and stop them (‘atah shabach hem).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:9)

The most popular belief systems among Gentiles are Roman Catholicism, Orthodox and Protestant Christianity, Sunni and Shia Islam, Socialist Humanism, and Hinduism. From God’s perspective they are not only presumptive, holding unwarranted status, and deceitful, 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.

As an example, the majority have been led to believe there is a place called “Palestine” and that oppressive Jews are occupying land which belongs to so-called “Palestinians.” We have endeavored to expose this myth, but only Yah can stop those who perpetrate it.

Now that the stage has been set, the cast must be introduced before the battle begins. And in this drama, there is a villain and a hero…

“You have rejected, humbled, and crushed (‘atah daka’) the contentious pleas and reprehensible nature of (ka ha chalal) the pretentious pride and stormy arrogance of the boisterous afflictor 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 Your empowered and fortified (ba ‘oz ‘atah) Arm and Protective Shepherd (zarowa’ – Productive Ram who shepherds the flock, one who prevails because he is effective and strong, fully resolved with the overall ability to accomplish the mission, the remarkably important and impactful individual of action who, as a leader and fighter, is engaged as a shepherd among his sheep, who is fruitful in his ways, especially when sowing the seeds of truth while denoting and advancing the purpose of the arm of God, of His shepherd and sacrificial lamb (speaking of Dowd)), isolating and separating (pazar) Your adversaries (‘oyeb ‘atah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:10)

Since Yahowah is not pretentious, when arrogant men such as Sha’uwl | Paul cop an attitude, God finds it annoying. As a result, He is going to crush the conceited, shattering those who seek to defeat His people.

Chalah | reprehensible and rahab | insolent and arrogant are both singular, and thus focused on one person or institution. And yet since chalal addresses that which is profane and thus common, and ka implies a broad association, this individual or institution has had a defiling and fatal influence over millions, if not billions. Their contentious pleas, reprehensible agenda, and deadly consequence have been overwhelming. Moreover, since God’s concern is always for His people, this man and his faithful have sought to harm Yisra’el.

We have a number of options regarding rahab in that Paul, Akiba, and Muhammad all qualify – as does Hadrian. They were presumptuous and pretentious, easily enraged and undisciplined. All four were annoyingly boisterous in their audacious promotion of false gods. Their confused musings and contentious pleas have led to senseless claims the world over. Their effect has been devastating and deadly. Each has inspired frenzied and senseless behavior, as well as an undeserved sense of superiority. All four promoted false gods, religious worship, and submission.

However, since Paul, Akiba, Muhammad, and Hadrian are “chalah – dead,” it is their reprehensible, confused, and fatal religious legacy that Yahowah is going to crush. The leadership and devotees of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and, in particular, Roman Catholicism have been forewarned.

There are three Zarowa’ – Moseh, Dowd, and Yahowsha’ – the mightiest of whom is Dowd. He is the one being deployed to crush Yahowah’s foremost adversaries: the aforementioned religions. This remarkable title is based upon “zera’ – to sow seeds.” As we have learned, these seeds can be sown to disseminate the truth and produce nurturing results, including an ample harvest. In addition, zera’ speaks of offspring and conceiving a family. In this way Zarowa’ conveys the fruit of the Towrah and the Miqra’ey, and thus of Moseh, Dowd, and Yahowsha’.

Dowd is the best fit for this role because Yahowah’s Zarowa’ will be “‘oz – an empowered and fortified, mentally acute, physically strong, and psychologically prepared” Shepherd.

The reference to “pazar ‘oyeb – isolating and separating adversaries” could mean that God is going to divide and conquer, separating Muslims from Christians and both from Secular Humanists. It could also indicate that He is going to isolate every party and creed, dispersing them from His presence.

What follows seems to suggest that Yahowah, and He alone, is justified crushing His adversaries because the world is not only His, He must do as He has promised to protect His children. If He did not do so, He would cease to be loving.

“The heavens (shamaym) are Yours (la ‘atah). The material realm (‘erets), the world (tebel), and all that is in it (wa malo’ hy’), is also Yours (‘aph la ‘atah). You laid the foundation for them and created them (‘atah yasad hem). (89:11) The north (tsaphown) and (wa) the south (yamyn), You have created them (‘atah bara’ hem).”

This distinction is important, and yet it is missed by religious adherents. We are not called to rise up and slaughter our oppressors as Akiba’s followers did against Rome with such horrid results. We are not called to be terrorists as Muhammad insists, nor crusaders as popes have pled. 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 is not only God’s responsibility, He is the only one who is justified in doing so. We did not create this world nor conceive the life within it, and thus souls are not ours to take.

Religions are deadly, not because Yahowah wants them to act this way, but because the faithful do not listen to God. Their conquests and inquisitions, as well as their intent to subjugate others, are entirely of human design. Therefore, the places where the Chosen People have been scattered and accursed, first by the Romans and then Muslims, will serve as God has intended…

“Tabowr | the Broken (tabowr – the shattered, crippled, and crushed, a high hill in Lower Galilee, location of the battle Deborah and Barak waged against the Canaanites, the location 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) and (wa) Chermown | the Banned and Exterminated (Chermown – the accursed, mutilated, and destroyed, a mountain in the Golan, the site of intense battles in the Six-Day War (1967) and Yom Kippur War (1973) against Muslims, also the location of the palace of Ba’al) shout for joy (ranan) in Your name (ba shem ‘atah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:12)

For those who have suffered, salvation will be especially sweet. Laments will become laughter. Pain and sorrow will turn to joy. And it is the Zarowa’ who will be working alongside Yahowah during this marvelous transformation to make the world a better place.

“Beside You and on Your behalf (la ‘atah), the Protective Shepherd (zarowa’ – the Productive Ram who shepherds the flock, who prevails because he is effective and strong, fully resolved with the overall ability to accomplish the mission, the remarkably important and impactful individual of action who, as a leader and fighter is engaged as a shepherd among his sheep, who is fruitful in his ways, especially when sowing the seeds of truth while denoting and advancing the purpose of the arm of God, of His shepherd and sacrificial lamb (speaking of Dowd)) with tremendous power and awesome ability (‘im gabuwrah – with the will to fight and the capacity to perform, who accomplishes what needs to be done, becoming victorious; from gibowr – a mighty warrior, valiant soldier, and capable defender, a hero worth noting) will be Your strong hand (‘azaz yad ‘atah) raised up high (ruwm) at Your right side (yamyn ‘atah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:13)

From Yahowah’s perspective, gabuwrah | accomplishing what needs to be done to protect the Covenant family from billions of angry Gowym, and indeed from themselves, is most reliably accomplished when He remains true to His nature. Therefore, God is not returning alone. He is not coming back with Yahowsha’, the Passover Lamb, but instead with His Protective Shepherd and beloved son. He knows that His people need a gibowr – a capable defender and valiant hero willing to fight for what is right. When it comes to interacting with humankind, God does not work alone.

As a result, shouldn’t we seek to appreciate why Yahowah is returning with Dowd | David instead of alone or with Yahowsha’ | “Jesus?” Why have Christians, Muslims, and Jews taken this honor from Dowd? Why seek to deny God His preference? Why do Christians pray to and worship “Jesus Christ” rather than listen to and learn from the actual Mashyach | Messiah? As a lost sheep, who is better to follow: the Protective Shepherd or the Passover Lamb? It is a simple question with an obvious answer.

There is a reason Dowd’s name appears over one thousand other times throughout the Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr. Understanding God’s preference helps us appreciate why Yahowsha’ | “Jesus” is never mentioned by name in any prophecy. Obviously, there is a reason more is spoken and written about Dowd, and by Dowd, all meticulously maintained and miraculously preserved in the language it was written and spoken, than anyone else. And yet by comparison we do not possess a single word communicated by Yahowsha’ reliably recorded in the language he spoke.

There is a reason that Dowd was inspired to compose one hundred songs and proverbs teaching us about God, when Yahowsha’ | “Jesus” didn’t write a single word for us to read. Yahowsha’ | “Jesus” cited Dowd’s 22nd Mizmowr | Psalm at the single most important moment of his life, when he was fulfilling his role as the Passover Lamb, because no one knows his sheep better than the Shepherd.

Dowd is the living embodiment of the Covenant, and the Beryth is the only reason we exist. God created the universe and conceived life within it, He authored and fulfilled His Towrah, for Dowd | David and for those who follow in his footsteps, and not for Yahowsha’ | Jesus. If you are looking for God, listen to what was spoken about and written by Dowd. It, like this Mizmowr, exists for this purpose.

“Being correct (tsedeq) regarding executing good judgment and justly resolving disputes (wa mishpat) serves as the foundation (makown) of your throne, your place of honor and respect (kise’ ‘atah).

A loving relationship and genuine mercy (chesed), along with a steadfast commitment to the truth (wa ‘emuwnah), encompass those who enter y/Your presence (qadam paneh ‘atah). (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:14)

Delighted to show the way and blessed (‘ashry) are the people (ha ‘am) who are aware of and acknowledge (yada’) Taruw’ah (Taruw’ah – Trumpets, the 5th of 7 Miqra’ey, time to expose corruptions while sharing the truth, blowing the showphar to announce the harvest of Covenant souls), who walk (halak) with the light into Your presence (ba ‘owr paneh ‘atah), Yahowah (Yahowah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:15)

This is who we are. It is what we do.

Everything we have written and spoken these past twenty years is an expression of Taruw’ah, as we have striven to celebrate its purpose. We have sought to shout out a warning, boldly, bluntly, clearly, 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 had to say about Himself, explaining what He is offering and expects in return. 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.

Since Yahowah has heightened our awareness of Taruw’ah, and since we have come to appreciate what it represents and our role in it, let’s see if we can come a little closer to ascertaining its timing. Based upon Yasha’yah / Isaiah 18, we have come to realize that Taruw’ah will be fulfilled after Israel is thinned at the waist in an ill-fated attempt to trade land for peace and yet before the worst of Ya’aqob’s Troubles. This means that it will occur after the fall of 2026 (seven years prior to Yahowah’s return with Dowd) and before the midpoint of the Time of Ya’aqob’s Troubles, a little over three years later, leading us to expect that the Harvest of Taruw’ah will occur no later than 2029.

If allowed to continue another 7 years, until 2028 – eighty years after Israel’s rebirth – and just prior to the commencement of the worst of Ya’aqob’s Troubles, then we will fly away. We know these things because we were told as much in Mizmowr 90.

For those who may be interested, in 2027, while the new year could begin on Tuesday, March 9th, at sunset, it is more likely to occur on Thursday, April 8, 2027, such that Taruw’ah begins at sundown on Friday, October 1st, a natural Shabat, and concludes prior to sunset on Saturday, October 2nd.

The following year, in 2028, Taruw’ah will be celebrated beginning on Tuesday, September 19th, and will conclude the following afternoon. If it were not for the fact that we will be given everything we need and want, I would encourage Covenant members to pack their bags.

We rejoice because there is vindication in getting Yahowah’s name right.

“In Your name (ba shem ‘atah) they rejoice (gyl) every day (kol ha yowm). And (wa) in Your justice and vindication, by being right (ba tsadaqah ‘atah), they are lifted on high (ruwm).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:16)

The first step we take to knowing Yahowah is to acknowledge and proclaim His name. It is where the path begins to being right regarding who He is, what He is offering, and how we should engage with Him to avail ourselves of His blessings. We do so without hesitation or equivocation.

As he steps forward into Yahowah’s light, the Psalmist cannot resist including himself among those enveloped and adorned in Yahowah’s radiant power.

“Indeed (ky), Your power (‘oz ‘atah) is their adornment (tiph’erth hem) and (wa) our status and radiance (qaran ‘anachnuw) is lifted up (ruwm) by Your desire to be accepting (ba ratsown ‘atah). (89:17) For (ky) our deliverance and protection (magen ‘anachnuw) are from (la) Yahowah (Yahowah).

Accordingly (wa la), the Set-Apart One (qadowsh) of Yisra’el (Yisra’el) is our king (melek ‘anachnuw – is our leader, our royal ruler, our authorized authority, and our sovereign).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:18)

Yahowah adorns His Children in a Garment of Light, a perfecting, immortalizing, and empowering adornment provided by the “Ruwach Qodesh – Set-Apart Spirit. It is how the imperfect appear perfect before Yah. It is what makes us acceptable. This Garment of Light not only delivers us safely into Yahowah’s presence, it protects us in the here and now and throughout all time.

Since qadowsh is universally corrupted to “holy” in English Bibles, the “Set-Apart One of Yisra’el, our king,” is rendered “the Holy-One of Israel, our King. This is then taken out of context to infer that our “king” is “Jesus” because religions have made him “Holy.” But this Psalm has been devoted to declaring that Dowd is the one God selected and distinguished, setting him apart from all others to be the king of Yisra’el.

There are, of course, a number of lingering conflicts which must be ignored by Christians to elevate one person over the other. Dowd’s name is ascribed to this prophecy and “Jesus’” is not. Dowd was the King of a unified Yisra’el and “Jesus” had no kingdom to call his own and came at a time when Yahuwdah was all that was left of the nation. Moreover, Dowd was special among Yisra’el, consistent with the text, while Yahowsha’ was set apart from Yahowah. All of this to say: Dowd is the Set-Apart One of Yisra’el, our King.

In a moment we will witness yet another transition from the Psalmist to Yahowah’s voice. God is going to make some extraordinary statements. If your reverence for Yahowsha’ | “Jesus” continues to supersede your respect for what Yahowah has chosen to accomplish through Dowd, you may want to rethink that position.

“At the time (‘az) You spoke (dabar) in a revelation (ba chazown) to (la) those whose love for You and commitment to You is unwavering (chasyd ‘atah), saying (‘amar), ‘I have provided (shawah) assistance, supplying what is needed, empowering, equipping, and enabling (‘ezer) on behalf of (‘al) the one with the strength to prevail (gibowr – the mightiest of men, the strong and effective fighter, the valiant and brave warrior, the 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).

I have raised up and exalted, empowering (ruwm), the Chosen One (bachar) from (min) the people (‘am).” (89:19)

Yahowah reveals Himself to us through His prophets. These men (chasyd is masculine plural) were chosen as God’s conduits for our benefit based upon their attitude and dedication. In a world filled with billions of souls who neither know Him nor respect Him, who think so little of Him that they have replaced Him with figments of their imagination, Yahowah sought out the forty men and women who respected and appreciated Him for who He really is, men He knew He could trust to be devoted to the relationship and unwavering in their commitment.

Chasyd reveals a number of things about these men and four women that are seldom considered. The worst thing that could have occurred is for one of the select to go rogue, like Miriam, and to go from accurately communicating what Yahowah was revealing through her, to being an independent operator, ad-libbing, presumptuously mixing in, “but I say” along with what Yahowah has revealed. For doing so, Miriam contracted leprosy and a seven-day time out. Had others done so, the result would have been babel | a commingling of right and wrong, thereby denigrating Yahowah’s witness and confounding everyone.

It is interesting that a second of the four women who were named prophetesses, Noadiah, also went rogue. With 50% of the women and none of the men going off message, it becomes apparent why Yahowah preferred men in the role of prophet. Other than the additional roles performed by Moseh, Dowd, and Yahowsha’, there is no higher calling or greater responsibility.

The baseline requirement for being a prophet is being 100% accurate 100% of the time. For that to occur, the prophet’s devotion to Yahowah must be resolute. They cannot be self-serving, self-aggrandizing, self-motivated, self-reliant, or have an agenda of their own. They can never contradict God nor replace His words, plans, or promises with their own. They must be like Dowd and not like Sha’uwl.

Yahowah does not work alone, but those through whom He works are never alone. Sure, Dowd brought something to the table Yahowah wanted to exploit for His and our benefit. His son was passionate and rational, insightful and reasonable, a good listener and articulate speaker, a lover and a fighter, a man of character who sought to be right, someone who loved to learn and teach. And yet we would never have heard of him, much less benefited from anything he had to say, had Yah not “shawah ‘ezer – enabled him, equipping him to be successful, supplying him with what was required to get this job done.” He did so through His Word and Spirit.

What was unique about Dowd in this regard was that even after being anointed as the Mashyach, even after slaying the giant, even after being appointed King, even after winning every battle, even after becoming wise beyond compare, even after writing one glorious song after another, even after becoming enormously rich, he remained reliant. It is the opposite of what we witness in others cursed with one, much less each of these seeds of arrogance. I share this because it does not matter how much Yahowah wants to give if we are not able to receive it without becoming self-willed or self-reliant.

Gibowr, “the strength to prevail” embodied by “the mightiest of men, the most valiant and courageous of men, those men willing to fight for what is right with virtue and valor,” is one of many characteristics which distinguishes Dowd from the rest of us. He was mighty with pen and sword. Beyond this, Dowd was not a pacifist. He did not compromise. He was not 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. I thought you should know that God obviously likes these qualities in men.

The third insight worthy of our consideration is that Yahowah bachar | chose Dowd. It means that He can and does select the men and women He wants to raise as His children, include in His family, invite into heaven, and work with and through. He did not usurp His son’s freewill. Since Dowd could have said “no” at any time rather than “yes” every time, he was not being controlled. They became the best Father and son team of all time.

“I discovered and then made known, then sought to reap the benefit by inspiring (matsa’) Dowd (Dowd), My coworker (‘ebed ‘any – My authorized agent who works on My behalf; from ‘abad – to work).

Out of (min) My set-apart oil which uniquely distinguishes (shemen qodesh ‘any), I have anointed him (mashach – I have applied the oil, dedicating him to My purpose; the actionable basis of and thus process of becoming the Mashyach | Messiah) (89:20) so that to show the way to the relationship (‘asher) My hand (yad ‘any) will be established and steadfast (kuwn – will be authenticated and sustained, made ready and prepared, be unwavering and persistent) with you (‘im ‘atah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:20-21)

By stating that He made Dowd known to us, Yahowah is taking credit for the accounts of his life and copies of his Psalms that have been made available for us to read 3,000 years after they were chronicled and composed. No other 11th century BCE life is as contemporaneously or voluminously documented.

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 for this man? And since He did so and prevailed with Dowd, why didn’t He do the same for Yahowsha’ who arrived 1000 years thereafter?

This is the most telling contrast between the two lives. We have nothing whatsoever from the lips of Yahowsha’ recorded in the language he spoke, not a word that he wrote, and nothing in any language that was reliably preserved. By contrast, we have more written about and by Dowd than we can process in a lifetime. It was all preserved in the original language, verified and proven to be credible with copious prophecies, conscientiously maintained, and extant among the Dead Sea Scrolls. There were more parchments of his Mizmowr, sealed in ceramics found less than twenty miles from where they were first composed, than anything else, including the Towrah.

The reason for this disparity ought to be obvious. Yahowsha’ was the Passover Lamb. It is a non-speaking role in God’s story. He was not here to change, add, or subtract anything, so there was nothing more to say. As for Dowd, more than anyone in human history, he not only exemplifies what Yahowah is trying to accomplish, he told us how we can achieve the same result.

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. Highlights of this search reveal that Yahowah wants us to call Him by name and Father, 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 intellect and character, passion and reliability, to those who are not afraid to say what needs to be conveyed, 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 us 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 that He has not done for anyone else – “Out of My set-apart oil which uniquely distinguishes him, I have anointed him.” Whether this is the oil of enlightenment, longevity, healing, protection, nourishment, or preparation for service, may you and I benefit from what remains of it.

There is one thing we should never do, and that is ignore what God has done or, worse, try to take it from this man and give it to another. Yahowah chose to personally anoint Dowd His Mashyach | Messiah. It 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 do not even exist, He did not do this for Dowd’s benefit, but instead for ours. By preparing the Messiah to serve in this way, God’s influence in 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 collective, and to the whole of Yisra’el, in the Towrah, but in Dowd’s songs it is all personal. The Towrah is the map and Dowd is the guide.

We have long since come to realize that Yahowah chose a shepherd to serve as His Zarowa’. He would protect God’s flock while sowing the seeds of truth such that we would come to appreciate the purpose of the Sacrificial Lamb.

“In addition (‘aph), My Protective Shepherd (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 important and impactful individual of action who, as a leader and fighter, is engaged as a shepherd among My sheep, who is fruitful in his ways, especially when sowing the seeds of truth while denoting and advancing the purpose of the arm of God) shall empower and embolden you, strengthening you, helping you grow (‘amets ‘atah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:21)

There is no need to interpret the text, to extrapolate or speculate. 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, 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, and it is his throne and his kingdom which will exist therein, forevermore.

“The Adversary (‘oyeb – the hostile opposition, the enemy, the one with animosity, enmity, and rancor (masculine singular)) will not nullify him (showa’ – will not negate his value nor annul his position or purpose) and (wa) the Son of Evil (ben ‘awlah – the Son of Wickedness, the Child of Malice and Injustice, the Seed of One who is Wrong, Harmful, and Damaging to Others; from ‘awal – evil) shall not deny him nor denigrate him (lo’ ‘anah huw’ – shall not silence him nor stop him, will not negate his answers nor nullify his responsive declarations).” (Mizmowr / 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 is not going to allow the Adversary, nor the Son of Evil, to denigrate or silence Dowd, either.

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. Yahowah is tying each of these clues together for us so that we might understand Satan’s desire to degrade Yahowah’s Chosen. God does not want us fooled into trivializing the son of God nor into worshiping the Son of Man.

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.” Interestingly, 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 does not 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 is stupefying that no one has bothered to ask: if Sha’uwl | Paul is as he claims, if he is the lone Apostle to the Gentile world, why are all of the prophetic references to him decidedly negative? Why isn’t there a single positive comment about the principal author of the Christian New Testament to be found anywhere in prophecy? 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 Sha’uwl’s name synonymous with She’owl? Why does it mean, “Question Him?” Why is he a Benyamite | Son Headed South to the Sea of Gentiles and a wolf if he is to be believed? Why does Dowd’s name mean “Beloved?” Why is he from Yahuwdah | Loved of Yah? And why does Yahowsha’ cite him and not Paul if Dowd is to be ignored?

Why, if we are not supposed to value his contribution to our lives, is Dowd afforded the most meaningful titles by God, Himself: from the Chosen One to the Set-Apart One, from the Son of God to the Right Hand of God, from Messiah to King, and from the Branch to the Protective Shepherd? Why is Dowd accompanying Yahowah upon His return, and then presented 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?

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 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, or 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? What did those who listened to Paul and rejected him realize what Christians fail to recognize today?

Rest assured, Yahowah was fully briefed on Sha’uwl | Paul’s irrational and pathetic attempts to disparage His son, and was vocal in submitting His unyielding rebuke. The Plague of Death must be vanquished.

Standing up for the one who stood with Him, Yah reveals…

“And so (wa) I will pulverize and crush (kathath) his foes, especially those who seek to constrain and restrict him (tsary huw’). Then (wa) from of his presence (min paneh huw’), I will smite and then destroy (nagaph) those who shun him by attempting to decrease his status, especially those who are openly hostile in their derision (sane’ huw’).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:23)

Empirically, having dissected, compared, and analyzed much of what Sha’uwl | Paul said and wrote, it is apparent that the principal author of the Christian New Testament was not only replacing Dowd with his god-man, “Iesous Christos – Jesus Christ,” but was decreasing Dowd’s status to elevate his own. This becomes all the more obvious when we scrutinize Paul’s spoken and written assessment of Dowd, the first in Acts and the second in Romans.

With Replacement Theology, before the Church was said to have replaced Israel, “Jesus” was afforded what belonged to Dowd. Had this not occurred, a thoughtful assessment of the Psalms would have undermined Paul’s New Testament, obliterating his credibility in the process.

Yahowah’s perceptions of Dowd are steadfast…

“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) and (wa) My love, devotion, and enduring favoritism, My unfailing affection and genuine mercy (chesed ‘any), are with him (‘im huw’).

In My name (wa ba shem ‘any) his light will radiate and enlighten (qaran huw’).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:24)

Dowd | David, like Yahowah, shares an unwavering commitment to the truth. By looking at one we see the other. Seen together, they encapsulate the Towrah and emulate the Covenant.

Since God is unwavering in His commitment to the truth, He could not have inspired the contradictory message found in the Christian New Testament – especially since it annuls much of what He claimed would be consistently reliable. Since the God of the Torah 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 does not), it becomes superfluous. If its message differs (and it does), for it to be true, the statement God just made must be false.

Dowd’s status with God is both special and secure.

“He shall call out to Me and welcome Me, announcing (huw’ qara’ ‘any), ‘You are my Father (‘ab ‘any ‘atah)!’ (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:26)

I (‘any), also (‘aph), will appoint him (nathan huw’) My Firstborn (bakowr ‘any), the highest of all (‘elyown) of the kings and rulers (la melek) of the earth (‘erets). (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:27)

For all eternity (la ‘owlam) I will keep watch over him, paying very close attention to him (shamar la huw’).

My unwavering love, unrelenting devotion, enduring affection, and genuine mercy (chesed ‘any) as a part of My Family-Oriented Covenant agreement (wa beryth ‘any) are truthfully presented and will reliably endure with him (‘aman la huw’ – are established and verifiable, confirmed and credible, upheld and everlasting, especially real for him and through him).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:28)

It all begins with qara’. Yahowah has “invited us to meet with Him.” God has “called us out” of this world so that we can be “welcomed” into His. By “reading and reciting” the Word of God, we find our Father “summoning us” to His side. When we “call out to Him, inviting Him into our lives,” He “answers our proclamation” with one of His own – the promises He has made to us in His Towrah.

Bakowr | Firstborn is the only meaningful title, apart from the Pesach Ayl | Passover Lamb that I thought would remain Yahowsha’s alone. I had seen Bikuwrym in year 4000 Yah (the 4th and 5th of April, 33 CE) when, what I had once thought was Yahowsha’s nepesh | soul reunited with Yahowah’s ruwach | Spirit, as the fulfillment of the Miqra’, making Yahowsha’ Yahowah’s Firstborn. But I appear to have been wrong in one way and perhaps right in another. Yahowah was honoring His promise to enable the benefits of Bikuwrym on this day. However, because it was, as we have subsequently surmised, Yahowah’s soul, the resulting union was not His son that was manifest this day.

The distinction of being the first and foremost among the Covenant’s children is Dowd’s. He is Yahowah’s Bakowr. What’s more, Yahowah “nathan huw’ – gave him” the title Bakowr | Firstborn as a gift. It also means that Dowd’s inheritance will be greater than other members of the Covenant family. And that is as it should be since he has all of the responsibility and we get to enjoy the benefits.

According to God, Dowd is King of Kings, “‘elyown – enjoying the highest and most exalted in status, rank, and position” of the “la melek – kings and rulers” of the earth. And while that may sound like a more impressive title, Bakowr | Firstborn of God is far superior.

This also gives entirely new meaning to Revelation 19: “Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And he who sat on him was called Faithful [‘emuwnah] and True [tsadaq], and in righteousness he judges and makes war. (19:11) His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns. He had a name written [Dowd] that no one knew except himself. (19:12) He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and his name is called the Word of God. (19:13) And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed him on white horses. (19:14) Now out of his mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it he should strike the nations. And he, himself, will rule them with a rod of iron. He, himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. (19:15) And he has on his robe and on his thigh a name written: King of Kings.” (Revelation 19:11-16)

What Christians have presumptuously claimed for their “Christ” was actually written, should it have been inspired, on behalf of Yahowah’s Mashyach | Messiah, the true King of Kings. As Yahowah’s Gibowr, Dowd will be riding the white horse. He is the one Yahowah has called ‘Emuwnah and Tsadaq. He is God’s righteous warrior and Right Hand of Judgment. And do not be taken aback by the “flames of fire” because as we shall discover in this Mizmowr | Psalm, Dowd shall “appear as the sun before Yahowah.”

It is Dowd’s name which few know, preferring to relegate “David” to a time long past, with many denying his very existence. It was even the blood Dowd shed protecting his people, and then the blood of those he will eliminate, that will appear on his robe upon his return. More than anyone else, Dowd wrote the Word of God.

Upon his return, Dowd will strike the Gentile nations, ending their rule with a rod of iron – a reference to smiting what Rome has come to represent. It is even Yahowah’s vineyard that Dowd was asked to tend.

When we explore everything beryth represents, we come to appreciate that we are family and have been invited home. We will be as Dowd – the firstborn son of God. According to God, Dowd is the most interesting man in the world. We devalue him and Yah’s relationship with him, his life and lyrics, at our peril.

Based upon 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) his seed, that which he sows, and his offspring (zera’ huw’), as an eternal witness forever (la ‘ed | ‘ad).

And (wa) his throne (kise’ huw’) shall be equated to the days of heaven (ka yowm shamaym).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:29)

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 the crowning achievement of his life.

“However, if (‘im) his children (beny huw’) continue to forsake, ignore, or reject (‘azab) My Towrah | Teaching and Guidance, Instruction and Direction, and (wa) make a habit of failing to walk (wa lo’ halak) according to My means to justly resolve disputes (ba mishpat ‘any), (89:30) if (‘im) they perpetually view My clearly communicated prescriptions for living with contempt (chuqah ‘any chalal), and further (wa), if they consistently fail to observe the instructive terms of the relationship (mitswah ‘any lo’ shamar), (89:31) then (wa) I will hold them accountable (paqad) with the measure (ba shebet) of their rebellion (pesha’ hem).

The consequence of their deviation from the way and of their wrongdoing (‘awon hem) will be a pestilence which causes widespread death (ba nega’).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:32)

Souls who forsake the Towrah, die. The consequence of ignoring Yah’s Teaching is to endure the plague of death. To reject God’s Guidance, as Paul has done, is to be held accountable. There is no substitute and no getting around it, not with the Talmud or Gospels, and most certainly not with the Qur’an.

For those who would take what was promised to Dowd and apply it to “Jesus Christ,” and for those who would advocate for the existence of a “New Covenant” as chronicled by the likes of Sha’uwl | Paul in his “New Testament,” this will either change their mind or they are out of their mind…

“Accordingly (wa), My unwavering love, enduring devotion, unmitigated affection, and genuine mercy (chesed ‘any) I will never remove from him (lo’ parar min ‘im huw’) because I will never communicate something which is not true nor will I ever contradict (wa lo’ shaqar ba) My steadfast commitment to the truth (‘emuwnah ‘any). (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:33)

I will never dishonor, nor will I create loopholes which violate the nature of (lo’ chalal) My Covenant (beryth ‘any – My Family, My Home, and My Relationship Agreement) nor will I ever alter nor change (wa lo’ shanah – and I will never rearrange, modify, nor adjust) that which has gone forth from (mowtsa’) My lips (saphah ‘any). (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:34)

There is only one (‘echad) to whom I have affirmed the truth by having made a promise (shaba’) by My Set-Apart nature (ba qodesh ‘any). If not to (‘im la) Dowd (Dowd), I will be proven a liar (kazab).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:35)

It is Christians who have called God a liar through their New Testament. They have replaced Yahowah’s Covenant with one of their own – poking holes in His in the process. It is Christianity which has transferred the promises made to Dowd and to Yisra’el such that they were errantly bequeathed to “Jesus Christ,” and through this misnomer to themselves. Shame on you for believing and promoting contradictions of Yahowah’s testimony, for undermining the measure of His mercy, and the reliability of His testimony.

There will be no loopholes for a “Gospel of Grace,” for “Salvation by Faith,” for a “New Testament,” for “Jesus Christ” being “the Messiah,” “the Son of God,” or “the King of Kings.” To claim otherwise is to call God a liar.

Continuing to affirm His love and respect for Dowd, Yahowah continues…

“His offspring and that which he sows (zera’ huw’) shall exist and endure (hayah) forever (la ‘owlam). And (wa) his place of honor (kise’ huw’) shall be as (ka) the sun (ha shemesh – the sunlight) before Me and as My counterpart (neged ‘any). (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:36)

Like (ka) the moon (yareach), it shall be established (kuwn) for a very long time (‘owlam), serving as an enduring and reliable (‘aman) witness (‘ed) in the sky (ba ha shachaq).

Pause now and contemplate what you have just read (selah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:37)

Not only are His affirmations of His promises to Dowd absolute, non-negotiable, and non-transferable, there is yet another attribute wrongly ascribed to Yahowsha’ that has been promised to Dowd. Based upon the Christian New Testament, we would expect to see Yahowsha’ returning in the likeness of a star – and yet it is Dowd who will be afforded this honor. Yahowah is returning with the Shepherd not the Lamb.

Christians can take their Madonna and Child, her baby ‘Jesus,’ their dead god on a stick, and their ‘Second Coming’ and stick them where the sun don’t shine, because they do not belong in Yah’s world.

At long last, we have reached the transition from benefit to consequence within the Mizmowr that was alluded to in Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7. After all of these years of trying, we have finally come to understand this most intriguing of prophecies. And prior to this time, we were ill-equipped to process what follows.

More perhaps than even Ya’aqob, Dowd is Yisra’el. The promises made to him were 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 with 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 2 Shamuw’el 7. After all, while Christians have done this, so has Yisra’el…

“But now (wa) you have refused to accept (zanach) and (wa) you have rejected by diminishing the merit of, even over time becoming averse to (ma’as), your Messiah (Mashyach ‘atah), improperly, and on your own initiative, meddling while presumptuously passing over (‘abar) any association with him (‘im)!” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:38)

Yahowah’s phrasing and timing are impeccable. He has affirmed this reality so many times and ways it is befuddling that as few as one in a million Yahuwdym acknowledge Dowd as such and nearly four billion Gowym bequeath the Greek variation of this title on another. After enduring 2000 years of harassment for failing to accept “Jesus” as their Messiah, turns out Jews were correct. Now it is time to recognize the 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. Much of what religious and secular Jews have claimed regarding Dowd | David and have alleged on behalf of the Christian Christ is untrue, upended, and reversed. Accept the realization that Dowd | David is the Mashyach | Messiah. Do not pass over him in an ill-conceived attempt to give Yahowsha’ | “Jesus,” the lamb, what the shepherd is due.

Yahuwdym have been plagued over the centuries by Christians who believe that “Christ” was the Messiah and then blame Jews for failing to accept him and then killing him. Turns out, there never was any rational basis for a Messiah named “Jesus Christ,” no reason for the religion of Christianity, no value in a “New Testament,” nor any merit in calling oneself a “Christian.”

Second only to removing Yahowah’s name 7000 times from His testimony in the Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr and replacing it with the Adversary’s name and title, “the Lord,” the mistaken identity of the Mashyach has caused more harm to Yahuwdym | Jews than any other. They ought not to have been looking to the future for a Messiah to save them when he had been the most prominent and protective man in their past. Yahowsha’s name would not have been changed to “Jesus Christ,” and Christianity’s “New Testament” would have been stillborn, had the actual identity and purpose of Yahowah’s Messiah been known.

In that it has been noted by Yahowah, 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 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: accept and embrace the Beloved Mashyach and Melek as your brother and as God’s son, even as your shepherd. 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 shake some sense into themselves in minyan | minions, they recite Dowd’s Mizmowr from rote directly into the stones of Herod’s wall. 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 non-religious and unpretentious.

Continuing to speak to Yisra’el, and to those whom the religions they begot have debased, especially to those who have been beguiled by Sha’uwl | Paul into believing in a “New Covenant,” Yahowah declares…

“You have repudiated and renounced (na’ar) the Covenant (beryth) with your coworker (‘ebed ‘atah), dishonoring and defiling (chalal) his dedication and preparation, even his consecration and crown (nezer huw’ – his uncommon ability to separate himself, demonstrate his unparalleled devotion, and show his respect; the basis of Nazarite).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:39)

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 with a human construct? Not only is the Christian replacement inferior, in that it only offers forgiveness and eternal life, it is unsupported by the God who, through His own Covenant, is offering so much more: eternal life, perfection, adoption, enrichment, and empowerment. While the Christian replacement only has one requirement, “believe,” it is about as useful as hoping Zeus will give you a ride on his unicorn.

Everything of value to Yahowah and cherished by Him is set apart and thus uncommon. Nothing is further from God than that which is commonplace, such as religion and government. By virtue of its popularity alone, the “New Covenant” is a nonstarter.

For those who may be protesting, saying that they have not repudiated Dowd because they honor David by having chosen to fly a flag emblazoned with his star, be aware that there was never a Star of David and David is not his name. Creating a false caricature of a man in this manner degrades his authentic nature. It is akin to alleging that Tunic Flufferson, instead of Thomas Jefferson, was essential to the French Revolution because he drew popular cartoons rather than authoring the Declaration of Independence. It would be like insisting that Thomas Jefferson’s insights on limiting the influence of government and religion, while disavowing central banks and established militaries, should not be considered because he had sexual relations with one of his slaves. It is akin to calling Yahowsha’ “Jesus Christ” and then modeling the resulting caricature after Dionysus.

For Christians, nezer / nazar (“dedicated and prepared”) is the basis of Nazarite. It was upon a corruption of this term that the Roman Church coined the phrase “Jesus of Nazareth,” writing it into their New Testament. The problem with this assumption is threefold. His name was not “Jesus.” He was not a “Nazarite.” And Nazareth did not exist during his lifetime. And yet, there actually is a nezer connection with Dowd because he is the branch.

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…

“Within the Land (la ha ‘erets) you have broken down and destroyed, having breached (parats) his entire sheepfold and all of its walls (kol gaderah huw’).

You have caused (sym) the undoing, degradation, and destruction (machatah) of his fortifications (mibtsar huw’).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:40)

As a rebuke to every religion, Yahowah has deliberately restricted access to His Covenant, effectively keeping the religious and political out. God has set as His conditions for entry, and yet men like Akiba and Paul have sought to annul the Almighty’s requirements and make their own. It is why the way is narrow and restrictive which leads to life and the path is wide open and broad which results in death and destruction.

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 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.

Fathers do not take kindly to gangs who abuse their son, especially when this Father had given this son the keys to His kingdom…

“All who pass by this way (kol ‘abar derek) plunder him (shasas huw’). It has become such that (hayah) he is scorned and abusively ridiculed (cherpah) by those who claim some affinity with him (la shaken huw’).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:41)

Claiming to have an affinity with “David” is common. His name appears in the New Testament, Talmud, and Qur’an. Similarly, Christians, Jews, and Muslims, with wholly contradictory belief systems, all claim to be Abrahamic religions even though they misrepresent ‘Abraham’s legacy. Claiming similar origins, their gods share nothing in common. Christians are particularly guilty, lugging the “Old Testament” with its tribute to Dowd | David around with their new one which robs him of his dignity. They claim an affinity for the boy who slew the giant and who sang the 23rd Psalm, not knowing that Goliath was a Philistine and that it is Yahowah, for whose name’s sake the song was written.

Speaking of the religious, whether they be pilgrims or refugees, crusaders or jihadists, God says…

“You have lifted up and exalted (ruwm) the upper hand (yamym) of his foes and adversaries, especially those who try to constrain it and limit him (tsar). You have caused all those who demonstrate animosity toward him and rancor (kol ‘oyeb) to be delighted (samach).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:42)

It was Jews who gave the upper hand to those who would later seek to destroy them. The four most toxic belief systems were all founded and abetted by Jews: Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Multicultural, Politically Correct, Socialist Secular Humanism.

The problem for Christians is as simple as it is profound. Without the Towrah, Prophets, and Psalms, they have no God and no credibility. But with them, they are a jumble of contradictions.

“What’s worse, in addition (‘aph), you have deliberately turned away from (shuwb) what he has chiseled in stone (tsuwr chereb huw’) such that (wa) you do not stand with him or support him (quwm huw’) in this conflict (ba ha milchamah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:43)

Dowd did not engrave the Ten Statements memorialized on the Two Stone Tablets, but what he wrote was inscribed to endure the test of time. God’s prophets are not equipped with erasers. What they have written was, and forever will be, true.

There has been a war of words for the past three thousand years: to Dowd or not to Dowd. It is the ultimate question because where we stand with Dowd characterizes where we stand with God.

“His brilliance and splendor (tahar huw’) and his position of honor (wa kise’ huw’) you have truncated (shabath) because (min) you have hurled it to the ground (la magar ha ‘erets). (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:44)

You have cut short, curtailing the ability to accomplish the mission, depreciating his essential nature (qatsar) during the days (yowmym) of his youth (‘aluwmym huw’). You have shamefully covered him over, dishonoring him by lowering his status and washing away his purpose (‘atah ‘al huw’ buwshah). Take a moment and consider the implications (selah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:45)

God is annoyed, disgusted that His beloved son, the man He chose, the king He anointed, has been so summarily and universally discounted.

At this time the Psalmist asks a rhetorical question. It is not for Yah to answer but for us to ponder. While the interval of time being questioned was of God’s choosing, being unknown for this long was counter to everything He intended. He has done His part, making it relatively easy for those who are serious in their pursuit to know Him. He has provided, and simultaneously validated, His revelation to us. Within it we are given everything we need to know to engage in a relationship with Yahowah, to be invited into His Home as part of His Family. The reason that so few have availed themselves of this marvelous opportunity is that religion and government, militarism and conspiracy, have gotten in the way, obscuring the view and cluttering the path.

“For how long (‘ad mah), Yahowah (Yahowah), will You remain hidden and unknown to most (sathar)? Will Your displeasure and antagonism (chemah ‘atah) burn like a fire (ba’ar kamow ‘esh) forever (la netsach)?” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:46)

Time does not flow for Him as it does for us. The 2500-year interval from the last of His acknowledged prophets, Malaky, could have passed as we would perceive days. 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 nineteen to twenty centuries which have crawled past since Yahowsha’ walked among us and Yahowchanan wrote the books which have been associated with him, if indeed he wrote them, and to the extent they reflect some of what he said, during which Yahowah has been largely unknown, was by design.

God would have known the full extent of this void in His communication with His people the moment ‘Adam and Chawah were expelled from the Garden of ‘Eden. Six laborious days would transpire before His creation would be invited back inside.

We are nearing the conclusion of this interval, and so to some extent we know how much longer Yahowah will remain “hidden and unknown” to His people. While we realize that He is returning on Yowm Kipurym, the Day of Reconciliations, in year 6000 Yah (October 2nd at sunset, 2033 in Yaruwshalaim), He is becoming known again by Name and Word.

Such is the stated purpose of His choter | stem, His nakry | observant foreigner, and His nes | banner – all of which are focused on His words and people. Within less than a decade we should expect ‘ElYah | Yah is God and another witness of Yah’s choosing to let the world know just how displeased He is with humankind. And so, it gets personal, as it should with all of us…

“For how short is the futile and empty life (cheled ‘al mah showa’) of all of the children of men (kol ben ‘adam) which You have created (bara’) that You have chosen to remember me (zakar ‘any)?” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:47)

Yahowah initiates the relationships He desires to form, leaving our response subject to our own freewill. He picks and chooses from among the few men and women He has encountered along life’s way. Those He reaches out to must amuse Him, impress Him, or just pique His interests in some way. And yet, we all have something in common, in that each has walked away from religion and politics prior to Yah’s introduction. We are all willing to listen, even go where He is leading.

The reason so few know Him is because men like Sha’uwl | Paul have plagued the world with their lies. Therefore, just as Sha’uwl | Paul 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. It is his hand, and those he duped, who wrote the New Testament’s most deadly tomes.

“What man (my geber) can live (chayah) and (wa) never see (lo’ ra’ah) death as a result of the plague (maweth), saving his soul (malat nepesh huw’) from the hand (min yad) 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).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:48)

This is addressing Sha’uwl, the man, not She’owl, the place. She’owl does not have hands nor influence. The 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 which have plagued mankind, in addition to inspiring Mark, Luke, Matthew, and Acts, in addition to those who copyedited John to synchronize the text. 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 Mashyach such that he could replace him.

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 nor 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 upon Paul’s letters, would not have propagated the anti-Semitic culture and conspiracies which culminated in the Holocaust without Paul’s jealousy and covetousness.

Even Muhammad would never have succeeded in establishing a religion predicated upon anti-Semitism without the foundation laid by his predecessor. And without Paul’s propensity to promote a cult following and promulgate ignorance such that they became commonplace, the growth of Multicultural Socialist Secular Humanism would have been truncated. The impetus behind Socialist Secularism was predicated upon capitalizing on what Paul had done in Romans to sanction the imposition and integration of government.

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. Escaping his grasp is difficult, and often impossible, as the integrated religious and political scheme he concocted has tread upon the entire world – suppressing truth and impeding freedom.

The Devil’s Advocate has been named, but Sha’uwl | Paul did not get top billing. Returning to Dowd | David, the Psalmist why so many have overlooked God’s love for His son…

“Where (‘ayeh) is Your unwavering love and enduring mercy (chesed ‘atah) which was expressed first and foremost right from the beginning (ri’shown) which You promised (shaba’) to Dowd (la Dowd), in harmony with Your steadfast commitment to being trustworthy and reliable (‘emuwnah ‘atah), my Upright One (‘edown ‘any)?” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:49)

The Pauline perspective on the Towrah and its God is wholly incompatible with the stories presented therein. Yahowah’s love is unwavering and His mercy is enduring. The hallmark of His character is His steadfast commitment to being trustworthy and thus reliable. He does not change and cannot change. He is what He has said of Himself. And thus, those like Sha’uwl | Paul who claimed otherwise are liars. And those who believe that God inspired a man to contradict Him and change everything He represents are idiots.

To encourage us not to discount him or replace him with another, this is the fourth time Dowd’s name has appeared in the 89th Mizmowr (89:3, 89:20, 89:35, and 89:49). By contrast, Yahowah’s name only appears twice and, even then, just in the concluding lines of the Song.

In his next request, the Psalmist asks of Yah what I have often requested of Him. Those who have denigrated and harassed His People ought to be held accountable. The fairest and most effective way for that to occur is to compile and act upon a record of their crimes.

“Choose to remember, and elect to be mindful of (zakar), the contemptible and condescending taunts and the dishonorable and deplorable decrees which were determined (cherpah) by the preponderance of the people (kol rabym ‘am) against those who work with You (‘ebed ‘atah) which I have now brought to bear (nasa’ ‘any) in my best judgment (ba heq).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:50)

‘Eythan the ‘Ezrachy has laid out the case against Sha’uwl | Paul, one that will be used to convict him. Like so many of us who have come to love Yah, we are not neutral or unbiased. We want justice for those who have been abused and accountability for their abusers. He wants Yah to expose and condemn Sha’uwl based upon the evidence he has marshaled against him. So do I.

This was written to affirm Yahowah’s love for Dowd and to reveal His animosity toward Sha’uwl | Paul, but it is more than that because Satan has also used the likes of Akiba and Hadrian, Muhammad and Hitler, to oppose Yahowah’s witnesses. The Christian New Testament and the Roman Catholic Canon, the Talmud and the Qur’an, even Mein Kampf, are not only counter to Yahowah, they are bewildering – which was their purpose. It is a great insult to God and to those who have worked with Him to suggest that the Almighty authorized and inspired men to default on His promises and revoke His testimony. Do not believe them. Do not worship their gods.

“That is because (‘asher) those in open opposition to You (‘oyeb ‘atah), Yahowah (Yahowah), are insulting with their bewildering derision and improperly discerned contempt, causing people to think irrationally, confounding them through blasphemy (charaph), which is why (‘asher) they are confused, responding improperly by ridiculing and defying (charaph) the beneficial and trustworthy footsteps (‘aqeb / ‘eqeb) of Your Messiah (mashyach ‘atah).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 89:51)

In the end, it all comes down to two simple questions: who do you accept as the Mashyach | Messiah, Dowd or “Jesus?” And, who do you trust to tell you about him, Yahowah or Paul? It has become apparent that this is the dividing line between those who will live with God and those plagued with death.

God created the universe and conceived life because He wanted to enjoy raising a family. In Dowd He got the son He sought. They have made beautiful music together.

“Blessed and benefited by kneeling down in love to uplift is (barak) Yahowah (Yahowah) forever (la ‘owlam). This is trustworthy, verifiable, and reliable (‘aman wa ‘aman – this is correct and true, affirmed and supported, easily confirmed, clearly stated and certain).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to be Sung / Psalm 89:52)

Yahowah is trustworthy, easily verified, and totally reliable. So are the words He inspired Dowd, and all of His prophets, to write for our benefit. Their veracity was His choice. What we do with them is ours.



Questioning Paul

Incredible

…Testing Faith

4

A New Testament

Not a Chance in Hell…

Throughout the Greco-Roman world, there would be an abrupt change from Yahowah, the God who gave us life and the means to become immortal, to a god now called “Iesous Christos | Jesus Christ,” who was not only mortal, but was killed by men. There would be a complete reversal, from promoting and affirming Yahowah’s Towrah, His Miqra’ey and Beryth, to denouncing and annulling something now called the “Law” and the “Jewish Feasts” such that the “Old Covenant” would be seen as so ineffectual it had to be replaced with a “New Covenant” and requisite “New Testament.”

As we turn the page from Yahowah’s Divinely inspired and consistently accurate prophets, away from men like Yasha’yah, Yirma’yah, and Zakaryah at the end of His book and open the new one beginning with “the Gospel of Matthew,” accuracy becomes a thing of the past and Yahowah’s love for His Chosen People, Yisra’el and Yahuwdah, even His dire warnings about the ways of the Gentiles, are completely upended, with God hating His People and choosing all others over them.

After being regaled with countless long, credible, and enlightening narratives which are verifiable in the annals of archeology about the likes of Noach, ‘Abraham, Moseh, and Dowd, the things we learned, the things Yahowah accomplished through these men, were turned to mush, with nothing but occasional and unattested musings about them which upend their lives in an irrational attempt to negate what they represented and validate a different narrative. From one page to the next, from Malaky to Matthew, almost everything changes with the exception of the Sermon on the Mount.

In the Hebrew text a relationship was prized above all else and religion was despised. Then suddenly, that relationship was discarded and replaced with a religion. Why?

What is the purpose of the Beginning of the Book when the Addendum works so hard to usurp its credibility and then negate it? This is to say: “All of that old stuff was unreliable and ineffective, and no longer applies, no matter what God said about it, but nonetheless you should trust us because that same God authorized us to denounce Him and come up with an entirely different plan.” Really?

We turned to Sha’uwl | Paul’s oral diatribe in his “New Testament” to see if Yahowah was right when He denounced the Son of Evil for renouncing Him and then transferring every promise He had made to His beloved son, Dowd, to a character who bears no resemblance to Him, now called “Jesus Christ.” And while we affirmed His assertion, we also came to see why God loathes the Despised and Despicable Soul who changed his name from Sha’uwl to Paul, along with his allegiance from Yisra’el to Greece and Rome.

While we have demonstrated with little difficulty that Sha’uwl, now Paul, deliberately misquoted and misrepresented the Towrah and Prophets to promote his faith, we also discovered that he lied about what occurred in what would soon be called Hadrianopolis. He presented “Jews” as his enemy and the enemy of his god, even as the people who murdered his god. The Gentiles were suddenly in the role of Jews and Jews were acting like Gentiles. As a result, we are told that Paul’s god changed allegiances such that this role reversal became the foundation of the resulting religion.

This leads us to consider what came first, the account of the hideous anti-Semitic episode at the conclusion of the “Gospel of Matthew” where “Jews” are engaged in elaborate conspiracies to kill “Jesus” or Paul’s crusade against them. Are we to believe that Paul was justified in his accusation that God had come to hate His people for killing His son to such a degree that He suddenly changed loyalties? Are we to believe that God had changed His mind and was now embracing the Roman Beast – which is shown cleansing its hands of the whole bloody affair as it is depicted in Matthew 27?

In the current order of things, the Gospel of Matthew precedes the Acts of the Apostles in addition to Paul’s fourteen letters. It has the appearance that Paul’s animosity flowed naturally from what was alleged to have been said during the “trial” before Pilate. While he was a liar of the first order, could Paul have been justified in concluding that God had turned on His People as the “Gospel of Matthew” suggests?

As is the case with most things worth knowing, if we want to know the truth, we will have to invest considerable time and due diligence to assess the credibility of the “Gospel” attributed to “Matthew.” If my suspicions are correct, and they are based entirely upon what we have come to know about Yahowah, in addition to what He promised Dowd, I think we will find that, while portions of it were correctly rendered very early on in Hebrew, after the Sermon on the Mount very little of what follows in the “Gospel of Matthew” was actually written by a Disciple, notably the tax collector whose name was Lowy | Levi according to Mark and Luke. It is only in what is now called the “Gospel of Matthew” that this fellow bears the name, Mattanyah | Matthew.

This obvious discrepancy is a serious problem relative to the identity of the book’s namesake. Matthew 9:9 reads: “And as Jesus passed on from there, He saw a man, called Matthew, sitting in the tax office; and He said to him, ‘Follow Me!’ And he rose and followed Him.” The designed implication is that “Matthew” became a disciple and that he, as an eyewitness to the events in “Jesus’” life, composed the “Gospel” bearing his name.

Whereas Mark, from which the “Gospel of Matthew” was substantially plagiarized, reads: “And as He passed by, He saw Levi [Lowy in Hebrew] the son of Alphaeus sitting in the tax office, and He said to him, ‘Follow Me!’ And he rose and followed Him.” (Mark 2:14)

The “Gospel of Luke,” from which substantial portions of “Matthew” were derived, and which also borrows heavily from Mark, conveys a similar account in Luke 5:27: “And after that He went out, and noticed a tax-gatherer named Levi, sitting in the tax office, and He said to him, ‘Follow Me.’”

Since Matthew and Luke were written later and were based upon Mark, since Mark, unlike Luke or Matthew, knew a disciple, that being Shim’own | “Peter,” and since Mark’s account contains the most information regarding the identity of the tax collector, prudence dictates that there never was a disciple named Mattanyah | Matthew. Therefore, the book bearing this name was not only written by an imposter, the impersonator intended to deceive through the pretense of being a disciple. This is fraud in the inception, making Matthew a scam.

Christians will protest, of course, and say almost anything to avoid a realization that is this caustic to their beliefs. The first Christian resource I checked on this matter wrote: “The answer is very simple. Both are true because Matthew and Levi are the same person. Matthew is the Greek name and Levi was the Hebrew name. As a tax collector, Matthew worked for Greek-speaking Romans. He gathered taxes from Hebrew-speaking Jews. We see, as an example, Peter also being called Simon.” (https://carm.org/bible-difficulties/matthew-mark/was-taxman-named-matthew-or-levi)

Plastering over a lie with another discredits both sources as deceivers. Matthew was a transliteration of Mattanyah, which superficially means: “Gift of Yah.” It was based on Hebrew nomenclature, not Greek. Mattanyah was a compound of “mattan – gift” and Yah, the familial form of Yahowah. Mattan, which appears eight times in the Towrah and Prophets, was both a noun, depicting a “present” and a name denoting an individual. It is based upon the verb “nathan – to give.” The verbal root is found 1078 times in the Hebrew text.

Incidentally, a little research shows that the fellow named Mattan was a priest in service to Ba’al | the Lord in Jerusalem, and thus represented the Devil. As such, there was no one named “Mattanyah” as it would have been considered an insult. The imposter who chose to misrepresent himself through it was either unaware of its history or was proud to serve Ba’al in this way.

Further, “Levi” is a Masorete corruption of the name of the priestly tribe, Lowy, meaning “to unite.” Moseh | Moses was a Lowy | Levite. It is obviously Hebrew too.

As for the Christian’s excuse for overlooking this overt evidence of fraud as if it did not matter, his “example,” which was that of “Peter also being called Simon,” is absurd. Simon is an English transliteration of Shim’own. This Hebrew name was derived from the verb “shama’ – to listen,” making Shim’own “He Listens.” “Peter,” on the other hand, is an English transliteration of the Greek translation of the Hebrew word, keph, which describes “hollow indentations in a rock.” Further, keph is closely related to kaphar which, as a “covering,” became the basis of “reconciliation.” And that indeed is the very purpose of the Miqra’ey of which Yahowsha’ was speaking when the title was afforded to his Disciple.

Therefore, the Disciple properly known as Shim’own was given the nickname, Kephas by Yahowsha’. This title was then inadequately and inappropriately translated into Greek as “Petros,” meaning “stone.” It was then transliterated into Latin and then into English, becoming “Peter.” Since the truth is so vastly superior to lies, it is a wonder Christians prefer one to the other.

As is the case with all but two books within the Christian New Testament (Yahowchanan | John and his Revelation), the closer we look the worse it gets. We are going to reaffirm that Paul’s diatribes were scribed and distributed long before the Greek versions of Mark, Luke, and Matthew were penned – and long before John, too. It was Paul’s attitude toward Jews that would cause these “Gospels” to read as they do today. Since this assessment is consistent with the historical evidence, Christianity is a house of cards, all Kings, Queens, and Jokers, which is about to tumble to the ground. This may be the most explosive exposé we have yet undertaken.

Let’s be clear. While there is no independent historical affirmation, it would still be reasonable to conclude that Yahowsha’ was condemned to be crucified by the Roman governor, Pilate, in the Province of Judaea on Passover in 33 CE. It is also possible, but not assured by any means, that some of Yahuwdah’s | Judah’s religious leaders, including the High Priest, didn’t much like Yahowsha’ because he would have sought to discredit them. However, the preponderance of the Jewish people did not know or care one way or the other, in contrast to what is written. They were trying to survive rabbinical oppression and Roman subjugation.

While we were told by Yasha’yah | Isaiah (in the 53rd chapter) that there was nothing about Yahowsha’ that would have caused him to stand out and to have been noticed, much less admired, it is likely that the few who met the reclusive Yahowsha’ would have been confused by what he had to say. He would have been caustic, as is Yahowah. When exposed to those who were religious and/or political, he would have criticized both. He would have been as opposed to Rome as he was to the Jewish establishment, and that would have been confusing at a time like this. Further, very few recognized him as the Passover Lamb. Most still don’t, even to this day.

Beyond Yasha’yah’s explanation, one of the reasons that we know that Yahowsha’ was not impressive is that nothing was written about him during his lifetime. He was not the kind of individual who would have garnered great animosity or respect. His legend was established two decades after his death by Paul – who famously speaks for him, thereby creating Iesous in his own image.

Based upon what we know, Yahowsha’ seldom engaged or spoke publicly and was a bit of a recluse. He would have been like Yahowah in this regard. Even among the twelve he chose, what little may have been written by an eyewitness would have been scribed by Yahowchanan decades later in Ephesus in an adopted tongue. And even then, “John” had very little to say about “Jesus’” life prior to the fulfillment of Passover – an event Yahowchanan never seemed to understand.

As for those who may have overtly opposed Yahowsha’, the Jewish leaders were not “teachers of the law” as they are errantly portrayed. They were no more depraved in character nor anti-God than any other clerics or politicians then or later, including, and most notably, Christians. If God had shown up at the Vatican, He would have been treated far worse. Catholics would have used the grotesque implements of torture they invented for their Inquisition to elicit a confession.

Some of what we read today in the “Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke,” and especially Yahowchanan | John pertaining to the events of Passover in 33 CE could have been accurate. However, there are more differences between their stories than there are similarities – which is a monumental affront to their credibility. Matthew, Mark, and Luke are not the reports of eyewitnesses nor of prophets – and thus they were not inspired by God, nor were they inerrant in the manner of the Hebrew text of the Towrah wa Naby’. Based upon their inconsistency with history and each other, this is not an opinion, but is instead an irrefutable fact.

Most of what was reported is inconsistent with the time, the people involved, and with common sense. There was only one potential eyewitness, Yahowchanan, but he was likely in hiding, and thus cannot claim personal knowledge of these events or discussions. Moreover, it is certain that he would not have been a witness to the musings of Jewish religious leaders or what was said before Pilate or Herod. And “John’s” assessment was written five decades thereafter when the author was at least 75 years old. It has been subject to more religious tampering than any other New Testament text, such that it is now impossible to distinguish what he may have said from what a religious scribe in Egypt or cleric in Caesarea attributed to him.

Evidence and reason dictate that some portion of what is now contained in the “Gospel of Matthew” was recorded by an eyewitness whose name was likely Lowy. However, the overwhelming preponderance of the events regaled in Matthew, especially apart from the Sermon on the Mount, were written by an imposter around 90 CE, ostensibly plagiarizing Mark and, to a lesser extent, Luke. The resulting assemblage was adjusted and augmented in the early 4th century by the Roman Catholic Church, conclusions which will become evident momentarily.

Our quest to understand the origin of the “Gospels” begins with coming to appreciate the role “John who was called ‘Mark’” played in this drama. His story begins in Acts 12:12 where Shim’own Kephas | “Peter” is shown visiting with him after a mal’ak | spiritual messenger is alleged to have freed the disciple from Herod’s custody. To the extent this is accurate, Mark would have been the lone author of a Synoptic Gospel who even knew an eyewitness. He was most likely regaled with Shim’own Kephas’ | “Peter’s” stories to the degree the Disciple could remember them.

Unfortunately, however, this made Mark a valuable commodity, one which Paul sought to exploit. Sha’uwl is shown bringing him into his circle of influence immediately thereafter in Acts 13:5, making Mark part of the imposter’s posse by Acts 13:13. By his own admission, Paul despised “Peter,” and would have stopped at nothing to curtail his influence for the sake of his own.

When next we see Mark, it is in Acts 15:37-39. At that time, the aspiring “Gospel” writer was wavering and ready to take leave of Paul, doing so along with Barnabas. “But Paul kept insisting otherwise, that those who had deserted him not take him.” “And there arose such a sharp disagreement that they separated from one another, and Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away.” Paul, however, did not handle desertion well, especially since Mark and Peter, Paul’s nemeses, had once been friends.

The trail runs through Colossians 4:10-11, where we find that Paul prevailed and once again had Mark back in his clutches, wrenching him away from Peter and Barnabas. In his letter to the Colossians we find Paul saying: “Aristarchus, my fellow prisoner sends you his greetings, and Barnabas’ cousin Mark, about whom you received instructions if he comes to you. Welcome him and Iesou, who is called ‘Justus.’ These are the only fellow workers for the kingdom of God who are from the circumcision, and they have proved to be an encouragement to me.”

Paul blabbered on about most everything, admitting to schemes against God that were appalling, and yet he was mum regarding the nature of the “instructions” he wanted to be implemented should someone encounter Mark. The Father of Lies was setting him up to write the Gospel according to Paul. And Mark would do just that, blending “Peter’s” fading memories with Paul’s rampant anti-Semitism, creating an epic to rival Homer’s Odysseus, spiced with the Sibylline Oracles for a sheen of prophetic authenticity. The Gospel was crafted under Paul’s oversight as he drew his last breath in 66 CE.

Once would not be enough, however for the author of 14 New Testament letters. Paul’s principal accomplice, Luke (Paul refers to him as his “fellow-worker” in Philemon who offers “lots of love”), would serve similarly, albeit more robustly, augmenting Mark with Luke/Acts, collectively comprising a quarter of the Christian New Testament. Having never spoken to an eyewitness or disciple, Luke incorporated a majority of Mark’s story into his own, leaving out parts he did not like while embellishing others. Luke/Acts was compiled shortly after Paul’s death, around 69 CE. The fact that Paul had passed away is why Luke felt at liberty to contradict his mentor, as he did from time to time in Acts.

While there is no credible witness, for Sha’uwl | Paul to have made such a ruckus by 50 CE that he was summoned to Jerusalem by the Disciples for questioning, he was likely 50 at the time. As such, he would have been around 33 at the sacrifice of the Passover Lamb (being the same age as Yahowsha’ which would have no doubt ticked the underbelly of the Serpent). His transition from murderer to preacher after being demon-possessed on the Road to Damascus would have occurred in the intervening years.

The Disciples were probably a few years younger than Paul, and thus around 45 at their initial meeting. A similar differential in age could be expected between Paul and his disciples, placing Mark in his mid-50s at the time of Paul’s death. Luke would have been around the same age, maybe a few years his senior when he composed his epic tale.

Matthew would come two decades thereafter, with the first draft appearing around 90 CE. And as we know, it was a derivative of the prior two Gospels.

Therefore, the order of things was most certainly not Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Galatians, then Ephesians. It was instead…

Lowy – 40 CE Lost (Sermon on the Mount)

Ya’aqob / James – 50 CE

Galatians – 52 CE

1st Thessalonians – 53 CE

1st Corinthians – 54 CE

2nd Thessalonians – 55 CE

Philippians – early 56 CE

Philemon – late 56 CE

2nd Corinthians – 57 CE

Romans – 58 CE

Colossians – 59 CE

3rd Corinthians – 59 CE Lost (ref: 2Cor 2:4 & 7:8)

Laodiceans – 60 CE Lost (ref: Col 4:16)

1st Ephesians – 60 CE Lost (ref: Eph 3:3-4)

1st Timothy – 61 CE

Ephesians – 62 CE

Titus – 63 CE

Hebrews – 64 CE

2nd Timothy – 65 CE

Mark – 66 CE

1st Peter – 67 CE

2nd Peter – 68 CE

Luke / Acts – 69 CE

Yahuwd / Jude – 69 CE

Revelation – 69 CE

Yahowchanan / John – 80 CE

1st, 2nd, 3rd John – 85 to 90 CE

Matthew – 90 CE

With independent corroboration nonexistent, there is considerable disagreement on the order of the books and the dates they were scribed, even on who may have actually written them. But this is certain, the present order in the Christian New Testament is wrong, leading Christians to believe that Paul’s letters were written in support of the story told in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, when the opposite is true. The Synoptic Gospels were composed to accommodate Paul. There are few realizations as crucial to one’s understanding of the stories told in the CNT.

I will admit, I’m biased. I am with Yahowah. I trust Him. I have come to love God’s people and despise those who abuse them, appreciate those who tell the truth and abhor those who deliberately deceive. So, before we press on, I have a confession to make on a directly related topic: I was wrong about “Mattanyah.” The evidence is clear: not a word of it was written by a Disciple named Matthew. The former tax collector turned Disciple, Lowy | Levi, did, however, unintentionally contribute to it with his book: According to Hebrew.

Unfortunately, as little as ten percent of what is presently contained in the Greek text came from According to Hebrew. The rest was largely plagiarized from Mark and Luke, and then embellished under the influence of the Roman Catholic Church. This conclusion is readily derived from the text itself because the “Gospel of Matthew” is exceedingly anti-Semitic. While I have come to this conclusion reluctantly, it was driven by trying to understand the origins of the anti-Jewish nature of the episode before Pontius Pilate and the zombiesque conclusion of Matthew 27 – especially as it relates to Paul’s rant against Jews in Acts 13. It is the case of the wolf and his litter.

Let’s acknowledge and become grounded in what is factual. The “Gospel of Matthew” does not specify an author. That would not have been the case if it had been written by one of Yahowsha’s Disciples, because the realization that he was both chosen by Yahowsha’ and an eyewitness would have given his account enormous credibility – as is the case with Yahowchanan | John. Moreover, had it been scribed by a Disciple, it would have been called “Lowy | Levi.” It is only called “Matthew” because the tax collector’s name was changed and then misappropriated.

The resulting “Gospel of Matthew” was based upon Mark, with 600 of Mark’s 661 verses incorporated into the text. Taking far less than 90% of any text and passing it off as one’s own is dismissed and discredited as “plagiarism” today. There are an additional 220 statements taken from Luke, Paul’s coworker. Collectively, 56% of Matthew came from Mark and 24% was taken from Paul’s associate, Luke, such that only 20% of it is original – with most of the additional material coming from the Book of Hebrew by Lowy.

Each time the Towrah and Prophets are cited, the wording matches that found in the Septuagint, including that of the supposed virgin birth. Every time Yisra’el and Yahuwdym are mentioned, the Greek text reflects the attitude we find reflected in Paul’s oral and written diatribes against them.

Now that we know from where the content was taken, let’s consider the timing of events. Since it contained his defiant and emotionally-charged rebuttal to the excoriating trial before Yahowsha’s Disciples in Yaruwshalaim, and since it is the only letter to restate (actually contradict) his frightening encounter with the flashing light he claimed was “Jesus,” Paul’s first letter was the one he dashed off to rebuke the Galatians. It was penned in 52 CE. Over the next 14 years, his 14 epistles (in addition to the 3 which were lost) were written and widely distributed. They are preserved in their entirety in P⁴⁶, a scribal copy comprising the most comprehensive early papyrus.

Luke, Paul’s “beloved physician” (read the conclusion of Colossians), was an active player in Paul’s entourage, and he produced the book that bears his name in addition to Acts of the Apostles, composing both shortly after Paul’s demise at 66 years of age in 66 CE. Considering that Paul admits that the “thorn in his side” was “a messenger from Satan,” Dr. Luke may have been a frustrated exorcist.

The overwhelming majority of scholars have concluded that the earliest Greek edition of the “Gospel of Matthew” was written in 90 CE, after the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple by Rome in 70 CE. That is at least two decades after Luke wrote his “Gospel” and its sequel, “Acts.” By that time, Paul’s initial letters had been in circulation for over three decades.

Matthew’s gestation, therefore, coincided with the end of the Towrah-centric movement among Yahuwdym | Jews who followed Yahowsha’ and the subsequent transition to the overwhelmingly Gentile phenomenon that evolved into the Christian religion. The author of the text may have been Jewish, but if so, he had become decidedly Christian. He wrote in a highly polished version of Greek. His story reads like a journey from one to the other, going from the Towrah-affirming Sermon on the Mount to the Romanesque nature of the meeting before Pilate and subsequent Roman crucifixion before a mob of angry Jews. It was shaped by the Sibylline Oracles, the Odyssey, and Paul’s epistles, as were its predecessors.

Interesting in this regard, prior to the melee leading to the crucifixion, Yahuwdym are called Yisra’elites by the compiler, only becoming “Ioudaioi – Jews” thereafter as a sign of their rejection of the Christian Christ. This tactic is deployed to preclude them from the Kingdom of Heaven and then as evidence that the promises made to them had been taken away and given to the church. The primary support for the advancement of Replacement Theology, apart from Paul’s letters and the Book of Acts, is found in the “Gospel of Matthew.”

In that I am admitting my mistake, in my defense, I had a good reason for considering key aspects of what I had wrongly attributed to “Matthew” favorably, and I was not alone. There is sound justification to conclude that the Disciple Lowy | Levi, as a witness to the Sermon on the Mount, transcribed what he had heard, composing what is found in the 5th to 7th chapters. There are aspects of the Olivet Discourse which also ring true and were likely copied from Lowy’s much earlier testimony.

There is credible extant evidence showing that the earliest followers of Yahowsha’ were Towrah-observant Yahuwdym who read what Lowy | Levi wrote in a book called “According to Hebrew” and nothing else apart from the Towrah and Prophets. Affirming this, in 140 CE Papias wrote that the book his fellow Christians now referred to as “Matthew” had “compiled the sayings of ‘Jesus’ in Hebrew.” In addition, Irenaeus wrote: “They use ‘Matthew’ only, and they repudiate the Apostle Paul, maintaining that he was an apostate from the Towrah.” (Ienaeus Haer 1.26.2) If Irenaeus is right, we already have our answer.

The Talmud even admits to burning early Hebrew accounts pertaining to someone who may well have been Yahowsha’. The lone candidate would have been Lowy’s | Levi’s According to Hebrew, now part of the mislabeled the “Gospel of Matthew.”

Even Jerome, the author of the Vulgate, admits to receiving a truncated copy of such a book written in Hebrew, one which he says was prepared for him by a Jewish acquaintance near Antioch. Fragmentary evidence of it is preserved in his notes. Known then simply as According to Hebrew, or just Hebrew, it was attributed to a disciple and contained the prophetic testimony leading to Yahowsha’s birth while excluding the genealogy now found in the “Gospel of Matthew.” The Hebrew text chronicled Yahowsha’s temptation before Satan in the wilderness. It included a limited collection of Yahowsha’s most important sayings, specifically His Sermon on the Mount – which is found nowhere else in the “New Testament.” Hebrew addressed his celebration of Pesach with his Disciples before actually fulfilling Passover. It even covered Yahowsha’s first appearance thereafter, which was to his brother, Ya’aqob.

Hebrew states that Yahowsha’ was a man, not God. Based upon what was quoted from According to Hebrew, it’s worth reiterating that this eyewitness account concludes with Yahowsha’s first post-Bikuwrym appearance, which, if to his brother and Disciple, Ya’aqob, would have affirmed that he made this sacrifice for his people. And speaking of Ya’aqob, in Jerome’s Commentary on Ezekiel Six, in reference to Hebrew, he would lament on behalf of the Roman Catholic insistence that Mary remained a virgin: “there is counted among it the most grievous offenses, ‘He that has grieved the spirit of his brother.’” As we might expect, Hebrew presents Ya’aqob, Yahuwdym, and Yisra’el as brothers, and the Towrah favorably.

Affirming the existence of the Hebrew eyewitness text, Clement, Origen, Hegesippus, and Didymus all cite from it, as did the aforementioned, Jerome. They admit that According to Hebrew was used as a proof-text to supplement what is now called the “Gospel of Matthew.” Eusebius, the most villainous man in this entire episode, included a reference to it in his list of disputed writings in Antilegomena, noting that “it was only used by the Hebrews.”

Sadly, shamefully, as a result of Eusebius and Roman Catholicism, indeed because of their utter disdain for all things Jewish, the codices of Hebrew were obliterated when the Church Canon was codified in the 4th century. According to Hebrew was deemed heretical and destroyed – that is with the exception of its memory.

Even the Roman Catholic Church admits: “Christian antiquity is unanimous in maintaining that St. Matthew wrote a gospel in Hebrew. The testimony of St. Papias, St. Irenæus, St. Pantænus, Origen, Eusebius, St. Epiphanius, St. Jerome, and of many other Fathers and ecclesiastical writers bears out this statement.” (eCatholic2000, Catholics Online for the Third Reich (oops, my mistake) Millennium) Please bear with me on the intended pun; we have a lot of ground to cover and it is going to get nasty. This is not the last time I’ll cop an attitude. Frankly, I’m disgusted that so few have fooled so many for so long.

There is a ray of light. The people who were responsible for drawing our attention to Hebrew referred to themselves as “Ebyownym.” Their name was based upon the Hebrew word, ‘ebyownym, which was spoken by Yahowsha’ to describe “those who have been oppressed and abused in need of deliverance who will inherit the earth” at the commencement of the Sermon on the Mount. The lives of those mistakenly called “Ebionites” were scandalously recorded by Irenaeus in Adversus Haereses, Origen in Contra Celsum, Eusebius in Ecclesial History, Hippolytus in Fefutatio Haeresium, and even by Jerome in his Commentary on Matthew. The Roman Catholic Church universally despised them – to the same extent and reason Paul loathed Towrah-observant Yahuwdym who recognized and followed Yahowsha’.

The justification for all this decidedly negative attention is that the ‘Ebyownym universally rejected Paul. They celebrated the Miqra’ey, Beryth, and Shabat. To these Church Fathers, they were “Judaizers” and thus “Heretics.” Furthermore, far from rabbinical, Rabbi Akiba and the followers of Bar Kochba also persecuted the ‘Ebyownym for refusing to recognize their messianic claims. Hated by both religions, following the Diaspora that ensued after the final Roman assault on Judea in 133 CE, few, if any, ‘Ebyownym survived. But they left an affirmation that the Disciple Lowy | Levi had transcribed Yahowsha’s words in Hebrew and that the first to follow Yahowsha’ treasured According to Hebrew along with the Towrah.

Additionally, the Sermon on the Mount, from which the ‘Ebyownym derived their name, is so universally disconcerting for Christians and destructive to their religion, it’s unlikely to the point of being incredulous to assume that Yahowsha’s speech was composed by one of the Christian faithful. The ‘Ebyownym have given us a gift, one I suspect Yahowah wanted us to have, because the “Sermon on the Mount” contains everything we need to know about Yahowsha’ to prove that he and Paul were enemies.

Collectively, the combination of the authentic material compiled in Matthew 4-7 (Testing and the Sermon on the Mount) and 24 (the Olivet Discourse), when compared to the weight of the Greek text’s irrational, anti-Semitic, and otherwise unattested conclusion, represents 90% of the 20% that was unique to the final product. The imposter writing surreptitiously under the pseudonym “Matthew” was therefore only responsible for 2% of his content, having derived 60% from Mark, 20% from Luke, and 18% from According to Hebrew. So much for the notion of inspiration.

Successful fabricators seldom invent anything from whole cloth, but instead weave in threads of truth by usurping the credibility of others. Such is the basis of the Book of Enoch and the Gospel of Thomas – as well as the Qur’an and Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The Christian who compiled Matthew would have been aware that the early followers of Yahowsha’ had treasured the Disciple’s eyewitness testimony in According to Hebrew. It is also readily apparent that he had copies of Mark, Luke, and Acts, in addition to Paul’s letters. He simply blended them together to create his “Gospel,” leaving its hideous conclusion to be embellished by a far more nefarious fellow, Eusebius. He followed suit, pilfering from the Acts of Pilate, a spurious work which reads eerily like the conclusion of the resulting compilation.

What we know for certain is that a disciple, and likely Lowy | Levi, as an eyewitness, strove to accurately record Yahowsha’s testimony in the language he spoke. According to the Disciple, the joy he expressed in initially reuniting with his brother, Ya’aqob, proved that he came for the lost children of Yisra’el. But this would all be disregarded, as it was too “Jewish” for the Roman Catholic Church. We also know that those who gained custody of these documents, those who compiled the Church’s Canon which became the “New Testament” of the “Holy Bible,” were the scum of the earth. They were everything they falsely projected on God’s people, an arrogant and deadly, scheming brood of religious racists and consummate liars. If you think this an unfair generalization or oversimplification, buckle your seatbelt.

The oldest surviving manuscript of the “Gospel of Matthew” is P¹⁰⁴ from Alexandria, Egypt. That is telling because it attests to the realization that Christians would return to the place from which Yisra’el had been freed. The Greek text was scribed sometime before 200 CE. It covers Matthew 21:34-37:

“When the harvest time approached, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his fruit. The tenants seized his servants; they beat one, killed another, and stoned a third. Then he sent other servants to them, more than the first time, and the tenants treated them the same way. Last of all, he sent his son to them. ‘They will respect my son,’ he said.”

We know that Yahowah asked Dowd to tend His garden, and that he is God’s son, who the world has failed to respect. But Christians, duped by Paul, have remained clueless in this regard. As a result, they would make this a battle between “Jesus” and “his killers” – the always cheating and conspiring, power-hungry, Jews. It takes one to know one, I suppose.

Verses 38 through 42 were not part of this papyrus, the lone pre-Constantine witness to the 21st chapter. Wherein we now read how this story was twisted to implicate the Jews:

“But when the tenants saw the son, they said to each other, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him and take his inheritance.’ So they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?

‘He will bring those wretches to a wretched end,’ they replied. ‘And he will rent the vineyard to other tenants, who will give him his share of the crop at the harvest time.’

Jesus said to them, ‘Have you never read in the Scriptures: “The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; the Lord has done this, and it is marvelous in our eyes?”’”

Not a word of this is found in the 3rd century P¹⁰⁴. It is so awkward, so readily transparent, with “Jesus” asking his audience, comprised of either Romans or Jews, to complete his parable, only to offer an incongruent citation, it is obviously a Christian interpolation. Think about it: why would Yahowsha’ ask those who were not to be trusted to convey something which is endorsed as trustworthy? Can you name another parable in which Yahowsha’ asks his audience to participate in the story?

Furthermore, the citation attributed to “Jesus” regarding the “cornerstone” is from Mizmowr | Psalm 118:22, and it pertains to Dowd | David. It represents yet another pathetic attempt to justify Christianity through Replacement Theology.

With P¹⁰⁴ in the late 2nd century jumping from Matthew 21:37 to what is now classified as Matthew 21:43-44, we find:

“Therefore, I tell you that the Kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. Anyone who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; anyone on whom it falls will be crushed.”

That appears to be all the unknown compiler wrote in the waning days of the 1st century. And since God has not taken anything away from His people, and cannot do so without becoming disingenuous, we should be asking ourselves why this parable was attributed to Jews in a much later, 4th century Roman addition:

“When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard Jesus’ parables, they knew he was talking about them. They looked for a way to arrest him, but they were afraid of the crowd because the people held that he was a prophet.” (Matthew 21:45-46)

Therein lies one of the three “Gospel” claims attributed to “Jesus” suggesting that the Kingdom of God had been taken from Jews and given to Gentiles. But without the added text from the 4th century, it is torn asunder. Although to be fair, the entire proposition is preposterous. It is Dowd’s Kingdom which will be established forever according to Yahowah, and Dowd is the most Yahuwd of Yisra’elites. In a moment, we will consider the fate of the other two.

Based upon all we have come to know, Heaven is actually out of reach to those who are common, and thus forbidden to the political and religious. Those who claim to be serving God, and who make a living doing so, will be excluded, many imprisoned in She’owl, for having misled multitudes.

And yet the only proof apart from the heavily redacted Roman Codexes of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus of the 27th chapter even existing before the conclusion of the 8th century is P¹⁰⁵, which was written sometime before 500 CE. It contains Chapter 27:62-64, a fanciful episode of “Chief Priests and Pharisees” walking to “Pilate” on the Shabat of Matsah and asking him to allow them to work on that day “by guarding and securing the tomb.” It also includes Chapter 28:2-5, describing a “violent earthquake caused by an angel of the Lord who came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men. The angel said to the women, ‘Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified.’” The earthquake the previous day is well-attested, but the resounding thump and dazzling light show of the heavyweight angel, not so much – nor the trembling dead.

Without Chapter 6 appearing prior to the time of Constantine and the Nicene (named after Nike, the Greek goddess of Victory) Council, Roman Catholics were free to add their own variation of “the Lord’s Prayer” (6:9-15). Without a single 2nd or 3rd century witness to Chapter 16, Eusebius, not Christ, authored the phrase upon which Roman Catholicism was built in 16:13-20, including “You are the Christ,” and then, “Upon this rock I will build my church.” From this unattested and incongruous citation, the un-Godly institution of a “Church” was born, along with the myth of a Divinely appointed papacy enshrined upon the “Seat of Saint Peter.” This addition would give unwarranted credence to the spurious notion that “Jesus” acknowledged that he was “the Christ.”

Without any evidence except for the heavily edited Codexes of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus (both scribed under Eusebius’ direction in the 4th century), prior to the beginning of the 9th century there is not any support for anything in Matthew Chapter 6. Therefore, based upon what we know of him, Eusebius becomes the most likely source of:

“From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests, and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.” (Matthew 16:21)

This was also seen as a repudiation of Jews and their Towrah. However, there were few if any “teachers of the law” in the sense of the “Towrah” at that time. The rabbinical types favored their Talmud, just as they do today. The few who were actually Towrah observant were neither religious nor leaders within the community – and all who were would have recognized Yahowsha’ and clung to his every word. Further, Yahowsha’ “suffered many things at the hands of the” ROMANS, not “elders, the chief priests, or the teachers of the law.” It is absolutely, and unquestionably, inarguably, Rome that “killed” the Passover Lamb. The notion that some Jews may have encouraged them is incidental to the fact.

It is worth noting that in Codex Sinaiticus alone, which is the least mutilated of the two Roman Catholic scribed codices, throughout the 6th and 7th centuries ten different scribes made over 20,000 alterations and revisions to the text. And this is clearly one of them because Yahowsha’ went to Yaruwshalaim to suffer a single occurrence, Passover, and the “hands of the elders, the chief priests, and the teachers of the law” had nothing to do with his role as the Pesach ‘Ayil. Further, the Passover Lamb does not make a curtain call so as to “be raised to life.”

Yahowsha’s life would have been meaningless if he had not fulfilled his responsibility as the Pesach ‘Ayl | Passover Lamb in harmony with the Towrah. This is one of many things that Christians cannot seem to fathom. While it is interesting that the Roman Catholic Church blames Jews for what they did in order to justify the Church’s standing with God, what actually matters is that Yahowah fulfilled His promise to provide the Passover Lamb – not who killed him.

Unlike Mark, however, upon which the Gospel of Matthew was based, you will find no mention of “Passover” in association with the crucifixion. It was deemed too Jewish for Roman Catholic tastes and was seen as clutter around the pagan festival of Easter. And thereby, the Church doomed the billions of souls it claimed to have saved.

While Chapter 4 is extant in P¹⁰², only verses 11-12 and 22-23 are shown, thereby eliminating any credible backing for the third of the three supposed allegations that the promises to Jews were somehow magically transferred to Gentiles. Christians use the belatedly added 4:17, which reads: “from that time on Jesus began to preach, ‘Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven has come near,’” to suggest that things had changed such that it was out with the old and in with the new. And yet even here, the Christian interpolator got it wrong. The “Kingdom of Heaven” would not begin for another 3,000 years, and even then, it would follow the reestablishment of the “Kingdom of Dowd.”

Returning to Chapter 16 for a moment, now that we know that there is no early evidence of it, we can credibly dismiss another false prophecy attributed to “Jesus” at the conclusion of the chapter. The beginning of this conversation rings true, while what follows is likely from Christian musings in the 4th century.

Trying to stop Yahowsha’ from serving as the Passover Lamb, the Disciple: “Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. ‘Never, Lord!’ he said. ‘This shall never happen to you!’ Jesus turned and said to Peter, ‘Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.’

Then Jesus said to his disciples, ‘Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it. What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done. Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.’” (Matthew 16:22-28)

It bears repeating. There is a message at the beginning of this story Roman Catholics and their stepchildren have missed. Yahowsha’ came to be the Passover Lamb. Allowing the body of His diminished manifestation to die was, therefore, the primary concern of God. Wanting to keep his physical body alive, wanting to prevent him from fulfilling his purpose, aligns one’s motives with the religious and their sponsor, Satan. Therefore, when Roman Catholics seek to blame Jews for killing “Jesus,” rather than expressing their gratitude for his sacrifice as the Lamb of God, they are associating themselves with the Adversary and precluding the benefits of Pesach.

If Jews were to blame for doing as the Towrah prescribes, and presenting the Passover Lamb for sacrifice, then they are to be commended. And that is likely the reason a small number of Yahuwdym were shown encouraging his death on this day. While they did not kill him, it was their responsibility to select and present the lamb. The Christian text’s failure to mention God’s intent on this day, and Yahowsha’s role in it, is an impenetrable blight on the religion’s credibility. Preoccupied with irrelevant details, and getting most of them wrong, the Church missed the big picture – the only story which actually mattered.

At this point in the timeline, it would have been jarring to mention the idea of a cross – of the device Romans invented to ensure submission to their subjugation through the most hideous form of torture ever perpetrated on humankind. The words ascribed to him are counter to the Towrah and sadistic, wholly incongruous with Yahowah’s nature – the very thing He rails against. Human sacrifice is an anathema to God. He is not asking us to torture ourselves, much less try to become our own Passover Lamb. He honored His promise to do this for us so that it would not happen to us.

The only influences we are asked to “deny” are the very deceptions those who wrote these words prescribe: submission to religion and government (theirs, of course). As a result of these three days, we receive the blessings of eternal life, perfection before God, and adoption into His Covenant Family.

According to Yahowah, He is returning with His beloved son, Dowd, His Chosen One and Messiah, not with the “Son of Man” – unless we read that as Dowd | David. God has made it abundantly clear that Dowd is returning with his Father’s glory.

While I do not know, and frankly don’t care, if Dowd is going to reward those who have done something meritorious, and only know that he is going to do away with the likes of Roman Catholics, “truly I tell you, EVERYONE who was standing there tasted death twenty centuries before ANYONE would see the son of God come in his kingdom.’” Placing words on Yahowsha’s lips he would never have said is unforgivable, as is making him out to be a false prophet. And yet I am thankful in a way for their blunder because it proves that these words were not inspired and that they were not spoken by God.

To assume otherwise, to believe that the “Gospel of Matthew” represents the inerrant word of God, is to be irrational. I suppose that is why it requires faith.

There is an issue here for thoughtful Jews that we should address before we move on. Since Yahowah is resolutely against human sacrifice, why was the Passover Lamb human on this day? Why not an actual lamb? The answer is that Yahowah told ‘Abraham not to harm Yitschaq because He was going to provide the sacrifice, becoming the Pesach ‘Ayl. In that He created us in His image, we humans, by design, were conceived to be the animal most like God.

When Yahowah set apart a diminished aspect of Himself to honor His promise to provide the Passover Lamb, the body took the form of a man, not a cute, furry, four-legged animal which would otherwise be consumed during the celebration. The Pesach ‘Ayl representing Yahowah on this day acted like Him and spoke like Him such that the observant would recognize Him and appreciate what He was doing to fulfill Passover.

Beyond this, the body was simply flesh – something with a very limited lifespan by any standard. His soul, which was and remains the essence of His nature, did not die. His nepesh | soul would go on to fulfill Matsah the following day such that, when it was released from She’owl, Yah’s nepesh and ruwach were reunited – representing the unification of man and God. Therefore, the actual life of Yahowsha’ was not sacrificed, just his body, which, as a collection of molecules, was meaningless apart from the symbolism. The real sacrifice was what Yahowah’s nepesh endured in She’owl on UnYeasted Bread, and it is this Miqra’ which perfects us so that we can be adopted into His Covenant Family.

Therein is yet another part of this story Christians miss: Passover without UnYeasted Bread is counterproductive. Eternal life without perfection equates to an eternity separated from God in She’owl. That is why the Roman Catholic insistence on “Good Friday” leading to “Easter Sunday” has become a Plague of Death. And this is not a recent contrivance, but instead, replacing Passover with the resolutely pagan celebration of Easter Sunday began in the late 2nd century such that it was ubiquitous among Christians by the time Roman Catholics seized upon it.

The Christian fixation on the tortured and dead body of their god is sadistic and bizarre. Even their belief in bodily resurrection is counterproductive. It is our frail, physical nature that keeps us stuck in time, making bodily resurrection leading to eternal life an oxymoron. To be eternal, we can no longer be material.

With the Jews swept off center stage and into hell in Christian lore, “God’s primary work in the world is now accomplished through the building of Christ’s church, after which Jesus will come again to the earth and establish His kingdom – ruling the world from Israel.” (Chuck Swindoll, God’s Masterwork) Speaking of “hell,” you have earned it, Chuck, for having swindled Jews of God’s Masterwork.

Returning to the Christian piece de résistance, the glaring omission from all ancient manuscripts of the entire episode before Pilate becomes more curious still when we recognize that there are two parchments attesting to what came before it, covering Matthew 26:7-8, 10, 14-15, 22-23, 31-33, and 29-40 dating prior to 300 CE, with another, P³⁷, written prior to 400 CE covering 26:19-52. This means that there is nothing apart from the aforementioned Roman contrivances dating prior to 800 CE to suggest that the Christian author of what has been entitled “the Gospel of Matthew,” whoever he may have been, wrote a word about what occurred before “Caiaphas, the High Priest” (Matthew 26:57-68), of them stating that “Jesus” was “worthy of death,” of them “spitting in his face,” or of them “taunting him.” There is also no validation for “Peter” denying “Jesus of Nazareth” in Matthew 26:69-75, which is convenient since there was no Nazareth at the time. In fact, to call him “Jesus of Nazareth” (as is now stated in Matthew 26:71) emphatically dates the completion of the “Gospel of Matthew” to the time of Constantine and his mother in the 4th century when this myth was conceived and then promoted by Eusebius – Constantine’s publicist. With this obvious error, we now have proof that portions of the “Gospel of Matthew” were developed under the dishonest and racist auspices of Eusebius and his Roman Catholic Church. There is no other rational way to explain this mistake.

In addition, there is no indication, whatsoever, apart from the mutilated texts prepared initially by Eusebius on behalf of Constantine known today as Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, both Roman creations in the 4th century, both replete with tens of thousands of modifications over many hundreds of years, that “early in the morning, all the Chief Priests and the elders of the people made their plans how to have Jesus executed. So they bound him, led him away and handed him over to Pilate, the governor.” (Matthew 27:1-2)

In Mark, upon which the Greek Matthew is based, this alleged meeting took place “two days before Passover,” not the morning of it. And it must be acknowledged that every reference to the motives of Jewish religious leaders is “alleged.” If such a meeting took place, there is no way that those who contributed to the creation of Matthew, Mark, or Luke, and not even Yahowchanan | John, would have known what was thought or said. They were not there. In fact, other than Yahowchanan, they were not even in Yaruwshalaim, and perhaps not even alive, when the events they regale occurred. But they left their fingerprints, proving with the long list of obvious misrepresentations and false prophecies that none of this was inspired by God.

There is no validation for “Judas’ remorse for having betrayed innocent blood” for having “thrown the money into the temple,” or for “hanging himself.” (Matthew 27:3-5) It may have occurred to a man of a different name, but the reference to “innocent blood” was a Roman contrivance used to condemn Jews.

The unattested conversation between the “Chief Priests” “talking about picking up the coins since it was blood money” is a myth, nullifying the misquotation and misappropriation of the prophecy in Zakaryah, “they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price set on him by the people of Israel, and they used it to buy the potter’s field, as the Lord commanded me.” (Matthew 27:6-10 (corrupted to fit the occasions from Zechariah 11:12-13)) The notion is preposterous. Clerics of their status do not go around picking up scattered coins. Moreover, if they perceived it as “blood money,” they would not have gone on to commit the crime.

This content is the residue of Roman Catholic anti-Semitism, and of their chief apologist and propagandist, Eusebius (d. 340 CE), as well as his unsavory cronies. He was the bishop of Caesarea, a place where there was no distinction between Imperial Rome and Roman Catholicism. He was also a raging anti-Semite and consummate liar who blamed the Jews for the “death of ‘Christ.’” It is as if religion constipates the brains of such men and, for them, becomes a license to lie (by Eusebius’ own admission as we will soon see).

Yahowsha’ was tortuously executed on a Roman order, by Romans, and in the Roman method. He was not stoned by the Jews who were powerless at the time – something clearly acknowledged in Mark. And as we have noted: the Passover Lamb always dies. It does not matter who does the deed, only that we understand and celebrate his sacrifice. In lamenting about “Jews killing Jesus,” Roman Catholics have become the embodiment of what they claim “Jesus” said in response to “Peter” when he took that same approach: “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”

We will make our case against the emergence of the Roman Catholic Church and Eusebius in a moment, but first let’s examine some of the other material which can be removed from the “Gospel of Matthew” now that we know that the 27th Chapter is spurious. Clearly, the following was written in the 4th century to exonerate Rome and condemn Jews. Not a single word of this is chronicled in any independent source – at least apart from the Acts of Pilate, which is not remotely credible. It, like the alleged letter from Pilate to Tiberius and the “Messianic” addendum to Josephus’ Antiquities in the 4th century regarding the events of this day, has been shown to be a careless forgery. It did not happen this way…

“Meanwhile Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, ‘Are you the king of the Jews?’ ‘You have said so,’ Jesus replied. When he was accused by the chief priests and the elders, he gave no answer. Then Pilate asked him, ‘Don’t you hear the testimony they are bringing against you?’ But Jesus made no reply, not even to a single charge—to the great amazement of the governor.

Now it was the governor’s custom at the festival to release a prisoner chosen by the crowd. At that time they had a well-known prisoner whose name was Jesus Barabbas. So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, ‘Which one do you want me to release to you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?’ For he knew it was out of self-interest that they had handed Jesus over to him.

While Pilate was sitting on the judge’s seat, his wife sent him this message: ‘Don’t have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him.’ But the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas and to have Jesus executed.

‘Which of the two do you want me to release to you?’ asked the governor. ‘Barabbas,’ they answered. ‘What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called the Messiah?’ Pilate asked. They all answered, ‘Crucify him!’ ‘Why? What crime has he committed?’ asked Pilate.

But they shouted all the louder, ‘Crucify him!’ When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. ‘I am innocent of this man’s blood,’ he said. ‘It is your responsibility!’ All the people answered, ‘His blood is on us and on our children!’ Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.” (Matthew 27:11-26)

All of the characters are out of character. This was so poorly written, it is transparent. If you cannot see through the lies, then you have indeed been blinded by them.

It is incumbent upon us to use the test Yahowah prescribed in His Towrah to know what is true and what is not. All we need is to use His criteria, plug in the evidence, and use reason. For example, I started to question this diatribe for many reasons. First, washing of the hands to absolve one of guilt is a Jewish practice, one prescribed in the Towrah. It was never Roman. Pilate would not have done so.

Second, Romans do not play to the crowd and they are not swayed by non-Romans. We have a credible, extant record of how Pilate dealt with messianic figures. His response is dutifully recorded by Josephus in Antiquity, Volume XVIII, Chapter 4, page 1. The incident occurred in 36 CE and chronicles the inhuman way Pilate quelled a messianic uprising. The chapter is entitled: “How the Samaritans made a tumult, and Pilate destroyed many of them. How Pilate was accused; and what things were done by Vitellius relating to the Jews.”

It reads: “[Year 36.] But the nation of the Samaritans did not escape without tumults. The man who excited them to it was one who thought lying a thing of little consequence: and who contrived everything so that the multitude might be pleased. So he bid them to get together upon mount Gerizzim: which is by them looked upon as the most holy of all mountains: and assured them, that when they were come there, he would show them those sacred vessels which were laid under that place; because Moses put them there. So they came there armed; and thought the discourse of the man probable. And as they arrived at a certain village, which was called Tirathaba, they got the rest together to them, and desired to go up the mountain in a great multitude together. But Pilate prevented their going up, by seizing upon the roads, with a great band of horsemen, and footmen: who fell upon those that were gotten together in the village: and when it came to an action, some of them they slew; and others of them they put to flight; and took a great many alive. The principal of which, and also the most potent of those that fled away, Pilate ordered to be slain.

But when this tumult was appeased, the Samaritan senate sent an embassy to Vitellius; a man that had been consul, and who was now president of Syria; and accused Pilate of the murder of those that were killed. For that they did not go to Tirathaba in order to revolt from the Romans; but to escape the violence of Pilate. So Vitellius sent Marcellus, a friend of his, to take care of the affairs of Judea; and ordered Pilate to go to Rome, to answer before the Emperor to the accusations of the Jews. So Pilate, when he had tarried ten years in Judea, made haste to Rome: and this in obedience to the orders of Vitellius; which he durst not contradict. But before he could get to Rome, Tiberius was dead. [A.D. 37, Mar. 16.]”

In light of this historical record, what are the chances that, when ordering the death of the most famous individual in world history, the leading “messianic” figure of all time, this same man turned to his wife and chatted about her dreams, or that he washed his hands of the whole affair? What are the chances that, if this occurred, not a word was written about it in any historical account, especially considering the Roman propensity to record and respond to every hint of revolt in their Empire with an iron fist?

What are the chances that Jews, who hated Romans for their subjugation, and who would be crucified by the hundreds of thousands by them, asked a Roman procurator to torture one of their own? Why would the Roman listen to, much less agree with, the Jews he was there to suppress? Why is there no record of “Jesus Barabbas” if he was such a notorious fellow? Why is there no history of Roman clemency in association with Passover if it was the governor’s custom? And speaking of Passover, if we are to believe that this was written by the Disciple, why didn’t he mention it since he would have known that it was Yahowsha’s sole purpose? He would have, after all, celebrated Pesach the previous evening with Yahowsha’ and have listened to him explain his role during this Miqra’ | Invitation to be Called Out and Meet with God. If this had been inspired by God, don’t you think He might have wanted us to know this as well?

Since the issues between Pilate and the Jewish religious leaders prior to this event are legend, with Pilate tormenting them by displaying all manner of Roman religious paraphernalia, why is the Roman capitulating to those who have sought his dismissal? Why would anyone, much less everyone, say: “Let his blood be on us and on our children?” Not only was contact with blood, especially from a dead person, of considerable concern to Jews, but their children had also done nothing.

This account is told quite differently in the other “Gospels,” especially in Mark and by Yahowchanan. And why is there no corroborating historical text for an event of this magnitude – one that would be used to change the course of history? And I am neither the first nor the last to bring this great aberration of God’s message to our attention. German theologian, Ulrich Luz, describes it as: “redactional fiction.” Graham Stanton, a British New Testament scholar, wrote: “Matthew’s anti-Jewish polemic should be seen as part of the self-definition of the Christian minority which is acutely aware of the rejection and hostility of its ‘mother’ Judaism.” Howard Kee recognized, “The bitter words he attributes to the Jews have caused endless harm in arousing anti-Jewish emotions.” N.T. Wright, the Anglican New Testament scholar and theologian, stated: “The tragic and horrible later use of Matthew 27:25, ‘His blood be on us, and on our children,’ has served an excuse for Christian anti-Semitism as a gross distortion of its original meaning, which was surely a reference to the fall of Jerusalem.”

Donald A. Hagner, a Presbyterian New Testament scholar and theologian, warned: “It cannot be denied that this statement, unfortunately, has been used to promote anti-Semitism. The statement is formulaic, and the reference to ‘our children’ does not make them guilty of the death of Jesus, let alone children or Jews of later generations.” Too bad he was unaware that the entire presentation was a Roman Catholic deception.

Anglican theologian, Rowan Williams, then Archbishop of Wales, and soon-to-be Archbishop of Canterbury, stated that Matthew’s Gospel has been made into “the tool of the most corrupt and murderous misreading of the passion stories that has disfigured the Church’s record.” “The evangelist’s bitterness at the schism within God’s people that continues in his own day, his impatience with the refusal of the Jewish majority to accept the preaching of Jesus, overflows into this symbolic self-denunciation by ‘the people.’ It is all too likely that his first readers heard it as a corporate acknowledgment of guilt by the Jewish nation, and that they connected it, as do other New Testament writers, with the devastation of the nation and its sacred place in the terrible disasters of AD 70, when the Romans destroyed the Temple and along with it the last vestiges of independent power for the people. Read at this level, it can only make the contemporary Christian think of all the centuries in which Jewish guilt formed so significant a part of Christian self-understanding, and of the nightmare which was made possible by this in the twentieth century.”

While that is the heart and soul of the Christian problem, the cancer that has eroded the church and led to its genocidal rage against Jews, that’s not the end of the lunacy. The following reads like a page out of the twisted and plagiarized Protocols of the Elders of Zion:

“While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened. When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, telling them, ‘You are to say, “His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.” If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.’ So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.” (Matthew 28:11-15)

This is so preposterous it requires a wholesale suppression of reason to believe a word of it. The book Yahowah inspired on behalf of Yisra’el had now been given an addendum to destroy these same people. The world was being engulfed in the longest-lasting and most reprehensible Conspiracy Theory of all time: Blame the Jews. The resulting carnage explains why Yahowah labeled the religion’s inspiration: the Son of Evil, the Father of Lies, and the Plague of Death.

Today, the fastest-growing, most destabilizing and pervasive belief system is Conspiracy. By blending religion, politics, culture, and sheer stupidity together, the advocates shirk responsibility and cast aspersions on others. They have become master manipulators, so effective at fabricating evidence that nearly half of those alive today believe one or more ludicrous claims. These include: Black Lives Matter, Make America Great Again, Socialism is progressive, Jews control the world, vaccines contain tracking devices, mass shootings are politically staged, 9.11 was an inside job, condensation trails from jet exhaust are really chemtrails for mind control, the Earth is flat, the six moon landings were staged, and then, unbelievably, shape-shifters and reptilian overlords run the governments of the world.

The worst Conspiracy may actually have been Christianity, itself. It was conceived by blending inaccurate and misappropriated citations from the Towrah and Prophets together with the mythology of Dionysus, Mithras, Odysseus, the Sibyl, Gnosticism, Roman politics, and Greek culture, along with a heavy dose of stupidity and anti-Semitism. The resulting concoction was incorporated into the Christian Bible (from babel – to confuse by intermixing) as a result of the imposters and coconspirators who originally scribed words like these in the Gospel of Matthew.

When we recognize what Roman Catholics were able to add in the 4th century, we are even freed from the Day of the Zombies…

“The tombs broke open and bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people. When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, ‘Surely he was the Son of God!’” (Matthew 27:52-54)

While this obviously did not occur, it does explain the Christian fascination with Zombies and the Living Dead. And please, if Yahowsha’ was the “Son of God,” don’t you think he would have said so and not referred to himself as “the Son of Man?” Said another way, should we rely on anonymous men, indeed Romans, to declare that “he” was other than he claimed?

Since all of the anti-Semitic warts found in the Gospel of Matthew are unattested in the 2nd, 3rd, and early 4th century manuscripts which have been unearthed, and with the exception of Eusebius’ heavily redacted Codexes of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, not one of these troubling accounts is contained in a later 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, or 8th century manuscript, the obvious conclusion is that the Church of Rome added them to justify their desire to annihilate the Jews and exonerate themselves immediately after having solidified their power.

Their embellishments remain incompatible with Yahowah’s enduring love for His People, they are inconsistent with the Towrah, are unattested in history, and are irrational in dialogue, setting, and execution. Only those predisposed by religion to believe lies would put any faith in something this completely incongruent, perverted and preposterous. Quite frankly, Satan’s Qur’an is not as overtly anti-Semitic as the closing chapters of Matthew.

The despicable men who wrote and promoted these repulsive theories had, in every conceivable way, become far worse than the vile assessments they were projecting on Jews. They created a Straw Man who, by comparison, didn’t make their intolerance seem as bad.

Since we have drawn the association, let’s consider how differently this story plays out in the book that was plagiarized to create it. Why, after copying 600 of Mark’s 661 verses to compile Matthew, are they so divergent when incriminating Jews?

In Mark 15, there was a question and answer session before Pilate, but no trial. Yahowsha’ is delivered to Pilate, but not accompanied. He asks him only two questions, “Are you the king of the Jews?” Yahowsha’s answer to the first is not only different than recorded in Matthew, his, “It is as you say,” would have led directly to his crucifixion without anyone playing the blame game. Rome had appointed Herod King of Judea and that response would have been seen as admitting to leading an uprising against Roman authority, and thus as treason. So, let’s agree that Mark, who was not there at the time, gave the wrong answer.

In Matthew, a flashback was deployed at this point as a rhetorical tool even though it was out of sync with the flow of events: “When he was accused by the chief priests and the elders, he gave no answer.” It was inserted because Pilate was not invited to that session and would have known nothing of it, providing no basis for his subsequent line of questioning. But in Mark, the religious are present and within earshot, interrupting the Roman governor: “And the chief priests accused him of many things, but he answered nothing,” which again was the wrong answer. They may not have agreed with his replies, but nonetheless, he provided answers.

Not only would it have been un-Roman and a security risk for Pilate to have shared the stage with the Chief Priests who detested him, had they been there taunting “Jesus” they could not have been among the crowd, inciting them. Nonetheless, Mark’s account reads: “Then Pilate asked him again, saying, ‘Do you answer nothing? See how many things they testify against you. But Jesus still answered nothing, so that Pilate marveled.” Matthew reads, “to the great amazement” of Pilate.

In an attempt to separate fact from fiction, that was the first time, not the second, Pilate is alleged to have asked this question. And secondly, Yahowsha’ answered the only answerable question Pilate posed in the Christian narrative, making the rest of this read like it was written by an idiot. For example, what is the motivation for Pilate being “greatly amazed” or “marveling?” Frustrated perhaps, bored, maybe, but rulers are seldom impressed with subjects who implicate themselves as Yahowsha’ had done if we are to believe Mark.

Mark’s story is enlightening because it reflects upon the nature of men. Individually, he was a good man. Curiosity led him to Shim’own | “Peter,” who brought out the best in him. But once under Paul’s shadow, insufficiently grounded, he wavered, showing the kind of vulnerability a psychopath was able to manipulate. Having heard Paul continually condemn “Peter” with his Conspiracy Theories, and having endured Paul’s incessant anti-Semitic rants, Mark was incorporated into Paul’s gang of goons, becoming one of them.

Mark’s migration to the dark side is indicative of humankind. Individually we can be good or bad, shifting from one to the other based upon our circumstances. However, collectively, as societies, nations, and civilizations, especially when religious, political, or conspiratorial, we are consistently malignant. I could give a thousand learned men a year, and nary a one of them could find a nation, civilization, or religion that was more good than bad, more truthful than dishonest, that afforded its subjects the same freedoms and opportunities as the leaders, and that treated its neighbors and rivals ethically. Not one, ever. And such is the psychology of gang mentality. The individual’s sense of responsibility and morality is appropriated by the group. People stop thinking for themselves and start believing what they are told. And then they lash out as a group, often as thieves and murderers, debasing themselves while corrupting their society.

While Mark has thus far presented much less information than is found subsequently in Matthew, and nothing conspiratorial, other than word order, “Matthew” regurgitates Mark’s assessment: “Now it was the governor’s custom at the festival to release a prisoner chosen by the crowd.” Versus: “Now at the feast he was accustomed to releasing one prisoner to them, whomever they requested.” There was no such custom in Judea or any Roman province, not on this day or any day. It is a fairytale, one that became a nightmare for God’s People.

Mark augmented his story with details “Matthew” chose to ignore: “There was one named Barabbas, who was chained with his fellow rebels, they had committed murder in the rebellion.” Excuse me for trying to make sense of this, but there was no rebellion at this time and Rome never released murderous revolutionaries. Of him, Matthew says: “At that time they had a well-known prisoner whose name was Jesus Barabbas.” If he was so well-known, why is nothing known of him?

Then rather than Pilate recommending the release of Barabbas, as we read in Matthew, “So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, ‘Which one do you want me to release to you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?’ For he knew it was out of self-interest that they had handed Jesus over to him,” we find something decidedly different in Mark…

“Then the multitude cried aloud and began to ask [him to do] just as he had always done for them. But Pilate answered them, saying, ‘Do you want me to release to you the King of the Jews?’ For he knew that the chief priests had handed Him over because of envy.”

Why do you suppose “Matthew” changed “King of the Jews” to “Jesus who is called the Messiah?” Since both were wrong, by contradicting his source, “Matthew” proved that neither Mark nor Matthew were inspired or inerrant, and neither could be trusted.

Keeping it real, in all of the annals of Roman history, there is no record of any kind that Rome released prisoners to appease those they had conquered. It is absurd to assume that an empire sufficiently ruthless to crucify rebels would accommodate them on occasions which were in opposition to Rome’s politics and religion, as is the case with Passover. Moreover, the one thing we know about Pilate is that he was famous for antagonizing Jewish religious sensibilities – not accommodating them.

And speaking of them, that is yet another flaw in the Christian fable. Not only wasn’t there room for a “multitude” before Pilate’s residence, but Roman soldiers would also have seen such crowds as a threat and removed them. The entire story is not only contrived, it is not credible.

Addressing the differences in the Gospel of Matthew, we find Pilate initiating the possibility of a prisoner release rather than the crowd requesting it – which is significant with regard to motivation. Worse, at least for the credibility of the text, in Matthew, as we have noted, Pilate is alleged to have said, “Jesus who is called the Messiah,” rather than “Do you want me to release to you the King of the Jews?”

Either claim, if admitted, would have resulted in a conviction and immediate execution. If Pilate had surmised that Yahowsha’ was claiming to be “King of the Jews,” this sham of a trial would have concluded with a pronouncement of guilt. The same is true as we have learned by searching Antiquities of those who made Messianic claims. And while they are not the same – not even remotely – they would have led to the same result, nullifying any chance that Pilate washed his hands of responsibility or found no reason for conviction.

The reason for this delegitimizing difference is likely found in a pathetic and desperate text entitled “The Acts of Pilate.” It purports to have been prepared by Pilate’s agents and sent to Rome because Pilate allegedly converted to Christianity and wanted Tiberius to know that they had appeased Jews by killing the Messiah. Most everything we read in Matthew that differs from Mark is found word for word in that thoroughly discredited 4th century text, likely forged by Eusebius, the same fellow that forged a letter from Pilate to Tiberius on this subject and altered Josephus’ testimony so that rather than never mentioning Yahowsha’, he waxes poetic about him, calling him “the Messiah.”

Pilate’s concluding assessment in both Mark and Matthew is inconsistent with the other “Gospels,” and it is out of character for Rome. Trying to explain the inexplicable, Mark wrote: “For he knew that the chief priest had handed him over because of envy.” Again, there isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell that the Roman governor would have considered or valued their motives, even if known. He had no concern for their “self-interest,” and was publicly opposed to them. Pilate’s loyalty was to himself and to Rome. He was not a tool manipulated by Jewish religious sentiments, which he famously abhorred.

When a subsequent document adds more to the story, it typically has more to do with the mindset of the writer than what actually happened. All that Mark, the text that was used to create Matthew, has to say next is: “But the chief priests stirred up the crowd, so that he should rather release Barabbas to them. Pilate answered and said to them again, ‘What then do you want me to do with Him whom you call the King of the Jews?’ So they cried out again, ‘Crucify Him!’”

Since the determination of whether this is true or false is life or death, I am not being petty picking it apart. The chief priests could not have stirred up the crowd if they were sitting beside Pilate accusing Yahowsha’. And this reads: “so that he [Pilate] should rather” instead of “so that the crowd of Jews would rather” release Barabbas. If the priests were inciting the crowd it would have been the other way around. And Pilate is said to be answering them [the crowd] when the people allegedly gathered have said nothing. Moreover, it reads, “he said to them again,” when this is the first time he has addressed them. Further, since there was no rebellion at the time, Barabbas, should he have even existed, could not have become a cult hero for rebelling against Rome. Romans suppressed such notions by killing a hundred subjects for every Roman murdered by a rebellious individual or community. The deadly repercussions of freeing a Roman rebel would have made this choice unconscionable.

As previously noted, a person claiming to be king in opposition to Rome was tantamount to treason. Had the Roman governor actually made this statement he would have become complicit in the crime, recalled and likely killed: “What then do you want me to do with Him whom you call the King of the Jews?” The Jews were not calling him their “king.” Every word of this is utter nonsense. From beginning to end, the narrative underlying the Bible’s Passion is pathetic.

As suggested previously, another irresolvable problem for the Christian depiction is that there was not enough room for a small crowd to gather, much less one sufficient to bring shame on an entire population. In the “Gospel” which has come to bear Mark’s name, Pilate met Yahowsha’ in an aule, which means “hall,” wherein Pilate was seated during the brief interview. This would suggest a room in the Praetorium – which was located in the northernmost wing of Herod’s Palace. From praetor, it would have been the residence of the highest-ranking civil servant of Rome. Those ushered into an audience before the Roman prefect, and within a hall serving as an adjunct to the larger palace, would have been by invitation only, thereby eliminating any possibility of a crowd.

Challenging Mark’s assessment, and moving the proceedings outside, Yahowchanan wrote five decades thereafter in what would become John 19:13 that “Pontius Pilate brought [Yahowsha’] forth, and sat down in the judgment seat, in the place that is called Lithostrotos, and in Hebrew, Gabbatha.” That is a problem as well because this not only differs from Mark’s aule, Gabbatha is an Aramaic term, not Hebrew, and means either “black” or “elevated.” Lithostrotos is a Greek word and means “tessellated” or “mosaic.” It was used to describe “ornamental pavement.” However, the only “tessellated mosaic floor” at the time was neither “elevated” nor “black.”

The lone mosaic of the kind dating to this period is on the eastern side of the palace. And even here we have two issues. Archaeological studies have confirmed that the Roman pavement at this site was laid by Hadrian in the 2nd century – a hundred years after these events played out. This mosaic serves as the floor of the eastern forum of Aelia Capitolina, which Hadrian named after himself after destroying the rest of the city in 133 to 135 CE. Prior to Hadrian’s artistry, the area he covered had been the site of the Struthion Pool, and thus was filled with water. The pool survives with vaulting added by Hadrian so that the Roman Forum could be built over it. Therefore, Yahowchanan’s depiction is all wet and dates this portion of his “Gospel” to sometime around 150 CE.

Suffice it to say, there is no possibility that a large crowd of unruly Jews had gathered before Pilate on this day to shout: “Crucify him” or “May his blood be upon our heads and that of our children.” And since that is historically impossible, and thus did not occur, there is no justification for Paul’s arguments against Jews. There is no longer a basis for Christianity, Replacement Theology, nor Christian anti-Semitism. They all dissipate into the ether of religious mythology.

Also inconsistent with the customs of this time, the Romans had a well-established system of jurisprudence. What is depicted within the “Gospels” was not a trial and Pilate was not sitting in the judge’s seat. Further, judges do not interrupt criminal proceedings of this magnitude to consider the musings of their spouse, nor use them to issue a verdict. Dreams are inadmissible. Therefore, this is equally ridiculous…

“While Pilate was sitting on the judge’s seat, his wife sent him this message: ‘Don’t have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him.’ But the chief priests and the elders persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas and to have Jesus executed.

‘Which of the two do you want me to release to you?’ asked the governor. ‘Barabbas,’ they answered. ‘What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called the Messiah?’ Pilate asked. They all answered, ‘Crucify him!’ ‘Why? What crime has he committed?’ asked Pilate. But they shouted all the louder, ‘Crucify him!’”

While this choice was not afforded in Mark, the rest of the story is somewhat similar, except Matthew corrects the problem of “Crucify him” only being requested once, not twice. Mark then finds closure, while Matthew has an agenda. Mark reads: “Then Pilate said to them, ‘Why, what evil has He done?’ But they cried out all the more, ‘Crucify Him!’ So Pilate, wanting to gratify the crowd, released Barabbas to them; and he delivered Jesus, after he had scourged Him, to be crucified.” End of story.

A Roman prefect would never have subjected himself to, nor solicited the advice of, an unruly crowd in this manner – even if there had been room for a school of them to swim in the fountain before him. If they were chanting death wishes while splashing about, there would have been no speaking over them or reasoning with them. Moreover, under the dictatorial control of Rome, popular sentiments were irrelevant, especially when judging a person suspected of treason. Rome governed through subjugation and fear, not through inclusiveness and harmony. Rome was vicious – ergo scourging followed by crucifixion.

These issues, while devastating to the credibility of Mark’s hearsay account, are nothing compared to what we now find in the Gospel of Matthew…

“‘Why? What crime has he committed?’ asked Pilate. But they shouted all the louder, ‘Crucify him!’ When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. ‘I am innocent of this man’s blood,’ he said. ‘It is your responsibility!’ All the people answered, ‘His blood is on us and on our children!’ Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.”

Frankly, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is more credible. No Roman washed his hands of any such affair, shirking his duty to Rome. And even Romans did not torture and kill innocent men strictly for their amusement – at least not until the advent of Roman Catholicism. Moreover, the notion that thoughtless zombies went from chanting “Crucify him” to a unified chorus of, “His blood is on us and on our children!” is ludicrous. There is a better chance of finding marshmallows and lemonade in hell.

This comparison was between Matthew and Mark, since one was predicated upon the other, and the latter couldn’t keep his story straight in the end. The conflicts with Luke’s account are far greater, and yet they pale in comparison to what we find in Yahowchanan. If these four “witnesses” were presented today, the defendant wouldn’t need Johnnie Cochran to rhythmically proclaim on behalf of a murderer: “If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit.”

Out of the “Gospels” and back to reality, after squelching the sanity of Arian (who recognized that Yahowsha’ could not have been the totality of God) at the Council of Nicaea, the Roman Catholic Church used the caricature of “Jesus” they had modeled after the vastly more popular Odysseus and Dionysus, to project Greco-Roman hatred on those they had oppressed, delegitimizing and dehumanizing Jews. They did so based upon the inspiration of Paul and the Roman Church. Their war of words serves as the basis of the conspiracy theories which led to the Holocaust and which are running rampant today.

Christians have perpetrated these lies for a reason: they, like their patron saint, Paul, want to claim for themselves what God has given to Yisra’el and Yahuwdah. And they want a scapegoat to blame for never having grown beyond their grotesque dead god on a stick. Clueless as to who Yahowsha’ was and what he was doing there, this miserable institution is attempting to mask its culpability and shame.

We will never know how far Paul’s devotee went in the waning days of the 1st century to blame Yahuwdym for what Rome had done to Yisra’el, differentiating what he wrote from what the Roman Church augmented. All we know is that he conspired to create an amalgamation of Paul’s letters, the Disciple Lowy’s | Levi’s Hebrew transcriptions of Yahowsha’s most important declarations, with Mark’s and Luke’s hearsay accounts. The result would have made Odysseus proud, caused Dionysus to blush, and the Sibyl to gush in response. But alas, they were no more real than the story of trial, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.

The historical evidence affirms that a disciple provided eyewitness testimony of the Sermon on the Mount and Olivet Discourse concurrent with his witness of those events. The result was beloved by the ‘Ebyownym – those who derived their name from the Hebrew text and were the first to recognize that Yahowsha’ walked out of the pages of the Towrah. In so doing, they realized as we do that Sha’uwl sought to demean and sever the only connection that made Yahowsha’s life meaningful.

To counter the credibility of the ‘Ebyownym, “Matthew” used Mark and Luke to flesh out the story such that it reflects the derogatory sentiments in Paul’s epistles and speeches. Then, as the Roman Church emerged under Constantine and began formalizing its creed at Nicaea, a Roman Catholic Bishop, Eusebius, wrote the rest to demonize Jews and canonize Replacement Theology.

Eusebius was not the only villain, but he played a horrific role to be sure, stirring the pot of anti-Semitism and Roman supremacy. He had the means and motive regarding the gestation of Codexes Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. They express his sentiments and read like his other works.

The evidence reveals that it was Rome that changed the course of history by writing: “As Pilate washed his hands of the affair, the Jews all shouted, ‘Let His blood be on our heads and that of our children!’”

Unfortunately for Roman Catholics, their forefathers not only committed this crime, but they also blamed the victims. Catholics and their Church earned the designation of the Whore of Babylon. They will be convicted for this audacious lie, along with the crimes of promoting the pagan practices of Sunday Worship, drinking the blood of “Christ” during the Eucharist, Lent, Christmas, and Halloween, the Madonna and Child, Mother of God, and Queen of Heaven, of the Lord Jesus Christ, for a New Covenant and New Testament, for the Trinity, for the myth of the birth, death, and resurrection of God, of crosses and Jewish culpability, of Replacement Theology, of popes, Holy Fathers, and saints holding the keys to heaven, while replacing the Passover meal with the “Last Supper,” and its fulfillment with “Easter.”

Romulus and Remus, mythically born of Greco-Roman nobility to this same Vestal Virgin and Mars, the God of War, were abandoned along the banks of the Tiber to be suckled by a wolf and adopted by a shepherd. One would kill the other, with the survivor becoming the antithesis of what Moses would achieve, creating the most vicious empire man would ever know, Rome. It is all chronicled in Dionysius of Halicarnassus’ Roman Antiquities should you care to read the Roman Old Testament. And just as Romulus would kill his brother and partner in pursuit of supremacy, it is the legend that Rome killed the Benjamite Wolf, Paul.



Questioning Paul

Incredible

…Testing Faith

5

Translating the Babel

Would You Believe…

Prior to the flood, Yahowah said that man had become overwhelmingly religious, political, militant, and cruel. For there to be any hope of a relationship, He would have to eliminate the perpetrators and start over. The eight souls willing to listen to His life-saving instructions were carried to safety aboard the Ark.

In that this story sheds light on Yahowah’s aversion to politicized and militant religions such as Christianity, let’s consider it with an eye to understanding how such beliefs hinder man’s approach to the Covenant. Also, this exercise will lead us to some rather amazing insights regarding the sordid history of English translations.

God’s warning begins…

“Indeed, when (ky – by contrast, and as a verifiable result) the defilement and slaying (chalal – the profane nature, contemptible attitude, and disgraceful wounding, the dishonorable pollution and violent, harmful stabbing; from chalah – sickening disease, illness which weakens and grieves, painful travails (hifil perfect – the subject causes the object to participate in the action which is comprehensive, albeit finite in duration)) of the descendants of ‘Adam (ha ‘adam – mankind, humans with a neshamah – conscience) came to actually and continually exist (hayah – began to occur, becoming manifest (qal imperfect – actually and habitually)), it increased dramatically (la rabab – it grew to the point of being multiplied greatly in a myriad of ways, reaching into the tens of thousands with the shooting of arrows (qal infinite – genuinely intensifying the action of the highly descriptive verb)) upon the presence of the realm of the descendants of ‘Adam (‘al paneh ha ‘adamah – on account of the face of and before the presence, thereby identifying the ground where Adam’s descendants lived, symbolically turning them the ruddy red color of blood).

And daughters were born to them (wa bath yalad la hem – therefore, in addition, female offspring were conceived by them (pual perfect – passively causing the object to suffer the effect)), (6:1) and the sons of the Almighty (wa beny ha ‘elohym – the children and male offspring of the Father, God Almighty) saw that (wa ra’ah ‘eth – they perceived and they noticed accordingly therefore that (qal imperfect)) the daughters of ‘Adam (ha bath ha ‘Adam – the female offspring of the man) were indeed (ky – surely as a result and by way of comparison and contrast, truly) desirable and beneficial (towb – pleasing, beautiful, and valuable, better, more productive and prosperous, especially for facilitating the accumulation of possessions, thereby possessing a useful quality).

So they habitually grasped hold of and took for themselves (wa laqach la hem – and they selected, obtained, and continually collected (qal imperfect)) women (‘ishahym – female individuals who had the potential to be, but were not necessarily, wives or mothers) from any which as a result of their relationships and to benefit their ways (min kol ‘asher – from every one whose benefit) they chose (bachar – they desired or preferred, they selected and considered (qal perfect)).” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 6:1-2)

Chalal, translated as “defilement and slaying,” depicts the problem Yahowah was seeking to resolve. The descendants of Adam, men with a neshamah / conscience, had become sullied with religious myths. Corrupt, they had become violent and deadly.

Ha ‘adam can be translated as “the man, a man called ‘Adam, or the descendants of ‘Adam.” Ha ‘adamah, which also appears in this statement, is either “the realm associated with ‘Adam” or “the ground where ‘Adam’s descendants lived.” While ‘adamah is nothing more than “‘adam – mankind,” rendered in the feminine, and thus perhaps “humankind,” it is often defined as “ground.”

Rendering ha ‘adam and ha ‘adamah as “man” and as “ground” is deficient. It not only ignores the definite articles, but also the Hebrew basis for both words, including their association with the first man created in Yahowah’s image and the ground upon which he had lived. The failure to associate the corrupt and deadly tendencies of these folks to the neshamah, which gave them a competitive advantage, and to the place this was occurring, deprives this statement of the principal insights required to understand it.

This infers that the neshamah, which was the singular attribute that differentiated ‘Adam and Chawah from the humans living outside of the Garden, was passed along to the “daughters who were born to” “the descendants of Adam.” That is what made them “desirable and beneficial.” The neshamah equips a person to think, to exercise good judgment, and to understand – even to predict the most likely outcome of events based upon the circumstances that led up to them. It, like the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil can be used for good or bad. In this case, it was almost universally detrimental, making those equipped with it vicious killers. They desired similarly equipped women because their superior intellect would aid in the construction of weapons and accumulation of possessions.

The “sons of the Almighty” refers to ‘Adam being conceived in God’s image and also to the relationship Yahowah had with ‘Adam, denoting His desire to have his descendants become part of His Covenant Family. In this context, therefore, it depicts men with a neshamah, the only distinguishing aspect capable of conceiving sons in our Heavenly Father’s likeness.

These individuals are unlike mal’ak, the heavenly messengers, who, while being spiritual beings, were not created in the image of God. They would never be described as “ha ‘adam.” The mal’ak are implements, not sons. There is no Covenant for them. The daughters of ‘Adam, therefore, depict women born with a conscience, with the ability to reason.

They were seen as desirable because children born unto them would be vastly more capable than those conceived without a neshamah. And in those days, sons supported their father’s ambitions. It became a recipe for disaster.

You may have noticed that there was no love involved here, no volition on behalf of the women. They were seized and taken, not unlike what occurs in Islam. They had nothing to say in the matter. Also noteworthy, most English Bible translations render ‘ishahym as “wives” when the word simply means “female individuals.” As “women,” they would have had the potential to be, but were not necessarily, mothers or wives. And without consent, the idea of marriage is ludicrous.

No doubt, Yahowah made Chawah “towb – beautiful and desirable” in addition to “beneficial and valuable.” These “advantageous” attributes were transferred to her offspring, making them “considerably better, more useful and productive,” than lesser endowed females outside of the Garden. In a world of man piercing and wounding other men and animals to survive, such women would have been preferred and chosen, selected and seized.

From the beginning, men, who are stronger, have had their way with women, treating them as inferior, even as property. As a salient example, it is the primary reason Muhammad was able to attract militants into his ranks and turn them into savages. Without misogyny, Islam would not have prevailed. But Muslims are not alone. Man grabbing, examining, testing, and probing any woman he chooses, without consideration of her desires, has been prevalent throughout human culture.

Profaning His creation, depriving women of freewill, and polluting the earth while wounding the living was not the course Yah had plotted. As such…

“Then (wa) Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of the name of YaHoWaH, our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah existence and our shalowm – restoration) said (‘amar – communicated using words with ongoing implications (qal imperfect)), ‘My Spirit (Ruwach ‘any – Spirit of Mine, always feminine in the text; from ruwach – to accept as a result of being perceptive, to facilitate understanding, and to provide relief and restoration, enlarging an individual and expanding their capabilities over an interval of space and time) shall not remain nor abide (lo’ duwn – will not dwell nor contend with, will not plead with nor vindicate (qal imperfect)) with the descendants of ‘Adam (ba ha ‘adam – with mankind, humans with a neshamah – conscience) forever (la ‘owlam – indefinitely or eternally, for an unending duration of time), also because (sha gam – to make a contrast, in addition) he is (huw’) flesh and prone to preaching (basar – biological life, an animal, a corporeal construct subject to decay; based upon the verbal root, basar – to proclaim, publish, and preach news considered good and beneficial by those who hear it).

So for a period of time, it shall exist that his days will be (wa hayah yowmym huw’ – therefore it shall actually and for a limited period be that his time shall be restricted to (qal perfect)) one hundred twenty (me’ah wa ‘esrym – a hundred and twenty) years (shanah – repetitions of the seasons, times to change and be different, a repeat of the solar year).’” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 6:3)

Time had run its course for every man and woman with a neshamah – conscience, save Noach and the seven souls with him. It will occur again, this time for everyone who fails to embrace the Covenant prior to 2033 CE, Year 6,000 Yah.

Yahowah’s Spirit is akin to light, and thus similar to energy. She is eternal. Our physical bodies, however, are comprised of matter, and are thus mortal. One cannot reside with the other beyond a finite period of time. To become immortal, to enter Yahowah’s presence, to become more like Him, to inherit the benefits of the Covenant and be empowered and enriched, we will have to jettison our physical bodies and be transformed into light. But this is only possible for the Covenant’s children. While Yahowah will abide with His sons and daughters forever, those who remain mortal, those who cling to the family of man, those impressed by expressions of human power and influence, will remain estranged and they will continue to degrade over time.

The primary meaning of basar is not “flesh.” Its verbal root, basar, reveals the actual reason Yahowah’s Spirit would no longer endure with man. Humankind had become overtly religious: “proclaiming, publishing, and preaching news considered good and beneficial by those who heard it.” Ask any Christian to define “Gospel,” and this is what they will say.

The limitation of 120 years is still in effect. Even with all of man’s scientific and medical advancements, the longest human lifespan was that of Jeanne Calment of France, a woman who died in 1997 at 122 years old. Women have the capacity to live longer because they have two X chromosomes while men have just one. Once one of one is damaged, there isn’t a second option to fall back upon.

The second oldest woman, Susannah Jones, an American, died in May 2016 at 116. The longest-lived man in recorded history was Jiroemon Kimura of Japan, who died in 2013, four years shy of 120. More recently, the oldest living man was Yisrael Kristal, a Yisra’elite. He was born in September 1903 and was 113 at the time of his passing in August 2017.

The length of a human life is determined largely by our genes. Human cells are limited in the number of divisions they can support, as they progressively lose telomeres with each subsequent cell partition until a few short telomeres become uncapped leading to an arrest of growth known as replicative aging. While these cells do not die initially, in the absence of genomic alterations, the telomere DNA remains quiescent, producing different proteins than younger cells. But then once a tipping point is reached, and many telomere ends become uncapped, the division of critically shortened telomeres leads to rapid cell death and puts the body into crisis.

There is, however, an enzyme called telomerase, which can lengthen clipped telomeres. Unfortunately, it has the side-effect of promoting malignancy. This should not be surprising since cancer is caused by rapidly replicating cells. The potential reward, the ability to provide a lifespan of up to a thousand years, has global pharmaceutical companies salivating. Since it would create the fabled Fountain of Youth, geneticists are trying to find a solution to the lifespan limitation of telomere DNA without the deadly side effects of telomerase-induced cancer.

While they are not going to resolve this challenge prior to Year 6000 Yah (2033 CE), at least with a drug that will be widely available, the fact that the DNA language of life can be edited to lengthen and shorten a human lifespan has profound implications regarding our interpretation of the Towrah. For example, Adam’s and Chawah’s DNA would have been programmed such that it prevented cell senescence indefinitely. But then, the information contained in the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil may have altered our initial script so that it started the aging clock ticking. Adam, Chawah, and those closely related to them would then have had the capacity to live for up to 1000 years.

Thereafter, since He authored the code of life, Yahowah edited our DNA such that 120 years would be the upward limit of human existence. As such, the oldest of the last generation conceived with the capacity to witness Yahowah’s return would have been born in 1913 – one of the darkest years in American history (the year the Federal Reserve was clandestinely created commencing the destruction of the currency and the Federal Income Tax was established to control everyone by redistributing wealth, all while Europe inched closer to world war and to an international pandemic).

There is some potential symbolism associated with the 120-year lifespan. It reflects three periods of testing, which is always a multiple of 40. For example, 40 Yowbel (50-year increments) separate man’s exclusion from the Garden to the affirmation of the Covenant on Mowryah with Yahowah and ‘Abraham in year 2000 Yah. After another 40 Yowbel, Yahowah fulfilled the first four Miqra’ey, facilitating the benefits of the Covenant in year 4000 Yah (33 CE). Then after the third passage of 40 Yowbel, in year 6000 Yah (2033 CE), Yahowah will return to fulfill Kipurym and Sukah, reconciling His relationship with Yisra’el so that we can reenter ‘Eden. Similarly, Moseh | Moses, who lived to 120 years of age, endured three 40-year trials, the first in Egypt, the second as a shepherd, and the third as the liberator of his people.

Looking ahead, those who are born to Covenant parents during the Millennial Shabat of Sukah will have their DNA reprogrammed such that they will again have the potential to live for 1000 years. As is the case with so many things we have discovered in the Towrah, from six days of creation accurately representing 14 billion years, depending upon whose clock one is considering, to the asteroid impact and upwelling of seawater which led to the flood, or now the reduction in human lifespans, Yahowah’s explanations are not only plausible, they can be validated.

Now moving on to the next statement, I am appalled by the number of conspiracy advocates who promote the myth that the Nephylym were “giant spiritual beings” who “mated with human women.” Many use the book of Enoch, which is outright fraud, to advance their case. The Nephylym were not giants, they were not even particularly tall, but they were religious. And they were also militant, becoming the living embodiment of the plights God hates most. We know this about them because this depiction serves as the basis of their name.

As one became many and families became societies, cultures, and civilizations, men and women became increasingly evil. As proof, if I were to ask you to name a single civilization, from Sumer, Babylon, and Assyria, to the Hittites, Canaanites, and Egyptians, the Greeks, Spartans, Persians, Romans, or Carthaginians, or even the Aztecs, Incas, or Mayans to the Americans, Germans, Russians, and Chinese, which treated its citizens fairly and its neighbors appropriately, in all of human history, could you name one?

The question, ‘Is man basically good or bad,’ is answered by another: ‘How many of them are there?’ Gang mentality, where an individual’s sense of right and wrong becomes collectivized, is the bane of religious and political institutions. The first group of people Yahowah identifies were oppressive and murderous. They were also overtly religious, political, and militant.

By the errant and pervasive rendering of naphylym as “giants” we must assume that the Latin scholars who initiated this myth wanted to avoid the religious and political connotations of the word. They assumed that physical prowess would be the only reason to mention such people in this negative light.

“There were (hayah – for an ongoing period of time, there actually and literally existed (qal imperfect)) the Nephylym (ha Nephylym – those who prostrate themselves and are stillborn; from the verbal root, naphal – to fall in prayer, battle, and status, going from a higher position to a lower one, those who are separated and die, those who bow down, falling prostrate to worship something on the ground, those who neglect and are thereby neglected, those who attack to conquer in an offensive military action, becoming inferior in the process, those subject to miscarriage, and thus untimely death) existing in the region (hayah ba ha ‘erets – came to exist within the land or territory, albeit for a limited period of time (qal perfect)) in those days (ba ha yowmym ha hem), but also by comparison, in a slightly different form, they existed for some time thereafter (wa gam ‘achar ken – and in addition, besides, but also by similarity and resemblance, after this, for some time later in another form, somewhat different and distinct but of the same genre, one following the other).

By association (‘asher – revealing the benefits and showing their way of life), the sons of the Almighty (beny ha ‘elohym) came (bow’ – actually made a habit of pursuing (qal imperfect)) to (‘el – toward and upon) the daughters of man (bath ha ‘adam – the female offspring of mankind who were descended from ‘Adam), and they conceived children for themselves (wa yalad la hem – they approached and impregnated them, culminating in the birth of their offspring (qal perfect)).

These (hem) warriors and political leaders (gibowr – prominent individuals with the ability to fight and who prevailed in their quest for military and political power), who hailed from a relatively long time ago (‘asher min ‘owlam – who are from antiquity and thus from the distant past), are individuals with reputations and recognizable names (‘ysh ha shem – men of renown).” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 6:4)

Most Hebrew nouns are defined by their verbal, or actionable, roots. Nephyl, and in the plural, Nephylym, is no exception. It is based upon “naphal – those who prostrate themselves and are stillborn.” It, therefore, depicts “religious people who bow down in prayer and die as a result.” Fully amplified, naphal describes those who: “fall in prayer, battle, and status, going from a higher position to a lower one, those who are separated and die, those who bow down, falling prostrate to worship something on the ground, those who neglect and are thereby neglected, those who attack to conquer in an offensive military action becoming inferior in the process.” It is related to nephel: “those subject to miscarriage, and thus untimely death.” It reveals that the religious conceive “stillborn children.”

Since ha Nephylym is a title, it should be transliterated, and then explained, either within a parenthetical as part of the translation itself, as a footnote, or in a collaborative commentary. But there is absolutely no justification for translating ha Nephylym as “giants.” This error is a legacy of the Septuagint, one incorporated into the Latin Vulgate and then passed along through the King James Version. Even Strong’s, while attempting to justify the KJV as is their penchant, attributes nephylym to the verbal root, naphal, acknowledging that it is “from H5307.” And yet, H5307 – naphal, is the antithesis of giant, of big, or of standing tall. It is about being decreased in stature and status as a result of bowing down and dying in battle.

Since the erroneous nature of English Bible translations is a product of religion, once we have concluded our evaluation of Bare’syth 6:4, we will use the errant rendering of ha Nephylym in English Bibles as “giants” to explain how these errors originated and why these mistakes are seldom corrected. It is a long and sordid tale, one that deserves our undivided attention.

Before we go down that road, however, let’s continue to focus on what Yahowah just revealed in Bare’syth 6:4. And what I find particularly interesting about this passage is what follows ha Nephylym. It is an insight every translator missed. Speaking of these overtly religious individuals and of their deadly and militant nature, even of the fact that they were in essence killing their own children, in Bare’syth / Genesis 6:4, Yahowah said: “wa gam ‘achar ken – but also by comparison, in a slightly different form, they continued to exist for some time thereafter.”

This means that a propensity for worship and war did not die out with the Nephylym, but instead, both traits continued to plague humankind throughout the civilizations which followed. And indeed, this was the case with Sumer, Babylonia, Assyria, the Hittites, Canaanites, Egyptians, Minoans, Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Greeks, Spartans, Romans, Persians, Byzantines, Ottomans, Indians, Chinese, Japanese, Aztecs, Incas, and Mayans, et al. Alone, man is bad, but in tribes, nations, and civilizations, he is far worse. It is the very point Yahowah will soon make regarding Babel.

I have long denounced the savage and grotesquely immoral nature of Rome, calling them the most horrific civilization in human history. By doing so, I am echoing Yahowah’s perception of them. But even though Imperial Rome was more ruthless than the barbarian tribes they subjugated, the Roman Catholic Church has been a greater menace to mankind. They are a legacy of the Nephylym. Rather than looking for giants or over-sexed spirits, their translators ought to have been looking at their own institution.

The conclusion of this misunderstood and errantly translated passage should have been easy to assess. The Nephylym, and those who resembled them throughout antiquity, were “gibowr – warriors and political leaders, prominent individuals with the ability to fight who prevailed in their quest for military and political power.” According to God, these egomaniacal despots were “‘ysh ha shem – men of renown, individuals with reputations and recognizable names.” They all left their mark on the world, one too often made by their weapons of war.

To be famous or, in this case, infamous, is not good. God does not value soldiers or those who deploy them. They are not heroes nor valiant. Their might did not make them right and their fame is their shame. There is no one depicted among them to be found in heaven.

Should you believe that I’m projecting my personal predilections with this assessment, as opposed to conveying Yahowah’s bias and perspective, you may want to consider what follows in Bare’syth 6:5, a statement we will consider before we track down the reason bible translations can all say the same thing and all be wrong.

“So (wa) Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of the name of YaHoWaH, our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah existence and our shalowm – restoration) saw, perceived, and understood (ra’ah – literally observed, actually considered, and consistently revealed, viewed, discovered, and made His perspective known because of its ongoing consequences (qal imperfect)) as a result that, indeed (ky – truly and surely, emphasizing and strengthening this statement), the depravity, wrongdoing, destructive nature, and perverse attitude (ra’ah – the wickedness, immorality, and evil, the harmful, troubling calamity, the corrupting and misfortunate criminal behavior which was injurious and miserable, creating the distressful and ruinous circumstances) of mankind, these descendants of ‘Adam (ha ‘adam – humankind), were excessive and being exalted (rab – were enormous and inordinate, abundant and prolific) throughout the region (ba ha ‘erets – within the land, territory, and material realm).

And also (wa), every inclination, conception, and motivation, most especially the way ideas are formed and framed (kol yetser – everything conceived and imagined, fashioned and formed, every desire and ambition, all of the impulses and tendencies, especially the many ways issues were framed and character was defined, the way ideas were shaped and forged, plans were devised, prepared, and ordained, and the framework of their society and purpose; from yatsar – to form, fashion, and frame premeditated and preordained ideas) regarding his thoughts, inventions, musings, reasoning, and plans (machashabah – in association with his cognitive abilities and thinking, the way he schemes, plots, and devises things, even the purpose of the myths he invents and meditates upon, his artificial constructs and contrived ideas; from mah – to ponder how and why and chashab – to cunningly invent imaginary accounts and then justify and esteem them, imputing value to them) which affect his judgment and perspective (leb huw’ – with regard to his reasoning, the way he processes information, his ability to evaluate evidence in a rational way and respond appropriately, his inner nature, his character and heart) were exclusively and continually (raq – were restricted to, uniquely and only yielding, always and without exception, chronically and sickeningly producing those who were undernourished and unhealthy, those who spit and drool) wrong (ra’ – bad, not good, immoral, ignorant, and irrational, wicked and evil, undesirable and harmful, injurious and troubling) every day without exception (kol ha yowm – all of the time).” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 6:5)

According to God, Barnum and Bailey were wrong. It is possible to fool most of the people most of the time. Man was doing so then, and he is doing so again now.

Over the course of many years, I have had the opportunity to lead readers on a wide variety of investigations as we have sought to understand something God has revealed along the way. And without exception, not only have our adventures been rewarded, we have always found Yahowah affirming what we discovered, usually in a subsequent statement. But seldom has an affirmation been this immediate or appropriate.

Yahowah just revealed that we were right – not just about the legacy of the Nephylym, not just about the harmful nature of religion, but also regarding how the inventions and schemes of man tend to produce the likes of the Christian New Testament. It was not an accident, but instead deliberate. It was the product of conniving men and it was wrong.

We interjected ourselves into this discussion to more fully understand Yahowah’s perspective on what ails man. And based upon what we have seen, we can reasonably surmise that religious malfeasance is man’s biggest foe.

It is fascinating to note that while “ra’ah – saw, perceived, and understood” is transliterated similarly to “ra’ah – depravity, wrongdoing, and calamity,” they are written differently in Hebrew. To “see” is , while “evil” was written .

This brings up an interesting perspective on the way a word’s meaning is conveyed in Hebrew. In “see,” man  (a Rosh) is shown facing the  (an Aleph), the first letter in “‘ab –  – Father” and “‘el –  – God.” In “evil,” man  (a Rosh) is forming his own perspective  (an Ayin) on  (a Hey) humankind. And this perspective is not just limited to these words, but to almost every word containing a  (Rosh). If the individual is facing a letter that is found in Yahowah’s  name or one of His favorite titles, the word conveys positive connotations, whereas if we are shown looking away from God, with our back to Him, the implications are typically derogatory.

Ky, translated “as a result,” is important in this context because it reveals that the deplorable situation Yahowah observed was a consequence of the ongoing legacy of the Nephylym and the negative implications of “these warriors and political leaders, the prominent individuals with the ability to fight who prevailed in their quest for military and political power.” The notion that they were “valiant heroes” has been eliminated. They were responsible for the adversarial conditions Yahowah deplored.

Equally important, by connecting cause and consequence with ky, Yahowah has validated the lessons we learned by considering the root of Nephylym. They, and those who were similar and followed in their footsteps, the Sumerians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Hittites, Canaanites, Philistines, Egyptians, Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Greeks, Persians, Romans, Byzantines, Muslims, Ottomans, Brits, Nazis, and Anglo-Americans, would be comprised of “naphal – religious people who would bow down in prayer and die as a result.”

Their “miscarriage of justice would lead to stillborn children who would meet with an untimely death.” Year after year, century upon century, they would “fall in prayer, battle, and status, going from a higher position to a lower one.” Separated from God by bowing down, they were dead men walking – resembling the zombies we have previously discussed.

The reason for the impending flood was that humankind’s “ra’ah – depravity” was “rab – great.” Man was “wrong,” and the consequences were “injurious.” “Evil” not only “prevailed and was prolific,” it was “being exalted.” This is, perhaps, a foreshadowing of Political Correctness, where all manner of moral turpitude is celebrated as if it were a source of pride. Also serving as a harbinger of our time, an “abundance” of “criminal behavior” had become “overwhelmingly” “destructive.” Man’s “corruptions” were “commonplace.” That is to say, the truth had become so unpopular, it no longer appeared credible. Such is the case today as you read these words.

While it is now a global problem, five thousand years ago the degradation of humankind was a regional concern. God is describing the fallen condition attributable to the descendants of ‘Adam as they migrated out of ‘Eden toward the Black Sea and along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. ‘Erets does not mean “Earth” in the sense of the planet, but instead “land or region.” It can also identify the “material realm,” which is distinct and separate from the “shamaym – spiritual realm.”

This is critical for several reasons. First, man’s “neshamah – conscience” was being misused, and it was only passed along to the direct descendants of ‘Adam – all of whom lived in this region. Second, the flood was isolated to this part of the world, and was not a global catastrophe. And third, just as Satan had inspired the exodus from ‘Eden, the Adversary and his fallen envoys were belligerents in this battle involving the material and spiritual realms.

According to God, man’s depravity was deliberate, a derivative of his “kol yetser – every inclination and motivation.” Man’s deadly nature was “premeditated and planned.” He had become a natural-born killer. His “every impulse and tendency” was corrupting and harmful. The strategy man deployed to achieve this debilitating and deadly condition lies at the heart of yetser, which speaks of “framing an issue.” It is how religions are formed, how politicians prevail, how generals motivate soldiers to kill. Twisted and jaundiced perceptions create an alternate and artificial reality whereby a perverted perspective causes deceptions to appear credible. It is how one fools most of the people most of the time.

“Machashabah – the cognitive ability to devise contrived schemes” is possible only in the presence of a functioning neshamah. But just like Yahowah’s other gifts to humankind, mortal life and freewill, each can be used to understand and advance the truth or to preach and accept a perversion of it.

When applied to Yahowah’s guidance and teaching, our neshamah’s capacity for reason is mankind’s most enlightening and empowering attribute. But it can also serve to inspire faith and instigate war. In this context, and cognizant of the fact that machashabah is derived from chashab, it speaks of “cunningly inventing imaginary accounts” and then not only “justifying these mythical constructs,” but also “elevating such musings to the point that they are revered.”

The old adage is true. Garbage in, garbage out. Myths were being promoted with a religious zeal. Everyone, from cleric to king, from lord to general, was singing out of the same hymnal. But there is yet another way to fool most of the people most of the time, and that is to negate the functionality of their neshamah – conscience. This can be done in several ways.

Rome crucified those who acted or thought independently. Its legacy, the Roman Catholic Church, branded them as heretics and then tortured them to dissuade similar considerations. Today, political correctness is used to deactivate our neshamah by not only inverting truth and lies and thus destabilizing the individual, those who dare challenge their indoctrination are publicly humiliated and disgraced. This is what Yahowah was referring to when He said that “their judgment, ability to reason, and perspective” were “continually and exclusively” “wrong.” And therein is the core of the issue.

This is not what Yahowah had intended. ‘Eden was a land devoid of religion and politics. There were no militaries or death. And the brief interlude of deception was a result of ha satan corrupting God’s testimony, removing what God had actually revealed from its context, and then twisting His intent to seduce the unwary woman into accepting a lie. Chawah was then guilty of adding to Yah’s testimony, going beyond what He had said, not unlike Rabbis with their Talmud, Mishneh, and Zohar and Christians with their New Testament.

God had envisioned a close and personal relationship based upon trust along with open and honest communication. Man came to prefer religion, instead, as it empowered men to rule over others as if they were gods. The swamp had become so murky and polluted, life was unsustainable. Mankind was on a collision course with self-annihilation. In this environment, Yahowah was essentially unknowable and life was unsustainable.

“So (wa – then) Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of the name of YaHoWaH, our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah existence and our shalowm – restoration), as a result of His compassion, was sorry and lamented (nacham – was disappointed, sympathetically grieving and regretting (nifal imperfect – passively, at no fault of His own, Yahowah was disappointed and therefore lamented with ongoing consequences which would unfold throughout time)) that (ky – therefore it follows accordingly because) He had engaged with (‘asah ‘eth – He had endeavored to perform, acting on behalf of (qal perfect – formed a genuine relationship even if for a limited period of time with)) the descendants of ‘Adam (ha ‘adam – humankind) in the region (ba ha ‘erets – within the material realm).

He was distressed over what He had fashioned and formed (‘atsab – He was hurt by His creation and consumed by grief, indeed injured by these deliberate distortions (hitpael imperfect – Yahowah, and He alone, was suffering the effect of what His creation was continuing to perpetrate, causing ongoing consternation)), even with regard to (‘el – in conjunction with) His decision and reasoning (leb huw’ – His judgment in this regard, His viewpoint and motivation).” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 6:6)

While nacham is simplistically rendered “regretted” in most English Bibles, the word is considerably more complex because it is “driven by compassion.” God “felt sympathy” for those who were being misled and abused. His “grief” was born out of “concern.”

It is hard for us to imagine God becoming so disappointed that He would regret His own decision. But this is how it had to be. If the Covenant was going to model a family, if we were going to be treated as sons and daughters rather than toys to be played with, mankind had to be afforded the opportunity to foil God’s intent.

Had God become a micromanager, prompting every good choice while preventing bad decisions, thereby predestining the outcome, it would have all been for naught – nothing but a charade. Just because Yahowah can peer into our future and witness the consequence of our decisions, both good and bad, does not mean that He predestined us to that outcome. If He were to do so, we would be nothing more than pawns to be pushed around on a gameboard.

If you have ever loved and lost, you know the feeling. Your intentions may have been sublime, but nonetheless, unrequited love leads to grief, consternation, and tears. But even we, corrupt as we may be, know that it is better to have loved and lost than to never have experienced love at all. For our Heavenly Father it was worth the risk, as evidenced by the fact He would give mankind yet another chance.

Before we move on, there are two additional words which would benefit from further clarification. The first is ‘asah, which is inappropriately rendered in religious publications to suggest that God regretted having “made” man. But in the context of a relationship, and particularly when used in harmony with ‘eth, ‘asah ‘eth is more accurately translated as “engaged with” or “performed on behalf of” humankind. Relationships require both parties to participate, so just as God wants us to “engage with” Him by “acting upon” the terms and conditions of His Covenant, He sets the example for us to follow, always taking the first step.

Therefore, it is the relationship that soured, not the inherent design of creation, life, or the Covenant. The universe was perfectly planned, but it required chaos to be interesting. If everything was orchestrated and predictable, it wouldn’t have been worth God’s time or effort.

The second under-appreciated term is ‘atsab. At first glance, it may appear as if God simply repeated Himself because the secondary connotation of ‘atsab and nacham are somewhat similar. However, they are used in a different context. Nacham reveals that “compassion was the reason for being disappointed” by the descendants of ‘Adam, whereas ‘atsab was used “in conjunction with” Yahowah’s “emotional distress” over the “deliberate distortions” which were “affecting His perspective” on humanity, especially considering what He was offering and had done on our behalf.

“Then (wa – so) Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of YaHoWaH based upon His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) said (‘amar – promised in response), ‘I will remove the contamination (machah – I will wash away and blot out the corruption and infection (qal imperfect)) of the descendants of ‘Adam (ha ‘adam – of humankind, of those made in God’s image with a neshamah) which, for the benefit of the relationship (‘asher – to show the way to life), I brought into existence (bara’ – I have created (qal perfect)) out of the material realm (min ‘al paneh ha ‘erets – from presenting their opposition to the land by their presence in the region).

Because as a result of humankind (min ‘adam), inclusive of the predatory beasts (‘ad bahemah – including plundering, warlike animals and the herd mentality of the ongoing witness and continued testimony of these frightening and fearsome monsters), the testimony of the slithering reptiles (‘ad ramas – the warlike nature of the serpentine aggressors), and (wa) the winged creatures (‘owph – beings that can fly, swiftly darting about while dispensing darkness and gloom) of the spiritual realm (shamaym – heavens), indeed (ky – surely, denoting these exceptions)), I regret as an expression of My sympathy (nacham – compassion moved Me to pity, sorrow and lamenting, disappointed (nifal imperfect – passively, at no fault of His own, Yahowah was saddened and therefore lamented with ongoing consequences which would unfold throughout time)) that (ky) I have engaged with (‘asah ‘eth – I have endeavored to perform, acting on behalf of (qal perfect – formed a genuine relationship even if for a limited period of time with)) them (hem – addressing the descendants of ‘Adam).’” (Bare’syth / In the Beginning / Genesis 6:7)

God intervenes, imposing His will so infrequently, when He interferes and alters the course of human events, we should consider His motivations. Based upon machah, man had become a contaminant, a deadly infection whose corrupting influence was poisoning His creation. Unless He removed the infection, life would be unsustainable.

A plague cannot be thwarted by treating the symptoms or by accommodating the pathogen. It is only by diminishing the accessibility of viable hosts that spread the disease that can be controlled. Then the breeding ground must be disinfected and sanitized, such that the infected area becomes safe to inhabit. God was doing what a loving father would do to protect His home and family. Had He not intervened when He did, man would have destroyed himself and God would have become unknowable.

When translating these words, the broad range of meanings associated with min, ‘ad, bahemah, and ramas should be considered. For example, since the usual translation of min as “from” or “out of” does not work in this context, the most logical choice becomes “because as a result,” denoting “the reason behind and cause of” what follows. It is not uncommon for min to be used in this manner.

We have dealt with ‘ad before and noted that its primary connotation denotes “testimony which endures,” as opposed to simply “until.” As noted previously, ‘ed, meaning “enduring witness and testimony,” would have been written identically in the text. Also revealing, ‘ad describes a “predator stalking and plundering prey as booty in war.” This, therefore, gives us a lot to consider prior to rendering the word one way or the other.

This is relevant because there would be no reason for God to truncate the lives of “domesticated animals” which is how bahemah is often translated. But now in conjunction with the full cadre of connotations associated with ‘ad, we can use them to ascribe revealing characteristics to these “beasts,” explaining why the region would be better off without them.

Likewise, remes can be rendered “moving or creeping things,” and thus by implication, that which “slithers.” This depicts the lowly and serpentine nature of a venomous snake. It serves metaphorically to convey Satan’s serpentine nature and deadly toxins which underlie many religious schemes. Additionally, the affinity between “those who aggressively trample and destroy, often in militaristic pursuit,” and Yahowah’s depiction of the Roman Catholic Church in Daniel is too similar to ignore.

Lastly, while ‘owph can be translated as “bird,” demons are “‘owph – winged creatures that can fly, quickly darting through space and time while dispensing darkness and gloom.” And then there is the potential association with “‘owts – counsel and plans” which are “‘owa’ – distorting and perverting.”

Moreover, these “‘owph – winged creatures” are being associated with the “shamaym – spiritual realm,” suggesting that God is referring to fallen mal’ak. Since a spiritual being cannot be killed, even by God, it is important that we correctly convey the meaning of machah, because Yahowah can and will “remove their contamination and corruption.”

Yahowah does not require perfection, is not impressed by popularity, and was willing to give us a second chance. Thankfully, Noach was willing to listen to God and engage, doing what Yahowah wanted to be done. It does not actually take much to please God because His goal is to perfect us in ways that are mutually beneficial.



The propensity of English Bibles to misrepresent ha Nephylym as “giants” serves to demonstrate why we should be suspect of Christian publications. Their portrayals of Genesis 6:4 are consistently wrong, absolutely and unequivocally untrue.

There was no race of giants. In fact, the average height of men is substantially taller today than it was five thousand years ago. Moreover, by misrepresenting God’s message, the essential lesson He was conveying relative to mankind’s propensity to be religious and vicious, necessitating the flood, was lost in translation.

This is what Yahowah revealed…

“There were for a limited period of time, the Nephylym (those who prostrate themselves and are stillborn, falling in prayer, battle, and status, who were militaristic and thus met with an untimely death), existing in the region in those days, but there would also be many bearing a resemblance to them in a slightly different form for some time thereafter.

By association, the sons of the Almighty habitually pursued the daughters of man (the female descendants of ‘Adam), and they conceived children for themselves.

These warriors and political leaders, prominent individuals who prevailed in their quest for military and political power, who were from a relatively long time ago, are those with reputations and recognizable names.” (Bare’syth / Genesis 6:4)

The long litany of errors, and especially the notion of “giants,” began during the transition from Hebrew to Greek. An overly imaginative, or perhaps, unthinking scribe composing the Septuagint wrote: “Now the giants were upon the earth in those days; and after that when the sons of God were wont to go into the daughters of men, they bore children to them, those were the giants of old, the men of renown.” (Brenton’s Septuagint Translation of Genesis 6:4)

As we are aware, there is no etymological justification, nor anything in paleontology, anthropology, archeology, or ancient history, to support changing ha Nephylym to “giants.” And while the name should have been transliterated, its value is derived from explaining it – especially based upon what God told us about them.

The statement “now the giants were upon the earth in those days” is false. Therefore, either the translation was wrong or the Author was mistaken. And should anyone believe man was right, I will take that wager.

Without an appreciation of what it means to be a son of God, all manner of misconceptions become possible, some of which we will witness in subsequent “translations.” Further, hayah ba ha ‘erets is much more accurately translated as “existing in the region” than “were upon the earth.”

The phrase, wa gam ‘achar ken, is trivialized by “and after that,” destroying the reason it was included in the text. Yahowah is telling us that the vicious religiosity of the Nephylym would continue to manifest itself in other civilizations for a protracted period. He is correct.

Halak, whose primary meaning is “to walk,” is commonly deployed to convey “to go.” Bow’, which was used here, means “to come” “to arrive,” “to enter,” or “to pursue.” Moreover, if the intent had been to convey “were wont to go,” the verb would have had to have been written in the volitional mood, but that was not the case. Likewise, ‘el means “to.” Had God wanted to say “into,” He would have used ba.

The Septuagint’s translator ignored the definite article, ha, preceding ‘adam, and then failed to convey the fact that ‘Adam was the name of the first man Yahowah created in His image.

There was no reason to write “children” in italics, which means that it was added for readability without justification in the text because yalad means “to conceive children.”

While gibowr can be rendered “mighty and powerful,” it does not mean “giants.” The most accurate translation in this context would be “warriors and political leaders, prominent individuals who prevailed in their quest for military and political power.” This underscores the point Yahowah was making with the Nephylym. It is also one He will confirm in the next statement. Also, while it is possible to extrapolate shem as “renown or reputation,” its primary meaning is “name.”

Therefore, as is the case with almost every attempt to render a Hebrew statement in Greek, the Septuagint’s translator failed miserably. Either Hebrew concepts are difficult to convey in Greek or the Greek scholars who attempted these translations were inadequately schooled in Hebrew – or both. More to the point, Greeks were not only the most xenophobic race in recorded history, they universally hated Yahuwdym and their language, Hebrew – believing that they and theirs were superior. However, since Yahowah and His Word are inseparable, to hate Hebrew is to hate God. To disassociate oneself from Yisra’el, is to estrange oneself from Yahowah.

The reason this is important is because “Old Testament” translations were derived from the Greek Septuagint as it was reflected in the Latin Vulgate. This becomes a serious problem because the only people who surpassed the Greeks in their overt animosity toward Yahuwdym and Hebrew were Romans. If we were to search the world for the two most inappropriate languages and cultures to communicate Hebrew ideas, we would find none worse than Helens promoting Greek and religious Roman scribes writing in Latin.

As anticipated, rather than translating the Hebrew text, Jerome replicated the Septuagint’s mistake in the Latin Vulgate on behalf of his Roman Catholic overlords. He wrote: “gigantes autem errant super terram in diebus illis postquam enim ingress sunt filii Dei ad filias hominum illaeque genuerunt isti sunt potentes a saeculo viri famosi,” which translates as: “Now giants were upon the earth in those days. For after the sons of God went into the daughters of men and they brought forth children, these are the mighty men of old, men of renown.”

In a moment, we will study the long and sordid history of English Bible translations, but before we do, let’s read what some of the earliest, and then a few of the most recent, Bibles have proposed regarding Bare’syth 6:4. Following the Septuagint and Vulgate, Wycliffe was the first to end the Roman Catholic embargo on the Bible, doing so by translating Latin into Anglo-Saxon, a precursor to English: “Soothly giants were on the earth in those days, forsooth after that the sons of God entered in to the daughters of men, and those daughters begat; these were mighty of the world and famous men (they were the mighty and famous men of the world).” While he was wrong, his heart was in the right place.

The next to publish, Tyndale, composed: “There were tirantes in the world in thos dayes. For after that the children of God had gone in vnto the doughters of men and had begotten them children the same children were the mightiest of the world and men of renowne.” While it would be natural to assume that “tirantes” was meant to be “tyrants,” as in ruthless despots, since the Tyndale Bible renders the same word in Bamidbar / Numbers 13:13 as “giants,” we would be closer to the truth with the assumption that his intent was to depict beasts who were frighteningly terrible.

The third oldest English Bible translation was composed by Cloverdale, although it wasn’t much of a translation since he copied Tyndale word for word. His renditions of Genesis 6:4 and Numbers 13:13 echo the mistakes made by his mentor.

Thereafter, we find the next four English “translations” slavishly returning to the familiar pattern of the Latin Vulgate. Without exception, they all replicated the errant rendering of ha Nephylym found in the Septuagint and thereby plagiarized Wycliffe’s efforts. King Henry VIII’s Great Bible reads “giants,” as does Queen Elizabeth’s Bishops’ Bible.

The resolutely Protestant Geneva Bible, demonstrating its adherence to the Latin text of the Church they opposed: “There were giants[g] in the earth in those days: yea, and after that the sons of God came unto the daughters of men, and they had borne them children, these were mighty men, which in old time were men of renown[h].” Footnote [g] says: “or tyrants” as an ode to Tyndale, and footnote [h] reads: “which usurped authority over others, and did degenerate from that simplicity, wherein their fathers lived,” which is neither helpful nor accurate.

The first Roman Catholic English translation (of the Latin Vulgate, of course), known as the Douay-Rheims, offered: “Now giants were upon the earth in those days. For after the sons of God went in to the daughters of men and they brought forth children, these are the mighty men of old, men of renown.”

Proving that the King James Bible made no attempt to translate the Hebrew text, but simply plagiarized earlier translations of the Latin Vulgate, the king’s minions published: “There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.”

Simply stated, the cast of alleged scholars who worked on the KJV was guilty of plagiarism. If students in their classes attempted such a thing, they would have received a failing grade and then be dismissed from academia in shame. Any time someone copies someone else’s work and passes it off as their own, they are being deceitful, even if the original answer was right. But when they copy an erroneous work, they not only reveal their ignorance, they expose their character, proving that they cannot be trusted. Such is the case with the whole of the KJV – the most acclaimed and popular of all English translations. That is a sobering indictment, especially for those who are rational and moral.

Thereafter, the Webster Bible parroted their predecessors: “There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore [children] to them: the same [became] mighty men, who [were] of old, men of renown.”

The Common English Bible toed the same line: “In those days, giants lived on the earth and also afterward, when divine being and human daughters had sexual relations and gave birth to children. These were the ancient heroes, famous men.”

We are obviously noticing a trend. The mistakes were passed along from one to the next. To call any of these “translations” is to dishonor the word. They are simply modest revisions for religious or political purposes.

Sadly, no one seemed interested, willing, or able to hold them accountable. Worse, no one protested, stating that these lies and deceptions could not possibly be the inerrant word of God. There were no giants. Divine beings did not mate with humans – that is unless one is sufficiently foolish to believe the myths associated with Greek gods.

Now that we have considered the oldest English Bibles, let’s see what time has wrought. Surely, more recent “translations” will be more accurate, right?

In Young’s Literal Translation, after “Jehovah saith” and before “Jehovah seeth,” we find, “The fallen ones were in the earth in those days, and even afterwards when sons of God come in unto daughters of men, and they have borne to them – they [are] the heroes, who, from of old [are] the men of name.” Well, at least, shem was literally rendered. As for “Jehovah,” they got one of the four letters right.

The Good News Translation was bad news. The authors of this modern paraphrase proposed: “In those days, and even later, there were giants on the earth who were descendants of human women and the heavenly beings. They were the great heroes and famous men of long ago.” This, of course, is invalid in every conceivable way. There were no giants on the earth then, or later, and God did not say or infer that they existed. The GNT completely disposed of the phrase “sons of the Almighty” and replaced it with “heavenly beings.” The only such beings are mal’ak, and they do not engage in sex. They are comprised of light and serve as Yahowah’s implements and messengers. There are no “heroes” in this story and God was not addressing “fame.” It is reprehensible that men sold this rubbish as the Word of God.

For those who may want to challenge the notion that “there were no giants on the earth then, or later, because Goliath was called a “giant,” I would argue that one particularly large individual does not define a race. And since archeologists have just recently unearthed the first evidence of a Philistine gravesite, we have proof that these invaders were of average height for their time, with the median stature just over five feet. Goliath may have been abnormal due to Acromegaly, a disorder that results from excess growth hormone. But sadly for the disagreeable giant, it made him rather grotesque looking with blurred vision. Andre the Giant is a modern example of someone suffering from Acromegaly. He was 7 foot 6 inches and 520 pounds when he died at 46 in 1993.

Beyond this, the Masoretic Text is corrected by the Dead Sea Scrolls with regard to Goliath’s height. The MT reads “six cubits and a span.” A cubit was measured from the elbow to the tip of the longest finger, and therefore averaged sixteen to eighteen inches. A span was the width of a hand, or six to nine inches depending upon whether it was measured across the palm or from an extended thumb to the little finger.

Therefore, while the rabbinical text would have Goliath towering above the fray at nine feet nine inches tall, according to 4Q51Samuel, a one-thousand-two-hundred-year-older manuscript found in the caves above Qumran, his height was actually four cubits and a span, and thus only six feet, six inches, tall. So, while that would have made him nearly a foot taller than the average Philistine or Yisra’elite, he was only a giant from the perspective of lesser men.

Returning to the myths promoted by the religious, in the Living Bible we find: “In those days, and even afterwards, when the evil beings for the spirit world were sexually involved with human women, their children became giants, of whom so many legends are told.” I did not think it could get worse than The Good News Translation, but that was before reading this in the Living Bible. Its rendition is despicable and wholly unjustified. It makes God out to be a nincompoop, nearly as dumb and perverted as His creation. Other than the opening phrase, which was out of order, they did not get anything right.

The message of the Message became: “This was back in the days (and also later) when there were giants in the land. The giants came from the union of the sons of God and the daughters of men. These were the mighty men of ancient lore, the famous ones.” With all evidence to the contrary, we are still mired in the ignorance and carelessness of the Septuagint and Vulgate.

Laughably, the most recent English variation, the New Living Translation, opined: “In those days, and for some time after, giant Nephilites lived on the earth, for whenever the sons of God had intercourse with women, they gave birth to children who became the heroes and famous warriors of ancient times.” While transliterating ha Nephylym as “Nephilites” would have been better than calling them giants, the NLT did not get either right.

It would be funny if it were not so sad. But it is depressing, because these money-grubbing religious imbeciles perpetrated their fraud in the name of God. They ascribed their verbal diarrhea to the Creator of the universe. In the process, they made God out to be a liar and launched a score of moronic conspiracy theories in the process. Thankfully, there is a consequence for doing such things. They will pay a price as a result.

While it would have been difficult for some, in that the Masoretic Text wasn’t readily available to them, anyone creating or updating a translation over the past century could have taken the time to examine the root of Nephylym as we have done, and could easily have created an accurate transliteration and translation. But they chose to parrot their predecessors. Even though there is absolute proof demonstrating that there never has been a race of “giants,” they continued to attribute this lie to God, hoping that Christians would buy the result.

These purported translations have gone from bad to worse. The most recent are even more despicable than the oldest. But that is the nature of things. Once something is perverted, it seldom gets better.

Now that we are in the midst of exposing the malfeasance of religious “translators,” or should we say, “copyists” and “plagiarizers,” there is yet another problem I discovered through my previous research a number of years ago. The first English translations of the “Bible” were derived from Latin, not Greek, and most certainly not from Hebrew. They were all based on the Roman Catholic Church’s Vulgate – which itself was an amalgamation of Old Latin manuscripts. While Jerome (actually Eusebius Hieronymus Sophronius (or more accurately, Erroneous)) completed his blending process in 405 CE, it’s the letter that he wrote to Pope Damascus that should have obliterated the credibility of Christianity before it was imposed by Rome:

“If we are to pin our faith to the Latin texts, it is for our opponents to tell us which; for there are almost as many forms of texts as there are copies. If, on the other hand, we are to glean the truth from a comparison of many, why not go back to the original Greek and correct the mistakes introduced by inaccurate translators, and the blundering alterations of confident but ignorant critics, and, further all that has been inserted or changed by copyists more asleep than awake?”

If Christians were aware of this assessment, and if they could process its implications rationally, it would be over. The person in the best position to know, knew that the text of the New Testament was not credible. And he was imploring his pope to create the illusion otherwise.

The process would be the same for Islam’s Qur’an three hundred years later: coalesce many divergent texts into one authorized version so that it can be promoted as the inerrant word of god. If people are given choices, they tend to think independently, and that is not in the interests of those who wield power. If discrepancies are allowed, they lead to questions, and ultimately to questioning authority. Facts are not good for faith.

Jerome’s (Eusebius H. Sophronius’) mission was to eliminate the opposition by forestalling criticism. He and his overlords would control the text, constraining people’s access to God, interpreting it as they pleased, while claiming that it empowered them, and them alone. And they would do so in their language, the tongue of the beast, Rome’s Latin – not Yahowah’s Hebrew, not even Sha’uwl’s Greek.

But that was just the motive for the crime of the millennia and, of course, the consequence. And yet, the most alarming part of this declaration was not even that the Christian religion’s most important individual, relative to the documentation of its “New Testament ‘Scriptures’” admitted that by the late 4th century there were already “many” “forms,” “variations,” “mistakes,” and “changes” in the “Latin texts” comprising the Christian New Testament.

While devastating to Christendom’s credibility, the foundation of the Roman Catholic Church, and thus of Christendom, the veracity of its “New Testament” crumbles with the realization that the myriad of errors was the result of “inaccurate translators” and “(un)duly confident” and “ignorant critics” who “blundered” their way to copious “alterations,” based upon the legacy of “‘comatose’ copyists.” And in this characterization Jerome was not incorrect. While he and his church destroyed the variant Latin manuscripts, the variances found among the 69 pre-Constantine Greek manuscripts tell the same story.

It should have been game over for Christianity. Seeking credibility, they destroyed it. If you are awake, if your mind is open, if you are rational, upon reading this, you should reject the New Testament if you haven’t already. The faith’s foundation is fraudulent – predicated upon a deliberate “babel – mixing together” of inconsistent and conflicting hearsay accounts composed by those with a sinister agenda.

Apart from the Greek Orthodox Church and the Copts in Egypt, the Vulgate served as the foundation of Christianity for over one thousand years, and now we know that the text was a deliberate amalgamation of errors, the product of acknowledged ignorance, the result of accepting blunders. Those who promoted it cannot and should not be trusted. If you believe what they concocted out of incongruous material, if your faith is based upon the message they manipulated, you are a gullible fool.

The variances between late 4th and early 5th century Greek manuscripts of the Christian New Testament are overwhelming, something Jerome (Eusebius H. Sophronius) would have known as a Greek scholar, but deliberately omitted from his letter to Pope Damascus. A score of unreliable, inconsistent, and incompatible Greek scribal scribbles cannot “fix” the problem of discordant Latin texts. One does not derive truth by distilling a vast array of errors into a single amalgamation of those many mistakes.

Jerome’s admission, along with the subsequent unearthing of scores of pre-Constantine codices, obliterates the myth held by Christians that “God would never allow his word to be corrupted.” Sorry, but facts are facts. Putting Paul’s disagreements with Yahowsha’ aside for a moment, there has never been a time when the foundational texts of the Christian New Testament agreed with one another. As a result, God either allowed the Christian New Testament to be corrupted because He had nothing to do with it in the first place or He was impotent, and thus unable to stop the unfathomable number of alterations.

In this regard, only the initial option is viable, because faith in a god incapable of providing mankind with credible testimony is a fool’s folly. Faith is, therefore, required because knowledge resulting in trust becomes impossible.

Since these points are logically irrefutable, there was absolutely no chance whatsoever that Eusebius / Jerome could have resolved the inaccuracies and blunders found in the early Latin texts by referring to Greek manuscripts which were equally divergent. This problem is exacerbated especially since Jerome errantly claimed in his letter to his pope that Greek represented the original language. Truth cannot be derived from a false premise. Greek was not the original language. Yahowsha’ spoke Hebrew – never Greek. (More on the implications of this in a moment relative to the “Church’s” most important citation.)

The “Christian New Testament” Greek copyists worked in the same places, for the same poligious (political and religious) institutions, at the same time as did those who had butchered the Latin translations. They were equally incompetent. But, and this bears repeating, unlike the Latin, where the divergent manuscripts were destroyed to hide the evidence of this crime, we have absolute and irrefutable proof that the Greek translators and copyists created “many forms and variations which were laden with mistakes and changes,” and that their “many errors, alterations, and inaccuracies” were the product of “blundering and ignorant” scribes.

Over the past century, sixty-nine extant Greek copies of the “Christian New Testament” have been recovered and published, all dating from the early second- through mid-4th century CE. They are not only substantially different with respect to each other, there are over 300,000 known variations between these early manuscripts and the Textus Receptus (which is comprised of 184,000 words).

The same is evident when the oldest extant papyri are compared to the Nestle-Aland, the blended texts publishers claim underlie more modern English translations. As would be expected, it was not just the Latin texts which were irreconcilably corrupt, the Greek manuscripts were wholly incompatible.

Since the evidence in this regard is prolific and irrefutable, this realization completely obliterates Christianity’s credibility. Even if the scribes of the 3rd and 4th centuries had accurately maintained the texts they were given, it would not have mattered. A perfect copy of an imperfect document remains errant. It is like correctly copying an incorrect answer during a test. It is wrong twice over.

And since we are dealing with facts, we now know that 80% of the Christian New Testament was corrupt the moment the author’s pen stained the papyrus. Paul’s fourteen letters are unGodly, invalid and, worse, demonic. And Mark, Luke, Acts, and Matthew are no better.

As for the few Greek texts that may have some merit, Yahowchanan and Revelation are now suspect because their value has been eroded by misguided translators and copyists. A glaring example of this would be the story of the adulterous woman told in John 8:1-11. The entire episode, including “let him who is without sin cast the first stone,” was contrived in the 8th century CE. There is no record of it in any of the many hundreds if not thousands of manuscripts composed between the 1st and 8th centuries. Not one. The entire account was made up because Christians wanted their god to contradict the Torah.

Simply stated: the Greek, Latin, and English texts of the Christian New Testament cannot be trusted. Manuscripts have been in a constant state of degradation since the Greek texts were first composed. This problem cannot be resolved or rationally refuted. Moreover, subsequent translations can be no more accurate than the underlying text which, as we know, is a jumbled mess of alterations from errant translations.

Should you seek proof of this, read Philip Comfort’s Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts where all sixty-nine pre-Constantine manuscripts are presented for our consideration. Do not blame me for a “lack of faith” until you have observed the evidence for yourself.

In his introduction, Comfort wrote: “This book provides transcriptions of sixty-nine of the earliest New Testament manuscripts…. All of the manuscripts are dated from the early second century to the beginning of the fourth (A.D. 100 – 300). We chose A.D. 300 as our terminus ad quem because New Testament manuscript production changed radically after the persecution under Diocletian (A.D. 303 – 305) and especially after Constantine declared Christianity to be a legal religion in the empire.”

The phrase, “changed radically,” when applied to “manuscript production” means that codices copied after 325 CE were so different from their predecessors, they were no longer comparable. It would not take long for variations to blossom from hundreds of thousands to millions.

Consider this graphic example. If we were to dive into a swamp and grab a bucketful of alligator excrement, then dissect what we had found, studying the evidence by amplifying the specimens individually and collectively under a microscope, sharing every nuance that could be derived from a close and careful evaluation of this collection, the fact remains that all we would be contemplating would be a chaotic arrangement of reptilian discharge that has been rotting away in a swamp. Nothing will ever change that, no matter how accurate or complete our rendition of the information conveyed becomes. It makes no difference how one slices, analyzes, polishes, or rearranges this product of decay – it still stinks.

Swamps not only tend to breed bacteria, but they are also home to some of the world’s most venomous and deadly reptiles. They are not safe for human habitation. Such is the case with the manuscripts of the Greek text of the Christian New Testament. Any attempt to accurately translate what remains is akin to evaluating decomposing organic material scooped out of a cesspool. As crude as this may sound, even shocking, it accurately depicts the condition of the Christian “Scriptures.” It is so bad, even Yahowah uses a similar metaphor to depict the nature of errant testimony.

This brings us to the realization that “Iesou Christos – Jesus Christ” did not create the Christian institution known as the “Church” by saying: “That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church.” (KJV Matthew 16:18) He did not speak Elizabethan English. But since Yahowsha’ did not speak Greek either, he could not have said: “ὅτι σὺ εἶ Πέτρος, καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν.” And while he could have made a declaration in Hebrew on this day, since we have nothing from the 16th chapter of Matthew prior to Eusebius in the 4th century, the line which served to justify the Christian Church was actually written by that Church.

This known, had Yahowsha’ said something John thought too insignificant to report and Peter remained remiss in sharing, we can translate Greek into Hebrew and see if it could have made some sense. In this regard, the Greek word “ἐκκλησίαν – ekklesia” as a compound of “ek – out” and “kaleo – to call” means “to call out.” The only word similar to it in Hebrew would be qara’, which in addition to “called out” means “to summon and invite, to meet and greet, and to read and recite. More importantly, qara’ serves as the verbal root of Miqra’, which as a compound of my and qara’ speaks of pondering the implications associated with being invited to be called out and meet with God. Moreover, it was the Miqra’ which Yahowsha’ was building upon because he was here to fulfill the first of them – Passover. Without it, there is no life in the Covenant nor salvation.

As an interesting aside, there is no correlation of any kind between ekklesia and “church,” The only Greek word upon which anything approaching “church” can be transliterated is the name of the goddess, Circe, the daughter of Helios. If you recall, she played a starring role in the Odyssey.

While there is absolutely no justification for changing ekklesia to the Christian institution known as the “Church,” in Hebrew the statement would have been instructive. Translating “ὅτι σὺ εἶ Πέτρος, καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν” out of the Greek and into Hebrew and then English, we derive: “Upon (‘al) this (ze’th) Rock (‘eben), I will build (banah ‘any) my Invitation to be Called Out and Meet (Miqra’ ‘any).”

The Septuagint, which was used as the basis of the citations found in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, is not credible either. Those who translated the text from Hebrew into Greek, and the others who copied their work, were equally incompetent and errant.

As proof, by the dawn of the 3rd century CE, discrepancies between the many versions of the Septuagint had become so pervasive, they required the better part of a lifetime to resolve – a resolution, however that has been lost to time. Third century Christian scholar, Origen Adamantius, devoted most of his life to overcome these disparities, creating his Hexapla of Greek translations in Alexandria, the birthplace of the Septuagint. In his Commentary of the Gospel of Matthew, he explained the purpose for creating the Hexapla:

“Due to the discrepancies between the manuscripts of the Old Testament…we were able to overcome them using the testimony of other editions. This is because these points in the Septuagint, which because of discrepancies, manuscripts aroused doubt, so we reevaluated them on the basis of other editions.” His assessment of the Septuagint was less pejorative, but otherwise identical to Eusebius’ / Jerome’s evaluation of Latin texts. Discrepancies prevailed. His “solution” was also the same. Compare texts filled with disagreements and then choose which variation to accept or discard.

According to his notes, Origen compiled a parallel presentation of four variations of the Septuagint, and he devoted one column to the Hebrew text transliterated using Greek characters, and another to present Hebrew written in Hebrew. Therefore, the Hexapla, meaning “sixfold,” was comprised of six columns, with four of them designed to compare divergent variations of the following Greek translations: Aquila of Sinope, Symmachus the Ebionite, Theodotion, a recension of Thodotian with interpolations to indicate where the Hebrew was inadequately represented, Lucian, Philoxenian, Harclean, Hesychius, Onkelos, and Sahidic.

Those who claimed to have seen it said that the lone copy was fifteen volumes and six thousand pages. During Origen’s life, however, it was poorly regarded and seldom considered. He, himself, was defrocked and banished from Alexandria by Bishop Demetrius. He fled to Yisra’el, where he was then tortured by Emperor Decius. Upon Origen’s death, the lone copy of his Hexapla was hidden away in the library of the bishops of Caesarea, collecting dust for centuries. It was then destroyed during the Muslim invasion in 638 CE.

So while he may have miraculously created a somewhat viable amalgamation from conflicting texts, his Hexapla was not available to Eusebius / Jerome and his devotion to rectifying the propensity of Christian translators and scribes to err accomplished nothing other than to demonstrate that, by the 2nd century CE, the Septuagint was an unreliable resource.

So now that we know that the Latin Vulgate was nothing more than a compilation of errors earlier translators and copyists had made, and that the Septuagint and early Greek manuscripts were similarly flawed, let’s complete the story. How did the errors and divergent renderings found in the Greek Septuagint and Latin Vulgate find their way into the earliest English translations? With so many variants, why did they all turn out the same?

As I had mentioned earlier, the first to compose and distribute an English translation was John Wycliffe, producing his by hand around 1380 CE. To his credit, he did so because, by reading the Latin Vulgate, he recognized that the teaching and claims of the Roman Catholic Church were inconsistent with the text of the book they claimed had authorized them to be the exclusive representatives of God on Earth. His resulting translation, however, was not based on a Hebrew or Greek text, but instead was derived from the amalgamation of errors which became the Latin Vulgate, only because there were no Hebrew or Greek texts available to him at the time.

Wycliffe and his associates produced twelve copies. Most were burned by the Roman Catholic Church on orders of the pope. He was so infuriated with Wycliffe for translating the Latin Vulgate into a language ordinary people could actually read for themselves, Wycliffe was banished as a heretic, and forty-four years after his death, another pope had his bones dug up, crushed, burned, and then scattered. Even worse, John Hus, one of Wycliffe’s associates, was burned alive by the Church in 1415 for the crime of translating the Christian New Testament. Not only was that the prescribed penalty of the Church for anyone possessing a non-Latin Bible, but the pope also used Wycliffe’s translations to kindle the fire. If you are among the 1.2 billion who call yourselves Roman Catholics, you should be ashamed. But no, Catholics are too arrogant for such a responsible response.

In 1490, Oxford professor and physician, Thomas Linacre, after reading the biographical accounts in the Greek New Testament, and then comparing them to what he had read from the Latin Vulgate, concluded that they were so different, they could not have come from the same source. He was right.

Then in 1516, the situation went from bad to worse. The precursor to a monumental intellectual fraud and religious hoax became known as the Textus Receptus. It was perpetrated on an unwary public by Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus. He was a living contradiction, a celebrated Dutch humanist, a homosexual who was known to have affairs with his colleagues and students, a Catholic priest devoted to the pope, a critic of the Catholic Church, a Latin scholar, and a Protestant antagonist and protagonist. One might say he was conflicted.

The moment he had mastered Latin to his satisfaction, he attempted to replicate Eusebius’ / Jerome’s work, and in 1512, collected every Latin manuscript he could find to create his own edition by consolidating divergent texts. Of it he wrote: “It is only fair that Paul should address the Romans in somewhat better Latin.” He could not contain his enthusiasm or ego, writing “My mind is so excited at the thought of emending Jerome’s text with notes, that I seem to myself inspired by some god.” Indeed.

No one paid much attention to his Vulgate emendations, so he sought fame by attempting to beat Roman Catholicism’s Complutensian Polyglot to print. If they were not impressed by his Latin, he would try his hand at Greek – even if it was only to justify his Latin rendition of the Vulgate. He therefore included a Greek text to permit “qualified readers” to verify the quality of his Latin translation.

Of this parallel edition, he wrote: “There remains the New Testament translated by me [in Latin], with the Greek facing [the Latin], and notes on it by me.” He said, “But one thing the facts cry out, and it can be clear, as they say, even to a blind man, that often through the translator’s clumsiness or inattention to the Greek has been wrongly rendered; often the true and genuine reading has been corrupted by ignorant scribes, which we see happen every day, or altered by scribes who are half-taught and half-asleep.” His assessment is equally disrespectful, and thus mirrors that of Eusebius / Jerome, whose text he was now attempting to correct, albeit more than a thousand years thereafter. Nothing had changed. What had begun poorly was now in shambles.

To be fair, however, this man of conflicts, Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus, didn’t actually compose a synchronized Greek text or even create one of his own by comparing various manuscripts and choosing between their inconsistencies. He simply copied his text from a handful of highly suspect and woefully incomplete Greek manuscripts from the same Byzantine family, all from the late 12th through 15th centuries.

He systematically filled in the numerous omissions between them by translating his version of the Latin Vulgate back into Greek. He did not have a complete manuscript or one that was even reasonably old. Moreover, he essentially ignored his oldest manuscript, the one from the 12th century, because it was so “erratic” and divergent from the more recent ones, and the inconsistencies were so numerous and extreme, they could not be reconciled. And in such places where the Greek of his 15th century manuscripts diverged from Catholic doctrine, he recrafted his text to comply by once again inverting the process, translating his Latin into Greek. I suppose that is one way to get them to concur. Rife with errors, and composed using circular reasoning, he rushed his compilation off to his partner-in-crime, publisher, Johann Froben. Even then, it omitted sections of 1 John, Acts, and Revelation, and included portions of John that should not have been there.

This sleight of hand did not actually beat the Complutensian Polyglot to press, but it was better marketed. They called it the Novum Instrumentum Omne – the New Testament Revised and Improved, and quickly added the “Comma Johanneum” after publication by translating the Vulgate’s version of 1 John 5:7-8 – all to satisfy his Catholic colleagues.

He had been right to exclude it, but wrong to add it. 1 John 5:7-11, while essential to Catholic doctrine, cannot be found in any ancient manuscript. The same is true of John 8:1-11, which was part of his late Byzantine manuscripts, but cannot be found prior to the 8th century on any manuscript. Thereafter, Erasmus translated Paul’s conversion experience from his revised Vulgate.

In subsequent editions, Erasmus actually used the Complutensian Polyglot to correct his text, particularly in Revelation, where he only had access to one highly flawed and incomplete 15th century text. But unfortunately, he could no longer remember which passages he had reverse-engineered out of the Latin, leaving much of Revelation uncorrected.

As time wore on, in 1533, prior to his fifth edition, a Catholic scholar named Sepulveda informed Erasmus that the oldest Vatican manuscripts differed from his text in favor of the Vulgate, citing 365 material variances. There was only one place where Erasmus’ Greek appeared superior to the Vulgate by agreeing with the Codex Vaticanus – a late 4th century manuscript, and that was the spelling of the name of an island mentioned in Acts 27:16. That is to say, his Textus Receptus was a giant step backward, not forward. Sepulveda later accused Erasmus of altering his Greek translations to accommodate his rendition of the Vulgate, in essence saying that he was a complete fraud.

But undeterred, even if his Latin translations were ill-conceived, in the fifth and final edition of his Christian New Testament, Erasmus’ Greek text was presented alone, without support, and subsequently hailed as “being a perfect copy of the Greek New Testament as if received directly from God, Himself,” as “the Textus Receptus.”

The origin of the name Textus Receptus came from the publisher’s preface to the 1633 edition, where the claim was made: “So you hold the text, now received by all, in which is nothing corrupt.” In actuality, it was a complete fraud, from conception to purpose, from execution to composition. But such is the nature of Christianity – a religion comprised of commingling errors.

As an interesting aside, Martin Luther wrote a letter to Erasmus stating, “Free will does not exist because sin makes human beings completely incapable of bringing themselves to God.” To which Erasmus replied, saying Martin Luther was “a mighty trumpet of gospel truth.” Thereafter, the man who penned the document Protestants would claim enabled them to discard the Church’s teaching and rely solely on his Textus Receptus, would write: “Unwritten Sacred Church Tradition is just as valid a source of revelation as the Bible, especially the Eucharist as part of the Church’s Seven Sacraments.” Denouncing his own text, he called all those who questioned the perpetual virginity of Mary, “blasphemers.” Luther would go on to call Erasmus a “viper, liar, and very mouth and organ of Satan.” It is hard to argue with that assessment, albeit this was the pot calling the kettle black.

True to form, even with the inclusion of the Latin Vulgate in early renditions, Pope Leo X dismissed Erasmus’ project, saying: “the fable of Christ was quite profitable to him.” John Mill, an Oxford scholar in 1707, however, had a significantly more intelligent response. He launched an attack that should have sunk the Textus Receptus and Protestantism along with it. Using eighty-two manuscripts scribed centuries before the handful of 15th century fragmentary texts deployed to create the Textus Receptus, Mill systematically highlighted over 30,000 discrepancies. That’s hardly inerrant.

Over time, especially now that we have unearthed sixty-nine much older, pre-Constantine manuscripts dating from the early 2nd century to the late 3rd century, the list of discrepancies between the relatively recent blending of popular Greek texts known as the Nestle-Aland, and the earliest witnesses has grown to almost twice the number of words contained in the New Testament itself.

This problem is so enormous in scope and consequence, it is not surprising that Christian clerics sweep the evidence under the doormats of their churches, hoping that no one learns the truth. For if they did, the reliability of the “New Testament,” the lone source of credibility underlying Christianity, would be vanquished.



In the progression of English translations, William Tyndale was next in line to publish, doing so in 1526. This “Captain of the Army of Reformers” started and stopped with the Christian New Testament. (We don’t have any interest in knowing what that old god had to say, after all.) Nonetheless, his publications were burned by the Roman Catholic Church as fast as they could be confiscated. The religious body accurately, although hypocritically, claimed that it contained thousands of errors. Anyone caught hiding, holding, or reading Tyndale’s translation was executed. Only two copies are known to have survived the torch.

Subsequently, Tyndale, himself, was betrayed by a fellow Christian. He was tried for heresy and accused by a special commissioner of the Roman Catholic Church. Incarcerated in hellish conditions for 500 days, he was strangled while he was burned at the stake in the Holy Roman Empire by the King of England on Friday, October 6th, 1536. Christianity had become such a merciful and loving religion.

The first English “Old Testament” with surviving copies was a bit of an enigma. It was offered in 1535 by Myles Coverdale and his associate John Rogers, both of whom were disciples of Tyndale. And while Rogers claimed that their English Bible was translated from Hebrew and Greek, that was not true. In actuality, they used their predecessor’s unpublished text and promoted it under Tyndale’s pseudonym, Thomas Matthew. The religion would not be known for its integrity either.

The next variation came shortly thereafter, in 1539. Thomas Cranmer published the Great Bible after revising the Coverdale/Rogers/Tyndale “translation” to the Archbishop of Canterbury’s liking. It was authorized, thereafter, by King Henry VIII for far more sinister reasons – the pope declined his request to divorce his wife and marry his mistress. After murdering two of his many queens, and thumbing his nose at the pope, the English monarch not only renounced the Roman Catholic Church, this bastion of morality created the Anglican Church, also known as the Church of England. He would, of course, appoint himself chief potentate and supreme religious muckety-muck (okay, I made up that title, but it fits). The Great Bible, the first legal English translation, was then printed by this murderous man to spite the pope. The Lord works in mysterious ways.

The occultist queen, Mary, sought to return England to the control of the Roman Catholic Church, and as a result, Bloody Mary banned the Great Bible and burned Rogers and Cranmer at the stake on February 4th, 1555 and March 21, 1556. With every revolting step along the way to composing an English translation, the 13th chapter of Paul’s ode to the Romans was looking all the more suspect.

Thereafter, the aforementioned Myles Coverdale moved from England to Denmark, then Germany, en route to Geneva, Switzerland. I suspect that it was a more inviting option than burning at the stake. He partnered with John Foxe, the man responsible for promoting the myth of Christian martyrdom (Foxe’s Book of Martyrs is to this day the only tome to claim massive persecution of Christians by Imperial Rome).

In conjunction with John Calvin, the theologian who got almost everything wrong, especially predestination, they published their “translation” under the title, Geneva Bible, in 1560. It became known as the “Breeches Bible” because it claimed that “God fashioned ‘breeches’ for ‘Adam and Eve.” To their credit, they got one word right. The pilgrims on the Mayflower, including John Bunyan and the Cromwells, were inspired to mistreat the indigenous people by reading the Geneva Bible.

Speaking of Eve, if you want further verification that English Bibles simply regurgitate the mistakes of their predecessors, look up Genesis 3:20 in any English translation. They all claim that ‘Adam named his wife, “Eve,” when he actually called her, “Chawah.” It is the legacy of the Nephylym becoming “giants” all over again.

The substitution was first made by a Greek translator working on the Septuagint. He inappropriately replaced Chawah with Zoe, the Greek word for “life,” unaware perhaps that “chayah – life” was the result of her name, and that names, unlike words, should always be transliterated, not translated. As we know, chawah means to inform and announce.

And lest I forget, in Greek mythology, the Serpent is not presented as the deceiver but instead as the one who “enlightens mankind.” Oh, what a wicked web the religious weave. With every new twist, the Bible was becoming ever more pagan – a commingling of lies sponsored by clerics and kings. Eve, like Church, serves as proof.

Furthering this progression, the clerics sponsoring the Geneva Bible sought to replace their politicized Great Bible with a religious alternative specifically to spite the new English Queen. It was composed by revising Coverdale’s pilfering of Tyndale’s unpublished translation of the Vulgate.

To their credit, and solely to undermine and antagonize the British monarchy, they added some marginal notes to the effect that Gentile kings and queens were never authorized by God to rule over their nations. To their shame, they were the first to include chapter and verse designations, which subsequently led to Christians removing statements from their context to advance a plethora of errant assumptions.

The Geneva Bible became so much more popular than its predecessor that eventually, Queen Elizabeth, Henry VIII’s daughter, was forced to cut a deal with its authors, whereby she reluctantly agreed to a limited release in Britain of the Geneva Bible as long as the marginal notes, which were vehemently opposed to the Roman Catholic Church, the Church of England, and monarchs in general, were censored, becoming considerably less forthright. All the while, she was scheming to publish a bible of her own, the Bishops’ Bible, to resolve this problem. Money prevailed over principle.

With the release of the Bishops’ Bible in 1568, it was now obvious for all to see that the fifth English “translation” was little more than a modestly edited variation of her father’s, Henry VIII’s, Great Bible. And while it was a failure with the public when it was introduced, scholars now openly acknowledge that it served as the “rough draft for the King James Version.”

Shortly thereafter, in 1582, more than one thousand years after the Roman Catholic Church imposed its Latin Vulgate on the world, killing anyone who would dare translate the script into another language, the Church surrendered, recognizing that they would lose their remaining toehold in England without an English translation.

Their Latin Vulgate was repositioned as the Rheims New Testament, with the Douay Old Testament arriving twenty-seven years later in 1609. Both were quickly challenged and condemned by Dr. William Fulke of Cambridge. He published Fulke’s Refutation in 1589, exposing the “errors and distortions” within the Vulgate-based translations by comparing them to the Bishops’ Bible.

With the death of Queen Elizabeth, Prince Iames of Scotland became King Iames I of England (the letter “J” had not yet made its way into the English language so the monarch was not yet “James”). His claim of divine sanction to rule, however, was questioned as a result of the now marginalized marginal notes still contained within the popular Geneva Bible. So, with the failure of Queen Elizabeth’s Bishops’ Bible to gain any traction, the newly-minted king immediately sought to resolve his political problem by authorizing a bible that would bear his name and serve his interests.

The Bishops’ Bible was updated, not as a result of a new translation, but by usurping the popular verse designations and word patterns found in the Geneva Bible, and then enhancing them with Shakespearian phrasing and heavy doses of Elizabethan English to create the King James Version. The marginal notes would, of course, be discarded in favor of political correctness.

It is said that fifty scholars rallied to support the king’s agenda. But they, by their own admission, began the process by creating their own Hexapla, a parallel bible that would facilitate the commingling of phrasing found in the Tyndale New Testament, the Cloverdale Bible (which included Tyndale’s previously unpublished “Old Testament”), King Henry VIII’s Great Bible, the ever-popular and yet menacing, Geneva Bible, and, if you can believe it, the rival, Rheims New Testament, so as to improve Queen Elizabeth’s Bishops’ Bible, which served as their blueprint. This was a purely political revision, nothing more.

If plagiarism is defined as taking something from a single source without providing credit, and research is described as stealing from multiple sources, then the KJV was a research project. By 1611, the private compilations were assembled into one text and published as The King Iames Bible. So much for Yahowah or Yahowsha’.

While the project had begun using the Bishops’ Bible as a rough draft, it would emerge as a modest revision of the Geneva Bible. Ultimately, the KJV incorporated ninety-five percent of its text.

It is ironic that many Protestant Christian denominations promote the King James Bible as the only authorized, and thus legitimate, English language translation. They seem ignorant of the fact that its “authorization” came from monarchs who hunted down and murdered Protestants for publishing English Bibles, especially John Calvin’s Geneva Bible, all for political purposes. The Church of England continued to persecute Protestants throughout the 17th century. It was this ongoing onslaught that caused the Protestant Puritans and Pilgrims to flee the Church of England’s persecution and risk their lives by immigrating to the New World. No better, these colonists under the banner of Manifest Destiny gave birth to a nation that would fight 101 wars over its first 400 years.

The evolution of cobbled-together and plagiarized bibles had run the gamut from the Latin Vulgate to Wycliffe to Tyndale to Cloverdale to Cranmer (actually Henry VIII) and his Great Bible, to the Cloverdale-Foxe-Calvin Geneva Bible, followed by Queen Elizabeth’s Bishops’ Bible, and then the King James Bible. Like the Great Bible and the Bishops’ Bible before it, the KJV had been published purely to serve the interests of British royalty.

The errors that had been incorporated into the Septuagint deliberately or by happenstance were transferred into the Old Latin texts that Jerome assailed and then blended together to create his Vulgate – Christendom’s official bible for more than one thousand years. Comprised of a veritable sea of alterations and mistakes, all mingled together, this fault-laden text served as the basis for the first English translation, that of Wycliffe. With every copy but one destroyed by the Church, it was edited, augmented, and updated by the likes of Tyndale and Cloverdale, then abused by Henry VIII and then again by his daughter, Queen Elizabeth, with their Great and Bishops’ Bibles.

The anti-establishment Geneva Bible served as a wedge between them and as a catalyst for what followed: the King James Bible. The errors in one progressed to the next, and they each became progressively worse over time. And since then, nothing has changed, with a continued downward digression into a text that bears little resemblance to the Hebrew words Yahowah and Yahowsha’ actually conveyed.

This is the basis of the game originally known as “Chinese Whispers,” but now called “Telephone.” Each time a phrase is transferred from one person’s mouth to the ear of the next, then stored briefly in a participant’s short-term memory before replicating the process, an early mistake is exaggerated, until the end result bears little in common with the initial statement. Missteps compound until a drop of truth is lost in an ocean of delusions.

This degrading result is true for all information transfer mechanisms. It is the reason redundancy is so valuable, as is the case with the Masoretic Text and the Dead Sea Scrolls emerging through entirely different paths. It is also the reason our cells were designed to avert mutations, almost all of which corrupt or destroy the information stored in our genome.

Similarly, Yahowah has created considerable redundancy along with multiple paths of transmission. He repeats the essential DNA of His life-support system throughout His Word. He communicated through numerous prophets, from Moseh to Yahowsha’ ben Nuwn, from Shamuw’el to Dowd, from Yasha’yah to Yirma’yah, from Howsha’ to Chabaquwq, and from Zakaryah to Malaky over 1000 years to convey a consistent message. In this way, Yahowah makes it possible for us to know Him without interfering with freewill by precluding the human propensity for corruption.

With a little effort, we are able to correct the relatively minor corruptions found in the Masoretic Codex Leningradensis (speaking of the Hebrew text not the JPS translation of it) by using the Dead Sea Scrolls. On average they differ by one word in fourteen. Then by stripping the Hebrew words found only within the MT of their 11th century diacritical marks and examining the original lettering, we end up with a text that is better than 99% accurate – all in the original language.

This is one of many reasons Yahowah affirmed:

“Yahowah’s (Yahowah – an accurate transliteration of the name YaHoWaH, our ‘elowah – God as guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence and our shalowm – reconciliation) Towrah (Towrah – Teaching, Guidance, Instruction, and Direction) is complete and entirely perfect (tamym – without defect, lacking nothing, correct, sound, genuine, right, helpful, beneficial, and true), returning, restoring, and transforming (shuwb – turning around, bringing back, and renewing) the soul (nepesh – consciousness).

Yahowah’s (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of YaHoWaH based upon His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) everlasting testimony (‘eduwth – restoring witness) is trustworthy and reliable (‘aman – verifiable, confirming, supportive, and establishing), making understanding (hakam – educating and enlightening to the point of comprehension) simple for the open-minded (pethy).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 19:7)

There is no such endorsement for the Christian New Testament. Christian scribes were careless. Not a single codex, not even a tiny fragment, has been found written in Hebrew or in Judea. The earliest Greek codices were scribed in Egypt, and none within a century of the events they allege to chronicle. As such, there are no credible early copies. And unlike the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest sixty-nine manuscripts of the Christian New Testament serve to further impugn the text rather than clarify or validate it. Simply stated, with the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, we know what Yahowah said in the language He said it because He wanted us to know Him as He revealed Himself to us.

By contrast, we do not have any record of what Yahowsha’ said in the language he actually spoke, Hebrew, nor do we have a credible translation of those words or a single reliable copy of the Hebrew he and his Disciples spoke translated into Greek. The only rational explanation of this disparity is that Yahowah intervened to preserve His Towrah, Naby’, wa Mizmowr in the original Hebrew because therein He conveyed His provisions to uphold life, while He neither inspired nor sought to preserve the Greek text of the Christian New Testament. The evidence demonstrates that the CNT is not the Word of God.

Even if the Christian Bible had begun credibly, as opposed to originating as an amalgamation of alterations in Egypt and then Rome, even if it had not clumsily migrated from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English, even if the publishers had studied the oldest texts in the original language as opposed to simply rephrasing their predecessors, it wouldn’t have mattered. There is no surviving manuscript in the language Yahowsha’ and his Disciples actually spoke. There is no credible codex to rely upon. So there is no solution to this problem.

And that is just the tip of the iceberg. The biggest problem for Christendom is that, at its inception, the Christian New Testament was disingenuous and counterproductive, deliberately misleading and anti-Semitic. Paul’s 14 epistles are an ode to Satan. Then the Devil’s Advocate used Mark and Luke to promote his dark and twisted mythology, rendering Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Acts little more than the Gospel of the Plague of Death. As a result, 91% of a Christian Bible’s opening 350 pages (using the NASB) were toxic at their inception, leaving only Yahowchanan | John as potentially credible. And even then, if it was written by the Disciple, it was scribed by a very old man five decades removed from the events he witnessed. What’s more, it has been subject to more copyedits than any other.

Recognizing that Matthew was not written by “Matthew,” scholars readily admit that there is no reason to believe that James, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd John, or Jude were scribed by men of these names. This leaves us with a very late, and highly corrupted, version of John, a partial text of Revelation, and “Peter’s” short letters, both poorly attested, extant prior to Constantine and the emergence of the final beast: the Church of Rome.

Choosing between collections of officially approved and authorized buckets of excrement dredged from the mud of a murky swamp will never lead to God. The Christian New Testament is not credible no matter how many publish a variation of it or how many believe it is true. And then to add insult to injury, the fact remains that everything Paul touched and influenced, which is 80% of what was written, was deliberately misleading, errant, contradictory, and irrational, serving to refute everything Yahowah said and Yahowsha’ had done.

Fortunately, we do not need Sha’uwl’s | Paul’s rubbish and are far better off without it. “Yahowah’s Towrah Teaching is complete, lacking nothing, because it is correct and true, transforming, restoring, and returning the soul. Yahowah’s everlasting and renewing testimony is trustworthy and reliable, making it easy for the open-minded to understand.”

The Christian response toward this reality is bewildering. Believers are universally incapable of dealing with evidence contrary to their faith. It is as if to be a Christian one has to live in denial. There is not one in a million who is willing to acknowledge or attempt to justify the countless irresolvable conflicts and irrefutable differences between what they consider “Old” and “New.” The Christian god is thereby rendered as schizophrenic and disingenuous as his apostle.

It is baffling that Christians are willing to believe the ridiculous notion that the “old god” lied, that he was mean and ineffective, so much so that a new and improved, more loving and accepting, variation was required. Worse, the “new and improved god” would be as inadequate as his predecessor, because neither he nor the twelve disciples he chose and trained would be capable of communicating what he said and did, requiring them to deploy a duplicitous and vicious, demon-possessed and sexually perverted (if we can believe what Paul wrote about himself) failed rabbi to convey his message to the world. It is all so preposterous, it is a wonder he fooled himself, much less billions.

The faithful will blame my “lack of faith” for this problem, as if beliefs change reality. Nary a one will examine the evidence or do any research on their own. Their only rebuttal, and universal retort, becomes: “I cannot believe that God would allow His word to be corrupted.” And yet the evidence demonstrates that He never intended anyone to get to know Him through the Christian New Testament because He did not preserve any aspect of anything Yahowsha’ had to say in the language he said it. God clearly had no role in creating the original drafts, the mistaken translations, or subsequent errant copies in Greek, Latin, or English. To believe otherwise renders God an incompetent babbling buffoon.

The lone defense of faith becomes faith. For the faithful, belief trumps reason, effectively paralyzing them. And for this reason, there is no way to reason with a Christian. Even Yahowah’s words are rejected by souls poisoned by Paul. It is the plague of death.

Almost as bad, when confronted by a literal and amplified translation of Yahowah’s testimony, rather than examine the words for themselves to ascertain their meaning, independently determining if they are accurate, Christians irrationally cling to the musings of those who have misled them, using the Argumentum ad Populum fallacy to say, “I cannot believe that all of my Bible translations are wrong and you are right.”

Prove to them that Paul admitted to being demon-possessed and that God called him the “Plague of Death,” “Son of Evil,” and “Father of Lies,” and they will quote him as if you were talking to a zombie. Reveal that God’s one and only name is Yahowah, that He expressed it 7,000 times in His Word, that the Passover Lamb was called, Yahowsha’, and they won’t even respond. Demonstrate that there was no one named “Jesus,” that “Christ” is not a last name or an appropriate title, and that the “Lord” is Satan’s moniker, all according to God, and they will reiterate their belief in “the Lord Jesus Christ,” not realizing that they might as well be putting their faith in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Like the living dead, they babel thoughtlessly as they slither past the warnings and ignore God’s cure for what ails them. It is like talking to a rock tumbling down a hill into an abyss.

Faith has made Christians so averse to evidence and reason, even to the Word of God, this comprehensive assessment of the deplorable and unreliable state of their “Scriptures” will not faze them. They will continue to believe nothing matters other than their faith. To their detriment and ultimate demise, they will gleefully slurp up the deadly pathogens their clerics are offering as if they were candies handed out to trick-or-treaters on Halloween.

While Yahowah gave man a “neshamah – conscience,” and thus the ability to think and reason, religions like Christianity nullify the intended benefits. Man has returned to the condition of the Nephylym. Five thousand years have passed, and nothing has changed.



Questioning Paul

Incredible

…Testing Faith

6

Fun with Popes

Highly Profitable…

Before we address the role Bishop Eusebius played in this crime, let’s consider the manuscripts Emperor Constantine ordered him to compose. After all, they were the first to incorporate anti-Semitism into the text of the resulting “Gospel of Matthew.” By coming to understand their origins and development, we will better appreciate how the Christian New Testament evolved through the centuries to serve the Roman Church.

According to Eusebius, Emperor Constantine’s letter read as follows…

“Victor Constantinus, Maximus Augustus, to Eusebius: Great numbers have united themselves to the most holy church in the city which is called by my name. It seems, therefore, highly requisite, since that city is rapidly advancing in prosperity in all respects, that the number of churches should also be increased. Do you, therefore, receive with all readiness my determination on this behalf. I have thought it expedient to instruct your Prudence to order fifty copies of the sacred Scriptures, the provision and use of which you know to be the most needful for the instruction of the Church, to be written on prepared parchment in a legible manner, and in a convenient, portable form, by professional transcribers thoroughly practiced in their art. The Bishop of the Diocese has also received instructions by letter from our Clemency to be careful to furnish all things necessary for the preparation of such copies.” (Eusebius, Life of Constantine, Volume IV.36)

Stepping aside from Constantine’s overriding ego, Eusebius, the Victorious Emperor Maximus’ publicist, would have means and motive, with all things necessary for the preparation of such copies. But let it be known, it was all for show and, of course, power. Constantine continued to worship Mithras, the Unconquerable Sun, to his dying day and never converted to Christianity.

In his introduction to his book on the publication of the resulting codex, now called Sinaiticus, Kirsopp Lake concluded: “the intermediate correctors, and certainly the earliest, and possibly all, belonged to Caesarea,” which is where Eusebius was Bishop when the initial draft was created in the 4th century. It is assumed by most scholars that Vaticanus was also compiled in Caesarea, largely due to its similarity with Sinaiticus and to the Vulgate (which was written by Jerome who studied in Caesarea and was the first to introduce the chapter breaks shared between the three manuscripts). T.C. Skeat, among others, formed this conclusion for many reasons, all of which he articulates. One of which is that original portions of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus were written by the hand of the same scribe, and likely share two in common. Further, both feature the controversial conclusion of Mark at 16:8, when other early MSS include Mark 16:9-20.”

Harvard Professor, paleographer, Church historian, theologist, and archaeologist, Lake, continued, “T.C. Skeat, a paleographer at the British Museum, devoted sixty years to studying Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.” He concluded: “they were among the 50 Bibles that the Emperor Constantine ordered Eusebius of Caesarea to produce in the 330s.” He would emphatically state: “no one working in this area should forget that Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus are from the same scriptorium. The common origins of Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus have been regarded as axiomatic from the days of Tischendorf through Lake to the present and no responsible New Testament scholar should ignore this fact.” (The Codex Sinaiticus, the Codex Vaticanus and Constantine, JTS 50, (1999))

Writing for the American Society of Papyrologists in 2013, Peter Malik concluded: “One of the most intriguing aspects of the production of Codex Sinaiticus is the corrections made at various stages in the scriptorium. Perhaps surprisingly, no one has yet undertaken to identify these corrections by scribal hands that authored them and by the correction stage at which they were made. Amongst the manuscript’s most striking features is the plethora of corrections made at different stages of its production and reception history. Especially intriguing are the earliest corrections made in the scriptorium, as they are illuminating regarding the copying process and early editorial activity. Moreover, corrections appear rather frequently in apparatus critici, yet their witness is not easy to interpret while some corrections merely remedy scribal errors, others betray a genuine shift of Vorlagen [the underlying text of the earlier version], and thereby provide an important datum concerning transmission history. My aim in this study is to scrutinize the corrections, to identify patterns of correcting activity, and to highlight their potential significance for textual criticism of the New Testament. As the extent of this article does not permit the study of all early corrections in Sinaiticus, the Gospel of Mark will be used as a test case; this portion of Sinaiticus exhibits the work of two scribes who also corrected the text and thus can be studied comparatively. Importantly, one of the most significant variation-units in the Gospel, namely Mark 1:1, involves an early correction, the interpretation of which is consequential for textual and exegetical purposes alike.”

Malik added: “The first scholar to study the manuscript’s many corrections was Constantin von Tischendorf. In the Prolegomena to the editio princeps, Tischendorf briefly depicts individual correctors and provides a concise commentary on all the corrections. Tischendorf recognized groups of correctors that worked in the scriptorium.”

Adrift in a sea of murky details, let’s maintain our perspective. Prior to Constantine’s edict and Eusebius’ resulting compositions – Sinaiticus and Vaticanus – there was no Christian New Testament. Independent, incomplete, and inconsistent copies of letters scribed mostly in Egypt were floating about, but they had not yet been integrated into anything resembling a New Testament. This was its inception.

Constantin von Tischendorf, the man who found Codex Sinaiticus in the Sinai Monastery, claimed that he “counted 14,800 alterations and corrections in Sinaiticus.” And that was just in the portion of the text, some two-thirds of it, that remained available to him. This scholar wrote: “Codex Sinaiticus abounds with errors of the eye and pen.” He acknowledged: “On nearly every page of the manuscript there are corrections and revisions, done by 10 different people…most of them in the 6th and 7th centuries.” Tischendorf would conclude: “the New Testament…is extremely unreliable.”

Specifically addressing Sinaiticus, Tischendorf revealed: “On many occasions 10, 20, 30, 40 words are dropped through carelessness. Letters, words, even whole sentences are frequently written twice over, or begun and immediately canceled. That gross blunder, whereby a clause is omitted because it happens to end in the same word as the clause preceding, occurs no less than 115 times in the New Testament.”

If you are a Christian, let me explain that sinking feeling: the Roman Church, the mother of your faith, was as disingenuous as it was incompetent. Christianity is the residue of mercurial clerics and sloppy scribes.

The ever-changing nature of these documents is important because it proves that they are not only unreliable, but that the Roman Catholic Church found it efficacious to change what they called “Holy Scripture” to suit their evolving agenda. It also conclusively demonstrates that the Christian New Testament is not the “inerrant word of God,” but is instead an amalgamation of the ever-changing inclinations of deceitful men.

Equally condemning, Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus, the Catholic priest and self-admitted sexual pervert, commonly known as Saint Jerome, was far from saintly. Born in 347 CE, he finagled his way up the religious ladder and became the protégé of Pope Damasus after being run out of Rome for bullying a woman to death. He composed the Latin Vulgate shortly after Eusebius’ anti-Semitic embellishments were added to the Gospel of Matthew and the resulting tome was canonized. As a result: Hebrew was circumvented by Greek and then whisked away by Latin, with the resulting Vulgate determining what would be considered “Christian Scripture” for a thousand years or more, thereafter.

Trying to turn back the pages of time and find the truth proves difficult. In the Introduction of Codex Sinaiticus – New Testament Volume, Tischendorf’s associate, Professor Kirsopp Lake wrote: “The Codex Sinaiticus has been corrected by so many hands that it affords a most interesting and intricate problem to the paleographer who wishes to disentangle the various stages by which it has reached its present condition.”

In the 16th century, Western scholars first became aware of Vaticanus as a consequence of the correspondence between Erasmus (who crafted the Textus Receptus) and the prefects of the Vatican Library. In 1521, Bombasius, who administered its contents, was consulted by Erasmus as to whether the Codex Vaticanus contained the Comma Johanneum (which provides the lone Christian basis for their Trinity), to which Bombasius supplied a transcript of 1 John 4:1–3 and 1 John 5:7–11 to show that it did not. Sepúlveda in 1533 cross-checked all places where Erasmus’ New Testament (the Textus Receptus) differed from the Vulgate and supplied Erasmus with 365 readings where the Codex Vaticanus supported the latter.

Consequently, the Codex Vaticanus acquired the reputation of being an old Greek manuscript that agreed with the Vulgate rather than with the Textus Receptus. Not until much later would scholars realize it differed from both the Vulgate and the Textus Receptus – in addition to all other early Greek manuscripts. (evidence accumulated by Wikipedia.org/CodexVaticanus)

As one would expect from the Vatican, knowing that they had a horrible secret to hide, prior to the 19th century, no scholar was allowed to study the Codex Vaticanus. It was not until 1843 that Tischendorf was permitted to make a facsimile of a few verses. Tregelles, who was the third scholar allowed to inspect it, bemoaned the absurd restrictions and obstructions Roman Catholics placed upon his observations – playing childish games to distract him. Old secrets, especially those of this magnitude, are protected by those who benefit from their illusions.

John Burgon, an Anglican divine, was the fourth scholar allowed to “examine” the codex, albeit only for an hour and a half. After considering 16 passages, he concluded that the Codex Vaticanus, as well as Sinaiticus, “were the most corrupt documents extant,” stating the codices clearly exhibit a fabricated text which is the result of arbitrary and reckless recension.” He specifically likened them to “the two false witnesses of Matthew 26:60.” That’s especially telling. The Roman Church would claim that the texts written in Hebrew and Greek should be equated to the two thieves which hung on either side of the Latin Christ (a.k.a., the Dead God on a Stick).

Henry Alford would then collate and verify the suspect passages, describing the many errors presented therein, but his work was nullified by order of Cardinal Antonelli. Henry Alford’s associate, Mr. Cure, tried to advance Alford’s work, but Vatican authorities placed all manner of obstacles in his way. The leading impediment, however, is ancient and remains largely impenetrable, because the original text, and that of its correctors in Vaticanus is now obscured under the heavy hand of an 11th century scribe who inked over the entire manuscript.

During the ensuing years, the copyedits of Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus came to differ significantly from one another and markedly from the Textus Receptus, even the Vulgate. According to Biblical scholar and textual critic, Herman Hoskier, there are 3,036 material variations between Sinaiticus and Vaticanus in the text of the Gospels, alone. Moreover, between them there remains copious apocrypha, including the discredited and spurious works entitled: Epistle of Clement, Baruch, the Epistle of Jeremiah, 1 and 2 Esdras, Tobit, Wisdom, Judith, 1 and 4 Maccabees, Ecclesiasticus, the Prayer of Manasseh, the Shepherd of Hermas, and the Epistle of Barnabas.

The Shepherd of Hermas is a Gnostic tome while the Epistle of Barnabas claims that ‘Abraham knew Greek and said that baptism was required for salvation. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are rife with Gnostic tendencies, as are all of Paul’s letters.

The question should be raised: if Vaticanus and Sinaiticus represent the original reading of the text, why do they differ so radically from the hundreds of Papyrus books and fragments found before and after them, and why were they changed tens of thousands of times? And should one peer past Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, both of which should be called, “Eusebius” or “Constantinus,” the text of the Christian New Testament emerges from the dark recesses of Egyptian scriptorium. What began convoluted had become babel.

Now that we have pondered some of what the most acclaimed textual scholars have written, let’s shift our focus to the man who may be, second to Paul, the most deplorable villain in the Christian tragedy. Bishop Eusebius had the means and motive to implicate Jews and exonerate Rome by crafting the Gospel of Matthew into the introductory tome of the resulting Christian New Testament. And he was up to the task, a tall order since Rome not only crucified Yahowsha’, Rome destroyed Yahowah’s Home in 70 CE and returned to annihilate Jews and decimate Yisra’el in 133 CE. A lot of blood would have to be swept into the catacombs for this myth to become the faith of billions.

As we know, Emperor Constantine is on record ordering Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, to produce fifty copies of the “sacred Scriptures,” officially sanctioning their composition, giving him the means. As for motive, Eusebius was the consummate Roman apologist. He wrote the Life of Constantine – repositioning the vicious pagan General as “the first Christian Emperor.” It would be Eusebius’ text which would serve as the basis of the eulogy at Constantine’s funeral, cloaking the General’s affinity for Rome’s religions. His reverence for the egotistical Emperor, and his devotion to the emerging Roman Church, was so great, despite all evidence to the contrary, he presented the man, who butchered his rivals and worshiped Mithras as Sol Inviticus his entire life, as the patron saint of Rome and Christianity. This reveals that he was more than willing to lie to shift blame from Romans to Jews for the crucifixion of “Jesus.”

For example, Eusebius would write in Life of Constantine: “Like the shining face of Moses, as the sun when he rises upon the earth, he liberally imparts his rays of light to all, as did Constantine, proceeding at early dawn from the imperial palace, and rising as it were with the heavenly luminary, imparting the rays of his own beneficence to all who came into his presence.” He was a brown-noser with a sunburn.

Averil Cameron and Stuart Hall would lament in their presentation of the Bishop’s glorification of Roman brutality in Life of Constantine: “The most obvious device used by Eusebius in the Life of Constantine to bring home his ideological message is to regard Constantine’s reign as divinely ordained in the same way as Moses was chosen to lead his people out of Egypt and receive the law.” (Cameron and Hall, Life of Constantine, p35 and 28). According to Eusebius, like Moses, Constantine destroyed the tyrants, persecuting emperors who had preceded him, and freed his people (in 313 CE the Edict of Milan established legal tolerance of Christianity in the empire).

In his Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius would opine (actually lie) of his patron and Roman General: “He, although he received no symbols and types of high priesthood from any one, although he was not born of a race of priests, although he was not elevated to a kingdom by military guards, although he was not a prophet like those of old, although he obtained no honor nor pre-eminence among the Jews, nevertheless was adorned by the Father with all, if not with the symbols, yet with the truth itself.”

As the Bishop of Caesarea (of the Caesars), Eusebius was the author of Constantine’s conversion myth, writing, “Constantine saw with his own eyes the trophy of a cross of light in the heavens, above the sun, and bearing this inscription: conquer by this. At the sight, he himself was struck with amazement and his whole army also.” (Eusebius, The Life Of The Blessed Emperor Constantine: from AD 306 to 337) It was eerily similar to a popular pagan play of the day and of what Paul had claimed occurred on the Road to Damascus.

Eusebius would use a line from his own correspondence, incorporating it into the Gospel of Matthew: “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it. — Matthew 21:43” He was a Roman Catholic and patriot who believed that he, his government, and his religion were divine. Of them he would say: “Whence it is evident that the perfect religion committed to us by the teaching of Christ is not new and strange, but, if the truth must be spoken, it is the first and the true religion. This may suffice for this subject.”

But, alas, he had more to say. Melding Mithraism into Christianity, he wrote: “It is admitted that when in recent times the appearance of our Savior Jesus Christ had become known to all men there immediately made its appearance a new nation; a nation confessedly not small, and not dwelling in some corner of the earth, but the most numerous and pious of all nations, indestructible and unconquerable, because it always receives assistance from God. This nation, thus suddenly appearing at the time appointed by the inscrutable counsel of God, is the one which has been honored by all with the name of Christ.” At least we have evidence that “Christ” is not a title, but instead the last name of the Christian God.

In the Roman Bishop’s mind, one Roman was as important as two thousand years of Jews, including the likes of Moseh, Dowd, and the prophets. He wrote: “the Roman who drew near to our Savior, was ONE (only), namely, the Chiliarch, who made a greater and better profession of Him, than (did the whole) Jewish people; and, that our Savior prophesied that instead of ONE, those, who should like this man draw near to Him, should be MANY; and, that these should be of those residing in the East, and in the West: those (I say), who, by means of the knowledge of Him, and of the confession (made) of Him, should be considered worthy of honor with God, equal to that of the Hebrew Fathers: even of him who is preached of as being the Father of their Fathers, ‘Abraham, who went forth from among his idolatrous forefathers, and changed his manner of life; and, leaving the error of many Gods, recognized the ONE GOD who is over all.”

Eusebius was an anti-Semite of the first order. His Eemonstratio Evangelica was an overt attack on Jews and the Towrah. Of them he would write: “It is my intention, moreover, to recount the misfortunes which immediately came upon the whole Jewish nation in consequence of their plots against our Savior and Lord Jesus Christ.” (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History) Of course, those plots were the invention of the Roman Church to exonerate the Roman Empire for actually crucifying the one whose name they neither respect nor know. And the misfortunes which immediately came upon the whole Jewish nation were a consequence of twin assaults by Roman Legions. But let’s not let the facts get in the way of the Christian story.

In a book where Eusebius attempts to demonstrate that the pagans got all their good ideas from the Jews, he lists as one of those good ideas Plato’s argument that lying for the benefit of the state is good and even necessary. Perhaps this is evidence of reincarnation, and we are witnessing Paul 2.0.

As was his inspiration, Eusebius was actually infamous for admitting to being dishonest when doing so protected his religion from the truth: “I have repeated whatever may rebound to the glory and suppressed all that could tend to the disgrace of our religion.” (Eusebius, Prae Paratio Evangelica, C31, B12). By this admission, Eusebius has openly stated that, given the opportunity to upend the truth, such as retelling the events in Jerusalem on Passover in 33 CE, he would willingly invent whatever story was necessary to exonerate Rome and its Church from complicity.

Speaking of lies, there are two discredited statements referencing Iesous the Christos falsely attributed to Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews (circa 94 CE). Both were actually composed by Eusebius, who supplemented, plagiarized, and then promoted the “History of the Jews.”

Desperate for affirmation that Pilate considered “Jesus” to be the “Christ,” and thus seen as innocent of the crime of sentencing him to be crucified, Eusebius forged an addendum to Josephus’ text known today as the Testimonium. As he had done with the Gospel of Matthew, with a heavy, exceptionally religious hand, he wrote his own “history” of “Iesous Christos – Jesus Christ” and embedded it in Book 18 of Antiquities of the Jews. He would have the proof he coveted, reading just as he wanted because he wrote it…

“About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Christ. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.”

What Bishop Eusebius contrived to establish the authenticity of the Christian myth of a dead and resurrected god, who was betrayed by Jews, did just the opposite for anyone familiar with Josephus, Eusebius, Yahowsha’, the Roman Church, and the creation of the New Testament. It is as obvious that Eusebius was insidious in composing this fraud as it is that Josephus would never have written it.

Since this story helps illuminate the dark shadows under which the Christian New Testament was composed and codified, let’s consider the tawdry tale of Yowseph ben Matityahuw. He was a conceited and ambitious young man who, like Sha’uwl | Paul, changed his name, becoming infamous as Titus Flavius Josephus.

As another Jew turned Roman, and like Sha’uwl, Yowseph was born into an elite religious family. Yowseph’s father, Matityahuw | Matthew became the namesake of the Gospel now bearing that name. His father was a priest of the first order in Yaruwshalaim | Jerusalem, who claimed to be a descendant of Yahowyaryb | Jehoiarib, with primary responsibility for Temple oversight. Yahowyaryb | Jehoiarib, the first of twenty-four priestly divisions organized by King Dowd | David, were said to be on duty when the Second Temple was destroyed by the Roman Imperial Legions in 70 CE. Then Yahowyaryb fled to Meron in Galilee according to the Caesarea Inscription. This was based upon a Talmudic reading: “Yahowyaryb, a man of Meron, the town of Masarbaye,” serving as a play on words. It meant: “I Contend with Yah and delivered the House unto the enemy.”

Not done bragging, and craving acceptance, Yowseph | Josephus claimed that his mother was a descendant of the Hasmonean dynasty. And while that remains unproven, he was as wealthy as he was unprincipled, albeit well-educated and thus literate. At least a handful of years before this would have been considered appropriate in Jewish society, Yowseph claimed that, while in his mid-twenties, he was sent to Rome to negotiate with Emperor Nero for the release of some Jewish priests who had been arrested and incarcerated.

Having failed, or perhaps succeeded in a more clandestine mission, the young man hastily returned to Yahuwdah | Judah just in time for the outbreak of the First Jewish-Roman War. With no political or military training, but with boundless ambition, and on a mission, he was appointed “Military Governor” of the aforementioned “Galilee,” a nonexistent position in a place actually known as Tiberius before the age of accountability.

As has long been the case with political and religious Jews, those in Galilee were fractured with internal divisions. An equal number preferred subjugation under Rome to the sting of Rome’s Legions should they revolt. Some enlisted the help of the Roman army while others appealed to King Agrippa’s forces to protect them from attack.

According to Yowseph | Josephus, he mustered a ragtag band of fishermen and farmers into an “army.” Then, with the help of the Sanhedrin, he garrisoned and fortified a number of small towns in the region before leading his Galilean militia against his brethren in Sepphoris and Tiberias, bringing them into subjugation. Immediately thereafter, his followers were sacrificed to Vespasian’s Legions, first at Garis, then Sepphoris, and finally, Yowdphat. The Romans slaughtered countless thousands of Yowseph’s | Josephus’ men while their leader cowered in a cave. When revealed by a traitor to Titus, Vespasian’s son and future Emperor, in July 67 CE, rather than surrender, Yowseph | Josephus conned his fellow Jews into a method of collective suicide, where they killed one another until only Josephus was left.

This is where this story gets particularly interesting. The Jewish priestly candidate, turned-Roman-negotiator, then governor and general, Yowseph ben Matityahuw, became Titus Flavius Josephus – prophet and traitor. While in the cave, Yowseph claimed to have experienced a divine revelation, predicting General Vespasian’s ascension to Emperor, as was commonplace in Rome. When Nero became the first Emperor to commit suicide in June 68 CE, Vespasian hailed Titus Flavius Josephus a Prophet to the Divine. He was even granted Roman citizenship.

Then rather than negotiating on behalf of Jewish priests, Josephus began collaborating on behalf of Titus against the Jews besieged in Jerusalem. Adding intrigue, Josephus would allege some justification because he claimed that his parents were being held captive by Simon bar Giora, the leader of one of Judea’s largest rebel factions during the war.

Aided by Josephus’ knowledge of Jerusalem, Titus’ siege was swift, destructive, and brutal. What was left of his people’s resistance migrated to Masada, a story known to us only through the traitor. He even wrote a variation of his own suicide pact into the story. Recent archeology, however, suggests that Josephus’ account was fabricated to glorify religious fanaticism and suicide – and thus to exonerate the young Yowseph ben Matityahuw. The two men and lock of a woman’s hair found in the baths along with the rest of the garbage were Romans, not Jews – now buried as heroes of the Jewish state. Lies often become popular and take on a life of their own and live large in the culture, politics, and religion of a nation.

In all likelihood, the whole of Antiquities of the Jews, at least apart from the portions composed by Eusebius, was written to assuage the traitor’s sense of guilt for having betrayed his people. Josephus, in his preface, suggests his method will not be wholly objective by saying he will be unable to contain his lamentations in transcribing these events. He wrote: “But if anyone be inflexible in his censures of me, let him attribute the facts themselves to the historical part, and the lamentations to the writer himself only.”

In 71 CE, the false prophet, Josephus, traveled back to Rome, this time as Titus’ consult. Behind them in the dust were thousands of beaten Jewish slaves, the Temple’s Manowrah, and the treasure of Yaruwshalaim. Now a client of the ruling Flavian dynasty, he was granted a luxurious accommodation, a lavish pension, and given a Jewish slave woman to boot. Under the patronage of Emperor Vespasian, Josephus contrived Antiquities of the Jews to serve his benefactors. He would write it in the style of Roman and Greek “historians,” in which the facts were never allowed to get in the way of a good story. The Greeks and Romans were portrayed as enlightened heroes while those they ravaged were considered savages.

Writing for this infamous traitor, Bishop Eusebius, who was by then custodian of Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews, positioned a now-familiar claim, one that he had already incorporated into the Gospel named after Matityahuw | Matthew. It reads: “The revelation taught me three things: that God, the Creator of the Jewish people, had decided to punish them, that fortune had been given to the Romans, and that God has chosen me to announce the things that are to come.”

There are no surviving Greek manuscripts of Josephus’ “History” which can be dated before the 11th century. The oldest were all copied by Christian monks. Their fascination with the story had nothing to do with Jewish history, and all to do with the three New Testament accounts written by Bishop Eusebius to deify Iesous, to usurp the title Christos with a Roman blessing, to exonerate the Romans who crucified the Lamb, and then to blame the Jews. It is among the longest-lived and most destructive of conspiracies.

It would not be until 1544 CE that the original Greek text of Antiquities of the Jews became available to scholars. The 1737 English translation of the reconstituted Greek text by William Whiston became enormously popular, second only to the Bible among Christians. A cross-reference apparatus for Whiston’s version of Josephus and the biblical canon was composed in which Whiston claimed that “Josephus’ works had a similar style to those in the Epistles of St. Paul.”

There are, however, to Christianity’s chagrin and Eusebius’ embarrassment, 170 extant Latin translations of Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews, some dating as far back as the 6th century. The “Testimonium” written by Eusebius and providing his history of Iesous the Christos is not found in any of them. His religious ode is also absent from the Table of Contents introducing Book 18 in all of the Latin manuscripts.

The three Eusebian creations designed to corroborate the Gospel of Matthew do not appear in any other version of Josephus’ The Jewish War, a collaborative history which speaks extensively of Pilate, except for a Slavonic version of the Testimonium Flavianun which surfaced in the west beginning in the 20th century after being found in Russia. Although originally hailed as authenticating the Testimonium, it is now universally acknowledged to have been the product of an 11th century writer bemoaning his ideological struggle against the Khazars.

Even a 10th century Arabic version and a 12th century Syriac manuscript reposition what Eusebius added by omitting the key phrase “at the suggestion of the principal men among us” which was designed to implicate Jews in the killing of the Christian Christ. They read: “Pilate condemned him to be crucified.” And speaking of Christ, both translations, instead of saying “he was Christ,” read: “he was believed to be Christ.”

In the 4th century, the Christian and Roman apologist responsible for editing, augmenting, and codifying the Christian New Testament, Eusebius became the custodian of Josephus’ work. He used the Antiquities of the Jews extensively as a source for his own Historia Ecclesiastica in 324 CE. He alone had the means and the motive to change what the traitor had written. His is the first mention of the passage now known as the Testimonium.

Ever since, the Bishop’s invention has been wrongly attributed to Flavius Josephus and the Antiquities of the Jews, Book 18, Chapter 3. As religious as he was patriotic, as anti-Semitic as he was dishonest, desperate for a Jewish authority to endorse the Roman Church’s myth, he wrote the Testimonium in his inept and flagrant fashion. Even the uninitiated should be able to see through the ruse because, as a religious Jew, Josephus would have used the Hebrew title “Mashyach,” not Greek “Christos” if he had wanted to make this connection. And there isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell that Yowseph ben Matityahuw | Titus Flavius Josephus converted to Christianity and proclaimed that Iesous was the Christos.

It was scribbled by another charlatan, the man who said that it is lawful to lie for the cause of his religion. And this same fellow, mind you, is the compiler of and a contributing author to the oldest copies of the Christian New Testament: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.

It is likely that “Iesous” was either wholly neglected by Flavius Josephus’ in his late 1st century accounting of his people or besmirched. Even in Book 20, Chapter 9, the only other reference, it is not realistic to think that the wannabe historian and prophet wrote: “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James.” This, too, was also added by a Christian apologist because, once again, a Hebrew scholar would not have written “Iesous” or “Christos,” much less anything that could be transliterated “James” after the English monarch. While Josephus may have mentioned Yahowsha’, and even Ya’aqob, it is Eusebius who inserted, “who was called the Christ.” Moreover, the timing of Josephus’ narrative places it after, rather than before, the siege of Jerusalem, contrary to the Christian account.

Similarly, there is an entry in Antiquities pertaining to the death of “John the Baptist” that is a blend of Josephian and Eusebian. It reads: “Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod’s army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man... Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion... Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod’s suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death.”

It was Paul, borrowing from the Sibylline Oracles, who introduced the concept of baptism into the New Testament, which is now integrated into Christianity. Jews not only didn’t perform them, Josephus would not have called someone “good” for contradicting the Towrah and Talmud. So, while there were many men named Yahowchanan at the time, and one of them may well have met his demise as a result of Herod’s temper, the notion of a Hebrew being called a “Baptist” is as spurious as if they had said that he was a member of the Baptist Church.

And lest we forget, the passages on “James” and “John” now found in copies of Antiquities scribed by Christian monks in the 11th century are nowhere to be found in Josephus’ parallel work, Jewish Wars.

Not only was Eusebius the first to cite this amazing “affirmation,” ostensibly because it did not exist previously, Origen, Tertullian, Cyprian, Justin, Celsus, nor Photius, who wrote numerous articles on Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews, said nothing about a statement that would have done wonders for their credibility had it existed. In fact, Origen expressly stated that “Josephus did not recognize Jesus as the Messiah.” (Origen, Contra Celsum, I, 47).

But should you want a smoking gun, you have it in the phrase “if indeed it be proper to call him a man” now found in the fictitious citation. Presenting his version of history, the Bishop of Caesarea wrote: “On account of Herod’s suspicion, John the Baptist was sent in bonds to the citadel of Machra, and there slain.” After relating these things concerning John, Eusebius wrote of his “Savior” in the same work using the following words: “And there lived at that time Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it be proper to call him a man. For he was a doer of wonderful works, and a teacher of such men as receive the truth in gladness. And he attached to himself many of the Jews, and many also of the Greeks. He was the Christ.” (Eusebius, Demonstrations of the Gospels) Further, the Eusebian phrases, “one who wrought surprising feats,” “the tribe of the Christians,” and “still to this day,” all found in the manufactured Testimonium, are found nowhere in any other Christian creedal statements or theological studies.

Let’s play the Christian game of pretend, shall we? Let’s imagine that Josephus converted to Christianity and announced his belief that Iesous was the Christos in Antiquities of the Jews. Considering his past, why would anyone care, much less believe him. For a Jew, that would be like gaining Joseph Goebbels’ endorsement.

This forgery does not stand alone. After falsifying the anti-Semitic conclusion to the Gospel of Matthew, and falsifying Josephus’ affidavit regarding it, the Church’s leadership forged a letter from Pilate to Tiberius about these same events, another from “Christ” to a Persian King, and finally regarding the Donation of Constantine. Should you be interested in the refutation of the Pilate letter to Tiberius, read Anne-Catherine Baudoin’s thesis: Truth in the Details: The Report of Pilate to Tiberius as an Authentic Forgery. (Splendide Mendax, Rethinking Fakes and Forgeries in Classical, Late Antique, and Early Christian Literature, 22 May 2017)

The Imperial Decree mentioned in this list of falsified documents supposedly transfers authority over to Rome and to the Pope. In the purported Donation of Constantine, dated 30 March, 315 CE at the Fourth Consulate of Gallicanus (which actually occurred in 317 CE), there is a detailed profession of Christian faith and a recounting of how the Emperor, seeking a cure for his leprosy, was converted and baptized by Pope Sylvester I. In gratitude, he determined to bestow “the Seat of Saint Peter power, dignity of glory, and vigor,” in addition to “Imperial Honor and Supremacy over the four principal sees, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Constantinople…as also over all the churches of God in the whole earth. For the upkeep of the Church of Saint Peter and that of Saint Paul.” As a result, Constantine gave estates “in Judea, Greece, Asia, Thrace, Africa, Italy and the various islands” to “Pope Sylvester and his successors,” granting them the “imperial insignia, the tiara, the city of Rome, and all the provinces, places and cities of Italy and the western regions.” Alas, it’s all fake news.

Replacement history would usher in Replacement Theology. Eusebius wrote: “And so the Jewish polity began about that time with Moses and continues in accordance with the voices of their own prophets until the coming of our Savior Jesus Christ. For this also was a prophecy of Moses himself and the prophets who followed, that the customs and ordinances of Moses should not fail before those of the Christ appeared, the ordinances, that is, of the New Covenant, which has been proclaimed to all nations through our Savior; and thus these ordinances found a fulfilment in the way which had been announced.”

Proving that Christianity is a blend of Babylonian myths and twisted verses lifted from the Towrah, Eusebius penned: “As to the Hebrews, and their philosophy and religion which we have preferred above all our ancestral system [the Greco-Roman religion], it is time to describe their mode of life. For since it has been proved that our abandonment of the false theology of Greeks and barbarians alike has not been made without reason, but with well-judged and prudent consideration, it is now time to solve the second question by stating the cause of our claiming a share in the Hebrew doctrines.

“When therefore we have the necessary leisure, we shall prove that our borrowing what was profitable from barbarians brings no blame upon us; for we shall show that the Greeks and even their renowned philosophers had plagiarized all their philosophic lore and all that was otherwise of common benefit and profitable for their social needs from barbarians: but that nothing at all has yet been found among any of the nations like the boon which has been provided for us from the Hebrews, will become manifest in the following manner. So, when these have been thoroughly discussed, we will pass over to the doctrines of the Hebrews—I mean of the original and true Hebrews, and of those who afterwards received the name Jews. And after all these we will add our own doctrines as it were a seal set upon the whole.”

That is breathtaking in its implications. If Catholics, indeed Christians, were rational, the religion would evaporate at the site of this admission. But let us leave the doubters with this pithy statement: “It is an act of virtue to deceive and lie, when by such means the interest of the Church might be promoted” – Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea.

In conclusion, each time we examine the Christian New Testament it proves itself untrustworthy. It was created by men of the worst kind. They cannot be trusted.

We have long known that nothing in the New Testament, unlike the Towrah, Prophets, and Psalms, was inspired by God. But it’s far worse than that. All but a sprinkling of Matthew and John, some of Revelation and perhaps a little from “Peter” and “James” is deliberately misleading. Further, the embellishments to Matthew and all of Paul’s 14 Epistles are likely Satanic.



Eusebius was only part of the problem. He was the victim of a pandemic disease: Christianity – the Plague of Death. Few exemplified this contagion more adroitly than Early Church Father, Saint John Chrysostom (meaning: Golden-Mouthed). In his first eight sermons, all against Jews, beginning in 386 CE, immediately after being ordained as a presbyter / priest of Antioch, and from his pulpit at the Golden Church, during the reign of Emperor Theodosius, this man whose character was admired by his fellow Roman Catholics preached hatred for Jews:

“Jews are immoral and vicious such that Christians are corrupted in morals and orthodoxy by contact with them.” He issued denunciations against visiting synagogues at times of the Mow’ed Miqra’ey. According to Saint John, “To attend the Jewish Passover is to insult Christ. To be with Jews on the very day when they murdered Jesus is to ensure that on the Day of Judgment He will say, ‘Depart from me! for you have had intercourse with my murderers.’”

“The Jews do not worship God but devils, so that their feasts are Unclean. God hates them and indeed has always hated them. Since their murder of Jesus He allows them no time for repentance. He concentrated all their worship in Jerusalem so that He might more easily destroy it.”

Speaking on behalf of Roman Catholicism, Emperor Theodosius, Pope Innocent, and Eusebius, Saint John roared: “The Jewish pretense that all their misfortunes were caused by Rome is nonsense, for it was not the power of the Caesars, but the wrath of God which destroyed the Jews. It is foolish for the Jews to imagine that God will ever allow the Jews to rebuild their Temple or return to Jerusalem, for He has rejected them. Since God hates the Jews, it is the duty of Christians to hate them, too. He who has no limits in his love of Christ must have no limits in his battle with those who hate Him.”

“I hate the Jews,” Chrysostom shrieked, “for they have the Law and they insult it.” A mirror might have done this scumbag some good.

In one particular case of a Christian woman who took an oath in the house of a Jew, because she believed a vow taken in the Jewish manner was more binding than any other, Chrysostom denounced it as a heinous crime, not only because the oath was Jewish, but also because a Christian woman had been taken into the house of a Jew. He issued edicts in his homilies decrying “Judaizers,” anyone who observed the Shabat, children subjected to circumcision, and anyone who befriended a Jew.

If it were not for the exegetical background which has already been implicated, it would have been impossible to explain his tone. In the Greek rhetorical form known as psogos, or blaming so as to censure, he said: “the Jews sacrificed their sons and daughters to devils;” “they are an outrage to nature and have become worse than wild beasts;” “for no reason at all, with their own hands they murder their offspring to worship the avenging devils who are the foes of our life.”

“The synagogues of the Jews are the homes of idolatry and devils, even though they have no images in them. They are worse than heathen circuses, and the very idea of going from a church to a synagogue is blasphemous. Some say that the synagogue is hallowed by the presence of the Bible, but one might just as well say that the temple of Dagon was hallowed by the ark. Actually, the presence of the Bible makes the synagogues more detestable, for the Jews have introduced it not to honor God, but to insult and dishonor Him.” If he had wanted to see the Devil, he did not have to look beyond Paul’s letters or past his own Church. Satan, himself, in the guise of Allah, was not this bad in the Qur’an. This even makes Mein Kampf appear tame.

In Chrysostom’s discourses there is no sneer too mean or gibe too bitter to fling at the Jews. No text is too remote, no argument too caustic, or blasphemy too startling for him to employ. The only explanation for his bitterness is the overtly anti-Semitic nature of his Scriptures, nation, and religion.

“I am present here before you and confess my guilt. I proclaim that I set the synagogue on fire or at least ordered others to do so, so that no building should be left where Christ is denied. If you ask me why I have not burned the local synagogue, I answer that the judgment of God had already begun its destruction, so my intervention was not needed.”

These are the words of a Saint celebrated by the Roman Catholic Church, Oriental Orthodox Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, Anglican and Lutheran Churches, all of whom recognize his death as a holy day to be observed annually. This is the man who, during Lent in 387 as the citizens of Antioch went on the rampage mutilating statues of Emperor Theodosius, entreated the people to see the error of their ways. As a result, for unifying Caesar and the Church, Chrysostom was appointed Archbishop of Constantinople.

It was short-lived, however, because of Church infighting. Saint John the Golden-Mouthed was considered a devotee of Origen, whom Theophilus, the Patriarch of Alexandrea, despised. But since there was an earthquake the night of his arrest, many took it as a sign of God’s anger and sought his reinstatement. No matter, when next we see Saint John, he is off lending moral and financial support to Christian monks who were enforcing Emperor Theodosius’ edict to destroy all traces of other religions, including their Scriptures and Temples. He was so effective at being destructive, Pope Innocent repealed Saint John’s banishment from Constantinople. The Catholic voice of anti-Semitism died shortly thereafter and was immediately venerated as a saint who was said to be the Embodiment of Christian Orthodoxy. Anti-Semitism had become institutionalized.

Nothing has changed. In the summer of 1942, Hitler’s Pope, Pius XII, explained to his College of Cardinals the reasons for the great gulf that existed between Jews and Christians: “Jerusalem has responded to His call and to His grace with the same rigid blindness and stubborn ingratitude that has led it along the path of guilt to the murder of God.”

May I recommend a real God, Yahowah, whom man cannot kill? And do not gloat, Protestants. Martin Luther was every bit as bad, if not worse.

To better understand the Roman Catholic Church, let’s consider some of its popes. For no reason other than it was handy, and easily validated, I have seized upon the research done in 2006 for the publication of The Criminal History of the Papacy. What we will find in this and many other sources is that the Roman Church mimicked Imperial Rome with a long succession of twisted monarchs.

Some of the leaders which Paul claimed in Romans 13 were authorized by God for good would include…

Augustus (27 BCE – 14 CE) Octavian murdered his way to the top, betraying long-time friends and family members along the way for no other reason than they obstructed his lust for absolute power. He was the first Roman Emperor to bequeath upon himself the title of Pater Patriae | Father of the Fatherland – or Pope.

Tiberius (14-37 CE) The second Roman emperor to declare himself both Father and God inflicted a reign of terror and repression on Rome from his palace on the island of Capri. He reinstituted the accusation of treason so that he could sentence anyone he disliked to death. He ordered his subjects to worship his statues. A depraved sexual predator, he molested and brutally tortured hundreds of little children, while sadistically abusing anyone who challenged his depravity. He was known for his constant orgies, and for having young boys and girls frolic like pans and nymphs for his amusement. He kept an illustrative book on perverted sexuality so that performers would know what was required of them. He threw infants and toddlers to their death on the rocks below the walls of his castle. Quite simply, he was a dictatorial and mercurial tyrant.

Caligula (37-41) He was a sadist who derived pleasure by torturing people – starting by suffocating his father, Tiberius. He had incestuous affairs with his sisters and is known to have raped the wives of his allies. Establishing a model popes would follow, he turned his palace into a brothel. The whores included his sisters. Beset by paranoia, he ordered random executions, killing relatives and foes alike, to maintain order through fear. He is infamous for declaring himself “God” while imposing an absolute dictatorship based upon his infallibility. He found pleasure in humiliating rival politicians, at one time even saying that his horse, Incitatus, would make a better consul. Then in a moment of absolute insanity, this lustful libertine waged war against the sea god, Neptune, and had his troops attack the waves with swords and gather seashells as booty. He financed his lavish lifestyle through legalized looting. Before he could move to Egypt to be worshiped as the sun god, he was publicly assassinated by one of the Praetorian guards that he had insulted, all while protesting that he was immortal.

Nero (54-68) ascended to the throne at sixteen, quickly squandering the wealth of Rome. He murdered his mother, beating her to death, his stepbrother because he didn’t want to share power, and then his wife, Octavia, whom he deserted for his lover, Poppeaea, charging her with adultery. Poppeaea did not fare much better because, after becoming pregnant with Nero’s child, the emperor kicked her to death. His third “wife” was a slave whom he had castrated. He was indiscriminate in his propensity to execute his critics.

It is said that Nero set Rome ablaze so that he could enlarge his home and burned Jews alive to illuminate his gardens. Like Paul, who died in Rome around this same time, Nero was particularly fond of poetry and prose, compelling audiences to endure long speeches.

Vespasian (69-79) He was infamous for hunting down and killing Jews while a general. Later he would be known for indulging the Jewish traitor, Josephus, plying him with gifts such that he would compose a history of Rome’s vanquished people.

Titus (79-81) He was noted for destroying Jerusalem and the Temple while using the confiscated treasure to construct the Colosseum in Rome with Jewish slaves.

Domitian (81-96) He found solace torturing Jews who wouldn’t worship the Roman gods, goddesses, and emperors. He poisoned his brother and squandered Rome’s resources as a patron of the arts. He nominated himself as public censor and outlawed all contrarian views, becoming the model of the Catholic Inquisition with his cruel and sadistic, indeed paranoid, approach to diversity. He was particularly fond of promoting conspiracies. He is known to have assassinated twelve consuls and two cousins. Domitian demanded, according to the historian, Cassius Dio, that he be treated like a god, ordering the empire to call him “Dominus et Deus – Lord and God.” He turned against the writers and academics of his day. Then for good measure, he arranged for the judicial murder of the chief of the Vestal Virgins, having her buried alive in a special tomb he had constructed for the occasion. For all the joy he brought to Rome, his own wife sought to kill him, although the actual deed was consummated by court officials who convicted him of advancing a conspiracy.

Hadrian (117-138) This man may have earned a place in Yahowah’s list of the most reprehensible people of all time, following only Paul, Akiba, Muhammad, and Maimonides. He obliterated Jerusalem and renamed Judea, “Palaestina,” murdering countless Jews in the process. Then he renamed Jerusalem after himself, erecting shrines on the Temple Mount to declare his divinity. All the while, he worshiped Dionysus and engaged in pedophilia with young boys.

Commodus (180-192) This arrogant, self-obsessed, and ruthless Roman ruler renamed himself Hercules and announced that he was a “living god.” His favorite vices were homosexual rape, pedophilia, and bestiality. He was a gladiatorial fanatic and aspirant. This pleasure-seeker nearly bankrupted Rome. His solution was to have wealthy citizens executed for treason so that he could confiscate their property. For his entertainment, and that of fellow Romans, he, himself, publicly slaughtered elephants, giraffes, ostriches, and humans he did not like. Although, he did not do so freely, but instead charged Romans fees to watch his performances. This megalomaniac would rename Rome, its legions, the senate, the imperial palace, every month, and the citizenry after himself – sort of like the Christian Church calling its institutions, houses of worship, and subjects, “Christian.” His life ended as he lived it, assassinated by his wrestling partner.

Septimius Severus (193-198) SS came to power the traditional Roman way, by killing his predecessor. He persecuted (i.e., tortured) everyone whose religion differed from Rome’s, but was especially fond of abusing Jews. He imposed a draconian interpretation of Roman Law and was particularly brutal in its fundamentalist enforcement.

Caracalla (198-217) The Emperor was noted for sibling rivalries. He had his brother, Geta, executed – along with brutally exterminating most of Geta’s supporters. He solidified his power by granting aliens citizenship, ostensibly to increasing the number of his subjects, and then lavished pay increases on the military to solidify their support for his regime. And yet he was so vengeful and sadistic that, after assassinating another brother, he led Rome into a civil war. Obsessed with war, he went off trying to better Alexander the Great, copying his now obsolete military tactics in conquests of Africa and the Middle East. He was assassinated by a soldier whose death he had ordered.

Elagabalus (218-222) He longed for the good old days of Roman paganism – albeit with a twist. He became the chief priest of the cult of the Syrian god, Elah-Gabal, which he introduced into the Roman pantheon. He even had himself circumcised to show his devotion. This may have been a precursor to Islam because he established a conical Black Stone as the symbol of the sun god, Sol Invictus Elagabalus, on Palatine Hill. He then capitalized in Muhammadan fashion by claiming the vestal virgin for himself, calling her his wife. For his entertainment, he tortured and sacrificed children to his gods. Like Muhammad, Elagabalus was also a sexual predator and pervert, with countless wives, sex slaves, homosexual lovers, and children to satiate his carnal desires. Ahead of his time, he became transgender. He was ultimately murdered by his grandmother.

Maximus Thrax (235 to 238) This soldier-turned-emperor feasted on carnage, setting fire to towns and villages just to watch the inhabitants burn. He exhausted his empire with war. Finally, his own troops turned on him, killing him, his sons, and his advisors. His reign became known as the “Great Military Anarchy” of the 3rd century. After bludgeoning Germanic tribes at a terrible cost, he fought the Dacians and Sarmatians simultaneously. Then in papal fashion, Thrax assassinated every leader that his predecessor had established.

Diocletian (284-305) He was best known for the Pauline concept of division, dividing the Roman Empire into two, one old, the other new. He forced everyone under his control to worship the Roman gods and goddesses or die. This is what caused so much grief for Christians, and especially Jews, as he is credited with being deliberately vicious toward both. He saw them as a threat to Roman religious, political, and social traditions. Little did he know that there would soon be no distinction between Imperial Rome and Roman Catholicism. Preoccupied with religion, he became an economic failure, bankrupting Rome while being the first to impose wage and price controls to curb inflation.

Constantine (306/324-337) Like his predecessors, this Roman stalwart murdered his way to the top, killing his rivals. Gloating, over the murder of an opposing general, he placed his head on a stick as he paraded through town. Ruthless, he killed both of his brothers-in-law so that he could reign unchallenged. He had his son, Crispus, executed for an unproven affair with his stepmother. While a pagan, he empowered and enriched Roman Catholic bishops, especially his favorite, Eusebius – whom he enriched by taxing Jews. He moved the Roman capital to Byzantium, where in megalomaniac fashion, he renamed it after himself, “Constantinople.” The man credited by many as the catalyst behind transforming Imperial Rome into Roman Catholicism created a Police State to ensure the continuance of his corrupt administration. Then he reestablished the Roman caste system to control the people, making it possible for the Church to subjugate them.

Constantius II (337-361) This largely incompetent monster was one of Constantine’s three sons who would share the empire after their father’s death. His rise to power commenced by overseeing the massacre of eight relatives. He was adept only in civil war.

Theodosius (379/392-395) Continuing to regale those Paul said were authorized by God for the good of His people, we find ourselves before what is perhaps the worst of them. Theodosius decreed the Roman Catholic Church as the lone legal heir to Imperial Rome, making Christianity the only legal religion within the Empire. The Beast predicted in Daniel was now in its final stage.

To the shame of the Roman Church, Theodosius instituted the feudal caste system of lords and serfs which would enslave Europeans for a thousand years. He launched an especially brutal era of intolerance and persecution under Roman Catholicism. He was responsible for the destruction of most ancient Greek and Roman temples, using their sites and stones to build grand churches. He even ordered the destruction of the Library in Alexandria because he viewed its contents as a threat to his religion.

Honorius (395-423) As Theodosius’ son, he carried on his father’s work of inquisitor, religious persecutor, and xenophobe. In a power-sharing arrangement with popes, he became increasingly jealous, paranoid, and extravagant, killing his own generals to maintain loyalty. Then following a pogrom against the Germanic people, whom Honorius deemed inferior, the Empire became vulnerable, with the best generals and soldiers lured into a trap by the supposed savages. It tipped the scales, allowing Alaric his revenge in sacking Rome. To be sure, Honorius’ bigotry, racism, ignorance, and incompetence hastened the fall of Imperial Rome, leaving the Roman Catholic Church as its heir.

While “Peter” was no more “pope” than astronaut, the Catholic Church credits one of Paul’s cronies as the second “Supreme Pontiff.” Without evidence to back the claim, St Linus, a Roman, was said to have become the “Holy See” circa 66 to 68 CE upon “Peter’s” death. He is mentioned as being with Paul in Rome in the Devil’s Advocate’s farewell to Timothy. The next mention of Linus was over one hundred years later by Irenaeus, who wrote in 180 CE that “the blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate.” Just because he wrote it more than a century thereafter, did not make it so.

Unfortunately for Catholic credibility, the Apostles did not do as he had claimed. Worse, when Linus is next mentioned by Eusebius, the Catholic apologist claimed that “Peter,” who had been condemned by Paul, appointed him – which would not have been possible considering his affiliation with his tormentor.

It wasn’t until the time of Constantine, Eusebius, Jerome, and Chrysostom in the 4th century that Romans began ascribing the Emperor’s Pater | Pope title upon “Peter,” making the initial line of popes entirely mythical. It was contrived by the likes of Saint Jerome, who would write: “Linus was the first after Peter to be in charge of the Roman Church.” Saint John Chrysostom, the raging anti-Semite, preached, “This Linus, some say, was second Bishop of the Church of Rome after Peter,” thereby contradicting Eusebius and Jerome. Nothing about Linus is known or knowable, making him the stuff of religious legend. Further, there is no agreement even among Church Fathers, with Tertullian saying that Clement I was the successor of Peter, while Jerome had Clement I fourth on his list.

What we know of these early myths and legends is that the Church claims they were all saints and that most of them (9 of the initial 12) were martyred. They were overwhelmingly Roman and Greek – albeit with a couple of token Jews tossed into the mix. The first of interest would be Saint Clement I who established apostolic authority for clergy, Saint Alexander who fabricated the notion of holy water, and Saint Pius I who in 81 CE decreed that Easter should only be celebrated on a Sunday.

Among the early “popes” we find an Alexander, a Sixtus, a Hyginus, a Pius, a Victor, a Natalius, a Hippolytus, a Lucius, and, of course, a Dionysius. There was even a St Eusebius, Julius, Damasus, and Ursinus. By the time of Emperors Theodosius and Honorius, the guilty were named Saint Innocent.

Out of myth and into history, following the lineage of Imperial Roman carnality, we find a long succession of Roman Catholic popes who were as bad if not worse than the emperors. It was as if nothing changed. Proving this point, let’s begin our comparison at the twilight of the 6th century.

Gregory I (590-604). He was the first to bequeath upon himself the exalted title “Pontifex Maximus.” Known as the “Father of Christian Worship,” he became infamous as the first pope to market fake memorabilia. He convinced a nobleman that the cross he sold him for an exorbitant amount contained the filings from the chains worn by “Saint Peter,” himself, and that it would free him forever from sins. After this successful venture, he made duping gullible Christians into a thriving business, selling all manner of phony relics. But with a limited supply of artisans to secretly create them, he postured a different scheme. He convinced land and slave owners that the end of the world would come in 600 CE and argued that “a man with possessions had as much hope of getting through the eye of a needle as getting through the gates of heaven.” This misappropriation worked so well that he received so much land and so many slaves, the pope became the largest land and slave owner on earth. Lordy, lordy. As his final decree, the pope, who also opposed secular education, ordered the burning of the Julian library in Rome. At that time it contained 120,000 books. It’s easier to fool fools when the foolish remain ignorant. That was Paul’s motto, too.

Sergius III (904-911) was known to his fellow cardinals as “the slave of every vice.” He inherited the “Seat of Saint Peter” by murdering his predecessors – both Leo V and Christopher (whom he incarcerated and tortured). He was voted pontiff, not through the inspiration of the “Holy Ghost,” but instead by threatening the opposing clerical hierarchy, giving them the choice of exile or torture. And speaking of the “Holy Ghost,” as pope he wrote: “As the Holy Apostolic See has made known to us that the blasphemous errors of a certain Photios against the Holy Ghost are still vigorous in the East, errors which teach that the Holy Spirit proceeds not from the son but from the Father.”

It is said that the “Holy See” fathered his first child with his teenage mistress, Marozia, the daughter of Rome’s governor. Marozia was thirty years the pope’s junior. Then in Catholic fashion, the Holy Father’s son grew up to become pope. But before Christ’s Vicar left the Vatican for his long dirt nap, he auctioned off every top clerical job to pay for his indulgent lifestyle. It was the beginning of another dark century for Christendom.

During this time, the aforementioned Theodora, who of noble status was nonetheless characterized as a “shameless whore,” and her daughter, the concubine, Marozia, ruled the papacy. Vatican historian, Cardinal Caesar Baronius, called it the “Rule of the Whores” – affirming the Church’s place as the Whore of Babylon.

Her legend began when Theodora seduced a young priest. Once he was under her control, she used her charms to have him appointed Archbishop of Ravenna. Later, she worked behind the scenes to get him elevated to pope, becoming John X (914-928). But it did not turn out well because her lover took to arms to fight against the Saracens. He was also known for indulging in nepotism, enriching his family through the Church’s coffers. With their newfound wealth, his brother hired Hungarian mercenaries to protect them, bringing a plague upon the nation. Having been empowered, enriched, and protected the old-fashioned way, through religion and politics, he spurned Theodora for a younger model, bedding the daughter of Hugh of Provence.

Jealous, Theodora “married” Guido, the Marquis of Tuscany. He and his charming bride carried out a coup d’état against the noble courtesan’s former lover, Pope John X. But adding injury to insult, Theodora was poisoned and died, leaving the pope to squabble with her daughter, Marozia. She turned the nobility of Rome against him, which wasn’t difficult because he had given the most profitable Church offices to his family, depriving the nobility of what they came to see as their private preserve. In their fight over power and money, the Roman nobility drove John and his brother, Peter, from Rome. Thereafter, the pope increased the size of his mercenary forces and returned, only to see Marozia’s army enter the Lateran Palace and murder Peter before the pope’s eyes. John was taken prisoner, deposed, and smothered to death.

Sweet little Marozia and her faction of wealthy Romans capitalized upon the vacancy and appointed Leo VI pope in 928. Dissatisfied, the Whore replaced him a few months later with the short-lived Stephen VI, who died under questionable circumstances, giving way to Stephen VII. His predecessor’s untimely death, however, was evidently insufficient because he ordered the VI’s corpse exhumed. Demonstrating boorish behavior even for a Roman, he propped up the former pope’s dead body on a throne and tried the corpse for perjury, finding his supposedly infallible predecessor guilty of the crime. VII stripped VI of his papal vestments, and then cut off the fingers he had used for consecrations. He would bury the body a second time, only to dig it up and cast it into the Tiber River. The Devil must have loved this guy.

The whore’s daughter, following in her mother’s footsteps, finagled her son onto the throne. Known as John XI (931-935), he was “fathered” illegitimately by Pope Sergius III. While with all of the Roman names and Roman numerals that it gets confusing, John XI’s “Holy Father” is the fellow who murdered his way to the top of the religious realm and who used his bedroom connections to earn the title, “Slave to Every Vice.” While Catholic apologists managed to justify Sergius murdering two previous popes, by doing so, they inadvertently revealed that he was not the only pope who was sexually involved with Theodora’s daughter, the seductress, Marozia. The “Holy Mother” was unscrupulous and ruthless. And yet at least four popes served at her appointment and pleasure. While scandalous, the Church accepts the five popes she and her mother installed as “legitimate successors of ‘Saint Peter’.”

This was not the last pope to elicit Satan’s favor. Born as Octavianus from the same noble Italian family that had dominated the papal office, the sixteen-year-old, John XII (955-963) opened a brothel within the Vatican. He was accused at his trial of sleeping with both of his sisters and routinely raping nuns. But with incest and perversity failing to satisfy his libertine lust, he invented his own catalog of disgusting new sins. He is infamous for beginning his inglorious career by invoking the support of pagan gods and goddesses. As an alcoholic, he was intoxicated most of the time. An incompetent manager, he put his mistress, a prostitute named Marcia, in charge of his whorehouse in the Lateran Palace. They drank so much during one or their orgies, they accidentally set the palace ablaze.

A host of cardinals and bishops testified that “John XII had been paid for ordaining bishops, including a ten-year-old, that he was an adulterer, that he had sexual relations with the widow of Rainier, with Stephana, his father’s concubine, with the widow, Anna, and with his own niece. They said that he turned the sacred palace into a whorehouse and then blinded his confessor, Benedict.” They accused him of murdering a cardinal after castrating him. He, they said, routinely toasted with the Devil, and invoked the support of Jupiter, Venus, and other Greek and Roman gods and goddesses.

It is said that John XII found recompense by battering in his skull with a hammer. The lowest of humanity, he was murdered at age 27 when the husband of one of the women he was raping burst into his bedroom and discovered him in the act. The intrigue and infighting around his papacy were reminiscent of how wannabe Roman Emperors jostled for position by pitting legions of Romans against one another. These were the worst of men.

Satan’s next little helper was a teenager when the College of Cardinals “elected” him. Theophylactus I was the son of Count Alberic III of Tusculum, and the nephew of Popes Benedict VIII and John XIX. He was the last to reign from the powerful and corrupt Tusculani family. His was a twisted family tree. Theophylactus was the great-grandson of the Roman seductress, Marozia, who was the mistress of Pope Sergius III and others. Pope John XI was their illegitimate child.

Under the moniker, Benedict IX (1032-1044, March to May of 1045, and 1047-1048), this wayward pope at the age of fourteen was hosting orgies and debauching young boys in the Lateran Palace. Since some within the religious community took exception to a sexual pervert becoming the Holy Father, and complained, in response to his critics, Benedict IX excommunicated the clerics who spoke out against the presence of orgies, bestiality (having sex with animals), and priestly pedophilia within the Church – establishing a standard that would be followed until the present day. He became the reincarnation of Nero and Caligula, with a dash of Tiberius.

He stepped down as Holy Father on two occasions, selling the papacy to the highest bidder. His violent and licentious conduct provoked Romans to insurrection, causing Benedict to flee Rome in 1044. Bishop John of Sabina briefly succeeded him as Sylvester III, but he was driven away by Benedict’s brothers. Whereupon Benedict sold the papacy to his godfather, Giovanni Graziano, who earned the right to call himself Pope Gregory VI by buying the “Seat of Saint Peter” and by granting his godson a lavish Church pension for all of the good work he had done abusing young boys, women, and animals.

The following year, however, Benedict disavowed the sale of the papacy to his godfather, and to make matters worse, Sylvester also returned to Rome and claimed that he was pope. The Council of Sutri was orchestrated in 1046 by King Henry III of Germany to resolve these “godly” issues. Therein, Sylvester was declared a false claimant and imprisoned. Benedict was deposed. Gregory was charged with simony (buying or selling a church office), rejected as a legitimate pope, and excommunicated. All three were replaced by a fourth aristocrat, Saxon bishop Suidger of Bamberg, a German, of course. It was a setup, as the nobleman accompanied the German king to the Council. Nonetheless, Suidger was consecrated Clement II on Christmas Day and crowned by Henry as Holy Roman Emperor. But that is not the end of the story.

The Roman Primates would become especially primal. Not beneath murdering his way to the top, Benedict had his supporters (whom there were many) within the Roman Church poison Pope Clement II as the highest-ranking Church official was returning from a meeting with the Holy Roman Emperor in Germany. With the rubble cleared out of his way, Benedict IX waltzed back into the Vatican and reclaimed his throne.

Displeased, the Holy Roman Emperor ordered Boniface of Tuscany to hire other malcontents to assassinate Benedict. But as the gang of attackers set upon him while he was celebrating Mass, Benedict slipped out of Rome for the final time. On this occasion, the Holy Roman Emperor dispatched an army to Rome to see to it that Benedict and his cronies were kept at bay, allowing him to fill the vacant seat with Bishop Poppo of Brixen, becoming Damasus II. Unfortunately for Henry III, Damasus II died of malaria twenty-four days later. All the while, Benedict was dispatched to a monastery where he conveniently repented and died of natural causes at age thirty-five.

Today Benedict IX is best known for running a brothel and toasting to Satan in the Holy of Holies of the Roman Catholic Church. Saint Peter Damian, in comparing the Vatican to Gomorrah, would say of him, “he was a wretch who feasted on immorality, a demon from hell in the disguise of a priest.” In his book, Dialogues, Pope Victor III wrote of Benedict IX: “His life as pope was so vile, so foul, so execrable, that I shudder to think of it.” When an organization infamous for crafting its public image and whitewashing its history, an institution responsible for the Crusades, Indulgences, witch hunts, the gruesome tortures of the Inquisition, and priestly pedophilia, states that one of its own “feasted on immorality,” he was a bad boy.

The Catholic Encyclopedia gives additional accounts of papal debasement during the post “Rule of the Whores” era: “The Popes ‘Benedict’ from the IV to the IX inclusive, belong to the darkest period of papal history…. Benedict VI (973) was thrown into prison by the anti-pope Boniface VII (d. 985). He was then strangled by his orders in 974. Benedict VII was a layman and became pope by force. He drove out Boniface VII. Pope Benedict IX had a long history of scandals and a most disorderly life. His immediate successor, Pope Gregory VI (1044-46), had persuaded Benedict IX to resign the Chair of Peter, and while doing so, bestow valuable possessions on him.” (Catholic Encyclopedia, I, p 31)

The so-called, “Anti-Pope,” Boniface VII, was described by Pope Sylvester II, (999-1003) as “a horrible monster that in criminality surpassed all the rest of mankind” with the exception of the “scandal” of Pope Benedict IX. Born, Theophylactus of Tusculum, in 1012 he won the murderous scramble for the wealth of the papacy. He immediately excommunicated leaders who were hostile to him and quickly established a reign of terror. He officially opened the doors of “the palace of the popes” to homosexuals and turned it into an organized and profitable male brothel. (The Lives of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages, Horace K. Mann, Kegan Paul, London, 1925)

Upon his death, undertakers refused to build him a coffin. He was surreptitiously buried in a cloth under the cover of darkness. Four succeeding popes then briefly held the papal position, and the following paragraph from the Catholic Encyclopedia is pregnant with evidence of the moral depravity of the entire priesthood:

“At the time of Leo IX’s “election” in 1049,” according to the testimony of St. Bruno, Bishop of Segni, “the whole Church was in wickedness, holiness had disappeared, justice had perished, and truth had been buried; Simon Magus was lording it over the Church, whose popes and bishops were given to luxury and fornication. The scientific and ascetic training of the popes left much to be desired, the moral standard of many being very low and the practice of celibacy not everywhere observed. Bishops obtained their offices in irregular ways, whose lives and conversations are strangely at variance with their calling, who go through their duties not for Christ but for motives of worldly gain. The members of the clergy were in many places regarded with scorn, and their avaricious ideas, luxury and immorality rapidly gained ground at the center of clerical life. When ecclesiastical authority grew weak at the fountain head, it necessarily decayed elsewhere. In proportion, as the papal authority lost the respect of many, resentment grew against both the Curia and the papacy.” (Catholic Encyclopedia, vi, pp. 793-4; xii, pp. 700-03)

Even the Catholic Church admits, “Pope Leo IX was an unscrupulous adventurer who spent his pontificate touring Europe with armed knights and left the world worse than he found it.” The Church said of him, “Leo coyly admitted that he defected from the faith...by actually offering sacrifices to false gods...although it is not known why he recanted his religion.” (Catholic Encyclopedia, Pecci ed., iii, p. 117)

The aforementioned, Saint Peter Damian, the fiercest censor of his age, unrolled a frightful picture of decay in clerical morality in the lurid pages of his Book of Gomorrah, a curious Christian record that remarkably survived centuries of Church cover-ups and book burnings. He said: “A natural tendency to murder and brutalize appears with the popes. Nor do they have any inclination to conquer their abominable lust; many are seen to have employed into licentiousness for an occasion to the flesh, and hence, using this liberty of theirs, perpetrating every crime.”

After a lifetime of research into the lives of the popes, Lord Acton, an English historian and founder-editor of The Cambridge Modern History, summarized the militarist papal attitude when he observed: “The popes were not only murderers in the great style, but they also made murder a legal basis of the Christian Church and a condition of salvation.” (The Cambridge Modern History, vol. 1, pp. 673-77)

They had become the living embodiment of their false god: “‘And as for these enemies of mine who didn’t want me to be their king over them, bring them here and execute them right here in front of me.’ After Jesus has said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem.” (Luke 19:27-8) While there is no chance Yahowsha’ said any of this, it reads right out of the Roman Catholic playbook – which is why they wrote it.

That was so repulsive it would take the likes of Urban II (1088-1099) to follow in the line of wretched men. He was yet another charming fellow. He introduced sex taxes to fund the First Crusade. At the Council of Piacenza in 1095, he had some 4,000 church officials and 30,000 lay-Catholics outlaw the marriage of priests – laying the foundation for the thousand years of unmitigated priestly pedophilia that would follow. At the time, and for the money, the Church sold the wives of every priest into slavery. Then, seizing upon the opportunity, he introduced his infamous cullagium sex tax. It allowed a priest to keep a mistress as long as he rented her annually from the Church.

By launching the First Crusade to “liberate” Jerusalem from the Muslims, Urban II’s crusaders, who were all promised a direct ticket into heaven, killed more Christians and Jews than they did Muslims – their intended target. But no matter. The RCC was so pleased with the pope that snuffed out the lives of 5 to 6 million people, that in 1881 Urban II was canonized and is now Saint Urban. How’s that for demonic?

Pope Innocent IV (1243-1254) was anything but guiltless. He actually declared that the Roman Catholic Church had “sovereign dominion over the entire world,” and hence owned all of the wealth to be found or confiscated on earth. He also claimed the Church had “legal authority over all people.” While the Towrah is not Law, we cannot say as much for the religion that sought to “replace the ‘Law’ with Grace.”

In actually it gets worse: Pope Innocent officially authorized the use of torture for eliciting confessions from those who sought to be free of his arrogant and dictatorial edicts, especially non-Catholic Christians. He is responsible for making the Inquisition a scene of abject horror. Those who survived his tortures were flagellated with whips designed to rip the skin off of the victim. “Relapsed heretics,” a.k.a., courageous critics of his sadistic ways, had their assets seized before they were burnt alive. Midwives were commonly roasted for his pleasure while their children were whipped as they watched their mothers burn.

After massacring the population of an entire Italian town, Boniface VIII (1294-1303) indulged in a menage a trois with a married woman and her daughter. Unsatisfied, he became a prolific pedophile, declaring that “having sex with young boys was no more a sin than rubbing one hand against the other.” He declared 1300 a “Jubilee” year, the first of many in Rome, because religious tourism was profitable – especially with 200,000 gullible Catholics participating. The poet Dante “reserved a special place for him in the eighth circle of hell.”

In 1410, thirty-seven of his own clergy witnessed and condemned Pope John XXIII committing adultery, incest, sodomy, selling indulgences and privileges, theft, and murder. And if that didn’t keep the Holy Father sufficiently busy, he kept a harem of 200 mistresses in Boulogne, mostly nuns.

The papacy hit an especially sour note with Sixtus IV (1471-1484). On November 1, 1478, he published the papal bull Exigit Sincerae Devotionis Affectus through which the Spanish Inquisition was established. He turned the Vatican into a palace of political graft and expensive whores. He had at best count six illegitimate sons, including one with his sister. He even collected a Church tax on prostitutes and charged priests for keeping mistresses, thereby increasing the prevalence of clerical homosexuality which was free from taxation.

Innocent VIII (1484-1492), as he chose to call himself, is known as the Holy Father of the Inquisition – the most overtly sadistic institution in religious history. Extending the horrors beyond Spain, on December 5, 1484, in a papal bull, Summis Desiderantes, he explicitly authorized inquisitor Heinrich Kramer to “investigate magicians and witches.” This stalwart of Roman Catholic values acknowledged siring eight illegitimate sons between mistresses, concubines, and prostitutes. He was so twisted, on his deathbed he insisted that a wet nurse supply him with mother’s milk right from her bosom. Lurking in the shadows and catacombs, we will never know the full scope of the pain this pope inflicted, especially on Jews. He will have earned his protracted stay in She’owl with Sha’uwl. Misery loves miserable company.

Guilty VIII’s successor to the contrived and now maligned “Seat of Saint Peter” was Rodrigo de Borja, who became the rotund Pope Alexander VI between 1492 and 1503. During the height of the Inquisition, he hypocritically presided over more orgies than masses. In 1501 he staged the “Joust of the Whores” so that 50 dancers could strip off their clothes around his table. They were taunted with scraps of food tossed onto the floor such that the women were forced to grovel at their feet like swine. Pope Alexander offered prizes, including grotesque clothing and jewelry, to the man who fornicated with the most women. To his credit, he may have been the only pope to welcome Jews, and was likely himself, a Jew. On the other hand, he had four illegitimate children and is alleged to have slept with one of them.

As an interesting aside, the reason “Christopher Columbus” (born either as Cristobal Colon (Spanish) or Cristoffa Corombo (Ligurian)) elected to sail off into the sunset at this time is that he and his officers, even many in the crew, were converso Jews who wanted to escape the Inquisition in Spain. It is also telling that the funding for the voyage did not come from Queen Isabella, but instead two Jewish Conversos, Louis de Santangel, Gabriel Sanchez, along with Don Isaac Abarbanel, a rabbi and statesman. That is not to say that Isabella didn’t play a role, because she confiscated most everything “Columbus” brought back, taking it away from his investors.

Pope Julius II (1503-1513) was a warmongering and drunken degenerate, and father of five, all out of wedlock. He declared “Christians represent the unstable, unlettered, superstitious masses.” This Vicar of Christ advised his secretary “to take three mistresses at one time in memory of the Holy Trinity.” He was the pope responsible for commissioning Michelangelo to paint the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, as well as the first of many to become infected with syphilis. He, like so many after him, contracted the venereal disease by frolicking with Rome’s male prostitutes. On Good Friday in 1508, the progression became so obvious he could no longer offer his feet to be kissed by the faithful as they were covered in syphilitic sores.

The first public outbreak of syphilis in Europe occurred in 1494 in Naples, Italy. Charles VIII’s invading soldiers took the disease with them back to France where it spread so rapidly it became known as the “French Disease.” It has been held that Columbus brought syphilis back with him from the New World. While he may have done so, skeletons in pre-Columbus Pompeii and Metaponto, Italy reveal somewhat similar damage to that caused by the disease.

Columbus’ culpability has been brought into question by a recent archeological investigation into a graveyard in an English monastery. Dating to between 1340 and 1360 CE, the bones of the Friars show overwhelming and unquestioned indications of syphilis. Even the reports from these Roman Catholic clerics affirm that the Friars were tormented by the disease, suffering from grotesque oozing pustules, intense pain, and senility. We can, therefore, conclude that this supposedly celibate and pious group of Catholic clergy were active homosexuals and may have also engaged in bestiality. There is proof that they were also alcoholics and that they scammed money from the surrounding community for religious services.

Pope Leo X (1513-1521) was the next to claim the “Seat of Saint Peter.” His life spoke volumes about what the Roman Catholic Church had become. On 11 March 1513, Giovanni de’ Medici was elected pope and assumed the aforementioned title of the 10th Lion. At the time, he had not even been ordained as a priest, a defect that was remedied four days later as the Vatican was celebrating the death of “Divine Julius Caesar.” Imperial Rome had become the Roman Catholic Church. And now they had their Caligula. Even the most Eusebius of Catholic apologists, those who attempted a defense of Julius II, abandoned Leo X to the wolves. Of him the Catholic Encyclopedia states: “He satisfied only those who looked upon the Papal Court as a center of amusement.”

This Lion of the Vatican began to “indulge in unnatural vice” to such a degree the Church did its best to cover it up. But still, Guicciardini could not help but note that the new pope was “exceedingly devoted to the flesh, especially those pleasures which cannot, with decency, be mentioned.” His biographer claimed that “he had penetrated the secrets of the night. He shared an improper love of some of his chamberlains, who were members of the noblest families of Italy.”

Today, with the Church exposed for having sexually abused hundreds of thousands of young boys, likely millions, modern Roman Catholics are trying to wipe away their long history of horrid behavior. They are suggesting that Leo X “was a man who lived a moral life and was sincerely religious,” (The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church), adding that his “pious qualities were responsible for his unanimous election by the cardinals.” (Zondervan Dictionary of the Christian Church)

History, however, tells a different story: When Pope Julius II died, Giovanni di Lorenzo de’ Medici (who would soon become Leo X) was so stricken with venereal disease, he was carried from Florence to Rome in a litter. Upon his arrival, an ulcer broke and the fluid which ran from it exuded such a stench that everyone in the enclave was poisoned by it. Thereafter, the cardinals consulted with physicians to better understand the matter. But they, being bribed earlier by Giovanni de’ Medici, said that he would not live a month. That being the case, the syphilitic lord of Medici, then 38 years of age, was elected pope on false information. But to the surprise of the cardinals, he soon recovered his health, giving the church a reason to repent. (Encyclopedia Britannica, 3rd ed., vol. ix, p. 788)

His first declaration was: “God has given me the papacy, now let me enjoy it.” His second act was to more fully develop the sale of “indulgences” into Christianity so that he could fund yet another military strike: the 18th Crusade since 1096. He was known to sell dispensations to the rich, on the promise to keep them from burning, absolving them from crimes such as murder, polygamy, perjury, and witchcraft. (Indulgences: Their Origin, Nature and Development, Quaracchi, 1897).

The “Holy Father” was broke. In less than two years he had squandered the wealth of the Vatican. So for a sum of money, a pardon was conveyed, a release from the pains of purgatory. Forgiveness of sins was granted to any person who bestowed their wealth to the Church. Not sufficiently enriching, a year after his election, he engaged in human trafficking, selling the archbishop of Mainz and two bishops to a rich, loose-living, young noble, Albert of Brandenburg, for a huge sum. Then he permitted the perverted libertine to recover his investment by authorizing him to market his own version of indulgences, something which inflamed Martin Luther.

Some 500 years before the Vatican received its first banking license, Lord Bryce, a British jurist and statesman, summarized the moral qualities of the priesthood reflected in their indulgences. He called it “a blatant fraud against the naïve…a portentous falsehood and the most unimpeachable evidence of the true thoughts and beliefs of the priesthood which framed it.” (The Holy Roman Empire, Lord Bryce, 1864, ch. vi, p. 107; Latin text, extracts, p. 76).

To replenish the coffers and maintain his luxuriant lifestyle, Leo X expanded the sale of indulgences into the leading source of Church revenue and developed a large body of priests to collect the payments. In forming his plans, he was assisted by his relative, Laurentius Pucci, whom he made Cardinal of Santi Quattro, and Johann Tetzel, a former military officer of the Teutonic Knights in Prussia. They appointed a series of retailers to keep pace with the disposal of goods given to pay for sins to be forgiven. He and his team would take their show on the road, traveling throughout Italy to entice more sales.

“The indulgence-seekers passed through the country in gay carriages escorted by thirty horsemen. The pontiff’s Bull of Grace was borne in front on a purple velvet cushion, or sometimes on a cloth of gold. The chief vendor of indulgences followed with his team, supporting a large red wooden cross; and the whole procession moved in this manner amidst singing and the smoke of incense.”

“The pope was the last speaker and cried out, ‘Bring money, bring money, bring money.’ He uttered this cry with such a dreadful bellowing that one might have thought that some wild bull was rushing among the people and goring them with his horns.” (Diderot’s Encyclopédie, 1759)

The Teutonic Knight, Tetzel, and the priests associated with him, routinely exaggerated the value of indulgences so as to lead people to believe that “as soon as they gave their money, they were certain of salvation and the deliverance of souls from purgatory.” (Diderot's Encyclopédie).

So resounding was the Protestant opposition to the sale of indulgences that Pope Leo X issued a bull called “Exsurge Domine,” whose purpose was to condemn Martin Luther for the audacity of claiming that “indulgences are frauds against the faithful and criminal offences against God.” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 3rd ed)

Forty-five years later, the eighteen-year-long Council of Trent pronounced an “anathema against those who either declare indulgences to be useless or deny that the Church has the power to grant them.” (Catholic Encyclopedia, vii, pp. 783-4). Hiding this blemish was the reason why Pope Clement XIII (1758-69) ordered all evidence of these indulgences destroyed. (The Censoring of Diderot's 'Encyclopédie' and the Re-established Text, D. H. Gordon and N. L. Torrey, Columbia University Press, New York, 1947)

To finance his lifestyle, Leo borrowed prodigious amounts of money from bankers at 40 percent interest. The booming brothels simply did not bring in enough tax money, even though there were 6,800 registered prostitutes servicing a male citizenry of fifty thousand. His gifts to relatives, friends, artists, writers and musicians, his lavish maintenance of an unprecedented court, the demands of the new St. Peter’s, the expense of the Urbino war and payments to Tetzel for preparation for the next crusade were all leading him to bankruptcy. “God’s work” was evidently expensive.

He even indulged in nepotism, appointing his son to Cardinal when he was just fourteen. When the College of Cardinals who had elected him tried to kill him, he had the flesh of their servants ripped off with burning pincers to extract information.

Leo X’s religious army was defeated when the French King Francis I invaded Italy in 1515. The Vatican was forced to concede control over the French Church and lost a meaningful source of revenue. In Rome, however, the bankers despoiled themselves. The Bini firm had lent Leo X 200,000 ducats, the Gaddi 32,000, the Ricasoli 10,000. Cardinal Pucci lent him 150,000 ducats and Cardinal Salviati 80,000, all so that the cardinals would have first claim on anything they could salvage from the Vatican. (Crises in the History of the Papacy, op. cit., ch. vi)

Leo X died bankrupt. As security for his loans, he pledged churches, monasteries, nunneries, the Villa Medici, the Vatican silverware, tapestries, manuscript collections, jewelry, even the infamous “Chair of Saint Peter” built by King Charles the Bald in 875 and displayed in the Vatican foyer until 1656 as a true relic upon which St. Peter once sat.

Desperate for money, Leo created 1,353 saleable offices, for which appointees paid a total of 889,000 ducats (US $175,000,000 in 2021 values). He nominated 60 additional chamberlains and 141 squires to the 2,000 persons who made up his ménage at the Vatican and received from them a total of 202,000 ducats – worth over $40 million today. In July 1517, he named 31 new cardinals, chosen “not of such as had the most merit, but of those that offered the most money for the honor and power.” Cardinal Porizzetti, among Leo’s appointees on this occasion brought in another half a million ducats for the treasury – another $100 million today.

Some cardinals received an income from the Church of 40,000 ducats a year (just shy of $8 million in today’s dollars) and lived in stately palaces manned by as many as 300 servants and adorned with every art and luxury known to the time. Leo X was so extravagant, he spent 4,500,000 ducats ($900,000,000) during his pontificate and died owing 400,000 (countless millions of dollars) more. (A History of the Popes, op. cit., vol. 2).

A favorite satire regarding Leo at that time was called the “Gospel according to Marks and Silver: In those days, Pope Leo said to the clergy: ‘When Jesus the Son of Man shall come to the seat of our Majesty, say first of all, “Friend, wherefore art Thou come hither? And if He gives you naught in silver or gold, cast Him forth into outer darkness.”’” (A History of the Popes, Joseph McCabe, ibid., vol. 2, the chapter on “The Age of Power”)

It was Pope Leo X who made the most infamous and damaging statement about Christianity in the history of the Church. His declaration revealed the Vatican’s ultimate fraud and unashamedly exposed the infantile nature of the Christian religion. At a lavish Good Friday banquet in the Vatican in 1514, and in the company of seven intimates, Leo X made the announcement the Church cannot invalidate. Raising a chalice of wine into the air, Pope Leo toasted: “How well we know what a profitable superstition this fable of Christ has been for us and our predecessors.” (Annales Ecclesiastici, Caesar Baronius, Folio Antwerp, 1597, tome 14)

The pope’s pronouncement is recorded in the diaries and records of both Pietro Cardinal Bembo (Letters and Comments on Pope Leo X, 1842 reprint) and Paolo Cardinal Giovio (De Vita Leonis Decimi, op. cit.), two associates who were witnesses to it. It is even validated by none less than Cardinal Caesar Baronius who was Vatican librarian for seven years. He wrote a 12-volume history of the Church, known as Annales Ecclesiastici, and remains the Church’s most acclaimed historian. (Catholic Encyclopedia, New Edition, 1976, ii, p. 105) His records provide vital inside information for anybody studying the rich depth of falsification in Christianity.

Cardinal Baronius, who turned down two offers to become pope in 1605, added the following comments about Pope Leo’s declaration: “The Pontiff has been accused of atheism, for he denied God and called Christ, in front of cardinals Pietro Bembo, Jovius and Iacopo Sadoleto and other intimates, ‘a fable.’” (Annales Ecclesiastici, op. cit., tomes viii and xi)

In an early edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia (Pecci ed., iii, pp. 312-314, passim), the Church wrote two-and-a-half pages trying to nullify the most destructive statement ever made in the name of Christianity. They suggested that what the pope meant by “profitable” was “gainful,” and “fable” was intended to mean “tradition.” Hence, the revisionist history would claim: “How well Christians have gained from this wonderful tradition of Christ.” But that is not what “the Holy Father” and “Christ’s Vicar on Earth” said.

It is from Roman Catholicism’s own records that Pope Leo X’s statement became known to the world. In his diaries, Cardinal Bembo, the Pope’s secretary for seven years, added that Leo: “was known to disbelieve Christianity itself. He advanced contrary to the faith and that in condemning the Gospel, therefore he must be a heretic; he was guilty of sodomy with his chamberlains; was addicted to pleasure, luxury, idleness, ambition, unchastity and sensuality; and spent his whole days in the company of musicians and buffoons. His Infallibility's drunkenness was proverbial, he practiced incontinency as well as inebriation, and the effects of his crimes shattered the people's constitution.” (Letters and Comments on Pope Leo X, ibid.)

Thereafter, John Bale (1495-1563) seized upon Pope Leo’s confession and the subsequent Vatican admission that the pope had spoken the truth about the “fable of Christ” and “put forward this knowledge truly.” (Annales Ecclesiastici, ibid.) Bale was an Englishman who had earlier joined the Carmelites at the age of twelve. He abandoned the order after the Inquisition, writing “I might never more serve so execrable a beast.” But then he slaughtered his family. (Of the Five Plagues of the Church [originally titled The Five Wounds of the Church], Count Antonio Rosmini [Catholic priest and papal adviser], 1848, English trans. by Prof. David L. Wilhelm, Russell Square Publishing, London, 1889)

Seventy-nine years after the fact, the Vatican would issue the following statement about Pope Leo: “As an ecclesiastic, his deficiency in professional knowledge, his utter indifference to the restraint of his character, the reputed laxity of his principles, his proneness to dissimulation, his deeply rooted voluptuousness and his fondness for the society of musicians, jesters and buffoons rendered him contemptible, or something worse. By a course of lavish expenditure in the indulgence of his own taste for luxury and magnificence, by the part which he took in the troublous politics of the day... Leo completely drained the papal treasury.” (Annales Ecclesiastici, Caesar Baronius, Antwerp, 1592-97, folio iii)

They would go on to say: “Leo gathered about him a company of gross men: flatterers, purveyors of indecent jokes and stories, and writers of obscene comedies which were often performed in the Vatican with cardinals as actors. His chief friend was Cardinal Bimmiena, whose comedies were more obscene than any of ancient Athens or Rome and who was one of the most immoral men of his time.

“Leo, who was morbidly fat, staged banquets which were as costly as they were vulgar. The coarsest jesters and loosest courtesans sat next to him and alongside the cardinals who played along. Since these things are not disputed, the Church does not deny the evidence of his vices. In public affairs he was the most notoriously dishonorable Vicar of Christ of the Renaissance period, but it is not possible here to tell the extraordinary story of his alliances, wars and cynical treacheries. His nepotism was as corrupt as that of any pope, and when some of the cardinals conspired to kill him he had the flesh of their servants ripped off to extract information.” (Crises in the History of the Papacy, op. cit., ch. v, “The Popes React with Massacre and Inquisition”)

Should apologists on behalf of the Whore of Babylon claim that we have plucked the likes of Paul, Constantine, Theodosius, Eusebius, Jerome, Chrysostom, Gregory I, Sergius III, Theodora, Marozia, John X and XII, Stephen VI and VII, Benedict IX, Boniface VII and VIII, Leo IX and X, Urban II, Innocent IV and VIII, Sixtus IV, Alexander VI, Julius II, out of an otherwise saintly crowd, let’s linger in hell a while longer.

Along came Paul IV (1555-1559). He earned his promotion by being particularly effective in causing pain. He was the Grand Inquisitor and thus master torturer of the Inquisition. He took mutilation to a whole new level, inventing some of the most heinous devices ever conceived by men – all in the name of Christian supremacy. He was so devoted to his sadistic and demonic craft that he gleefully reimbursed the inventors for the cruelest devices.

Paul IV was the first to order Jews to wear yellow hats at all times, reminiscent of the Nazi’s yellow stars. He forbade Jews from engaging in any form of commerce to ensure that they remained impoverished and in ghettos. Paul IV was so inhumane the population of Rome was halved during his brief reign. Upon his death, the statues of this sadistic man that the Church had commissioned were torn down and dragged through the sewers. A yellow cap was placed upon them and then they were tossed into the Tiber. When his dungeons were opened, even cardinals were freed.

This is getting wearisome but let’s hold our noses through three more popes. Urban VIII (1623-1644) is infamous for persecuting his former friend, Galileo. Put before the Inquisition, the scientist was forced to kneel before the pope and swear with his hands on the Gospels, that his theory that the earth revolved around the sun was a lie and a “damnable heresy.” He was ordered to write: “having been admonished by this Holy Office entirely to abandon the false opinion that the Sun was the center of the universe and immovable, and that the Earth was not the center of the same and that it moved, I abjure with a sincere heart and unfeigned faith, I curse and detest the said errors and heresies, and generally all and every error and sect contrary to the Holy Catholic Church.” The Father of Lies had the Church of his dreams.

With deception and debauchery in every corner, Pius IX (1846-1878) did the unthinkable. He invented the “Doctrine of Papal Infallibility.” The Church born of lies would now claim:

“Divine revelation is perfect and, therefore, it is not subject to continual and indefinite progress in order to correspond with the progress of human reason….

No man is free to embrace and profess that religion which he believes to be true, guided by the light of reason…

The Catholic religion shall be the only true religion….

The Catholic religion shall be held as the only religion of the state, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship….

The Roman Pontiff cannot and ought not to reconcile himself or agree with progress, liberalism, and modern civilization.”

Then for his first mistake, in 1854 he promulgated the dogma of the Immaculate Conception: that Mary, the Mother of God, was conceived without original sin.”

This same delusional narcissist was notoriously anti-Semitic. He forced all Roman Jews into ghettos of his making. He took their children away from them and forcibly baptized them, raising them in horrible conditions in Catholic orphanages.

In 1858, in a highly publicized case, the police of the Papal States seized a six-year-old Jewish boy, Edgardo Mortara, from his parents. Since a Christian servant girl unrelated to the family washed him during an illness shortly after his birth, he was considered “baptized,” and thus a Christian. Papal state law forbade Christians from being raised by Jews, even their own parents, so it was off to the orphanage. For his hatred of Jews and repudiation of freewill, Pope John Paul beatified Pius IX. So now we know what it means to be a good Catholic.

This leads us to Hitler’s Pope, Pius XII (1939-1958). His overt support for the rise of Adolf Hitler, the Nazi regime, and the Final Solution led to the deaths of 50 million people, 6 million of whom were Jews – one million of whom were children under the age of two. I wonder when he will become Saint Pius.

As I write these words, former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States, Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, has made news accusing a number of prelates of dereliction of duty in dealing with the Church’s sex abuse scandal. He specifically accused the current pope, Francis, of having elevated Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, knowing that he had committed acts of pedophilia with young boys. To which Francis said during his morning homily at Mass in the chapel of the Santa Marta residence in the Vatican, “The Great Accuser, as he, himself, tells God in the first chapter of the Book of Job, roams around the earth looking for someone to accuse. In these times it seems that the Great Accuser has been unleashed and has it in for the bishops. It is true, we are all sinners,” he said, “but the Great Accuser seeks to unveil sins so that they may be seen to scandalize the people.”

To be a professing Roman Catholic, you must be out of your mind. The Church of Rome is arguably the greatest menace ever conceived by men.

In a broader sense, the Christian Church conceived by Sha’uwl | Paul has remained in She’owl | Hell. Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts, Romans, 1st Corinthians, 2nd Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1st Thessalonians, 2nd Thessalonians, 1st Timothy, 2nd Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and Hebrews were either inspired or written by the Father of Lies, the Son of Evil, and the Plague of Death. His Lord Jesus Christ bears only a passing resemblance to Yahowsha’. Rather than speak for Yahowah, Paul contradicted Him. His religion, predicated upon absconding with the promises made to Dowd and Yisra’el, has impoverished more souls than anything ever written.



Questioning Paul

Incredible

…Testing Faith

7

The Death of Religion

Inaccurate Accounting…

It is with considerable trepidation that we venture into the pages of the Christian New Testament once again. And yet Shim’own’s alleged accounting of the fulfillment of Shabuw’ah in 33 CE as it was scribed by Luke in the Book of Acts may be worth the risk.

Having lived alongside Yahowsha’ for three years, and having been in Yaruwshalaim during Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym, the Disciple would have been prepared by the first three Miqra’ey to capitalize upon the fourth – Shabuw’ah. Shim’own had been in the right place, for the right reasons, at the right time, with the correct expectations such that he should have been able to share his experience with us. As a beneficiary of Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children, he would have been enriched by the Covenant, enlightened by the Towrah, and empowered by the Spirit, causing him to be an especially effective witness.

If only.

In the opening line of the second chapter of the book of Acts, it appears as if the Miqra’ of Shabuw’ah, like the three preceding it, was fulfilled in accordance with Yahowah’s Towrah | Instructions. Other than the Greek title replacing Yahowah’s Hebrew nomenclature, the initial sentence serves to make this point.

This known, we are painfully aware that that Acts, like the Gospel of Luke, is a work of fiction – far more wrong than right. Neither book was inspired by God. However, since they are considered “Scripture” by billions, these books, which were scribed at the conclusion of the lifetimes of the eyewitnesses to the events they chronicle, are seldom scrutinized as we are doing. And that is a shame, because it becomes immediately obvious to an informed and rational reader that they were agenda-driven and, more specifically, heavily influenced by Sha’uwl | Paul – the Plague of Death.

This becomes readily apparent the deeper we dive into either the Book of Acts or the Gospel of Luke because both are riddled with inaccuracies, fallacies, and, worse, anti-Semitism. It is only because the first seven chapters of Acts present events and discussions apart from Paul, and purport to convey the testimony of Yahowsha’s Disciples, especially Shim’own, that any of this is presented for your consideration.

With this in mind, the second chapter of Acts begins...

“Indeed (kai), on (en) the Day (hemera) of Fifty (Pentekoste – feminine form of pentekonta, meaning fifty), it was fulfilled (sumpleroo – was fully completed).

It came to exist (eimi) that all were assembled in harmony (pas homou – everyone was like-minded, like-natured, and unified in an assembly) in the presence of (epi) it (auto).” (Acts 2:1)

I may be the first to share the bad news. This is an inaccurate portrayal of Shabuw’ah. God has invited everyone to attend, such that those gathered on this day would be exceedingly diverse in their situations, perspectives, attitudes, and thinking. They would not be in harmony or like-minded if they were celebrating the Mow’ed according to Yahowah’s Towrah | Guidance.

“And immediately (aphno) there came into existence (ginomai) out of (ek) heaven (ouranos) the sound of information and news (echos – of a spoken report), like (hosper – corresponding to) a compelling force (biaias – a powerful source of energy), moving inwardly and upholding (pheromai) the breath of spiritual life (pnoe – feminine derivative of pneuma Spirit), and filling (pleroo – supplying) the whole (holos) household (oikon) where (ou) they were residing.” (Acts 2:2)

I have had the opportunity to spend the past twenty years of my life aided by the Ruwach Qodesh. As we will discover when we consider Yahowah’s prophets, particularly Dowd, Solomon, and Yasha’yah, God had a great deal to say about how what you are reading would be used to influence His people. And from those words and this experience, I can say without equivocation that this is not how the Set-Apart Spirit operates in our lives. She does not speak externally, but instead internally. She does not communicate independently from the Word of God, but instead enlightens us regarding it. She is inspiring, not compelling. And the Spirit does not make a racket. When She comes upon us, there is no audible sound.

“And languages (glossa – the various dialects of human speech) became apparent to them (horao – they came to know and understand them), like a fire burning (pyros) in them.

And they were distributed (diamerizo – dispersed), conferred, and appointed (kathizo) upon (epi) each one (hekastos) of them (autos).

And they were all individually (pas) filled with (pimplamai) the Holy (hagion – gender neuter of hagios) Spirit (ΠΝΣ – placeholder for pneuma), and began (archomai) to speak (laleo) other (heteros – different) languages (glossa – dialects), just as (kathos) the Spirit (ΠΝΑ) gave (didomi) them the ability to convey the spoken words (apophtheggomai – the ability to pronounce words).” (Acts 2:3-4)

It is true: the world would benefit from understanding the Mow’ed | Enduring Testimony regarding the Appointments which are Miqra’ey | Invitations to be Called Out and Meet. And the only way for people around the globe to understand what the Towrah Teaches would be through accurate translations.

This is largely why the Yada Yahowah Series exists. We recognize the value of rendering the testimony Yahowah conveyed in Hebrew in the language spoken by the most people. English has become the most universal – especially among Jews.

What is inaccurate, however, is that there is no indication in the Towrah and Prophets that the Spirit teaches anyone a foreign language. She enlightens us in the language of God – Hebrew.

It is likely that most, if not all, of the Disciples would have been bilingual. In addition to Hebrew, they would have been reasonably fluent in Aramaic, Greek, and Latin due to the influence of the Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks, and Romans.

What they were missing, based upon what has been said and what follows, is an accurate understanding of what the Towrah teaches. And that is the role of the Spirit.

If it were not for the popularity of the Pentecostal movement, where “speaking in tongues” is interpreted to be “praising God in a heavenly language,” I would not be required to state the obvious. This presentation states that those affected by the Spirit were equipped to speak human languages, not God’s. The language spoken in heaven is Hebrew, rendering the notion of “speaking in the tongues of angels” by muttering incomprehensible gibberish – as nonsensical as the sounds, themselves. What’s more, Pentecostals act like they are out of their minds, often posing as the poster children for: This is your Brain on Religion.

The reason for the “likes of a burning fire within them” was to replace the experience of Moseh and the Children of Yisra’el around Choreb when the Towrah was being revealed. These “Christians” experience their own fire, and thus their own New Testament to replace the Towrah.

The claim here is that this spirit, rather than enlightening the Disciples, equipped them to become bilingual. And while that is unlikely, what follows is an outright lie. It was scribed by Luke on Paul’s behalf to besmirch Jews. For his new religion to prevail, Yahuwdym would have to be swept off center stage and replaced by the Gentile Church.

“And now (de) existing (eimi) inside (eis) Yaruwshalaim (Ierousalem – Jerusalem), resided (katoikeo) Yahuwdym (Ioudaios – Jews), overtly pious (eulabes) men (andros) from (apo) every (pas) ethnicity (ethnos – race) under (hypo) heaven (ouranos).

And so now when (de) this (houtos) voice (phone) came to exist (ginomai) in large assemblies of people (plethos), they were confused (sygcheo), because (hoti) each and every one (hekastos heis) heard (akouo) what was spoken (laleo) in his (autos) own (idios) language (dialektos).” (Acts 2:5-6)

As is the case with so much of the Christian New Testament, the writer’s attempts to paint Jews as hypocrites, overtly pious, and thus conniving and undeserving, is pathetic. And it is dishonest to claim that Yahuwdym | Jews, who are a unique ethnicity, represent “every race under heaven.” This overture defines Gowym | Gentiles.

This amalgamation of Jews into one monolithic perception was not a simple mistake, but instead sinister and deliberate. Paul, like Muhammad after him, wanted God’s Chosen People tarred with the same brush. The reason for this is that the Jews, unlike the Gentiles, knew that both men were lying because they were constantly misappropriating and misquoting their Towrah wa Naby’ to establish their credibility. Having rejected both Paul and Muhammad, the Jews had to be silenced and discredited for either of these infamous men to be believed.

Beyond silencing Yahuwdym, for Paul’s claims or those of Muhammad to be seen as plausible, their followers would have to become the recipients of the promises made to God’s people – the Yisra’elites. And for that to occur, they would both have to concoct schemes by which God not only rejected His people but was compelled to replace them with others. They accomplished this by slandering Jews – attributing all manner of lies to them, and doing so in a way that the entire race would be despised.

The first strokes toward that end appear in Paul’s fourteen epistles. The next are here in Acts, followed in chronological order by the slanderous and sour notes in Mark, Luke, and Matthew.

Keeping it real, it would have been impossible for there to have been a gathering representing every race on earth in this place at this time. Further, people are confused by languages they do not speak, and not by their native tongue. Yes, I am pointing out the obvious, and yet, without someone having done so, billions upon billions have been misled by this malarkey for nearly a score of centuries.

You may have also noticed that the scene changed abruptly from a room of like-minded people within a single home to a widespread phenomenon expressed throughout an entire city. That could never have occurred within the Covenant because participation is the result of a deliberate and sequential process. It was fabled here because Paul needed to break free of the Disciples, the Hebrew Towrah, and the Chosen People. He required the acceptance of the opposite of these things. And that is why his unGodly message, in his language, with the people he claimed as his own, was being born anew by way of Paul’s satanic spirit on this day.

Lucky for me, I do not live under the influence of Paul’s and Peter’s Roman Catholic Church. Given the opportunity, they would have tortured me to death as a deterrent to keep me, and dissuade others, from telling you the truth. And yet sadly today, they are tormenting little children instead.

It is bewildering that so many believe that this irrational rant was inspired by God. Even worse than inferring that your god is a nincompoop, through this verbal diarrhea, Christians somehow think that God withdrew the countless promises He had made to Yisra’el and transferred them to Gowym. Not only would that have made God a liar and an anti-Semite, like themselves, He would have become completely untrustworthy – giving ever more credence to the realization that religious gods are made in man’s image. And in reality, the Romans who controlled Judea, and who evolved into the Roman Catholic Church, were far worse than the Jews. Throughout the history of the religion, that would never change.

Continuing to slander the Chosen People on behalf of the worst of people, we read…

“And (kai) besides (de), they were out of their minds (existemi), and they were surprised (thaumazo), saying (lego), ‘Look (idou), are not (ou) the entirety (hapas – the whole and all) of them who are (eimi) speaking (laleo) Galileans (Galilaios)?’” (Acts 2:7)

Pointing out the obvious again, the Disciples were entirely Jewish – as were each of the celebrants of this day, thereby rendering this entire diatribe absurd. Galilee was used as a pejorative because it was a swampy, mosquito-infested lowland, beneath Jerusalem in status and elevation. It was inserted to make the Jews appear like snobs.

This dialogue demonstrates the inherent fraud associated with the Christian New Testament. At the very earliest, Acts was written forty to fifty years after the fulfillment of Shabuw’ah – well beyond the time a specific conversation could have been accurately recalled. Luke, its author, was not an eyewitness to any of these events – making his account hearsay. Moreover, “pious Jews” would have spoken Hebrew, not Greek. Further, the Roman legions which occupied Yaruwshalaim were comprised of conscripts and slaves from throughout the Empire. Under such circumstances, the sound of a foreign language would not have driven anyone crazy.

Much of the Christian New Testament was written to include awkward and unattested conversations. Not only were they contrived, they were projected upon the entire population – all to condemn the Jewish people. That way, the Christians could not only claim superiority, they would have a common enemy and ready excuse for their horrid behavior.

“Somehow (pos), each and every one (hekastos) hears them speak (akouo) in the distinct (idios – individual and unique) language and dialect (dialektos) of their birth (gennnao): Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and those who live in Mesopotamia, Yahuwdah (Ioudaia), Cappadocia, Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, Pamphylia, Egypt (Aigyptos), parts of Libya toward Cyrene, and visitors from Rome (Rhomaios), not only Yahuwdym (Ioudaios – Jews) and newcomers (proselutos – visitors from other nations), Cretans and Arabs (Araps), listening to (akouo – receiving the news and hearing) them speak (laleo – talk) in their own tongue (glossa – language and dialect) the magnificent things and powerful works (megaleios – the great deeds and miracles) of the God (ΘΥ – placeholder for theou).” (Acts 2:8-11)

While it would have been impossible, even for a multilingual Disciple and eyewitness to know if this had occurred, the overall point is unlikely, especially with the pretense of authenticity inherent in the details. Among the most glaring issues, the Romans were not “visitors” and Yahuwdym were listed twice while their language was not mentioned. Most everyone from Mesopotamia would have spoken Aramaic, a language which was very similar to Hebrew, making “Parthians, Medes, and Elamites” verbose while the absence of the Persians was a significant slight. Arabs speak a corrupted form of Hebrew. Similarly, insignificant places like “Cappadocia, Pontus, Phrygia, Pamphylia, and Cyrene” were listed, while the people responsible for the lingua franca of this region – the Greeks – were not.

Had this been written: “the Disciples, in addition to their native Hebrew, now spoke Greek, Latin, and Aramaic” it would have been far more credible. One would have been hard-pressed to find anyone in Yaruwshalaim who was not conversant in one or more of these languages.

In this passage, the Greek word, proselutos, is transliterated in most English Bibles as “proselytes.” Then, those who aided and abetted this misleading transliteration, erroneously defined that word as “converts to Judaism,” and thereby misconstrued Yahowah’s intent. This day marked neither the birth of the Church nor the transition from Judaism to Christianity as Catholics and Protestants profess. Equally relevant, Jews did not, and do not, proselytize. Paul’s rants against “Judaizers” were delusional.

The beneficiaries of Passover and UnYeasted Bread, as few as they may have been, would have been born anew from above, becoming spiritual children, adopted into Yah’s family, fully seven Shabat days ago. Now, the truth be known, they were being given the opportunity to grow up, becoming enriched, enlightened, and empowered by the Towrah’s promises. The actual celebrants of Shabuw’ah were being prepared for Taruw’ah. There would have been no religious converts to be found here, only empowered and enriched relationships.

Sporadically, from this moment to this present day, the Word of God has been conveyed to the peoples of the world by Spirit-filled men and women who are cognizant of the Towrah. Yahowah’s family is inclusive of people from different races and places. Everyone is welcome. And all arrive the same way – by embracing the Covenant and observing its Invitations to Meet with God.

The Miqra’ of Chamisym / Invitation to be Called Out and Meet of Fifty is qodesh | set apart, a special day for us to reveal the magnificent work performed by Yahowah in concert with the Set-Apart Spirit. It is an annual party where those who are related to Yah invite their friends to celebrate the good news – a path home has been laid out at great cost, its toll paid by God, so that we might journey free of encumbrances. This day of growth and enrichment will endure for all time, for all people, and in all places, serving as a rehearsal of what was to come and now has been done.

The Feast of Seven Sevens follows Firstborn Children by seven weeks. The pattern is seven Shabats plus one day after the special Shabat observance of UnYeasted Bread – the most essential day on the road to our redemption. As we have discovered, this opportunity to be Called Out and Meet on Shabuw’ah is a time to be enriched by Yahowah’s Word so that we can communicate His testimony more effectively during Taruw’ah. It is open to all people, free and slave, Yahuwdym and Gowym, men and women, young and old, no matter how common or unclean. We know this because it is the only Miqra’ey where yeasted bread is sanctioned – and because God has said so. Unlike the Catholic Eucharist which is limited to their converts, this Festival comes with an open invitation. Shabuw’ah is the day which unites the promise with its purpose, making them one.

The reason for the yeast in the bread is ingenious. To become part of Yahowah’s family, we are all required to remove it from our lives – which is symbolic of walking away from Mitsraym. And now that those who have disassociated from religion and politics have become immortal and perfected, adopted and empowered, as Covenant members we are perfectly equipped to share what we know with those most in need of hearing it – those under the influence of man’s malignant schemes. It is the cure for what ails them. And to help them, we must speak to them where we find them.

Upon examining the nature of this day, one comes to understand that the best way to broadcast its message and celebrate its inheritance is to host a grand party replete with a medley of foods, including a variety of libations, and most especially breads and desserts baked with yeast. Invite everyone who is interested in knowing God, whether they are engaged in a relationship with Him, mired in a religious swamp, or deluded by a secular mirage. After a time of casual conversation and music, stand before the guests and share what you have come to know about the path home our Heavenly Father has provided. Explain how, on this day, those who rely upon Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children are immersed in Yahowah’s Set-Apart Spirit, enabling them to grow, enriched by the Covenant, enlightened by the Towrah, empowered by the Spirit. Most of all, have fun. Radiate the light which comes from knowing Yah and express the joy loving families experience as their children grow.

Each Miqra’ has been designed to memorialize an important event in the life of Yisra’el and to be prophetic of even more important events in the unfolding of Yahowah’s redemptive plan. They speak poignantly of Yahowah’s role in the reconciliation of His people, with detail after detail pointing directly and unambiguously toward the Towrah as the map and light along the way.

Thus far, each of the first four Mow’ed has been introduced and fulfilled in the proper order, and on the very day of its mandated celebration. That fact alone makes the odds against their coincidental fulfillment over sixteen billion to one. The lesson is: pay attention to dates and numbers – they are important to our Creator.

And this pattern is important because there are three more annual Feasts yet to be realized. They all take place in the autumn, in Tishri, the seventh and final month of Yahowah’s redemptive calendar. Each predicts a strategically essential event in the reconciliation of Yisra’el and Yahuwdah with Yahowah. And more to the point, they complete the picture God is painting.

The spring Feasts have come to pass; the fall Feasts are yet to come. Yahowah has given us carefully drawn prophetic word pictures to teach us the most important lessons we can possibly learn.



While it is trivial by comparison, there is a sinister religious proclamation which may have inadvertently arisen as a result of Shabuw’ah – one which poisons one-and-a-half billion souls. To share Yahowah’s message of salvation in the language of the Araps / Arabs (in Acts 2:8-11), an alphabet was required, as the Arabs had none at this time. Written Arabic, the language of the Qur’an, was actually created by Syrian Yahuwdym | Jews who were Followers of the Way for the express purpose of witnessing to the merit of this day. The resulting “Syriac” alphabet and vocabulary, derived from the 22 letters which comprise the Hebrew alphabet in the 6th century CE, ultimately became the tool Satan would use in his most acclaimed recital: the Islamic Qur’an.

Of particular interest in this regard is the fact that almost all of the Qur’an’s essential terms are actually Hebrew, with a smattering of Greek – but not Arabic. And yet, Muslims the world over, unaware of the basis of their language, claim that those who do not read paleo-Arabic (which would include all but a few hundred people worldwide) cannot understand Allah’s message. That would be untrue because the best way to comprehend the Qur’an (besides reordering it chronologically and setting it into the context of Muhammad’s life as it is revealed in the Hadith / Oral Reports) is to appreciate the meaning of the Hebrew words which comprise the Qur’anic message.

This includes Qur’an, itself. It is from the Hebrew Qara’ and conveys the same meaning: to read and recite. It is the first word that Gabry’el | Gabriel (a Hebrew name) allegedly conveyed to Muhammad.

The basis of Allah’s claim, and the foundation of Islam, is the false notion that Allah, not Yahowah, was the God of ‘Adam, ‘Abraham, Moseh, Dowd, and the prophets, even Yahowsha’ (whom Allah calls Issa, Arabic for Esau). Allah protests that “his Qur’an confirms the Torah, Prophets, and ‘Gospels’,” when in fact, Allah’s Qur’anic recital is the antithesis of Yahowah’s Towrah wa Naby’ and the Gospels contradict the Towrah as well.

Muhammad, for example, as Allah’s lone messenger, violated and negated each of the Ten Statements Yahowah etched in stone. Allah even says that “his Qur’an, written in pure Arabic,” was “inscribed on tablets before the world was created,” and the reason that the “Torah, Prophets, and Gospels” no longer convey the same message is that 7th century CE Jews living in Yathrib, today’s Medina, “changed and corrupted their ‘scriptures’ to foil Muhammad.”

Therefore, the existence of the Dead Sea Scrolls proves that the Islamic god was lying. But more than this, it is unconscionable that the advocates of Islam, a religion which inverts and repudiates Yahowah’s message, claim that the Arabic of the Qur’an is proof of its superiority, and material to its message, when in fact, the means to convey it was developed by the very people Allah orders Muslims “to wipe out to the last.”

These things known, had rabbis, priests, and Christian theologians not removed Yahowah’s name from His Towrah wa Naby’, Islam would have been stillborn. Even a fool would have been able to recognize that Allah is not Yahowah.



There is still much we can learn from this portrayal of what “happened” on Seven Shabats in the year of its fulfillment – even if the primary lesson is to distrust the Christian New Testament.

“But (de) also (kai), all (pas) were astonished (existemi – astounded beyond comprehension), even (kai) perplexed and puzzled (diaporeo – embarrassed and in doubt, at a loss without sufficient information to render a rational conclusion), with different people (allos) saying (lego) to (pros) others (allos), ‘What (tis) is (eimi) the purpose of (thelo) this (houtos)?’” (Acts 2:12)

Let’s be honest, there was nothing everyone in Jerusalem agreed upon – not among the Romans and Greeks, and certainly not among Jews. Their history proves that Yahuwdym were divided among themselves. And it was their internal fractures which festered, bringing the wrath of Rome upon Judea with Pompey’s invasion in 63 BCE, Vespasian’s assault in 67 CE following the revolt in 66, and again following the Bar Kokhba uprising under Akiba by Hadrian in 133 CE. On all three occasions, the Jews would likely have prevailed over the Romans had they not been a house divided.

Any time we read, “with people saying…” we know that the writer’s sentiments are being projected upon his perceived foes. An actual quote would have to be attributed to a specific individual who said it and to another who heard it, in addition to providing the names or conditions under which it was preserved accurately over the decades.

Moreover, the Jews knew the purpose of Shabuw’ah. It was Greeks, like Luke, who were clueless.

When it comes to knowing the mind of God there are several paths a person can take. Some simply ignore the quest, preoccupied with their mortal existence or overconfident that man is the highest form of life. Others, like the man who wrote this passage, do not know enough to draw an informed conclusion – or are driven by their own agenda. And while both of these roads lead to death, and to the destruction of one’s soul upon the completion of their mortal existence, there is a far worse fate awaiting those who promote the false notion that “Pentecost celebrates the birth of the Church.” There is no mention of a “Church” in the Towrah or in the Naby’. Only the Beryth and its Miqra’ey are presented. We have been called out of man’s world and into God’s realm, away from religion and into a familial relationship.

Even today, the secular and the sectarian ridicule the Mow’ed Miqra’ey, belittling them, concealing them, corrupting them, or counterfeiting them. It is why the narrow path to God remains unpopular.

“Others (heteros), now (de) poked fun, scoffing, sneering, and mocking (diachleuazo – flapping their lips and running their mouths), saying (legos), ‘It is because they are (hoti eimi) exceptionally full (mestoo) with sweet wine (gleukos – new wine which is still fermenting).’” (Acts 2:13)

If Luke had written about the correlation between the Towrah’s presentation of Shabuw’ah and its fulfillment rather than spending his time trying to besmirch Jews as slanderous and demeaning, there would be a point to this other than not to trust him.

And speaking of someone who did not trust him, Shim’own, misnamed “Petros” in this account, stood up because we are called to confront lies, exposing and condemning them. We are never asked to be tolerant of deception. And that is why...

“But now (de) Petros (Petros – Peter, Greek for “rock”) stood up (histemi – made a stand so as to enable others to stand) with (syn) the eleven; he raised (epairomai) his voice (phone) and he spoke to them (apophthengomai – he addressed them), ‘Yahuwdym (Ioudaios – a transliteration of Yahuwdym – Beloved of Yahowah) men (andros) and all (pas) who dwell in (katoikeo) Yaruwshalaim (Ierousalem – a transliteration of Yaruwshalaim – the Source of Guidance on Reconciliation), listen carefully to (enotizomai) my voice (rhema), and let this (houtos) be (eimi) known (gnostos) to you…” (Acts 2:14)

Paul disowned his Hebrew name, Sha’uwl, not only because it was synonymous with She’owl | Hell, but because of the many prophecies where he was called out by name and condemned. As such, it served Paul’s interests to change Shim’own’s Hebrew name, which means “Listen to Him,” to the Greek “Petros,” for “Stone.” Additionally, Paul both envied and despised Yahowsha’s Disciples, which is why his pal, Luke, referred to them as “the eleven,” rather than by their title.

The notion that Shim’own bothered to confront the alleged rumor of “intoxication” is not likely, especially to say it in this way because it still infers that they were inebriated. But at least we finally have something to investigate with the upcoming reference to Yow’el | Joel.

“…because (gar) they are not (ou) drunk (methuo – intoxicated) in the manner (hos) you suppose (hypolambano – are willing to accept), for indeed (gar) it is (eimi) the third (tritos) hour (hora) of the day (hemera).

To the contrary (alla) this (houtos) exists as (eimi) the pronouncement (eipon) of (dia) the prophet (prophetes) Yow’el (Ioel – a transliteration of Yow’el, a contraction of Yahowah and ‘el, meaning Yahowah is God, but improperly transliterated Joel):” (Acts 2:15-16)

While we will turn to Yow’el to see what Shim’own may have had in mind in due time, let it be known that Shabuw’ah is the pronouncement of the prophet Moseh. There is nothing in Yow’el / Joel to explain Seven Shabats. It speaks of Yahowah’s return in 6000 Yah to fulfill Yowm Kipurym. Therefore, if Shim’own cited it as a retort to these supposed Jewish cynics, he was mistaken. It was the wrong Mow’ed and wrong time. And if Luke arbitrarily attributed this mistake to him, he demonstrated that his Gospel ought not be trusted. Either way, Acts 2:16 through 21 is erroneous.

According to Luke, Shim’own is said to have quoted Yow’el / Joel 2:28 through 32. At least that is what is recorded in Acts 2:17 through 2:21. However, since Shim’own did not deliver his “rebuttal” in Greek, even if it occurred, but instead in Hebrew, to accurately render what the Prophet wrote and the Disciple may have said, we will need to examine it in the original language – something we will do at the conclusion of this chapter and again during our review of the events pertaining to the Day of Reconciliations. So for now, here is that reading from the King James Version…

“And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: (17) And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: (18)

And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke: (19) The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord come: (20) And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” (Acts 2:21)

Should you prefer a more literal and accurate rendering…

“And it shall come to be (eimi – exist in an identical fashion) in (en) the final (eschatos – the last in a series (the theological term eschatology is derived from this word)) days (hemera), God (ΘΣ – placeholder for theos) says (lego – affirms), ‘I will pour out (ekcheomai – I will bestow and spill, liberally distributing) from (apo) Me, My (ego) Spirit (ΠΝΣ – placeholder for pneuma) upon (epi – among) all (pasa) flesh (sarx – physical bodies, on the corporeal mortal nature of humankind).

Your sons (huios) and your daughters (thygater) will speak inspired utterances (propheteuo – proclaim what God wants known).

Your young men (neaniskos – used of males between twenty-four and forty years old) shall see visions (horasis – from horao, see with their own eyes), and your elders (presbyteros – old men and ranking individuals) will experience supernatural communication from God (enypnion enupniazomai – experience revelations while dreaming). (Acts 2:17)

Indeed (ge – really and truly), upon (epi) My male servants (doulos – slaves) and also upon My female servants (doule – female slaves) in (en) those (ekeinos) days (hemera – period of time) I will pour out (ekcheomai – I will shed and bestow, spill and distribute) from (apo) Me, My (ego) Spirit (ΠΝΑ – placeholder for pneuma) upon (epi – among) them and they will speak inspired utterances (propheteuo – proclaim what God wants known). (Acts 2:18)

And (kai) I will allow and produce (didomi – bestow and permit) wonders and miracles which foreshadow significant upcoming events (teras – omens, marvels, and signs which serve as portent to arouse attention) in (en) the sky (ouranos – atmosphere and universe) above (ano) and signs (semeion – miraculous signals and unusual occurrences which transcend the common course of nature) upon (epi) the earth (ge – land) below (kato): blood (haima), fire (pyr), and (kai) rising clouds of (atmis – steam, billowing vapor, from aer, air and atmospheric) smoke (kapnos). (Acts 2:19)

The sun (helios) will be changed (metastrepho – turned) to (eis) darkness (skotos – obscured, made gloomy, from skia, have its light intercepted as in a shadow), and the moon (selene) to (eis) blood (haima) before (prin) the coming (erchomai – arrival and appearance) of the (ho) great (megas – massively important and enormously sizable) and brilliantly shining (epiphanies – wonderful, glorious, radiant, and illustrious, notable appearance in clear and full view shining forth as light visible as a star) day (hemera – time) of the Lord (ΚΩ – placeholder for kurios – most always conveyed as “LORD”). (Acts 2:20)

And it shall come to pass (eimi – be that) all (pas – everyone) who (hos), and as many as (an – used as a preposition to present a possibility), call upon (epikaleomai – ask for help in and bear) the (ho) personal and proper name (onoma) of the Kurio | Lord (ΚΩ) will be saved (sozo).’” (Acts 2:21)

This is yet another nail in the coffin of souls known as the Christian New Testament. Even when its authors turned to the Prophets for credibility’s sake, they embarrassed themselves. This did not occur in 33 CE but will in 2033. To understand Shabuw’ah, we must turn to Moseh, not Yow’el. Yow’el’s prophecy is spectacular, confirming many of the things we have surmised while offering new insights regarding what we should expect as the world is transformed before our eyes during the transition between Kipurym and Sukah.

It would be 2000 years from 33 CE to the last days in 2033. That alone should have been sufficient to scuttle Luke’s credibility and the notion that Acts was inspired. The Spirit did not come upon all flesh at this time – not even close. There were no new prophets inspired either – something that would remain so from Mal’aky to the fulfillment of Kipurym in 6000 Yah.

On this day, and for the 2000 which would transpire after it, there were no “wonders in the heavens nor signs in the earth beneath.” There would be “blood and fire, vapor and smoke” – but these would be man’s doing, not God’s. The “sun was not darkened” and the “moon did not appear as blood” at this time because the Day of Reconciliations in 6000 Yah, not Shabuw’ah in 4000 Yah, is the “great and notable day” of Yahowah to come. Further, as evidenced by this writing, no one called upon Yahowah’s name, and thus no one was saved.

So please tell me, how is it that billions upon billions are fooled by such outright lies? Unable to produce a prophecy, or even understand one, these buffoons couldn’t even get their history right. The acceptance of Acts provides a sad commentary on the perceptiveness of humankind. Most have become as Shim’own was portrayed: as dumb as a stone.

Luke’s late 1st century assessment of Shim’own’s protestations against his fellow Yahuwdym during the fulfillment of Seven Sevens continued with him giving religious zealots who were mocking these events an earful…

“Yisra’elite (Israelites – a transliteration of Yisra’elite) men (andros), listen to (akouo) these words (logos): Iesou (ΙΝΥ – a placeholder for Iesou which became “Jesus,” whose actual designation was Yahowsha’) the Nazarene (Nazoraios), is a man (andros) who publicly demonstrated (apodeiknymi) to (eis) you (sy) that He is from (apo) Theos (ΘΣ – placeholder for theos – god) using supernatural powers and abilities (dynamis) to perform extraordinary miracles with prophetic significance (teras).

These are signs (semeion) which (hos) Theos (ΘΣ – placeholder for theos – god) performed (poieomai) through (dia) him (autos) in your midst (mesos) as (kathos) you know (oida).” (Acts 2:22)

At this point, the ten tribes which comprised Yisra’el were long gone – hauled off to Assyria as slaves. Therefore, it is unlikely that Shim’own would have used this designation.

Having spent three years with Yahowsha’, Shim’own would have known his name, rendering “Iesou” absurd. The Greek rendering does not share a single letter in common with Yahowsha’. Even the Shin in Yahowsha’ is a sh, not s which would have been from a Sin or Samech.

Worse, why ask people to listen if all you are going to do is lie to them? Nazareth did not exist at the time. A town would not be established by that name until the 2nd or 3rd century. The designation, “Jesus of Nazareth,” conveys the wrong name and wrong place at the wrong time. This inclusion of Nazoraios here in Acts and again in Matthew proves that these embellishments were scribed by Eusebius in the 4th century – after Constantine’s mommy’s trip to the “Holy Land.”

If Yahowsha’ demonstrated that he was from God, there would have been no reason for this speech. If those among the hecklers had witnessed supernatural powers and extraordinary miracles, they would not be criticizing the Disciples but, instead, apologizing to them.

And yet, none of this would have made Yahowsha’ “Theos | God,” as the passage concludes. Moreover, it is not the purpose of the Passover Lamb to show off and not in God’s nature to dazzle us with signs and wonders. His preference is to impress us with His words – of which we have almost nothing credibly retained from Yahowsha’.

“He was appointed to (horizo) the pre-arranged and prophetic (prognosis) plan and purpose (boule) of Theos (ΘΣ)…” (Acts 2:23)

With Calvinism on the rise in the West, I would like to make an important distinction. Yahowah’s response to the fallen nature of humankind was predetermined but our response to God is always subject to freewill. Each of us has the opportunity to ignore God’s plan, serve a god of man’s making, accept Yahowah, or reject Him.

Within prophecy there are certain things which Yahowah has preordained – the fulfillment of the Miqra’ey are examples. They will be accomplished on the stage of human events in complete accord with the Towrah’s | Teaching, all in the proper order, and on the predetermined day, regardless of mankind’s response.

Other prophecies simply report what mankind will do with the continued exercise of freewill. In such cases, Yahowah has witnessed our future and is reporting back to us what He has seen. Then when these things consistently occur as He attested, we are provided proof that we can trust His testimony. So, while Yahowah was certain that Yahuwdym would return to Yisra’el in the last days as a result of the Holocaust, He had no hand in those horrific events. Individual men and women made poor decisions, squandering the gift of freewill, and the consequences were devastating. Such will continue to be the case between now and 2033.

What follows is as essential to Paul’s claim that Christians replaced Jews because Jews betrayed God as it is errant in every regard. The purpose of the Pesach ‘Ayl was to be the Passover Lamb. Had Yahowsha’ not served to fulfill Yahowah’s promise, there would be no assurance of eternal life in the Covenant nor reason to trust God. Yahowsha’ did not fulfill Passover because he was betrayed, but instead because that was the reason he was here.

“…he was betrayed and given over (ekdotos) to (dia) the hand (cheir) of the Towrahless (anomos) who chose to take control and lift Him up (anaireo), affixing Him (prospegnumi).” (Acts 2:23)

If a modicum of Yahuwdym actually handed Yahowsha’ over to the Romans then, rather than blaming them and shaming them, we ought to be thanking them. Fulfilling Pesach was essential for us to live, and for that to occur, the lamb must die.

Everyone was “Towrahless” at this time. The Jews turned to their Talmud, the Greeks to the Odyssey, the Romans to the Aeneid, and the Christians to Paul’s Epistles.

While prospegnumi is almost always translated “crucify,” this Greek word simply means to “affix and to fasten.” I bring this to your attention because the Roman cross and its piercing nails were irrelevant. Christianity has made a religion out of an inanimate object. It is like crediting a knife for the Yatsa’ | Exodus rather than Pesach. The fulfillment of Passover is about the who, where, why, and when, not the how or even the what.

As an interesting aside, it is worth noting that the preponderance of Catholic sculptures and paintings depict Yahowsha’ in one of two ways, as a helpless infant attached to his mother, or helplessly affixed to a cross. It is as if the Catholic hierarchy has chosen to control him in these ways. They are quietly saying: if he cannot take care of himself, why would you trust him to take care of you?” And that leads to: “Trust us instead with your soul.”

“Theos (ΘΩ) restored Him to life and raised Him (anistamai), releasing and dismissing Him (lou) from the suffering and pain (odin) of death (thanatos) because (kathoti) it was not (ou) possible (dynatos) for Him to exist (eimi) held and influenced (krateo) by (hypo) these things.” (Acts 2:24)

On the contrary, the Passover Lamb is never restored to life. The Pesach ‘ayil does not make this sacrifice to save itself. Further, Yahowsha’s body suffered the full impact of what the Romans mercilessly inflicted. He was not released or dismissed from the pain. And as we know, the excruciating anguish was perpetrated by the Romans who became Roman Catholics, not Jews.

Furthermore, this diatribe was supposedly in support of the Miqra’ of Shabuw’ah. So why is “Peter” fixated on presenting what occurred previously? And why, if his intent was to also cover the events of Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym, didn’t he mention any of these by name? This is fixated on attributing Divine attributes to Iesou rather than explaining the benefits of the Mow’ed. If “Peter” wanted to speak about Yahowsha’, the time to do it was on Passover, not Shabuw’ah. Even within the jaundiced Christian accounts, Yahowsha’ departed prior to the fulfillment of Seven Sevens. The events of this day had nothing to do with him or what he had done.

That said, there are few things as insightful when understood as what actually transpired on Passover, UnYeasted Bread, and Firstborn Children as it relates to Yahowsha’s body, Yahowah’s soul, and the Set-Apart Spirit. Fortunately, those who have been with us from the beginning know that Yahowah honored His promise to provide the lamb by placing His nepesh in Yahowsha’. Upon the completion of Passover, the Set-Apart Spirit took Yahowah’s soul to She’owl upon the death of Yahowsha’s body. What remained of the Passover Lamb was incinerated later that night in accordance with Yahowah’s instructions. Then during UnYeasted Bread, a Shabat in 33 CE, Yahowah’s soul endured She’owl to redeem us, to give us the choice of not being separated from Him. Having paid our penalty, the Set-Apart Spirit freed Yahowah’s soul from the place of separation, fulfilling Firstborn Children.

The Apostle’s alleged Shabuw’ah soliloquy was “advanced” by way of a second Tanakh citation, this time from the 16th Mizmowr / Psalm. But so as to better understand why he selected it, let’s begin our examination by studying the entire Song from which the excerpt was taken. Shim’own would not have cited it in a vacuum so we should not approach it out of context either.

It begins…

“A poem (miktam – a written piece of literature, inscribed by staining the parchment upon which it is indelibly conveyed) concerning Dowd (la Dowd – about the Beloved).

Watch closely over me and be concerned about me (shamar ‘any – keep a caring focus upon, tend to, and be observant regarding me), God (‘el), because (ky) in You (ba ‘atah – with You) I confide and trust so I am kept safe and comforted (chasah – I rely for protection and safekeeping).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 16:1)

The contrast is between trust and faith. Trust is the result of knowing while faith is its substitute. Dowd, as the exemplar of knowing, is God’s Chosen One. Paul, as the advocate of faith, became the Plague of Death. My hope is that Shim’own may have cited Dowd’s Psalm to make this very point.

Dowd knew where and with whom he stood…

“I say (‘amar – expressing in words) to approach (la – concerning and about) Yahowah (Yahowah – God’s name pronounced as taught by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence and our shalowm – reconciliation from ‘elowah – our God), ‘You are my foundation and support (‘edown ‘any ‘atah – You are my Upright One who is the Pillar of my Tabernacle).

I have nothing to offer which is worthwhile or useful (tobah ‘any bal – I have nothing good, satisfying, or beneficial) apart from You (‘al ‘atah).’” (Mizmowr / Psalm 16:2)

Trust is built upon a reliable foundation. And when our footing is right, our lives are satisfying and worthwhile.

Our goal in life ought to be to approach Yahowah. The result is to be enriched by that which is genuinely worthwhile and beneficial.

If Dowd, the man with the most illustrious résumé on Earth, felt this way, it should be especially true for us. The most brilliant mind and articulate orator in human history credited Yahowah in everything.

I find it particularly reassuring that Dowd found pleasure in knowing that we would capitalize upon what he had written to lead others to this same place…

“Regarding (la – pertaining to) the Set Apart (qadowsh – the separated and uncommon) in the Land (ba ha ‘erets – within the material realm) who show the way to the relationship (‘asher – who lead to the benefits of the proper path), they are also (hem wa) awesome (‘adyr – marvelous, honorable, and worthy), and in them (ba hem – with them) is all my satisfaction and enjoyment (kol chephets – is my greatest joy, engendering my complete support and appreciation).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 16:3)

God’s Covenant Family are Yah-some.

In contrast to those who would join him in their approach to Yahowah, Dowd realized that most people would be led astray – chasing after gods made by men…

“The sorrows and suffering (‘atsebeth – the anxiety and anguish, the unfavorable circumstances and mental illness) of those (hem) who are impetuous and who chase after (mahar – who are rash and without wisdom, who are fearful, and unwilling to invest the time to study, and who quickly buy into) another (‘achar – someone or something different, either following along or doing so to develop a following) will be great as they will be numerous and influential (rabah – will multiply, becoming the preponderance of people, and who through their popularity will gain tremendous status).

Their drink offerings of blood (nesek hem min dam – their sacred and pagan liquid libations to a deity associated with killing and death [a.k.a. the Roman Catholic claim that “Jesus” died and that they are drinking his blood during their Eucharist]), I will never pour or offer (bal nasak – I will not endorse, especially with all of their associations with pagan gods, religious rites, and death).

And I will not advance or promote (ba nasa’ – I will never lift up or bear, honor or respect, desire or tolerate) their names (‘eth shem hem) on my lips (‘al sapah – as part of my speech).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 16:4)

This is the choice between Dowd and Paul, Yahowah and Jesus, the Towrah and the New Testament, a relationship or a religion, the Covenant or Christianity, life or death. The latter is the fate of those who are impetuous and fearful, unwilling to invest the time to study the actual words Yahowah conveyed. And yet, Dowd knew the most influential and the most prevalent would be wrong. His assessment was as accurate then as it is now.

Dowd chose wisely and he was rewarded for being right…

“Yahowah’s (Yahowah) gift is my decision, my fate, my assigned share, and my reward (manath cheleq ‘any – allotment is my choice) as well as my cup and receptacle (wa kows ‘any – and the vessel which holds what I will drink).

You (‘atah) uphold (tamak) my lot and destiny (gowral ‘any – my portion and allotment, even my systematic means of making decisions, delineating the outcome). (Mizmowr / Psalm 16:5)

The measuring lines (chebel – the inheritance and boundary lines, the shares and apportionments) have aligned for me (naphal la ‘any – have been allotted and distributed to be) in highly acceptable and delightful ways (ba ha na’ym – in pleasant and favorable places).

Surely (‘aph – in addition), I have been offered (‘al ‘any) an enjoyable and pleasing, especially brilliant (shaphar – a lovely and beautiful, radiant and bright) inheritance (nachalah – association and share). (Mizmowr / Psalm 16:6)

I will commend the excellence of (barak ‘eth – I favor the goodness and I am thankful for the greatness of) Yahowah (Yahowah), who, to show the way to the benefits of the relationship (‘asher – who, to lead the way to the path to get the greatest joy out of life), determines the plan and provides me with counsel and purpose (ya’ats ‘any – decides the direction and offers me advice), even (‘aph) during the night (laylah).

Then my visceral reaction to being Yah’s implement (kilyah ‘any – my kidneys (which the ancient Hebrews perceived as the source of emotions), core nature, inclinations, and feelings, my innermost being; a compound of kol – total, kaly – implement of Yah) provides me with disciplined teaching, proper instruction, and correction (yasar ‘any – facilitates my training and acceptance, direction and guidance, and my appreciation for cause and consequence).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 16:7)

And now we know why Yahowah chose Dowd, called him His son, anointed him Mashyach, inspired him as a prophet, appointed him Shepherd and King, enabled him with His Spirit. It was for our benefit.

Yahowah is offering His children the ultimate reward: eternal life in His presence. It is a brilliant inheritance. And for it, we should be as Dowd was – appreciative, ever willing to proclaim the excellence of Yahowah and the resulting relationship.

The point to all of this is that we can live like Dowd, think like Dowd, and experience what Dowd enjoyed when we study his words and apply them to our lives. We should all be singing along, at least up to the point of screaming.

By robbing the world of everything Dowd contributed to our lives to legitimize the Dionysian caricature of “Jesus Christ,” Paul and pals transformed the Passover Lamb into an anti-Semitic monster. To confront this, Dowd leveled a broadside against the Gnostic nature of Pauline Christianity. The argument that Sha’uwl | Paul used to rob Yahowah, His Towrah, His Covenant, His People, and His Mashyach of their relevance was to opine that they were of the flesh, which, from the Gnostic perspective, was corruptible and evil.

While this would have been an exceedingly odd place for Shim’own to have begun his citation of a Mizmowr, it is nonetheless the place Luke jumped aboard. By doing so, rather than realizing that the Psalm is about Dowd describing his relationship with Yahowah, the reader of Acts is fooled into believing that David was speaking prophetically of the Christian “Jesus Christ” and referring to him as “the Lord.” I kid you not…

“For David speaketh concerning him [the context would make “him” “Jesus”], ‘I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: (Acts 2:25 KJV) Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope:” (Acts 2:26 KJV)

Or if you prefer the more literal rendering…“For (gar – because) David (ΔΔ – a placeholder for Dowd using the Greek transliteration Dauid) said (lego – declared) of (eis) him (autos), ‘I foresee (proorao) the Lord (ΚΩ – placeholder for kurios – the Lord and Master) in front of (enopion – and before) me (ego) always (pas) on my behalf (dia) because (hoti) from (ek – out of) His right hand (dexios – authority) I will not be (me eimi) shaken or swayed (saleuomai – be overthrown or distressed). (Acts 2:25)

Therefore (dia), my heart (kardia) rejoices (euphrainomai – celebrates), and my tongue (glossa – speech) delights (agalliao) that also (eti) my flesh (sarkos) will abide and endure (kataskenoo – live) as a result of (epi) a confident and trusting expectation (elpis).’” (Acts 2:26)

This is a horribly misconstrued paraphrase of Psalm 16:8-9 which was wrongly attributed. If you recall, in Acts 2:22-24, Shim’own was supposedly telling the Jews all about the miraculous nature of “Jesus.” So by saying that “David spoke concerning him,” Dowd’s assessment of his relationship with Yahowah was wrongly projected upon “Jesus.” This “mistake” by either Shim’own or Luke may have been due in part to not being aware that it was Yahowah’s name which had been replaced with “‘adony – the Lord” in the Septuagint, not Yahowsha’s. However, since Dowd’s Psalms were all written about Yahowah and never mentioned Yahowsha’ by name or title, this misrepresentation could not have been by accident.

In his Mizmowr, Dowd would continue to refer to God by His one and only name…

“I intensely desire to firmly place (shawah – I genuinely want to put) Yahowah (Yahowah) before me (la neged ‘any) always and continuously (tamyd – regularly and consistently, even perpetually).

Indeed (ky), as a result of (min) me being right (yamyn ‘any – my orientation, right side, or right hand, even looking east as the sun rises; from yaman – to choose to be right), I shall neither be shaken nor fall into an unfavorable or unresolvable circumstance (bal mowt – I will not slip up, be dislodged, stagger, fail, nor fall, nor will I lose control, be random in my approach, nor found to be consistently inadequate). (Mizmowr / Psalm 16:8)

Therefore (la ken), my attitude and thinking (leb ‘any – my inclination and disposition, my judgment and approach, my character and nature, my internal resolve and thoughtful responses) are joyous (samach – are upbeat and happy, elated and content).

What’s more (wa), the manifestation of power which is abundant and valued within my persona (kabowd ‘any – the glorious and rewarding Divine presence within me) expresses His joy over this enormously favorable and uplifting situation and outcome (gyl).

In addition (‘aph – moreover and furthermore), my physical body and my proclamation regarding my flesh (basar – my pronouncement and positive news regarding my corporeal human and animal nature, and the substance which sustains that life) lives and abides (shakan – dwells and remains, camping out for a considerable period of time) with confidence (la betach – safely and securely, without any concern, through trusting and relying; from batach – to trust and rely with confidence and be bold, living without fear).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 16:9)

And therein is how the Christian New Testament deceives. By removing citations from their proper context, misquoting and misapplying them, the likes of Luke and Paul have tricked readers into believing things about “Jesus” which apply to Dowd | David. Robbing David to pay tribute to Jesus is among the most egregious and deadly crimes ever committed by religious men. It was the first of two steps which led to the malignant myth of Replacement Theology. After replacing David with Jesus, they would substitute Gentiles for Jews.

Along these lines, the statement “I foresaw the Lord always before my face” will be extrapolated to convey something astonishingly sinister by the time we reach Acts 2:35. The bad boys of Christendom were just getting warmed up.

Also telling, Paul claimed that, by contrast, his faith was spiritual, and thus better. He slathered ‘Abraham and Dowd with his errant perceptions to make his point. Unfortunately for Paul, and those who foolishly believe he spoke for God, the flesh is not evil.

Should Dowd be correct regarding the flesh, and he was clearly inspired by Yah, then Paul, and his publicist, Luke, were not only wrong, they could not have been inspired by God. As is the case with everything in this debate, trust and reliance, indeed confidence, is a product of knowing and understanding insights such as this, while faith bridges the gap when a believer is ignorant and/or irrational. The reason Yahowah inspired Dowd to share this with us is so that we could replace one with the other, and like His prophet, be right.

Should you hold the belief that this poem has not been about commending Yahowah and condemning Sha’uwl | Paul and the religion he and his devotees fathered, consider this, especially in light of Paul saying: “Now when David had served God’s purpose in his own generation, he fell asleep; he was buried with his ancestors and his body decayed.” (Acts 13:36) Methinks this proves that the principal author of the Christian New Testament was wrong…

“By way of contrast (ky – emphasizing this point while exposing the contrary position), You will not abandon Your association with (lo’ ‘azab – You will not neglect, reject, forsake, nor desert, never releasing (qal imperfect)) my soul (nepesh ‘any – my consciousness, my inner person, character, and personality) with regard to Sha’uwl (la She’owl / la Sha’uwl – by approaching She’owl or on behalf of the goals of Sha’uwl), never allowing (lo’ nathan – never offering nor giving, not permitting nor surrendering (qal imperfect)) Your Set-Apart One (chasyd ‘atah – Your dedicated and loyal one, Your special and unique individual (adjective singular)) to see (ra’ah – to look upon, to experience, to gloat about, or to find pleasure in) corruption or degradation (shachath – what it is like to be corrupt or corrupted, useless or ruined, marred or blemished, dishonest exploitation or fraud, especially in association with the slime and the dungeon and pit in which such corrupt and ruinous captives are destroyed).” (Mizmowr / Psalm 16:10)

What is particularly illuminating about this statement is that Sha’uwl (mis)quoted it as Divinely inspired, thereby acknowledging that it was true. And yet by misappropriating it for ‘Jesus,’ Paul undeniably proved that he should not be trusted.

Paul went on to say… “So it is also stated elsewhere: ‘You will not let your holy one see decay.’” (Acts 13:35 NIV). Let’s never lose sight of the realization that Sha’uwl and She’owl are synonymous for a reason. One leads to the other.

Luke, aware of Paul’s twisted portrayal of Psalm 16, did his mentor proud and had “Peter” endorse the same myth…“‘Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.’” (Acts 2:27)

Or…“‘Because (hoti) my soul (psyche – consciousness) will not (ou) be utterly forsaken and totally abandoned (egkataleipo – be left behind and deserted) in Hades (hades – the abode of the dead). Neither (oude) will Your Set-Apart and Dedicated One (hosios – loyal and faithful, undefiled and pure) be allowed (didomi) to see (horao – experience) decay and decomposition (diaphthora).’” (Acts 2:27)

The inference Luke and Paul were making at Shim’own’s and Dowd’s expense was that David’s body rotted in the grave while “Jesus” did not suffer that indignity. However, the prophecy was addressing Dowd’s soul, not Yahowsha’s body. Therefore, the authors of the Christian New Testament deliberately lied to promote their religion.

As such, this remains a debate between relationship and religion, between right and wrong, between Dowd and Sha’uwl, between the Towrah and New Testament, and between the Covenant and Christianity. God is on Dowd’s side, which is why Loukas and Sha’uwl misquoted this statement and twisted it to claim otherwise. Forewarned is forearmed.

Sha’uwl’s way leads to death and destruction while Dowd’s way leads to renewed life. It is the reason this Mizmowr was written. Let us never forget…

“You have made known to me (yada’ ‘any – You are my source of understanding, You reveal information and instruction to me, You enable me to be aware and perceptive such that I am acquainted with, reveal, and experience) the way to (‘orach – the path, manner, conduct, and route to travel which leads from this place to) life (chay – living a bountiful, blessed, favorable, and prosperous existence, nourished, restored, and renewed; from chayah – to live and remain alive, with life restored and sustained).

There is total satisfaction and contentment in the abundant (soba’ – there is complete and abounding) transcendent joy (simchah – sublime delight with an uplifting cheerful attitude, favorably entertaining the senses) associated with Your presence (‘eth paneh ‘atah – through Your appearance and in association with Your face).

The pleasure of being accepted (na’ym – the benefits of being considered favorably and becoming acceptable, along with the melodious contentment and satisfaction) by being right with You (ba yamyn ‘atah – with my orientation on Your right side, with my right hand in Yours, and with me looking east in the morning toward You as the sun rises; from yaman – having chosen to be right) is glorious and forevermore (netsach – is splendid and unending, producing everlasting status and permanent prominence).” (Mizmowr / Lyrics to be Sung / Psalm 16:11)

This, which was written by Dowd and of Dowd, is to be compared with this projection onto “Jesus”…“‘Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.’” (Acts 2:28)

Or literally… “‘Reveal and make known to (gnorizo – provide the information needed to understand and thereby expose to) me (ego) the way (hodos – path, road, and journey) to a complete and fulfilling (pleroo – full and abundant) life (zoe) of joy and gladness (euphrosyne – cheerfulness and gratitude) in proximity to (meta – in association with) Your presence (prosopon).’” (Acts 2: 28)

To accept Yah is to be right. To know Yah is to live. To be with Yahowah is to be joyous, satisfied, and content. We would have to search long and hard to find a more fitting proclamation to refute the likes of Paul and Luke.

We could read this a thousand times and never grow weary of what it reveals. And yet by contrast, there is the swamp of grotesque corruptions known as the Christian New Testament. It is filled with deliberately convoluted statements like these written by Luke and yet it is by a factor of a million-to-one more popular than Yahowah’s prophets.

One of two things is true: Shim’own agreed with Sha’uwl and wrongly attributed something Dowd wrote about himself and his relationship with Yahowah, and projected it onto Iesou, or Luke, Paul’s apologist and propagandist, put these words in “Peter’s” mouth to support his mentor. And if you are wondering who to blame for this deliberate and debilitating deception, you may want to consider who wrote it.

Our excursion into the bowels of the Christian New Testament has thus far provided very little to affirm the Towrah’s presentation of Shabuw’ah. And yet by considering how its authors convoluted Yahowah’s intent by misquoting Him, we have learned a great deal about the religion Paul perpetrated to rob Jews of their rights and responsibilities, beginning with Dowd.

This known, if you are interested in knowing or sharing the way to life, consider reading and reciting Dowd’s Mizmowr rather than anything scribbled in the Christian New Testament. Therein, you will become right, will be accepted, and find satisfaction – enveloped in Yahowah’s glory forevermore.

This is now Sha’uwl’s | Paul’s argument placed in the mouth of Shim’own | Peter. It remains inaccurate…

“Gentlemen (andros), brothers (adelphos), it is possible (exesti – permissible and obligatory) after all to say (eipon – based on this account) to you in open public discourse, enjoying freedom of speech (parresia – without any concern or fear) with regard to (pros) and concerning (peri) the patriarch (patriaches – founder and forefather) David (ΔΔ – placeholder for Dauid, a Greek transliteration for Dowd), that (hoti) he both died (teleutao – his life is finished and has come to a close) and was buried (thapto), and his tomb (mnema – grave) exists (eimi – and can be identified) among (en) us, even until (achri) this (houtos) day (hemera). (Acts 2:29)

Being (hyparcho) therefore (oun) a prophet (prophetes), and knowing (oida) that (hoti) Theos (ΘΣ) swore (omnuo) an oath (horkos) that from out (ek) of the fruit (darpos) of his loins (osphys), would sit (kathizo) upon (epi) His (autos) throne (thronos), he foresaw (proorao) and spoke (laleo) about (peri) the rising up and standing upright (anastasis) of the Christon (ΧΡΝ – placeholder for Christon, which became Christ), because namely (hoti), He was not (oute) left behind and abandoned so as to remain (egkataleipo – forsaken and deserted) at (eis – inside and within) Hades (hades – the abode of the dead), nor (oute) did His flesh (sarx – physical human body) see (horao – experience) decay and decomposition (diaphthora – corruption).” (Acts 2:30-31)

Wow, it is hard to believe that they were this overtly committed to killing and burying “David.” There is likely nothing in all the universe that they could have said more irritating to his Father – who just so happens to be God.

This is Paul’s plot, one which Luke advanced by ascribing it to Peter. But every aspect of it is a lie – from the details to its sweeping implications.

For example, unlike ‘Abraham, Yitschaq, and Ya’aqob, who have always been the “forefathers” of Yisra’el, Dowd was not a patriarch. Dowd is the Son of God, the King of Yisra’el, and the Messiah – none of which apply to Yahowsha’ as is claimed by Luke or Paul. Moreover, the location of Dowd’s tomb, other than it is somewhere among the twelve acres which would have comprised “the City of Dowd,” remains unknown.

According to Yahowah, Dowd’s soul was put in a sleeplike state, awaiting his reawakening prior to his glorious return. His nepesh most assuredly is not “dead.” Moreover, the prophecy was unequivocally about Dowd’s soul, not his physical body as Luke and Paul are insisting.

Remember…“By way of contrast, You will not abandon Your association with my soul (nepesh ‘any – my consciousness) with regard to Sha’uwl, never allowing Your Set-Apart One to see corruption or degradation (shachath – what it is like to be corrupt or corrupted, useless or ruined, dishonest or associated with the slime pit in which such corrupt and ruinous captives are destroyed).” (Mizmowr 16:10)

Therefore, Paul’s and Luke’s argument was predicated upon a false premise and then based upon a citation which does not apply, which they then misappropriated and misquoted. And this is just in the hypothesis stage of their delusion. The prophecy in Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7, to which Luke is alluding, does not predict the arrival of a Messiah who would be known as Christon | Christ. It does not speak of Yahowsha’ or of “Jesus.” Instead, just like the misappropriated Psalm, 2 Samuel 7 is all about Dowd | David – and only the Beloved from beginning to end.

This sweeping prophecy opens with Yahowah explicitly speaking to Dowd and then it concludes with God directly addressing Dowd once again. In the middle, Yahowah speaks to us of Dowd. Other than the conduit of this proclamation, Nathan, and the one offering it, Yahowah, no other name is mentioned.

The only thing which changes as we move through the prophecy is the audience. At times Yahowah is speaking to us of Dowd and at others, God is directly addressing His son. When you arrive at this transition in the 12th statement, this perspective will help you appreciate why God goes from referring to Dowd as “you” and then speaks of “he” when He, Yahowah, is speaking to us about him. God’s return to “you” then occurs at the conclusion of the 14th statement.

“It came to pass when the king sat down and relaxed in his home, because Yahowah had given him comforting respite from his adversaries, (7:1) that the king said to Nathan, the prophet, ‘Please look around. I live in a house of cedar, but the Ark of God sits within curtains.’ (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:2)

So, Nathan said to the king, ‘Choose to go and do all that is in your best judgment for Yahowah.’ (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:3)

But then that evening it came to be that the word of Yahowah came to Nathan. He conveyed, (7:4) ‘Go and tell Dowd, My coworker, that this is what Yahowah says. “Why should you build Me a home to live in? (7:5)

Indeed, I have not lived in any house since the time that I lifted the Children of Yisra’el out of the crucibles of oppression in Mitsraym, even to this day. I have existed going about in a tent dwelling. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:6)

Anywhere along the way, that I have journeyed with the Children of Yisra’el, did I say a single word to any of the tribes of Yisra’el, My people, Yisra’el, whom I fed, asking, ‘Why not build Me a house of cedar?’ (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:7)

Therefore, say to My associate, Dowd, this is what Yahowah of the spiritual implements says, “I took you from the sheepfolds, from chasing after lambs, to be the leader over My People, over Yisra’el. (7:8)

And I have been with you wherever you traveled. I have cut off all of your enemies, removing them from your sight, and I have made your name great, comparable to the names of the greatest on earth. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:9)

Furthermore, I will appoint a place for My People, Yisra’el. And I will plant them there such that they may dwell in this place of their own and never have to move again.

Neither shall the Son of Evil afflict them any more as will have been the case. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:10)

And since the time that I instructed the Judges in conjunction with My People, Yisra’el, I have created for you a respite from all of your enemies.’

Moreover, Yahowah is boldly and publicly announcing for you that, indeed, He will act, engaging with you to create a family and home. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:11)

‘Surely (ky), your days will be proclaimed and fulfilled (male’ yowmym ‘atah) after your relaxing rest (wa shakab) with your fathers (‘eth ‘ab ‘atah).

Then I will rise up and take a stand (quwm) to bring to fruition what you have sown (zera’) without hesitating nor delaying (‘achar) your approach to providing the way to the benefits of the relationship (‘asher).

This shall be extracted and withdrawn, then delivered out of (yatsa’ min) a small particle of your physiological nature (ma’ah).”

And so (wa) I will establish (kuwn) his reign over his kingdom (‘eth mamlakah huw’).’” (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:12)

I am interrupting the flow of this prophecy regarding Dowd because I want you to appreciate something that has taken me twenty years to fully comprehend. The primary meaning of ky is not “when,” but instead, “truthfully.” The verb male’ was scribed in the imperfect conjugation. Therefore, it cannot be addressing something which is over, such as Dowd’s previous existence. Instead, in the imperfect, male’ speaks of an everlasting fulfillment – thereby addressing Dowd’s eternal reign as King of Kings.

After Dowd’s relaxing intermission between the two phases of his life, with shakab scribed in the perfect, thus indicating that his rest is now over, Yahowah is going to intervene in the course of human events to quwm ‘eth zera’ | establish what Dowd has sown. Zera’ speaks of seeds which, when sown, take root and grow. It serves as a metaphor for the tens of thousands of thoughtful words this man wrote on our behalf.

Yahowah is not doing this “after” Dowd, but instead “without hesitating or delaying, and without equivocating.” Such is the primary meaning of ‘achar derived from its verbal root. And it is ‘asher which brought us to this place, to this prophecy, and to this understanding over the course of the past twenty years. More than anyone who ever lived, Dowd embodies “the way to the benefits of the relationship.”

Yatsa’ is the operative term of the “Exodus.” It means “to withdraw, to extract, and to deliver.” It does not speak of a man’s seed, in the sense of sperm, gushing out of his manhood. Equally revealing, the primary meaning of ma’al is not “viscera,” but instead it describes “a minute, exceedingly small, particle which comprises something much larger.” That particle is Dowd’s DNA.

The Second Coming of Dowd will be manifest, not only through the return of his nepesh | soul, but also by reconstituting his DNA. This manifestation of the Messiah will not only have Dowd’s authority and personality, but his appearance as well. The returning Messiah, Son of God, and King of Kings, will be Dowd. And that is why Yahowah is now speaking of him to us, telling us what they will accomplish together…

“‘He, himself, shall reestablish and restore a home for My name. And, I will fashion and form the place of honor of his kingdom as an eternal witness forever. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:13)

I, Myself, will be a Father for him and he shall be My son. So when that which is perverted and twisted is associated with him, I will correctly reciprocate and argue on his behalf, deciding with him to chastise with the scepter of this man, and by assaulting so as to end the lives of the children of ‘Adam. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:14)

Then My steadfast love and enduring mercy shall not be taken away from him in the manner that I rejected it being associated with Sha’uwl, whom, to show the way to the benefits of the relationship, I removed, abolishing before your appearance. (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:15)

Moreover, your house will remain established, verified and true and your kingdom and reign will exist forever as an eternal witness in association with My presence.

Your throne and place of honor shall exist and be established forevermore.’ (Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7:16)

Consistent with all of these words and everything within this revelation, Nathan correctly conveyed them to Dowd.” (Shamuw’el / Listen to Him / 2 Samuel 7:17)

Once again, Yahowah revealed something exceedingly important and useful and the religious have sought to convolute it to serve their perverted interests. That which Luke took from Dowd to make his Iesoun appear worthy became part and parcel of Christianity.

Demonstrating that our assessment was correct, and that Peter, Luke, Paul, and/or the Roman Catholic Church concocted this medley to take what was said of Dowd on these two occasions and apply it to Iesou Christon | Jesus Christ, Shim’own’s monologue resumes with one of the Church’s misnomers for Yahowsha’…

“This Iesoun (ΙΝ – placeholder for Iesoun – Jesus) whom Theos (ΘΣ – placeholder for theos – god) raised up (anistamai – caused to be restored to life and stand upright), which all (pas) of us exist as (eimi) witnesses (martyros – spectators and observers who can testify based upon their experience), therefore (oun) is the right hand (dexia – the authority and power) of Theos (ΘΥ), lifted up and exalted (hypsoo).

He also (te) promised (epangelia) the Holy (hagion) Pneuma (ΠΝΣ – placeholder for pneuma – spirit) who is received and acquired (lambano) from (para) the Pater (ΠΡΣ – placeholder for pater – father), which (hos) you all (sou) have also (kai) seen (blepo) and heard (akouo).” (Acts 2:32-33)

There was no one named “Iesoun.” The person being addressed in the prophecy was Dowd, not Yahowsha’. And the Passover Lamb’s body was bludgeoned, discarded, and incinerated. The pesach ‘ayl never comes back to life – as that would be ridiculous and defeat its purpose.

No one in this alleged audience was a witness to a risen Iesoun. Fact is, those exposed to the post-Bikuwrym presentation of Yahowah’s nepesh did not recognize Him – negating this claim. Further, Dowd is the Right Hand of God, not Iesoun.

The Father is not the source of the Set-Apart Spirit. She is the Maternal representation of Yahowah’s nature. Moreover, no man has seen the Ruwach Qodesh. I do not think that these clowns could have messed this up any worse, even if that had been their intent.

The Ruwach Qodesh | Set-Apart Spirit is, as Her title denotes, “set apart” from Yahowah. She is part of God projected into our frame of reference and represents the more feminine and maternal aspects of Yahowah’s nature. She is not, however, a separate “person” or involved in religion.

The Greek hagiazo, which is typically rendered “holy,” denotes religious implications. In addition to the “Holy Ghost,” Christianity sports a “Holy Catholic Church,” “Holy Bible,” a “Holy Father,” the “Holy See,” a “Holy Mother,” the “Holy One,” a “Holy Trinity,” “Holy Water,” “Holy Baptism,” and the “Holy Grail,” in addition to “Holy Communion” to name a few – even a “Holy of Holies” and “Holy War” fought over the “Holy Land.” They even celebrate “Halloween.” The New World Encyclopedia states: “The word Holy denotes the presence of sacredness in an object, being, person, place, or idea. It can also indicate an experience of numinosity – all-inspiring and imbued with sacredness. It is often ascribed to saints, gurus, times, or places.” Thomas Aquinas defined holiness “as a virtue by which man’s mind applies itself and all its acts to God.”

The origin of the word “holy” comes from the 11th century Old German hulis and Old English holegn meaning “Holly” as in the Holly Tree – considered a sacred plant to both pre-Christian Celtic and Roman worship. “To hold holy” became “to be holy,” and then “to make holy,” as in “to sanctify.”

The concept of being “set apart” is as central to the Covenant as religious notions like holy are opposed to it. At best, “holy” conceals and corrupts this message, and it replaces God’s terminology with man’s. Worse, it applies attributes to saints, objects, relics, and the Spirit which are completely inaccurate.

But the story gets darker, because holy has a satanic past. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, “holy” was “originally used to venerate heathen deities in Old Norse.” In the Dictionary of Mythology, Folklore and Symbols, “holy in practically all languages was derived from the divinely honored sun.” Forlong’s Encyclopedia of Religions says: “Holi is the Great Hindu spring festival held in honor of Krishna as the spring sun-god…and a personified woman called Holi.”

Heilei, which is the German pronunciation of holy, means “sun’s ray” and “halo” – combining the religious and scientific symbols for the sun god and man. It is then little wonder religious types are wont to place these pagan images over the heads of their “saints.” As confirmation of this, J.C. Cooper in his Illustrated Encyclopedia of Traditional Symbols, writes: “Nimbus (a halo around a saint’s head replete with a sunburst), Halo, and Aureole (a heavenly crown of radiant light or corona worn by saints) were originally indicative of solar power and of the sun’s disk, and hence display an attribute of sun-gods.”

Since so many of man’s religious words, such as “church,” which is an adaptation of Circe (pronounced similarly to church, representing the sun goddess who was the daughter of Helios), come from Germanic sources, it is instructive to know that heilei and heilig, the German equivalent of holy, were derived from Heil. In Bell’s New Pantheon, “Heil was a Saxon (Prussian and North Germanic) idol.” So it is safe to say that at best, “holy” is wrong in that it misses the point, and at worst, “holy” leads us in the wrong direction.

The closest Hebrew word, choly, is typically transliterated as “holy” and means “severe plague and chronic sickness.” Shim’own would have known better, but not Luke.

At this point, Luke, speaking for Shim’own, would have us believe, that the Beloved Son of God, the Messiah, the past and future King of Yisra’el, Yahowah’s Firstborn and Chosen One, His Shepherd and the Branch, the great Prophet and Psalmist, did not get into heaven. If so, then no one will ever get in…

“For (gar – indeed) David (ΔΔ – placeholder for the Greek transliteration Dauid), did not (ou) ascend (anabaino – rise and go up) to (eis) heaven (ouranos), but (de) himself (autos) said (lego), ‘Said (eipon) Lord (ΚΣ – placeholder for kurios – lord): My (ego) Lord (ΚΩ – placeholder for kurio – lord) sits and resides (kathemai – lives and remains) out of (ek) My (ego) right side (dexios – right hand of power and authority) (Acts 2:34) until (hoes) I put (tithemi) your enemies (echthros) as a footstool (hypopodion) for your feet (podos).’” (Acts 2:35)

The initial declaration that – “David did not ascend to heaven” – is so far from the truth, so insulting to Yahowah, so demeaning of His Beloved, so negating of the Covenant, and so dismissive of the Mow’ed Miqra’ey, by stating it publicly, Luke and his mentor, Paul, have earned for themselves a long stay in She’owl | Hell. And from this juncture into oblivion, the Church has opined that “the Lord speaking of my Lord” proves that there are multiple persons in the “godhead” and that the unnamed “Jesus” must be in heaven instead of David. Stupid is as stupid says.

Just for my own entertainment, I would ask the morons promoting these lies: If we are to suppose that Dowd is speaking in the first person, who is it that is saying “until I put your enemies as a footstool for your feet?” With Dowd as the speaker rather than the subject of the Psalm, wouldn’t that make “Dauid” more powerful than “the Lord?”

Tell me please, how is it that the full cadre of Christian theologians over this vast chasm of time have not been able to admit the conclusion of the sentence negates any possibility that it was spoken by “David” of “Jesus?” Are they all complete ignoramuses or is their problem a total lack of integrity?

We have more copies of the Psalms extant among the Dead Sea Scrolls than any other, more even than the Towrah or Isaiah. Unfortunately, this citation from Psalm 110, which is what Luke misappropriated, is not among them. And at issue is the use of ‘adony | my lord after and before Yahowah’s name, in addition to the realization that the entire Psalm was written in Yahowah’s voice as God addresses His subject in second and third person. This is to suggest that Yahowah is speaking to this individual and then of him as was the case in Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7.

This said, the Psalm was written about Dowd, not by Dowd – as is the case with the magnificent 89th Mizmowr. Therefore, the introductory line in Acts 2, “but he, himself, said…” is an unproven assumption. It is far more likely that the Psalm was scribed about Dowd since every statement save one fits what Yahowah has said of him and no one else.

“A psalm (mizmowr – a poetic song with melody and words) regarding (la – about and concerning the approach of) Dowd (Dowd – the Beloved).”

Using the primary meaning of the preposition, la, the mystery of the Psalm is resolved. It is not Dowd, himself, who is saying…, but is instead what Yahowah is saying about Dowd.

Based upon the Masoretic Text, the Mizmowr reads:

“Yahowah (Yahowah – a transliteration of , our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) prophetically announces in advance of it occurring (na’um – declares and predicts through a prophet) concerning (la – regarding and about the approach of) my Lord and my Upright One (‘adony / ‘edony – my master and authority figure used as a sign of respect by someone looking up to another individual, or my foundation and support upon which I stand): ‘You have chosen of your own accord to actually dwell (yashab – under the auspices of freewill, you have decided to genuinely live and remain (qal imperative – a genuine expression of volition in the second person)) at (la – near and by) My right side (yamyn ‘any – My right hand with My power and authority) as an eternal witness (‘ad – continuously and forever, into perpetuity as a source of testimony).

I will place (syth – I will set (qal imperfect)) your enemies and those who discount you (‘oyab ‘atah – your foes who are openly hostile to your status and opposed to your position, displaying animus and rancor toward you) as (la) your foot (regel ‘atah) stool (hadom – a piece of furniture to rest one’s feet; from an unused root meaning to stamp upon).’” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 110:1)

This was written by a prophet, perhaps the aforementioned Nathan, to reveal what Yahowah said to him regarding this individual, whom the prophet calls either ‘adony | my lord or ‘edony | my upright one. Either is a common and appropriate title to use when addressing a person of some status, like a king, whom the writer knows and respects. However, not only is it inappropriate to call Yahowah “my Lord,” this is not Yahowah speaking at this point, as there is no situation where He would refer to anyone as “My Lord.” Further, there would have been no one at the time this was written who would have known Yahowsha’ or spoken of him as ‘my Anything.’ To which we should add, all but one word of what follows obviously pertains to Dowd and nothing is applicable to Yahowsha’.

Excuse me for a moment, but as Captain Obvious, I would like to point out that the psalmist has already identified “my lord.” The introduction reads: “A psalm (mizmowr) about (la – concerning) Dowd (Dowd).”

Recognizing that Yahowah’s soul was deployed in Yahowsha’ to honor God’s Pesach and Matsah promises, the Christian premise unravels. It would have Yahowah predicting that His soul decided independently of Himself to live at His right side. Even if it were possible, there would be no reason to predict such a thing.

While God has freewill, Yahowah is speaking of another, not Himself. And the one person who has made it abundantly clear that he has chosen to live with Yah is Dowd. And not-so-coincidentally, he is the same person Yahowah has referred to as His Right Hand.

Yahowsha’ did not leave us with a single written word, and Dowd was the most prolific writer among Yahowah’s prophets. Dowd exemplifies “‘ad – an everlasting and eternal witness.”

Yahowsha’ has never been “‘oyab – discounted by those opposed to his position” but instead the opposite. He is afforded titles well beyond what is appropriate. By contrast, Dowd’s Psalms are replete with references to his enemies who have sought to negate his position with Yahowah.

Dowd is the only one being discredited by those besmirching him and ascribing undue status to Yahowsha’. To claim that David is not in heaven is as opposed to his status as is possible to assert.

Very few acknowledge Dowd as the Right Hand and Son of God, as the Shepherd and the Messiah, or the King of Kings who is returning to vanquish Yisra’el’s foes. And this passage in Acts 2 is one of many which point directly toward what Christians have done at Dowd’s expense. So even at this early point, we know that this is not something being said by Dowd or about Yahowsha’, negating Luke’s claim on behalf of Sha’uwl.

When we compare Luke’s positioning of this prophetic declaration with Yahowah’s presentation of it, an observant and rational reader immediately recognizes that the misquoted statement provides no evidence to prove any of Luke’s assertions – and many to discredit them. While his rendition shares some words in common to fool the unwary, the Psalm does not infer that “David did not ascend to heaven.” The prophecy is about Dowd, so he is not the one who said what follows – negating the somewhat clever repositioning. The Greek citation replaced Yahowah’s name with “kurios – Lord,” giving the false impression that there were two “Lords” in the passage, with one referring to “Jesus Christ.” However, counter to Luke’s claim, nothing in the prophecy applies to Yahowsha’, and thus cannot be the Passover Lamb.

Before we move on, let’s compare God’s Word to man’s New Testament drivel…

“A psalm (mizmowr) about (la) Dowd | the Beloved (Dowd). Yahowah (Yahowah) prophetically announces in advance of it occurring (na’um) concerning the approach of (la) my Lord and Upright One (‘adony / ‘edony): ‘You have chosen of your own accord to actually dwell (yashab) at (la) My right side (yamyn ‘any) as an eternal witness (‘ad).

I will place (syth) your enemies and those who discount you (‘oyab ‘atah) as (la) your foot (regel ‘atah) stool (hadom).’” (Mizmowr / Psalm 110:1)

Versus:

“For (gar) Dauid (ΔΔ), did not (ou) ascend (anabaino) to (eis) heaven (ouranos), but (de) himself (autos) said (lego), ‘Said (eipon) Lord (ΚΣ): My (ego) Lord (ΚΩ) sits and resides (kathemai) out of (ek) My (ego) right side (dexios) until (hoes) I put (tithemi) your enemies (echthros) as a footstool (hypopodion) for your feet (podos).” (Acts 2:34-35)

How is it that over the past 1700 years, not a single religious scholar has denounced this obvious deception while countless have opined that it validates the Trinity? Is the Christian religion that universally effective at incapacitating every believer’s ability to think or are the clerics and theologians in on the scam?

While the misappropriated and mistranslated portion of the Psalm in Acts 2 concludes with the 1st verse, I am not one to turn the page when there is much more to learn, when there are false prophets to expose and liars to condemn. The fraudulent repositioning of the 110th Psalm to elevate “Jesus” over Dowd is something those who love Yahowah must overcome with evidence and reason. In spite of its repetitive mentions of Yahowah’s name and its overt violence against Yisra’el’s foes, as Yahowah and His coworker rid the world of Christians, Psalm 110 is the single most quoted Hebrew citation in the Greek New Testament.

As we recommence, Yahowsha’ never touched a scepter or a lance, and did not wield a staff while shepherding sheep, but Dowd held all three in a meaningful way. Dowd ruled over Yisra’el as King and he is defined by Tsyown, but neither apply to Yahowsha’. Dowd fought countless battles to protect his people, while Yahowsha’ did not fight anyone.

“Your mighty scepter (mateh ‘oz ‘atah – your fortified staff, powerful spear, and forceful lance), Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of YaHoWaH, our ‘elowah – God as directed in His ToWRaH – teaching regarding His HaYaH – existence and our ShaLoWM – restoration) extends (shalach – reaches out) from (min) Tsyown | the Signs Posted Along the Way (Tsyown) to rule, dominating and subduing (radah – to lead and direct while showing authority over (qal imperative)) your foes who are openly hostile to your status and opposed to your position (‘oyab ‘atah – your enemies and those who discount you, displaying animus and rancor toward you) in battle (ba qerab – while fighting the war).” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 110:2)

Yahowah spoke of doing this very thing for and with Dowd in the Shamuw’el / 2 Samuel 7 passage Sha’uwl and his pals misappropriated. It is a constant theme throughout the Prophets. Dowd is a fighter, a shepherd and king who constantly battled to protect his people. Yahowsha’ never confronted a militant foe.

We will discover that, while both Dowd and Yahowsha’ came from Bethlehem, the location and purpose of Tsyown is explained in harmony with the Mashyach while Yahowsha’ is never mentioned in association with this place. This connection is so strong, there is only one man, at the exclusion of all others, of whom Yahowah would “extend from Tsyown.”

There are only two individuals Yahowah has announced are returning. ‘Elyah will arrive in Yaruwshalaim on Passover in 2030 to serve as one of two witnesses. And Dowd will be returning with Yahowah on the Day of Reconciliations in 2033 as Mashyach and Melek. His first order of business will be to do as Psalm 110:2 predicts.

While we know that there are several wonderful prophecies pertaining to the fulfillment of Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym, not only is Yahowsha’ never mentioned by name in his role as the Passover Lamb, what was left of his mauled and crucified body was incinerated, ceasing to exist. All that remains of him is Yahowah’s nepesh | soul – further disqualifying him from being “my lord” or benefiting from a “footstool.”

In this next statement, ‘am ‘atah | your people is used in reference to the family comprised of the Children of Yisra’el – not a gowym church.

“Your people (‘am ‘atah – your family) will be free and abundantly enriched, willing and able (nedabah – will be liberated and highly motivated, desirous and eager to volunteer and play their part), on the day (ba yowm – during the time) associated with the beautiful appearance and uncommon splendor, the uniquely majestic and honorable manifestation (ba hadar qodesh – in glorious fashion, instilling respect, adorned in a manner which sets you apart as a person of the highest status), of your physical prowess, exceptional qualifications, noble character, and unique ability (chayl ‘atah – of your extraordinary endurance and effectiveness, even your enormous wealth, the strength of your troops and your political and military competence, also your ability to prosper through an eternity of time).

From (min – out of) the womb and in love, showing the compassion of a Mother (rechem – the point of origin with great affection and mercy, showing concern for the relationship), your light will dawn, approaching (mishchar la ‘atah – in the early morning light, your time will approach, transitioning from darkness to light with a renewed vigor; from my – to ponder the implications of shachar – being diligently observant while earnestly seeking the truth from the onset, right from the very beginning with) the prosperity and abundance (tal – like the enveloping covering and refreshing nature of the dew, you will be renewed, adorned, and pervasive; from talal – to be wholly saturated and covered) of your youth (yalduwth ‘atah – of the time you were young, your childhood; from yalad – when you were born).” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 110:3)

This is prophetic of the Second Coming of Dowd | David. When he returns, it will be to liberate and enrich his people – Yisra’el and Yahuwdah. It is a time when everyone will be like-minded, motivated to help rid the world of every threat – including Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and Socialist Secular Humanism. God’s people will rally around our leader, the Messiah and King, eager to volunteer as the Earth is scrubbed of the stench of religion and nationalism.

We are told on two occasions that Dowd was beautiful, the most handsome of men (Psalm 45 and 1 Samuel 16). By contrast, we were informed in Isaiah 53 that Yahowsha’ was average-looking at best. Therefore, should I have been correct regarding ma’al describing “a minute, exceedingly small, piece” of Dowd’s DNA, then we will see him in all of his original glory – just as this Psalm attests.

This said, Yahowah’s perspective on men is different from our own. Dowd was beautiful in Yahowah’s eyes for many reasons. Among them were his brilliant mind, soaring rhetoric, passion for his people, and exemplary character. I have only seen his words, and yet, after observing them I have come to love him.

One of the most effective ways to ascertain the identity of the individual presented in Messianic prophecies, such as the one in Yasha’yah / Isaiah 9:6-7, besides the fact that Dowd’s name is included in most of them, is that he is presented as a gibowr. Its definition is very similar to chayl: “physical prowess, exceptional qualifications, noble character, and unique ability.” It foretells of a man of “extraordinary endurance and effectiveness, who possesses enormous wealth.” And as a gibowr and chayl, he will be “a warrior, someone who fights to defend Yisra’el, competently leading troops into battle while wielding political and military authority.” Dowd is this man. Yahowsha’ is not.

The conclusion of the 3rd statement of the 110th Mizmowr speaks of Dowd alone. He was born Beloved. He is the ultimate recipient of Yahowah’s rechem | love and affection. He was known for beginning his day at dawn and no one began as gloriously in their youth as God’s son. He was not only chosen and anointed at eight, in short order, he slayed his people’s most belligerent foe. His best Songs were written early in his life.

Equally befitting, Yahowah tells us that Dowd will be “as brilliant as the sun” upon his return. He will be “as God.”

Not only did Dowd provide an abundance of Mizmowr | Psalms during his life as God’s Shepherd and Chosen One, as Yahowah’s Firstborn and the returning King of the Universe, Dowd will receive the lion’s share of the inheritance associated with the Covenant.

While Yahowah made promises to many, there were only two to whom He made solemn oaths: ‘Abraham and Dowd. And since He has already fulfilled all of His promises to the former, it appears as if Yahowah is ascribing yet another distinction upon the latter…

“Yahowah (Yahowah – a transliteration of , our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) has sworn an oath, having made a solemn promise (shaba’ – He has affirmed the truthfulness of His previous statements by meeting the conditions in association with seven), and will not change it (wa lo’ nacham – will not reconsider or relent, and He will not alter His course of action, and He is not apologetic or sorry).

You are a royal advisor and supreme leader adorned in a priestly fashion (‘atah kohen – you are a counselor and ruler, the principal officer, serving by ministering; from kahan – to serve by playing the role of a priest, becoming a priest, and being adorned as a kohen) forever (la ‘owlam – for the duration of time) with regard to the words of (‘al dibrah – corresponding to the proper sequence of events which have been communicated through the words of; feminine of dabar – the spoken and written word of) Meleky Tsadaq | My Rightful King (Meleky Tsadaq – My Royal Counselor and Advisor and Sovereign Ruler; from melek – king, which is from the verbal root malak – to be king and to provide counsel and advice with the pronoun suffix y – My and tsadaq – right, correct, acquitted and vindicated, just and righteous, which is from the verbal root tsadaq – to be right and thus to be correct, to acquit and be vindicated, and to be justified, righteous, and upright).” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 110:4)

Throughout the prophets, Yahowah speaks more about Dowd, and of the promises He has made to him, than any other individual – and by a wide margin. At one point, God even says that if all of the promises He has made to Dowd do not materialize, you can call Him a liar – which is what Christians have done by transferring everything said of Dowd to “Jesus.”

As a direct affront to the most pervasive plague to infect humankind – Christianity – God says that regarding this individual that He will not change His mind. This is a stunning rebuke of Replacement Theology in the very Psalm used more than any other to advance this malignant mythology. What Yahowah promised to do for and with His Beloved and Firstborn Son, His Chosen Shepherd and Messiah, the King of Kings, cannot ever be taken away from him and given to another.

The concluding phrase of the 4th statement has left scholars and theologians bewildered for centuries because they are unwilling to search the meaning of Hebrew words – especially names. And they fail to appreciate how context dictates the proper way to translate the ideas embedded within the terminology.

God is not talking about a “kohen – priest” in the sense of a Lowy | Levite serving in this role. The only Lowy of the status required to be the subject of this prophecy was Moseh – and it does not apply to him. He has fulfilled the mission of liberating the Children of Yisra’el while helping them grow by sharing Yahowah’s Towrah | Guidance and Teaching.

I say this because no Lowy | Levite, other than Moseh | Moses, chose to dwell at Yahowah’s right side while serving as an eternal witness. However, Moseh’s foes were vanquished long ago. Dowd’s arose after his service as king and prior to his return.

Moseh wielded a staff, but not a scepter nor a spear. Dowd held all three. Dowd is the living embodiment of Tsyown while Moseh never set foot upon this place. Moseh was a liberator and Dowd a defender.

Then every allusion to any other individual other than Dowd, including Moseh and Yahowsha’, dissipates entirely within the 3rd statement. The final liberation and enrichment of Yisra’el occur upon Dowd’s return, when he will be as brilliant as the sun. It is God waxing poetic of His beloved son, the poet, when He calls his “appearance beautiful” and “uniquely majestic.” As for “honorable,” “earning the highest respect,” and “being exceptionally qualified,” these are accurate assessments of this man of “noble character and enormous wealth” – even by God’s standards.

Further, while Dowd was eight (representing eternal life) when he began, Yahowsha’ was 30 and Moseh 80, affirming the one and excluding the two. And while Dowd prospered monetarily, Moseh and Yahowsha’ did not.

As we continue to demonstrate that this prophecy could only be addressing one man at the exclusion of all others, should Yahowah have been addressing “Jesus” as Christians claim, by “shaba’ – honoring a solemn promise” which He “lo’ nacham – will not change,” then God could not have endorsed a new religion based upon Replacement Theology, a New Testament, nor negated the role of the Passover Lamb. And if the kohen is a reference to Moseh, then the Towrah remains in effect – now and always.

The key to understanding kohen is to look beyond the initial definition to its secondary connotation, “counselor and advisor,” recognizing that this is why the title was chosen. And then we must look to its actionable root: kahan, meaning: “royal ruler, priestly advisor, supreme leader, and sovereign counselor who serves the people while adorned in priestly fashion.” Since there has never been a Lowy who qualifies within this context, Yahowah is addressing the “royal advisor and supreme leader” of His people who is Meleky Tsadaq | My Rightful King. Of these, there is only one: King Dowd.

The problem people seem to have translating this is that they are not familiar with the words which comprise the names Yahowah has chosen. There is no “priestly order of Melchizedek.” It is nothing more or less than Yahowah announcing that Dowd is His rightful king. Meleky means “My King” and Tsadaq means “right.” Based upon the root meaning of both words, Meleky Tsadaq conveys: “My Royal Counselor and Advisor, My Sovereign Ruler who is right, correct, acquitted, and vindicated, justified, righteous, and upright.”

More than for anyone who has ever lived, Yahowah has said of Dowd that he is right. And when the people chose Sha’uwl, Yahowah chose Dowd as Melek of Yisra’el.

At this point, the prophet announces that Dowd, as Yahowah’s Right Hand, will do as God has promised…

“My Lord and my Upright One (‘adony / ‘edony ‘any – the one I look up to as a sign of respect and my foundation and support upon which I stand) at Your right hand (‘al yamin ‘atah – upon Your right side, designating the preferred position of authority and power) will strike and actually shatter (machats – he will pierce and dash, severely agitate and shake up, ultimately crushing (qal perfect)) during this time (ba yowm – in this day) of His king’s wrath (‘aph huw’ melek – of the frustration and resentment of His ruler, the righteous indignation of His sovereign counselor).” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 110:5)

This is a prophet, likely Nathan, revealing what Yahowah revealed to him about the coming Messiah, King Dowd. At Yahowah’s right hand, ha Mashyach will lash out at Yisra’el’s foes, especially Christians and Jews. The King is angry as is his God. And frankly, after reading Acts, who can blame them?

Should you be a Christian, this is not good news. To be judged seldom has a favorable outcome – particularly now. And to have the man whose life your religion has ransacked, and whose people you have demeaned and “replaced” be the arbitrator, puts those who believe in the Pauline “Jesus Christ” in a very bad position. But do not take my word on this – listen to God.

“He will execute judgment to defend and to accuse (dyn – he will decide between right and wrong based upon the agreed set of principles, adjudicating by contending and convicting, taking legal action against while debating and disputing) among the Gowym | Gentile religions and nations (ha gowym – those who are not Jews, the communities of people from other races, cultures, and places) filling them (male’ – putting an end to them) with corpses (gawyah – with the carcasses of dead bodies; from gewah – to be left behind, feminine of gowy – non-Yisra’elites).

He will strike, mortally wounding (machats – he will physically impact and dash, slicing up and shattering), the leaders (ro’sh – the highest-ranking individuals, especially those who govern at the highest levels) of the greatest nations (‘al ‘erets rab – the preponderance of the earth).” (Mizmowr / Song / Psalm 110:6)

Methinks Gowym did not replace Yahuwdym.

And yet Gowym Christians believe that this Lord, the one killing them and their leaders, will be their very own “Jesus Christ.” Welcome Twistian Zombies to the land of the Living Dead.

Once upon a time, I shuddered when I read statements like this one. But now, I concur with them. The punishment fits the crime. And without recompense, there is no justice.

Yahowah will once again engage with Dowd, the returning Messiah, to protect His people and home from a world that has turned against them. It is appropriate and fair.

Gentile Christians and Muslims, Conspirators and now Socialist Secular Humanists, Communists, and Progressives, have continued to conspire to rob King Dowd’s people of their calling, their land, their rights, their dignity, their freedom, and their very lives. And they have chosen to support human religious and political institutions whose edicts besmirch Yahowah’s name and reputation. Their assembly of United Nations is overtly and overwhelmingly anti-Israel. It is so pathetic; the leaders of nations will invert the truth and embrace Islamic terrorists to condemn God’s people.

If I were to ask you to name a moral and truthful political or religious leader, and give you a month to find one, your list would appear as a blank page. Goodbye and good riddance. And along with this cadre of corrupt souls, we can toss out the myth that the 110th Psalm demonstrates that, while David was excluded from heaven, dead and buried, he nonetheless peered into the Christian paradise to praise the Lords who had dealt fraudulently with him.



We now have irrefutable proof that those who wrote the Christian New Testament were disingenuous idiots, deliberate liars who played the faithful for fools. They despised the God whose authority they claimed and disparaged His people. And for these insights, our journey into Acts has paid dividends.

Since Luke was not yet through tarnishing “Peter’s” reputation, let’s see what else the ventriloquist would have his puppet say in the process of presenting Iesoun Christon as the reincarnation of Dionysus.

“Therefore (oun – consequently, these things being so), let every (pas) household (oikos) in Israel (Israel – a transliteration of Yisra’el) know (ginosko –acknowledge) with certainty (asphalos – beyond any doubt) that (hoti) the Lord (ΚΝ – placeholder for kurion, meaning Lord) made (poieomai – performed what was required to cause and designate) him (autos) the (tov) Christ (ΧΡΝ – placeholder for Christon) and God (ΘΣ – placeholder for theos – god), this (houtos) Jesus (ΙΗΝ – placeholder for Iesoun) whom (hos) you crucified (ΕΣΡΩΣΑΤΕ – placeholder for aorist active tense of the verb stauroo – affixed to an upright stake).” (Acts 2:36)

Based upon their misappropriation of 2nd Samuel 7 and Psalms 16 and 110, why not? Just because neither apply and there is no logical connection between those prophecies and this conclusion, what’s the harm in starting a new religion by robbing the actual Mashyach of his title, inferring that Dowd was dead so that Iesoun could live, and reconstituting the Passover Lamb as God while changing his name? Okay, so maybe that’s not a great idea, but that is the least of their problems. The founders of the Christian religion actually attributed their delusions to God. And if that were not enough to earn an enduring stay in She’owl | Hell along with every other Christian leader, the authors of the New Testament blamed the Jews, not the Romans, for crucifying their god.

Let’s play along with them for a moment. Let’s pretend that crucifixion was a Jewish invention and that the Jews, not Romans, had the authority to convict and condemn a prisoner in this Roman province. If Jews killed God, shouldn’t we be worshiping Jews? And should this have occurred, if man was capable of killing God, how is such a pathetic being going to restore the lives of men?

Continuing to play along, if the Lord made Iesoun the Christon based upon him being crucified by Jews, why isn’t any of this predicted or explained in the Prophets? Why is there no mention of an Iesoun | Jesus or Christon | Christ if he is a junior God? Why did God set the example of anointing the Mashyach with oil if the same status could be achieved by “Jews killing him?” Since the prelude to this outcome required robbing Dowd, why did God say that all of His promises on behalf of Dowd were everlasting? Why is there no mention of this transfer from one to the other anywhere in the Prophets? If this was all so obvious and convincing, why did the authors of the Christian New Testament have to lie to make their point? Why, if God was now changing sides and rejecting Jews for having killed Him, are there countless prophecies pointing to the restoration of His relationship with Yisra’el and Yahuwdah? And why, if the Gentile Church has become the Chosen People, is God shown annihilating them upon His return?

Humm…

Okay, so Peter, Paul, and Luke flunked logic, what about their audience…

“Now when (de) they heard this (akouo – received this news and message), they were pierced through (datanyssomai) the heart (kardia).” (Acts 2:37)

Really? Are we to believe that Yahuwdym are as ignorant and irrational as Gowym?

“They said (eipon) to Petros (Petros – meaning stone or rock), and to (pros) the rest (loipos – remaining) of the Apostles (apostolos – those who informed and equipped as messengers), ‘Brethren (adelphos – bothers and fellow countrymen), what (tis) is a man (andros) to do (poieomai)?’” (Acts 2:37)

Expose and condemn them. Mock and ridicule them. Turn to the God they besmirched for answers. And then consider the words of the actual Messiah and Son of God.

“And now (de), accordingly (pros), Petros (petros – meaning stone or rock) told (phemi – instructed) them, ‘Change your thinking (metanoeo – after you have come to recognize that which is false, change your perspective and obtain a proper understanding of what is true to avoid the consequences) and also (kai) be baptized (baptizo – sprinkled with water) each and every one (hekastos) of you by (epi) the name (onoma) of Christ Jesus (ΧΥ ΙΥ – placeholders for Christou Iesou) in order to (eis) be pardoned (aphesis – to be released) from your sin (hamartia – being mistaken), and then (kai) receive (lambano – grasp hold of and acquire) the gift (dorea – the present) of the Holy Spirit (hagios ΠΝΣ).’” (Acts 2:38)

If you count yourself among them, I would highly recommend “metanoeo – coming to recognize what is false and changing your thinking.” As for the rest, no.

Baptism is a pagan religious rite having nothing to do with God. To do so with a religious intent is to offend Yahowah and estrange oneself from Him. The sign of the Covenant is circumcision – and that is never going to change.

God has but one name – Yahowah – and there was no one named Christou Iesou. There is no forgiveness nor reconciliation apart from Yahowah. And the Ruwach Qodesh | Set-Apart Spirit embraces those who attend the Mow’ed Miqra’ey. This was the worst advice ever.

Recognizing that all names should be transliterated, it is useful to know that there is no “J” sound or letter in Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, or Greek. And even if there were, and had this been an accurate reflection of what Shim’own may have said, he would have addressed fellow Yahuwdym in Hebrew. The name Yahowah used in His role as the Pesach ‘Ayl | Passover Lamb was Yahowsha’ | Yahowah Saves. That said, there is no correlation between Yahowsha’ and what has been claimed of him in Acts.

Iesou, Iesous, and Iesoun, upon which “Jesus” was derived, was not written on any page of any pre-Constantinian (read Catholic), 1st, 2nd, or 3rd century manuscript of the New Testament. Therefore, its very foundation does not exist. Jerome, who created the Latin Vulgate on behalf of the Catholic Church, would have had access to these early manuscripts and therefore would have known about the existence of the placeholders – and yet he chose to ignore them. As a result, a dozen centuries later, a hundred years after the initial appearance of the “J” in English, and in the third edition of the King James Version, men decided to give Iesou a new name: “Jesus.”

To add insult to injury, Yahowsha’ was not anointed and thus was not a Mashyach. And he was not Greek, so he could not have been the Christou either. Worse, the verbal root of Christou, Christon, and Christos is chrio, which means “to apply drugs.” Oh, what a wicked web they have woven.

Beyond all of these lies, please take note: on the day Catholics allege their “Church” was born, Shim’own, the man they have renamed “Peter” and now claim was the first Pope, is not even alleged to have said any of the following when his audience supposedly asked him what they should do: join the church, become a Catholic, convert to Christianity, make a profession of faith, promote me to pope, kiss my ring, pay me an indulgence to minimize your time in purgatory, have your children baptized and confirmed, attend Mass, go to confession, stay clear of the seven deadly sins, do a bunch of good works, become celibate, observe Lent and celebrate Christmas and Easter, perform the sign of the cross, buy some prayer beads and perform three Hail Marys, worship the Lord, bow down in prayer, tithe, trust me because I am the rock upon which the Church will be built, or don’t worry because I hold the keys to heaven. And that would be it for the claims of Catholicism.

“For indeed (gar – because) the announced promise (epangelia – consent approval) exists (eimi) for you, your children (teknon), everyone (pas) who is a great distance away (makran), and for as many (hosos) as the Lord (ΚΣ – placeholder for kurios) our God (ΘΣ – placeholder for theos) calls to Himself (proskaleomai – summons).” (Acts 2:39)

If we are to believe that this was the “announced promise” why was there no announcement – not a single prophecy regarding any of this? And why, since Luke knew that there were none, did he have “Peter” offer prophecies which spoke of a different person and an entirely different set of circumstances?

Why, when Yahowah tells us that He has only one name, and that “the Lord” is Satan’s moniker, does the Christian New Testament insist on calling their god “the Lord”? And if God is calling us to Himself, why do they ignore His Invitations?

“And with many more (pleion – an increasing quantity), yet different (heteros – additional) words (logos), He admonished and testified (diamartyromai – he warned) to earnestly encourage and summon (parakaleo – to admonish, and exhort) them, ‘Become saved from (sozo apo – become healed from the sickness of) this crooked and corrupt (skolios – unscrupulous, dishonest, and twisted) generation (genea – age and race).” (Acts 2:40)

Sadly, we do not know what all of those many more and different words may have been, because he finally got one thing right: “become saved from this crooked and corrupt generation.” But alas, Luke scribed this line to imply that we need to be saved from “unscrupulous and twisted” Jews.

There is good news after all. We have reached the end of this religious rant against God’s people and plan.

“Indeed (men), therefore (oun – as a result), approximately (hosei) three thousand (trischilioi) souls (psyche) received and accepted (apodechomai – welcomed and grasped hold of) his (autos) words (legos – message).

They were baptized (baptizo – dipped and sprinkled with water in pagan fashion) and were added (prostithemai – were granted and given favorable access) during (en – and in) that one (ekeinos) day (hemera).” (Acts 2:41)

At least they were clean.



As promised, it is time to consider Peter’s / Luke’s misappropriation of Yow’el / Joel in Acts 2:17-20. If you recall, the brain trust behind the Christian New Testament laid an egg. They claimed that the events surrounding the fulfillment of the Mow’ed Miqra’ of Shabuw’ah were explained by the prophet who foretold Yahowah’s return 2000 years later on Yowm Kipurym.

“But now (de) Petros (Petros – Peter, Greek for “stone or rock”) stood up (histemi – took a stand) with (syn) the eleven; he raised (epairomai) his voice (phone) and he spoke to them (apophthengomai – saying), ‘Yahuwdym (Ioudaios – a transliteration of Yahuwdym – Beloved of Yahowah) men (andros) and all (pas) who dwell in (katoikeo) Yaruwshalaim (Ierousalem – a transliteration of Yaruwshalaim – the Source of Guidance on Reconciliation), listen carefully to (enotizomai) my voice (rhema), and let this (houtos) be (eimi) known (gnostos) to you (Acts 2:14) because (gar) they are not (ou) drunk (methuo – intoxicated) in the manner (hos) you suppose (hypolambano – are willing to accept), for indeed (gar) it is (eimi) the third (tritos) hour (hora) of the day (hemera).

To the contrary (alla) this (houtos) exists as (eimi) the pronouncement (eipon) of (dia) the prophet (prophetes) Yow’el (Ioel – a transliteration of Yow’el, a contraction of Yahowah and ‘el, meaning Yahowah is God, but improperly transliterated Joel): (Acts 2:15-16)

‘And it shall come to be (eimi – exist in an identical fashion) in (en) the final (eschatos – the last in a series (the theological term eschatology is derived from this word)) days (hemera), God (ΘΣ – placeholder for theos) says (lego – affirms), ‘I will pour out (ekcheomai – I will bestow and spill, liberally distributing) from (apo) Me, My (ego) Spirit (ΠΝΣ – placeholder for pneuma) upon (epi – among) all (pasa) flesh (sarx – physical bodies, on the corporeal mortal nature of humankind).

Your sons (huios) and your daughters (thygater) will speak inspired utterances (propheteuo – proclaim what God wants known).

Your young men (neaniskos – used of males between twenty-four and forty years old) shall see visions (horasis – from horao, see with their own eyes), and your elders (presbyteros – old men and ranking individuals) will experience supernatural communication from God (enypnion enupniazomai – experience revelations while dreaming). (Acts 2:17)

Indeed (ge – really and truly), upon (epi) My male servants (doulos – slaves) and also upon My female servants (doule – female slaves) in (en) those (ekeinos) days (hemera – period of time) I will pour out (ekcheomai – I will shed and bestow, spill and distribute) from (apo) Me, My (ego) Spirit (ΠΝΑ – placeholder for pneuma) upon (epi – among) them and they will speak inspired utterances (propheteuo – proclaim what God wants known). (Acts 2:18)

And (kai) I will allow and produce (didomi – bestow and permit) wonders and miracles which foreshadow significant upcoming events (teras – omens, marvels, and signs which serve as portent to arouse attention) in (en) the sky (ouranos – atmosphere and universe) above (ano) and signs (semeion – miraculous signals and unusual occurrences which transcend the common course of nature) upon (epi) the earth (ge – land) below (kato): blood (haima), fire (pyr), and (kai) rising clouds of (atmis – steam, billowing vapor, from aer, air and atmospheric) smoke (kapnos). (Acts 2:19)

The sun (helios) will be changed (metastrepho – turned) to (eis) darkness (skotos – obscured, made gloomy, from skia, have its light intercepted as in a shadow), and the moon (selene) to (eis) blood (haima) before (prin) the coming (erchomai – arrival and appearance) of the (ho) great (megas – massively important and enormously sizable) and brilliantly shining (epiphanies – wonderful, glorious, radiant, and illustrious, notable appearance in clear and full view shining forth as light visible as a star) day (hemera – time) of the Lord (ΚΩ – placeholder for kurios – conveyed as “LORD”). (Acts 2:20)

And it shall come to pass (eimi – be that) all (pas – everyone) who (hos), and as many as (an – used as a preposition to present a possibility), call upon (epikaleomai – ask for help in and bear) the (ho) personal and proper name (onoma) of the Kurio | Lord (ΚΩ) will be saved (sozo).’” (Acts 2:21)

There are forty Hebrew names, including Yow’el (Yahowah is God), Yownah (Yahowah’s Dove), Yowbel (Yahowah’s Lamb), and Yowseph (Yahowah has Joined and Increased), whereby Yahowah was contracted to Yahow and then to Yow over time. And that is why virtually every lexicon affirms the connection between “Yow,” “Yahow,” and ultimately with “Yahowah.”

While it is obvious to all who have not had their brains turned to mush by religion that citing Yow’el missed the mark by a score of centuries, there was more to their malfeasance than misappropriating the prophet’s testimony. It is not just that they misquoted God either, but it is what the authors of the Christian New Testament did not convey from the prophecy which leaves them naked, exposed and condemned.

Not interested in making the same mistake, we are going to engage the prophet from the beginning and see what leads to this day like none other.

“The word (dabar – the oral and written word) of Yahowah (Yahowah – a transliteration of , our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence), which, to show the path to the benefits of the relationship (‘asher – which to lead along the correct path to get the most enjoyment out of life), literally came to exist (hayah – came to be at this moment (qal perfect)) for (‘el – to, inside, and by) Yow’el | Yahowah is God (Yow’el), son (ben) of Pathuw’el | Open to God (Pathuw’el – wide open and thus completely receptive to the Almighty and persuaded by God). (Yow’el / Joel 1:1)

Choose of your own volition to listen to this (shama’ zo’th – under the auspices of freewill, hear this (qal imperative)), elders (ha zaqen – leaders within the community who are older and more mature).

Hear this and respond of your own accord (wa ‘azan – pay attention, listen, be perceptive, and focus on understanding so as to reply appropriately (hifil imperative)), everyone living in and inhabiting (kol yashab – all those who have established a dwelling place within) the Land (ha ‘erets – the material realm generally and Yisra’el specifically).

Has such as this happened (ha hayah zo’th – questioning the prior existence of this) in your days (ba yowm ‘atem – during your time) or (wa) even (‘im) in the time of your fathers (ba yowm ‘ab ‘atem)? (Yow’el / Joel 1:2)

Regarding its approach (‘al hy’ la), recount it accurately (saphar – proclaim this written communication to inform, choosing to recount it (piel imperative)) to your children (ben ‘atem).

Then let your children tell their children (wa ben ‘atem la ben hem), and then their children (wa ben hem) to the last generation, so they do not hesitate and get left behind (la dowr ‘achar – so that those of this age do not linger, procrastinate, or equivocate, holding back or delaying, leaving this place).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 1:3)

As I had suspected, the misappropriation of this proclamation by Luke was intentional. The prophet’s name was clearly attested and means “Yahowah is God,” not “the Lord” nor Chrestou Iesou. He was “Open to God” which is why he was a prophet and Luke was not.

He was not demeaning nor demanding, but instead spoke under the auspices of freewill. And he was communicating to those living in Yisra’el about what would occur that would affect the last generation of Yisra’elites in the Land. Yow’el was providing information from Yahowah which, when heard and understood, would enable an intelligent response. And he asked those listening to do the opposite of what Luke had done: recount this message accurately in writing.

According to Yow’el, nothing had ever occurred that would be similar to what would come. This would be unlike anything the world had ever seen. It would be so profoundly important, and come so suddenly, he did not want anyone to hesitate or equivocate, for fear they would be left behind.

Well now, at least we know why Luke interjected the notion of being drunk with sweet wine…

“Awaken and choose to take action (qyts – after the summer has passed, awake from your stupor, act alive and be alert (hifil imperative)), you who are intoxicated (shikowr – you who are inebriated and drunk).

Weep and wail (wa bakah wa yalal) all who drink (kol shatah – everyone who consumes) in association with new and sweet wine (yayn ‘al ‘asys – effervescent grape juice which is recently fermented, immature, and incomplete, even overly sweet).

For indeed (ky) it is cut off and severed (karath – it will be excluded and disassociated) from (min) your mouth, and thus your speech (peh ‘atem) (Yow’el / Joel 1:5) because (ky – for the express reason) a large group of a non-Yisra’elite nation (gowy – a country comprised of heathen gentiles from many diverse cultures which are not Jewish) have come up against (‘alah ‘al – have risen up to oppose) My Land (‘erets ‘any), the potent force of a great multitude (‘atsuwm – a mighty and powerful, even accomplished and effective, exceptionally large vicious), so numerous as to be uncountable (‘ayn misphar – beyond inventory and innumerable).

It has sharpened teeth (shen huw’ – its jaws), the piercing incisors of a destructive beast (shen ‘aryeh – the jaws of a fierce lion which plucks its prey apart), and it has the fangs (matalaowth la huw’ – it approaches with the rash talk and bite, even the devouring nature) of a roaring white leopard (laby’ – symbolic of violent white men with a loud roar). (Yow’el / Joel 1:6)

My vines (gephen ‘any – My tendrils and plants, especially My vineyards) will be set up (sym – will be appointed and assigned) for appalling desolation (la shamah – for atrocious devastation and being laid waste, for something really atrocious and ugly).

And My fig tree (wa ta’enah ‘any) will be a splintered stump, snapped off and cut down (qatsapah – toppled and yet still rooted in the ground), stripped bare, exposed and condemned (chasaph chasaph hy’ – vulnerable and denounced then torn apart), rejected and hurled away (wa shalak – thrown down and cast aside), its branches (saryg hy’ – its intertwined shoots) bleached white (laban – whitewashed as a snow leopard).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 1:7)

And now we know why Dowd will be slashing away and piling up corpses within this gentile nation. His battles will be as they once were – defensive as he strives to protect Yisra’el.

Following the summer of their discontent, Yahuwdym will be roused for the final Fall Miqra’ey prior to Yahowah’s return. Awakened from their stupor, they will witness a time of great sorrow as a result of those who spoke of being drunk on sweet wine.

The belligerents assaulting Yisra’el, which Yahowah refers to as “My Land,” will come from a gentile nation. This will be a potent force, accomplished and effective, so numerous, they will be uncountable.

While there will be two billion Muslims by this time, it is unlikely that God would have called them ‘atsuwm because, while vast in quantity, jihadists are blithering idiots. They have barely advanced from sticks and stones to bottle rockets. Moreover, this is the final battle for supremacy over the Promised Land. Muslims will have already tried and failed during an all-Islamic war waged against Israel. That battle will occur in 2030 and this is the final world war in 2033.

Since gowy was actually singular, this force is likely from one nation, region, race, religion, or cultural group. Should that be the case, the lone remaining candidate would be Communist China. The Han Chinese people comprise the world’s largest ethnic group at 1.4 billion individuals – 18% of the planet’s population. Having invested sixty billion dollars building a roadway and railway from China through the Middle East, and heavily in Israeli infrastructure, particularly the ports of Haifa and Ashdod, they are now capable of projecting a force of this magnitude, replete with a newly developed naval base in the Arabian Sea. It is among the wonders of the modern world, with infrastructure well beyond the needs of the stated objectives.

This beast will be destructive, seeking to tear Israel apart. And the warriors, as would be the case with the Chinese, will appear white in contrast to the olive-skinned people of Yisra’el and the Middle East.

Yahowah often equates the health of His Land to a vineyard and His people’s presence to the blooming of a fig tree, both of which are used in this prophetic portrait. The intent of the invading force will be to set the nation up for appalling devastation – which is to say that they do not want to occupy it, but instead destroy and depopulate it. The fig, representing the presence of God’s people, will be splintered and bent, but not uprooted. Stripped bare and rejected, Jews will be scalded by the sun.

The Land’s great potential will be squandered, farmers will be frustrated, and food will become scarce. The vineyards and the olive orchards will fail, and the grain harvest will wither. From barley to grapes, from figs to pomegranates, from dates to apples, it will all shrivel up and die.

After sharing this with us, Yow’el reveals…

“Even the sacrificial offerings which bestow a share (ky minchah – the gifts which lead to an apportionment) and the drink offerings which anoint (nesek – the valued libations) will be withheld (mana’ – are denied and deprived) from the Family of your God (min beyth ‘elohym ‘atem). (Yow’el / Joel 1:13)

Consecrate (qadash – dedicate and set apart) a fast (tsowm – a time of voluntarily abstaining from food). Summon and announce (qara’ – call out and proclaim to read and recite, to welcome and greet (qal imperative)) an assembly to meet (‘atsarah – a time to congregate together under severe constraints).

Gather (‘asaph – assemble) the elders (zaqen) and all of the inhabitants (kol yashab) of the Land (ha ‘erets) to the Home and Family (beyth – the household) of 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 ‘atem).

Then cry out to and summon (wa za’aq ‘el – appeal to and request assistance from) Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of YaHoWaH, our ‘elowah – God as directed in His ToWRaH – teaching regarding His HaYaH – existence and our ShaLoWM – restoration). (Yow’el / Joel 1:14)

This is a warning (‘ahah – oh, alas, emphasizing the alarming concern regarding) to those approaching this day (la ha yowm – nearing this time) because (ky) the Day (yowm) Yahowah (Yahowah – written as directed by His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) is near (qarowb – is close and approaching).

A great force will be exerted (wa ka shod – soon, there will be a period of elimination and a cause for destruction) upon (min) the arrival (bow’ – the return) of Shaday | the One Who is Satisfactory and Sufficient (Shaday – the One Who is Acceptable and Reasonable, Who is Necessary and Enough, Who is Adequate and Appropriate; from she – who is and day – enough, sufficient, suitable, fitting, appropriate, acceptable, and pleasing).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 1:15)

We do not need to go further to destroy the credibility of Christianity, and the stupidity of claiming that this prophetic portrayal addressed the fulfillment of “Pentecost.” However, for those the resulting religion has victimized over the ensuing score of centuries, this is among the most important messages you will ever consider. It is your final and last warning: come to your senses and embrace Yahowah before it is too late.

Since the House of Yahowah was destroyed by the Romans nearly 2000 years ago, and since there are no offerings being made in this regard, the opening statement clearly reveals that what God is offering to His Family is being temporarily withheld. The remedy then is to announce an assembly to meet, especially now under such trying circumstances. God wants His people to gather together and cry out to Him for assistance – which He will provide.

What He did for the Children of Yisra’el upon hearing their collective cry for help when persecuted under religious and political tyrants in Mitsraym, He will do again – but this time without negotiation and without restraint.

This offer comes with a warning because time is short. We are quickly approaching the Day of Yahowah, when He will exert a tremendous force upon the Earth to clean up man’s mess – demonstrating that He is up to the task. Yahowah’s response will be shaday – appropriate and fitting, necessary and sufficient.

It is a shame that it has to be this way, but their world will be ablaze before Yisra’elites call out to God…

“To You (‘el ‘atah), Yahowah (YaHoWaH – an accurate presentation of the name of ‘elowah – God as guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence), I call out (qara’ – I summon and meet, invite and welcome (qal imperfect)).

For indeed (ky), fire (‘esh – flames) has devoured (‘akal) the dwelling places (nawah – the beautiful abodes) where the word is questioned (midbar – from my – to question and dabar – the word) and ablaze with flames (wa lehabah lahat) are all the trees (kol ‘ets) of the field (ha sadeh – of the open and broad way).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 1:19)

There will be a war raging for control of the planet. It will be man against God. It is time to sound the alarm.

The fact is, Yahowah is returning, precluding the Second Coming of “Jesus Christ.” And He is not the least bit amused with humankind. Rather than God returning for “His Church in Rome,” He will be blasting the religious into oblivion from Tsyown. Rather than introducing a new Messiah, He will be bringing the finest to have ever lived back with Him.

The showphar and ruwa’ are both symbolic of Taruw’ah | Trumpets – the next, and yet unfulfilled, Miqra’. It should be observed as it was intended…

“Sound the Showphar (taqa’ showphar – blow the trumpet comprised of a ram’s horn) in Tsyown and among the Signs Posted Along the Way (ba Tsyown), signaling future action, providing a warning, an explanation, and a shout of exaltation (ruwa’ – provide a cautionary notice and further elucidation, along with the good news) on My Set-Apart mountain (ba har qodesh ‘any).

Be roused to anger (ragaz – respond to the agitation) all of you who live in the Land (kol yashab ha ‘erets) because the Day (ky yowm) of Yahowah’s ( – a transliteration of YaHoWaH as instructed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) return (bow’ – arrival) is near (qarowb – is approaching and is close).” (Yow’el / Joel 2:1)

We find in ruwa’ the full intent of Taruw’ah: signaling future action, providing a warning, an explanation, and a shout of exaltation while providing a cautionary notice and further elucidation, along with good news. I do not know if this is speaking of the fulfillment of Taruw’ah in 2027-2030, or if it is a call for the remaining Yahuwdym to pick up where we left off. But its purpose remains the same.

This is not what the religious envision, but it is what will occur. The planet must be cleansed for it to remain habitable. And for that to occur at this time when almost everyone is either religious, political, or conspiratorial, billions must go.

“It will be a day of darkness during a time of ignorance and confusion (yowm chosek – a period of terror and gloom) when there is a reduction of light (wa ‘apelah – when there is a lack of enlightenment), a day of obscuring phenomenon (yowm ‘anan – a time of smoke screens and clouds so thick they obscure the light), gloomy and miserable (wa ‘araphel – blocking the light), similar to (ka – comparable to) the swarthy blackness (shachar) which is spread out (paras – enveloping) upon the mountains (‘al ha har) with many people from a large and powerful army (‘am rab ‘atsuwm – a great multitude of related individuals from the most populous nation), the likes of which (kemow huw’ – incomparable) has not existed previously, even to the dawn of time (lo’ hayah min ha ‘owlam).

And after this (wa ‘achar huw’ – following this), it will never occur again (lo’ yasaph – there will not be another) throughout the years (‘ad shanah – into perpetuity as part of this eternal witness of changing times), generation unto generation (dowr wa dowr – throughout the cycle of life no matter the dwelling place or time).” (Yow’el / Joel 2:2)

With Muslims eliminated from consideration because of their incompetence, the multitude of nations from which they hail, and the realization that they would have lost their battle with God several years ago, we are left with only two viable candidates for this dubious distinction: the United States and China. And there may only be one option since the nuclear fallout of an all-Islamic war waged against Israel, a massive asteroid impact (should the 8th chapter of Revelation be correct) in April 2029, and an impending tsunami as a volcanic island cascades into the sea, may collectively and morally wound America, Europe, and Russia years prior to this conflict.

This is the war to end all wars. The largest force ever mustered by man will darken the hills leading into Yisra’el. And then there will be no more.

So much for the arms race, for the great jihad, or onward Christian soldiers marching off to war. So much for the forefathers of Twistianity claiming that Yow’el was predicting the birth of their church rather than the obliteration of what they would come to represent.

Almost immediately after delving into the Towrah’s Teaching regarding what occurred in the Gan ‘Eden and then comparing those insights to the Towrah’s Instructions pertaining to the Mow’ed, I realized that Yahowah would cleanse the Earth so that we could return to where we began. Yow’el, however, beat me to this realization by 2,850 years…

“As they approach (la paneh huw’ – as they appear and before their presence) fire will consume them (‘akal ‘esh) and behind them (wa ‘achar huw’ – then following after them) a flame blazes (lahat lehabah) as the Land and Earth (ha ‘erets – the material realm) comes to resemble (ka – becomes comparable to) the Gan ‘Eden | the Garden of Great Joy (Gan ‘Eden – a sheltered and defended, cultivated and covered, enclosure of favorable circumstances and delightful experiences) before them (la paneh huw’ – in front of them).

But behind them (wa ‘achar huw’) is a desolate and unpopulated wasteland clothed in horror (shemamah – a barren wilderness where speeches and the word are questioned), and in addition (wa gam), there is no escape or deliverance for them (peletah lo’ hayah la huw’ – there is no salvation nor remnant of them).” (Yow’el / Joel 2:3)

This trash will be incinerated so that it does not foul the surrounding gardens as the Earth is transformed from Hell to Heaven, from the dominion of men to the liberation of God. That is for the fortunate few who join the Covenant before the conflagration begins. As for those who came to destroy Yisra’el and decimate Yahuwdym – there will be no reprieve, no escape, and no saving them.

Before they are swallowed up in the flames of Yah’s fury, they will make one last stand…

“There will be what could be compared to the appearance of (ka mar’eh – similar to the sight and visual phenomenon and could be comprehended by a comparison to; from mah – to ponder the implications of and ra’ah – what is seen and perceived as) swift warhorses (suws – mobile military transports (commonly transliterated sus)).

This phenomenon could be perceived (mar’eh huw’) as being similar to chariots and calvary (wa ka parash – akin to piercing war machines with riders), especially pertaining to the way they run and are driven in pursuit of their foes (ken ruwts – considering the pace they dart about and aggressively chase after an opponent in response to their operators). (Yow’el / Joel 2:4)

As with the loud roar (ka qowl – consistent with the sound and thunderous rumbling noise) of these chariots and military vehicles (merkabah – wheeled transports with riders commenced in battle) upon the summits of the mountains, their leaders seek the high ground (‘al ro’sh ha har) as they leap about, springing into the air (raqad – they seem to skip around and dart around, leaping up) like the crackling of a flame (ka qowl lahab) of fire devouring (‘esh ‘akal) stubble (qash – the chaff comprised of the husks of grain and straw which when dry fly off with the wind).

Such is the nature of this powerful, exceedingly capable, and enormous army (ka ‘am ‘atsuwm – this mighty nation and accomplished people who are innumerable, potent, and effective) drawn up, aligned, and arranged (‘arak – taking up positions, prepared, organized, and ready) for war (la milchamah – for battle equipped with the weapons of war [from 4QXII]).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:5)

Based upon the prophet’s depiction, this is not the United States, but instead China. America, even if it exists by this time, would wage this war in the tight confines of Yisra’el with drones, doing so from above with aircraft and cruise missiles. But these belligerents have arrived driving a massive array of military vehicles – all of which are now poised to drive Yahuwdym into the sea.

Should our assessment of China be correct, and it alone fits this bill at this time, then the nation’s motivation will be revenge and access. China is in bed with Iran over oil, and therefore is heavily vested in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. When these nations are defeated during the Islamic Federation war against Israel, China will be looking to recover what she lost. Also, following the defeat of her Islamic allies, China would gain unfettered access to the Mediterranean and Red Seas with Israel out of the way. Further, China is strategically invested throughout Africa, particularly Ethiopia, and has considerable rare-earth mining interests throughout the continent. Their roadway to these riches passes through Israel. And then there is the most recent fly in the ointment. China is Israel’s second-largest and fastest-growing investment partner during a time when the U.S. is imposing global restrictions.

By this time, China, as the most populous nation, will boast the world’s largest economy and army. Theirs will be a disciplined military, trained and accustomed to giving and following orders. They will not be dissuaded nor distracted.

“From their presence (min paneh huw’ – at their appearance and when facing them), the people (‘am – the people) labor and tremble because of their power and wealth (chayl – capitulate in fear of their military and in deference to their prosperity). Every face (kol paneh) becomes flushed and pale (qabats pa’ruwr – shows signs of anxiety). (Yow’el / Joel 2:6)

Like warriors (ka gibowr – like soldiers trained in combat, strong and disciplined), they charge ahead (ruwts – move quickly and aggressively).

As men (ka ‘ysh) of war equipped with weapons (milchamah – battle ready fighters), they scale (‘alah – they climb) barriers and walls (chomah – protective barricades and defensive blockades). Each individual marches in his own lane (wa ‘ysh ba derek huw’ halak). They do not swerve (wa lo’ ‘abat) from their path or conduct (‘orach hem – their way and destiny in life).” (Yow’el / Joel 2:7)

“Walking around with their weapons (halak wa ba’ad ha shelach), they attack (naphal) without relenting (lo’ batsa’ – without ceasing). (Yow’el / Joel 2:8)

They rush (shaqaq – they leap, charging) into the city (ba ha ‘yr) from within the walls (ba ha chomah), running into the houses (ruwts ba ha beyth) by climbing through the windows (‘alah ba’ad ha chalown), entering like thieves (bow’ ka ha ganab).” (Yow’el / Joel 2:9)

What we have read describes an army more reliant on vast numbers of soldiers rather than more advanced technology. It will be a horrifying experience. The only protection from this will be Yahowah and His Covenant. In His Family, your family is protected.

“The earth will quake before them (la paneh huw’ ragaz). The heavens will be shaken (ra’ash shamaym). The sun and the moon (shemesh wa yareach) will grow dark (qadar) and the stars (wa kokab), their brightness (nogah hem) will be taken away (‘asaph). (Yow’el / Joel 2:10)

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) offers (nathan – provides) His voice (qowl huw’) before the presence (la paneh) of His especially capable and powerful force (chyl huw’). Indeed (ky), exceedingly great (rab me’od – with power beyond measure) and capable (‘atsuwm) is His temporary dwelling place which is now in close proximity (machaneh huw’ – is His encampment).

The one who engages and acts upon (‘asah – he who accomplishes) His Word (dabar huw’) is indeed (ky) valuable and important (gadowl – extremely significant).

The Day (yowm) of Yahowah will be exceedingly awesome (yare’ me’od) for whoever (wa my) is lifted up and carried away by Him (nasa’ huw’ – has his burdens born by Him and is sustained by Him [from 4QXII]). (Yow’el / Joel 2:11)

‘Yet even now (wa gam ‘atah),’ prophetically declares (na’um) Yahowah ( – the pronunciation of YaHoWaH as guided by His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence), ‘Choose to return (shuwb – of your own freewill come back and be restored (qal imperative)) all the way to Me, enduring forever based upon My testimony (‘ad ‘any), by using your best judgment (ba kol lebab ‘atem – while wholly engaging your conscience).’” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:12)

This will be a dark time, but isn’t that when the light shines the brightest and when it is the most needed? Therefore, this is a time when Yahowah will be near because His people will need Him more than ever.

Yahowah has always been appreciative of those who engage and act upon His word, but now with time in short supply and the foes more numerous than ever, His witness is especially important. And yet, so few volunteer, the verb ‘asah | to act and engage was scribed in the third person masculine singular. It is baffling that the most enjoyable and rewarding job in the universe goes largely unfulfilled.

Even as the sands of time run through man’s hourglass, God remains an object of reverence for some and a source of fear for many depending upon our attitude and approach toward Him. Either way, this will be His final call. Return and be restored or remain to die with the rest of humanity.

It is uncommon for Yahowah to use ‘ad ‘any in conjunction with shuwb | return. And while ‘any reveals that God is addressing us in first person, ‘ad speaks of “eternity” and of “testimony.” Also insightful, lebab, which is typically rendered “heart,” describes the “exercise of good judgment” and of “exercising our conscience to influence our attitude and inclinations.”

The rabbinical response to someone actually pronouncing Yahowah’s name has been to tear their clothing. So this is a bit tongue-in-cheek when God asks them to open their minds rather than their cloaks…

“So tear open (wa qara’ – rip and rend) your hearts and minds (lebab ‘atah) and not your garments (wa ‘al beged).

Return to (shuwb ‘el – choose to change your thinking, come back to, and be restored by (qal imperative)) Yahowah (Yahowah – a transliteration of , our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence), your God (‘elohym ‘atem).

For indeed (ky – by contrast), He (huw’) is compassionate (chanuwn) and merciful (rachuwm – showing favoritism while forgiving), long-suffering, patient, and slow to anger (‘arek ‘aph), abounding in steadfast and loyal love (wa rab chesed – unfailing devotion, genuine kindness, and favor).

He will provide reassurance and encouragement (nacham – comfort and support while consoling those who change their approach) during this malevolent and miserable ordeal (‘al ha ra’ah – throughout this wicked undertaking and wrongdoing resulting in suffering through calamitous circumstances).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:13)

With man this bad and God this good, why do men choose man over God – favoring religion and politics, patriotism and militarism, over genuine compassion, mercy, and love by one million to one? Considering who we are and what we have done, why does God have to beg us to embrace Him?

When this transpires in our immediate future as it was written 2850 years ago, will anyone pay attention to it and respond? Or will Yow’el’s prophecy remain squandered, left as a tool to be misappropriated by Christians?

Turns out, these were not rhetorical questions. I am pleased to acknowledge that Yahowah wants us to ascertain this answer as well.

“Who knows (my yada’ – who is aware, who acknowledges and understands, and who is Yada’ and what role might he play in revealing and then questioning this, making the declaration known through observation (qal participle masculine singular – actually and literally seeks to know to the point he is defined by the quest to understand)) who will change his thinking and return so that he can be restored (shuwb – who will turn around and come back to where we began (qal imperfect)) and be reassured and encouraged after reconsidering (wa nacham – be comforted and supported, consoled and relieved after having changed his mind (nifal perfect))?

He will survive, enduring as a remnant (sha’ar – he will be spared, continuing to exist as flesh and blood), in the end (‘achar – remaining at this conclusion of time during the last days).

He will be a blessing (huw’ barakah – he will become enormously beneficial, praiseworthy, eminent, and prosperous), a gift (minchah – a wonderful present which is bestowed) set before (nasak la – chosen to be part of a special relationship with) 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 ‘atem).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:14)

After twenty years of private discovery and public disclosure, I have come to view Yahowah’s testimony to Yisra’el as if it were written for me as a member of His Covenant. If it is relevant and true for Yisra’el, it is relevant and true for us individually. I share this because I have long encouraged everyone to approach Yahowah’s revelation similarly.

Making this personal, I see Yahowah acknowledging the role Yada’ would play in changing the thinking of His People so that Yahuwdym and some Gowym would return to Him. If so, many will survive as a result of Yahowah’s testimony as it is presented in these books, and each reconciled soul will be a blessing to God – a gift. And that is a pleasing thought.

“Sound the Showphar (taqa’ showphar – blow the trumpet comprised of a ram’s horn) in Tsyown among the Signs Posted Along the Way (ba Tsyown).

Consecrate (qadash – dedicate and set apart) a fast (tsowm – a time of voluntarily abstaining from food). Summon and announce (qara’ – call out and proclaim to read and recite, to welcome and greet (qal imperative)) an assembly to meet (‘atsarah – a time to congregate together under severe constraints). (Yow’el / Joel 2:15)

Gather the people for a harvest (‘asaph ‘am – bring the family together). Set the community apart (qadash qahal – dedicate and consecrate the meeting).

Collect those more advanced in age (qabats – collect the leaders within the community). Assemble the children (‘asaph ‘owlal), including the infants who are nursing (yowneq sad).

The bridegroom should be brought out (yatsa’ chathan) of his room (cheder huw’) and the bride from her bridal chamber (wa kalah min chupah hy’).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:16)

Simply stated, it is now or never – and never is a very long time. Stop what you are doing, pay attention, and return to Yahowah before it is too late.

The reference to a limited diet is suggestive of the famines which will ravage the world at this time. If you are going to go hungry, it might as well be with a purpose. Weeping, which is addressed throughout this prophecy, is evocative of the travails of Yaruwshalaim as the last world war approaches. And mourning is in reference to Yowm Kipurym – the great day of Yah’s return, which is known to Jews as the Day of Mourning.

And while Yahowah does not designate Yowm Kipurym as a “fast,” it is one of two Miqra’ey where the menu is not designated. And while there is no instruction to “mourn” associated with the Day of Reconciliations either, our reunification with God will be so emotional, we will mourn as one would for a lost son, now found.

“For the purpose of understanding and making connections, between (bayn) the portico and colonnade (‘eylam – the porch and vestibule) and up to the approach to the altar (wa la ha mizbeach), the priests (ha kohen) and those who serve (shrath) Yahowah (Yahowah – written as directed by His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) will cry out (bakah – will wail), pleading (wa ‘amar – they will admonish (qal imperfect jussive)), ‘Please choose to show compassion upon and spare (chuws ‘al – opt to take pity and deliver (qal imperative paragogic cohortative – a genuine and emphatic expression of volition in the first and second person)) Your people (‘am ‘atah – Your family), Yahowah (YaHoWaH – an accurate presentation of the name of ‘elowah – God as guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence).

And do not allow (wa ‘al nathan) Your property which was offered as an inheritance (nachalah ‘atah) to become a contemptible and dishonored object of scorn which is jeopardized (cherphah – place subject to taunts and abuse), simply a slogan to determine who controls it among (mashal ba hem – a quoted expression which makes comparisons, becoming a proverb to designate who governs it among) the gentile nations (gowym – non-Yisra’elite ethnicities and nationalities).

Why should they constantly ask (la mah ‘amar – for what reason should they enquire (qal imperfect)) among the people (ba ‘am), “Where is (‘ayah) their God (‘elohym hem)?”’” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:17)

Mislabeling Israel “Palestine,” claiming that it is “illegally occupied,” and that it belongs to the “Palestinians” is the epitome of contemptible. And these lies have become slogans to change who inherits God’s Land.

As for the question which will be posed by many as Israel is overrun, it will be resoundingly answered upon Yahowah’s return. But those who asked it will not be around to see it answered.

And speaking of being without a proper response, this next statement destroys Paul’s claim in 1st Corinthians that “love is not jealous nor does it seek its own.” Yahowah steadfastly disagrees…

“Then (wa) Yahowah ( – a transliteration of YaHoWaH as instructed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) will be envious and zealous, having His passions aroused (qana’ – will jealously desire exclusivity in the relationship) for His Land (la ‘erets huw’) and show mercy for and spare (chamal ‘al – will take pity upon and show kindness to) His people (‘am huw’ – His family).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:18)

That is all she wrote for the absurd notion that Christian Gentiles have become God’s new besties. God’s people have not changed in 4000 years. His desire is for them. All of the anti-Semitic rhetoric we endured in our review of Acts was for naught. Sorry Twistians, but your days are numbered.

“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 (‘anah – replied), and He said to His people (wa ‘amar la ‘am huw’), ‘Please take note (hineh – behold, look up now and see), I am sending to you (shalach la ‘atem) that which is associated with grain (‘eth ha dagan), new wine (wa ha thyrowsh – quickly and lightly fermented grape juice, similar to a fruity Beaujolais Nouveau), and olive oil (wa ha ytsahar – fresh and shining anointing oil) so that you will be fulfilled and satisfied (saba’ – content, your needs met in abundance) with this (‘eth huw’).

And I will no longer allow (wa lo’ nathan) you to ever again be (‘eth ‘atem ‘owd) taunted and insulted (cherphah – disgraced or dishonored, held in contempt or harmed, reviled or reproached) among the Gowym | Gentiles (ba ha gowym – among the nations of different ethnicities and cultures).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:19)

Grain for bread, grapes which become wine, and olives for oil represent things which must first be crushed before they are useful. That is what has happened the last and final time to Yisra’el. These three things also represent Matsah, Pesach, and Bikuwrym, which is why God’s people will find them so fulfilling and satisfying.

The lost souls accredited with writing the Christian New Testament and those engaged apologizing for it should have considered what we have just read prior to composing and advancing their anti-Semitic rants. Yow’el was not speaking for “Jesus Christ,” addressing “Christians,” nor describing “Pentecost.” This prophecy is from Yahowah, it is on behalf of Yahuwdym, and it has not yet been fulfilled. And when it is, God will be on the side of the Jews.

“I will avoid any association with and remove (rachaq – I will distance Myself from and send very far away, severing any connection with (hifil imperfect)) the invading army whose objectives are concealed along with their use of stealth technology (wa ‘eth ha tsaphowny – the military from the north whose quest for treasure remains undisclosed, whose motives are sinister, and who prefers to remain hidden and unseen, especially with regard to their intent; from tsaphan – to hide from discovery and to seek treasure and own – powerful and all-encompassing) from within and over you (min ‘al ‘atem).

Then I will drive him and banish him (wa nadach huw’ – I will thrust and expel him, casting him) into a realm (‘el ‘erets) which is parched (tsyah – dry, barren, and solitary) and lifeless and deserted desolation (wa shamamah – a ruinous wasteland of despair and anxiety cloaked in devastation and horror that is appalling and stupefying).

Concerning his appearance facing toward (‘eth paneh – regarding his appearance turned to) the Sea (ha yam) from the east (ha qadmony), he will meet his demise at the conclusion of his journey (wa sowph huw’ – his final result will be to fail, and his main purpose will cease to exist upon his ultimate destruction) at the Sea (‘el ha yam) in the end (‘acharown – at last, in the future, and toward the west).

And his stench (wa ba’osh huw’ – the foul odor) will rise up (‘alah) and his putrid smell (wa tsachanah huw’ – his rancid and rotten aroma) will ascend (‘alah) because (ky) he has acted (la ‘asah) boastfully (gadal – arrogantly to glorify himself).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:20)

It isn’t just that God favors Yisra’el – He disavows other associations. And this time, the point of departure sounds hellish.

In most translations, it is stated that this foe will be arriving from the north instead of just from the east. Their justification comes by way of a derivative of tsaphowny. However, its verbal root reveals something far more menacing. This “invading army will have concealed their objectives” and they will deploy “stealth technology.” Further, ‘eth ha tsaphowny indicates that they are indeed on a “quest for hidden treasure” which seems to affirm my earlier suggestion that their mining of rare-earths may be a motive.

According to God, their march from the east toward the Mediterranean Sea will be halted and they will meet their demise. There will be so many of them, and their ambitions so grandiose, the stench from their decay will be appalling.

“Fear not and do not be awed (‘al yare’ – be neither afraid nor intimidated, distressed nor concerned) earth (‘adamah – land having given birth to ‘Adam; the feminine version of ‘adam). Be glad (gyl – be joyful over the anticipation of more favorable circumstances) and show a positive attitude (wa samach – be happy and express your elation outwardly) because (ky) Yahowah ( – the pronunciation of YaHoWaH as guided by His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) has done and will continue to do (la ‘asah – has become well-known for acting and engaging in a manner which is (qal infinitive construct – is genuinely and literally defined by acting in this manner and doing what follows)) that which enables our growth (gadal – whatever is needed to nurture and rear us, making us stronger and more honorable, elevating our status (hifil perfect – engaging at the right moment in time to facilitate that which is great)). (Yow’el / Joel 2:21)

Do not be distressed or concerned (‘al yare’ – do not be afraid) animals of the open environs (bahemah saday) because (ky) the beautiful pastures and dwelling lovely places (naweh – the attractive encampments) of the barren wastelands (midbar) are becoming verdant and growing (dasha’ – are sprouting new green shoots and coming back to life as vegetation thrives).

Surely (ky – by contrast) the tree (‘esh) lifts up and bears (nasa’ – brings forth) its fruit (pery huw’ – its harvest).

The fig tree (ta’enah) and the vine (wa gephen) give (nathan – offer) their vigor and strength (chayal hem – their wealth and noble characteristics).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:22)

I have known Yahowah for twenty years, and in all of that time I have never experienced depression because my relationship with God is uplifting. That is not to say that I have not endured heartache or pain, even frustration and disappointment, in my dealings with my fellow man, but that I see above it and past it to what matters most.

Let it be known: Yahowah wants to be associated with people who have a positive attitude. And He has done His part to make that happen.

By stating ‘asah in the qal infinitive construct, and by following it with gadal, God is telling us that He has become synonymous with doing whatever is needed to facilitate our growth. We should expect Him to do what is in our best interests in the future because He has consistently done so in our past. Yahowah is engaging to rear us as His children, elevating our status and nurturing our understanding while cultivating our character. He is the perfect parent.

By using ‘adamah, God is not speaking to the ground, but instead of that which gave birth to ‘Adam. However, since God can communicate with animals, it is in His nature to console and encourage them – especially based upon how man has mistreated every species – especially his own. Beyond this, God is speaking to us as well, letting us know that the land man has wounded, He will restore. We are returning to the Gan ‘Eden.

The renewed vigor of the fig and the vine are symbolic of Yahowah’s people flourishing in the Land. Those who survive and respond to Him will be “chayal – enriched and empowered with noble characteristics.”

Should you have missed this connection, one that Luke, Paul, and their fellow Christians have remained oblivious to,…

“Rejoice over these favorable circumstances (gyl – since you have been given this opportunity, choose of your own volition to display a positive attitude and be genuinely happy (qal imperative)) Children of Zionists (beny Tsyown – descendants of the Signs Posted Along the Way).

Demonstrate a positive attitude (wa samach – be happy and express your elation outwardly) with (ba – alongside) Yahowah ( – the pronunciation of YaHoWaH as guided by His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), for (ky) He has provided for you (nathan la ‘atem – He has given to you) that which is associated with the autumn rains through a teacher who communicates what you need to know about the towrah to live (mowreh – authorized, accurate, and informative instructions by pointing out and showing the directions; from mah – to ponder the implications of yarah – the source from which teaching and guidance, instructions and directions flow (serving as the actional base of towrah)) so that you can be right and thus vindicated (la tsadaqah – for you to be correct, upright, and acquitted, innocent and prosperous as a result of exercising good judgment regarding that which is verifiable and true).

He has brought down (yarad) for you (la ‘atem) an abundant shower (gesem) of guidance and instruction (mowreh – pouring out and pointing out what you should be contemplating regarding the towrah’s teaching and directions, communicating as a teacher what you need to know to live) about being gleaned and growing thereafter (malqowsh – being gathered together and finally harvested in the aftermath; from mah – to ponder the implications of and laqash – being gleaned in a final harvest and then growing thereafter) as was intended in the beginning (ba ha ri’shown – returning to where it all began).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:23)

Progressives, unwilling to publicly acknowledge their inherent anti-Semitism, refer to Israelis as Zionists – which they openly condemn as if they were no longer a race. Yahowah not only disagrees, He is the foremost Zionist. He wrote the Signs which His son, Dowd, Posted Along the Way.

Having read those signs, having written about them in Coming Home, we have every reason to be joyous – even in the midst of the worst man has to offer during the Time of Ya’aqob’s Troubles. Fact is: this is a wonderful announcement – the shimmering silver lining surrounding the most ominous cloud.

It will no doubt rain on the lands man has parched, but rain is a metaphor, not the object of this prophetic proclamation. God is pouring out His Towrah | Teaching for me and for you. Through the Mowreh He “is pointing out the directions” to the Malqowsh where the real “growth begins after the harvest.” God is bringing us back to Gan ‘Eden | the Garden of Great Joy “ba ha ri’shown – as was intended from the beginning.”

Since Yahowah said this, it would be disrespectful and counterproductive to ignore it. We are in the Autumn of our existence as mankind separated from God. The remedy, the final three Mow’ed Miqra’ey, transpire in the Fall. We are the living embodiment of Taruw’ah, the result of Shabuw’ah, and the implement Yahowah is using to increase His harvest during Kipurym so that we might all enjoy Sukah – our return to ‘Eden.

Rain does not bring vindication. Showers do not make us “tsadaqah – right” with God nor “innocent” in His eyes. These are the result of His Towrah | Teaching and Guidance.

It is Yahowah’s desire that the Children of Tsyown follow His Signs Home. And that is why:

Yahowah (YaHoWaH), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), has truthfully and reliably (ky) provided for you (nathan la ‘atem) a teacher who communicates what you need to know about the Towrah to live. His teaching is an authorized and accurate source of guidance and instruction (mowreh) so that you can be right and thus vindicated, correct and acquitted by exercising good judgment regarding that which is verifiable and valid (la tsadaqah).

He has brought down (yarad) for you (la ‘atem) an abundant shower (gesem) of guidance and instruction, pouring out and pointing out what you should be contemplating regarding the towrah’s teaching and directions, communicating (mowreh) about being gleaned and then growing thereafter, being gathered together and finally harvested in the aftermath (malqowsh) as was intended in the beginning, returning to where it all began (ba ha ri’shown). (2:23)

This message is repeated in Zakaryah / Zechariah 10, where it is directed toward Yahuwdym and against the religious and political leaders of Gowym. It was also shared in Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5, contrasting this opportunity to learn against the rabbinical propensity to deceive.

I am consistently happy and fulfilled in my relationship with Yahowah, but there are moments like these when I experience some sadness along with the joy. It should not have been this way. God should have been able to find a billion people better than me – and a million Yahuwdym – eager and able to present His Towrah | Teaching and Guidance to His People. Our God deserves better.

And yet, because He searched and found no one according to the prophet Yasha’yah / Isaiah, a nobody would have to do. Informing His People that He was calling them Home was worth supporting a choter | sucker and nakry | foreigner because it would lead to awakening Yahuwdym | Yah’s Beloved. But just think how disappointed God must have been to have to inform Yisra’el – after all He has said and done through them – that it would occur this way.

And should you think that I have jumped to an unsubstantiated conclusion, we will turn to Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5:19 through 31 prior to concluding our review of events pertaining to Shabuw’ah and Yahowah’s return. What we will discover is that, even though God is so disgusted with Gowym that He will be obliterating most of them, He is not happy with Yisra’el either. And in this context, Yahowah will explain the nature and purpose of the mowreh – pouring out and pointing out of His teaching and how it will be used to circumvent the rabbis and their Talmud.

Mowreh is one of a feast of Hebrew terms built by combining the interrogatories – my or mah – with a descriptive noun or verb. In this case, mowreh is from “mah – to ponder the implications” of “yarah – the source from which teaching and guidance, instructions and directions flow.” And while that is instructive, this guidance becomes transformative when we realize that Yahowah defined “Towrah” using the verb yarah. As such, this is a referendum between Yahowah and the rabbis, Guidance and Laws, the Towrah and Talmud, and between a stifling religion and a liberating relationship.

Mowreh is the source of our joy, the directions to the harvest, guidance for growing, pointing out the instructions on how to return to what was originally intended. Refer to mowreh as an Autumn rain if you so desire, but never lose sight of what is being provided.

After all, should you encounter an ordinary shower you will simply get wet – not unlike the Christian baptism. But being drenched in a mowreh is life-changing, capable of making you “tsadaqah – right and thus vindicated.”

Through this shower of guidance and instruction, Yahowah pouring out what you should be contemplating regarding His Towrah’s teaching and directions, communicating what you need to know to live a joyous life. This mowreh leads to malqowsh | being gleaned and then growing thereafter, being gathered together and harvested with life in the aftermath. This mowreh was intended, right from the beginning, to return us to where it all began.

Are you going to stay out of this rain or dance in it?

For the Yahuwdym who drink in this outpouring of teaching and guidance in the autumn of our existence with a positive attitude, and who are vindicated as a result, they will find…

“The threshing floors (ha goren – the places where grain is processed and becomes usable by threshing and winnowing) will be filled (male’) with pure grain, symbolic of the most radiant children (bar – the brightest sons and daughters who are chosen and favored for their integrity and understanding to be heirs within this special relationship).

And fresh, new wine, sweeter with less alcohol (thyrowsh – quickly and lightly fermented grape juice, similar to a fruity Beaujolais Nouveau), will overflow (suwq) the presses and vats (yeqeb) along with olive oil (wa ytshar – fresh and shining anointing oil).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:24)

The goren is an ideal metaphor to reveal that something good can emerge from a crushing experience. It is why Yahowah’s Temple was built above one.

From this perspective, to render bar as “grain” and nothing more is to miss the point of God’s message. Bar means “son” in addition to “brilliant and radiant light,” “chosen and favored,” possessing “integrity and understanding,” and “becoming an heir as part of a special relationship.” And just as grain is synonymous with Matsah, and wine with Passover, oil is indicative of Bikuwrym – delineating how we avail ourselves of this relationship.

Continuing to address Yisra’el, and not the Christian Church, Yahowah reveals…

“I will reconcile and restore (wa shalem – I will fulfill My promises and honor My vows to make amends, completing what is required to reestablish the relationship, personally providing restitution) on your behalf (la ‘atem) the years (‘eth ha shanah) which (‘asher) suddenly disappeared (ha ‘arbeh – you were a widow besieged by a swarm of locusts) and were devoured (‘akal)…. (Yow’el / Joel 2:25)

Then you shall eat and be nourished (wa ‘akal ‘akal). And you shall be overwhelmingly satisfied (saba’), radiating a clear and brilliant light while cheering (halal – extolling and praising the resulting enlightenment while exclaiming) the name (‘eth shem) of Yahowah (Yahowah – a transliteration of , our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence), your God (‘elohym ‘atem) who, for the benefit of the relationship (‘asher), has acted and will engage (‘asah – who has dealt) marvelously (pala’ – wonderfully and awesomely) with you (‘im ‘atem).

So never again will My People be humiliated or disrespected (wa lo’ bowsh ‘am ‘any la ‘owlam – My family will not be ashamed or despair throughout all eternity). (Yow’el / Joel 2:26)

And you will know (wa yada’ – you will actually recognize and acknowledge, even understand at that moment (qal perfect)) that I am in the midst (ky qereb ‘any) of Yisra’el (Yisra’el – Individuals who Engage and Endure with God).

I am (wa ‘any) Yahowah (Yahowah – written as directed by His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), and there is no other (wa ‘ayn ‘owd – there will never be another besides Me, not now nor subsequently, as I am the only one who can restore or provide an eternal witness and to whom you can return). My Family (wa ‘any) will never be disapproved or experience distress (lo’ bowsh – will not be frustrated, mistaken, or wronged, neither shall they be embarrassed or be remorseful) again throughout all time (la ‘owlam).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:27)

Time is short and truth is rare, so let’s not mince words. When Luke wrote that Peter quoted Joel 2:28 through 32 to equate this prophecy with the fulfillment of “Pentecost,” either he or Peter was being deliberately dishonest. This prophecy is directed to the reconciliation of Yahowah’s relationship with Yisra’el immediately prior to His return. Not only hasn’t Yisra’el been replaced with a Gentile Church, it is the Gowym who are being obliterated on this day. Moreover, clearly stated, even repeated, is that the disapproving and disparaging rhetoric presented against Jews in Acts 2 is being explicitly renounced by God. Further, the prophecy is devoted to recognizing that Yahowah, and Yahowah alone, is God, negating everything that was said about “Jesus Christ.”

These conclusions are obvious and they are undeniable. Therefore, neither Peter nor Luke is to be trusted. And that is a blow Christianity cannot endure because Peter was among the three most trusted Disciples, and without Luke, we know nothing of Paul and the formation of the Christian religion apart from Paul’s caustic and contradictory letters.

As devastating a blow as this is for the credibility of the Christian scriptures, it is also proof that no one associated with the religion can be trusted. This prophecy states the opposite of what Christians claim, and yet not one Church leader has had the integrity to stand up and divulge the truth about its misappropriation.

Normally, we would juxtapose the Greek citation against the original Hebrew text to ascertain the ways Yahowah’s testimony was twisted to advance Christian interests – but not this time. It would not matter if they were precisely accurate because it does not apply – not even remotely. The moment the words were written “this exists as the pronouncement of the prophet Joel” it was over. Peter’s and Luke’s credibility was destroyed and, along with it, the validity of the Christian New Testament.

Out of the book of Acts, we read…

“But now (de) Peter (Petros) stood up (histemi) with (syn) the eleven. He raised (epairomai) his voice (phone) and he spoke to them (apophthengomai), ‘Yahuwdym (Ioudaios) men (andros) and all (pas) who dwell in (katoikeo) Yaruwshalaim (Ierousalem), listen carefully to (enotizomai) my voice (rhema), and let this (houtos) be (eimi) known (gnostos) to you (Acts 2:14) because (gar) they are not (ou) drunk (methuo) in the manner (hos) you suppose (hypolambano), for indeed (gar) it is (eimi) the third (tritos) hour (hora) of the day (hemera). (Acts 2:15)

To the contrary (alla) this (houtos) exists as (eimi) the pronouncement (eipon) of (dia) the prophet (prophetes) Joel (Ioel): (Acts 2:16)

‘And it shall come to be (eimi) in (en) the final (eschatos) days (hemera), God (ΘΣ) says (lego), ‘I will pour out (ekcheomai) from (apo) Me, My (ego) Spirit (ΠΝΣ) upon (epi) all (pasa) flesh (sarx).

Your sons (huios) and your daughters (thygater) will speak inspired utterances (propheteuo).

Your young men (neaniskos) shall see visions (horasis), and your elders (presbyteros) will experience supernatural communication from God (enypnion enupniazomai). (Acts 2:17)

Indeed (ge), upon (epi) My male servants (doulos) and also upon My female servants (doule) in (en) those (ekeinos) days (hemera) I will pour out (ekcheomai) from (apo) Me, My (ego) Spirit (ΠΝΑ) upon (epi) them and they will speak inspired utterances (propheteuo). (Acts 2:18)

And (kai) I will allow and produce (didomi) wonders and miracles which foreshadow significant upcoming events (teras) in (en) the sky (ouranos) above (ano) and signs (semeion) upon (epi) the earth (ge) below (kato): blood (haima), fire (pyr), and (kai) rising clouds of (atmis) smoke (kapnos). (Acts 2:19)

The sun (helios) will be changed (metastrepho) to (eis) darkness (skotos), and the moon (selene) to (eis) blood (haima) before (prin) the coming (erchomai) of the (ho) great (megas) and brilliantly shining (epiphanies) day (hemera) of the LORD (ΚΩ). (Acts 2:20)

And it shall come to pass (eimi) all (pas) who (hos), and as many as (an), call upon (epikaleomai) the (ho) name (onoma) of the Kurio | Lord (ΚΩ) will be saved (sozo).’” (Acts 2:21)

After stating this…

“I will reconcile and restore (wa shalem) on your behalf (la ‘atem) the years (‘eth ha shanah) which (‘asher) suddenly disappeared (ha ‘arbeh) and were devoured (‘akal)…. (Yow’el 2:25)

Then you shall eat and be nourished (wa ‘akal ‘akal). And you shall be overwhelmingly satisfied (saba’), radiating a clear and brilliant light while cheering (halal) the name (‘eth shem) of Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym ‘atem) who, for the benefit of the relationship (‘asher), has acted and will engage (‘asah) marvelously (pala’) with you (‘im ‘atem).

So never again will My People be humiliated or disrespected (wa lo’ bowsh ‘am ‘any la ‘owlam). (Yow’el 2:26) And you will know (wa yada’) that I am in the midst (ky qereb ‘any) of Yisra’el (Yisra’el).

I am (wa ‘any) Yahowah (Yahowah), your God (‘elohym ‘atah), and there is no other (wa ‘ayn ‘owd). My Family (wa ‘any) will never be disapproved or experience distress (lo’ bowsh) again throughout all time (la ‘owlam).” (Yow’el 2:27)

Yahowah revealed…

“And (wa) it will literally come to pass at that very moment (hayah – it will happen and come to exist (qal perfect – actually occur at that point in time)) without hesitation during the last days (‘achar – subsequently in the end and without waiting a moment longer), likewise (ken – accordingly), I will pour out (shaphak – I will provide a continual outpouring, bestowing and lavishing (qal imperfect)) My Spirit (‘eth ruwach ‘any) upon (‘al – over) all (kol) who hear and proclaim the message (basar – who convey this beneficial proclamation) and they will be inspired by the Spirit (wa naba’ – they will communicate as prophets as a result of the Spirit and accurately present the past, present, and future (nifal perfect – reveals that it is the Spirit communicating through them at this time)).

Your sons (ben ‘atem) and your daughters (wa bath ‘atem) as well as your elderly (wa zaqen ‘atem – older and prominent individuals) will have their thoughts guided by Divine revelations and be restored and empowered as a result (chalam chalowm – will grow stronger and healthier as they mature from children to adults through Spiritual disclosures).

Your boys will become capable men (bachuwr ‘atem – your youth will grow in strength and ability, becoming the best they can be during this period) by choosing to continually witness, observing and considering (ra’ah – viewing and perceiving (qal imperfect jussive – literally, continually, and by choice being shown)) these communications from God (chizayown – the revelations).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:28)

With Yahowah reconciling and restoring His relationship with Yisra’el, with Him nurturing and enlightening His people, uplifting and protecting them, and with His people acknowledging His presence in their midst and finally proclaiming His name, God will pour out His Spirit upon those who have heard and now proclaim His message. He will do so at this moment, and without hesitation, because all who remain are Covenant.

With the Ruwach Qodesh upon them, everyone will be inspired and empowered, becoming more aware and more capable. Boys and girls will become men and women as we are raised and grow alongside our Father.

For the first time in history, the truth will be popular.

I do not know if the Yisra’elites will have servants at this time, but I know that they will be working. As a Gowy, I will not be among the remnant of Yisra’el repopulating the Land during the millennial celebration of Sukah. I expect that I will be among friends, brothers and sisters, out exploring the existing universe before Yahowah eliminates it, creating a new one in its place.

That said, I am served by Yahowah’s mal’ak | spiritual implements and heavenly envoys. Their job is to keep me safe so that I can share Yahowah’s message in a hostile world. They may represent the outpouring of the spirit Yahowah is addressing.

And if not, and should these be servants and not workers, then God could be speaking of the process He inspired Moseh to articulate in Dabarym 15:12-18 regarding voluntary servitude, whereby the worker’s obligations are paid off and they are released after six years. Or possibly, the Gentiles who neither deserved to die nor earned the right to live may be provided with the opportunity to earn His favor.

Or perhaps there are no servants at all – just men and women engaged in the work of Yahowah…

“And also (wa gam) upon (‘al – over and among) the men who work (ha ‘ebed – the males who serve by working; from ‘abad – to work) and upon (wa ‘al) those engaged in service to the family (shaphchah – homemakers; the closest cognates are mashaphchah – considering the implications associated with raising a family and shaphat – to adjudicate and decide, exercising good judgment) in those days (ba ha yowm ha hem – during that time) I will bestow (shaphak – I will pour out) My Spirit (‘eth ruwach ‘any).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:29)

While I do not need to know because it is not my business, it seems that by studying ‘ebed and shaphchah my concerns were resolved. Families will be formed and children born on Earth during the one-thousand-year-long celebration of Sukah. It appears that Yahowah prefers what we would call traditional roles, with men working outside of the home and women within it. If so, it explains why they will be receiving an outpouring of Yahowah’s Spirit.

Recognizing that Yah’s People are protected by His Spirit, it is time to resolve the problem of mankind estranged from God.

“Then (wa) I will provide (nathan – I will offer and give, bestowing and producing) signs (mowpheth – tokens of upcoming events; from mah – to contemplate the meaning of and yaphah – that which beautifies) in the heavens (ba ha shamaym – throughout the universe) and on the Earth (ba ha ‘erets – in the Land and within the material realm): blood (dam – that which is essential to life; from ‘adam – mankind and damam – restful silence) and fire (wa ‘ets – burning and blazing light), along with columns of smoke (wa tymarah – upright pillars of fine particulates of carbon).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:30)

If I am interpreting this message correctly, then God is going to eliminate mortal man, creating a restful silence from his noise by way of His blazing light. The columns of carbon particulates will be all that remain.

For people who are apart from the Spirit and estranged from Yahowah, this would be frightening…

“The sun (ha shemesh) will become weaker and unreliable (haphak – will be altered) and thus darker (la choshek – obscured, becoming dimmer), and the moon (wa ha yareach – and the month) bloody red (dam) before the vitally important and awe-inspiring day (la yowm ha gadowl wa ha yare’) of Yahowah’s appearance (paneh Yahowah) arrives (bow’ – comes).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:31)

Mankind will have made a mess of the planet. Our wars and pollution will have contributed to these effects, but there will also be the residual fallout of nuclear war and the lingering debris from an asteroid impact.

All of this is occurring immediately prior to Yahowah’s return which will occur on Yowm Kipurym in year 6000 Yah (October 2nd at sunset in Yaruwshalaim in 2033).

By writing haphak, Yow’el predicted what will happen to the sun. It invokes the idea that the sun, as Satan’s most popular guise, will be “overturned and be proven unreliable” in the last days. Its illumination, as well as its influence, will be “dimmed and obscured” by the arrival of Yahowah’s Light.

Just as the sun is not going to be extinguished, merely darkened in the aftermath of nuclear holocaust, an asteroid strike, and the billowing smoke which will rise from the torching of the Middle East’s oil fields at the conclusion of the all-Islamic war against Israel, the moon will not turn into blood, but rather will reflect a diminished reddish-brown aura. If you have ever seen the moon during a full eclipse, or viewed it through air saturated with smoke, you will recognize this depiction. And it is an important one because, if the light reflected off of the moon’s surface is diminished by global atmospheric pollution of this magnitude, observing a new moon, especially in the seventh month of the final year of the Time of Ya’aqob’s Trouble, will be impossible. The first emerging crescent is already hard to see, as it occurs briefly just before sunset, low on the horizon through the greatest density of atmosphere, and it is always in competition with the source of its light – the sun.

Therefore, for those who survive long enough to witness the fulfillment of Yowm Kipurym with Yahowah’s return, and then the Miqra’ of Sukah which begins the Millennial Shabat, they will not be able to actually see the first crescent of the new moon which not only designates Taruw’ah, but also determines the arrival of the Day of Reconciliations ten days later. We will, therefore, need to anticipate the date based upon prior calculations such as those provided in this book.

“And it shall come to pass at that moment in time (wa hayah – it will actually and literally occur for a limited time (qal perfect)) that all who, to receive the benefits of the relationship (kol ‘asher – that everyone led along the correct path to get the most out of life), call out to receive, proclaim and summon to meet (qara’ – reading and reciting a welcome (qal imperfect)), in the name (ba shem – in the person and proper designation) of Yahowah (YaHoWaH – an accurate presentation of the name of ‘elowah – God as guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence) will be spared and delivered, protected from danger and saved from harm (malat – will be rescued and escape).

Indeed (ky), within the Mountain of the Signs Posted Along the Way (ba har Tsyown – upon the ridgeline of Mount Mowryah between Dowd’s and Yahowah’s houses) and in Jerusalem (ba ha Yaruwshalaim – the Source of Guidance and Teaching on Reconciliation), there will be (hayah) deliverance for a remnant (paleytah – survivors who remain free from oppression), just as (ka ‘asher) Yahowah ( – a transliteration of YaHoWaH as instructed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) has promised (‘amar).

And among the survivors within this remnant (wa ba ha saryd – among those who remain) are those benefiting from the relationship who (‘asher) 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) has invited and welcomed (qara’ – summoned and called out (qal participle absolute)).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:32)

There is only one name for God, and it is the one and only name capable of saving us from ourselves. Only those who called upon the name of YaHoWaH were spared – no one else.

You can argue this point until you are blue in the face, but it is not going to change God’s mind. From His perspective liberated in time, this has already occurred. And it is as it should be. Yahowah’s name is the point of departure. It is banned from the Roman Catholic Church and that will ban Roman Catholics in return. It was not only omitted from the Christian New Testament, God’s name was replaced by the LORD and Jesus Christ. And it was that sleight of hand which facilitated the fraudulent integration of Psalm 110 and Joel 2:28-32 into their scriptures. Yahowah will not accept a fraud. And thankfully, the requirement of knowing and using Yahowah’s name to be counted among those He saves will exclude all Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Mormons, Scientologists, and Socialist Secular Humanists.

It will also keep every rabbi and Hasidic Jew from being among the surviving remnant. No one is more averse to saying God’s name than them. It is a crime that will cost them their souls – a consequence I both lament and celebrate. There can be no justice unless those in the best position to know and convey the truth, and yet who decided to bury it under the tomes of their religion, are held accountable for committing the deadliest crime in human history. Judaism has been a curse on Jews.

Those who were malat | spared and protected by Yahowah did not just ‘amar | say His name, they Qara’ ba shem Yahowah to be malat | delivered from harm’s way. Qara’ is the most important verb in the Hebrew language. It means that these reconciled Yisra’elites and Yahuwdym “qara’ – called out” to Yahowah, “summoning and inviting” Him to be part of their lives. They “read and recited” His name, “proclaiming it” because they wanted “to be called out” of man’s mess and “meet with” Yahowah. In this way, they “were welcomed into His company.”

And this is why the verb, qara’, defines the Miqra’ey – the title Yahowah chose to describe His “Invitations to be Called Out and Meet.” The my prefix before qara’ encourages us to ponder the implications of these opportunities to meet with our Maker and to be welcomed into His family.

Luke misled his readers when he inadequately translated qara’, which, in the qal imperfect, means that those who were spared “consistently and literally, continually and actually called out” in the name of Yahowah. He misled them further when he failed to convey the meaning of “‘asher – to show the way to get the most out of life and enjoy the benefits of the relationship by walking along the correct path.” And then Luke committed the only unforgivable crime: he diminished the relevance of Yahowah’s name by replacing it with “kurios – the Lord.” Then to add insult to injury, he rendered malat inaccurately as “saved” when it speaks of “being spared and delivered, protected from danger and saved from harm.” It is “to be rescued from a deadly and destructive situation such that the beneficiary escapes the harm which will befall others.” Those who qara’ ba ha shem Yahowah were being delivered

Worst of all, Luke misappropriated a prophecy which, in context, negates the essence of his anti-Semitic rant. Yahowah is condemning Gentiles, not saving them. He is rescuing Israel, not condemning them.

Acts 2 was contrived to support Paul’s insistence on replacing Dowd with Jesus and Yisra’el with Christians, even the Towrah wa Naby’ with the Christian New Testament. But it was all a lie, a deliberate fraud, a poorly crafted hoax. And theirs was not a victimless crime, not only because of the billions it robbed of their souls, but because of the resulting carnage upon the Chosen People.

It was with and through Dowd that Yahowah Tsyown | Posted the Signs Along the Way. They did so in Yaruwshalaim | the Source of Guidance and Teaching on Reconciliation. Yahowah returned Home to His People – just as He has promised. And that is the point of all of this: God can be trusted to honor His word. This fact alone destroys any possibility that Judaism, Christianity, or Islam are valid.

“And among the survivors within this remnant (wa ba ha saryd) are those benefiting from the relationship who (‘asher) Yahowah (Yahowah) has invited and welcomed (qara’).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 2:32)

What follows ties Yahowah’s return and the restoration of His people together. It is little wonder Luke did not incorporate this testimony into Peter’s speech. Had he done so, maybe, just maybe, one Christian may have actually noticed that Paul and his accomplices were full of $#!+ {&%@?}…

“Look and see (hineh – pay attention to the details), because indeed (ky) in those days (ba ha yowmym ha hem), and during this particular time (wa ha ba ‘eth ha hy’ – that specific and definite point in the sequence of events), when, for the benefit of the relationship (‘asher), I return to restore (shuwb – I come back to the place I had previously left to reestablish and renew) the fortunes, freedom, and property (shebuwt – freeing from oppression and persecution, and of being controlled by others while returning their assets and possessions (such as that which was promised to them and taken away by Luke and Company)) of Yahuwdah (Yahuwdah – Beloved of Yah who bear Yahowah’s name) and Yaruwshalaim (Yaruwshalaim – Source of Teaching and Guidance on Reconciliation).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 3:1)

This is in the autumn of 2033, year 6000 Yah, during Kipurym, which is celebrated between Taruw’ah and Sukah. This timing has been designated as important and specific, not indefinite or subject to change. And the events transpiring this day are clearly delineated, rendering the notion that it was fulfilled 2000 years ago with “Jesus Christ” and in conflict with Yahuwdym absurd in the extreme.

It is Yahowah who is returning, not the never-named Yahowsha’ who was misnamed Jesus. “Jesus Christ” is not associated in any way with the events transpiring at this time – making the diatribe about him in Acts 2 nonsensical.

Rather than replacing Jews, Yahowah is returning to restore them, returning everything Christians tried to steal from His people. And that admission is a broadside attack on the credibility of the Christian New Testament which claims the opposite.

Yahowah is coming home to Yaruwshalaim in Yahuwdah. And it is there that He is restoring the fortunes and possessions of His People.

As for the Christians, Muslims, and Communists who attempted to rob them, this will not work out as they had planned. If you count yourself among them, then you have been played for a fool. This prophecy is as counter to the religions of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Multicultural Secular Humanism as words allow. It is absolute proof that Paul, Luke, Peter, Mark, Matthew, and Christianity, Rabbis Akiba, Yochai, Maimonides, Eliezer and Judaism, and then Muhammad and Joseph Smith lied when they claimed to have spoken on behalf of the God of the Towrah and Prophets. And if you do not concur – welcome to your destiny…

“Then (wa) I will collect and assemble (qabats – I will gather (piel perfect – the object suffers the effect at this moment in time)) all of the Gentiles (kol ha gowym – everyone estranged from Yisra’el, those from different countries, cultures, and ethnicities) and bring them down (wa yarad hem – I will come down to diminish and prostrate them, subjugating them and exterminating them) to the Valley (‘emeq – the deep depression between elevated places which is symbolic of a reduction in dimensions) of Yahowshaphat (Yahowshaphat – Yahowah Judges).

And I will enter into judgment against them (wa shaphat ‘im hem – I will decide against them, arguing and litigating in opposition to them, and will execute justice in disagreement with them) there (sham – by that name) on behalf of My people (‘al ‘am ‘any – for My family) and My inheritance (wa nachalah ‘any – My property and assigned association), Yisra’el (Yisra’el – Individuals who Engage and Endure with God, Israel).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 3:2 in part)

To assume that the authors of the Christian New Testament and every Christian cleric throughout the ages were too preoccupied promoting their religion to bother reading what Yahowah said before and after the pilfered citation in Acts is incredulous. And that makes this murderous crime premeditated and deliberate.

As a consequence, every Gentile estranged from Yisra’el will be brought down and diminished as they are judged by Yahowah. There will be no reprieves, no escape, and no salvation for them. God will condemn them by the name they loathed, rejected, and replaced. And He will do so on behalf of the people these gowym loathed, rejected, and sought to replace. It is poetic justice.

There are only two outcomes of Yahowshaphat: the destruction or diminishment of one’s soul. Those judged to have been victims of man’s misguided ways will have their souls obliterated, ceasing to exist. While the victimizers, those who knowingly led them astray, will be cast into She’owl where dimensions are reduced to a singularity – existing only in time.

Yisra’el was God’s to give and Yahowah gave it to His people. Gentiles of every ilk have tried to take it away. This problem is especially prevalent today.

From the time of ‘Abraham to the present day, Yahuwdym and Yisra’elites have been scattered among the Gentiles – mostly as a result of being enslaved. They were systematically abused by the Egyptians, Philistines, Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks, Romans, Roman Catholics, Byzantines, Ottomans, Muslims, Nazis, and now Progressives. No people have been treated worse, nor persecuted longer, than Jews.

If you are among those advocating a “Two-State Solution,” a return to 1967 borders, or believe that Jews are wrongfully occupying “Palestine,” God is going to hold you accountable.

“They have scattered and dispersed them (pazar – they have thrown them) among the gentile nations (ba ha gowym) and My Land (wa ‘erets ‘any) they have divided and apportioned (chalaq – they have assigned and distributed among themselves).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 3:2)

This is one of many reasons Gentiles will be judged and condemned by Yahowah. And that should be concerning to almost everyone since the prevailing edict among the nations is to evict and then apportion the Land.

Even worse, Christians, Muslims, Nazis, and Communists have treated Jews as property to exploit and extinguish at their pleasure. The Romans, who became Roman Catholics, went so far as to rob Yahowah’s Temple. Therefore, these grievances comprise verses 3, 4, and 5.

“And the children of Yahuwdah | Jews (wa ben Yahuwdah – the offspring related to and beloved by Yah) and the children of Yaruwshalaim | Jerusalem (wa ben Yaruwshalaim – the offspring of those who taught about reconciliation), you have betrayed, exchanging them (makar – you have engaged in a quid pro quo exchange to betray them, transferring their rights (qal perfect)) for the descendants of that which is Grecian (la ben ha Yawany – Greek Ionia, particularly applicable to the language ascribed to Greeks, those mired in their love of wine and who pursue, repress, and subjugate others) for the express purpose (la ma’an – with the intent) of removing them (rachaq hem – severing them and distancing them) from their own territory and bounds (min ‘al gebuwl hem – from the extent of their rights and boundaries of their claims; from gabhuwt – to be conceited and arrogant in one’s claims).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 3:6)

Paul’s letters, as was the case with the entire Christian New Testament, including Acts, were written in Greek. Paul not only spread Christianity throughout Greacen Ionia, he constantly contrasted Greeks with Jews, claiming the Greeks for himself. Luke, the author of the Gospel and the Book of Acts, was Greek, as was Timothy, Paul’s lover. The Roman Catholic Church formed in Greek Constantinople. The oldest Greek prose was written in the Ionian dialect, including Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey from which many New Testament myths were derived. Ionic Greek was simplified to become Attic, the Koine | Common Greek of the New Testament.

Recognizing this, Yahowah seems to be condemning the Replacement Theology of the Greek New Testament many centuries before Greeks began to menace Jews.

“Read and recite this (qara’ zo’th – proclaim this, issuing a summons (qal imperative)) against the Gentiles (ba ha gowym – in opposition to those who are estranged from Yisra’el ethnically, culturally, religiously, or politically).

Be set apart and prepared (qadash – become dedicated and focused) to engage in battle (milchamah – for conflict, to fight a war along these battle lines).

Alert and arouse (‘uwr – awaken and rise up) the most valiant, accomplished leaders and battle-hardened fighters (gibowr – the best and brightest, the strongest and most powerful, those who are experienced leading soldiers into battle, the most prominent and influential of men (used explicitly to describe Dowd)).

Approach and rise up (nagash ‘alah – come forth, be present and accountable, ready to engage and be confrontational by ascending) every man who is able and equipped to fight (kol ‘ysh ha milchamah). (Yow’el / Joel 3:9)

Beat (katat – pound) your plowshares (‘eth ‘atem) into swords (la chereb – weapons of war) and your pruning hooks (wa mazmerah ‘atem) into lances (la romach).

Let the weak and disabled (chalash – those with comparatively little strength) say (‘amar), ‘I am a capable fighter and honorable leader (gibowr ‘any – I am strong, empowered, and accomplished, and can be influential). (Yow’el / Joel 3:10)

Provide assistance without hesitation (‘uwsh – hasten to lend a hand).

Then come (wa bow’ – arrive) all of you Gentiles (kol ha gowym) from all around (min sabyb). Assemble there (qabats sham).

Yahowah ( – the pronunciation of YaHoWaH as guided by His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence), bring down (nachath) Your Gibowr | most prominent leader and devoted fighter (gibowr ‘atah – Your most capable and empowered individual, the man with the best character and greatest strength with a history of prevailing and affirming (a.k.a., Dowd)). (Yow’el / Joel 3:11)

The Gentiles (gowym) will be aroused, stirring themselves up (‘uwr – will be ready for action, even gloating, incited with expectations of triumph, although they will be exposed) going off (‘alah – being carried away and withdrawn to, being offered up) to the Valley (‘emeq – the deep depression between elevated places which is symbolic of a reduction in dimensions) of Yahowshaphat (Yahowshaphat – Yahowah Judges).

There (sham – and by that name), and I will enter into judgment against them (wa shaphat ‘im hem – I will decide against them, arguing and litigating in opposition to them, and will execute justice in disagreement with them); there (sham – by that name), I will sit (yashab – I will remain) to judge (shaphat – to decide, arguing, and litigate, to execute justice by condemning and punishing) all of the Gentiles (‘eth kol ha gowym – everyone estranged from Yisra’el) from all over (min sabyb).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 3:12)

This will not be a sneak attack. God will not be ambushing these confrontational Gentiles. They have been forewarned and will hear it again.

As for His people, God wants us set apart from these assailants and prepared to engage against them. Yes, He could wipe them all out with a single word, but that is not how He operates. He wants us to respond to the threat and defend our home and family along with Him. Accepting responsibility by standing up against evil to protect those we love is good for us and them.

Twice we find Yahowah using gibowr – a word closely identified with the Mashyach and Melek Dowd. He will be ‘uwr | aroused, ready to do as he has done: gibowr | fight to defend his people.

Dowd was a leader of men, which is why we are given the opportunity to rally at his side to rid the world of anti-Semites. And while we are instructed to fabricate our weapons, Yahowah knows that the most effective has always been words wisely wielded.

When we are part of Yahowah’s family, even the relatively weak are strengthened and the disabled enabled. We can all provide assistance, contributing to the cause of justice – even if it is to lend moral support.

While I am a gentile by ethnicity, I am no longer one culturally, politically, religiously, or militarily. I am among those who have embraced what it means to be Yisra’el | an Individual who Engages and Endures with God. And as a result, I am also Yahuwdah | Beloved of Yah.

As such, I will be among those rallying in support of Dowd as he fights to protect his people. As Ruth so eloquently stated, “Where you go, I will go, where you live, I will live. Your people shall be my people and your God, my God.” (Ruth 1:16)

Those who retain their affiliations with gowym cultures, institutions, nations, and the religious will endure a different outcome. Facing Yahowah and the Gibowr | Chief Defender of His people, the remaining Gowym will be headed to Judgment Day. There will be no exceptions or reprieves. Yahowah, the God they denied and rebuked, will become their Judge and Executioner. Fitting.

Suffice it to say, a church was not born on this day, but it will be extinguished. And may I remind you, the closest Greek word to the transliterated title, “Church,” is Circe. In Greek mythology, she was a sorceress, the daughter of the sun god, Helios, and a Nymph of the Sea, Perse. She used chrio | drugs and spells to change humans into wolves and swine. The Greek superhero, Odysseus, of whom Iesou Christo was modeled, stayed with her for a year before continuing his journey home. Christians have been with her a lot longer.

As an interesting note, the product of Circe’s and Odysseus’ escapades was Latinus – the language of the Roman Catholic Church. She has even become the patron saint of the liberated, sexually-free woman, and thus has been idolized by progressives since the Renaissance.

“Extend (shalach – reach out) the reaping sickle (magal) because (ky) the harvest (qatsyr) is ripe (bashal).

Return and be included (bow’ – come back to and enter) to demonstrate your dominion (radah – stamping your feet) because the winepress (gath) is full (male’ –is filled).

The vats (ha yeqeb – the vessels in which the juice of the grapes is held once mashed) have reached their ideal capacity (shuwq – are sufficiently filled to the proper point) because the consequence of them being wrong is great and there are so many of them who are immoral and miserable (ky rab ra’ah hem – because their propensity to be evil abounds and they are malignant and hurtful). (Yow’el / Joel 3:13)

Vast multitudes of uproarious and confused people making an intolerable racket (hamown hamown – an enormous display of the word’s accumulation of wealth, with an excessive overabundance of possessions and other useless objects, held by hordes, great masses of people and troops, will be making a commotion, rude and disorderly, loud and riotous) are in (ba) the deep depression (‘emeq – the valley between elevated places which is symbolic of a reduction in dimensions) of judgment, condemnation, and punishment (charuwts – of the verdict determining the sentence for those whose guilt is being assessed as a result of having maimed and mutilated).

For indeed (ky), the Day (yowm) of Yahowah (YaHoWaH – an accurate presentation of the name of ‘elowah – God as guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence) is approaching (qarowb – is near) in (ba) the valley (‘emeq – the deep depression between elevated places which is symbolic of a reduction in dimensions) of the verdict determining the sentence for those whose guilt is being assessed (charuwts – of judgment, condemnation, and punishment as a result of having maimed and mutilated). (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 3:14)

It is as they are being crushed for the final time that Yisra’elites and Yahuwdym return to Yahowah and seek His protection. This is why the harvest is ripe and ready to be reaped. It is indicative of the vats having been filled to their ideal capacity. It is the time for God’s people to assert their dominion over everything Yahowah has offered.

Yahowah is affirming that it will require a calamity of unheralded proportions to get His family’s attention. Never have there been so many who are wrong, miserable and immoral. Evil abounds as never before. Mankind has become a cancer – a malignancy which must be cut out for the Earth to survive.

For those who have read the volumes on the Covenant, you know that Yahowah predicted that two very different kinds of people would come from ‘Abraham. This includes Yisra’el, those who would be “hamown – vast multitudes of uproarious and confused people making an intolerable racket.” To be hamown is to present “an excessive overabundance of possessions and other useless objects along with an accumulation of wealth.” In the end, there will be “hordes, great masses of people and troops” who are hamown, and they “will be making a commotion, being both rude and disorderly, loud and riotous.” The two sides of ‘Abraham – Yitschaq and Yshma’‘el – have finally met. This is their day of destiny.

For most of man’s existence, mortal souls have been free to select one of three fates. Those who choose to rely upon Yahowah will become part of the Covenant and live forever with Him. Those who have opposed Him, as those in the valley of Yahowah’s Judgment will have done, will endure an eternity in She’owl separated from God. And while most souls will simply cease to exist at the end of their mortal lives, that option will not be afforded to the rumbling, tumultuous, and confused multitude who have come to annihilate Yahowah’s Chosen People. It is decision time, and they have all expressed theirs by way of the company they have chosen and the mission they have accepted.

This paints Yahowah as patient, always waiting until the last possible moment, giving people every opportunity to change before usurping their freewill, and demonstrably intervening as He eventually must in human affairs. To fulfill the final two Miqra’ey, and to save a remnant of Yahuwdym from having the worst of men destroy the Promised Land, and all life on Earth, He will arrive a heartbeat before we annihilate ourselves and the planet to save the day.

“Yahowah (Yahowah – a transliteration of , our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) roars (sha’ag) from (min) Tsyown | the Signs Posted Along the Way (Tsyown).

He offers His voice (wa nathan qowl huw’ – He speaks as a gift) from (min) Yaruwshalaim | the Source of Teaching and Guidance on Reconciliation (Yaruwshalaim).

The atmosphere trembles and shakes (wa ra’ash shamaym) along with the Earth (wa ‘erets), while (wa) Yahowah (Yahowah – written as directed by His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) provides protection and shelter (machaseh – a refuge from danger and falsehood) for His family (la ‘am huw’) along with (wa) a safe situation (ma’owz – a stronghold and safe harbor to prevail and be empowered) for the Children of Yisra’el (beny Yisra’el). (Yow’el / Joel 3:16)

Therefore (wa), you should know (yada’ – you should recognize and acknowledge, perceive and understand (qal perfect – literally and genuinely at this moment in time)) that, indeed (ky – surely and truthfully), I am (‘any) Yahowah (YaHoWaH – an accurate presentation of the name of ‘elowah – God as guided by His towrah – instructions regarding His hayah – existence), your God (‘elohym ‘atem), lives; He resides and remains (shakan – He dwells and abides, camping out and settling down) in Tsyown (ba Tsyown – along the Signs Posted Along the Way) – My Set-Apart Mountain (har qodesh ‘any).

Then also (wa) Yaruwshalaim | the Source of Teaching and Guidance on Reconciliation (Yaruwshalaim) shall be (hayah – will exist as) set apart and special (qodesh – separated and uncommon, unique and unsullied).

Unauthorized and illegitimate strangers (zar – errant foreigners and aliens showing hostility who are alienated and estranged) will never pass through it again (lo’ ‘abar ba hy’ ‘owd).” (Yow’el / Yahowah is God / Joel 3:17)

Yahowah is in Yisra’el, on Tsyown, speaking from Yaruwshalaim on behalf of His family. What part of this is so difficult for the religious to understand? Rather than an international and multicultural religious city, Yaruwshalaim will be off-limits to anyone who is not in the Covenant Family.

In this passage, Yahowah has transitioned from themes of reconciliation upon His return on the Day of Reconciliations, to providing shelter on Sukah / Shelters, because one Miqra’ flows to the next, one leading to the other. Just as the first four Invitations to be Called Out and Meet with God have been fulfilled in the right way, on the right day, and in the right order, the final three Miqra’ey will also be fulfilled, restoring the Children of Yisra’el as they begin the Millennial Shabat, camping out with God for one thousand years.

The whole story has been brought to its conclusion. Everyone who has survived His glorious return will yada’ Yahowah, they will “know, recognize, and acknowledge, they will realize and understand,” that “being qodesh | set apart unto God” so that He can enrich, empower, and enlighten His Children is the purpose of Shabuw’ah. From this time forward, only Covenant members will be afforded the opportunity to camp out on the set-apart mountain and set-apart city. Those who did not avail themselves of Passover, UnYeasted Bread, Firstborn Children, the Promise of Seven, Trumpets, and Reconciliations when they had the opportunity will be excluded as strangers.



Earlier in this chapter, as we were contemplating the meaning behind Yow’el’s use of mowreh in 2:23, I promised to share what Yirma’yah / Jeremiah had to say about Yahowah’s provision. Remember…

“Yahowah provided for you the autumn rains through a teacher who communicates what you need to know about the towrah to live (mowreh – authorized, accurate, and informative guidance; from yarah – to guide and instruct) so that you can be right and thus vindicated.

He has brought down for you an abundant shower of guidance and instruction (mowreh – pouring out what you should be contemplating regarding the towrah’s teaching and directions) about being gleaned and growing thereafter as was intended in the beginning.” (Yow’el 2:23)

It would have been advantageous if Yahuwdym simply read the Towrah and studied the Prophets. Had they done so, they would not have needed a Towrah teacher to rain Yahowah’s instructions down upon them.

In Yirma’yah / Jeremiah, beginning with the 19th statement of the 5th chapter, we find Yahowah systematically assessing the reasons He would have to go outside of the family to find someone willing to shower His people with His Towrah.

“When it comes to pass that you ask (wa hayah ky ‘amar), ‘Why (mah) has Yahowah (Yahowah – a transliteration of , our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence), our God (‘elohym ‘anachnuw), systematically (tachath – in an orderly arrangement and in succession over time) caused (‘asah – triggered) all of these things to happen (kol ‘eleh) to us (la ‘anachnuw)?’

Then you should explain to them (wa ‘amar ‘el hem), ‘It is because (ka ‘asher) you have abandoned and forsaken Me (‘azab ‘eth ‘any – you have rejected and neglected Me, disavowing a relationship with Me, deserting Me).

And you have served (wa ‘abad – you have indentured yourself, expending considerable energy and intensity pursuing) the gods observed by foreigners (‘elohym nekar – showing respect for and paying attention to the recognition of phony and pretend gods) in your Land (ba ‘erets ‘atem).

Therefore (ken), you will serve (‘abad) illegitimate and unauthorized foreigners (zar – inadvisable and misled strangers) in a land which is not yours (ba ‘erets lo’ lo ‘atem).’” (Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5:19)

Yahowah is opposed to the various religions observed by Gentiles – from which Christianity and Islam were derived. But His larger concern is when these religious ideas are seen among His people. Judaism is a prime example of what God hates most.

To be sure, Yahowah is going to condemn Christians, Muslims, and Socialist Secular Humanists for persecuting His people. However, God recognizes that Judaism has actually been deadlier, as it is a cancer which has metastasized, killing His people from the inside.

By being religious, Jews have forsaken their relationship with God. Because of their Talmud, they have neglected the Towrah. By accepting “Ha Shem,” they have rejected Yahowah. The Hasidic value their rabbis over the Prophets, their Halakhah above all else.

Having abandoned the Covenant, Yahowah withdrew its benefits and His people were orphaned. Uprooted and unprotected, they were dragged off as slaves and forced to serve the very foreigners whose jargon they incorporated into their religion. God is indeed fair.

Now, if only they would listen…

“Declare this (nagad zo’th – report this and explain it) in the House of Ya’aqob (ba ha beyth Ya’aqob – in the family of Yisra’el) and hear it in Yahuwdah (wa shama’ hy’ ba Yahuwdah – and perceive what is said among the Beloved of Yah), saying (la ‘amar), (5:20) ‘Please choose of your own volition to listen to this (shama’ na’ zo’th – under the auspices of freewill, I urge you to hear this) foolish and senseless people (‘am sakal – ignorant and irrational, even immoral family members), those without common sense, who are heartless and incapable of executing good judgment (‘ayn leb), who have eyes (‘ayn la hem) but cannot see (wa lo’ ra’ah), who have ears (‘ozen la hem) but cannot hear (wa lo’ shama’).’” (Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5:21)

And now we know why there were no Yahuwdym willing or able to share Yahowah’s Towrah with His people. When it comes to God, the brightest ethnicity in the world act as if they are the dumbest. They are still listening to the very rabbis who are their worst enemies.

This known, be aware, Yahowah is not expecting, nor is He even interested, in religious Jews changing their attitudes and minds, such that they reject the rabbis and choose to act upon His instructions. Even God cannot fix stupid. Therefore, the autumn rain of Towrah Teaching is for the Yahuwdym who are open to the truth and who will follow it home.

As for those still lost in their own delusions, God asks…

“‘Do you not respect Me (ha ‘eth ‘any lo’ yare’)?’ prophetically inquires (na’um) Yahowah (Yahowah – the proper pronunciation of YaHoWaH, our ‘elowah – God as directed in His ToWRaH – teaching regarding His HaYaH – existence and our ShaLoWM – restoration).”

The answer has been unequivocally and ubiquitously, “No!” Yahuwdym have continued through the ages to twist and pervert God’s message, dancing about as if they were smarter than Him.

“Before My presence (min paneh ‘any – before My appearance and in My face) do you not twist and turn (‘im lo’ chyl – do you not dance about while waiting for some kind of resolution, albeit from a comparatively powerless and impoverished position)?”

In what follows, Yahowah is using “ha yam – the sea” metaphorically to speak of hostile Gentiles, those who are not of the Land but seek to claim Yisra’el as their own.

“For the benefit of the relationship (‘asher), I have placed (sym – I have put, setting in place) sand as a vast and boundless (chowl) outer limit (gebuwl) for the sea (la ha yam), an inscribed boundary to endure the test of time (choq ‘owlam – as a clearly communicated prescription which is etched in stone for all eternity) that it cannot cross (wa lo’ ‘abar huw’).

Even though the waves recede and thrust forward (ga’ash), they will not succeed (wa lo’ yakol – it will not prevail and accomplish its goal).

Its surging waves and turbulent seas (wa gal huw’ – the strong currents and destructive storms) are loud and uproarious (hamah – they are noisy, moaning and crying, bristling with rage, chaotic and disorderly, particularly disturbing with their angry and snarling political and religious yearnings), but it will not pass over it or possess that which is beyond it (wa lo’ ‘abar huw’ – it will not extend past it).” (Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5:22)

The empires which have surged into Yisra’el have withdrawn. Those who have sought to erode the Land have evaporated. The most contested place on Earth is now occupied by Yahuwdym. Imagine that.

In spite of this miraculous outcome…

“And yet this family (wa ha ‘am ha zeh – but these people) remains (hayah) rebellious with their inclinations, defiant in their thinking, and obstinate in their judgment, especially stubborn in their attitude (leb sarar).

Audaciously contentious and insolent (marah – recalcitrant and brazenly imprudent), they have turned away and departed (suwr – they have taken off in a different direction, leaving the relationship, removing themselves for a time (qal perfect)), having walked away (wa halak).” (Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5:23)

Reading the Jerusalem Post, and listening to rabbis spew their venom, I concur with Yahowah’s assessment. They are disgusting. Acting as if they were the gibowr | leaders and defenders of the Jewish people, they are the scum of the Earth. There is nothing, including God, Himself, capable of resolving what ails them.

“It is not germane to their thinking to convey (wa lo’ ‘amar ba lebab hem – they do not say in their hearts), ‘Surely, we should respect (yare’ na’ ‘eth) Yahowah (Yahowah – written as directed by His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence), our God (‘elohym ‘anachnuw), who has provided (ha nathan – who has offered as a gift, having bestowed) an outpouring (geshem – showers) of towrah | teaching and guidance (yowrah – autumn showers of instructions and directions; active participle of the verb yarah which serves as the actionable root of Towrah | the Source from which Teaching and Guidance, Instructions and Directions Flow), and at the proper time (wa ba ‘eth hy’) enabling a gleaning (malqowsh – considering the implications of an ingathering, being gathered up in a harvest promoting subsequent growth; from mah – to ponder laqat and laqash – being gleaned and then growing) during Shabuw’ah | the Promise of Seven (Shabuw’ah – the Feast of Weeks and Miqra’ of Seven Sevens), providing the inscribed prescriptions for living (chuqah – the clearly communicated instructions of what you should do to be accepted, live, and receive a share of the inheritance) associated with the harvest (qatsyr – the reaping in the harvest season) for us to observe, closely examining and carefully considering (shamar la ‘anachnuw).’” (Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5:24)

And now we know why…“Yahowah provided for you the autumn rains through a teacher who pours what you need to know about the towrah’s guidance (mowreh – authorized, accurate, and informative instruction; from yarah – to guide and instruct) so that you can be right and thus vindicated. He has brought down for you an abundant shower of teaching and directions (mowreh – pouring out what you should be contemplating regarding the towrah’s guidance and instructions) about being gleaned and growing thereafter as was intended in the beginning.” (Yow’el 2:23)

But what I do not understand is how – why – Yahowah’s beloved Yahuwdym have forfeited this opportunity. Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5:25 is the ultimate gift from God to His people. Please capitalize upon it so as not to ostracize Yahowah any more than you already have.

What I did not expect was that this prophecy would be so explicit in explaining the symbolism behind mowreh. God goes right to the essence of His offer by using yowrah malqowsh | teaching regarding the harvest. Moreover, He and His Prophet came full circle, and tied Yahowah’s gift right back into Shabuw’ah – just as we were completing our thoughts on this Mow’ed. Even better, we found two of our favorite words in the text – chuqah and shamar – encouraging us to observe the Towrah’s prescriptions for living so that by closely examining and carefully considering them we can live and grow as part of the Covenant Family. What a wonderful gift. And at just the right time.

This was our answer – big, bold, and powerful. And all who know and love Yah are humbled by His generosity and appreciative of His gift. However, most Yahuwdym remain mired in the cesspool of their religion – too stubborn and stupid, if I may quote Yah, to get out of their own way.

It is time to forever sever the misconception that to be Jewish is to accept Judaism. This ethnicity is the most treasured by Yahowah while the religion is the most despised.

I say this because God said it. He wants open-minded Yahuwdym and Yisra’elites to reject the rabbis and to listen to what He is offering and expecting in return. Man is wrong. God is right.

Considering how miserable the past 2000 years have been under the rabbis, maybe it’s time to give God’s approach a try. But please, no matter if you choose to believe men or trust God, accept the fact that they are opposed to one another. Rabbis do not speak for God, but instead argue against Him.

Should you not agree, consider this…

“Your propensity to be wrong and the damage you have inflicted upon yourselves (‘awon ‘atem – the consequence of your perverse and twisted corruptions) has caused these things to be thrust aside by perverting God’s approach (natah ‘el leh – you have disengaged from the relationship, denying these, thrusting the Almighty away).

Furthermore (wa), you have missed the way and having gone astray (chata’th ‘atem – your offensive nature and tendency to be mistaken) has caused that which is beneficial to be withheld (mana’ ha towb – has kept that which is generous and good away) from you all (min ‘atem).” (Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5:25)

The beneficial things which the religious have perverted and thrust aside are: “yare’ – respect” for Yahowah, the “nathan – gift” of His “geshem yowrah – outpouring of Towrah teaching and guidance,” being “malqowsh – gathered in” during the “qatsyr – harvest” of “Shabuw’ah – the Promise of the Shabat,” and then they rejected the “chuqah – clearly inscribed prescriptions for living.”

If I may be blunt: over the past 2000 years Jews have been the most mistreated people on Earth because they have been the most mistaken. And there is no excuse because Yahowah chose Yisra’elites to convey His guidance and did so in their language. If we can read it, so can they.

Dressing-down the rabbis, exposing and condemning them while warning His people about them, Yahowah reveals…

“Indeed (ky), wickedly unrighteous men (rasha’ – evil and unethical individuals who are in gross violation of the standard and will be condemned, these unGodly religious criminals) have been discovered (matsa’ – have been uncovered and found) among My people (ba ‘am ‘any).

They are in plain sight, easily seen (shuwr – they lie in wait openly, readily perceived if you care to view them), like those who entice and lure birds into their snare (ka yaqosh – similar to fowlers who set and bait their traps) then sneak away as they appease and pacify (shakak – recede, hiding the evidence to abate culpability).

These wretched officials in their appointed positions are rigid in their stance (natsab – they stand firm behind their binding proclamations and implied authority, establishing official decrees which are exhausting), destructive and deadly (mashachyth – corrupt and ruinous, as well as perverted and toxic).

They ensnare and capture men (lakad ‘ysh – they prey upon and seize, catching and controlling people).” (Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5:26)

Should you have thought that I was being presumptuous in accusing rabbis of being the object of God’s scorn, He just affirmed this conclusion. The Yisra’elite governance of Yisra’el has varied over the past 2500 years from nonexistent to inconsequential. The only prevailing influence has been religion. And it has not served the people well. The most prominent and persuasive individuals among Yahuwdym have been rabbis. These hypocrites, as wickedly unrighteous men, are easily seen, indeed, unmistakable, in their religious outfits. And their mission continues to be to control Jews – influencing every aspect of their lives, placing the people in cages they have built with their wretched words.

Rabbis are parasites.

From Yahowah’s perspective, rabbis “natsab – stubbornly enact their binding proclamations using their implied authority, establishing official decrees which are exhausting” “mashachyth – corrupt, perverted, and deadly.” In their destructive pursuit of their brethren, they have turned their own people into their prey.

Now, do we all see why Yahowah chose to pour out His towrah | teaching and guidance through an alternative source? Does everyone understand why God is not only anti-religious, but has set walking away from it as a condition to entering His Covenant?

Continuing to compare rabbis to fowlers and Judaism to a cage…

“Like a cage (ka kaluwb – similar to a basket designed to confine birds; from kaluwa’ – to imprison and keleb – a contemptible and abasing pagan cult for whores and prostitutes) filled with a multitude (male’) of fowl (‘owph – of those who flitter and fly around), their houses are filled (beyth hem male’) with deception and deceit, deliberately misleading words and deeds, fraudulently perpetrated (mirmah – dishonesty and treachery, along with the riches pilfered through trickery and fraud; from my – to consider the means of ramah – beguiling deceit and misleading betrayal).

This is how they are enriched and empowered (‘al ken gadal wa ‘ashar – it is the source of their wealth and aggrandizement, even their boasts, and it explains how they have risen to power and have been deemed important, but they are thieves).” (Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5:27)

It is His decision, not mine, but I am in favor of accountability. Give them a full dose of what they have prescribed.

“For these things (‘al ‘el leh) should I not hold them accountable (ha lo’ paqad – inventory and take stock of what they have written and punish them)?’ Yahowah (Yahowah – a transliteration of , our ‘elowah – God as directed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) asks in advance of it happening (na’um).

‘In the case of a nation acting as if they were gowy (‘im ba gowy ‘asher ka zeh – with the people relating as if they were Gentiles estranged from the relationship with Yisra’el), should I not seek justice, and in retribution return harm with harm (lo’ naqam – should I not avenge Myself; from naqa’ – to become estranged and alienated, severing the relationship) for My soul (nepesh ‘any – My conscious persona, My nature projected though a lifetime of experiences and My response to them)?’” (Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5:29)

Yahowah’s nepesh | soul endured Passover as the Lamb, and thus Roman crucifixion and She’owl | Hell during UnYeasted Bread as an avatar, to remove the stigma, stench, and stain of the religious ideas these rabbis have been promoting. Therefore, should Yahowah seek justice in retribution for them having attempted to negate what He accomplished, their souls may endure a similar fate.

Said another way: can Yahowah remain just if He does not hold rabbis accountable for corrupting His people? And what would be preferable: for God to forfeit His credibility to give these deadly parasites a second chance, or for Him to rid us all of their malevolent malignancy? And while you may be a proponent of “second chances,” what would the ramifications of this change be on the credibility of the promises Yahowah made regarding the Mow’ed and Beryth? Couldn’t He alter them too?

Based upon God’s presentation of ‘Eden, the nature of His Covenant, and Yahowah’s consistency and integrity, the answer to these questions is a resounding, “Hell yes!” She’owl is going to be an exceedingly religious place. It will be filled with rabbis, priests, imams, and pastors – all incarcerated for doing “the Lord’s work.” No doubt, you will find the authors of the Talmud, Zohar, Mishneh, New Testament, Church Canon, Qur’an, Book of Mormon, Communist Manifesto, and Mein Kampf singing in the choir.

Methinks Yahowah will be singing the lyrics of Dowd’s Mizmowr | Songs rather than the sour notes of their hymnals…

“An appalling and stupefying (shamah – an atrocious and wasteful, horrible and destructive, confounding and deadly; from shamem – to stun and ravage, to desert and desolate, dumbfound and astonish) abomination, especially shocking and horrible (wa sha’aruwr – and also defiling and corrupting; from sha’ar – particularly divisive and irrational) has occurred (hayah – will transpire) in the Land (ba ha ‘erets).” (Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5:30)

Jews, through their rabbis, have become their own worst enemy. Thankfully, this is a foe which is washed away and drowned out by the Mowreh. And that is why Yahowah pointed it out to us.

As a final reminder that He has been condemning the religious leaders among His people, Yahowah concludes…

“Those who claim to speak for God (ha naby’ – these prophets) communicate deceptively, misleading by professing a fraudulent message from a false god (naby’ ba ha seqer – are false prophets, vain liars whose deceptions will disappoint, they are hypocrites and swindlers who betray their trust as a breach of faith).

The priests, the clerics and ministers performing religious rites (kohen – the mediators and those conducting religious services) seek to control as autocrats, dominating and subduing by trampling upon their societies (radah – they subjugate, ruling through a governing authority, dominating the culture), on their own initiative, influence, and authority (‘al yad hem – at their own hand and terms).

And My people (wa ‘am ‘any) love it so (‘ahab ken – desire it and like it like this, developing a close and personal relationship with it because it is familiar to them)!

But what (wa mah) will you do (‘asah – engage in and act upon) when it comes to an end (la ‘acharyth hy’ – in the future at the end, during the last days and upon its demise)?’” (Yirma’yah / Jeremiah 5:31)

A self-aggrandized, indeed, religious, sense of self is forever fixated upon perpetuating its own existence. Established on the wavering foundation of faith, it eliminates every perceived threat, including evidence contrary to its validity. It is so vulnerable to common sense, the people’s individual and collective interests, and so fragile, it is forever frightened by the truth and must control everyone and everything to keep it at bay. It is rendered incapable of learning from the past, incapable of understanding current events, and incapable of drawing correct conclusions about the future. Incalcitrant and stupefied, unable to think, it is paralyzed, and thus cannot be reasoned with. Mired in its own minutia and stuck in time, it is doomed to die.

The world loves politics and religion, and no one more so than the Yisra’elites. They have become so familiar to them, they permeate every relationship. And yet, these are mankind’s greatest adversaries. They exist to control others, and to subdue them. They remain the greatest obstacles to knowing Yahowah. So God asks: “What will you do when it comes to an end?”



As we were criticizing Roman Catholic Church’s inclusion of Nazareth into the text of the Book of Acts, I had promised to share yet another place where the addition of Nazareth impugns the credibility of the Christian New Testament. Luke, or those who copyedited him, did more than wrongly attribute Nazareth to Yahowsha’, he, or they, placed a prophecy in his mouth that clearly does not apply to him. It is one of the most egregious errors in the Christian New Testament.

After being tempted by Satan, the story goes that the Passover Lamb walked into a synagogue, and rather than citing something from the Towrah pertaining to Pesach, he opened a scroll to the book religious Jews have long ignored. Then he is alleged to have cited the following prophecy which pertains to our time, not his. And that is a problem because he is said to have claimed that these prophecies were being fulfilled as he was reading them.

Let’s begin with what Yahowah revealed through His prophet, Yasha’yah | Isaiah…

“The Ruwach | Spirit (Ruwach) of Yahowah (Yahowah – written as directed by His towrah – teaching [from 1QIsa because the MT has ‘adonai]) is upon me (‘al ‘any).

For this reason (ya’an – and for this purpose and insomuch as) Yahowah (YaHoWaH) has anointed (mashach – He has designated, appointed, and devoted by setting apart at this moment in time (qal perfect)) that which is associated with me (‘eth ‘any – in accompaniment with me) for the purpose of bringing this proclamation (la basar – this positive and uplifting message (piel infinitive – the anointed is becoming the embodiment of the message in a descriptive and demonstrative way as a verbal noun)) to the unpretentious and sincere and those ready to respond (‘anaw – those who have been oppressed and are now responsive, eager to move forward by replying to these answers; from ‘anah – to respond to a witness and reply to the answer).

He has sent me (shalach – He has dispatched me at this time (qal perfect)) to encourage (chabash – to enliven, speaking the words which hearten by dressing the wounds, to bandage and gird (qal infinitive)) those whose judgment has suffered (la shabar leb – whose desires have been shattered and whose thinking has been thwarted), to provide an invitation (qara’ – to proclaim a summons, reading and reciting an announcement to be called out (qal infinitive)) to be liberated (darowr – to be free, released from all obligations and captivity, to be emancipated and free to move about without constraint) to those who are being controlled (la shabah – who are being led away and oppressed, whose freedoms have been confiscated such that they are captive (qal passive participle)), and to those who are obligated and bound (wa la ‘asar – to those who have sworn an oath of allegiance and who have joined in) a means of release (paqach-qowach – an opening, a means to extricate oneself from being controlled),…” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 61:1)

Yahowah’s Spirit descended upon Dowd | David as he was being anointed 3000 years ago. Also, while being mashach | anointed is a prerequisite of being the Mashyach | Messiah, most who are anointed fall short of the title. Moreover, there are those who are appointed by Yahowah to accomplish something He wants to be done who have never seen a drop of anointing oil.

Basar is the point of initial conflict between the Gnostic nature of Paul’s letters and Yahowah’s positive message. It also highlights the difference between the Jewish religion and the relationship Yahowah intended. Typically rendered “flesh,” the physical world is all there is to Judaism. It is a works-based dogma without the benefit of the Spirit or afterlife. And Paul wrote that his message was superior to God’s because the Torah was of the flesh while his gospel was spiritual.

‘Anaw is based upon one of the Towrah’s most significant verbs: “‘anah – to respond, reply, and answer.” To render it “humble” as is the case with most English Bible translations, is to miss the point. This messenger’s “basar – news is uplifting” for those “‘anaw – willing to respond.”

Modern readers often struggle with leb | heart, believing somehow that it is used to express “feelings.” That may be true today, but when this was written, the leb was the center of judgment, revealing the capacity of a person to make good decisions such that their inclinations and ambitions would be reasonable and rational. This, therefore, is not addressing the “broken hearted,” but instead those “whose judgment had suffered because their desires had been shattered and thinking was thwarted.” He was anointed to free God’s people from religion, politics, and conspiracy.

Yahowsha’ did not fulfill these words so he would not have claimed this prophecy for himself.

“…to issue an invitation (la qara’ – to read and recite a summons to be called out and meet (qal infinitive)) to the year (shanah – the cycle of the seasons) of Yahowah’s ( – a transliteration of YaHoWaH as instructed in His towrah – teaching regarding His hayah – existence) approval and acceptance (ratsown – favor and reward, will and desire) and the day (wa yowm) of the vengeance and retribution (naqam – revenge and repayment, recompense and punishment) of our God (la ‘elohym ‘anachnuw) to comfort and console (nacham – to show sympathy and provide solace, consolation, and relief, showing compassion to) all who grieve and mourn (kol ‘abel – who have cried, lamenting a great calamity),…” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 61:2)

There is only one year and just one day within that year when Yahowah’s favor and His retribution coalesce. This is Yowm Kipurym | the Day of Reconciliations in the Yowbel year of 6000 Yah – October 2nd and 3rd in 2033. As we have discovered in Yasha’yah, Zakaryah, and Malaky, Yahowah wants nothing more than to reconcile His relationship with Yisra’el and Yahuwdah. But on this day when many are approved, far more will be condemned for having opposed God’s family.

I am delighted to see Yasha’yah explain the reason for recompense. It is to console and comfort those who were victimized. To seek retribution is not only to be fair, just, and moral, it is compassionate, and it provides solace for the grieving.

“…to provide (la sym – to put in place and appoint) for those who grieve and mourn ( ‘abel – who have cried, lamenting a great calamity) for Tsyown (Tsyown – for the Signs Posted Along the Way) to give to them (la nathan la hem – to bestow and allow for them) an honorable endowment which provides an opportunity to be lifted up (pa’ar – a clearly explained reason to boast over one’s status) instead of (tachath – in place of) ashes, as if insignificant (‘epher – humiliation, a sense of worthlessness, distress, and sorrow), olive oil (shemen) resulting in gladness (sasown – jubilation and happiness) instead of (tachath – in place of) mourning over the dead (‘ebel), garments of adoration (ma’ateh tahilah – laudable clothing) instead of (tachath – in place of) a dark and obscure, weakening (kahah – a feeble and dim, a faint and dull, restraining and faltering) spirit (ruwach).

Then (wa) they may be invited and called out (qara’ la hem – they may be proclaimed and summoned), ‘Leaders of the Flock who are the Doorway (‘ayil – the sheep, ram, and rulers, the doorposts and pivot point, the vigor and robustness, even the strength, pilaster, and mighty tree)’ of being right and vindicated (tsedeq – of being correct and acquitted, affirmed and validated, honest and just, upright, accurate, and fair), the basis of which was established by (mata’ – being placed and planted in the garden by) Yahowah ( – the pronunciation of YaHoWaH) to approach the honorable endowment which provides an opportunity to be lifted up (la pa’ar – concerning the clearly explained reason to boast over one’s status).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 61:3)

We should all grieve for Tsyown. The marvelous Signs Posted Along the Way between Dowd’s home and Yahowah’s have been torn down and replaced with churches and mosques. It is those signs which revealed Yahowah’s honorable endowment, which is to be lifted up, out of this world and unto God.

For all of the past 2000 years, Jews have been treated as if they were dirt, insignificant and worthless, but that is about to change. They will soon be dressed for success in loving garments and laudable clothing – akin to a Garment of Light.

For far too long, the religious have supported the dark and obscure, weakening and faltering spirit of ha Satan. It is long past time that Yisra’el upgrade to the Ruwach Qodesh.

Those who do will become Leaders of the Flock and the Doorway to Life because they are not right and thus vindicated. This is the way established by Yahowah.

Considering the length and implications of this statement, let’s review it before we assess the speaker…

“The Spirit (Ruwach) of Yahowah (Yahowah) is upon me (‘al ‘any). For this reason (ya’an) Yahowah (YaHoWaH) has anointed and appointed (mashach) that which is associated with me (‘eth ‘any) for the purpose of bringing this proclamation and uplifting message (la basar) to the unpretentious and sincere who are ready to respond (‘anaw).

He has sent me (shalach) to encourage and enliven (chabash) those whose judgment has suffered because their desires have been shattered and thinking has been impaired (la shabar leb),

to provide an invitation (qara’) to be liberated, released from all obligations and emancipated (darowr) on behalf of those who are being controlled (la shabah),

and to those who are obligated and bound, having sworn an oath of allegiance or joined in (wa la ‘asar), providing an opening and a means to extricate oneself from being controlled (paqach-qowach), (Yasha’yah 61:1)

to issue an invitation (la qara’) to the year (shanah) of Yahowah’s (YaHoWaH) approval and acceptance, favor and reward (ratsown), and the day (wa yowm) of the vengeance and retribution (naqam) of our God (la ‘elohym ‘anachnuw) to comfort and console (nacham) all who grieve (kol ‘abel), (Yasha’yah 61:2)

to provide (la sym) for those who mourn ( ‘abel) for Tsyown (Tsyown) to give to them (la nathan la hem) an honorable endowment which provides an opportunity to be lifted up (pa’ar) instead of (tachath) ashes, as if insignificant (‘epher), olive oil (shemen) resulting in gladness (sasown) in place of (tachath) mourning over the dead (‘ebel), garments of adoration and laudable clothing (ma’ateh tahilah) instead of (tachath) a dark and obscure, weakening and faltering (kahah) spirit (ruwach).

Then (wa) they may be invited and proclaimed (qara’ la hem), ‘Leaders of the Flock who are the Doorway (‘ayil)’ of being right and vindicated (tsedeq), the basis of which was established by (mata’) Yahowah () to approach the honorable endowment which provides an opportunity to be lifted up (la pa’ar).” (Yasha’yah / Isaiah 61:3)

As I have shared and will continue to prove, Luke, who was Paul’s publicist, had an agenda other than God’s in writing his Gospel and the Book of Acts. Very little of what he claimed actually occurred. The following is a flight of fantasy…

“So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read. (Luke 4:16) And He was handed the book of the prophet Isaiah. And when He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written: (Luke 4:17)

‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, Because He has anointed Me To preach the gospel to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives And recovery of sight to the blind, To set at liberty those who are oppressed; (Luke 4:18) To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.’ (Luke 4:19)

Then He closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him. (Luke 4:20) And He began to say to them, ‘Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.’ (Luke 4:21) So all bore witness to Him, and marveled at the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth.” (Luke 4:22 New King James)

Yahowsha’, whose name Luke did not know, did not “come to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and as was his custom, go into a synagogue on the Sabbath day.” The town of “Nazareth” did not exist during his lifetime, so he could not have grown up there. He was opposed to the religious, so the last place you’d find Yahowsha’ was in a “synagogue.” In fact, there is no mention of synagogues in the Towrah because it isn’t even a Hebrew word and God does not sanction such a place. (It is a Greek compound of sun – together and agein – bring and describes the blending together of Greek and Jewish cultures.)

The single least-respected book among religious Jews is Yasha’yah because it is so condemning of their religion. So even if “Isaiah” was the prophet’s name, that would have been the last scroll, not the first, the religious would have handed anyone.

The prophecy does not read “the Lord” or “He” but instead “Yahowah” both times. There is no Hebrew word for “preach” or “gospel” and thus “Jesus” could not have read either. There was no reference to “the poor,” but instead “the responsive.” Chabash means “to encourage and enliven” not “to heal.” And we have already addressed the myth of the “brokenhearted.” Qara’ is more adroitly translated “to provide an invitation” or “to recite a summons to meet” than “proclaim.”

“Liberty” is an accurate, albeit abbreviated rendering of darowr, just as “captives” is a permissible but inadequate translation of la shabah. There is no reference to the “recovery of sight to the blind.” It was added without any textual basis.

Clearly ad-libbing, somewhere along the way Luke omitted the prophet’s second inclusion of qara’ | to issue an invitation. Then instead of reading that “those who were bound by their oaths of allegiance are being given the means to extricate themselves from being controlled,” Luke suggested, “to set at liberty those who are oppressed.”

Once again, one of the Towrah’s most revealing verbs, qara’ was dismissed with “to proclaim,” as if this had nothing to do with the Miqra’ of Kipurym. And yet all of these deliberate misrepresentations pale in comparison to Luke’s final gaffe: “the acceptable year of the Lord.’” He had his “Jesus” read the first part but not the second part of the most important pronouncement. He obviously knew that he would have discredited his claim that this prophecy was fulfilled by “Jesus” if he had read to the end of the sentence. So Luke’s “Jesus” omitted Yahowah’s name a third time and “the day (wa yowm) of the vengeance and retribution (naqam) of our God (la ‘elohym ‘anachnuw),” demonstrating that his intent was to deceive.

By not having him complete the sentence, the Christian “Jesus” also failed to explain the reason why the day of Yahowah’s return would include retribution… “to comfort and console (nacham) all who grieve (kol ‘abel), to provide (la sym) for those who mourn ( ‘abel) for Tsyown (Tsyown) to give to them (la nathan la hem) an honorable endowment which provides an opportunity to be lifted up (pa’ar) instead of (tachath) ashes, as if insignificant (‘epher), olive oil (shemen) resulting in gladness (sasown) in place of (tachath) mourning over the dead (‘ebel), garments of adoration and laudable clothing (ma’ateh tahilah) instead of (tachath) a dark and obscure, weakening and faltering (kahah) spirit (ruwach).”

The dark and faltering spirit of Satan inspired Luke to misquote, misconstrue, and misappropriate this prophecy. It is so obviously perverted, it’s a wonder 2.5 billion people prioritize Satan’s little ditty over the source from which it was twisted and torn.

In that I’m trained to be thorough, there were no “books” presenting the prophets in this day, only scrolls. “Scripture” is a religious term with no Hebrew equivalent. (It is from the Latin, and thus Roman, scriptura – writings.) This prophecy was not fulfilled by Yahowsha’ but, instead, is coming to fruition as we approach Yowm Kipurym in year 6000 Yah. Had he spoken these “words,” those “who bore witness” would have mocked him, as we are doing with Luke. Even “gracious” is a Christian concept based upon the Roman goddesses known as the Graces.

Since Luke was not a blithering idiot, and was in fact literate, we can be certain that his intent was to deceive. But with the truth readily available for comparison and his perversions so grievous, why are there any Christians? It is as if logic is lost on the religious.

Returning to reality, of the three mighty Zarowa’ – Moseh, Dowd, and Yahowsha’ – Dowd would be the only possibility to make these statements upon his return. But even then, it isn’t in his voice, does not reflect his style, and there is no record of him attesting to it in his Mizmowr or Mashal. Moreover, when a prophecy applies to Dowd, his name is included.  

As much as I would like to see Yasha’yah making this marvelous declaration himself, in that I respect him and empathize with him, it is becoming obvious that he is performing in the role of a prophet and is presenting the testimony of another – someone who he has previously introduced by affirming that Yahowah’s Spirit is upon him, whom he has identified as being appointed to proclaiming this message to those who are ready to hear it and respond, someone who knows that for it to resonate, God’s people must be willing to think for themselves and crawl out from under the religious influences which have impaired their progress, who is aware that Yahowah is committed to the liberation of His people from those seeking to control them, who celebrates Yahowah’s desire to reconcile His relationship with Yisra’el, who has a propensity for run-on sentences, for making copious connections and explanations, with a deep-seeded desire to explain what is occurring within the context of the Miqra’ey and God’s timeline, who is committed to advancing the mission laid out within the prophecy, including achieving retribution to console the victims, and who shares the prophet’s fascination with these words along with a steadfast devotion to using Yahowah’s name. 



RESOURCES

YadaYah.com

ProphetOfDoom.net

Tea with Terrorists

InTheCompanyOfGoodAndEvil.com

Forum.yadayah.com

BlogTalkRadio.com/Yada

Facebook: Yada Yahowah Observations

Facebook: Yada Yahowah Coming Home

Printed and eBooks: Amazon.com (Craig Winn)

Contact: email@YadaYah.com

ASSOCIATED RESOURCES

YahowahBeryth.com (Books & Audio Archives)

BlessYah.com (Books & Audio Archives)

Facebook: Shamar Towrah (Discussion Group)

Yada Yah on YouTube (Audio Programs)

Cover photo courtesy of hystar.wordpress.com

Ver. 20210827

Incredible

The Lord uses authority figures, and thus religious and political leaders, to elicit obedience. This demonic spirit presents himself as God, even as the Lord Jesus Christ of Christianity. The alternative is found throughout Yahowah’s Towrah and Prophets and in the Psalms and Proverbs of His son…

“You should choose to pursue (bow’) correct counsel, seeking the right advice (‘etsah). Then engage in (‘asah) thoughtful decision-making (palylah). Of your own freewill, present (shyth) yourself (tsel ‘atah) in contrast to (ka) the darkness (ha layl)… (16:3)

Indeed (ky), the oppressive extortioner (ha mets) will be no more (‘aphes). This demonic spirit seeking to be worshiped as God (shed) is finished, his purpose complete. He will be imprisoned, restraining (kalah) the one who treads upon (ramas) the entire earth (min ha ‘erets). (16:4)

Then genuine mercy and enduring love (wa chesed) will be established and sustained (kuwn – enduring) on the seat of honor (kise’). And upon it (wa ‘al huw’), he will be restored and abide (yashab) in (ba) truth (‘emeth) within (ba) the brilliant dwelling (‘ohel) of Dowd | David (Dowd). By exercising good judgment (shaphat) while (wa) considering (darash) the means to resolve disputes (mishpat), he will effectively (wa mahyr) pursue that which is right and vindicating (tsedeq). (16:5)

We have heard (shama’) of the agitation and arrogance (ga’own) of Mow’ab | those of a Questionable Father raised as Pauline Christians and amoral secularists (Mow’ab). He is self-promoting (ge’ me’od) with his delusional projection of himself as magnificent and moral (ga’awah huw’). His presumptive attribution of merit (ga’own huw’) and (wa) his improper and immoral outbursts, which display an inflated sense of superiority (‘ebrah huw’), are not right (lo’ ken) nor is his unwarranted speech (bad huw’).” (Yasha’yah / Liberation and Salvation are from Yahowah / Isaiah 16:6)