Unravelling The So-Called Pastoral Epistles – 1 Timothy 3 – Part 6

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:

http://www.liquisearch.com/polygamy_in_christianity/early_church_period&p=6&pos=6

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.

Unravelling the So-Called Pastoral Epistles – 1 Timothy 1 & 2 – Parts 1-4:
https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/unravelling-the-pastoral-epistles-parts-1-2/

Unravelling the So-Called Pastoral Epistles – 1 Timothy 1 & 2 – Part 5:
https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/2018/09/14/unravelling-the-so-called-pastoral-epistles-part-5-1-timothy-2/

What Is The MYSTERY of Mystery Babylon The Great?:
https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/what-is-the-mystery-of-mystery-babylon-the-great/

The Counterfeit Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion:
https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/2017/05/26/the-cainite-judeo-christian-religion/

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

Prologue

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

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

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

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

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

Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Paul, too, gave us this timeless warning:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Unravelling The So-Called Pastoral Epistles – Part 2

Plagiarising

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ignatius of Antioch, died 110 AD

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

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

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

Papias of Hierapolis, Phyrgia circa 130 AD

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

Irenaeus, circa 140 – 202 AD

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

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

Origen, Alexandria circa 185? – 254? AD

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Please note Paul was not a Jew.

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

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

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

He also gave the twelve disciples explicit intructions:

Matthew 10:5-6 (KJV) These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 6 But go rather to The Lost Sheep of The House of Israel.

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

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

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

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

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