Did the Pharisees Purposely Make up Christianity?

[wizanda]

Anyway, why don't you quote from Barnabas? Since you trust the Bible and mistrust some parts of it arbitrarily, why dont you quote Barnabas?

Because if you were paying attention to what I've stated are anti-Christ's doctrines:

The Pharisees believed prophet's deaths, and the Messiah's death could pay the price of sin to God; Yeshua stood against these principles - Where Yeshua challenged the Sanhedrin for saying that the murdering of the prophets counted as atoning sacrifices in Matthew 23:27-38, Mark 7:1-13, and the Parable of the Wicked Husbandman (Matthew 21:33-46, Mark 12:1-12, and Luke 20:9-19).

In the Epistle of Barnabus it says:

Barnabas 5:1-2 For to this end the Lord endured to deliver His flesh unto corruption, that by the remission of sins we might be cleansed, which cleansing is through the blood of His sprinkling. (2) For the scripture concerning Him containeth some things relating to Israel, and some things relating to us. And it speaketh thus; He was wounded for your transgressions, and He hath been bruised for our sins; by His stripes we were healed. As a sheep He was led to slaughter, as a lamb is dumb before his shearer.

These statements in the Epistle of Barnabus are a Pharisaic reading of Isaiah 53; where it is unlawful to say God murdered the Messiah as a human sacrifice to forgive sin.

John, Paul, and Simon also all use Isaiah 53 to say it was lawful to call the Messiah a human sacrifice; whereas they've missed within the language used by Isaiah, it is all part of a Snare to see who would believe such a thing.

In my opinion.

 

[wizanda]

That sincere Christians have eternal life already and so will not be in the judgement that determines that,

Unfortunately this is what the Bed of Adultery is about; the Pharisees (John, Paul, Simon) have set you up by their faulty reading of Isaiah.

The word 'Rumour' in Isaiah 53:1 interlinks with the Bed of Adultery in Isaiah 28:9-19.

In the Middle of the Bed of Adultery is the Chief Cornerstone; where the sheets of the Bed are that the Covenant with Death (believing in the death & resurrection of Christ as the way to be saved), was dis-annulled before it was thought about.

Thus when the Judgement Day Fire comes the Christians will not be sanctified, they will be condemned, and the Pharisees/Rabbinic Rebels will be condemned for having set you all up.

When it says "where the 'vultures gather', there the body is" (Luke 17:37, Matthew 24:28), that is expounding on the Judgement Day Fire in Isaiah 34, and that the ravenous beings that are hovering around the dead body of Christ, looking for reward, all get removed.

In my opinion.

 

[Estro Felino]

Because if you were paying attention to what I've stated are anti-Christ's doctrines:

The Pharisees believed prophets deaths, and the Messiah's death could pay the price of sin to God; Yeshua stood against these principles - Where Yeshua challenged the Sanhedrin for saying that the murdering of the prophets counted as atoning sacrifices in Matthew 23:27-38, Mark 7:1-13, and the Parable of the Wicked Husbandman (Matthew 21:33-46, Mark 12:1-12, and Luke 20:9-19).

In the Epistle of Barnabus it says:

These statements in the Epistle of Barnabus are a Pharisaic reading of Isaiah 53; where it is unlawful to say God murdered the Messiah as a human sacrifice to forgive sin.

John, Paul, and Simon also all use Isaiah 53 to say it was lawful to call the Messiah a human sacrifice; whereas they've missed within the language used by Isaiah, it is all part of a Snare to see who would believe such a thing.

In my opinion.

This theology of "atonement" is the epitome of contradiction.
Because if Jesus' sacrifice was something decided by God, it means that Judas, Caiaphas and Pilate deserve to be called saints because they made this atonement possible.

And yet the Catholic Church call them sinners.
Even Dante Alighieri put the all three in Inferno. Pilate is in the circle of the uncommitted; Caiaphas in the bolgia of hypocrites; Judas is eaten up by Satan.

 

[firedragon]

Because if you were paying attention to what I've stated are anti-Christ's doctrines:

The Pharisees believed prophet's deaths, and the Messiah's death could pay the price of sin to God; Yeshua stood against these principles - Where Yeshua challenged the Sanhedrin for saying that the murdering of the prophets counted as atoning sacrifices in Matthew 23:27-38, Mark 7:1-13, and the Parable of the Wicked Husbandman (Matthew 21:33-46, Mark 12:1-12, and Luke 20:9-19).

In the Epistle of Barnabus it says:

These statements in the Epistle of Barnabus are a Pharisaic reading of Isaiah 53; where it is unlawful to say God murdered the Messiah as a human sacrifice to forgive sin.

John, Paul, and Simon also all use Isaiah 53 to say it was lawful to call the Messiah a human sacrifice; whereas they've missed within the language used by Isaiah, it is all part of a Snare to see who would believe such a thing.

In my opinion.

Being the messiah, you didn't know about the epistle of Barnabas. Now you do. That to me is strange.

 

[wizanda]

Being the messiah, you didn't know about the epistle of Barnabas. Now you do. That to me is strange.

I had already read the Epistle of Barnabus, and just reread it, simply for pointing out to you where it was contradictory to the standards set.

I'm not sure if you get what the Messiah returns to do? It is to announce the coming Judgement Day, and test who the hypocrites are.

Betelgeuse will be seen supernova as Armageddon happens, and then reality will be cleansed; then after we keep those worthy - Thus I don't need to convince you to accept religion; I'm just testing for hypocrisies.

There is no where saying the returning Messiah - King David has to be a scholar; he was a simple shepherd boy appointed by God, as his heart was in the right place.

In my opinion.

 

[dybmh]

Betelgeuse will be seen supernova as Armageddon happens

If I recall, two years ago you said armageddon would happen in five years. Am I remembering correctly? Does that mean we have 3 years left? Are you prepared to admit you were wrong if it doesn't happen?

There is no where saying the returning Messiah - King David has to be a scholar

I think the claim of archangel and leader of the divine council confers a certain onus of elite knowledge of scripture and fluency in Hebrew, the divine language.

 

[wizanda]

This theology of "atonement" is the epitome of contradiction.

I'd say much of the contradictions have been ordained on purpose to see how hypocritical some people are; as we're down near Hell, and so God knew lots would accept things that are so backwards, it shows they're not worth keeping.

In my opinion.

 

[firedragon]

I had already read the Epistle of Barnabus, and just reread it, simply for pointing out to you where it was contradictory to the standards set.

I'm not sure if you get what the Messiah returns to do? It is to announce the coming Judgement Day, and test who the hypocrites are.

Betelgeuse will be seen supernova as Armageddon happens, and then reality will be cleansed; then after we keep those worthy - Thus I don't need to convince you to accept religion; I'm just testing for hypocrisies.

There is no where saying the returning Messiah - King David has to be a scholar; he was a simple shepherd boy appointed by God, as his heart was in the right place.

In my opinion.

One does not have to be a scholar Wizanda. One simply has to be genuine. If you don't know about something, don't make that kind of comment about ahadith, the Bible, Q source, etc etc. A messiah will not make commentary about things he does not have knowledge of.

Anyway, I don't personally believe that a messiah is gonna return. So none of that is relevant to me. I only got involved because you claimed that the New Testament is like hadith science. So I asked you. In ilme hadith, there is something called Thadhlees. Just a simple question. How do you show thadhlees in the New Testament? Basic, simple question.

You avoided it.

A messiah will not do that.

Cheers.

 

[wizanda]

I think the claim of archangel and leader of the divine council confers a certain onus of elite knowledge of scripture and fluency in Hebrew, the divine language.

I believe that when I was 21 I fulfilled Revelation 10, which is the Final Trumpet referenced in the Bible; three years later I read the Bible.

What I was told at that fulfilment was how Yeshua came to set a 'Snare' on the world (Isaiah 8:11-22); I'm here to close the Bed of Adultery (Isaiah 28:9-19) according to prophecy globally.

When Yeshua told us watch for the Parable of the 'Fig' before 'Summer' (Matthew 24:32-34), that is in reference to Isaiah 28:4; where in Isaiah 28:11-13 the Messiah comes back explaining precept upon precept in a different language, yet is rejected, and mocked before Judgement Day (Isaiah 28:22).

Thus do I speak many of these ancient languages that the prophetic writings are in? No; yet does anyone speak these languages efficiently any more, as they were spoken in ancient times? No.

Thus I use the best resources I can find to get the job done, and have found a more proficient way then most people's referencing I look at.

Heaven is formless, it doesn't have grammar police; it is pure energy, and I get the metaphysical stuff - I just don't get all the mortal mechanisms we use, without studying them first.

If I recall, two years ago you said armageddon would happen in five years. Am I remembering correctly? Does that mean we have 3 years left? Are you prepared to admit you were wrong if it doesn't happen?

I'm not sure you get the different clauses I'm suggesting are taking place:

I believe we can read Zechariah 12 a number of ways, and one is that the Word of God could become a Fire between the Leaders of Judah; where that ignites Israel, which is where Ezekiel 20:49 says, the Lord is a speaker of Parables, in reference to the same timeline of the Fire...

Jeremiah 23 is about David being appointed Messianically, and Jeremiah 23:29 it allows for the Word of God being a Fire.

Thus personally I'm an eternal optimist; so I'm ever hopeful we can reach the Rabbis through ReligiousForums...

If not, option 2 of what Zechariah 12 suggests is:

Because they push to, and throw, they cause the Fire in the Middle East; then because God has timed everything, at that same time they've started Armageddon - We will see Betelgeuse has gone supernova as prophesied (Amos 5:8, Isaiah 13:10, Joel 2:31, Zechariah 14:7).

So to answer your question, people always try to pin point me with dates; like that makes a case...

The evidence of the claims, is that they align with Biblical prophecy, which I understood prior to me studying any of this.

I don't know dates, God does; thus can't imagine me giving a date, as I don't have one - Instead I'll always try to explain the data.

In my opinion.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Considering you're not even reading that verse right; I'd say it does go against Yeshua's mission...

The verse says 'and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.' - Philippians 2:11

Paul is quite clear, we have one Lord, and One God (1 Corinthians 8:6).

Thus when someone is messing up the theology, so that many choose to reject what is straight forward, of course that detriments people accepting it.

In my opinion.

Yeshua is God--Isaiah says all will bow and confess to God. Historic Christianity recognizes the NT epistles and more with excellent reasons--including hidden codes and gematria in the Greek. There is no evidence in or our outside the Bible to reject any of the 27 NT books in my opinion.

 

[Brian2]

This theology of "atonement" is the epitome of contradiction.
Because if Jesus' sacrifice was something decided by God, it means that Judas, Caiaphas and Pilate deserve to be called saints because they made this atonement possible.

And yet the Catholic Church call them sinners.
Even Dante Alighieri put the all three in Inferno. Pilate is in the circle of the uncommitted; Caiaphas in the bolgia of hypocrites; Judas is eaten up by Satan.

God did not force Caiaphas, Judas etc to do what they did. They are responsible for what they did and they did what was not right. They did not even know about the atonement and so cannot accept credit for helping to bring it about. All they did was what they did, what God knew they would do, and God was able to bring good from the evil they had in mind.

 

[Estro Felino]

God did not force Caiaphas, Judas etc to do what they did. They are responsible for what they did and they did what was not right. They did not even know about the atonement and so cannot accept credit for helping to bring it about. All they did was what they did, what God knew they would do, and God was able to bring good from the evil they had in mind.

God could not know what they would do, because free will wouldn't exist.
People are not puppets. They are autonomous.
If free will doesn't exist, neither do Hell and Heaven.

 

[wizanda]

Yeshua is God--Isaiah says all will bow and confess to God.

Unfortunately ever since Babylon the Rabbis have muddled the language; where El (H410) is not the same as Eloh (H433) - Isaiah 46:9 is saying go back to the former theology in Deuteronomy 32:7-9.

Yeshua is a Divine Being (Eloh - H433), and part of the Divine Council (Elohim - H430); with God (El - H410) Almighty above it.

When Malachi 4:4-6 was saying the Lord will come to lead them back to the Father; Yeshua was a manifestation of the Lord of Creation (YHVH), where that is not God - As El Elyon is the God Most High, and the Rabbis have been teaching people to follow a form of Henotheism since Babylon.

There is no evidence in or our outside the Bible to reject any of the 27 NT books in my opinion.

Paul teaches opposite to Yeshua on purpose, and has set people up to follow a form of Vampirism, where they will be condemned according to the Law (Revelation 16:6).

The Gospel of John is teaching people to assume God committed premeditated murder, which is what Balaam teachings is about (God doesn't require sacrifice), and again people will be condemned for it.

As far as I understand the Pharisaic teachings of John, Paul, and Simon the stumbling stone (petros) will cause billions of Christians to be destroyed by God for going against Biblical Laws, and standing against Christ.

I'm not saying for people to reject the texts; yet to understand where we should not be following the Pharisees as Yeshua stated (Matthew 5:20), else if the blind lead the blind, both fall into a pit (Matthew 15:14).

In case you missed I believe we can prove I'm the return of Yeshua & King David, here before the Great Tribulation, and having had a Near Death Experience, I can honestly say the Source of reality is much more powerful than any beings created by it.

In my opinion.

 

[wizanda]

They did not even know about the atonement and so cannot accept credit for helping to bring it about. All they did was what they did, what God knew they would do, and God was able to bring good from the evil they had in mind.

Sorry to say as far as I understand from Biblical prophecy, all of you have been set up to be anti-Christ's doctrine is the one thing that could be deemed good...

As Yeshua was against the murdering of the prophets for atonement (Matthew 23:27-38, Mark 7:1-13), and said the Pharisees would teach the same about him in the Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen (Matthew 21:33-46, Mark 12:1-12, and Luke 20:9-19).

Thus the Pharisees have set all the Rabbinic Rebels up to follow a lie, as they've rejected the Messiah due to their tampering, and then the Christians & Muhammadans have been set up by rejecting what they were meant to be accepting.

Yet I don't think setting simple people up unknowingly is a fair Legal charge...

So I'm personally more determined to bring justice to the Gentiles, and fix this mess (Isaiah 42:1); rather than condemn billions of people for trying to be better people, yet not being smart enough to understand the riddles.

Judas, Caiaphas and Pilate

In the Apocalypse of Abraham the person kisses the Messiah in betrayal, to shorten the Days of Ungodliness; Judas being paid 30 pieces of silver, which was placed into the Potter's Field in the House of Israel, specifically fulfils Zechariah 11:12-14.

Pilate didn't want to put Yeshua to death; if we read the Gospel of Nicodemus the Pharisees went privately by night, and forced Pilate's hand - Which is where Pilate said publicly, his hand was free of Yeshua's death (Matthew 27:24).

Caiaphas in the Gospel of John (written by the Sanhedrin) shows they purposely thought murdering the Messiah would bring in the Tribes of Israel (John 11:45-57), and thus shows they've committed premeditated murder...

Whereas in their Pharisaic writings (John, Paul, Simon) they've tried to suggest people are blessed by Yeshua's death; instead the reality is that the Curse of Moses (Deuteronomy 28) was placed on the world for it.

In my opinion.

 

[Brian2]

God could not know what they would do, because free will wouldn't exist.
People are not puppets. They are autonomous.
If free will doesn't exist, neither do Hell and Heaven.

It is not the place to start up a discussion about free will and omniscience of God etc. but I don't think it has anything to do with whether Caiaphas and Judas should be regarded as saints because of their part in the atonement story.
Why do you even claim to be a Catholic if you think the atonement not true?

 

[Estro Felino]

It is not the place to start up a discussion about free will and omniscience of God etc. but I don't think it has anything to do with whether Caiaphas and Judas should be regarded as saints because of their part in the atonement story.
Why do you even claim to be a Catholic if you think the atonement not true?

I have never heard of it. It doesn't ring any bells, if I think of my catechism classes, or catechism books. Or if I think of the homilies.
If I need to be honest, I heard of the atonement notion here on RF, for the first time of my life.
Besides, I speak Italian...we don't use that word to speak of Jesus Christ's sacrifice.
We use the word Most Holy Savior, which means that God saved us from sin, but through resurrection.
Not through crucifixion.

 

[Brian2]

I have never heard of it. It doesn't ring any bells, if I think of my catechism classes, or catechism books. Or if I think of the homilies.
If I need to be honest, I heard of the atonement notion here on RF, for the first time of my life.
Besides, I speak Italian...we don't use that word to speak of Jesus Christ's sacrifice.
We use the word Most Holy Savior, which means that God saved us from sin, but through resurrection.
Not through crucifixion.

The resurrection certainly shows that God was honoring Jesus for what He said He was, the Son of God, the Christ, the one sent to die for the redemption of many.
When I left the Catholic Church I remember thinking that I did not know what the gospel message was. I knew what the 4 gospels were but what was the gospel message?
But the Catholic Church does have Jesus death as an atoning sacrifice as Jesus said and the OT says etc
A Primer on Atonement

 

[Estro Felino]

The resurrection certainly shows that God was honoring Jesus for what He said He was, the Son of God, the Christ, the one sent to die for the redemption of many.
When I left the Catholic Church I remember thinking that I did not know what the gospel message was. I knew what the 4 gospels were but what was the gospel message?
But the Catholic Church does have Jesus death as an atoning sacrifice as Jesus said and the OT says etc
A Primer on Atonement

I reject the notion that Jesus' sacrifice was necessary. He would have saved us, even if nobody had killed Him.
Because believing in necessary crucifixion would make Caiaphas a saint and and and angel for making it possible.

And it is blasphemous to believe that Judas as a saint too...because I know that some shady (perhaps Masonic) fringes of Catholicism would want to turn that traitor into a saint.
Judas is the embodiment of the fake Christians...we see every day. There are thousands of them. every day.
They claim to serve Jesus Christ and his doctrine, while they stab Jesus in the back every day, by cheating, by getting richer and richer at cost of the neighbor's poverty, and yet going to Church.

 

[Brian2]

I reject the notion that Jesus' sacrifice was necessary. He would have saved us, even if nobody had killed Him.
Because believing in necessary crucifixion would make Caiaphas a saint and and and angel for making it possible.

How does Caiaphas end up being a saint when his part was as one of the villains.
If he had known the result of the Crucifixion (atonement for sinners) then there might be a small case for sainthood, but he did not know, and a saint would have said that he was not going to do what was evil, no matter the consequences.
The same goes for Judas.
But it seems that you want to believe what you believe no matter what the Catholic Church says or what the Bible says,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and of course, no matter what I say.

 

[Estro Felino]

How does Caiaphas end up being a saint when his part was as one of the villains.
If he had known the result of the Crucifixion (atonement for sinners) then there might be a small case for sainthood, but he did not know, and a saint would have said that he was not going to do what was evil, no matter the consequences.
The same goes for Judas.
But it seems that you want to believe what you believe no matter what the Catholic Church says or what the Bible says,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and of course, no matter what I say.

Yes. Because the Gospel says "and angels shall come forth and sever the wicked from among the just".
It doesn't say that angels will sever Christians from the non-Christians.

Who are the wicked. The wicked are the ones who prevent others from being happy. Wilfully or unwillingly, that's irrelevant. They will be cast away by God.
Who are the just? The just are co-workers of justice.

So believing in Jesus' sacrifice is irrelevant. Jesus wants people to be co-workers in truth and co-workers of justice.