Have you ‘FALLEN IN LOVE’ With Yashua Messiah (Jesus Christ)?

OK, this will be a short one, just in case I have to go to the loo in order to throw up due to diabolical vileness of this subject matter!

What a question eh? Why am I asking it? I am asking it, because I see it everywhere on wretched Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religious Yewtube threads. Most, I have to admit, are from silly delusional women commenting in the comments section and who all sign off with that equally irritating, gratuitous and meaningless slogan: “God bless you”, another of my pet hates!

Now as it happens I was on a Yewtube thread today (9th June 2018) entitled: “Rabbis Call Him the Most Dangerous Man in America! – Frank Eiklor.” Published on the: “Sid Roth’s It’s Supernatural!” Yewtube Channel.

Now I have listened to this Jewish Sid Roth character before and he is definitely a blind guide, and this Frank Eiklor fella is also a blind guide, but which blind guide is leading the other, I have no idea, but rest assured an empty ditch should soon be accommodating both of them quite comfortably in the near future if it hasn’t done so already.

However, I have digressed slightly so back to this satanic video. Now approximately five minutes and forty seconds into it, which consists of Eiklor telling us about his childhood and early introduction to the US military, we then get to this point where he states, and I quote:

“….here is someone with all power, here is The One who said He was The Creator of the whole universe, putting on flesh, disguised as a hu-man being, as Messiah, as Saviour, and yeah, I’ll be very candid with you, I FELL IN LOVE like no one had ever FALLEN MORE IN LOVE!”

Can you believe this stuff? The Jew, Sid Roth then comes back with the equally evil line:

“As a curiosity I have to ask you this question, being raised as a Jew hater, how did you handle the fact that Jesus was Jewish? (See link below)

This evil garbage video lasts for nearly 26 minutes – I could only bear half of it.

So this deluded fraud claims that he ‘FELL IN LOVE’ (as in a romance) with Yashua Messiah, not that he had been called by The Father and was drawn or dragged to Yashua Messiah.

John 6:44 No MAN can come to me, except The Father which hath sent me DRAW (DRAG) him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 6:65 And He said, Therefore said I unto you, That no MAN can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

Moreover what are we to deduce from this wickedness? Was this a Jewlywood sodomite’s romance he was experiencing here? ‘cos I’ll tell you straight, this son of The Devil blind guide was NOT experiencing a Fatherly call.

Furthermore, to claim that he had ‘fallen in love’ as in romantically ‘fallen in love’ with Yashua Messiah makes this ‘love’ a vile evil blasphemy. Why is that? Quite simply because it would be INCESTUOUS in nature!!!

Godly Fatherly or Brotherly love, from the Greek word ‘agapao’ is not ‘falling in love’ – period – fullstop – end of!!

Mark 12:30-31 And thou shalt love (agapao) The Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is The First Commandment. 31 And the second is like this, Thou shalt love (agapao) thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other Commandment greater than these.

From Strong’s Concordance:

Love – G25 – ἀγαπάω – agapaō – ag-ap-ah’-o -Perhaps from ἄγαν agan (much; or compare [H5689]); to love (in a social or moral sense): – (be-) love (-ed). Compare G5368.

1 Corinthians 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity (agape love) I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

From Strong’s once more:

Love – G26 – ἀγάπη – agapē – ag-ah’-pay – From G25; love, that is, benevolence; specifically (plural) a love feast (offering): – (feast of) charity ([-ably]), love.

Now let’s be clear about this, for to ‘fall in love’ would immediately infer a romantic connotation, which would then necessitate the Greek word ‘eros’ for that kind of love. This is a word which cannot be found in the Greek New Testament.

So what does this tell us? It tells us that satanic mainstream so-called Christians, those of the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion, have erroneously romanticised their relationship with Yashua Messiah (Jesus Christ). This, my friends, can only be a demonic perversion of OUR TRUE RELATIONSHIP WITH HIM as our King, High Priest, Comforter, Master, Saviour, Friend and eldest Brother!!

Whatever you do, do not be sucked into this subtle deceptive wickedness.

Brother Charles in brotherly agapao love!

https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/2016/06/13/was-jesus-christ-a-jew/

Advertisements

The JEWS are The TARES!

The Parable of The Wheat and The Tares

The Jews are The Tares!!!!??? How on earth did you work that out, I hear you say? Quite easily, because once you know what a Tare is, you will then know it can only apply to The Jews and to no other race or ethnic group on the face of this earth!

So first things first, and let’s copy the relevant Holy Scriptures here:

Matthew 13:24-30 (MCV) Another parable put He forth unto them, saying, The Kingdom of God is likened unto a man which sowed good seed (White Caucasian Israelites) in his field: 25 But while men (White Caucasian Israelites) slept, his enemy (Satan) came and sowed Tares (The Jews) among The Wheat, (White Caucasian Israelites) and went his way. 26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit (White Caucasian Israelite offspring), then appeared The Tares (The Jews) also. 27 So the servants (Those AWAKE) of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed (White Caucasian Israelites) in thy field? from whence then hath it Tares (Jews)? 28 He said unto them, An enemy (Satan) hath done this. The servants (those AWAKE) said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? 29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up The Tares (The Jews), ye root up also The Wheat (The White Caucasian Israelites) with them. 30 Let both grow together until THE HARVEST: and IN THE TIME OF HARVEST I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first The Tares (The Jews), and bind them in bundles to BURN THEM (A REAL HOLOCAUST): but gather The Wheat (The White Caucasian Israelites) into my barn.

Above, you can see a True version of Matthew 13:24-30 hence I call it the MCV version or Messenger Charles’ Version, for, and on behalf of, Yashua Messiah.

Right, now for second things second. What is a Tare? for we need to know what it is before we go blazing forth in exuberant error as so many do! A Tare is a weed, but not an ordinary kind of weed, for that would make it very easy to spot and it would stand out like a dollop of mud on an otherwise spotless white suit – the field of Wheat. So make note, these devious tricky Tares were only visible amongst The Wheat to those who were able to spot them, that is, the awakened servants of The Farmer.

OK so what kind of weed were these Tares? Easy, they were a counterfeit type of wheat otherwise known as ‘bearded darnels’. And from Strong’s Concordance we get this:

Tare – G2215 – ζιζάνιον – zizanion – dziz-an’-ee-on – Of uncertain origin; darnel or false grain: – tares.

In the Latin it is known as: ‘Lolium temulentum’ and it is POISONOUS. From Wiki: “Lolium temulentum, typically known as darnel, poison darnel, darnel ryegrass or cockle,” – how approppriate IS THAT!!?? (See link below.)

So here we have a very deceptive weed (a false grain) that looks very much like The Wheat amongst which it is sown and yet is no such thing and it’s highly poisonous as well. So what does this tell us?

It tell us that The Jews, like the Tares, look like wheat, that is, they look white but are, in Truth, not Wheat, that is, not white and nor do they see themselves as white, even though they look white and as confirmed for us here:

“Jews in America struggled for decades to become white. Now we must give up whiteness to fight racism. Let’s teach our children that we are, in fact, not white, but simply Jewish.

We must cease to consider ourselves to be part of the social construct of whiteness, despite all the white privilege that America affords us, privilege that eluded many of our parents and grandparents. Starting in this new year of 5776, we must teach our children that we are, in fact, not white, but simply Jewish.”

— Gil Steinlauf September 22 2015 Gil Steinlauf is the senior rabbi at Adas Israel Congregation in Washington, D.C.

“You’re on the endangered list [White people]. And unlike, say, the bald eagle or some exotic species of muskrat, you are not worth saving. In forty years or so, maybe fewer, there won’t be any more white people around.

— The Jew, Tim Wise

“If white men were not complaining, it would be an indication we weren’t succeeding and making the inroads that we are.”

— Arthur Sulzberger Jr., Jew owner of The New York Times.

The goal of abolishing the white race is, on its face, so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed WHITE SUPREMACISTS….Make no mistake about it: we intend to keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females too, until the social construct known as the white race is destroyed.”

– Noel Ignatiev, Jewish Harvard professor and co-founder of ‘Race Traitor’ magazine.

“Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity. The key to solving the problems of our age is to abolish the white race, the abolishment of the privileges of the white skin”

– Noel Ignatiev, Jewish Harvard professor and co-founder of ‘Race Traitor’ magazine.

As we can see from the five nasty HATE FILLED quotes above, Jews do not consider themselves to be a part of The White Caucasian Israelite Race – Sermites, nor of any other white Semitic race, for example, the Assyrian Germans – Semites, and wish to see its total demise and/or annihilation. Not only that, but from this we can easily deduce that Anti-Semitism re the Jews is just a lying scam. and it has ALWAYS been a lying scam. The Jews are Hamitic Canaanites and carry the brown skin genes of Ham, Naamah (Noah’s Cainite wife) and the incestuous Canaan and not the white skin gene of Adam, Noah and Shem = JEWS ARE NOT SEMITES!!

OK, finally we have Yashua Messiah explaining the Parable of The Wheat and The Tares to His Learners (disciples):

Matthew 13:36-43 (MCV) Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and His disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. 37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth The Good Seed (White Caucasian Israelites) is The Son of Man (Yashua Messiah); 38 The field is the world; The Good Seed are The Children of The Kingdom (White Caucasian Israelites and others of Mankind); but The Tares are The Children of The Wicked One (Satan’s offspring The Jews, and all other Canaanites – hu-man kind); 39 The enemy that sowed them is The Devil; The Harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. 40 As therefore The Tares are gathered and burned in the fire (A REAL HOLOCAUST); so shall it be in the end of this world. 41 The Son of Man shall send forth His angels, and they shall gather out of His Kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; 42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in The Kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolium_temulentum

Companion reading to the above article:

https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/did-eve-have-sex-with-the-devil-or-did-she-just-eat-some-fruit-part-1/

https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/were-abraham-isaac-and-jacob-jews-part-1-the-beginning/

https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/were-abraham-isaac-and-jacob-jews-genesis-38-royal-judahites-and-the-canaanite-jews-part-1-of-2/

https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/2016/06/13/was-jesus-christ-a-jew/

Did Yashua Messiah (Jesus Christ) Say: I AM NOT GOOD and I AM NOT GOD?

The short, but very substantial, story of the Wealthy Young Ruler.

Now this subject is yet another of those ‘pain in the neck’ subjects that blaspheming Judaisers and satanic gnat strainers, alike, try to spiritually garrote me with, but, I hasten to add, they always fail. So let’s copy and paste here the Holy Scriptures that they then pollute with their perverted reasoning and satanic Judaising nonsense:

Matthew 19:16-17 (KJV) And, behold, one came and said unto Him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have Eternal Life? 17 And He said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Mark 10:17-18 (KJV) And when He was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to Him, and asked Him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit Eternal Life? 18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

Luke 18:18-19 (KJV) And a certain ruler asked Him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit Eternal Life? 19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.

Now the first issue that these mongrel dogs will attempt to make mileage out of is the monotheism BS value that they think these verses possess. They think these verses PROVE that God is ONE and that Yashua Messiah was clearly stating that He was was not God, but is this TRUE? NO a thousand times NO!!! But hang on Yashua Messiah said: “none is good, save one, that is, God.” So how do you get around that, I hear you say? Quite easily is the answer to that and it all depends upon your understanding of the word ‘GOD’ in the New Testament.

However, in order to understand the word ‘God’ in the New Testament we have to understand the word ‘God’ in the Old Testament FIRST, for the Godhead never changes. We also have the issue of the Greek language of the New Testament, for it is too vague in its description of God, unlike the Hebrew definition of the Old Testament. Therefore from Strong’s Concordance we get this:

God – H430
אלהים – elohym – el-o-heemPlural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God[head]; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: – angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty. (Square brackets mine)

god – H433
אלהּ אלוהּ
‘ĕlôahh ‘ĕlôahh – el-o’-ah, el-o’-ah (The second form is rare); probably prolonged (emphatically) from H410; a deity or the deity: – god. See H430.

This ‘eloah’ singular deity would be used when describing Satan, who is the only solitary god (‘eloah’) of this world.

So from this proof we now know for sure that the Godhead is two distinct Spiritual beings, not one, other than their being number one with none above.

Moreover, if we now move onto The New Testament we have a Greek word being used for the word ‘God’ and not a Hebrew word. However, does that mean the nature of the Godhead changes? Do they become a different Godhead just because a new word is in use? No way, so what gives? The word ‘theos’ is what gives instead of ‘eloheem’ or ‘elohim’ but the plural nature of the Godhead remains the same. From Strong’s Concordance once more:

God – G2316
θεός – theos – theh’-os – Of uncertain affinity; a deity, especially (with G3588) the supreme Divinity; figuratively a magistrate; by Hebraism very: – X exceeding, God, god [-ly, -ward].

In ancient Greece there were only ‘gods’ ‘plural’ because the Greeks were polytheists and worshipped many gods, not two alone. However, there was no need for a singular Greek word for a god because there was no singular god in polytheistic Greek worship. This means the Greek word ‘theos’ did the job just fine when describing the true Duality Godhead = more than one!!

Matthew 1:23 (KJV) Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. (Emphasis mine)

OK, so here we can plainly see that Yashua Messiah is described as being: “God with us”, that is, in the flesh so, in turn, the Old Testament plural Duality Godhead ‘Elohim’ is also still with us with The Father in heaven and The Son on earth in the flesh and, therefore, still Two God’s.

So this brings us to our little conundrum of: “there is none good but one, that is, God:”

Now what was Yashua Messiah actually saying here? For we know for sure that He wasn’t saying God is one; He certainly wasn’t saying He wasn’t God and He certainly wasn’t saying He wasn’t good either, even though most will mistakenly think He was saying that. So what was He really saying? Well, first of all, He was telling us plainly, and those there present, that He was God in the flesh as part of the Godhead, but without them realising it. This is due to The Truth that the Godhead is a Duality Godhead and always was a Duality Godhead with Him now standing there amongst them as God, so how could He say that He was not good or tell His questioner not to call Him good? What was Yashua Messiah doing by saying that?

The answer to that my friends is very simple. This unsaved and lost wealthy young ruler was trying to win favour with Yashua Messiah by calling Him good. This was plain and simple flattery which got him nowhere with Yashua Messiah who quickly rebuked him with the question: Why callest thou me good? This was nothing to do with Yashua Messiah not being good. Of course He was good, He was God in the flesh so He had to be good – He could be nothing else.

However, just for the benefit of the wealthy young ruler He adds these two riders: “There is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, KEEP The Commandments.”

Now, as already shown, Yashua Messiah was God in the flesh so was stating clearly that He was good, but without anyone there realising it and yet at the same time giving Glory to His Father in heaven as being good as the other half of the Godhead.

With the second rider we have Yashua Messiah saying: “But if thou wilt enter into life, KEEP The Commandments.” In J B Phillips’ translation he has it better: “But if you WANT TO enter into [that] Life you must KEEP The Commandments.”

So first things first. Yashua Messiah is saying: “If you WANT TO enter into Life? So does this wealthy young ruler want to or not? Furthermore, where is The Law in this arrangement? It’s nowhere in it at all, so clearly Yashua Messiah is teaching the wealthy young ruler that this is about a FREE CONSCIOUS DECISION on his part and not a commandment issue = no Law. Second, we have this word ‘KEEP’ which everyone, and his dog, mistakenly thinks means OBEY when it mean what it says, that is, to keep – to protect – to hold onto as precious – internalised and have them written on our hearts so NOTHING to do with obedience at all. (Please see my article “When Did The Biblical Word KEEP Become OBEY?” – Link below.)

This is what Yashua Messiah was REALLY saying to the wealthy young man that came forward gushing and fawning all over Yashua Messiah in his initial, over the top, flattering enthusiasm.

Now don’t get me wrong on this, for later on I believe that this young man WAS saved. How do I know this? Easy, because Yashua Messiah loved him, so that means He knew the young man’s heart deep down and knew he was sincere. He also knew The Father was calling him, and KNEW that eventually he would repent and love his neighbour by giving up his wealth and then FOLLOWING Yashua Messiah. The same, in a different way, applied to Nicodemus but I won’t go into that subject now.

Furthermore we then have the issue of the wealthy young ruler’s question: “What good thing shall I DO, that I may have Eternal Life?” OK, I have made my point quite obvious here by emphasising the words ‘I DO’. Moreover, so what could this young man DO in order to inherit Eternal Life? NOTHING! absolutely nothing is the answer to that question. How do we know that? Quite simply because he was asking the question within the backdrop of the Ten Commandments of which he boasted in being a fautless observer. This means he was asking Yashua Messiah what other Commandment he should be observing or doing that he may have missed. His mission in questioning Yashua Messiah was solely Law based and understandably so because The Law was still in force at that time, even for the faithful.

However, The Lord then stuns him with His reply which immediately introduces the SPIRITUAL DIMENSION or SPIRITUAL THRUST of The Commandments = LOVE!! Not the feeble letter of The Law of The Commandments = legalistic Pharisaism and its close companion hypocrisy.

So the wealthy young ruler is challenged with Yashua Messiah’s charge to go sell all his possessions and give the proceeds to those in need and THEN to follow Him. Now mark this point and mark it well for the gifting of his wealth will not save him, but the act of gifting his wealth will prove that he is being called by The Father to Yashua Messiah and also prove that he is saved. Salvation is ALWAYS an undeserved free gift and our good works will follow as a result or as evidence that we are saved, not because we are trying to be saved or trying to earn our salvation.

Finally,Yashua Messiah in saying these tough things to the wealthy young ruler was in turn challenging his commitment to Him. Was he prepared to give up his Law/Commandment based life and comfortable wealthy lifestyle and put his sole trust and faith in Him? These are the points and questions that Yashua Messiah was getting across to the wealthy young ruler.

https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/when-did-the-biblical-word-keep-become-obey/

I Have Been Called a Christofascist! – Hilarious or What!?

Ever heard of that one before? If not, no matter, for nor had I until a month or so back (29th August 2017). So let me enlighten you:

From Wikipedia (Jewpedia):

“Christofascism is a combination of Christian and fascism coined by Dorothee Sölle in 1970. Sölle, a liberation theology proponent, used the term to describe segments of the Christian church which she characterized as totalitarian and imperialistic.”

First, a little grammar correction, where I believe they should have said: “A combination of Christianity and Fascism” and not: “A combination of Christian and Fascism.”

OK, with little aside dealt with, who is this ‘Dorothee Sölle’, when she’s at home?

Again from Wikipedia (Jewpedia):

“Dorothee Steffensky-Sölle (born Nipperdey; 30 September 1929 – 27 April 2003) was a German liberation theologian and writer who coined the term Christofascism. She was born in Cologne and died at a congress in Göppingen.”

Now those of you who have read my series of articles on “Blacks and Their Black Jesus and Those Behind it” (see the link below), which is founded upon Black Liberation Theology in the USA, will know of my strong views on this evil satanic subject, for evil and satanic it undoubtedly is. This evil philosophy is just vile modern social justice liberalism and/or progressivism. It is more truthfully known as Bolshevik Jew Marxism which, these days, is known by the more benign sounding title, Cultural Marxism and/or Critical Theory, which is straight out of the subversive Jewish Frankfurt School.

So here we have this ‘woman’ Dorothee Sölle with Cultural Jew Marxist, SJW (Social Justice Warrior), liberal credentials criticising and pontificating about committed Christians (albeit misguided committed Christians) of the fundamental variety and calling them Christofascists. I will deal later with the issue of whether or not I am a Christofascist.

From Gendering Liberation: “Deprivatising” Women’s Subjectivity in the Prayer-Poetry of Dorothee Sölle. — Katja Lisa Elena Neumann

“In an English-speaking context, Sölle is typically ranked amongst American Liberation Theologies, which mark her most sustained theological focus. Reflecting on her own theological project, which developed as a Political Theology, informed by the works of Rudolf Bultmann and Dietrich Bonhoeffer – but also deeply affected by Jewish thinkers such as Martin Buber – she declares that the language of Liberation Theology appeared much more appropriate to her political theological starting points. Her approach, based on a biblical hermeneutics – figured in the metaphor of eating of the Psalms – also has implications for this study, even though I do not place my emphasis on the Bible but on an engagement with Sölle‘s poetic texts.”

So in the above paragraph we can begin to see the negative influences that guided Dorothee Sölle, the inventor of the term Christofascist and in particular the Jewish thinker (always very dangerous for ‘Christians’) Martin Buber.

We then read: “she declares that the language of Liberation Theology appeared much more appropriate to her political theological starting points.”

From her interest in: “the language of Liberation Theology” we can easily deduce that her motivations are Bolshevik Jew Marxist secularism/atheism and/or Cultural Jew Marxist political social justice, with her so-called ‘theology’ a fraud or a cover. Not that theology has anything to do with Yashua Messiah’s Kingdom Gospel message, for it hasn’t. Theology is just Spiritually dead, hu-man made, quasi-intellectual secular reasoning, that is, Hellenising philosophy. This is the driving, quasi-intellectual, and carnal philosophising force of the satanic Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion.

From Liberation Theology we also get Theological Liberalism which Sölle was also a proponent and came out with such statements as this: Every theological statement must be a political statement as well.”

Now did Yashua Messiah come out with theological political statements or did He just tell people the simple Truth which, by default, were attacks on the theological political system of His day (Pharisaism) which is exactly the same theological political system that we have today, only they now call it POLITICAL CORRECTNESS which is Communism which is Talmudic Judaism.

“Some call it Marxism, I call it Judaism.”

– Rabbi S. Wise, The American Bulletin, May 5, 1935.

“There is much in the fact of Bolshevism (Communism) itself, in the fact that so many Jews are Bolshevists, in the fact that the ideals of Bolshevism at many points are consonant with the finest ideals of Judaism.”

– The Jewish Chronicle, April 4, 1919

Furthermore, let’s be clear, for The Truth is the enemy of The State and there is no way Sölle was an enemy of The State. On the contrary her ideas were very state friendly as we will see from the quote below:

From Theopedia: Theological Liberalism:

“Theological liberalism, sometimes known as Protestant Liberalism, is a theological movement rooted in the early 19th century German Enlightenment, notably in the philosophy of Immanuel Kant and the religious views of Friedrich Schleiermacher. It is an attempt to incorporate modern thinking and developments, especially in the sciences, into the Christian faith. Liberalism tends to emphasize ethics over doctrine and experience over Scriptural authority. While essentially a 19th century movement, theological liberalism came to dominate the American mainline churches in the early 20th century. Liberal Christian scholars embraced and encouraged THE ‘HIGHER BIBLICAL CRITICISM’ of modern Biblical scholarship.”

Here we can plainly see that Sölle was an arrogant Theological Liberal and a philosopher and therefore a stranger to The Truth – The Holy Scriptures. Paul warns us about the dangers of listening to such satanic people:

Colossians 2:8 (KJV) Beware lest any man spoil you through PHILOSOPHY and VAIN DECEIT, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. (Emphasis mine)

So there we have it and all exposed for what it is – Liberation Theology and Theological Liberalism and it is definitely NOT AFTER CHRIST!

Notice, too, the humdinger proof of her arrogance, for these conceited popinjays actually believe that they have a ‘HIGHER BIBLICAL UNDERSTANDING’ which apparently equips them to be critical of the Holy Scriptures!

OK, so what is the trap? for there is ALWAYS a trap with these ear tickling liberal ideas. The trap is ‘Social justice liberal do-gooding’ and Sölle was no different from any other worldly self-righteous liberal do-gooder. As with all these fake politicised Christians they latch onto WORLDLY SOCIALISM (Utopianism) and add it to their so-called Christianity. This Utopianism was otherwise known as Bolshevik Marxism in the early 20th century and today it’s known as Cultural Marxism. This, modern movement in its alledged ideals, is worse than Bolshevik Marxism with all its blood letting. Cultural Marxism is the violent assault on people’s minds, rather than a violent assault on the body. Hence their “Thought Police,” as portrayed by Orwell in his book “1984,” are now the order of the day, through Jew controlled political, media and educational (conditioning) whores.

Here are some of Sölle’s crusading statements and ideas:

From Wiki once more: “Sölle, a liberation theology proponent, used the term Christofascist to describe segments of the Christian church which she characterized as totalitarian and imperialistic.

Now who were these alleged Christians that she labelled as: ‘totalitarian and imperialistic’? No doubt they were 1) Fundamentalist Bible bashing Christians and 2) Protestant Puritans and Strict and Particular Baptists, and 3) 19th and early 20th century British Empire building Christians of the Victorian and Edwardian eras.

Now don’t get me wrong, for these people did do some amazing work in the British Territories overseas and thouands of people got to hear about Jesus Christ, but unfortunately they tended to be the legalistic Judaising type of ‘Christian’ believing that they could force their 10 Commandment, Old Covenant religion down people’s throats, so were not Scriptural in their approach at all, having no GRACE.

Moreover, this means that these satanic judgemental liberal Cultural Marxist ‘progressive’ types like Sölle had a point in their criticism of these false Christians. However, as we know, TWO WRONGS NEVER DID MAKE A RIGHT.

OK, so moving on with a definition from the Urban Dictionary:

Christofascist:

“Christian religious extremist. Often a person who believes in forcing a right-wing Christian agenda on the rest of the world. Also known as a ‘fundamentalist’ or more recently ‘evangelical’…..”

So what do we have here? Well first let’s gain some understanding with a very appropriate quote regarding the words Fascist and Fascism, for the Jewish controlled Cultural Marxist left always use these emotive words very successfully in their lying propagandised attacks on people with right-wing views:

“Dealing with The Jews requires a Jewish Primer on how the Jews talk and how they use certain words:

1) “Fascist.” Jews call someone a fascist when that person prevents the Jews from taking control of the politics of a particular nation.

2) “Fascism.” The political status of a particular nation that keeps the Jews in their place and out of power.

“There is not a single instance when the Jews have not fully deserved the bitter fruit of the fury of their persecutors….We come to the nations pretending to escape persecution, we [Jews] are the most deadly persecutors in all the wretched annals of men.”

— Samuel Roth, Jewish writer, Jews Must Live (NY,NY: The Golden Hind Press Inc., 1934) pp. 64-65

Right, there you have it, and once you have fully absorbed the above Truth, the words “Fascist” and “Fascism” lose most, if not all, of their automatic negative connotations, as deviously planted in the unthinking minds of the duped leftie plebs and proles of so-called western democracies.

However, here is a conundrum, because, as I have already stated, Christianity cannot be forced upon anyone, at least, not successfully, for a REAL Christian HAS TO BE CALLED by The Father to His Son Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ) in order to be a REAL Christian, so the fundies and zealots of the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion do The Faith and The Way a disservice and bring Yashua Messiah’s name into disrepute. Hence their punishment will be more severe than the lost and unsaved in the resurrection.

Continuing:

“…..since many Christofascists bristle at the term ‘fundamentalist’ there has been a movement to get the media to refer to them as ‘evangelicals.’ However the term ‘evangelical’ is a misleading one as many Christian sects are evangelical in nature and not all evangelical Christians have such extreme views or political agendas. Christofascist is a more descriptive term for these right-wing extremists.”

“James Dobson’s Focus on the Family is a Christofascist hate group bent on banning abortion and opressing homosexuals.”

OK, so what do we have here? Well, first, let’s understand the self-righteousness of these Cultural Jew Marxist zealots and bigots in the way that they have twisted and perverted what is right and what is wrong so that they can adopt some kind of satanic, demonic and demented hypocritical moral high ground.

Let’s be clear about this stinking, diabolical, evil wickedness, for THEY in their support for the genocidal mass murder of living foetuses (in Britain alone 186,000 per annum and counting) are then accusing these alleged Christians of being right-wing extremists for speaking out against their vile selfish murderous policies and actions. Just how demonic, sick and perverted is their thinking? Answer: Sick and perverted enough for Yashua Messiah to wipe them all out with FIRE upon His return to this earth, just as He did with water to the pre-flood world.

So all you dumbed down secular brainwashed dupes out their, take this as a VERY SERIOUS warning to all of you who are foolish enough to support satanic Cultural Jew Marxist dogmas and ideologies, for a FIERY END awaits you unless you change your vile, evil, satanic, murdereous thinking and ideas.

Finally, back to the original accusation of my being an alleged Christofascist, well am I, that is the question? Well it would seem that in THEIR HYPOCRITICAL PHARISAICAL PERVERTED EYES I am, but when we consider that they, like their first century Pharisee spiritual forebears, are Spiritually dead and totally blind and deaf, as well, does it really matter what they think or say? – so NO I am not a Christofascist, I am a REAL Christian whom they call a Christofascist!

https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/2016/03/10/blacks-and-their-black-jesus-and-those-behind-it-part-1/

The DUALITY GODHEAD

The Duality Godhead? What Godhead is that, I hear you ask? Well I’ll tell you straight, right away, They are not a mickey mouse triune godhead, They’re not a Unitarian/Judaic/Islamic monotheistic godhead and They are not a Binatarian godhead either, if that’s what you were thinking.

Now what is a Binatarian godhead? I’ve never heard of such a thing, again I hear you say. OK, so let me explain, a Binatarian godhead is a half-truth so that means it’s a lie just like the monotheistic godhead and the trinity godhead.

Binatarianism is belief in a Duality Godhead that has been corrupted with Triunism and turned into yet another lying hu-man magical construct. This means that instead of a mythical godhead that is one in three and three in one they have constructed a godhead that, like the trinity, it is one in two and two in one – total fallacious religious nonsense. We therefore need to understand that The Godhead consists of TWO DISTINCT Spiritual Beings who are NEVER at anytime one solitary being.

This means that The Duality Godhead are very simple to understand for we are told about Them right at the beginning in Genesis Chapter 1:

Genesis 1:1 (KJV) In the beginning God (‘Elohim’ – plural) created the heaven and the earth.

There They are, in the very first verse of the Holy Scriptures ‘ELOHIM’ and ‘Elohim’ is the plural of ‘Eloah’, so if the Godhead was ONE GOD, it would have read: “In the beginning God (‘Eloah’ – singular) created the heaven and the earth.” But it DOES NOT SAY THAT it says ‘ELOHIM’ – PLURAL! MORE THAN ONE GOD – THE GODHEAD! Please excuse the shouting folks, but shouting is very necessary for some stiff necked duped people out there who love to hang onto their nonsensical Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religious myths = monotheism and/or triunism.

From Strong’s Concordance:

God – H430
אלהים
‘ĕlôhı̂ym
el-o-heem’
Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: – angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.

Now pay attention to what Strong is doing here, for he is following a satanic monothesitic agenda and explaining away The Truth by introducing his own irrelevant intellectual nonsense into his definition of ‘Elohim’“but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God;”

Moreover, ignoring his intellectual waffle, ask yourself this very pertinent question: Would a Bible scholar of Strong’s immense calibre, with his excellent knowledge of the Hebrew language, have not known of the word ‘Eloah’ and known its SINGULAR meaning and also have known that ‘Elohim’ was the plural of that singular word? I will leave you all to answer that no brainer question for yourselves.

OK, so we have established from the first verse of the Holy Scriptures that the Godhead is more than one god and this is further confirmed for us in Genesis again:

Genesis 1:26 (first part) (KJV) And God said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness: (Emphasis mine)

Right, now is this claimed solitary mono-god speaking to himself? If not, who is he speaking to – the angels? No way, for I’ll tell you straight, the angels never created anything, and man is definitely not created in the image of angels. This means that if we take the “God is one” nonsense, seriously, it must mean that their god needs certifying, for he is hallucinating and seeing someone in his head that he is now attempting to hold a conversation with. Hilarious or what!?

Having said all that, I can now see all the monotheists jumping up and down, frothing at the mouth, and renting their clothes in true Moloch and Baal worshipping style as they did in Elijah’s day when their mono-god failed to bring down fire to ignite the wet wood, such is their delusional thinking. Not only that, but when I have finished this article the trinity dupes will no doubt have joined them in their manic frenzy. Who said being a follower of Yashua Messiah – The Way was not good fun? LOL

Moving on I will now quote a segment from one of my earlier articles which covers the prime and/or premier “identity of God verse in Deuteronomy”, and we all know it, don’t we? This verse is the verse that nearly all monotheists quote in an attempt to support their erroneous satanic claims:

Deuteronomy 6:4 (KJV) Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

Please note, as I disect this verse it will be, in part, a repeat of what I have said above.

“Hear, O Israel” – or better translated “Hear you Israel” or “Listen up you Israelites”, for I, your Lord, have something important to tell you:

“The Lord our God” – properly translated from the Hebrew; The Lord = The Eternal or The Self-Existing. Our God = Our ‘Elohim’ (plural); the Godhead that has always self-existed before time began and was/is always a plural Duality Godhead.

Straight away in this short phrase of Holy Scripture we are told by the use of this word ‘Elohim’ (the plural of ‘Eloah’) that we are dealing with more than one God. Look folks, there is no getting away from this Truth, and we need to get it through our heads that the Hebrew word ‘Eloah’ (singular) would have been in use here, not ‘Elohim’, IF God was one. OK, so we have now ascertained that The Godhead is more than one, and yet it says:

“Is One Lord” – so what’s going on here and what does this mean? The Hebrew word here for ‘one’ is ‘Echad’ which means ‘united’ or ‘in unity’ in one sense, and ‘number one’ the prime number in the other sense, that is, no one higher or no one above – The Most High as wriiten elsewhere in the Holy Scriptures.

One – H259
אחד
‘echâd
ekh-awd’
A numeral from H258; properly united, that is, (as) one; or (as an ordinal) first: – a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any (-thing), apiece, a certain [dai-] ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.

OK, as we can see the word ONE does not mean solitary or one god or a mono-god, for it means UNITED AS ONE, that is, in agreement in thought, word and deed, yet still distinct and separate as Two Spiritual Beings.

A Numeral – H258
אחד
‘âchad
aw-khad’
Perhaps a primitive root; to unify, that is, (figuratively) collect (one’s thoughts): – go one way or other.

The primitive root word then confirms this for us – TO UNIFY!! And again this, in turn, means They are not one being, for being united or unified is always an arrangement whereby a number of beings are at one with each other or unanimous in their thoughts, aims and ideals, as in a football team. Newcastle United is a team of individuals united in one aim – to win, but they are not one being, they are eleven distinct beings. This is how it is with the Godhead; they are Two Spiritual Beings, united as one in thought, mind and deed – totally likeminded – united!

This, too, is why The Lord, through Paul, exhorts the Congregations of God to be like the Godhead in their relationships one with another:

Romans 15:5-6 (KJV) Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another according to Christ Jesus: 6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. [Two distinct beings] (Emphasis and brackets mine)

Take note, the Congregations of God were not ONE BEING, but they were exhorted by Paul to be of ONE MIND just like The Father and The Son and like the Godhead of God with God in the beginning who said: “Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness:”

If we now move on to the New Testament we have a new word for the Godhead and that word is the Greek word ‘Theos’ instead of the Hebrew word ‘Elohim’. However we need to be clear that just because a Greek word is now used instead of a Hebrew word doesn’t mean that the nature and make-up of the Duality Godhead has changed. In fact the Greek word ‘theos’ is very useful for this topic for, generally, it means a DEITY and in the Greek sense that means gods plural, for the Greeks were polytheists – they, like the ancient Egyptians, had many gods. As far as I know they did not have a word in their language to describe a monotheistic god. It was only the Jews that worshipped such a deity and they worshipped that deity in error and in ignorance when they knew very well that God ‘Elohim’ was a plural Godhead.

God – G2316
θεός
theos
theh’-os
Of uncertain affinity; a deity, especially (with G3588) the supreme Divinity; figuratively a magistrate; by Hebraism very: – X exceeding, God, god [-ly, -ward].

So there we have it: ‘Theos’ = a deity and in Ancient Greece that would mean more than one god, not a mono-god. Not only that, but because ‘Theos’ is such a general all encompassing word in terms of objects of worship, it means it can be interpreted any way you like, if you have a monotheistic or triunistic agenda to fulfil. Moreover, notice that within this very definition we can see Strong doing just that with all his figurative nonsense regarding ‘magistrates’. With regard to ‘magistrates’ I will leave a link below for additional reading regarding this satanic subject.

Furthermore, because we know that the Godhead does not cause confusion re their identity we can definitely know for sure that plural ‘Theos’ in the NT means exactly the same a plural ‘Elohim’ in the OT – The Duality Godhead with The Holy Spirit as their LIVING POWER.

One last Holy Scripture:

Galatians 3:20 (KJV) Now a mediator is not [a mediator] of one, but God is one.

Now does this verse make any sense? First of all, who is The Mediator that this verse is refering to? Answer: Yashua Messiah. And was Yashua Messiah God come in the flesh? Answer: Yes, hence it states quite plainly that a mediator is not of one, so there has to be more than one in order for one to mediate to the other and yet it then says: “God is one!” So what’s going on here?

Easy, God = ‘Theos’ = ‘Elohim’ = more than one, for the Godhead does not change:

Malachi 3:6 (KJV) For I am The LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. (Emphasis mine)

Here we have Yashua Messiah speaking on behalf of the Godhead, for no one has ever seen or heard The Father:

John 1:18 (KJV) No man hath seen God (The Father) at any time; The Only Begotten Son, which is in the bosom of The Father, He hath declared Him. (Brackets and Emphasis mine)

John 5:37 (KJV) And The Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. YE HAVE NEITHER HEARD HIS VOICE AT ANY TIME, NOR SEEN HIS SHAPE. (Emphasis mine)

So there it is folks, NO ONE has ever seen or heard The Father at any time so that must mean that Yashua Messiah was The God of the Old Testament who spoke on behalf of Himself and/or The Father = The Duality Godhead.

https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/what-is-the-mystery-of-mystery-babylon-the-great/

Brother Charles

Unravelling The So-Called Pastoral Epistles – Parts 1 & 2

Prologue

For those of you not familiar with my work for Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ) please allow me to explain that this series of articles is not for the faint hearted or for those new to my work. This topic is heavy going and could easily be described as a deep end subject, especially if you are a King James Bible (KJV) idolator, that is, you worship the KJV as being inerrant (100% true) – unfortunately a fallacy for the Spiritually blind.

If you are a newbie or a beginner in The Faith I would certainly recommend that you read a few of my other articles, first, in order to give yourself a foundation in The Truth, before attempting this series which, even I, after 35+ years of study, am finding very challenging and in need of much Holy Spiritual guidance in order to put them together.

I do not enjoy being critical of the KJV as I still believe it to be the best English translation of The Holy Scriptures, however when error is discovered in its pages we cannot close our eyes or, more importantly, our hearts and minds, and begin a life of living in denial of The Truth. These issues have to faced head on and confronted and then dealt with. The same applies to fear. Fear has to be confronted, challenged and overcome. Start running from fear and you will never stop running – the coward dies a 1,001 deaths!

Please note, this series is a first attempt at this huge subject and will be ammended and edited as I discover more Truth and expose more errors to add to its pages, but suffice it to say there is most definitely a case for questioning the authenticity of these three Epistles.

Having said that I do not believe that The Pastoral Epistles should be expunged from the The Holy Scriptures, because there is some Truth in them but at the same time those verses of Truth are surrounded by many errors – the errors of the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion.

Introduction

The Pastoral Epistles is a name that has been conjured up by someone, or some people, for three of Paul’s letters in the New Testament: 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy and Titus. Unofficially included in this grouping is 2 Peter which, allegedly, is also of spurious origin and that is the issue with all four of these books of the New Testament – their questionable authorship.

So where does this title come from, would be my first question regarding this tetchy subject? All the historical information I can find points to the commencement of the 19th century when Bible scholars began to question their authenticity, but I have no idea who originally coined the term. Perhaps someone could shed some Light on it.

From The Bible Hub: “History of the Christian Church, Volume I, Philip Schaff ”

“The three Pastoral Epistles, two to Timothy and one to Titus, form a group by themselves, and represent the last stage of the apostle’s life and labors, with his parting counsels to his beloved disciples and fellow-workers. They show us the transition of the apostolic church from primitive simplicity to a more definite system of doctrine and form of government. This is just what we might expect from the probable time of their composition after the first Roman captivity of Paul, and before the composition of the Apocalypse.”

Philip Schaff was a Calvinist preacher from that 19th century period and we can immediately see that he was of that snobbish, elitist, self-righteous, religious mind set when he condescendingly refered to the first century Congregations of God as having a primitive simplicity. Now pay attention dear people for this arrogant puffed up spirit and attitude is crucial in understanding the same spirit that pervades throughout the Pastoral Epistles. And now for a Holy Scripture that proves my point:

2 Corinthians 11:3 (KJV) But I fear, lest by any means, as The Serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. (Emphasis mine)

Here we can plainly see that Mr Schaff, the Calvinist, had allowed his mind (via Satan’s subtilty) to be corrupted and displayed by his vain disparaging opinion of the first century Congregations of God by calling them primitively simple. Rather him than me when he stands before Yashua Messiah in the first resurrection.

Furthermore, he compounds his vanity by stating, and I quote: “to a more definite system of doctrine and form of government.” So this ignorant man thought, just like the author of the Pastoral Epistles, that the first century church and its TRUE SIMPLE BELIEFS in Yashua Messiah and its simple egalitarian non-structure could be improved upon. Delusional vanity or what!?

As a final point I will raise the issue of the artificial religious construct known as the ‘Apostolic Church’. This term, like so many others created by the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion, cannot be found in the Holy Scriptures, nor can the word ‘apostolic’, now there’s a surprise. So here’s a question: Did Yashua Messiah come to this earth in order to plant HIS CHURCH – The Church of God or hand it over to His messengers, pompously called apostles, from the Greek word ‘apostolos’, by the religious translators of the KJV, and rename it the Church of The Apostles? For I tell you straight folks, that is exactly what the term ‘Apostolic Church’ means and The Church of God it is not.

Are you beginning to see The Light dear readers? because I have not even started analysing 1 Timothy 1:1 yet and already one of those who would try and support these Epistles as genuine has already been unceremoniously found out!

OK, the problems that are the so-called Pastoral Epistles. As already stated, the Pastoral Epistles constitute 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. Although not included, 2 Peter also falls into the same questionable category re being authentic Holy Scripture and, not as claimed, as being written by the named authors.

Now with regard to the two books of Timothy and the book of Titus, are they the genuine writings of Paul or of a forger of a later date, as some Bible Scholars confidently declare? Taking that question further, if they are the writings of a forger and, I might add to some degree, a plagiariser, can we even challenge their right to be a part of what they call the Biblical Canon or even the inspired Word of God?

Let’s face it, the Biblical Canon was put together by religious people, with an evil Romish agenda, who would be very happy with the Pastoral Epistles and their content, hence the reasons for their inclusion in that Canon, and their defence of them today as being the authentic writings of Paul.

We need to get this Truth firmly fixed in our minds that the satanic religious spirit that pervaded the second, third and fourth centuries with its Hellenising philosophers still pervades today in the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion of the 21st century – NOTHING has changed.

Paul, too, gave us this timeless warning:

Colossians 2:8 (KJV) BEWARE! lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, AND NOT AFTER CHRIST. (Emphasis mine)

Again, let’s be clear, for the aim of second, third and fourth century Hellenising philosophers was ALWAYS the usurping and supplanting of the True Church – the Church of God and putting in its place: “a more definite system of doctrine and form of government.” to quote our ‘friend’ Mr Schaff.

This is the more definite system of the Nicolaitans as mentioned by Yashua Messiah in Revelation TWICE!

Revelation 2:6 (KJV) But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Revelation 2:15 (KJV) So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. (All emphasis mine)

Notice that these evil people of the Hellenistic NICOLAITAN persuation had deeds and a DOCTRINE. Now what could those deeds and doctrine have been? The very same deeds and doctrine that Mr Schaff was rambling on about – things allegedly ‘superior’ to the primitive simplicity of the first century egalitarian Congregations of God.

Nico = To rule; Laitan = The laity; = To rule over the laity; = Something that Yashua Messiah HATES!! = “A more definite system of doctrine and form of government.” = the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion in ALL its guises with its Popes, Archbishops, Cardinals, Bishops, Ministers, Vicars, and satanic Priests called ‘Fathers’ etc. etc.. Non-egalitarian pecking orders with men lording it over other men who are their equals in God’s sight and with no God given authority whatsoever.

Fortunately, and as an aside, by the year 35 AD the Church of God had been planted in Britain and was not contaminated by the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion until the arrivals of the Papist devils Augustine (not Augustine of Hippo) and Patrick the slave trader in circa 597 AD.

I think that will do for part one, part two coming up shortly.

Unravelling The So-Called Pastoral Epistles – Part 2

Plagiarising

Without further ado I will get straight in with more opinions from the ‘experts’ and as one commentator (Leighton Pullan) from The Bible Hub put it:

“Their genuineness is more frequently denied than that of any other of St. Paul’s Epistles, and this attack upon their genuineness has been mostly based upon the character of their teaching about the office-bearers of the Church. Attempts have sometimes been made to separate some fragments supposed to be genuine from the remaining portions. All such attempts have failed. These Epistles must either be rejected entirely or accepted entirely. Otherwise we become involved in a hopeless tangle of conjectures.”

Having quoted this opinion, which I agree with in part, the major question for me here is this: Are these Epistles an intregral part of the early beginnings of the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion (primarily Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy) through a Hellenising philosopher(s) author making out that he was Paul, or not? If I can prove that there is much Hellenising philosophy and/or meaningless BS in terms of early religious jargon terms and expressions (allegedly a more definite system of doctrine) then the case for them being forgeries is a done deal, and, as he correctly put it: “These Epistles must either be rejected entirely or accepted entirely.”

However, I will add one caveat to that regarding his comment: “to separate some fragments supposed to be genuine from the remaining portions.” The point he has obviously missed is this: If someone sets out to deceive by making out they are someone else then they MUST at times use thoughts, ideas and material that will attempt to make them look like the man they are trying to impersonate. This will then mean that they are playing the old half-truth telling trick. We need to realise that without some Truth in the narrative the scam will easily be rumbled. This game is not new and it’s played some of the time in the mainstream fake news media today and even more so in the internet alternative media.

So let’s analyse Mr Pullan’s comment a little further: “Their genuineness is more frequently denied than that of any other of St. Paul’s Epistles.” Now why would that be I wonder? Has he really done his homework in an open minded unbiased way to find out what the reasoning is behind this frequency of denial? I would suggest that he has not. I would also suggest that he, like Philip Schaff, is already convinced of their alleged authenticity and sets about defending his flawed position.

He then states: “this attack upon their genuineness has been mostly based upon the character of their teaching about the office-bearers of the Church.” Question: When did Yashua Messiah, or Paul for that matter, declare the need for ‘office bearers’? When did the need for corporate officials or officialdom become necessary in God’s egalitarian Church? Certainly not in the first century church that’s for sure, so when did these satanic ideas creep in? Answer: As soon as, if not before, the Messengers (apostles) had died. The second century AD was the time when most of these blasphemers crawled out of the woodwork and asserted themselves as leaders and mouth pieces of this planned philosophised, Hellenised counterfeit church.

Here is a list of the counterfeiting scoundrels involved in founding the Hellenised Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion, from the “Catholic Fidelity” web page:

Clement I, 4th Bishop of Rome, circa end of the first century. This is not the Clement of Paul’s time.

Ignatius of Antioch, died 110 AD

Polycarp of Symrna, places and dates 65 – 140 AD Allegedley a stalwart of the early Congregations of God.

Unknown Author of The Didache (The Teaching), Syria dates 70 – 110 AD. Author of what teaching?

Barnabus, circa 130 AD, so could not be the first century Barnabus as claimed on this site.

Papias of Hierapolis, Phyrgia circa 130 AD

Justin Martyr, circa 100-165 AD, philosopher and theologian.

Irenaeus, circa 140 – 202 AD

Clement of Alexandria, place and dates, Athens circa 150? – 215? AD

Tertullian, convert to the Christian Religion circa 190 – 195 AD. Sorcerer and conjurer of the pagan heathen Trinity doctrine circa 200 AD.

Origen, Alexandria circa 185? – 254? AD

If necessary I will provide more details of what these villains got up to, but as this series of articles is not specifically about the devious shennanigans of the so-called ‘Church Fathers’ (I cover the subject elsewhere on my blog) I will leave it there.

And now a quote from the “Early Christian Writings” web page.

“Vocabulary. While statistics are not always as meaningful as they may seem, of 848 words (excluding proper names) found in the Pastorals, 306 are not in the remainder of the Pauline corpus, even including the deutero-Pauline 2 Thessalonians, Colossians, and Ephesians. Of these 306 words, 175 do not occur elsewhere in the New Testament, while 211 are part of the general vocabulary of Christian writers of the second century. Indeed, the vocabulary of the Pastorals is closer to that of popular Hellenistic philosophy than it is to the vocabulary of Paul or the deutero-Pauline letters. Furthermore, the Pastorals use Pauline words in a non-Pauline sense: dikaios in Paul means “righteous” and here means “upright”; pistis, “faith,” has become “the body of Christian faith”; and so on.”

As this series progresses I will reveal several of these crucial words that prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that these three Epistles are not from the hand of Paul and are most definitely from the hand of a Hellenising philosopher of the 2nd century and a founder of the satanic Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion.

Right, let’s make a start with the first verses of 1 Timothy 1:

1 Timothy 1:1-2 (KJV) Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope; 2 Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord.

1 Timothy 1:1-2 notes — This introduction is plagiarised from Paul’s earlier genuine Epistles, but with the addition of a greeting to Timothy which Paul probably did write, but the real Epistle was either lost or destroyed. We have to assume this because Timothy was a learner of Paul’s and we can be fairly sure Paul did write to him but not the nonsense that follows in verse 4 onwards:

1 Timothy 1:3 (KJV) As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine.

1 Timothy 1:3 notes — Instructions from Paul to Timothy which again are probably a genuine part of the original Epistle with instructions to remain in Ephesus, now lost or destroyed. However, I say, now lost or destroyed, because the Epistle now changes from the plagiarising part of the first half to counterfeiting in the second half of this verse. How do I know this? Answer: through the use of one suspicious word – ‘charge’ and one suspicious term – ‘no other doctrine’ combined with what then follows in verse 4.

Now the word ‘doctrine’ is one of those crucial words that I made reference to earlier. This is due to the fact that three Greek words are are involved here and this Greek word in 1 Tim 1:3 is partly the odd one out, being: ‘heterodidaskaleō’. The other two words are these: ‘didachē’ (Strong’s G1322) and ‘didaskalia’ (Strong’s G1319)

Moreover, here is where it gets very interesting. The word ‘didachē‘ (instruction) cannot be found anywhere in 1 & 2 Timothy or Titus and yet it is found in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans and 1 Corinthians. In contrast all that can be found in 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus is the word ‘didaskalia’ (instruction – teaching) – if we then take the word ‘heterodidaskaleō’ we can see that it comes from ‘didaskalia’ and not ‘didachē’. So what!! I here you exclaim. Ah but there is much more to this than meets the eye as explained here:

From: “Is Doctrine a Dirty Word?” by Peter Ditzel

“”Doctrine/doctrines” appears fifty times in the King James Version New Testament. With the exception of one place (Hebrews 6:1 where it is translated from logos), it comes from either of two Greek words, didache and didaskalia. Didaskalia is derived from didaskalos, which means “teacher.” Didache comes from the verb didasko, “to teach.” Thus, strictly, didaskalia refers to the teaching of a teacher.”

So here we have that crucial difference explained and why ‘didache’ (Strong’s G1322) applies to Yashua Messiah’s and Paul’s instruction and ‘didaskalia’ (Strong’s G1319) applies to the teaching of a teacher, which leads us to the knock on question – WHICH TEACHER and WHAT TEACHING!!?? Answer: the teaching of Hellenising philosophers and religious counterfeiters.

If we now move straight on into verse 4 we can see how it is a continuation of the second part of verse 3 and notice, too, that from here on in (verse 4) we now enter a part fictional, part truthful, made up and fabricated la la land narrative with religious writings by an unknown early Hellenising religious author, most likely circa 150 AD, and long after Paul’s death. He, or they, would have been one of the alleged ‘Church Fathers’ of the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion, which was always a counterfeit and not officially organised until the Council of Nicea in 325 AD. However, in the meantime this satanic edifice had been nearly 300 years in the making, commencing with the Canaanite Jew Philo in Alexandria (philosophy) in the first century along with Simon Magus the sorcerer in Rome – the lover of filthy lucre. All these elements came together in Nicea in 325 AD under Constantine.

Second half of 1 Timothy 1:3 and 1 Timothy 1:4 (KJV) That thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine. 4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do. (Emphasis mine)

1 Timothy 1:4 Notes part 1 — “Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies.”

What are these ‘fables’ that this Hellenising author could be refering to? More on this later.

Furthermore, if there was to be no heeding of genealogies and the study of same, then what are Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38 if they are not genealogies? In turn, why would Yashua Messiah object to his brothers and sisters in the faith studying up their own Israelite genealogies? And who determines what genealogies come under the umbrella of “endless genealogies”? And who would be opposed to such genealogies and for what reason? Would Paul? Who was proud of his Benjaminite tribal origins:

Romans 11:1 (KJV) I say then, Hath God cast away His people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

Philippians 3:5 (KJV) Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee.

Please note Paul was not a Jew.

Moreover, what information do genealogies provide us with? Why, the origins of different peoples as listed in the Old Testament and who hates the Old Testament? Why Rome hates the Old Testament and so do the Canaanite Jews with their Babylonian Talmud, the mainstay of their satanic Judaic religion.

So what does the first part of 1 Tim 1:4 constitute? It was an early Hellenising Romish dictat to dissuade people from researching True Israelite history and the identity of the True intended recipients of the Gospel message as instructed by Yashua Messiah Himself:

Matthew 15:24 (KJV) But He answered and said, I am not sent but unto The Lost Sheep of The House of Israel.

He also gave the twelve disciples explicit intructions:

Matthew 10:5-6 (KJV) 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: 6 But go rather to The Lost Sheep of The House of Israel.

1 Timothy 1:4 notes part 2 — “Which minister questions.” Yet more of the tyranny of Catholicism revealed re unquestioning obedience – no Bereans or questioning allowed in this church, just blind faith and obedience.

1 Timothy 1:4 notes part 3 — Edifying – Strong’s 3622 – Administration. Everywhere else (7 times) the word ‘edifying’ – means “building up” see Strong’s 3619.

This word ‘edifying’ from the Greek MSS ‘oikonomia’ which means ‘administration’ is telling us quite plainly what this Hellenising philosopher writer has in mind, that is, only one thing – a church corporation – a money making church corporation and not the Spiritual Congregation of God that needed REAL edifying, that is, building up and/or encouraging and supporting.

Please note – Part 3 and all follow on articles in this series will be posted at this link below:

https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/unravelling-the-pastoral-epistles-parts-1-2/

Are YOU a Heretic and What is Heresy?

If you are a Christian, or even not a Christian at all and with no interest in Christianity, have you ever wondered about these two words and what they mean? for they get banded about with great regularity by those of the satanic Roman Catholic Cult, which is a part of the equally satanic Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion.

Moreover, when you hear these words, do they resonate a positive vibe with you or a negative vibe? For me, they have always resonated a negative vibe, because they have always sounded accusatory and judgemental. Now don’t get me wrong, for there are some people that deserve to be labelled a heretic, that’s IF the word heretic actually means what people believe it to mean, that is, a blasphemer or an apostate, and again, that is, someone who has turned his back on Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ) and walked away as did these wretched people here:

John 6:65-66 And He said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. 66 From that many of His disciples went back, and walked no more with Him.

However, I have learned just recently that the words heretic and heresy from a Holy Scriptural sense are not what they seem when compared to the erroneous Roman Catholic religious interpretations. In fact, they do not mean what I have described above at all. They have been mistranslated from the Greek manuscripts, and more on that later, but first let’s look at some secular dictionary definitions for the words in question.

From Dictionary.com:

Heretic

1) A professed believer who maintains religious opinions contrary to those accepted by his or her church or rejects doctrines prescribed by that church.

2) Roman Catholic Church – a baptized Roman Catholic who willfully and persistently rejects any article of faith.

3) Anyone who does not conform to an established attitude, doctrine, or principle.

From Merriam-Webster:

Heretic

1) Religion: a person who differs in opinion from established religious dogma; especially: a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church who refuses to acknowledge or accept a revealed truth the church regards them as heretics.

2) One who differs in opinion from an accepted belief or doctrine – a nonconformist.

From Dictionary.com:

Heresy

1. Opinion or doctrine at variance with the orthodox or accepted doctrine, especially of a church or religious system.

2. The maintaining of such an opinion or doctrine.

3. Roman Catholic Church. the willful and persistent rejection of any article of faith by a baptized member of the church.

4. Any belief or theory that is strongly at variance with established beliefs, customs, etc.

From Merriam-Webster:

Heresy

1a:  adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma (see dogma 2) They were accused of heresy.

1b: denial of a revealed truth by a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church

1c :  an opinion or doctrine contrary to church dogma

2a: dissent or deviation from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice – to disagree with the party leadership was heresy.

2b: an opinion, doctrine, or practice contrary to the truth or to generally accepted beliefs or standards

So there we have it from the secular perspective and notice how the Roman Catholic Cult features prominently in these definitions giving it a strong association with these two negative words.

Notice, too, in 2a how they now apply it to those that reject rigid political dogma as well. Rejection of Bolshevik Marxist Political Correctness (Cultural Marxism) anyone? Do I also sense the spirit of the legalistic satanic Pharisees here in the application of these two words? You bet your life!

OK, so what’s your point I hear you ask? confusion and some I would answer and to unravel that confusion let’s go now to the Holy Scriptures for The Truth regarding these two misused words:

First and foremost, the word heretic cannot be found in the KJV Bible at all – it ain’t there folks, so that tells you just how important this subject is to Yashua Messiah. However, it is VERY important to those Roman Catholic judgemental mongrel dogs who like to accuse people of being heretics, that is, those who have rumbled their money making, money laundering scam called a church and have started to voice their truthful opinions.

Second, and just as crucial, the word heresy can only be found once in the KJV Bible and here is the verse with its only use:

Acts 24:14 (KJV) But this I confess unto thee, that after The Way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in The Law and in The Prophets: (Emphasis mine)

So here we have some very interesting things being said by Paul. First of all, Paul let’s it be known that following Yashua Messiah was known by the followers of Yashua Messiah as The Way, for He is The Way – The ONLY Way to The Kingdom of God and Eternal Life and NO RELIGION required!

Second, the creatures of the Cainite-Judeo-Christian RELIGION called those who were followers of The Way (Yashua Messiah), HERETICS!!! and their beliefs and Faith solely in Yashua Messiah – HERESY!!! How blasphemous is that?

Not only that, if we look up the word in the Greek MSS what do you think we will find? Answer, this from Strong’s Concordance:

Heresy – G139 – αἵρεσις – hairesis – hah’ee-res-is
From G138; properly a choice, that is, (specifically) a party or (abstractly) disunion. (“heresy” is the Greek word itself.): – heresy [which is the Greek word itself], sect.

Look what we have here: 1) a choice; 2) a party in disunion; 3) a sect. So what does this tell us? Well far from being negative, the word heresy looks like it is something very positive, that is, the separating of those who follow Yashua Messiah (The Way) from satanic religious illegitimates. In the first century that would have been primarily the Pharisees and Sadducees who were later usurped by the so called Hellenising philosophers known as the ‘church fathers’, that is, the counterfeit founders of the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion.

Be sure you understand that religion is a spirit called Legion and Satan presents this phenomena in a myriad of ways whether it be Jews or Fundie ‘Christians’ with their Judaising Law based religion or Papists with their Babylonian Mystery Religion.

Furthermore, today, whilst the Pope is traipsing here, there and everywhere around the world promoting his mickey mouse satanic multi-faith unity BS, Paul was and is teaching the exact opposite – now there’s a surprise and is that hilarious or what?

Moreover what’s more interesting is the way this Greek word hairesis has taken on a dual meaning in some people’s eyes for we find it used elsewhere:

Acts 28:22 (KJV) But we desire to hear of thee what thou thinkest: for as concerning this sect (hairesis), we know that every where it is spoken against.
(Brackets and emphasis mine)

In this verse we can see the word hairesis used more accurately, in it being translated as sect and not heresy, but, either way, neither translations of this word point to the evil and distorted and satanic interpretations of The Devil’s Roman Catholic Cult who misuse, twist and pervert it to accuse those of The Truth and/or The Way of being heretics which, in reality, is a compliment to us, not an insult.

This means dear brothers and sisters that in the future if some evil papist calls you a heretic, just thank him or her as sarcastically as you can and be encouraged by their plug ignorance.

Brother Charles.

As a PS I would add that the word heresies can also be found three times which again should be translated as sects and which I will deal with here at a later date.