Questioning Paul

Volume 1: The Great Galatians Debate

Chapter 12 part 5

Here is the conclusion of Yahowah’s Dabarym 18 declaration...

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

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

In (ba – with) arrogance and presumptuousness (zadown – with an inflated view of himself, self-willed and self-motivated, this morally flawed, disrespectful, imprudent, insulting, and shameless individual has taken great liberty while overstepping all due bounds in contempt of the established authority), the prophet (ha naby’ – the one claiming to be issuing inspired statements from God) has spoken and written (dabar – he has conceived and presented his message (piel perfect – he has completely and deliberately sought to influence)). You should not respect or revere him nor conspire to rebel with him (lo’ guwr min – you should not fear him, join him, congregate or live with him either)." (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:21-22LEB)

In a text where a single conflict portends the death of the one testifying falsely, as well as the demise of those who are led to believe him, Paul has failed all six. That’s not my opinion. It is an undeniable conclusion based upon Yahowah’s standard. It is case closed. The verdict is "Guilty!" Paul was a false prophet. If you trust him, you do not know or trust God.

There are two additional thoughts in this Towrah passage worthy of our consideration. The first is an indictment on all religions, but especially Christianity and Judaism. Indeed, when you come into the land associated with Yahowah, your God, which is given to you, you shall not accept, teach, imitate (lamad – be trained in, instruct, become accustomed to, disciple others in), or act upon ('asah – engage in, celebrate, profit from, bring about, ordain, or institute) any of the disgusting religious ways (tow'ebah – abhorrent rites, detestable idolatrous things, repulsive and loathsome rituals, abominable festivals) of these Gentile nations." (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:9LEB)

Pauline Christianity is Dionysian, and thus Babylonian, while also being steeped in Greek Gnosticism. To this, Constantine’s Roman Catholic Church integrated their affinity for Mithras. The resulting religion remains disgusting.

Without the Torah, there is no call for Abraham to come out of Babylon—to flee man’s religious schemes. And worse, Paul’s epistles call believers in the opposite direction, back to Babylon, which is why the faithful remain mired in mankind’s religious muck.

Then speaking of the Word personally delivered by Yahowah on Mount Horeb, and of the promised arrival of the Word made flesh, God said: "According to all you inquired about and requested of Yahowah, your God near Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, ‘Let me not hear again the thunderous voice of Yahowah, our God, nor let me see this great fire again, lest I die,’ Yahowah said to me: ‘They have successfully and rightfully spoken. I will come onto the scene, standing upright, establishing them as an inspired prophet from among their brothers, as Myself, in a point in time. And I will put My Word in His mouth, and He shall say to them all that which I direct and instruct. And it shall come to pass that any man who will not listen to My Word, which He shall declare in My name, I will question and judge him, holding him accountable.’" (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 18:18-19LEB)

The fact remains, Paul didn’t listen to Yahowsha’ speak Yahowah’s Word. He only quoted Yahowsha’ one time in all of his letters, and even then he misquoted Him. And each time he attempted to recite something from Yahowah, he not only truncated God’s testimony, he purposefully twisted Yahowah’s message.

And let’s never forget God’s position on His family: "Yahowah will enable you to stand upright, restoring and establishing by Him, as a set-apart family, because beneficially by way of association He has made a sworn promise to you, if you closely observe, carefully examine, and closely consider, the terms and conditions regarding the Covenant relationship of Yahowah, your God, and walk in His ways." (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 28:9LEB)

The purpose of the book Paul demeaned is to provide us with the opportunity to get to know God and then participate in the Family-Oriented Covenant Relationship with our Heavenly Father. Salvation, then, is a byproduct of that relationship, making the Covenant and its children perfect and enduring. Therefore, Yahowah’s testimony remains diametrically opposed to Galatians.

You’ll also notice that Moseh inscribed the Towrah on behalf of Yahowah, not Hagar nor Ishmael, that there was only one Covenant, and that the Covenant and the Towrah are inseparable...

"And as soon as it came to be that Moseh finished writing the words of the Towrah on the Almighty’s document, completing it, Moseh instructed the Lowy to lift up and carry Yahowah’s Ark of the Covenant, saying, ‘Grasp hold of this written documentation of the Towrah and place it beside Yahowah, your God’s, Ark of the Familial Covenant Relationship, existing there as the everlasting witness and restoring testimony among you." (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 31:24-6LEB)

This is an unequivocal refutation of Sha’uwl’s claims that: the Towrah cannot save, that the Towrah came to an end," and that the Covenant and Towrah are unrelated. God’s position and Paul’s are the inverse of one another.

Sha’uwl’s instructions and Yahowah’s are completely irreconcilable. They are mutually exclusive. And that means Sha’uwl lied when he claimed that he spoke for God. As a result, absolutely nothing he said or wrote should be considered trustworthy.

The Torah’s message, its purpose, and its ongoing place in the lives of those who seek to live with God remains incongruous with what Sha’uwl has written. "Moseh instructed them, saying, ‘At the end of seven years, in the appointed time, the year of canceling debts, releasing debtors from their obligations, during the festival feast of Shelters / Sukah, when all Yisra’el, the individuals who engage and endure with God, come to see and experience the presence of Yahowah, your God, at the place which relationally He chooses, you shall read and recite this Towrah (towrah – teaching and instruction, source of guidance and direction) before all Yisra’el (kol Yisra’el – every individual who engages and endures with God), so that they can hear it.’" (Dabarym / Words / Deuteronomy 31:10-11LEB)

In that it is God’s hope that we answer His invitations and choose to campout with Him, this might be an opportune time to consider Yahowah’s guidance regarding Sukah. He revealed...

"And Yahowah spoke to Moseh, for the purpose of saying, ‘Speak to the children of Yisra’el, to say, "On the fifteenth day of the seventh month is the Festival Feast of Sukah Shelters for seven days for you to approach and be near Yahowah. ...For seven days approach and come near the maternal manifestation of the light to be with Yahowah.

On the eighth day, there exists, and will always be, a set apart invitation to meet, a Miqra’, on your behalf. And you should answer and respond to the invitation, appearing before the enlightening Mother according to Yahowah. Her joyous assembly does not engage in, doing any of the work of the heavenly messenger who is God’s spiritual representative.

These Godly and specific designated meetings times of Yahowah, which relationally and beneficially you are invited to attend as set-apart Miqra’ey, as Invitations to be Called Out and Meet, reading and reciting, are for the purpose of coming near and approaching the maternal manifestation of the light of Yahowah and are a gift which elevates, a reconciling sacrifice for forgiveness, and also a pouring out of the Word – a day for His day.

As part of the Shabats, the seventh days, the days of promise, the days to cease your ordinary work and reflect on the relationship with Yahowah, and as part of your contribution to the relationship, as part of all of your vows, and as part of your expression of your freedom to choose, relationally and beneficially give yourself, entrusting yourself to Yahowah.

Indeed, on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when you have gathered in your yield from the land, you should celebrate the Festival Feast of Yahowah for seven days. With the first and foremost day, there shall be a Shabathown for the promise of empowerment and enrichment, and on the eighth day a Shabathown for resting and reflecting on this opportunity to grow. ...Rejoice and be glad in the presence of Yahowah, your God, for seven days.

Celebrate it as a Festival Feast in association with Yahowah seven days during the year. It is a clearly communicated and inscribed prescription of what you should do in life to live forever, throughout your generations. Celebrate it in the seventh month." (Qara’ / Called Out / Leviticus 23:33-41LEB)

And that leaves all of us with a clear choice. We can accept God and reject Paul, or we can accept Paul and reject God. But no matter whom you choose to trust or believe, one thing is certain: Paul lied.


While the answers are overwhelmingly obvious, at least for those who are rational, two questions may remain for the most ardent Pauline advocates. Are the eight remaining epistles (1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians), the four personal letters (1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, and Philemon), and the citations in Acts attributable to Paul as errant and repulsive as Galatians? And what motivated Paul to oppose God?

Over the course of Questioning Paul we have chronicled copious amounts of material gleaned from Paul’s letters to Corinth, Thessalonica, Rome, and Ephesus, and we have studied his preaching as it is reflected in Acts, in addition to the morose conclusions he conveyed to Timothy. What we discovered is that they were even less credible and more condemning. That is not to suggest, however, that nothing Sha’uwl wrote elsewhere was encouraging. I cite the following example in Acts 24: "Paul responded:…‘But this I will admit to you, that according to ‘The Way,’ which they call the sect, I do serve the God of our fathers, trusting everything that is in accordance with the Torah, and that is written in the Prophets." (Acts 24:14LEB) If that was all that Paul wrote, then the verdict regarding his testimony would be different. But the same man also said that he pretended to be Torah observant when it served his interests.

The fact is: liars lie, but not all the time, otherwise no one would believe them. To make something false appear credible, every myth must include some accurate elements.

Christian apologists might cite the "Gifts of the Spirit" in First Corinthians 12 as evidence that Paul was inspired by God. And yet, most everything he included in his list was inconsistent with Yah’s teaching. Others will protest that the next chapter in Corinthians, which was dedicated to love, could not possibly be errant, but it is nonetheless. Much of what Paul wrote departs from God’s perspective on the same subject. And while I am going to leave you to verify the evidence behind these conclusions for yourself (because I’d rather study the Torah and Prophets), it should be obvious to everyone that Sha’uwl was a living contradiction—routinely displaying behaviors which contravened his own testimony.

Recognizing that three-quarters of Galatians has been overtly opposed to God’s revelation, for there to be any hope of finding some beneficial testimony in the letters to the Thessalonians, Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians, they would all have had to have been written by someone other than the author of this epistle. And yet each was explicitly identified with Paul in their salutations, and each was expressly associated with communities Paul visited according to the book of Acts. So the odds Galatians was written by someone other than Paul, the man depicted in Acts, and the author of the epistles to the Thessalonians, Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians are remote in the extreme. Consider the required makeup of an imposter, and the circumstances under which a conman would have had to operate under to perpetrate such an astonishing fraud.

The Galatians ghostwriter would have to have convinced the Disciple Shim’own Kephas that Paul wrote this letter to the Galatians, even though that was not true. And that means the Pauline imposter would have had to have perpetrated his fraud during the height of Paul’s fame, and while Shim’own was still alive, because the Rock specifically, and adroitly, addressed the letter to the Galatians in his second epistle. Considering the number of times these men met, considering the enormous responsibility borne by Shim’own, the imposter would have had to have been the most adroit impersonator in human history.

This charlatan, should one exist, would have had to pull off this stunning fraud without Paul himself knowing about it or objecting to it. And therein, the hypothetical scenario of a ghostwriter crumbles, because as anal as Paul was about signing his letters to prevent frauds from being perpetrated, as intense as he was about not allowing anyone to alter his message, as self-indulgent and paranoid as he was, it is ludicrous to think that Paul wouldn’t have had a conniption fit over someone pretending to be him, and writing a falsified letter in his name.

And there is no way to credibly push out the timeline on Galatians beyond Sha’uwl’s and Shim’own’s lives (which terminated around 65 CE), particularly because these men left a lasting legacy of their reactions to people around them. Especially relevant, it’s obvious that Galatians was written in 50 to 52 CE, and that it was Paul’s first letter, composed in the immediate aftermath of the Yaruwshalaim Summit, when nerves were still raw and tempers enraged. This was all very personal, emotional, self-serving and self-promoting, and thus very, very Paul. The self-proclaimed "Apostle" would have had twelve subsequent letters in which to expose an imposter—something Paul surely would have done had there been one.

There are a score of reasons to acknowledge that Galatians was Paul’s first letter. It’s the only one which details his life story from birth to the Yaruwshalaim Summit, which strives to validate his calling, and which describes the inception of his preaching. In his salutation, Paul uncharacteristically greets the Galatians alone, having been recently separated from Barnabas (Paul’s companion while in Galatia) but not yet united with Timothy (whom Paul would meet in the immediate aftermath of the Yaruwshalaim Summit).

Further, the Galatians epistle shares something in common with those penned in haste to Corinth and Thessalonica—in that these hurried and defiant replies were written to the three most rebellious assemblies Sha’uwl encountered. And since we know that he crafted both of his letters to the Thessalonians and to the Corinthians within two years of his initial visits to these places, it’s instructive to know that the timeline which can be deduced from the book of Acts places Paul and Barnabas in Lystra, Galatia in 48 CE.

Moreover, this conman would have had to fool Barnabas and Timothy, and then Luke as well. But knowing Luke’s penchant for detail that would have been impossible. If Luke smelled a fraud, his suspicions, Peter’s, Barnabas’, or Timothy’s protestations, would have been chronicled in Acts.

But there is more to consider. A potential impostor would have to have been an expert in the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. For example, in this letter, and again in Romans, the author cited (albeit misquoted) Habakkuk, a book most people don’t even know exists. He identified a Torah passage which could be misconstrued to associate the Torah with a curse. He even recognized that zera, the Hebrew word for "seed," was singular throughout Genesis. And yet this imposter would have to have despised the Torah sufficiently to dedicate himself to denying its purpose. You could count such individuals on one hand and not use all of your fingers, meaning that the pool of potential applicants in line to impersonate Paul in the mid-first century would have been very small. In fact, there was only one: Paul himself.

Should there have been a pretender, the conman would have to have been schooled sufficiently in Rabbinical Law to pass himself off as a former Pharisee who trained under Gamaliel—the most esteemed religious teacher of his day. And yet, he would have to have hated Judaism sufficiently to demean the religion and condemn Jews—positioning them as the faith’s foe. And while it is not uncommon, even today, to find Jews who are self-destructive and self-loathing, Paul’s condemnation of his own people in 1st Thessalonians 2:14-16LEB is a league apart—uniquely qualifying Sha’uwl as the anti-Semite who wrote Galatians.

Should Galatians have been penned by a mystery writer, the perpetrator would have had to have received formal training in Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, as well as in classic literature, mythology, and rhetoric (the basis of debate), at a time when just being literate was rare. Keep in mind, that while Paul’s message has been hard to decipher, that’s partly because elitists of the day sought to impress one another by communicating in the fewest possible Greek words, leaving the reader with the challenge of correctly interpreting them. And that is some of what we are witnessing in Galatians, and is why the New Living Translation has more than doubled the letter’s word count in their attempt to convey its intent.

The ghostwriter, should there have been one, would have to have accompanied Paul and known the timing and nature of his travels during a time bereft of rapid or public communications. He would have had to know intimate details about his life, including the grotesque physical stigmata he bore while visiting the Galatians. He would have had to have known what Paul said to this audience during his previous visit, and also know why this remote province was now rebelling against him. And he would have to have had a reason to intervene in the midst of a nasty argument, and somehow benefit from such animosity.

The Galatians imposter would have had to be willing to perpetrate a fraud to artificially elevate Paul’s status above Yahowsha’s Disciples in the midst of conceiving a new religious faith. And yet the only person in recorded history known to hold such views, and to be similarly motivated, Marcion, hadn’t even been born when this fraud would have had to have been perpetrated. Further, in the case of Marcion, entire tomes have been written to marginalize him, yet nothing was ever said about this hypothetical ghostwriter who turned out to be vastly more influential.

Pseudo Paul would have had to have been a party to the Yaruwshalaym Summit, because rather than coming up with an entirely different story, he was clever enough to twist what actually occurred, so that it would serve a wannabe apostle’s peculiar agenda. And he would have to have been in the room when Sha’uwl condemned Shim’own for hastily leaving a meal – and to have had a reason for demeaning one of Yahowsha’s Disciples. And why if this person wasn’t Paul, was he so obviously angry and so emotionally involved in Paul’s affairs?

What’s more, this imposter would have had to be skilled at impersonating Paul’s handwriting, because the last half of the last chapter of Galatians claims to have been penned in Paul’s hand. And that would have been especially challenging since it’s obvious that this is the first letter Paul wrote. Moreover, the charlatan would have had to have had Paul’s jargon down pat, including knowing his propensity to use alla, charis, euangelion, stoicheion, and pistis, in addition to the now ubiquitous: "but I Paulos say..."

The Galatians ghostwriter would have had to have hired a courier whom the Galatians would have trusted as one of Paul’s emissaries. And then he would have had to convince the leaders of wealthier assemblies to pay scribes to copy his fraudulent letter and include it in codices with other Pauline epistles.

And along these lines, since we know that Paul wrote a letter to the Galatians, if the one we have is a fraud, the pretender would have had to have confiscated Paul’s original before replacing it with his own, and to have done so without anyone noticing. I say this because the time interval isn’t sufficient for an authentic Galatians epistle to have arrived, been circulated, and then been forgotten, so that the imposter’s letter could have replaced it without anyone noticing that they were different.

And lastly, Paul’s letter to Rome reprises the climax of Galatians—the existence of two covenants, one of the flesh, the other of the promise. This was Paul’s amazingly clever, albeit devastatingly deadly, means to circumvent the Torah, bypassing it by going from Abraham to the Ma’aseyah, with nothing in between. It is the crowning achievement of Pauline Doctrine, his signature. Therefore the man who wrote Romans, also wrote Galatians.

Also, as we have discovered, Second Corinthians was penned by a man whose ego, credibility, and spirit were a perfect match for those on display throughout this epistle. Moreover, the adversarial attitude on display throughout the Thessalonians letters is consistent with what we have read in Galatians.

But even if someone could pull off the greatest fraud in human history, why would they? Who in the first century benefited from defending Paul by attacking God? Who else met the criterion of the devastating prophecies Yahowah and Yahowsha’ leveled against this man? Why did Yahowah call him "Sha’uwl" and Yahowsha’ refer to him as "Lowly and Little?"

While we have covered some of this material before, in support of Galatians being from Paul, we must recognize that the book of Acts reveals that Sha’uwl had the kind of contentious relationship with the Galatians, and with Yahowsha’s Disciples, which is reflected in this epistle. Shim’own, specifically, wrote critically of Paul’s letter to the Galatians, so if not this one, where is that one? Moreover, the language the Rock used to describe Galatians adeptly identifies the issues which permeate this surviving copy. The subtle twists and clever interpretations of the Jerusalem Summit, as chronicled in Acts, tells a similar story.

And as we have learned, Galatians is all about Paul, about his childhood, his education, his qualifications, his preaching, his detractors, and his trials and tribulations, even his personal issues with God. Within its text, we find the author referring to himself as the mother of the faithful, as the parent of his spiritual children, as the perfect example to follow, as a person who can do no wrong, and as someone who cannot lie—all themes which are echoed in the other epistles attributed to him. So if Paul didn’t write it, why would anyone ascribe such a lofty status on another, especially in the midst of a letter purported to speak on behalf of God?

How was it possible that a copy of Galatians was included in the midst of the oldest extant codex containing Paul’s epistles: Papyrus 46? There we find in order of their appearance: Romans, Hebrews (which is widely considered to have been written by one of Paul’s disciples), 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, and 1st Thessalonians. And since P46 is dated between 85 and 125 CE, there would be no way to attribute this fraud, if it is such, to someone writing at a time when everyone who had actually known Sha’uwl was long since dead.

And as we know, Paul had a propensity to sign his letters so that his audience would have complete assurance that he was actually the author. But with Galatians, he did more than just sign his name. The last chapter attests to having been penned in his own hand. He even commands believers to pay particular attention to the specific characteristics of his handwriting so that they could use it later to verify the veracity of subsequent epistles.

Recognizing also that Sha’uwl knew the Torah, that he was an expert in Judaism, that he was skilled in public debate, and that he was fixated on proving his calling, all of which are prerequisites for authorship, that leaves us with only one viable alternative: that the person depicted in Acts and associated with the epistles to the Thessalonians, Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Timothy was the author of Galatians as well.

Therefore, the only informed and rational conclusion is that Paul wrote Galatians to establish a new religion. As a result, the best possible spin we can put on this disastrous tome is that he was clearly angry, and may well have dashed off an emotional response that, from a more sober perspective, he would have thrown away. But, then again, Paul’s ego was way too big for somber reflection.

End of part 5