This is my 90th monthly teaching letter and I will continue with William Finck’s an Open Letter Responding To H. Graber, where Graber makes all kinds of harsh allegations against the apostle Paul. You will need #89 in this series, or you will not fully understand this one:

 To continue by examining another part of this paragraph at <F>, I will discuss his lies concerning Galatians 4:14. Quoting my own translation of this verse: “And of my trial in the flesh you did not despise or loathe, but as a messenger of Yahweh you accepted me, like Yahshua Christ.” It may be proven (start by reading 4:15) that Paul’s “trial in the flesh” was his failed eyesight (see also Gal. 6:11), and he was here commending the Galatians for treating him respectably, even though he had such a disability. Paul is not elevating himself to the position of Christ, but rather is commending the Galatians for abiding by the words of Christ, expressed at Matthew 10:40: “He that receiveth you receiveth me”! Paul is being fair in his assessment. Is Mr. Graber? Who is a liar, but H. Graber? It is obvious that Graber does not know his Scripture, yet makes many accusations. The jews did the same thing to Christ!

<Reference G> H. Graber states: “WORD OF GOD FIRST TO THE JEWS: In the above scriptures, Acts 13:46-47, Paul says that it was neccessary [sic.] that the word of God should first be preached to the Jews (Yehuwdiy). (Here we must understand that the words Jew and Israel are not synonymous.) We read in I Cor. 9:20, ‘And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews;’ We have no evidence in the Bible that Jesus Christ ever done [sic.] this, to the contrary, Jesus said, speaking of the Jews in Matt. 13:10-13, ‘And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not; from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.’ Also in Matt. [sic. 13:] 34-35, ‘All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, saying, I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundations of the world.’ Does this sound like Jesus Christ was trying to gain the Yehuwdiy (Jews)? Of course not, Jesus knew that the Jews are the children of the devil as He tells us in John 8:44. We read in Jude: 4, ‘For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.’ Certainly Jesus Christ knew who the Yehuwdiy are, and I believe that the learned Paul did too.”

William Finck answers <G>: Now to come to the paragraph marked <Reference G>. There is much deception on Graber’s part here! First Graber continues, in good catholic tradition, to confuse the Greek word Ἰουδαῖος, or properly “Judaean”, with the term “Jew.” Then, because Graber himself is confused, he accuses Paul of wanting to preach to Canaanites and Edomites! Now, Paul explains thoroughly the difference between Jacob and Esau (see Romans 9:1-13), and is very aware of those children of Cain masquerading as Judah (Acts 13:6-10, 19:13, 2 Thes. 2). Why does Graber not criticize John, who recorded our Redeemer as saying: “Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of (τῶν Ἰουδαίων) the Judaeans” (where the A.V. has “of the Jews”). Does Graber hold John to a different standard than Luke? Seemingly! Does Graber expect that the same word has some mysteriously different meaning if uttered by Yahshua rather than Paul? Surely! Who is a liar, but Mr. Graber?

I could write at length on why Paul felt that he had to bring the gospel to those Israelites (who at that time were calling themselves Judaeans) under the law first, who were mostly of true Judah and Benjamin, and then to those lost Israelites, the Nations of Genesis 17:6 and 35:11, though that is far beyond the scope of my purpose here. To read 1 Kings 11:36 and Zech. 12:7 should be sufficient for the time being.

To address Graber’s duplicity in the paragraph marked <G> of his twisted document: Paul spoke amongst the dispersion of Israel, lost and Judaean alike, in plain language. Yahshua spoke amongst the Judaeans of Palestine in parables. Paul’s mission was to live long enough to adequately spread the message of Redemption among lost Israel. Yahshua Christ’s mission was to announce that same gospel which Paul spread, He being its originator, and then to die at the hands of His enemies, and to live again, accomplishing our Redemption. Two different missions require two different methods. Paul also used many parables and analogies in his letters, which surely Graber and his ilk do not understand, because if they did they wouldn’t be critical of Paul!

Graber quotes Jude 4: “For certain men crept in unawares ...” yet ignores the nearly identical words of Paul at Gal. 2:4 “And that because of false brethren unawares brought in ...” and Acts 20:29: “... after my departing [from Asia Minor] shall grievous wolves enter in among you ...” Who is a deceiver, but H. Graber? And a liar too!

<Reference H> H. Graber states: “THE GENTILES: We note that Paul tells us in Acts 13:46-47, that, ‘the Lord commanded us saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles,’ And we also read in Rom. 11:13, ‘For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:’ Let us also read Rom. 15:16, ‘That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.’ There is no place in scriptures or secular history that tells us where Paul received this authority, except by his own claim and that of his companion Luke, who was a gentile. NOW, let us read what Jesus had to say in this matter. We read, Jesus commanding His Disciples, in Matt. 10:5-6, ‘These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’ (The white caucasian [sic.], anglo-saxon [sic.], celtic [sic.], germanic [sic., should be capitalized] people of the world, the TRUE Israelites of the Bible!) We also read in Matt. 15:24, ‘But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’ Very clearly, by the words of Jesus Himself, He tells us that He did not come for the Gentiles. WHY? Because Jesus came for salvation for His children that had the original sin imputed upon them, and thereby had become prisoners of Satan after death. The original sin was only imputed upon the seed of Adam, and not upon the Gentiles or Jews! I am sure the learned apostle Paul knew this. SO WHO ARE YOU GOING TO BELIEVE, JESUS OR THE PROFFESSED [sic.] APOSTLE PAUL?”

William Finck answers <H>: Here, in the paragraph marked <H>, is Graber’s biggest and most obvious lie! First, Graber criticizes Paul for going to so-called ‘Gentiles’ – a word that no true scholar should even use, and then Graber admits that “the True Israelites of the Bible” are the “white Caucasian, Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Germanic people of the world” [though he must have missed or slept through his third-grade school-classes the days when he would have been taught that these words should be capitalized.] Well, here Graber is right, but fails to mention that Paul wrote to the Galatians, better written “Gauls” (see my Galatians translation and the accompanying notes), and also mentioned the Scythians. It is the Galatians (synonymous with Kelts) and Scythians who are the parent races of all the “Anglo-Saxon, Celtic, Germanic people”, as is demonstrated by history. But Paul also went throughout Asia Minor, in his time inhabited mostly by Trojans, Phoenicians, Romans, Danaan and Dorian Greeks, all Israelites who left Israel during the 1,000 years between the sojourn in Egypt and the Assyrian deportations, and also by Thracian and Ionian Japhethites and Kelts (Galatians). And Paul also went to Greece, inhabited by Phoenicians, Danaan and Dorian Greeks (all Israelites) and Ionian Greeks (Javan, son of Japheth), and Paul went to Italy, inhabited by those same Greeks and Phoenicians and Trojan-Romans, and Paul likely went to Spain, inhabited by Phoenicians, Tartessians (Japhethites) and Kelts (deported Israel), and except for these tribes of Japheth (see Genesis 9:27) and the Semitic Lydians of Asia Minor (who are also the Etruscans of Italy), all of the people Paul went to and wrote to were also Israelites and all took part and have a share in the promises to Jacob, Isaac and Abraham. Only since Paul’s time have these southern European nations been invaded and mongrelized. When Paul was there – as archaeology fully proves – they were all “white Caucasian nations.” H. Graber, again: a liar and a deceiver! I wonder, does the “H” stand for Hymie, or Huckster? Paul never uttered the silly non-word “gentiles”! Rather, Paul used only the Greek words τὰ ἔθνη (ta ethnê) “the nations”, and knew that he was going to those same nations of Genesis 17:6 and 35:11, which nearly every one of his epistles proves in multiple ways.

I call “gentile” a non-word because in our language it is just that, not an English word. Rather, “gentile” was borrowed from the Latin language, and assigned a corrupted meaning, “Non-Jew”, which it never bore in Latin! The English translators chose the Latin gentilis, “gentile”, for their corrupt translation of the original Greek word ἔθνος (ethnos) because Jerome, when he made the Latin Vulgate, used the word gentilis to translate ἔθνος into Latin. Jerome, however, may well have had more wisdom than the later English translators, since gentilis is defined “family, hereditary; tribal; national ... clansman, kinsman” by The New College Latin & English Dictionary, and describes a people with some degree of relationship to each other. The Junior Classic Latin Dictionary published by Wilcox & Follett Company in 1945 defines gentilis: “of the same clan or race”, surely a word consistent with all scripture (Amos 3:2, Matt. 15:24 et al.) and nothing like the corrupted catholic interpretation of the word! To be honest, ἔθνος must be translated into a like English term when translating the Greek scriptures into English, and no borrowed and corrupted third-language term should be used, especially when that word’s true sense is ignored completely!

Now if Paul did not bring the gospel of Yahshua Christ to the promised nations of Jacob Israel (on book and parchments – i.e. 2 Tim. 4:13), then who did?!?! The other apostles?!?! If so, where are their letters, besides the seven brief epistles we have?!?! Although surely they all had their own function to perform, and I criticize them not, it was Paul whose work was best remembered and preserved, and it was Paul who risked his neck in Anatolia, Thrace, Macedon, Greece, Rome, and possibly even Spain and Britain, and his writings are still reaching out to the Israel-nations of today. Paul went nowhere but unto where history separately tells us the Israel-sheep were! There was no Paul in Egypt, China, India, Arabia or Ethiopia, places much safer and out of the way of jewish persecution, and far better to pollute Christianity if that were one’s mission. Anyone who criticizes Paul is a liar! H. Graber is a liar!

<Reference I> H. Graber states: “GENEAOLOGY [sic.]: The apostle Paul tells us in I Tim. I:4, ‘Neither give heed to fables and endless geneaologies [sic.], which minister questions rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.’ Again we read in Titus 3:9, ‘But avoid foolish questions, and geneaologies [sic.], and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.’ IF this be true, why did Almighty God give us the examples in the Old Testement [sic.], and why was the geneaology [sic.] of Jesus Christ documented in Matthew chapter I, reckoning Jesus Christ back to Adam? Did Jesus ever tell us that geneaologies [sic.] were vain? The Old Testement [sic.] gives us (12) times that the children of God were reckoned by geneaology [sic.], and purged of any and all adulterated seed. Read Ezra 2:62, ‘These sought their register among those that were reckoned by geneaology [sic.], but they were not found: therefore were they, as polluted, put from the priesthood.’ People that do not understand IDENTITY, cannot comprehend this truth.”

William Finck answers <I>: On to the next paragraph, which was originally on page 3 in Graber’s polluted document, and Paul’s exhortations to Titus and Timothy concerning “fables and endless genealogies” (1 Tim. 1:4) and “foolish questions and genealogies” (Titus 3:9), these were NOT, as Graber the deceiver insinuates, admonitions by Paul to forgo or ignore concerns over one’s racial purity. To the contrary, Paul calls Titus “a purely bred child according to the common belief” (Titus 1:4, my translation) which is all Titus had to go by, his being Greek (a “lost” Israelite) and no true genealogical records being in his possession! Paul also addressed Timothy as a “purely bred child in faith” (1 Tim. 1:2, my translation) and Timothy being half-Greek and half-Judaean (Acts 16:1) the average Greek or Judaean, being ignorant of Greek roots, may have considered him a bastard.

To comprehend Paul’s admonitions concerning genealogies, we must understand that Paul is writing to Greeks, men schooled in Greek thought and literature, and is writing on Greek terms (which is what he is explaining at 1 Cor. 9:20-21 and which Graber understands not, that Paul being educated in Judaism and Greek literature, had the ability to speak to each on their own terms!) If anyone has read Homer, Hesiod, and the many other Greek poets and playwrights, and otherwise respectable Historians such as Strabo, Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus who often repeat such fables, only then can that one comprehend and appreciate the Greek idea of genealogy, and Paul’s admonitions here. Paul is certainly not condemning the likes of Esdras, and the Levitical record keepers of ancient Israel, but rather he is condemning Hesiod and the likes of his Theogony, and the many similar works which account for the races of men in various genealogies where those races are said to have descended from various pagan gods and goddesses such as Zeus, Apollo, Athena, Heracles, etc. Such accounts were quite intricate, repeated by poet and historian alike, and absolutely vain.

Who, then, can comprehend the Bible without understanding these things? Nobody! To properly understand the Bible, one must study language, history and archaeology, and the other literature of the periods of the Bible. Not to do so is to be susceptible to the lies of men such as H. Graber and Scott Nelson!

As for “contentions and strivings about the law” Paul warns Titus not to get caught up in the same such deceit which we find in the Talmud, a reflection of thought in Judaism of the period, and a perverted web of deceit and evil indeed! It is obvious that Graber, by his criticism of the statement, can not or is not willing to distinguish between “strivings about the law” and the law itself! Graber is as deceitful as those who wrote the Talmud!

This closes the sixteenth page of [my original handwritten] comments which by now I hope you agree have entirely discredited Mr. Graber. Yet I’m just coming to the bottom of page 3 of his document, and I have 5 pages to address yet, and address them I will, even if I must write twice sixteen pages again. I only hope the reader will be able to share this with others, who may be weak in the faith, and caught up in Graber’s deceit, and that they benefit somewhat by it. I also hope the reader will see through these empty and vain attacks upon the Truth which are engineered by Graber and his ilk. Anyone with only a surface knowledge of the Scripture is easily taken away by purveyors of deceit. A great difference there is, between hard study and casual reading, and then the source materials one uses make a world of difference also.

<Reference J> H. Graber states: “THE LAW: The doctrine of the professed apostle Paul very emphatically negates the Laws of God. BY WHAT AUTHORITY? We read in Rom. 1:17, ‘For therein is righeousness [sic] of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, the just shall live by faith.’ (Not the law) <Reference J-2> Here we need to point out how Paul many times misquotes the Prophets of the Old Testement [sic.]. <Reference J continued> This is quoted from Hab. 2:4, which reads, ‘the just shall live by his faith.’ Again Paul says in Rom. 6:14, ‘For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.’ Certainly we can understand this, because the law was not given to the Gentiles, but neither did Jesus Christ offer salvation to the Gentiles, because they do not need it, for the original sin was not imputed upon them. Eph. 2:15, ‘Having abolished in his flesh the enemity [sic.], even the law of commandments contained in ordinances;’ Rom. 4:15-16, ‘Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is there is no transgression. Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all.’ Paul is telling us that if we repeal the laws of God, then there can be no sin. That is the same as if we repealed all criminal law, then we would have no crime! WHAT DOES JESUS TELL US CONCERNING THE LAW OF GOD? Jesus tells us in Matt, 5:17-18, ‘Think not that I am come to destroy, but to fulfil [sic.]. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.’ (emphasis added) Has heaven and earth passed, or did Jesus change His mind? We also read in John 14:15, ‘If ye love me, keep my commandments,’ And again, in I John 2:4, ‘He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.’ WHO DO YOU BELIEVE, JESUS OR THE PROFESSED APOSTLE PAUL? Paul tells us over and over again that the law was negated by the cross. If that is true, Why did Jesus Christ not give us one word of evidence that this is so?”

William Finck answers <J>: Beginning with the first few lines of the paragraph marked <Reference J> (which was the last three lines of page 3, and continuing into page 4 of Graber’s original document), Graber makes a treacherous attack upon Paul’s views concerning the law. Graber states that “Paul very emphatically negates the Laws of God”, which is a vile lie, for Paul clearly states at Romans 3:31 (from the A.V.): “Do we make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea we establish the law.” Graber is very short of understanding, and so that you may see what I speak of here, I will take the time to explain a few things concerning the law under the New Covenant.

First, as can be witnessed by history, the Levitical laws in the Pentateuch, based upon but not a perfect image of Yahweh’s law (i.e. Matt. 19:8) certainly had their purpose, and still do: for we see today the greater part of the enemies of Yahweh, the seed of the serpent, have trapped themselves in the Old Testament law – and not having the Faith of the Anointed – they have voluntarily condemned themselves! Both Paul and James as you will see make allusions to this. Both jew and muslim claim to believe and accept the Old Testament, and all (and they are nearly all descendants of Cain) are condemned by it!

Now it is certain that Yahshua Christ came not to destroy, but to fulfill, both the law and the prophets. Now, let us see just what the prophets say concerning the New Covenant, which all agree that Yahshua Christ, Yahweh Himself, compacted with the children of Israel:

• Jer. 31:31-33: “Behold, the days come, saith Yahweh, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers ... which my covenant they brake ... But this shall be the covenant that I will make ... I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts ...”

• Isa. 51:7: “Hearken unto me, ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart is my law ...”

• Jer. 32:39-40: “And I will give them one heart, and one way ... And I will make an everlasting covenant with them ... I will put my fear in their hearts ...”

• Ezek. 11:19-20: “And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh: That they may walk in my statutes, and keep mine ordinances ...”

• Deut. 30:6: “And Yahweh thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed ...”

• Jer. 4:4: “Circumcise yourselves to Yahweh, and take away the foreskins of your heart ...”

Now it should be evident, that if the laws of Yahweh were to be written in our hearts [a promise made only to Israel] then there is no longer a need for the written Levitical law, for the matters of the Law, encapsulated in the 10 commandments which Yahweh Himself illustrated (i.e. Mark 10, Luke 18), are common sense to OUR RACE! Paul explains these things in Hebrews 7, and in Romans 7:6 and 2:29 where he explains that we keep the law in spirit, and not in letter. The jews pretend to keep the law in letter, yet their Talmud is filled with many devices of “reasoning” and vile ways to get around the law! Know that even in modern litigation according to the laws of man, that courts often cite the difference between the “letter of the law” and the “spirit of the law” and realize that Paul is explaining that same thing here to the Romans.

So it should be obvious, that the removal of the yoke of the Levitical law is a matter of prophecy along with the New Covenant – [For Yahshua says “For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light”, Matt. 11:30] – and Paul explains this very thing over and over, but using different methods for Romans and Hebrews, since they have different perspectives. Where Paul writes at Romans 2:14-15 “For when the Nations, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law ... which show the work of the law written in their hearts” is Paul not demonstrating that the Romans – themselves a part of “lost” Israel – are indeed Israelites to whom such a promise was made? Compare this to the words of the prophets quoted above! And where Paul tells the Corinthians at 2 Corinthians 3:2-3 “Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshly tables of the heart.” Is Paul not showing the fulfillment of the words of the prophets: that the New Covenant was being brought to Israel, whom the Dorian Greeks also descended from (as I can demonstrate in history and archaeology)? Read Paul’s quote of Jer. 31:33 to the Hebrews at 10:16. If one studies prophecy, one must come to the conclusion that the children of Israel are NOT bound to the written law, yet they should seek to obey it voluntarily. This is what Paul explains. The children of Satan have bound themselves to the written law, and never being able to fulfill it, they have condemned themselves!

Now this I can go further to demonstrate, but what I have written here should be sufficient. The children of Israel following the law in Spirit, and not in letter (the written law), is in itself a fulfillment of the law and the prophets, which Christ came to accomplish, and did! To deny such is to deny Him. Paul does not deny Christ: H. Graber does! Yet I will discuss a few more things concerning Paul and the law.

At Colossians 2:14 Paul states that the ordinances, not the entire law, were nailed to the cross. These are all of the rituals, sacrifices, oblations and such. Daniel 9:27 prophecies that when Yahshua confirms the covenant, “the sacrifices and the oblation [He shall cause] to cease.” These are what Paul calls elsewhere “the works of the law”, which in Ferrar Fenton’s translation (and in my own) you will find translated “the rituals of the law”, which are precisely what Paul means. That these were done away with are also a matter of the law and the prophets, and it was NOT written on our hearts to continue them! Of course, the catholics have a schedule of rituals that they have substituted, none with any foundation in Scripture (not even water baptism!). So enough of this. Now we will see that James and Paul agree on the law!

An examination of the epistle of James, compared to Paul’s epistles, demonstrate that James and Paul were in complete cohesion regarding the law, and so was Peter. Here I will demonstrate such.

• Romans 2:13 (see 2:14-15 quoted above): “For not the hearers of the law are just before Yahweh, but the doers of the law shall be justified.”

• James 1:22-24: “But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.”

• Galatians 2:4: “And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ ...”

• Galatians 5:1: “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.”

• Galatians 5:13-14: “For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh [i.e., to follow lust], but by love serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself’.”

• 1 Peter 2:15-16: “For so is the will of Yahweh, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of Yahweh.”

• 2 Peter 2:1, 19: “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying Yahweh that bought them ... While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.”

• James 1:25: “But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.”

• James 2:10: “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.”

• Romans 2:25: “For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.”

• Galatians 5:2-3: “Behold ... if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing ... every man that is circumcised ... he is a debtor to do the whole law.”

• James 2:12: There is a problem with the A.V. translation of this verse. The word μέλλοντες is treated as a Substantive and translated “they that shall be”, which is only necessitated if the word were preceded by an Article, which it is not. Also, the A.V. places an Article before “law” which does not exist in the Greek, hence here is my own translation: “Thusly you speak, and thusly you do: as going to be judged by a law of liberty.”

• Romans 14:10: “But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.”

• James 4:11-12: “Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge. There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?”

So with this it must be evident, Paul taught liberty from the letter of the Old Testament law, and to follow it in deed and in Spirit, and these same things were foretold by the prophets, and also taught by James and by Peter! And who can read this, then deny such? Now compare Luke’s account of James’ and Peter’s opinions concerning Paul’s teaching and the law at Acts 15, and now that you see that this by no means conflicts with Paul’s epistles, with James’ or Peter’s epistles, with the prophets, or with the gospels, what may one say? Surely Paul said much more concerning the law, and it should be examined, but none of it is with fault. Paul may only be attacked in ignorance, or by those caught up in the deceit and devices of Yahweh’s enemies: among whom I count H. Graber, and Scott Nelson! [End of the second episode in this series, with more to come by William Finck.]

Note again, this is a personal letter Finck wrote to a friend which is here presented as an open letter exposing H. Graber, and will be continued in the next teaching letter.