Was Saul (who became Paul) actually a deceiver of the early church and Apostles?
Posted by truthtalklive on December 18, 2007
In our discussion on “Should Pastors Live in Poverty” we somehow veered off-track and a new conversation took shape. We’d like that discussion to remain on-topic and have this thread serve as our new discussion on Paul, Essene Christianity and how true Christian Doctrine and the REAL teachings of Jesus may, or may not, have been hi-jacked by Paul.
Here is a good pre-amble posted by Thomas in the previously mentioned thread:
ESSENE CHRISTIANITY VERSUS PAULIANITY
Click HERE to go back and read how the discussion evolved (scroll down to comment #34) and let’s continue this debate HERE.
Thank you – Moderator
Joe said
I’m still waiting on the documented proof of validity of these documents and info mentioned by Thomas and Nick.
ADB said
The premise of this assertion is really sort of silly when you think about it. By all accounts the Pauline epistles were the first NT documents to be written (1st Thessalonians being written around 50 A.D., and the final ones written while in prison in the early 6o’s). By comparison Mark the first gospel was written about 65-70 A.D., Matthew and Luke somewhat after that, and John coming around 90 A.D. If our only knowledge of the words of Christ comes from the gospels, how can we know that Paul perverted them if the gospels were written after Paul’s letters. The only way around this is to start citing hypothetical sources that may lie behind the four gospels, and it’s hard to really put much stock in a source that may not have ever existed to begin with.
jAsOn said
Whomever,
Typically, the 20th century motivation behind the denial of Pauline authority is an attempt to escape the fact that homosexual behavior is sinful, and the differing roles with which God created men and women; because they often misread Paul (and I can’t help but think this is intentional), they think he has said something against the Law, against women, or against those who struggle with the sin of homosexual behavior that hasn’t been said in other places in the NT. Paul NEVER shifts away from the doctrines of God in Jesus Christ; God instead used him to reveal some things in a fuller fashion than He had done before.
So, with those and other motivations in mind, some persons approach Scripture with the presupposition that Paul obviously did not have apostolic authority, and internal “evidences” are contrived to try to prove that Paul contradicted Jesus.
It must first be said that the alleged contradictions are not contradictions at all, even though there are some things that are paradoxical.
One of the proofs that Thomas used in a much earlier post (I think #43 on the other thread) he claimed that Paul contradicted the gospel account of Jesus’ genealogy because he claimed that Jesus was the son of David, but here we read differently, Matt 1:1 “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.”
Paul never contradicted the Jerusalem council, but Thomas misunderstands the purpose of those statements made by the council.
On the positive, the book of acts clearly shows how the apostles eventually accepted Paul and his authority as an apostle of Jesus Christ: they confirmed his experience on the road to Damascus, and what motivation could Paul possibly have had for giving up a highly reputable position as a Jewish leader and scholar to become a lowly tent maker who was beaten, imprisoned, and eventually martyred for what he believed? Likewise, the other apostles never wrote against Paul and what he was teaching; they even suffered and died for the same reasons. As virulent a writer as the apostle John was, he surely would have counted Paul’s teachings if he disagreed with them…particularly after Paul had died.
As for the account on the road to Damascus, Paul doesn’t contradict himself in his words to Agrippa. What happened is what we refer to as “telescoping”. Here is what Paul recounts for Agrippa, “And the Lord said, ‘I am Jesus whom you are persecuting. 16 But rise and stand upon your feet, for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to appoint you as a servant and witness to the things in which you have seen me and to those in which I will appear to you, 17 delivering you from your people and from the Gentiles— to whom I am sending you 18 to open their eyes, so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’”
Now, if Paul or Luke had written and said that Christ appeared to Paul and the only thing He said to me was this:
“And he said to me, ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting.’ 9 Now those who were with me saw the light but did not understand the voice of the one who was speaking to me. 10And I said, ‘What shall I do, Lord?’ And the Lord said to me, ‘Rise, and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all that is appointed for you to do.’ 11 And since I could not see because of the brightness of that light, I was led by the hand by those who were with me, and came into Damascus.”
and this: “”I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. 6 But rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do.” 7 The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one. 8 Saul rose from the ground, and although his eyes were opened, he saw nothing. So they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus. 9 And for three days he was without sight, and neither ate nor drank.”, and He said nothing else but those words…then if Paul had added something to the story it would have been false.
The fact is that Paul and Luke didn’t account for every word that was said in the first to records. Likewise, let’s say I got off work and went to the grocery store, the movie store, and went home and decorated the Christmas tree with my wife and kids, then the next day, my coworker asks what I did last night and I tell him, “oh, I had a great time decorating the Christmas tree with my family”, but then my boss walks in and says, “I tried to get hold of you last night at your house, but you weren’t there until 7:00, what did you do last night?” I would answer him, “Well, I left here and went to the grocery store and then the movie store, and then I went home and decorated the tree.” I have not lied to either my coworker or my boss, but the stories were different.
Fred said
ADB, I think we if we accept the dates you gave for Mark, then we must accept that pre-Markan Gospel sources existed, whether verbal or written, mustn’t we?
Of course we can hypothesize about what they contained, but they must have existed. Whether or not Paul was aware of them is beyond my ken.
best,
Fred
ADB said
Fred,
Scholars speculate about what sources the gospel writers may have used, but they are all very hypothetical at this point. Of course, tradition says that Matthew and John wrote the gospels that bear their names, but there still may have been source material they used. There is a strong tradition that the Apostle Peter was the primary source for Mark’s gospel. With the nearly unanimous agreement that Mark was written first, and the similarity between it and Matthew and Luke, it is quite likely that Matthew and Luke used Mark, or at least had access to it. What access Paul would have had to source materials for the gospels is entirely impossible to guess. In any event, in my opinion there simply aren’t the great contradictions between Jesus and Paul that some seem to find. We must remember that Paul wrote to address specific issues in specific churches. He never actually wrote a theological treatise that summarized systematically all that he thought.
A curmudgeonly pastor
jAsOn said
Below is an interesting perspective by James White on the topic of transmission (an excerpt from his article discussing the errors of Brian Flemming.
“I hear precious little discussion of the fact that there would have been an insatiable desire for knowledge of Jesus and His teachings in those early decades. And once the gospel stories became known to tens of thousands, memorized by devoted repetition, the idea that someone else could come along (i.e., Paul, for example), and make up a whole new religion and a whole new view of Jesus (as Shabir Ally suggests) is simply without merit. While the early church surely looked for the imminent return of Christ (as do we today), I think the real impetus for the production of the canonical gospels was the growth of the church and the need for documentation of the record that was already so familiar and well known to believers. The idea that these gospels were just “cooked up” decades later flies in the face of the reality of the existence of the infant Christian church. Of course, this would require Flemming to be honestly examining the facts at this point, and one thing we can tell just by the choice of “scholars” used is that examination of facts is not his goal.”
The article in its entirety can be found at:
http://aomin.org/index.php?itemid=1754
ADB said
Good points. By the second half of the first century two things were happening. Many of those who had seen Jesus were dying and there was a perceived need to write this material down. Secondly, as you pointed out the movement was growing very rapidly, and the gospel writers recorded their gospels to show who Jesus was/is for their particular audiences.
Fred said
That is ADB’s hypothesis of pre-Markan Gospel sources. Could there be others?
(queue the spooky Discovery Channel music)
My favorite hypothesis is that the Gospels were originally plays written for actors. So Paul’s letters were instructions to the various theater companies? Just kidding about that last part!
Cheers!
Fred
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Before we attack the validity of the Pauline scriptures any further and due to anonymous people posting links to my myspace, as if they were exposing me…
If I wanted to hide, I wouldn’t have a myspace in the first place and if I was afraid of being exposed in the light… I wouldn’t have posted anything online at all.
Myspace blogs are for me as a form of Therapy.
On the other hand I post online not to deceive but to reveal that I too, struggle and I am not greater than another being.
I wear the title because It is my right and privilege to do so as it is yet sits unclaimed.
If you read your bibles, you will find that God endorses one form of Government… A Monarchy. And one House by which to Rule and leave no Throne empty… The Davidic Line.
I am through my Patriarchal line of the Royal house of Judah and the Tribe of Dan(Tuatha de Danaan). Through my Matriarchal line of the Tribe of Benjamin (Of which were promised literal ownership of the city of Jerusalem.)
Yes… I am Merovingian.
Hierosolyma means ‘Two Jerusalem’s’ as one lies hidden in Iraq.
Let’s be honest.
Christianity as it stands today is largely a farce based nowhere on Truth… Historically that is.
What is Faith?
Demons believe in God but they do not have faith.
Faith then is not Belief.
For if Belief was Faith… Even the Devil would be pleasing to God (If there is only one Devil outside of human existence).
Is faith blind… No.
The things hidden are revealed in the light.
It appears no matter what I say or anyone for that matter having a difference in their faith will be judged by ignorant wanna be Christians who have seduced their own minds to believe in things that have no foundation in Faith.
That is a run-on sentence… whew!
That is if Faith be based on Truth.
While belief can be based on false assumptions, Faith cannot exist in assumption.
Faith is substance, is it not?
Faith must rest on Truth.
Many of you have based your judgments on me from a Pre-molded truth. A Truth you have devised in your own hearts to be true.
I warn you… that can be a terrible Sin.
A sin against yourselves… Having no foundation based in Truth.
Be careful you, you who find peace in your hearts to decide what is true or not… Is that not arrogant?
Even the Prophet Jeremiah warned that the priest have turned the truth into a lie (“…The lying pen of the scribes!…”)… That the prophets speak from their own vain imaginations. This is not just left to flaky new agers reading palms or Tarot cards… The same outlet is involved in making peace in our hearts over an issue. Usually and most often issues involving Anger and Fear. We have the power to seduce ourselves into what is true… or what is Not True or considered true…
It’s when we find comfort we should be warned to question even more important to ponder our own heart… If our heart be true.
Reading the Bible rarely brings me solution it rather brings me to question… My self, my motives and my struggle…
More often than not I am troubled from the Truth.
Not just with Sin. I am not an addict. I attempt to live a balanced life and when possible I eat as healthy as I can… I limit my self in moderation to substance that this world is made up from.
Do I doubt God?
No, no way… God is in me and I in him as Jesus declared in the Gospel of John.
What is my faith, how is it different from yours?
My faith instructs me to question, yes even argue with God.
I must argue or wrestle with God even if it hurts to come to the end of myself… Not the end as people, pastors or priest might suggest is the end… For I do not allow any agency of Man or mankind to stand between God and I.
There isn’t any greater Authority than my own experience and inner searching of myself.
Jesus commanded our family to not ‘Rule’ over one another… As the Gentiles do.
So Paul hasn’t the right to suggest in Romans 13, that all leaders are ordained by God to be leaders… Then we ought to repent for removing Saddam from Iraq because that was a Sin regardless of our opinion of the man… Even Hitler should have been respected in his day.
Hitler being A Jew himself knew of the Prophecy that Jehovah would crush the Holy people and was only fulfilling the will of Jehovah.
(Jehovah not being the most high God as he exclaims or confesses rather in his submission and abject Rebellion against the Most High God in Psalm 82)
I do not believe nor is my faith founded in or upon the ideals of ‘Fallen’ man and definitely do not blame women for my short comings.
As I, as a matter of faith, have never been separate from God.
No, never… That is the lie from the pit of Hell that we could even exist outside the Heart of Holy Spirit or the Mind of God… That is and would be Idolatry.
Adam and Eve are prototypes of the Psyche`.
As we all struggle from the same duel nature.
Male… Female… Right, Left… Good, Bad… Etc…
This Struggle centers around subjects of importance stemming from one’s own learned reaction…
God… Judgment… Eternal Punishment…
…Life and Death… Birth, Life and Death… Fear.
Yes, Fear is the reaction we are trained to respond with, in the midst of the unknown.
Man has a problem with death and when a death occurs, it becomes a reminder to our Psyche’ that we too will die.
Aside from never ever thinking about Death, many can’t deal with death, but many people can’t even deal with life either. We have (not in our culture) a variety of way’s to deal and not just cope with death:
There is only Nothing..?
First state Hylic, we can cop-out with the seemingly easy road of denial and just believe (or Accept) that we die, we rot, the worm’s eat us and that’s it! The oblivion.
God is separate from Me..?
Second state Psychic, we can run to and hide in our blinded faith of the ‘world beyond’ and lie to ourselves that we will find eternal life outside of ourselves. The eternal.
(NOTE: The state above is where most (The Cattle)Christian’s chose to remain)
God is inside me..?
Third state Pneumatic, we can take accountability for ourselves and explore who we really are and discover our beginning so as to discover our end. The womb.
Which, ever-way we choose nothing is absolute but we are as something in a state-of-being.
If darkness is absolutely nothing the light is infinitely something.
If we descend from our higher state-of-being we establish our foundation from what we see, feel, taste, touch, hear due to fear, ignorance and weakness.
The Oblivion is the realm where we are tossed into this life, knowing nothing or nothing knowing us. Simply put, not knowing our self, who we are or where we come from.
This is the place called the ‘Momentary thought’ we see, feel, taste, touch, hear, smell but do not allow any Conscious thought of it. We are base, instinctual, and primal.
If we ascend from our view or foundation, for some a false reality due to fear, ignorance and weakness, we will discover a pattern in nature…
The Eternal is the realm where we discover a frontier outside our perceptions, feelings and ideals. Simply put, refusing to know our self in search of who we are and where we are from.
This is the place called the ‘Fleeting thought’ we see, feel, taste, touch, hear, smell but do not allow any Polymathic thought of it. We are linear, unfocused, and close-minded.
If we transcend our base conscious state-of-being we will return from whence we came, back to the higher sub-conscious state-of-being.
The Womb is the realm where we return to beginning and receive a revelation of the self. Simply put, remembering our self, who we are and where we are from.
This is the place called the ‘Free thought’ we see, feel, taste, touch, hear, smell but do not allow any oppressive thought of it. We are liberated, ecstatic and Immortal.
Once we receive this revelation we become the true Gnostic and child of Love.
That is the Revelation of the Law of Liberty.
Fred said
Thanks, your highness! I think you will get along splendidly with the others here about!
Ta Ta for now!
Fred
ADB said
Thomas,
May I ask a couple of questions to clarify your beliefs? Do you believe that the material world is evil and is created by a different god than that of the New Testament? Do you believe that the afterlife is in some sense, a matter of the soul escaping from the body?
Thanks.
jAsOn said
Thomas said, “There isn’t any greater Authority than my own experience and inner searching of myself.”
If this is true for every individual, then what if my experience “proves” to me that omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, trinitarian God of the Bible exists, and someone elses experience “proves” to them that the same God does not exist, then we have two mutually exclusive ideas…God cannot exist and not exist at the same time and in the same relationship. In that scenario, the God that my experience has proven to me transcends all beings, so my experience “proves” to me that He exists whether the other person believes it or not. Those to ideas cannot exist simultaniously, thus they break the law of non contradiction and that is irrational and a manefest absurdity. Here is a quote from RC Sproul because I cannot state it any better,
“Absurdities often sound profound because they are incapable of being understood. When we hear things we do not understand, sometimes we think they are simply too deep or weighty for us to grasp when in fact they are merely unintelligible statements like “one-hand clapping”. the Bible does not talk like that. The Bible speaks of God in meaningful patterns of speech. Some of those patterns are more difficult than others, but they are not meant to be nonsense statements that only a guru can fathom.”
So Thomas, please start making rational arguments instead of cryptic statements, or this conversation can go nowhere.
Joe said
Still…..no proof.
Anonymous said
“Even Hitler should have been respected in his day. Hitler being A Jew himself knew of the Prophecy that Jehovah would crush the Holy people and was only fulfilling the will of Jehovah.”
You should be ashamed. I wonder what God thinks of this?
No kool-aid for me, thanks.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
“Do you believe that the material world is evil and is created by a different god than that of the New Testament?”
Well ADB, to answer your first question, I do not believe nor is it a part of my faith that the material world is Good or Evil. Good or Evil is only a product of the being manipulating matter and the perspective of the matter being manipulated.
For instance:
A God isn’t neither Good nor Evil by appearance alone but by the actions of that God in question. Although, this can only be defined by the followers of the God in question.
An example of this dynamic is associated with the belief that a Vampire is Evil. If mankind were only food being cultivated on planet Earth to feed another species is that Evil? It is only Evil among mankind’s perspective being prey rather than the predator.
A Vampire is not Evil in themselves but only Evil in the eye’s of their intended victim.
I hope that’s make it clear.
“Do you believe that the afterlife is in some sense, a matter of the soul escaping from the body?”
The answer here is little more complicated…
There are three parts my species. First I am a Spirit – a Sentient Being.
The Flesh that I reside is a complimentary and conducive vibrational pattern that best houses my spirit. When these two become one then they produce a living Soul.
Hence the Parable of the Wheat and Tare. The tare looks like wheat but is only an empty husk. So a Flesh body that has no spirit while it appears alive has no Soul. Thus it is only an empty piece of flesh.
The Trinity is only a map of the offspring of God.
The Father being the inspiration of the Holy Spirit of which made it possible for the Manifestation of the Son.
_________________________________________________________________
Jason,
My only point with that statement wasn’t meant to be cryptic but more a declaration.
For instance how can a Psychiatrist no more about what your think and why than you?
I am responsible and accountable for what I think or even allow to enter my thoughts.
I do have Mentors and Teachers in my life as well as peers but I do not allow anybody to separate me from God (Not even myself). Because that is Sovereign… As my Family are all only peers on the same journey as I.
Sin is separation from God… But I being is Son do not fear nor doubt my relation to God of which could arise if allow someone to throw in doubt… While I am listen to others it does not affect my Faith unless divinely orchestrated.
And that is solely up to me to discern.
I will attempt in the future to speak plainly as I can.
_________________________________________________________________
Sorry Joe…
Can I speak at your Church next Sunday?
Why not?
Tell me or prove to me rather, that Paul met Jesus on the Road to Damascus.
And why is it, he feels, he needs no certificate of approval or ordainment?
If Paul were here today Most Churches would call him a flake and wouldn’t dare let him teach or have access to the pulpit. (Why? because he sounds crazy)
But I guess he’s special, huh?
________________________________________________________________
My dear Anonymous,
Watch as you snicker at this…
What do you know about the Albigensian Crusade under Pope Innocent III?
Called by the Catholic inquisition the Albigensian Heresy.
Albigens means… Relation to ALBA of which we derive the word ELF.
The Thousand Year Elven Holocaust.
But hey Elves don’t exist… Right?
A Jewish Holocaust… What!?! Everyone knows that Jews don’t exist, silly… LOL!
jAsOn said
THomas,
I hope you can take my critisizms an intention to help…you remain either unable our unwilling to address the topics at hand… and you dodge the questions that are asked by running off on endless rabbit trails, and you ignore the plan facts of history.
You do realize that there are more extant documents assuring the accuracy of the transmission of the old and new testament scriptures than there are for any other historical documents which we consider accurate today.
You continue to speak about truth and even speak of “god”, but I wonder what sourse you have for knowing these things, you inner self alone, then please adress the issue of objectiveity; the issue of breaking the law of non-contradiction.
Anonymous said
I’m sorry, Thomas. I just can’t take you seriously. You with your profane websites and your reference to vampires and obvious obsession with Dan Brown’s fictional novels.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
My goal here is to give a perspective on the matter as whole between Paul and Jesus. At this point I feel the need to present the teaching’s of Jesus or better, what political, religious and what foundation did Jesus Stand.
In my opinion Paul re-presented the Law under a whitewash and gloss over of which Jesus could not stand (Pardon the pun).
Part One will deal with scripture references from and only from the Gospel of John.
Jesus Speaking to the JEWS.
Gospel of John Ch. 5 vs. 37-47
37. 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.
38. And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.
39. Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
40. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.
41. I receive not honour from men.
42. But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.
43. I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
44. How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?
45. Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.
46. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.
47. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?
In verse 45 we need to pay attention the language being used. Accuser is equivalent to Satan… So, if we read it now with Accuser interchanged with Satan: “Do you think that I will be Satan to you before the Father: there is one that is Satan to you, even Moses, in whom you trust.”
If Moses was an Accuser/Satan how did Jesus feel about him?
The Jews confront Jesus:
30. They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?
31. Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.
Pay attention to how Jesus responds to them:
32. Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.
33. For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.
34. Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.
35. And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
“Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you ‘not’ that bread from heaven…”
I guess then Moses lied?
Jesus then defines God and himself:
36. But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
37. All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
38. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
39. And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
40. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
41. The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven.
42. And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?
43. Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves.
44. No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
45. It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
46. Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.
47. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
Bread is the same as Flesh, Word or Sperm (DNA).
48. I am that bread of life.
49. Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.
50. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.
51. I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
52. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
53. Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
55. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
57. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
58. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.
59. These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.
Notice how Jesus refers to the Father’s of the Jews, “…not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead…” Again reiterating Moses being a liar along with the Jews and their Father’s.
John Ch. 7 vs. 1-7
1. After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him.
2. Now the Jews’ feast of tabernacles was at hand.
3. His brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go into Judaea, that thy disciples also may see the works that thou doest.
4. For there is no man that doeth any thing in secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou do these things, shew thyself to the world.
5. For neither did his brethren believe in him.
6. Then Jesus said unto them, My time is not yet come: but your time is alway ready.
7. The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil.
This is important to understand that ‘The World’ (Mans Socio-economic System) and their works are Evil. This language is enough to contradict Paul’s opinion if Worldly Government in Romans 13.
This discussion I will discuss later.
John Ch. 7 vs. 8-19
8. Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come.
9. When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee.
10. But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.
11. Then the Jews sought him at the feast, and said, Where is he?
12. And there was much murmuring among the people concerning him: for some said, He is a good man: others said, Nay; but he deceiveth the people.
13. Howbeit no man spake openly of him for fear of the Jews.
14. Now about the midst of the feast Jesus went up into the temple, and taught.
15. And the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?
16. Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.
17. If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.
18. He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.
19. Did not Moses/The Accuser/Satan give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?
Here it needs to pharsed in the context that the language is being spoken or used: “If Moses (being a liar) gave you the Law, and none of you (being liars) keep the Law?”
Then Jesus openly apposes and confronts the Jews with their reflection in the next question to publicly humiliate them: “…Why go about seeking to Kill me?”
It is funny that people immediately attack a person’s character when they cannot defeat his words.
Of course at this point the Jews can only defend themselves by responding publicly trying to disgrace him and ruin his credibility:
John Ch. 7 vs. 20-27
20. The people answered and said, Thou hast a devil: who goeth about to kill thee?
21. Jesus answered and said unto them, I have done one work, and ye all marvel.
22. Moses/ The Accuser/Satan therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers;) and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man.
23. If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses/The Accuser/Satan should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?
24. Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
25. Then said some of them of Jerusalem, Is not this he, whom they seek to kill?
26. But, lo, he speaketh boldly, and they say nothing unto him. Do the rulers know indeed that this is the very Christ?
27. Howbeit we know this man whence he is: but when Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence he is.
The Jews cannot budge him. I want to take the time to state that the term Jew first appeared in 441 BC in the city of Alexandria to denote those that were Jewish by blood but were spiritually Hellenized.
KJV 1611 Bible the term Pharisee refers to an Essene and Jew refers to a Hellenized Priest from Jerusalem.
Galilee refers to a Gentile Settlement and territory.
After the Jews try to discredit him, Jesus cannot take their hypocrisy any longer…
John Ch. 7 vs. 28-35
28. Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not.
29. But I know him: for I am from him, and he hath sent me.
30. Then they sought to take him: but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come.
31. And many of the people believed on him, and said, When Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these which this man hath done?
32. The Pharisees heard that the people murmured such things concerning him; and the Pharisees and the chief priests sent officers to take him.
33. Then said Jesus unto them, Yet a little while am I with you, and then I go unto him that sent me.
34. Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am, thither ye cannot come.
35. Then said the Jews among themselves, Whither will he go, that we shall not find him? will he go unto the dispersed among the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles?
The concern here is that Non Bloodline Jews would have equal say in the temple Jesus being of Jewish Blood and Gentile Blood.
Refer to Isaiah Ch. 9 vs. 1-2
John Ch. 7 vs. 36-50
36. What manner of saying is this that he said, Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am, thither ye cannot come?
37. In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.
38. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
39. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
40. Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet.
41. Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee?
42. Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was?
43. So there was a division among the people because of him.
44. And some of them would have taken him; but no man laid hands on him.
45. Then came the officers to the chief priests and Pharisees; and they said unto them, Why have ye not brought him?
46. The officers answered, Never man spake like this man.
47. Then answered them the Pharisees, Are ye also deceived?
48. Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him?
49. But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed.
Notice here the Law in question and he who knows it not is Cursed.
50. Nicodemus saith unto them, (he that came to Jesus by night, being one of them,)
The reference of going to Jesus in the night is a Gentile practice because of the inherent adverse condition to sunlight. And the nocturnal practices of the Gentiles, in this case a specific bloodline of Gentiles.
John Ch. 7 vs. 51-53
51. Doth our law judge any man, before it hear him, and know what he doeth?
52. They answered and said unto him, Art thou also of Galilee? Search, and look: for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.
53. And every man went unto his own house.
Obviously the Bloodline Jews and Religious Pharisees were in agreement that Gentiles were lesser beings and oft times referred to as Dogs in the scriptures.
John Ch. 8 vs. 31-33
31. Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
32. And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
33. They answered him, We be Abraham’s seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?
The Jews here attempt to use their supposed Genealogy against Jesus
John Ch. 8 vs. 34-37
34. Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
35. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.
36. If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
37. I know that ye are Abraham’s seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word / bread / sperm / DNA hath no place in you.
Jesus agrees that they are the seed of Abraham and that Abraham was not an Israelite, he was a Hittite / Iraqi / Arabic descent.
(I am not saying that Arabic / Iraqi people are of Evil or lesser bloodlines… I am merely making distinctions of Bloodline to be clear… I will discuss this entirely different bloodline later in [Part Six]of ‘Why Jehovah is the Devil’.)
Jesus then responds with, “…because my word hath no place in you.”
This is a rebuttal to the Genealogical attack made by the descendent’s of Abraham… Remember ‘Word’, in the Scripture is synonymous with Flesh / Sperm / Bread (DNA).
Interchanging ‘Word’ with any of the other descriptive choices Like, because my bread / Sperm / DNA has no place in you.
John Ch. 8 vs. 38-40
38. I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.
39. They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
40. 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.
Jesus makes it clear that Abraham did not tell the truth because he could not hear God.
Here the Jews defend their Ego driven spiritual superiority:
John Ch. 8 vs. 41
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.
Jesus then responds:
John Ch. 8 vs. 42-43
42. Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
43. Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
This was a Jab at their ignorance because they do not have the Ears to Hear. Which was an insult against the Jews in-ability to discern truth and scripture concerning genealogical meanings.
Jesus finally drives it home slamming them and their father Jehovah:
John Ch. 8 vs. 44
44. 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.
Jesus then explains that you must have the DNA of God to hear him. Remember here also the word Sin is an Old English used during archery events, meaning ‘Off Target’. In a Genealogical sense it can be applied as separated or unrelated.
John Ch. 8 vs. 45-47
45. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.
46. Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?
47. He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.
Now the Jews try to save face and take a cheap shot at Jesus and his family Tree.
John Ch. 8 vs. 48-55
48. Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?
49. Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me.
50. And I seek not mine own glory: there is one that seeketh and judgeth.
51. Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.
Unable to dent Jesus’ family Tree, they attack his Character…
52. Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death.
53. Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself?
54. Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:
55. Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.
It is clear by now that Jesus has not only called Moses, Abraham and the Jews a liar but offspring of the Devil, Jehovah.
None of them have any relation to God what so ever but now we take a detour I am not sure how deliberate it is but it would seem to me that somebody wanted to blur the facts at this point I can only guess, hoping to obscure what the hell Jesus was actually talking about…
To only add to the confusion:
John Ch. 8 vs. 56-59
56. Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
57. Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
58. Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
59. Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.
Now what the Hell happened?
It is relatively easy to explain there was a Patriarchal seat called the ‘Abraham’ and in order to speak with him in the Temple you had to be at least 50 years old At this point Jesus is around 44 years old so it is obvious that he is not old enough for the Patriarchal father of the Community to have spoken to him in the Temple Much less rejoice.
The passing through was because Jesus was under the protection and Authority of the ‘Father’ of the Community and hadn’t yet finished his initiation… So he could not be touched, yet.
Continued- Part Two
Joe said
Again, I’m no theologian…but, I’m not buying it. Are you the head of a church, Thomas? Is it a growing church? Tell me about it. I am interested. Still not sure if I call this proof or not. Sounds way too out there.
jAsOn said
I’m sorry for the pointedness of my condemnation, but you don’t know how to read a book if you think John in 5:45 means the translation you provided. You have avoided my questions of you ability to converse rationally, and I believe that you do so because you have no intention of being rational, if fact you have rejected the notion that God has spoken and we can know what He has said.
Matthew 10:”13 And if the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it, but if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. 14 And if anyone will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town. 15 Truly, I say to you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town.”
I will no long speak to you until you decide to respond in a logical fashion…btw, you never responded to the email I sent you.
John said
King Thomas, all of this sounds odd coming from a man who, on his website, said “F*** the gods, and F*** Jehovah!”
I’d never dare to do such a thing, and I’m not even a subject of this deity!Surely you must realize that you’re coming off as a weirdo, not that that’s all bad, mind you, as we are all weird in our own ways.But you should know enough about people that if you throw words like elves, dragon, ring, king,and vampire all together in your replies, that “most normal” people are gonna think “Wow. This guy’s mind is trapped in a game of Dungeons and Dragons.”, or something.
I may be wrong.We will see.
Tripp said
While this is all very fascinating & interesting…I’m curious to ask Thomas a few questions just so I can understand where he’s coming from. Thomas – Do you profess to being a Christian? Do you believe in the Crucifixion and the Resurrection? Do you believe that you will go to Heaven when you die and how do you believe that is possible? Would you mind answering these questions, please?
Jeff Duncan said
Thomas – you are most definitely a study in contradictions.
This is downright blasphemous:
“…I will discuss this entirely different bloodline later in [Part Six]of ‘Why Jehovah is the Devil’.)”
Please explain how you can claim to be of the Tribe of both Dan and Benjamin, as well as Merovingian. I would like to know how you came to that discovery.
ADB said
Good ole’ gnosticism warmed over again after 1900 years. I normally try not to be too judging, but this exact stuff was considered heretical as early as John’s gospel and epistles at the end of the first century. Goes to show that the saying is true that “there is no such thing as a new heresy.”
A curmudgeonly pastor:)
Mike Sears said
A good rebuke from our resident wiccan. Good advice John! And Merry Christmas to you!! Mike
Nick said
This may help people understand where King Thomas is coming from.
Elven Holocaust
I think it’s something you need to really research before you can judge the material.
It has validity. And just because Americans are so skeptical doesn’t mean the world is. What I mean to say, if you’re at a Pub in America and you say, I’m a communist, you’re liable to get your lights punched out. Although, if you’re in a Pub in Europe somewhere, you’re liable to make a friend and great conversation.
It’s all Perspective.
jAsOn said
I agree with Nick that we need to understand where one is coming from so we can present the truth to them in a context to which they can relate, but we also must remember that popular opinion doesn’t determine what is true, and that the Truth is absolute. John 14:”6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him.”
As far as judging the material goes:
When trying to prove something with no historical validity at all, the first thing that one must attempt to do is convince his audience that all historical documents which make statements contrary to his position are suspect because they are contrived by their authors desire is, not to record what has happened, but to edit the record of events so as to highlight the events that elevate the historians position and diminish events that condemn the historian. As an aside, if this were the only test for the validity of an historical document, then we can look at the Bible and expect its historical validity because of its sheer honesty about the lives it records.
Secondly, we have yet to hear Thomas even represent the position on the above link (post #26) head on; he has talked over it and around it, but not about it.
In the document there are several misunderstandings of church history (or history at all) and the intentions of the church in that time. Apparently, elves, fairies, and mediums and witches are nearly synonymous, and the church has been involved in their “genocide” as a “race”. We must note that to call mediums a race, people or nation would be fallacious. Even the United Nations definition of genocide (which was quoted in the article) is a poor one. To begin the article with a statement that says that etymology is part of the study of history, and then go on to say that the systematic eradication of those who claim to speak with the dead is genocide is confusing at best. The word genocide is a combination of two different Latin words: geno (or genus) meaning race, kind, birth, offspring, and cide which means to kill. Saul of Tarsus and later, Nero both tried to eradicate the members of the church, but it does damage to language to refer to those actions as “genocide”.
Another thing to note is that, even though the persons and institutions representing the church (we call this the visible church) have done terrible things in the past, because none of us is perfect and those who claim to be Christians are not all redeemed. Unlike the way it was represented in the article, the Word of God demands that we do not try to communicate with those who have died. The charge that this is what we do when we pray to God, through Christ our mediator, is not accurate, because Christ is not dead, He died and rose, and ascended to the right hand of the Father.
Joe said
Hey Nick – I looked over this Eleven Holocaust document. Seriously, where do you guys get this stuff? Is it even the least bit relevant in today’s society? Shouldn’t we focus all our attention on Christ and fulfilling His Great Commission? I mean, I’m trying to decide between Huck and Thompson and you guys are really distracting me here.
Anonymous said
Beware the false prophets.
F. L. A. said
INTERESTING DOCUMENT. SOUNDS LIKE THE PLOT OF A COOL[FANTASY] MOVIE.YOU ARE WRONGE ABOUT HOW THE CELTS REGARDED WOMEN.WHY DO YOU THINK THEY HAD SO MANY GODDESSES[SOME OF WAR!]AND FEMALE DRUIDS? DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT THE CELTS AS YOU PORTRAY THEM WOULD HAVE WORSHIPED DEITIES LIKE THE MORRIGAN? AND YOUR FARIES ARE VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE “GOOD NEIGHBORS” THAT WE HAVE GROWN ACCUSTOMED TO.
THE PERSON WHO COMPILED THIS INFORMATION IS AN ARTIST.
jAsOn said
Hi John,
I just realized who you are, you were on the show some time back right? I just wanted to say, though our world views differ on a multitude of very important levels
, that I am glad you are still a part of all these various conversations; I’m certain that this forum is more a “marketplace of ideas” because of your presence, so we all can hopefully have meaningful discourse (and I must add, to the glory of God).
John said
Hello, JAsON.
The feeling is mutual. I have been here since Stu E. had me on his show for the Interview With A Wiccan site.And now, like a cold virus in a school building, I’m all over the darn place.
I try not to be too much of a roaring pain.
Aside for amusement,I come here to study all of you as theological test subjects, and expected the same from you all in return.This dose not mean that I haven’t grown rather fond of some of you, because I have, and in fact have a handful of favorites.From the very start I was not expecting agreement or acceptance of any kind, as my ways are alien and considered sacrilegious to your ways by many in the Christian faith.But it feels good to be appreciated,for whatever reason, and I give you my gratitude for that.I and a few others within my little tribe would truly miss not being able to come here to this interesting “marketplace of ideas”.
I hope I don’t come off as sounding too “cold”.If so, then sorry.
I never did have a very easy way with humans.
ADB said
John,
You are a welcome contributor. You sound like someone who realizes that there is just so much that we do not understand, and appreciate your input (and occasionally agree with it!)
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
About Jesus.
Jesus is the ‘only begotten’ son of God. This is a figure of speech in the era of the birth of messianic Faith. As all ‘first born’ Sons are considered the ‘Only Begotten’ but does not mean they are the only child.
While Jesus was anointed hence the title, ‘Messiah’ there were other’s anointed messiah as well. James the Just was anointed Messiah in his own right even having disciples himself.
Today in the modern Pauline churches we find the term being thrown around randomly and in reckless fashion. While I could write an entire treatise on that subject there is only one term in particular I would like to draw to light, the Anointing.
Many Christians claim to be Anointed by God… this is dangerous language as we are warned in Matthew to beware of people claiming to be Messiah. If a person claims to be anointed they are saying that they are the Messiah. As Messiah means, ‘Anointed one’.
Many Churches claim that Jesus is in their church or in their home but again in Matthew we are warned that, that is false and not believe them.
What do I believe about Jesus?
That he is the first born of many brethren. I too am a Son of God… Not that I claim any title of Messiah, never would I do that neither dare I claim some fictitious Anointing from God as that would make me every bit as false as the false church.
Jesus is my Lord and King. His capacity to save me is limited to my perspective to receive. And that is multi-faceted in us all, at least those of us that are always growing, learning and changing.
I do not claim him to Be God in the Flesh alone. As the brethren are all Son’s of God just not the first born. That Jesus not only symbolically came to redeem my flesh but that he literally came to save it in our DNA. That he fostered a New creation and family literally on Planet Earth. That Jesus is a Literal King and Priest not just symbolic for biblical sake. That Jesus was married to Mary Magdelene and they fostered a New Royal family of God on planet Earth.
Another figure of speech used to denote children being born is the reference in the Gospel about hundred fold blessing. “…Some thrirty, some sixty and some a hundred fold…” is actually a genealogical reference to birthing children in a family unit.
When Jesus exclaimed this he was declaring his Joy over the blessing of Mary Magdelene’s Womb. The throne of God is his Mother’s lap.
You can argue that Jesus wasn’t married but I assure you that while the scripture never plainly addresses the issue they never plainly address that he wasn’t either.
Do any of you believe that having a wife, children or a family to be Evil, a sin or unclean?
What right do we have to make such arrogantly bold assertions that we cannot truly know beyond the tingly’s in your heart as so..?
So, it is not blasphemous to think or believe that Jesus fell in Love with woman and they produced children. Unless you think woman are only saved through their child bearing as Paul asserts. I do not believe nor I condone the false teaching of the fallen nature of man or the posting of blame for my short comings on woman.
It is most often true in in ancient writing’s that when a male author bashes woman they are most often homosexual. As they like Paul feel inferior to women unless they submit themselves like an animal to a man.
Do you realize how much violence and abuse towards woman is justified by the teaching’s of Paul? It is disgusting.
Besides many of you do not even follow his ideals or ‘His’ Gospel. Such Woman should be silent in Church and with their head covered in the church.
Jehovah kicked the Shekinah out of the Temple… That is why so many Rabbinical teachings’s chastise Jehovah for kicking his wife out of the Temple…
Blasphemy is declaring your truth above another and destroying any free thought by use of fear. When a Demon comes out of person it is never accomplished by commanding them in the ‘Name of Jesus’… It is done by one thing and one thing only… It always works and is sure to silence the Devil himself… LOVE.
Although, I do not believe in the DEVIL in the sense that I do not separate him from Jehovah. What better way to win against God but by convincing God’s creation that he is God.
God does not need to threaten me to believe him not respect him. He Loves me and that is enough.
Or do you not consider that Mary the mother of Jesus was no older that sixteen when she was betrothed the Joseph..?
So old testy (Jehovah) being a mean loud mouth bully finally knocks up and under aged teenage girl and finally decides he better have Mercy and Grace rather than Judgment and Severity..?
That almost makes Jehovah a pedophile and Sex offender… Wow, it does in our world and Law does it not?
Jesus is not only God but all his brethren(Family) are God incarnate.
Or who do you think are the 144,000 thousand Son’s of God and the 144,000 thousand Maidens in Revelation?
Take a moment and consider, what if you are all wrong and the church is apostate… What would that mean?
Because if this is the ‘End Time’ then you cannot blame the Catholic’s alone as being apostate for that would be ignorant.
Rather that the very elect may be deceived…
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Forgive the typo’s as I am attempting multi-task and I did not look it over before I posted it.
John said
Thank you, ADB.
King Thomas, if what you think is true, then tell us if you can,
where are the descendants of Jesus and Mary RIGHT NOW ????
Anonymous1 said
Thomas – You haven’t answered any questions about your church and if you believe you are going to heaven when you die. In fact, you haven’t answered hardly any of the questions. Your statements borderline on the bizarre and quite frankly, sound completely ludicrous. You’ve offered zero proof concerning the information you reference and claim to be true. Where is Brad when we need him?
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
I’m one…
Although I would like to say there millions and less hundreds of thousands but I cannot even say hundreds.
How about .03% of the Human population are descendent’s of Jhesus-Mariah.
It just so happen’s that I am lucky enough to know my Genealogy on my father’s side because it’s of Royal & Public record. On my mother’s side it’s little more obscure finding the proof but I have without too much out of my pocket book. Of course, you will disbelieve me but I don’t care about that.
The ‘Kelly’ family is well documented publicly but my Mother’s family is little more protected in the matter much as Lady Diana is distant relative of mine… But I bet until here recently due to the media clamor you didn’t even know she was a Jew.
Joan of Arch is my cousin as well… As my family is from a region of France which at one time was part of what was known as the ‘Jewish Quarter’ under the headship of Godroi de Bullion King of France and Jerusalem.
And even at the sheer dis-enchantment (by many of the ilk involved) that was caused when it was brought before the Late Grand master Martin Lunn of the Dragon Society… Of which by acceptance of: A Knight of the Dragon Society.
It costs, thousands of dollars to buy your genealogical information and family history…
So, I can direct you to my pay-pal account if you would like to purchase a summary copy of my proof… $69.99 USD+tax if applicable.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
My Church…
Heaven, as I stated in a previous somewhere on this site under a different topic title, is a state of being.
We are accountable to create Heaven or allow Hell to persist. God does not make Hell or Heaven… As they both pass away and are not eternal concepts.
“…Heaven and Earth Pass away but Words/DNA will never pass away…”
As the Essenes and Naz-Aryans (Like Jesus) were before me, I will be reincarnated.
Not everyone is reincarnated… Only those that possess the DNA of God are eternal.
Mike Sears said
What a hoot! Now we’re selling geneologies? I don’t need one to know that I am a wretched sinner in need of a savior. And I don’t need a geneology to know that I am a Child of God, thanks to what Jesus did!! 1John 3:1 Merry Christmas!
Mike Sears said
Thomas
Do you follow Eckhart Tolle as well?
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Oh this wicked generation seek for a sign… Some proof of the eternal… Some fact of the Divine.
That’s not how Faith works neither does that work with Magik as Faith and Magik are purely genetic attributes of the divinely qualified.
You search the scriptures because in them you think you will find eternal life…
Please…
Jesus has the literal answer… It’s in your DNA… But only time will prove it… Of which Mankind has very little of because they lack the DNA of God.
You are afraid to apply Science to your Faith because it decimate it but if you had the Truth Science would only follow suit of your Faith.
Is God with in or With out?
Did God create creation or did creation create God?
Dates from history sure do not fit the Bible Chronology but if you fit the Bible into history… It is surprising how many things suddenly line up and make sense…
Reference,
HRH Prince Nicholas de Vere
Ahmed Osmen
Robert Eisenmen
To name few references in my library of study… And I have read most of their material avidly and non-stop.
John said
Wow……………….
And to think, I didn’t think that there was absolute proof that Jesus as we know of him actually existed.
Thanks for clearing that all up for me.I guess we should feel honored, huh.Strangely, your claim does not surprise me at all.
I like the sales pitch at the end.Does Nick get a cut?
WHAT THE HECKS WRONG WITH YOU?!?!
You should have known better.
Now, assuming that your NOT just some con-man…….
Thomas, we all need to feel needed, to feel wanted, respected,and important.This is natural and understandable.But there is no need to go to such an extreme.I personally was willing to accept the possibility that you were descended from some ancient royal bloodline of the Merovingians,or something.
It would not have been impossible.But your claim.Come ON………! It would be like me claiming to be Merlin, only worse, because you’re trying to make some money off the claim.
I would like to assume that Jesus wouldn’t approve of such a thing, what with the scene he caused at that temple, and all.You know what I’m talking about[or should].Sometimes we can lie to ourselves, good enough, long enough, until we believe it.Is this what you did with your ancestry?Because you felt a little…insignificant in some way? If so, then tell us a.s.a.p.! It can be forgiven, in time.I’m sure.
As for now, though, you’ve just unintentionally [?] made yourself look like a complete B.S.Artist.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
“So, I can direct you to my pay-pal account if you would like to purchase a summary copy of my proof… $69.99 USD+tax if applicable.”
Mr. Sears,
That is what you call a Joke all betwixt a smart remark…
Did I need to apply “LOL!” or “Ha ha” at the end of that comment?
F. L. A. said
IT MIGHT HAVE HELPED.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
John your so right about that… Then I would be like every other flaky Wiccan writer out there… Read a bunch of books and rehash old subject matter… Then Print.
Wow… “How to practice Earth Magik Dragon Style!”
I assure you, I have nothing for sale as I my Vow requires that I own nothing…
I am like my forefathers before me… Naz-Aryan, and I vowed, shaved my head and refuse to cut my hair, until I see my Vision fulfilled..
Anonymous1 said
Just when I thought I had heard it all. Thomas – do you believe the accuracy of the Four Gospels? What do you do for a living? No wait…you’re a king, right? Seriously, why is this nut job even allowed to post this rubbish?
Joe said
Oh boy, here we go. Our little Christian blog is gonna turn into the Gnostics vs. the Wiccans. HAHAHAH! Go get him, John.
Moderator (not Stu) said
Hello Anonymous1 – Please refrain from mindless name calling. Let’s debate intelligently and freely here. Anyone is allowed to post, unless they post profanity, obscenity and vulgarity….or links to sites that contain these things. We’ve allowed it once because we felt it was relevant to the conversation. Otherwise, we won’t. Name calling serves no purpose here. This is America and everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, be it Christian, Mormon, Wiccan, Gnostic, Jehovah’s Witness, etc. This forum’s purpose is to exist as an extension of the radio show and provide us with an outlet to discuss and debate. Merry Christmas, everyone! Yuletide Greetings to our friends, John & company. Thank you – Moderator (not Stu)
John said
Befor I go to bed, I apologize for my implied dirty words in my post to King Thomas.I really didn’t think at the time that that sales pitch he made was meant in jest.
King Thomas, what exactly was I right about pertaining to you?
Joe…..later on, maybe.
Goodnight.
John said
Alright, just for arguments sake, let’s go with this.
Thomas, you stated that your family line on your fathers side was
on Royal and Public record, which somehow confirmed that you were the great, great,+1,000[?]grand nephew,son, whatever, of Jesus the Christ.Right? Where can WE go to see such Royal and Public records?Many Christians that I talk to don’t think that Jesus had any descendants.By himself or any of his siblings.Some that I’ve debated with don’t even think he had any blood siblings.
Seems like these records would be a really big deal in the theological community, so why haven’t we “little people” heard anything about this?Nobody ELSE ever claimed that Joan of Arch was related to Jesus.How do you know that you weren’t tricked in some way by your sources?
What do vampires have to do with any of this?Are there some of those in your bloodlines,or something?I imagine it would tie in nicely with all that talk about being reborn and eternal life, and stuff.You’re standing in the sunlight on your web sight,so……….?
If your claims are true, it matters not to me anyway, being a Pagan.Pagan mythology has untold numbers of tales about Demigods/goddesses and their children, so, big deal[for someone like ME anyway].It would just mess things up for Christianity.
Which leads me to ask why you came hear to this site to tell all of us about this stuff.What was your motivation?
Just bragging?
Are you being stalked by a big albino monk?[grin]
Although I don’t claim to have the DNA of a deity[except perhaps in the most LIBERAL way possible]I work Magick, so I must be “divinely qualified” too!
Maybe we can swap techniques,eh?
Please answer my questions Thomas.
Nick said
The dividing line between Paul and Jesus begins right here.
(I though it appropiate for this thread and the season. So, with a package of thought and concern wrapped with a bow, Merry Christmas)
Laurence Gardner
Author of ‘Bloodline of the Holy Grail’
States in his lecture,
“The nativity story itself provides a good example. Itís widely accepted, and the Christmas cards keep telling us that Jesus was born in a stable. The gospels donít say that. There is no stable mentioned in any authorized gospel. The nativity is not mentioned at all in Mark or John, and Matthew says quite plainly that Jesus was born in a house.
So where did the stable come from? It came from a misinterpretation, really, of the Gospel of Luke which relates that Jesus was laid in a manger-not born, but laid-and a manger was then, and still is, nothing more than an animal feeding box. One only has to study society history of the time to recognize the fact that it was perfectly common for mangers to be used as cradles, and they were often brought indoors for that very purpose.
So why has it been presumed that this particular manger was in a stable? Because the English translations of Luke tell us that there was no room in the inn. Must then have been in a stable! But the pre-English translations of Luke donít talk about any inn; the manuscript of Luke does not say there was no room in the inn. In fact, there were no inns in the East in those days. There are very few inns there now; and if there are, theyíre illegal! People lodged then in private houses. It was a common way of life. It was called family hospitality. Homes were open for travelers.
Come to that, if weíre really going to be precise about this, there were no stables in the region, either. In fact, “stable” is a wholly English word and it specifically defines a place for keeping horses; horses of a particular stable. Who on earth rode around on horses in Judaea? Oxen, camels; the odd Roman officer might have had a horse, but even the mules and the oxen, if kept under cover, would have been kept under some sort of a shed or out-house, not in a stable.
As for the mythical inn, the Greek text actually does not say there was no room at the inn. By the best translation it actually states that there was no provision in the room. As mentioned in Matthew, Jesus was born in a house and, as correctly translated, Luke reveals that Jesus was laid in a manger, an animal feeding box, because there was no cradle provided in the room.
If we’re on the subject of Jesus’ birth, I think we ought to look at the chronology here, because this is important as well; because the gospels, the two gospels that deal with the nativity, actually give us two completely different dates for the event.
According to Matthew, Jesus was born in the reign of King Herod, Herod the Great, who debated the event with the Magi and ordered the slaying of the infants. Well, Herod died in 4 BC, and we know from Matthew that Jesus was born before that. And because of that, most standard concordant Bibles and history books imply that Jesusí date of birth was 5 BC, because that is before 4 BC and Herod was still reigning, so thatís a good date.
But in Luke, a completely different date is given. Luke doesnít tell us about King Herod or anything like that. Luke says that Jesus was born while Cyrenius was Governor of Syria, the same year that the Emperor Augustus implemented the national census, the census which Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem to be a part of.
There are relevant points to mention here, and they are both recorded in the first-century Jewish annals (such as The Antiquities of the Jews). Cyrenius was appointed Governor of Syria in AD 6. This was the very year recorded of the national census, put into operation by Cyrenius and ordered by Emperor Augustus. As Luke tells us, it was the first and only ever recorded census for the region.
So Jesus was born before 4 BC and in AD 6. Is this a mistake? No, not necessarily, because in the way it was originally portrayed weíre actually looking at two quite specific births.
Both gospels are correct. Were looking at Jesus physical birth, and were looking at Jesus community birth. These were defined at the time as the first and second births, and they applied specifically to people of particular groups and certainly to dynastic heirs.
Second births for boys were performed by way of a ritual of rebirth. It was very physical: they were wrapped in swaddling clothes and born again from their motherís womb. It was a physical ceremony. Second births for boys took place at the age of twelve.
So we know that Jesus was twelve in AD 6. Unfortunately, the latter-day transcribers of Luke completely missed the significance of this, and it was their endeavor to somehow tie in this event about swaddling clothes and being born then, that led to this mention of the nonsense about the stable.
So if Jesus was twelve in AD 6, this means that he was born in 7 BC, which ties in perfectly well with the Matthew account that he was born during the latter reign of King Herod.
But we now discover what appears to be another anomaly, because Luke says later in the gospel that when Jesus was twelve years old, his parents, Mary and Joseph, took him to Jerusalem for the day. They then left the city to walk home for a full dayís journey with their friends before they realized that Jesus was not in their party. They then returned to Jerusalem to find him at the temple, discussing his fatherís business with the doctors. Well, what sort of parents can wander for a whole day in the desert, without knowing their twelve-year-old sonís not there?
The fact is that the whole point of the passage has been missed. There was a wealth of difference between a twelve-year-old son and a son in his twelfth year. When a son, on completing his initial twelve years-that is to say, when he was actually on his thirteenth birthday-was initiated into the community at the ceremony of his second birth, he was regarded as commencing his first year. It was the original root of the modern bar mitzvah. His next initiation, the initiation of manhood in the community, took place in his ninth year, when he was twenty-one-the root of the age-twenty-one privilege. Various degrees followed, and the next major test was in his twelfth year-at the end of his twelfth year, at the age of twenty-four, on his twenty-fourth birthday. When Jesus remained at the temple in his twelfth year, he was actually twenty-four. Not surprising that they expected him not perhaps to be wandering around the desert with them!
So his discussion with the doctors related to his next degree. He would have discussed this at the time with the spiritual father, the father of the community; and indeed, he did. It was the fatherís business he discussed; his fatherís business. The father of this era is recorded. The spiritual father of the community at that time was Simeon the Essene, and if we look back a few verses in Luke we see that it was exactly this man, the just and devout Simeon, who legitimated Jesus under the law.”
Nick said
If you would like read the entire Lecture click link below:
The Full Lecture
John said
That IS interesting.
Nick, did you remember before advising that site that it led to other links which alleged that the Merovingians[of whom King Thomas says he's descended from in post#9, among others,some non-human like the semi-divine Tuatha de Danaan Fairy race of Ireland]where a Satanic bloodline?I explored through 4 links from the one you mentioned above through words like “family”, “Antichrist”, and “bloodlines” and all this info on it just popped up.OOPS![smile]
If I’ve somehow misinterpreted this information, then please let me know how, because it looks pretty self-incriminating for Thomas.And the person who gave that lecture is also accused of shape-shifting into a reptilian monster[!?] and participating in human sacrifice[!], on another related link.
This doesn’t help your case very well, Nick.You should know that people here will use these kind of things to judge you guys in a….. less than favorable light.
Tripp said
I, for one, don’t need to judge on this one. I can sum it up in one, hyphenated, word.
Poppy – Cock!!!
Nick said
Whether people accuse other’s or not, does it change who or what they are?
What kind person are you, the kind that throw stones, like Peter? Who later, when confronted by the Authorities, denied even knowing Jesus??
Of Course, unless you are like the Christian cattle seeking after
“…Smooth sayings…”
It’s funny, many of you demand proof yet, when anything is presented all you can do is scoff at it..? Or maybe, you decide to attack a persons personal weakness..? Why, becasue you do not know any other way to respond? I’ve been watching the bigotry, arrogance and sheer audacity of some of the people responding.
Anonymously even?
Again, Judge the material and not the people behind it> Better Judge with ‘Righteous Judgement’ as Jesus instructs.
I personally, find it rather insulting after God went through all the trouble to design a brain (As complex as it is), and people would choose to remain ignorant.
Remember, God will forsake the ‘ninety nine’ loyal sheep for the ‘One’ that Rebels.
Rebellion is not bad, it’s what your rebelling against that matters.
It’s amazing, when did many of quit learning? How can you say, you have it all right?
Because your Priest say’s so?
The Majority say’s so?
Because of the ecstatic states you experience while in prayer?
It’s not that Jesus Died for you, or do you not get it?
It’s that Jesus lived for you.
This whole issue, I blame on Paul.
Or when did intelligence become seperate from God that people would quit questioning?
Why do you continue to crucify Jesus, maybe you do not understand my reasoning??
Mankind is, I must admit, trully dim-witted.
Beth said
What you are promoting here is simple. You are promoting a cult and/or occultism. The Scriptures are very clear on this.
Paulinian said
I’m from a different spectrum – I would say the Church doesn’t emphasize Paul’s epistles enough
Classic Pauline Dispensationalism – http://www.WithChrist.org
Merry Christmas! Even though Christ wasn’t born on December 25th
Joe said
Aha!!!! Here we go! Let the debate re-begin!!!! Welcome, Paulinian.
John said
But Nick, did I lie? Well? Did I?
I told you in my last reply that if I had somehow misinterpreted the information to let me know how. You did not.
I was not trying to cast stones at you, to be rude.It wasn’t as if the other people here never could have found that stuff on their own.Right?
It’s just confusing to me that you and King Thomas keep recommending websites to back up your claims that have so much self incriminating stuff.
“Or when did intelligence become separate from God that people would quit questioning?”-YOU
Well, I am.Did you expect easier, dumber, questions and replies?
If you’re going to swim with sharks,then you should prepare to get bitten at times, Nick. It happens to us all, sooner or later.
No need to get all upset over it.I actually like you and Thomas because I think you’re both really weird, and this makes you all the more interesting and valuable to me.When King Thomas declared that he was related to Jesus, I was like”Alright! What a test subject he’ll be! What to ask him?”
He’s been rather quiet of late.I want some answers from him.
That make some sense, that is.
Paulinian said
The Lord Jesus, as Israel’s Messiah in His pre-Cross humiliation, “went about all Galilee, teaching in their [Israel's] synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom” (Matthew 4:23). It was at this time that He sat upon the mountainside and taught His disciples the Sermon on the Mount.
The Lord Jesus Christ, after the Cross and in His ascension glory as Head and Life, ministered His “glorious Gospel of Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:4) to His Body–and He did it through Paul. “I want you to know brothers, that the Gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.” (Galatians 1:11,12). “…I was not disobedient to the vision from heaven” (Acts 26:19).
Not one of the apostles or disciples taught the Gospel of the kingdom, or any other gospel, to Paul. The “glorious Gospel of Christ,” of and to the Church, had been hidden in God–it was not in any of the Scriptures–until the glorified Bridegroom presented it to His Bride, through Paul.
Dr. William R. Newell presents clearly the new-creation difference between the Lord Jesus as Messiah speaking to His earthly people, Israel, and the glorified Lord Jesus Christ as Head speaking to His heavenly Body. “He is the Head of the Body, the Church; He is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead…” (Colossians 1:18).
“There are two great revelators, or unfolders of Divine Truth in the Bible–Moses in the Old Testament, and Paul in the New Testament. Some may ask, “Is not Jesus the Great Teacher?” In a sense that is true, but actually He is the Person taught about, rather than teaching, in the Gospel. The Law and the prophets pointed forward to Him; the Epistles point up to Him; and the Revelation points to His second coming, and those things connected with it. The Lord Jesus Christ, therefore, is the theme of the Bible.
Unto none of the Twelve Apostles did God directly reveal the great body of doctrine for this dispensation. Just as He chose Moses to be the revelator to Israel of the Ten Commandments and all connected with the Law dispensation, so He chose Saul of Tarsus to be the unfolder of those mighty truths connected with our Lord’s death, burial, resurrection and His ascended Person. And all the “mysteries,” revealed to the Church in this dispensation by the Holy Spirit in the Word, are set forth by Paul. Finally, Paul is the revelator of that great company of God’s elect, called the Church, the Body of Christ, which is also His Bride–members of the Lord Jesus Himself.
Paul is the glorified Lord Jesus’ declarer of the Gospel to us. Take his thirteen Epistles of Romans to Philemon out of the Bible and you are bereft of Christian doctrine. If you were to take Paul’s Epistles from the Word, you could not find anything about the Church, the Body of Christ, for none of the Apostles mention that Body.
You could not find the exact meaning of any of the great doctrines, such as: 1) Justification, 2) Redemption, 3) Propitiation, 4) Reconciliation, 5) Identification, or 6) Sanctification. You could not find what is perhaps the most tremendous fact of every Christian’s life, that of his personal union with the Lord Jesus Christ in glory.
Saul already stood in clearer light regarding the Risen Lord than did the other apostles; for they had known Him primarily in His humiliation, and they were His messengers to Israel, of whom is Christ according to His “human ancestry” (Romans 9:5). But Paul’s first vision of Christ was as the Glorified One, the Son of God, in ascension glory.
The concept of the Lord Jesus in Paul’s Epistles is one of constant, unspeakable glory. We do not mean that the other apostles did not recognize the Lord Jesus as the Son of God. They had, long since (Matthew 16:16; John 1:14, etc.). But their first testimony at Jerusalem and to Israel had been more of the Messiahship and Lordship of Jesus, as the Crucified and now risen King, who was ready to return to Israel and set up His kingdom if they would repent (Acts 2:36; 3:19, etc). But Paul received his teaching all from heaven, from the Lord Jesus Christ in glory, rather than on earth in Jewish connections. Paul’s glorious Gospel has nothing Jewish about it.
You can discern a man’s preaching or teaching by this rule–is he Pauline? Does his doctrine start and finish according to those statements of Christian doctrine written by the glorified Lord Jesus Christ through Paul? No matter how wonderful and popular a man may seem in his gifts and apparent leadership, if his Gospel is not Pauline, it is not the Gospel; and we might as well get our minds settled once and for all as to that.
Failure or refusal to discern the Pauline Gospel as a separate and new revelation, and not a “development from Judaism,” accounts for most of the confusion in many people’s minds today as regards just what the Gospel is.”
- Miles Stanford http://www.withChrist.org
There are other great articles on this website along with notes from other great Christian writers who saw the differences and distinctives in ministry.
Sincerely and free in Christ,
the Paulinian
jAsOn said
John, Nick, Thomas,
You guys should know that the infomation presented by “the Paulinian” in no way represents orthodox/historical Christianity, and “Dispensationalism” in general was only systematised about 200 years ago. I just didn’t want you guys to think that “the Paulinian” represents all of what calls itself Christianity, and Im not quite sure why he thinks it’s helpful to present Miles Stanford’s (nearly cultic) deviations from scripture in this argument…I’ve read many of them and I have found that he rarely represents the opinions of his critics accurately; he is a very confused man, and he has a tendancy of confusing others with his HIGHLY polemical and pejorative statements;I think that he has very little good to say.
Thanks, Merry Christmas,
jAsOn
the Paulinian said
jAsOn,
Considering that this thread is based on a belief that Paul corrupted Christ’s message. I believe quotes and statements from classic pauline dispensationalism are appropriate.
Why are you so personally offended by classic pauline dispensationalism? What is driving you to consider it “nearly cultic”? Especially when you are addressing 3 people that most Christians would consider are “cultic”.
Covenant theology does not have a monopoly on Biblical truth. It is simply a means of interpreting Scripture. Just like dispensationalism is. And there is no need to promote covenant theology as “orthodox” and “historical”. For it is neither, no more than you would say classic dispensationalism is.
Stick with the topic at hand. Where I feel classic dispensationalism can be of a help on this thread, I will post comments.
That being said – Paul the apostle didn’t corrupt the teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ. Our Lord gave Paul more revelation concerning His church than any of the other apostles. Our Lord, through Paul, made a great distinction between His heavenly Church in Christ(Paul’s epistiles) and earthly covenant Israel. We should, therefore, keep the two separate. Why does the Church with all its spiritual blessings in heavenly places need earthly covenant Israels earthly blessings based on complete adherence to the Law of Moses? This is the underlying problem of the “word of faith” movement and even of covenant theology. The Church is not national/earthly Israel.
Some covenant theologians say we are spiritual Israel – then why do you force us to live under earthly Israel’s law based covenant?
Merry Christmas,
the Paulinian
http://www.withChrist.org
ADB said
Hope all are having a good Christmas Day. Jason made excellent points about dispensationalism I think. IMHO it represents an artificial framework that is imposed upon scripture. The result is reading things into scripture that aren’t there. It is telling that none of the great church leaders of history would have taught anything resembling the dispensationalism of the past couple of hundred years. I don’t want to be argumentative on a holy day, but just wanted to add my two cents worth.
the Paulinian said
What is the objection to classic dispensationalism? Do not confuse it with ultra/hyper or even traditional dispensationalism. You are certainly entitled to your opinions, yet to proclaim something as “nearly cultic” or as “artificial framework..imposed upon Scripture” would need evidence and rebuttal.
Also, it is said that December 25th is a “holy day”. By who? Did the church fathers? Paul? Peter? John?
Could it be that celebrating Christ’s birth on December 25th is an artificial framework imposed on Scripture? Considering none of the Puritans(calvinistic) nor other church leaders celebrated this day as His birthday, seems we have an issue here.
Hope my point is made. Don’t call one thing artificial and then promote another as “historical” and “holy”.
the Paulinian
jAsOn said
Paulinian,
I said what I had to regarding any type of dispensationalism on this particular thread. Though we agree with you that Paul never contradicted Jesus, in our discussions with John, Nick and Thomas, you would have VASTLY different things about the continuity of scripture than ADB and I would say…thus I believe your introduction of the “dispensational” category will bring more confusion to the discussion than clarity.
If you want to continue the discussion regarding the differences between dispensationalism (whatever stripe) and covenent theology, I would gladly do that on another forum, perhaps my blog (click on my name above) or perhaps an older feed where there was a similar conversation http://truthtalklive.wordpress.com/2007/11/27/how-do-you-reach-your-jewish-friends-for-christ/
the Paulinian said
And I said what I had to say as well jAsOn. Covenant theology is far from being consistant in what it teaches. You promote it as if it was the only means of interpretation since the apostles and that just is not the case. It is “one” of several methods of interpretation. And IMHO, it is a poor choice. But that is my opinion. As is your opinion concerning dispensationalism. I would not venture to say covenant theology is “nearly cultic” however.
I’ll not get this thread chasing rabbits, but people need to be aware that not all of us are Calvinists, nor reformed, nor covenant in our theology. Yet, according to the Scripture I don’t need to be a calvinist, nor reformed, nor a covenant theology proponent in order to be a born-again Christian.
take care y’all. To learn more about classic dispensationalism you can visit http://www.withChrist.org or you can read Chafers systematic theology or read Darby’s writings. Oh, and you can also read the apostle Paul’s epistles to the church. It’s all about identification.
Have a happy and blessed New Year,
the Paulinian
jAsOn said
Based on what you have said thus far, regarding covenant theology, you don’t appear to understand what it teaches (this would certainly be true if you gathered your understanding of it from Miles Stanford) but it sounded as though you weren’t interested in discussing it any furhter, is this true?
I don’t believe that one has to be a calvinist, reformed, or a covenant theologian to be born again, but I do maintain that dispensationalism of any type is aberrent, and the understanding that Darby, Chaffer and Scoffield promoted remains dangerous because of many of the views it holds as a result of its method of interpretation, and if you would like to discuss it further, then you tell me a forum on which we could do so.
the Paulinian said
Let me say that what I know of Covenant theology and Calvinism, I learned from listening to and reading from R.C.Sproul, Roger Wiles, D.James Kennedy, and for extra “flavor” John MacArthur.
I compared this to classic pauline dispensationalism and believe the latter to be more in line with Scripture and in harmony with the church epistles.
The big differences that I can tell between covenant theology and classic dispensationalism are: 1)what the Law is for 2)Israel’s covenant 3)believers identification 4)Israel and the church being separate or one
There are probably more, but these are ones that stand out to me.
Free in Him,
the Paulinian
Nick said
I think that this may set the stage so, that readers can understand what we are realy dealing with here.
Many ask me, “Why do you care”?
I care, even though realizing it may never change anything and for the most part, may even make it worse.
Yet I try.
The Greatest Fraud
by Nicholas de Vere
2003
The Donation of Constantine first appeared during the 8th century and was a document which purported to recognize the Roman popes as Christ’s representatives on Earth and to donate to Pope Sylvester and the Roman Church all those Imperial powers formerly invested in the Throne of Byzantium.
The ’Donation’, the Church claimed, was written in the 4th century at the insistence of the emperor Constantine. The Church said that he was so grateful for having been cured of leprosy by Pope Sylvester, that he gave into the Church’s hand the entire power and wealth of the unified Roman Empire, including the right to crown and dethrone kings. Now that is what you call expensive medical insurance.
Supposedly written before 337 AD – the year of Constantine’s death – the Donation of Constantine actually didn’t make an appearance on the stage of European history until four hundred years later. So far-reaching are the powers bestowed upon the Church by this document, one would have thought that it would have been made public at the time of its bestowal. Not centuries later.
The provisions of the Donation were enforced in 751 AD following which the Merovingians were deposed by the Church and replaced by their sycophants, the Mayors of the Palace who later became known as the Carolingians. The Church had made a pact with the Mayors and offered to ’recognize’ their legitimacy as rulers if they would dispense with the true Dragon Kings. The deal was done and the Carolingians were made the puppet rulers under the Roman Church.
The Donation, because it was made by a Dragon King, Constantine, legitimized the Church’s right to take this action. To all intents and purposes they had the authority of Dragon Kingship given up to them by this Charter. No doubt the Merovingians knew this to be a fraud, which is why they refused to recognize the authority of the Church to meddle in affairs of state. What do we learn from this?
We can see from the Church’s choice of ’benefactor’ that the Church was well aware that universally, only those of the Dragon Blood would be recognized as true kings. Therefore they chose Constantine as he was known to have been descended from both the Britannic PenDragon House and the Dragon House of David. Furthermore he was a member of the Desposyni – the heirs of the Lord – the blood descendants and legitimate representatives of Jesus Christ. In the Donation, it appeared as if Constantine had relinquished his hereditary spiritual position as a Messiah and invested it in the Papacy.
By suggesting they were the representatives of Christ, the popes were claiming Dragon descent for themselves. It was well known that Jesus had descendants and that they were part of the only Eurasian dynasty which was authorized to be kings – the Elven Overlords or Dragons. It would have appeared to the public then, that in the displacement of the Merovingians, one Dragon dynasty was being replaced by another, albeit a paper one. This reduced any danger of mass unrest. As time passed however, it became uncomfortably clear that the function of kingship under the Merovingians had been entirely different to that under the Carolingians. Whilst the Merovingians had formerly assumed the role of overseers, sages and wise counsellors, the Carolingians and their successors, prompted by the Church, became deliberately poorly educated, ignorant, insensitive tyrants and territorial tradesmen.
Dragon Kingship and the Grail Code had died to be replaced by a corrupted form of feudal totalitarianism and brutal, economic slavery as the Church carefully and strategically replaced the old dynasties with its own merchant-class client families who, from that day on, became vassals of the Vatican.
Lastly we learn that from 751 AD the true Dark Age began in earnest. The Elven Holocaust was initiated and would run its course for another thousand years until, in England at least, the witchcraft laws were repealed in 1736. North of the border in Scotland, however, the persecution of witches in the 1700’s was at its fiercest until the end of the century.
During this time, history has witnessed the rise of the Church of Rome and its successful struggle for power. In time, no dynasty ruled in Europe or remained in power unless the Church sanctioned their reign. The Church chose the royal families, it crowned kings and it deposed its detractors. In short, the Church, under the auspices of the Donation of Constantine was the sole and supreme temporal power in Europe and the known world. Without this purported imperial benefice however, the Church would have remained a marginalized Mediterranean cult contesting for patronage along with a host of other gnostic Christian denominations.
The royal dynasties, sponsored by the Church and crowned by its Divine Right, instituted their courts and parliaments, passed laws and employed agents to act on their behalf. To all intents and purposes it seemed as if the Church had the absolute right of Dragons and wielded power by the very sanction of Jesus Christ and God.
No monarch reigning today and no government under the monarch or instituted in their name would enjoy their position if the Church, empowered by the Donation, had not given them permission to rule in the first place. Without the Donation of Constantine, European history today would be totally different and none of the dynasties past or present would have had the right to have reigned. Nor would they reign now and none of their governments or agencies would have exercised power.
One slight problem, though. The Donation of Constantine is a complete and utter fraud and the Church was never given any temporal powers at all, let alone the right to found dynasties, crown kings or institute governments. The whole document was a lie from beginning to end and has been known to be a fake since Lorenzo Valla applied the methods of historical criticism to it during the Renaissance.
How do we know Valla was correct? The New Testament references incorporated into the wording of the Donation were taken from the Latin Vulgate version of the Bible. The Vulgate Bible was compiled by St. Jerome who was born more than two decades after Constantine was supposed to have signed the Donation. The actual Vulgate Bible wording that appears in the Donation didn’t exist until St Jerome invented it, fifty years after the document had supposedly been dated and signed by the Emperor. By this time Constantine had been dead for decades and couldn’t have signed the Dragons’ rights away anyway.
The language of the Donation is eighth century clerical or dog Latin, whilst the Latin used in the 4th century Empire was late classical Roman. The Imperial and Papal ceremonials described in the Donation didn’t exist in Constantine’s time but were developed some centuries later.
Several documentary instances of the Church’s use of the Donation to assert their authority in the medieval period still exist, including the letter of Pope Gregory IX entitled ’Si Memoriam Beneficiorum’ dated October 23rd 1236 and addressed to the Emperor Frederick II. Pope Gregory writes,
“…….that as the Vicar of the Prince of Apostles (the Roman Pope) governed the empire of priesthood and of souls in the whole world, so he should also reign over things and bodies throughout the whole world; and considering that, he should rule over earthly matters by the reins of justice to whom – as it is known – God had committed on earth the charge over spiritual things. The Emperor Constantine humbled himself by his own vow and handed over the empire to the perpetual care of the Roman Pontiff with the Imperial Insignia and sceptres and the City and Duchy of Rome……..”.
People in the medieval and Renaissance period, confronted with this document, did not generally criticize the Donation on the grounds of its veracity. They just exclaimed aghast that they could not believe that Constantine would have been stupid enough to have given the Roman Church everything.
From the Donation we understand that Constantine offered the Pope all the robes and Crowns of office but the Pope, being such a humble man, gave them back to the Emperor. This lets the Church off the hook should some malcontent turn up and ask for sartorial evidence. If the readers read the Donation for themselves they will be appalled at the pretentious egotism, the arrogance and the sheer material greed of the Church, as authors of the document.
The fraudulent imperial power of the Vatican to create kings by ’coronation’ – derived from this faked 8th century ’Donation of Constantine’ – was later adopted by the Archbishops of the Church of England with the complicity of the Tudors, who were Catholics themselves.
When he split with Rome, Henry VIII still retained and later ratified and re-established in the Anglo-Catholic Church of England the fraudulent right of the Church’s clergy to create by coronation, a succession of British monarchs. This was an illegal act. The ’Donation of Constantine’ was proved to be a completely fake document. Therefore no Royal Elven House that knew its origins and cared about social justice could possibly bring itself to recognize a Christian British monarchy or any of their Church sponsored, Church crowned predecessors or any of their regnant or formerly regnant, European cousin Houses.
Because the Donation was a fraud and no subsequent priest of any Catholic derived denomination ever had the right to crown kings, Britain has had no legally reigning monarch for 900 years. As a consequence of this, all the laws passed by these monarchs were and are illegal and worthless and all the governmental agencies set up by or derived from these monarchs or their laws are also illegal and worthless up to the present day.
When considering this, the reader might like to consider the fact that all the arrests ever made by the police in Britain and Europe are acts of kidnap and habeas corpus. Equally, any man who has taken up arms for the Crown and killed for his country is unprotected by law and guilty therefore of murder.
However, paradoxically, as the entire British legal system is illegal, there are no laws, and so the crimes of habeas corpus and murder as we define them today, simply do not exist. Subconsciously people know that their politicians and monarchs have no legitimate authority to rule over them. They manifest this knowledge in an increasing disrespect for these optional, arbitrary and illusory social conventions, which is yet another reason why social order is breaking down.
If the UN is right, we may face chaos in the near future; and all because of a stupid fraud, perpetrated by a group of myopically greedy, maniacal peddlers of false religion who are now long dead.
Again, for asserting this kind of view the Fairies are implicitly guilty of Treason, even though all British laws are constitutionally illegal and the act of treason itself is a non sequitur. Think of the implications of this.
It applies to any nation state in the Christian world today which is still a monarchy or which has evolved as part of a successive, developing political process originating from a monarchy, by virtue of its continuing sanction from, or sponsorship by, the Church of whatever denomination. It is unauthorized by any temporal or divine power to coerce anyone to obey any law originating at any stage of that government’s evolution.
In effect, Britain, Europe and America are ruled by the sword, and that sword is being wielded by people who are no more than short sighted, self seeking robber barons. They have no constitutional right to rule even in America, where in the 19th century, the libertarian commentator, Lysander Spooner, demonstrated that the consensual nature of the original document, upon which the subsequent, consecutive clauses are founded, was being flouted, thereby making the entire Constitution illegal. Pierre Proud’hon called them all “Tyrants and Usurpers”. Next time you are tempted to eulogize Western Democracy, bite your tongue and let your brain select first gear before you open your mouth. Flawed or otherwise, the idea that the English speaking world has any democracy at all is a joke.
At the beginning of this work the author stated that the people have been conned enough. He now hopes that the readers might appreciate for themselves the precise extent to which the people have actually been deceived. They have accepted a state of affairs where they and their ancestors have been enslaved by a chameleon-like corporate body that has destroyed their creativity and robbed them of their psychological liberty and their freedom of conscience for over a thousand years.
The entire moral basis of our society is founded upon a massive historical lie which has twisted the minds of generations of individuals until they have become terrified of the natural drives of their own bodies and souls.
The resultant taboos that have been created have been used to divide the minds of the people and make them dependant on the Church-State for solutions to the problems of resisting Satan and fighting temptation and sin, when these contrived, nonsensical whimsies never existed in the first place.
As a result, western Christian society was turned into an open air lunatic asylum packed full of lost souls who weren’t lost at all and had no need of a cure for diseases of the soul they weren’t actually suffering from in the first place.
The Church created the confusion and the division and then offered the solution. In fear the population invested its trust in the perfidious Church and in return for their confidence the Church turned the people into slaves and an entire civilization into a manufacturing plant to service their own greed for luxury and power.
For a thousand years the Fairies have remained silent about their identities – formerly for fear of their lives – latterly for fear of becoming social outcasts and objects of mirth and derision. Still however, a shadow of menace lies over the ancient families. Greed will go to any length to ensure the continuity of its satisfaction and the same motives that prompted the Church to murder and lie in the past, still prompt their merchant-class puppets to kill and deceive today.
the Paulinian said
OK, I stand corrected. Neither covenant theology nor classic dispensationalism have anything to do with what “Nick” is saying.
His whole post is a fairy-tale
Carry on……
I see no need to express rebuttal.
Free in Christ,
the Paulinian
John said
Thank you, JAsOn.I was aware of this possibility ready.Although it’s a little off topic, I am trying to use both Nick and Thomas as objects of study in regards to theological insanity.Unfortunately King Thomas seems to have disappeared.
Perhaps that big albino monk caught him?[grin]
Nick said
Dearest Paulinian,
Fairy-tale… As is the whole Jesus mythos presented in the (not four) but over five thousand Gospels.
In all honesty, I truly know nothing but what I can say is neither you, or anyone else nor can I provide one shred of evidence of our own existance much less a God who created all things.
That leaves a broad spectrum for us to define as it would be the greatest of sin, a sin of sins, for me to allow myself to be spoon fed and accept my person to be blindly led.
And if God be a being, that will Judge me to Hell in my search for Truth, then I would not want to serve that God anyway.
I am anti-Zionist but I am not anti-Semitic as I am Jewish by race (Not religeously).
We can all agree there is something out there but you cannot pin a name or likeness to God. Beisides that would be, by definition Idolitry, would it not? Jesus wasn’t named Jesus… Neither did he actually go by that name.
Honestly and historically speaking his name would more match these derivitives (Depending on the dialect and region you would have lived), Dositheus, Dosithius, Doetus or Dorcus.
Share your fairy-tales all you want, but the entire Christian religion is a farce, no matter what your faith in it may be.
Yes you have a right to your faith, Faith in whatever you want your faith in, until you demand legislation or laws that would enforce others to that faith.
This is the heart issue with the Pauline doctrine.
Examples with issues such as Abortion… I am personally, Pro-Life as far as my faith is concerned, but I am Pro-Choice concerining lagality. Especially when comes to the reality of the World we live as I have met a survivor of coat hanger in the alley abortion. Of which is far worse then having a trained Medical doctor performing it. We must keep in mind reality when discussing issues of faith. Becasue as strong as you think your faith is and how mighty your god… Women will contitnue to have abortions whether legal or illegl, why? It’s always been and will always be that way.
Who am I to say to a Woman you must give birth to a baby… God may have that right but I surely do not. So, let God sort it out in the end. The best that we can do is be there for the girls when the issue arises and then you have a chance to convince them othr wise.
I do not have the right to impose my faith on someone becasue when you threaten people to believe it does not produce faith.
Or what is the opposite of LOVE?
Hate… No, Hate is a result of Love… You cannot Hate what you do not already Love.
The opposite of Love is Fear.
I do not fear God nor do I believe that anyone should fear God… What god would want me to fear him and threaten hell fire if I did not?
If you treated other people around you in manner Paul suggests, you’d possibly find yourself in Jail if not burnt by the people that you inflicted abuse on.
But I bet, you were not ever a victim of abuse nor did you probably ever experience Fear on a daily basis?
I grew up in Fear of my father… So much so, I would have rather come home in bodybag, than to have the police deliver me to him.
I do not blame God for all that has happened to me but rest assured he cannot blame me if I do not trust any man to stand over me nor do I trust a God that would subject me to that kind of abuse.
I am done being afraid… I fear nothing. Not that I donot occasionally become fearful but I am never conceding that part of myself to anyone not even God. The God that Paul presents is tyranical, abusive and conditional God with is his Love. as you discover quickly when reading the beginning Romans.
As for your views of Paul, as this thread is a discussion about, he is far less credible of a source. considering, I have been lucky enough to read a few epistles of Paul, that were not included in the Bible.
One such epistle has a man engaged to be married but doubts the faithfulness of his soon tobe wife. So Paul has the woman sit over the hole of wine cask and has her breath out so he can smell her breath. Upon finding no odour of wine on her breath, Paul declares she is still a virgin.
And the couple then run off to be married.
It is only obvious why this epistle was left out as it makes Paul appear a total flake not to mention a complete idiot.
But I bet you haven’t read anything outside the box and that I find a terrible travesty. Because it is not God that gains from your ignorance and lack there-of of wisdom but Evil men gain oppourtunity to to take advantage of you.
You comfort yourself to believe what you believe because you’re frightened that you might end up in Hell… Hell is a result of loosing your individual sovereignty, free creative thought and the right to think for your self. And Paul is an enemy to indiviual Sovereignty and a robber of free thought and usurper of creative intellegence.
And as Tom Petty put it. “You can take me to the gates of Hell but I won’t back down… No, I won’t back down.”
Because I am not afraid of who, and what I am, neither what brings me happiness.
And I know nothing… But that I AM.
Tripp said
pure heresy…the docithians totally rejected Christ
Anonymous said
Hey – What did Tom Petty do to deserve being dragged into this nonsense?
Joe said
I Googled “Nicholas de Vere” and got a lot of stuff, but first was this interview: http://www.paranoiamagazine.com/mykingdom.html and this exchange puzzles me:
TT: Is the Dragon bloodline a Satanic or Luciferian bloodline?
NDV: Yes is the honest and simple answer.
How can you claim to be of Merovingian descent and claim Jesus as an ancestor, then turn around and claim that your bloodline is Satanic?
Nick – I am assuming that you are Nicholas de Vere.
ADB said
Paulinian
I certainly am not a dispensationalist, but surely do not regard it as being cult-like in any way. Too many times latch onto labels and this causes problems and puts unnecessary barriers up. Referring to Dec. 25th. Of course it is not “holy” in a literal way, as no one really knows the exact date of Jesus’ birth. In effect it is holy because of its use. Best wishes. By the way, what planet do you think Nick and Thomas are from?
Joe said
Isn’t it amazing what you can find online? Google Nicholas de Vere yourselves and make your own decision. Here is an interesting comment I found on a message board. There is plenty of information on this out there.
DVB11-13-2006, 05:31 AM
How many people remember Nick de Vere aka Nick Weir’s previous incarnation?
Don’t know about his previous incarnation, but I thought I’d do a quick Google search. These are just some of the results:
http://www.razza.fsnet.co.uk/kreeegans/kep2.htm & …kep3.htm
REVEALED IS NICK DE VERE, WHO IS AGED THIRTY. HE IS TALL, VERY HANDSOME, BLONDE, THE GREEK GOD TYPE [....]
Well the sooner we get the krip out of you the sooner we can put it in Nick de Vere….! from a comedy site
KREEEGANS is the comic story, in screenplay format, of the visit to Earth by five aliens from the planet Kreeeg. Their planet is dying and it is the Kreeegans mission to find a new world they can inhabit. The planet Earth is on the short list. They very soon begin to wish it was on the long list.
Then there’s this rather scary one: http://swordofgryffindor.com/2006/08/10/the-meaning-of-the-phoenix/
and from my Good Lord who’s name JESUIS DVIR/Dvere sighed through my mind…
My beloved is *AHA-Nicholas de Vere; and He is in fact: JE SUIS = Jesuis is Nick de Vere; Nick de Vere is JESU(I)S. NISSE III: LAMB of GOD and Our Egyptian Shepherd King; Brite morning star & Pharaoh for our flock.
And there is this very interesting, serious and quite disturbing piece about the website http://www.dragoncourt.org/ at http://sandbat.batcave.net/dcgreg.html
An explanation of the strife between Nicholas De Vere, Tracy Twyman, et all and the folks at http://www.dragoncourt.org. OR: How Nicholas De Vere attacked his own website. which, if accurate, does not paint a very edifying picture of De Vere &/or his followers.
He’s not someone who I’ve had any dealings with; obviously, Robin, you have — I found this as well, from one RCH (!) at http://messageboard.cinescape.com/phenomenamagazine/forums/showthread.php?t=637&page=5:
As for Nick de Vere… I knew him well, I helped to construct his original DragonCourt website in a past life. His real name is Weir and the DragonCourt history is fiction, so I wouldn’t bother with that red herring!
So he’s all tied up with Dragon bloodlines, and Raymond McNally’s historical Dracula research, and Laurence Gardner’s tripe? But who or what is he himself? Presumably he’s not the Nick Weir who is a British entertainer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Weir)? Or the lawyer Nick de Vere Moss who runs a language school for the blind, Eye Talk English?
http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/01/26/unravelling-the-nicholas-de-vere-story/
Anonymous said
Ah yes…..now we’re talkin’. If you’re gonna throw yourself out there like that you gotta be prepared for what one might uncover simply by doing a Google search.
Here is that message board: http://www.mania.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-2735.html
jAsOn said
Nick,
The is no historical data that reveals that there were “thousands” of gospels written about Jesus which were under consideration by the apostles or the early church fathers as being authentic. Yes, there were many gnostic writings that were quickly rejected by them. Dan Brown was no historian, and neither are you.
ADB said
Nick,
#73- a lot of that made no sense at all. A couple of points to make- Jesus name in Aramaic/Hebrew would have been roughly pronounced “yeshua” similar to Joshua from the OT. In Greek it would have been “jesous” with the “j” pronounced as a “y.” As for the different names you gave, what linguistics are you using? I agree with your point about God being a just judge (actually he’s not merely just, he’s merciful), and that you will stand before him one day. That is exactly right, and is exactly the reason you need to be very careful.
Nick said
I am not Nicholas de Vere.
And much of the opinions posted about him are a result of people who do not agree with the exclusivity of the Dragon Court. People want a club that is all inclusive but that is not reality.
Not everyone is born a Cherokee so not everyone is qualified to be a Dragon.
It’s a non-joining fraternity of which I am not affiliated with.
The issue of the name of Jesus and his real name are not a mystery…
‘DOSITHIUS’ search it out.
Joe said
You may not be de Vere, but you’re posting material by him, apparently a professed satanist who references Aleister Crowley in his writings. Boy, you and Thomas sure are a confusing bunch.
Moderator (not Stu) said
Folks, this is interesting stuff, but I feel like we’re veering off-topic again. Not a big deal. Continue on, but we’d like to see it stay on the subject of Paul, if possible.
Thank you,
Moderator (not Stu)
jAsOn said
Nick,
Who here wants an all inclusive club; what does that mean?
“The issue of the name of Jesus and his real name are not a mystery… ”
I agree, that Jesus’ name is not a mystery…we have it recorded in all the new testament and in MANY consequnt documents that corroberate its use and historical validaty.
Nick, I think your goal here should be to prove that the documents we consider as inspired by the Holy Spirit to be the New Testament (not the apocryphal works) are not the ones that the first century church accepted as “God breathed”, or were not written in the first century at all.
I don’t think you have addressed that specifically, instead you seem to be addressing what are perceived as atrosities that have been commited by those who call themselves the church.
We need to bear in mind that no one is perfect, not even the redeemed, and there is a distinction between the “visible” church and the “invisible” church; the later being those who are actually born again, counted righteous in Christ. If we are not going to end up debating relativism, you need to assert and prove the historical validaty of your sources and the undeniability of their exclusive truth claims.
the Paulinian said
In what ways did Paul contradict the other apostles and Jesus’ teachings?
I think Nick understands more than we give him credit for. He sees a difference in the synoptic gospels message and Paul’s epistles.
Obviously his understanding is warped concerning Christ, yet even he sees a distinct difference in Paul’s message which is- that of the believers identity, the mystery of the Church, and the separation of the Heavenly Church and Earthly covenantial Israel.
We do not forsake the 4 gospel accounts nor the epistles of the other apostles. We simply contextually interpret the text. You must admit that if we did away with Paul’s letters to the churches, much of the core doctrines we adhere to would be unheard of – specifically the Church and our identity in Christ.
I would like for Nick to give evidence for his accusations against Paul the apostle, and also for the supposed “other” letters that Paul supposedly wrote.
Free in Christ because of Christ,
the Paulinian
http://www.withChrist.org
jAsOn said
Paulinian,
There is ABSOLUTLY NO difference in the gospel message preached in the gospels and in Paul’s writtings; you must remember not to confuse the promises of the Abrahamic Covenant with the stipulations of the Mosaic Covenant–there certainly is a progression in the words God has revealed, but the message is the same (Eph. 2:11-12). I think you need to re-read the book of Hebrews. We have to allow the NT writers to guide us in our understanding of the OT.
I would love to interact with you on this topic. I have provided an exegesis of many pertinent text in Hebrews and other NT writings on my blog, please comment there so we can discuss this.
http://sjep.blogspot.com/search/label/Theology%3A%20Hermeneutics
the Paulinian said
jAsOn,
Re-read my post again. I didn’t say the gospel was different in Paul’s message – for it is the same from Adam to us now. All are “saved” by the same means.
You see only covenants. While we see covenants and dispensations in the Scriptures. I don’t know where you are coming from. You are very angry toward dispensationalism, even referring to it as “nearly cultic” “aberrant”, etc. Even though I do not agree with Calvinism, reformed theology or covenant theology. I won’t call it what you have called dispensationalism.
I can’t even give a remark without you negatively running dispensationalism down and telling me to go to another forum to discuss this. If anything, classic pauline dispensationalism is more apropriate for this topic than your covenant theology.
Please help me understand why you are so bitter and angry toward dispensationalism.
the Paulinian
jAsOn said
In a context where we are only reading one another’s words, comunication can be misread. I feel very strongly about this topic, but I am not angry or bitter, I just believe that dispensationalism (not so much progressive–which it is debatable whether or not it is dispensationalism at all) is a hermenutical structure that provides interpretations of of scripture as a whole that is very unhealthy for the church.
What am I supposed to do when I think that your assesment of Nicks comment is wrong, and that you would lead the discussion away from its center, which should be the historical validity of Paul’s writings, and God’s faithfulness in transmitting them to us while retaining their accuracy. If you go on to explain to Nick that the reason he sees “differences” in Paul’s writtings and the record of what Jesus taught, is not that they contradict, but that Paul had a “different message” to proclaim, then you will inevidably lead him down the wrong path.
I retract my statement about you saying that the two taught a different gospel.
jAsOn said
The reason I have pointed you to other forums is because I am looking for interaction on this topic…I believe that we all benefit from should discussions. Granted, I hold my position firmly, but I am willing to accept challenges, how else are we supposed to grow?
Anonymous said
So Paulinian, are you and the character MonkeyMan one in the same, or are the two of you just using the same computer?
Just wondering, after reading your last post on the “Code Huckabee”site.
Paulinian said
Anon,
Yes, monkeyman and paulinian are one in the same – but two different topics so trying to keep them separate.
jAsOn,
What “wrong path” would I lead Nick down? I don’t want this thread to get off topic, yet you are making strong accusations. Forgive me if I am “misreading” your sentences. But how can I misread “nearly cultic”, “wrong path”, etc.?
Paul’s “different message” was concerning the mystery – “Christ in you, the hope of glory” and the otherside of the coin “I in Christ”. He emphasized the Church being heavenly, not earthly. He only, through the Spirit, elaborated on the teachings of Christ concerning His kingdom. Through Paul, Christ revealed the Church. Just as I’ve stated above, if we remove Paul’s epistles and declare them heretical, what are we left with as far as Orthodox/Historical Christian doctrine?
It is crucial that we as Christians understand the uniqueness of the Church. It being heavenly, and guided by the Spirit. We are not bound by the law for it never justifies nor sanctifies any way. It is crucial that we as Christians understand our Identity in Christ – crucified with Christ, raised with Christ, seated with Christ, alive in Christ, etc. and we will rule and reign with Christ. If you have read Stanford’s writings, surely you know what he taught concerning Identification?
Classic dispensationalism is not what you see today on television nor even what is taught at Dallas seminary, etc. It is definately not progressive.
You are more than welcome to go to http://www.withChrist.org and interact with them concerning your hatred of dispensationalism.
- the Paulinian
ADB,
Thank you for your affirmation in the faith.
jAsOn said
The wrong path is to say that Paul’s message was different than Jesus’. Yes, God had reveled a fuller understanding of the same story He had been telling throuhgout the history of redemption. The mystery was that gentiles and jews were going to be in the same Kingdom and are part of the same body of saved persons. Paul didn’t teach that there are two kingdoms (one heavenly and one earthly). The hope of glory for OT saints and NT saints is one in the same…Christ. Paul said that Abraham was sounted righteous BEFORE he was circumcised and that righteiousness was the righteousness of Christ, no one (OT or NT) is saved outside of that (which I’m sure you would affirm)Christ Himself spoke of the same heavenly kingdom of which Paul spoke, Christ said that His kingdom was not of this earth, etc. Neither one of us believes that we should deem PAul’s writtings as heretical. The obedience anyone exhibits in any era, under any covenant, is by grace, and guided by the spirit, and it is crucial that we all understand that Christ fulfilled the New Covenant for all of us who believe (OT and NT) so that we can inherit the promises of that covenant. It is also crucial that we understand that the church is spiritual Israel (not national, physical Israel, mind you). Standford did not understand justification correctly, let alone identification with Christ. Paul says in Gal. 3:29 “And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” speaking to, none other than NT believers.
The way I read the history of dispensationalism, is that it staprimarily with Darby and his emphasis between the differences between national Israel and the church, then to chaffer, then to Scoffield, then it has become whatever it is today, multifaceted, and includes Ryrie, who’s book, “Dispensationalism Today”, wherein he was trying to “fix” statements made by Scoffield which indicate that the OT saints were saved in a different way than the NT saints. He claimed that covenant theologians misread him in their critiques, and that scoffield wasn’t saying that.
Again, I am not angry or bitter, nor do I hate dispensationalism, I do however think that it is dangerous, and directing persons like Nick to the writtings of Miles Stanford is especially unhelpful because of his hermenuetical errors.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
1. Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope;
“…By the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ…”
When in the entire Bible does God or Jesus mention anything about this supposed command of Paul?
I guess I could wake up tomorrow morning and walk into the Church and make up stuff that God says?
2. Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus ‘Christ’ our Lord.
‘Christ’ is a Babylonian title given to the annual male sacrifice it is not a surname, so why does Paul use it that way?
3. 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,
No other ‘doctrine’ as apposed to what? What doctrine could he be referring to because there is only one doctrine taught in the Old Testament and New Testament’s, Gospel teachings of YESU, The doctrine of ‘The Way’?
4. Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
“…Fables and endless genealogies…”
Really… Then forget any stories of a dying a resurrecting God man that Paul conveniently plagiarizes as he goes from one place to the other…
But what is he saying to Timothy about, ‘Endless Genealogies’?
Of which he goes on the say, “…which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do”?
What questions could there be, knowing your ancestors? Could it be that by knowing, who your related to can only make trouble for Paul? Maybe questions against the sale of this ‘New’ doctrine Paul is preaching?
By Paul’s statement, he nullifies the family of Jesus, the house of David and his messianic heritage.
Of which, Paul makes the Gospel to no effect, as the validity, upon which the justification of Jesus’ messiah-ship rest solely on his Genealogy.
The question has to be asked, is a bloodline Holy because of Jesus or is Jesus Holy because of a bloodline?
Paul has everything to gain by undermining the Royal House of Judah, him being a of the house Herod and all…
5. Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
What command is he referring? Of course it sounds good but Jesus gave us two commands, which hang ALL the Law.
6. From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
Who is he referring to here? Could it be he is attempting to hijack a dynastic Priesthood of which is purely a hereditary right?
I must admit, I smell a tinge of jealousy here.
7. Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
Oh, now we know, who he is referring to… Single handedly he has summed up the entire Royal Priesthood, suggesting that they do no know what they are talking about.
8. But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
Because you know the Royal Priesthood are all a bunch Lawless liars… Right? Or at least they do not use the Law, lawfully which implies they are Lawless.
9. Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man-
STOP right there!
On the contrary Jesus scolded the Authority for being hypocrites in this fashion… Jesus teaching that in the light of Gods Mercy, Grace and Love we are all equal. That no man is greater than another… That we should, have all things in common, dropping title, riches and seats of power. That the, brethren, should not, lord it over one another.
Faith is literally letting all things go and take no thought for tomorrow…
Pay close attention, as what Paul does here is ‘whitewash’ the Law. It isn’t bad until you apply the false teachings of the ‘Fallen Nature of Man’ and “…All fall short of the Glory God”
9. Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10. For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
Who doesn’t fall under any of these descriptive titles?
Paul has seduced everyone back under the Law nullifying the Gospel message very cleverly… What a tricky man Paul is.
“…And if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine”
Sound doctrine… What doctrine could he be referring to?
11. According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
His Trust… Where in the Gospel is Paul even mentioned?
And what God presented him, a doctrine, solely to his Trust?
This is dangerous speech. Many of you accuse me of promoting a Cult… and practicing Occultism (Hidden-ism or Better a practitioner of Privacy).
But you want me to swallow this guy’s beguiling lies that he is the only Man God trusts’?
And that he was single handedly picked without any of the Prophets ever mentioning him or a likeness of him… Unless you apply ‘False Teacher’, ‘Lawless one’ or ‘False Prophet’… Oh yeah the Naz-Aryans did have a name for him, ‘The Black Priest’…
12. And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;
While I do believe Paul met Jesus on the ‘Road to Damascus’ this is merely a figure of speech.
As when in ancient texts one reads the same reference, ‘on the way to…’ or ‘…on the road to Damascus’, it means literally, while a person is attaining or being enlightened or simply, while they were studying in the Temple.
The reason Paul met Jesus was because Jesus was alive and well at Qumran.
13. Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.
Notice here that Paul admits that he is blasphemer… And notice how he say’s Jesus responds to him…
(Note: Compare with the way Paul treats a blasphemer later in is rant to Timothy)
What should be added here? Well let me speak for Paul…
I am Thaddeus Alexander born of the Herodian line, the puppet kings of Rome. I being commissioned by Rome to find Jesus and his family, there-by murder them and leave no one living, no man, woman or child.
You know the best way to destroy something is from the inside.
14. And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.
Of which when Paul met Jesus this is exactly how Jesus treated him… well after he punched his lights out anyway.
15. This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
That is a little arrogant and egotistical to say but hey what ever floats your boat Paul… Or Thaddeus.
16. Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.
Well that’s nice… At what point do you think, Paul realized what a money, maker this movement could be?
17. Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
This in interesting, as it applies to a particular God in Egypt… The state God Amen or Amun… The Hidden God or Hidden one of which the term ‘Occultism’ arises.
He even ends his Prayers ‘AMEN’ when the Hebrew way to end a Prayer is ‘Ha’em’ meaning ‘So be it…’
18. This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare;
That is militant and in good conscience necessary considering that the Zealots have at this moment shaved, their heads and vowed to find and kill Paul.
19. Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck:
Oh, really Paul, of whom, are you referring to?
20. Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.
Satan being the literal term you would apply to any Man-made or organized societal and legal Authority. Like, the police, the judge, the king and executioner.
Where is the Mercy for these men, Paul, you know the same that Jesus showed you?
Is this how Jesus taught us to respond to blasphemers?
Or didn’t Jesus even say, (Paraphrased) “…Blaspheme me or blaspheme the father and will be forgiven you but if you blaspheme the Holy Spirit it will be un-forgiven you…”
I like to say this way, “Talk about me or talk about my father but don’t you talk about my mama!”
1 Timothy 2
1. I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
2. For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
Yeah of’ Course this is read with Romans 13 in mind… So if the King be a tyrant just shut up a deal with it… Go home and be quiet or rather apathetically remain in subjection to the tyrant.
This reminds of the mentality here in the South of, “Be happy you even have a Job…” If your Boss doesn’t pay you enough, and you have this attitude, what does it profit you?
Rather use wisdom and quit that Job and get a better one besides, you don’t owe your boss anything…
I am not saying there aren’t good boss’ out there, I am saying, if your being paid less than $14-15.00 an hour with no benefits, your Job sucks anyway. A family cannot be supported on that alone.
Especially, the list of crappy Jobs available that pay far less and do not even provide benefits… You cannot follow this prescription because first, it is unwise and second, Jesus said to have all things in common… Period.
Of which the modern Church refuses to obey Jesus… You can follow Paul but Jesus you conveniently ignore because you’re too greedy to give up all your possessions.
3. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
4. Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth,
What Truth, Your truth Paul?
5. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Then who the heck are you!?!
6. Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
What a great thing to say but what is your agenda Paul?
Oh yeah, here ya go…
7. 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.
If your telling the truth why would the idea of lie, come to (YOUR) mind Paul?
This leaves a bad taste in my mouth and as a matter psychology and statistical data this is most often a warning that the person speaking is in actuality lying. In this case Paul is lying.
Ordainment… You are not ordained Paul… That’s the issue between James the Just and You. You were never ordained or commissioned by the Temple… Of who only two people had the Authority to give… James the High Priest of the Temple and Jesus who could not give his approval because he’s supposedly off in Heaven playing Love songs to himself.
James surely didn’t commission you as an Apostle because of one main requirement… You had to be related, as it was a, Hereditary, entitlement.
8. I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
No… No, no Paul. Jesus instructed to pray in private and not in public as the hypocrites do, only to be seen by other men to be Holy. That whatever you ask your father in private he will answer openly.
9. 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;
Oh really, tell that to your congregation, your mothers, your sisters and your wives… See how far that gets you.
How far for a married man… How about divorced?
First, the covering of a woman’s head is not a derogatory requirement nor is it an implication that a woman is lesser…
Rather, that she is greater and should be honored and respected, not lusted after or dishonored by staring strangers after her beauty. But also, so that a woman does not cause a distraction to the weak in faith, while in the Temple.
If any men that read this have daughters, you can probably relate…
Knowing how healthy children are in puberty… Or better remember how you were and maybe you still are…
10. But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
Where does Paul come up with this BS?
11. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
Really… Is that how churches think of and view women?? Oh I see, when it comes to homosexuality it should be enforced in a Church but these Womanly issues that Paul prescribes… That’s optional?
12. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
Oh really? The Temple is symbolic of the Womb, the Holy of Holies the Uterus. Of which at root derives the word ‘Utter’ meaning ‘to speak’. So it is from the Uterus that God Speaks or the Holy of Holies… The conduit of Gods voice or Utterance is through the Woman.
13. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
Adam was the Prototype and Eve was the finished product then?
14. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Where does, Paul, get this idea? Considering he has left out much of the story… He conveniently picks the parts that best fit his agenda.
15. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
Oh really… Saved in childbearing… What?
He has taken a Sacred act among the Dynastic Royal Priesthood of which he began this rant and has belittled it to a sexist requirement of women… Knowing full well that anyone in their right mind would never follow these instructions… But what he has really accomplished is more than ‘Evil’. He has successfully destroyed the Holy Union of Marriage within the Royal Bloodline and validity of Gods promise in the Garden.
The two becoming one flesh as the consummating act between A Priest (A Joseph) and a Priestess (A Miriam). There-by Pregnancy being the sealing pact of their marriage as a Holy and Sacred act. Only now, because of Paul, it has been defiled to sexist wifely duty, that if she, be lucky enough to bear a child it will be her salvation…
Paul knew what he was doing here and he is very successful in doing so… So, successful, that my words fall on deaf ears.
1 Timothy 3
1. This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
What does Paul know about leadership qualifications?
He has not only betrayed Rome, he has betrayed the Trust of Jesus, James and the entire Royal Priesthood.
Only remaining true to that Herodian reputation well known by the Native population…
2. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
Since Paul hijacked the Faith of Jesus he not only changes the name but creates all new, never before heard of Titles.
3. Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
4. 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?)
So what position does Paul hold in this New religion? Has he ruled himself out as a leader by not being married and never producing offspring? And what of the fact that Thaddeus Alexander was indeed a Homosexual… This definitely explains the thorn in his side…
6. Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.
7. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
8. Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;
9. Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.
10. 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.
You know, if these rules were applied as hard as others verses written by Paul, not only referring to homosexuality but that of working a Job… “…Let those that not work, not eat…” Then many churches would find themselves empty. That ‘Job’ reference is actually miss- interpreted because what is most often left out, due to the ignorance of the teacher of the circumstances involved, that there was a famine at the time.
That doesn’t stop the ignorance… As it, yet continues to be used as a weapon against the jobless in the Church.
Again, do not take a Job that doesn’t pay you what you need. You only accept a Job that is worthy of a Son of God and what one Christian has, demand no less… As we as believers, are instructed by Jesus, to have all things in common.
14. These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly:
Ever wonder why Paul wrote Timothy in regard the Authority and the Structure of the Church?
The Herodian family prided themselves in Greco-Roman Style and Fashion leaving nothing but hedonistic orgies in their wake of oppression. It was fanciful for older men to have young lovers and I more than believe that Paul Loved Timothy… And mean he loved a young boy… Which was customary, that is the practice of pedophilia, of the times in which Paul or Thaddeus Alexander lived… It must be stated that it is no known secret of Ancient times that such behavior today would not only be frowned against and terribly abusive but it’s down right illegal!
Even if Paul had come to true repentance, finding Jesus as his Lord and Savior as claimed consistently within his Epistles, he knew Timothy for year’s prior to his conversion.
And if he were living under today’s standards and Law he would not only be been run out of town and writing from a prison cell he’d have his guts carved out.
Oh that is what happened to him… How Ironic.
He most certainly wouldn’t be speaking in any Christian church, leading a church, founding a church much less be called an Apostle of the Lord Jesus.
And we all are familiar of what happens to people in a crisis situation involving being held captive, aren’t we? The victim not only relates to their captors they sympathize with them.
Now considering the fact that Timothy was, I assure not of the Herodian bloodline and most likely a slave given to or bought by Paul. Most disturbing is that the average sex slave, even in today’s market is and was twelve years old. What is even worse? Fact is, the largest sex slave operation in the World can be found in God’s supposed Holy city of Jerusalem.
The Jews have always prided themselves in providing top quality service in the sex industry bar none… Just ask anyone in the know.
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.
One can almost, hear Paul as if he was alive, today say, “And Timothy, don’t tell anyone our little secret…”
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.
Wow… Paul, did you make that up yourself?
The Angel reference is not of supernatural being but that of a messenger of the community as all messengers were referred to as Angels.
Mary the mother of Jesus was of the branch of Japheth, which had settled the Isle of Britannia. Incidentally, Berith-anna or Berith-ain – mean Covenant of the Prophetess, and/or Covenant Land.
When Jehovah had kicked the Shekinah out of the temple, which implies that the Priests of Jehovah kicked the Sacred Temple Nuns out of the Temple they had no where to go.
The Prophet Jeremiah later led the Priestess’ to the Isles of Britannia of which later become to home of the, renown Priestess’ of Avalon.
Mary was a Gentile, which means that Jesus was born of not only Jewish blood but Gentile blood as well.
So Paul wasn’t the sole person gifted with message to the Gentiles especially that of symbolic salvation as Mary the mother of Jesus was a Gentile.
1 Timothy 4
1. Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
Who is he implying departed from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils?
2. Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
Who is now speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron?
3. Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
If one so chooses he can become a Priest of God but it comes with a price…
If but for only a season a Initiate must abstain marriage because Jesus taught that no one be given in marriage in Heaven and Initiates of the Priesthood must transcend Earthly existence and ascend to Heaven or else what difference would priest be from anyone else?
An Initiate must abstain from eating of meat not because it is a sin or not a sin but because meat weighs you down. And it’s a Spiritual Law that meat / proteins weigh the body down and create mass thus distracting energy and absorbing it. So by abstaining from meats it increases one’s Spiritual energy and helps to open conduits in the body for energy to flow freely.
What does Paul have to fear from this Royal Priesthood he so easily demonizes?
4. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
Better why does Paul wish his followers, are weighed down with Meats (proteins)? Could it be because people are more conducive to suggestion as their body is too busy breaking down meats in the intestinal track and dampening a person’s awareness?
5. For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.
6. If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.
So not only is it Good but it sanctified by the word of God and prayer to decimate the Royal Priesthood?
7. But refuse profane and old wives’ fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness.
Now Paul belittles Jesus and his disciples reducing the Royal Priesthood to a profane and old wives fable. And even that Jesus, James and the Royal Priesthood lack godliness?
8. For bodily exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all
things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come.
‘Bodily exercises’, referring to the practices and meditations of the Royal Priesthood and again reiterating that all such practices lack godliness.
Of which denying the Royal Priesthood is a means to not only gain life now but attain to eternal life to come?
9. This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation.
And seals this fact with this statement that in order to be faithful you must accept this.
10. For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.
Here Paul makes the teachings of Jesus to no effect and the Royal Priesthood implying that anyone can be a Royal Priest on mere belief. Belief is not Faith for even the Demons believe and shudder at his presence but they aren’t Faithful and faith being the only way to please God.
According to the scriptures anyway…
11. These things command and teach.
He commands Timothy to do this; and Timothy will obey remaining, as any victim would do, in submission to Paul.
12. Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity.
13. Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.
Yes read the Gospel, exhort but keeping (my) doctrine.
14. Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.
And here Paul takes advantage of fearful and desperate people into artificial mimicry of the ministry of Jesus becoming the great sham and terminal flaw of the Church.
15. Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all.
16. Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.
Save thy self from what Paul? Not everyone wakes up guilt ridden and ashamed of being a human or living life to it’s fullest. Paul’s implication here is that all people lack something only to be found without. I once pondered this method only to find pain, loneliness and despair.
1 Timothy 5
1. Rebuke not an elder, but intreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren;
2. The elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, with all purity.
Now Paul, yet again reveals his disdain for James, the disciples and the Royal Priesthood;
3. Honour widows that are widows indeed.
“…Honour widows that are widows indeed…” What could Paul ever mean by that? I mean either a woman is a widow or not?
4. But if any widow have children or nephews, let them learn first to shew piety at home, and to requite their parents: for that is good and acceptable before God.
What he is referring to is not just a woman who’s husband has died but to the dynastic requirements of the Royal Priesthood. When a Priestess became pregnant the Priest had to leave her and the child for designated period of time.
If she be pregnant with a girl, the Priest / Father had to leave for three years and if it be a boy then six years. During this separation the Priestess was considered symbolically a widow and the children orphans.
Let’s read as Paul clarifies exactly what he is talking about…
5. Now she that is a widow indeed, and desolate, trusteth in God, and continueth in supplications and prayers night and day.
Which was indeed a customary practice.
6. But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.
7. And these things give in charge, that they may be blameless.
8. But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.
Here he refers to the separation period that Mary and Joseph would fulfill their Royal and Priestly duty. Of which the Priestess (widow) and the children (orphans) were under the care of the Temple. Paul then claiming that this practice is a denial of faith and the Priests in question are worse than an infidel’s. That is truly, truly an Evil act as Paul is a selfish, power hungry, glory seeker and genuine opportunist.
9. Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old, having been the wife of one man,
10. Well reported of for good works; if she have brought up children, if she have lodged strangers, if she have washed the saints’ feet, if she have relieved the afflicted, if she have diligently followed every good work.
Above, is continued customary duty of a Priestess / Wife to here Husband / Priest. Hence, Mary Magdalene is recorded in the Gospel as fulfilling these requirements.
11. But the younger widows refuse: for when they have begun to wax wanton against Christ, they will marry;
If their husband died it would not be only wise for them to remarry but customary. It seems that Paul had some sort of disdain to the function of a woman’s body… Did Jesus consider an orgasm a sin?
12. Having damnation, because they have cast off their first faith.
That the desire for companionship and sex is a choice between what Paul calls, ‘their first faith’ and because they having damnation.
What is he talking about? It is apparent that he desires to belittle the Royal Priesthood and there-by turn it into a trivial matter and less worthy of faith and even a damnable custom.
13. And withal they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house; and not only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not.
It was normal for widows to be guest in other peoples dwellings as it was a part of Communal living in which Jesus highly praised and promoted among his disciples.
“…Having all things in common…” And we will see how Paul continues to undermine this lifestyle and custom for the more popular and hedonistic capitalist of Rome.
14. I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.
May I attempt to translate?
Woman ought to be in submission to a man (As Marriage is a Holy Sacred Act between two Equal and Whole people neither of which are the lesser, male or female.), be barefoot and pregnant, tend the house being her wifely duty and never should she question or talk back to her man because that is Satan.
15. For some are already turned aside after Satan.
Oh now this is exactly why the inquisition found justification for divine right to burn single, beautiful and wealthy female landowners as Witches.
So talking back or questioning your husband is turning aside from God?
So, any woman, who expects equality with men, is now a Satanist?
That is Poppy – Cock!
Wow, why do we put up with that kind of crap?
As if Christians are more successful with marriage… Wrong. Christians have almost a higher rate of divorce than that of secular community as a whole. Women were never meant to submit to a Man, never.
Or do you not consider that the Holy Spirit is Sofia the divine feminine wisdom?
And could it be that Christians, ignorantly so, have not only offended God’s Grace but also his Wrath. Of which is actually, blaspheming the Holy Spirit who is God’s co-equal part. And I remind you Jesus says, is the ONLY unforgivable sin!
16. If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged; that it may relieve them that are widows indeed.
Oh really? Again Paul is more than down playing the responsibility of the Temple and the customary practice of the Royal Priesthood. As the Temple was solely responsible for Widows and Orphans… What is Paul’s agenda for burdening the poor and placing this yoke on the neck’s of the meek in the community?
17. Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.
Here we go… That’s all you had to say Paul! You can almost hear the guilt in Paul’s voice as to justify why he takes such a large portion of the Tithe (All of it)?
18. For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.
Now he adds to his Justification now by making it a general rule.
19. Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.
20. Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.
Oh so demanding to know what a preacher uses the tithe for is not the congregations business much less a passer-by. Matter of fact it’s a sin to question the Authority of the Church.
As most Christians submit to this abuse everyday… Don’t think for one moment, that your pastor doesn’t ever chuckle to his self, as he deposits money into his account.
Could it be that Paul wanted nobody to question what he did with all the money and as a matter of Roman record Paul / Thaddeus Alexander purchased a Roman citizenship justified by the missionary excuse of spreading the Gospel in which it is his sole responsibility? How lucrative of him as only the rich elite could afford such an item.
Can it be called to question as to why Paul’s missionary track was through some of most popular vacation spots in the known world?
Again this was only an option for the Rich Elite to enjoy… Yet, in all Paul’s epistles does he even mention the beauty of the Mediterranean landscapes but rather continued to whine about how many times he was beaten and suffered in the name of ‘Christ Jesus’ as he adventured around with the rich elite? He lived like a Millionaire of today’s standards.
A popular ministry in Atlanta, called ‘Blood and fire’, sends missionaries over to Africa. And they collect offerings and tithes for their support to go… And they live in Mansions while they are there equipped with servants and all… Eating gourmet meals and living like Kings… God is good when you live off the backs of the bruised.
21. I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.
Now this is strange… Paul is writing this as if he, were speaking directly to his audience and messengers from Qumran suddenly entered the tent.
22. Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men’s sins: keep thyself pure.
23. Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach’s sake and thine often infirmities.
24. Some men’s sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment; and some men they follow after.
25. Likewise also the good works of some are manifest beforehand; and they that are otherwise cannot be hid.
Are you saying, Judge not by appearance… Or do you mean do not judge my appearance, Paul? Maybe your robes were of fine quality or maybe you are justifying the money or in the least exemplifying yourself from your past?
1 Timothy 6
1. Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.
Well, of course you are… Subtly a little guilt is guilt none the less as guilt is not feeling but place rather as you are either guilty of a crime or you are not.
Is that why Paul justifies slavery? How can he do that that when Jesus came to set the captives free? And I hate to beat a dead horse but Jesus did teach that we are to have all things in common.
So why if Jesus was against slavery of any kind is Paul justifying it? Well if one considers that ideally it wouldn’t sell tickets to the next Gospel show in Greco-Roman culture. And Paul wanted to not only afford a citizenship in Rome but he didn’t want to miss out on all that tithe and offering money.
Rather Jesus would tell the masters to drop the title and become a servant to their servants. That in the Gospel, even Jesus taught as he, himself and a Literal King washed the feet of his disciples.
2. And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort.
“…partakers of the benefit…”? Benefit of what and who Paul, their master’s use of them as slaves?
How does condoning that kind of mentality become a glorification of God… what kind of god, a god of bondage, like the Devil?
Oh whatever Paul… Teach and exhort slavery, this is exactly why slavery has been justified for so long and one of the defenses the South used against the North for the justification for slavery.
“The in errant word of God says through Paul, that Slavery is not only Lawful its God’s will…”
3. If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;
So if any man teach freedom rather than bondage and slavery then his words are not wholesome, and the will of Jesus? Surely any man who disagrees with Paul and slavery they lack godliness?
4. He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,
So, someone who wants to liberate people, like Jesus, from oppressive leaders and are not only defying Paul, but also God. So to question our leaders is wrong causing strife, envy, railings and evil surmisings?
Thank God this is a lie. The Law was and is to be applied to our leaders, as especially we in America do not have live under such oppressive and ignorant rules… Thank God.
5. Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.
Now a liberator like Jesus is Perverse, corrupt of mind and destitute of truth…
“…supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.”
6. But godliness with contentment is great gain.
Oh so do not question Paul, his use of money and private activities with young boys!
7. For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out.
Now he justifies the rich elite, their use of slavery and dominance over woman. Because, you were born naked, and you die naked doesn’t change that the Rich are responsible and accountable for the Poor.
8. And having food and raiment let us be therewith content.
So Paul, tell me when you took up the tithe and offerings from the poor and needy did you think this up? Anything to shut up the mouths of the weak…
9. But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.
Is this a confession Paul because you’re surely not poor?
10. For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
Anything to convince if not frighten the poor so that do not want the hard and dangerous responsibility of tending to all that money, you’ve accumulated.
11. But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness.
Oh dig in, accept your plight and place in life… Besides Jesus will make it better later so just accept the things as they are… Like do not resist the Authority and do not demand equality, liberty or freedom.
12. Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.
Because you know fighting the good fight is like living as an apathetic weak woman that doesn’t talk back and like the slaves that should tuck their tails, neutering themselves and their minds?
13. I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession;
What, are you namedropping now and bragging about your birthright and power?
14. That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:
15. Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
16. Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.
Here Paul again praises the Hidden God, even by name? So not only has he illegitimated Jesus, his family, Royal Priesthood and his liberating work but also out right commits Idolatry!
But don’t question him as you have no right and anybody who opposes this ideal, are not only godless but Of Satan.
17. Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy;
18. That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate;
Yeah go ahead and butter them up Timothy! Because, you do not want the rich elite to forget, or choose not to pay the Tithe and offerings, do you? Besides, Paul will be with you soon to count the money in the coffers.
19. Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.
Oh so now Paul is selling a plots of land in Heaven?
20. O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
Do not listen to the Essenes or the Egyptian Theraputate (The Doctors and Scientist of Qumran) who only speak vain babblings?
As many Christian easily shrug off this subject and blindly go as sheep led to the slaughter. Any one speaking reason or logic, are only ‘vain babblers’ and of Satan?
Do not question, and do not think for yourself… and surely do not be creative.
21. Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
So thinking for your self, questioning the Authority, being creative or promoting equality among the sexes, stations, classes resulting in liberty and freedom is erring from the faith?
Please…
What utter nonsense.
Why should we ever let a suspected pedophile be leader of the church much less our, family.
jAsOn said
Thomas,
Lets get one thing straight, when you pit the words of Jesus against the words of Paul, you are actually pitting the words which another Apostle recorded against the words of Paul, so the entire argument from your perspective should be the words of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John against the words of Paul, another way to say it is this, you are pitting the words of one professing Apostle against the words of other professing Apostles.
1. Jesus died and was raised before this event happened to Paul.
2. No Christian claims that “Christ” is a surname, it means the anointed one, and was the title given to Him (by even the gospel writers) as a fulfillment of the coming Messiah from the OT.
3. No other doctrine?!?! What do you think spurred the idolatry of the Corinthians, the worship of Caesar, etc?
4. Because of the emphasis of the OT on the children of Abraham, which in Christ’s and Paul’s day caused some Jews to consider themselves righteous before God solely based on ancestry, others of them made an idol out of the genealogies and their overemphasis confused the gospel.
That’s all I have time to answer right now.
jAsOn said
Thomas,
It is difficult to imagine how Timothy or anyone in the assemblies to whom Paul’s letter was written, and by whom it was read (probably in one sitting) would ever have come to the same conclusions that you have about what Paul has written. We have to remember that the Bible is a collection of books, letters, etc, and must be read as such, taking into account the genre of the specific literature at hand. This is a letter, and should be read as letters are read…you are not doing this. This has HISTORICALLY been regarded as “literal” interpretation, that we read the Bible as literature. Granted, the Bible is VASTLY different than any other literature due to its being expiated by God.
4. You completely miss the point of Paul’s statement; his comment on genealogies was not against their inclusion and validity in the historical narrative of scripture, but he uses hyperbole (endless) to prove that the overemphasis of some is not edifying, quite similar to your mistaken notions of scripture…the scriptures you criticize are no less scriptures because of your critique, but your invalid use of them is destructive, and causes endless questions!
5. Ends and means…don’t you see the difference, the end of the commandments of God is charity, etc.; you must come to the scriptures void of your contempt for them! And you cannot do that except by the Holy Spirit of God.
6. NO is the answer to your question, it has absolutely nothing to do with that. If you smell jealousy, it is not because you got it out of Paul’s words, but because you read it into them.
Btw, I suggest you start using a different English translation because you obviously can’t read the original languages (many of us can’t) and the translation you are using (KJV?) is only helping to confuse your understanding.
More later…
jAsOn said
Thomas,
Here is the rendering of vs. 4 & 5 in the ESV, 4 “nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith. 5 The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.”
Paul is clearly arguing that Timothy care for the sheep over which he see, by making sure they are not DEVOTED TO” myths and genealogies and the CHARGE made by Paul and the other Apostles represented by Paul in this pastoral letter was to love, which comes from, “a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.” This in no way contradicts the words of Jesus recorded by other Apostles.
I and others have attempted to directly address many of your claims but you have done very little of that, I for one would appreciate your attempt at the same, from this or from earlier comments we have made in this tread.
7 “desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions.”
This is a continuation of Paul’s description of those whom he urged Timothy to charge them not to teach different doctrine, or devote themselves to myths and genealogies. If, as you suppose, the “certain persons” to whom Paul addresses his comments are the Levitical Priests, we know that Christ Himself had very harsh words for the priest, the scribes, and the Pharisees; this is no different, and paul is simply reiterating similar charges.
8 “Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9 understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, 11in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.,”
We know from elsewhere in the NT that the Law was meant to be a schoolmaster, and that Christ fulfilled all righteousness in the Law by living a perfect life, He did not come to destroy it, but to fulfill it. Notice also that the NT again and again shows Christ as having fulfilled the symbols and types that were presented in the Law, like the ritual sacrifices, the Sabbaths, and New Moon, even the temple itself and the promises of the land, etc were fulfilled in Christ, so we can clearly see that the NT witnesses to the completion of all those things in Christ, therefore, when Paul says that the Law is good, he is right, and he goes on further to say that it is good when it is used rightly, not when it is used to devote oneself to genealogies or a different doctrine than that of Christ, not that the Law itself is bad, but that the improper use of it is.
Frankly Thomas, I don’t see how any literate person can look at the way you are reading this text and agree; I firmly believe that you would never pick up any other historical document and obscure it this way, I don’t even thin you read the gospels this way, yet, since this is Paul’s writing, you somehow feel at liberty to blind and deaf to the gospel.
Paul is in no way contradicting the intent of Jesus or the other apostles. You allude to Acts 2:43 “And awe came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were being done through the apostles. 44 And all who believed were together and had all things in common. 45And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need.”
You also use the phrase “lord it over one another”, which would be a direct reference to a command in Paul’s words!!! 2 Cor. 1:23 “But I call God to witness against me—it was to spare you that I refrained from coming again to Corinth. 24 Not that we lord it over your faith, but we work with you for your joy, for you stand firm in your faith.
Note that it is “all those who believed” who “had all things in common”. Furthermore, Paul’s point is not to make a hierarchy of sins and sinners (elsewhere he actually would put himself at the bottom of such lists) the point is that for those who are in Christ (those who have their ears and eyes opened to the Moral Law of God) the Law is not made, the Law is not their slave master, because they have been freed from trying to keep it for righteousness, but those who are still in sin, in Adam, and have not been born of God, the Law to they is death; it remains a slave master driving them with a whip to try to obey its stipulations in their own strength for salvation, and it was never intended to do so. The Law can NEVER provide the power to obey it, it is an accuser, but the good news is that Christ obeyed all its stipulations for all those who believe; the gospel has the power to free us from the slavery of self-righteousness! I ask you Thomas, have you been freed?
I see that you deny any teaching of original sin, passed down to Adam’s posterity (a doctrine certainly not relegated to Paul’s writings alone) and
You said, “Faith is literally letting all things go and take no thought for tomorrow…”
The Bible knows of no such definition of the word faith, faith is in an object, we are not saved by faith in faith, but by a faith that is in an object, and that object is the Lord Jesus Christ, so for OT saints, they were saved by grace through faith in the coming messiah, and the NT saints are saved by grace through faith in the Messiah who has come!
Nick said
We have been arguing whether Paul had the right to proclaim himself an Apostle of Jesus but the in-errant word of God also declares in Hebrews that Jesus was the ‘Melchi-Zedek’…
Who was Jesus and what was his faith?
Before we can answer that question we have to ask…
Who was Melchizedek?
Q: Here’s a question for you: who was Melchizedek, exactly? He’s mentioned about ten times in three books of the Bible (Genesis 14:17-20; Psalm 110:4; Hebrews 5:6,10; 6:20; 7:1,10,11,15,17), but not much is said except for his being a high-priest of God, and Jesus was ordained as a High-Priest of the Melchizedek Order.
A: The bottom line is that no one knows for sure. He is a very strange figure who kind of pops up and then disappears. From Genesis 14:17-20, we know that he is a priest and a king (like Jesus). His name means “king of righteousness” and he is the king of Jerusalem (so all of this prefigures Christ). He brings bread and wine to Abraham (a figure of the Lord’s supper?). Finally he receives tithes from Abraham indicating that he is greater than Abraham (see Hebrews 7:4).
So who was Melchizedek? Here are the three options that I know of:
1.
Melchizedek is a pagan priest who recognizes God’s blessing on Abraham. Although Genesis 14 calls Melchizedek a “priest of God Most High,” the titles “most high,” “lord of heaven” and “creator of earth” (see Genesis 14:18-20) were frequently applied to the chief Canaanite deity in ancient times. The problem with this view is why would Abraham give a tithe (a tenth of the spoils) to a pagan?
2.
Melchizedek is a priest of the true God. If you count the years it has not been all that long since the time of Noah. Since Noah’s time, almost all of human kind has corrupted the worship and knowledge of the God, but Melchizedek may be an exception. He is a priest who worships the true God. Abraham recognizes this and gives Melchizedek a tithe.
3.
Melchizedek is a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ. There are instances in the Old Testament where God seems to appear in human form (Genesis 18 and Daniel 8:15-16 for example). Some of the “angel of the Lord” appearances seem to fall into this category too. Melchizedek could be Christ. It would not surprise me to get to heaven and find that there had been an untold story of Christ walking through history appearing in various forms and guiding His people.
So, to understand the perspective I have added a study of this material by my friend, a Pagan High Priest. I know this is a Christian venue but this must be considered because it has academic validity and if we are understand whether Paul correctly represented Jesus, we must know what it means when the scripture say’s that Jesus is the Melchizedek.
Pagan Priesthood and the Mystery of Melchizedek
Chapter Five of The Crafted Cup
c The Rev. Shadwynn, O.A.G.
Every Sunday and, indeed, every day throughout the world, a strange and obscure personage is ritually remembered at the altars of the Catholic faithful:
Father, we celebrate the memory of your Son. We, your people and your ministers, recall his passion, his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into glory; and from the many gifts you have given us we offer to you, God of glory and majesty, this holy and perfect sacrifice: the bread of life and the cup of eternal salvation. Look with favor on these offerings and accept them as once you accepted the gifts of your servant Abel, the sacrifice of Abraham, our father in faith, and the bread and wine offered by your priest Melchizedek. 1
For the most part, even Catholics, by and large, have little knowledge as to the identity of the Biblical context of the story, which to some degree, gives a brief and tantalizing glimpse into the life of Melchizedek.
Who was he? The well-informed among the pious will answer, “He was a priest of the Most High God.” What did he do? “He offered bread and wine to Abraham.” Other than this bare shred of information regarding a single incident in the life of this mysterious man, we are left with a historical and Biblical blank. What does it matter? For Christians, his identity carries with it important implications which affect one of the very foundational tenets of their faith. For Pagans, Wiccans, and those of us in the Ordo Arcanorum Gradalis in particular, the political and priestly position, the religion, and the later theological exaltation of Melchizedek at the hands of Jewish and Christian writers, represents the key by which the Pagan priesthood can once again assert its authority over the sometimes intolerant and prejudicial claims of the ecclesiastical establishment of the Church.
The earliest and only information regarding this ancient figure from an almost forgotten past is contained in Genesis, the very first book of the Bible. Biblical scholars have long recognized the fact that Genesis, as well as the rest of the Pentateuch, is a compilation from at least two divergent sources of oral and written tradition, known respectively as “J” and “P”; “J” standing for the Yahwist narrative and “P” designating the Priestly source. But fragmentarily sandwiched in between these diverse streams of literary source material are occasional stories which have embeded themselves here and there in the manuscripts, but whose origins are distinctly more ancient than those of “J” and “P”, and originating from often more obscure and independent sources in Hebrew antiquity. Genesis 14:17-20 is a vivid case in point:
When Abram (Abraham) came back after the defeat of Chedor-laomer and the kings who had been on his side, the king of Sodom came to meet him in the Valley of Shaveh (that is, the Valley of the King). Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought bread and wine; he was a priest of God Most High. He pronounced this blessing: “Blessed be Abram by God Most High, creator of heaven and earth, and blessed be God Most High for handing over your enemies to you.” And Abram gave him a tithe of everything.2
On the basis of this extremely brief passage, some of the most mistaken assumptions in Judeo-Christian theology have been made which have affected the traditional perceptions of the nature and superiority of Christ and the Christian priesthood. To begin with, later Jewish commentators unwittingly initiated what would subsequently become a “domino effect” of seemingly legitimate conclusions based upon inaccurate linguistic interpretations and a faulty historical exegesis of the above scriptural text.
Outside of Genesis, reference to Melchizedek is made only one other time in the entire canon of the Hebrew scripture: Psalm 110:4, “Yahweh has sworn an oath which he will never retract, ‘You are a priest of the order of Melchizedek, and for ever.’”3 Here we see that by the time of the composition of this psalm (1000 BCE-600 BCE?), the writer, speaking for Yahweh, was no longer aware of the true identity of Melchizedek. He was obviously under the impression that this priest-king who blessed the patriarch of the Hebrew nation was a member of the priesthood which from the dim mists of antiquity had been in the service Israel’s god Yahweh. It is this colossal misidentification of Melchizedek which later became the fallacious cornerstone for the Christian teachings regarding Eucharistic archetypes and the doctrine of the superiority of the priesthood of the Church over the Levitical priesthood of the Jewish people:
You remember that Melchizedek, king of Salem, a priest of God Most High, went to meet Abraham who was on his way back after defeating the kings, and blessed him; and also that it was to him that Abraham gave a tenth of all that he had. By the interpretation of his name, he is, first, “king of righteousness” and also king of Salem, that is “king of peace”; he has no father, no mother or ancestry, and his life has no beginning or ending; he is like unto the Son of God. He remains a priest forever. Now think how great this man must have been, if the patriarch Abraham paid him a tenth of the treasure he had captured … this man (Melchizedek), who was not of the same descent (as the Levitical Jewish priesthood), took his tenth from Abraham, and he gave his blessing to the holder of the promises (Abraham). Now it is indisputable that a blessing is given by a superior to an inferior … It could be said that Levi himself (the ancestor of the tribe which composed the Jewish priesthood), who receives tithes (through the priesthood of his descendents), actually paid them, in the person of Abraham, because he was still in the loins of his ancestor (Abraham) when Melchizedek came to meet him. 4
This passage from the New Testament Epistle to the Hebrews goes on to designate Christ as the next in line to inherit the prerogatives of Melchizedek’s superior priesthood by virtue of applying to Him the previous quoted prophecy of Psalm 110:4, “You are a priest of the order of Melchizedek, and for ever.”
The writer of this early scripture to Hebrew Christians was “making as much hay” as possible from the legendary narratives of Genesis as well as the involved sacrificial instructions contained in the Levitical regulations of the Jewish priesthood as a foreshadowing of the atoning sacrifice of the Christ. Secondarily paramount was the writer’s intention to show the superiority of the Christian priesthood of apostles and prophets (having received their authority from Christ Himself, the very embodiment and fulfillment of Melchizedek’s priesthood) over the “superceded” priesthood of the Jewish temple.
Part of the writer’s argument hinged on the identity of Melchizedek. Admittedly, he or she knew the Old Testament extremely well, and was quite adept in bringing forth an interpretation of the scriptures which fit into the mold of his/her spiritual preconceptions. As seen from the above passage, Melchizedek is described in no uncertain terms as being like the Son of God, the original King of Peace, and even by implication, a deathless and eternal being. No doubt the author saw in Melchizedek the cast shadow which prophetically pointed to the substantive continuation of his priesthood in Jesus, the new Priest-King Messiah. It is possible the writer even conceived of Melchizedek as a literal manifestation of the pre-incarnate Christ or primordial Logos. In fact, latching on to this idea, there were those in the later Church who went so far as to assert that Melchizedek was a greater manifestation of the Logos than was Jesus!5
Many shades of interpretation colored these verses, depending on who was expounding from this epistle. But one thing is certain: the argument of the early Christians was clear enough. The fact that Abraham, in whose loins were the later progeny of the Hebrew people, paid voluntary tithes to this mysterious priest-king of ancient Salem (Jerusalem) was proof that the messianic priesthood of Christ, being after the Order of Melchizedek, was superior to the later priesthood of the Jews, who through Abraham their supreme patriarch, were paying tithes to Melchizedek! Or so ran the argument throughout the rest of the seventh chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews.
However, upon closer examination of these evolutionary interpretations of Genesis 14, we will discover that, far from validating the ecclesiastical preeminence of the Christian clergy, this Biblical passage actually strengthens the historical and sacramental superiority of the Pagan priesthood in relation to both church and synagogue. The thrust of this chapter is not, however, an attempt to establish one religion as being better than another. It is, rather, an effort to apply the logic used by early Christian interpreters drawn out to its ultimate conclusions when based on the historical facts surrounding the mystery of Melchizedek instead of the unfounded assumptions of the early Church fathers.
Ironically, the first mistake was made originally by the Hebrew commentators themselves with regard to the meaning of certain pivotal words in the original text itself. In Genesis 14:18, Melchizedek is described as being a priest of “God Most High.” While technically speaking, this rendition of the words el ‘elyon is not a mistranslation, it is most definitely reflective of the translators’ historical ignorance relative to the contemporary culture of which Melchizedek was a part. Scholars have now learned that Melchizedek was a Canaanite priest-king who reigned over the city of Jerusalem long before it ever came under the control and supremacy of the Hebrews. The words el ‘elyon , while technically permitting the translation of “God Most High” according to later Hebrew usage, were originally a designation of either one or possibly two Canaanite deities, apparently among the most exalted gods of the Canaanite pantheon! What has become abundantly clear to discerning Biblical scholars is that Melchizedek was a Pagan priest, who, after the great battle between the kings, blessed Abraham, the father and patriarch of the Hebrew people, in the name of the Canaanite god(s) El ‘Elyon for his victory over their common city-state enemies! Melchizedek was neither a priest nor a worshipper of the god of Abraham, known to later generations as Yahweh. Instead, he worshipped and served the god(s) of his own Pagan, Canaanite religion:
Finally, the notice about Melchizedek merits a measure of confidence in its own right. He Abraham, on the other hand, refers to Yahweh, using the Canaanite name or names in suitable apposition, which is no less appropriate in his particular case …The narrative itself has all the ingredients of historicity …Now that this chapter (Genesis 14) is amply attested as a source unto itself, it is not only unnecessary but fallacious to harmonize its contents with other portions of the OT (Old Testament). As a Canaanite priest, Melchizedek would invoke his deity or deities by name; and this is what the above translation has sought to reproduce. Abraham, on the other hand, would just as naturally turn to Yahweh, especially in an oath …6
We cannot…be certain about Melchizedek’s historical context, but it is likely that his kingdom of “Salem” was Jerusalem, and that the “God Most High”" whom he served was the Canaanite god El-Elyon …7
Melchizedek is an old Canaanite name meaning “My King Is (the god) Sedek” or “My King Is Righteousness” (the meaning of the similar Hebrew cognate). Salem, of which he is said to be king, is very probably Jerusalem … The god whom Melchizedek serves as priest is “El ‘Elyon,” again a name of Canaanite origin, probably designating the high god of their panteon … For Abraham to recognize the authority of a Canaanite priest-king is startling and has no parallel in biblical literature.8
As just stated above, the very name itself–Melchizedek–literally means from the Canaanite usage, “My King is (the god) Sedek.” So this priest-king of early Salem (later Jerusalem) was even dedicated by his own name to yet another Canaanite deity!
The theological implications of these facts are nothing short of staggering. The later Hebrews saw in Melchizedek the archetype of the perfect priest of their Lord, Yahweh. They had totally lost sight of his actual identity as a Pagan priest of the very Canaanite peoples which the invading Israelites under Moses and Joshua had sworn to destroy due to the “abominations” of their Pagan religion (Deuteronomy 7:1-6)!
The Christians, in their turn, continued to compound this same scriptural misinterpretation by making Melchizedek either a pre-incarnate manifestation of the Christ, or else a foreshadowing type of the Messiah who would continue his ancient priesthood through the apostolic succession of the Church. But when we understand the historical facts surrounding the original events described in Genesis 14, we see that not only are the Jewish and Christian theologies relating to Melchizedek totally fallacious in their basic assumptions, but they play perfectly into the hands of those of us who are instrumental in the contemporary re-establishment of the Pagan priesthood.
If we use, in our turn, the same interpretive approach as did the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, we will easily come to some most astounding conclusions. To being with, Melchizedek was a Pagan priest. He did not serve the god of Abraham, but rather his own Canaanite deity(ies), El ‘Elyon. Abraham paid his tithes to the chief priest of a Pagan religion, so, if like the early Christian interpreters, we see Abraham as symbolically containing in his loins the later spiritual progeny of the Jewish priesthood, and succeeding them (in Christian teaching), the priesthood of the Church, then we can just as consistently argue that in paying his tithes to Melchizedek, Abraham and through him all the later generations of Jewish and Christian clergy were acknowledging the superiority of Melchizedek’s priesthood, which, as has been clearly established, as PAGAN! Furthermore, Jesus Christ is said by the New Testament writers to be an eternal High Priest of the Order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 7:17, 24). If we use the same kind of interpretive analysis, this makes Christ the successor and embodiment of an ancient and venerable Pagan priesthood! Therefore, it can be said that modern Pagans have more of a legitimate claim upon the deified priest-king Christ than does the Christian Church itself, for His priesthood is derived, not from the Jewish Temple, but from the Pagan priest-king Melchizedek!
Neither should it be forgotten that Melchizedek is seen as the great archetype of the divine origination of the Eucharist, giving as he did bread and wine to Abraham. For this reason, as quoted at the beginning of this chapter, Melchizedek is memorialized daily in the traditional Canon of the Roman Catholic Mass. Now again, when we use the same interpretive logic as did the early Church, we can confidently assert, in light of the historical facts, that the very elements of sacred bread and wine–the Eucharist in the making–were a gift to Abraham and his spiritual descendents (i.e., the Christian priesthood of apostolic succession) from one of the most venerable Hierophants of ancient Paganism: Melchizedek, priest of El ‘Elyon! “Melchizedek is hermetically considered to be an inner master because he had neither ‘beginning of days nor end of life’ His motif is woven into the Grail legends. He is a strong and high contact which will bring the reader into the presence of eternal things.9 For those of us in the Ordo Arcanorum Gradalis, for whom the Eucharistic mystery of the Grail Mass is of central importance within the confines of our tradition, this all the more reinforces our long-standing belief that, far from being alien to the Pagan way, Eucharistic worship is indeed inextricably bound into the heart of Pagan antiquity. It was not stolen from the Church. Actually, it was the Church, which, through Abraham, received it as a gift from the chief priest of Canaanite Paganism!
Contemporary Pagans, Wiccans, and other esoterically-minded occultists need to realize that it often pays off theologically to closely examine the teachings, claims, and dogmas of the Church, for very often we will find that they have built upon the foundation of the pre-Christian Pagan mysteries whose original meaning has been distorted for the purposes of furthering certain claims of Christian exclusivity and theological intolerance. But it is in the process of this kind of investigation that we occasionally come across “a pearl of great price” like Melchizedek, a man whose mysterious obscurity has long held the key for authenticating the spiritual precedence and antiquity of the Pagan priesthood over the later Judeo-Christian claims of religious and ecclesiastical superiority.
This knowledge is important for us because it reinforces the realization that through Melchizedek, Pagan, Jewish, and Christian clergy stand on an equally valid footing derived from the same source of blessing and empowerment. For this reason (as well as a host of others), it is needful for those who function as priest/esses of covens, groves, and chapels of the Pagan way to ponder deeply upon their calling as ministers of the sacred.
During much of the recent upsurge of the Wiccan and Neo-Pagan movements, there was often what can only be described as a much too cavalier and/or casual attitude towards being a high priest or high priestess. For some it was the means of obtaining power over a small group for immature ego gratification. Titles of priesthood among modern Neo-Pagans have often been “a dime a dozen.” In some groups, any pretense of priesthood has degenerated into a travesty; the means of initiation often depending upon who slept with who. As one Grailpriest reflected:
All too often in American Neo-Paganism, the steps leading to office and title can be all too easy (“I read Starhawk, so I’m a High Priest!”), all too immature (“Okay, I slept with you, where’s my 2nd degree?”), or irrelevant (“The initiate shows proper magical attitude by washing the High Priest’s car.”). The steps to title and office must be challenging, mature and relevant. Plus they must refer back to a tradition, to connect us with our past.10
In the past lies our religious and historical authentication; in the future lies the fulfillment of our priestly potential, if we learn a lesson from the example of Melchizedek. As contemporary Paganism comes of age, there is dawning upon many in the positions of leadership a corresponding yearning for more serious structuring of both practical and theoretical training for those who feel compelled to follow the call of service and responsibility as a member of the ranks of Pagan clergy. This is a necessary imperative in the right direction if we are to reflect in our society at large a reputation as representative os serious theological substance and religious relevance. Historically, members of any priesthood have been expected to function as intercessors for their people before the gods, to minister to the spiritual needs of their people, and to stand courageously in resolute defense of their deities, traditions and sacred truths. In the Ordo Arcanorum Gradalis we also take seriously our priestly stewardship as the dispensers of sacramental grace through the celebration of the Grail Mass. If we want the public at large to view the priesthoods of modern Paganism with the same sense of validity as they do both Jewish and Christian clergy, we must be able to expound not only the realities of our links with the revered faiths of ancient antiquity, but also upon the seriousness with which we take our vows of ordination in order to serve the spiritual needs of our people and the ecological imperatives of our planet. It is a most astounding commentary for our consideration that Melchizedek as a Pagan priest-king was so respected even by those–like Abraham–who were of other religious faiths, that they willingly received upon themselves and their posterity the blessing which he bestowed. Let us pray to the Goddess that the Pagan priesthood can become worthy of being held in such high esteem by Jews, Christians, and all other faiths within our pluralistic society, that they will willingly listen to the wisdom of our counsel and respect the integrity of our convictions.
Footnotes
1 Excerpts from the English translation of The Roman Missal c1973, International Committee on English in the Liturgy, Inc. All rights reserved.
2 Genesis 14:17-20, The Jerusalem Bible. (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1966).
3 Psalms 110:4, The Jerusalem Bible.
4 Hebrews 7:1-4, 6-7, 9-10, The Jerusalem Bible. (Emphasis Shadwynn’s.)
5 The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Ed. by F.L Cross. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1974), p. 899.
6 The Anchor Bible: Genesis. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary by Ephraim A. Speiser. (New York, NY:Doubleday & Company, 1981), pp. 109, 104 (Emphasis Shadwynn’s.).
7 Richard Coggins, Who’s Who in the Bible. (London: B.T. Barsford Ltd., 1981), p. 100. (Emphasis Shadwynn’s.)
8 From “Melchizedek” in Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th edition (1985), 7:1029. (Emphasis Shadwynn’s.)
9 Caitlin and John Matthews, The Western Way, Volume II–The Hermetic Tradition. (London: Arkana, 1986), p. 178.
10 William Calhoun, “Vigil and Question,” Hallows, Fall 1990 (Glen Allen, VA), p.11.
jAsOn said
Nick,
I wish that you and Thomas could stop submitting new material long enough to answer/cross-examine a rebuttal to previous material you have offered.
This current method doesn’t produce dialogue; it is just multiple competing monologues. Cross-examination is where we will weed out contradictions and inconsistencies, and is where the truth will be exposed.
Let’s remember that Melchizedek was referred to as a priest of the most High God, which in the context of that passage in Genesis would have meant no other than the God, creator of all heaven and Earth who descended as Christ and died as the perfect sacrifice and rose again to triumph over death.
You said, “the in-errant word of God also declares in Hebrews that Jesus was the ‘Melchi-Zedek’…”
When in fact, the book of Hebrews doesn’t say that, here is the text, Heb. 5:5 So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him,
“You are my Son,
today I have begotten you”;
6 as he says also in another place,
“You are a priest forever,
after the order of Melchizedek.”
7 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. 8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered. 9 And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, 10 being designated by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek.”
And,
Heb 6:20 “where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf, having become a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.”
And
Heb. 7:1 “For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, 2 and to him Abraham apportioned a tenth part of everything. He is first, by translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then he is also king of Salem, that is, king of peace. 3 He is without father or mother or genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever.”
And,
Heb. 7:7 It is beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior. 8 In the one case tithes are received by mortal men, but in the other case, by one of whom it is testified that he lives. 9 One might even say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, 10 for he was still in the loins of his ancestor when Melchizedek met him. 11 Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron? 12 For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well. 13 For the one of whom these things are spoken belonged to another tribe, from which no one has ever served at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. 15 This becomes even more evident when another priest arises in the likeness of Melchizedek, 16 who has become a priest, not on the basis of a legal requirement concerning bodily descent, but by the power of an indestructible life. 17 For it is witnessed of him,”
“You are a priest forever,
after the order of Melchizedek.”
So we see very clearly, the author of Hebrews never says that Jesus, “the Melchizedek”, which may have been a typo on your part Nick, but the important distinction is that the author of the book of Hebrews was intending to use the Melchizedek reference to show that Christ’s priesthood did do exactly what you friend below denies.
Btw, it seems that Thomas attacks Paul’s writings, but agrees with the gospel writers, but you are attacking the validity of the OT writers as well, is this an accurate assessment?
Shadwynn said,
“Here we see that by the time of the composition of this psalm (1000 BCE-600 BCE?), the writer, speaking for Yahweh, was no longer aware of the true identity of Melchizedek. He was obviously under the impression that this priest-king who blessed the patriarch of the Hebrew nation was a member of the priesthood which from the dim mists of antiquity had been in the service Israel’s god Yahweh. It is this colossal misidentification of Melchizedek which later became the fallacious cornerstone for the Christian teachings regarding Eucharistic archetypes and the doctrine of the superiority of the priesthood of the Church over the Levitical priesthood of the Jewish people:”
Here is the quotation from the Psalm,
110: 3 Your people will offer themselves freely on the day of your power, in holy garments; from the womb of the morning, the dew of your youth will be yours. 4 The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind, “You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.” 5 The Lord is at your right hand; he will shatter kings on the day of his wrath.
Shadwynn wildly claims that the Psalmist is no longer aware of Melchizedek’s identity which he does not provide a shred of credible evidence, but just makes an argument from antiquity over majority—regarding the oral sources for the life of Melchizedek. As I have also shown, it is absurd to think that Melchizedek was not a servant of the God of Abraham.
You and Shadwynn seam to think that the only reason we should believe that Jesus was the messiah or the Christ is because of the Psalmists and the NT writers association of Jesus’ to Melchizedek, is this correct? This is plainly not the only reason to consider Christ the Lord of Lords, King of Kings, and yes, even the Priest of priests, the NT is filled with claims that Jesus fulfilled those OT prophesies of such a person, and Christ Himself claimed to be God, the Most High God in fact. I will read the rest later and comment.
Joe said
I’m still trying to figure out how Thomas and Nick plan to get into Heaven since they believe Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and that Jesus didn’t actually die on the cross. Forgot which one of you posted this, but it sure raises more questions.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/biblianazar/esp_biblianazar_1.htm#Part%201
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Hey Joe,
Heaven and Hell are only states of being that are evident by manifestation.
If we fill our minds, hearts surroundings with negative images, information and emotions what will we manifest in our life?
This is true to the final Judgement.
If are full of disgusting things then surely your eternity well reflect those things as well beautiful things.
Salvation is knowing we have the power to change ourselves.
The freedom to chose our path, our destiny and create our eteranl abode.
The Our Father prayer was actually transcribed from Sumerian Text
of which actully began, “Oh Anu who are in Heaven”
I have below tied the basic cross meanings in the Our Father Prayer something a little more balanced in meaning.
Our Father(ANU) who are in Heaven
Hallowed be your name(Bloodline)
Your Kin(g)dom come
Your will (Be fruitful and multiply) be done
On Earth as it is Heaven (As a above so below)
Give us this day
Our daily bread (Living bread)
Forgive us of our Separations,
As we forgive those,
who bring Separation against us.
Lead us not into Temptation,
But deliver us from Evil(DEATH).
What we know is Heaven and Earth a simular places that the will of God is that both become Identical.
Jesus say’s Heaven and Earth Will Pass away but my word will never pass away…
Refering to the same word that became flesh and dwealt among us.
So Jesus’ DNA will out live Heaven and Earth?
No, two perspectives of the same reference are one in the same.
OUr perspective of these places change not only our perspective but actually transform Heaven and Earth into someting new.
A New Heavens and New Earth of which the only people that can survive this transformation are actually(Becasue they are eaternal beitg they possess the ‘Word’ in them) etarnal and can be ‘Born Again’.
Matter O’fact if you are not ‘Born Again’ you cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Meaning you must be reincarnated becasue of the Word (DNA) of God in You.
We are already in Heaven but look what we have done to it…
Look around and see what we have done a beautiful paradise… We Steal from other Countries, like their OIL and we Kill them when we they resist; we do not care as we will destroy them, their homes and their posterity.
We Ameirca come to Steal, Kill and Destroy.
Our Sin is evident before us… God will not Judge the weak, drug addicts, sex addicts and dirtiest among us. When most of the isn is propegated from the top. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit as well a bady tree cannot produce good fruit.
Americans go to Church while we condone murder, robbery with no respect of family.
The reason America is lost… Is becasue we have no root to keep us.. We are lost in the briars of Political correctness, watered by the bribery and pay off to Rich Elite.
If this is Heaven, don’t you think we should be held accountable to clean up the mess? But you see, Christians tend to shrug it off assuming Jesus will take care of it all… Jesus never taught to be apathetic nor would he condone passing the buck of responsibility.
If the Church does not agree with that then why do we not just hand out hundred dollar bills on the streets to the bums?
People want to see a person pay his due? Although Jesus never gives this requirment we know it to be wise. So if when it comes to money we require such responsibility of one another but do not hold the Authority to the same Ideals what good is it?
Such Hypocrisy.
It is sad but true, you cannot inherit the Heaven you wish to have if you do not take care of the Earth you already have.
Especially if they are the same place.
Think about that as women that lack in IQ or are so impoverished and lonely… Add three children and you have a very desperate woman. She cannot work hard enough to take care of her childrt then although if she prostitute herself she can make six figures… Thats gross and don’t think anyone of us are off the hook because Faith without works is Dead. We have to be out in the streets fighting for the Human Rights of People notjust here in AMERICA but the entire Earth.
Why will the Anti Christ have power? Becasue the christians will apathetically award it to Evil and have already. You know becasue I’m busy working,paying bills you know… I mean I do not like George Bush but what can I do?
There are no excuses before the Throne of God. If you skip work for Jesus we would see our corrupt Governement fall and WE the People can take back the Consititution.
I am afraid that Ameirca is already sold out to the most terrible Evil Greed.
And what is worse so is the Church.
Heaven requires the accountabiltity of Earth.
Joe said
Hey Thomas – What you’re saying makes sense and I agree with you on most of it. I’m curious to know out of the republican and democratic candidates for the 2008 election…..which one has the right bloodline and which one do you think will keep us on the path to a New World Order and North American Union? I’m having trouble understanding your answer concerning heaven. Is it really true that you don’t believe in the Crucifixion and Resurrection?
jAsOn said
Thomas,
What is the source text of the supposed “Sumerian” prayer from which Christ stole to create the “Disciples” prayer?
I reentered the discussion with you because, about 15 posts ago, you seemed to be trying to form some rational arguments, but you still haven’t answered many of my rebutals of your arguments, why not?
F. L. A. said
AND YOU NEVER ANSWERED JOHNS QUESTIONS FROM POST #51, “KING”THOMAS.
NO DOUBT HE WILL STILL FIND ALL OF THIS VERY INTERESTING WHEN HE RETURNS FROM HIS KILLING SPREE.
WE HAVE.
Anonymous said
FLA – why do you post with all caps?
F. L. A. said
I LIKE CAPS.
IT SUITS MY FORM AND PERSONA.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
By Popular demand!
Sorry John that it took me so long
“Alright, just for arguments sake, let’s go with this.
Thomas, you stated that your family line on your fathers side was
on Royal and Public record, which somehow confirmed that you were the great, great,+1,000[?]grand nephew,son, whatever, of Jesus the Christ.Right? Where can WE go to see such Royal and Public records?”
Well you can begin with Ancestry.com or Rootsweb but ultimately you will need to find genealologist and then you need to petition for grants that will allow you to view Royal archives.
I have a couple of links I will post later…
Laurence Gardner has the bulk work published in Bloodline of the Holy Grail.
“Many Christians that I talk to don’t think that Jesus had any descendants.By himself or any of his siblings.Some that I’ve debated with don’t even think he had any blood siblings.
Seems like these records would be a really big deal in the theological community, so why haven’t we “little people” heard anything about this?”
Oh they are public knowledge it’s that most scholars do not want to upset the chruch because their funding could be cut. And live by an old Texas motto, ‘If it aint broke don’t fix it.’
The Church is the most powerful finacial entity in the United States second only to the federal reserve itself.
The bottom line is Money… If Jesus’ Faith were being expressed, Churches wouldn’t recieve the money they do and the preacher could no longer justify thier 80 thousand dollar car, 2 million dollar estate, their Italian suites and rolex watches.
“Nobody ELSE ever claimed that Joan of Arch was related to Jesus.How do you know that you weren’t tricked in some way by your sources?”
Because that would be stupid.
Tricked by whom… Don’t you think the Bible would be under scrutiny as well? Can you imagine a conspiracy to fake the genealogical records of Joan of Arch? I mean if people are going to fake something like that.. Why not just fake the Bible?(Far more fun in tha, don’t you think?)
What I’m saying if the records of Joan of arch are wrong… The whole damn bible is based on the same wrong information.
“What do vampires have to do with any of this?”
That is multi-part answer to a simple question. First, Vampires are not blood sucking demons who cannot be in the daylight. Those are fictitious creations that the catholic Church propagated against certain bloodlines, Namely, Vladd ‘the Imapaler’ Tepes son of Dracul.
Origins of Vampirism
“Are there some of those in your bloodlines,or something?”
Yes.
“I imagine it would tie in nicely with all that talk about being reborn and eternal life, and stuff.You’re standing in the sunlight on your web sight,so……….?”
If you are alive and you die and then you are raised from the dead what does that make you?
Undead.
Sunlight does make me very ill if I spend to much time in direct conctact with the suns rays. I cannot work in the sunlight or remain exposed for more than thirty minutes at a time as it becomes very painful especially, if I do not wear long sleeves.
My skin burns and I sunburn fast, I become extremely nausiated and get a terrible migraine head ache… I am very Nocturnal as all white skinned people are naturally nocturnal. That is why many fair skinned people suffer from Insomnia.
“If your claims are true, it matters not to me anyway, being a Pagan.Pagan mythology has untold numbers of tales about Demigods/goddesses and their children, so, big deal[for someone like ME anyway].It would just mess things up for Christianity.
Which leads me to ask why you came hear to this site to tell all of us about this stuff.What was your motivation?”
I will not stop until the truth be known.
“Just bragging?”
Bragging… Bragging no… I’m not bragging, I’m at war. All I want is Vindication for my family.
“Are you being stalked by a big albino monk?”
Maybe… there are stange people following me…LoL!
“Although I don’t claim to have the DNA of a deity[except perhaps in the most LIBERAL way possible]I work Magick, so I must be “divinely qualified” too!
Maybe we can swap techniques,eh?”
John I would love to hang out with you maybe you would like to attend a Pagan festival and you could meet some of my SUMERIAN friends?
HAPPY NEW YEAR… I guess? That is if you follow the solar calender.
Anonymous1 said
Oh pullleeeeeaaaaassssse. Again, just when I thought I had heard it all. Put your boots on boys!
Anonymous said
Hello Thomas – I am a direct descendent of Richard Keith of Clan Keith in Scotland. I have not been able to trace back further than the 1200’s. Keith was a son of the family of Keiths Earls Marshall of Scotland, and in proof carry in their arms the chief of Keith Marischal. I wonder if you can tell me if it would be of interest to me to investigate further. I’m curious to find out if I can trace any ancestry to the Merovingians, etc.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Keith-
I say hell yes.. although you and I as well many others are in the dilemma.. Seems that by personal research everyone finds d aead end about the same time.
Between 10-1200’s there comes a genealogical brick wall.
Usually, if you can find one relative in scotland you can petition to fly your colors so-to-speak.
Hiring a recognized or Royal appointed Genealogist is necessary at this point.
It’s not cheap.. try 5-7000 Euros.
The only alternative is do it yourself which is a tremendous amount of work (And quite franky impossible). The Mormans have the corner on the market for Genealogy even the Jews go to the Mormans for their genealogy.
Which gives the Mormans some validity becasue they have the records that even the Windsors do not have in their own family tree… Well of’Course even they paid the Latter day Saints money to get their genealogical info.
As for the Merovigian blood line that is little bit tricky.
Are you Jewish/Sicambrian Frank descent at all?
And by tradition, it can only be validated through the Matriarchal line.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
The
Main Proof Paul is a false Prophet?
He Blasphemes the Holy Spirit, The Wife of God.
Rose Of Sharon
Moderator (not Stu) said
Hello Thomas – We would really appreciate it if you would not use anymore curse words in your posts. We value your input and would rather not have to delete any comments containing profanity. Thank you – Moderator (not Stu)
jAsOn said
Thomas,
Many of your critisicms of the church fall on segments which reformed protestants wouldn’t consider to be accurate depictions of Christianisty, i.e., the “Word Of Faith” movement, via Hinn, Copeland, etc. (Please note that I didn’t say they weren’t redeemed)
I think it would benefit you to investigate the “visible church/invisible church” principle; there are many who in the end will say, “Lord, Lord, but He will say, ‘Depart from me you workers of iniquity, for I never knew you’.”
You must remember that WE ALL, every one of us are hypocrites at times, thus we sometimes misrepresent what we say we believe by acting and doing contrary.
A little graciousness would be appreciated; it seems to me that the ones who generally call “foul” first are the ones who end up casting the first stone, i.e., your continual denegration of the materially “rich”–the REJECTION of things material is not definitional to Christianity, but closer to gnosticism.
John said
Happy New Years everybody! Thankyou Thomas, that will do very well.Samhain[Holloween] is the New Year for us, but as not all of us are Wiccan/Pagan and we like to party and celebrate for any little reason at all, wishing me a happy New Years now is just fine with me, as the begining of this post makes clear.
After reading your response to my kin here, my mother wanted to say….:”And all of you thought that JOHN was weird? Now THAT’S weird! That’s scary weird!”
No offense intended from me,Thomas. She’s “normal”, not like us[ha.ha.]But I’m a very different kind of weird compared to you.
Jeff said
Thomas – I’m curious to know how you reconcile John 14:6, or do you have a different translation for that piece of Scripture too? Seems pretty clear to me and I still don’t understand how you plan to get into Heaven since Jesus is clear that the only way to the Father is through Him.
Anonymous said
Thomas – Do you have an email address you can share? I would like to email you and ask you a few questions offline concerning ancestry.com, etc. Thanks.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Moderator and and all ‘Passer bys’…
I apologize for offending some with the occasional use of profanity.
I hide nothing, I cus it up when I feel the inclination to do so, as you can see it is intergrated into my Angalish.
So again I Apologize.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Jason,
I do apologize as my life gets really hectic and seems at times I can’t keep up.
Please, could you start from the beginning and give me alist of questions in order of importance.
That way, we can work out any mis-understandings… Forgive me amidst the multitude of Books of history, religion and philosoophy from modern to ancient times and back forget… I tend to throw out information assuming my audience is well read.
I will do my best to clarify and confirm sources one by one as needed to bring everyone up to speed.
—————————————————————-
Jeff,
John 14.6
Jesus said to him, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the father except through Me.”
Jeff first tell me what you think by telling me what you are trully asking…
What is the Way?
What is the Truth?
What is the Life?
Surely I will respond to you.
Jeff said
Thomas – I’m assuming what Jesus is saying in John 14:6 is that through following Him and having a personal relationship with Him…one can spend eternity with Him in Heaven. What’s your translation?
jAsOn said
Thomas,
I looked through the posts above, and as far as I can tell, posts #95,96, and 97 contain my rebutals and objcections…as far as putting them in order of importance…I’m not sure that’s a reasonable exercise, so if you would try to address those issues I would appreciate it; we probably all know what it is like to be busy.
Mike Sears said
HRH
The answer to your 3 questions to Jeff is Jesus!
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
NEW AGE CRITIQUE
Jason,
Here is ‘in part’ some answers to the addressed questions:
“Lets get one thing straight, when you pit the words of Jesus against the words of Paul, you are actually pitting the words which another Apostle recorded against the words of Paul, so the entire argument from your perspective should be the words of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John against the words of Paul, another way to say it is this, you are pitting the words of one professing Apostle against the words of other professing Apostles.”
Simple answer:
YOu could not be an Apostle if were not related as it was and still is a hereditary appointment.
“1. Jesus died and was raised before this event happened to Paul.”
Jesus reamain among the desciples and taught them for what the bible describes as ‘40 days and 40 nights’ but this was only figure of speech purposely used to describe and unknown amount of time. And as for the Death on the cross… It took around 7-8 days on the average for a person to die from Crucifixion as most people die suphicating from preasure on the lungs. Jesus wasn’t even hanging there for an entire day before he was lowered down.
“2. No Christian claims that “Christ” is a surname, it means the anointed one, and was the title given to Him (by even the gospel writers) as a fulfillment of the coming Messiah from the OT.”
The main point was to bring to light that this wwas never a term used by Jesus or the bretheren. Jesus is not a ‘Christ’ unless you want to practise Paganism..?
“3. No other doctrine?!?! What do you think spurred the idolatry of the Corinthians, the worship of Caesar, etc?”
Until you are willing to step outside the box you never see another doctrine but the one so ingrained into your psyche from birth.
“4. Because of the emphasis of the OT on the children of Abraham, which in Christ’s and Paul’s day caused some Jews to consider themselves righteous before God solely based on ancestry, others of them made an idol out of the genealogies and their overemphasis confused the gospel.”
This why you need to understand the New Testement written by the Underground stream and sanctiond my King James to render the 1611 KJV of the Bible was written in a CODE.
I cannot teach you the code… Becasue that would defeat the purpose and I’d only be throwing pearls before swine.(Jason I do not refer that to you or any other’s who are diligently seeking after the truth)
But I will attempt to help you some…
Pharisee – Essene Priest of Qumran
JEW – Priest of the Hellenized Temple in Jerusalem
These are two entirely different factions… The Pharisee had no problem with Jesus talking smack to the Jews.. and vice versa.
“It is difficult to imagine how Timothy or anyone in the assemblies to whom Paul’s letter was written, and by whom it was read (probably in one sitting) would ever have come to the same conclusions that you have about what Paul has written. We have to remember that the Bible is a collection of books, letters, etc, and must be read as such, taking into account the genre of the specific literature at hand. This is a letter, and should be read as letters are read…you are not doing this.”
First Timothy was a sell out for Paul… He was never formerly trained or intitated by the bretheren. He would have had no clue to question really and you have to ask why would Timothy even care?
But without exception Paul has lied saying he is an Apostle… Of which I say again, was an ‘exclusively’ reserved seat for the blood related being a Hereditary Title and Position.
Paul hasn’t any relation to Jesus other than by marriage as Phillip was Herodian also.
This has HISTORICALLY been regarded as “literal” interpretation, that we read the Bible as literature. Granted, the Bible is VASTLY different than any other literature due to its being expiated by God.
What are you saying? I do not contest the Rabbinical requirements for what is considere divine or not. But there is a science to the Torah of which again would throwing pearls before swine.
Riddle me this:
‘wheels with in wheels, sevens with in sevens’
“4. You completely miss the point of Paul’s statement; his comment on genealogies was not against their inclusion and validity in the historical narrative of scripture, but he uses hyperbole (endless) to prove that the overemphasis of some is not edifying, quite similar to your mistaken notions of scripture…the scriptures you criticize are no less scriptures because of your critique, but your invalid use of them is destructive, and causes endless questions!”
What? He emphaitically attacks the issue and constantly declares that he is an Apostle. While he could have joined the Bretheren of Qumran he would nor could he ever be an Apostle.
Peter and Andrew were of the original twelve ‘Disciples’ but they weren’t even granted such a Title of ‘Apostle’ being they weren’t directly related to James or Jesus.
“5. Ends and means…don’t you see the difference, the end of the commandments of God is charity, etc.; you must come to the scriptures void of your contempt for them! And you cannot do that except by the Holy Spirit of God.”
I think we ought to leave the issue at hand from involving the break down of the Holy Spirit as I do not want Exploit Her.
That is an entirely differet issue and one that will surelly raise a few flags… So I will stick with the pauline issue and Doctrine but the Goddess discussion is for later.
“6. NO is the answer to your question, it has absolutely nothing to do with that. If you smell jealousy, it is not because you got it out of Paul’s words, but because you read it into them.”
Who was Saul? And Who was Jesus? and what was the Royal House of David? And does bloodline matter? Because according to God (Who in our modern world of political correctness would be considered a racist bigot) we are not to mix outside our tribal bloodlines.
According to the Bible it’s a very serious issue as is also Usery(Interest) on money you owe of which GOd is against. But Christian’s conveniently ignore this issue as well being sold out to God Mammon.
“Btw, I suggest you start using a different English translation because you obviously can’t read the original languages (many of us can’t) and the translation you are using (KJV?) is only helping to confuse your understanding.”
I have most of the different version from front to back repeatedly only to come back to the KJV 1611 as being the most valid versions as the other skew the original intent and meaning of the scripture.
Looky here… Did you know that the New American Standard, New International Version and one other I cannot rememebr off hand are not printed by christian publishers? Nor Jewish, Muslim or Buddhist? But they are published by companies owned by the Satanic Church of Europe..?
The King James 1611 retained coded references to the origian scribal codes used by the ancient scribes. And certain surface information lay atop layers of hidden knowledges, genealogical, alchemic and medicianl, geo-politiac and religeous information and general history.
When reading the other versions this coded information is lost.
Interestingly the NIV is a good tool as it seperates the many Gods in the bible with different references shuch as, ‘Lord’ and ‘Lord God’ being used in Genesis. There are more and you can usually find this break down in the intro of a descent printing of the NIV.
“Here is the rendering of vs. 4 & 5 in the ESV, 4 “nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith. 5 The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.”
Paul is clearly arguing that Timothy care for the sheep over which he see, by making sure they are not DEVOTED TO” myths and genealogies and the CHARGE made by Paul and the other Apostles represented by Paul in this pastoral letter was to love, which comes from, “a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.” This in no way contradicts the words of Jesus recorded by other Apostles.”
You say it is… But history and the facts sitll remain, Paul lied repeatedly about being an Apostle when as I have state it was impossible. Now if he claimed it was merely symbolic I could swallow it but it would not, could not be a valid Title.
Again Jesus knew about the rules, don’t you think he would have said something about it in the Gospel?
I and others have attempted to directly address many of your claims but you have done very little of that, I for one would appreciate your attempt at the same, from this or from earlier comments we have made in this tread.
7 “desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions.”
This is a continuation of Paul’s description of those whom he urged Timothy to charge them not to teach different doctrine, or devote themselves to myths and genealogies. If, as you suppose, the “certain persons” to whom Paul addresses his comments are the Levitical Priests, we know that Christ Himself had very harsh words for the priest, the scribes, and the Pharisees; this is no different, and paul is simply reiterating similar charges.
Job, Enoch, Elijah did not need Jesus to be taken up… And in the New Testement Gospel of LUKE 1:(*5)-6 It was stated:
“6 And they (*refering to Zacharias and Elizabeth) were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandements and ordinaces of the Lord blameless.”
Jeff said
Our friend, the illustrious Mr. King Thomas, ruler of whatever, etc. etc. also makes this unbelievable claim in a separate thread on this site.
“(I personally have a gift of talking to dead but I ignore it… No amount of prayer or kneeling before God about made it go away… I yet can see them and hear them but I say nothing- Most of the time anyway until they irritate me. I dont try to do it nor is there any ritual mumbo jumbo but it is a natural gifting.
I do not exploit it either it’s a very private issue although I have helped children who lost a parent(s) and occasionally I have used my gift so that they can properly say goodbye… It requires little of me but to let them know that they are there and then I leave the room… And what they expereince is private and intimate but ultimately for their good.)”
Why is anyone even listening to this guy?
jAsOn said
Thomas,
You said, “YOu could not be an Apostle if were not related as it was and still is a hereditary appointment.”
Yes you could, apostle means “sent one”. You are wrong when you say that one had to be physically related to Jesus to be an Apostle. See Matt. 10:2 “Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; 3 Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus”
You said, “And as for the Death on the cross… It took around 7-8 days on the average for a person to die from Crucifixion as most people die suphicating from preasure on the lungs. Jesus wasn’t even hanging there for an entire day before he was lowered down.”
I figured that you didn’t believe that Christ had died on the cross, but the physical and historical evidence doesn’t allow for any other solution: the disciples of Jesus never would have died at the hands of the Jews or the Greeks for something they knew wasn’t true, if the Romans had remove Jesus from the cross they would have produced His live body to the disciples to prove them wrong and pragmatically resolve a conflict among the Jews that would have caused the Roman leadership in the area a great deal of frustration, and the Jewish leadership would never have allowed anyone under any circumstances to believe that Christ had died on the cross after the disciples had claimed that He had risen from the dead…it was in their best interest that the body remain in the tomb where it had been laid. Furthermore, it was customary Roman practice to stab the victim to insure that he was dead BEFORE he was removed from the cross and EVERY historical account of the event either agrees with this occurance or doesn’t even mention it…no legitamate historical document validates that Jesus was removed from the cross before death.
You said, “The main point was to bring to light that this wwas never a term used by Jesus or the bretheren. Jesus is not a ‘Christ’ unless you want to practise Paganism…?”
Your argument was that persons who claim to be Christians use the term “Christ” as a surname…this is patently false. There are about 500 instances where the word CHRIST appears in the NT, and about 70 of them are in the gospel records.
You said, “Until you are willing to step outside the box you never see another doctrine but the one so ingrained into your psyche from birth.”
That has nothing to do with the comment to which I was resoponding, in your post #94 you addressed 1 Tim. 1:3 and said, “No other ‘doctrine’ as apposed to what? What doctrine could he be referring to because there is only one doctrine taught in the Old Testament and New Testament’s, Gospel teachings of YESU, The doctrine of ‘The Way’?”—Thomas
I rebutted by saying, “No other doctrine?!?! What do you think spurred the idolatry of the Corinthians, the worship of Caesar, etc?”
The point is that you didn’t address what Paul was saying in verse 3; Paul is trying to get his audience to see that ALL “OTHER” DOCTRINES THAT OPPOSE CHRIST are false!
You said, “This why you need to understand the New Testement written by the Underground stream and sanctiond my King James to render the 1611 KJV of the Bible was written in a CODE.”
There are no valid historical documents that show that King James was sanctioned by such a group; all of the books written by the NT authors which are included in the canon claimed by the protestant Reformers as having been inspired by the Holy Spirit have more historical evidence backing their authorship than many validated secular documents to which there is no opposition. There is NO HISTORICAL PROOF OF YOUR CLAIM!!!!; You do not know what you are talking about; you oppress the truth in righteousness and are a fool in the biblical sense; the only reason I have continued to humor your responses and address you in this stream is because I want all the other participants to see that you have nothing of intellectual/factual/historical value to offer tto the discussion.
You said, “I cannot teach you the code… Becasue that would defeat the purpose and I’d only be throwing pearls before swine.” I don’t care about the insult…I just want this staement to go on record as evidence that gnosticism is alive and well.
ALL of the Pharasees had to be of JEWISH decent, oh yeah I forgot, you don’t believe in Jews?!?!
That’s all I have time to respond to for now…I hope you have the intention of cross-examining the claims I have just made or else this is an exercise in futility!
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Matt. 10:2
Simple answer to that…
The Gospel of Mark was rippped to shreds and rewritten.
The Gospel Matthew was taken from relative sources but main from the Gospel of Mark.
The Gospel of Luke is borrowed from the Gospel of mark as well.
The Gospel of Mark was taken from many sources but mainly from the Gospel documant ‘Q’.
While Peter and Andrew are part of the Twelve the writer of Matthew was not aware of such rules or he just did not care.
While Matthew (Or whoever he or she really is) was a very poetic writer but not a very accurately informed person.
The evidence is in the Dead Sea Scrolls of what kind of people the Bretheren were and I assure you just going to have to study that one out.
You need to Purchase and of His work and and his credentials are listed here…
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Sorry about the link I am not sure what happened there..?
Robert Eisenman’s name should have been there… hmm?
oh well ooops!
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Jason,
I didn’t mean to insult you… It was general reference as I do not know whould read it but what i can say first read Laurence Gardner’s ‘Bloodline of the Holy Grail’… Then pay careful attention to the Foreword in his Second book ‘Genesis of the Grail kings’.
And then you will realize… You know the code.
But forgive me because I did not intend that to mean you as you seem to be a genuine truth seeker and I would in no way inhibit you to delve deeper into any subject concerning scripture with me.
Personally, it would be easier to meet for coffee but I am not sure how possible that is.
Paulinian said
Seems to me that somebody is watching way too much Discovery, History, and National Geographic channel t.v.
Not all “science” is true Science and not all “history” is true History. We must discern between truth and error. Just because someone writes a book, says its truth, and puts it on the best seller list, doesn’t make it nonfiction.
There are no “hidden” codes in the Scriptures, no “secret” rites/sects that hold the real “truth” that mainstream Christianity has tried to suppress for 2,000 yrs.
This is about reality and being able to wade through fairy tales.
Jesus corrupted Moses’ message, Paul corrupted Jesus’ message, the Church corrupted Paul’s message, the Christian corrupted the Church, and the devil made me do it…………nonsense
- the Paulinian, I reckon
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
You don’t say… Even Paul knew of the Code hence, the term he barrowed from Qumran to… ‘Rightfully divide the word of God’
jAsOn said
Thomas,
This is a quote from the link you posted for Robert Eisenman, “He is most famous for having completed a translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls in only 6 months, and his attempt, now discredited by carbon-14 dating and paleographic evidence, to identify the early Christians as synonymous with the Qumran sectarians through analogies between the Pauline Epistles and the Dead Sea Scrolls.”
The quote states, “…and his attempt, now discredited by carbon-14 dating and paleographic evidence…”, am I missing something; how is this link or his work a credit to your argument; is this the souorce of your information regarding the dates and occasions for the authorship of the NT letters?
I would link to suggest a book for your reading, one by Dr. James White called, “From Toronto to Emmaus”. http://www.aomin.org/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=22&products_id=41&osCsid=003ebb0eb739e5ef6cd07d0a41ec508e
Also here, http://www.aomin.org/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=261&osCsid=869e20b480a2713729a7b0ced4a8a142 you can download an mp3 of one of his lectures regarding transmition, textual criticism, inerrency, inspiration, and Jesus’ own view of the Scriptures.
I am in Winston Salem, NC, where are you?
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Thank You Jason I will read the information above.
Robert Eisenman is a good source to color you canvas with.
There many other authors that I would suggest…g Give a minute and I will compile an entire list of books and authors to read…
Umberto Eco … For example or Zachariah Sitchin…
and even Stephen Hawking?
My library is extensive.
I study the bible ‘the way’ it was intended with an open mind and open heart.
Note:
I say, I am a King and many say, hogwash!
Are the Jewish People God’s chosen race?
Is the Royal House of David valid?
Irony…
I do not believe that Israel should remain a nation as the only standing in the way of democracy in the middle east are the Jews as they will not concede to Equality of all men.
Besides the ‘Jews’ or rather those that claim to be Jews but or not… But of the synagogue of Satan.
The so called Jews you run Israel are Zionist Russians posing
as Jews. The Israeli army doesn’t even speak Hebrew… Broken Hebrew at best but they indeed speak Russian.
I believe in a Free Palestine and support the dismantling of Israel. So isn’t that strange?
As you I too do not like religious fanaticism… And I do not condone Terrorism of any kind.
Run the word, ‘Terrorism’ and read all the descriptions and definitions… After you have good understanding of Terrorism then apply that to biblical figures such as Abraham, Moses, David, King Saul, Paul and Even Jesus…
And you know what?
They would all be Terrorist.
And I like saying this so pardon me…
Moses was a Terrorist for Jehovah as was Abraham.
Paul candy coats the Law to fit his needs but uses it when convenient. But then throws the law to the wayside when convincing people of this new found freedom of Lawlessness.
Paul doesn’t even follow the law himself but imposes the Law in the minds of people not in the way of self introspection but one of defined reflection. He gives you boundaries within this New doctrine and imposes it on others more heavily then the Keepers of ‘The Law’.
Jesus declared Moses to be the Accuser or Satan. And Abraham and his children were of their father Satan who was a murderer from the beginning.
How many times does Jehovah justify Murder in his name?
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
I’m in Dallas / Fort Worth (DFW), Texas
jAsOn said
Thomas,
Please address the fact that RE was discredited.
The debate ofver JEws vs Palestinians is not simple, and I would not take the typical Dispensationally charged view, but in the end I have to admit that I would probably not agree with your take 100% either.
You said this, “The so called Jews you run Israel are Zionist Russians posing as Jews. The Israeli army doesn’t even speak Hebrew… Broken Hebrew at best but they indeed speak Russian.”
Where did you get this info…I very seriously doubt it is true.
“Terrorism” according to Merriam-Webster means, “: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.”
You said that all these were “terrorist”: “Abraham, Moses, David, King Saul, Paul and Even Jesus”
All of those but Jesus were sinners, but none of them were terrorists any more than you or I should be occasionally considered so, at least by the definition given by Webster.
You could redefine the word, or revise the historical lives of those you mentioned in order to call those you mentioned “terrorist”, but you would be stretching the truth very thin.
Jehovah NEVER justified “murder”, but sanctioned killing of persons which of course He had never considered innocent…which I would guess is a concept that is completely foreign to your world view–the depravity of man and the Holiness of God.
F. L. A. said
KING THOMAS, MAY WE ASK YOU MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR VAMPIRISM?
WE ARE KEENLY INTERESTED.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Hi Jason,
This is very irritating…
“You said this, “The so called Jews you run Israel are Zionist Russians posing as Jews. The Israeli army doesn’t even speak Hebrew… Broken Hebrew at best but they indeed speak Russian.””
What do you know about the Israeli Army?
Obviously, you have assumed as most people that they are Jewish..?
There are countless resources not excluding calling them up your self and asking them directly what language they speak fluently… I have friends in Israel, from Israel and Minister who have worked for their government.
Of which all do not want to exploited with this thread.. So Jason I apologize but just go find out them come back and talk to me about that subject.
Google “Zionism, anti semitic”
About Terrorism…
In a few places we are referred to read the book of ‘Yasher’ in the old Testament?
“Joshua(Yehoshua) 10:12-14; “On that occasion, when Yahweh routed the Amorites before the Yisraelites, Yehoshua addressed Yahweh; he spoke, in the presence of the Yisraelites: ‘Stand still, O sun, at Gibeon, O moon, in the valley of Aijalon! The sun stood still and the moon halted while a nation wreaked judgment on its foes. As it is recorded in the book of Yashar so the sun halted in mid-heaven and did not press on to set. For an entire day Yahweh fought for Yisrael. Not before or since that time has there ever been such a day in which Yahweh acted upon the words spoken by a man.’ “”
“2 Samuel 1:17-18; “And David intoned this dirge over Shaul and his son Jonathan: ‘He ordered the Judites to be taught the bow.’ That is what is recorded in the book of Yashar.”"
It makes me wonder why the scribes would reference that book and later religious authorities did not consider it Canon….
Now while I do not agree with every word in this book either it must be considered somewhat valid if God made sure to mention through his in-errant word to read it.. Not once but multiple times.
When you read it… Abraham isn’t some poor pilgrim running around with his family in the wilderness… He is conquering Hittite Warlord.
He most certainly was a Terrorist.
With Moses it’s easier… If her were alive today and he led us to a mountain and we began to worship other Gods while he’s busy sippin gin with other priests… Comes back down finds dis obeying his command and orders to have all the Hebrews slaughtered?
That isn’t Terrorism?
Please you know it as well as any high court in the Land of Men would agree that he was indeed a Terrorist.
And that is why the Church has failed and become apostate because they justify themselves as spiritual Terrorist…
Unlike many people who frequent the forums have material wealth to some degree… I own nothing… My faith has led me to ruin in this World. But I know that God is, God is Love. And Love covers a multitude of Sins… God is not some white haired bearded old man jotting tiddles… keeping track of your sin.
God is no respecter of persons.
God does not need Moses or Abraham.. As Jesus make very clear in the Gospel of John.
And when Jesus discounts them and their bloodline do not think for minute he is referring to the bloodline of the Ebionites (The Meek).
What we have here is a Genealogical mis-understanding.
Read:
JEREMIAH 33:23-26
Jason, I have more to say on this but I have to work on my car today.
You may ask me about ‘Vampirism’… ‘My’ vampirism is an intimate journey of understanding.
Ask what you will…
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
And I forgot…
Carbon dating is unreliable… If anyone here is familiar with how many times you have to test different samples to come up with a realistic average.
Tens of thousands of times and more…
What Robert Eisenmen does right is in regard linguistic and phonetic connections as well as well names, titles and symbolic imagery that do not need dates, times and places…
It’s an understanding of historical figures of speech and messianic brotherhood that is far older than Jesus.
messiah is all one as we are all messiah.
Tripp said
Thomas – Don’t you consider this statement even the least bit blasphemous?
“messiah is all one as we are all messiah.”
John said
Rather pantheistic, I think. Thomas, in regards to asking about your vampirsm, are you sure that there isn’t anything that you DON’T want us to ask you about?
jAsOn said
Thomas,
Regarding the whole “Jewishness” of the Israeli Army thing (though I am sceptical of your interpretaiton of historical data anyway) I am not sure of the pertinance of this information and how it concerns the historical legitimacy of the writings of Paul or other NT writers.
Further, why do you say this, ““You said this, “The so called Jews you run Israel are Zionist Russians posing as Jews. The Israeli army doesn’t even speak Hebrew… Broken Hebrew at best but they indeed speak Russian.””
Those are not my comments, and why do they iritate you.
You call the church, “spiritual terroists”, but to whom do you refer as the church, and what do you mean by spiritual terrorism?
You refer to the book of Yasher, and you must also remember that there were other instances in history to which the writers of Holy Writ specifically refered and they were not canonised as books of the Bible. (Jude 14) I really can’t help that you don’t accept the historical account of the canonization of our present day, protestant scriptures…but I defy you to emperically prove that it happened differently. Your “higher critical” views and the “higher critical” views of your sources you cite are suspect from the get go…you have said that you are well read, but I doubt that it is so in any arena other than “fantastic history”.
You said, “Unlike many people who frequent the forums have material wealth to some degree… I own nothing… My faith has led me to ruin in this World. But I know that God is, God is Love. And Love covers a multitude of Sins… God is not some white haired bearded old man jotting tiddles… keeping track of your sin.” Really Thomas, what does this have to do with anything?
Your presumptions are astounding and you seam to have blind faith in the sources from which you aquire your information.
Rom 1:18 “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. 24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.”
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Hello Tripp,
While this statement is meant for the Ebionim…
Blasphemy?
First, maybe it is to you but with me it’s not because I am not separate from whatever God is.
Not that I do not have problems and adversity… I just do not put myself down that way.
Second, If I am blasphemous then so are most of the Apostles…
Especially, James the Just because he was anointed Messiah as well as his younger brother Jesus.
Third, Do you not feel blasphemous denying the Mother Goddess, the Holy Spirit of God?
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
Right now I wanna obey God and say thank you.
Maybe you do not understand me… I am like everybody else…
I want a home, family and love.
Thats something that many people take for granted… And I know I might fall into the complacent group if I had a family to go home to.
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
John,
Thank you for asking…
I am not a swinger, I do not like to have sex with random partners.
So, I will not disclose certain intimate details of my relations.
I’m a One woman man.
Jeff said
I love Greg Laurie’s devotional email newsletter for today. He writes…
One morning as Alfred Nobel was reading the newspaper, he was shocked to find his name listed in the obituary column. It was a mistake, but nonetheless, there it was. He was stunned to see that he was primarily remembered as the man who invented dynamite. At that time in history, dynamite was used in great effect for warfare. It distressed Nobel to think that all he would be known for was inventing dynamite, something that was used to take the lives of others. As a result of reading this mistaken obituary, Nobel decided to change the course of his life. He committed himself to world peace and established what we know today as the Nobel Peace Prize. When the name Alfred Nobel is mentioned today, dynamite is rarely the first thing that comes to mind. Rather, we think of the prize that bears his name. It’s all because Alfred Nobel decided to change the course his life was taking.
Another man, living centuries earlier, also changed the negative course his life was on. His name was Paul, formerly known as Saul of Tarsus. Known as a relentless persecutor of the early church, he was determined to stop the spread of Christianity. But after a dramatic conversion on the Damascus Road, Paul devoted the rest of his life to preaching the gospel and building the church. Today we remember him as a missionary, church planter, and author of 13 New Testament epistles.
If you were to read your own obituary today, what do you think people would remember you for? It isn’t too late to change your direction.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Jason,
I apologize but you must realize while I might address you I may throw out a bone or two…
Not necessarily for you but many people read this thread and I am sure they are fascinated and not sure how to jump in or respond.
I am speaking to the silent majority…
“Unlike many people who frequent the forums have material wealth to some degree… I own nothing… My faith has led me to ruin in this World. But I know that God is, God is Love. And Love covers a multitude of Sins… God is not some white haired bearded old man jotting tiddles… keeping track of your sin.”
As for the ‘Church’ I mean the established imperialistic doctrine… You know the only curriculum as any other faith is deionized by the churches intolerance and ignorance.
The Pauline Doctrine.
And this is very irritating…
I know I was quoting *’Below’ it because of the issue… As many Christians assume their teaching that has been doctored to suit the establishment.
*“You said this, “The so called Jews you run Israel are Zionist Russians posing as Jews. The Israeli army doesn’t even speak Hebrew… Broken Hebrew at best but they indeed speak Russian.””
As most Christians do not have a clue what is happening in the Middle East as the Church flying the banner of Saint George only justifying the slaughter.
I have walked many Christian circles my friend… I am not saying every Christian person is Evil but I am more than declaring the Pauline doctrine as Evil.
If you do not accept my Lord then you will go to Hell?
How is that not spiritual terrorism?
Jesus was more than clear in Gospel as it is not a focus on what we are doing wrong everyday (Sin) but it’s a focus of service.
Google “Zionism, anti semitic”
Zionism has everything to do with the Pauline doctrine.
My point is not to prove I am the master of knowledge and scriptural data…
All you have to throw at me are more references from that thief Paul whom you trust so much and you cannot even prove one word of it… Except by you vain imagination.
I am an actor and Shakespeare is hard to understand for the laymen and trust me I have had some tough situations with characters.
But the KJV 1611 was written by the ‘Underground Stream’ and here are a few members, Francis Bacon, William Shakespeare, Sir Edward de Vere.
These men were commissioned by King James to write the 1611 and that is a fact of history.
Shakespeare took an old farm slang and reinvented the English language. In his first play Shakespeare introduced over 5000 New words to the English language (Or did you think people actually talked that way?) In the KJV 1611 Shakespeare invents over 500 New English words.
Like the word ‘Host’ which is a Militarized unit hence the Jehovah witness’ rendering in their Bible is most correct, ‘Jehovah of Armies’.
And even Ancient words used as or in Sorcery were applied to the average, everyday speaking person… So as to have the populace repeated sounds and vibrations to bring about their desired results through Incantations, invocations, etc…
So while we speak our English many words are actually being utilized by an ongoing working of a ‘Spell’… So you see just by our ignorance we are still practicing Witchcraft.
We are a guilty of the old Testaments sin regarding Witchcraft.
It’s not in the words we use… It’s in the vibrations we create when speaking them.
For instance the Sumerian word (translated phonetically to English) ‘KLON’ is pronounced the same as the the English word ‘Clone’… and they mean exactly the same thing.
Matter of fact the roots of English are found in the ANGALISH speak of the Magi which of course was private language used between them.
What does this have to do with Paul… Everything.
If I wanted to be an Apostolic Christian of the Celtic Church I would be ridiculed and not taken seriously, If I were of the Naz-Aryan faith you would call me a heretic (One word Paul created or picked up somewhere).
What right do Christians have to say things like this about other people?
As if Paul had it all right…
Paul contends that the Temple was taking a profit and he turns around taking the tithe he collected and purchases a citizenship in Rome. Please, come on… It’’s just like the Preachers I have been around and please do not make me name drop as I am trying not to do that but… These men are arrogant and Evil… They laugh about their riches while they fly around the world almost daily it would seem enjoying the high life while many in their congregations are struggling with everyday life.
Why do we allow these church leaders to be treated as Kings?
When they do not give any concern for these people… But merely laugh them off. I fought to get help, real help for people and there was none but if I wanted to, ‘Sell Out to Jesus’, I could be in the gang…
That was my invitation to the high life of Christian ministry…
Who isn’t involved?
Dr Gene Scott, Arnold Murry and Mother Theresa…
Those are just a few Ministers I have found no spot or blemish concerning the faith.
But my growing list of crooks and beguilers continues to grow more rapidly by the day.
Read:
JEREMIAH 33:23-26
jAsOn said
Thomas,
Do you read Greek and Hebrew?
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Jason,
You asked,
“Do you read Greek and Hebrew?”
Of course the answer to that question is, Yes and No.
Israel was invaded by:
(Ashkenazi & Khazar Zionist = Germans/Russians Masquerading as the True Lineage of Abraham/Jews) These are the True Anti-Semites, do some research and you will find the truth.
jAsOn said
Thomas,
What does “yes and no” mean?
John said
Hello Thomas.I was not interested in your love life, so your answer was confusing to me.I would think that being a vampire would involve a large amount of secrecy.Perhaps it’s different where you are living, but where I’m at being a vampire would be kept a great secret, a secret worth killing to protect. The fear of exposure would be tremendous, as it would lead to your death, or at the very least, a mob of fanatics and bullies trying to make every moment of your undead life absolutely miserable.So I was interested that you brought it up so freely.Is it because of the anonymity of the internet, perhaps?
Anyway,….what kind of a vampire are you? Folklore teaches that, like were-beasts,nature spirits, and dragons, the vampire belongs to a very large, diverse group of beings that change from culture to culture throughout the world.I’ve studied up on the topic quite a bit so feel free to hold nothing back, in case you think that I might not understand.
What makes you sure that you’re really a vampire and not simply a man with a ……..blood fetish, or something?Are you genetically human?Could you be something else, some other kind of a creature that is just “vampire-like” and simply have a case of mistaken identity?Is your body physically different from a man in obvious ways[fangs, claws, super strength,etc.]?You mentioned your magick before.What kind of magickal abilities do you have?
Also, how did you become a vampire? Was it through supernatural means, like a curse or self inflicted ritual? Were you simply born as one? Or was it like a viral infection?
This is all for now.Please take your time and answer carefully[and hopefully in great detail].
jAsOn said
Not that I don’t find it interesting, but John and Thomas, I don’t think that this thread has any more vacancy for tangental topics, do you?
John said
Perhaps not, but how often does one get to interview a vampire?
Where else could we go to do this?
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
“What makes you sure that you’re really a vampire and not simply a man with a ……..blood fetish, or something?”
You want the truth about Vampires.
The truth is I do not have a blood fetish.
I do not drink blood from a the veins of another.
It is very dangerous to drink blood for ‘Many’ obvious reasons and many less known but deadly reasons.
Crutchfield-Jacobson Disease for one.
“I would think that being a vampire would involve a large amount of secrecy.
Perhaps it’s different where you are living, but where I’m at being a vampire would be kept a great secret, a secret worth killing to protect.
The fear of exposure would be tremendous, as it would lead to your death, or at the very least, a mob of fanatics and bullies trying to make every moment of your undead life absolutely miserable.
So I was interested that you brought it up so freely.
Is it because of the anonymity of the internet, perhaps?”
Oh sure it’s a secret, John but I am not afraid what man will do to me it’s beyond that.
How about being alone, truly alone.
You want to know about my Power… I have none.
I am powerless to the Cosmos, I am drawn by the Fates.
I am not a depressive person… I have been beaten and abused my whole life… When I find another that I can relate too it is often too much for us to remain together because if you have light in the darkness may attract attention but two surely will be even brighter.
Mis-understood by many but it’s my own that I most fear.
If I fear anything at all…
Trying to stand alone is tough and you have to understand that I am merely a hybrid of a separate species.
So am I human, Yes.
I am Man also.
Mankind and Human beings are two different and separate things that are often assumed to be the same.
I am not afraid to expose myself or my weakness because what is death at this point to me?
I do no condone suicide and I do not really want to die… I love life, the trees, the grass, the wind, the rain… But when you cannot find another person to talk to you, understand what you think and find some form of similarity but cannot it is very alienating.
I always tried to fit in and I do not.
I live in continual heartache, I grew up feeling abandoned and forgotten as if some sick joke were played on me. And Love, yes love… What love in this world is for me…
I wish I had not been born… I wish I would have died at birth.
Do you not feel the pain and anguish of the Earth?
Yes, let’s talk about Vampirism and why Jehovah forbid the eating of blood… And Why Paul submitted to that tyranny.
I wish some one would come kill me, put me out of my misery but I would only come back again.
Jesus commanded us not to resist the Evil man. So please, many people have been manipulated to believe all sorts of nonsense.
Or do you not know, that the Red object four times the size of Jupiter heading towards Earth… Is the home Planet, the species that have genetically engineered Mankind (The Clones of Jehovah) and developed Hybrids for genetic research and pro creation?
Mankind is for Slavery and Food.
While I am related… Those of my kind are separated into at least 17 different genetic lines.
And of those *17 many are sold out to the Anunnaki Lords of the Earth… But their are some that remain loyal to their kind that are coming and already here.
Those of Earth are the ones that most hate mankind and are with Jehovah/Enlil in the destruction of Mankind but Anu/The most high God and Father in Heaven is the God that you should be bending a knee too for he is our High King and his first born Son of the Royal blood (The Only Begotten) and heir is Enki/ Jesus.
So do you see Jason and John?
What I see?
Soon the the catastrophes will far out number the reporters reporting them… Soon one the largest Hurricanes known to man will pummel the east and southern coast of the United States. A tsunami will strike the Gulf… Caused from the eruption in the sea… Setting off a chain reaction causing the largest Earth quake in a hidden less talked about fault line stretching up through the middle of the United States. This in turn will cause Yellowstone to blow (virtually a Volcanic bubble)… Blanketing a third of the Earth in Darkness.
The waters will recede…
So the Earth will totter and shake from earthquakes deep with in as Nibiru comes closer to Earth… The Closer Nibiru gets to Earth the more that we will be violently destroyed by that forces all around us.
Earth will totter and she will be turned up right and we shall be a return to Sharon. Earth will stand straight up and will be aligned perfectly 360 days in year.
As a SHA – means a complete circle and equals 360 degrees.
RA – means Light
ON – means Temple
SHARON – means Orbiting Temple of Light.
Cites long forgotten will arise out of Sea.
And suddenly when we least expect it, in a twinkling of an Eye Water will divide into Fire. And will consume a third of the Earth.
The two most flammable gases known to man make up ‘H2O’…
Where will you be?
“I would think that being a vampire would involve a large amount of secrecy.
Perhaps it’s different where you are living, but where I’m at being a vampire would be kept a great secret, a secret worth killing to protect.
The fear of exposure would be tremendous, as it would lead to your death, or at the very least, a mob of fanatics and bullies trying to make every moment of your undead life absolutely miserable.
So I was interested that you brought it up so freely.
Is it because of the anonymity of the internet, perhaps?
Anyway,….what kind of a vampire are you?”
Because it’s soon to be over… All of it.
“Folklore teaches that, like were-beasts,nature spirits, and dragons, the vampire belongs to a very large, diverse group of beings that change from culture to culture throughout the world.I’ve studied up on the topic quite a bit so feel free to hold nothing back, in case you think that I might not understand.”
Again much of the material, information and history of Vampires is very distorted. The Catholic Church feared the Aryan Church and sought to decimate it along with any other religious ideals and or information
It is Paul who personally burned countless library’s and private schools not excluding the burning of the Library of Alexandria, yet again.
“Are you genetically human?”
Yes Human as that means I am Half Eloh and Half Anunnaki.
A son of God or the of the Sons of Light as they are called in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Could you be something else, some other kind of a creature that is just “vampire-like” and simply have a case of mistaken identity?
Well as whole, tribally speaking, I am a Dragon… The references in the bible for the Dragon family many often confusing for the masses to know what those references are. Ultimately the bible refers to ‘fiery flying serpents’ This is a reference to Genetically altered species or the Hybrid Species of which make up the Dragon Families. They were spawned and originated from the genetic material of the Ape Woman (according to the Sumerian text) as they were called received the genetic inheritance of the Elder Gods / Anunnaki / Elohim. They tried to take our DNA and splice with their own but it failed every time but the Hybrid was possible because the Eloh peoples that were original natives of Earth had a superior genetic make- up than any other species in the Known Federation of Planets. So whatever the genetic materials that the extra terrestrial beings, Anunnaki / Elohim wanted, it did work out… As it was not compatible with their own DNA.
HU man beings on the other hand have adopted all the traits of these seemingly superior beings… That is why Jehovah / Enlil wanted to destroy of Human beings (The children of Nephilim) and Mankind (Monkeys)… As Jehovah / Enlil hated mankind with a passion. The serpent at the tree was not Satan, it was not the Symbolic Devil… It was Enki / Jesus who is and was and will always be the Bright and Morning Star.
“Is your body physically different from a man in obvious ways[fangs, claws, super strength,etc.]?”
Many people contend that they do have physical traits and most common that I have found are large Canine teeth over lapping the other teeth. The canine are usually very sharp. Regretfully I let an Orthodontist straighten my teeth and sand the points down. Had I known, or been consciously aware of why they were like that, I would have never allowed anyone to touch them.
“You mentioned your magick before.What kind of magickal abilities do you have?”
Well I practiced Demonism which is the art of opening portals and gates to the Anunnaki Lords of the Earth or the Seven Angels spoken of in the book of Revelation.
“Also, how did you become a vampire?”
I was born with the genetic inheritance.
“Was it through supernatural means, like a curse or self inflicted ritual?”
Yes the ritual of the Anunnaki- The Magi came to me when I was Twelve years old.
Well I feel, that it is a curse to know the truth and that we are Prisoners on Planet Earth being manipulated by the Anunnaki Lords of the Earth, behind their self imposed leader, Jehovah / Enlil a traitor and murderer.
“Were you simply born as one?”
YES
“Or was it like a viral infection?”
The world does treat woman the are RH(neg)- blood type as a disorder but it’s because they are Hybrids giving birth to gods on the Earth. They are not compatible with any other blood type as their body will naturally reject the baby and kill it… Because her body assumes the fetus of the child as a threat being a completely separate species.
There are good reasons for Jehovah’s racism… Genetic ones and I would have to agree with Him that we should not be mixing races as we are not all children of Adam and Eve… I for one am the the Child of Enki / Jesus and Eve hence, the blood of Cayin runs through my veins as he was the first KIN KAIN KING of the Dragons or latter called the Pen dragons.
C- ayin – The AYIN is symbolized by a circle with a dot in the middle and represents the third eye… So thats lets the reader of GENE_ISIS the first book of the Bible know that Cayin had the a Sovereign Mind having his third eye open.
I will post some scientific data that has been compiled by the Dragon Families…
Jeff said
Thomas – you need 3 things…
1 – psychiatric help
2 – Jesus
3 – a loving church
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
And for the people who think this is some Gothic wanna-be nonsense…
I am not a Goth and I do not wear make-up unless I am on stage, Halloween or cross dressing… Joking…
I rarely wear make-up when I am cross dressed!
It’s ok to Laugh now…
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Jeff you’re so right…
Really… Jeff you live in fear of thinking for yourself and outside the box.
Are you so spoon fed you cannot see anything else?
Let me wipe your blind eye… so that you can see…
First of all, Suffering and Ecstasy are requirements of Enlightenment.
You think, ‘this guy is crazy…’ But you accept the truth as it is handed to you.
The Dragon Families are as valid as the Cherokee Families.
Even Jesus explains that while his heart is for everyone he knows he is only here for those whom that his father has sent him too.
Those that have the Word in them, Gods DNA.
I do not need impersonal self gratifying hugs from shallow spoon fed Christians.
I do not need Sun-day worshipers to pray for me to their false God (The SUN) there-by breaking the commandment to keep the Sabbath day Holy and committing Spiritual Idolatry and Adultery against the true Father in Heaven
Saturday being the true Sabbath Day as Saturn is ANU.
I suggest you do a little reading in the Epistle of James. Chapter two to be exact. (As to what a true Christian is and I don’t see churches offering houses and cars as they need it.)
To answer that unspoken question, ‘What is a Pauline Christian verse an Essene’
Ignorance is never an excuse not even before the Throne of God (The Throne of God being the Goddess hence, the Madonna and Child ash she is God’s Glory and Wrath.)
We today have lost our sense of true family and community… It has given way to weak and ineffectual leaders.. Do you not suppose Jesus was himself was a pro racist supporter as well as Jehovah?
Read John 10:1-21
1. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.
2. But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.
3. To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.
4. And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.
5. And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.
6. This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them.
7. Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
8. All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them.
9. I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
10. The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.
11. I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.
12. But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.
13. The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep.
14. I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.
15. As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.
16. And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
17. Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
19. There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.
20. And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?
21. Others said, These are not the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the eyes of the blind?
So even Jesus declares that our Great grand fathers (Enki / Jesus being the Serpent / Seraphim at the Tree of Life) are our true Leaders and the hireling (Elected and Apointed officials are the false Authority).
Again, the only form of Government created by God and Endorsed by God, biblically speaking, Is a Monarchy of which the Royal house of David (TUT or THOTH) are to RULE and REIGN which means – To Measure and Teach.
When will you kill your EGO… Because your responses to me are full of yourself and no where grounded with anything academic, creative or scriptural but are only interjected as personal insults and an attempt to either sling hash that I am flaky (As that is your uneducated opinion I’m sure…) or to discredit what I have to say because you cannot handle the Truth.
Yes, I am honest and open with how I feel, inside and out.
The Earth too, is alive and suffering although, soon she will shake us from her back… Mankind is only a Virus that lack the understanding that if you destroy your (Host) Planet you in inadvertently destroy themselves.
I am at one with the Earth Mother even though my true Mother is not Earth…
You have to understand that you are not alone in this Cosmos of Cosmos’.
Those beings from Marduk had a Monarchical system of government on their home planet. Their present king was named Anu. His rank was “60″ and he was the head of a pantheon of twelve. The members of the pantheon of twelve were all related to each other and were ranked downward from “60″. Anu had two sons: Enki, the oldest (by Anu’s wife Antu) and Enlil (by Anu’s half-sister). Succession to the throne went to the son by the half-sister, therefore Enlil had the rank of “50,” whereas the oldest son, Enki, had the rank of “40.” Each of the wives were ranked “5″ under their spouses, therefore Anu’s wife had the rank of “55″; Enlil’s wife had the rank of “45″; Enki’s wife was ranked “35,” and so on until the 12 were completed. (Never more than twelve and never less than twelve. Each of the members of the pantheon were identified with one of the twelve “planets” in our solar system. (The ancients counted the Sun and Moon as planets, Marduk/Nibiru being the 12th planet.)
Note: Enki and Enlil had problems with one another over the issue of Authority.
Enlil being designated Lord of Earth and Air.
Enki being designated Lord of Earth and Sea.
Hence, why bible referred to the Devil/Jehovah/Enlil as the ‘Principality and Powers of the Air’.
And Why Baptism was included into Essene living following the guiding of the Lord being Enki the ‘Principality and Powers of the Sea’.
Jeff, I dare you to study outside the box because I know you will discover the truth. And if you’re a Human being it will effectively be nothing short of resonating through your heart and being as TRUE.
Jeff said
OK, Thomas. How do I figure out if I have God’s DNA? If I don’t does that mean I’m going to hell? Please advise.
Paulinian said
Thomas,
I really can’t believe that you believe all this that you are writing
It sounds like a fairy tale. I actually met a guy who talked in similar tone as you “el ohim having a wife, etc.” and he was very serious about this. I referred him to the Scriptures, even to the Hebrew of Genesis 1. Yet, he continued to espouse is very unbiblical nonChristian thoughts.
It is sad that you are in such error, but it does not sway me from faith in Jesus Christ, the Jesus Christ of the Holy Bible.
We can’t even debate Scripture with you for you believe it is corrupted by Paul. I do pray for your understanding to be conformed to the truth of the One True God Jesus Christ.
Paulinian
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Jeff… Is Belief the same as Faith?
No.
So, if the only way to please God is Faith then how can I be forgiven of my sins and allowed eternal life to run around God’s throne screaming Holy, Holy, Holy… All based on my Belief in Jesus.
That is silly, idiotic and very unrealistic.
The answer to your question is Yes and No… Yes if you do not have the DNA/ Word in you… Then while you look like the Wheat, you are actually the Tare but No… You are not going to Hell but you will be burned in the all consuming Fire which is the Glory and Wrath of God… The Goddess / Holy Spirit.
To be honest we all go through the fire and we are burnt to ash but if we be Wheat then we have Seed / Sperm / Word / DNA and that means we have the Fire of the Holy Spirit in us.
Think about it like this.. we are mostly made up of water H2O and Hydrogen and Oxygen in their gaseous state are two of the most flammable gases known.
If you can become one with the Holy Spirit you will be born of Fire that as Jesus explained to Nicodemus hence, the term, ‘Born Again’.
What Jesus called Born Again the Sidhe (Druids) called ‘Twice Born’.
From the ashes of our self inflated ego’s we are reborn. To receive the Holy Spirit is to receive the Phoenix Fire the Resurrection from the Dead.
So, if Fire burns Fire, what dies?
The Idea here is, if you are Wheat, then you have the seed of God in you. You are his offspring reborn through is wife the Holy Spirit.
Jeff, let me set you at ease… If you are worried about whether or not you are the Wheat or the Tare… You are, obviously, the Wheat for the Tare is not, even, concerned about their Eternal well being… Because they cannot fathom such Ideas.
Jeff said
So, what you are saying is that if I don’t have God’s DNA in me, I will be reincarnated. Correct? This is difficult to understand, Thomas.
jAsOn said
Thomas,
What makes you think there is life after death?
Jeff said
If I Google “God’s DNA” I get all kinds of crap. Too many theories out there for me to research.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Jeff you are correct… You will be reincarnated that is what the Essenes taught.
Holy Spirit is Spirit not a spirit…
when we become on with the Holy Spirit we enter in ti the divine plan for eternal life.
How big is God?
Is he bigger than an infinite Universe we find ourself in?
Are there multiple dimensions?
Yes…
When you leave here you can go anywhere… There is so much to explore so many species to meet, so many galaxies to discover… So many planets to spend time on.
When does knowledge end?
When are you finished living, growing and evolving?
Never.
How can we place everything in box and say I have it, I know the truth?
We cannot do that…
Faith comes from what we KNOW..
Knowledge cannot be forgotten nor subtracted from the equation of God. Neither can Wisdom be divided out of understanding Life.
Faith is not Blind.
Look we all wish their was a man called Jesus who came to take all our problems away… But what is most often shoved aside is our accountability.
John said
Wow. All I can say for now is ….. WOW!!!!!
Thank you,Thomas. That’ll do very well for now.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Jeff you are right about one thing… I would to find a loving Church that honestly cared about what I am going through…
I mean I do not need another cheeseburger and fries discussing how good the Lord is.
It would be nice if more Christians put their money where their mouth is.
I think if Jesus were here he puke all over himself.
I have needs that if a churched stepped and helped me with as Jesus instructed I would change my life.
Christians do not realize that instead preaching to people about Jesus they instead became like Jesus they would be more successful.
When I was Minister I only prayed the prayer of Salvation with three people and each time I felt wrong about it.
From then on I spent more time being like Jesus and I could pack out a house… What Christians need to apply is the Gospel… If you see a person and they haven’t any way to work and you have spare vehicle give it to them.
If they need a place to live and you have enough money in the bank to pay the rent do it.
It’s all for the Kingdom.. What is with Rich Christians and their inability to part with their Money.
Jeff said
Thomas – This is one area where I can agree with you 100%. I find it completely disgusting when I see these gigantic churches where all these wealthy people attend, yet when someone within the congregation is in need they think all they need to do is pray for them. How about pray AND GIVE!!!! The Joel Osteen’s, Benny Hinn’s and Joyce Meyer’s of the world ought to be thrown in jail and have their millions distributed amongst the needy people in our country. Yes, I concur Thomas. Tell me more about this reincarnation.
jAsOn said
Thomas,
What epistimological reasons do you have for claiming the things in post # 159.
You makes statements about Jesus, but how do you know who he is?
You said,
“Christians do not realize that instead preaching to people about Jesus they instead became like Jesus they would be more successful. ”
If Jesus is not preached, how will people know how to become like him?
I have absolutely zero respect for someone who cannot make or engage in rational conversation; I dare say that you make those of us who oppose your lunacy think that one must check his brain & ability to reason in at the door of the temple of paganism.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
For you Jason…
You can stand on a corner preaching at people or you can just be.
Jesus didn’t preach at people.
He responded and in most cases met people where they are at.
For instances… Take a fairly wealthy Church… in growing attendance homeless and hungry people show up. The Church decides to provide day old food to the homeless and poor… Do you make the people listen to a message about Jesus before you feed them or do you feed them and give a message?
This why I know how bring a revival in Church and where most Christians fail to meet the mark.
The answer is obvious… But most Churches decide that they will give message and then pass out food.
This is wrong thinking.
And that is why I know I can fill any church and why I am more successful at conversion than most ministers, especially on the streets.
I never preach about Jesus.. I meet people where they are at and before I say anything I ask what they need. Then I go to work for them and help them with out question as Jesus requires nothing in return for his gifts… As that is what he Jesus is a gift not a tool for a pew quota.
I packed out a Denny’s every night for three years with out preaching. I have gone all over the united states and I can have Pagans studying the bible practically leaving me in the dust with their enthusiasm.
In ministry it’s not about you or what you think. The Gospel is action.
St. Francis of Assisi once said, “Go out and preach the Gospel, and if you have to, use words.”
You think the Gospel is about preaching a Jesus nobody will ever know and action is being the only Jesus people will meet.
You do not preach Jesus… You show people Jesus by your actions.
I know I am a good Preacher because the first thing I do is Listen.
YOU feed the hungry but you do not foist your beliefs on them or you will never catch the fish.
You provide housing to the homeless but not at the cost of their freedom to believe whatever they want to believe.
The reason I have hundreds of friends that love me and house me is because I do not preach at them or to them… But I mimic Jesus and they see fruit in me.
They see something in me and want that which I have and… I wait patiently until they bite the bait… That is when they come to me and ask how can they receive the gifts that I have… Then I reel them in and I give them the Gospel of Love.
(Yes I have been homeless for the better of fourteen years mostly as a missionary in the United States itself… I live by absolute faith that not only will God provide way he must keep his word to me.)
I do not believe you,re very experienced, Jason, in the art of Evangelism or Sales.
When I sell a product I will fail every time if I talk to the customers or try to get them to listen.. I sell the product by using it properly by action.
Love is a Verb and Love is the Heart of the Gospel.
I am a walking Love letter of Jesus.
I guarantee I will get true conversions while that baptist boy using and waving the bible in his hand will get people to pray the prayer of salvation but it will not last.
You cannot help those who do not want help.
Read the Gospel, Jesus does not help everybody nor does he preach unless it is necessary… Which if you pay attention it’s at the demand of his audience by their relentless questions.
You can cry tears of how sinners are going to Hell and Jesus died on the cross but that means nothing to people out drinking and having a good time… Lets be honest when I am out drinking and looking a chicks I don’t care about hell or Jesus… I thinking that girls hot and I’m drunk.
It bothers me to see preachers out preaching in the middle of a bar district with a cross in one hand and bible in the other.
Jesus said, (And this has a multi-layered meaning) “…Be wise as Serpents with the heart of a Dove…”
I will give you lesson… Next time you go out to minister the Gospel on the streets instead of bringing your bible or rather find a tiny bible you can keep out of sight then go into the bar order a beer and sit down and wait for the fish… the right fish God will bring you. Then talk to them and listen… Be patient and listen intently… Give them time and if you are truly gifted (Jason) they will notice you have something they are lacking… They will confess their sins to you naturally and you do not have to say anything. They will break the ice and ask you about God or what ever it is that they notice… You know the light in you.
Jason you may think I am crazy and I that I am deceived but I bet my soul to the devil that you I cannot out minister me resulting in a true conversion that goes for most any preacher or minister alive today.
It’s not that I am great… It’s that My king said be patient… Oh and I do know Jesus my friend and his favorite color.
I tore up my first bible using it as a projectile on the street… I would throw it down, stomp on it and kick it… And you would not believe the crowd of drunks that would stop on the street and watch.
Sometimes I would cuss like a sailor while reading the bible out loud…
And you know what… People were convicted by the Holy Spirit. People do not silence me when I yell in grocery stores, jump on tables in coffee shops. I offend them in their hypocrisy… But all people are listening and I have their undivided attention. Thats when I use the art of planting seeds of Faith in people and they do not know it.
You cannot force a plant to grow, You can only plan a seed and water the plant… But the plant grows on it’s own despite you, the bible or the gospel.
I Am the only Jesus people will know until they come to repentance and seek to discover on their own…
My mentor once said if any Christian ever asks you, how do you know it’s Jesus… Say to them “It’s none of your D%$* business.”
Jesus is a personal relationship and what makes you think it’s your right to preach to someone?
It’s not your work anyway.. Not even Jesus set out to save the world… He was only for those whom his father chose.
Leave the Drunks alone… Instead help them out and buy them another drink and then you made a friend… Then you have their ear… listen to them… And then you have their mind… wait for their confession… And then you have their heart.
Love on them and they will be saved.
John said
Hey JAsOn, please don’t judge Paganism by what King Tomas says.That would be as bad as pagans judging Christianity by what he says!Not that I think he’s crazy, or anything[I'm not winking,I just have something in my eye[grin,grin].
Thomas, if you don’t feed on blood, then why do your kind have fangs? you talked about being soooooooo alone, but what about Nick and the others on your web-site? How does Nick fall into all of this?
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
“if you don’t feed on blood, then why do your kind have fangs? you talked about being soooooooo alone, but what about Nick and the others on your web-site?”
When I say I am alone, I do not mean a neediness for human contact or desperation for love.
Those feelings have more depth than simple mundane insecurity. It’s a lack of true family and community… No real connection of tribal and life direction. As all forms of Christianity aside from the current apostate version in Southern Religion and supposed Catholic Church, have all been wiped out by Christians.
Do I open a church for those like me and of me? What so that some ignorant Christian redneck’s know exactly how to find us?
Because of Christianity we are being held back and lied to about numerous Archaeological discoveries. If anyone speaks out or says’s anything contrary to the status quo of the Church those people stand to take REAL persecution.
Take for instance Gay Bashing… Most of these crimes are committed by sick and twisted individuals… What and who twisted them? Most often they are homophobic closeted queers who are threatened by the Gay community and fear ridicule themselves and persecution. These people are at large a product of their environment and I mean Christianity. The Christian churches attack children and molest their psyche placing guilt on them for a puritanical code that the Pauline doctrine espouses.
NO other culture has been more cruel to Gay and trans gendered people than that of Christianity. At least Islamic people in most Muslim countries, aside from the few fanatic groups, actually, privately promote homosexual tendencies in their youth before marriage.
Jews do not even really care about it, not even in the ‘old Testament’ times did people ever think to poke heir nose in other peoples business, as do Christians today.
I agree, I do not want a gay pride parade walking down my neighborhood street, but they wouldn’t be marching if people would leave them alone.
In Christianity many times when single woman are lonely, I have heard the advise given to them, to draw strength from their spiritual husband Jesus…
After I heard this a few times from different sources I thought to myself… What about lonely guy..? Should I draw strength from my Husband Jesus too?
Christianity is Sterile and Cold. It’s Homo erotic on the denial side and bad by fetish. Jesus I am lonely come spoon me…
I am sorry.. I am not able to accept Jesus as my Husband. I am not Gay… I need female contact even from the Goddess.
Jesus taught a form Christianity that had both a Female and Male counterpart.
Why would Jehovah want to be referred to as father and be personified as male? And then as Paul explains but wish to mainly interact through men… Jehovah must be Gay himself.
As the male sex organs seem to be his primary focus, being that circumcision is his favorite way to mark his cattle or little boys.
How does Nick fall into all of this?
HRH Prince Nicholas de Vere von Drakenburg Kt. S.D. is the King of Witches.
John said
King of Witches?If you say so.
You and your Mesopotamian deities.In your mention of the deity Anu, did you mean Anu the Mesopotamian[Babylonian-Akkadian] Creator God, consort of Antu[m], derived from the older Sumerian God An?
Or did you mean Anu the Celtic[Irish] Chthonic Mother Goddess, mother of the Tuatha de Danann?
Tripp said
Thomas –
In post #82 –
Nick Says:
December 27, 2007 at 7:28 am e
I am not Nicholas de Vere.
And much of the opinions posted about him are a result of people who do not agree with the exclusivity of the Dragon Court. People want a club that is all inclusive but that is not reality.
In post #166 you answer –
How does Nick fall into all of this?
HRH Prince Nicholas de Vere von Drakenburg Kt. S.D.
- You say in one comment that Jesus is your King, but that you hate Jehovah. Honestly, you guys are incredibly confusing. You obviously are well-read, but very inconsistent and I believe….quite troubled. It’s hard to take you seriously in this thread.
Beth said
People please…this conversation is totally ridiculous. Vampires? This guy Thomas is accusing Jehovah of being gay? Come on, Truth Talk Live…..get rid of this silliness so we can debate with intelligent people.
Jeff said
Thomas – What archaeological discoveries?
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
MOON BLOOD
Hello Beth,
“This guy Thomas is accusing Jehovah of being gay?”
I did not accuse Jehovah of being Gay…
I merely made statement of possibility… “Jehovah must be Gay himself.” due to the
homophobic tendencies of the Paul and the Christian church.
Or I would have said, “Jehovah is Gay.”
SCIENCE BEHIND VAMPIRISM
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Hi Tripp,
The bantering can go on for ever don’t you think…
Knowledge is never ending journey.
It’s like saying we can defeat Terrorism… Terrorism is relative to the one being Terrorized.
How can Terrorism defeat Terrorism?
Can Fear cast out Fear?
No only perfect Love cast out all Fear.
Love is not afraid of knowledge or Truth. Love is not afraid of Terrorist either.
Let us pray Osama Bin Laden has found the Heavens and forgiveness before the Throne of God… As he is dead and it’s only a lie and propaganda of the Bush administration that he is alive only to continue their justification (Even claiming it’s Gods will) to continue the war in Iraq and the Middle East.
Let us pray that the United States will no longer live in a curse.
My beef with Christianity lie in the fact that it’s whole premise is inconsistent and distorted.
You think I banter on about subjects of Lunacy?
Lunacy is a persons ability to justify murder and kill others for any reason.
Take for instance Christians and their suppression of knowledge. You see how Beth reacted… If she had it her way there would only be (What she describes as…) Intelligent conversation… But what she means is, what she considers truth and worthy of discussion.
Although in a persons limited capacity to understand they attempt to reject new information feeling threatened by it or just overwhelmed.
Many Christians would say God is not the author of confusion. But if truth be and island in the middle of a Sea called confusion… located amidst a larger land mass called Information and we traveled to the Island of Truth… WE must pass through confusion to get there and find Truth. If we are tricked into climbing aboard a ship called Religious Propaganda we will never arrive at the island of Truth.
When it says in Genesis, the Cayin traveled to the land of Nod… Nod meaning the anxiety and uncertainty of the unknown… He was experiencing anxiety and uncertainty of his future without the security of the garden. I know this first hand as my father kicked me out of the house when I was kid and I had to fend for myself on the streets.
I no longer had the security of knowing where I would sleep or what I would eat… It became a matter of life and death… a Matter of survival.
I too have been to the land of Nod and Jesus came to set my people at ease as we no longer and to toil for our daily bread nor should we take thought of what we should eat or what we should wear… We no longer had to live in the and of Nod.
The curse of Jehovah upon the descendants of Cayin has been lifted and is only a matter of time when my family will inherit the Earth. Or do you not understand who the Ebionim are?
I didn’t come here to debate or get trapped into a intellectual clap-trap. I donot want to convert anyone… I want to find those that I know find this information fascinating and resonating within their spirit and heart that this be Truth.
How arrogant Christians are… When have any of you ascended to Heaven and have returned to Earth to tell about it?
When have any of you seen Jesus in the Flesh?
Once upon a time…
A protestant preacher and his family, while making their way west, were captured by savages (as they called them) or native Americans. While these so called savages burnt the wagons the preacher pulled out his bible and began to rebuke in the them with a boldness. He cried, “The Lord rebuke you!” while waving his bible in the air.
Fascinated by his fearlessness the natives decided instead of killing him and taking his wife and children they brought them back to their tribe safely. The woman of the tribe tended to the preachers family while the men motioned for the preacher to come into the tent and smoke a peace pipe.. The preacher offended rebuked them again waving the bible and claiming it’s a sin to smoke because the body is the temple of the lord.
The Chief began to grow even more interested in the preacher and said to the his brothers in their native tongue “he is an idiot, let us see his wisdom”… Suddenly a young hunter spoke in broken English and said to the preacher, “My grand father knows you are a very wise man and that you serve a great spirit…” The preacher nodded and said, “I serve the Lord Jesus Christ!” The young hunter requested, ” My grandfather wishes to see the wisdom of your great spirit” The preacher smiled and thought to himself this was his chance to preach the gospel So, he opened the bible and began to present the Jesus and explained how he died.
The tent was filled with an uproar and the Chief yelled out and suddenly silence fell on the tent. The Chief leaned over to the young hunter and whispered in his ear. The preacher tried to continue but the young hunter interrupted, My grand father says, “My grand father says he would like to see you wisdom… He says, if your great spirit is as powerful as you say please produce light.” After he had spoken the torches were extinguished one by one until they sat in pitch black. The preacher began to pray and pray but he could not produce any light in the tent so that anyone could see… Finally the Chief grew tired and whispered in the young hunters ear.
They then seized the preacher and carried him outside and then buried him up to his neck, scalped him and left him to die. They named him the man of darkness and considered him a liar. His wife and children were given mercy and became members of the tribe and eventually converted to the beliefs of the tribe.
One day the preachers youngest daughter asked the Chief why they did not like her daddy… The Chief answered her, “Your father was not a wise man he spoke many empty words with out substance…” The little girl pondered for a moment but why did my daddy have to die?” The Chief answered, “He died because he was an idiot, when we asked him to make light he was not able to neither did his great spirit help him” The little girl confused asked, “How do you make light?”
The Chief then smiled and doused the torch so that the tent was dark and then went outside the tent leaving the little girl alone in the dark. He went to the great fire and stuck the tip of the torch in the fire. She began to get scared when suddenly the Chief came back with the torch lit with fire and sat back down. The little girl frowned and asked, “Is that it?” The Chief laughed and laughed and exclaimed, “Yes!”
The End
Beth said
I can only think of one word, Thomas…
Whatever
Jeff said
Thomas – Bin Laden being dead is an archaeological discovery?
How did you come to the conclusion that he is dead?
Please respond.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Hello Beth,
I will remember that you said that when the North American Union is installed and our current government is dissolved.
Maybe you should look at the bigger picture.
“Every Elf for Himself
“This is our Law, and the Law of the Strong. ” — Crowley, ibid.
To the charges of “conspiring to take over the world,” the Dragons deny that they give two licks what the rest of humanity does with itself. Their primary concern is,
“the restoration of their own Tribes, their own Nation and their own Homelands…. the foundation of their own distinct society.. re-introducing their old social structures and values.”
This results in “The Grail Code,” a system of Egalitarian, Chivalric ethics that govern how dragons treat other members of their race. However, “it is not the code that efficiently orders the behavior of the Dragon Families in their dealings with those not of the Grail Blood.” They acknowledge and defend their own elitist attitudes towards mankind, whom they regard as,
“thoroughly stupid and dimwitted, with a clear indication that this condition is genetically inherited.”
Whereas in contrast,
“The Elves were naturally transcendent of spirit and their queens and kings were insulated from the common round of nuisances and petty concerns by minds which were bred for deeper matters.”
Despite their hatred of humanity, they will kindly agree to be the guardians of our governments again (if they aren’t secretly doing so already), should the population choose to accept them, and offer them the thrones of the Earth, which de Vere and friends indicate are rightfully theirs anyway. They are just waiting for mankind to realize it again. We will have to deal with the fact that these “Elves” seem to be in possession of a material that bestows long life as well as fantastic physical, mental, and spiritual powers, giving them a distinct advantage through which they are clearly attempting to lord over us, while they allow our populations to wallow in disease, death, and spiritual degradation. As an excuse, de Vere and Gardner claim that the Starfire and White Gold are only effective for those already of the Dragon Blood anyway, because the rest of us,
“won’t have the right blood serum or the right connections in their cerebral lobes.”
De Vere denies the claims of most people who believe themselves to be of this bloodline.
“Some people argue that because of the out breeding of the old families, there must be millions of people ’of the fairy blood’ living today: but such a statement flies in the face of accepted facts of history. The genuine old royal families rarely outbred at all, whilst the later, fake parvenu, tinker nobility whom people now confuse with them often did.”
So that leaves little hope for you and me of ever obtaining the fruits of this magnificent “Philosopher’s Stone,” which “gives youth to the old” and is described as “the summation of the heart’s desire.” And if such a substance were available to the public, how much would it cost? Would it be obtainable by everyone or only the rich and privileged? What if it could be administered for free in the water supply or was available in tablet form at your local pharmacy, covered by your health insurance policy? What would happen to our already exploding population?
As a species, mankind will have to decide how to deal with the information – provided that the information is aired in public someday, and provided our “thoroughly stupid and dim-witted” populace can figure out what to do with it. Will we take advantage of what could be our greatest opportunity to advance as a species, or will we allow it to be used against us by a caste of Aryan overlords who despise us (and who are literally the spawn of Satan!)
Then again, will we perhaps wish to accept their rule, and the benefits of being led by an advanced race whose powers and insight are greater than our own. After all, there are those who believe that civilization is created by and can only be maintained by an established elite. Would we want to meddle with that, and allow positions of power to be overrun by inferior men? Perhaps it is worth considering whether an elite can truly be made by enhancing human faculties, or whether such powers are purely in the blood sources.”
Want more?
Divine Right
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Paul and Ananias
Jesus said that true prophets can be distinguished from false prophets by
“their fruits.” He mused, “Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of
thistles?” In other words, he told us to check out the story of a so-called
prophet or person of influence. If the story doesn’t add up, then the person
in question should be viewed as a false prophet.
Having stated that, here is some additional information about Paul. Firstly,
Paul was linked—from the moment of his so-called conversion in Damascus—to
one of the same high-priests who had Jesus killed. The man’s name was
“Ananias” (Acts 9:10, King James). It was Ananias who restored Saul’s sight
after being blinded during his so-called vision of Jesus at Damascus.
The Bible states that Ananias [complained to the Lord that Paul] had “authority
from the chiefs to bind all that call on thy name” (Acts 9:14). [So Ananias was
apparently quite familiar with the hierarchy of the high priests and the Sanhedrin.
Ananias may have been somewhat influential himself.] Possibly a former high priest.
Ananias [may have been] one of the high priests in the Sanhedrin who questioned
Jesus before his execution. In the King James Version of the Bible, this man’s
name is spelled “Annas.” He was the father-in-law of Joseph Caiaphais, the high
priest who decreed that Jesus must die (John 11:49-51). In fact, Jesus was
first questioned by Annas after being arrested by the Sanhedrin guards. Annas
turned Jesus over to Caiaphas who turned him over to Pilate for crucifixion.
The English translations of Antiquities, by Josephus, identifies “Ananus” as a
high-priest appointed to head the Sanhedrin a few years before Caiaphas (ref.
Josephus, Antiquities, Book 18, Chapter 2). In John 18:13, it states that Annas
(Ananus) was the father-in-law of Joseph Caiaphas.
So we know that Ananus and Annas were the same person, but different authors or
translators spelled their names differently (in Antiquities versus John). So it
seems highly plausible that the person known as Ananias (from Acts 9, Saul’s
pal) is also Ananus/Annas.
It is highly suspicious that the same high priest who was deeply involved in the murder
of Jesus was also linked to Paul’s conversion to Christianity.(More than likely his co-conspirator to help Paul with his fake vision lies)
Secondly, Paul’s teachings are much different from those of Jesus. Jesus
taught people how to live their lives in a manner that would please God. In
addition, he said in no uncertain terms that those who practice Pharisaic
teachings would not escape hell. He called them the children of the Devil. Paul
WAS a Pharisee. In addition, Paul focused on the meaning of the resurrection
in an obsessive manner that left most of Jesus’s teaching
forgotten—particularly the damnation of the Pharisees and their followers.
Thirdly, Paul never attempted to atone for his life as a Pharisee or his
association with one of the high priests involved in the murder of Jesus. In
fact, he boasted of his status as a Pharisee. It should be regarded as
blasphemy that an active Pharisee would spread Christianity and [may have
been] aided in [his] efforts by one of Jesus’s murderers, high-priest Ananus.
Jesus said of false prophets, “Ye shall know them by their fruits.” I can see
nothing but rotten fruit produced from Paul.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
“They say they are Jews are not, but are the synagogue of Satan”
John, in his Revelation, scowls at Paul and his Gentile following, who “say they are Jews and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9). He denounces the doctrines of Nicolas, [2:6] one of the seven first deacons of the Church, as hateful; and he expresses his detestation of the Laodiceans (Rev. 2:16) by saying that the Almighty would spew them out of his mouth. Paul returns the compliment by “withstanding” Peter for his “dissimulation,” (Gal. 2:11-13) and sneering at James and John (Gal. 2:9) as seeming to be pillars, the former of whom retorts that Paul is a “vain man” (James 2:20). Paul vehemently tells the Galatians: “If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed” (Gal. 1:8). Even “the beloved disciple,” in his second Epistle, manifests the same persecuting spirit:
“If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: for he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.” (2 John 10-11)
In the very first century Christianity was split into many petty sects, each denouncing the other as teaching false doctrine. The early Nazarenes, who adhered to the Jewish law, were called Ebionites, or contemptible people. The Ebionites denounced the Paulinists, and declared that Paul was an impostor who became a Christian because he was not allowed to marry a Jewish woman. In an epistle of Peter to James, prefixed to the Clementine Recognitions, and as genuine as any other portion of the writings ascribed to Peter, Paul is alluded to as “the enemy,” and the author of lawless and foolish teachings. Of the Recognitions itself, a work ascribed to Clement, alluded to in Philippians 4:3 and undoubtedly belonging to the first era of Christian history, the author of Supernatural Religion says:
“There cannot be a doubt that the Apostle Paul is attacked in this religious romance as the great enemy of the true faith, under the hated name of Simon the Magician, whom Peter follows everywhere for the purpose of unmasking and confuting him. He is robbed of his title of “Apostle of the Gentiles,” which, together with the honor of founding the Church of Antioch, of Laodicea, and of Rome, is ascribed to Peter. All that opposition to Paul which is implied in the Epistle to the Galatians and elsewhere (1 Cor. 1:11-12; 2 Cor. 11:13-20; Philip. 1:15,16) is here realised and exaggerated, and the personal difference with Peter to which Paul refers is widened into the most bitter animosity.” (Vol II, p.34.)
Irenaeus, in the second century, in his work against Heretics, stigmatises them with the most abusive epithets, and accuses them of the most abominable crimes. He calls them “thieves and robbers,” “slippery serpents,” “miserable little foxes,” and so forth, and declares that they practise lewdness in their assemblies.
Tertullian, in the third century, displays a full measure of bigotry, with an added sense of exultation over the sufferings in reserve for his pagan opponents.
“What a city in the new Jerusalem! For it will not be without its games; it will have the final and eternal day of judgment, which the Gentiles now treat with unbelief and scorn, when so vast a series of ages, with all their productions, will be hurled into one absorbing fire. How magnificent the scale of that game! With what admiration, what laughter, what glee, what triumph shall I perceive so many mighty monarchs, who had been given out as received into the skies, even Jove himself and his votaries, moaning in unfathomable gloom. The governors too, persecutors of the Christian name, cast into fiercer torments than they had devised against the faithful, and liquefying amid shooting spires of flame! And those sage philosophers, who had deprived the Deity of his offices, and questioned the existence of a soul, or denied its future union with the body, meeting again with their disciples only to blush before them in those ruddy fires! Not to forget the poets, trembling, not before the tribunal of Rhadamanthus or Minos, but at the unexpected bar of Christ! Then is the time to hear tragedians, doubly pathetic now that they bewail their own agonies; to observe the actors, released by the fierce elements from all restraint upon their gestures; to admire the charioteer, glowing all over on the car of torture; to watch the wrestlers, thrust into the struggles, not of the gymnasium, but of the flames.”
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
C.S. Lewis once wrote that the teachings of Jesus tend to be harsh, and that Paul’s writings soften their impact. This is true. But is it good? Do you want those in power to be held accountable to a high moral standard with harsh penalties, or a low moral standard with slap-on-the-wrist penalties? If a man is deciding whether to rape his niece, is it more beneficial for him to read “All things are permissible” (1 Corinthians 6:12) or “Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.” (Matthew 7:19)?
James the Just, in James 1:12, stated that salvation belongs to those who love God, who are patient under trial, and who stand up under temptation. Jesus stated that the most important command contained in the Law is the duty to love God with all your heart. Yes, the duty to love God–a duty which Paul omitted from his teaching–is more difficult than merely believing. Real Christianity is a hard road to follow, certainly harder than the salvation through belief that Paul preached.
Jesus and James asked for more than just belief. They asked for more than just a love for neighbor. They asked people to love God, to love Him passionately, to love Him so deeply that patience under trial and the resistance of temptation would inevitably follow. Yes, good works could be expected to follow too. But, in their eyes, the key, the cornerstone, the seed, the necessary and the sufficient condition for salvation is a passionate, whole-hearted love for God.
While the choice is not easy, the right answer is clear. A society that bases its actions upon justice, upon love of God, and upon a genuine respect and love of neighbor will be a more peaceful, more equitable, more fair place to live than a society that believes works to be irrelevant, exploitation normal, and holiness a quaint fancy.
Paul rejected the authority of the Apostles that Jesus appointed, and the Apostles that Jesus appointed rejected Paul. Paul lacked authority to preach, and his own letters make it clear that he did not possess a letter of recommendation from the authorities that Jesus instituted. Jesus did not institute the Twelve Apostles as a means of personal amusement or to fill his idle time; he did so to protect the Church from idle, heretical, or blasphemous doctrines. He did so with the intention of creating an institution that would preserve correct teaching. Paul chose to go outside of this institution, without a letter of recommendation, and without benefiting himself from its teaching or instruction. Not only do Paul’s writings lack consistency or reliability, they cannot be considered Christian.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
There are two flaws with Paul’s approach: the first being that it is not based on the teaching of Jesus, and the second being that it is designed to propagate a mixture of superstitious belief and secular humanistic practice.
Paul’s letters display a remarkable degree of ignorance about Jesus the man, and his teaching. The entire corpus of Paul’s letters contains two historical facts about Jesus: that he was crucified, and that he had a brother named James. Paul seems content with his ignorance, stating “knowledge puffeth up” (1 Corinthians 8:1).
Jesus spent years living with and teaching a group of twelve Apostles. Paul’s attitude towards these Apostles can be found in the following passage from Galatians: “But though we, or an angel of heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. . . . For I neither received [the gospel] from man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. . . . I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it . . . But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb . . . To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles I saw none, save James the Lord’s brother. Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not. Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia” Galatians 1:8-21.
As this passage makes clear, Paul did not avail himself of the opportunity to learn from those whom Jesus taught face to face. Paul instead claimed that his revelation came directly from God, making instruction from humans unnecessary for him. Given this attitude, it would not be surprising if Paul did more talking than listening during the fifteen days he spent with Peter. It will become clear that he was unable or unwilling to eliminate contradictions between his own doctrine and that of Jesus. It is surprising that someone who had chosen a profession of lifelong ministry should fail to avail himself of the opportunity to learn from those who had been taught by Jesus himself. Paul’s approach to the Apostles that the visible Jesus chose can be found in the following passages. Paul sneers the three chief Apostles: James, Cephas (i.e. Simon Peter) and John, saying that they “seemed to be pillars” Galatians 2:9. Paul publicly rebukes Peter (Galatians 2:14), scolds Barnabas (Galatians 2:13), and claims “For I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles” 2 Corinthians 11:5. And in 2 Corinthians 12:11, Paul claims, “in nothing am I behind the very chiefest apostles, though I be nothing.”
Jesus’ attitude towards the twelve Apostles was different. “Then answered Peter, and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore? And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” Matthew 19:27-28.
Paul clearly felt that the personal revelation that he experienced was of greater value than the years of instruction that the Apostles received from Jesus himself. To test the validity of this assertion, it is necessary to compare Paul’s teaching with that of Jesus. If, in fact, Paul’s teaching turns out to be a natural extension of that of Jesus, in the same way that a fully grown tree is the natural extension of a sapling, then there may be validity to his belief. If, however, the voice or spirit that Paul thinks communicated with him is unreliable, then we should expect to see Paul choosing a different path than the one Jesus chose.
The fulfillment of the Law
“For all the Law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself.” Galatians 5:14, also see Romans 13:9, in which the sentiment is repeated. Gamaliel, the Pharisee, Hillel the Pharisee’s grandson, taught the same thing. Hillel was one of the founding fathers of Phariseeism, and is favorably mentioned in the Talmud.
“Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” Matthew 22:37-40. Also see Mark 12:29-31.
This is the most glaring contradiction between the teaching of Paul and Jesus. On this issue, Paul sides with the Pharisees, who behaved as though they were more afraid of the Roman conquerors of Israel than of God. Thus, those parts of the Law which demanded holiness were weakened, while new rules were created to convince people to submit to secular authorities. Based on the general direction that Paul took religion, it is most likely that the omission of an explicit command to love God was deliberate.
Slaves
“Slaves, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ.” Ephesians 6:5
This passage is based neither on the Old Testament nor on the teaching of Jesus, as will be seen.
“Thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel; I made a covenant with your fathers in the day that I brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondmen, saying, At the end of seven years let ye go every man his brother an Hebrew, which hath been sold unto thee; and when he hath served thee six years, thou shalt let him go free from thee: but your fathers hearkened not unto me, neither inclined their ear. . . . But ye turned and polluted my name, and caused every man his servant, and every man his handmaid, whom he had set at liberty at their pleasure, to return, and brought them into subjection, to be unto you for servants and handmaids. Therefore thus saith the LORD; Ye have not hearkened unto me, in proclaiming liberty, every one to his brother, and every man to his neighbor: behold, I proclaim a liberty for you, saith the LORD, to the sword, to the pestilence, and to the famine; and I will make you to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth.” Jeremiah 34:13-17.
“I [Paul] urge you on behalf of my child Onesimus, whose father I have become in my imprisonment, who was once useless to you but is now useful to you and me. I am sending him, that is, my own heart, back to you. . . . Perhaps this is why he went away from you for a while, that you might have him back forever, no longer as a slave but more than a slave, a brother, beloved especially to me, but even more so to you, as a man and in the Lord.” Philemon 10-16.
“Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the slave which is escaped from his master unto thee: He shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it liketh him best: thou shalt not oppress him.” Deuteronomy 23:15-16.
“[The covenant of Moses] is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. Now Hagar . . . corresponds with the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman. It was for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened by a yoke of slavery” Galatians 4:24-5:1.
The escaped slave Onesimus is probably wondering how to avoid “letting [himself] be burdened by a yoke of slavery” when the person who gave that advice, Paul, re-enslaved him, and returned him to his ex-master. Had Paul been under the covenant of Moses, which he likened to slavery, then Paul could not have returned the escaped slave Onesimus back to his master Philemon. However, because Paul was free, a “child of the free woman,” his freedom freed him to return Onesimus to slavery. Onesimus, being a Pauline Christian, was, by Paul’s reckoning, also a “child of the freewoman.” Therefore, “All things are permissible to [him]” (1 Corinthians 6:12), except disobedience to his master (Ephesians 6:5) or to governing authorities generally (Romans 13:1-4). Under these constraints, Onesimus is not the servant of God, but the slave of man.
Paul has more to say on the subject of slavery. In Galatians 5:1, Paul states that “It was for freedom that Christ has set us free” even though his passage 1 Corinthians 7:20-24 states “he who was a free man when he was called is Christ’s slave.” Paul appears unable to decide whether Jesus has enslaved Christians or set them free.
The same lack of consistency that Paul exhibited when addressing slavery can also be seen in his approach to circumcision.
“Mark my words, I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all” Galatians 5:2.
“Paul wanted to take [Timothy] along with him on the journey, so he circumcised him because of the Jews who lived in that area, for they all knew that his father was a Greek” Acts 16:2.
Paul’s Attitude Towards Sin
Romans 6:12-14, “Let not sin . . . reign in your mortal body . . . For sin shall have no dominion over you: for you are not under the Law [of Moses], but under grace.”
Romans 8:13, “If you live after the flesh, you shall die, but if you, through the Spirit, mortify the deeds of the body, you shall live.”
Romans 7 :14-25 “I am carnal, sold under sin. . . . I can will what is right, but I cannot perform it. For I fail to practice the good deeds I desire to do, but the evil deeds that I do not desire to do are what I am [ever] doing. . . . [I am] a prisoner to the law of sin that dwells in my bodily organs. . . . I [with mind and heart] serve the Law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.”
Paul made a promise in Romans 6:14. In a behavior disturbingly similar to a modern politician, he wastes little time in revealing the empty nature of his own promise. Also, it is not immediately clear whether there is an observable difference between “living after the flesh,” which Paul states will lead to death (Romans 8:13), and the “law of sin” that Paul admits to serving with his “flesh” in Romans 7:25.
The Sabbath
“One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God.” Romans 14:5-6
“Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath” Matthew 24:20
Unclean foods
“As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean.” Romans 14:14
“But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols . . .” Revelation 2:14.
Justification through love alone, as expressed by faith and works, or through faith alone, unaided by love?
“For if Abraham were justified by works, he had whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and was counted unto him for righteousness. Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.” Romans 4:2-5
“[B]ecause thou [Abraham] hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son: That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.” Genesis 22:16-18.
“Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham justified by works when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by his works was made perfect?” James 2:19-22.
“Abraham . . . was made a friend of God, because he kept the commandments of God and did not choose the will of his own spirit” The Dead Sea Scrolls: Damascus Document, column 3, line 2.
“For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works” Matthew 16:27.
“Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect” Matthew 5:48.
“[I]f thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments” Matthew 19:17.
“Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink . . . And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal” Matthew 25:41-46.
The status of woman
“For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of man.” 1 Corinthians 11:7.
There is nothing in the book of Genesis to support this contention. Genesis does state that woman was created as a helpmate for man, but if anything, this further weakens Paul’s already baseless argument, as “he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.” Matthew 23:11.
“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” Genesis 1:27.
Based on this passage, it would appear that woman, like man, was created for the glory of God.
“Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.” Ephesians 5:22. This commandment closely parallels Ephesians 6:5, in which Paul exhorts “slaves, be obedient to . . . your masters . . . as unto Christ.” Disturbingly, these two new commands occur within less than a chapter of each other.
“[Pharisees] love to be called of men Rabbi, Rabbi. But be ye not called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren. . . . Neither be called masters, for one is your Master, even Christ.” Matthew 23:7-10.
Paul saw many christs: a husband is christ over his wife (Ephesians 5:22), an owner a christ over his slaves (Ephesians 6:5), and a secular government the gatekeeper of heaven (Romans 13:2). Paul saw many christs, Jesus saw only one.
Submission to governing authorities
“[The Polish priests] will preach what we want them to preach. If any priest acts differently, we will make short work of him. The task of the priest is to keep the Poles quiet, stupid, and dull-witted” Adolf Hitler. Did Paul’s teachings encourage people to critically examine their government, and to insist upon ethical conduct? Or were they more likely to promote the quietness, stupidity, and dull-wittedness that Adolf Hitler saw as prized attributes for conquered people?
“Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God” Romans 13:1.
At the time those words were written, Nero, the Roman Caesar, was demanding that his populace worship him as god.
“Everyone must know for all future time that if he raises his hand to strike the State, then certain death is his lot.” Adolf Hitler.
“Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and they that resist shall receive to themselves [eternal condemnation]” Romans 13:2.
Whether secular rulers deliberately harm good people
“Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod.” Mark 8:15
“For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.” Romans 13:3-4.
“[Pilate] had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified” Matthew 27:26.
“[Herod] sent, and beheaded John in the prison. And his head was brought in on a platter, and given to [Herodias' daughter] who carried it to her mother” Matthew 14:10-11.
“Wherefore, behold, I send unto you [scribes and Pharisees] prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some ye shall scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth.” Matthew 23:34-35.
“But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God. . . . At this they . . . began to stone him. Meanwhile, the witnesses laid their clothes at the feet of a young man named Saul. . . . And Saul was there, giving approval to his death” Acts 7:55-8:1.
Taxes
“Unto you [disciples] it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: That seeing they may see, and not perceive, and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins forgiven them” Mark 4:11-12.
“And they sent unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch [Jesus] in his words. And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? Shall we, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? Bring me a penny, that I may see it. And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is the image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar’s. And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” Mark 12:13-17.
“The earth is the LORD’s, and the fullness thereof” Psalms 24:1.
Thus, when someone has finished giving to God what is God’s, there is nothing left to render unto Caesar.
“And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? Of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? Of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. [Note that this concept of freedom is radically different than Paul's.] Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, [pay the tax anyway, with money miraculously obtained]” Matthew 17:24-27.
“For this cause [i.e., the divine appointment of secular rulers] ye pay tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor. Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law” Romans 13:6-8.
“And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in [the place of condemnation]” Matthew 10:28.
Peace or a sword
“Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I am not come to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.” Matthew 10:34-37.
“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. . . . For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 5:17-20.
“For [Jesus] is our peace . . . having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances, for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace. . . . And [Jesus] came and preached peace to them which were afar off, and to them which were nigh.” Ephesians 2:14-17
“[They have said] Peace, peace, when there is no peace. . . . Hear O earth: behold, I will bring evil upon this people . . . because they have not hearkened unto my words, nor unto my law, but rejected it. . . . your burnt offerings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices sweet unto me.” Jeremiah 6:14-20
“And mine hand shall be upon the prophets that see vanity, and that divine lies: they shall not be in the assembly of my people . . . because they have seduced my people, saying Peace, and there was no peace . . . Because with lies ye have made the heart of the righteous sad, whom I have not made sad; and strengthened the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, by promising him life” Ezekiel 13:8-23.
“[T]o the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness” Romans 4:5.
“[I]f thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments” Matthew 19:17.
Divorce
“And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.” 1 Corinthians 7:10-11
“The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And [Jesus] answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. They said unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? He saith unto them, Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committed adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.” Matthew 19:3-9.
The effect of studying the Law
“What can we say? That the law is sin? Of course not! Yet I did not know sin except through the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, ‘you shall not covet.’ But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of lust. For without the law sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. . . . But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceedingly sinful.” Romans 7:7-13.
A close reading of this passage is necessary to a careful evaluation of the claims Paul is making. The reader is asked to carefully consider Paul’s contention that he would not have known to lust after women had he not been commanded against doing so.
“Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man. But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.” James 1:13-14.
Boasting
“Let no man think me a fool; if otherwise, yet as a fool receive me, that I may boast myself a little. That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting. Seeing that many glory after the flesh, I will glory also. . . . Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? So am I. Are they ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool) I am more; in labors more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft. . . . In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by my own countrymen . . . in perils among false brethren; In weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness. . . . If I must needs glory, I will glory of the things which concern mine infirmities. . . . In Damascus the governor under Aretas the king kept the city . . . with a garrison, desirous to apprehend me: And through a window in a basket was I let down by the wall, and escaped his hands. It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. . . . For though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now I forbear, lest any man think of me above what he seeth me to be, or that he heareth of me. . . . in nothing am I behind the very chiefest of the apostles, though I be nothing. . . . For what is it wherein ye were inferior to other churches, except it be that I myself was not burdensome to you? Forgive me this wrong” 2 Corinthians 11:16-12:19.
For James, such boasting is proud, potentially hypocritical, hurtful to others, and, ultimately, unneeded.
“But now ye rejoice in your boastings: all such rejoicing is evil” James 4:16.
It is interesting that the word “I” does not once appear in the book of James. Contemporaries had described James as a man of exceptional holiness, a man who prayed so often that the skin on his knees began to resemble a camel’s hide. When Paul, in Galatians 1:8, wrote “But though we, or an angel of heaven, preach any other gospel unto you . . .” it is most likely that James was the “angel of heaven” that Paul had in mind. James did not mention the work he had done for God, choosing instead to follow the teaching of Jesus, to “not let the left hand know what the right hand is doing.”
Paul the Man
To find information about Paul the man, one can turn to the book of Acts, the Clementines, Paul’s letters, and the histories of Josephus. Of the four historians, Josephus appears to have the most knowledge, writes with the most detail, and is the author about whom the most is known. Like most writers of the time, he often chooses to whitewash Roman misdeeds. When “The Jewish War” was written, Josephus had reason to fear execution at the hands of the Romans. Consequently, the book must be dismissed as a piece of pro-Roman propaganda. His later works were written after his adoption into the royal family, and in “Antiquities” he displays a moderate level of willingness to examine Roman and Herodian misconduct.
Interestingly, none of these four sources state that Paul was martyred. There is support for the idea in apocryphal Gentile Christian literature of the time. It is perhaps advisable to read such literature fully before giving wholesale credence to its assertions. In one case, the same work that declares Paul to have been martyred also claims that he baptized a lion, and that the animal spoke to him, going so far as to have a short conversation about how the lion had been captured.
The book of Acts was written by Luke. Luke was a follower of Paul, could write in Greek, and was perhaps from Cyrene. Beyond this, nothing is known about him.
Luke paints a picture of a Paul who is born poor, martyrs Christians before becoming one himself, and who proceeds to live the rest of his life for Christ. Acts attributes several miracles to Paul. The Clementines follow the same basic story line as the first part of Acts, but with some key differences. James is elected the head of the Christian Church following the departure of Jesus. After his conversion, Paul remained on good terms with the Herodian family. He initiated a physical attack on James, in which James was cast down from the Temple stairs, and left for dead. There was, of course, no understanding between Paul and the main Church, and no one gave him permission to preach to the Gentiles.
The first part of the Book of Acts appears to be a rewritten version of an early version of the Clementines. The Clementines presents the Jewish Christian side of the Early Church’s history, and Acts presents the Pauline view. Josephus tells the story from the perspective of one who has taken neither side. Josephus’s Saulus is a descendent of Herod’s brother, and hence is a free-born Roman citizen. Saulus’s house arrests were relatively mild affairs, done primarily to protect him from those who had sworn to kill him. Saulus was on bad terms with king Aretas, because Saulus had supported the killer of John the Baptist (Herod Antipas) in his war against King Aretas. As a result of this disagreement, Saulus was not safe in King Aretas’s domains, and, at one point, had to escape the city of Damascus by being let down in a basket. For more information about the Herodian family in general, or Paul in particular, see Robert Eisenman’s “James the Brother of Jesus.”
Josephus’s account provides a more comprehensive and consistent explanation of Paul’s background than does Luke’s. Hillel was one of the most famous Pharisees of all time. His grandson, Gamaliel, was Paul’s boyhood teacher. Luke says nothing about how a poor tentmaker’s son from somewhere in Turkey could possibly have acquired such a famous teacher. Likewise, there is no mention of why or how Paul was “freeborn” into full Roman citizenship, at a time when the distinction was rare. There is also no explanation of how Paul acquired authority-which he clearly had-to kill Christians (Acts 7:58, 22:20). That a young man should have such power is surprising, that a young man born into a poor and obscure family should have such power is absurd. A more logical and consistent explanation of the facts is the one Josephus provides: Paul was born into a rich and powerful family, was given instruction from the most prestigious Pharisee available, and was later, because of his family connections, given power to persecute Christians in whatever manner he pleased.
“Behold, the hire of the laborers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth: and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth [i.e., the Lord of Hosts, or even the Lord of War]” James 5:4.
This statement echoes back to the riots of the 60s. In these riots, slaves of the Rich High Priests robbed the Poor Lower Priests of tithes that were rightfully theirs. The riots were violent affairs, and some of the Poor Lower Priests were killed. According to Josephus, Saulus actively participated in, and indeed lead, these riots-on behalf of the Rich High Priests. These riots, incidentally, took place well after Saulus’s/Paul’s Damascus road experience.
“When an evil spirit comes out of a man, it goes through arid places seeking rest and does not find it. Then it says, ‘I will return to the house I left.’ When it arrives, it finds the house unoccupied, swept clean, and put in order. Then it goes and takes with it seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there. And the final condition of that man is worse than the first. That is how it will be with this wicked generation.” Matthew 12:43-45.
Even a casual perusal of the works of Pauline Christians reveals a disturbing willingness to bend or stretch the truth to gain converts. Because they felt belief to be the necessary and sufficient condition for salvation, they exhibited a strong willingness to fabricate tall tales about miracles that strain credulity. In the Acts of Paul and Thecla (which are a subset of the Acts of Paul), a lovely virgin heroine is cast nearly naked into a stadium, and requires several consecutive very public miracles to rescue her, including help from a mysteriously benevolent lion (perhaps the same one Paul baptized). In several of the infancy gospels, Jesus miraculously killed a boy who had accidentally banged into him. He turned clay pigeons into real birds, for no apparent reason other than that it was the Sabbath. Jesus exhibited a strong willingness to miraculously kill or maim those who disagreed with him, healing people only when doing so would solidify his own social position. Few, if any, of the miracles discussed in these books have moral meaning, the apparent purpose instead being to demonstrate raw power. The efficacy of these works in gaining converts was surprisingly high: there were many who had converted simply on the strength of what they had read in an infancy gospel. Many of these works can be found in “The Other Bible,” a compilation of various apocryphal writings.
Apart from the testimony of those actively engaged in marketing Paul’s religion, there is no historical evidence to support the contention that Paul’s life was marked by any unusual degree of holiness or personal rectitude. On the contrary, aside from the writings of Paul and a few sectarians (who predominately wrote long after Paul’s death), early historians paint a disturbing picture of a man whose driving energy was a strong desire for personal aggrandizement and power.
Beth said
Thomas – You’re not answering any questions. You’re just spouting out ridiculous Gnosticism. How many times have you read The Davinci Code? Probably more times than you’re read the Bible. Plus, you say Nick is Nicholas de Vere. Nick says he’s not.
Folks, if we ignore him long enough maybe he’ll go away. I’ll be the first.
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
Accountability
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
YOU are so afraid of me Beth…. Essenes nor the Naz-Aryans practiced Gnosticism But if you like I can start with the Catharii?
I have never read the Davinci Code (I grew bored of it in the first chapter)… And I Promise you Beth and I guarantee when you stand before the Throne of God… You will eat those words and apologize to me.
The Father in Heaven Knows how many times I’ve read the Bible… How many versions and how much time I have committed to study of which I owe Paul one debt… That he pissed me off enough to prove him wrong by reading the Books of the Prophets repeatedly.
And if you must know… Unlike most Christians I Truly Love Jesus… Enough to really study it out to find out who Jesus really is.
God as my witness, I have laid my life down repeatedly for God.
Many times I was scared for my life but when I did preach, I endured more beatings than you could imagine.
I say this with conviction… I like you Beth and I know God likes you too.
I do not down you for your faith and if Paul did not condemn mine I wouldn’t have anything against him at all. But I would watch your attitude though because you haven’t a real clue who you’re talking too… Yeah I am sure that it’s possible, you as well as many other who have seen my myspace assume they can Judge me by appearance alone.
I do not Judge any one of you … I do not even Judge Paul before God… I Judge his doctrine and motive. God has already Judged the Devil and his false Prophet.
Paul is a Liar and a false Apostle.
Let us, then break down what the Law is in Paul’s eyes, verses, Jesus, James and the Bretheren, Shall we?
HRH King Thomas of Hierosolyma Kt. S.D. O.G.S. said
The Law Stands
Christian anti-Semitism and other errors of Paul
RESOURCE & REFERENCE
Paul was anti-law and said the law was a curse
Now we need to look at more of Paul’s errors in doctrine, especially those that suggest one is not expected to live by God’s Law. We have already seen that Paul’s doctrine concerning the sovereignty of God is severely flawed, his use of Scripture to prove his doctrine is lackluster at best if not outright dishonest, he lies, and he is in all probability the false apostle that Yeshua commended the Ephesians for rejecting.
Still, Paul makes both pro-law statements and anti-law statements in his writings that he never does reconcile. Indeed he can’t! Either God expects us to live by His Law or He doesn’t. There is no in-between. But to be fair, I must make mention the fact of his pro-law statements. One reason I need to do this is because among the growing sect of Messianics there is a small number who call themselves “observant” Messianics. They continue to believe, as Yeshua taught, that the law stands today. But in their endeavor to try and maintain some semblance of credibility with other Messianics, (who are really little more than Christians with a Jewish flair and an umbilical cord attached directly to mainstream Christianity) these observant Messianics will engage in bend-over-backwards apologetics for Paul and do everything they can to argue he was pro-law. Apparently they continue to feel the need to embrace the picture of an infallible New Testament. We shouldn’t be surprised about the fact that Paul made both pro and anti-law statements because of things he said like the following.
“…to the Jew I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law; to those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without law; to the weak I became as weak, that I might win the weak, I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.” 1Corinthians 9:20-22
At the very least, it is apparent that Paul was a chameleon who blended with his surroundings whatever they were! Paul clearly taught contradictory messages for the purpose of making everybody happy… something you will never find Yeshua doing. As long as there are numerous, clearly anti-law statements made by Paul, Christians and non-observant Messianics alike will always point to them and rest their case against the poor legalistic observant Messianics. There is no simple misunderstanding about it. Even Paul’s contemporaries accused him of encouraging others not to practice the law of Moses. They even had him there in the flesh to explain and straighten out the misunderstanding if indeed it was so simple. This I have already established. (See again Acts 21:20-12,28 for an example) As you will see shortly while I display more of Paul’s anti-law doctrine, the observant Messianic’s endeavors might be better termed… appaulling apaulogetics! They would be better off facing the fact that Paul was a false apostle, call him on it, and suffer the ostracism of Christianity. They aren’t having much success convincing anyone that Paul was pro-law anyway.
The book of Romans.
The book of Romans is considered by many Christians to be Paul’s masterpiece argument against justification through the law in favor of justification through faith by grace. In trying to deal with Paul’s errors in logic one can quickly become bogged down in the very convoluted string of arguments he makes. In dealing with his logic, it is not just a simple matter of untying a series of knots in a long string. His logic is more like one big twisted ball of knots made of knots made of knots! Many of those who believe in Paul have an extremely difficult time following his rambling flow of logic themselves. To deal with all of Paul’s nonsensical logic in the book of Romans alone would take an entire book by itself. I’m not going to take the space to do that here. But what I will focus on are the fundamental premises on which he bases his doctrines, and most importantly his ongoing blatant abuse of Scripture to support them. In doing this alone, Paul will be totally disarmed. His building will come crumbling down when these foundations that are built on sand are removed. I will deal with only a portion of his nonsensical logic.
One of Christianity’s favorite Pauline passages that clearly suggests we ought not bother trying to keep God’s Law comes from the first part of the book of Romans. Right off in chapter 1, Paul tries to establish some fundamental premises on which to continue building his doctrine. He says;
For in it (the Gospel) the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “The just shall live by faith”. Romans 1:17
This was a favorite passage of the Christian reformer Martin Luther. He believed, as Paul clearly lays out later in Romans and Galatians, this faith that the just are supposed to live by is as opposed to living by the law. Paul eventually turns it into an either-or… mutually exclusive incompatibility of faith and law. Notice once again that Paul feels compelled to prove his doctrine by quoting Scripture. This observation alone should make it go without saying that the Scripture he quotes had better paint the same picture, or his premise is flawed… or groundless at best. Here again Paul misquotes Scripture albeit slightly. The passage he quotes is:
“Behold the proud, his soul is not upright in him, but the just shall live by his faith.” Habakkuk 2:4
In its context, and more accurately translated, it is obvious that what God is saying here is that the just person (someone who is righteous) shall live (as opposed to dying) “by” (literally “because of”) “his” (personal, as opposed to general) faithfulness: (literally, “steadfastness”, ) to righteous living. Let me shorten this up for better understanding. It is this: The righteous person will survive if he is steadfast in his righteousness. Nowhere in this picture is the idea: If an unrighteous person wants to become righteous, he must live by exerting his faith.
This one relatively small mistake of Paul’s is only the beginning. From here, he builds on his doctrine by continuing to make more grave errors that end up taking him way off course. It’s like an astronaut’s rocket being off in trajectory by only a couple of degrees when he begins his journey to the moon. He will eventually find he missed it by thousands of miles. By the end of the book of Romans, Paul is so far off it’s hopeless! Watch where he goes from here in chapter 3.
Romans 3
Whenever someone suggests to a Christian (most particularly evangelical Christian) that the law of God still stands today, one of the first things out of their mouths to refute the suggestion comes from Romans 3. We are quickly informed that no one is able to keep the law, and all are guilty of breaking it and forever remain labeled by it… unrighteous. Then we hear this quote:
“There is none righteous, no, not one”. Romans 3:10
This passage is again a quote Paul takes from the Scriptures to prop up and prove his case. From verse 10 on through 18 is Paul’s apparent direct quote from Scripture that is supposed to prove to us that no one is righteous, but all are full of evil. Please read all eight verses for yourself. Now guess what? No such single passage exists! What Paul quotes is a compilation of no less that six separate passages that have been jerked out of their original context in the Psalms and the book of Isaiah, and they are all strung together in such a fashion that it appears they are one. We have seen this deceptive practice of Paul’s before. Remember in Romans 9, where he pastes together two short passages from Genesis and Malachi concerning Jacob and Esau?! And Paul’s accuracy in quoting from the Psalms leaves much to be desired. The first passage he quotes in verses 10-12 come from Psalm 14. Here is his version first.
As it is written: “There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands; there is none who seeks after God. They have all gone out of the way; they have together become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no, not one.” Romans 3:10-12
Now here is the passage quoted accurately… and in its context.
“The fool has said in his heart, “there is no God”. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none (of the atheistic fools) who does good. The Lord looks down from heaven upon the (corrupt) children of men to see if there are any who understand, who seek God. They have all turned aside, they have together become corrupt; there is non who does good, no, not one. Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge, who eat up my people as they eat bread, and do not call on the Lord? There they ( the evil people) are in great fear, for God is with the generation of the RIGHTEOUS. Psalm 14:1-5 (Amplification in parentheses mine)
Guess what? In David’s picture there are no atheistic fools who do good! This passage is obviously not speaking of every human being but of a very distinct group of people whom David describes as fools, atheists, workers of abominations, corrupt, ignorant, and workers of iniquity. Of course, not one of them do good. And these evil people are pitted against a second group of real people known as “my people” and “the generation of the righteous”. Even in this very Psalm that Paul quotes from, there are obviously those whom God refers to as “righteous”! This is hardly the picture Paul wants us to get from this Psalm. Notice also Paul’s embellishment of this passage. He would have us believe the phrase, “no, not one” is used twice when it is only used once. The first time Paul uses the phrase is where it doesn’t exist, and it is coupled with the word “righteous” which Hebrew word doesn’t exist in this part of the Psalm or anywhere near the words “no, not one”. Instead the Hebrew word for righteous shows up later in verse 5 and directly implies that there are those who are righteous! So much for Paul’s “no, not one”.
In Paul’s string of quotes in Romans 3:10-18, he continues in verse 13 to take Scripture snippets out of their context from Psalm 5:9 and Psalm 140:3. In verse 14 he snips from Psalm 10:7. Verse 15,16 and 17 he yanks from Isaiah 59:7,8. And verse 18 he jerks from Psalm 36:1. In each and every case, the people spoken of in these passages are specifically evil men, and in the greater context of these passages, the evil men are contrasted with people who are called “the righteous”, “the upright”, and “the innocent”. Please check for yourself. They are all obvious and easy to see except for the Isaiah quote. In Isaiah, compare 59:7,8 which Paul quotes to the previous chapter… Isaiah 58:6-12 and take special notice of the word “righteousness” and how it is used in verse 8.
Paul wants us to believe that no one becomes righteous through the works of the law. But there are many whom God called righteous. From Genesis 7:1 where He says to Noah, “I have seen that you are righteous before Me in this generation”, all the way through to the New Testament where Yeshua says, “many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it…”, there are many references to righteous men. Take an exhaustive concordance and look under the word righteous.
After supposedly proving his premise with his deceptive quoting of Scripture that no one can be righteous under the law, Paul is forced to try and find for us a good working reason as to why God gave man the law at all! Here is his logic.
“Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that (for this purpose) every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Romans 3:19,20
This begins to defy words to describe the blasphemous lie that it is. But hey, Paul has to come up with some reason for the law’s existence after demolishing the truth! Are we really to believe that it’s God’s purpose to make man guilty before Him? If God intentionally made His law impossible for man to keep, that would make God the author of unrighteousness and guilt! Here’s God’s version of why He gave man the law.
“Oh, that they had such a heart in them that they would fear Me and always keep all My commandments, that (for this purpose) it might be well with them and with their children forever!” Deuteronomy 5:29
“And the Lord commanded us to observe all these statutes, to fear the Lord our God, for our good always, that (for this purpose) He might preserve us alive, as it is this day. Then it will be righteousness for us, if we are careful to observe all these commandments before the Lord our God, as He has commanded us.” Deuteronomy 6:24,25
This blasphemous lie by itself should finish Paul off and nail his hide to the wall as a false apostle. Here, read it now again after having read these words from God’s own mouth and compare them closely.
“Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that (for this purpose) every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Romans 3:19,20
Yeshua never taught anything remotely close to this. But we are still long from being finished with all of Paul’s doctrinal errors. He goes on to mention some fringe benefits that go along with his extremely faulty premise. The logic flows that if no man is capable of doing God’s law, and salvation is instead granted as a free gift of grace, then nobody can brag about keeping the law anymore!
Where is boasting then? It is excluded, By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law. Romans 3:27,28
Never mind the fact that it is an important part of the law for man to know his place and humble himself! If people kept all the law they wouldn’t be boasting anyway.
“He has shown you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.” Micah 6:8
Notice also what it says about the man who gave us the law.
Now the man Moses was very humble, more than all men who were on the face of the earth. Numbers 12:3
God has never been in the business of making it impossible for man to boast. He just makes it not worth the while by humbling proud men if they refuse to humble themselves. The ironic fact is that in the real world, Paul’s doctrine is the source of far more pride and arrogance than any other doctrine! One only need look at Paul himself, and as mentioned before, notice how he lifted himself above the very apostles who followed Yeshua (2Corinthians 11:5, Galatians 2:6,9), and how he even lifted himself above Moses (2Corithians 3:11-13 and notice the phrase, “we use great boldness of speech unlike Moses”), anyone who believes in the concept off destiny, and that before creation God destined some vessels for honor and some for dishonor (Romans 9:20-23), and naturally believes he is one of those who is destined for honor, that person will be extremely conceited in his heart.
But it’s Paul’s flow of logic from the presupposition that God intentionally made the law impossible to keep that becomes totally absurd. Since in his world, no one can keep the law, man must therefore be justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law. At this point he uses Abraham as his cornerstone example.
Abraham justified by faith?
Abraham’s supposed justification by faith is Paul’s ace-in-the-hole argument for faith apart from the works of the law both in the book of Romans and the book of Galatians. The following passages come from Romans and Galatians and contain his supposed direct quote from the book of Genesis.
What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something of which to boast, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” Romans 4:1-3
…just as Abraham “Believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness”. Galatians 3:6
So fundamental is Paul’s use of Abraham as a proof-text example for his righteousness “apart from works” doctrine that James became fully aware of it and refuted it in his letter.
Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” James 2:21-23
James’ logic here is far superior to Paul’s, but the disappointing thing about James’ rebuttal is that he could have done a better job and perfectly squashed Paul’s pet argument! One reason it is obvious that James is directly addressing P