The Truth is The True Gospel Message of the coming Kingdom of God and Salvation under His Glorious Grace and KNOWING The Duality Godhead of The Father and The Son – The ONLY Godhead. And always remember that The Truth (Yashua Messiah) is the enemy of The State. Below is the Lion of Judah (not the Jews). Please scroll down for the selected article.
….God shall take away his part out of The Book of Life, and out of The Holy City, and from the things which are written in this Book.
The same verse from the Greek Transliteral:
Revelation 22:19 (Greek Transliteral) And if-ever any-one should-be-eliminating from The Sayings of-the scrolled of-the before-averment (Prophecy) this shall-be-eliminating the God placer the part of-him from the Wood (Tree) of-the Life and out of-the city the holy of-the ones-having-been-written in the scrolled this. (Brackets mine)
Now this verse has always troubled me due to the fact that I have found so many corruptions, omissions and religious agenda driven translator changes elsewhere in the KJV Bible. This means, when it comes to Revelation I tread VERY carefully when interpreting it. In fact I seldom work on Revelation at all due to this severe warning verse hanging over it.
We then have an additional dimension to this verse, for there are satanic blind guide numbskulls, out there, that apply this verse to the WHOLE of The Bible when it applies to Revelation ONLY. This is the kind of blasphemous stupidity and ignorance I deal with regularly on social media platforms when confronting fakestream Bible scholars.
However, when it comes to, what appears to be, a contradiction in the pages of Revelation, it cannot be ignored. Furthermore, how do we know that words have not already been taken away from this book, or added, or changed by the 16th and 17th century translators, or even the writers of the Greek Manuscripts for that matter!? We don’t!
So without further ado let’s take a look at the suspect verses, and I will use the KJV as I have not yet worked on my MCV version of Revelation as yet.
Revelation 19:11-14 (KJV) And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and He that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He doth judge and make war. 12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns; and He had a name written, that no man knew, but He Himself. 13 And He was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and ‘his’? name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed Him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
Now the first thing that hits us is this horse, upon which Yashua Messiah is sat, and this horse is referred to as a HIM!!! Now who refers to animals as ‘hims’ and ‘hers’? (unless they’re your pets) when the usual term here would be ‘IT’.
This word ‘him’ is translated from the Greek word ‘autos’, pronounced ‘ow-tos’. In my Greek Interlinear is uses ‘auton’, but they also use ‘autou’ as well. This Greek word seems to be very flexible, for it can mean ‘him’, ‘himself’ ‘her’ ‘his’ ‘itself’ or ‘it’ etc. etc..
In addition to this, my Greek Interlinear has two renderings of Revelation 19:11 with one saying ‘him’ and the other saying ‘it’ using the Greek word ‘auton’. This means we know that the Greek word ‘auton’ can mean either ‘it’ or ‘him’ and all determined by the whims of the translators or perhaps I should say by the agenda of the translators.
OK, I will now deviate from this article, for a while, and draw your attention to my earlier article entitled: “The Truth of John 1:1-4” (see link No. 1 below). In that article I prove that The Word otherwise called The Saying, in the Greek MSS, is The Set Apart Exclusive Spirit (aka The Holy Spirit in religious jargon terminology) and not Yashua Messiah at all. Yes The Saying (The Word) emanates from Yashua Messiah, from His Breath but, in and of itself, The Saying (The Word) is not Yashua Messiah – The Saying (The Word), or the POWER of The Saying (The Word), is the Set Apart Exclusive Spirit.
So back to these verses in Revelation and I will copy The Greek Transliteral version of these verses here:
Revelation 19:11-14 (Greek Transliteral) And I-perceived the heaven having-been-up-opened and you-be-perceiving horse white and the One-sitting on it believing being-called and truthful and in just-togetherness (righteousness) he-is-judging and battling 12 the yet viewers (the eyes) of-Him blaze-of-fire and on the head of-him diadems many having names having-been-written which not-yet-one has-perceived (which no one has seen nor is aware of) if no Himself 13 And having-been-about-cast cloak having-been-dipped to-blood has-been-called the name of-it The Saying of-the God placer 14 and the war-troops in the heaven followed to-Him on horses white having-been-in-slipped cotton (cambric) white and clean. (Brackets mine)
I will now rewrite Revelation as it should be:
Revelation 19:11-14 (MCV) And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and He that sat upon it was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He doth judge and make war. 12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns; and He had a name written, that no man knew, but He Himself. 13 And He was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and its name is called The Saying of Yah. 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed Him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
Notice this crucial difference from the KJV, and you might say, but that now makes no sense at all, as it is written, and you’re right, but what that says to me is that there is something wrong with the words that precede it. This also says to me that verse 13 is spurious by addition due to three things: 1) Elsewhere in The Greek MSS, in numerous places, the Set Apart Exclusive Spirit is referred to as an ‘it’ and not a ‘he’ or a ‘him’ (see link Nos. 1 & 2 below). 2) We have a contradiction in that only Yashua Messiah knows His name in verse 12 and then we’re told His name is The Word of God in verse 13. 3) If we join verse 12 to verse 14 leaving out verse 13 what do we have?
Lets take a look:
Revelation 19:12, 14 (MCV) His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns; and He had a name written, that no man knew, but He Himself. 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed Him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
See that? Beautiful text continuum!! making verse 13 a load of irrelevant and erroneous nonsense. However, I am not going to remove it, as I do not wish to risk my name being removed from The Book of Life, but when I get to Revelation in my MCV Bible, I will certainly highlight this verse and expose it for what it is.
Moreover, I will also draw a parallel with a verse I discovered in 1 Corinthians 15, that is, verse 29, which is also spurious, and this spuriousness has caused a lot of trouble amongst believing Christians for centuries, with them arguing over it non-stop and getting nowhere (see link No. 3 below). Likewise with this verse we get believing Christians going at it hammer and tong over whether the alleged cloak of Yashua Messiah was dipped in His Blood or the blood from the battle field.
Finally, and to sum up, what do we have? This: that Yashua Messiah is NOT The Word of Yah but, rather, The Set Apart Exclusive Spirit, thereby making verse 13 a lie! Plus we have this contradiction of His name only being known by Him and no one else, and in the next verse we’re told His name is The Word of Yah!!!! Ding! Ding! Hello!! Excuse me!
So there we have it, yet more solid gold proof that The Word or, better, The Saying is the Set Apart Exclusive Spirit and it’s an ‘IT’ not a ‘he’ or ‘him’, so therefore cannot be Yashua Messiah as claimed in verse 13, but it is The Set Apart Exclusive Spirit which emanates from Yashua Messiah and The Father.
Now this verse in 1 Corinthians 15 is very interesting, but not for reasons that you might at first imagine for, in my opinion, this is not a Scripture at all, and yet there it is in the penultimate chapter of 1 Corinthians. This is a bogus verse, having already caused many, many, many hours of wasted time for Bible scholars of all denominations (demon-inations), who have spent those hours trying to explain it, but failing every time, NEVER coming to a satisfactory conclusion. Quite a few of them refer to it as the most perplexing and difficult verse to understand in all the writings of Paul, even in the whole of the New Testament. So when I read these views in their papers my Spiritual antennae went into overdrive, and they flashed their helpful warning lights at me.
This means that I immediately ceased doing by own research on this nonsensical verse, resulting in only three or four hours of wasted time. However, it was still three of four hours of precious time that I could have used more productively, now that I am embroiled in writing my own version of the Set Apart Scriptures, which, as you can imagine, is a mammoth task, even with the assistance of computer technology.
So, as is my want, let’s copy and paste the culprit verse here from one or seven Bible Versions; starting with my version – The MCV, followed by the KJV, The Greek Transliteral, The Scriptures 2009, The Good News Bible, The Phillips NT and The Amplified Bible:
1 Corinthians 15:29 (MCV) Else what shall they do, that is, those which are Baptised for the Spiritually dead, if the dead rise not at all? And why are they then Baptised for their sake?
1 Corinthians 15:29 (KJV) Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?
1 Corinthians 15:29 (The Greek Transliteral) Else (any) what? They-shall-be-doing the ones-being-baptised for-sake-of dead-ones if absolutely (wholly) dead-ones not are-being-roused why also they-are-being baptised for-sake-of them.
1 Corinthians 15:29 (The Scriptures 2009) Otherwise, what shall they do who are immersed for the dead, if the dead are not raised at all? Why indeed are they immersed for the dead?
1 Corinthians 15:29 (Good News Bible) Now, what about those people who are baptized for the dead? What do they hope to accomplish? If it is true, as some claim, that the dead are not raised to life, why are those people being baptized for the dead?
1 Corinthians 15:29 (The Phillips NT) Further, you should consider this, that if there is to be no resurrection what is the point of some of you being baptised for the dead by proxy? Why should you be baptised for dead bodies?
1 Corinthians 15:29 (The Amplified Bible) Otherwise, what will those do who are being baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people even baptized for them?
Right, first question! What is this satanic drivel all about? Answer: Baptism for the sake of the dead, whether they are Spiritually dead, or completely dead, is what it’s all about!
How is that even a thing? How is it Scriptural? And why is Paul even mentioning it? when it’s not Scriptural, for NO ONE can be Baptised for the sake of another man or woman, whether they are Spiritually dead or completely dead. The whole thing is ludicrous, and 100% erroneous, so why is this verse in 1 Corinthians 15? And why has Paul not exposed it for what it is?
In the previous verses we have this:
1 Corinthians 15:23-28 But each man in his own order: The Messiah – The Anointed being the first-fruits; afterwards they that are The Messiah’s – The Anointed’s at His coming to be near at hand. 24 Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up The Kingdom to Yah The Father; when He shall have neutered, and rendered useless, all ruling principalities, and all authorities and power structures on this earth. 25 For He must Reign and rule His Kingdom with a Royal Sceptre of iron, till He hath put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27 For The Father hath put all things under His Son’s feet. But when The Father says: “All things have been put into subjection under my Son,” it is clear that The Father, who put all things in subjection under Him, is excepted, because The Father is not in subjection to His own Son. 28 And when all things shall be subjected unto The Son, then shall The Son also Himself be subject unto The Father that put all things under Him, that Yah The Father may be all in all.
Notice how verse 29 starts, for it reads as if it is a continuation of what’s been written before in the previous verse….else what shall they do?…. Yet this short opening phrase bears no relation to verse 28 at all!
Notice also the subject matter of the whole passage, for it has NOTHING to do with Baptism, let alone Baptism for the sake of others, so what’s going on? This thing has echoes of the other examples of spurious additions to the KJV I have revealed in the past: (see link Nos. 1, 2 & 3 below).
OK, so let’s see one or two examples of what these Bible scholars say:
From the: “For What Saith The Scriptures” web page, which I do not recommend:
“This is probably the most mysterious verse in all of the Pauline epistles—yea, in all the Bible. I doubt there is a person on earth who could fully explain it.”
He’s probably right, and that’s why it’s in there. For me, this verse stinks of sabotage and subversion by satanic Hellenising religious philosophers of the late first century and early second century AC, who wanted to mock Baptism. Plus to generally confuse believers on a huge scale and bog them down in endless research, studies and debates.
Look folks, I’ll tell you straight, just web search this verse and witness the number of web sites all attempting their silly meaningless explanations, when all the while no explanation exists, and is totally impossible to unravel – it’s a trap, or what they call today, in the modern vernacular, a ‘sting operation’! It can also be likened to an ‘Alice in Wonderland’ or ‘Through The Looking Glass’ blind rabbit hole, which leads us nowhere = the obvious intention of the saboteurs from the start!
Needless to say The Mormons (The Church of Latter Day Saints) are big on this verse and practise Baptism for the dead.
So were there any examples of this phenomenon in The Assemblies of Yah in Paul’s day? No, of course not, but certain pagan heathen water rituals were not unheard of.
From Wikipedia we get this:
“Baptism for the dead is mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15:29 as proof of a physical resurrection, though the exact meaning of the phrase is an open question among scholars. The plainest reading of the Greek text suggests vicarious baptisms performed by the living on behalf of the deceased, but some scholars dispute whether Paul approved of the practice or whether the verse truly refers to an actual physical practice among early Christians. Early heresiologists Epiphanius of Salamis (Panarion 28) and Chrysostom (Homilies 40) attributed the practice respectively to the Cerinthians and to the Marcionites, whom they identified as heretical “Gnostic” groups, while Ambrosiaster and Tertullian affirmed that the practice was legitimate and found among the New Testament Christians (though Tertullian later recanted his original beliefs in his later life as he became associated with Montanism)”
In this little piece we can see another reason for this satanic verse, that is, they have used it in a pathetic attempt to try and prove their blasphemous PHYSICAL resurrection garbage, when The Resurrection is a SPIRITUAL resurrection (see link No. 4 below). We then get a connection to Marcion and the Gnostics, who, apparently, practised this satanic ritual.
Next we have this Cerinthus creature who was a Serpent Seed Canaanite Jew, and active in the apostate Hellenised church…. (see link No. 5 below):
Cerinthus:
“One of a sect of early heretics, followers of Cerinthus, a Jew believed to have been born before the crucifixion, and one of the first heresiarchs in the (counterfeit) church. (Brackets mine)
“One of an ancient religious sect, so called from Cerinthus, a Jew, who attempted to unite the doctrines of Christ with the opinions of the Jews and Gnostics.”
….along with, the religious criminal Tertullian who, surprise surprise, also practised this blasphemous ritual – he seems to pop up everywhere, and always where there are evil shenanigans going on. My file on this reprobate is growing considerably, and I might even have enough evidence for an article on him alone. Watch this space.
OK I think that just about wraps it up. If you want to do more research on it, feel free, and also leave a comment, but I have wasted too much time on it already, and will happily strike it through when I publish 1 Corinthians in my MCV version.
In Yashua Messiah’s Set Apart name
Messenger Charles
1. Romans 13:1-7 Do Sons and Daughters of Yah Have To Obey Secular or Religious Authorities?:
Roman Catholicism is NOT Christianity; Eastern (Russian & Greek) Orthodoxy is NOT Christianity; AngliCAINism is NOT Christianity; PROTESTantism is NOT Christianity.
5. The Counterfeit Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion:
Now this is going to be a very interesting article, and one that I had not been planning, for the subject matter only came to light a few days ago on the 14thNovember 2022. My earlier view on it was that the origins of The Adversarywere just as Genesis 3:1 has it, that is, that The Serpent Creature was the most crafty, devious and cunningBeast of The Field that The Yahavah Yahhad made, but as it turns out, I was duped by yet another corruption in the KJV Bible.
OK, so let’s get the crucial Scripture written here:
Genesis 3:1 (MCV) Now The Serpent Creature was more devious, cunning and crafty than any [Beast of The Field] which The Yahavah Yah (The Elohim) HAD MADE. And he said unto the woman (Eve), Yea, hath Yah said, Ye shall not eat of every ‘Tree’ of The Garden?
There we have it, or should I say there we have their gross deception, and how did I come to the conclusion that it is a gross deception? With GREAT difficulty, I can tell you that, for I have been working on this topic for several days solid, and without let up, because each and every way I turned I was stone walled when trying to make sense of the whole idea that this Serpent Creature was formed from the ground a physical living breathing creature, and yet at the same time supposed to be a spiritual creature with the ability to reason, walk upright and talk, that is, the Devil, and as we read in Revelation:
Revelation 20:1-2 (MCV) And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having The Key of The Bottomless Pit and a great chain in his hand. 2 And he laid hold on The Dragon, that Old Serpent, which is The Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years.
However, this past several days has not been wasted, for I have learned one or two other things, along the way, as you do, once you start Biblical word searches and studies. So the first thing I learned was that the word ‘Satan’ can nowhere be found in the Hebrew Masoretic Texts of the Old Testament. Each and every time it’s found in the English translations it has been mistranslated from the word ‘Adversary’, so Adversary is the word that should be written there, not Satan. I now believe there’s question mark over this word ‘Satan’ too, but that’s a subject for another day.
Moving on, I was next confronted in my searches online, by numerous sites ranting and raving about a pre-Adamic beast species, allegedly Negroids, that is, based on the erroneous ideas that: 1) the beasts of the field were two legged humanoid upright creatures, half hu-man and half animal, and not natural quadruped animals, and 2) that Genesis chapter 1 was a first creation, and Genesis chapter 2, with Adam and Eve, as a second creation – all 100% bogus, I might add. How do I know it’s bogus? Easy, and I’ll post just two verses here in order to prove my point:
Genesis 1:27 (MCV) So The Yahavah Yah (The Elohim) created man (Hebrew ‘aw-dawm’ – Adam) in Their own image, in the image of Yah created He him; male and female created He them.
Genesis 2:7 (MCV) And The Yahavah Yah formed man (Hebrew ‘aw-dawm’ – Adam) of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath (the spirit) of life; and man became a living soul – a living creature.
So were there two Adams and two Eves? Furthermore, if Eve was the mother of ALL living, that is mankind and hu-mankind, what progeny did these other Adam’s and Eve’s produce? (See link No. 1 below)
Genesis 3:20 (MCV) And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living (Mankind and hu-mankind).
The next problem I had was that of understanding how a brute beast of the field could scheme, talk to and seduce (beguile) a woman (see link No. 2 below). Some say that The Adversary entered or possessed a serpent creature thereby enabling it to talk and to carry out The Adversary’s dastardly deed, but that would mean The Adversary had not actually done it, and the beast was just a proxy. And let’s be clear, for The Adversary wanted his genes and DNA impregnated into Eve, not those of some dumb beast. So that rules out the demonic possession nonsense.
I then had the issue of The Yahavah Yah declaring His creation as good and very good, so how could it be declared as such if there was an evil beast of the field, as a part of that very same creation, roaming around like a roaring lion looking for innocent victims to devour?
Genesis 1:18 (MCV) And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and Yah saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:31 (MCV) And Yah saw every thing that He had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
On top of this I also had this verse in the mix:
Revelation 13:8 (MCV) And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him (The Adversary), whose names are not written in The Book of Life of THE LAMB SLAIN FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD.
OK, so let me explain. If Yashua Messiah was The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, that meant that sin and evil HAD TO enter into the world or into the creation in order for this prophetic statement of Yashua Messiah’s to be true, and to come true. So when did evil and sin enter into the world or the creation? Answer: as soon as The Serpent Creature entered The Garden and seduced Eve = The Original Sin.
However, notice this important point. The Garden event didn’t occur until AFTER the creation was finished, and The Spiritual Serpent Creature had been made before the creation, so was not a part of it.
So, at this point, I began getting suspicious, and having already proven that Genesis 4:1 is a corrupted spurious verse (see link No. 3 below), why not Genesis 3:1 as well. OK, I am fairly sure that this is just a coincidence, but you never know.
Today, (17th November 2022) I came across a web page that proposed the idea that the heavenly Four Beasts (Living Creatures) of Revelation 4 had once been Five Beasts (Living Creatures) with The Adversary being the fifth, as one with the head of a Serpent, but who left his first estate in order to play around being a hu-man, as did the so-called ‘sons’ of Yah in Genesis 6.
Now this made sense to me, as he would not have been a part of the physical creation, so thereby not tarnishing it by being a part of it, and leaving the creation clear to be classified as good and very good by The Yahavah Yah. Let’s face it, as a heavenly beast he would have been a usurper from outside and not a part of the physical creation.
This now left me with the task of rewording the verse, so that it made sense and here it is:
Genesis 3:1 (MCV) Now The Serpent Creature was more devious, cunning and crafty than any Beast of Heaven which The Yahavah Yah (The Elohim) HAD MADE. And he said unto the woman (Eve), Yea, hath Yah said, Ye shall not eat of every ‘Tree’ of The Garden?
Another thing that didn’t sit right with me was the use of the two words ‘HAD MADE’ when referring to a ‘beast of the field’, when it should have read ‘had been formed from the ground’. ‘HAD MADE’ sounded a far more appropriate term in reference to the making of angels, when beasts of the earth were formed from the ground.
So there you have it, that Old Serpent was ALWAYS a spirit being and MADE crafty, devious and cunning by The Yahavah Yah, hence he left his first estate in order to pursue his evil career, but with the added ability to become physical and seduce Eve.
If any of you has a problem with the idea of The Yahavah Yah creating things evil, then Scripture will bear me out (see link No. 4 below):
Proverbs 16:4 (MCV) The Yahavah hath made all things for Himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.
In Yashua Messiah’s name
Messenger Charles
1. Hu; Hu-mans; Cainites; Canaanites; The Serpent Seed:
Now this article should really be Part 5 of my series of articles: “Did Eve Have Sex With The Devil, Or Did She Just Eat Some Fruit?” (See link No.1 below), so I will be adding it to that page, whilst leaving this article as a stand alone article. Moreover, I have dealt with this subject within that series of articles, but due to my having discovered more proof and evidence, this week commencing 13th February 2022, that shows that Genesis 4:1 in its KJV rendering is 100% bunkum and hogwash. It therefore behoved me to share this additional Truth about the damnable translation of this verse.
Here is the bogus verse in question, as written in the KJV:
Genesis 4:1 (KJV) And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from The Lord.
OK, so let me make this known first of all, for this will be mostly the work of a man by the name of Clifton A. Emahiser who was knowledgable in THE SEEDLINE DOCTRINE, as it is known by some, but not by me, I call it The Two Seeds Truth. Moreover, he wasn’t correct in all his teaching, which I will reveal in another article. So here are his opening remarks on Genesis 4:1:
“THE PROBLEM WITH GENESIS 4:1
“Many may reply, “I didn’t know there was a question concerning that verse.” Unless one understands that the Hebrew is badly corrupted on this passage, he will, like most everyone else who has ever read it, arrive at a mistaken conclusion. Before we start an evaluation to discover the ramifications, let’s read it according to the KJV: “And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord.
“Genesis 4:1 is probably one of the most misunderstood verses in the Bible. This is really an understatement of fact to say the least. On the understanding of this verse, lies the entire theme of the Bible. Actually Genesis 3:15 is the main theme of the Bible, but without a correct understanding of Genesis 4:1, the theme becomes muddled and confused!Therefore it is of the utmost importance that one gain an understanding of this verse or the entire Bible will remain a mystery! It is with this thought, that the object of this Bible study is to completely master this passage so that the story of the Bible can be opened up to us in all of its splendour and brilliance.”
Later, he then goes on to say:
“It would appear, if this were the only verse in the Bible that had anything to say about this matter of the birth of Cain, and if the King James version of the Bible were the only version of the Bible we had, that we would have to accept the fact that Adam was the father of Cain. You see, here is the problem, Adam was not the father of Cain! Not only are the “Jews” of today not of Adam, but they know themselves they are descended from Cain. Let’s see who the “Jew” admits himself to be. In the “Jewish” publication Liberal Judaism, January, 1949, there is an article entitled, “Liberal Judaism and Israel” written by one of their greatest and most renowned Rabbis, Dr. Abba Hillel Silver. Dr. Silver, writing about the then new State of Israel says:
{“’ … the third commonwealth of the Jewish Nation is thus an accomplished fact. The State of Israel exists.
{“’As a result the concept of the wandering Jew is bound eventually to disappear along with the term (galut) exile. All nations send forth immigrants to all parts of the world. People are continually moving from one country to another, and change their citizenship, but they are not regarded as exiles.
{“’This fact alone – the end of national exile for the Jewish people, as such —is destined to affect favourably the psyche of the Jew throughout the world. It will endow the Jew, wherever he lives, with a self respect and a sense of security, a normal tone, long-wanting in Jewish experience. For the curse of Cain, the curse of being an outcast and a “wanderer” over the face of the earth has been removed …’”}
So here, Emahiser, in using this quote from Rabbi Silver, has proven to us that the Jews KNOW WHO THEY ARE, and that they definitely KNOW who they are descended from, and, just as they knew in the first century, when they lied to Yashua Messiah our future King, when they claimed that: “They were not born of fornication”.
John 8:40-41 (MCV) But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you The Truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham. 41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to Him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
Notice, that they did not say they have Abraham as their father, they went straight to The Garden event claiming to be sons of Adam – a part of God’s creation, and thereby denied (they lied) that they were the Devil’s sons through Cain.
For further evidence, we now go to the immense work called “The Interpreter’s Bible”, which I only learned of at the commencement of this study. The Interpreter’s Bible, is a twelve volume work of 36 editors who worked together in order to produce it. It is available online at this web address:
“Cain seems originally to have been the ancestor of the Kenites … The meaning of the name is ‘metalworker’ or ‘smith’; here, however, it is represented as a derivation of a word meaning ‘acquire’, ‘get’ — one of the popular etymologies frequent in Genesis — hence the mother’s words I have gotten a man. ‘From the Lord’ (KJV) is a rendering, following the Septuagint (LXX) and Vulgate., of ’eth Yahweh, which is literally, ‘with Yahweh’, and so unintelligible here (the help of [RSV] is not in the Hebrew). It seems probable that ’eth should be ’oth — so, ‘the mark of Yahweh’ — and that the words are a gloss …”
Did you notice that? As Genesis 4:1 is written in the KJV it is taken from the Hebrew term ‘Eth Yahweh’ meaning ‘with Yahweh’ or better ‘laying with Yahweh in order to conceive’ which, as they have correctly said, is unintelligible or utter nonsense, and it is from this very same nonsense that they conjured up the erroneous term: “I have gotten a man from the Lord.”
This can be firmed up from The Geneva Bible where it states:
Genesis 4:1 (Geneva Bible) Afterward the man knew Eve his wife, which conceived and bare Cain, and said, I have obtained a man by the LORD.
This interpretation clearly leads us to believe that Eve lay with The Lord in order to conceive, which has already been declared here as preposterous. However, at the same time, it is also telling us that Eve definitely conceived by someone other than Adam!
If we now go to the other writings that I used to support The Truth in my original article, and post them here, we’ll see how they make even more sense now that I have revealed Emahiser’s findings:
First from the Aramaic Targums:
“Genesis 4:1 And the woman saw Sammael, the angel of death, and she was afraid and knew that the tree was good for food, and that it was a remedy for the enlightenment of the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise. She took of its fruit and ate and also gave (it) to her husband and he ate.”
Second from the Aramaic Targum,pseudo-Jonathan:
“Genesis 4:1 Adam knew that his wife Eve had conceived from Sammael the Angel (of death) and she became pregnant and bore Cain. And he was like those on high and not like those below. And she said: ‘I have got a man from the angel of the LORD’.”
Third fromthe Targum Onkelos: THE TARGUM OF PALESTINE IV:
“Genesis 4:1 And Adam knew Hava (Eve) his wife, who had desired (lusted after) the Angel; and she conceived, and bare Kain; and she said, I have acquired a man, (from) the angel of the Lord. And she added to bear from her husband Adam his twin, (superfetation) even Habel (Abel). And Habel was a shepherd of the flock, but Kain was a man working in the earth. (All brackets mine)
Fourth from the Rabbinic work of Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer: (See link below.)
“Genesis 4:1 And she saw that his likeness was not of earthly beings, but of the heavenly beings, and she prophesied and said: I have gotten a man from the Lord.”
So there we have it, Eve NEVER said “I have gotten a man from the Lord” but rather: “I have gotten a man from the angel of death – The Serpent Creature!!”
I will add further articles to this series as I am sure more evidence will reveal itself.
In Yashua Messiah’s Set Apart name
Messenger Charles
1. Did Eve Have Sex With The Devil or Did She Just Eat Some Fruit?:
OK, now the first issue that arises out of this title is who were these Jews? for until we ascertain who they really were, we’re not going to fully understand this question, or this issue. We then have to see the word ‘synagogue’ in The Light of the Holy Scriptures for, again, unless we know for sure what ‘synagogues’ represent, we’ll flounder in the dark.
So let’s get this second point firmly set in our minds and onto our hearts of Truth, because there is NOTHING positive about synagogues, and the only synagogue mentioned by name in the Holy Scriptures is this one here, and it’s mentioned twice! just so we get it!
Revelation 2:9 (KJV) I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are The Synagogue of Satan.
Revelation 3:9 (KJV) Behold, I will make them of The Synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.
These verses tell us, without any ambiguity, that there’s only one kind of synagogue – SATAN’S SYNAGOGUE, for there is no other.
Right, so who were these ‘Jews’ that said they were Jews, but were lying? Now here we have the usual type of translator’s error that we find so often in the pages of the KJV, and which I reveal in so many of my articles. So let’s go straight to Strong’s Concordance for some insight:
Jews – G2453 – Ἰουδαῖος Ioudaîos, ee-oo-dah’-yos; from G2448 (in the sense of G2455 as a country); Judæan, that is, belonging to Jehudah:—Jew(-ess), of Judæa.
OK, the first thing we must understand here is The Truth that the word ‘Jew’, as used in the KJV, is 100% a misnomer, for it is automatically and deceptively leading us to believe that the word ‘Jew’ is referring to the Hebrew Israelites, The Chosen People of God, when NOTHING could be further from The Truth.
This means that these Jews were Jews who thought they were Judeans, but were not Judeans at all, for Judeans were Semitic Hebrew Israelites, and these ‘Jews’ claimed, falsely, that they were Judeans. These impostors, known as ‘Jews’, were/are, in Truth, Hamitic Canaanites from Bathshuah the Canaanitess, through her son Shelah, as recorded in Genesis 38, so they were NOT Judean Semitic Israelites at all. These days they openly admit it!:
“We are a chosen people. Most Jews do not like to admit it but our god is Lucifer and we Jews are his chosen people. Lucifer is very much alive.”
— The Jew, Harold W. Rosenthal
“Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a ‘Jew’ or to call a contemporary Jew an ‘Israelite’ or a ‘Hebrew’. The first Hebrews may not have been Jews at all…”
— 1980 Jewish Almanac, p. 3.
This is why I call the Jews The Serpent Seed from The Garden (see link Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 below for all the historical proof and evidence that the Jews are nothing to do with The Chosen People – The Twelve Tribes of Israel).
So moving on, we have now learned that these Jews were not Semitic Israelites, so who were these Judeans? The Judeans were descendants of a remnant of the three Tribes of The House of Judah that returned from the Babylonian captivity, namely Royal Judahites, Levites (The Priesthood) and Benjaminites. As examples we had Mary Mariam and Joseph who were Royal Judahites, John the Baptist and his family who were Levites, and The Messenger Paul who was a Benjaminite. Joseph of Arimathea was likewise a Royal Judahite, and no doubt Nicodemus was also a Levite. However, NONE of these crucial Biblical characters were Jews!
All this information now brings us to the thorny issue of whether or not Paul REASONED with the Jews if, by ‘Jews’, Holy Scripture is referring to the Canaanite Jews. If that was the case and the people present in the synagogue were Canaanite Jews then there would have been no reasoning with them at all. Paul would have preached and declared The Gospel of The Kingdom of God and the Jews would have argued with Paul and sent him packing or, worse, attempted to have him arrested and after a rigged trial had him put to death, most likely stoning him to death. This is how much the Jews hated The Gospel Message and thereby making any reasoning totally impossible.
However, if there had been Judahites, Levites and Benjaminites there present with these Canaanite Jews, then some kind of reasoning could have been possible, but always keeping in mind that unless The Father was calling these Judeans, they would also have been non-receptive to The Kingdom Gospel Message.
Moreover, all of you who have read my articles on “Theology and Theologians or Bible Intellectualism and Bible Intellectuals” (see link Nos. 6 and 7 below), will know my views and be aware of the compelling evidence I have gathered that proves them to be next to useless when it comes to matters Holy Spiritual and Scriptural. If you have not read them, I thoroughly recommend them to you now for, without the knowledge contained therein you are, and will always be, vulnerable to their deceitful and deceptive ways. Make no mistake these so called experts will lead you astray if you give them, not even, half a chance.
Back to the title question; well did he? Did Paul ‘reason’ with the Canaanite Jews in the Synagogues? In fact, as already stated, did Paul ‘reason’ with anyone? What if he did or he did not, what does it matter? It matters greatly for, if he didn’t, why is the word ‘reasoned’ in the Holy Scriptures at all?
Let’s deal with the question.
Did Paul reason with the Jews?
Well the KJV of The Holy Bible says he did so that must be it, yes? Actually, no is the plain and simple answer to that. To help us with this study I will list the relevant Holy Scriptures here:
Please take note that the word ‘reasoned’ cannot be found in any of Paul’s letters, nor in Hebrews. So this tells us that it’s a word that only Luke uses in Acts which immediately puts a question mark over it.
Acts 17:1-2 (KJV)Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures.
Acts 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.
Acts 18:19And he came to Ephesus, and left them there: but he himself entered into the synagogue, and reasoned with the Jews.
Acts 24:25 And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee.
There we are, four Holy Scriptures that Bible intellectuals and theologians love, especially Roman Catholic Bible intellectuals. Why do they love these Holy Scriptures? because they think that Paul was just like them, a debating, pontificating Bible intellectual or theologian, when nothing could be further from The Truth, and The Truth is Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ).
OK, let’s print Strong’s definition of this word:
Reasoned – G1256 – διαλέγομαι dialegomai dee-al-eg’-om-ahee. Middle voice from G1223 and G3004; to say thoroughly, that is, discuss (in argument or exhortation): – dispute, preach (unto), reason (with), speak.
Now here in Strong’s definition we can see some confusion through his contradictory remarks:
On one hand he says ‘dialegomai’ means: “To say thoroughly”; “To preach (unto)”; “To speak”; “To exhort.” Then on the other hand he says it means: “To discuss”; “To argue”; “To dispute”; “To reason.”
Now which is it, for it cannot be both?
In 2 Corinthians 12:20 Paul states quite clearly what he thinks of debating, reasoning and arguing:
2 Corinthians 12:20 (MCV) For I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates,(reasoning) envyings, wraths, strifes, (arguments) backbitings, whisperings, swellings, (haughtiness through puffed up meaningless intellectual vanity) tumults.
Is Paul a hypocrite? Is he giving advice and warnings to those he is teaching whilst he himself does the opposite!! Is this an example of the worldly norm of: “Don’t do as I do, just do as I tell you?” Is that what it’s all about – is that what Paul was saying here? I don’t think so, in fact I know so and we all know so, don’t we? if The Truth is in us.
Here is the bottom line: “Saying thoroughly”; “preaching unto”; “speaking and exhorting” is a one way street. These activities do not invite debate, unless you are opposed to the aforementioned declarations. We need to understand The Word of God is not up for debate, nor up for discussion, nor up for reasoning on for hours and hours. It is preached and either received or rejected; there is no half way house.
Paul went into the synagogues and preached and there stated his case (he said thoroughly) for Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ). Now there would have been some there that received Paul’s message joyfully, and others that would not have done so. Those who received it joyfully would have questioned Paul further initially being curious and then hungry for The Word of God, and wanting to know more. No doubt those who did not receive his message would have given him much opposition. This opposition would have come from the men of religion, but he would not have argued and reasoned with them. He would have said the same things to them as Yashua Messiah said to the Pharisee Canaanite Jews of His day. Hypocrites; whited sepulchres; nests of vipers etc. etc. The mindset that is opposed God – the carnal hu-man mindset cannot be reasoned with, it’s impossible and Paul knew this. See link No. 8 below)
Let’s not forget he was once one of them himself, a Pharisee, so he knew exactly how their minds worked. That’s why he stated this in Romans 8:6-7
Romans 8:6-7 (KJV) For to be carnally minded is death; but to be Spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
So there we have it; it’s either one or the other, called or not called.
Let’s now take a closer look at those Holy Scriptures that Bible intellectuals use to support their right to foolishly reason and pontificate on The Holy Word of God, something they are not Spiritually qualified to do.
1) “And three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures.”
What does this tell us? It tells us the opposite of The Truth. It says Paul reasoned with them for three Sabbath days, which means every Sabbath, for three consecutive weeks Paul went to this synagogue to preach The Word of God out of The Holy Scriptures. He didn’t reason out of the Holy Scriptures, for it is impossible for a Spirit born son of God to do so. Therefore to ‘say thoroughly’ is just another way of saying he spoke with confidence and authority; he taught, preached to or exhorted those present he didn’t reason. One only reasons with people who are in disagreement. If, as True Believers, we reason with the argumentative, we automatically give credence to their view. If someone was disagreeing with the Messenger Paul, whose servant do you think this trouble maker was? Only one chance for the right answer folks and no prizes for getting it right!
2) “And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.”
Here we go again; he ‘reasoned’ and persuaded the Jews Judeans and Greeks. No he didn’t, he ‘said thoroughly’ what the Holy Scriptures said and then they were persuaded. They were convinced by what they heard. How?
John 6:44 (MCV) 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.
This is how it works folks: The Father God calls a man or a woman to His Son and this is made possible by The Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit has not yet indwelled this convert yet, but he or she is receiving special attention from The Father through His Spirit. After this miraculous event, and a called person hears The Word of God preached or ‘said thoroughly’ by a messenger from God, he or she will respond positively, they can do nothing else. This is how these Israelite Judeans and Greeks were able to be ‘convinced’. The Father God was calling them and Paul was His messenger bringing them the Good News.
If we look at Strong’s definition for ‘persuaded’ it’s not the best word choice for this situation:
Persuaded – G3982 – πείθω peithō pi’-tho A primary verb; to convince (by argument, true or false); by analogy to pacify or conciliate (by other fair means); reflexively or passively to assent (to evidence or authority), to rely (by inward certainty): – agree, assure, believe, have confidence, be (wax) content, make friend, obey, persuade, trust, yield.
In order to satisfy The Truth of John 6:44 we need something better than ‘persuaded’ because to be ‘persuaded’ means a choice has been made and that is not the case at all as being saved is not up to us, it’s not our decision. Let’s assess this miracle properly: “To passively assent to”; “to trust and rely on with an inward certainty”; “to trust and be in agreement with”; “to have no doubts and total confidence that what we and they are hearing is The Truth.” All of the above is only possible through The Father making it possible through The Holy Spirit and Yashua Messiah with us for, where else would this inward certainty originate – from ourselves!!??
When Samuel the Prophet was called The Father God did not reason with him, He just called his name and Samuel replied: “Here am I.”
1 Samuel 3:4 (KJV) That the LORD called Samuel: and he answered, Here am I.
Have you noticed two things missing here – reasoning and persuasion, well, would you believe it? I do hope so, because the words ‘reasoned’ and ‘persuaded’ are the additions of Bible intellectuals, who over time have contaminated The Word of God through their personal religious agendas, and thereby reflected them in the pages of The Holy Bible.
As a final point, you could ‘argue’ that I am ‘reasoning’ with you to ‘persuade’ you with this article, right this minute, but again that would not be true unless The Father were already calling you to His Son. If that is the case you will need no reasoning or persuading, and I will certainly not have to argue with you. I am only the sower and the seed is The Word of God and you are either fertile soil or stony ground. Furthermore, I cannot tell you whether you are fertile soil or not, only you can answer this question for yourself, for you will either agree with me or disagree with me.
In Yashua Messiah’s Holy name
Messenger Charles
1. Did Eve Have Sex With The Devil or Did She Just Eat Some Fruit?:
This is my third article on this contentious issue, and I recently received some objections to my teaching on it via e-mail. This complainant was very agitated and vociferous, with all his e-mails written in block capitals. Why do people shout when they are in error? Do they think people are going to take more notice of what they are saying if they shout? I suppose they must, but is this the case? I don’t think so, in fact I know so, because all it does is makes them sound and look foolish, combined with The Truth that text written in all-caps is harder to read than upper/lower text, and the writer thereby self-defeated.
So what were his objections? His objections were based on Old Testament Holy Scriptures where it states, and I will quote:
Leviticus 22:18 (MCV) Speak unto Aaron, and to his sons, and unto all The Children of Israel, and say unto them, Whatsoever he be of The House of Israel, or of the strangers in Israel, that will offer his oblation for all his vows, and for all his freewill offerings, which they will offer unto The Yahavah for a burnt offering.
OK, the pesky word is written there, but does it change anything that I have not already covered in my previous two articles? Let’s return to some of my teaching just to clarify. Man is a fallen being, a lost being, an unsaved being and that is his overall condition, into which he is born, and he cannot be rescued from that condition until he is called by The Father Yah to His Son Yashua Messiah, and regenerated through water Baptism (full immersion), and the gifting of The Set Apart Exclusive [Holy] Spirit.
Genesis 3:5 (KJV) For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Genesis 3:22 (MCV) And The Yahavah Yah said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil.
Here is the fallen condition, and notice what Yah says: “He is become as one of us,” that is, to know ‘good’ and to know evil, to have the knowledge of these two ways of behaving or living. This means from that moment in time (when Adam and Eve fell) man knew about being ‘good’ and about being evil. It also meant he would now be capable of both actions, good, kind or generous actions, even loving actions, or evil, cruel and spiteful actions.
Now if we transfer this reality of The Truth of man’s overall fallen condition to so called ‘freewill offerings’, does this mean that man has had freewill all along and the fall of man in the Garden of Eden didn’t take place. For, make no mistake, this is what it means. It also means man had free will after he fell. For if we say we have free will, it means the fall of man never took place, and we are all free from the bondage of sin and are therefore free, so, by default, we must have free will and we are free to choose. The other issue, and far more important, being that there would been no need for Yashua Messiah to come and die for us.
This, though, flies in the face of The Truth, for in the fallen condition we are slaves to sin, we are lost, so how can we be free. OK, so we are slaves to sin, so what does that mean in terms of will, because we now know it’s not free will that we possess, for we are slaves and slaves have no freedom whatsoever. We have will, certainly, but it’s not free. As mankind we can only have one of two wills, either it’s The Adversary’s will, or it’s the Father Yah’s will, we certainly don’t have any will of our own, and this is what it means to be fallen or lost.
How can that be I hear you ask? Quite simply because Yah is in charge, but so, in a lesser way, is the other god – the god of this world – The Adversary. The difference being, the god of this world or this age is soon to lose all his power, but at this moment in time he is still the god of this world and people of this world do his will – period – full stop – end of.
So what is his will? His will is that people believe his lies and that they do it continually, just as they did from day one in The Garden. People love to be lied to, and that’s why they vote for politicians; why they think politicians are on their side; it’s why they go to ‘church’; it’s why they follow religions of all descriptions. It’s all lies and deceptions of The Adversary and people love them!! These are nothing but outward displays of the lost, fallen condition and man can behave in no other way – he’s fallen. Paul confirms this for us:
Romans 8:7 (MCV) Because the carnal mind is enmity (open hostility) against Yah: for it is not subject to The Law of Yah, neither indeed can be.
Apart from that, it is also The Adversary’s will that man behaves in accordance with the knowledge he acquired when he fell in the Garden of Eden. This issue is of paramount importance when we deal with issue of ‘freewill’ offerings, and it also confirms that The Adversary maintains his deception through people doing ‘good’ as well as doing evil. If he got people to do evil and only evil his cover would soon be blown, and all people would see him for what he is. No, he is the arch-deceiver and he deceives the whole world, apart from one group of people – The Assemblies of Yah, otherwise known as The Ecclesia, those set apart called and chosen out of this world by The Father.
Freewill offerings – H5071 – nᵉdâbâh, ned-aw-baw’; from H5068; properly (abstractly) spontaneity, or (adjectively) spontaneous; also (concretely) a spontaneous or (by inference, in plural) abundant gift:—free(-will) offering, freely, plentiful, voluntary(-ily, offering), willing(-ly), offering).
So to press on, there are seventeen verses in the OT where we will find the word ‘freewill’ and the above verse from Leviticus is one of them. The first problem we have with the usage of this word is the usual one of translation error, for if we look in the Hebrew version of the OT we find the word ‘voluntary’ is used. In other words it’s voluntary offerings, not freewill offerings, and there is a subtle difference between these two words. Mr Strong in his concordance gives it as ‘spontaneous’ but has any of this shown that man has free will? No, not at all. Therefore the use of the word ‘freewill’ is definitely misleading, and it is definitely a translator’s choice, so therefore gratuitous, when the word ‘spontaneous’ would work far better and not mislead. These voluntary offerings were a display of ‘good’ works, the ‘good’ part of the ‘good’ and evil make up of fallen man, and sometimes they were offerings that were given for a reason – there was a motive or an agenda.
In Ezra we find voluntary offerings being given towards helping with the construction of the Temple:
Ezra 1:4 (MCV) And whosoever remaineth in any place where he sojourneth, let the men of his place help him with silver, and with gold, and with goods, and with beasts, beside the freewill offering for The House of Yah that is in Jerusalem.
As I have already stated, all these acts of generosity were acts of ‘goodness’ and therefore fall under the umbrella of the fallen condition, for man has the knowledge of ‘good’ and evil. This means these acts of giving offerings were not ‘freewill offerings’ they were fallen condition offerings, ‘spontaneous’ acts of ‘goodness’ within that fallen condition.
To decide between doing ‘good’ or evil is all part of The Adversary’s deception, so that people like my complainant think free will is involved when deciding whether to do ‘good’ or not. Which ever thing we decide to do, the things we are doing are still The Adversary’s will, not our own will, for it is all part and parcel of the fallen condition. There is no escape from it until we are born of Yah (born again).
John 8:32 (MCV) And ye shall know The Truth (Yashua Messiah), and The Truth (Yashua Messiah) shall make you free
John 8:36 (MCV) If The Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
We need to get these verses into our heads, and written on our hearts, for they tell us plainly and simply that only Faith and belief in Yashua Messiah can set us free, and thereby give us free will. And who gives us the ability to believe – Yashua Messiah Himself through The Father’s call, His will, not our will.
John 6:44 (MCV) 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.
In addition to all I have said thus far, another excellent example of this ‘good’ issue is the British liberal reformers of the nineteenth century. They did all manner of what they thought were ‘good works’ and kind deeds and some of them were, indeed, good and kind works. They were kindly, well meaning people, and they ‘chose’ to do these ‘good deeds’, but unless they were born of Yah (born again) these people’s actions and choices were still only do-gooding acts within the lost and fallen condition, just like the ‘spontaneous’ offerings in Leviticus.
If these reformers were not born of Yah (born again), their motive for doing ‘good’ was not for Yah’s Glory but, rather, for their own glory, and for the benefit of mankind. Yah was not in the picture, and that means His will was not in the picture either. So if Yah’s will was not involved in these do-gooding acts of kindness, whose will was it? Why, it was The Adversary’s will via man’s ‘choices’ within the fallen condition, so it could not be a free will decision, any more than the so called free will offerings in Leviticus were.
These were acts of ‘good’ emanating from men who had the knowledge of ‘good’ and evil – the fallen condition. Whatever man does, whether it be ‘good’ or evil, he is still a slave, a slave to sin, until he is born of Yah (born again) and he has no free will until that happens.
Ever heard the expression: “Only the good die young!?” Is it true? Well it’s my belief that if fallen people are too good in The Adversary’s eyes, he takes them out, because he hates them doing all their good deeds – or he hates them if they have a kind disposition and they love their neighbours on a daily basis. To The Adversary this is not the right kind of behaviour for someone in the fallen condition, for only the right kind of do-gooding is allowed = self-centred do-gooding, not selfless do-gooding.
I trust this will help you all (including my complainant) to come to a clearer understanding of the issue of fallen man’s ‘will’ for it is most definitely not free.
This article is an important postscript to part one which is essential reading before reading this article so please take time out to read that first (see link below – thank you).
Now having compiled the first article, I was soon drawn by Yashua Messiah to another Holy Scripture in Revelation. This, whilst doing some study on The End Times, and the soon coming return of Yashua Messiah to commence rule over His Kingdom as King of kings and Lord of lords, on King David’s Throne, on this earth. Moreover, this End Times subject will involve another article, or series of articles, over which I have been cogitating for many years, and I jest not.
However, what of these Holy Scriptures in Revelation? I’ll copy and paste them here:
Revelation 19:11-13 (KJV) And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and He that sat upon him IT was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He doth judge and make war. 12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns; and He had a name written, that no man knew, but He Himself. 13 And He was clothed with a vesture (cloak or garment) dipped in blood: and his‘autos’ ITS name is called The Word of God. (Strike through, brackets and emphasis mine)
Revelation 19:11-13 (Greek Transliteral) And I perceived the heaven having-been-up-opened and (you)-be-perceiving horse white and the one-sitting on IT believing being-called and Truthful and in just-togetherness He-is-judging and is-battling 12 The yet viewers of-Him blaze of-fire and on the head of-Him diadems many having names having-been-written which not-yet-one has-perceived if no He 13 and having-been-about-cast cloak having-been-dipped to-blood and has-been-called the name [Him] ‘autos’ of-IT The Saying of-the God(placer).
Here in Revelation 19:13 we see some differences between the Greek Transliteral and the KJV (well would you believe it!? – the usual mirth here for the author) Here in verse twelve we have a ‘name’ whereas in the Greek Transliteral we have ‘names’ plural. Then we have what seems to be a translators whimsical driven choice of ‘HIM’ rather than ‘IT’ when referring to the horse. I won’t say agenda driven here because in this instance I am not sure that it is an agenda driven issue. Moreover, let me draw your attention to verse eleven to set the precedent where it says: “and behold a white horse; and He that sat upon him IT was called Faithful and True.”
Now in this verse we have the same Greek word ‘autos’ which can mean ‘it’; ‘he’; ‘him’; ‘himself’ and in the KJV the horse is definitely referred to as a ‘him’ and yet the Greek MSS has it as an ‘IT’, so the translators chose ‘autos’ as ‘HIM’ instead of ‘IT’ just as we would normally refer to an animal, unless we’re into humanising animals, as many people do today and would refer to it as a him.
From Strong’s Concordance:
Him; Himself; He; It – G846 – αὐτός autós, ow-tos’; – from the particle αὖ aû (perhaps akin to the base of G109through the idea of a baffling wind) (backward); the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other persons:—her, it(-self), one, the other, (mine) own, said, (self-), the) same, ((him-, my-, thy- )self, (your-)selves, she, that, their(-s), them(-selves), there(-at, – by, -in, -into, -of, -on, -with), they, (these) things, this (man), those, together, very, which. Compare G848.
How does a baffling wind become a ‘he’ or a ‘him’? Perhaps it’s best that we don’t even go there. OK, so we’ve set the precedent, which needs now to be applied in verse thirteen. Confused? Don’t worry, for all will be explained.
In verse thirteen in the KJV we are led to believe that: “and He had a name written, that no man knew, but He Himself” and then straight away in13 “And He was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and His name is called The Word of God”.
Have you noticed this before? In one breath it’s a name written that that no man knew apart from Yashua Messiah Himself, and in the next breath it’s: “His name is called The Word of God!” Hello! Excuse me! How does that work? Easy, for this is how it works:
Verse thirteen once more: And He was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and [His] ITS name is called The Word (The Saying) of God (Please refer to part one if you haven’t already done so).
OK so what am I saying here? Quite simply I am saying that Yashua Messiah is clothed (cloaked as in the Greek MSS) in The Holy Spirit. The Cloak is representative of The Holy Spirit and The Cloak or Garment is dipped in blood. How do you know that, I hear you ask? and well you should ask, for it took a little searching out and it led me to some new understanding, which I always love.
Luke 24:49 (KJV) And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be ENDUED with power from on high.
From Strong’s Concordance:
Endued – G1746 – ἐνδύω endýō, en-doo’-o; from G1722 and G1416(in the sense of sinking into a garment); to invest with clothing (literally or figuratively):—array, clothe (with), endue, have (put) on.
So here we have graphically explained to us how The Holy Spirit is likened to a garment or a cloak or clothing in which we sink into, and that is exactly what is being described to us, by John, in Revelation 19:13. This, too, as I proved in part one, is yet more proof that The Holy Spirit was TOWARD God (as in the Greek MSS) or close to God and VERY near to God, as in this wonderful picture of our Saviour sinking into His Holy Spirit like an enveloping garment or cloak = an IT, not a ‘he’ or ‘him’.
We then have this issue of blood and the garment or cloak (The Holy Spirit) having been dipped or more accurately soaked in blood, where does this blood come from? Once again that’s easy, for John tells us in verse eleven: “and in righteousness He doth judge and make war.” And how will Yashua Messiah on His horse make war? Through the immense POWER of His Holy Spirit and in that war the Holy Spirit will be drenched in the blood of Yashua Messiah’s enemies. This is described for us in Isaiah:
Isaiah 63:1-4 (KJV) Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah? this that is glorious in His (Holy Spiritual) apparel, travelling in the greatness of His strength? I that speak in righteousness, mighty to save. 2 Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, and thy garments like him that treadeth in the winefat 3 I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me: for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment. 4 For the day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of my redeemed is come.
As a final point, does this mean that even though as born of God (born again) Christians we’re indwelled with The Holy Spirit, that The Holy Spirit still comes upon us as a cloak or garment? Hmm I am not so sure about that. I know for sure that those The Father is calling certainly get regular visits from The Holy Spirit, if not permanent protection, until they’re Baptised and indwelled, but I would need Scriptural proof that those already indwelled get the same visits when The Holy Spirit is already within them.
There I was, having just started a new article about ‘God and Science’, which amazingly led me into this article, in as much that the new discoveries that I had made in my research for that article, forced me to drop everything regarding that article and focus on this one.
So what is The Truth of John 1:1-4? To answer that we must first copy and paste the relevant Holy Scriptures here, so that we can see all that’s going on in these verses and, rest assured, for here we will find yet more mistranslations and corruptions within The KJV, and which will be revealed for all to see:
John 1:1-4 (KJV) In the beginning was The Word, and The Word was with God, and The Word was God. 2 The same (Word) was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In Him was life; and The Life was The Light of men. (Brackets mine)
Now what is the mainstream Christian (the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion’s) teaching regarding these verses? Answer: They think it proves their mickey mouse Trinity, when it does no such thing. Perhaps, what I should have said, is what was my understanding of these verses? for I was once just as deceived as they are on this crucial passage of Holy Scripture.
Moreover, as we progress, we’ll discover some strong similarities with my unravelling of The Trinity deception (see link No. 1 below). We will also learn some more crucial Truth to support Yashua Messiah’s teaching re The Duality Godhead, and The Truth that The Holy Spirit is an ‘it’ and not a ‘he’ or a ‘him’, that is, the LIVING POWER or LIVING FORCE of The Godhead, so not a personage of a non-existent Trinity.
OK, so let’s now write out the Greek Transliteral version of this same passage of Holy Scripture to firm up this Truth:
John 1:1-4 (Greek Transliteral) In original was The Saying and The Saying was TOWARD The God(Placer) and The God(Placer) was The Saying. 2 This was in original TOWARD The God(Placer) 3 All through IT became and apart from IT became not yet one which has become 4 in IT Life was and The Life was The Light of men.
In the beginning, here termed the original, was The Saying and The Saying was TOWARD God(placer) that is, facing The Godhead or was/is near to The Godhead, so we’re dealing with something that was very close to The Godhead and yet it says The Godhead was The Saying. How does this work? Read on:
Notice verse three: All things through IT came into being and apart from IT not one thing came into being. So what does this mean, when I have ALWAYS believed that The Word or The Saying or The Logos was Yashua Messiah (Jesus Christ), but how can that be? for He is definitely not an IT!! He is a Spiritual Being, so what is this IT? Answer: It’s The Holy Spirit which is The Saying or The Word or The Logos which is the LIVING POWER or LIVING FORCE of The Godhead and brings things into being through ITS immense supernatural POWER or FORCE. As confirmed for us here:
“All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a Force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this Force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter.“
— Professor Max Planck, the father of quantum physics.
An Image of The Atom
Here we have explained to us, in scientific terminology, The Holy Spirit in ACTION and how IT brings the particles of the atom, by virtue of vibrations, and through those vibrations IT holds the particles of the atom together. Now what are these vibrations? Easy, they are the vibrations of The Sayings and/or the vibrations of the spoken Word of the Godhead. This is confirmed for us in Psalms:
Psalms 33:6 (KJV) By The Word (The Saying – vibrations) of The Lord were the heavens made; and all the host of them by The Breath of His mouth. (Brackets mine)
We then have the term: ‘The Breath of His mouth’. What is this a direct reference to? Again, that’s easy:
John 20:21-22 (MCV) Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye The Holy Spirit:
So from and through Yashua Messiah’s breath the Twelve Learners received the gift of the Holy Spirit and from Strong’s Concordance we get this:
Old Testament Hebrew:
H7307 – Spirit – רוּחrûwach, roo’-akh; – from H7306; wind; by resemblancebreath, i.e. a sensible (or even violent) exhalation; figuratively, life, anger, unsubstantiality; by extension, a region of the sky; by resemblance spirit, but only of a rational being (including its expression and functions):—air, anger, blast, breath, × cool, courage, mind, × quarter, × side, spirit(-ual), tempest, × vain, (whirl-) wind(-y).
New Testament Greek:
G4151 – Spirit/Ghost – πνεῦμα pneûma, pnyoo’-mah; – from G4154; a current of air, i.e. breath (blast) or a breeze; by analogy or figuratively, a spirit, i.e. (human) the rational soul, (by implication) vital principle, mental disposition, etc., or (superhuman) an angel, demon, or (divine) God, Christ’s spirit, the Holy Spirit:—ghost, life, spirit(-ual, -ually), mind. Compare G5590.
OK, so far so good, but what of this statement in John 1:2 The same (Word) or same (Saying) was in the beginning with God. Quite simply, the Saying was toward God or IT was close to God or IT was facing God, but IT was never God, for IT, that is, Yashua Messiah’s Saying, was His POWER or His ‘breath’ which carried the Godhead’s Sayings and actioned those same sayings.
Numbers 14:35 (KJV) I The Lord have said (The Saying), I will surely do it unto all this evil congregation, that are gathered together against me: in this wilderness they shall be consumed, and there they shall die.
Isaiah 14:24 (KJV) The Lord of hosts hath sworn, saying (The Saying), Surely as I have thought, so shall it come to pass; and as I have purposed, so shall it stand:
Ezekiel 24:14 (KJV) I The Lord have spoken it (The Saying): it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent; according to thy ways, and according to thy doings, shall they judge thee, saith the Lord God.
Next we have verse 4: In Him was life; and The Life was The Light of men, and once again from the Greek Transliteral verse 4: in IT Life was and The Life was The Light of men.
Notice how this PROVES that The Holy Spirit is an IT and is LIFE, that is, a LIVING FORCE which gives Life to all things. So now we know that The Holy Spirit is The Word (The Saying) and goes forth from The Father and from Yashua Messiah in order to exercise Their will throughout Their Creation.
In part one we learned that there are only three occasions where we will find the term ‘God is one’ in the pages of The King James Bible, just three times. Now if we search for the term ‘one God’ how many times do you think we will find that? Answer: seven times with only one in the Old Testament namely:
Malachi 2:10 (KJV) Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?
Now before I press on you MUST remember that the word ‘God’ really means ‘Godhead’ for it is from the plural word Elohim = more than one!
So let’s rewrite this verse so that it makes sense:
Malachi 2:10 (MCV) Have we not all one Father – The Most High and a united member or the Godhead? hath not a united Godhead (H410 El = Yashua Messiah as a member of that Godhead) created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?
Genesis 1:26 (MCV) And God (The Elohim plural) said, Let US make man in OUR IMAGE, after OUR LIKENESS:
NOT let ME make man in MY image and MY likeness!
From Strong’s Concordance:
One – H259 –‘echad ekh-awd’a numeral from 258; properly, united, i.e. 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,
One – 258 – ‘achad aw-khad’ perhaps a primitive root; to unify, i.e. (figuratively) collect (one’s thoughts):–go one way or other.
NOTICE! we’re dealing with a UNION and a UNIFYING of the Godhead members of God with God.
Next Scripture:
Mark 12:32 (KJV) And the scribe said unto Him, Well, Master, thou hast said The Truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but He:
Correct translation:
Mark 12:32 (MCV) And the scribe (an evil lawyer) said unto Him, Well, Master, thou hast said The Truth: for there is one united Godhead (Elohim plural) and there is no other but He Them (from the Greek word autos).
From Strong’s Concordance:
He – G846 – αὐτός autós, ow-tos’; from the particle αὖ aû (perhaps akin to the base of G109 through the idea of a baffling wind) (backward); the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other persons:—her, it(-self), one, the other, (mine) own, said, (self-), the) same, ((him-, my-, thy- )self, (your-)selves, she, that, their(-s), them(-selves), there(-at, – by, -in, -into, -of, -on, -with), they, (these) things, this (man), those, together, very, which. Compare G848.
Romans 3:30 (KJV) Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.
Correct translation:
Romans 3:30 (MCV) Seeing it is one united Godhead of The Father and Son, which shall justify the circumcision by Faith, and uncircumcision through Faith.
And the next:
1 Corinthians 8:6 (KJV) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him.
Correct translation:
1 Corinthians 8:6 (MCV) But to us there is but a united Godhead of The Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him, and a united God The Son, Yashua Messiah, through whom are all things, and we through Him.
Next verse:
Ephesians 4:6 (KJV) One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
Correct translation:
Ephesians 4:6 One Godhead with The Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
Next verse:
1 Timothy 2:5 (KJV) For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Correct translation:
1 Timothy 2:5 (MCV) For there is one Godhead, and one mediator between The Father and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Roll up, roll up, for the last corrupted verse:
James 2:19 (KJV) Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
This one deserves a little more attention to reveal how silly it is. Here we’re expected to believe that the devils tremble with fear because this god is one! Hello! Excuse me because of what? Because God is one! LOL. Let me tell you straight, the devils fear because of an Almighty powerful Godhead with none above them because they are Number One, not because of the oneness of a fake god. You couldn’t make this stuff up, but amazingly they have.
OK that wraps it up for now, but there will eventually be a part three so stay in touch.
….And a word that Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ) was never recorded as having uttered!
Now here’s a thing, a HUGE THING. The WHOLE WORLD, to a greater extent, has gone after one religion or another, and if we were to add up all those people that do have a religion, of one kind or another, I bet those left would only amount to a very small minority – which would also include followers of Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ).
Even those who profess to be atheists worship other things in place of an organised religion or deity, namely themselves in the mirror (narcissists), the creation, that is, the green eco-nutters (Extinction Rebellion morons), their families, (yes there is such a thing as ‘family worship’), their pets, wealth, careers, their cars, their boats, sun-worshipping holidays, science, technology, art, music, or even football teams. All of these things, however we cut it, can be, and are, objects of their RELIGION, that is, idolatry and, whether they like to hear it or not. So you see, dear people, in Truth there is NO ESCAPE from RELIGION – it’s all enveloping and encompassing and across the whole world.
However the reason for this article is not for the atheist lost and unsaved, although they are welcome to read and learn from it, IF the Father is calling them. No, the reason for this article is to rebuke and admonish in agape love, those who profess to be Christians, and yet waste their time and money on the wretched pursuit of religion, delusionally thinking that they are doing Yashua Messiah’s (the Lord Jesus Christ’s) will.
And now for the proof and evidence from The Holy Scriptures that show us that ALL RELIGION is of Satan the Devil and not of God. But before I do that here is a foundational aside: the word ‘RELIGION’ is derived from the multi-faceted demon called LEGION, whom Yashua Messiah cast into The Gadarene Swine. All the swine died as they plunged over the cliff edge, but LEGION did not, for spirits cannot die. This means that LEGION had a make-over and re-invented himself as RE-LEGION, and there you have it = the multi-faceted evil spirit (demon) that pervades ALL RELIGIONS, whether it be Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Bahaism, Confucianism and, of course, not forgetting the most important one, the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion which at the moment doesn’t have an ‘ism’. Perhaps I should invent one! LOL
OK, here are ALL the verses from the New Testament that mention the word RELIGION, followed by the word RELIGIOUS, and you will immediately notice that NONE OF THEM are from the Four Gospels, which means Yashua Messiah never uttered the word, nor did He instruct His learners in the ways of RELIGION for He did not have a RELIGION – GOD HAS NO RELIGION:
Acts 26:5 (KJV) Which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straitest sect of our RELIGION (G2356) I lived a Pharisee.
In this first offering we get an inkling of what RELIGION really is, that is, ‘a straitest sect’, as Paul accurately calls it, so from this we can immediately deduce that this is a very legalistic set up, and, of course, we already know that, because we know that The Serpent Seed Pharisee Jews were satanic Judaisers and very ritualistic. This means they dotted every ‘i’ and crossed every ‘t’ of The Mosaic Law in an attempt to pathetically save themselves. This, in turn, resulted in Yashua Messiah mocking them with the remark: “The ‘healthy’ have no need of The Physician!”
So straight off, the first example of the word RELIGION is a negative one.
Galatians 1:13 (KJV) For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in THE JEWS’ RELIGION (G2454), how that beyond measure I persecuted The Church of God, and wasted it:
In this verse, our first negative verse above is confirmed for us once again by Paul with an even more negative example. Here he beefs it up by calling it the (Serpent Seed) JEWS’ RELIGION and how, in the name of that VILE SATANIC RELIGION, he persecuted the Church of God and wasted it.
‘Wasted’ here meaning to destroy and overthrow or to make havock, and from Strong’s Concordance we get:
Wasted – G4199:πορθέω πορθέω: imperfect ἐπόρθουν; 1 aorist participle πορθήσας; (πέρθω, πεπορθα, to lay waste); from Homer down; to destroy, to overthrow (R. V. uniformly to make havock): τινα, Acts 9:21; τήν ἐκκλησίαν, Galatians 1:13; τήν πίστιν, ibid. 23.
So clearly we can now see what an evil thing the Jews’ RELIGION is, that is, Judaism, and please keep this in mind as we analyse the three remaining verses.
Galatians 1:14 (KJV) And profited in THE JEWS’ RELIGION (G2454) above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.
Here Paul reveals how he ‘profited’ or progressed in The (Serpent Seed) JEWS’ RELIGION, and left his contemporaries way behind, so zealous was he for this evil satanic cult and its dogma. We MUST fully understand that Saul was a ruthless cold blooded murderer before Yashua Messiah gave him the shock of his life on the road to Damascus.
Next, we have two very interesting verses that seem to go against everything Paul has revealed and taught us about his past involvement with RELIGION, and how evil it was/is. We therefore have what some misguided people use as an example of sending up RELIGION, and let’s be clear, for these are the ONLY VERSES in the whole Bible that appear to paint RELIGION in a positive light, but do they?
In order to answer this question we will need Strong’s Concordance once more for there are several Greek words at play here. The first is G2356 and the second is G2454 and here are the definitions:
Religion – G2356θρησκεία thrēskeía, thrace-ki’-ah; – from a derivative of G2357; ceremonial observance:—religion, worshipping.
Religion – G2454Ἰουδαϊσμός Ioudaïsmós, ee-oo-dah-is-mos’; from G2450; “Judaism”, i.e. the Jewish faith and usages:—Jews’ religion.
Religion – G2357 – threskos thrace’-kos probably – from the base of 2360; ceremonious in worship (as demonstrative), i.e. pious:–religious.
Religion – G2450 – Ioudaizo ee-oo-dah-id’-zo from 2453; to become a Judaean, i.e. “Judaize”:– live as the Jews.
James 1:26 (KJV) If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s RELIGION (G2356) is vain.
James 1:27 (KJV) PURE RELIGION (G2356) and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.
Right, now we get down to some very devious and deceptive nonsense going on here, for in Acts 26:5 we get the G2356 reference to Paul speaking of his previous religious life which is exactly the same religion as mentioned in Galatians 1:13-14 and yet the translators have given it a new number, that is, G2454. So what’s going on? Has Paul’s past religion changed from being, and I quote: “G2356 ceremonial observance:—religion, worshipping.” to “G2454 “Judaism”, i.e. the Jewish faith and usages:—Jews’ religion.” Or are they just one and the same, but dressed up differently in the G2356 definition.
Do you see what’s happening here? With the use of G2356 θρησκεία thrēskeía, thrace-ki’-ah they are attempting to paint Paul’s old religion in a benign oh so loving, compassionate and kind, kind of way, that is, people who generally wouldn’t hurt a fly, and then with the use of the next word: G2454 Ἰουδαϊσμός Ioudaïsmós, ee-oo-dah-is-mos’; we’re then dealing with murdering psychopaths namely, Saul, and his fellow Pharisee criminals, and yet we’re definitely talking about the same RELIGION. The irony here being that the KJV translators have got this right by using the word RELIGION for both Greek words.
OK, so it looks like a load of shenanigans has taken place with the Greek manuscripts, proving that they, too, are liable to little corruptions, as with Matthew 28-19, which I unravelled in my article: “Should Christians Be Baptised Into Yashua Messiah’s (Jesus Christ’s) Name Alone? – Part 1” (See link No. 1 below).
So let’s now move on to James and analyse what he’s up to and I’ll repost the two troublesome verses below:
James 1:26 (KJV) If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s RELIGION (G2356) is vain 27 PURE RELIGION (G2356) and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.
So straight away we have use of that deceptive G2356 definition which, as we have already ascertained really means the same as G2454 – Saul’s and the Pharisee Jews’ satanic Judaising religion. But why is James rambling on about religion anyway? Well it’s obvious, isn’t it? Look at the opening statement: “If any man among you seem to be religious.” What does he mean by this remark? Let’s copy and paste the Concordant Literal Version for a better understanding:
James 1:26-27 (CLV) If anyone is seeming to be a ritualist, not bridling his tongue, but seducing his heart, the ritual of this one is vain, 27 for ritual clean and undefiled with God the Father is this: to be visiting the bereaved and widowed in their affliction, to be keeping oneself unspotted from the world.”
Why would anyone in the Church of God be hanging on to old religious ritualistic customs, that is, the ways of the world? When all of this was done away, with Yashua Messiah’s death and resurrection. Why would this wretch want to be seen as someone who was still into meaningless rituals and religion?
So here’s a further pertinent question or two: 1) Since when did visiting the bereaved and widowed become ritualistic or religious? Answer: It never has. 2) In what way is visiting the bereaved and widowed a ritualistic or religious activity? Answer: It’s not, nor has it ever been, so what’s James on about?
Easy, he’s mocking the whole idea sarcastically. James 1:26-27 is all about exposing this fraud (whoever he or she might be) and possibly doesn’t exist at all, but he’s using this possible scenario, as an example, so that anyone within his congregation that still fancies himself as religious or hankers after the old Pharisaical ways, had better shape up and get with the New Covenant and repent of his old Pharisaical Religious ways or else. (See link No.2 below)
So there we have it, RELIGION fully revealed and exposed from The Holy Scriptures for the fraud that it is, and NOW is the time for ALL true Christians to set themselves free from it:
Revelation 18:4 (KJV) And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
In Yashua Messiah’s Holy name
Messenger Charles
1. Matthew 28:19 Is a Spurious Verse and Baptism Is Not Into The Trinity:
….Or perhaps a better title would have been: The Satanic Curses of Judaism and Islam – Is God One?
Introduction
Now this article has been up on Ezine Articles since 2009, so it’s obviously long overdue for a little revising and editing, because my knowledge has greatly increased since 2009. In turn, it must be said that it’s a crucial support article for my other articles: “Exposing The Trinity Lie – Parts 1 through 5”; “Do YOU Worship and Ogre god? – Parts 1 through 4”; “Are Trinity Worshippers Anti-Christs? and “The Duality Godhead”, (See link Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 below.) This means, also, that it’s long overdue for a place on my blog. Still, better late than never, eh?
So, to my question, IS HE ONE, that is, is God ONE!? for the phrase “God is one” can only be found three times in the whole King James Bible – THREE TIMES ONLY! Now here’s a thing, for all of my regular readers will, by now, be aware of a little conundrum that we have going on here, that is, within the confines of the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion. That conundrum, of course, is this mysterious habit they have of majoring in the minors. It seems to be a common practice of theirs to make big theological determinations with very little Scriptural proof for backing up those determinations. The silly Trinity dogma being a very good example of it, with two references, only, to the Trinity, again, in the whole of the King James Bible (see link No. 1 below). Not only that but no mention of it by the name, the Trinity. However, having said all that, MANY people still believe that their god is one and in the case of believers in the Trinity, for them it’s three in ONE!
So back to the thread, and to prove it, here’s another thing: All the Jews and all the Muslims on this earth believe their god or their Allah is one. There he is, up there in his ‘heavenly domain’, all alone, that is, a single solitary god, who is the object of their worship and of their deification (chuckle, chuckle, chuckle).
The thing is, is their worship of this deity all in vain? and is it just a massive deception on the part of the god of this world, Satan the Devil? We must be clear about this, for he is most definitely a god, that is, the god of this world, or the god of this age, or the god of this world’s system, or even the god of The Matrix, to use the modern vernacular. If you have any doubts about this arrangement, then you must refer to the Holy Scriptures for the proof, and thereby assuage those doubts:
2 Corinthians 4:4 (MCV) In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest The Light of the glorious Gospel of Christ, who is the image (one in whom the likeness of anyone is seen) of God, should shine unto them.
As an aside, notice, the minds of the lost and unsaved who don’t believe are completely blinded to The Gospel of Yashua Messiah, which is yet more solid gold proof that no man or woman can accept a ‘Jesus’ as their saviour of their own volition or own initiation, for only The Father can remove the scales from our eyes.
Ephesians 2:2 (MCV) Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to The Prince of The Power of The Air, the evil spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience (and unbelief):
OK, now all this is very straight forward, because we know that the lost and unsaved do not believe, and the above verses explain clearly why they don’t believe. Moreover, what about the Jews and the Muslims, for they do believe and, boy, do they believe? Let’s face it, we could never doubt their zeal and their fervour, especially the Muslims, so what gives? Is their belief in vain, for we know that Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ) does not feature in The Jew’s beliefs at all. The Jews have their imaginary satanic Talmudic ‘god’, and the Muslims have their ‘Allah’, but Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ) as God with God is not included in either of these blasphemous belief systems.
However, Islam does acknowledge a ‘Jesus’ as a prophet, but this imaginary ‘Jesus’ is not revered any higher than their prophet Mohammed which, in itself, is an evil blasphemy. (For the origins of Islam see link No. 5 below.)
So to briefly sum up, we have at least two religions that believe in gods that are one, that is, alone and solitary. Now some of you may say well so what, we’re Christians, and we believe that God is one, too? Yes, quite so, but is that true and who told you that God is one? And if God IS ONE what separates your god from the heathen god of the Jews and Muslims, for he is one too? Answer: NOTHING! Oh come on, there are loads of Holy Scriptures that say God is one, I hear you say, and yes there are some that appear to say that, but do they really say it? Well, there is only one way to find out using these examples:
In Mark 12:29 the Lord Jesus Christ quotes Deuteronomy 6:4 which He voices aloud:
Mark 12:29 (KJV) And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
Now this statement is a word for word exact copy of what Moses wrote down in Deuteronomy 6:4. You can check it for yourselves if you do not believe me.
Deuteronomy 6:4 (KJV) Hear, O Israel: The LORD our GOD is one LORD.
OK, let’s analyse this Scripture in detail, from the Hebrew, as it predates Mark’s Gospel by approximately fifteen hundred years:
Hear, O Israel:
1) The Lord – The Jehovah or The Eternal our God (Elohim) who has always self-existed.
2) Our God – now the word ‘God’ or ‘Elohim’ in Hebrew means God plural – more than one. The Hebrew word ‘Eloha’ or Eloah is the singular word for Elohim. Now if God is one, a singular solitary God, then ‘Eloha’ is the word that would have been used here, not Elohim – more than one. This evidence alone, and in one fell swoop, disproves monotheism or Judaism, for the Elohim Godhead is more than one being.
3) Is one – OK, God = Elohim = plural beings, which in turn means we have the Elohim (plural) Godhead of more than one being, being described as ‘one’, but is that one being? and how can plural beings be one? In Hebrew the word for ONE is ‘Echad’ which means unified or united or in unity or at one and it also means number one; first and none above, the prime number. This means that The Elohim (plural) Godhead is united – completely likeminded and in unison, that is, in total agreement.
A football team is united as in Newcastle United, and they are united as one team with one goal – to win, but they are also a team of eleven individuals. The Godhead is one team of two Spiritualbeings who have plans to add to their number by calling sons and daughters/brothers and sisters, not close themselves off in isolation in a closed trinity. The number 3 is God’s number for finality and if anything comes in threes with God that’s it – fini – kaput – the end, nothing more, just like the three woes in Revelation. The thing is, there is nothing final in God’s plan for us His future family! Plus all of mankind, eventually, in the Kingdom of God!!
4) Lord– Eternal or self-existent.
So there we have it, and if we were to ask the question is God one? we can reply and affirmative yes to that, for the expounded question should read as: IS THE GODHEAD UNITED AS ONE? that is, a Godhead of two individuals who have always self-existed, a God with God who later became The Father and The Son, Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ) and then a Godhead in heaven with Yashua Messiah at The Father’s right hand.
Here, alone, we have enough proof and evidence to disprove monotheism or the worship of one god. The Godhead has always been two who are unified or united or at one with themselves, with each other, or in oneness of mind, word and deed, that is, in complete and total agreement and totally likeminded – yet distinct Spiritual beings; this is the True nature of the Duality Godhead.
Hopefully, too, you will have noticed that the Holy Spirit is nowhere mentioned in Deuteronomy 6:4, nor in Mark 12:29 in the description of The Duality of the nature of the Godhead. Am I denying the existence of The Holy Spirit? no way, for The Holy Spirit is the Godhead’s living POWER, but not a personage of a mickey mouse Trinity. (See link No. 1 below)
Moreover, we now have a full understanding of Deuteronomy 6:4 of which Mark 12:29 is a direct copy. Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ) frequently quoted Old Testament Holy Scriptures (from The Septuagint) when preaching. So what is the point I am making here? The point I am making is this: Deuteronomy 6:4 and Mark 12:29 are identical and yet they are taught differently, due to the change of language or misinterpretation of same, that is, from Hebrew into Greek.
If we copy out Mark 12:29 from the Greek you will see what I mean:
Mark 12:29 (Greek Transliteral) Answered the Jesus that before-most is (foremost) be hearing (be you hearing) Israel Master (Lord) the God of us Master (Lord) one is.
OK, if we concordance the word ‘God’ we will find a subtle change has taken place:
From Strong’s Concordance:
God – G2316 – 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].
Notice; a deity, not the deities. God in the Old Testament was Elohim – plural, not Eloha = not singular, but look at what has happened here. God has become a singular god – a deity, not the deities of The Elohim who are ‘at one’ or who are ‘unified as one’ and in ‘perfect likemindedness’ – two united beings thinking as one. And all this when The Greeks were polytheists = more than one god.
This deliberate language corruption is what causes all the trouble and confusion within the pages of the New Testament and deceives millions of people within mainstream Christianity. Look folks, the Godhead does not change, they have never changed and that is why THEY SAID in Genesis 1:26; “let us make man in OUR IMAGE and OUR LIKENESS; they were always the two beings of the Godhead. This, therefore, means that what was written in Deuteronomy 6:4 should have been copied exactly into Mark 12:29 with same OT meaning, for the Lord Himself uttered the very same words. This also means that because the word ‘God’ now has a different meaning, a singular meaning, not a unified plural meaning, a translator’s corruption has most definitely occurred. Well just fancy that!!??
Moving on, if we now take a look at a few Holy Scriptures that allude to their claim that ‘God is one’, we will then gain a better understanding of what the evil translators of the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion have done to God’s Holy Word, and what better example than the following verses from Matthew’s Gospel, for there are corruptions galore in these two verses:
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.
And from the Greek Transliteral, and supported by The Concordant Literal Version:
Matthew 19:16 (Greek Transliteral) And be-perceiving (lo!) one toward-coming (coming to) to-Him (Him) said Teacher! Any (what) good I-shall-be-doing that I-should-be-having life eonian?
Matthew 19:6 (CLV) And lo! one coming to Him said, “Teacher, what good shall I be doing that I should be having life eonian?
OK, so what have we got going on here? Hmm, well, as we can see, this verse is revealing that Matthew 19:16-17 is not quite as ‘good‘ as we may have, at first, thought (like the pun?). The operative word here, of course, being ‘good’. Notice, the man in the Greek original does not call Yashua Messiah ‘Good Master’. The word ‘good’ has been thrown in gratuitously by the devious translators, but why? Well that’s easy to answer; in order to corrupt the whole passage and give it a different focus and a blasphemous, phony new emphasis. Not only that, but we have the assertion that The Father God is the ONLY ONE that is good, so there it is, the ugly perversion of Jewish monotheism slithering in like a snake by the back door, so to speak.
As it happens, this has always been a passage of Holy Scripture that I have never been comfortable with and, now, as I examine the original Greek rendering I fully understand why I have always felt uncomfortable with it. Notice the crucial element to this missing word ‘good’. If Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ) is not the ‘Good Master’ and is only the Master or Teacher as in the original Greek, then by default it makes a mockery of what Yashua Messiah was supposed to have said to the man, that is, “Why callest thou me good?” For as we can see the man said no such thing, but what he did refer to was what one good thing must he do in order to have Eternal Life, so what’s going on?
Back to the Greek Transliteral for the answer:
Matthew 19:17 (Greek Transliteral) The yet He-said to-him any (why) me you-are-asking about (concerning) the good one [thing] is the good if yet you-are-willing into the life to-be-into-coming keep (keep-you) the directions (precepts) [Square brackets mine]
Straight away, it is crucial that we realise there is no reference to God in this verse at all especially the nonsense phrase: “there is none good but one”, and we now know, too, that the phrase: “Why callest thou me good?” is also bogus. What this means in Truth, is that there is not an inkling of any suggestion within this passage to suggest that God, in anyway, shape or form is here alluded to as one. Unless, of course, you have a demonic evil agenda and your desire is to classify Yashua Messiah as not being ‘good’ which, of course, is what the blasphemous KJV does – DELIBERATELY in my view.
First, though, lets finish analysing the Greek version of verse 17. The verse opens with the Lord answering the man’s question and notice, for the emphasis is purely on the subject of the man’s question and nothing else. What the Lord is asking him here is this: “Why are you asking me about this one good thing that you think you should be doing in order to enter Eternal Life, when you should know that the only good thing you can do is to keep (hold Spiritually dear) the commandments and love God?” OK, having cleared that up, let’s return to the blasphemous KJV and I will re-copy it here for your convenience:
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.
Right, we know from the Greek rendering the man did not say ‘Good Master’, so this must mean that the Lord had no need to reply with that spurious man made question, and nor did He, for it is not there in the Greek. To confirm, if we check once more in the Greek version of verse 17 we also have the proof that the Lord did not ask the man that question: “Why callest thou me good?” So all this wickedness and deceit is added by the translators – WHY? Why, because through this verse in the KJV it is scandalously trying to tell us that Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ) did not see Himself as good and, in turn, by doing that making us think that He was not God. If He was not good, then how could He be God in the flesh?
Now this truly is an evil heresy we have unravelled here! It’s also constitutes a heresy with them trying to fool us into thinking that there is only one God. As stated, Yashua Messiah (the Lord Jesus Christ) was God in the flesh, so how could He be anything but good? Obviously, the Lord cannot be anything but good, but to those in the blasphemous Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion, they want us to think that only the Father God is good. What kind of diabolical evil is this? I’ll tell you, it’s Jerome’s and Erasmus’ diabolical evil and whoever else had their filthy Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religious translator’s mitts on God’s Holy Word when they wrote their King James Bible.
Furthermore, if you think Matthew’s account is a one off and Mark’s account says otherwise you would be wrong and I will keep this brief for I wish to move on to the next misunderstood verse:
Mark 10:17 (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?
Again from the Greek Transliteral:
Mark 10:17 (Greek Transliteral) And of-out-going (of-going-out) of-Him into way (road) toward-running one and knee-falling (falling-on-his-knees) him inquired-of Him Teacher! good any (what) I-shall-be-doing that life eonian I-should-be-tenanting (I-should-be-enjoying-the-allotment-of).
Here again we can see that the translators have chosen to place the word ‘good’ before ‘Teacher’ or ‘Master’ instead of correctly attaching it to the subject at hand after the word ‘Master’, that is, what good thing should this man be doing in order to enter into Eternal Life? Notice, too, that the word ‘good’ only appears once so, by default, it must apply to the ‘thing’ and not to Yashua Messiah. Why is that I hear you say? It’s that, because in the Matthew account we learnt that the second ‘good’ was gratuitously thrown in by the translators.
In part two I will expose more translator corruptions.
Now, as I am sometimes want to do, I am going to challenge my readers, yet again, with what I deem to be a very dodgy piece of Scripture. I won’t say Holy Scripture, because I believe it to be satanic, and not Holy at all.
You see, since I discovered that Romans 13:1-7 was a corruption by addition to Paul’s Letter to the Romans (seven whole verses – see the link below), that is, completely bogus, I have started checking one or three other places in the Freemason-Canaanite-Judaic King James Bible to see what else I can find that would merit my scrutiny. Now what do you think I found? low and behold, Acts 16:3-5 jumped right out at me, just as my good wife and I were studying The Holy Scriptures, this very day – the 8th June 2014.
As usual, I went online to see what most commentators were parroting, and it was all the usual guff about Paul being all things to all men in order to gain some of them for Christ. However, I could not rationalise this sweeping generalisation in order to apply it to what Paul was supposed to have done regarding Timothy and HIS member – not Paul’s member, if you get my drift. If we stop and think about this issue for a minute or two, we must ask ourselves who the blazes was Paul to take it upon himself to order a brother in Yashua Messiah, or a brother in The Faith under His Glorious Grace, to give him the authority to maim and mutilate Timothy’s body, that is, The Temple of The Holy Spirit? Just what is supposed to be going on here? Were Paul and Timothy under The Law, or under Yashua Messiah’s Saving Grace?
Let’s be clear, Paul had no rank or authority over Timothy, other than Timothy was Paul’s charge as a Learner (disciple) of Paul, a student, and therefore in Paul’s care on behalf of Yashua Messiah, and that was a great responsibility. Moreover, was Paul about to insult and blaspheme against Yashua Messiah and His sacrifice and go back on his own words as well?:
Galatians 1:6-7 (KJV) I marvel that ye are so soon removed from Him that called you into The Grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
“But there be some that trouble you.” Who were those troubling the brothers and sisters in Galatia? The very same types of people that we’re told Paul kowtowed to in Derbe and Lystra, so what is this all about? Are you suspicious yet? If not, I will copy this verse for you:
Galatians 2:21 (KJV) I do not frustrate The Grace of God: for if righteousness come by The Law, (circumcision) then Christ is dead in vain. (Brackets mine)
Is that simple enough to understand or are we going to explain it away with intellectual, philosophical, religious sophistry and clap trap?
And this verse:
Philippians 3:2 (KJV) Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the CONCISION. (Emphasis mine)
BEWARE OF THE CIRCUMSION!!!
Come on peeps, what are we dealing with here in Acts 16:3? I will copy it here for your information:
Acts 16:3 (MCV) Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Canaanite Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek.
Are we being asked to believe that Paul did a 180 degree U-turn and went back on all he had learnt from Yashua Messiah, and he himself taught elsewhere just to pander to a few Canaanite Judaising dogs of the circumcision? Well, if we read the King James Bible as it stands, and believe like lemmings that it has no errors, nor any Cainite-Judeo-Christian religious agenda, then yes YOU are being asked to believe it, and unfortunately probably do.
However, before you make your decision to carry on blindly believing this verse in Acts, as written, you might want to consider the story of Paul and Peter, and Peter’s refusal to eat with non-Israelite foreigners. Did Paul rebuke and admonish Peter severely for pandering to the religious whims of the Concision – the circumcised Jews? You bet your life he did. So are we now being asked to accept that Paul is now a hypocrite? Yes you are, because that’s how the translators of The KJV have polluted this chapter of Acts: 1) to discredit the character of Paul, 2) to cause confusion and 3) to get silly blind believers in the ‘inerrant KJV’ making all kinds of excuses on Paul’s behalf in order to explain this satanic verse away.
So did Paul circumcise Timothy? Not on your life and to prove it I will use the same method that I used to prove that Romans 13:1-7 is a satanic corruption of the Holy Scriptures. So let’s copy Acts 16 from verse 1 through to verse 8:
Acts 16:1-2 (MCV) Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, who was a Jewess, Judean Israelite and believed; but his father was a Greek: 2 Which was well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium.
The first thing we must understand about these opening eight verses is that they are primarily an itinerary of Paul’s travels in this part of the world, that’s all. This is the primary focus of these verses and later on I will write them as they would have been written before they were corrupted by this satanic addition.
Acts 16:3 (MCV) Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Serpent Seed Canaanite Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek.
If Timothy was well received and well reported of, why the need for circumcision? or indeed, how did they know he wasn’t circumcised? Does that make any sense!!?? Furthermore, if his father was a Greek, that is a heathen, even more reason for him not to be circumcised, because heathen converts to The Faith did not have to fulfil the demands of The Law. Yet, conversely, with Timothy having a Judahite Israelite mother (not a Jewess), one would have expected him to have been circumcised when he was eight days old.
Acts 16:4 (KJV) And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.
Here is the same verse as written in The Amplified Version:
Acts 16:4 (TAV) As they went on their way from town to town, they delivered over [to the assemblies] for their observance the regulations decided upon by the apostles and elders who were at Jerusalem.
Now what do we have here? Does this verse also sound all a bit legalistic and hierarchical (the system of the Nicolaitans that Yashua Messiah hates) with Jerusalem being the HQ like an early type of Rome dishing out its Papal Bulls and directives!!?? Again, if it doesn’t to you, then I suggest you have a rethink or perhaps you can point out The Grace within that verse.
Acts 16:5 (KJV) And so were the churches established in The Faith, and increased in number daily.
This verse as we read it sounds benign enough, but to me it has a propaganda ring to it, making you think that hundreds of people came flocking. How great were these numbers that were added when Paul, later on in Athens, after speaking in the Auditorium with 100’s, possibly 1,000’s in attendance, gathered two named people and certain men. ‘Certain men’ sounds very specific doesn’t it? small in number without doubt.
Acts 17:34 (KJV) Howbeit certain men clave unto him, and believed: among the which was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them.
Who were these others? Were they genuinely interested or just curious? We’re not told. However, this verse is not crucial to the point I am making here about Acts 16:3-4, which are definitely spurious. If we then look at verses 6-8, we can see the continuum issue that I raised in Romans 13:1-7 cropping up again, where the story flow gets interrupted with lies and nonsense and then reverts back the relevant subject of Paul’s itinerary:
Acts 16:6-8 (KJV) Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia, 7 After they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia: but the Spirit suffered them not. 8 And they passing by Mysia came down to Troas.
So let’s post this same passage as I believe it should be written without verses 3 and 4:
Acts 16:1-8 (MCV) Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess Judean Israelite, and believed; but his father was a Greek: 2 Which was well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium. 5 And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily. 6 Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden by Yashua Messiah through the Holy Spirit to preach the word in Asia, 7 After they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia: but Yashua Messiah via The Holy Spirit suffered them not. 8 And they passing by Mysia came down to Troas.
There it is folks, as it was truly written – no Jewess mother, no circumcision of Timothy and no nonsense about KGB rules and regulations coming from ‘Papal Jerusalem’, or even of thousands flocking to Paul.
Matthew 22:14 Many are called, FEW are chosen.
Matthew 7:13-14 (MCV) Enter ye in at the strait (narrow and difficult) gate: for wide (easy) is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, (Spiritual ruin) and MANY there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and FEW there be that find it.
In Yashua Messiah’s Holy name
Brother Charles
Romans 13:1-7 Do Sons and Daughters of God Have To Obey Secular or Religious Authorities?:
OK, I think I know what many of you are going to ask here – what is Cessationism? Others of you will already know what it is and hold differing views on it. Some of you will not be sure about it one way or the other, in turn, some will be wholly against it and others wholly persuaded and for it.
However, before we press on with the pros and cons, another essential question arises out of this very important subject, and that question is: what has Cessationism got to do with being Baptised into Yashua Messiah’s (The Lord Jesus Christ’s) name alone? I believe it’s everything to do with it, and it fully explains why we have the issue of Cessationism in the first place, and people who consequently believe in it. Equally, we must not discount those who do not believe it, because at the same time they are believing in something that I believe is totally false, as well, and I will return to this aspect of it later. Needless-to-say, it’s no coincidence that this phenomenon is just a copy of the scenario we have with Libertine (Progressive) Christianity versus Fundamental Christianity, for both parties are wrong. (Please see link No. 2 below). Both pro and anti Cessationism people are deceived. How can that be I hear you ask? Well, the answer to that is all tied up in the error of Baptism into The Trinity (See link No. 3 below) and I will now explain.
First, I will deal with the Cessationists and their false ideas. Cessationists believe that the Spiritual gifts and wonderful miracles performed by Our Lord Yashua Messiah and The Messengers (apostles), in the first century, were a one off. As far as they’re concerned, they were solely for Yashua Messiah and The Messengers (apostles), that is, for their time only and not for anyone else who was born of God (born again) after their generation. This means they believe that for one thousand nine hundred and seventy years, no one in the Church of God has been blessed with these amazing Spiritual Gifts.
Now for me this has always been a very sweeping or generalised statement and one that cannot be proven one way or the other, so this alone makes it ridiculous. Furthermore, and to be perfectly frank, this is a topic that I had shelved in the back of my mind several years ago. I was one of those people in the middle and that was simply because I didn’t know whether Cessationists were right or wrong. As it happened, I didn’t think it was crucial to our salvation anyway, so considered it a minor issue, but of course when we take on board the subject of the validity or, rather, the invalidity of our Baptism this throws a giant spanner into the works of our previous understanding.
You probably know what I am going to say here, but for those who may need some extra help, let me throw this in the air and see if any of you are willing to catch it. My belief and understanding now is that my original Baptism is invalid. This is due to the fact I was not Baptised into Yashua Messiah’s (the Lord Jesus Christ’s) name alone but, rather, into the name of The Trinity as allegedly ‘commanded’ in Matthew 28:19, which in part one I proved was false, due to the verse being partly spurious. This means, not just my Baptism, but all those in mainstream Christianity down through the ages, (apart from the few who are baptised into His Name) are invalid. Like me, they are, or were, not Baptised into Yashua Messiah’s (the Lord Jesus Christ’s) name alone, so this tells us much about how the erroneous concept of Cessationism came into being.
If we think about it for a while it’s obvious isn’t it? How can we expect to see the gifts of The Holy Spirit and the wonderful miracles if we have not been properly Baptised. All The Learners (disciples) were Baptised into Yashua Messiah’s (the Lord Jesus Christ’s) name alone, and after the Lord’s ascension into Heaven were baptised with The Holy Spirit in the upper room when tongues of fire were seen to descend upon their heads. The Messengers (apostles) were not Baptised into the Roman Catholic Trinity for it was not conjured up by Tertullian until circa 200 AC. If they had been there would have been no visible displays of The Holy Spirit in action at all, that is, speaking in tongues, prophecies and/or miracles.
I hope you can now see how the Cessationist movement sprang up. They knew, and still know, the huge majority of mainstream Christians couldn’t do, and still can’t do, the things The Messengers (apostles) did so looked for a reason why and called it Cessationism. To compound it they even used Holy Scriptures to support their views, but in reality this is just twisting the meaning of certain verses in order to try and prove their case and I will quote a few here just to expose their errors.
1 Corinthians 13:8-12 (KJV) Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail;whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. 9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. 11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
Here in this passage of Holy Scripture, which they use to support their ideas, we can see what they believe to be an end of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, which they then apply retrospectively to the end of the first century. Is this true or is it correct? Notice, in verse 8 we can see an end of knowledge mentioned here too, but there has never been an end to knowledge and as we know man has more knowledge now than he’s ever had before. What these verses are referring to is a time yet to come in the future when knowledge will “vanish away”, when prophecies will fail and tongues shall cease – why? Easy, because there will be no need of them in the Kingdom of God, when we are powerful Spirit beings. Notice how Paul refers to it as looking through a glass darkly; as believers we know those days will come, but we do not yet understand what they will be like for it is a mystery, but one thing we do know, charity (love) will be there, for it never fails. This passage of Holy Scriptures has nothing to do with cessation of the Spiritual gifts in this age, and Cessationists have completely misapplied and misunderstood these verses.
Right, let’s have a look at another passage of Holy Scripture:
1 Corinthians 12:7-11 (KJV) But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. 8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; 9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; 10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: 11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he it will.
Notice, there is no time limit attached to the apportionment of the gifts. Paul doesn’t say after verse 11: “And after us – The Messengers, these gifts and the benefits they give will cease when we die” This is what Paul would have said if cessation was to be the case, but of course it was not. Let’s look at these verses again, if the greater gifts were to disappear or cease, that is, healings, miracles, prophesies and tongues at the end of the first century, why didn’t the lesser gifts – the gifts of discerning of spirits, knowledge and wisdom? I will correct myself here: that’s if we can actually say the gifts of discerning of spirits, knowledge and wisdom are lesser gifts – most likely not.
Moving on, here is something from a Cessationist paper written by a Thomas Edgar:
“History indicates that tongues did cease. Tongues are not mentioned at all by the Post-Apostolic Fathers. Other writers such as Justin Martyr, Origen, Chrysostom, and Augustine considered tongues something that happened only in the earliest days of the Church.”
Here is living proof that invalid baptisms were already having their negative effect because the above mentioned counterfeiters, otherwise known as ‘Post-Apostolic Fathers’ didn’t have the gifts, and now we know why, don’t we? They were not Baptised into Yashua Messiah (The Lord Jesus Christ) but, rather, into the heathen satanic Trinity of Matthew 28:19.
Finally, there is a view that Matthew 28:19 represents Godly authority only and I have copied here what could easily be the consensus of mainstream Christian thinking on this subject.
“Christian baptism is also in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). Being baptized in this manner simply means we are identifying ourselves with the Trinity.”
Right, there it is, by their own admission, the fact that they are identifying themselves with The Trinity, a blasphemous false Roman Catholic satanic addition to Holy Scripture and in direct opposition to what Yashua Messiah really taught through His Messengers (apostles).
“We belong to the Father, are saved by the Son, and indwelt by the Spirit”
No, we do not belong to the Father, we belong to Yashua Messiah (Jesus Christ) and we are saved by His Sacrifice, His Blood and His Grace, for He is in us through THE POWER of The Holy Spirit.
Mark 9:41 (KJV) For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.
We have access to the Father through The Lord’s Sacrifice.
“This is similar to how we pray in Jesus’ name (John 14:13)”
No it’s not, John 14:13 states quite clearly that whatever we ask in The Lord’s name – not The Trinity’s name, He will do and that the Father may be glorified in The Son. In turn because of what we have asked in The Lord’s name first. We are asking for nothing in The Father’s name.
“If we pray in the name of Jesus, we are praying with His authority and asking God the Father to act upon our prayers because we come in the name of His Son Jesus”
This sentence is true, but it does not mean we should be Baptised in the Father’s name or in the Holy Spirit’s name. What he is saying here is that prayers should be prayed in the Lord’s name and no other, which, if we are consistent, also points to our being Baptised solely into His name too.
So there we have it, but what about these people who are Baptised into the name of The Trinity who profess to have Spiritual Gifts? You know; the Charismatics or that group of people who have adherents who say that if we haven’t got the gift of tongues we are not properly birthed in Christ or, even, we’re not born of God (born again) at all. How’s that for blasphemous arrogant effrontery and self-righteousness? I have known worldly businessmen with less!
OK, so what’s all this about? Easy, it’s about genuine gifts of The Holy Spirit and whether these people have them or if they’re just servants of the Devil with false tongues. I have been in their company, on more than one occasion, when they’ve been uttering noises along the lines of: bab, bab, bab, bab, bab, bab, bab, and on it goes in never ending vain repetition, and at the same time supposedly all for my edification and upliftment. Well I’ve news for them, it did no such thing and just gave me a laugh at their expense. Another trick of these people is to lie on the floor and bark like dogs – unbelievable? No, it’s the truth, I’ve witnessed it, but where does all this stuff and nonsense come from? Well it certainly isn’t Yashua Messiah (The Lord Jesus Christ) I’ll tell you that.
I am pleased to inform you all that my wife and I have now been re-baptised into Yashua Messiah’s (The Lord Jesus Christ’s) name alone. Have we since experienced tongues and have we prophesied? Yes, I have the Gifts of Tongues, Knowledge and Spiritual Discernment and my wife the Gifts of Faith and Wisdom. As for the Gifts of Healings and Miracles no, but that does not mean we won’t be blessed with them in the future, as the need arises, and if we add to it the fact that Baptism into The Trinity is false, we felt it too big a risk to take the chance and leave it undone.
In Yashua Messiah’s Holy name
Messenger Charles
1. Should Christians Be Baptised Into Yashua Messiah’s (Jesus Christ’s) Name Alone? Part 1:
OK, so here we go again, with yet more corruptions by addition to The King James Bible. This one, I have to admit, has always bugged me, due to its sensationalist nature. It really does read as if it was faked, that is, first century fake news. Moreover, it reads as if it was written by a BBC or CNN lying media whore, so crass and stupid is it.
Matthew 27:52-53 (KJV) And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, 53 And came out of the graves after His resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
The same passage including the previous and following verses:
Matthew 27:50-54 (KJV) Jesus, when He had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up The Ghost (Spirit). 51 And, behold, the veil of The Temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; 52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, 53 And came out of the graves after His resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. 54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.
So let’s see what one or two commentators have to say about it, starting with Adam Clarke and he says:
“It is difficult to account for the transaction mentioned Mat 27:52, Mat 27:53.Some have thought that these two verses have been introduced into the text of Matthew from the gospel of the Nazarenes….”
He goes on to say:
“….by the earthquake several bodies that had been buried were thrown up and exposed to view, and continued above ground until Christ’s Resurrection.
For me that would mean dead bodies lying around for three days and three nights! Does that sound like something The Father would do?
“[Excerpts taken from: Daniel L. McConaughy (Seventh Way Corps), Early Patristic Evidence For The Forgery Of Matthew 27:52b And 53, GMIR (from Aramaic gmr – “to perfect”, presenting the necessary documentation to get back the original, God-inspired Word, by believing on 2 Tim. 2:15), The Way Magazine, May-June 1982]”
According to Daniel L. McConaughy only the second part of Matthew 52 is deemed a forgery, so it’s the part that reads: “And the graves were opened” and is OK as far as he’s concerned. However, I would question that, too, with the question: WHY!? Why would The Father open some graves through the earthquake unless it was to resurrect the occupants of those graves? To expose them just for sake of it would be meaningless, especially as Yashua Messiah has just died and is about to be put in His tomb, not resurrected from it.
Next we have this from E. W. Allen, author of: “St. Matthew, The International Critical Commentary”, from which he states:
“This passage (Matthew 27:52-53) probably comes from… Palestinian traditions… If Christ was the first-fruits of them that slept [as 1 Cor. 15:22-23 declares *], how could His resurrection have been preceded by that of these saints? Under the influence of such idea, the editor adds the caution, “after His resurrection” [which in its previous tampered form seems to have been “after their resurrection”] (Allen, W.C. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary of the Gospel According to Matthew, 3rd ed. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1912, p. 296).”
I know nothing about ‘Palestinian Traditions’, but as we can see this spurious two verse addition has created its own can of worms over which Biblical scholars have salivated – as they are want to do. However, if it’s for the right reasons and Truth is their agenda, then all kudos to them.
Moreover, the evidence revealed to us here from the above experts renders these verses very dodgy indeed, to say the least, but there is one crucial point that they have all missed, and it’s in the second part of the opening phrase. Did YOU see it? I hope so, but if not, don’t worry, for I will explain: “and many bodies of the saints which slept, arose.”
So what makes a saint, a saint? Being born of God (born again) makes a saint, and what takes place in order for a man or woman to become a saint? Repentance, confession of sins or admission to being a sinner and in need of The Father’s forgiveness, baptism and the gifting of The Holy Spirit. Now who were the first recipients of these tremendous blessings? Yashua Messiah’s twelve Learners (disciples) were the first recipients, in the upper room, and were any of them in their graves when Yashua Messiah died? No, not a single one, so how could there have been any saints in their graves at the time of Yashua Messiah’s crucifixion and death?
You see, dear brothers and sisters, these frauds always shoot themselves in the foot and betray themselves through their ignorance of The Truth. In this example it’s ignorance of what constitutes being A SAINT! This means we know that some Hellenising, religious fantasist was responsible for the penning of these two bogus verses.
OK, so let’s prove the point and write these Holy Scriptures as they should be written in order to reveal The Truth:
Matthew 27:50-52 (KJV) Jesus, when He had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up The Ghost (Spirit). 51 And, behold, the veil of The Temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; 52 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.
Interesting how it makes good sense with those bogus verses removed eh?
This proves, too, that the bogus verses were gratuitous sensationalist irrelevant religious mumbo jumbo, from the same spiritual mind sets that would later add Mary worship, fake fraudulent saints and transubstantiation to their satanic religious belief system – namely The Roman Cult.
Was The Flood, otherwise known as Noah’s Flood or The Deluge, worldwide, or partial, that is, localised and didn’t cover the whole earth? Many take the position of: Who cares? But those of us who are fixated upon knowing The Truth, would never in a million years adopt a couldn’t care less attitude to this crucial subject. So which is it?
Holy Scripture first, if only to get this off on a positive trajectory:
Genesis 7:17-23 (KJV) And The Flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up The Ark, and it was lift up above the earth. 18 And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and The Ark went upon the face of the waters. 19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. 20 Fifteen cubits (26 feet approx) upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered. 21 And ALL FLESH DIEDthat moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: 22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. 23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in The Ark.
Now it’s circus clown time. Here is the opening paragraph to the seventh chapter of Comparet’s – “The Complete Works of Bertrand Comparet”entitled: “Noah’s Flood was NOT Worldwide!”
“Among the many mistaken and unscriptural notions, commonly taught in nearly all churches, is the idea that the flood mentioned in the Bible, covered all the earth. It states everybody on earth was drowned excepting Noah and his family, who escaped death by being in the ark. Many churches have firmly insisted the Bible says this, when there is ample proof the flood was not worldwide.”
He goes on to say:
“Part of this mistaken idea about the flood is due to the many mistranslations found in the commonly used King James Bible. Part of it appears plainly to be false, if you carefully read even the King James Bible.”
Now don’t get me wrong, for I am FULLY AWARE of many of the mistranslations and corruptions in the KJV Bible, starting with Genesis 4:1; Isaiah 9:6; Matthew 28:19; 1 John 5:7-8; Romans 8:1; Romans 13:1-7; plus all the others that erroneously interpret The Holy Spirit as a personage of their mickey mouse Trinity. (See links 1, 2 and 3 below)
Further to, he says, and I quote: “If you carefully read even the King James Bible.” Which clearly he has not done, and which I will now unequivocally prove.
First of all he builds strawman number one, by referring to Cain being driven by God from “the face of the earth” (translated from the Hebrew word ‘erets’ or ‘eh-rets’) Here is what he says:
“First lets see what the translators have done to what Moses originally wrote. Remember the King James Bible says that the rain was upon the earth and the waters increased greatly upon the earth and all flesh died that moved upon the earth. Definitely not!” Remember that in Genesis 4:14, when Yahweh has driven Cain away in punishment for his murder of Abel, the King James Bible quotes Cain as saying, “Behold, Thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth.” So what did Cain do, climb into his rocket ship and take off for outer space? Of course not! He was not driven from the face of the earth, and he never said so, only the translators said so.”
Never mind what the translators of the KJV said, let’s see what the translators of the more reliable Septuagint say:
Genesis 4:14 (Septuagint) If thou castest me out this day from the face of the earth, and I shall be hidden from thy presence, and I shall be groaning and trembling upon the earth, then it will be that any one that finds me shall slay me.
Genesis 4:14 (KJV) Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.
Well it looks more or less exactly the same as the KJV. So what is Cain actually saying here? Is he alluding to being physically removed from ‘the face of the earth’ or is he being allegorical and painting a picture of being deprived of ALL the fruits from THE FACE of the earth? so therefore being cast from the earth in terms of life’s sustenance. This means he was threatened with being cast from THE FACE of the WHOLE earth. I think, therefore, that we all know what Cain meant, apart from this numbskull Comparet with his syllogism building.
From Strong’s Concordance:
Earth – H776 – ʼerets, eh’-rets; – from an unused root probably meaning to be firm; the earth (at large, or partitively a land):—× common, country, earth, field, ground, land, × natins, way, + wilderness, world.
Outline of The Biblical Usage of the words ‘Earth’ and ‘Land’ from the Blue Letter Bible web page:
1 EARTH, LAND.
A. Earth
i Whole earth (as opposed to a part)
ii Earth (as opposed to heaven)
iii Earth (inhabitants)
B. Land
i Country, territory
ii District, region
iii Tribal territory
iv Piece of ground
v Land of Canaan, Israel
vi Inhabitants of land
vii Sheol, land without return, (under) world
viii City (-state)
C. Ground, surface of the earth
i ground
ii soil
D. (in phrases)
i People of the land
ii Space or distance of country (in measurements of distance)
iii Level or plain country
iv Land of the living
v End(s) of the earth
E. (Almost wholly late in usage)
i Lands, countries
ii Often in contrast to Canaan.
From the above we can see all the multiple uses this Hebrew word ‘eh-rets’ has, so its meaning is directly affected by the context of the words surrounding it or, more importantly, its use in other verses of crucial Holy Scripture, which I will show later. However, let’s hear more from the numbskull Comparet:
“When we come to Genesis chapter 7 where it is talking about the flood, wherever it says the flood covered the earth, the Hebrew word used in the original writing by Moses was eh-rats, meaning the land. The flood did cover the particular land where it occurred. It was a local flood, which covered one particular region or land, not the whole earth.
Here we can see him adding his agenda driven interpretations to what’s written, because ‘eh-rets’ primarily means The EARTH as a whole, so he’s lying straight off. He’s also playing word games, or is it a perverted form of semantics? I’ll go with both, for that’s exactly what it is. So let’s use his twisted logic to our advantage:
Genesis 1:1 (KJV) In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth (H776 eh-rets – erets).
So here in Genesis 1:1 we have exactly the same Hebrew word in play, that is, ‘eh-rets’ or ‘erets’ and what is Genesis 1:1 telling us? It’s telling us that the word ‘earth’ (‘eh-rets’ ‘erets’) IS REFERRING TO THE WHOLE EARTH OF THE CREATION. Or perhaps the numbskull Comparet thought the Creation was only a partial creation or even a localised creation! ROTFL!!
Now here’s another thing, if the translators wanted to use the word ‘land’ in the correct way, do you not think they would be capable of doing so? Here’s an example:
Genesis 2:11 (KJV) The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;
In this example we see the use of the word land (‘eh-rets’ or ‘erets’) in reference to the localised area of Havilah. So, in turn, why did they not use the word ‘land’ when describing the area covered by The Flood, if it was only a localised event and/or only a partial flood. Why use the word ‘earth’ if they didn’t mean the whole earth and meant some localised land where as we can see they did use it when they needed to, in order to describe a local area like Havilah?
So here we are, after having copied, pasted and written just over three and a half A4 pages we have utterly debunked this fraud’s ‘Partial Flood’ satanic ideas. However, I will not leave it at that, for there is more, much more, so please bear with me.
OK, let’s focus on the second part of the above paragraph:
“The flood did cover the particular land where it occurred. It was a local flood, which covered one particular region or land, not the whole earth.”
Now apart from having already debunked his garbage, I will make use of some very valid points from a Tim Chaffey at “Answers in Genesis” (see video link below) where he does a great job of debunking this localised flood idea.
1 The Partial or Localised Flood makes God a liar.
How does that work? Quite simply because God gave Noah the sign of The Rainbow as part of a Covenant with Noah that He would NEVER flood the earth again. This means, that if The Flood of Noah’s day was localised or partial then God has broken His promise/covenant to Noah a million and one times, for there must have been millions of localised/partial floods since Noah’s time – which automatically makes God a liar for having broken His Covenant. All this when we know for sure that God cannot lie!
2 IF The Flood was partial or localised, why get Noah to build an Ark?
Good question eh? And very valid, because IF The Flood was only partial, or localised, why didn’t God get Noah and his clan to skedaddle off to where it didn’t flood, and thus negate the necessity of building an Ark, which must have taken Noah decades to construct. Let’s face it, God asking his pivotal characters to move elsewhere, would not have been a revolutionary idea. A good example being Abram moving to Canaan from Ur of the Chaldees, and then to Egypt to avoid a severe famine. Therefore Tim Chaffey has another great point here and makes nonsense of Comparet’s partial flood BS.
3 Why take birds on the Ark IF the Flood was localised and partial?
Yet another excellent point, so yes, why take birds on The Ark, when they could have easily flown off to where it was not flooded. Again, let’s face it, distance is no problem to birds, they can fly hundreds of miles, if necessary. However with such an insignificant localised mickey mouse flood, fleeing to safety would have been easy-peasy even for the smallest of birds, chuckle chuckle chuckle. I hope you’re beginning to see the stupidity of this man’s silly ideas.
4 The purpose of the Flood was to destroy ALL flesh:
Thirteen times the Holy Scriptures uses the term ‘All Flesh’ in relation to the world, before, during and after The Flood and thirteen is God’s number for rebellion, so very appropriate for reprobates like Comparet.
Genesis 6:12 (KJV) And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.
ALL FLESH was corrupted on the earth, not some flesh, but ALL OF IT!
Genesis 6:13 (KJV) And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
The end of ALL FLESH is come before God and the EARTH is filled with violence – ALL of the earth, not a part of it!
Genesis 6:17 (KJV) And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.
A Flood of waters to destroy ALL FLESH.
Genesis 6:19 (KJV) And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.
Genesis 7:15 (KJV) And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.
Genesis 7:16 (KJV) And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him: and the Lord shut him in.
Genesis 7:21 (KJV) And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:
And ALL FLESH died that moved upon the earth. If it was only a partial flood then ALL FLESH would NOT HAVE DIED! And of course this is the straw-man scenario that the blasphemer Comparet is aiming to construct – more on this later.
Genesis 8:17 (KJV) Bring forth with thee every living thing that is with thee, of all flesh, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth; that they may breed abundantly in the earth, and be fruitful, and multiply upon the earth.
Genesis 9:11 (KJV) And I will establish my covenant with you, neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.
“And I will establish my Covenant with you, neither shall ALL FLESH be cut off any more by the waters of a flood.” If it was only a partial flood, how would a Covenant be valid in terms of ALL FLESH not being cut off again by another flood, when ALL FLESH would not have been cut off by a partial flood? Do you see how this makes a total mockery of the partial flood idea? I do hope so.
Genesis 9:15 (KJV) And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh.
Genesis 9:16 (KJV) And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth.
God’s Covenant is with every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth. How would that be possible if the flood was only partial and/or localised.
Genesis 9:17 (KJV) And God said unto Noah, This is the token of the covenant, which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon the earth.
OK, lets move on with more Comparet garbage:
“If six miles of water covered the whole earth, then all nations must have been completely exterminated. However Babylonian, Egyptian and Chinese history runs right through this period without a break.”
Where has he got these ideas from? Fair enough he got the first bit nearly right, when he claimed six miles of water covered the whole earth, but even that was erroneous, because, no doubt, he was basing that on water covering modern day mount Everest at twenty nine thousand feet, which equates to five and half miles. However, in Noah’s day, mount Everest and the rest of the Himalayas didn’t even exist, they, being created by massive tectonic plate shifts that didn’t occur until The Flood and shortly thereafter, as described here:
Genesis 10:25 (KJV) And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother’s name was Joktan.
H6504 – Divided – parad paw-rad’ – a primitive root; to break through, that is, spread or separate (oneself):–disperse, divide, be out of joint, part, scatter (abroad), separate (self), sever self, stretch, sunder.
At this time we know that the earth’s continents did form and break off from the land mass known as Panjea and separate through tectonic plate shifts, thereby causing mountains to rise up, but this was after The Flood, so it’s ridiculous to suggest that six miles depth of water would have been necessary to cover The Earth. We also know that there are trillions of marine fossils in the Himalayan mountains, just as they are found at the top of the Grand Canyon. (All deposited there by Mr Comparet’s partial flood LOL).
Then we have his bogus dates for the Chinese and Egyptian dynasties, all based upon erroneous, one following the other, chronology, when most of these dynasties were living side by side contemporaneously, not chronologically, which then reduces the time periods drastically. Egypt was in its infancy in the days of Abram, as were all the other fledgling empires of those times.
OK, that just about rounds it off for part one – part 2 follows so please stick with it.
Exposing The Lying Blasphemer Bertrand Comparet – Part 2
In part one, I completely debunked Comparet’s stupid ideas regarding his partial flood and/or localised flood nonsense. In this article, we’ll get into the ‘meat’ of this subject, and I say ‘meat’, because these deceivers desperately need the partial flood BS in order to try and make the rest of their demonic doctrines stick.
Confused? Not to worry, for I will explain. So first of all, let’s be clear in our minds, for Comparet needed far more people to have survived The Flood than the eight souls who actually did survive The Flood and as confirmed for us in the NT by Peter:
1 Peter 3:20 (KJV) Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while The Ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
Notice, WHEREIN FEW, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
Now why do they need more than eight souls to have survived? Easy, because they erroneously claim that all three sons of Noah were white; that all three daughters-in-law were white, and that Noah’s wife was white. They erroneously deduce this whacky idea from this Holy Scripture:
Genesis 6:9-10 (KJV) These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God. 10 And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Genesis 6:9-10 (TAB) These are the records of the generations (family history) of Noah. Noah was a righteous man [one who was just and had right standing with God], blameless in his [evil] generation; Noah walked (lived) [in habitual fellowship] with God. 10 Now Noah became the father of three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
From this, we can easily fathom that the generational perfection was Noah’s and Noah’s only, and did not apply to any other member of his family, with the exception of Shem who, like his father, was white. His siblings however were not white. Ham was either dark brown or a swarthy brown and Japheth was slit eyed and yellow skinned.
Ham’s son was named Cush or Kush and Cush literally means black. The largest tribe of Cushites on earth today is the sub-continent Indians and they live south of the Hindu-Kush mountains in India. Likewise, Rebekah’s brother was called Laban and Laban means white and he was a white Semite. So these names mean what they say.
I have digressed slightly, so back to the thread. So how could this possibly be? Easy, through Naamah, Noah’s wife, who was the sister of Tubal-Cain, so Naamah was a Cainite, and not Adamic at all. WHOA!! I can hear all the Comparet sycophants screaming, you can’t be saying that!! But I am saying it, because it’s true. It has to be true in order for all the world’s ethnic groups to exist today, and they do exist, and they ALL come from the eight souls that disembarked The Ark after the WORLDWIDE flood waters had been on the earth for nearly a year. However, there is one caveat to this arrangement in the shape of the serpent creature called Canaan who made their number up to nine souls.
Now this is where it gets very messy, very messy indeed, if you’re a disciple of the blasphemer Comparet, because you desperately need your partial flood, whereby all the non-white people we share this earth with can be explained as people whose forefathers by-passed the localised flood and came through unscathed. LOL You see you have to have these mythical people in order to hang on to the falsehood that all three sons of Noah were white.
These Comparet numbskulls are never going to deny that black and slit eyed yellow skinned people exist, that would make them a bigger a laughing stock than they already are. They therefore desperately need this fairy story of a partial flood so that their imaginary descendants of the ‘beasts of the earth’ can get through the flood event as dry as a bone and totally unscathed. Hilarious or what?
Beasts of the earth? I hear you ask, who or what are they? They’re in Genesis 1:25:
Genesis 1:25 (KJV) And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Now here the Comparet cultists go into magic mushroom creative thinking mode and add all manner of BS to the Holy Scripture narrative, because, for them, these are not beasts as we would obviously know beasts, oh no – nothing as straight forward and simple as that! These are beasts with chutzpah, pizazz and front! LOL. Allegedly, these are two legged apeoid or negroid beasts, that are not wiped out by the flood but, rather, come through by by-passing the flood event and ultimately end up producing the millions of sub-Saharan Africans that we know of today. Interestingly the oriental peoples get by-passed completely in this bestial mayhem. More laughs for Messenger Charles.
Now you can see how crucial it is for them to maintain the partial flood myth, for without it they know they are screwed. They also know that when they are confronted with the challenge of having to engage their brains, and work out how Noah’s three sons plus Canaan produced ALL the ethnic groups we see around us on this earth today, they are at a complete loss.
So what of the descendants of the eight that came off The Ark + Canaan? he was the first born after The Ark settled on mount Ararat. And how was it that Noah’s sons were NOT ALL WHITE? Quite simply, and as already mentioned, because Noah’s wife was the sister of Tubal-Cain, so she was a an inbred Cainite. However, that was not an issue, because only Noah’s Adamic blood counted in his three sons, irrespective of their skin colours and appearances = all three sons were Adamic with Noah’s blood in their veins.
However, the problems started when Ham bedded his mother whilst his father was drunk and she produced the incestuous bastard Canaan. Canaan’s birth rekindled Cain’s bloodline post-flood, hence Noah cursed him. In turn, Canaan took daughters from all three sons of Noah and that miscegenation produced all the different Canaanite tribes we have today. Namely The Jews (white Canaanites); The Chinese/Koreans (yellow Canaanites); Sub-Saharan Black Africans (Black Canaanites); The Turks (The Edomites swarthy Canaanites); The Italians (Chaldean/Babylonian Canaanites). There are, no doubt, numerous other Canaanite splinter tribes, but the above are the principal Canaanite tribes or ethnic groups.
Moreover, this leaves us with many non-white ethnic groups who are of mankind (Adamic) and are definitely not white, but they’re definitely not Canaanites. These are The Japanese, The Greeks, The Malayans, The Indonesians, The sub-continent Indians, The Ethiopians, The Spanish, The Portuguese, The Arabs and The Filipinos.
In case you missed it, white people are from Shem = Semites. Jews, who look white, are not white. Jews are Shelahite Hamitic Canaanites which I explain in detail here:
Oh yes, isthatso? and how many of you are deceived and brainwashed by this wickedly satanic corruption of the King James Bible? Furthermore, did Yashua Messiah (Jesus Christ) actually say “the Jews”, or was He referring to a different ethnic group of people altogether?
John 4:22 (MCV) Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of The JewsThe Judaean Israelites.
Right, let’s go straight to Strong’s Concordance for some Light on this illegitimate KJV verse:
Jews – G2453 –Ἰουδαῖος Ioudaîos, ee-oo-dah’-yos; – from G2448 (in the sense of G2455 as a country); Judæan, that is, belonging to Jehudah:—Jew(-ess), of Judæa.
So first off, for the word ‘Jews’ we have ‘Judaean’ and ‘belonging to Jehudah’ (Judah). Now let’s get this firmly fixed in our minds, for Judaeans (the occupants and residents of Judaea) were not necessarily Jews, and Jews most definitely did not belong to Jehudah (Judah) (see link below).
In Judaea, in the first century, there were Royal Judahites, Levites and Benjaminites, who, in turn, were descended from the Israelite Tribes that made up the post Babylonian captivity House of Judah, that is, a remnant of those three tribes who returned to Judaea circa 515 BC. In fact, in a strict ethnic sense, Jews were not Judaeans at all. They were always alien usurpers, hijackers and parasitical subversive invaders, who inveigled their way into Israelite society, just as they do today in Britain, America and most civilised western nations.
“Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an Ancient Israelite a ‘Jew’ or to call a contemporary Jew an ‘Israelite’ or a ‘Hebrew’. The first Hebrews may not have been Jews at all…”
— 1980 Jewish Almanac, p. 3.
I will firm up the Jewish Almanac quote by stating, for the record, that Jews were NEVER Hebrews, nor were they Israelites, hence you will not find the word ‘Jew’ in the first eleven books of The KJV Bible.
Juda – G2448 – Iouda ee-oo-dah’ of Hebrew origin (3063 or perhaps 3194); Judah (i.e. Jehudah or Juttah), a part of (or place in) Palestine:–Judah.
In this definition we have confirmed for us that Juda or Judah is of Hebrew origin so, therefore, nothing to do with The Jews.
Judas – G2455 – Ἰούδας Ioúdas, ee-oo-das’; – of Hebrew origin (H3063); Judas (i.e. Jehudah), the name of ten Israelites; also of the posterity of one of them and its region:—Juda(-h, -s); Jude.
Again, in this definition, we are told that the name Judas is of Hebrew origin, which when applied to Israelites would be correct. Hence we get this:
Matthew 1:2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas (Judah) and his brethren;
And this:
Matthew 13:55 (KJV) Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called Mary? and His brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas (Judah)?
Judah – H3063 – Yhuwdah yeh-hoo-daw’ – from 3034; celebrated; Jehudah (or Judah), the name of five Israelites; also of the tribe descended from the first, and of its territory:–Judah.
Even in the Old Testament Mr Strong makes no reference to Jews, just Judahite Israelites.
However, Jews are very fond of hiding their Shelahite, Hamitic Canaanite, Serpent Seed identity by using names common to their host nation. This a favourite Jew trick, and this is why I am fairly certain that Judas Iscarriot, the betrayer of Yashua Messiah, was a Jew, and not an Israelite. Betrayal is a standard characteristic of the Jews, as evidenced by a past President of The US:
“The Jews are all through government, and we have got to get in those areas. The government is full of Jews, second, most Jews are disloyal. You can’t trust the bastards. They turn on you.”
President Richard M. Nixon, Nixon Tapes, July 3rd 1971.
In support of the above I will use this example, for we have Paul, later, professing his Israelite Hebrew ethnic identity:
Philippians 3:4-5 (KJV) Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: 5 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;
The first thing you will notice or, at least you SHOULD notice, is that he, at no time, professes himself as a Jew. So what does this mean? It means that erroneous ‘JEWISHNESS’ is read into these Holy Scriptures by ignorant uneducated people with a satanic agenda:
1) He was circumcised on the eighth day, as all Israelites were.
2) He was of the stock of Israel = a white Semite, so not a Jew.
3) The Israelite Tribe of Benjamin, so not a Jew.
4) An Hebrew of the Hebrews, so not a Jew.
5) Touching The Law, A Pharisee, and not all Pharisees were Jews. Nicodemus being another example of a non-Jew Pharisee.
Here is more solid gold evidence of who the Jews are, and Israelites they are definitely NOT!:
John the Baptist:
Matthew 3:7 (MCV) But when he (John) saw many of the Pharisee Jews and Sadducee Jews come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation (offspring or race) of vipers (snakes or reptiles), who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
Yashua Messiah:
Matthew 12:34 (MCV) O generation (offspring or race) of vipers (snakes or reptiles), how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.
Matthew 23:33 (MCV) Ye SERPENTS, ye generation (offspring or race) of vipers (snakes or reptiles), how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
John 8:44 (MCV) Ye are of your father The Devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in The Truth, because there is no Truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
The Jews were easily identifiable for their rabid lusting for the death of Yashua Messiah and then claimed responsibility:
Matthew 27:25 (MCV) Then answered all the the Jews, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.
Generation – G1081 – gennema – ghen’-nay-mah – From G1080; OFFSPRING; by analogy produce (literally or figuratively): – fruit, generation.
Having read all of the above quotes from the very lips of Yashua Messiah and John the Baptist, how on earth can salvation be of the Serpent Seed Jews = the spawn of the Devil himself, both literally and spiritually?
Essential reading for understanding the TRUE ORIGINS of the Serpent Seed Jews:
Before reading this article I recommend that you read “Unravelling The So-Called Pastoral Epistles – Parts 1-4 and 5” first, to gain a full understanding of where I am coming from on this exposé of these highly suspect epistles. (see links below)
Now chapter 3 of 1 Timothy is a dead giveaway for satanic religiosity, with it being full of Nicolaitan hierarchical nonsense, with bishops here and deacons there; all lusting after their positions of POWER and AUTHORITY – as you do NOT, if you’re a real Christian and part of the egalitarian Church of God!!
OK, so let’s get straight on with the first two verses of 1 Timothy 3:
1 Timothy 3:1-2 (KJV) This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach.
1 Timothy 3:1-2 Notes Part 1: “This is a true saying.” he says, but is it a true saying? We shall see. If a man desire the office of a bishop! So let’s have a look at what the Greek MSS says about offices and bishops:
1 Timothy 3:1 (Greek Transliteral) Believing the saying if any-one of-on-noting (supervision) is craving of-ideal work he-is-on-feeling (desiring).
Now why would a humble Christian be craving an alleged position of supervision (authority), in a supposed church? Does this phoney creature fancy his chances of being ‘king of the heap’ in this congregation, or see himself as lording it over his brothers and sisters, whom, he perhaps feels are in need of a good whipping into shape? You betcha!
Is ‘supervision’ the right word, or would ‘overseer’ be a better word? I speak here as if giving the benefit of the doubt to most of the verses of 1 Timothy 3, that is, verses 1 through 13, as being genuine Pauline verses which, in truth, I will prove are not.
So what policy or agenda were the KJV translators trying to impart here, and promote, with this word ‘office’? Well obviously it’s administrative and GOVERNMENTAL, is it not? and nothing to do with egalitarian Christian brotherly and sisterly love and fellowship at all. This is the modus operandi of the pecking order system of the Nicolaitans which is being promulgated here – plain and simple.
We then get this 100% religious BS term ‘BISHOP’, translated from the Greek word ‘episkope’, which means an ‘overseer’, that is, someone who keeps a watchful eye, as a protector and guardian, over the flocks, and who, no doubt, was selected by the elders of the congregation as someone fit for the job, not some upstart who fancied himself as a big shot in his so-called local church and desired, that is, most likely lusted after the position.
1 Timothy 3:1-2 Notes Part 2: Not only that, but this religious, 100% mythical, lustful Hellenising bishop must be blameless, eh? That’s a tough call to say the least. Where do you find a blameless counterfeit Christian who fancies himself as a bishop? Nowhere! And vanity, not repented of, must be the first blot on the list with regard to the character of this would-be so-called ‘bishop’.
And then we get, and wait for it! ‘The husband of one wife’!! Wow!! What’s going on here? This suggests to me, that in these Hellenising congregations there were a few bods with MORE THAN ONE WIFE! Was this permissible in the first century congregations of God? I have no idea, but here’s something on it:
Either way, I am not really interested, other than in what went on in the true Congregations of God, and I doubt very much that polygamy was something practised by them, so, yet again, bringing into doubt the provenance of these so-called Pastoral Epistles.
After the ‘only one wife’ hoo ha we get: ‘vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach’. I find this totally hilarious! What kind of so-called Christians are we dealing with here? If the laity are prone to being a load of inhospitable, yobbish boozers who lack the character quality of vigilance, what’s going on? Are we having described for us here a load of reprobates or Christians?
Then we get ‘apt to teach’. So are these bishop candidates gifted with the Spiritual gift of teaching or not? I would say that if someone who fancies himself as a bishop, is NOT gifted with the Spiritual gift of teaching, he’s next to useless for the job.
1 Corinthians 12:28 (MCV) And God hath placed some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, pilotage or guides, diversities of tongues.
Notice how the list of gifted abilities above does not include governors, administrators, bosses, leaders or tin pot dictators.
I will leave it there and move on:
1 Timothy 3:3 (KJV) Not given to wine, no striker (no quarrelsome bruiser), not greedy of filthy lucre (not a lover of money); but patient (lenient), not a brawler (peace loving), not covetous; (Brackets mine)
1 Timothy 3:3 Notes: The comedy continues…and in the same vein as verse 2 we have all these worldly characteristics being highlighted, as if we were dealing with lost and unsaved reprobates. Unrepentant sinners no less, who, if truly under Paul’s stewardship and guidance, would have been severely reprimanded or admonished and possibly threatened with expulsion from The Church. Furthermore, what would such people be doing in a Christian fellowship at all, let alone stand to be considered as a candidate for a bishop overseer!? I trust you can see the ignorant nonsense message these verses portray.
1 Timothy 3:4-5 (KJV) One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
1 Timothy 3:4-5 Notes: OK, this one could be taken as somewhat ambiguous: ‘one that RULETH well his own house’! Does this mean that the same rigid dictatorial mindset that operates in his household is then transferred to his local congregation? For it then says: ‘having his children in subjection with all gravity;’ so we have to assume that this transfer of strict ruler-ship is what the forger means by this, and then classifies it by adding in the gratuitous: (‘For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?’). ‘Taking care’ meaning ruling the roost? Still at least he got the name of The Church right.
Now don’t get me wrong, for a certain amount of no-nonsense discipline is definitely required when bringing up children properly, but, should this Victorian sounding, parent-child, disciplinary regime be transferred to the Church? Let’s be clear, sound informative Gospel teaching is all that is required when dealing with Christian adults, not a big stick pseudo-tyranny. My verdict, therefore, on these two verses is take from them what you will and for what they are worth, and use much wisdom. Always bearing in mind that the agenda being served here in these epistles is not a Christian agenda, but, rather, the Hellenising Religious agenda of the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion.
1 Timothy 3:6 (KJV) not a new convert, lest having been puffed up he may fall to a judgment of The Devil;
1 Timothy 3:6 Notes: Now this sounds like don’t give the keys to your Ferrari and the booze cabinet to your 18 year old son, whilst you’re away for the weekend. The only thing I’ll add is this: Would the elders of genuine congregation of God be giving the position of overseer, with all the great responsibilities that that entails, to a boy or a novice new convert to the faith and to the fellowship? Not a chance!
1 Timothy 3:7 (KJV) and it behoveth him also to have a good testimony from those without, that he may not fall into reproach and a snare of The Devil.
1 Timothy 3:7 Notes Part 1: Now get a load of this! ‘and it behoveth him also to have a good testimony from those without’. YOU WHAT!!?? So are we to believe that Paul would have written this irrelevant worldly garbage? Are select members of God’s church now chosen based upon the so-called ‘good reports’ of worldly sinners or the lost and unsaved!? What business do the Spiritually dead and/or unregenerated have with The Church of God other than to be recipients of Christian good works? NONE! ZILCH! ZERO!
1 Timothy 3:7 Notes Part 2: ‘that he may not fall into reproach and a snare of The Devil’.
From Adam Clarke’s Commentary:
“Lest he fall into reproach, for his former scandalous life. And the snare of the devil. Snares and temptations, such as he fell in and fell by before. This is called the snare of the devil; for, as he well knows the constitution of such persons, and what is most likely to prevail, he infers that what was effectual before to their transgressing may be so still;”
Looks like repentance and forgiveness was non-existent in these illegitimate Hellenising fake churches, and in contrast, judging was a full time occupation. Let’s be clear about this, real Christians repent before they are Baptised. That means they TURN from their old ways, they give up their old lives and bury them in the watery grave of Yashua Messiah’s death/sacrifice. They then rise out of the water a new creation – a new man or new woman, not capable of sin; once gifted with The Holy Spirit. This means that if our former scandalous life is still held against us by certain people within this so-called church, then we have an untenable situation and those enforcing such a policy are judgemental, spiritual renegades and apostates, who do need dealing with.
1 John 3:6 (KJV) Whosoever abideth in Him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen Him, neither known Him.
1 John 3:9 (KJV) Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for His seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
Rest assured, the clown who penned 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus hadn’t a clue about Christian regeneration.
1 Timothy 3:8 (KJV) Likewise must the deacons be grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;
1 Timothy 3:8 Notes: Again, as before, what kind of Christians are we dealing with here, if they’re double tongued boozers and money grabbers? It would be hilarious if not so serious. It looks like matey, the second century author of these epistles, hasn’t a clue about regenerated Christians and Christianity.
1 Timothy 3:9 (KJV) Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.
1 Timothy 3:9 Notes: You what? What is he rambling on about? ‘mystery of the faith’? what mystery? how is SIMPLE faith in Yashua Messiah mysterious? is it not all very straight forward. Paul confirms it for us, doesn’t he?
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.
If someone or something is simple to understand, where is the mystery? There is no mystery, but there’s plenty of mystery in the Cainite Babylonian MYSTERY Religion otherwise known as the Cainite-Judaeo-Christian Religion. (see links below)
He then, almost gratuitously, throws in ‘in a pure conscience’. Answer me this, dear readers, what kind of conscience does a regenerated Christian have, if it’s not pure? Does this author creature have any understanding at all? Is a Christian completely forgiven or not – is he or she beyond reproach or not, that is, beyond condemnation?
1 John 3:3 (KJV) And every man that hath his hope in Him purifieth himself, even as He is pure.
Romans 8:1 (MCV) There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus.
1 Timothy 3:10-13 (KJV) And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless. 11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things. 12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. 13 For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.
1 Timothy 3:10-13 Notes Part 1: Much of this is just a repeat of the nonsense that applied to their so-called bishops, however, there are one or two other issues within these verses: “Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things”. I will highlight once more, what kind of Christians are we dealing with here? Are they regenerated or not? Are they being led by the Spirit or not? All I see in these verses are the characteristics of the heathen, not born of God Christians.
1 Timothy 3:10-13 Notes Part 2: “For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.”
From Adam Clarke’s Commentary:
Verse 13. ‘That have used the office of a deacon well’ They who, having been tried or proved, 1Ti 3:10, have shown by their steadiness, activity, and zeal, that they might be raised to a higher office, are here said to have purchased to themselves a good degree.
Here we can graphically see explained for us by Adam Clarke the pecking order system of the Nicolaitans, that this forger is promoting. “If you do well then the sky is the limit and one day you could be a pope” This is the spirit that’s at work here – advancement as if an employee in a large corporation, which is exactly what the Cainite-Judaeo-Christian Religion is.
1 Timothy 3:14-16 (KJV) These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly: 15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
1 Timothy 3:14-16 Notes – Part 1: Now the above last verses of 1 Timothy 3 are 50/50 in terms of Truth and religious hogwash. Verse 14 is irrelevant to the subject matter at hand, as the forger is quite obviously attempting to pass himself off as Paul. However, this statement is true, if the message is figurative: “how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the Truth.” If it’s not figurative, and the forger is referring to a literal CHURCH BUILDING, made with man’s hands, then he gives himself away in no uncertain terms. In fact it could carry a dual meaning, as we know how their grandiose church buildings and cathedrals would feature in the future, and then be referred to a house of God.
1 Timothy 3:14-16 Notes – Part 2: “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness.” Once more we have this religious bunkum word ‘godliness’ which I previously unravelled in my earlier writings on 1 Timothy 2. (see link below).
1 Timothy 3:14-16 Notes – Part 3: Finally we get this: “God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.”
“God was manifest in the flesh” I have no problem with that, but “justified in The Spirit” I am not so sure about. Did the only begotten Son of God need to be justified? And “believed on in the world”. Is this speaking generally or referring to a select few that He met on His travels? Not very clear is it?
Now also notice, how there is no mention of who Yashua Messiah really came for, so let me refresh your memories:
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 Learners explicit instructions:
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.
Please take note: I am not referring to the Serpent Seed Canaanite Jews when mentioning The Twelve Tribes of Israel.
To summarise, these last verses are probably the best verses in the whole chapter, but still leave a lot to be desired and certainly don’t let the Hellenising religious forger off the hook. 1 Timothy 4 coming up.
In parts one through four on this subject (link below) I proved without a shadow of doubt that the writer of 1 Timothy 1 was a forger of the early to mid 2nd century AC and that Paul was definitely not the author of chapter one of said Epistle. How can you be so certain I hear you ask? Well, that’s very simple, for the language of 1 Timothy 1, and the words used, are those of a Hellenising religious philosopher, that is, a deceiver. In other words, he was a philosophising counterfeiter of the early Romish Babylonian Church; the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion as I call it, and certainly not Paul the first century Messenger (Apostle) of Yashua Messiah.
Moreover, as I begin unravelling 1 Timothy 2, I will reveal to you even more convincing proof that this author is a forger. In fact, 1 Timothy 2 is the humdinger chapter that cements my case and proves the Hellenising, philosophising, religious credentials and provenance of these Epistles.
However, having said all that, there are times when The Truth is written into these forgeries, for a religious deceiver will always hide his lies amongst The Truth. Hence the adage: “A lie is best hidden between two Truths.” Furthermore, are The Truths within these Epistles from Paul’s pen or the forger’s pen? Are they from scraps of genuine manuscripts and then embellished by the forger’s own additional writings? Answer: I have no idea, but rest assured, there are some Truths in these epistles, which cannot be denied.
So, pressing on:
1 Timothy 2:1 (KJV) I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, BE MADE FOR ALL MEN; (Emphasis mine)
1 Timothy 2:1 Notes – part 1 — “THAT, FIRST OF ALL, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, BE MADE FOR ALL MEN.” Oh really, is that so!? Now is this statement a genuine Christian statement from Paul’s hand or is it meaningless religious clap trap and an erroneous generalised unscriptural religious statement with no Holy Spiritual or Holy Scriptural provenance whatsoever?
Now notice first the Spiritual contrast from Paul’s hand here:
Romans 8:26 (KJV) Likewise The Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but The Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. (Emphasis mine)
Here Paul is stating that we don’t even know how to pray correctly, so the Holy Spirit prays for us!!!
And again:
1 Corinthians 14:15 (KJV) What is it then? I will pray with The Spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with The Spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.
Now is The Holy Spirit even mentioned in 1 Timothy 2:1? Not at all. Notice the emphasis: “THAT, FIRST OF ALL.” So this exhortation is prioritised above any others following it, never mind praising The Father God and giving Him thanks FIRST. So, basically, what he’s saying is put supplications, prayers and intercessions first, for ALL men, and then not even any thanks to God before or afterwards – as you do – NOT!!
1 Timothy 2:1 Notes – part 2 — Moreover, should we be making supplications, praying and making intercessions FOR ALL MEN at all, or is this nothing but a man made religious idea? By the term “ALL MEN” we must assume that this author is referring to all rebellious, lost and unsaved creatures, both mankind and hu-mans (non-mankind) alike. Even those that may have heard the Kingdom Gospel message and ‘rejected it’. Yet what did Yashua Messiah say about these types of people?
Luke 10:13-16 (KJV) Woe (a curse) unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works had been done in Tyre and Sidon, which have been done in you, they had a great while ago repented, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. 14 But it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment, than for you. 15 And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted to heaven, shalt be thrust down to hell. 16 He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me. (Brackets mine)
Woe unto thee Chorazin, which means a “horrendous grief” or CURSE towards Chorazin, Bethsaida and Capernaum!!!
OK, so let’s get this straight and ask ourselves another pertinent question: Are we, as Christians, supposed to make prayers and supplications and intercede for people generally that Yashua Messiah would otherwise curse for their wicked rebellious behaviour in rejecting the Gospel Message when presented, that’s if He were here today in the flesh? Keeping in mind that these people would despise Yashua Messiah and The Father by treating Their Message with contempt, just like those people of Chorazin, Bethsaida and Capernaum did in the first century.
We could also put this another way and ask this question: Are the rebellious, lost and unsaved masses entitled to the mercy, forgiveness and blessings as bestowed upon those The Father has called to His Son Yashua Messiah and saved? NO!!
If we then follow up with our due diligence on this subject of prayer what do we find?
1 Corinthians 14:13-14 (KJV) Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. 14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
2 Corinthians 5:20 (KJV) Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God.
2 Corinthians 13:7 (KJV) Now I pray to God that ye do no evil; not that we should appear approved, but that ye should do that which is honest, though we be as reprobates.
Philippians 1:9 (KJV) And this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment;
Colossians 1:9 (KJV) For this cause we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding;
1 Thessalonians 5:17 (KJV) Pray without ceasing.
1 Thessalonians 5:23 (MCV) And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
1 Thessalonians 5:25 Brethren, pray for us.
2 Thessalonians 1:11 (KJV) Wherefore also we pray always for you, that our God would count you worthy of this calling, and fulfill all the good pleasure of His goodness, and the work of faith with power:
2 Thessalonians 3:1 (KJV) Finally, brethren, pray for us, that The Word of the Lord may have free course, and be glorified, even as it is with you:
Make sure you understand, for ALL these genuine Pauline exhortations for prayer are Holy Spiritually based prayers and are for the brethren ALONE, not for mankind in general!
So what is 1 Timothy 2:1 all about? Answer: satanic Hellenising religious blanket universal forgiveness for all unrepentant sinners or a universal pardon FOR ALL MEN as long as they join matey’s new money making religious cult now on offer, by this forger, on behalf of the Babylonian Romish Cult or, as I call it, The Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion, and cough up. Oh and don’t forget the hail (Queen of Heaven) Mary’s. LOL.
OK, I’m being deliberately facetious and sarcastic here, but the principle remains, and this is what 1 Timothy 2:1 is promoting here – the Hellenised Romish Cult. It is also a foundational verse of these fake epistles, for it sets the tone for what follows and from Paul’s pen they most definitely did not come!!
However, having said all that, if there is someone you know and wish to pray for them, by all means pray, but always remembering that if The Father is not calling them, then they will remain unsaved in this age and the answer to your prayer will be postponed to a future age. The same applies if they are sick. He may or may not heal them.
1 Timothy 2:2 (KJV) For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. (Emphasis mine and I will deal with the heinous and ghastly religious word ‘godliness’ in detail next)
1 Timothy 2:2 Notes — “For kings, and for all that are in authority;” Yes especially for Kings or Queens as they are anointed by God and are answerable to God alone. However, those ‘in authority’ (politicians) are your enemies, so pray for them as you would for any enemy, but you shouldn’t vote for them, nor co-operate with them, nor forgive them. No repentance, no forgiveness:
Luke 17:3 (KJV) Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. (Emphasis mine)
So when you pray for these satanic verminous people in authority, remember that they are your sworn enemies and pray as Yashua Messiah told you to pray here:
Matthew 5:44 (KJV) But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; (This verse requires an article all of its own – coming soon)
Furthermore, as for praying so that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, by all means, but always bearing in mind that these criminals in authority are The Devil’s own and your friends they are definitely NOT, and will do their damnedest to make sure that you do not have a quiet and peaceable life!! So keep this permanently in mind and be on your guard! This quote puts it into perspective:
“Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn’t mean politics won’t take an interest in you!”
— Pericles (430 B.C.)
1 Timothy 2:3 (KJV) For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; (Emphasis mine)
1 Timothy 2:3 Notes — This verse is part Truth especially in relation to what I have said above about 1 Timothy 2:2 so it is therefore only partly good, but it does tell us that Yashua Messiah is God.
1 Timothy 2:4 (KJV) Who WILL have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of The Truth. (Emphasis mine)
1 Timothy 2:4 Notes — Now this verse is solid gold Truth, BUT WILL NOT HAPPEN IN THIS AGE! All men being saved will occur in the Second Resurrection when they will come to a knowledge of The Truth. And who is The Truth? Yashua Messiah is The Truth. (A new article on the Two Resurrections subject coming soon.)
1 Timothy 2:5 (KJV) For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; (‘who was made man’ from The Geneva Bible notes)
1 Timothy 2:5 Notes — This verse is blasphemous satanic ‘God is one’ Monotheistic nonsense. From the Greek Transliteral:
1 Timothy 2:5(Greek Transliteral) One for God, One and Mediator of-God and of mankind the man Anointed Jesus.
1) NOTICE: The remark “For there is one God” is total translator nonsense, for the words in italics [there is] are a translators addition, so what it should say is:
1 Timothy 2:5 (MCV) For one is God The Father, and one is mediator God between God and men, the man Christ Jesus who came in the flesh;
That is, ONE who is God The Father and ONE who is Mediator for man as God – letting us know that there are Two Gods = The Father and The Son. (See links below.)
2) To emphasise, I trust also that you will notice how this verse has been sneakily corrupted. Yashua Messiah is God and Mediator of God, not a lesser being between man and God. He is God as Mediator, Advocate, Consoler and Comforter. This contamination is very subtle along the lines of both Monotheist and a Trinity corruption where the KJV says ‘Spirit of truth’, when it is the ‘Spirit of THE Truth’ as written in the Greek Transliteral. (See link below)
1 Timothy 2:6 (KJV) Who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
1 Timothy 2:6 Notes — Here we have more Truth, as long as you understand that “testified in due time” is referring to the future resurrections and not this age. The testifying in this age is only for those CALLED and those CALLED and CHOSEN by The Father, not for the masses of lost and unsaved.
1 Timothy 2:7 (KJV) Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak The Truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.
1 Timothy 2:7 Notes — This verse is fairly sound but whether it is from Paul’s pen or the forger I cannot say. However, I have my suspicions. For my notes on this verse I will go straight to the Greek Transliteral and then raise the relevant points:
1 Timothy 2:7 (Greek Transliteral) Into which was-placed I proclaimer (declarer or herald) and commissioner (messenger) Truth I-am-saying in Anointed (Christ) not I-am-falsifying teacher of nations in belief (faith) and Truth.
OK, the first relevant point here is ridding this verse of the religious slogan words ‘ordained’ ‘gentiles’ and ‘verity’. Paul was placed as a proclaimer or, better, placed as a declarer or herald of the Good News Kingdom of God message by Yashua Messiah Himself = no religious ritualistic ‘ordaining’ nonsense ever took place.
Gentiles is a word that needs full examination, for it means someone who is not a Roman Citizen from the Latin word ‘gentilis’. This meaningless corrupting Latin word can be found in both Old and New Testaments so what is it doing there? Answer: causing satanic confusion.
Secondly, and a final word on this verse, is that it may be genuine, but was corrupted by the religious translators anyway with the use of the word ‘verity’ – a derivation of the Latin word ‘veritatem’ which means Truth.
Now here’s a thing. This totally religious Latin based word ‘verity’ can only be found twice in The Holy Scriptures. Once in the Old Testament and once in the New Testament, here in 1 Timothy 2:7, so my questions would therefore be: 1) WHY? and 2) Is this some kind of KJV translator religious tokenism going on here, as if to leave their Latin Romish religious trade mark in both Testaments in some sort of gratuitous way? Or is it just a symbolic way to make a satanic statement like a rubber stamping? Everywhere else the word Truth is used, so why use this vain unnecessary word at all unless it’s only promoting elitist meaningless religiosity? Here is the verse from the Old Testament:
Psalm 111:7 (KJV) The works of His hands are verity (truth) and judgment; all His commandments are sure. (Emphasis and brackets mine)
Here is 1 Timothy 2:7 as it should be written:
1 Timothy 2:7 (MCV) Whereunto I am ordained placed a preacher, and a apostle Messenger, (I speak The Truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the gentiles Nations in Faith and verity Truth.
Right, enough of that:
1 Timothy 2:8 (KJV) I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
1 Timothy 2:8 Notes — Now this verse is total Babylonian Romish religious drivel and humbug. Paul would have prayed no such thing, for most men everywhere were lost and unsaved and WITHOUT Holy hands, so why would Paul utter such erroneous generalised blanket rubbish? Let’s be clear, only a creature of the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion could come out with bunk like this. So this verse is from the forger 100%.
As for wrath, the Word of God says be angry but do not sin, and don’t let the sun go down on your wrath – so nothing about being without wrath. Oh and how can you not be angry about this satanic evil world today, EVERYDAY!!?? Think on this very pertinent point!
Oh and finally, don’t you doubt his Babylonian Romish Cult or YOU will excommunicated forthwith!
1 Timothy 2:9-12 (KJV) In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; 10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. 11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. (Emphasis mine)
1 Timothy 2:9-12 Notes — Whether this was from the hand of Paul or not I have no idea, but I have no issues with any of it apart from the use of the word ‘shamefacedness’ which can mean ‘shame’ and is therefore a blasphemy, if that’s the meaning the translators were implying. TAKE NOTE!: No son or daughter of God should feel any shame about ANYTHING now that they are forgiven ALL their sins, if Baptised and gifted with The Holy Spirit.
Furthermore, this word ‘shamefacedness’ can also mean ‘bashfulness’ which would be fine, especially as we look at the brazenness of the drunken tarts and froward hussies that parade themselves around the streets today semi-naked with no shame at all.
To compound this, today, we have vile Cultural Jew Marxist dyke (lesbian) feminists and filthy dyke politicians (amazons) strutting around with their bows and arrows and who now rule over us.
I will therefore quote Isaiah as a severe warning because it has all happened before, re our ancestors, in the Northern Kingdom of Ancient Israel before they were carried off in captivity by the Assyrians (forefathers of The Germans):
Isaiah 3:12 (KJV) As for my people, children are their oppressors, AND WOMEN RULE OVER THEM. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.
This is what happens when we move away from the sound advice given here in 1 Timothy 2:9-12 whether it be from Paul’s hand or not.
Right, those brackets: “(which becometh women professing godliness).” What’s wrong with them I hear you ask? EVERYTHING is the answer to that question, but in what way? I also hear you ask. Quite simply, it’s all wrapped up in ONE WORD and that word is ‘godliness’ which is a satanic religious deception, for it means ‘piety’ and ‘piety’ is wholly a meaningless, empty, religious word:
From Strong’s Concordance:
Godliness – G2317 – θεοσέβεια – theosebeia – theh-os-eb’-i-ah – From G2318; devoutness, that is, piety: – godliness.
Now this non-word ‘godliness’ (notice how it’s spelt with a small ‘g’ and not a capital ‘G’) can only be found in the questionable books of the New Testament, namely, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus and 2 Peter which tells us three very important things:
1) It is a word NEVER used by Yashua Messiah in the Four Gospels.
2) It is not a word used by Paul or Peter in their genuine writings and…
3) ALL these books were most likely penned by the same Hellenising religious forger or by Hellenisers with same satanic religious mindset as the forger and Christians they certainly were NOT!
Moreover, let’s be clear, ‘piousness’ or ‘godliness’ is a religious state of being, a phony state of being, not a Christian state of being and it’s not a born of God (born again) state of being. For example, ‘piousness’ is not being ‘Holy’ for ‘Holy’ means to be ‘set apart’ by God or to be called out by The Father to His Son Yashua Messiah and be made Holy by the indwelling of His HOLY Spirit. ‘Piousness’ or ‘godliness’ is none of this – it’s a fraud, it’s a fake religious counterfeit state of being, practised by the evil creatures of The Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion, especially in the Babylonian Romish Cult and by its slapper daughter offspring Protestant Anglicanism = AngliCAINism.
Pious – Religious definitions from Dictionary.com:
1) Having or showing a dutiful spirit of reverence for God or an earnest wish to fulfill religious obligations.
2) Characterized by a hypocritical concern with virtue or religious devotion; sanctimonious.
3) Practiced or used in the name of real or pretended religious motives, or for some ostensibly good object; falsely earnest or sincere: a pious deception.
In the above secular definitions we can see how being ‘pious’ has many more negative meanings than positive, and even the ‘positive’ are still within the framework of RELIGION, and that’s because ‘pious’ and ‘piety’ as with ‘godliness’ are wholly religious, fake Christian, words and nothing to do with Christianity or following Yashua Messiah at all. A fake Jesus, yes, but not Yashua Messiah (The Lord Jesus Christ). Notice, in point one of these definitions: ‘the dutiful spirit of reverence for god’ will be referring to the god of this world, Satan the Devil for he is the god of all RELIGION.
OK the final verses of 1 Timothy 2:
1 Timothy 2:13-15 (KJV) For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. 15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
Here, dear reader, is a little test for you. Can YOU see the religious humbug and outright lies in the satanic words of this verse? I do hope so, but if not, no matter, for we all have to learn and I recommend that you pray to The Father and ask Him to give you the Spiritual gift of discernment.
Lie No 1) And Adam was not deceived.
Lie No 2) Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing.
So did Eve beguile and deceive Adam or not? Who was responsible for whom in The Garden? Upon whose desk did the buck stop? Is not the Man the head of the wife? Once we know what the original sin REALLY WAS (see link below) then EVERYTHING else falls into place, and this verse just reads like Babylonian Romish Cult religious hogwash and humbug.
So here’s a question: When was a woman ever saved through child bearing? Answer on the back of a postage stamp, thank you.
The Duality Yahhead!? What Yahhead is that, I hear you ask? Well I’ll tell you straight, right away, They are not a mickey mouse triune yahhead (godhead), They’re not a Christadelphian/Unitarian/Judaic/Islamic monotheistic godhead and They are not a Binatarian yahhead (godhead) either, if that’s what you were thinking.
Now what is a Binatarian yahhead (godhead)? I’ve never heard of such a thing, again I hear you say. OK, so let me explain, a Binatarian yahhead (godhead) is a half-truth, so that means it’s a lie, just like the monotheistic mono-god and the trinity triune yahhead (godhead).
Binatarianism is belief in a Duality Yahhead (Godhead) that has been corrupted with Triunism and turned into yet another lying hu-man magical construct. This means that instead of a mythical yahhead (godhead) that is one in three and three in one, they have constructed a yahhead (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 Yahhead consists of TWO DISTINCT Spiritual Beings who are and were NEVER at anytime one solitary spiritual being – a mono distinction that applies solely to The Adversary – The Serpent Creature, for he is the ONLY MONO-GOD. This means that The Duality Yahhead is very simple to understand, for we are told about Them right at the beginning in Genesis Chapter 1 verse 1
Genesis 1:1 (MCV) In the beginning Yah (H430 Elohim – plural) created the heaven and the earth.
There They are, in the very first verse of the Set Apart (Holy) Scriptures: The ‘ELOHIM’, and the Hebrew word ‘Elohim’ is the plural of the Hebrew word ‘Eloah’ or ‘Eloha’. So if the Yahhead was ONE YAH, it would have read: “In the beginning Yah (Eloah – singular) created the heaven and the earth.” But it DOES NOT SAY THAT it says Yah ‘ELOHIM’ – PLURAL! MORE THAN ONE GOD – THE YAHHEAD, but NOT a triune yahhead! Please excuse the all-caps shouting folks, but shouting is very necessary at times, especially, for some stiff necked duped rebellious people out there who love to hang onto their nonsensical Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religious myths, whether it be monotheist myths or triune myths.
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 monotheistic 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’ or ‘Eloha’ 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. (Take note, I have recently learned that Strong was a Freemason so great care MUST be employed when using his concordance for a certain agenda will be at work therein.)
OK, so we have established from the first verse of the Set Apart (Holy) Scriptures that the Yahhead is more than one Yah and this is further confirmed for us in Genesis again:
Genesis 1:26 (MCV) (first part) And Yah (H430 Elohim – plural) said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OURlikeness: (Emphasis mine)
Right, now is this erroneously 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 “Yah is one” nonsense, seriously, it must mean that their yah 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 around their altar, such is their delusional thinking. (See 1 Kings 18) However, not only that, but when I have finished this article the trinity dupes will no doubt have joined them in their manic heathen frenzy. Who said being a follower of Yashua Messiah (Jesus Christ) – 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 Yah 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:
Deuteronomy 6:4 (MCV) Hear, O Israel: The Yahavah our Yah is one Yahavah:
Please note, as I dissect 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 Yahavah, have something important to tell you:
“The Lord our Yah” – properly translated from the Hebrew; The Yahavah (The Lord) = The Eternal or The Self-Existing. Our Yah = Our God – Our ‘Elohim’ (plural); the Yahhead that has always self-existed before time began and was/is always a plural Duality Yahhead.
Straight away in this short phrase of Set Apart (Holy) Scripture we are told by the use of this word ‘Elohim’ (the plural of ‘Eloah’) that we are dealing with more than one Yah. 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 Yah was one. OK, so we have now ascertained that The Yahhead is more than one, and yet it says:
“Is One Yahavah (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 written elsewhere in the Set Apart (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 yah or a mono-yah, 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 Yahavah, through Paul, exhorts the Congregations of Yah to be like the Yahhead in their relationships one with another:
Romans 15:5-6 (MCV) Now the Yah of Patience and Comforting grant you to be likeminded and/or of a mutually agreeable mindset, one toward another according to Messiah Yashua: 6 That ye may be united with one mind and one mouth Glorify Yah, even The Father of our Yahavah Yashua Messiah.
Take note, the Congregations of Yah 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 Yahhead of Yah with Yah in the beginning who said: “Let US make man in OUR image, after OURlikeness:”
If we now move on to the New Testament we have a new word for the Yahhead 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, character and make-up of the Duality Yahhead 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 automatically 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 Canaanite Serpent Seed Jews that worshipped such a deity and they worshipped that deity in error, and in ignorance, when they knew very well that Yah ‘Elohim’ was a plural Yahhead.
Yah (God) – G2316 – θεός theos theh’-os – Of uncertain affinity; a (polytheistic) 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 polytheistic 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 triune 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.
“Based on the previous blog, I received a question, How do you come to the definition of the Greek word “theos” (God) as PLACER? The well-known Lexicon to the New Testament of Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, says the following:
The most probable derivation is from the verb theo, to place (see tithemi, Str. 5087). The heathen thought the gods were disposers (theteres, placers) and formers of all things.
The Keyword Concordance of the Concordant Literal New Testament presents the same origin of theos. The verb appoint or place we also recognize in our word thesis, which is a proposition (anti-thesis = contrast, synthesis = composition). Below are some passages where the word theos is remarkable combined with tithemi, from which it was derived.
Romans 4:17 … A father of many nations have I appointed you – facing which, he believes it of the GOD … 1 Corinthians 12:18 Yet now GOD placed the members, each one of them, in the body according as He wills. 1 Corinthians 12:2…whom also GOD, indeed, placed in the ecclesia, first, apostl… 1Thessalonians 5:9 for GOD did not appoint us to indignation…”
The Greek word theos is much more concrete than our word Yah (God). Theos refers to One Who appoints everything and gives it a place. Nothing takes place without Him giving it a place.”
Furthermore, because we know that The Yahhead does not cause confusion re their identity we can definitely know for sure that plural ‘Theos’ in the NT means exactly the same as plural ‘Elohim’ in the OT – The Duality Yahhead with The Set Apart Exclusive Spirit as their LIVING POWER.
One last Scripture:
Galatians 3:20 (MCV) Now a mediator is not [a mediator] of one, but Yah is one.
Now does this verse make any sense? First of all, who is The Mediator that this verse is referring to? Answer: Yashua Messiah. And was Yashua Messiah Yah 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: “Yah is one!” So what’s going on here?
Easy, Yah = ‘Theos’ = ‘Elohim’ = more than one, for the Yahhead does not change:
Malachi 3:6 (MCV) For I am The YAHAVAH, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
Here below we have Yashua Messiah speaking on behalf of the Yahhead for He tells no one has ever seen or heard The Father:
John 1:18 (MCV) No man hath seen Yah (The Father) at any time; The Only Begotten Son, which is in the bosom of The Father, He hath declared Him.
John 5:37 (MCV) 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.
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 Yah of the Old Testament who spoke on behalf of Himself and/or The Father – The Duality Yahhead. (See link Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 below).
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:
First of all we’ll get some insight from Adam Clarke’s Commentary on this word ‘heresy’:
“The high priest – and – the sect of the Sadducees – Αἱρεσις των Σαδδουκαιων, The heresy of the Sadducees. In this place, (Acts 5:17) as well as in several others, the word αἱρεσις, heresy, has no evil meaning in itself; it is a word of distinction, and may receive either a good or bad colouring from the persons or opinions designated by it. It signifies a sect or party, whether good or bad, distinguished from any other sect.”
So in and of itself the word ‘heresy’ is benign, however, if you are a True Christian, or even a member of a counterfeit Protestant denomination (demon-ination), or not even a Christian at all, and with no interest in Christianity, have you ever wondered about these three words and what they mean? for they get banded about by the secular and religious alike, and with great regularity, especially by those of the satanic and judgemental Roman Catholic Cult, which is a major part of the equally satanic Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion. (See link No.s 1 and 2 below) Let’s face it, as soon as you decide not to go with the flow, you’re quickly branded a HERETIC!!
Moreover, when you hear these words levelled at someone, do they resonate a positive vibe within you, or a negative vibe? For me, they have always resonated a negative vibe, because they have always sounded accusatory and judgemental. Furthermore, historically, it usually meant the unfortunate people being judged and accused by The Roman Cult of ‘heresy’were often brutally tortured, in order to extract their ‘confessions’. Shortly thereafter they would be burned at the stake for their alleged ‘heresies’ (usually based upon trumped up perjurious charges) and in true Roman Catholic loving ‘Christian’ style, of course. Nothing like spreading the Good News Gospel of The Kingdom eh? Furthermore, just to compound their evil wickedness, they, in their gross arrogance and self-righteousness, would be self-convinced that they were doing The Lord’s work – such was their delusional vain satanic thinking, and it still persists to this day as demonstrated here:
This is a social media comment addressed to me recently by an illegitimate who calls himself ‘Pantocrator’:
“‘Thetruthnotdoctrine’ is a heretic. The fool’s Internet alius is paradoxical: how can one communicate the truth without doctrine? Let all Christians on this forum beware of his poisonous doctrines – let him be anathema.”
For those interested to know what a ‘Pantocrator’ is, here’s a little from Wikipedia:
“In Christian Iconography, Christ Pantocrator – Greek: Χριστὸς Παντοκράτωρ – is a specific depiction of Christ (an idolatrous image). Pantocrator or Pantokrator, usually translated as “Almighty” or “all-powerful”, is derived from one of many names of God in Judaism.
“The Pantokrator, largely an Eastern Orthodox or Eastern Catholic theological conception, is less common under that name in Western Roman Catholicism and largely unknown to most Protestants. In the West the equivalent image in art is known (more Idolatry) as Christ in Majesty, which developed a rather different iconography. Christ Pantocrator has come to suggest Christ as a mild but stern, all-powerful judge of humanity.” (Brackets mine).
So here we have graphically displayed for us, an idolatrous dissolute reprobate – an apostate – a worshipper of graven icons, images and idols, that is, a vile creature of religion, calling me a heretic, and for me to be declared anathema!! I can hear his weeping, wailing and the gnashing of his teeth in The Resurrection from here LOL.
I have digressed slightly, so back to the thread:
Now, don’t get me wrong, for as we can see from the above, there are some people that deserve to be labelled a ‘heretic’, that’s ifwe take the Roman Catholic meaning of the word. However, the word ‘heretic’doesn’t exist in The Holy Scriptures, now there’s a surprise! But what do exist are the words ‘Heresy’ and ‘Heresies’, ‘Heresy’ is used only once,and ‘Heresies’ three times, so they are REALLY IMPORTANT BIBLICAL WORDS! Much mocking sarcasm from the author with much laughter. Not only that, but are they a correct translation?
So let’s get Strong’s input on these two words and afterwards I will post all four Holy Scriptures so that we can get a contextual understanding:
G139 – Heresy– αἵρεσις haíresis, hah’-ee-res-is; – from G138; properly, a choice, that is, (specially) a party or (abstractly) disunion:—heresy (which is the Greek word itself), sect.
G138 – Heresy – αἱρέομαι hairéomai, hahee-reh’-om-ahee; – probably akin to G142; to take for oneself, that is, to prefer:—choose. Some of the forms are borrowed from a cognate ἕλλομαι héllomai hel’-lom-ahee; which is otherwise obsolete.
From The Blue Letter Bible Lexicon:
a) act of taking, capture: e.g. storming a city; b) choosing, choice; c) that which is chosen; d) a body of men following their own tenets (a sect or party)
Look what we have here from Strong’s: 1) a choice; 2) a party; 3) disunion; 4) a sect. Then we get confirmation from the Blue Letter Bible Lexicon. 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 and Judaising mongrel dogs. In the first century that would have been primarily a separation from the Pharisee and Sadducee Jews, 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 ruled by a spirit called Legion, and he presents this phenomena in a myriad of ways, (again see link No. 2 below) whether it be the religion of the ‘Christian’ Zionists, Jews, Muslims or Fundie ‘Christians’ with their Judaising Law based religion. We can then add in Papists with their Babylonian Mystery Religion, or Eastern Orthodox ‘Pantokrators’ with their iconographic idolatry. 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 another surprise, and is that hilarious or what?
Acts 24:14 (KJV) But this I confess unto thee, that after The Way which they call heresy (‘a sect’), 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 the ONLY use of the word ‘heresy’ in the whole of the Holy Scriptures, and all very positive it is, too, for it looks like the members of the True Church were known by certain evil creatures of religion as ‘heretics’. Now I wonder who these verminous mongrel dogs were that called the elect and/or the saints, heretics? Let’s see if we can shed any Light on it:
Acts 24:1-2 first part (KJV) And after five days Ananias the High Priest descended with the elders, and with a certain orator named Tertullus, who informed the governor against Paul.
2 And when he was called forth, Tertullus began to accuse him…
Acts 24:5 (MCV) For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Judean Israelites (not Jews) throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes:
Acts 24: 9 (MCV) And the Canaanite Jews also assented, saying that these things were so.
So there we have it, the Sanhedrin Canaanite Jews making use of this secular orator Tertullus (strange how he had a name very similar to the satanic Hellenising dog, Tertullian, who came on the scene over a hundred years later – circa 200 AC). Today, this orator would be known as a barrister, or an attorney in the USA, so a man ‘gifted’ with a slippery evil tongue.
From the above account we learn that the real ‘heretics’ were those very same types of people that laid accusations on our Lord Yashua Messiah before they crucified Him, and they were now accusing the brethren of Paul.
Right, let’s now move on to these three other verses that use the word ‘heresies’:
1 Corinthians 11:16–19 (Concordant Greek Literal Version) Now if anyone is presuming to be rivalrous, we have no such usage, neither The Ecclesias of God.” 17 Now in giving this charge I am not applauding, for you are coming together, not for the better, but for discomfiture.” 18 For first, indeed, at your coming together in The Ecclesia, I am hearing of schisms inhering among you, and some part I am believing.” 19 For it must be that there are sects(‘heresies’)also among you, that those also who are qualified may be becoming apparent among you.”
In this passage we can see that there was a load of argy-bargy going on within the fellowship of the Corinthian Church, with rivalries, which were causing discomfort to the brethren, due to the rivalries between them. These rivalries then developing into schisms and finally into sects, here called ‘heresies’ in the good old RELIGIOUS friendly King James Version.
Now there is a crucial point I would like to make here, and that is the choice of this word ‘heresies’, because, for me, it’s got Popery stamped all over it!! That means that there was no need for its use at all, when the word ‘sects’ was definitely more accurate and more appropriate from the non-religious True Christian perspective.
OK next verse:
Galatians 5:19-21 (Concordant GreekLiteral Version) Now apparent are the works of the flesh, which are adultery, prostitution, uncleanness, wantonness, 20 idolatry, enchantment, enmities, strife, jealousies, furies, factions, dissensions, sects (‘heresies’), 21 envies, murders, drunkennesses, revelries, and the like of these, which, I am predicting to you, according as I predicted also, that those committing such things shall not be enjoying the allotment of The Kingdom of God.”
As we can see the same Roman Catholic RELIGIOUS evil contamination has taken place with the erroneous choice of ‘heresies’ on the part of the translators instead of ‘sects’.
Final verse:
2 Peter 2:1 (Concordant Greek Literal Version) Yet there came to be false prophets also among the people, as among you also there will be false teachers who will be smuggling in destructive sects (‘heresies’), even disowning The Owner (Yashua Messiah) Who buys them, bringing on themselves swift destruction.” (Brackets mine)
I think that just about wraps it up unless you think the article is heretical! LOL
Once again this is an overdue article and the reason being is because I didn’t complete my “Exposing The Trinity Lie” series of articles, so it is my mistake. However, just recently, I have had much noisy opposition to my Truthful teaching on the lying shell game scam known as the trinity dogma, otherwise known as Tertullian’s conjuring trick called The Trinitas circa 200 AD.
Here is one of their favourite erroneous mantras as thrown at me the other day:
“The Holy Spirit is a person who can be grieved, can be lied to, etc. (Eph 4:30, Acts 5:3).”
Now the grieving of The Holy Spirit nonsense I deal with here:
And the ‘Holy Spirit being lied to’ I will deal with in this article, but first let’s get the story copied here so we are familiar with the WHOLE story and have ALL the details:
Acts 5:1-11 (KJV) But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession, 2 And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles’ feet. 3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? 4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. 5 And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great FEAR came on all them that heard these things. 6 And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him. 7 And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in. 8 And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much? And she said, Yea, for so much. 9 Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out. 10 Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead, and, carrying her forth, buried her by her husband. 11 And great FEAR came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things. (Emphasis mine)
Now before I analyse the above passage of so called Scripture I will follow the same procedure that I employed in my article entitled: “Romans 13:1-7 Do Sons of God Have To Obey Secular or Religious Authorities?”
This means I will quote the overall contextual theme of Acts 4 and Acts 5 and show how this, off topic, alleged Scriptural story was added for very different reasons than you may at first realise. Here are the verses from the end of Acts 4 and, notice, how encouraging, positive and upbeat it all is:
Acts 4:32-37 (KJV) And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. 33 And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of The Lord Jesus: and Great Grace was upon them all. 34 Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, 35 And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. 36 And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, 37 Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet.
Continuing I will now add Acts 5 from verse 12:
Acts 5:12-14 (KJV) And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; (and they were all with one accord in Solomon’s porch. 13 And of the rest durst no man join himself to them: but the people magnified them. 14 And believers were the more added to The Lord, multitudes both of men and women.) (Emphasis mine)
Notice how the positive story line continues and how the people are elated with joy and gladness and all are likeminded and of one accord. So what is this very negative fear based story of Ananias and Sapphira doing right there in the middle of this very Spiritually uplifting narrative? (Please note, I will give special attention to verse 13 at the end of this article.)
Notice, too, how the same trick has been played as they did in Romans 13:1-7 by breaking up the continuum of the positive story line in order to shove in their agenda fuelled lies.
Now for some questioning analysis of this suspect story:
1) Who were these two people? For in Adam Clarke’s Commentary he states this:
“’But a certain man named Ananias’ – Of these unhappy people we have no farther account than what is recorded here. In reference to birth, connections, etc., their names are written in the dust. The import of his name, Chananiyah, the Grace or Mercy of The Lord, agrees very ill with his conduct.”
So someone whose name means: “Grace or Mercy of The Lord” is mercilessly struck down dead by The Lord for telling a lie? Do I sense some sort of mocking going on here by the authors of this evil corruption?
Moreover we have two Biblical nobodies, not previously mentioned anywhere else in the Holy Scriptures, and there they are, out of the blue, and also known by name, just for the recording of this very negative story. All very handy and convenient eh? Too convenient for my liking!!!
2) Look at how the authors stole, in copycat fashion, the “land or property” subject matter from chapter 4. This means that they were too lazy and unimaginative to make up something original in order to try and make their lying point, as we shall see:
Acts 4:34-37 (KJV) Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, 35 And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. 36 And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, 37 Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet. (Emphasis mine)
3) “But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost?”
OK, now in my article “Exposing The Trinity Lie Parts 1-5” I prove without a shadow of doubt that The Holy Spirit (here called The Holy Ghost) is not a personage of The Godhead but, rather, is the Living Power or Living Force of The Godhead, a Living Force that does things like this:
“All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a Force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this Force the existence of a conscious and Intelligent Mind. This Mind is the Matrix of all matter.” (Emphasis mine)
– Professor Max Planck, the father of quantum physics.
So here we have a qualified scientist describing The Holy Spirit in action, without actually stating it out loud and, notice, that he says “BEHIND THIS FORCE there is an Intelligent Mind.” So behind The Holy Spirit there is The Godhead of The Father and The Son. That means, folks, from this Truthful scientific perspective that The Holy Spirit is NOT A PERSON of a trinity but a FORCE!!
Moreover, and with this Truth in mind, how could the Holy Spirit be lied to if the Holy Spirit is a FORCE and not a person? It can’t, and that’s it. So if nothing else this makes Acts 5 verse 3 a blatant corruption and a LIE!!!! and the whole story a fraud.
4) Peter sits in judgement!! At what point were the Messengers (Apostles) given the power or the authority to sit in judgement over their brothers and sisters, or the power to interrogate them like a Communist KGB officer?
We know very little about the travels and experiences of the other Messengers (Apostles) but we do know much about Paul. Now where do we find him anywhere giving his brothers and sisters the third degree type inquisition re their sins? We don’t, other than him telling us that certain members had to be handed back to Satan for blaspheming, that is, teaching a satanic false gospel against Yashua Messiah’s Gospel Message that Paul was teaching, which is blaspheming against the Holy Spirit. Were they struck down dead?
Now here’s another thing. How well does this blatant nonsense story fit in with the other Papist LIE of Peter being a Pope – a fake in authority? Very well indeed is the answer to that!! Coincidence anyone?
5) “Why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.”
Look at that for another LIE!!! How did these dissembling authors get away with this? How did Ananias and Sapphira not lie unto men? If this story is true then they lied to both God and men. Did their brothers and sisters not believe that they had given all the proceeds of the sale of their property to be shared? If so, then Ananias and Sapphira lied to them as well as God. So what’s this erroneous nonsense verse all about? Answer: building up the emotional crap is what it’s all about, in order to make it a more emotionally convincing story. However, it backfired, and like all liars they always shoot themselves in the feet at the same time. This verse is pure arrogant embellishment.
6) “And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great FEAR came on all them that heard these things.”
RIGHT!!! Now we get to the rub!! For this is the REAL REASON for the addition of this satanic evil corruption – FEAR! FEAR! FEAR! Oh how the Papist illegitimates love to put FEAR into their duped lemming followers. Without FEAR and mind numbing superstition the Cainite-Judeo-Christian religion would cease to exist.
Always remember folks that FEAR is the OPPOSITE OF LOVE. People KILL what they FEAR. FEAR is the breeding ground for mindless uncontrolled HATE. So why would Yashua Messiah allow such wickedness to be included in His Word? He didn’t, evil people with an evil agenda added it to serve that evil religious agenda – the Cainite-Judeo-Christian religious agenda.
Again, compare this narrative with the positive verses each side of it. Its sole purpose is to negate the uplifting verses that go before it and after it and, of course, to add in the nonsense that The Holy Spirit can be lied to. All this, when Yashua Messiah knows what we are going to do before we even do it, and acts as our Advocate on the rare occasions that might be necessary.
7) Were Ananias and Sapphira Born Again, that is, were they born of God? If so, then they could not sin:
1 John 3:9 (KJV) Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for His seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
1 John 3:6 (KJV) Whosoever abideth in Him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen Him, neither known Him.
1 John 3:3 (KJV) And every man that hath this hope in Him purify himself, even as He is pure.
This issue, backed by the above Holy Scriptures, raises a massive point in confounding this vile eleven verse contamination of The Holy Scriptures. Make no mistake, folks, because if these two characters WERE BORN OF GOD there is no way they would have done what they were accused of doing.
Romans 8:4-5 (KJV) That the righteousness of The Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after The Spirit. 5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after The Spirit the things of The Spirit.
The question that now needs to be asked is whether Ananias and Sapphira were Spirit led Christians or not? If they were, there is no way they would have done what they are allegedly accused of doing, that is, they would not have been walking after the flesh. However, if they were not saved then the flesh is all that they could have served and their behaviour completely understandable.
Therefore, there is no way Peter would have dealt with them as he did, if they were unsaved and minding the things of the flesh. So yet again we have more solid gold proof that this story is a lying fabrication and a satanic corruption by addition.
Furthermore, whoever added this passage had no understanding of what it means to be born of God – a new creation so it had to be written by someone with a Cainite-Judeo-Christian religious mindset, not a Christian Spiritual mindset.
8) And great FEAR came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things.
LOL and then finally and, for ‘good’ measure, they bung in another verse of FEAR MONGERING, but not just the congregation of God this time but also those outside that heard of this event. Just what you need to give The Church a loving Christian reputation.
Well, let’s face it, when you’re building a house of cards like the Babylonian Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion with hoped for billions of deluded serfs and slaves as members, in the future, how do you hold them in captivity without an unhealthy dollop of FEAR!!!???? Think of all that lovely dosh you will lose without the FEAR!!!
9) For the final point I will return to verse 13 of Acts 5 “And of the rest durst no man join himself to them: but the people magnified them.”
Now why did the rest (whoever they were) not dare (durst not) to join the congregation of God and yet they magnified them – praised them? Was it because of the alleged fearful episode that was supposed to have taken place or because they were not prepared to sell all that they had and lay it at the Messenger’s feet to be given to the needy? Yet at the same time were very impressed by such overwhelming acts of kindness and generosity and praised them for doing so? The next verse gives us the answer:
Acts 5:14 (KJV) And believers were the more added to The Lord, multitudes both of men and women.
Again this verse proves that the events of Acts 5:1-11 NEVER TOOK PLACE and the whole episode is a lying fabrication made up by the founding fathers of the Hellenised counterfeit Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion.
Is The Father Calling YOU to His Son, Yashua Messiah? 