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

Advertisements

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.