Questioning Paul

Chapter 5

part 3


Therefore, the "other Scripture" connotation required to infer that Paul’s letters were inspired, isn’t remotely plausible. Moreover, there is no textual basis for the continuous adding of "he" and "his" in English bibles, which is also required to make the connection between Paul, his letters, and the Writings. The ESV, for example, adds "he does," "his letters," and "he speaks," all without textual support.

In summary, by writing the following words, Shim’own Kephas was alerting us to the fact that the Pauline epistles were poison.

"Therefore, we await a new universe and a previously unknown spiritual realm, and a freshly created earth according to His promise, expecting in which that the righteous and vindicated will live. (3:13) So dear friends, those eagerly anticipating this, earnestly make every effort to become pure, without blemish or defect, blameless, avoiding judgment for Him, learning to be found with reconciliation leading to salvation. (3:14) Also this regarding our Upright One, Yahowah: steadfast endurance and constraint, always analyzing while expressing righteous indignation toward the adversary, even being exasperated, considering forming opinions regarding the process of salvation inasmuch as it pertains then to this, our esteemed countryman, Paulos, through the clever use of human philosophy having been produced by him in writing to you. (3:15) And even as in all epistles, inside them they speak and convey a message which encompasses the other side, deploying circular reasoning, which is different and opposed to this, within which there are some things difficult to understand, hard to comprehend, and detrimental to comprehension, which the uneducated and improperly taught as well as the malleable misinterpret and distort, turning away, as also with the remaining inferior writings, pertaining to their own individual destruction and annihilation of themselves." (2P3:16)

Shim’own’s view of Sha’uwl’s letters is consistent with Yahowah’s observations, especially as they were prophetically presented in the second chapter of Chabaquwq / Habakkuk. But they also mirror Yahowsha’s assessment, as He prophetically presented His sentiments in the second half of His Instruction on the Mount. So while we considered Yahowsha’s pronouncement in the first chapter, it is especially relevant here, especially since it concludes by referencing the name Shim’own was given: the Rock.

"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) the false prophets deceptively pretending to be divinely inspired spokesmen (ton pseudoprophetes) who (hostis) come to you, currently appearing before you making public pronouncements (erchomai pros umas) as if they belonged (esothen) by (en) dressing up in sheep’s clothing (endyma probaton), yet (de) they actually are (eisin) exceptionally self-promoting, self-serving, and swindling, vicious and destructive (harpax) wolves (lykos). (7:15)

From (apo) their (autos) fruit (karpos), by conducting a careful, thorough, and competent inquiry in the future, you all will be able to use evidence and reason to genuinely comprehend (epiginosko) them (autos). Is it even rationally possible (meti) to collect (syllego) a bunch of grapes (staphyle) from (apo) a thorn (akantha), or from (e apo) a thistle (tribolos), figs (suka)? (7:16) In this way (houto), every (pas) good and useful (agathos) fruit tree (dendron) produces (poieomai) exceptionally suitable and commendable (kalos) fruit (karpos). But (de) a tree (dendron) which is corrupt, rotten, and harmful (sapros) bears (poieomai) diseased and worthless, seriously flawed and faulty, annoying and perilous (poneros) results (karpos). (7:17)

It is not possible (ou dynamai) for a good and useful (agathos) fruit tree (dendron) to produce (poieomai) seriously flawed or disadvantageous (poneros) fruit (karpos), nor (oude) a tree (dendron) which is corrupt, unsuitable, and destructive (sapros) to make (poieomai) suitable or commendable, genuine, approved (kalos), fruit (karpos). (7:18) Any and every (pas) tree (dendron) not (me) producing (poieomai) suitable, fitting, genuine, approved, and advantageous (kalos) results (karpos) shall actually be cut off and done away with, eliminated and removed (ekkopto), and toward (kai eis) the fire (pyr), it is thrown (ballo). (7:19)

So then indeed (ara ge), by (apo) their (autos) production (karpos), you will be able through careful observation and studious contemplation to actually know and understand them (epiginosko autos). (7:20)

Not (ou) any (pas) one saying (legon) to Me (moi), ‘Lord (kyrie) Lord (kyrie),’ will actually as a result enter into (eiserchomai eis) the kingdom of the heavens (ten basileian ton ouranon), but by contrast (alla) the one presently acting upon (o poieomai) the purpose and desire (thelema) of (tou) My (mou) Father (patros), the One (tou) in the heavens (en tois ouranois). (7:21)

Many (polys) will say (erousin) to Me (moi) in that specific day (en ekeinos te hemera), ‘Lord (kyrie) Lord (kyrie), in Your (to so) name (onoma) did we not actively speak genuinely inspired utterances (ou propheteuo)? Also (kai) in Your (to so) name (onoma), we drove out (ekballo) demons (daimonion), and (kai) in Your (to so) name (onoma), many mighty and miraculous things (pollas dynamis), we made and did (poieomai). (7:22) And then (kai tote) I will profess to them (homologeo autois) that because (oti) I never at any time knew you (oudepote ginosko umas), you all must depart from Me (apochoreo apo emou) those (oi) of you involved in (ergazomai ten) Torahlessness, who are in opposition to and have attempted to negate the Towrah, thereby those of you without the Towrah (anomia). (7:23)

Everyone (pas), therefore then (oun) who (ostis) presently and actively listens to (akouo) these (toutous) statements (logos) of Mine (mou), and (kai) he or she genuinely acts upon them (poieomai autous), will be likened to (homoioo) a wise, intelligent and astute, a prudent and sensible (phronimos) individual (andros) who (ostis) edifies and strengthens (oikodomeo) his or her (autos) house (oikia) upon the (epi ten) rock (petra). (7:24) And even when (kai) the rain (e broche) descends (katabaino), (kai) the rivers (oi potamos) come (erchomai), and the rapidly shifting winds (anemos) blow (pneo), descending upon (prospipto) this specific (te ekeine) home and household (te oikia), then (kai) it shall not fail (ouk pipto) because (gar) the foundation was previously established and is enduring (themelioo) upon (epi) the rock (petra)." (Mattanyah / Yah’s Gift / Matthew 7:25)

Yahowah and Yahowsha’ are of one mind, affirming the same testimony. Yahowsha’s Disciples universally concur. The only one with bellowing a different story in an effort to shift our attention is Paul.

Although the Rock (duly noting the connection between Yahowsha’s chosen moniker for one man and His assessment of another) has made his point in this regard, I would be remiss if I didn’t share the last two lines of Shim’own’s epistle. In the context of Paul’s remaining letters being twisted and misunderstood, even inferior and destructive, what he wrote next is especially relevant.

"You, therefore (gmeis oun), beloved (agapetos – dear esteemed ones, those set apart and welcomed), now knowing this in advance (proginosko – currently possessing this foreknowledge), you should be observant, on guard, keeping your distance (phylassomai – you should choose to keep away and abstain by being especially watchful and protective, isolating yourself from this, completely disassociating to be safe) in order that (hima) not (me) in or of this (te ton) un-appointed, unprincipled, and irreverent (athesmon – unrighteous and licentious, unjust and Torahless, self-gratifying) deceptive delusion (plane – perversion and corruption) you are forsaken, having been led astray (ekpipto synapagomai – you yield and fall, you are carried away, drifting off course, and you are judged, being held accountable, submitting to an improper association with the lowly and inadequate (the meaning of paulos), perishing) from the steadfast and dependable One (tou sterigmos idiou – from the firm and unchanging guarantee of the One who saves)." (2 Shim’own / He Listens / Peter 3:17)

Shim’own Kephas warned the Galatians to be on their guard, to be especially observant, keeping their distance from Paulos, so as not to be led astray into deception or delusion by the un-appointed one, the unprincipled one, who sought to gratify himself by annulling the Towrah. The only thing worse than being forsaken by Yahowah is to be judged by Him. And the best way to prevent that from happening to you is to recognize that God’s guidance is dependable, serving as a never changing guarantee of salvation. But for you to do that, you will first have to reject Paul.

It’s little wonder that Christians disassociate "Peter’s" last statement from the preceding one. This one line undermines most of what Paul will say in the remainder of his Galatians epistle, because the Disciple is establishing the fact that God’s message is dependable because it never changes, in effect affirming Yahowsha’s statement that the Torah was and will always be the source of life.

The Galatians, and also us based upon the public distribution of the Disciple’s letter, have been made aware that Paul’s epistles would lead countless people astray, into deception and delusion, causing many to forego salvation. In this regard, dikaiosune, remains Shim’own’s fulcrum term. As you recall, it speaks of "thinking correctly so as to become acceptable," of "becoming upright by observing God’s directions," and of "exposing the evidence required to teach and prove something is consistent and authorized."

Therefore, those who twist Peter’s words relative to Paul’s epistles, and thus misinterpret the Disciple’s overwhelmingly critical assessment of Pauline Doctrine, convoluting a condemnation into a glowing endorsement, must ignore or reject everything that was written before and after the supposed characterization.

If an endorsement, why would Shim’own tell those he loves to be wary of Paul’s epistles, to be on their guard lest they be led astray into the delusion of the un-appointed one and thus lose their hope of salvation? After all, if he isn’t advising us to be wary of Paul’s letters, then the Rock would be suggesting that the Torah itself is a hindrance to understanding. And since that’s ridiculous in the context of Shim’own’s Discipleship, the Rock’s conclusion affirms he was condemning Sha’uwl’s epistles, not commending them.

The purpose of the Covenant, in fact the purpose of the entirety of the Towrah, is for us to become our Heavenly Father’s children and grow as a result. Shim’own Kephas says as much..."So grow in mercy and knowledge of Yahowah, our Upright One and Savior, the Ma’aseyah Yahowsha’. To Him the splendor, brilliance, and greatness, now and throughout all time. This is truthful and reliable." (2 Shim’own / He Listens / Peter 3:18) Knowledge and understanding leads to trust and reliance upon the eternal Light of the universe.

Notwithstanding the last two statements, if 2 Shim’own 3:16 represents the lone Christian affirmation that Paul’s letters were Scripture—word for word inspired by God—then they are out on a limb of their own making. The Rock gave no such assurances. And these were his last words.


Before we move on, it’s past time we consider another ugly underpinning of Christianity: Marcion of Sinope. His influence is especially relevant here because Papyrus 72, the oldest extant manuscript containing Peter’s epistles, was likely influenced by his scribes. Suffice it to say for now that Marcion played a pivotal role in the formation of the "New Testament" canon, especially with regard to textual liberty (inaccuracy), and the inclusion of Paul’s contradictory epistles. Born to a bishop in Sinope around 85 CE, Marcion, a wealthy ship owner, fled to Rome during Rabbi Akiba’s Bar Kokhba revolt in 133 CE. There, he studied under Cerdo, an influential Gnostic.

In the process, Marcion became a raging anti-Semite who rejected Yahowah and the entirety of His Torah and Prophets, and Psalms. He saw Paulos of Tarsus as the only true Apostle, and he sought to elevate his thirteen epistles, as well as his own significantly edited version of Luke and Acts (which were written under Paul’s influence), elevating their status while at the same time, rejecting all other books. In his view, one which shaped Christendom in the second and third centuries (and on to this day), Yahowah was a lesser, wrathful, tyrant and evil demiurge when compared to the "all-forgiving, loving, and gracious" god, Ieosus Christos, found in Paul’s epistles. Ironically, his dualistic view was both Gnostic in nature and shared by the Jewish theologian, Moses Maimonides – blending the worst of Greek philosophy and rabbinical thinking, not unlike Paul, himself.

Had it not been for Marcion, in all likelihood, all of Paul’s letters would have been rejected as apocrypha and ultimately disassociated from the eyewitness and historical texts. They would not have been canonized. And had this occurred, the Christian religion would not exist.

Christians are universally ignorant of the influence Marcion had on their faith because Marcionism was ultimately denounced as heresy in 144 CE, not so much because he was wrong, but because he became a competitor of the emerging Church, threatening their desired exclusivity over establishing doctrine and manuscript production. He was, therefore, bad for business. But that didn’t stop Marcion from preaching to large crowds and forever altering the mindset of the religious community.

Foremost among his influences, Marcion was the first capitalize on Paul’s categorization in Galatians 1:4, where he claimed that what Yahowah had revealed represented the "aionos – old system of past circumstances" which Yahowsha’ was "exaireo – tearing out" because it was "poneros – disadvantageous ineffective," thereby coining the term "Old Testament," in the sense of being the obsolete will of a now retired and out of touch deity. In its place, and as a replacement, he promoted Paul’s "New Testament," a canon comprised of the Pauline epistles, and his heavily edited versions of Luke and Acts—where all things "Jewish" were demeaned. In the process, Marcion promoted the division Sha’uwl had established, one which had not previously existed. Capitalizing on Paul’s letters to the Galatians and Romans, he advanced the notion that the Torah was now obsolete, having been replaced by the "Gospel of Grace." Anything which didn’t support this view was either erased or ignored. It was a transition in perspective that would influence and haunt Christianity forevermore.

And while these teachings and titles continue to permeate Christian doctrine, Marcion’s most haunting legacy was his propensity to edit the text so that it could be interpreted to support the religious views he shared with Paul. Over time, Marcion became the father of what’s called the "Western," "Popular," or "Free" text of the "Christian New Testament." Under his influence, scribes were encouraged to harmonize the accounts, improve their readability, and add popular traditions and beliefs as they saw fit. Marcion not only made copious copies of his "Gospel" and "Bible," his followers became prolific copyists, and using Marcion’s considerable wealth, they flooded the empire with their versions of Luke, Acts, and the Pauline epistles. As a result of the sheer quantity, immense popularity, and appealing anti-Semitic tone of their manuscripts, much of what now appears in today’s Majority Texts of the "Christian New Testament" is suspect because it has all been heavily edited. Proof of this is the realization that there are more than three-hundred thousand known discrepancies between the oldest manuscripts – nearly twice as many variations as there are words in these codices.

Papyrus 72, the late third-century manuscript we were unfortunately required to use in our rendering of Second Shim’own / Peter (in that it is the oldest surviving witness to the Disciple’s letters), is the most "Free," and thus least reliable, of the seventy manuscripts which predate Constantine. It was written by someone who was neither a professional scribe, nor interested in accurately conveying what had previously been written. And as such, Marcion’s fingerprints are all over it. Therefore, we need to be sensitized to anything and everything which artificially elevates Paul—especially when derived from the hand of Sha’uwl’s most outspoken critics, the Disciples Shim’own, Ya’aqob, and Yahowchanan.


Yahowsha’ made yet another prediction regarding Sha’uwl. And just as Shim’own’s last words warned us about this man, the following prophetic admonition was the last Yahowsha’ would make before returning home.

As was His custom, God’s preamble provided the information we need to understand his prediction, so let’s begin where this specific conversation began. But keep in mind, this is actually a translation of what Yahowsha’ said in Hebrew into Greek and then into English. Also, with the exception of portions of seven words from a tattered one by three inch fragment of the 18th and 19th verses on P109 dating from the late second century, nothing prior to the wholesale corruption of the text under Constantine’s Roman Catholicism in the mid 4th century exists from which to verify the authenticity of this translation. So while the fragment from the 2nd century affirms that this conversation took place, and that Yahowchanan recorded it, we must be careful reading too much into the words themselves as they were subject to translation and copyedit.

This conversation followed a theme which completely undermines Christianity and its bogus notion of bodily resurrection. Yahowchanan, who recorded these words as an eyewitness, was with Shim’own Kephas (meaning: He Listens to the Rock), Ta’owm (known as Thomas today but called Didumos, with both names suggesting that he was a twin), Nathan’el (meaning: the Gift of God), the sons of Zabdy (meaning: Endowment and transliterated Zebedee), and two other, unnamed Disciples, had gathered together on the shores of the Sea of Tiberias to go fishing. And as was the case with every prior meeting with Yahowsha’ after His fulfillment of Pesach, Matsah, and Bikuwrym, not even those who knew Him best, and who had recently seen Him, could recognize Him. That is the antithesis of what we would expect to read if bodily resurrection occurred, again negating the preeminent claim of the Christian religion.

That these things known, please note the change from "agapas – showing and taking pleasure in love" to "phileo – engaging in a loving familial relationship" as Yahowsha’s conversation with Shim’own progresses.

"This was already the third time (outos ede tritos) Yahowsha’ (ΙΣ – a placeholder used by the Disciples and in the Septuagint to convey Yahowsha’ –Yahowah Saves) was seen (phaneroo – was disclosed and displayed, made known and revealed) with the Disciples who were Learners (tois mathetes – to the followers who were students being educated regarding the relationship), having been aroused and equipped to stand up (egertheis – having been caused to be recalled, restored, and appear; from agora – assembling His facilities and collecting His capabilities for the purpose of being seen, debated, and chosen in a public place) out of lifelessness (ek nekron – out of breathing His last breath, being spiritually deficient in a state of ineffectiveness and powerlessness, unable to respond, departed and separated). (21:14)

Therefore (oun – as a result), while (hote – when) they ate breakfast (aristao – they consumed food early in the morning), He says (lego – He speaks) to (to) Shim’own Kephas (Simoni Petro – an awkward transliteration of the Hebrew Shim’own, meaning He Listens, combined with a translation of the Aramaic Kephas to the Greek word "Rock") being Yahowsha’ / Yahowah Saving (o ΙΣ – a placeholder used by Yahowsha’s Disciples and in the Septuagint to convey following the article o in the nominative: being Yahowsha’, meaning being Yahowah Saving), ‘Shim’own of Yahowchanan / He who listens to Yahowah’s Mercy (Simon Ioannou – crude transliterations of Shim’own – He Listens to Yahowchanan – Yahowah’s Mercy), do you show your love for Me more than these (agapas me pleon – do you take pleasure in, desire, and express your love for Me to a greater degree than these)?’

He says to Him (legei auto), ‘Yes (vai – verily acknowledging agreement), Yahowah (ΚΥ – a placeholder used by Yahowsha’s Disciples and in the Septuagint to convey ‘edon, the Upright One, or Yahowah’s name), You are aware (ou oieda – You realize, know, acknowledge, and appreciate) that I am engaged in a loving relationship with You (oti phileo de – that I have great affection for You based upon our friendly and familial association; from philos – to engage in a close, family-oriented relationship as a companion similar to a marriage).’

He says to him (legei auto), ‘Feed (boskomai – tend to, caringly guide, and nourish) My sheep (ta arnia mou – the young lambs of Mine).’ (21:15)

He says to him (legei autos) again, a second time (palin deuteros), ‘Shim’own, of Yahowchanan / He who listens to Yahowah’s Mercy (Simon Ioannou – transliterations of Shim’own – He Listens to Yahowchanan – Yah’s Mercy), do you love Me (agapas me – do you revere and respect Me)?’

He says to Him (legei auto), ‘Yes (vai – verily acknowledging agreement), Yahowah (ΚΥ – a placeholder used by Yahowsha’s Disciples and in the Septuagint to convey ‘edon, the Upright One, or Yahowah’s name), You are aware (ou oieda – You realize, know, acknowledge, and appreciate) that I am engaged in a loving relationship with You (oti phileo de – that I love You fondly as my close friend and that I have great affection for You based upon our family-oriented relationship).’

He says to him (legei auto), ‘Shepherd (poimaino – acting as a shepherd guide, care for, feed, protect, tend to, and assist) My sheep (ta probate mou – My adult flock).’ (21:16)

He says to him (legei autos) a third time (to tritos), ‘Shim’own, of Yahowchanan / He who listens to Yahowah’s Mercy (Simon Ioannou – transliterations of Shim’own – He Listens to Yahowchanan – Yah’s Mercy), are you engaged in a loving, family-oriented relationship with Me (phileo me – are you My companion and friend; from philos – to engage in a close, familial relationship akin to a marriage)?’

The Rock (o Petros – a translation of Kephas, the Aramaic word for rock) was saddened (lypeomai – was grieved and distressed) because (oti) He said to him a third time (eipen auto to triton) ‘Are you engaged in a covenant relationship with Me (philies me – are you participating in a close, friendly, and family-oriented association with Me consistent with the vows of a marriage)?’

So he says to Him (kai legei auto), ‘Yahowah (ΚΥ – a placeholder used by Yahowsha’s Disciples and in the Septuagint to convey ‘edon, the Upright One, or Yahowah’s name), You are aware (oidas su – You perceive and realize, know and recognize) of everything (panta – of all of this). You (ou) know and understand (ginosko – through examining the evidence and evaluating it recognize and realize) that I am engaged in the loving, family-oriented, covenant relationship with You (oti pilo de – that I have great affection my association with You, see You as friend and family).’

Says to him (legei auto) Yahowsha’ / Yahowah Saving (o ΙΣ – a placeholder used by the Disciples and in the Septuagint to convey Yahowsha’ –Yahowah Saves), ‘Nurture and tend to (boskomai – feed and nourish, care for and guide) My sheep (probaton mou – My adult flock)." (Yahowchanan / Yahowah is Merciful / John 21:14-17)

Yahowsha’, whom it appears Shim’own Kephas of Yahowchanan thoughtfully and appropriately addressed as "Yahowah" in His post Bikuwrym state based upon the Divine Placeholder, wasn’t talking to His pupil about grazing, about sheep, or about animal husbandry. The "sheep" were a reference to Yahowah’s "Covenant children." It is why Yahowah is called "My Shepherd" in the 24th Psalm, and is credited with guiding, nurturing, and protecting His flock. Their "food" is "the Towrah." As a "shepherd," Yahowah through Yahowsha’ was asking His Disciple "to guide and protect" His flock, keeping His sheep out of harm’s way, while keeping the wolves at bay. And never forget, they were and remain "His" sheep, not "Peter’s," and especially not Paul’s, not a pope’s or a pastor’s.

"Tending" to Yahowah’s Covenant children requires a shepherd to be "properly prepared," which means Shim’own would have to diligently study Yahowah’s Towrah while comparing Yahowsha’s words and deeds to it, so that he would be able to teach our Heavenly Father’s children what they need to know to survive and grow, and to be properly nourished and guided.

To tend the most highly valued sheep in the universe, "the Rock" would have to remain "observant," which is to say that he must be vigilant, never letting his guard down, lest a diseased or vicious predator, unfit food, improper guidance, or an unauthorized shepherd mislead God’s flock. And the best way to do that would be to nurture Yah’s children on the merits of the Torah, so that they would be equipped to care for their children for generations to come.

Agapao, the verb meaning "to love," and agape, the noun for "love," express the ideas of "showing love, expressing love, and enjoying love." Agapao is from agan, meaning "much," thus emphasizing quantity versus quality. And while the verb phileo can also be rendered "love," its etymology, based as it is on "philos – friendly and familial association akin to a marriage relationship," is more focused upon the "nature of the relationship" than the feelings associated with it. Phileo was, therefore, being deployed in translation to ask Shim’own whether or not he "was engaged in the family-oriented covenant relationship" Yahowah established in His Towrah. While our response to our Heavenly Father saving us may be agapao, this emotional retort while appropriate, isn’t as important as whether or not we phileo – have engaged in the Covenant.

Cognizant that Yahowah was telling Shim’own Kephas to fend off false prophets by properly feeding, directing, and protecting His children, regardless of place or race, Yahowsha’ provided this prophecy to Shim’own regarding Sha’uwl before returning to Yahowah…

"Truly (amen), truly (amen – this is certain and reliable), I say (lego) to you (soi), when you were younger (ote es neoteros), you were girding yourself (ezonnues seauton – you were fastening the ties of your own garments, preparing yourself for work, clothing yourself in protective armor (second person singular imperfect active indicative of zonnymi)), and you were walking (peripateo – you were living, traveling around, conducting, and directing your life) wherever you were intending and whenever you decided (hotan thelo otan – as often as you were proposing and as long as you wanted, desire, and determined).

But (de) when you grow older (gerasko – when you age), you will extend (ekteneis – as a gesture you will hold out, stretching forth) your hands (tas cheipas sou) and another (kai allos – and a different kind of person) will gird you, placing a yoke on you to control you (se zosei – will fasten a strap around your midst; from zugos – imposing a yoke of bondage to manipulate and control, used to depict the burden of troublesome religious laws and commands (future active indicative third person singular)) and he will move (kai oisei – he will bring, manipulate, and drive (future active indicative third person singular)) you to a place where you do not presently intend or desire (hopou ou thelo – you do not currently want, wish, propose, or determine (present active indicative second person singular)).’ (21:18)

And then this (touto de – in addition, therefore this is what), He said (eipen – but now this He shared, providing meaning), making the future clear, signifying (semaino – intentionally producing an insight to indicate, make known, and foretell) what kind of (poios – to answer questions regarding the manner, nature, and whereabouts) deadly plague (thanatos – pandemic death and physical demise, judgment separating dying and diseased souls) he will attribute to Yahowah (doxasei ton ΘN – he will impart and extol as being supposedly worthy regarding his opinion and estimate on how to properly judge, value, and view God).

And this (kai touto) having been conveyed (eipon – having been communicated), He said to him (lego auto), ‘You should choose to follow Me (akoloutheo moi – you should decide to actively accompany Me and engage as My Disciple, learning from Me and electing to side with Me on My path; from a – to be unified and one with keleuthos – the Way (present active imperative)).’" (Yahowchanan / Yahowah is Merciful / John 21:18-19)

Since this follows God asking Shim’own to shepherd His children, to feed them, to protect them, and to guide them, wherever they may be, when He speaks of the Disciple’s current liberty to accomplish this mission being constrained in the future by another person, we should be looking to identify the man (third person masculine singular in the text) who openly sought to limit Shim’own’s ability to influence individuals outside of Yisra’el. The second clue that we were given to identify this villain, is that he "attributed a deadly plague to God," in essence killing millions of people with his words. Third, since this advisory concludes with Yahowsha’ encouraging Shim’own to follow His Way instead of the path proposed by his future adversary, and recognizing that Yahowsha’ was the living manifestation of the Torah, we should be on the lookout for someone whose philosophy differed from God’s, someone who was demonstrably opposed to the Torah, its Covenant, and its Invitations to Meet with God. And fourth, since this is a prophecy, for it to have merit, this heinous man would have to be known to history, he would have to appear on the scene within a reasonable number of years, and he would have to caustically interact with Shim’own during that time, limiting the Disciple’s audience, while attempting to thwart his ability to negate this foe’s contrarian message.

I know such a man, and so do you. Sha’uwl is a perfect fit in every regard. And I dare anyone reading this material to suggest any other viable candidate.

You’ll notice that this begins and ends with freedom. And that is because the children of the Covenant, like Shim’own and all of those who follow Yahowsha’, are liberated by the Towrah. It is the great irony of religion, the putrid misnomer of Christianity. Beguiled by Paul into believing that they are emancipated from "the Law" by believing "Jesus’s Gospel of Grace," in reality by rejecting the Towrah’s guidance and therefore Yahowsha’s path, Christians are controlled by the religion that claimed to free them. Moreover, all who follow Yahowsha’ are Torah observant because He was Torah observant. It is nonsensical to believe that one can reject the former without also denying the latter.

The Towrah’s prescriptions for living, and its means to resolve disputes, when approached by those embracing the terms of the Covenant, not only free us from all forms of human oppression, they bequeath Yahowah’s promised benefits: eternal life, vindication, adoption, enrichment, and empowerment. This is the Way of Yahowsha’, the path He not only followed, but also encouraged Shim’own and all of us to walk along with Him, learning from Him along the way.

This explains why Yahowsha’ encouraged Shim’own of Yahowah’s Mercy to be wary of the man who would try to put his own yoke upon him. It would lead not to life, as Paul would promise, but instead to the death of billions – to the greatest pandemic the world would ever know: Pauline Christianity. And this is why Yahowah said "She’owl is the plague of death."

The Hebrew equivalent of the Greek thanatos that Yahowsha’ almost assuredly communicated to Shim’own is deber. It speaks of "diseased statements," of "words which plague," of "pandemic death resulting from a spoken or written message." Deber is not only associated with "divine judgment," but it is also a "thorn" and a "sharp pointed stick," also known as a "goad" – things which are directly associated with Sha’uwl and his poison pen. Further cementing deber’s place in this discussion, it depicts a "pasture where flocks of sheep are grazed." Therefore, Yahowsha’ was not predicting Shim’own’s ultimate demise, but instead the deadly plague that would be unleashed upon the world by his rival – Sha’uwl.

Unfortunately, as was the case with much of what Yahowsha’ told His Disciples, Yahowchanan, the eyewitness who chronicled this conversation, may not have understood its prophetic intent. If he actually wrote the commentary which was added much later, then he incorrectly assumed, especially with Yahowsha’s crucifixion vivid in his mind, that the reference to "ekteneis tas cheipas sou – you will extend your hands" was a prophetic portrayal of the nature of Shim’own’s death. But in context, it’s obvious that this isn’t possible because those who are nailed to a wooden beam become immovable, and thus cannot be taken to a place they do not intend. Moreover, since we don’t actually know how Shim’own died, it’s likely that the commentary was added much later by a scribe to keep the prediction from appearing irrelevant. And since I don’t suppose Yahowsha’ squandered His last opportunity to talk directly to His Disciples by conveying an immaterial message, I’m inclined to do as we have done, and ascertain exactly what He was predicting. And in this regard, we were given many useful clues – some of which we have already deployed to identify our villain.

The most compelling words which lead us to the perpetrator are: zosei, oisei, semaino, doxasei, and akoloutheo. On the surface they mean "gird," "move," "clearly predict," "opinion attributed," and "follow," respectively. But to fully appreciate the prophecy, we will have to dig a little deeper – just as we did with thanatos.

Zosei, translated "will gird you, placing a yoke on you to control you," is from zugos, which means "to tie together so as to yoke, to apply a burden, or to enslave." Those who are zosei and zugos will find a strap fastened around their midst by someone who is trying to control and manipulate them. Yahowsha’ is translated using the term to depict the burden of troublesome religious laws and commands which were imposed by man. It was also used by Shim’own in his debate against Sha’uwl during the Yaruwshalaim Summit.

Remember Acts 15:10: "Now, therefore, why do you test and tempt (peirazo – do you (speaking to Sha’uwl and Barnabas) look for mistakes and try to exploit and trap) God, to place upon and impose a yoke (zugos – a mechanism for controlling the movement of animals) upon the neck of the Disciples which neither our fathers nor we were given the authority to accept, support, put up with, or endure in our walk?" (Acts 15:10) I suspect that Shim’own used zugos expressly because of Yahowsha’s warning seventeen years earlier.

"He will move," was transcribed in the third person singular, affirming that there is one solitary male individual in the Disciple’s future who would attempt to manipulate "the Rock," dragging Yahowsha’s Apostle to a place he had not intended. And we find this occurrence bluntly conveyed in Galatians, with Sha’uwl condemning Shim’own and pushing the Disciple out of Antioch, driving him back to Yaruwshalaym. Sha’uwl’s rhetoric and force of personality, especially the devotion he seemed to garner initially with his followers, caused Shim’own to cower as he had before on Passover, and even retreat, leaving Yahowsha’s flock to be devoured by a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Keep in mind, Yahowsha’, as He had before, let Shim’own know that this would occur.