Questioning Paul

Volume 1: The Great Galatians Debate

Chapter 11 part 2

No matter how one slices and dices these words, written as a command, this next statement is a problem, especially in this context.

"But (de) one must share (koinoneito – one is ordered to participate together as a partner and in association with others, must take part in) the one (o) making the ears ring, verbally informing (katechoumenos – reporting the instruction and teaching orally; from "kata – according to" and "echos – loud-mouthed rumors and noisy reports") the (ton) word (logos), orally instructing (katechounti – verbally communicating and loudly teaching) in (en) all (pas) good (agathois – worthy, excellent, useful, beneficial, and right)." (Galatians 6:6LEB)

We are in the sixth chapter, and there haven’t been six passages cited from Yahowah’s Word thus far. And recognizing that the Torah verses which have previously been cited have all been misquoted and twisted, it’s obvious that the "word" Sha’uwl wants promoted is his own.

His purpose has been to demean the Word of God, obsolescing and besmirching the Torah. So there is no chance whatsoever that Sha’uwl was motivating the Galatians to share the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. And at this point, Mark and Luke had not been written, and Mattanyah’s eyewitness account wouldn’t have been of any value to the Galatians because it was initially written in Hebrew. Also, while Yahowchanan’s testimony was composed around this time, it had not yet been widely distributed. Therefore, the Devil’s Advocate was ordering, actually commanding since koinoneito was written in the imperative mood, the Galatians to recite what he had preached and written.

If the Nestle-Aland McReynolds Interlinear is right, then Paul was also saying that the one being instructed should do the instructing. That’s like asking a class of children to educate their teacher (a.k.a. a liberal American classroom). NAMI: "Let be partner but the one being instructed the word to the one instructing in all good." Jerome agrees with them in the LV: "And let him that is instructed in the word communicate to him that instructeth him, in all good things." And therefore, the KJV regurgitates this same upside down notion of the student informing their instructor: "Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things." Apparently suffering writer’s block, the NLT serves as a revision of the King James: "Those who are taught the word of God should provide for their teachers, sharing all good things with them." This unique twist of the text is quite revealing. It says that "those who are taught the word of God," which is code for "Evangelical Christians," "should provide for their teachers, sharing all good things with them," which is code for "pay your pastor a generous salary and provide him with a nice house and a munificent living allowance." Not surprisingly, the authors of the NLT were money-grubbing preachers.

This next line comes out of the wild blue yonder. Devoid of context or an intelligent transition, the "Apostle" who has devoted himself to mocking God and treating His Word with contempt, said:

"You must not become misled and stray (me planaomai – you are commanded not to wander away deceived, deluded, or mistaken) because a god (ΘΣ) is not sneered at or ridiculed (ou mykterizo – he is not mocked nor treated with contempt, derided). For then (gar – for), whatever (o) if (ean) a man (anthropos) may sow (speiro – might potentially scatter), this (touto) also (kai) he shall reap (therizo – he will harvest)." (Galatians 6:7LEB)

God is mocked all the time. Christians call Him "Lord," an epithet for Satan, rather than referring to Him by His name. They mock God when they pray to "Jesus Christ" and when they credit and blame God for everything, trivial or significant, good or bad, that occurs in their lives.

Sha’uwl has been sneering at Yahowah from the onset of this letter. He has derided and ridiculed His Torah, treating the Word of God with utter contempt, suggesting that it enslaves and that it was annulled—even that it was impotent. As a result of these letters, Christians uniformly turn up their noses at the Almighty’s seven annual Invitations to Meet. And it’s hard to imagine wandering further from the truth than saying that there are two covenants, not one, or that the Covenant memorialized on Mount Sinai was established with Hagar and led to slavery. And what could be worse than replacing the relationship God is offering with religious delusions.

So once again, Sha’uwl is being a blatant hypocrite. He has been doing the misleading, the straying, the deceiving, and the deluding. He has been the one sneering, ridiculing, mocking, and deriding. But ever the clever one, he wants the faithful to believe that it is those who are exposing him as the fraud he has become who are what he is. In politics, those who are crafty, falsely accuse their opponents of the crimes they, themselves, are guilty of committing. That is what is happening here.

Beyond duplicity and hypocrisy, in the world God conceived, as a result of Passover and Unleavened Bread, we don’t all reap what we have sown. We are forgiven. Only those who deliberately lead souls away from God, as Paul has done, will reap what they have sown. Sha’uwl will spend his eternity in the place that shares his name: She’owl.

In an ongoing effort to preclude Christian apologists from dismissing Questioning Paul solely on the basis of my amplified and literal translations of the oldest Greek manuscripts, I will continue to provide you with at least four other renderings for your consideration. The scholarly NAMI published: "Not be deceived God not is mocked. What for if might sow man this also he will harvest." The Roman Catholic LV promoted: "Be not deceived: God is not mocked. For what things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap." The Protestant KJV proclaimed: "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." And last and least, the Evangelical NLT printed: "Don’t be misled—you cannot mock the justice of God. You will always harvest what you plant."

If God’s justice cannot be mocked, then every Christian publisher who has encouraged believers to reject His Name, His Towrah, His Covenant, and His Invitations based upon Paul’s epistles is in serious trouble.

Speaking of reaping that which one sows, Sha’uwl continues to cultivate his agricultural theme while advancing his Gnostic beliefs. It is, however, not a revelation that flesh decays, which is why we won’t have bodies in heaven, or that a spirit is eternal.

"Because (oti) the one (o) sowing (speiron – scattering seed) into (eis) the (ten) flesh (sarx – corporeal nature or physical body) of himself (eautou), from (ek – out of) the (tes) flesh (sarkos – the physical body or corporeal nature) will reap (therizo – will harvest) corruption, destruction, and dissolution (phthora – depravity and death, decay which leads to perishing). But (de) the one (o) sowing (speiron) into (eis) the (to) spirit (ΠΝΑ / pneuma – Divine Placeholder for the Ruwach), from (ek – out of) the (tou) spirit (ΠΝΑ / pneuma) will reap (therisei – will harvest) life (zoe) eternal (aionios)." (Galatians 6:8LEB)

To his credit, this is the first time in six chapters that Paul has written something that reads well. It even sounds nice. Too bad it isn’t true.

In his own sneaky way, Sha’uwl was saying: the circumcised are cut off. But in truth, this is nothing more than Gnostic propaganda. We actually reap many wonderful things from our corporeal nature, and the greatest of them is children born into a loving family. In the bodies Yahowah designed on our behalf, we can use our eyes and ears to read and recite His Word, getting to know our Creator in the process. And so it is through our human nature that we come to know, love, understand, respect, and trust the source of life.

For Galatians 6:8LEB to have been useful, Paul would have had to have done what Yahowsha’ did in His discussion with Nicodemus, and explain the process of Spiritual birth. But that wasn’t Sha’uwl’s intent. For him, "the flesh" remains synonymous with the tangible and concrete nature of "the Towrah" (in part because of its insistence on circumcision), and "the spirit" is represented by the unseen and nebulous ether of "faith." Therefore, he is saying that sowing the seeds found in God’s Word leads to destruction and decay, while those who place their faith in the spirit of his writing will find life eternal. The opposite is, of course, true.

But not entirely so, because in the way Sha’uwl intended believers to understand it, if they were to consider sowing as being actively engaged planting and nurturing the lies of Pauline Doctrine, then they "will reap eternal life." Unfortunately, it will be in She’owl.

And while it is a technical point, we don’t "sow into the Spirit." We can sow the seeds of truth by conveying Yahowah’s Word, and we can invite the Ruwach Qodesh into our lives, but that is as far as we can go in this direction. Everything else flows the opposite way, from God to us, not the other way around. So the notion of "sowing into the Spirit" isn’t sound literally, operationally, metaphorically, allegorically, or Scripturally.

The following translations are accurate, but yet their message is not. NAMI: "Because the one sowing in the flesh of himself from the flesh will harvest corruption the but one sowing in the spirit from the spirit will harvest life eternal." LV: "For he that soweth in his flesh of the flesh also shall reap corruption. But he that soweth in the spirit of the spirit shall reap life everlasting." KJV: "For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting." NLT: "Those who live only to satisfy their own sinful nature will harvest decay and death from that sinful nature. But those who live to please the Spirit will harvest everlasting life from the Spirit." We are not called to "please the Spirit," we are only told not to belittle Her. And while our Spiritual Mother plays a crucial role in our salvation, "eternal life" isn’t the result of anything we do, including "living to please the Spirit."

Not finished, Satan’s gardener continues to plow the fields of deception. In this case, after having recast and inverted good and evil, he encourages believers to harvest a field of human souls on behalf of his faith.

"But (de) the one (to) good (kalon – advantageous, fine, fitting, beneficial, beautiful, sound, and handsome) doing (poiountes – performing behaviors and working assigned tasks) we do not become malicious (me egkakomen – we do not give into harmful emotions or disparaging behaviors; from "ek – out of" and "kakos – a bad nature, injurious actions, pernicious thinking and destructive feelings"). Because (gar) on occasion (kairo – in an opportunistic time or specific season), for oneself (idio – on one’s own, separately) we will reap (therisomen – we will harvest), not (me) being discouraged by being bound (ekluomenoi – being weary, exhausted, or collapsing as a result of ties which bind; from "ek – out of" and "luo – binding ties and bandages")." (Galatians 6:9LEB)

Egkakomen initially was a bit of a riddle until I realized that it was a compound of "ek – from" and "kakos – a bad nature or wrong mode of thinking." Kakos speaks of "injurious actions, a pernicious attitude, and destructive emotions," and thus of "maliciousness." But following "me – not," it becomes a double negative, thereby denouncing the very thing Galatians has become.

Based upon several factors, it is obvious that Paul was taking another swipe at Yahowah’s Towrah. He has already called what he perceives to be the old system "malicious," and he made a career out of claiming that the Towrah "binds and controls" us. Therefore, in Pauline Christianity, as well as in Greek Gnosticism, the spirit is both good and liberating while the evil flesh enslaves.

There is another insight worth exploring, because the seven Miqra’ey are not only directly associated with the "reaping" of saved souls, these "propitious harvests" are all celebrated "in season." In fact, specifically, three of the seven are designated as harvests (First-Born Child, Seven Sabbaths, and Trumpets) and a fourth, Shelters, is symbolic of a covered shelter or storehouse of saved souls. So since Sha’uwl has told Christians to ignore Yahowah’s Harvests, and impugned the Torah which presents them, he is now offering a substitute – not unlike what Christmas and Easter have become.

And lest I forget, haven’t we been led to believe that "working away at assigned tasks" was the bane of the Towrah? But now works are good, so long as the workers are doing what Paul demands of them.

Having considered some of the many concerns surrounding this statement, let’s review the Christian renditions. NAMI: "The one but good doing not we give in to bad in season for own we will harvest not being loosed out." LV: "And in doing good, let us not fail. For in due time we shall reap, not failing." KJV: "And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not." NLT: "So let’s not get tired of doing what is good. At just the right time we will reap a harvest of blessing if we don’t give up."

There are problems which arise in these translations which we should not ignore. First, it’s God’s job, not ours, to reap the harvest of saved souls. And second, far too many people go out ill-prepared and just spin their wheels endlessly. It’s like the person who has read some of the quotes in Prophet of Doom and then runs off to debate Muslims in chat rooms and wonders why they aren’t making any progress.

While there is nothing wrong with trying, those who are prepared get better results with considerably less effort. That is not to suggest that pertinent information and logical reasoning prevail with those still mired in religious delusions. All a prepared person can hope to accomplish is to provide a trigger that encourages open-minded individuals to approach their search for the truth from a different perspective. The better prepared you are, however, the better the chances are that you will eventually find a topic which resonates with your audience. Further, once you make the transition in your mind from knowing to understanding, you are equipped to enlighten the world.

This particular problem resonates throughout Paul’s letter. He throws all manner of poorly identified and unsupported things against the wall, hoping that something will stick. But he hasn’t presented sufficient evidence to educate anyone or to prove any of the points he has sought to make. He seeks faith, because in his world understanding isn’t possible.

A long time ago, when I was a salesman in the retail consumer products industry, I overcame my personal limitations (I was very shy) by being better prepared than those I competed against. I studied my customers, researched my factories, dissected my products, compared them to the competition, and then invested another many hours preparing and tailoring each sales presentation for each and every customer. Then, after the customer responded and purchased products from the firms I represented, I invested countless hours following through on the logistics of the shipment, making sure nothing went wrong. I was prepared, and thus prevailed.

Before we leave Paul’s field of lies, this appears to be an opportune time to share something from this "Apostle’s" most famous prophecy, one specifically related to a harvest, because it proves that he was a false prophet. While the purpose of religion is to control and fleece the masses, clerics achieve this goal in large part by artificially allaying people’s fears over the death of loved ones. So the founder of the Christian religion said:

"But (de) we really do not want or take pleasure in (ou thelo – we do not actually will, enjoy, or propose (present active indicative (denoting something that is actual))) you all (umas) being ignorant and irrational (agnoeo – ignoring and paying no attention and thus not knowing, being mistaken and failing to understand (present active infinitive (acting as a verbal noun))) brothers (adelphos) concerning (peri – about and because of) the ones sleeping (ton koimomenon – those who are deceased (present passive participle (a verbal adjective))). So that you might not grieve (ina ue luphesthe – in order that you may not be sad or distressed (present passive subjunctive (suggesting a possibility))), just as (kathos – to the same degree and inasmuch as) also (kai) the ones remaining (oi loipos – the rest who are left over and lacking (present active participle nominative)), the ones not possessing (oi me echo – those not holding or clinging to (present active participle)) hope (elpis),..." (1 Thessalonians 4:13LEB)

Hope, like faith, is likened to religion in that they are all bred in "agnoeo – ignorance." But since we will soon discover that Sha’uwl was wrong with regard to his prophecy, why would anyone who isn’t ignorant trust his reassuring words in this regard?

Also, how would it be possible, recognizing that this was his first letter to the second community he visited, for those who had passed away before his arrival to benefit from his faith? Was Paul trying to win the favor of the living by promising to save the dead?

God cannot die, and thus believing that He did, isn’t accurate nor beneficial. It is one of the great myths of Christendom.

"For if (gar ei – because under the condition) we really believe (pisteuo – we actually have faith (present active indicative)) that (oti – because namely) Iesous (ΙΥ) actually died (apothnesko – was physically dead (aorist indicative (at some unspecified time in the past)) indicative (in reality))) and (kai) genuinely stood up (anistemi – actually was caused to stand (aorist indicative)), thus likewise (houtos – it follows in this way) also (kai) being God (o ΘΣ), the ones put to sleep (koimeoentas – have been caused to be deceased (aorist passive (meaning that they were acted upon at some unspecified time in the past))) by or through (dia – because) of the (tou) Iesou (ΙΥ), will actually lead (ago – will really bring, take, carry, and guide) (future indicative)) with Him (oun auto)." (1 Thessalonians 4:14LEB)

In keeping with the religious mythology echoed at most Christian funerals, Paul said that "God" was responsible "for putting people to sleep," and thus for their death. Sha’uwl’s theology continues to be wrong.

Beyond the errant notion that God is the reason we die, the verb "ago – to lead" is a strange choice. While it was written in the third person singular, since it was not designated as masculine, it cannot be "he" or refer to "the Iesou." So who is guiding and bringing whom?

If you’d like to gain a full appreciation from God’s perspective of exactly what happened on Passover, Un-Yeasted Bread, and First-Born Children, and why, and if you’d like to understand how it applies to you and your relationship with God and to your resulting salvation, you are invited to read the Salvation Volume of Yada Yah, free at There you will discover that Yahowah’s Spirit departed from Yahowsha’s body and His soul on the upright pole so that His physical body could die serving as the Passover Lamb while His soul descended into She’owl for the express purpose of enabling the promises Yahowah had made to make the children of the Covenant immortal and perfect. His soul, then reunited with the Spirit, became the living embodiment of First-Born Children, enabling God to adopt us into His family.

The implication in this next statement is that Sha’uwl is attempting to quote something Yahowsha’ said. If true, it would be the first time in any of his letters, but it wasn’t to be. Yahowsha’ never said anything like this. In fact, His depiction of the Taruw’ah Harvest was remarkably different. So why do you suppose Paul, other than speaking for his "Lord," has been using "we" instead of "I" throughout this doctrinal prediction?

"For this (gar touto) to you all (umin), we actually say (legomen – we speak (first person plural, present indicative)) in (en) a word (logo – a statement (singular)) of the Lord (kuriou – of the Master, the one who owns, controls, and possesses slaves (genitive and thus possessive), that we (oti emeis), the ones (oi) living (zontes – alive (present active participle)), the ones (oi) presently left and currently remaining (perileiphomenoi – left behind; a compound of peri meaning concerning, and leipo, being left behind, being inferior, wanting, and forsaken (present tense, passive (currently being acted upon), participle (serving as a verb and adjective))) unto (eis) the (ten) arrival and presence (parousia) of the (tou) Lord (kuriou – Master who possesses, owns, and controls slaves), by no means might we possibly go prior to (ou me phoasomen – certainly not and never may we arrive beforehand, come to by preceding (first person plural, aorist (as a snapshot in time) subjunctive (indicating a possibility)) the ones (tous) having slept (koimeoentas – having been put to sleep and having been caused to die (aorist passive (meaning that they were acted upon at some unspecified point in time)))." (1 Thessalonians 4:15LEB)

Feel free to speculate as to why Sha’uwl used the double negative ou and me in succession. When written in this form, ou typically represents "no" and me means "not or lest." But when combined, rather than read as a negation of a negation, ou me can convey a "strong prohibition," communicating "never, not at all, by no means, and certainly not," which is how it was rendered above.

You may want to contemplate the reasons that Paul claims that his Lord caused so many people to die, why Paul refers to death as "sleep," why the fate of the sleeping is universal and favorable, and why they must precede the living? I suspect that it was a ploy, one designed to promote the merits of his faith so that it would be more readily accepted. He told his audience what they wanted to hear. The fact that it was inaccurate, inconsistent, and irrational did not matter.

You can also speculate on the identity of Paul’s "Lord and Master." But while doing so, consider the inherent conflict between representing a Lord, who is someone who "possesses, owns, and controls slaves," and discounting the Torah because it was allegedly "controlling and enslaving."

You may even want to speculate on why Sha’uwl claimed to speak for his god and yet neglected to cite any of said god’s instructions. And if we are to believe that Sha’uwl was speaking for Yahowah about His Taruw’ah Harvest, why didn’t he quote what God had His prophets write about this Miqra’ in His Towrah, in Yasha’yah (Isaiah), Zakaryah (Zechariah), or Mal’aky (Malachi). Yahowah had a great deal to say about this Spiritual Harvest of His children.

But getting past all of those inherent inadequacies, inconsistencies, and internal conflicts, it is undeniably clear that Paul predicted that he would be among "the ones presently left and currently remaining (perileiphomenoi – scribed in the present tense and passive voice (telling us that they were currently being acted upon)) unto the arrival and presence of the Lord." But he wasn’t even close. He died alone and miserable nineteen centuries before the fulfillment of the still-future Taruw’ah Harvest. Moreover, his promises were hollow to those who were sleeping and living.

Yahowah had long since established in His Word that the Taruw’ah Harvest was predicated upon the concept of being a troubadour to trumpet His message. So while the association of the harvest with this instrument, a showphar, or ram’s horn in Hebrew, is accurate, it was not prophetic. As for the rest of this, while it is neither correct nor prophetic. Further, the "call of the archangel" is reminiscent of Islam.

"Because, Himself (oti autos), the Lord (o kurios – the Master who possesses, owns, and controls slaves), in (en – with) a command (keleusma – a shout, order, signal, and call) in the voice (en phone – in the sound and language) of the leading messenger (archaggelou – of the chief representative, the ruling envoy), and in (kai en – the with) a trumpet (salpiggi) of god (ΘΥ theou), will descend, stepping down (katabaino – will come down; a compound "kata – down from" and "basis – stepping"), separated from (apo) of heaven (ouranos), and the ones lifeless (kai oi nekros – so the ones deceased) in (en) Christo (ΧΥ) will actually stand (anastesontai – will really rise) first (protos – before)." (1 Thessalonians 4:16LEB)

The order of rising, if indeed there is a difference, will be completely irrelevant in association with eternity. So this was spoken to accommodate religious sensibilities. And as a result, Christians believe that their dearly departed are already in heaven, looking down on them and waiting for their arrival. But what’s especially troubling here is Sha’uwl’s use of "apo – separated" as opposed to "ek – out of" with regard to heaven. While Yahowsha’ can come "from and out of" heaven, He cannot be "separated from" heaven.

Lastly, the reason for all of the colorful detail, the command, the voice, the archangel, the trumpet, and the stepping down, and soon left behind, seized, air, a meeting, and in the clouds, is to provide the semblance of knowledge. Muhammad painted heaven, hell, and the day of judgment with similarly vivid strokes.

In the conclusion of his errant portrayal, Sha’uwl predicts through the use of "emeis – we" and through his selection of verbs that he would be alive when the "harpazo – violent snatching away" occurred. Since he was wrong, he was a false prophet.

"Then later (speita – thereafter) we (emeis – the first person personal plural pronoun includes the speaker who is Sha’uwl), the ones (oi) currently alive (zontes – living (present active participle)), the ones (oi) left behind and remaining (perileipo – surviving (present passive participle)) at the same time (hama – together in association), with them (sun autois) we will actually be violently seized and snatched away (harpayesomeoa – first person plural future passive indicative of harpazo – will be attacked, controlled, drug away, spoiled, and plundered forcibly by thieves) in (en – with) clouds (nephele – obscuring atmosphere) to (eis) a meeting (apantesis – a rendezvous or encounter of those going in opposite directions; from "apo – to be separated" and "anti – to be against or opposed") of the Lord (tou kuriou – of the Master who possesses, owns, and controls slaves) into (eis) air (aer). And (kai) thus (outos – likewise and in this manner) always (pantote – at all times) with (syn) Lord (kurio), we will actually be (esomeoa – we will really exist (future indicative))." (1 Thessalonians 4:17LEB)

It will be a long wait for those anticipating a rendezvous with the Lord in the clouds. And these questions linger: why take the dead and the living to a place of obscurity where nothing can be seen, where no one can stand, where light is diminished, and where it is cold, neither on earth nor in heaven? Why did he neglect to say whether this encounter would be for souls or reconstituted bodies? Why not explain when this is going to occur? Why not reveal why some will go and others will be left behind? Why not reveal what reaction should be expected on earth as this occurs based upon how many go bon voyage? After all, Yahowah explained all of these things many centuries before Paul penned this letter. And why paint such a violent depiction of something that should involve a loving embrace?

At issue, "harpazo – will be violently attacked, controlled, dragged away, spoiled and plundered forcibly by thieves" isn’t the kind of word one would normally associate with Yahowsha’, although it’s a perfect depiction of Satan’s (a.k.a. the Lord’s) idea of a good time. And what’s particularly interesting is that Yahowsha’ used a derivative of harpazo in Mattanyah / Matthew 7:15LEB, "harpax – exceptionally self-promoting and self-serving," to describe wolves such as Sha’uwl:

"At the present time, you all should be especially alert, being on guard by closely examining and carefully considering, thereby turning away from (prosechete apo – you all should choose to beware, presently paying especially close attention, actively and attentively watching out for and guarding yourself against so as to separate yourself from (present active imperative)) the false prophets (ton pseudoprophetes – those pretending to be divinely inspired spokesmen, from pseudo – deliberately false, lying, deceitful, and deceptive and prophetes – one who speaks of hidden things, declaring what he claims to have received from God) who (hostis) come to you, currently appearing before you (erchomai pros umas – who approach you, moving toward or up to you, making public appearances or statements against you (the present tense reveals that the false prophet is currently in their midst, the middle voice indicates that he is self-motivated, that his statements are affecting him, and that the more assertive he becomes, the more he is influenced by his aggressiveness and claims (i.e., one lie leads to another), while the indicative mood affirms that this is actually occurring)) from within (esothen – as an insider and thus from the same race, place, or group) by (en) dressing up in sheep’s clothing (endyma probaton – cloaked in the outer garments of sheep (note: the root of probaton is probaino – to go beyond, to go farther and forward, to go on and on, overstepping one’s bounds)), yet (de – but) they actually are (eisin – they correspond to, represent, are similar to, and exist without contingency as (present active indicative)) exceptionally self-promoting, self-serving, and swindling (harpax – vicious, carnivorous, and thieving, robbing, extorting, and destructive, ferocious, rapacious, and snatching; extracting and compelling under duress; from harpazo: to violently, forcibly, and eagerly claim and then seize for oneself so as to pluck and carry away; itself a derivative of haireomai – to take for oneself, choosing to be)) wolves (lykos – fierce individuals under dangerous pretenses who are vicious, cruel, greedy, destructive, overreaching, voracious, avaricious, acquisitive, and insatiable men impersonating beasts of prey)." (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:15LEB)

Recognizing these problems, it is telling that Paul concluded his false prophecy with this related command: "As a result (oste – therefore), you all must presently summon and plead with (parakaleite – you are all commanded to call out a summons while begging and imploring (present active imperative)) each other (allelon – one another) in (en – with) these (toutois) statements (logois – words, speeches, and treatises)." (1 Thessalonians 4:18LEB)

It would be his statements Christians would henceforth proclaim, not God’s. As Roman Catholics, they would summon the world to their Lord and to their Church. And as evangelicals, they would plead, imploring the lost to go astray.

Now that we know that Paul was a false prophet in addition to being a deceitful messenger, and that he wanted believers to value and extol his words rather than the Word of God, let’s return to Galatians. There we find Comrade Paul, the Devil’s Advocate, telling everyone to start working for the benefit of his household:

"As a result (ara), therefore (oun), likewise (hos – in the same way and time), on occasion (kairon – period of time, moment, season, or opportunity), we are presently able to experience (echo – we really possess, hold onto, and currently have (first person plural, present indicative)) the potential to work (ergaxometha – we may presently do business and perform, perhaps laboring) for the (to) advantageous (pros – as is necessary and needed) generous benefit (agathos – for the good) of all (pas), but (de) especially and exceedingly (malista – chiefly and above all) benefiting (pros) those belonging to (tous oikeios – the relatives, immediate families, households, and members) the (tes) Faith (pisteos – religion or belief; while pistis originally conveyed trust, that concept is incompatible with Sha’uwl’s epistle)." (Galatians 6:10LEB) (While in P46, the verb "might work" becomes ergaxometha, the noun "work," my rendering is consistent with the Nestle Aland in this case because their verbiage fits better in the sentence.)

Therefore, according to Paul, man is enslaved when he chooses to act upon the Towrah’s guidance for his own benefit and for the enrichment of his family, and liberated when God’s instructions are rejected. But that is only so that he can now work for the benefit and enrichment of the Pauline Faith. Either way, it’s all about works.

Also, you’ll notice that while all of Yahowah’s benefits are for the enrichment and empowerment of His Covenant family, other than choosing to respond and participate in the Covenant, man does not make any contributions because God does all of the work. But here, man is the one laboring. And the beneficiary is Paul’s religion. Rather than God empowering His Family, Paul wants to exceedingly benefit members of the Faith he, himself, founded.

The Nestle-Aland 27th Edition McReynolds Interlinear renders the passage: "Then therefore as season we have we might work the good toward all especially but toward the households of the trust." So it too reveals that after investing the first three-quarters of this epistle criticizing "works," calling them unproductive, Paul is now promoting them as good. So much for consistency. But to be fair, or unfair depending upon your perspective, Paul wants everyone to do what he commands and not what Yahowah requests.

The Catholic Latin Vulgate reads: "Therefore, whilst we have time, let us work good to all men, but especially to those who are of the household of the faith." Therefore, the KJV says: "As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith." Toeing a similar line for a change, the New Living Translation published: "Therefore, whenever we have the opportunity, we should do good to everyone—especially to those in the family of faith."

In his own words, Sha’uwl wrote: "But one must share, partnering with the one making the ears ring, verbally informing the word, orally instructing in all good. (Galatians 6:6LEB) You must not become misled and stray because a god is not sneered at, ridiculed, or treated with contempt. For then, whatever if a man may sow, this also he shall reap. (Galatians 6:7LEB) Because the one sowing into the flesh of himself, from the flesh will reap corruption, destruction, and dissolution, depravity and death. But the one sowing into the spirit, from the spirit will reap life eternal. (Galatians 6:8LEB)

But the one good doing we do not become malicious, giving into harmful emotions, disparaging behaviors, or pernicious thinking. Because on occasion, for oneself we will reap and harvest, not being discouraged by being bound. (Galatians 6:9LEB) As a result, therefore, likewise, on occasion, we are presently able to experience the potential to work, laboring for the advantageous generous benefit of all, but especially and exceedingly benefiting those belonging to the Faith." (Galatians 6:10LEB)

End of part 2