Did the Pharisees Purposely Make up Christianity?

[wizanda]

Do you trust what the New Testament says? Your OP shows you do!

I believe we can show that the Synoptic Gospels, Revelation, James, Jude, align with prophecy in the Tanakh, and other religious texts.

As I said I don't really do trusting things in this world; I know I can validate the bits I can show to be real.

Plus as the OP suggested I'm fulfilling prophecy in the Quran 43:60-77 before Judgement Day, of explaining that in which people differ over the book.

In my opinion.

 

[wizanda]

Why would Jews pay him to do such a thing?

The prophecies in the Tanakh relay that Yeshua cut the Jews off (Zechariah 11:1-14), and so Paul is cleverly rewriting them to the other nations (Gentiles), making people believe that to a follow of Christ it is 'first Jew, and then Gentile' (Romans 2:10)...

Whereas Christ was saying those who follow him like the Roman Centurion will be included in the kingdom, and the Jews will be kicked out (Matthew 8:5-13).

In my opinion.

 

[wellwisher]

As far as I can see from the Bible, I believe we can show Paul & Simon the stumbling stone (petros) purposely corrupted the teachings of Yeshua to a more Pharisaic ideology - Creating Christianity between them in Antioch (Acts 11:25-26) with the help of the Sanhedrin.

Where it is also possible to show that the Gospel of John was purposely made up by the Sanhedrin, to corrupt Yeshua's original message.

It is being questioned historically, that the original followers of Yeshua were the Ebionites; which stemmed from the Essenes, then the Nasoraeans & Mandaeans.

It is questioned James the Just was Head of the church of Jerusalem, and an Ebionite; where the terminology 'Poor Ones' was prophesied in Zechariah 11:11 prior to the 2nd temple destruction.

The idea that the Nasoraeans/Mandaeans fled Jerusalem prior to the destruction, is because they were following Yeshua's teachings.

Paul & Simon taught an idea that the Jews were now under Grace, as Christ had died for them; rather than what scripture shows, that they were placed under the Curse of Moses (Deuteronomy 28), because their Worthless Leaders (Sadducees, Pharisees, Levites) rejected the Messiah for 30 pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:1-14).

Proof that the Curse was placed is that in Zechariah 11:9, it repeats the idea that they will eat each others flesh as found in Deuteronomy 28:53-55; where we can show historically, that at the Siege of Jerusalem by the Romans, they literally eat each others flesh due to being starved to death.

To me it is clear that the book of James in the Bible is standing against Paul, on some of the similar concepts that were debated between them. Some of these contrary points, are Paul kicking people out who didn't want to follow his sacrificial Messiah's death & resurrection doctrines, impartially deciding who is worthy of being part of Pauline Christianity, Abraham being faithful, and thus doing good works, etc.

When Revelation 2:2 says about the False Apostle who tried to get them to follow his fake Gospel, Paul also stated that he was rejected by the Church of Asia Minor with his own version of the Gospel (2 Timothy 1:15).

Because over time Christianity has become the main orthodox view on the teachings of Christ, the original ideas have been partially overwritten; yet it is still possible to see from the texts alone, that the original message is still there in the Synoptic Gospels.

I understand it could be possible for us to fix this as part of Messianic prophecy; otherwise in my understanding scripture says God will condemn the Rabbinic Jews for having lied to humanity (Jeremiah 5:26, Isaiah 29:20-21).

It appears to me that what the Pharisees did, is try to cover up the prophesied concepts they'd been cut off, to make the Gentiles follow a system supporting them, and in doing so creating the false representation of the Messiah.

Thus when there are Jewish texts called the Sefer of Zerubbabel that refer to a true, and false Messiah both in Rome; the problem I find, is that the Rabbinic Jews don't realize they've made up the false Messiah contrary to the real one, that they have overwritten. Thus when in Ezekiel 22:3, and other places, it says they made their own idols, this is talking about how they made the Messiah into an idol.

I believe as a provable return of the Messiah it is possible for me to redeem, and fix this situation (Isaiah 52:3-7) - if I can get the support from the Rabbis, to help fix what they've messed up; otherwise Judgement Day will come, and God will just keep the Enlightened Saints who've already noticed.

To quickly summarize the difference between the original followers, and the Pharisaic Christianity: Is that the Pharisees taught an Oral Tradition, that "the death of the righteous, can atone for the sins of that generation"...

Where Yeshua challenged the Sanhedrin, and cut them off, 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).

Yeshua is prophesying in the Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen that the Pharisees will corrupt his message, teaching you get an inheritance from his death; when instead it is saying many will be condemned by God at Judgement Day for believing such a thing.

In my opinion.

The Old Testament was about law, with law the same as knowledge of good and evil, which was the forbidden tree occupied by Satan.
God never wanted human to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and be under law. Satan was in control of the humans in the Old Testament, since they lived under law due to original sin. This was Satan's forte'. Just like in mythology where Mars was the god of war and Venus was the goddess of love, Satan was the angel of law. God did not want Adam and Eve to narrow themselves to just that.

Paul tries to explain this at a time when people did not know anything but law, as a means to salvation or social control. If Adam and Eve had not teamed up with Satan, humans would have never been exposed to law. Humans would have existed with faith in natural instinct which is not judgmental and full of fire and brimstone. They would be under faith, apart from any learned law.

Forgiveness of sins was another way to say law was now passé. Law involves learning good and evil and then obedience to good and punishment for doing evil and/or violation. If your sins are forgiven by Jesus, it is like you are perfect in the law, while not being required to make any choice that the law says. The end result of forgiveness of sin like there is no law. If the speeding law is 65mph and and you are doing 75MPH and the trooper stops you and says drive slower next time and then let you off, the teeth behind the law are not there and you get the same end result as no law or obeying the law.

Jesus could not say law was over and the reign of Satan was ending. This would have triggered anger. Instead he said the same thing in a positive way which could dispel fear and punishment from law. The way Jesus said it, did not challenge those who liked law but the math added the same, as no law, for those who had faith.

Paul tried to explain this in clearer terms, that the days of law were done. This ended in rage and his execution by Rome; dark side of law. As history shows human did not give up law or Satan, but doubled down conjuring up manmade sin; thou shall not use fossil fuel. The forgiveness of sin would allow this option, while also allowing green alternatives, which is how free people behave; children of god. Those under law are slaves to law with one choice or punishment; children of the bondwomen have to go green. Those children are full of angry self righteousness and thereby sin by the higher laws of God; love each other. The tree of life, does not involve Satan, as does the tree of knowledge and law.

In Revelations, Satan is thrown from heaven. This means law and Satan was no longer condoned by Heaven. It is not clear when the future deadline was set, but the same self behavior connected to law would officially no longer be a path for righteousness. Human had centuries to get things in order, so this was not a surprise. Paul was trying to explain to those who only thought in terms of law being eternal.

 

[wizanda]

If your sins are forgiven by Jesus, it is like you are perfect in the law, while not being required to make any choice that the law says.

I find what you're stating is similar to the Pharisaic concepts being challenged; that they believed everyone is under sin from Adam & Eve.

I believe Yeshua wasn't someone in that religion, yet was a Divine Being (Eloh) sent from Heaven to correct them.

According to what I understand when we've removed the Pharisaic concepts within John, Paul, & Simon, we're left with a different religion, that aligns with prophecy both in the Tanakh, and the other religions.

From what I understand praying for repentance with the terminology 'Salvation' (Yeshua) or that the 'Lord Saves' (Yehoshua), means we're praying to the right department in Heaven, and so the Lord intercedes for our sins (Isaiah 53:11-12); yet they are not automatically forgiven by a 'sin sacrifice' (Isaiah 53:10).

Yeshua's teachings were showing we have to go the extra mile in the opposite way to sin, and so becoming better people; whereas the Pharisees thought we could pay for sins.

The whole idea that Paul's Pharisaic concepts make a 'Covenant with Death', claiming people are free of sin by being in Christ, is what was being specified in the Bed of Adultery (Isaiah 28:9-19) - with the Chief Corner Stone in the middle of it (Isaiah 28:16).

The Bed of Adultery goes from 'Rumour' to 'Rumour', and in Isaiah 53:1 it asks, 'who would have believed the 'Rumour', and to whom is the Arm of the Lord revealed'.

In my opinion.

 

[rational experiences]

God the rock.

Don't give god a name as a Theist. Legal testimony.

Reviewed testimonial said so. Life's reason sacrificed hurt. Early age death given. Natural death over ridden.

About human men the satanist.

In the past a human man's science title was satanist. Satanism outlawed. Exact.

The satanist theist tells you he knew taught satanic memories of old pyramid science by image voice. Heard. All life previously had been destroyed instant combustion. Ended as dusts.

Told you. He had done it. He remembered.

He also told you the testimony was about man's Christ consciousness.

CH gases were heavenly sacrificed from cold into burning. As God by law was all highest greatest types of everything or anything. Spirit of man's consciousness fell as burning. Fall of man caused.

The Satan burning wandering star he said taught him.

Brain prickling crown thorns. Taught him. When he heard old mans visionary recorded satanic science themes speaking giving predicted visions as prophetic.

How to destroy and how to convert gods rock by sun star terms. Sun time. Nuclear.

Phi RA....see.

Pretty basic a human theist lied. No man is God.

Terms in created creation as highest greatest.

On earth life in garden nature was is mutual equal.

Propagation procreation and sex.

By its preceding parent type of any two forms. The law on earth nature.

Phi RA see a man's confession as a theist. What he caused. Death and destruction man's sin holes in earth for changing suns freeze. Ice.

 

[Brian2]

I meant Galatians 2:11

It is Saint Paul who said he fell from his horse.
I might believe that...but that doesn't eliminate the issue with his mental problems (probable bipolarism DID and MPD).

There were witnesses in the Christian Church and one was told by God to go and heal the blind Saul.
From what we know, the early Christian Church was agreeing with Paul and his version of the gospel which he took to the gentiles.

 

[Brian2]

Then ask specific questions, and we can go into detail of where I believe this can be shown...

Please do take into account that I believe we can prove I'm the return of Christ, here trying to save many of your existences, and though I'm using ReligiousForums as a method of dialogue with the world, much of where I'm coming from has been inspired by God. - In other words, I'm on your side.

In my opinion.

How can we prove that you are the return of Christ?

 

[Brian2]

The idea that Paul would have any legal authority in Damascus seems a bit far fetched. Damascus at that time was not part of Israel or Judea. It would have been a bit like Mexican police crossing the border to arrest some Mexicans for something illegal in Mexico but not in the US.

Saul was taking letters to the synagogue in Damascus, not to any political authorities.
I don't know if the Roman political authorities would have been on the side of the High Priest in Jerusalem or not (see Acts 9) or if he was taking any prisoners back to Jerusalem slyly.

 

[Brian2]

The epistle of James is clearly an invitation to follow right Christianity.
Because Saint Paul has created a personal version of Christian hamartiology, where all sins are equally grave in the eyes of God.
The Paul who persecuted Christians (probably participated to Saint Stephen's martyrdom), is the same Paul who reproaches a young Corinthian for sleeping with his own stepmother.

Sins are grave. But the sins of the flesh are infinitely less grave than murder, which is an irreparable sin.
So Paul is the one who looks at the speck of dust in the neighbor's eyes, forgetting about the big log within his own eye.

One more thing about hamartiology.
Paul perverts Jesus Christ's Gospels, by making the sins of the flesh unforgivable, and condoning the sins of selfishness and fraud.

Jesus Christ forgives the adulteress and Mary Magdalene. He doesn't forgive the moneychangers at the Gates of the Temple of Jerusalem.
Which means: there are emendable sins and there are sins that will provoke God's wrath and punishment.

I see Paul and James as teaching the same message. No contradictions there imo. Paul speaks of works of the law and James speaks of works of love.
Paul is addressing what happened in various churches and giving his advice. When it comes to someone sleeping with his stepmother, there is no suggestion that this cannot be forgiven, but Paul is saying to the Church that they should not tolerate such behaviour in the Church.
I don't see that Paul makes the sins of the flesh unforgivable or that he condones selfishness and fraud.
Where are these things?

 

[Brian2]

so true... and i didn't know just where to start other than "I think you are creating your own interpretation" type of a statement

Yes it was a case of where to start and also why to start.

 

[Estro Felino]

I don't see that Paul makes the sins of the flesh unforgivable

Yes, he does make the sins of the flesh unforgivable.
1 Corinthians 6:9 and following

And he somehow acquits himself, despite participating to Saint Stephen's murder.

 

[Brian2]

Something about Galatians 2:11.
It is a clear example of bipolar thinking...since he contradicts himself.
in 1 Corinthians 9:19 he says he does all the time what he accuses Peter of in Galatians 2:12.
What bipolars do. They accuse other of their own doing.

I have never looked at those passages like that.
I would have thought that Peter was compromising the truth of the gospel in Gal 2:11 but that Paul would not have done that in relating to others and his freedom from the law.
I don't think Peter was gaining anyone by his actions, but was showing the opinion of those of the circumcision party about gentiles and the law to be more important that the gospel and acceptance of gentiles as brothers and sisters in Christ. Peter should have been teaching those with him about the truth of the gospel and not bowing to their scruples.

 

[Kenny]

Yes, he does make the sins of the flesh unforgivable.
1 Corinthians 6:9 and following

And he somehow acquits himself, despite participating to Saint Stephen's murder.

I don't really think that is what he is saying... notice in the versus to come: 11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

So he really is referencing those who have not accepted Jesus (people who are practicing the sins of the flesh without having Jesus as Lord) and living their lives in the flesh.

At least that is how I see it since in other books and even in Corinthians, it would run contrary to the rest of what he wrote.

 

[Harel13]

I did not get the ideas the Sanhedrin worked with Paul and Simon from the Midrash, that was posted on here years after (2019); I've been saying Yeshua called Simon petros to fulfil Zechariah 3:9, and Isaiah 8:14-16 since around (2006).

Then it is unclear why you are referring to the midrash in that thread (made by me, by the way; it was my second thread here) since it does not agree with your view.

 

[Brian2]

Yes, he does make the sins of the flesh unforgivable.
1 Corinthians 6:9 and following

And he somehow acquits himself, despite participating to Saint Stephen's murder.

1Cor 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

I would say that Paul was writing those things because people were deceiving the Corinthians about the seriousness of those sins. The Corinthian church was said to be too tolerant they may have been tolerating things that they should not.
As to whether they are unforgivable is something for Jesus to judge at the judgement. I know that I am not perfect and fall and have fallen in regards some of those sins but rely on the forgiveness of Jesus. We certainly know that those who do these things will not be in the Kingdom of God.
Paul does see his sin in regards Stephen as serious and calls himself the worst of sinners because he persecuted the church also. But he knows that he has been forgiven because of his repentance and faith in following Jesus.

 

[firedragon]

I believe we can show that the Synoptic Gospels, Revelation, James, Jude, align with prophecy in the Tanakh, and other religious texts.

As I said I don't really do trusting things in this world; I know I can validate the bits I can show to be real.

Plus as the OP suggested I'm fulfilling prophecy in the Quran 43:60-77 before Judgement Day, of explaining that in which people differ over the book.

In my opinion.

Qur'an is not relevant to your OP so I will not respond to that.

So you do trust the New Testament. That's the clarification I asked for.

Thank you Wizanda for engaging. Have a good day.

 

[wizanda]

Qur'an is not relevant to your OP so I will not respond to that.

Actually I believe this is all part of prophecy in the Quran, as the OP also states I'm the return of the Messiah here before Armageddon, and I'd like to fix the religious errors; rather than mankind soon wiping its self out, as people can't help arguing until they've caused their own extinction.

So you do trust the New Testament. That's the clarification I asked for.

This thread is about me trying to explain where the New Testament is heavily edited by the Pharisees to begin, and then added to by the Roman Catholic Church; so no I do not trust it - Yet I believe we can show logistically where these additions are, to the point I think we could prove it legally, and thus fix the religious crisis about to cause WW3.

In my opinion.

 

[Estro Felino]

I have never looked at those passages like that.
I would have thought that Peter was compromising the truth of the gospel in Gal 2:11 but that Paul would not have done that in relating to others and his freedom from the law.
I don't think Peter was gaining anyone by his actions, but was showing the opinion of those of the circumcision party about gentiles and the law to be more important that the gospel and acceptance of gentiles as brothers and sisters in Christ. Peter should have been teaching those with him about the truth of the gospel and not bowing to their scruples.

Peter and Paul are like the sun and the moon, day and night. The opposite of one another.
It is evident Paul's aim is to evangelize as many people as possible. Including anyone, with zero selection.

Saint Peter wanted very small communities with a communist-like approach. He did not accept anyone. He didn't want frauds or thieves within his community.
In fact Ananias and Sapphira died of heart failure after they confessed they had lied to the community.

 

[muhammad_isa]

How can we prove that you are the return of Christ?

Nobody is the return of Christ except for Christ himself.

Some people may ask "how would we know?"
Truth is distinct from falsehood.
Light is distinct from darkness.
Righteousness is distinct from evil

..and Almighty God is the Most Wise.
It's a bit a like saying "How will we know if God will send a flood?" in the time of Noah.
Oh .. Glory be to God .. we will all know alright !

 

[wizanda]

From what we know, the early Christian Church was agreeing with Paul and his version of the gospel which he took to the gentiles.

From what we know the Christian Church was established by Paul & Simon (Acts 11:25-26) contrary to the Ebionites, who were the original prophesied Church of Yeshua (Zechariah 11:11), that Saul was having put to death.

How can we prove that you are the return of Christ?

In Revelation 19:12 we are told Christ has a New name that only he knows; I've known since 4-5 years old that I'm sent from Heaven as an Avatar, with my name in the world's religious texts.

When we understand that the New name is correlated in Revelation 3:12; we can then see how the symbolism of our name references, can be shown to interlink the world's religions as one (Zechariah 14:9).

Plus I was given loads of advanced information about theology, as we'd sort of expect from an archangel in human form (Son of Man)...

Thus there is a lot to the case that can be used to prove it to everyone; where we can discuss it in the other thread about the name references, and I will detail all of it on here for the world as prophesied.

In my opinion.