Biblical Heretic Paul the Herodian and Edomite

[Unified Serenity]

Paul of Tarsus claimed to be an apostle turned Jesus' teachings around. There are some great papers online about what was really going on in the struggle to control the early "church". I am looking for one that deals with how Luke along with a few other Apostles was surreptitiously trying to warn people about Paul and calling him a liar. In my search for that paper, I came across these two videos that are quite interesting. I will keep looking for the info I originally was seeking, but wanted to share these for now.

You see, I think the problem with Christianity is the perverted message within it. We have Paul countering the very principles laid out by Jesus and the Tanach. Obviously, that message won't work with Jews, and those grafted in then find no reason to truly embrace the way of Jesus the ultimate Jew who obeyed the law, kept the feasts of the Lord, and commanded his followers to do the same. So, I offer these two interesting videos. I am sure most Christians will not appreciate this as it is hard to imagine that 95% of the New Testament is written by a wolf in sheep's clothing. By the way, Paul was from the tribe of Benjamin whom his father said is a ravening wolf.


IXeSikN4Ci0


mpd4IAhrKoA

Oh, and I had never heard this about Bacon and Shakespeare and found this info online which I will have to be reading to find out more:

http://thelostsecretofwilliamshakespeare.com/downloads/BACONS_SMOKING_GUNS_THE_HARD_EVIDENCE.pdf

[Lord Sidious]

There is a book called Jesus, Prophet of Islam.
There is a lot of info about him in that book that I never saw in christian sources.

[RedeZra]

is there a problem with Paul ?


the Jews are under the intricate Jewish laws

not the Greeks not the Romans not any other nations not even Christians


Jesus who was a Jew of course observed the intricate Jewish laws

but the purpose of Jesus was to bring God to the gentiles

and every heart who will receive the Paraclete or Spirit of Truth

whom He would send to His Disciples and from there to the whole world after He ascended to heaven


"But I tell you the truth: it is expedient to you that I go: for if I go not, the Paraclete will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you." - John 16:7


those who recieve the Holy Spirit are not under Jewish laws

but convicted and guided by the Spirit Himself



it is possible to grieve and ignore this Spirit of Truth for He is gentle and not forceful

but those who delights in His counsel are under guardian Grace and not laborers under Jewish laws

[truth4me]

good find......

[Unified Serenity]

I think the video addresses all your points RedEzra. It raises some very interesting facts, and the sites I shared offer more very interesting insights as well.

[Unified Serenity]

Here is a very interesting interview with Dr. Scott Mcquate. He covers a lot of the topics many are interested in here at Avalon like Nibiru, Tiamat, Serpents, religious lies, Annunaki, Israel, Bankers, the plan of the elites, and what we are about to experience here on earth.

EqwWnAkg50M

[Seikou-Kishi]

Excellent video, Unified Serenity. Most interesting. I am surprised that you have not had a backlash from more sensitive people. I would only say that anybody who is Christian is surely loyal to the teacher and not to the teaching; if the teaching can be edited but you are loyal to the teacher, it is incumbent upon you to restore the original, not to entrench yourself in denial.

[Unified Serenity]

Excellent video, Unified Serenity. Most interesting. I am surprised that you have not had a backlash from more sensitive people. I would only say that anybody who is Christian is surely loyal to the teacher and not to the teaching; if the teaching can be edited but you are loyal to the teacher, it is incumbent upon you to restore the original, not to entrench yourself in denial.

Hi Seikou-Kishi,

Did you get to watch the videos? What was your impression of them? My post is not to cause pain or turmoil, but to examine a very important topic that is rarely addressed because is it so volitile and can get out of hand so fast. I like to stick to facts, original languages, known history, and I spend hours digging it up. Paul has always been a problem for me because he said the opposite of what Jesus said, and the more I have studied over the years, the worse it has become to now realize that just as the sons of Cain had to infiltrate the house of Judah and cause them (The Jews) much turmoil, so must they infiltrate the path of righteousness and cause the people to walk in error, and what better way to conquer a people than to make them think they are free? The elite have a plan, they are moving every day closer to it's fulfillment, and unless people wake up, prepare to not be overcome in fear when the time comes to choose whom they will serve, and trust me, there will be a choice, then for most it will be a very painful time.

Truth can be very simple for me. In the argument of is the bible even important, I won't engage therein. The bible has much truth and historical verification. I am not going to argue whether or not there is a God, if Jesus was the son of God or a prophet or even ever born. I am interested in signs and events we are now seeing. Were they foretold to us? Is there evidence of a systematic plan to carry out what is foretold? For me, we cover a lot of those topics within this forum about what is happening in government, science, pharma, and such. So, in looking at all that data, ancient history, peoples and what they say, we see parallels to the bible.

The church has had a major impact on the world, and for many here it has not been a good impact. I can say that about all world religions really. There's good and bad within them all. But, Christianity has been a dominant religion for eons now. How much of a bombshell is it if one of the key players within Christianity can be shown to be nothing more than one of the Elite Master Builders just like the elites of today who needed to take over Banking, Government, Media, Medicine, Food, Education ... if this Master Builder is nothing more than a liar who derailed the truth in it's infancy? For some to really read what the bible says. To really examine the passages, Jesus' words and the Apostles compared to Paul. The links I provided are easy to read, the vids are easy to watch. You may find that your problems are not with Jesus and his "religion", but with Paul and his elite agenda that negates the word of God.


In Revelation there are 12 Apostles spoken of as the foundations and Paul is not one of the 12. Paul has caused a lot of trouble with his twisting the true message of Jesus and the plan of God within the bible. Just look up who the twelve Apostles were that Jesus picked and the one replaced upon Judas' death. Paul never met Jesus, he did not get instructed by Jesus, he did not witness Jesus ministry, life, death, and resurrection, so he cannot be an Apostle. And yet, we are to simply take his word for it that he was chosen by Jesus to be the Apostle to the Gentiles despite Jesus choosing Peter earlier. For me, there is abundant evidence that Paul derailed the true message and has caused untold damage to be done in the name of Jesus / Yeshua.

[Seikou-Kishi]

I did. I considered them very compelling. I've even dug out a bible with the resolution to re-read it bearing the videos' insights in mind.

I am reminded that the classical image of a battle of good vs evil could never really happen, because 'evil' is deceptive and any such war would be asymmetric. Those on the 'good side' are simple, up-front and so expect everyone else to be the same, and that's exactly what the 'evil side' relies on, secrecy, deceit, and all their cloaks and daggers. When I look at the story of Paul (incidentally, Paulus is Latin for 'small', which strikes me as the same kind of neurotic and false humility with which the pope calls himself the 'the servant of the servants of God'), there does seem to be very much about him that, in political terms, we would call a fifth column: he started out as an enemy, had an apparent change of heart and then worked his way up through the ranks.

[58andfixed]

These are new to me Unified Serenity, and I suspect there will only be more resources yet to be published and produced about even more perspectives to do with falsehoods in Bibles and Organized Religion.

Two resources that did me well were:

1. "The Dawn of Conscience" by James Henry Breasted (1933)

http://www.goldenageproject.org.uk/dawn.php

"How many modern clergymen, requested to preach before some convention of business men, have taken as text the quotation from the Book of Proverbs "Seest thou a man diligent in business, he shall stand before kings"?"

"It is not likely that any such clergyman ever prefaced his sermon with the observation that this text was taken by the Hebrew editor of Proverbs from a much older Egyptian book or moral wisdom."

"This discovery has added profound significance to the fact that civilized development in the countries surrounding Palestine was several thousand years earlier than that of the Hebrews."

"It is now quite evident that the ripe social and moral development of mankind in the Nile Valley, which is three thousand years older than that of the Hebrews, contributed essentially to the formation of the literature which we call the Old Testament."

*****

2. "The Oxford Companion to the Bible" by Bruce M. Metzger (Editor) & Michael D. Coogan (Editor)

http://books.google.com/books?id=Y2KGVuym5OUC&printsec=frontcover&img=1&zoom=1&l=220

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/oxford-companion-to-the-bible-bruce-m-metzger/1100535353

"[700 entries] written by more than 250 scholars from some 20 nations and embracing a wide variety of perspectives, the Companion offers over seven hundred entries, ranging from brief identifications—who is Dives?"

"where is Pisgah?"

"—to extensive interpretive essays on topics such as the influence of the Bible on music or law."

*****

These are conservative approaches to do with the historical evidence for the mortal construction of Bibles.

Certainly I have added more to my library, for the chorus grows bigger, and different voices sing with different keys & tones.

- 58







My post is not to cause pain or turmoil, but to examine a very important topic that is rarely addressed because is it so volatile and can get out of hand so fast.

I like to stick to facts, original languages, known history, and I spend hours digging it up.

[HORIZONS]

In Paul you can see both the hard core Jewish zealot and the Mystic he became after his conversion. If you study the books attributed to him in chronological order you can see this progression being worked out in his life, and his own personal struggle with his human nature verses the spiritual/mystical ideologies - and identity - he strived towards. Remember: it is the Spirit of the message that gives life, not the letter.

[modwiz]

I am of the opinion that Paul was a lot more comfortable with the "Christianity' he was cultivating. There is a reason James, the brother of Jesus and Paul were at odds. Paul was being creative. I think Paul wanted considerable distance from Judaism because he was gay, and that was a death sentence in his old Pharisaic religion. Jesus had nothing to say about it. It clearly did not matter to him.

I went to seminary, Interfaith, school with a few gay men. I asked if they thought Paul was gay and the reply was, "If you have to ask?"

[HORIZONS]

I am of the opinion that Paul was a lot more comfortable with the "Christianity' he was cultivating. There is a reason James, the brother of Jesus and Paul were at odds. Paul was being creative. I think Paul wanted considerable distance from Judaism because he was gay, and that was a death sentence in his old Pharisaic religion. Jesus had nothing to say about it. It clearly did not matter to him.

I went to seminary, Interfaith, school with a few gay men. I asked if they thought Paul was gay and the reply was, "If you have to ask?"

Yes, I have heard this before too, I don't know if he was gay but he did distance himself from companionship with women - and advised others to do the same if they wanted to follow him into the deep things of his Spiritual understanding.

[Lord Sidious]

I am of the opinion that Paul was a lot more comfortable with the "Christianity' he was cultivating. There is a reason James, the brother of Jesus and Paul were at odds. Paul was being creative. I think Paul wanted considerable distance from Judaism because he was gay, and that was a death sentence in his old Pharisaic religion. Jesus had nothing to say about it. It clearly did not matter to him.

I went to seminary, Interfaith, school with a few gay men. I asked if they thought Paul was gay and the reply was, "If you have to ask?"

Yes, I have heard this before too, I don't know if he was gay but he did distance himself from companionship with women - and advised others to do the same if they wanted to follow him into the deep things of his Spiritual understanding.

Ok, so to get into deep spirituality, you distance yourself from those that bore you?
Ok.
That is like the jedi claiming to understand the force when all they studied was one side.

[eaglespirit]

...bringing Montalk's current update here, seems fitting:

http://montalk.net/notes/on-the-historicity-of-jesus

Therefore we must turn to the sayings, teachings, and parables that predate the writing of the New Testament. Scholars have given these a name: the “Q” source (Q for Quelle, German word for “source”, thus a generic title) which is a hypothesized document containing the original sayings of Jesus. Of course it’s ridiculous to think it had to be a document since it could just as well have been a secret oral tradition. In any case, the closest thing we have to the “Q” source is the Gospel of Thomas, which is a collection of the purported sayings of Jesus. There is some dispute over when it was written. Even if written later, the content indicates it is a setting down of an older oral tradition.

Over 80% of the Gospel of Thomas can be found distributed throughout the New Testament, but padded and deviated with the aforementioned artifices. The Gospel of Thomas contains all the meat and none of the dressing found in the New Testament. It is fundamentally subversive to the religious power structure, and it is of Gnostic disposition, including the 80% that are in the Bible. Thus the New Testament contains a Gnostic nucleus. The rest contains a mix of genuine wisdom from other sources and corruption with malicious intent.

The historical context and timing of these teachings, as well as their spiritual content and direction, says something about the role of the original Jesus Christ. It’s very similar to the role of other avatars such as Gautama Buddha. As I proposed in my Gnosis series, Jesus was an advanced soul who incarnated as a human in order to become a living vessel for a higher divine intelligence. There is a difference between Jesus the man and Christ the higher consciousness that became active in him, and can become active in us. The end goal of his legacy was for each of us to do likewise, and that is the basis of Gnostic belief. It was his intent that we follow in his example and succeed him, whereas the corrupted version of Christianity demands we remain in his shadow on our knees.

The Gnostics, more than any other sect in history, have suffered the greatest and harshest persecution by the Church. It is both ironic and expected that those who were closest to the original Christian teachings would become the greatest targets of those who hijacked the teachings. The greatest threat to any simulacrum is the original.

[CdnSirian]

I am not a biblical scholar, but did have some eye opening in a short course I took a few years ago, using the book by Bishop John Shelby Spong "Rescuing The Bible From Fundamentalism". It covers the various creation myths, which get recycled over and over again. Yet the most prolonged discussions in this class were focused on Paul and his re-working of Jesus' message. Noting that none of the New Testament books were written until over three hundred years after Jesus died.

Also noting that the Old Testament was also re-written many times by the Judaic priests, and the current version of the Old Testament was written around 200 A.D. Very provocative book.

Have not completed the 2 hr + footage above, will continue now and pray for no interruptions. :)

Oh, P.S., completely different story on the writing of the Bible in one of the Jordan Maxwell interviews with Kerry and Bill. Takes St. Paul, and all the others right out of the loop. So much data - so little time!

[HORIZONS]

There is a difference between Jesus the man and Christ the higher consciousness that became active in him, and can become active in us.

When Jesus said "Of my own self I can do nothing" he was speaking of his natural Adamic-consciousness: When he stated "I am the resurrection and the life", he was speaking of his Christ-consciousness. This is not a contradiction, but rather an understanding of who He really was.

Paul meant the same thing in the statement: "I can do all things through Christ."

[HORIZONS]

I am of the opinion that Paul was a lot more comfortable with the "Christianity' he was cultivating. There is a reason James, the brother of Jesus and Paul were at odds. Paul was being creative. I think Paul wanted considerable distance from Judaism because he was gay, and that was a death sentence in his old Pharisaic religion. Jesus had nothing to say about it. It clearly did not matter to him.

I went to seminary, Interfaith, school with a few gay men. I asked if they thought Paul was gay and the reply was, "If you have to ask?"

Yes, I have heard this before too, I don't know if he was gay but he did distance himself from companionship with women - and advised others to do the same if they wanted to follow him into the deep things of his Spiritual understanding.

Ok, so to get into deep spirituality, you distance yourself from those that bore you?
Ok.
That is like the jedi claiming to understand the force when all they studied was one side.

That was his viewpoint - not an absolute - as is most things.


advised others to do the same if they wanted to follow him into the deep things of his Spiritual understanding.

[Beren]

Sidious,

there is only one power and that is Creator.

Force is lower than power and is used in polarity as good Vs. bad.

P.S.
When you `re going to return/hand down that light sabre ?
Or do you use exclusively sheer force?

[Lord Sidious]

Sidious,

there is only one power and that is Creator.

Force is lower than power and is used in polarity as good Vs. bad.

P.S.
When you `re going to return/hand down that light sabre ?
Or do you use exclusively sheer force?

I was using that as an example.
And I keep the lightsabre handy at all times, just in case that little green communist surfaces again.

[Beren]

Sidious,

there is only one power and that is Creator.

Force is lower than power and is used in polarity as good Vs. bad.

P.S.
When you `re going to return/hand down that light sabre ?
Or do you use exclusively sheer force?

I was using that as an example.
And I keep the lightsabre handy at all times, just in case that little green communist surfaces again.

I know. ;)

Now regarding the sabre ,little green creature doesn`t fancy you either, what did you do in your deep past so you don`t like eachother?
Don`t tell me that you burned his hair with force lightening?

Now change in Saul before he became Paul was profound.

[Second Son]

I really enjoyed these videos, Serenity. They are very spot on in a lot of areas, but I have some issues with some of it. I do believe that Apollonius and Paul were one and the same. In fact the parallels, for those who wish to look into the history of these apparently separate personages, are staggering, and the conclusion, obvious.

To call Paul, or Apollonius evil because he was a Hermeticist is to say the Pope is evil because he is Christian (I make no distinction between Christianity and Catholicism) These men were evil to be sure, as they were servants of the Archontic pleroma. The free masons and their earlier incarnations of occult brotherhoods, have always been builders, but what are they building? Nothing short of our civilization, the very fabric of our “reality”, this has been done over the countless millennia through consensus. This slow process of shaping our beliefs and social more’s through the arts has been happening since day one. These Archons are allowed to be here, and have but two laws which they must observe, they cannot meddle in our affairs directly, and they must fully divulge their agenda, this so the Universal Law of Free Will is not violated. I have not yet heard it put this way, but the very name “Freemason” implies fashioners of a construct which is up to the individual to either embrace or to shun using free will. Please bear with this long post... it gets good.

The plays, poetry, and literature of Shakespeare’s day was that era’s equivalent of today’s mass media. If you think the world’s media has only recently been co-opted, think again…

So, this brings us to the Nag Hammadi codex, and the Emerald Tablets, both of which I have researched in depth, and both of which have been perverted to obscure the message, especially in the case of the Nag Hammadi. These texts have been added to, and anyone who sees in them a precursor to Christianity, are mistaken indeed.

These scrolls were an urgent warning about Christianity and its subjugation of mankind!

Because everything they do has to be made known.

to be continued...

[Second Son]

There are only a handful of Archontic hosts on our planet at any given time, and their job is massive, so, in keeping with aforementioned laws, they need to enlist the help of many others, through consensus, so that they can swell their numbers with unwitting allies, who do not know (or care to know in some cases) the agenda.

In the royal courts of Shakespeare’s day, the decisions which would shape our world’s civilization for centuries to come were being made, and the Archontic Governors were orchestrating all of the affairs of state from behind the scenes, using lesser nobles, who were patrons of the arts. One such noble was Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford. He had a similar writing style to Shakespeare, had an intimate knowledge of the life in the royal court (as did Shakespeare) his coat of arms depicted a lion shaking a spear, and his nickname, because of his prolific talent in the tournaments was “spear shaker”
I believe that it was Edward de Vere who was the Bard of Avon, and here are just a few reasons why, which correlate with my first post, dealing with both the molding of the masses through consent, and the transparency with which they (the Archons) must operate.

The theory that the Earl and the Bard are one and the same has been around for some time, is accepted by many, and rejected by many as well, but rest assured, this post goes much deeper than this controversy.

The occult brotherhoods tend to hide everything in plain site, and the message we can all find in de Vere’s writings (as his pseudonym) certainly is sobering if you care to look for it.

[TWINCANS]

To casually mention that Paul was gay, and wished to 'distance' himself from women is so surface a statement as to mislead. He set out to remove women from any position of respect in his new religion. He besmirched Jesus' wife with the ultimate insult. The woman who was the closest to the adept himself was as highly respected for her spiritual achievement level as an equal. This is one of the most important untruths ever told. This is the reason we have a completely unbalanced western civilization where the attacks against the feminine continue if anything to grow unchecked to this day. Paul's sexual prefernce is his own business. His anti-woman stance is unconscionable.

[onawah]

How very true, and well put!

To casually mention that Paul was gay, and wished to 'distance' himself from women is so surface a statement as to mislead. He set out to remove women from any position of respect in his new religion. He besmirched Jesus' wife with the ultimate insult. The woman who was the closest to the adept himself was as highly respected for her spiritual achievement level as an equal. This is one of the most important untruths ever told. This is the reason we have a completely unbalanced western civilization where the attacks against the feminine continue if anything to grow unchecked to this day. Paul's sexual prefernce is his own business. His anti-woman stance is unconscionable.

[onawah]

I have found the information that the late Sir Lawrence Gardner put forth to be very helpful in getting a better perspective on the Church's suppression of the Sacred Feminine.
There were some suspiciously hysterical detractors :blabla: :blah: :attention: :rant: who claimed he was a devoted Illuminati wolf in sheep's clothing, but I never found any evidence of that at all.
(He was of an Illumianti bloodline certainly, but it didn't stop him from using his privilege and connections to research secret documents for hidden historical truths.)
Bob Dean respected him greatly, and his work correlates in a most interesting way with Z.Sitchin's.

Here are some links:
http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.com/grail.html
http://graal.co.uk/
http://graal.co.uk/lectures.php
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_sociopol_dragoncourt.htm#Additional_Information
http://www.karenlyster.com/body_bookish.html

[Second Son]

The following quote from Macbeth is very telling. Most scholars believe that this play is autobiographical in nature, and “Shakespeare” is himself, the protagonist.

And oftentimes, to win us to our harm,
The instruments of darkness tell us truths,
Win us with honest trifles, to betray ’s
In deepest consequence.
Macbeth. ACT I Scene 3.

Now this sounds like a veiled reference to the Archons. But this next text seems like a direct reference to the Emerald Tablets, which de Vere is sure to have studied.

Your face, my thane, is as a book where men
May read strange matters. To beguile the time,
Look like the time; bear welcome in your eye,
Your hand, your tongue: look like the innocent flower,
But be the serpent under ’t.
Macbeth. ACT I Scene 5.

Here is an excerpt from the VIII Tablet of Thoth which refers to the “serpent under ‘t”

In the form of man they amongst us,
but only to sight were they as are men.
Serpent-headed when the glamour was lifted
but appearing to man as men among men.
Crept they into the Councils,
taking forms that were like unto men.
Slaying by their arts 
the chiefs of the kingdoms,
taking their form and ruling o'er man.


This next quote is (to my mind) a direct reference to the Pauline perversion of the teachings of Jesus.


Confusion now hath made his masterpiece!
Most sacrilegious murder hath broke ope
The Lord’s anointed temple, and stole thence
The life o’ the building!
Macbeth. ACT II Scene 3.

BUT… it is also a reference to Archontic possession, because aren’t we told in 1Corinthians “Do you not know your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit?”

It gets weirder...

[onawah]

Wow! That's definitely weird and very telling...

[TWINCANS]

I have read quite a bit of Gardner and undoubtedly he adds to the body of knowledge that truthers and rehistorians are working with. I only have two reservations; one is that he positions himself as 'the authority' due to his standing in The Order of this and The Court of that, but I have actually found there are more than one authority on these matters. Also his published bloodline of Jesus makes me wonder either who is he leaving out or adding in? As an amateur geneologist of some experience I am certain that it can only be highly speculative at best, yet is presented as if is unquestionable.

As to him being a bloodline illuminati, he is. So I read his material with interest but caution. They (and the alien controllers) have a 90% Truth policy, which means that what they say is 90% true - but it's what they don't say - the secret 10% that makes all the difference. After all, the devil is in the details.

[Jay]

Thanks for this thread. Been following this subject avidly since reading "The Hiram Key" (Christopher Knight & Robert Lomas).
Following site (not mine) also covers some research http://www.truthseekers.co.za/

[TWINCANS]

The mystery of who wrote Shakespeare is a very deep rabbit hole. IMO it was written by a group not one person. Walter Raleigh's School of Night, a group of seditious aetheists come to mind, Marlow, Lord Percy. Harriot, Philip Sidney, Bruno, Lord Greville, Lord Strange, their literary publisher Field and Fulke Greville who I find most mysterious. They were into very deep alchemical studies not to mention many spied for Walsingham, and had access to 2000+ books that survived through the Middle Ages though Henry Percy's library at Petworth House in Sussex. It's like the group were literally the centrepoint in their era of the periodic battle between good and evil that breaks out from time to time in the halls of power.

Weirdly in 1604 a supernova in the constellation Cygnus was seen as a portent for James1's daughter Elizabeth and husband Frederick of the Palatinate to unite europe behind protestantism. They were supported by Protestants + aetheists vs the Catholic Hapsburg counter-reformation - using some hefty witchcraft as discovered in the 1970/80's by the original psychic questers. It makes a good story in the books The Green Stone and The Seventh Sword.

[onawah]

Agreed. My take on it is that the true descendants, or the soul group of Jesus abandoned the bloodline plan when it proved no longer viable.
Those who are currently of that bloodline are not the reincarnated souls of Jesus's followers (rather, his soul family), which is what is important, so the genealogical value of being of that bloodline now is negligible.
I would say that is certainly an important part of the missing 10%, and Gardner never mentioned that aspect, to my knowledge, but made a big fuss about the current bloodline.
Still, that 90% he provided was helpful in piecing the whole puzzle together.

I have read quite a bit of Gardner and undoubtedly he adds to the body of knowledge that truthers and rehistorians are working with. I only have two reservations; one is that he positions himself as 'the authority' due to his standing in The Order of this and The Court of that, but I have actually found there are more than one authority on these matters. Also his published bloodline of Jesus makes me wonder either who is he leaving out or adding in? As an amateur geneologist of some experience I am certain that it can only be highly speculative at best, yet is presented as if is unquestionable.

As to him being a bloodline illuminati, he is. So I read his material with interest but caution. They (and the alien controllers) have a 90% Truth policy, which means that what they say is 90% true - but it's what they don't say - the secret 10% that makes all the difference. After all, the devil is in the details.

[Unified Serenity]

Thanks for the reply and interesting information. I do believe Paul is called evil not because of just Herodian lineage, but he preached a different gospel. He subverted the truth, thus laying the groundwork for the false path of Christianity. Please note, I mean in that the false path was not the one laid out by Jesus / Yeshua. Thus, just as Eve the virgin bride of Adam was beguiled in her infancy, so the "church" also called the virgin bride of Christ was beguiled in it's infancy.



I really enjoyed these videos, Serenity. They are very spot on in a lot of areas, but I have some issues with some of it. I do believe that Apollonius and Paul were one and the same. In fact the parallels, for those who wish to look into the history of these apparently separate personages, are staggering, and the conclusion, obvious.

To call Paul, or Apollonius evil because he was a Hermeticist is to say the Pope is evil because he is Christian (I make no distinction between Christianity and Catholicism) These men were evil to be sure, as they were servants of the Archontic pleroma. The free masons and their earlier incarnations of occult brotherhoods, have always been builders, but what are they building? Nothing short of our civilization, the very fabric of our “reality”, this has been done over the countless millennia through consensus. This slow process of shaping our beliefs and social more’s through the arts has been happening since day one. These Archons are allowed to be here, and have but two laws which they must observe, they cannot meddle in our affairs directly, and they must fully divulge their agenda, this so the Universal Law of Free Will is not violated. I have not yet heard it put this way, but the very name “Freemason” implies fashioners of a construct which is up to the individual to either embrace or to shun using free will. Please bear with this long post... it gets good.

The plays, poetry, and literature of Shakespeare’s day was that era’s equivalent of today’s mass media. If you think the world’s media has only recently been co-opted, think again…

So, this brings us to the Nag Hammadi codex, and the Emerald Tablets, both of which I have researched in depth, and both of which have been perverted to obscure the message, especially in the case of the Nag Hammadi. These texts have been added to, and anyone who sees in them a precursor to Christianity, are mistaken indeed.

These scrolls were an urgent warning about Christianity and its subjugation of mankind!

Because everything they do has to be made known.

to be continued...

¤=[Post Update]=¤


To casually mention that Paul was gay, and wished to 'distance' himself from women is so surface a statement as to mislead. He set out to remove women from any position of respect in his new religion. He besmirched Jesus' wife with the ultimate insult. The woman who was the closest to the adept himself was as highly respected for her spiritual achievement level as an equal. This is one of the most important untruths ever told. This is the reason we have a completely unbalanced western civilization where the attacks against the feminine continue if anything to grow unchecked to this day. Paul's sexual prefernce is his own business. His anti-woman stance is unconscionable.

Paul was most definitely a misogynist who subverted the truth. Women have paid the price for centuries due to his lies.

[RedeZra]

I do believe Paul is called evil not because of just Herodian lineage, but he preached a different gospel. He subverted the truth, thus laying the groundwork for the false path of Christianity. Please note, I mean in that the false path was not the one laid out by Jesus / Yeshua. Thus, just as Eve the virgin bride of Adam was beguiled in her infancy, so the "church" also called the virgin bride of Christ was beguiled in it's infancy.



this is a twisted tale from ....? please fill in the blanks

[miqeel]

Welcome, Avalonians
This is my first post - I was always unsure that I could bring something to the discussion with my postings. Right now however, I would like to thank you Unified Serenity, for this amazing find.
It is said that it was Paul who really built the Church, caused Christianity to be as it is now. His teaching are in many points different than those of Jesus - fact that I never realized until now. Being a catholic I find this info very disturbing and quite frankly, surprising.
There is more to Paul than what we know and the videos and links you posted are, to say the least, very thought provoking.
Thank you again

[Second Son]

Milton: on Shakespeare (1632)

What neede my Shakespeare for his honour'd bones,
The labour of an Age, in piled stones
Or that his hallow'd Reliques should be hid
Vnder a starre-ypointing Pyramid?
Deare Sonne of Memory, great Heire of Fame,
What needst thou such dull witnesse of thy Name?
Thou in our wonder and astonishment
Hast built thy selfe a lasting Monument:
For whil'st to th'shame of slow-endevouring Art
Thy easie numbers flow, and that each part,
Hath from the leaves of thy unvalued Booke,
Those Delphicke Lines with deepe Impression tooke
Then thou our fancy of her selfe bereaving,
Dost make us Marble with too much conceiving,
And so Sepulcher'd in such pompe dost lie
That Kings for such a Tombe would wish to die.

What did Milton mean by “Vnder a starre-ypointing Pyramid?”

Maybe this?


http://www.christian-restoration.com/fmasonry/images/2nd%20tracing%20board.gif

Please note: the Star of David with the uniquely masonic "G" in the middle. These two belief systems, which have the same goals, are intricately entwined. Christianity too, can certainly be implicated as well, as there is plenty of blame to go around. Perhaps the star Milton was referring to is this; the de Vere family coat of arms. The masonic checkerboard is also present.

http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~sklloydm/HowardKiemele/VairCoatofArmsSmall.jpg

I personally think that in keeping with the esoteric and occult tradition, Milton was referring to BOTH, implicating "Shakespeare" as both a member of the de Vere family, and a Freemason. This next photo, to me, is proof positive that Shakespeare was in fact a masonic operative:

http://shakespeare.palomar.edu/editors/images/07-dugdaleIllustration.png

This is actually an artist's drawing which might have been a conceptual design for Shakespeare's actual funerary edifice. The two are almost identical. The twin pillars are the most noticeable of all the masonic symbols, and it is hard NOT to notice both the skull and the cherubim with the shovel. The jousting lance is an obvious reference to Edward de Vere.

In the next post. I will look at the Earl of Oxford's roots as well as head into a hall of mirrors, where nothing is as it seems. I will explore the phenomena of "king makers" as well as the "fall of Eve".

[Second Son]

Ok... I'm heading down the rabbit hole now.

It seems there is nothing new under the sun. The earliest forms of entertainment were nothing but platforms for social engineering, and the political leaders even then were actually controlled by handlers/advisors just like our very own Henry Kissinger and Zbignew Brzynsky. Seems that the very first time we see the name de Vere in our history books, we find one Aubrey (or Albericus in Latin) de Vere, who was a tenant in chief of William the Conqueror. He was in many respects William’s Aide de Camp, and a trusted advisor of the King, being granted title to estates in no less than six counties. His first name “Albericus” actually means “Faery King” and is associated with being an immortal changeling, or shape-shifter (David Icke would have a field day with this stuff)

But, who was the first advisor associated with British nobility? None other than Merlin, court magician, shape-shifter, king-maker, guardian of the Holy Grail, and mentor to the Arthur of legend. It is quite probable that Merlin is actually fashioned after an actual historical figure from the dark ages named Ambrosius, who is said to have helped a mid fifth century Briton King unite the realm and push back Anglo-Saxon invaders. The name “Albericus” sounds similar to “Ambrosius”, but what about their meanings? One means “Faery King”, and the other means “undying or immortal”. It seems there a similarity to the name meanings as well. Another title the 17th Earl (Albericus” son) held was The Lord Great Chamberlain, literally a “king maker” like Merlin before him. In this post he was charged with dressing the monarch on coronation day and investing the monarch with the insignia of rule. This is a rite with ties going back to Egypt and the birth of the Freemasons.


I think we will find stunning similarities if we look at the etymology of Albericus’ son Edward’s name as well. “Edward” means “blessed guardian”, but of what or whom? Because of the duplicity and obfuscation practiced by those, who, through the ages, have had “eyes to see” we will look at both “what” and “whom”. The name de Vere in latin means “the truth”, so it could be said that The Earl of Oxford was a guardian of the truth, just as Merlin was the Grail guardian. But, here is where things take a strange turn… “ver” in Gaulic means “alder” as in the tree. So what does THIS signify? Well, in ancient times alders were thought to be a powerful tree capable of protecting (guarding) other trees. In Celtic legend, paradisal apple orchards are surrounded for protection by alder trees. He was actually the protector/steward of arcane knowledge, not the least of which was the knowledge of “good and evil”.

Which takes us to the Garden of Eden...

[Unified Serenity]

Welcome, Avalonians
This is my first post - I was always unsure that I could bring something to the discussion with my postings. Right now however, I would like to thank you Unified Serenity, for this amazing find.
It is said that it was Paul who really built the Church, caused Christianity to be as it is now. His teaching are in many points different than those of Jesus - fact that I never realized until now. Being a catholic I find this info very disturbing and quite frankly, surprising.
There is more to Paul than what we know and the videos and links you posted are, to say the least, very thought provoking.
Thank you again

Hi and thanks for the reply miqeel. I have always had issues with Paul because of the disparity between Jesus' words and what Paul would preach. Then today, I did a head smack moment and said, "Isn't the anti-christ called the man of lawlessness? Well DUHHHHHHHHHHH... obviously if someone is going around preaching an end to the law, then they are preaching lawlessness." There are so many examples of Jesus saying watch out for some liar who will come after me preaching a different message, who claims to have seen Jesus. Jesus warns over and over to not be fooled by such a person, false prophet. The hardest part of this for Christians who love Jesus and God is that to even consider that Paul was a liar and false prophet is that it flies in the face of the belief that the bible is the inerrant word of God. I'd much rather follow Jesus and keep his ways than listen to a lying pharisee named Paul who had no witness' to his conversion, claimed to have seen Jesus, and did signs and wonders claiming that was proof of his Apostleship.

Jesus warned us that if he comes in his own name people would reject him, but another would come after him whom they would accept. Who came after Jesus in their own name? Well, Paul rarely quotes Jesus. He opens all his letters with "I Paul" and often declares himself an Apostle. There were no witnesses to give corroboration to Paul's testimony of his road to Damascus conversion which he gives 3 versions of. I just finished reading the book by Dr. Scott McQuate called, "Blueprint for Bondage". It is an amazing read, well documented exegesis of the bible regarding this topic.


I will quote from the book by McQuate that I just finished, and you can decide to go buy the book if you want.

From Chapter 9 of Blueprint for Bondage:

Since belief in Yashua and His teachings is held as one of the few remaining
common denominators among the Bride, let’s ask ourselves the obvious question: Did
Yashua warn us about Paul? The answer is yes. Just like any good shepherd, Yashua
warned us ahead of time about the wolves in sheep’s clothing.
As we have already seen in John 5:43, Yashua states, I have come in my Father’s
name, and ye receive me not; if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
To whom was Yashua referring? When we study Paul’s letters, it becomes quite obvious.
Without belaboring the subject, here are some examples of how Paul addresses his
audiences. 2 Corinthians 10:1, Galatians 5:2, Ephesians 3:1, Colossians 1:23, I
Thessalonians 2:18 and Philemon 1:19 all contain the phrase I Paul. Paul commonly
used this phrase at the beginning of his letters. This would perfectly fit the description of
one coming in his own name about whom Yashua specifically warns.


In Romans 1:1, I Corinthians 1:1, II Corinthians 1:1, Galatians 1:1, Ephesians 1:1,
Colossians 1:1, I Timothy 1:1, II Timothy 1:1 and Titus 1:1 Paul continues to disclose his
true identity. We see him using the title of apostle when he states in every verse listed,
I, Paul an apostle. Here, Paul is not only coming in his own name, as Yashua warns
against, but he is also referring to himself as an apostle. What is wrong with that? You
might ask. Well, we need to go to the book of Revelation for an answer to that question.

In chapter 2 of Revelation, beginning in verse one, we read Yashua’s words to the
church of Ephesus. He says to them, Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write;
These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the
midst of the seven golden candlesticks; In verses 2 and 3, He goes on to say, I know thy
works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are
evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found
them liars: And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name's sake hast laboured,
and hast not fainted.
In Acts chapter 19, verses 8, 9 and 10a, we read the following: (8) and he (Paul)
went into the synagogue (in Ephesus) and spoke boldly for the space of about 3 months,
disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God. (9) But when divers
(certain ones) were hardened and believed not, but spoke evil of that day before the
multitude, he departed from them and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the
school of one Tyrannus. (10) And this continued by the space of two years.
Is it purely coincidental that Yashua commends the church in Ephesus for
patiently and successfully enduring the lies of false apostles, and that Paul, who was
shunned by the Ephesians after arguing with them for 3 months, calls himself an apostle,
with no verification of his position anywhere else, by anyone else in scripture? A study
of the scripture, along with what we already know about Paul, would seem to indicate that
it is not coincidental at all.

After further review, we find even more evidence that Paul, by his own words, has
argumentatively pounded out yet another nail for the coffin that will help put his
apostleship to rest, when in I Corinthians 10:28 – 30, he states, But if any man say unto
116
you, ‘this is offered in sacrifice unto idols’, eat not for his sake that showed it, and for
conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof: Conscience, I say,
not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man’s
conscience? For if I, by grace be a partaker, (eat the food sacrificed to idols), why am I
evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks?
Here, Paul clearly advocates eating food sacrificed to idols, which, in our society
might not seem relevant, however, we are trying to prove out Paul’s character, through
his teachings and therefore, not only that his apostleship must be false, but that his words
are purposefully meant to deceive the bride. Therefore, let’s once again look at them in
light of what Yashua, Himself says about this exact topic.
In Revelation 2:14, when speaking to the church in Pergamos, Yashua states,
through his servant John, 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 stumbling block before
the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols and to commit fornication.
In Numbers 25:2, we see the result of Balaam’s doctrine on the Bride. In verse 2
we read, And they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods: and the people
(Bride) did eat …
In Deuteronomy chapter 7 verses 25 and 26, YHWH specifically instructs hhis
Bride regarding such practices when he states, The graven image of their gods shall ye
burn with fire: thou shalt not desire the silver or gold (sacrifices) that is on them, nor
take it unto thee, lest thou be snared therein: for it is an abomination to the Lord thy
God. Neither shall thou bring an abomination into thine house, lest thou be a cursed
thing like it: but thou shalt utterly detest it, and thou shalt utterly abhor it; for it is a
117
cursed thing. In layman’s terms, what YHWH is telling his people here is that they are
not to make use, in any way, of an idol, anything associated with it, including liquid or
other forms of offerings.
What happened as a result of them breaking the law? YHWH ordered Moses to
hang 1,000 of the leaders of the people in the sun for all to see, and 23,000 more
members of the Bride died, due to the plague that was brought on by their disobedience.
24,000 lives were lost in all. This story can be found in Numbers chapter 25.
It’s obvious to see how seriously YHWH takes obedience to His law. Just as
important is the carrying out of His judgments for breaking His law. In this case, the
broken law dealt with a false prophet and His Bride knew exactly what to do, as we see
in Joshua 13: 22, where we read, Balaam also the son of Beor, the soothsayer, did the
children of Israel slay with the sword… This being the case, the question must be asked,
should those who espouse and teach the antinomian message of the false prophet, Paul
be treated any differently today?
YHWH is very serious about the punishment of false prophets. Notice how
Yashua carefully describes and warns against false prophets in detail in Matthew 24:
23. “At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not
believe it. 24. For false Christ’s and false prophets will appear and perform great
SIGNS and MIRACLES to deceive even the elect - if that were possible. 25. See, I have
told you ahead of time. 26. "So if anyone tells you, 'There he is, out in the desert,' do not
go out; or, 'Here he is, in the inner rooms,' do not believe it.
118
Besides teaching against the law, as we have already seen as being a tell-tale
characteristic of a false prophet, Yashua clearly explains 2 more earmarks of a false
prophet in the end-times.
1. They will do signs and wonders.
2. They will claim they have seen Yashua
Was it just a coincidence that Yashua chose those two specific things when
warning us about false prophets? Did He choose those specific warnings for a specific
reason? Maybe, maybe not, you say, but either way, what does this have to do with
Paul? Let’s look at what true scripture tells us about Paul in relation to these two specific
warnings given by Yashua.
1. They will do signs and wonders. -
In II Corinth.12:12, Paul, struggling with the Corinthian church to prove his
apostleship says, “When I was with you, I certainly gave you every proof that I am truly
an apostle, sent to you by God himself. For I patiently did many SIGNS and
WONDERS and MIRACLES among you.”
Here, Paul states, just as Yashua warned about, that he, himself did signs and
wonders, yet, he still had trouble being accepted by the church. Why would that be?
Because they understood the earmarks of a false prophet and therefore, knew exactly
who(se) Paul was.
1. They may claim that they have seen Yashua -
In Acts chapter 9, verses 1 through 8, we read of an
119
alleged encounter with Yashua that Saul (Paul), the most ardent persecutor of Christians
that existed at the time, had on his way to Damascus. This alleged spiritual encounter
supposedly instantaneously transformed this brutal persecutor and murderer of Christians
into a powerful apostle of YHWH used by Yashua to proselytize the nations. Beginning
in verse one, we read And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against
the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, and desired of him letters to
Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any (followers of Yashua) of this way,
whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem. And as
he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a
light from heaven: And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul,
why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am
Jesus whom thou persecutest: [it is] hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he
trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord [said]
unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. And the
men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they
led him by the hand, and brought [him] into Damascus.
To decide whether or not this alleged experience
of Saul/Paul’s is legitimate, all we must do is ask ourselves a couple of straight-forward
questions; First, who were the witnesses of Paul’s alleged experience and is it important
to know? And second, would Yashua take measures to specifically warn us against
believing someone who claims they saw Him in a certain location, and then expect us
to accept that person’s claims as the truth?

To answer the first question, we simply need to look at the words of Yashua in the
book of John, chapter 5 verse 31, where He says, If I bear witness of myself, my witness
is not true. Paul allegedly had witnesses to his alleged conversion on the road to
Damascus, however, there are no names or verification given … ever. What good are
witnesses if they have no names and cannot be verified? In that situation, it is the same as
having no witnesses at all. Paul’s conversion and encounter with Yashua, in light of
Yashua’s standards therefore, must both be patently false.
As to the second related issue, (that of Yashua’s warnings of someone claiming to
have seen Him), unless we believe Yashua to be a hypocrite and a liar, we must realize
and submit to the truth that anyone claiming these things (even though their words may
be printed in the Bible) must be deemed a false prophet.
The evidence against Paul is insurmountable. He was a false prophet, plain and
simple. He struggled to maintain a foothold among the churches and even among the
disciples. In Acts 9 verse 23 we read, And after that many days were fulfilled, the Jews
took counsel to kill him. Continuing on in verse 26 of the same chapter, we see just how
the disciples felt about him when it states, And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he
assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not
that he was a disciple."
by Dr. McQuate, "Blueprint for Bondage"


I wish you well Miqueel in your searching. I know how hard it is to study without fear but just looking for truth as it lines up and does not contradict the words of Jesus. Paul clearly wanted to create a new message and take over the Bride of Christ. Sadly, few will have oil in their lamps when it is most needed, and will be ashamed wailing and gnashing their teeth as the bible says about the sleeping virgins. One last bible quote on who could be an Apostle, Peter said in Acts 1:21-22 "21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”

23 So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24 Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” 26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles."

Paul does not meet these requirements at all, and further proof is there are only 12 foundation stones for Apostles in the New Jerusalem per Revelation, so who is Paul? Oh yes, that's right, a persecutor of the church, pharisee, and liar who preached a different gospel and promoted lawlessness.

[Khaleesi]

I do believe Paul is called evil not because of just Herodian lineage, but he preached a different gospel. He subverted the truth, thus laying the groundwork for the false path of Christianity. Please note, I mean in that the false path was not the one laid out by Jesus / Yeshua. Thus, just as Eve the virgin bride of Adam was beguiled in her infancy, so the "church" also called the virgin bride of Christ was beguiled in it's infancy.



this is a twisted tale from ....? please fill in the blanks


I think I can answer this. The simple truth is Paul does NOT teach what Yeshua taught. If you want me to compare the teachings side by side, I can do that. Invariably the response to this approach is "The Bible is inerrant. The scriptures say so." Wellllllllllll ..... let's look at what the Bible ACTUALLY says. I will use the King James Version because that is what I was taught, from a very young age. As a side note, I was raised in a very conservative, religious family. I went to church twice on Sunday and every Wednesday night, so studying this has certainly upset my apple cart.

Deuteronomy 4:2
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

Deuteronomy 12:32
What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

Proverbs 30:5-6
5 Every word of God [is] pure: he [is] a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

Revelation 22:18-19
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.

These verses say that adding and removing is something we should not do lest God punish us! They do NOT say no one has done so. It is a commandment, just as "Thou shall not steal" is a commandment. How well have we 'humans' done in following that commandment?
And just to prove Paul is a liar, I will quote Paul on the subject.

Galatians 1:6-12
6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.
11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Notice verse 8.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Why does he say 'we' twice? "But though we, ....preach any other gospel than that which we ..."
Who is 'we'? It's kind of a confusing statement to make. Isn't Satan the author of confusion? Why doesn't he just say do not add or take away from? Instead he rewords it but with a twist. Paul is supposed to be a scholar. Why doesn't he just quote scripture LIKE YESUA DID?

Those that have eyes to see etc. If you just want to trust what Paul said without checking to see if he lines up with Yesua, then maybe you are just going along because you are afraid of what you might find to be the truth.

Please notice the final verse. Gal 1:12
12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

So, by Paul's own admission, he did not receive his 'word' from the Apostles. He claims Yesua gave him the word. Didn't Yesua say a false prophet would claim to see him? Paul never met Yeshua during Yesua's life, but he claims Yesua came to him after he ascended. Yesua clearly states this as a sign of a liar and a false prophet.

[miqeel]

Paul's testimony of his road to Damascus conversion which he gives 3 versions of.

What I find most interesting about Paul/Saul is his conversion. Here are verses from Kings John Version of Bible describing it:

Acts 9:3-7
3. And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: 4. And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? 5. And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: [it is] hard for thee to kick against the pricks. 6. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord [said] unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. 7. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

Acts 22: 9

And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

Acts 26:13-20

13. At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me. 14. And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? [it is] hard for thee to kick against the pricks. 15. And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. 16. But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; 17. Delivering thee from the people, and [from] the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, 18. To open their eyes, [and] to turn [them] from darkness to light, and [from] the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me. 19. Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision: 20. But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and [then] to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

The last passage is from when Paul is in front of Herod Agrippa II. There is clear difference between the first two passages. In the third one Paul describes what happened to him, completely forgetting to mention that Annanias healed his eyes.
Now, i am no detective, but i am guessing that if i saw that a suspects has two different versions of the same event, then I might be onto something right?

Paul was without a doubt a very intelligent man, and he hated christianity. Im wildly speculating here, but if I was him, I would (probably) understood that I have no chance of destroying the newly created sect that was attracting more and more people every day. I would probably pretend to do what most people did (covert) and taught the new religion to masses in such way that the new religion would look kind of similar to what the original idea was, but really, something completely different.

Looking from Polish catholic point of view - Paul teachings seem to be overwhelmingly more important in Church's doctrine. Im starting to wonder, is Catholic a Christian?

Once again, thank you for your post.

[RedeZra]

So, by Paul's own admission, he did not receive his 'word' from the Apostles. He claims Yesua gave him the word. Didn't Yesua say a false prophet would claim to see him? Paul never met Yeshua during Yesua's life, but he claims Yesua came to him after he ascended. Yesua clearly states this as a sign of a liar and a false prophet.

Jesus did not leave the Apostles to themselves but came to them a number of times

Thomas the Apostle was by lot given India to preach the Gospel but he refused to go so Jesus had to come and take him by the hand and sell him as a slave to a merchant on a ship with sails set to India

when the merchant asked Thomas if this was his master then Thomas was free to say either 'yes' or 'no'... and so Thomas went to India

[Unified Serenity]

The last passage is from when Paul is in front of Herod Agrippa II. There is clear difference between the first two passages. In the third one Paul describes what happened to him, completely forgetting to mention that Annanias healed his eyes.
Now, i am no detective, but i am guessing that if i saw that a suspects has two different versions of the same event, then I might be onto something right?

Paul was without a doubt a very intelligent man, and he hated christianity. Im wildly speculating here, but if I was him, I would (probably) understood that I have no chance of destroying the newly created sect that was attracting more and more people every day. I would probably pretend to do what most people did (covert) and taught the new religion to masses in such way that the new religion would look kind of similar to what the original idea was, but really, something completely different.

Looking from Polish catholic point of view - Paul teachings seem to be overwhelmingly more important in Church's doctrine. Im starting to wonder, is Catholic a Christian?

Once again, thank you for your post.

These were some of the same issues I had with Paul when I was a "baby" believer back in 1987. I spent the next 8 years studying the bible and other books almost 8 hours a day. I learned how to use study tools like a JP Green's Interlinear Lexicon and a Strong's Concordance to study words and passages back to their original languages. I have no doubt based on my years of study from then until now, that the work Jesus started became twisted and fully taken over by 326 A.D at the Council of Nicea. Who says the Nicean Creed every Sunday? Who got rid of everything they could that the Jews did in keeping the Bible / word of God and substituted their own holidays and feasts? The Catholic Church did of coarse. What's wrong with celebrating the Feasts of the Lord as laid out in the bible? Why do Christians celebrate a fertility right day called Easter on what should be one of the holiest days of the year for Christians? Passover is one of the most beautiful feasts of the Lord. It's all about redemption from slavery. We are commanded to keep that feast, Yeshua kept the feast, the Apostles kept it, and the early messianic community kept it. They kept all the feasts of the Lord. Not many people complain about observing Christmas or Thanksgiving, but so many look at Passover, Shavuot, and other feasts as if it's just a burden.

The Church has done everything they can including changing the names of the Apostles and others of Jesus time, to take away who they were and what family they come from. Now, people don't want the truth. They want teachers who will tickle their ears, tell them nice things, and give them false hope. Look at all the divisions in the Body/Bride of Christ. Most of those divisions are around things Paul helped to instigate and put in place. A house divided cannot stand, and it's no wonder the Bride is asleep. What are those divisive issues? Baptism methods, Speaking in Tongues, Women's role in the Church, Law vs Grace doctrine, Rapture of the Saints. Some of these things are not directly Paul's fault but teachers / ministers who wrongly teach what was written, but don't you think Paul was pretty smart and knew that by using confusing words it would cause problems? We know that if you put out 90% truth then there is a good chance the lie will be accepted. Paul knew how to communicate and yet there are many passages that are so confusing.

I think we see Paul caught in lies in several places. Jesus warned us about false prophets, those who would claim to have seen Jesus, do signs, wonders, and miracles in his name and to NOT believe them. As a matter of fact, he rebukes them and says in that day (Day of the Lord) many will come to me saying Lord Lord, I healed in your name, did mighty miracles in your name as they try to get him to accept them, and Jesus reply is "Get away from me, I never knew you". My question is do we really know Jesus and he us if we are following a snake and vipers teaching instead of Jesus' teachings? How different a witness in the world would we have if we had not been fooled by Paul all those years ago? It's time to come out of Babylon. It's time to wake up, correct our mistakes, and learn to love one another just as Jesus said, "They will know you are my disciples by the love you have for one another!" The bride of Christ is being called out. We were warned of the end times. We were warned of the plans of the evil one. We were warned that the deception would be so great as to even fool the very elect. God will protect and provide, but we best not be following a false prophet teaching the ways of Balaam and lawlessness. Not one jot nor tittle would be changed in God's law until all things (prophecies) were fulfilled. There is no way that has changed.

Let me add this. I was raised Catholic. I loved the Catholic church growing up. I have loved God all my life Miqeel. I know many very sincere Catholic people, and we are raised to believe the virgin birth, life of Jesus, his ministry, death and resurrection. But, we were never encouraged to open our bible and really study the word of God. We were never shown how to study it, what tools to use, and we loved our Mass. We loved the ritual of it and the community feeling of belonging. We were given an Epistle and followed along with the Mass ritual. Traditions make us feel safe and secure. There are millions of good but decieved people in the church Catholic and otherwise. "My people perish for lack of Knowledge" is written in the bible. They don't rightly divide the word of truth to show themselves a good workman. No, we listen to some preacher who listened to some preacher ad infinitem and they are sincere, sincerely wrong in some doctrines. When I got saved it was a life changing event not because I was some down on my luck drug addict grasping at anything to make me feel better. No, I was on the top of the world, graduating from college within a month with the world at my fingertips. Things were very very good for me. Yet, I met a woman where my sister started boarding a horse, and this woman was so kind and loving. She was a nut for Jesus. She invited me to her Lutherin church. She gave me a book to read after that Sunday called "Lessons from a Sheep dog" by Phillip Keller. God used that book to open my eyes, my heart and mind. It was a very personal experience. I did not have some public sermon pull me into making a profession of faith. Heck, I believed I was a true Christian already, but it was in reading that book that I found out that there was a huge difference in believing and knowing. I believe in Abraham Lincoln, I do not know him nor he me.

All I can say is that since that day in 1987 my life changed. I truly knew Jesus and had a hunger for truth to know, love and follow him all my days. I have stumbled along the way, but one thing I can say for certain, is he loves us. God loves us, and does not want us to suffer. We have been shown the way, and yet we are stubborn and proud. We fear man more than God. We have been fooled, deluded to believe lies, and it could cost us dearly. I know how hard this issue is for us rehabilitated Catholics to deal with. I felt like I died the day I finally really understood and loved Jesus with all my heart, mind and soul and because of him, I loved God truly for the first time. I knew I could not follow the Catholic Church and for me that was akin to dying. So many are so deeply indoctrinated to the system. Some would say all this religion and Jesus stuff is still part of that system. I study the ancient texts and learn much, but nothing has dissuaded me from the truth of Jesus / Yeshua and God's plan for his children. One day I hope we please him, and show our love in the best way possible by finally obeying him.

[Unified Serenity]

So, by Paul's own admission, he did not receive his 'word' from the Apostles. He claims Yesua gave him the word. Didn't Yesua say a false prophet would claim to see him? Paul never met Yeshua during Yesua's life, but he claims Yesua came to him after he ascended. Yesua clearly states this as a sign of a liar and a false prophet.

Jesus did not leave the Apostles to themselves but came to them a number of times

Thomas the Apostle was by lot given India to preach the Gospel but he refused to go so Jesus had to come and take him by the hand and sell him as a slave to a merchant on a ship with sails set to India

when the merchant asked Thomas if this was his master then Thomas was free to say either 'yes' or 'no'... and so Thomas went to India

This is a non sequitur as we are talking about Paul, not Thomas. Paul has no verifiable witnesses as to his Damascus road experience. He is his own witness and therefore does not count. Peter gave the requirements to be an Apostle and Paul does not meet them. Paul is not one of the 12 Apostles. There are only 12 Apostles, and Paul's name is not in there. Jesus hand picked his Apostles, taught them, and they witnessed his ministry. Paul is a liar, pharisee whom Jesus warned us over and over about, and his father is the same as all the other vipers whom Jesus warned us about, the pharisees. Good ol' doubting Thomas, I do believe Jesus called him by name.

I do believe in the day of the Lord these words will mean so much to Paul:

Matthew 7:15-27 15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

So, we see we are being warned of someone claiming to serve God, is a Christian, but is actually a wolf. Remember Paul claimed to be a Benjamite who was prophesied would be a wolf. Look at Paul's fruit of sewing division via his false doctrines, look at the damage done to the church and the world because of her ruined testimony. A house divided cannot stand. This one is a tare, and is simply doing what he does best, lying like his father and all the other pharasees.

True and False Disciples

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

Oh my gosh, wow. only the one who does the WILL of my father who is in heaven! I do believe we call God's will his LAW! I believe Paul will say these very words beseeching Christ to accept him, and Jesus will say he never knew him and that he is an evildoer. It is a grave sin to cause a little one to stumble. What a burden Paul must carry knowing how he has made the little lambs to stumble and not follow the truth.

The Wise and Foolish Builders

24 “Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26 But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27 The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.”

Paul called himself the Master Builder which we know goes back to the Masonic tradition of Hiram Abif. The funny thing is they are not master builders, but think they are. This text is two sided. It's written for the bride to not be foolish, to obey the words, and be blessed. It's also saying those who think they are master builders are not.

[ajyana]

i always believed, we don't need the church to love Jesus, right?

[Unified Serenity]

i always believed, we don't need the church to love Jesus, right?

Hey ajyana,

No, we can love Jesus anytime anywhere with anyone. I certainly was not in church when I 'converted' if you understand my post above. That being said, we are the bride of Christ and I for one would love to get to fellowship with others who love Jesus and are following him. My problem is I cannot stomach being around Pauline Christians and their false doctrines. I don't want to argue with them. I don't want to deal with their derision if my intention is to fellowship. How can two walk together who are not in agreement? So, I encourage you to keep loving Jesus and to ask God to provide a way to meet like minded people to break some bread with and relax. God knows we will need it as the days seem to get darker.

[RedeZra]

Jesus did not leave the Apostles to themselves but came to them a number of times


This is a non sequitur as we are talking about Paul, not Thomas. Paul has no verifiable witnesses as to his Damascus road experience. He is his own witness and therefore does not count. Peter gave the requirements to be an Apostle and Paul does not meet them. Paul is not one of the 12 Apostles. There are only 12 Apostles, and Paul's name is not in there. Jesus hand picked his Apostles, taught them, and they witnessed his ministry. Paul is a liar, pharisee whom Jesus warned us over and over about, and his father is the same as all the other vipers whom Jesus warned us about, the pharisees.


what is it about Paul that is contrary to Jesus ?

besides my point with the anecdote above was to show that Jesus was very involved with the Apostles and their early mission to preach the Gospel all over the world

Jesus would strip Paul from his head position in those formative years if Paul was not in line with Himself


the Church has stumbled over time and now 2000 years after several doctrines and practises are not in line with Jesus

but the apostasy was also foretold 2000 years ago so it is no surprise

[Unified Serenity]

Jesus did not leave the Apostles to themselves but came to them a number of times


This is a non sequitur as we are talking about Paul, not Thomas. Paul has no verifiable witnesses as to his Damascus road experience. He is his own witness and therefore does not count. Peter gave the requirements to be an Apostle and Paul does not meet them. Paul is not one of the 12 Apostles. There are only 12 Apostles, and Paul's name is not in there. Jesus hand picked his Apostles, taught them, and they witnessed his ministry. Paul is a liar, pharisee whom Jesus warned us over and over about, and his father is the same as all the other vipers whom Jesus warned us about, the pharisees.


what is it about Paul that is contrary to Jesus ?

besides my point with the anecdote above was to show that Jesus was very involved with the Apostles and their early mission to preach the Gospel all over the world

Jesus would strip Paul from his head position in those formative years if Paul was not in line with Himself


the Church has stumbled over time and now 2000 years after several doctrines and practises are not in line with Jesus

but the apostasy was also foretold 2000 years ago so it is no surprise

Paul taught that the law was no longer in effect and we are just under grace. He taught that it was ok to eat food sacrificed to idols. That is forbidden. Peter even stated it again as a condition of gentiles coming into the faith that they must abstain from food sacrificed to idols. We don't have a lot of sacrificial food being offered, but the problem that Balaam caused was exactly around this issue and that example has been well spelled out. Do we have idolatry today? Is there any symbolism we use almost daily here in America that has idols on it, thus to take part in that system is to worship it? We are destroyed because we value gold and silver above our creator. I speak of the little owl hidden on the one dollar bill. Yes, Moloch worship is alive and well. But hey, we are not under the law per Paul and if his conscience is clear then it's not a sin right? I call that a sociopath to not have a conscience. Paul preached lawlessness, to be out from under the curse of the law. The law was not a curse. It is a blessing and Paul deems it a curse. Paul was not an apostle, he was not accepted by the very Apostles whom Jesus picked, and you ask me where he and Jesus differ? Jesus said nothing would change in the bible (Old Testament) until all the prophecies were fulfilled. I do believe we have a few more to go. So, Paul is changing it for those who would rather not bother with rules and regulations, laws and what not. Men love to control women and while Jesus went around freeing women Paul puts the shackles right back on them. If I am called to walk in Jesus path, then wouldn't it be wise to do the things Jesus did like keep the Feasts, obey the law, and love God and my neighbor? For some it seems very complicated, but for me to preach lawlessness is to go directly against what Jesus taught.

[araucaria]

This is a fascinating thread, which the opening videos do not do justice to, in my opinion, I am afraid. There is plenty of much higher quality material out there explaining how Christianity was hijacked from the outset by Paul, and this demonizing of Freemasonry I find childish and extremely misleading.

Regarding Shakespeare, the poet Ted Hughes in “Shakespeare and the Goddess of Complete Being” offers 500 pages of actual analysis of the plays in defence of his thesis that Shakespeare was using the theatre as a ploy to expose his Catholic views at a time when Puritanism was persecuting Catholics. Simplfying outrageously, the eternal feminine (the Goddess of Complete Being) he says was the major battleground at this time, espoused by Catholicism and rejected by Puritanism. She comprises the mother figure, the bride and the whore (representing her sexuality) which are not separable without leading to tragedy (a simple example, Othello, who loves his wife, kills the whore; or Hamlet, who sends the bride Ophelia to a nunnery, and in killing the whore also kills his mother).

In this sense, misogynistic Pauline Christianity corresponds to Puritanism and counterintuitively Catholicism is its heretical offshoot – the main difference being the emphasis on Mary the mother, Mary Magdalen the bride and sexual partner. Shakespeare was an Elizabethan whistle-blower and spiritual guide of the first order. Today we have people like Dan Brown getting this message out to a much wider audience. Not as aesthetically satisfying by a long chalk, but I have no problem with that.

[Lord Sidious]

i always believed, we don't need the church to love Jesus, right?

If you wish to follow jesus, then you ARE the church, not some antiquated organisation that says it stands for x, but speaks of y.

[Ivanhoe]

Absolutlely.



i always believed, we don't need the church to love Jesus, right?

If you wish to follow jesus, then you ARE the church, not some antiquated organisation that says it stands for x, but speaks of y.

It might not be for others, but this is MY understanding.

[araucaria]

i always believed, we don't need the church to love Jesus, right?

If you wish to follow jesus, then you ARE the church, not some antiquated organisation that says it stands for x, but speaks of y.

I agree, but on that reasoning, why would you want to follow Jesus, as opposed to just being him?

[Unified Serenity]

i always believed, we don't need the church to love Jesus, right?

If you wish to follow jesus, then you ARE the church, not some antiquated organisation that says it stands for x, but speaks of y.

I agree, but on that reasoning, why would you want to follow Jesus, as opposed to just being him?

We can put on the mind of Christ. We can walk in his love and be a new Christ man. It is a choice, but that being said, I do want to be me as well in Him. :D

[Lord Sidious]

i always believed, we don't need the church to love Jesus, right?

If you wish to follow jesus, then you ARE the church, not some antiquated organisation that says it stands for x, but speaks of y.

I agree, but on that reasoning, why would you want to follow Jesus, as opposed to just being him?

Why do you think I started my post with the word ''if''?
I don't want to follow anyone, I am working on assembling my own holy grail.
Once I do that, again, I will be my own master.

[araucaria]

i always believed, we don't need the church to love Jesus, right?

If you wish to follow jesus, then you ARE the church, not some antiquated organisation that says it stands for x, but speaks of y.

I agree, but on that reasoning, why would you want to follow Jesus, as opposed to just being him?

Why do you think I started my post with the word ''if''?
I don't want to follow anyone, I am working on assembling my own holy grail.
Once I do that, again, I will be my own master.

Sure - your 'you' didn't mean you and my 'you' didn't mean you either. Maybe we should stick to the I word.
Out of the millions of different offspring my parents could have had (and this has been going on for umpteen generations), I was the one. There is a reason for that.

[RedeZra]

what is it about Paul that is contrary to Jesus ?


Paul taught that the law was no longer in effect and we are just under grace.

Paul preached lawlessness, to be out from under the curse of the law. The law was not a curse. It is a blessing and Paul deems it a curse.

So, Paul is changing it for those who would rather not bother with rules and regulations, laws and what not.


Paul did not do away with the Ten Commandments

the law Paul is talking about is the Halakha (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halakha)which is a complex collective body of Jewish law

and Christians are not under this law which is a strict Jewish law


Paul says the Jews are bound by this body of Jewish law until they accept the grace of Christ





Men love to control women and while Jesus went around freeing women Paul puts the shackles right back on them. If I am called to walk in Jesus path, then wouldn't it be wise to do the things Jesus did like keep the Feasts, obey the law, and love God and my neighbor? For some it seems very complicated, but for me to preach lawlessness is to go directly against what Jesus taught.


most of what Paul wrote is just instructions to the early churches

Paul was responsible for building a new organisation with a specific mission

to tell the whole world about Jesus Christ and keep His Name and teachings alive

he had to be strict and disiplined else Jesus would disappear from history in matter of years


as long as we are not Jews then we are not bound to observe the Feasts but it is good to know about them i agree


and again Paul did not do away with the Ten Commandments

[Unified Serenity]

what is it about Paul that is contrary to Jesus ?


Paul taught that the law was no longer in effect and we are just under grace.

Paul preached lawlessness, to be out from under the curse of the law. The law was not a curse. It is a blessing and Paul deems it a curse.

So, Paul is changing it for those who would rather not bother with rules and regulations, laws and what not.


Paul did not do away with the Ten Commandments

the law Paul is talking about is the Halakha (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halakha)which is a complex collective body of Jewish law

and Christians are not under this law which is a strict Jewish law


Paul says the Jews are bound by this body of Jewish law until they accept the grace of Christ





Men love to control women and while Jesus went around freeing women Paul puts the shackles right back on them. If I am called to walk in Jesus path, then wouldn't it be wise to do the things Jesus did like keep the Feasts, obey the law, and love God and my neighbor? For some it seems very complicated, but for me to preach lawlessness is to go directly against what Jesus taught.


most of what Paul wrote is just instructions to the early churches

Paul was responsible for building a new organisation with a specific mission

to tell the whole world about Jesus Christ and keep His Name and teachings alive

he had to be strict and disiplined else Jesus would disappear from history in matter of years


as long as we are not Jews then we are not bound to observe the Feasts but it is good to know about them i agree


and again Paul did not do away with the Ten Commandments

Once again you avoid the facts about Paul and his lying about being an Apostle, the history of his actions and being rejected by the Apostles. As for Paul saving the message of Jesus, that is utter bunk! You mean to tell me that if it were not for Paul that God's plan and Jesus are too impotent to take care of the bride and plan of bringing salvation to the lost sheep of the house of Israel? We will have to agree to disagree Redezra. It is because of Paul's words that the church does whatever it pleases with regard to special days / Feasts of the Lord. It is because of this that people disregard the dietary laws to their own detriment. It is because of Paul's instructions that we have so much division in the body of Christ arguing about diverse doctrines. Again, You have ignored the scriptures shared showing Paul's lies, Jesus warning, and the Apostles rebukes. I think this is getting into a circular argument and of little benefit. You love and accept Paul who came in his own name, lied about being an Apostle, and sewed division. I accept that and wish you well.

edit to add:

As for preserving Jesus message, it is my very contention that this is exactly what Paul did NOT do. Jesus was a Jew. He lived as a Jew, kept the laws, ordinances and precepts of his Father and told us to do the same except for him being the perfect blood sacrifice for all time. He kept the Feasts and the Apostles did as well. Jesus would not recognize what has become of his bride / church if he came back today. Paul created his own message and called others to do the same. He destroyed the bride except for a remnant. "My people perish for lack of knowledge". The bride is asleep and in danger today.

[Beren]

When you follow the writings after gospels you find that at first there are a lot of messages of hope and love and spirit. Move on and you see until the end of Bible that Paul writes more about "false believers"...

Galatians; second chapter;


This matter arose because some false believers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. 5 We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.


So you see that some "spies" came in in aim to drag down these people to worship God in Religious way, to bring them back to lower conscience from whence they emerged with aid of Christ.

Truth of Gospel of which Paul speaks of can only stay with free people, free of religious bonds of Judaism or any organized religion.
In that time before "spies" gained steam Christians were not a religion , they were a social movement of people who desired to be free of NWO in those days.

Got any similar things of today???

Now continue on in Galatians and you`ll see how Paul confrontated Peter before many because of his double standards;

11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. 14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?
15 “We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles 16 know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in[d (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+2&version=NIV#fen-NIV-29098d)] Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.
17 “But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we Jews find ourselves also among the sinners, doesn’t that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18 If I rebuild what I destroyed, then I really would be a lawbreaker.
19 “For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!


Paul thus was not quiet when he saw a beginning of separation by religious influence in Peter ,so he acted and voiced against separation of classes in Christians. Peter was somehow influenced to start to make a new version of Judaism though Christ didn`t wanted that.

And what`s good is that God used Paul (inspired him) to act and raise the voice for truth against division and against religion (NWO at that time).


And here comes for the end a beautiful summary of how Peter reacted many years afterwards .

His words from his own letter are speaking volumes.

Peter , the same one who was considered a leading figure then , stated these beautiful words in support of Paul and in reality in support of Christian unity and Love.


2 Peter

chapter 3;



15Think of our Lord’s patience as an opportunity for us to be saved. This is what our dear brother Paul wrote to you about, using the wisdom God gave him. 16He talks about this subject in all his letters. Some things in his letters are hard to understand. Ignorant people and people who aren’t sure of what they believe distort what Paul says in his letters the same way they distort the rest of the Scriptures. These people will be destroyed.
17Dear friends, you already know these things. So be on your guard not to be carried away by the deception of people who have no principles. Then you won’t fall from your firm position. 18But grow in the good will[b (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Peter+3&version=GW#fen-GW-30519b)] and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Glory belongs to him now and for that eternal day! Amen.


So at the end of this comment of mine here , I can not really back up claims against Paul of many claims that were placed upon his burden. Despite many things that he said and that we of modern times think different, we were not there to see that people and to see how they struggled in a world that was terribly primitive and backward, where human life wasn`t worth a penny.


Some will mention misogyny but that`s small deal when you compare about average man woman and child and their worth in those days. Christians actually elevated women from their lower than male child position.


But as soon as apostles died , it took almost a century until the Christianity became a religion for "spies" gained steam and introduced same false dealings as you find in religions emerged from Babylon , introduced clergy and whole system became another lookalike .



Here and there you found honest people but more and more they looked as other religions and finally until Constantine proclaimed Christianity a state religion , truth faded among many .


They believed more in leading men than to Christ. God became some detached form and people with low conscience needed a visible rulership... THEY wanted and chose shackles...



Message of Christ remained the same and despite ruling Church elite (pharisee wanna be`s ) meddling in writings of first Christ`s pupils and adding details and rest, message is the same in its core.


But it is up to each of us to see or to close our eyes...

[Fred Steeves]

From what I've gleaned from The New Testament, (and Baptist school taught me well) Saul of Tarsus was a hard ass, straight up, both before and after his conversion. If he was indeed a real person of that portrayed personality, I would have stayed as far away from him as I could.

I can just see the lecture I would get if he caught me tipping pints with a few mates.:nod:

Cheers,
Fred

[RedeZra]

Once again you avoid the facts about Paul and his lying about being an Apostle, the history of his actions and being rejected by the Apostles.

this is just an opinion which is not in line with Peter in the New Testament as Beren told above




You mean to tell me that if it were not for Paul that God's plan and Jesus are too impotent to take care of the bride and plan of bringing salvation to the lost sheep of the house of Israel?

God has shown the way and men must walk it while God helps

Christ was working with and through Paul in establishing His Church




As for preserving Jesus message, it is my very contention that this is exactly what Paul did NOT do. Jesus was a Jew. He lived as a Jew, kept the laws, ordinances and precepts of his Father and told us to do the same except for him being the perfect blood sacrifice for all time. He kept the Feasts and the Apostles did as well. Jesus would not recognize what has become of his bride / church if he came back today.

Jesus was a Jew and so was Paul and the Apostles

but Christ is for everyone and not only the Jews


Jesus is aware of this apostasy over time and He even foretold it

so no surprise here

[Lord Sidious]

I tell ya, our friend Redezra is slipperier than a turkish oil wrestler. :p
In a love and light kind of way.
Of course.


























































Maybe.

[panopticon]

I tell ya, our friend Redezra is slipperier than a turkish oil wrestler. :p


G'day Lord Sidious,

This is the reason I don't usually engage with fundamentalists.
I have found over the years that they run from facts that they don't agree with, grasp onto half truths that suit them and hide in the "shadow of dogma" when proven wrong.
They are truly:
NASA = Never A Straight Answer.

In a face to face conversation they get caught in their propaganda lies, however within the forum dialogue they are able to be selective and manipulative in their use of quotes and not answer questions that don't assist their conversion message. This is also why they "congregate" together so they reinforce each others limited world view.

I don't feel anything for them other than pity.
Kind Regards, :yo:
Panopticon

[58andfixed]

There is hope for clarity of understanding from a studied perspective, that Unified Serenity, EagleSpirit, CdnSirian, Second Son, Khaleesi, Panopticon, TwinCans, -- specifically for the extent of their demonstrated study -- not to take away the many others who also counter the acquiescence to Pauline Doctrine -- that need not win over the stubborn, just need to trigger a cautionary thought for those that peek over our shoulders, here on this thread on PA.

There will be value for others, for the test of time will always be the best test of truth.

It is a rarity indeed that such topics get so thoroughly discoursed as this one has.

A privilege indeed to have it collaborated right here, sustaining evidence for the range of awareness and perspectives available from PA members.

- 58




These were some of the same issues I had with Paul when I was a "baby" believer back in 1987.

I spent the next 8 years studying the bible and other books almost 8 hours a day.

I study the ancient texts and learn much, but nothing has dissuaded me from the truth of Jesus / Yeshua and God's plan for his children.

One day I hope we please him, and show our love in the best way possible by finally obeying him.

[RedeZra]

I tell ya, our friend Redezra is slipperier than a turkish oil wrestler. :p


I have found over the years that they run from facts that they don't agree with, grasp onto half truths that suit them and hide in the "shadow of dogma" when proven wrong.


hello Panopticon

it is not a fact that Paul is heretic so i have no problem defending him and his work


this turkish wrestler seems slippery because he is anointed in truth ; )

[Lord Sidious]

I tell ya, our friend Redezra is slipperier than a turkish oil wrestler. :p


I have found over the years that they run from facts that they don't agree with, grasp onto half truths that suit them and hide in the "shadow of dogma" when proven wrong.


hello Panopticon

it is not a fact that Paul is heretic so i have no problem defending him and his work


this turkish wrestler seems slippery because he is anointed in truth ; )

In your opinion, maybe.
There is a difference between THE truth and YOUR truth.
That is the part that you refuse to acknowledge.

[modwiz]

I tell ya, our friend Redezra is slipperier than a turkish oil wrestler. :p


I have found over the years that they run from facts that they don't agree with, grasp onto half truths that suit them and hide in the "shadow of dogma" when proven wrong.


hello Panopticon

it is not a fact that Paul is heretic so i have no problem defending him and his work


this turkish wrestler seems slippery because he is anointed in truth ; )

Slippery, yes. I thought was from all of the lubricant you are using to try and jerk us all off.

God bless you.

[miqeel]

it is not a fact that Paul is heretic so i have no problem defending him and his work


this turkish wrestler seems slippery because he is anointed in truth ; )

"12 Angry Men" is one of my favorite movies of all times. There is a very important quote there, that I think is relevant. I linked up a video on youtube. The relevant bit starts around 2:10, when Henry Fonda starts speaking.
gTDhgR3p12w

Perhaps you are right RedeZra, and we are wrong. Perhaps we are correct. I for instance think that there is reasonable doubt behind Paul teachings. I am not disqualifying him, I just ask questions. In my short life I learned one thing - question everything. This is what we do here, we question dogmas, we inquire, we propose different points of views and discuss them. I believe it makes much sense that after all the arguments posted in this text, one refrains from saying that Paul is not a heretic ,just because that is the truth - because there is reasonable doubt to that statement.

[Unified Serenity]

I posted this in another thread and think it is relevant to this thread:

Jesus said nothing would change in the bible (Old Testament) until all the prophesies were fulfilled. He still has some prophesies to fulfill including ruling for 1000 years during the millennial kingdom, and what is the main thing about the millennial kingdom? It is simply to choose to obey God, and in fact we will have an easier time obeying God for no man will have to ask about the truth of God then, for all will know because of the Day of the Lord.


Hebrews 8:7-12

7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

The word "laws" in verse 10 is nomous from Strong's concordance it is #3551:

nomos: that which is assigned, hence usage, law
Original Word: νόμος, ου, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: nomos
Phonetic Spelling: (nom'-os)
Short Definition: a law, the Mosaic Law


Is there any doubt about how important the law of God is? That our Lord Jesus said he has come preaching the kingdom of God, to show the way, and that the path is narrow and straight? That the NEW COVENENT IS THE LAW OF GOD WRITTEN UPON OUR HEARTS! God does not change, his law does not change, and the reason the church is in such dire straights today is because of the one whom Jesus warned us of came preaching another gospel of lawlessness which has caused division within the church. Again, if you doubt my words of warning about Paul, please see the thread regarding the Herodian snake pharisee, Paul.


Micah 4:1-3

But in the last days it shall come to pass,

That the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established in the top of the mountains, And it shall be exalted above the hills;

And people shall flow unto it. 2 And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,

And to the house of the God of Jacob; And he will teach us of his ways, And we will walk in his paths:

For the law shall go forth of Zion, And the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. 3 And he shall judge among many people,

And rebuke strong nations afar off; And they shall beat their swords into plowshares, And their spears into * pruning hooks:

Nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, Neither shall they learn war any more.


The word Law used here is shown in the strongs as #8451:

torah: direction, instruction, law
Original Word: תּוֹרָה
Transliteration: torah
Phonetic Spelling: (to-raw')
Short Definition: law

What is the Torah:

"The Written Law consists of the books of the Hebrew Bible, the Tanakh. The term "Bible" is more commonly used by non-Jews, as are the terms "Old Testament" and "New Testament." The appropriate term for Jews to use for the Hebrew Bible is "Tanakh." Tanakh is an acronym for Torah, Nevi'im (Prophets) and Ketuvim (Writings).

The Torah is also known as the Chumash, Pentateuch or Five Books of Moses. The word "Torah" has the following meanings:

1. A scroll made from kosher animal parchment, with the entire text of the Five Books of Moses written in it by a sofer [ritual scribe]. This is the most limited definition.

2. More often, this term means the text of the Five Books of Moses, written in any format, whether Torah scroll, paperback book, CD­ROM, sky­writing or any other media. Any printed version of the Torah (with or without commentary) can be called a Chumash or Pentateuch; however, one never refers to a Torah Scroll as a Chumash.

3. The term "Torah" can mean the entire corpus of Jewish law. This includes the Written and the Oral Law, which includes the Mishna, the Midrash, the Talmud and even later day legal commentaries. This definition of Torah is probably the most common among Orthodox Jews. Usually you can figure out which definition is being used by the context." From http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...itten_Law.html

So we see from Micah that in the Millennial kingdom the Lord will reign, teach us the law or path, and judge the nations.

Jesus said, "I do the will of my father". If we are following in Jesus footprints / path then we too will do the will of the father.

[RedeZra]

this turkish wrestler seems slippery because he is anointed in truth ; )

Slippery, yes. I thought was from all of the lubricant you are using to try and jerk us all off.



i believe the Bible and you don't and so we have an insurmountable disagreement regarding the very premise of the purpose of life

so bro you are a jerking me off as much as you feel i am jerking you off


God bless you

[RedeZra]

Jesus said nothing would change in the bible (Old Testament) until all the prophesies were fulfilled. He still has some prophesies to fulfill including ruling for 1000 years during the millennial kingdom, and what is the main thing about the millennial kingdom? It is simply to choose to obey God, and in fact we will have an easier time obeying God for no man will have to ask about the truth of God then, for all will know because of the Day of the Lord.


so Jesus will come again and as a Judge this time

He will come with the reward we deserve since we didn't want His mercy


God does not tolerate evil and so evil has an expiration date

[Lord Sidious]

Jesus said nothing would change in the bible (Old Testament) until all the prophesies were fulfilled. He still has some prophesies to fulfill including ruling for 1000 years during the millennial kingdom, and what is the main thing about the millennial kingdom? It is simply to choose to obey God, and in fact we will have an easier time obeying God for no man will have to ask about the truth of God then, for all will know because of the Day of the Lord.


so Jesus will come again and as a Judge this time

He will come with the reward we deserve since we didn't want His mercy


God does not tolerate evil and so evil has an expiration date

But according to your bible, your god created evil.
If he doesn't tolerate it, why create it then judge people?
Isn't that unconscionable?

[RedeZra]

so Jesus will come again and as a Judge this time

He will come with the reward we deserve since we didn't want His mercy


God does not tolerate evil and so evil has an expiration date

But according to your bible, your god created evil.
If he doesn't tolerate it, why create it then judge people?
Isn't that unconscionable?

according to my beautiful Bible evil is the machination of the Devil who is a creature and not the Creator

[Unified Serenity]

Jesus said nothing would change in the bible (Old Testament) until all the prophesies were fulfilled. He still has some prophesies to fulfill including ruling for 1000 years during the millennial kingdom, and what is the main thing about the millennial kingdom? It is simply to choose to obey God, and in fact we will have an easier time obeying God for no man will have to ask about the truth of God then, for all will know because of the Day of the Lord.


so Jesus will come again and as a Judge this time

He will come with the reward we deserve since we didn't want His mercy


God does not tolerate evil and so evil has an expiration date

Understanding what the truth is and choosing to do it will not be hindered by lies and the devil's interference during the millennium because Lucifer will be locked away, and then there is the final judgement. During the millennium, anyone who chooses not to obey will not get rain. So, ultimately, there will be a judgement and end to Lucifer's evil influence. This has nothing to do with my OP regarding Paul beguiling the infant church and drawing her away with his false gospel of being under grace and no longer under the law, for I have shown that the New Covenant which Jesus brought to us is the Law written upon our hearts.

I note again you do not try to address my points, but continue to obfuscate to another issue. Paul is a liar, he was never appointed to be an Apostle and all of his letters are mixed with truth and lies. He has caused immeasurable harm in the church, and those who propagate his lies must either repent of them or face judgement for them. I love the quote that when an honest man realizes he is mistaken he will either recognize his mistake or cease being honest. A house divided cannot stand and two cannot walk together who are not in unity. If you are part of the New Covenant of Jesus, then following his path is paramount to anything any other would say. Jesus warned us of one who would come in their own name, claim to have seen Jesus, do signs, wonders and miracles and to not listen to that one. Paul first tried to defeat the church openly as a Pharisee, and then realizing he could not do it he claimed to have met Jesus and been appointed an Apostle. I think it's been laid out in the above posts as to the veracity of this truth. Some will either accept these facts or not. If you do not, then agree to disagree. This post is about Paul the liar, not anything else.

[jorr lundstrom]

Jesus said nothing would change in the bible (Old Testament) until all the prophesies were fulfilled. He still has some prophesies to fulfill including ruling for 1000 years during the millennial kingdom, and what is the main thing about the millennial kingdom? It is simply to choose to obey God, and in fact we will have an easier time obeying God for no man will have to ask about the truth of God then, for all will know because of the Day of the Lord.


so Jesus will come again and as a Judge this time

He will come with the reward we deserve since we didn't want His mercy


God does not tolerate evil and so evil has an expiration date


Finally RedeZra yoy have understood how this unfolds. And you think god

doesnt tolerate evil. Maybye god just want to hold the monopoly on evil.

I said it before and I say it again. The victim forgiving the perpetrators turhs

the former victim into the new perpetrator. Thank you for stating this so clearly.

:focus:

[Lord Sidious]

so Jesus will come again and as a Judge this time

He will come with the reward we deserve since we didn't want His mercy


God does not tolerate evil and so evil has an expiration date

But according to your bible, your god created evil.
If he doesn't tolerate it, why create it then judge people?
Isn't that unconscionable?

according to my beautiful Bible evil is the machination of the Devil who is a creature and not the Creator

Created by whom?
And could evil exist if your god said no?
Come on redezranugget, don't stoop to this nuggetry, it is obvious to even a blind man that you are trying to dodge again.

[Fred Steeves]

so Jesus will come again and as a Judge this time


God does not tolerate evil and so evil has an expiration date

But according to your bible, your god created evil.
If he doesn't tolerate it, why create it then judge people?
Isn't that unconscionable?

You know, that just happens to be another one of those simple questions I had during my born again years, and all I got for answers was the old runaround. I'll now sit back and see if we have any new and improved explanations that are at least plausible.:pop2: This could be good...or not so much.

Cheers,
Fred

[trenairio]

[edit][edit][edit]

[CdnSirian]

this turkish wrestler seems slippery because he is anointed in truth ; )

Slippery, yes. I thought was from all of the lubricant you are using to try and jerk us all off.



i believe the Bible and you don't and so we have an insurmountable disagreement regarding the very premise of the purpose of life

so bro you are a jerking me off as much as you feel i am jerking you off


God bless you

Which Bible? There is no "the" Bible.

¤=[Post Update]=¤


Yeah imo this is accurate. Paul was sent by the Roman establishment, of King Herod, to subvert the Christian movement. But who was the original messianic figure?

Was there a Messianic figure? I believe it is documented that there were a few.

[CdnSirian]

Jesus said nothing would change in the bible (Old Testament) until all the prophesies were fulfilled. He still has some prophesies to fulfill including ruling for 1000 years during the millennial kingdom, and what is the main thing about the millennial kingdom? It is simply to choose to obey God, and in fact we will have an easier time obeying God for no man will have to ask about the truth of God then, for all will know because of the Day of the Lord.


so Jesus will come again and as a Judge this time

He will come with the reward we deserve since we didn't want His mercy


God does not tolerate evil and so evil has an expiration date

Understanding what the truth is and choosing to do it will not be hindered by lies and the devil's interference during the millennium because Lucifer will be locked away, and then there is the final judgement. During the millennium, anyone who chooses not to obey will not get rain. So, ultimately, there will be a judgement and end to Lucifer's evil influence. This has nothing to do with my OP regarding Paul beguiling the infant church and drawing her away with his false gospel of being under grace and no longer under the law, for I have shown that the New Covenant which Jesus brought to us is the Law written upon our hearts.

I note again you do not try to address my points, but continue to obfuscate to another issue. Paul is a liar, he was never appointed to be an Apostle and all of his letters are mixed with truth and lies. He has caused immeasurable harm in the church, and those who propagate his lies must either repent of them or face judgement for them. I love the quote that when an honest man realizes he is mistaken he will either recognize his mistake or cease being honest. A house divided cannot stand and two cannot walk together who are not in unity. If you are part of the New Covenant of Jesus, then following his path is paramount to anything any other would say. Jesus warned us of one who would come in their own name, claim to have seen Jesus, do signs, wonders and miracles and to not listen to that one. Paul first tried to defeat the church openly as a Pharisee, and then realizing he could not do it he claimed to have met Jesus and been appointed an Apostle. I think it's been laid out in the above posts as to the veracity of this truth. Some will either accept these facts or not. If you do not, then agree to disagree. This post is about Paul the liar, not anything else.

Personally I think Paul was a con man and a hijacker of the Christic movement, which seems to have nothing to do with an individual called Jesus. I do not think that it matters anymore. Not that it isn't cool to sort out historical matters, when we can.

[another bob]

Greetings, Friends!
Here's an easy, straightforward way to assess the question:

If the message being transmitted by the writer (ie Paul) is infused with a spirit of unconditional love, selfless goodwill, mature peace and happiness, then it can generally be trusted as authentic (albeit likely still culture-bound in expression). On the other hand, if the message is tainted by fear-mongering, a sense of lack or separation, partiality and division, righteousness and judgmentalism, or a control-orientation, then it is simply another human grab for self-confirmation.

Blessings!

[Unified Serenity]

Greetings, Friends!
Here's an easy, straightforward way to assess the question:

If the message being transmitted by the writer (ie Paul) is infused with a spirit of unconditional love, selfless goodwill, mature peace and happiness, then it can generally be trusted as authentic (albeit likely still culture-bound in expression). On the other hand, if the message is tainted by fear-mongering, a sense of lack or separation, partiality and division, righteousness and judgmentalism, or a control-orientation, then it is simply another human grab for self-confirmation.

Blessings!

Sorry, but I completely disagree with you. Based on what you have said, Jesus was not speaking the truth when he beat the crap out of the money changers and destroyed their work area! Paul's message of salvation by grace/faith alone sounds very nice to most, I mean why have to do anything especially like obeying God's laws on something as silly as meat sacrificed to idols when yo haven't eaten in 3 days? or keeping the Feasts of the Lord or whatever law you find less than appealing at the moment. Paul gave an easy way, Yeshua said his way was the narrow path. Not many people wake up imagining carrying a cross daily, but that's how it really is to follow Christ. Now, granted if you are filled with his love then doing so is easier, but if you are not filled with his love, then it is a burden and thus one would want to gravitate to Paul's easy wide road to salvation.

[another bob]

Based on what you have said, Jesus was not speaking the truth when he beat the crap out of the money changers and destroyed their work area!

Greetings, Friend!

I've learned long ago to resist speculating about matters in which I was not directly involved. Even then, any presumptions about anothers' level of realization is merely a fantasy of interpretation, especially when involving some reputed historical personage, and so best discarded before it becomes another belief (ie baggage).


Blessings!

[TWINCANS]

so Jesus will come again and as a Judge this time


God does not tolerate evil and so evil has an expiration date

But according to your bible, your god created evil.
If he doesn't tolerate it, why create it then judge people?
Isn't that unconscionable?

You know, that just happens to be another one of those simple questions I had during my born again years, and all I got for answers was the old runaround. I'll now sit back and see if we have any new and improved explanations that are at least plausible.:pop2: This could be good...or not so much.

Cheers,
Fred

This is another case of 'ya can't have it both ways', imo. If the Creator create(d)(s) everything, then he/she/it created both good and bad and everything in between, including the just plain 'dumb as mud'. But if so, why are so many fundamentalists judgementalists?

(Evil is just 'live' backwards so it means that which is dead, without the spark of life, ie without the spark of the creator in it. It's not something bad, just something not in alignment with divinity -as yet.)

[58andfixed]

Simple questions can reveal great hypocrisies - nice one TwinCans.

If a story in a belief system can be determined to be a 'catch-22,' then it smacks of attempting to discover 'Unified Theory' based on a square and flat earth.

The First Source didn't 'create evil.'

The First Source's priority was the exercise Free Will Choices, which is a paradigm of non-intervention. [KJV] ".. for He maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust."

Evil is the result of mortals Free Will potential of options, where we get to learn of the consequences of our choices - individually and collectively.

Mortals create evil by not desiring good for their brothers, sisters, sons and daughters.

Evil comes from us, and reflects selfishness.

Seldom are people pure evil. More likely we are some shade of gray between good and evil, depending on the daily seeds we sow.

In an instant one could go from doing good, to evil, and so it is the act that needs correcting - not usually the person.

Evil can be the result of malevolent intent, or mere innocent ignorance [people who don't know that they don't know.]

Evil isn't fought against, nor battles against it won by rhetoric from a pulpit just on Sundays.

We are the solution, however the solution won't come from convenient non-involvement or denial. This is a 24x7 circle of hands project.

The solutions will come about through awareness, education and changes in the way we live.

The avalanche of misinformation that has been poured on civilization is incredible, and digging ourselves out of the falsehood may begin with simple discoveries, like the use of Norwegian Spruce trees for Christmas decoration idea that was introduced in Prince Albert in 1841, to replace the more poisonous Yew Tree for lighting up with candles.

- 58




This is another case of 'ya can't have it both ways', imo.

If the Creator create(d)(s) everything, then he/she/it created both good and bad and everything in between, including the just plain 'dumb as mud'.

[RedeZra]

I note again you do not try to address my points, but continue to obfuscate to another issue.

i am addressing your points but you refuse to listen because you have made up your mind

just as you made up your mind about the Kenites even though there is absolutly no basis in the Bible to diss the Kenites

and still you do ?!


when Paul is in Heaven and you mock him... how do you think that will go down ?

i am warning you

[RedeZra]

so Jesus will come again and as a Judge this time

He will come with the reward we deserve since we didn't want His mercy


God does not tolerate evil and so evil has an expiration date

But according to your bible, your god created evil.
If he doesn't tolerate it, why create it then judge people?
Isn't that unconscionable?

according to my beautiful Bible evil is the machination of the Devil who is a creature and not the Creator

Created by whom?
And could evil exist if your god said no?
Come on redezranugget, don't stoop to this nuggetry, it is obvious to even a blind man that you are trying to dodge again.

please Sith prince


God gave us individuality and free will and so we are free to flunk

[RedeZra]

Finally RedeZra yoy have understood how this unfolds. And you think god

doesnt tolerate evil. Maybye god just want to hold the monopoly on evil.

I said it before and I say it again. The victim forgiving the perpetrators turhs

the former victim into the new perpetrator. Thank you for stating this so clearly.



of course i understand and i've been trying to tell you for years now


God is good and Devil is evil

see you can even understand this by just looking at the english words

[Fred Steeves]

so Jesus will come again and as a Judge this time

He will come with the reward we deserve since we didn't want His mercy


God does not tolerate evil and so evil has an expiration date

But according to your bible, your god created evil.
If he doesn't tolerate it, why create it then judge people?
Isn't that unconscionable?

according to my beautiful Bible evil is the machination of the Devil who is a creature and not the Creator

Created by whom?
And could evil exist if your god said no?
Come on redezranugget, don't stoop to this nuggetry, it is obvious to even a blind man that you are trying to dodge again.

please Sith prince


God gave us individuality and free will and so we are free to flunk

Still waiting for that plausible answer.:):pop2:

[Lord Sidious]

I note again you do not try to address my points, but continue to obfuscate to another issue.

i am addressing your points but you refuse to listen because you have made up your mind

just as you made up your mind about the Kenites even though there is absolutly no basis in the Bible to diss the Kenites

and still you do ?!


when Paul is in Heaven and you mock him... how do you think that will go down ?

i am warning you

I would suggest you don't warn anyone.
That could be taken as a violation of the guidelines.
Oh, and stop being such a nugget too.








so Jesus will come again and as a Judge this time

He will come with the reward we deserve since we didn't want His mercy


God does not tolerate evil and so evil has an expiration date

But according to your bible, your god created evil.
If he doesn't tolerate it, why create it then judge people?
Isn't that unconscionable?

according to my beautiful Bible evil is the machination of the Devil who is a creature and not the Creator

Created by whom?
And could evil exist if your god said no?
Come on redezranugget, don't stoop to this nuggetry, it is obvious to even a blind man that you are trying to dodge again.

please Sith prince


God gave us individuality and free will and so we are free to flunk

I am not a prince, I am an emperor and I acknowledge that you have been checkmated.

[modwiz]

so Jesus will come again and as a Judge this time

He will come with the reward we deserve since we didn't want His mercy


God does not tolerate evil and so evil has an expiration date

But according to your bible, your god created evil.
If he doesn't tolerate it, why create it then judge people?
Isn't that unconscionable?

according to my beautiful Bible evil is the machination of the Devil who is a creature and not the Creator

Created by whom?
And could evil exist if your god said no?
Come on redezranugget, don't stoop to this nuggetry, it is obvious to even a blind man that you are trying to dodge again.

please Sith prince


God gave us individuality and free will and so we are free to flunk

Still waiting for that plausible answer.:):pop2:

Someone is still slathering on the lubricant.

[Unified Serenity]

I believe I have clearly laid out the case about the Kenites in other posts, and they became the scribes and Pharisee spoken of by Jesus as snakes and vipers. Paul was a Pharisee and self appointed Apostle. He could not be an Apostle as there are only the 12 chosen by Jesus with then Judas being replaced later. So, again, you Redezra never deal with the very scriptures I bring up. You quote church doctrine. What part of "I will write my law upon their minds and hearts do you not understand? Paul preached salvation through grace and faith. Faith without works is dead, and works means to do the will of the Father. One law and you fulfill all the others, mean by doing the one you will not break the others, it does not negate the others. Love God with all your heart, soul, and mind. It's really simple. Jesus said if we are his disciples we will do the things he did. Ignoring the law is not what Jesus did.

[modwiz]

I believe Kenites is a corruption and derivative of Cainites. FWIW.

[Unified Serenity]

I believe Kenites is a corruption and derivative of Cainites. FWIW.

You're absolutely correct, and you can see who their father is by following the bread crumbs in the OT.

1Ch 2:55 And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.

Kenites in the Strong's Concordance

H7017
קיני קיני
qêynı̂y qı̂ynı̂y
kay-nee', kee-nee'
Patronymic from H7014; a Kenite or member of the tribe of Kajin: - Kenite.

H7014
קין
qayin
kah'-yin
The same as H7013 (with a play upon the affinity to H7069); Kajin, the name of the first child, also of a place in Palestine, and of an Oriental tribe: - Cain, Kenite (-s).


So, the Kenites are the father of the the Rechabites, house of Rechab.


What are the Rechabites and what do they do?

Jer 35:1 The word which came unto Jeremiah from the LORD in the days of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, saying,
Jer 35:2 Go unto the house of the Rechabites, and speak unto them, and bring them into the house of the LORD, into one of the chambers, and give them wine to drink.

What does Jer. 35 tell us about these Rechabites?

Jer 35:5 And I set before the sons of the house of the Rechabites pots full of wine, and cups, and I said unto them, Drink ye wine.
Jer 35:6 But they said, We will drink no wine: for Jonadab the son of Rechab our father commanded us, saying, Ye shall drink no wine, neither ye, nor your sons for ever:
Jer 35:7 Neither shall ye build house, nor sow seed, nor plant vineyard, nor have any: but all your days ye shall dwell in tents; that ye may live many days in the land where ye be strangers.
Jer 35:8 Thus have we obeyed the voice of Jonadab the son of Rechab our father in all that he hath charged us, to drink no wine all our days, we, our wives, our sons, nor our daughters;
Jer 35:9 Nor to build houses for us to dwell in: neither have we vineyard, nor field, nor seed:
Jer 35:10 But we have dwelt in tents, and have obeyed, and done according to all that Jonadab our father commanded us.

Does this lifestyle sound familiar?

Gen 4:9 And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?
Gen 4:10 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.
Gen 4:11 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand;
Gen 4:12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.
Gen 4:13 And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear.
Gen 4:14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.
Gen 4:15 And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

So, Cain cannot grow food, so why even sew seed? Cain will be a vagabond thus he will not settle down, but be a tent dweller.

What happened to these kids of Cain? Well, they are the Cainites/Kenites and Jer. 35 tells us where they went:

Jer 35:11 But it came to pass, when Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon came up into the land, that we said, Come, and let us go to Jerusalem for fear of the army of the Chaldeans, and for fear of the army of the Syrians: so we dwell at Jerusalem.

Where is Jerusalem? It's in Judea where the tribe of Judah lives called the Jews. They lived there many years and became scribes and Pharisees. They became called Jews because they lived there long enough to intermingle and claim to be Jews and are not of Judah. They do the works of their father Cain whose father was the devil.

Did Jesus bear witness to this fact?

Mat 23:29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
Mat 23:30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
Mat 23:31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
Mat 23:32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
Mat 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
Mat 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Who killed Abel? Cain killed Abel, and Jesus is publically telling them they are of Cain, are Kenites (Tares) and not Jews but proclaim to be Jews, but Jews came from Abraham, and Yet Jesus tells the people openly they are not of Abraham, but of another, Cain, and they do the works of their Father a liar from the beginning who kills the prophets sent by God.

Joh 8:38 I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.
Joh 8:39 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.
Joh 8:40 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.
Joh 8:41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
Joh 8:42 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.

I think it's safe to say that Jesus spoke plainly, he's the prophet of all prophets, and he warned us over and over to not be beguiled by a false one such as Paul who would come in their own name, preach another gospel, claim to have seen Jesus, do signs, wonders, and miracles. I think this shows very clearly via the OT and Jesus words just whom Paul's real father was, what he did, and we see the outcome in his church which refuses to follow Jesus New Covenant of the Law written upon our minds and hearts.

The truth is verified by multiple witnesses:

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.


Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Heb 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
Heb 8:11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
Heb 8:12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

To ignore the truth of the new covenant is dreadful. For those who claim to be believers to ignore the truth of what the New Covenant is would be to tread the blood paid under their feet.

Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Heb 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
Heb 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
Heb 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
Heb 10:15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,
Heb 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
Heb 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
Heb 10:18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
Heb 10:19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
Heb 10:20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;
Heb 10:21 And having an high priest over the house of God;
Heb 10:22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
Heb 10:23 Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)
Heb 10:24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
Heb 10:25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
Heb 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
Heb 10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
Heb 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
Heb 10:30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
Heb 10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.


I appreciate those who trod through this incredible subject with me. It is one of my favorites, not because it stirs up controversy, but because those who care, who seek the Lord, and wish to walk pure in the path of Jesus to really study, accept the truth via the words despite what some preachers would teach, to love the word, Jesus, more than they fear man is such a beautiful thing to me. The bride of Christ is in such a sad state of animosity today with one another. Her witness is not as it should be for who could hate a people who love one another so much and out of that love do as Jesus would do? May we see that soon.

[modwiz]

I believe Kenites is a corruption and derivative of Cainites. FWIW.

You're absolutely correct, and you can see who their father is by following the bread crumbs in the OT.

1Ch 2:55 And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.

Kenites in the Strong's Concordance

H7017
קיני קיני
qêynı̂y qı̂ynı̂y
kay-nee', kee-nee'
Patronymic from H7014; a Kenite or member of the tribe of Kajin: - Kenite.

H7014
קין
qayin
kah'-yin
The same as H7013 (with a play upon the affinity to H7069); Kajin, the name of the first child, also of a place in Palestine, and of an Oriental tribe: - Cain, Kenite (-s).


So, the Kenites are the father of the the Rechabites, house of Rechab.


What are the Rechabites and what do they do?

Jer 35:1 The word which came unto Jeremiah from the LORD in the days of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, saying,
Jer 35:2 Go unto the house of the Rechabites, and speak unto them, and bring them into the house of the LORD, into one of the chambers, and give them wine to drink.

What does Jer. 35 tell us about these Rechabites?

Jer 35:5 And I set before the sons of the house of the Rechabites pots full of wine, and cups, and I said unto them, Drink ye wine.
Jer 35:6 But they said, We will drink no wine: for Jonadab the son of Rechab our father commanded us, saying, Ye shall drink no wine, neither ye, nor your sons for ever:
Jer 35:7 Neither shall ye build house, nor sow seed, nor plant vineyard, nor have any: but all your days ye shall dwell in tents; that ye may live many days in the land where ye be strangers.
Jer 35:8 Thus have we obeyed the voice of Jonadab the son of Rechab our father in all that he hath charged us, to drink no wine all our days, we, our wives, our sons, nor our daughters;
Jer 35:9 Nor to build houses for us to dwell in: neither have we vineyard, nor field, nor seed:
Jer 35:10 But we have dwelt in tents, and have obeyed, and done according to all that Jonadab our father commanded us.

Does this lifestyle sound familiar?

Gen 4:9 And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?
Gen 4:10 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.
Gen 4:11 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand;
Gen 4:12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.
Gen 4:13 And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear.
Gen 4:14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.
Gen 4:15 And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

So, Cain cannot grow food, so why even sew seed? Cain will be a vagabond thus he will not settle down, but be a tent dweller.

What happened to these kids of Cain? Well, they are the Cainites/Kenites and Jer. 35 tells us where they went:

Jer 35:11 But it came to pass, when Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon came up into the land, that we said, Come, and let us go to Jerusalem for fear of the army of the Chaldeans, and for fear of the army of the Syrians: so we dwell at Jerusalem.

Where is Jerusalem? It's in Judea where the tribe of Judah lives called the Jews. They lived there many years and became scribes and Pharisees. They became called Jews because they lived there long enough to intermingle and claim to be Jews and are not of Judah. They do the works of their father Cain whose father was the devil.

Did Jesus bear witness to this fact?

Mat 23:29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
Mat 23:30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
Mat 23:31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
Mat 23:32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
Mat 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
Mat 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Who killed Abel? Cain killed Abel, and Jesus is publically telling them they are of Cain, are Kenites (Tares) and not Jews but proclaim to be Jews, but Jews came from Abraham, and Yet Jesus tells the people openly they are not of Abraham, but of another, Cain, and they do the works of their Father a liar from the beginning who kills the prophets sent by God.

Joh 8:38 I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.
Joh 8:39 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.
Joh 8:40 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.
Joh 8:41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
Joh 8:42 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.

I think it's safe to say that Jesus spoke plainly, he's the prophet of all prophets, and he warned us over and over to not be beguiled by a false one such as Paul who would come in their own name, preach another gospel, claim to have seen Jesus, do signs, wonders, and miracles. I think this shows very clearly via the OT and Jesus words just whom Paul's real father was, what he did, and we see the outcome in his church which refuses to follow Jesus New Covenant of the Law written upon our minds and hearts.

The truth is verified by multiple witnesses:

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.


Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Heb 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
Heb 8:11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
Heb 8:12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

To ignore the truth of the new covenant is dreadful. For those who claim to be believers to ignore the truth of what the New Covenant is would be to tread the blood paid under their feet.

Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Heb 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
Heb 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
Heb 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
Heb 10:15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,
Heb 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
Heb 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
Heb 10:18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
Heb 10:19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
Heb 10:20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;
Heb 10:21 And having an high priest over the house of God;
Heb 10:22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
Heb 10:23 Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)
Heb 10:24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
Heb 10:25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
Heb 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
Heb 10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
Heb 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
Heb 10:30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
Heb 10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.


I appreciate those who trod through this incredible subject with me. It is one of my favorites, not because it stirs up controversy, but because those who care, who seek the Lord, and wish to walk pure in the path of Jesus to really study, accept the truth via the words despite what some preachers would teach, to love the word, Jesus, more than they fear man is such a beautiful thing to me. The bride of Christ is in such a sad state of animosity today with one another. Her witness is not as it should be for who could hate a people who love one another so much and out of that love do as Jesus would do? May we see that soon.

You ran with that beautifully US. Did I miss something though in both Jer 31:31 and Heb 8:8 it mentions a new covenant with the tribe of Israel and Judah but then seems to mention the new covenant with Israel only. There would seem to, therefore, not be a covenant with Judah and thereby both the Benjaminites and Levites (by default) who were part of the Kingdom of Judah.

Can you elaborate on that? I am guessing you can. I find the omission curious.

[Unified Serenity]

Hey Modwiz,

This is a deep subject that I had not anticipated going into. There is both a simple answer here and a much deeper one as well. It has caused much debate for Christians. First let's look at whom Jesus said he was sent to:

Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

The word house is:

G3624
οἶκος
oikos
oy'-kos
Of uncertain affinity; a dwelling (more or less extensive, literally or figuratively); by implication a family (more or less related, literally or figuratively): - home, house (-hold), temple.

Thus we see the family of Israel. Who is Israel?

G2474
Ἰσραήλ
Israēl
is-rah-ale'
Of Hebrew origin [H3478]; Israel (that is, Jisrael), the adopted name of Jacob, including his descendants (literally or figuratively): - Israel.

Who are the sons of Judah?

1Ch 2:1 These are the sons of Israel; Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun,
1Ch 2:2 Dan, Joseph, and Benjamin, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher.

Joseph had two sons blessed by Israel / Jacob:

Num 26:28 The sons of Joseph after their families were Manasseh and Ephraim.

Thus we see, that the house of Israel encompasses the 12 and Jacob blessed Ephraim and Manasseh separately for Joseph.

The deeper teaching is partly revealed here:

Gen 48:8 And Israel beheld Joseph's sons, and said, Who are these?
Gen 48:9 And Joseph said unto his father, They are my sons, whom God hath given me in this place. And he said, Bring them, I pray thee, unto me, and I will bless them.
Gen 48:10 Now the eyes of Israel were dim for age, so that he could not see. And he brought them near unto him; and he kissed them, and embraced them.
Gen 48:11 And Israel said unto Joseph, I had not thought to see thy face: and, lo, God hath shewed me also thy seed.
Gen 48:12 And Joseph brought them out from between his knees, and he bowed himself with his face to the earth.
Gen 48:13 And Joseph took them both, Ephraim in his right hand toward Israel's left hand, and Manasseh in his left hand toward Israel's right hand, and brought them near unto him.
Gen 48:14 And Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it upon Ephraim's head, who was the younger, and his left hand upon Manasseh's head, guiding his hands wittingly; for Manasseh was the firstborn.
Gen 48:15 And he blessed Joseph, and said, God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day,
Gen 48:16 The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.
Gen 48:17 And when Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, it displeased him: and he held up his father's hand, to remove it from Ephraim's head unto Manasseh's head.
Gen 48:18 And Joseph said unto his father, Not so, my father: for this is the firstborn; put thy right hand upon his head.
Gen 48:19 And his father refused, and said, I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations.
Gen 48:20 And he blessed them that day, saying, In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh: and he set Ephraim before Manasseh.
Gen 48:21 And Israel said unto Joseph, Behold, I die: but God shall be with you, and bring you again unto the land of your fathers.

The issue becomes later, who are the lost sheep of the house of Israel, hint it's not Judah, Benjamin and Levi.

The short answer is Jesus came for all of Israel's family. But, there was a special lost sheep message and that is the harder one to delve into. The bible is written in three levels, milk, food, meat. This is a meat issue.

[modwiz]

Hey Modwiz,

This is a deep subject that I had not anticipated going into. There is both a simple answer here and a much deeper one as well. It has caused much debate for Christians. First let's look at whom Jesus said he was sent to:

Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

The word house is:

G3624
οἶκος
oikos
oy'-kos
Of uncertain affinity; a dwelling (more or less extensive, literally or figuratively); by implication a family (more or less related, literally or figuratively): - home, house (-hold), temple.

Thus we see the family of Israel. Who is Israel?

G2474
Ἰσραήλ
Israēl
is-rah-ale'
Of Hebrew origin [H3478]; Israel (that is, Jisrael), the adopted name of Jacob, including his descendants (literally or figuratively): - Israel.

Who are the sons of Judah?

1Ch 2:1 These are the sons of Israel; Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun,
1Ch 2:2 Dan, Joseph, and Benjamin, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher.

Joseph had two sons blessed by Israel / Jacob:

Num 26:28 The sons of Joseph after their families were Manasseh and Ephraim.

Thus we see, that the house of Israel encompasses the 12 and Jacob blessed Ephraim and Manasseh separately for Joseph.

The deeper teaching is partly revealed here:

Gen 48:8 And Israel beheld Joseph's sons, and said, Who are these?
Gen 48:9 And Joseph said unto his father, They are my sons, whom God hath given me in this place. And he said, Bring them, I pray thee, unto me, and I will bless them.
Gen 48:10 Now the eyes of Israel were dim for age, so that he could not see. And he brought them near unto him; and he kissed them, and embraced them.
Gen 48:11 And Israel said unto Joseph, I had not thought to see thy face: and, lo, God hath shewed me also thy seed.
Gen 48:12 And Joseph brought them out from between his knees, and he bowed himself with his face to the earth.
Gen 48:13 And Joseph took them both, Ephraim in his right hand toward Israel's left hand, and Manasseh in his left hand toward Israel's right hand, and brought them near unto him.
Gen 48:14 And Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it upon Ephraim's head, who was the younger, and his left hand upon Manasseh's head, guiding his hands wittingly; for Manasseh was the firstborn.
Gen 48:15 And he blessed Joseph, and said, God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day,
Gen 48:16 The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.
Gen 48:17 And when Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, it displeased him: and he held up his father's hand, to remove it from Ephraim's head unto Manasseh's head.
Gen 48:18 And Joseph said unto his father, Not so, my father: for this is the firstborn; put thy right hand upon his head.
Gen 48:19 And his father refused, and said, I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations.
Gen 48:20 And he blessed them that day, saying, In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh: and he set Ephraim before Manasseh.
Gen 48:21 And Israel said unto Joseph, Behold, I die: but God shall be with you, and bring you again unto the land of your fathers.

The issue becomes later, who are the lost sheep of the house of Israel, hint it's not Judah, Benjamin and Levi.

The short answer is Jesus came for all of Israel's family. But, there was a special lost sheep message and that is the harder one to delve into. The bible is written in three levels, milk, food, meat. This is a meat issue.

Thank you US. That was great. I appreciate what you have given us.

[RedeZra]

I believe Kenites is a corruption and derivative of Cainites. FWIW.

You're absolutely correct, and you can see who their father is by following the bread crumbs in the OT.

1Ch 2:55 And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.

Kenites in the Strong's Concordance

H7017
קיני קיני
qêynı̂y qı̂ynı̂y
kay-nee', kee-nee'
Patronymic from H7014; a Kenite or member of the tribe of Kajin: - Kenite.

H7014
קין
qayin
kah'-yin
The same as H7013 (with a play upon the affinity to H7069); Kajin, the name of the first child, also of a place in Palestine, and of an Oriental tribe: - Cain, Kenite (-s).


So, the Kenites are the father of the the Rechabites, house of Rechab.



the Kenites are first mentioned in Genesis 15 as one of the tribes together with the Kenezzites Kadmonites Hittites Perizzites Rephaim Amorites Canaanites Girga****es and the Jebusites who live in the land of Caanan which will be given to the descendants of Abraham according to God


your reasoning is based upon the premise that the Kenites are the descendants of the Cain son of Adam and Eve who lived long before the Deluge and killed his brother Abel

and not considering the Kenites are named after another Cain ?


Moses had a father-in-law who was a Kenite

and God states this about the Rechabites who come from the Kenites



And Jeremiah said to the house of the Rechabites, "Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: 'Because you have obeyed the commandment of Jonadab your father, and kept all his precepts and done according to all that he commanded you,

'therefore thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: "Jonadab the son of Rechab shall not lack a man to stand before Me forever." ' " - Jeremiah 35:18-19


so your premise doesn't stand the light of the day and your reasoning is not sound under the sun

[Unified Serenity]

I believe Kenites is a corruption and derivative of Cainites. FWIW.

You're absolutely correct, and you can see who their father is by following the bread crumbs in the OT.

1Ch 2:55 And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.

Kenites in the Strong's Concordance

H7017
קיני קיני
qêynı̂y qı̂ynı̂y
kay-nee', kee-nee'
Patronymic from H7014; a Kenite or member of the tribe of Kajin: - Kenite.

H7014
קין
qayin
kah'-yin
The same as H7013 (with a play upon the affinity to H7069); Kajin, the name of the first child, also of a place in Palestine, and of an Oriental tribe: - Cain, Kenite (-s).


So, the Kenites are the father of the the Rechabites, house of Rechab.



the Kenites are first mentioned in Genesis 15 as one of the tribes together with the Kenezzites Kadmonites Hittites Perizzites Rephaim Amorites Canaanites Girga****es and the Jebusites who live in the land of Caanan which will be given to the descendants of Abraham according to God


your reasoning is based upon the premise that the Kenites are the descendants of the Cain son of Adam and Eve who lived long before the Deluge and killed his brother Abel

and not considering the Kenites are named after another Cain ?


Moses had a father-in-law who was a Kenite

and God states this about the Rechabites who come from the Kenites



And Jeremiah said to the house of the Rechabites, "Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: 'Because you have obeyed the commandment of Jonadab your father, and kept all his precepts and done according to all that he commanded you,

'therefore thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: "Jonadab the son of Rechab shall not lack a man to stand before Me forever." ' " - Jeremiah 35:18-19


so your premise doesn't stand the light of the day and your reasoning is not sound under the sun

What's really sad RedEzra is that you cannot seem to see what is right in front of you. Who slew Abel? Who was cursed with not being able to be reap from the ground that which he planted? Who was told he would be a vagabond / tent dweller because of killing his brother Abel? Who was the first liar and the father of lies? How could the Pharisees be guilty of the blood of Abel unless they were of the house of Cain? Whose deeds did the Pharisees do and why did Jesus say they were snakes and vipers? I think you just can't bear to accept the truth of this no matter what and want to bring up the deluge and another Cain? Are you possibly a defense attorney? I would want you in my corner if I were say OJ Simpson and needed someone who could come up with enough non-sequiturs to throw people off the obvious.... "if the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit!" Another Cain? Ok, let's look at the parable of the Wheat and Tares shall we?

Now remember, Cain and Abel are brothers and therefore should look somewhat like one another. Seth likewise should resemble both Cain and Abel. It's logical and not a definite, but let's go on with the parable.

Mat 13:24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
Mat 13:25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.
Mat 13:26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.
Mat 13:27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
Mat 13:28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
Mat 13:29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
Mat 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

Ok, so tares look a lot like wheat and you can hardly tell them apart, but when it's time to harvest wheat the tares are bad fruit. We are told they are there, to not uproot them and to let them grow, hence they are standing.

Tares:

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


This was such an important parable that Jesus explains it to his disciples. 8 times the phrase "who has ears to hear" is said by Jesus and it should ring a loud bell for any student of the word to pay very close attention that it is a very deep and important teaching.

Mat 13:35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.
Mat 13:36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.
Mat 13:37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;
Mat 13:38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
Mat 13:39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
Mat 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
Mat 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
Mat 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Mat 13:43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

It is interesting to note that the word for seed in Greek is Sperma:

G4690
σπέρμα
sperma
sper'-mah
From G4687; something sown, that is, seed (including the male “sperm”); by implication offspring; specifically a remnant (figuratively as if kept over for planting): - issue, seed.

This goes into the deeper teaching of who Cain's father really is and that is Lucifer the devil. Most Christians are taught that when Jesus said, "you are of your father the devil" it just meant spiritual, and there is a portion of truth that we can all be influenced to do evil, but in the case of Cain, it is literal, and Cain does the work of his father, his children continue in that work and fulfill the negative side of prophecy. "Oh you mean Eve had sex with Satan and Cain was born?" Yes, that is exactly what it says, and though many want to treat Genesis creation story as just a nice fairy tale, it is more than that. God does not lay pearls out for swine, and all the really good stuff is hidden in scripture. It takes time and effort and constant seeking to find them and know the truth.

Mat 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
Mat 7:7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

Ask is:

G154
αἰτέω
aiteō
ahee-teh'-o
Of uncertain derivation; to ask (in generally): - ask, beg, call for, crave, desire, require. Compare G4441.

Seek is:

G2212
ζητέω
zēteō
dzay-teh'-o
Of uncertain affinity; to seek (literally or figuratively); specifically (by Hebraism) to worship (God), or (in a bad sense) to plot (against life): - be (go) about, desire, endeavor, enquire (for), require, (X will) seek (after, for, means). Compare G4441.

Knock is:

G2925
κρούω
krouō
kroo'-o
Apparently a primary verb; to rap: - knock.


There is a sense of urgency, worshipful attitude, persistency to this ask, seek and knock to gain the pearls of wisdom and knowledge from God. We are being let in on a great secret. They killed Jesus because he was revealing it openly and that would destroy their plans to have the people know they were Kenites, sons of Cain, and not Jews. It was a good thing and provoked them to complete their task to kill him because they do fulfill the negative side of prophecy for their father. They are extremely obedient to him. This has caused our Father much sorrow that Lucifer's kids are so obedient and God's kids are stiff necked rebellious harlots whom he had to divorce at one point, lost their identity and became the lost sheep of the house of Israel. But, in God's mercy he would bring them back as the good shepherd and husband that he is.

Jer 35:13 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Go and tell the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, Will ye not receive instruction to hearken to my words? saith the LORD.
Jer 35:14 The words of Jonadab the son of Rechab, that he commanded his sons not to drink wine, are performed; for unto this day they drink none, but obey their father's commandment: notwithstanding I have spoken unto you, rising early and speaking; but ye hearkened not unto me.
Jer 35:15 I have sent also unto you all my servants the prophets, rising up early and sending them, saying, Return ye now every man from his evil way, and amend your doings, and go not after other gods to serve them, and ye shall dwell in the land which I have given to you and to your fathers: but ye have not inclined your ear, nor hearkened unto me.
Jer 35:16 Because the sons of Jonadab the son of Rechab have performed the commandment of their father, which he commanded them; but this people hath not hearkened unto me:
Jer 35:17 Therefore thus saith the LORD God of hosts, the God of Israel; Behold, I will bring upon Judah and upon all the inhabitants of Jerusalem all the evil that I have pronounced against them: because I have spoken unto them, but they have not heard; and I have called unto them, but they have not answered.
Jer 35:18 And Jeremiah said unto the house of the Rechabites, Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Because ye have obeyed the commandment of Jonadab your father, and kept all his precepts, and done according unto all that he hath commanded you:
Jer 35:19 Therefore thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Jonadab the son of Rechab shall not want a man to stand before me for ever.

God is not saying, hey you are wonderful people, Godly in all your ways. God rebuked HIS children for their disobedience and uses the obedience of these Kenite children of the house of Rechab to show the irony of it all. I can accept that there will be one Kenite to stand before God forever. I don't know if one get's redeemed or if God has a special cell for that one. All I do know is that Jesus spoke plainly about the Pharisees. He laid out whose children they were. The Rechabites follow diligently their father's words and commands as cursed by God and to live they had to obey that curse so they did. Cain was afraid he would be killed, and God said he put a mark on them so none would kill them. They are the tares of the field. They won't be removed until the harvest. This is one reason why no matter how bad the elites are and people want to work to change them or remove them to stop their plans, I know that will not happen. They are tares, bad fruit is all they have to offer. God has told us what will come in the end days, and part of that is a NWO. We are also told not to fear when evil men prosper. That we are to walk the narrow path, to be ready with oil in our lamps, and that the day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night and that most of the people will be asleep.

I think it's very clear most people are very asleep. It takes a persistency to seek out the truth, dedication to follow it, and a worshipful heart to adhere to it. Paul preached the wide easy path of grace alone, and his forked tongue confused the children whom Jesus tried to warn. They wanted easy words that tickled their ears. They continue to persecute those who speak the truth. There is nothing new under the sun, and all will happen as it should.

[Lord Sidious]

I hate to give you credit Unified Serenity, you are one of the most patient people I have ever seen.

[Unified Serenity]

I hate to give you credit Unified Serenity, you are one of the most patient people I have ever seen.

I take that as I high compliment Lord Sidious, thank you.

My last post is likely to send Redezra into a fit. I know the things I share are not accepted at all by the Pauline church. They are near heresy to them. But, I think I do a decent job of explaining why things are the way they are, and how I come to those conclusions. I am not saying I have all knowledge or understand all truth. I am saying though what I do believe up until now on these areas.

Got some cookies Sidious?

[Lord Sidious]

You take it as intended.
No cookies, but I have a stack of Dilmah extra strong tea.
All I need is some mint and we could have arabic mint tea.

[Jay]

Some Rooibos Tea from me - Thank you Serenity & all

[Lord Sidious]

Some Rooibos Tea from me - Thank you Serenity & all

I have had that a few times and I liked it.

[Unified Serenity]

I love arabic mint tea and earl grey. Good stuff.

[58andfixed]

If life isn't so busy, maybe a book by Alexander McCall Smith, just for something calming.

- 58



Some Rooibos Tea from me - Thank you Serenity & all

[RedeZra]

My last post is likely to send Redezra into a fit.

not at all as i am calm all the time ; )


like Sitchin with the Sumerian tablets you inject ideas into the Bible that are not there

and think that your highly subjective interpretation is right regardless if it is supported by the Book itself or not


take the premise with the Kenites descending from the Cain

who lived thousands of years before the Deluge which drowned everybody except a small family in an Ark according to the Bible

how plausible is it that the tribe of Kenites - just one of many tribes in Caanan after the Flood - are the direct descendants of the Cain ?



read the Gospel of John 8:37 and see that Jesus acknowledges the Pharisees as descendants of Abraham

"I know that you are Abraham's descendants, but you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you." - John 8:37

why then does Jesus say about the Pharisees "You are of [your] father the devil..." in John 8:44 ?

it is of course because the Pharisees are under the spell of the spirit of Satan so much so that they don't even recognise the Truth of the Messiah standing right in front of them

[Unified Serenity]

My last post is likely to send Redezra into a fit.

not at all as i am calm all the time ; )


like Sitchin with the Sumerian tablets you inject ideas into the Bible that are not there

and think that your highly subjective interpratation is right regardless if it is supported by the Book itself or not


take the premise with the Kenites descending from the Cain

who lived thousands of years before the Deluge which drowned everybody except a small family in an Ark according to the Bible

how plausible is it that the tribe of Kenites - just one of many tribes in Caanan after the Flood - are the direct descendants of the Cain ?



read the Gospel of John 8:37 and see that Jesus acknowledges the Pharisees as descendants of Araham

"I know that you are Abraham's descendants, but you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you." - John 8:37

why then does Jesus say about the Pharisees "You are of [your] father the devil..." in John 8:44 ?

it is of course because the Pharisees are under the spell of the spirit of Satan so much so that they don't even recognize the Truth of the Messiah standing right in front of them


Gen 8:1 And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters asswaged;

Earth:

H776
ארץ
'erets
eh'-rets
From an unused root probably meaning to be firm; the earth (at large, or partitively a land): - X common, country, earth, field, ground, land, X nations, way, + wilderness, world.


Think what you want Redezra. Keep bringing up misunderstood history. The flood of Noah destroyed the region the Nephilim were living in, hence the word "world / earth" was not correctly translated. That word can be used to mean country, city, dirt, world, my land. It's just like reading that Cain went off to the land of Nod to find his wife. Who were these people in the land of Nod? Oh yeh, that's right Adam and Eve got really busy and just populated Nod as well and Cain hung around to find a sister he would like. How is it that if God destroyed all life on earth during the flood that we still had Nephilim after the flood? David faced one of these fallen angel's kids who had 4 brothers. His name was Goliath. Again, look at the curse, look at the Rechabites living with that curse, and look at Jesus words about whose father the Pharisees really is. If it's just a bad spiritual condition and not bloodline, then why make them guilty of Abel's blood? It doesn't fit. You do like to avoid these facts.

The deeper student of the bible will discover most of the things that confuse them are easily explained if they simply study and know what it actually says in it's original languages because English is not a very good translation in some places.

[Lord Sidious]

My last post is likely to send Redezra into a fit.

not at all as i am calm all the time ; )

Which is why you warn people?
I know what the problem is here.
Some of the posters, such as Unified Serenity are reading the book/s esoterically, whilst some, such as you, are reading them exoterically and then arguing about it.
There is no wisdom in what words say, only in what they mean.
One of the issues you need to work on is that you think you know it all and are not open to correction.

[RedeZra]

Earth:

H776
ארץ
'erets
eh'-rets
From an unused root probably meaning to be firm; the earth (at large, or partitively a land): - X common, country, earth, field, ground, land, X nations, way, + wilderness, world.


The flood of Noah destroyed the region the Nephilim were living in, hence the word "world / earth" was not correctly translated. That word can be used to mean country, city, dirt, world, my land.

erets means many things as you have shown above

and in connection with the Creation it means the whole earth

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth [erets]." - Genesis 1:1


and in connection with the Flood it also means the whole earth

"And the waters prevailed exceedingly on the earth [erets], and all the high hills under the whole heaven were covered." - Genesis 7:19


"So He destroyed all living things which were on the face of the ground [adamah]: both man and cattle, creeping thing and bird of the air. They were destroyed from the earth [erets] . Only Noah and those who with him in the ark remained." - Genesis 7:23





It's just like reading that Cain went off to the land of Nod to find his wife. Who were these people in the land of Nod? Oh yeh, that's right Adam and Eve got really busy and just populated Nod as well and Cain hung around to find a sister he would like.

"After he [Adam] begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters." - Genesis 5:4

"Then Cain went out from the presence of the LORD and dwelt in the land of Nod on the east of Eden." - Genesis 4:16

"And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. And he built a city, and called the name of the city after the name of his son--Enoch." - Genesis 4:17

so the wife of Cain was one of his sisters as Adam and Eve had several children and so Cain went and built a city with his sister who was also his wife





How is it that if God destroyed all life on earth during the flood that we still had Nephilim after the flood? David faced one of these fallen angel's kids who had 4 brothers. His name was Goliath.

this is a good question since the Nephilim rose again after the Flood and so the hybrid spirit-human gene survived somehow or spirits again mingled with women





Again, look at the curse, look at the Rechabites living with that curse,


the curse of Cain died with him and the Rechabites are not under any curse

they lived a nomadic lifestyle and abstinence from alcohol





and look at Jesus words about whose father the Pharisees really is. If it's just a bad spiritual condition and not bloodline, then why make them guilty of Abel's blood?


the spirit of Satan in Cain killed Abel and the spirit of Satan in Judas betrayed Jesus and the spirit of Satan in the Pharisees killed Jesus

this spirit of Satan is the prince of the air and the god of this age

[RedeZra]

My last post is likely to send Redezra into a fit.

not at all as i am calm all the time ; )

Which is why you warn people?


yes i warn Unified Serenity to not diss Paul who is in Heaven

because i want to see her in Heaven too

[Lord Sidious]

My last post is likely to send Redezra into a fit.

not at all as i am calm all the time ; )

Which is why you warn people?


yes i warn Unified Serenity to not diss Paul who is in Heaven

because i want to see her in Heaven too

In your opinion.
You forgot to mention that.

[RedeZra]

My last post is likely to send Redezra into a fit.

not at all as i am calm all the time ; )

Which is why you warn people?


yes i warn Unified Serenity to not diss Paul who is in Heaven

because i want to see her in Heaven too

In your opinion.
You forgot to mention that.

of course it's my opinion

[Beren]

Let me try to sum it up here and note that I am under impression that you (OP) are stating that Jesus held all Hebrew laws( they frequently accused him of breaking Jewish laws), that Paul is an intruder (however you quoted from his letter to Hebrews) and that somehow Jesus is actually freeing us just to be taken in another form of "proper" Judaism now called Christianity?

If anything Christ did is to awaken people in those years to get to their sense and start seeing God as who God truly is "a spirit and that God wants to be worshiped in truth and spirit by men"... It`s obvious that after being allowed by God to make commandments and Mosaic law and myriad of other laws all "in the name of God -thus God spoke"...

Reality says that according to the law of free will they wanted written laws and wanted visible king and God granted their desires though warning what may happen.

In the meantime from that time frame until Jesus `s they stranded so much that their lives were a petty try of a life where you can`t move more than 300 meters out of your house on Sabbath for it would be considered traveling ,thus breaking one of the thousand petty rules, if you `d drop some wheat on the ground on Sabbath it would be considered as sowing thus work and you could be stoned...

So if you tell me that THAT laws Jesus obeyed and proclaimed and vested upon his future disciples and all humanity then I don`t see which Jesus Christ you speak of?

He was a liberator and still IS.

He was killed by establishment for they saw him as a threat to their rule over people.

Simply in Christ you, me, are new persons , newly born , we died in our old life and understandings and are reborn into Christ.
And you CAN`T put new wine in old containers , you can`t be anew and wish to be a part of the old paradigm of Judaism and all religion upon Earth then and now.

Modern Christianity is as same as any other wanna be religion.
Has the face of divinity but has NOT its power - holy spirit.

And finally - there is no particular path that leads to Christ or a mantra or practice, or sect or church or meditation or book (starting from Bible) , or anything under the Sun BUT a direct words from your own heart and soul to Christ directly - man to man - soul to soul .

That`s it.

That`s the only way and it was and it will ever be.
And it`s the most difficult one can take and the divine one for then you see your self as one who you are , you see how you are growing in knowledge that Christ awoken you to grow to see that YOU are child of God and God itself.

[Beren]

Just to add here it`s a good thing to see a good reasoning or hard talk about this theme. With respect and with occasional darts ( A sith can`t resist the temptation - you bad bad boy :eyebrows:- do not abuse the force) and it`s civil .
That shows the maturity of all here.

That`s the way to go in difficult themes where heated debates can arose.

[Unified Serenity]

Let me try to sum it up here and note that I am under impression that you (OP) are stating that Jesus held all Hebrew laws( they frequently accused him of breaking Jewish laws), that Paul is an intruder (however you quoted from his letter to Hebrews) and that somehow Jesus is actually freeing us just to be taken in another form of "proper" Judaism now called Christianity?

If anything Christ did is to awaken people in those years to get to their sense and start seeing God as who God truly is "a spirit and that God wants to be worshiped in truth and spirit by men"... It`s obvious that after being allowed by God to make commandments and Mosaic law and myriad of other laws all "in the name of God -thus God spoke"...

Reality says that according to the law of free will they wanted written laws and wanted visible king and God granted their desires though warning what may happen.

In the meantime from that time frame until Jesus `s they stranded so much that their lives were a petty try of a life where you can`t move more than 300 meters out of your house on Sabbath for it would be considered traveling ,thus breaking one of the thousand petty rules, if you `d drop some wheat on the ground on Sabbath it would be considered as sowing thus work and you could be stoned...

So if you tell me that THAT laws Jesus obeyed and proclaimed and vested upon his future disciples and all humanity then I don`t see which Jesus Christ you speak of?

He was a liberator and still IS.

He was killed by establishment for they saw him as a threat to their rule over people.

Simply in Christ you, me, are new persons , newly born , we died in our old life and understandings and are reborn into Christ.
And you CAN`T put new wine in old containers , you can`t be anew and wish to be a part of the old paradigm of Judaism and all religion upon Earth then and now.

Modern Christianity is as same as any other wanna be religion.
Has the face of divinity but has NOT its power - holy spirit.

And finally - there is no particular path that leads to Christ or a mantra or practice, or sect or church or meditation or book (starting from Bible) , or anything under the Sun BUT a direct words from your own heart and soul to Christ directly - man to man - soul to soul .

That`s it.

That`s the only way and it was and it will ever be.
And it`s the most difficult one can take and the divine one for then you see your self as one who you are , you see how you are growing in knowledge that Christ awoken you to grow to see that YOU are child of God and God itself.

Hi Beren,

I appreciate the message you are trying to share, for it is partially correct as per my studies of the word, historical issues facing the Jewish community of Jesus' day that they would strain a gnat and swallow a camel, thus they adhered to the letter of the law and not the spirit of the law. The fact was there is a law, it is the New Covenant written upon our minds and hearts which makes it much easier to keep. One key issue you are not sharing or possibly are unaware of it what is referred to in Rabbinical circles as the "Fence around the Torah" which the basic idea was to add a protective layer to the law so that if one did not break that layer they would not come close to breaking the law. In the 613 commandments, I do not see a law about traveling at all. The idea of the Sabbath and not working was all about focusing on God, and enjoying a day away from toil to make a buck. It does not say, Though shalt not break a sweat. It does not say though shalt not have sex with they spouse. I can tell you that sex without sweat is pretty mundane imho, so what is a woman to do in pleasing her spouse who is doing a mitzvot in pleasing his wife?

The fence around the Torah is a huge issue, and it has nothing to do with the law. Does God value life or not? Life is sacred and Jesus pointed out their illness of this fear of breaking the law in his example of someone's donkey in danger and do you let it just die because you can't exert yourself on the sabbath or save it? Obviously you save it. Would you say God has an issue with using anything sacrificed to idols? I would. Yet, Paul taught it was nothing to eat food sacrificed to idols if his conscience was clear, and yet we have Balaam's issue and Peter saying unequivocally NOT to eat food sacrificed to idols. It is very easy to go from follow the spirit of the Law as Jesus was explaining to we are now under grace, the law is no longer in effect and we can therefore make up our own way pleasing to us and justify by Paul's words of salvation through faith and grace alone.

Again, I say it has caused immeasurable harm within the church, it is Paul's church and not Jesus' church. The law as I have shown is the Mosaic Law, but the difference again is it is written upon the heart and mind, and one is expected to understand the truth and value the situation like the donkey example.

Beren, the point you raised was the very reason Jesus / Yeshua had so many problems with the religious leadership for changing the truth, for putting their ways ahead of the Torah. I share this, and the footnotes are available at the site I will list at the end. It is an excellent explanation and I thank you for bringing up this aspect of the problems faced and what Yeshua / Jesus was correcting, and why Paul's message of the Law being no longer in effect because of grace has the same effect as the rabbi's, scribes, and Pharisees whom Jesus warned us about:

A FENCE AROUND THE TORAH

"Moses received the Torah at Sinai and transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets to the men of the Great Synagogue.

"The latter used to say...make a fence round the Torah." Aboth 1.1

The Third Talmudic Claim: The oral law is a fence around the written Torah.

Why does the Torah need a fence around it? J. Israelstam explains that, "The Torah is conceived as a garden and its precepts as precious plants. Such a garden is fenced round for the purpose of obviating willful or even unintended damage. Likewise, the precepts of the Torah were to be 'fenced' round with additional inhibitions that should have the effect of preserving the original commandments from trespass."1

This explanation is affirmed in different places in the Talmud, e.g. "The Rabbis erected a safeguard for a Scriptural law."2 "R.Eliezer b. Jacob said: I have heard that the Beth Din may impose flagellation and pronounce [death] sentences even where not [warranted] by the Torah; yet not with the intention of disregarding the Torah but to make a fence around it."3 Though the actions of the Rabbis are not sanctioned by the Torah, they are done to protect the Torah.

This is the common understanding of how the Oral Law serves as a fence around the Torah, but there is a serious problem with it. The Rabbis were not seeking to "preserve the original commandments from trespass." Had they done that, they and their laws would have been left without any authority. After all, the original commandments did not authorize the Rabbis to build a fence or do anything else.

There was a radical and irreconcilable conflict between the Torah and the Rabbis as to the basis and structure of authority, as well as its source and administration. That is why the Rabbis gave themselves the right to alter, revise, trespass, and uproot the original commandments. Nevertheless, there is a sense in which the Oral Law really is a fence around the Torah, a fence that serves a different purpose. Robert Frost speaks to the point in his poem, "Mending Wall":

"Before I built a wall I'd ask to know

What I was walling in or walling out,

And to whom I was like to give offense."

A fence protects by restricting access. What it surrounds can only be seen through the fence or approached by permission of the owner. When something is fenced in, someone is fenced out.

The Talmud says the Rabbis gave complete authority to themselves.4 To obscure that fact, they built a fence around Torah. The fence both obscures Torah and keeps the people from Torah. "Our Rabbis taught: They who occupy themselves with the Bible are but of indifferent merit; with Mishnah, are indeed meritorious, and are rewarded for it; with Gemara — there can be nothing more meritorious; yet run always to the Mishnah more than to the Gemara."5 Studying the Bible was said to be of no great importance. Studying the rabbinic writings brought great reward. Israel was told to trust in the Rabbis.

Above all, a fence indicates ownership. The Talmud explains that erecting a fence is a means of asserting ownership over something one didn't own before. "In the case, however, where land is presented as a gift, or of brothers dividing an inheritance, or of one who seizes the property of a proselyte, ownership can be claimed as soon as the first step has been taken towards making a door or a fence or an opening."6 "If he does anything at all in the way of setting up a door or making a fence or an opening, this constitutes a title of ownership."7

This Talmudic portion is followed by a section discussing what actions constitute 'taking possession' of a particular piece of property. One means for taking possession is to increase the height of a fence. "If a man raises a fence already existing to ten handbreadths, ...this constitutes effective occupation."8

"R. Akiba said:...Tradition is a fence to the Torah.'"9 In saying this, Akiba agreed with Josephus and the gospels, though their view of placing torah behind tradition was negative. The contemporary sources indicate that the appearance of "tradition" before Akiba was as a small fence with great gaps in it.

That allowed too much free access. "The All Merciful taught Moses thus: ‘Thou must not allow the greater part of a fence to consist of gaps’. R. Huna the son of R. Joshua ruled, ‘it is forbidden for it is this that the All Merciful taught Moses: ‘Its greater part [must be] fence’."10 Akiba raised the fence and closed the gaps to assert ownership of the Torah, according to the rabbinic principle of labud. 11

The goal was to fence the people off from the Torah and from all other influences that would have competed with rabbinic interpretation and authority.12 In the system which was erected, no one else had the right to interpret Torah. Not the am ha'aretz, nor the priests, nor the prophets, nor the Sadducees, the Qumran Covenanters, the Talmidei Yeshua, nor anyone else.

Not even God.

This was the continuing theme of the rabbinic writings. "The apologetic function of the midrash is not only to denigrate the translation of Scripture, but to establish the exclusive authority of the Pharisaic tradition as the legitimate recipient and interpretation of divine revelation."13 Only the Rabbis could give the authorized interpretation. Who said so? They themselves. As a fence, the Oral Law is a means to assert and entrench rabbinic hegemony. Without it, nothing needs rabbinic approval. With it, everything does.

http://www.elijahnet.net/A%20FENCE%20AROUND%20THE%20TORAH.html

[Lord Sidious]

Very interesting, more of the talmudic rubbish.
And, reading this I can see I was right, Unified Serenity is indeed an esoteric thinker.

[RedeZra]

Would you say God has an issue with using anything sacrificed to idols? I would. Yet, Paul taught it was nothing to eat food sacrificed to idols if his conscience was clear, and yet we have Balaam's issue and Peter saying unequivocally NOT to eat food sacrificed to idols. It is very easy to go from follow the spirit of the Law as Jesus was explaining to we are now under grace, the law is no longer in effect and we can therefore make up our own way pleasing to us and justify by Paul's words of salvation through faith and grace alone.


the Scribes Pharisees and the doctors of law even chided Jesus about not washing His hands before a meal


"When the Pharisee saw [it], he marveled that He had not first washed before dinner.

Then the Lord said to him, "Now you Pharisees make the outside of the cup and dish clean, but your inward part is full of greed and wickedness."" - Luke 11:38-39


what good is it to follow the law to the letter just to miss integrity ?


there is nothing good or godly with the law not even the Ten commandments

it only serves to show us where we sin or miss the mark or make mistakes


those who are not in the Grace of God must labor under His law


the law is dead and for the dead

Spirit is Alive and for the Living

[Unified Serenity]

No man is so blind as he who refuses to see or so deaf as he refuses to hear. Please don't confuse the law of the Pharisees with the law of God. The New Covenant is the LAW of God written upon our minds and hearts. Do you really think God changes? That what he finds as holy and right changes? That to walk in love would have a different outcome based on the Law of God then vs. the Law of God now? Jesus showed the way, walked according to the same Law and dealt with those who tried to confuse the people by putting in their own oral laws and make the people afraid because their (the Pharisees) judgements could destroy them, and the people were more afraid of the Pharisees and their laws than they were of pleasing God and walking in the Spirit and keeping the true path. They knew life was more important, but they didn't want to get stoned to death for breaking the Pharisees laws (Fences) so they lived in fear. Jesus came and set the captives of this false system free, he did NOT negate the Laws of God his father, but showed how to walk according to them in a spirit of Love, first for God and secondly for his neighbor.

[RedeZra]

Please don't confuse the law of the Pharisees with the law of God. The New Covenant is the LAW of God written upon our minds and hearts.

the Pharisees turned their minds into elaborate labyrints and intricate mazes in where they got lost


the LAW of God is to love God with all the heart and the neighbour as yourselves

which is as easy as drinking water for one under the Grace of God

[Unified Serenity]

Please don't confuse the law of the Pharisees with the law of God. The New Covenant is the LAW of God written upon our minds and hearts.

the Pharisees turned their minds into elaborate labyrints and intricate mazes in where they got lost


the LAW of God is to love God with all the heart and the neighbour as yourselves

which is as easy as drinking water for one under the Grace of God

Hey RedEzra,

I can agree with what you say here, but I am not sure you're definition of following the Law of God through loving him and our neighbor as ourselves means the same thing when you defend the gospel of Paul and his words which basically say the Judaic following of the precepts and ordinances of God as spelled out in the OT are no longer applicable. Following that law our of love is easy, if not out of love then it can be hard. My other problem with Paul is his trying to say he is an Apostle and stating he met Jesus, did signs, wonders, and miracles as if that were proof of his calling and being an Apostle in light of Jesus' warnings of one who would come in their own name preaching a different gospel and do signs, wonders, and miracles as proof of their claim. Jesus did not set up a new religion. There was the Old Covenant which Israel and Judah broke which did encompass the Law which God gave to them. The New Covenant simply says it is the Law of God written upon our minds and hearts and sealed by the Blood of Jesus as a sacrifice for one and all time.

I really think had we kept things simple from the beginning with the Apostles, not gentilized the Church that we would have a much more powerful witness in the world today, but we have turned away from the Feasts of the Lord which were perpetual, we have embraced pagan feast days, and we basically do as we FEEL led by the Spirit. I would trust that the same Spirit that led Jesus to keep the Laws and Feasts of the Lord has not changed, it is we who simply want to make God fit our paradigm and God does not change in my book.

[Lord Sidious]

Please don't confuse the law of the Pharisees with the law of God. The New Covenant is the LAW of God written upon our minds and hearts.

the Pharisees turned their minds into elaborate labyrints and intricate mazes in where they got lost


the LAW of God is to love God with all the heart and the neighbour as yourselves

which is as easy as drinking water for one under the Grace of God

Oh boy.
If that avatar is the one I am thinking of, wow. :eek:

[RedeZra]

Hey RedEzra,

I can agree with what you say here, but I am not sure you're definition of following the Law of God through loving him and our neighbor as ourselves means the same thing when you defend the gospel of Paul and his words which basically say the Judaic following of the precepts and ordinances of God as spelled out in the OT are no longer applicable. Following that law our of love is easy, if not out of love then it can be hard. My other problem with Paul is his trying to say he is an Apostle and stating he met Jesus, did signs, wonders, and miracles as if that were proof of his calling and being an Apostle in light of Jesus' warnings of one who would come in their own name preaching a different gospel and do signs, wonders, and miracles as proof of their claim. Jesus did not set up a new religion. There was the Old Covenant which Israel and Judah broke which did encompass the Law which God gave to them. The New Covenant simply says it is the Law of God written upon our minds and hearts and sealed by the Blood of Jesus as a sacrifice for one and all time.

I really think had we kept things simple from the beginning with the Apostles, not gentilized the Church that we would have a much more powerful witness in the world today, but we have turned away from the Feasts of the Lord which were perpetual, we have embraced pagan feast days, and we basically do as we FEEL led by the Spirit. I would trust that the same Spirit that led Jesus to keep the Laws and Feasts of the Lord has not changed, it is we who simply want to make God fit our paradigm and God does not change in my book.


hi Unified Serenity

i think too that the Feasts are signs and signals within the Hebrew calendar which might be the very timetable of Christ regarding Israel and the Church

Christ Israel and the Church are intrinsically entwined together historically and prophetically


i do not doubt Paul nor did Peter regarding his visions and revelations from Jesus as Jesus was very active after His ascent appearing to the Apostles and Paul to teach chastise and guide


Jesus is still alive and it is our personal relationship to Him that is of importance

so if we seek Him we will find Him and He will take it from there

point is that we must seek Him



it is time to come out of churches which have fallen into apostasy and get to know Jesus one on one

and it is time for the Jews to accept Him as one of their own


after all He is One of Three

[Unified Serenity]

Moses had a father-in-law who was a Kenite.

Actually, that is part of the trick and why studying the word in totality is very important. Just as the Kenites moving into Judea per Jeremiah 35 are no closer to being Jews than I am to being a Navajo if I moved into a Navajo land, so Moses married a Midianite Priests daughter. There is a small name spelling issue, but we can see by what happened and the story of Moses protecting the Priest daughter at the well that these girls were treated badly by these Kenites who drove them away daily from the well. They lived in a Kenite area, they were Midianites and discriminated against by the Kenites. Here, let's look at the Midianites first:

Who are the Midianites
Genesis 25:1-2 gives us the identity of the Midianites. They are the children of Abraham through his wife Keturah.

"Then again Abraham took a wife, and her name was Keturah. 2 And she bare him Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah."

This shows the children born to Abraham through his lawful wife Keturah. As Abraham was a spiritual man, he passed his beliefs on to these sons as well, thus we see in Exodus chapter 2 the Midianite priest who undoubtedly served the God of Abraham. That is the background of the daughter of Raguel whom Moses married, not a Kenite!

The Midianite people were living in the region of the Kenites. They were not treated well as Numbers 10:29 shows. Why? They were not Kenites by blood, only residing in the Kenite area. Why are the native people of America from the 1400's called Indians today? Because Columbus thought he was in India. Moses future wife was called a Kenite because she lived in a Kenite area. We white Anglo Saxons are no closer to being Indians than those Midianites living in Kenite territory were to being Kenites, but in Genesis 25 the Midianites are called Kenites. Moses married the daughter, Zipporah, of a Midianite priest. This is a nasty scribe trick. They expect God's children to NOT keep the words meaning true. They expect to twist it, and the sheep will just buy into it. Satan will quote the word all day long, it does not mean he intends to keep it, but just get you to get twisted around and start miss applying it as Eve did in the garden.

So, Exodus 2 says:

Exo 2:16 Now the priest of Midian had seven daughters: and they came and drew water, and filled the troughs to water their father's flock.
Exo 2:17 And the shepherds came and drove them away: but Moses stood up and helped them, and watered their flock.
Exo 2:18 And when they came to Reuel their father, he said, How is it that ye are come so soon to day?
Exo 2:19 And they said, An Egyptian delivered us out of the hand of the shepherds, and also drew water enough for us, and watered the flock.
Exo 2:20 And he said unto his daughters, And where is he? why is it that ye have left the man? call him, that he may eat bread.
Exo 2:21 And Moses was content to dwell with the man: and he gave Moses Zipporah his daughter.
Exo 2:22 And she bare him a son, and he called his name Gershom: for he said, I have been a stranger in a strange land.

Reuel is #7467
H7467
רעוּאל
re‛û'êl
reh-oo-ale'
From the same as H7466 and H410; friend of God; Reuel, the name of Moses’ father in law, also of an Edomite and an Israelite: - Raguel, Reuel.

Num 10:29 And Moses said unto Hobab, the son of Raguel the Midianite, Moses' father in law, We are journeying unto the place of which the LORD said, I will give it you: come thou with us, and we will do thee good: for the LORD hath spoken good concerning Israel.

This same word was mistranslated in Numbers or visa versa for Exodus, but it is the same word as Raguel. It can be written Raguel or Reuel. Moses married a Midianite Priests daughter and the Midianites are children of Abraham, not Kenites. If he were a Kenites it would not say he was a Midianite. This is the same Midianite Priest of Exodus.

It is clear that through carefully studying the scriptures we find that Kenites did not marry into the children of Abraham to become "sons of Abraham". They claim to be of our brother Judah and lie (Revelation 2:9 & 3:9).

I hope this clears up this discrepancy. I appreciate you bringing this up because it is apparent discrepancies that make so many claim the bible flip flops and is in error. It is not, it is our lack of properly studying and understanding where scribes may have purposefully put in some very confusing language, even like the name issue of the Midianite priest. I doubt they are that dumb to not get his name right, but if you don't know how to use a concordance or interlinear lexicon then you walk away scratching your head.

I want to say this that anyone who accepts the gift of salvation offered through faith in Yeshua / Jesus then they are made new, and no longer cursed, so yes a Kenite can leave the curse. It is highly rare, but I personally believe I watched one get saved and it was an amazing thing.

[Lifebringer]

I've read the major or well known "Books" the most that rang true was the Urantia and it was found in a pyramid in a blue book.. It is proportedly written by the Celestial Associatesa and Melchezedek priest of Havona the kingdom of the Universe of Universes. It told of the beginning creation of the planet and all life in it from brackish pond scum waters. up until the first incarnation of Jesus/Michael Son of God. There are many Sons of God and America better get used to it.

[Unified Serenity]

I've read the major or well known "Books" the most that rang true was the Urantia and it was found in a pyramid in a blue book.. It is proportedly written by the Celestial Associatesa and Melchezedek priest of Havona the kingdom of the Universe of Universes. It told of the beginning creation of the planet and all life in it from brackish pond scum waters. up until the first incarnation of Jesus/Michael Son of God. There are many Sons of God and America better get used to it.

I really don't know what America getting used to it has to do with anything. Maybe I am misunderstanding you. Could you please clarify?