This 7-part site is dedicated to the one
who is bent on finding the one true God!

All '156 case-questions' answered in this 1-page are designed to help you truly master the 66-book Bible in 24-hours: without even having to read the entire book!

What is dtrueacademy?

• Chevron Down

I’m PeterdNatsari: an ordinary everyday human being who however said yes to the creator of spirit and physics, so please permit me to say - it so happens that: I see things. The duty of the messenger is to speak the word, the hearer decides what they do with the message.
🙏

In 2017, I was moved to establish dtrueacademy as a free school to help restore spiritual literacy and bring true spirituality back to common knowledge. This is the common and simple knowledge that God actually exists - and not as some force or energy, but as a personal father who actually loves us, and who has long opened a pathway via which we could travel, to get to find and fellowship with Him.So I pieced together everything I had been shown from age 8 and basically wrapped it up as an online school of truth called dtrueacademy. dtrueacademy tells a true love story of how a Father was able to reunite with his once-lost children: a story that however has been increasingly twisted and corrupted for thousands of years by religion. Thankfully, the academy has been stood up by the Father to be the instrument that untangles the twists, and returns spiritual literacy back to its original height. The academy restores the foundation of spiritual literacy (which is virtually lost today), and leads the people back to the Father because indeed: it's all about the Father and His infinite love for His creation.The Father has opened His redemptive love to all the people of the world regardless of race and regardless of whatever evil we feel we might have done because He indeed loves us all the same, we only have to see ourselves as He sees us, and love ourselves as well - enough to return back to His open arms. All are welcome: Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Free-thinkers, Traditionalists, Cultists, Agnostics and Atheists alike. As long as we have the breath of life in us, and we are willing to accept change, the love of the Father is ever available. I may have found The Academy, but I did not author THE STORY OF LIFE. I only speak as the Lord directs me to, so the words of this story are far from being mine.

Not all wrongs damn a soul
(1John 5:17)

Not all theological fights are necessary - because not all wrong-doings damn a soul. It doesn't really matter that much to the Father that we call the Messiah "Jesus" instead of his correct sacred name (Yahushua), neither does it matter that much to Him that we wrongly believe He made the earth flat: those are all matters of physical (flat-earth) and spiritual (Yahushua) maturity which everyone has time to grow into. We only ultimately stand a chance to lose our assurance of eternal life on the last day - if we add to the above errors: 12 particularly damning beliefs.To tell the whole story, but in the shortest time possible, I have revealed the entire secret by centering it around 12 groups of rhetorical case-questions that interestingly answer themselves, this is to ensure that the reader does not have to do any work whatsoever to grasp what is being revealed. So these questions do not only raise our curiosity, they also teach us exactly what true Christianity ought to look like: which the Church as an institution - does not know.Over 10 thousand days of inquiry has been crushed into this 1 simple page. All you need to do is sit back, relax, and open your mind to sincerely reflecting on these self-answered questions: bearing it in mind that the aim for this disclosure - is not necessarily to cause a divide, or to win an argument, but on the contrary - it is to win-back our souls from the damning consequences of the 12 abominations we all have been taught as a Church: probably since the time we were born.

The 12 apostasies that damn a soul

Nothing man possesses is more important than his soul, so the academy ignores the wrongs that do not damn a soul, and only focuses on matters of life and death, so I beseech us not to take the words of this story for a game. The Devil knows that what sets a person free from his bond is their belief in the provided redemption of the Father, this is why he has worked to present to the people a different redeemer, so that their belief in this counterfeit redeemer would amount to nothing for the one in bondage. What the Church does not know is that the Devil has been able to achieve this mission of presenting a counterfeit redeemer - by building a different image of the Messiah: using 12 deathly Apostasies.The revelation of the 12 apostasies of the Church rather call for a deep searching of the word, for many secrets have been exposed here which the majority would most likely be hearing for the very first time, hence, most of the words of this revelation would be shocking to hear, and it might even take years for the reader to completely grasp what they would be reading.

The story is divided into 7 major parts

We're going to be pulling out unbelievable Bible verses that even Pastors have never come across before. So it is advised that we read slowly, as well as insightfully, let us also be sure to read to the very end before we begin to pass judgements, lest we miss the message - in our hastiness to quickly draw conclusions. Indeed: life is spiritual, and dtrueacademy tells the true story of this mysterious life that we live. And for easy assimilation, this remarkable story has been divided into 7 major parts:Part-1 welcomes us to the Academy of Truth - we begin by answering the top 2 questions that tend to keep people the farthest - away from the God of the Bible: Why would the God of the Bible need blood sacrifice to take away sin? And what does it really mean to fulfil The Law?
Part-2 reveals how God never really abandoned us (His children) but has been trying to get into our heart all this time
Part-3 paints the clearest picture of the true story of our Father's redemptive love
Part-4 exposes how the Church-fathers have for years - twisted this fatherly love into confusion: by introducing 12 soul-damning apostasies into the Church
Part-5 exposes the 12th apostasy in greater detail seeing that it is the foundational and most shocking Apostasy of the Church
Part-6 reveals the 4-ways-out of the 12 apostasies of the Church - as revealed by the Father, and
Part-7 is a bonus part that seals the knowledge of Parts 1 to 6 into 1 wisdom. While Parts 1 to 6 reveal the spiritual side of the global deception, Part 7 is the sealing part which shows us the physical side of the deception, and also reveals to us how to escape the matrix for good, and yet live a rich and successful life.We truly have more fun when we do things or share our moments with those we care about. So do well to make your stay here fun: by sharing this website with those you love the most. And thank you for staying this long. Yah bless you as you take even more time and patience to read to the end.

Please, proceed to Part-1:
Use the orange-coloured up-down arrows to navigate the parts with ease. And you can make navigation even easier (if viewing from a mobile phone) by switching your browser to the desktop mode. To do this, simply click the 3 vertical dots on the top right corner, and check the box that says ''Desktop site''.

• Chevron Up

• Chevron Down

Why would the God of the Bible need
blood sacrifice to take away sin?

IF GOD IS ALL-POWERFUL...
💪

why didn't he just forgive mankind instead of having his son be inflicted with pain and murdered for our redemption back from the court of the ETERNALLY damned devil? The answer to this question is surprisingly simple.(Isaiah55:8-9) ~ For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.Apparently, being all powerful does not NECESSARILY mean you should be unfair and unprincipled in your dealings. In other words: if a God be good, He must of NECESSITY be just in all his ways so that in this case - he becomes compelled ''by His own holiness'' - to employ a just principle towards restoring lost mankind back to Himself. And this ''JUST'' approach He must take - cannot be the snapping of His fingers to magically correct all wrongs simply because He is all-powerful and can do just that. A just God cannot do this because doing this would ultimately erase the dividing line between good and evil - thereby killing justice and consequently nullifying His goodness: this is what most do not realise.

THE TACTICAL NATURE OF THE FATHER'S REDEMPTIVE PLAN
🧠

A good God must be just, justice is holiness, holiness requires righteousness, righteousness requires equity, and equity requires laws: which become responsible for ultimately creating a level playing field that allows Justice and fairness to eventually manifest. In other words: A good God cannot be PARTIAL, and this fact inevitably gives birth to LAWS. These laws are called THE LAWS OF EQUITY, and these laws do not exist so that they can later be abolished in the future like the Church thinks, but they exist to forever establish the righteousness of a God that must ETERNALLY be good. By being the first sinner, the Devil earned rights to rule the kingdom of darkness, our righteous way out of death and the court of the Devil is therefore not force. It is by an approach that both respects the Devil's rights and yet preserves the Father's holiness.The Devil rules the kingdom of darkness and by our sin, he gained due right over us. Taking us out of the Devil's hands without following due process - but by force - will make Father an abuser of human rights: hence a sinner, but we know that the Father cannot possibly sin. So the Father has to find a way to bargain with the Devil for the redemption of man and this is where the TRANSACTION of redemption comes in. But apparently, the Devil did not work to steal our salvation so he could turn around and sell us for a profit, he stole our salvation so he can eternally destroy us. So he is not about to VOLUNTARILY enter any kind of transaction that will get him to possibly lose us from his grip.It appears that the Devil is not going to fall for a check, only a checkmate that renders him helpless will get him to release mankind to the Father., and this is what introduces TACTICALITY into the transaction of man's redemption. So the transaction of redemption set up by the Father is not one that gives the Devil an option to decide to engage or not to engage, it is rather one that legally strips away his right to have a say in the matter. Technically speaking, it is one that cancels the Devil's right to continue to keep mankind hostage. The Father's transaction of redemption was quite TACTICAL, it wasn't necessarily a negotiation, it was actually an offer the Devil could not possibly refuse.If the Father can possibly make available the worthy price to redeem lost mankind back from the Devil's rule, the Devil will automatically lose his right to continue to keep us in bondage (whether he wants to let us go or not): not only because the right of God to preserve what He created and HAS JUSTLY FORGIVEN will at that point supersede the right of the less powerful Devil to continue to keep under UNJUST oppression - all of God's creation of mankind who decide to leave the Devil's cage, but most importantly: because you cannot accuse a person of any wrong - if the supposed victim tells you that they take no offence. Therefore, whosoever will believe in the provided redemption of the Father: that person would automatically be saved.

WHY DID GOD HAVE TO BE BORN IN FLESH?
👶

By dirtiness - a body is stained, but by cleanliness - the body is restored back to purity. By sin - we were lost to the court of death, but by holiness - we can be redeemed back to everlasting life. This is a law of equity. Hence, holiness is what it takes to buy us back from death. Holiness is the good, just, and worthy price to pay for the redemption of mankind. But whose holiness? For equity's sake, it has to be the holiness of another man just like Adam (in whose body - we all became lost), because no one would try to redeem a damaged APPLE by giving an ORANGE in exchange as price.To get that same damaged Apple back in your hands, you will need to give a fruit that is not only human and an Apple (JUST LIKE what was lost), but a fruit that is also holy and in good condition (JUST LIKE what was lost to sin and eternal damnation). Since man is the very breath of God (only enveloped in flesh), there is therefore no price high enough to pay apart from the very life of God. This is why Christ asked: what shall a man give in exchange for his soul (Mark8:36-37)? The answer is NOTHING-CREATED because as Christ resounded: our souls are little gods (Psm82:6, John10:34), and deity is infinity and has nothing equal to it in any sense by which it can be bought. The only thing equal in essence to man - who was lost - is the breath of life in man which is itself the very same life of God. Therefore, presenting to death - the life of God Himself becomes an offer that death cannot possibly JUSTIFIABLY refuse: not only because it is a price equal IN ESSENCE to that of man which was lost, but because there is indeed no other price in existence - that is higher or more valuable than the life of God: THIS IS WHY GOD HAD TO INEVITABLY BE BORN IN FLESH: if He insisted that He was going to redeem lost mankind from death.

WHY AN IMMACULATE CONCEPTION?
😇

It so happens that if God must earn us back to life, he has no other option than to give Himself over to death - but not Himself as "Spirit-God" (seeing that God in his true spirit form - cannot die, neither is "Spirit-God" same in form or in equal form - with that which was lost), if God must therefore give Himself over to death to redeem us back to life, He mustn't only do so as man because man is God in flesh, nor because it was flesh that was actually lost, but He must do so because in the first place: it is only flesh that can possibly die.To pay the price for our redemption therefore - God basically had to die for us: as man. To give death a fruit that is also an Apple (just like what was lost) - God had to ultimately become man so He could die as man. But mere God in flesh isn't all it would take to buy us back from death. Remember that the cleanliness of Holiness is the good, just, and worthy price that has to be paid for the redemption of mankind - who fell by the dirtiness of sin, and the very spirit of God is the embodiment of that holiness that must be exchanged as the sacrifice for that redemption. So to give death a fruit that is also holy and in good condition (just like what was lost to sin and death) - God had to therefore be IMMACULATELY born, because if He came begotten by an earthly father, he would have become stained with the sin his earthy father had unfortunately become corrupted by: and would have - by this fact - lost His qualification to die ''IN HOLINESS'' for man regardless of the fact that He came as God in flesh. This is why Christ had to be born SINLESS and IMMACULATELY as "The Son of God" who carried God-the-Father" inside of himself IN FULLNESS just like John confessed (John3:34).

HOW FATHER PROVED HE REALLY DOES LOVE US
❤️

A good God must be just, justice is holiness, holiness requires righteousness, righteousness requires equity, and equity requires laws: which become responsible for ultimately creating the level playing field that allows Justice and fairness to eventually manifest. In other words: A good God cannot be PARTIAL and this fact inevitably gives birth to LAWS. These laws are called THE LAWS OF EQUITY, and these laws do not exist so that they can later be abolished in the future like the Church thinks, rather, they exist to forever establish the righteousness of a God that must ETERNALLY be good. Hence, The Law of God must stand - as long as God remains good.The law of equity requires that the principle of redemption be "A LIFE FOR A LIFE". And because the spiritual life of a creature is in its blood (Lev17:11): there can obviously therefore be no redemption of life without NECESSARY blood sacrifice. And just like our sons have their own souls and personality even if they carry their parent's genes, THE LAW OF EQUITY ensures that so does the BEGOTTEN son of God have his own soul and personality as well different from that of the Father (the Church's doctrine of the Trinity is a lie as we would clarify soon - for Christ is not God the Father). Just like our sons have their own souls and personality even if they carry their parent's genes, THE LAW OF EQUITY as well ensures that Christ also carries the Father's genes, and the Father's genes are far from being physical because the Father has no flesh. The genes of the Father are rather spiritual in nature: as Holiness and Power. Through the WILLFUL cooperation of the Son, and the eventual physical death of The Christ, the Father was able to finally bring His dearest wish to come to pass.This story does not only reveal the great wisdom that is graciously possessed by our heavenly Father: the creator of all the heavens and the earth, neither does it only reveal the infinite value that has been placed in our souls enough to cost the very life of God himself for it to possibly be bought or redeemed, more importantly, this story reveals the deeply rooted love of both the heavenly Father and His only begotten son (who chose to listen to Him at the cost of his own life): because even if righteousness said God had to "die" to redeem us, nothing whatsoever said He had to actually do it: BUT HE ACTUALLY DID IT: why? Because He truly loves us that much. Greater love has no man than the one who lays down his life for his friends (John15:13).

🙏
To God be all the glory and honour forever and ever.

SUMMARY: THE REASON WHY THE GOD OF THE BIBLE
NEEDS BLOOD SACRIFICE TO TAKE AWAY SIN
🎓

So why would the God of the Bible need blood sacrifice to take away sin? This is because He is JUST. If a God be just, he must control his omni-potency to do only good and nothing of evil. He must maintain the dividing line between good and evil by creating an eternal law that will forever establish EQUITY for all things and beings: so that AS ABOVE - SO BELOW. So that if by sin - we fell into the rightful ownership of the Devil, then by holiness, we can be pulled out. But to satisfy the law of equity, this holiness must be that of another man because it was man that was lost, and no one redeems a damaged Apple by giving an Orange in exchange. Hence, a new man had to be born to give his life for the old man seeing that the life that is to be transacted: is itself in the blood (Lev17:11).However, to be born sinless, this new man cannot be born of an earthly father, because all men alive have become stained by the dirtiness of sin in Adam who CLONED them in their begetting. The Church does not understand that there is a stark difference between ''to create'' and ''to beget'', but I have explained this in detail: in the book-series of dtrueacademy titled The Manual of Life (Book 1, Chapter-28, and also in question 14 & 15 of Chapter 31)'' available on Amazon. It so happens that while the body of a child is created by the FUSION of that of the mother and the father, the spirit of the child is rather created by the FISSION OR CLONING of the father's spirit. Hence, the new man had to be born by a holy father, and this is where God comes in.Thankfully, man is already a little god (God in flesh) (Psm82:6, John10:34), so God becoming flesh as The Messiah happens to be in line with the law of equity that requires another Apple (rather than an Orange) to be given to redeem a damaged Apple. The only thing that would differentiate the new man from the old is that he would rather be the clone of the SPIRITUAL Father as opposed to being the clone of a PHYSICAL father. What would this mean? This means that the new man would not only be born holy: a holiness he must inherit from his father (which consequently bestows upon him the requirement to be the worthy death-sacrifice for the old man), but he would also be born with infinite power inside of him because the genetics of the Father - which all children compulsorily inherit from their parents - is not FLESHY but is rather SPIRITUAL: seeing that the Father has no flesh but is fully SPIRIT.Being the clone of the Father does not in anyway - tamper with the man-ness or ''apple-nature'' of the Messiah because he fulfilled the requirement that indicated that: ''all men after Adam must be born of a woman (Gen1:28)''. The second man - though begotten of the SPIRIT God (from where he gets his holiness) - would yet qualify to be called a man because he was indeed born of a woman, and this is where Mary had to come into the picture. So while the old man is a Man-man, the second man is a God-man - inheriting his divinity from his SPIRIT father (as the son of God (Matt16:16)), and his humanity from his PHYSICAL mother (as the son of man (Matt9:6)).It appears that all the choices that were made to redeem lost mankind back to life were guided by laws of equity:1. The choice not to use abusive force to pull us out of the RIGHTFUL ownership of the Devil: but to use fairness
2. The choice to make this transaction of redemption TACTICAL rather than an ordinary bargain
3. The choice to specifically pay HOLINESS as the price of redemption
4. The choice for DEATH AND BLOOD SACRIFICE to be the transaction-portal for the paying of this holiness
5. The choice for this holiness and blood sacrifice to be that of A SECOND MAN
6. The choice for A SINLESS FATHER to be involved to guarantee that the Messiah is born holy
7. The choice for the second man to be born out of a WOMAN rather than fall from the sky - to guarantee that he qualifies to be called a manNotice how all 7 steps to redeem mankind were all guided by laws of equity, this is because regardless of the fact that the Father is all-powerful, He is yet holy, fair, loving, and just. And being the very symbol of perfection, He is wise enough to control His infinite power with love and fairness, else, an existence that accommodates mankind as we know today - would not have possibly been a thing. This is the simple but honourable reason why the God of the Bible needs blood sacrifice to take away sin.

• Chevron Up

What does it really mean to fulfil the law?

To fulfil the law is to annul the animal blood sacrifices -
NOT the commandments

• Chevron Down

THE LAW IS PRIMARILY DIVIDED INTO 2 PARTS:
THE COMMANDMENTS AND THE SACRIFICES
🎓

The commandments is ofcourse necessary to sustain our existence as believers and so - it is meant to be eternal. And this eternal commandments of course does not require the death of anyone or anything to be kept (except for now when the eating of meat is allowed until the new earth is established (Gen9:3-4, Matt14:14-21)) because a perfect world is devoid of death. On the other hand, blood sacrifice was never something in the original plan of the Lord because they are never really needed to sustain existence or redeem us from sin. this is why he said in Jeremiah 7:22–23 that he never spoke to our fathers about sacrifices the day he brought them out of Egypt but that he only asked them to be obedient to the commandments. But God had to institute the sacrifices because of our stubbornness.The Father conceptualised sacrifices as a backup disciplinary measure to raise his children (Exo8:27,10:26, 20:24, 23:18, Jer7:22-24) and only eventually established it as law in (Lev4) after we proved we could use more stringent awakening evidenced by the fact that even after we had agreed to serve only him and obey his laws (Exo20:1-5, 19:8, 24:3, 7) and even after we had agreed not to build for ourselves gods of silver and gold (Exo20:23), we yet went backwards by going ahead to build for ourselves a golden calf to worship (Exo32). All animal killings that were commanded before (Lev4) like the killing of the Passover lamb (Exo12), the killing of the sin offering on the day of atonement (Exo30:10), and the giving of the firstborn males of the animals to God (Exo13:11-16) are necessary rituals and are not classed under what God called sacrifices in (Jer7:22-23) seeing that when he spoke this, the Israelites had already eaten the Passover in (Exo12): a Passover which is also classed together with the day of atonement as 2 of the commanded 7 feasts of the Lord (Lev23), the giving of the firstborn males of the animals was also not classed under the sacrifice seeing that it was optional because it could be redeemed with money so that the animals were not killed (Exo13:11-16).

GOD INSTITUTED THE SACRIFICES TO MAKE US DETEST SIN:
NOT TO TAKE AWAY SIN
🎓

The whole point of the perpetual sacrifices was to help afix the consciousness of the people unto righteousness and away from sin. It was to more deeply drive unto our consciousness the severity of sin, the grave need for redemption, the beauty of righteousness and the dare need for the Messiah. It was instituted to be a strict measure taken to ensure the people grow a disdain for sin even as the scene of sacrificing blood is horrendous to behold. It is the onetime sacrifice of the Messiah that took away our sin - not perpetual animal blood sacrifices. Hence, it is only right that the animal sacrifices were to be annulled after the death and resurrection of the Messiah: which is what fulfilling the law means according to (Dan9:27) - And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease...The gift of righteousness is the Holyspirit and it is obedience that attracts to us the indwelling Holyspirit: it is not animal blood sacrifices that does this (Acts 5:32). Before Christ came, obedience and repentance to the commandments did the true work of taking away sin, the animal blood sacrifices that followed were only an outward appearance of an inner reality (repentance), this is why the father said he values mercy (for the repentant) above their sacrifices (Hos6:6). The Father actually only wanted obedience to the commandments (Exo19:5–6, Jer7:22-24) and only had to institute sacrifices to help deter us from missing the mark, but in time however, the Israelites grew even more cold-hearted and began to actually enjoy the act of killing animals as game and were no longer performing the rituals in the consciousness of the law but rather religiously and this is why God eventually began to express disgust for their sacrifices (1Sam15:22, Psm40:6, Hos6:6, Isa1:11–15).

CHRIST REPLACED THE SACRIFICES WITH HIS DEATH:
HE DID NOT REPLACE THE COMMANDMENTS
🎓

Christians who endorse the abolition of the law (and who as typical of Christians - confuse the commandments and the sacrifices as one thing) take (Jer7:22-24) to mean that God never wanted the commandments to be eternal in the first place but that he rather only wanted good intentions. But when you get the true picture, you understand that the Father's disgust as expressed (Jer7:22-24) did not mean to say the sacrifices were useless altogether (neither did he mean to say the law as a whole was to be abolished), the Father simply meant to say: the people were no longer doing the sacrifices in spirit and in truth but as a game they had happened to normalise for themselves to enjoy playing. He was disgusted by the sacrifices of the people for the same reason why he calls the prayers of sinners an abomination (Prov28:9).In fact, the last book of the Old Testament yet speaks about his disgust for the manner with which the Israelites perceived the sacrifices (Mal1:6–8). It is apparent that even to the last of the Old Testament prophets, the hypocrisy of man-made outward religiosity was still rampant and repugnant in God’s eyes. The Israelites got to so-much love their personally conjured up religion of killing animals that they killed Christ in 30BC for eventually putting an end to the blood sacrifices - which is something they were told in the first place that he was going to - and was supposed to do (Dan9:27): The irony.

The words of the Messiah:
If ye love me, keep my commandments.
~ John 14:15 ~

• Chevron Up

• Chevron Down

The story of how God had long established a covenantal relationship with man:

using 1 original covenant
that however played out in 4 phases

A covenant is a signed agreement between 2 people, in this case: between God and His children. God did establish a covenantal relationship with us but it actually played out in phases till it became fulfilled in the 4th phase after Christ came. This is why Christ said he has come to fulfil the law. The law he spoke of was the law binding the covenantal relationship that had been signed between God and man.Why is God's covenantal relationship with us ''law-bound''? And why must a thing called ''The Law'' (which we are indebted to keep) exist at all? This is not only because the one who created life is ETERNALLY good (thereby requiring ETERNAL law to ETERNALLY establish equity and fairness) but because all things (including the relationship between 2 or more things) must of necessity be sustained and held in existence by guides and principles, so that as long as existence remains a thing, we remain inevitably subject to the laws that govern the sustenance of such existence (and all the relationships that are featured within it): else we cease to remain in existence, this is why it is not possible for ''The Law of God'' to be abolished (for the one existent) like the Church wrongly believes.Why is God's relationship with us covenantal as a law-bound agreement rather than dictated as an imposition? This is because He created us with a freewill: AS FREE AGENTS, so if He must fellowship with us, we have to agree to it to satisfy the demands of righteousness. For the sake of God's own Holiness - He does not unrighteously impose His law upon us even if only His law can save us, but He rather makes His relationship with us covenantal as a signed agreement, and all agreements have to be signed to be sealed as valid. Below is the breakdown of the 4 phases it took to finally fulfil God's righteously established covenants including the signs that sealed each of them.

Phase 1: The Noahic covenant (Gen6:18, Gen9) - This is where God agreed to never again destroy the earth with a flood. And He signed this covenant with the rainbow. The fact that we still see the rainbow today, means this covenant is still in effect.Phase 2: The Abrahamic covenant (Gen17) - This is where God agreed to make Abraham the father of many nations (Gen17:4), and he proceeded to geographically position the greatest nation as the land of Canaan. God signed this covenant with the circumcision of our male children.Phase 3: The Mosaic covenant (Exo34, 31:14-16, Lev25:2, Ezek20:12, 20) - This is where God agreed to FORMALISE His everlasting law for man and for the earth. This law was centered around blood sacrifice and oblations in the temple of God. And God signed this covenant with the Sabbath day: The Sabbath day is a day to be selfless, a day to do God's pleasure only (Isa58:13), and a day not to work for money (Amos8:5).The fact that the Sabbath day is the sign of the Mosaic covenant proves that the Mosaic covenant did not really begin with Moses but actually began with creation, the establishment of this covenant only happened to find conclusion with Moses. So indeed, the Mosaic covenant is the very first covenant God made with us (and it was supposed to be the only one), and it did not begin as a covenant of redemption but as a covenant of rest and lawful preservation of creation. Redemption was only incorporated into this covenant after man fell to sin. It was the addition of the redemptive factor that warranted the establishment of the other covenants there are. So though the Mosaic covenant appears to be one covenant amongst a set of 4 covenants, the reality of the case is that - the other 3 covenants are actually a subset of the original Mosaic covenant, with the 4th covenant only working to fulfil this original covenant and restore it back to what it originally started off as, which is: to be a covenant of Sabbath-rest and the lawful preservation of creation.Phase 4: The Messianic covenant (Jer31) fulfilled in (Dan9:27) - This is when God promised to switch the temple for the body of man so that His law then takes a new home in the hearts of men rather than remain in a temple of stone. This is how God finally gets into our hearts. With this covenant, the Holyspirit would then be in the very hearts of men to guide us to all truth that has been hidden in the law, (and the original covenant would have successfully been restored). God signed this covenant with water baptism (Mark16:16, Acts2:41, 8:12-13, 18:8).

There is neither a New Testament nor an Old one

The 4 different phases are not 4 different covenants; they are only 4 different stages of the evolution of one original covenant: WHICH IS THE COVENANT OF SABBATH-REST AND THE LAWFUL PRESERVATION OF CREATION. Hence the covenant next in line - does not replace the previous, it rather magnifies and clarifies it: thereby making the previous more fulfilled. The so-called ''New Testament'' does not replace the ''Old Testament'' because there is no New Testament different from the Old. The Church's replacement theology is a mistake. The Most High is not dealing with ''Testaments'' but ''COVENANTS'' and there is only 1 Covenant that however plays out in phases and the next phase of this original covenant does not replace the previous, it rather magnifies and clarifies it: thereby making the previous more fulfilled.The evidence for this is seen in the fact that we still see the rainbow today, even if we have past that phase of the evolution of God's covenantal relationship with man. This means that the Church is wrong to say Jesus came to abolish the law. For if the Messianic Covenant did not abolish the Noahic Covenant (so that we still see the rainbow today), then it is confirmed that the Messianic Covenant did not abolish the Mosaic Covenant. God is too perfect to be in a business of testing out laws to see which ones work, rather he is revealing one single law to precision as we are able to receive it. Missing this basic truth - is the beginning of the problem of the Church.

There is only One Original Covenant, and its Law is necessary and so - cannot be abolished

Again - the Mosaic covenant is indeed the original covenant: which is actually supposed to be a covenant of ''Sabbath-rest and lawful preservation of creation'' rather than be a covenant of redemption. So with or without the ''Redemption of mankind'', a law to preserve creation would have yet necessarily existed as the original law and covenant, so Christ coming to fulfil the Law - was never really about the abolition of the Law, it was rather about the MAGNIFYING AND ESTABLISHING OF THE LAW ITSELF which Christians are ironically trying hard to do away with. Missing this basic truth - is the beginning of the problem of the Church.How were the New Testament believers able to yet preach the Gospel even without any New Testament writings? Because all they had to do was continue to keep what is unchanged in the Mosaic Law after it was fulfilled while taking into consideration - what changed (the taking away of the daily blood sacrifices and the oblations). The truth is - The Law hasn't even yet been completely fulfilled (the last 3 Feasts prove so), and that is why Christ is coming back, when he returns, would he find our lamps lit with obedience or would he find us revelling in lawlessness? The choice is ours to make.

CONCLUSION - WHY DOES HELL EXIST?: The Law of God exists as an everlasting rock that cannot be abolished because all things (including the relationship between 2 or more things) must of necessity be sustained and held in existence by guides and principles, so that as long as existence remains a thing, we remain inevitably subject to the laws that govern the sustenance of such existence (and all the relationships that are featured within it): else we cease to remain in existence. This means: those who choose to do away with God's law - are asking to be taken away from existence, and this is why a hell exists: to satisfy the right a soul has to exercise their freewill: even if they exercise it unreasonably. Apparently, a soul is the very breath of God and it happens to be eternal in nature, hence, the death of a soul is never annihilation but is rather eternal and everlasting pain that comes with being completely separated from the Father who gave us breath.

• Chevron Up

• Chevron Down

The true story
of the 2 types of Christianity

Roman Christianity & Jewish Christianity
aka: The Natsarim Way of Life

So the story begins with the fact that

the faith we call Christianity - did not start off as Christianity as most think, but as a different practice called "the-way-of-life". And the first believers of this way - were not really the Christians of Antioch (as they were derogatorily first called in 40AD) but were actually "the Natsarim (Nazarenes) of Nazareth" (as perfected and established with the coming of Christ from 26AD when he was baptised, to 30AD when he died). Before Christ came to fulfil and establish the Natsarim way as the-way-of-life for all men, John the Baptist headed this sect of believers as their leader. Though the followers of Christ were sacredly called ''Essenes'' (meaning ''the pious ones''), and casually called ''Ebionites'' (meaning ''the poor''), the disciples of the way are spiritually and generally called "Natsarim". The term ''Natsarim'' was the umbrella-name for the believers, and all Natsarim (Essenes and Ebionites) happen to keep the fulfilled law. While the Christians seem to keep no laws, the Natsarim keep the fulfilled law: this is nothing but the old law of the Mosaic Covenant: but devoid of its temple sacrifices and oblations).

But why even believe the Bible?

It is at this junction that the reader ought to demand for proof to justify the outrageous statements that have just been made above. Surprisingly, these proofs are sitting right there in the Bible - only waiting for someone to pay close attention. But before we delve into that, we must agree that it is indeed wise for the unbelievers to ask: ''why even believe the Bible? And why must anyone take seriously whatever that book - written by man - has to say?'' This is exactly why I wrote the sister website to dtrueacademy to show that most people who speak about the Bible (even Christians) are yet to fully grasp what the book is actually saying. When you read the-114-messianic-prophecies, you join the few who came to understand how the Bible gained veracity a long time ago as the only divinely-inspired document on the planet.The secret the world does not want us to know is that ''though the Bible has been corrupted by men, it yet contains the sacred words of the one true God'': not because any mortal man says so but actually because the Bible speaks of 114 specific already-fulfilled prophecies which could never have possibly been fulfilled: except supernaturally. And I have comprehensively documented this information in a sister website that lists all the 114 messianic prophecies. It is indeed a beautifully written website (I put a lot into it) - Read to the end to discover the link to this website but below is a preview of what it looks like: READ TO THE END TO UNLOCK THIS WEBSITE.

The fact that God yet lurks in the corrupt Bible: (as demystified by the sister website whose link would be unveiled in Part 7),is the father of all secrets, but here is the mother. The second biggest secret the world does not want us to know is that ''though today's Christianity can get one saved, it however cannot keep one saved till the end''. And exposing the mother of all secrets in the simplest and fastest way possible is what this website (dtrueacademy.com) is all about. The exposition would be simple and fast because all the evidences are sitting right there in our very Bibles - only waiting for someone to pay close attention, so let's get started.

THE BIBLE IS THE ONLY ALIVE BOOK IN EXISTENCE BECAUSE IT IS THE ONLY BOOK THAT HAS AN IMMUNE SYSTEM: HENCE, IT CAN BOTH EXPOSE THE LIES HIDING INSIDE OF IT - AS WELL AS SINGLE-HANDEDLY DESTROY THEM.
Below begins the 17-point biblical (KJV) exegesis that prove the sad inability of today's Christianity to keep anyone saved: TILL THE END.
PLEASE: YOU WILL NOW NEED TO GET HOLD OF A BIBLE.

1
Matthew 2:23
First things first:
Jesus is not a Christian - he is the way of life
And those who believe in him are called the Guardians of the way (aka The Natsarim)

And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, ''He shall be called a Nazarene''. Hebrew is based on a root system, it is originally a language of only consonants so depending on where you add the vowels, the meaning of the words change - yet they all would point back to the original root word. Both words: "Nazareth and Nazarene" are based on a 3-letter root word: "N-TZ-R". The words ''Nazareth" and "Nazarene" are derived from the same root word "Netzer" which is Hebrew for "branch". Nazareth and Nazarene are English corrupt translations (transliteration) of the Hebrew words Natzeret and Notzri (plural Notzrim). They mean "city of the branch" and "a person from the city of the branch" respectively.When Matthew referred to Christ as a Nazarene as prophesied, the prophecy he was referring to - was that spoken of by Isaiah in (Isa11:1) where the Messiah was prophesied to be a branch that would shoot or bud out of the stem or root of Jesse. This prophecy is not necessarily about plants but indeed has a deeper spiritual meaning. It is a prophecy about Christ who is to be the branch, extension, copy, image, clone, body, or begotten son of God - to be born through the line of David. So when Christ is called a Nazarene: his divinity is inferred: not just his nativity. What are the odds that Christ the branch or image of God just happened to be born in a city that is named "city of the branch". That itself is another miracle, but the true miracle is the fact that he is the branch, extension, copy, image, clone, body, or begotten son of God.So to be a Netzer of God therefore - is to be a "son of God". This is why even the believers (the redeemed sons of God) are themselves also called branch or "Netzer" (Isa60:21). While believers are Netzers, Christ is "The Netzer or The Branch" (Zech6:12, 3:8). And the singular agent that specifically defines us as branches of God is righteousness (Jer23:5), this is why - as the righteous ones - we are collectively called The Branch (Isa4:2). But never lose touch however of what our branch nature points to, that is: our sonship of God.

______________________________How we maintain our sonship of God
______________________________

As sons of God (defined by righteousness), we uphold righteousness above lawlessness and we do this by specifically listening to God just like a good child listens to his father. As sons of God who follow the way of life (Christ), the word of the Father is law (Matt4:4) and we do well to guard it so that we can remain undefiled in the way (Psm119:1) because his law is the truth (Psm119:142) that keeps us alive all the way as His worthy sons of God (Prov13:14, 7:2). This is why all sons of God necessitatively become guardians of the law of God - else they lose their sonship. And this is how the first followers of Christ (the Natsarim) got to find their name.There exists another Hebrew word to which Netzer is even further rooted, it's called "Natsar" (pronounced Naw-tsar). It means ''to guard, watch, watch over, keep, preserve, keep sacred and secret, protect, maintain, obey, observe, and as a participle or a noun - it means watching or watcher or guardian''. So what do we call a person or people that guard or ''Natsar'' the law of God? It's simple. When you add the suffix ''i'' to a Hebrew noun you create a ''possessive or belonging to'' form out of that noun, and when you add the suffix ''im'' to a Hebrew noun, you create the plural version of the ''possessive or belonging to'' form of that noun. Hence a Netzer who guards the law of God is called a Natsari and the plural of Natsari is Natsarim. But always remember that Natsarim is pronounced ''Naw-tsarim''.Unlike Netzer, Natsar is not geographic as used in Nazareth and Nazarene but it is actually spiritual. It defines a Netzer who is living as a doer and guardian of the law of God. The term ''Natsarim'' is the spiritual meaning inferred when the believers were being referred to as "the sect of the Nazarenes" in (Acts24:5). The word "Natsarim" is the spiritual meaning inferred when the group of law-abiding and Christlike people named their geographic settlement Nazareth. The word "Natsarim" is also the spiritual meaning inferred when this said group of people began to be called Nazarenes (Acts24:5). It's more than geography: it's spiritual.

____________________________________The spiritual meaning of the word ''Nazarene''
____________________________________

Present-day Nazareth is located in the region called Galilee in Northern Israel. Galilee is the biblical land given to the tribe of Zebulun in (Josh19:10-16). In those passages, twelve towns and six villages are mentioned, but not Nazareth. This indicates that Nazareth did not exist then as a town or village. Apparently, "Nazarene" as biblically used - is not a geography-based adjective like "Galilean" is. While a Galilean refers to someone who is native to a geographical land called Galilee, a Nazarene does not necessarily refer to someone who is from a geographical land called Nazareth, but on the flip side, Nazareth was so-named because it was the settlement for a group of pious people in Galilea who had a particular law-abiding-type mindset called the Natsarim-mindset. Hence, the term "Nazarene" is more of a mindset than it is geographic. Thus, the Jews referred to Paul as the ring leader of the SECT of the Nazarenes. Notice how Nazarenes are called a sect? This cannot be said about Galileans. So the two terms (Nazarene and Galilean) are not defined on the same basis, while one is of geography (Galilean), the other is of mindset (Nazarene): as drawn from "Natsarim".

____________________________The dual meaning of ''Nazarene''
____________________________

''Nazarene'' as biblically used - is dual in meaning, it isn't just a geographical term used to describe those who are residents of Nazareth: it's also a spiritual term to define the Natsarim and even ''watered-down'' Wikipedia recognises this, (note that the words in brackets are mine).Wikipedia defines Nazarene as a sect of Jewish Christians who continued to observe the Torah (excluding blood sacrifices & oblations), in contrast to Gentiles who eschewed Torah observance.Just like the Messiah is not an English man but is Hebrew, and just like the Messiah's true name is not really Jesus but Yahushua, the believers are not really Christians but Natsarim. Christian is the English translation of the Latin Christianus, which is itself the translation of the Greek Christianos: which means to be Christlike, but Natsarim is the very embodiment of the Christlikeness we speak about. Contrary to popular opinion, the first believers were not those named by pagan Antiochenes as Christians (Acts11:26), rather, they are those named long ago by God himself in the Old Testament as the keepers of His commandments or the Natsar translated as the watchmen in (Jer31:6): these saints are also known as the Nazarenes (Matt2:23, Acts24:5) or more correctly the Natsarim.In conclusion,
since Christian means Christlike, then Jesus (Yahushua) is not a Christian, rather, he is the Netzer or the extension, branch, copy, image, clone, body, begotten son of God and the way of life who his believers aim to be like. And his believers themselves are not Christians, they are Natsarim because to be a guardian of the way of life - BY KEEPING THE LAW - is what it truly means to be Christlike.

2
Daniel 9:27
When Daniel was shown what it means
for Christ to fulfil the law without necessarily abolishing it

And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week (i.e. the Passover week which is Sunday to Sunday): and in the midst of the (Sunday-Sunday) week (which is Wednesday when Christ died in 30AD) shall cause the (animal-blood) sacrifice and the oblation to cease,... The animal blood sacrifices were to go away because it was replaced by the blood of Christ, and the ritual water washings had to go away because it was replaced by the gift of the indwelling Holyspirit, (only these 2 laws were COMPLETELY dropped, the rest of The Mosaic Law are actually still in action, howbeit - in a renewed form). Consequently, there was found no more use for the temple of stone because the individual bodies of the Natsarim became the new temple of the Holyspirit and all Natsarim became ranked as priests.

3
Ezekiel 36:26-27
When Christ revealed that the Spirit of the Lord
actually inspires the believers to keep the law -
rather than drives them to abolish it

A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

4
Matthew 19:17
When Christ revealed the requirement
for earning eternal life - to be the keeping of the law

... but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

5
1 John 2:7 and 24
When John made clear
what commandments Christ was referring to for us to keep - as Natsarim

Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning (i.e. The Mosaic Law). The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning. Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.

6
Daniel 9:27
The 3 basic laws all biblical-Natsarim kept
even after the law was fulfilled

As Daniel was hinted, the Natsarim rightly stopped keeping the temple-bound laws like animal sacrifices or oblations and Levitical tithes, but in addition to the 10 commandments (which is just a summary of the 600-plus laws of The Mosaic Law), they rightly continued to keep the dietary law (Acts10:14), as well as the feasts-holydays (Acts18:21) because these did not require the temple to be kept.

7
2Peter 2:2
The Natsarim-faith is called the way of truth

And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.

8
John 14:6
The Natsarim-faith is called the way of truth and life

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

9
Acts 9:2
Since Paul had not yet founded Christianity at the time, it becomes easy to see that it was actually the Natsarim that Paul persecuted

And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem.

10
Acts 22:4
The Natsarim-faith is called the way

And I persecuted this way unto the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women.

11
Most miss the fact that even Paul was first Natsarim
All believers were indeed Natsarim
and they all kept the fulfilled law (the old law but devoid of temple sacrifices and oblations), before Paul twisted the way into today's Christianity using his doctrine of lawless-grace

Even Paul started out as a Natsari before he began to divide the flock with his doctrine of lawless-grace (notice how he so insisted on compulsorily keeping a particular feast-holyday that he even had to sail from Ephesus to Jerusalem for it (Acts18:21), only for him to condemn the keeping of the same feasts in (Col2:16) as typical of someone who isn't straight-forward. The point to note is that Paul actually started out embodying everything the Natsarim way stands for, this was why the ''non-messianic'' Jews derogatorily referred to him as the ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes (Acts24:5).One can easily tell that these ''Nazarene-mocking Jews'' weren't themselves Natsarim, but rather, they were unbelieving (Pharisee-kind) Jews who did not accept Christ as the Messiah, so once Paul eventually started the corrupting of the Natsarim way to create the false Christian way by telling the people (mostly the Gentiles) not to keep the fulfilled law (the old law but devoid of temple sacrifices and oblations), these non-messianic Jews were oblivious to what Paul was actually doing because they did not even believe that any part of the law (let alone - only blood sacrifices and oblations) was supposed to be put away.The point is that Paul was an unrepentant Pharisee as self-confessed (Act23:6) who had to become a Natsari to successfully destroy the Natsarim way, hence, why he likes to double-speak (speaking for and against the fulfilled law as it suits his purpose). The point is that even Paul obviously had to first be Natsarim (those he once persecuted as self-confessed - (Act22:4) before he became a Christian, for to successfully divide a group and conquer it, one has to first infiltrate the group.

________________This is the dark secret-identity of Paul which his Christians today cannot see, just like the Gentiles of Antioch couldn't see it too. The Christians cannot possibly see nor believe Paul's true identity even if it is biblically very clear. Many have been chosen, but only a few have been called to see this deep truth. And this is definitely not all there is to Paul, a lot more will be revealed about him when we discuss the last apostasy of the Church.

12
James 2:14-26
written sometime before 50AD
When James admonished the people
not to abolish the lawful works of the Natsarim way:
despite the fact that the law had been fulfilled,
and despite the fact that animal sacrifices or oblations were no longer required

What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can faith save him?...Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my work... For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

13
Acts 19:1
Note how Paul was the only 'so-called' apostle to visit Ephesus

And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus...

14
1 Timothy 1:3
written sometime before 65AD
Paul - being the only 'so-called' apostle to visit Ephesus - eventually ignored the words of James in point 12, and began to enforce a particular doctrine upon the Ephesians which we of course know to be the doctrine of 'lawless-grace' as embodied by today's Christianity

As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine.

15
Revelation 2:1-5
written sometime before 96AD
Father eventually clears all confusion by putting a stamp of fallacy on the Pauline-doctrine. He exposes Paul to be a deceiver, and uncovered his doctrine of lawless-grace: to be an apostasy

Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write...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... (this is speaking of Paul and his top followers who were the only ones calling themselves apostle even if they were not part of the 12. Paul would later refer to these Ephesians who stood against him as beasts (1Cor15:32)). Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love (the perfect Natsarim way as taught by the 12 Apostles which the Ephesian-believers had gotten all mixed-up due to much confusion by Paul's false doctrine). Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works (The INITIAL Natsarim Works Paul was teaching against); or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.

16
Religion is the worshipping of God through man;
The-way-of-life is the worshipping of God through God
Religion tries to reach God by going through mere men, but God has said that ''there is only 1 way to get to him, and that is - through the Messiah: the only one begotten of the Holyspirit''

Hence, while today's Christianity is nothing but a religion seeing that she listens to Paul before she listens to Christ; 'the Natsarim way' is not a religion but is indeed the perfect way of life because she only listens to Christ and to the 12 Apostles Christ established and asked us to listen to.

________________However,
Amongst all the religions that exist, Christianity is the closest to God because it is actually good enough to spark salvation, but it is the Natsarim way that particularly keeps this fire burning, and keeps us lit and saved to the very end. It does this by inspiring us to do 3 particular works-of-love (thereby saving all 3 of our spiritual soul, mind, and body) which goes a long way to prove to God that we truly love Him, and that we are appreciative of the forgiveness he has granted us by grace and mercy.
Indeed: Love needs action, trust needs proof, sorry needs change, and change needs ears that listen. Christ in John14:15 said ''If ye love me, keep my commandments''.
He clearly didn't ask his lovers to abolish them.

17
The 6 indoctrinations that blind believers
from seeing the Gospel for what it truly is

1) The wrong belief that to fulfil a thing is to put an end to the thing - Christians believe that to fulfil a thing - is to do away with the thing, when the fact is that TO FULFIL A THING IS TO MAGNIFY THE THING BY BRINGING CLARITY TO THE THING ~(Isa42:21) ~ The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness' sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable. Magnifying the law then perfects it - hence renews its look. So apparently, the 600-plus laws still stand - but it however now has a new look because the law is now in its Fulfilled, Magnified and Clarified State. Rather than doing away with God's eternal law, we are to get ourselves acquainted with this new look of The Magnified Law.2) The wrong belief that there are 2 disconnected testaments of the Gospel - Christians believe that there are 2 separate testaments of the Gospel (the old and the new) because they mix the words of God with that of man (Heb8:13, 10:9), when the fact is that there is only one testament: the original testament but Magnified, Clarified and Perfected by Christ - hence renewed: NOT ABOLISHED. Both testaments are actually connected as ONE. And it is easy to prove that both the Old Testament and the New Testament are truly connected as One Original Testament. Notice that though the Old Testament is signified and formalized by circumcision (Acts 7:8), and the New Testament on the other hand is signified and formalized by keeping the Sabbath day (Exo31:16-17; Ezek20:12), one can yet break the entire Mosaic Law (and render the keeping of the Sabbath day useless) just by refusing to keep the command of circumcision (John7:23). Thus, by breaking the old, we break the new as well. This is how we get to confirm that both the Old Testament and the new - are truly connected as One Original Testament.3) The wrong belief that the 10 commandments is disconnected from The Mosaic Law - Christians believe that the 10 commandments is separate from the 600-plus Old Testament laws, when the fact is that the 10 commandments is only the 10-point summary of the 600-plus laws of God. While the one-point summary of the Law in one word: is Love (Matt22:37-38), the 10-point summary or the Law in 10 statements: is the 10 commandments. And just as the one-point summary (love) does not abolish the 10-point summary (the 10 commandments), so does the 10-point summary not abolish the Law itself. The 1-point and 10-point summaries - are all pointing to the same one thing: they are all trying to EXPLAIN, MAGNIFY AND GIVE CLARITY to the 600-plus eternal laws of God - which themselves cannot be abolished, because it is by their very existence - that order is maintained in creation.4) The wrong belief that the office of apostleship is open to all - Christians believe that the office of Apostleship is ever open to all and that Paul is the head of it, when the fact is that the office is closed at 12 and Peter is the true head hence the greatest apostle.5) The wrong belief that the works of the law is dispensable - Christians believe that salvation is finished at conversion and so works play no part, when the fact is that salvation must be maintained to the end ~(Matt24:13) ~ But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. To stay saved to the end, we are to employ nothing else but the expected works of love: which is the works of the very Magnified Law the brethren (in ignorance) have taken to be abolished.6) The ignorance of the fact that we only have to keep 3 basic laws today: not 600-plus - Christians wrongly believe that the believers are AT EVERY SINGLE TIME required to maintain salvation by keeping all the 600-plus tenets of the law. They have this wrong belief because they do not really understand the law: Christians do not know that The Mosaic Law is divided into 3 parts: The Personal Laws, The Cultural Laws, and The National Laws (This in no way refers to the wrong categorization - deceptively fabricated by the Roman Christians of Paul as: moral, ceremonial and civil laws). Hence, as long as the believers are not numerous enough to form a cultural cluster (like the biblical Jews did in Israel), and as long as we're not in political control of our nation (as the Jews once were over Israel), then there is PRACTICALLY no need to keep both the cultural and the national laws. We're therefore left with only the personal laws - to keep, and the personal laws are simple because they only require 3 things: the personal laws only require us to RIGHTLY keep the 10 commandments, the dietary laws, and the 7 feast-holydays of the Lord.

Hosea 4:6
My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shall be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

• Chevron Up

• Chevron Down

12 Groups of Questions

that expose the 12 apostasies of the 3 Churches:
Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy & Protestantism

1.The Gospel

1) If the Father said He was going to one day magnify the law (Isa42:21); ¹how then did the Church get ABOLITION out of MAGNIFICATION?2) If Paul says God is the same yesterday, today and forever (Heb13:8), ²why then would he turn around and say: the Law as given by God yesterday is faulty - and so needs to be replaced with a new one today (Heb8:7)?3) If the law has truly been abolished, and if the Church is correct that the grace of the Gospel possesses no law to it, and if we're no longer required to keep the Saturday Sabbath, the dietary laws, the 7 feast-holydays of God, and the law of circumcision (amongst others), ³what then did Christ mean when he said we should "think not that he has come to abolish the law (Matt5:17)''? ⁴And why did the 12 Apostles all COMPULSORILY keep the above laws as respectively seen in (Acts13:42,44; 17:2; 18:4), (Acts10:14), (Acts18:21) and (Acts21:21-24)?4) If the law is done away with (Eph2:15) and we're now meant to follow the spirit (as Christians like to say) rather than follow the law, ⁵why then does it say in (Ezek36:26-27) that THE SPIRIT CAUSES US TO FOLLOW THE LAW? ⁶And why did (Prov4:2) say: good doctrine is that which requires the keeping of the law?5) God made a covenant with Noah (in the Mosaic-law-bound old covenant) not to destroy the earth with water anymore, and the sign of this covenant was a rainbow (Gen9:13-17). If the Church says the law is truly done away with - because the New Covenant of Christ abolished the Old Covenant (which is inclusive of Noah’s covenant), ⁷why then do we still see the rainbow today?6) If the covenant with Abraham - bound by the sign of circumcision (Gen17:11; Acts7:8) has also been abolished since it is contained in The Mosaic Law which the Church says is abolished, ⁸why then does the Church ironically still circumcise boys today?7) And if the scripture says: not circumcising our boys is to break The Mosaic Law (John7:23), ⁹why then does the Church WHICH STILL CIRCUMCISES HER BOYS ON THE 8TH DAY yet claim that The Mosaic Law has been abolished?CONCLUSION: So there are 2 kinds of Gospels spoken about in the Bible: that of God with law, and that of Paul which is lawless.

The hidden meaning behind the 7 questions:

The Church is the people - not a building one must enter every Sunday
Marriage has always been a family business - not a Church event
Saturdays are not for weddings - Saturday is the Sabbath day
Fulfilling the law - does not necessarily abolish it
There's yet a FULFILLED law to be kept

How this apostasy keeps us far away from salvation:

Believing in a gospel without laws - is claiming you love your wife or your children but yet refusing to prove this with expected works of love. It is listening to Paul above Christ, and throwing away the eternal life that Paul does not have, but that is rather only present in Christ.

Take your time to meditate on this:
unlock all related posts below and leave comments
by subscribing to the private members-group on Substack.

2.The Virgin Birth

If Christ did not have a virgin-birth, but rather was the son of Joseph (as today's Ebionites and some others say), ¹⁰why then was Joseph scared to continue to be with HIS OWN BETROTHED when he realised she was pregnant? Is he supposed to be scared of a wife he impregnated? (Matt1:20) ~ But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost).CONCLUSION: Apparently, there are 2 biblical narratives that can be drawn concerning the birth of the Christ: that which has him born of God (Matt16:16) and that which has him born of Joseph (Rom2:16, 16-25, 2Tim2:8, 1Tim1:11, 1Tim1:16) and (Gal6:14).Christ said in pain - that he wasn't received, even if he came in his Father's name (was sent AND BEGOTTEN by the Father), yet the people will accept the one that comes of his own accord (John5:43 ~ I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive), and Paul happens to fulfil this prophecy by exposing his ego to be the authority by which he spoke: personalising the Gospel to himself, and calling it "HIS Gospel" (Rom2:16, 16:25; 2Tim2:8), saying the Gospel was committed to "HIS trust" (1Tim1:11), and also speaking too highly of himself as if he was Christ (Gal6:14 ~ But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world). And also saying ''that God made him the role-model (rather than Christ) to all that may believe (1Tim1:16).If Paul can assume the position of the Christ in this manner, then he is nullifying the sacredness that surrounds the birth of the Messiah, and implying that the Messiah is only but an ordinary man. Hence, implying that any Tom, Dick and Harry could do exactly what he did: without having to necessarily be immaculately born.

The hidden meaning behind the question:

There's nothing immaculate about Mary like the Roman Catholics think
Only Christ was born immaculately - which qualified him to save us
And Christ is not the Almighty, because God cannot be born

How this apostasy keeps us far away from salvation:

Believing that Christ was not born of a virgin - is listening to Paul above Christ. It is inferring that Christ has a human father, and that he therefore isn't qualified to redeem mankind with his blood. By this belief, we rob ourselves of the eternal life that Paul does not have, but that is rather only present in the immaculately born Christ.

Take your time to meditate on this:
unlock all related posts below and leave comments
by subscribing to the private members-group on Substack.

3.Apostleship

1) If the Church is correct that "the number of apostles isn't supposed to be fixed at 12 but could be any number", ¹¹why then was Mathias chosen to REPLACE Judas when the later was lost (Acts1:26) instead of carrying on with just the 11 apostles available?2) If the office of apostleship wasn't closed at 12, ¹²why does the wall of New Jerusalem have only 12 gates - with the names of the 12 Apostles written on them (Rev21:12)? ¹³And why does the city have only 12 foundations - with the names of the 12 Apostles written on them (Rev21:14)? ¹⁴And why did Christ say the Apostles would sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel in the millennial reign (Matt19:28)?3) If scripture proves that there is space for only 12 Apostles (Rev21:12; 21:14, Matt19:28), ¹⁵how then is Paul an apostle?4) If Peter was personally appointed: the head apostle by the Messiah himself and was given the key of the Kingdom (Matt16:18-1, John21:15-17), and if Paul is supposed to be a true apostle of the Messiah, ¹⁶why then didn't he meet Peter's qualification to become one (Acts1:21-26)?5) If Paul was truly meant to become the 13th apostle to carry-on the Gospel to the Gentiles, ¹⁷why then did Peter contradict him (in the same Bible) by saying "God declared that by his own mouth (Peter's) shall the Gentiles hear the Gospel (Acts15:7)?6) If the Church is correct that the word ''Apostle'' merely means ''to be sent out'' rather than ''to be SPECIFICALLY sent'', ¹⁸why then weren't the 72 disciples also ''SENT OUT'' in (Luke10:1) equally called apostles?7) Paul tells his one conversion story 3 times in the scriptures (Acts9:1-19; 22:1-21; 26:13-32), and every time he does, this one story is not consistent. A number of 7 discrepancies can be observed in his stories but we can only reveal 5 here. (1) Did the men with him hear the voice according to account 1 (Acts9:7) or did they not hear any voice according to account 2 (Acts22:9)? (2) Did the men with him see the light according to account 2 (Acts22:9) or did they not see any man according to account 1 (Acts9:7)? (3) Did the men with him stand speechless according to account 1 (Acts9:7) or did they fall to the ground according to account 3 (Acts26:14)? (4) Paul claimed that the men also fell with him to the ground (Acts26:14), but how could Paul have known that the men with him fell too if he was supposed to have gone blind according to account 1 (Acts9:8) and 2 (Acts 22:11)? (5) Did the Messiah ask him to go into the city to be later told what to do according to account 1 (Acts9:6) and 2 (Acts22:10) or did the Messiah tell him straight away exactly what to do, consequently assigning him to be the messenger to the Gentiles according to account 3 (Acts26:16-18)? If the 4 biblical accounts of the life of Christ written by four different men yet aligns perfectly, ¹⁹then why can't one man reporting an event surrounding his own very self - yet get his story straight?8) If God requires the testimony of at least 2 witnesses to establish all things (Deut17:6, Matt18:16, John8:17-18), and if the Almighty God Himself kept His own law and provided at least 2 witnesses to behold the establishment of the messiahship of His son (His voice representing his personal self as the Father and His dove-form representing his hidden self as the Holyspirit), ²⁰why then couldn't Paul provide even a single witness (from the crowd of the soldiers who he claimed accompanied him) to testify to the fact that his conversion experience really happened? If Paul himself also agreed that all things must be established in the presence of at least 2 witnesses (1Tim5:19, 2Cor13:1, Heb10:28), ²¹why then couldn't he keep his own word to righteously establish his conversion story - but yet expects us to believe him?CONCLUSION: So there are 2 kinds of apostleship spoken about in the Bible: that of Christ which stops at 12, and that of Paul which is limitless.

The hidden meaning behind the 8 questions:

As the head apostle, Peter laid down the qualification for apostleship
The number of apostles is to be fixed at 12 - not 11 or 13
Mathias (not Paul) qualified to replace Judas

How this apostasy keeps us far away from salvation:

Believing that there are more than 12 Apostles - is listening to Paul above Christ, and throwing away the salvation that Paul does not have, but that is rather only present in Christ.

Take your time to meditate on this:
unlock all related posts below and leave comments
by subscribing to the private members-group on Substack.

4.The Holyday-Calendar

1) If it is true that the Babylonian luni-solar calendar used by the Jews (as endorsed by the Pharisees) supersedes the "purely solar one" of God (as revealed through Enoch), ²²why then did Christ choose Enoch's over that of the Pharisees? So that both he and his apostles ate their Passover (the last supper Matt26:19) a day before the Jews ate theirs (John18:28) (even as the Passover of 30AD fell on a Tuesday - i.e. 1 day before Passover on the Pharisee-approved Babylonian luni-solar calendar in 30AD when Christ was crucified)?2) And if the Messiah was prophesied to be cut off (killed) in the middle of the week (Dan9:27) which of course is "WEDNESDAY", ²³how then does Friday become the day Christ died as acclaimed by the Church? Keeping it at the back of our minds that "the sign of Jonah" was the ONLY proof Christ personally gave us for use to validate his messiahship (Matt12:40), and also keeping it at the back of our minds that "Wednesday evening to Saturday morning" is more befitting to be called 3days and 3nights - than "good Friday to Easter Sunday".CONCLUSION: So there are 2 kinds of Calendar systems spoken about in the Bible: the sacred kind of God used to keep His compulsory Feast-holidays, and the secular kind of Paul that only tracks day and night without giving regard to God's holidays.

The hidden meaning behind the 2 questions:

Enoch's 364-day calendar is God's calendar for marking spiritual days
In this calendar, Christ died on a Wednesday and rose on Saturday
This proves that Easter is a pagan tradition

How this apostasy keeps us far away from salvation:

Refusing to acknowledge the sacred calendar - is listening to Paul above God. It is abolishing the fulfilled law of God for we are throwing away the one key that makes it possible for us to seal our salvation by the keeping of God's laws (precisely the Sabbaths and the Feast-holydays).

Take your time to meditate on this:
unlock all related posts below and leave comments
by subscribing to the private members-group on Substack.

5.Speaking in Tongues

1) If the Church is correct that "speaking in tongues is indeed the one expression that proves that one has received the Holyspirit, and that speaking in tongues also - is intricately tied to a Holyspirit baptism, ²⁴why then did the 12 Apostles not speak in tongues immediately after Christ blew upon them the Holyspirit in (John20:22), but instead were only able to receive it on a later date - when it manifested powerfully on the day of Pentecost (Acts2:1-4)? Does it mean that the Apostles didn't really receive the Holyspirit in (John20:22) but received something else?2) If the people who heard the 12 Apostles speak - could unaidedly hear for themselves exactly what was said (Acts2:8-11) without NECESSARILY needing any interpreter as the so-called 13th apostle commanded (1Cor14:13; 27-28), ²⁵how come then don't we all miraculously hear our different personal languages when these tongue-speakers of today speak their own tongues? And why do they SPECIALLY need interpreters to make us understand what they're saying?3) And if scripture proves that the gift of speaking in tongues COULD ONLY BE TRANSFERRED BY THE HANDS OF THE 12 APOSTLES ALONE (Acts8:18; 6:1-6; 8:5-17) even as proven by the fact that Philip (who was one of the 7 men the Apostles laid hands on) - could not himself transfer this ability to the souls he converted and baptised in his evangelic mission at Samaria, but had to send for Peter and John (who had to PAINSTAKINGLY travel from Jerusalem to Samaria to do what Philip seemed not to be empowered to do (Acts8:5-17)), ²⁶how then did these Christians of today receive their own power to speak in tongues?CONCLUSION: So there are 2 kinds of Tongues spoken about in the Bible: that of the 12 which is of real languages, and that of Paul which is gibberish - needing interpretation.

The hidden meaning behind the 3 questions:

God's gift of tongues is not gibberish but features REAL LANGUAGES
And it is not a compulsory bestowment on everyone baptised
It is a gift of the Holyspirit given to boost evangelism
But the gift ended with the first-generation believers
Because only the 12 Apostles could transfer it

How this apostasy keeps us far away from salvation:

Believing in the speaking of gibberish tongues - is listening to Paul above Christ and his 12, and throwing away the salvation that Paul does not have, but that is rather only present in Christ.

Take your time to meditate on this:
unlock all related posts below and leave comments
by subscribing to the private members-group on Substack.

6.Baptism

1) If one only qualifies to be baptised because they confess belief in Christ (Acts2:38, Mark16:16), ²⁷why then do Roman Catholics baptise children who are obviously not yet mature enough to choose a side?2) If baptism is from the Greek ''baptizo'' which means TO IMMERSE, and if it is also true that all baptisms mentioned in the Bible are of immersion (John3:23, Matt3:16 and Acts8:38), ²⁸why then do Roman Catholics baptise people by pouring and sprinkling?3) If scripture proves (as even Paul says (Eph4:5)) that there is only one baptism, and if the baptism of the followers of John the Baptist - who all moved on to follow Jesus - was sufficient enough to not require them to receive another baptism under Jesus (John1:34-42) FOR WHATEVER REASON, ²⁹why then did Paul turn around to speak about the DOCTRINES of baptism: insinuating that there are more than one (Heb6:1-2), ³⁰and why did he mandate John-baptised and believing-disciples of Jesus to receive another baptism under himself (Acts19:2-6) which this time - was to cause them to COMPULSORILY speak in his own gibberish kind of tongues that need interpretation (1Cor14:13; 27-28) unlike those of the 12 Apostles which were self-interpreted by the hearers themselves because they were indeed real native languages (Acts2:8-11)?4) And if it is said that the 7 men chosen to be laid hands upon (to impart in them the gift of speaking in tongues of course) in (Acts6:3-5) were actually already filled with the Holyspirit (of course from water baptism) before they were laid hands upon, does it not then imply that water baptism actually automatically ushers the indwelling of the Holyspirit? If this is true, ³¹why then does the Church teach that converts need a second baptism called "the baptism of the Holyspirit" to possibly receive the indwelling of the Holyspirit?CONCLUSION: So there are 2 kinds of Baptism spoken about in the Bible: that of Christ which is of water and which ushers the indwelling Holyspirit and is signed by no necessary tongue-speaking, and that of Paul which requires the laying on of hands ''after water baptism'' - to impact the indwelling Holyspirit, and which is signed by compulsory gibberish tongue-speaking.

The hidden meaning behind the 4 questions:

After Pentecost, water baptism began to usher in the indwelling Holyspirit
To qualify for baptism (by immersion) one must confess belief in Christ
A separate Holyspirit-baptism is an apostasy

How this apostasy keeps us far away from salvation:

Believing in a separate baptism of the Holyspirit that is different from water baptism - is listening to Paul above Christ, and throwing away the salvation that Paul does not have, but that is rather only present in Christ.

Take your time to meditate on this:
unlock all related posts below and leave comments
by subscribing to the private members-group on Substack.

7.The Trinity

1) If Yahushua said his Father (Yahuah) is greater than himself (John14:28), ³²why would Paul say Christ is equal to the Father (Phil2:5-6)? ³³Why would he say Jesus was equal to the Father in heaven but only took the form of a servant on earth (Phil2:6-7)? ³⁴And why would he proceed to speak of God as a Godhead (1Cor2:9) even after professing that God is one (Eph4:6)? ³⁵Why yet speak of a Godhead if God is indeed one?2) If Christ did found the Church upon the true confession Peter made about his spiritual identity (Matt16:13-20), we are therefore certain that it was Peter who best understood the person of Christ. So if the Church is right that Jesus is the same person as the Father, ³⁶why then did Peter (whose understanding of divinity had already been certified most true by Christ himself) address Jesus and the Father as 2 different persons instead of one, ³⁷and why did he yet refer to the Father as the God of Jesus (1Pet1:3)?3) If the Church is correct that "God-the-Father is not the same ONE as the Holyspirit: contrary to what He personally confessed to Moses (Deut6:4)", and if the Holyspirit is truly someone different from the person of the Father as the Church claims, and if it is only right that all individual persons must have their own separate name that identifies them from the rest, ³⁸why then doesn't the Holyspirit have his own personal name as does both the Father (Yahuah) and the Son (Yahushua)?4) ³⁹And why is he excluded from the greetings in the epistles of the head apostle: Peter (1Pet1:3; 2Pet1:2), ⁴⁰as well as in all the greetings in the epistles of the man the Church takes as the greatest apostle (Rom1:7; 1Cor1:3; 2Cor1:2; Gal1:3; Eph1:2; Php1:2; Col1:2; 1Thes1:1; 2Thes1:2; 1Tim1:2; 2Tim1:2; Tit1:1; Phil1:3 and Heb1:1-2)?5) And if Christ was truly God the Father (who alone is all-knowing), when the woman with the issue of blood touched him to get her healing, ⁴¹why couldn't Christ tell who touched him but instead had to ask ''who touched me?'' (Luke8:45-46). How can Christ be God - and not be omniscient?6) If the Church is right that Yahushua and Yahuah are actually the same one person, then when the mother of Zebedee's children asked that her 2 sons may sit at the right and left of Christ in heaven (Matt20:20-23), ⁴²why did Christ say to her that it was only the Father that could decide on such matter? If Jesus was himself - the Father, didn't he therefore just tell the woman a lie there?7) If the Church is correct that "Yahushua is LITERALLY the same person as God-the-Father", ⁴³wasn't Christ therefore lying when he said only his Father knew the date of his second coming? (Matt24:36) ~ But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only). And if he lied back there, ⁴⁴how then was he able to yet die SINLESS: for us to possibly be saved today?CONCLUSION: So there are 2 descriptions of the nature of God spoken about in the Bible: that of Peter which has the Father as greater than the Son but working perfectly through him (unequal 2 as perfect 1), and that of Paul which has Jesus equal with the Father (equal 2 in 1).

The hidden meaning behind the 7 questions:

The Father is most-holy & also Spirit so he becomes the Holyspirit
God is one person (Yahuah) - who later begot a son (Yahushua)
We don't pray to Jesus, but to the Father - through the Son
It's 1-God revealed by Yahushua, not 3-persons in 1-God
Neither God nor man is a trinity

How this apostasy keeps us far away from salvation:

Believing in the false doctrine of the Trinity - is vexing the jealous God and causing Him to hide his salvation from us because we are sharing his glory with other beings. It is listening to Paul above Christ, and throwing away the salvation that Paul does not have, but that is rather only present in Christ.

Take your time to meditate on this:
unlock all related posts below and leave comments
by subscribing to the private members-group on Substack.

8.The Nature of Man

If the Church is correct that "SPIRIT and SOUL do not refer to the same one thing called CONSCIOUSNESS", and if the Church is right that "man is a tripartite being (simply because God - in whose image we were made - is himself tripartite: as they say), when the Church eventually learnt from scripture that: THE FATHER ALSO HAS A SOUL IN ADDITION TO HIS SPIRIT (Matt12:18) ~ Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom MY SOUL is well pleased: I will put MY SPIRIT upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles), ⁴⁵why then didn't they add SOUL as the 4th person of the Godhead so that the Trinity becomes updated to a Quartet of: Father, Son, HolySPIRIT and SOUL)?CONCLUSION: So there are 2 descriptions of the nature of man spoken about in the Bible: the unequal 2 as perfect 1-type of Peter which speaks of the more powerful spiritual and mental soul (a type of the Father) working perfectly through the less powerful body (a type of the son), and the equal many in 1-type of Paul (spirit with soul living in a body) which though should indicate that the innerman and the bodyman are equal - is yet not a rational concession, seeing that our bodyman is kept alive by our innerman (exactly how the Father keeps the Son alive) so that - the body consequently cannot possibly be equal to our innerman.

The hidden meaning behind the question:

Man is one personal man (soul) - who is reflected as matter (body)
Since the soul is spiritual in nature - soul becomes same as spirit
Man is not 3-in-1, he is spiritual soul revealed as body
Neither man nor God is a trinity

How this apostasy keeps us far away from salvation:

Believing in the false tripartite nature of man - is listening to Paul and man above God. It is killing our knowledge of self, and also corrupting the very nature of God in whose image we were formed. By this belief, we lose alignment with the being of God and so cannot establish a good enough hold unto his salvation.

Take your time to meditate on this:
unlock all related posts below and leave comments
by subscribing to the private members-group on Substack.

9.The Rapture

1) If the Church is correct that "the rapture really refers to the taking up of the entire Church into heaven (as Paul said) so they do not see the great tribulation", ⁴⁶why then does the scripture speak of the FAITHFUL REMNANTS (Rev12:17) - who are all to be left behind to continue to keep the commandments of God: even after the man child had been caught-up/raptured into heaven (Rev12:5)?2) If it is true that the entire Church and saints are raptured to heaven, ⁴⁷who then are these so-called "REMNANT of believers" left behind to give glory to God - even after the rapturing of the man child, and even after the great earthquake of the great tribulation had hit the land (Rev11:13)? Or do sinners have the habit of giving glory to God?CONCLUSION: So there are 2 descriptions of the Rapture spoken about in the Bible: that of Christ which only involves 2 groups of 144 thousand people, and that of Paul which involves the whole Church.

The hidden meaning behind the 2 questions:

The entire Church won't be saved from tribulation like the Church thinks
Only 2 groups of the body of Christ have been prepared to be raptured
Every believer should investigate what group they belong to

How this apostasy keeps us far away from salvation:

Believing in the rapture of the entire church - is listening to Paul above Christ, and therefore becoming spiritually and physically ill-prepared to receive the salvation only Christ can give.

Take your time to meditate on this:
unlock all related posts below and leave comments
by subscribing to the private members-group on Substack.

10.Tithe

1) If tithes were given to the Levite-priests because they had no inheritance (Num18:24), and to the poor because they had nothing (Deut14:28-29; 16:12-15; Amos4:4; Tobith1:7-8), ⁴⁸why then do Pastors with inheritances and even jobs today demand for tithe?2) If Pastors unscripturally insist that they have today replaced the Levites, ⁴⁹why then don't they pay "a tithe of these tithes" they receive to the Highpriest (who today is the Messiah - who is presently in heaven), exactly as was commanded by God for them to do (Num18:25-30)?3) If tithe is SCRIPTURALLY food and not money (Lev27:30&32; Deut14:22; 2Chron31:5-6; Neh13:12), ⁵⁰why then doesn't the Church collect foodstuffs today as tithe? And if God himself has commanded that we should not add to, or remove from his word (Deut12:32), ⁵¹who then gave the Church the authority to change tithe from being food to money (assuming they were even supposed to collect tithes in the first place)?4) If the Church is not dubiously ONLY interested in our money, ⁵²why are the 2nd and 3rd type of tithe (which technically can be eaten by the tither himself (Deut14:28-29; 16:12-15; Amos4:4; Tobith1:7-8) not preached about today? ⁵³Why do they only hammer on the 1st type of tithe - which used to require 10% to be given to the Levite-priests in the temple (Num18:21-24)?5) And if the tithe of Abraham and of Jacob were clearly voluntary as respectively proven in (Gen14:18-20) and (Gen28:20-22), and if the only compulsory tithe existent is dependent on the same Mosaic Law (Lev27:30-34) the Church tirelessly insists has been done away with, ⁵⁴why then do Pastors still demand for tithes?CONCLUSION: So there are 2 kinds of Tithes spoken about in the Bible: that of God which is basically food to help take care of the needy, and that of Paul which is basically money to help take care of Pastors.

The hidden meaning behind the 5 questions:

It is not necessarily a sin to pay tithes to a Church or to a Pastor
But it is an indirect way to partake in, and encourage sin
Because it sponsors the 12 apostasies of the Church

How this apostasy keeps us far away from salvation:

Paying money tithes to Pastors - is listening to Paul and man above God, and helping antichrists sponsor the 12 apostasies of the Church. By doing this, we indirectly relinquish our endorsement for the word of God, the law God, and the salvation of God.

Take your time to meditate on this:
unlock all related posts below and leave comments
by subscribing to the private members-group on Substack.

11.The Ethnicity of Christ

1) ⁵⁵If Solomon's wife revealed that she was black (Songs1:6 ~ Look not upon me, because I am black...) and Solomon white (Songs5:10 ~ My beloved is white and ruddy...).2) ⁵⁶And if the scripture revealed that King David - the father of Solomon - was also white (1Sam17:42 ~ And when the Philistine looked about, and saw David, he disdained him: for he was but a youth, and ruddy, and of a fair countenance...).3) ⁵⁷And if the scripture revealed that the Israelites were generally white (Lam4:7 ~ Her Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than rubies, their polishing was of sapphire...).4) ⁵⁸And if the scripture revealed that the Israelites were only categorically white but were realistically olive (Num12).5) ⁵⁹And if the scripture revealed that the Israelites overtime - mingled with other races and eventually became a mixed multitude (Exo12:38 ~ And a mixed multitude went up also with them...).6) ⁶⁰And if the scripture revealed that out of the entire black race, it was only Canaan (black natives of West Africa) that was cursed - to be a servant of servants - (Gen9:25 ~ Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren...), (Gen9:26 ~ Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant...), (Gen9:27 ~ God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant...).7) And if the scripture describes the risen Christ as having brass skin (Rev1:15 ~ And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace...), ⁶¹why then do the Black Hebrew Israelites insist that Christ was a black man - forgetting that the skin tone of the middle-eastern men are more BRASS than that of the Africans: whose skin tone are more BLACK, also forgetting that the fore-fathers of Christ were themselves not black, and forgetting that even these non-black ancient Israelites had yet mingled with the other races of the world to become a mixed-multitude today?CONCLUSION: If the above 7 points prove that Christ was neither white nor black but was brass and rather came to die for all the races of mankind, ⁶²why then do the Black Hebrew Israelites teach that salvation belong only to the Blacks ⁶³and why do the Mormons teach that Salvation belong only to the Whites?

The hidden meaning behind the 7 questions:

The Israelites (David & Solomon) are realistically olive-skinned
But have become brass-skinned after mingling with the races
The black race is not cursed - only the tribe of Canaan was
Salvation neither belongs to the Whites nor to the Blacks

How this apostasy keeps us far away from salvation:

Believing that salvation belongs to a particular race because Christ is of that particular race - is diminishing the power and love that inspired the painful sacrifice Christ made to save the whole world from death. By believing this, we become racist and hateful enough to not be able to possibly hold the love, grace and salvation of Christ.

Take your time to meditate on this:
unlock all related posts below and leave comments
by subscribing to the private members-group on Substack.

• Chevron Up

• Chevron Down

12.The Divinely-planted False Apostle

This single apostasy is so shocking and foundational:
that it has to be exposed in 7 levels of depth:

______________1. The ignored introductory back-story of Paul
2. With 13 prophecies: God already did expose Paul
3. In 41 irrefutable ways - Paul contradicts God in the Bible
4. What Paul really preaches but yet can't plainly say lest we unmask him
5. Paul is the author of the half-holiness that keeps us from being saved till the end
6. The early-church documents that exposed Paul: as excavated in the 19th century
7. Today's Christianity is Paulainity: since Paul alone commands 11of12 Apostasies

• Chevron Up

Level 1of7The ignored
introductory back-story of Paul

1) How Jewish spirituality (Mosaism) became compromised (as Judaism) before Jesus was born
The original plan of God for the earth is for civil (body) and religious (soul) matters to be coordinated by one law, and God chose Israel (located at the centre of the earth) to be the model-nation whose influence was to eventually spread out into the rest of the world. So religion and state was to be fused as one and controlled by one law: The Mosaic Law, but this plan of God is obviously only going to be possible in an independent, unconquered and uncolonized Israel.Unfortunately, in the times Jesus walked the earth (born in 5BC), Israel was under Roman colonisation (as Rome conquered Israel in 63BC) and Rome was the authority controlling the civil life of the Israelites but they left the Jewish religious affairs under the control of the Jews seeing that the Romans were themselves pagan sun god worshippers, the Jews couldn't however meter out capital punishment, which is why they had to present Jesus to Pontius Pilate the governor - to be condemned, instead of doing it themselves.At the time, the Jewish Religion was controlled by a system of government called the Sanhedrin: and this government was headed by the Highpriest. The Highpriest is the head of all the priests and by God's directive - he (just as all priests) had to be a descendant of Aaron. The Romans however couldn't possibly let the Jews run their religious government unchecked, so they installed a man of their choosing as Highpriest so they could gain covert control of Jewish spirituality. And this was how the Highpriest of Israel ceased from being of the bloodline of Aaron (as it should be), to being Rome-appointed. A man called Annas became the first Highpriest of Israel installed in 6BC by Rome, rather than by God (Luke3:2, John18:13, 24, Acts4:6).While he served as an illegitimate Highpriest, an Aaronic and legitimate Priest named Zechariah (whose wife was also of the daughter of Aaron (Luke1:5) worked under him. This man became the father of John the Baptist: who by right therefore - was to be the last Highpriest of Israel before Jesus dissolves the Aaronic priesthood and temple sacrifices with his Messianic covenant (John3:30). Jesus was to be our Highpriest, appointed under the order of Melchizedek (which means he did not earn it by blood but directly by God) (Gen14:18, Psm110:4). What are the odds that Jesus would later be baptised by the rightful Highpriest of Israel even if this Highpriest wasn't recognised by the religious institution of the time? So we have the last of the Highpriest, according to the order of Aaron, baptizing the Highpriest according to the order of Melchizedek. What a way to signal the transfer of authority from the old order of Aaron to the new order of Melchizedek.2) Romans as Edomites, and the true reason why Jesus despised the Pharisees and religious leaders of his time
Jacob (later renamed Israel) was blessed by the Father to be the lineage through which the Messiah would be born, but because Jacob stole this right from Esau through manipulation, Esau swore to forever be against Jacob, even God himself despised Esau because Esau did not see his birth right as a big deal: a bowl of food was worth more to him than to be the progenitor of the Messiah. But Jacob showed great reverence for the privilege: enough to scheme to get it. He however incurred upon himself the eternal wrath of Esau, because Esau's children (the Edomites) never forgave him and they vowed to war with the Israelites in general forever (Amos1:11). So even if Esau eventually slept in death, his children carried on this hatred and truly: they will carry it on - even till the end of the days. In other words, the arch enemy of Israel is Esau. This is why God has promised to cut them off forever (meaning they cannot be saved). In other words, neither the Pharisees nor Rome can be saved: (Oba1:10 ~ For thy violence against thy brother Jacob shame shall cover thee, and thou shalt be cut off for ever).It is a secret to many that the Romans are indeed Edomites. So though the Romans were sun-god worshippers (practicing Mithraism), they yet had a personal disdain for both the Jews and for their God. So though they left the Jews to freely practice their faith, they however took covert control of Jewish spirituality - not just by installing anyone there, but by installing their blood brothers: who happen to also be the arch enemy of the Jewish people - who would therefore not need any external motivation whatsoever to see to it that the people of God are surely oppressed and spiritually enslaved. So while the people of God were physically enslaved by Edom through Rome, they were spiritually enslaved by Edom through the Pharisees and the Sadducees.Jewish spirituality ceased to be one of righteousness because the Pharisees and religious leaders had made it a matter of money, power and respect: by bending, adulterating, washing down, and perverting the law of God to squeeze money and salvation out of the people, and John wanted nothing to do with the Edomite Sanhedrin. This is why John the Baptist secluded himself to the wilderness environs of Israel (Matt3:1-2, Isa40:3). John was the destined forerunner of Christ (Mal3:1). So he did not only teach the people Mosaism, he also prepared them for the coming of the Messianic covenant by being the one to introduce water baptism - which we have learnt is the sign of the Messianic covenant Christ was going to establish when he comes. Those who followed John became the group we call the Essenes.3) Why the Pharisees hated the law, but yet did not want the Levitical priesthood to end
By the time Jesus was born, 2 very influential groups had arisen within the Sanhedrin. They were the Pharisees and the Sadducees. To be a Sadducee is to be a less radical, more politically inclined and hence more wealthy Pharisee, and to be a Pharisee was to hold 3 offices as one, a Pharisee was actually a minister, a teacher and a lawyer all in one, hence, their words were held with higher esteem (than those of the Sadducees) by the Israelites back in the day when it came to matters concerning faith. But the religious leaders saw no need to uphold the righteousness of the law seeing that they themselves were not there as true bloodline Jews nor were they interested in anything that wouldn't put money in their pocket.The religious leaders therefore grew to despise the law of God, they hated the law of God because it gave the Jews too much liberty and window space for prosperity, and it reduced how much they could gain from the masses. This is why Jesus hated the Pharisees and the Sadducees to his bones and reserved the best of his woes for them (Matt23, 3:7, 12:22-45). He never for once hid his hatred for the religious leaders of his time but warned the people to exceed them in righteousness if they were to possibly enter the kingdom of heaven (Matt5:20).

4) As Judaism - the Law is a burden, but as Mosaism - the Law is liberty
Contrary to what Roman Christians today think, the law indeed ensures freedom, independence and equity even as God does everything by the laws of equity. The law stated among other things that all are equal and that no one person may oppress and exploit another, that all have right to be free and to be independent masters of their own fate. It was their constitution and bill of right. For example, every person is entitled as a matter of right to social security. This means that people are entitled to be supported by the community not only when they fall on hard times but also to maintain their dignity as independent breadwinners of their family. The community had to provide backup funds to those who needed them and they had to be provided as and when required to prevent people from being exploited through their needs, these funds had to be provided without charging interests and such loans were cancelled every 7th year if the borrower had been unable to pay them (Deut15, Exo21:2-6, Lev25:39-41, Jer34:14).The countless wealth (and this applies particularly to productive capital) belonged equally to all and had to be shared among everyone. This equal and fair distribution of the community's wealth were to be updated at regular intervals and the role of those who were rich seemed to be to help the poor and not to keep getting richer at the expense of the poor (poor tithe: Deut14:28-29, 16:12-15, Amos4:4, Tobith1:7-8. These are some of the many liberating mandates embodied by The Mosaic Law and these are the laws the religious leaders (who had to get rich) detested and changed to favour themselves thereby exploiting the people and getting rich off their oppression.5) God's Mosaism versus the Judaism of the Pharisees
The Edomite scribes had also edited the law overtime to suit their selfish desires by putting unwarranted emphasis on sacrifices of materials for remission of sins and thereby making the law spiritually and financially burdensome for the people to keep. Their version of the law became what we call Judaism today. But Jesus rather called this version of the law: vain traditions of men. So the religion we know as Judaism today does not really reflect what God intended for the Jews as encapsulated in the Mosaic covenant, Judaism is rather a corrupt version of Mosaism and Jesus calls it: mere traditions and commandments of men (Matt15:9). Hence, what we know as Judaism is a commandment of man, that of God is however called Mosaism. If you've ever wondered why Jesus hated the Pharisees even if they were known to be zealous for the law, this is the reason: they were not zealous for the law of Mosaism but for the law of Judaism, and these are 2 completely different things.By the time Jesus began his ministry at age 30 (26AD), Mosaism had greatly been compromised to an unbearable extent so that Jesus tried to reinstate the true intent and purpose of the law as Mosaism and have them applied correctly: Yahushua taught Mosaism and not the pharisaic Judaism, and this is exactly why both the Edomite religious government and the rich and powerful of the land rose against him and his true teachings of the law. So just like they rose against John the Baptist for teaching Mosaism, they rose against Jesus for doing same, hence it is clear that truly, Christ never came to do away with the law (Matt5:17), and this is where Paul comes in.6) Paul enters the scene
Paul’s father was a man of Jewish/Edomite blood but living in Tarsus, a city of rich people which was the capital of Cicilia - a Roman province in the southeast of Asia Minor. Tarsus was the seat of a famous university higher in reputation than the university of Athens and Alexandria - the only other that then existed. Paul’s father was married to a Roman woman who was a Roman government official so Paul’s father was both a Jew and yet a Roman citizen, he might have bought or won this privilege by a distinguished service to the Roman empire or acquired it in several other ways. Also notice how Paul happened to have been born as an Edomite: both by bloodline (through his father) and also by political status (directly through his mother and indirectly through his father).Tarsus was where Paul was born: making him a free-born (Acts23:28) and a full citizen of Rome but also possessing a dual citizenship with Israel because he had Jewish blood of the tribe of Benjamin (Phil3:9). So this is why Paul can both claim to be a Jew (Acts22:3) and also a Roman (Acts25:9-16, 22:25).Paul was born at about the same time as Jesus and his birth name was not Paul but was Saul which in Hebrew means "underworld". He clearly had ties and relations with the noble families and Herodians (the politicians) (Rom16:7, 11-12, 21), and he spent his youth in Tarsus enjoying the best of education. He learnt the trade of making tents from goat skin - a trade which was one of the commonest in Tarsus.7) Paul is sent to Jerusalem
Paul was later sent to Jerusalem to become a Pharisee. He became a pupil of Gamaliel (Acts22:3), Gamaliel was the grandson of Hillel (who Christ would have probably engaged philosophically at 12 when he did amaze the religious leaders with his wisdom (Luke2:46-47) and he was the leader of the whole Pharisee party then so Paul was having the best of education even there in Jerusalem too but unfortunately from the wisdom of a man who sought to corrupt the law for gain. It is clear that Paul would have been a grown man here because Gamaliel was a teacher of advanced studies and not a teacher of children.After his study-life, he probably left to Tarsus where he may have been engaged in connection with some synagogues for some years but we find him back again at Jerusalem shortly after the death of Jesus at the site where Stephen was stoned to death (Acts22:20), he was doing what any Pharisee at that time would do which is persecute the disciples of the man who claimed to be one with God and who wanted to dissolve the Levitical priesthood that was fetching them so much money. It must have been at this time that he learnt of the life and works of Jesus.8) Paul begins active work as a Pharisee - persecuting the Natsarim
He entered houses after houses, seized men and women sending them to prison (Acts8:3). He couldn’t have been entering houses to houses, seizing men and women and sending them to prison merely by his individual power for this can only be done by some kind of official order and authority and the scriptures make it clear who Paul’s authority was, it was of course the Edomite religious government of the Jews led by the Highpriest and president of the Sanhedrin (Acts9:1-2, 26:10). By the time Stephen was killed, we are certain that Paul was a member of the great Sanhedrin because the phrase he used in (Acts26:10) while talking to Agrippa “gave my voice against them” goes to show that he had a say, a voice, an opinion to condemn or free the victims. This phrase is referring to a voting. It can only refer to a voting of the Sanhedrin or a council of elders which was convened to try capital cases so that Paul must have been a member of the great Sanhedrin and an active Pharisee in the time of the early-church.9) Paul changes tactics and wears the clothing of Natsarim
As a result of all the persecution the Natsarim were facing, majority of them had to flee to Damascus (which was the last safe place at the time) to take refuge and Paul in his desperate hatred for the believers, had to go take permission from the Highpriest so he could go after this believers (Acts9:1-2) and this is the point where he seems to stop telling us the truth and begins to lie beginning with his conversion story which the Natsarim later discovered to be a lie (even as we will reveal soon). This was done so as to infiltrate the faith from the inside with the aim to "attack God the Son and the gospel he preached" while Gamaliel was to continue destroying Mosaism as a Jew - "attacking God the father and His law".This is no child’s play, it was carefully planned by the Edomite religious power of Israel. The plan was to destroy both Mosaism and the Natsarim way of life. So knowing that they had secured the fall of the Jews who themselves had proven their allegiance by giving up their Messiah to the enemy to be killed (Mark15:1-15), the Sanhedrin sent Paul out to go get a satanic grip on the Natsarim, and on anyone at all who would accept Jesus as Messiah. This way, they could destroy both Mosaism (with Judaism) and the Natsarim way (with Christianity).This last apostasy of the Church would show how Paul is indeed a (Benjamite) wolf borrowed from the underworld and given a sheep clothing by the Roman-Pharisaic alliance who he secretly worked for. Paul was a secret government agent just like the religious leaders of the Sanhedrin were secret government officials and like Jesus told us, their mission was to steal salvation from the people (Matt23:13 ~ But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in). He changed his name to Paul so as to hide his true identity, and to continue the diabolic mission of all Pharisees which is to rob believers of their salvation (Matt23:13). And to execute this undercover mission of his, Paul chose double-speech as his weapon of engagement. The rest of the 6 levels of this part would shine the brightest light most have ever seen on the 2-faced identity of the double-agent called Paul. So sit back, relax, and discover the biggest lie of Roman Christianity the Church does not want us to know.

• Chevron Up

Level 2of7With 13 prophecies:
God already did expose Paul

1) ⁶⁴If Jacob prophesied on his sons - revealing how their respective tribes would influence the last days (Gen49:1 ~ And Jacob called his sons and said, Gather together, that I may tell you what shall befall you in the last days: Gather together and hear, you sons of Jacob, and listen to Israel your father).2) ⁶⁵And if Jacob prophesied that Benjamin would be a wolf that will devour the sheep in the last days (Gen49:27 ~ Benjamin shall ravin as a wolf: in the morning he shall devour the prey, and at night he shall divide the spoil).3) ⁶⁶And if Christ: who was born at the inception of the last days - warned us to beware of wolves dressed as sheep (Matt7:15 ~ Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves).4) ⁶⁷And if Paul shows up 3 and a half years after the resurrection of Christ (in 34AD) to announce himself as one from the tribe of Benjamin (Rom11:1 ~ I am of the tribe of Benjamin).5) ⁶⁸And if Paul-the-Benjamite began his ministry by first killing the first believers known as the NATSARIM (Acts7:58-59), and also became responsible for dividing the spoil (into sect-groups as prophesied) by being responsible for the denominational divisions of Christianity: first into Roman Catholicism, and then into the daughter Churches (1Cor11:19 ~ There must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized).6) ⁶⁹And if Christ warned us to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the leaven of Herod (Mark18:15), and we find Paul proudly announcing Herod to be his kinsman in (Rom16:11 ~ Salute Herodion my kinsman. Greet them that be of the household of Narcissus, which are in the Lord), and also dividing the spoil of the NATSARIM into sects as an unrepentant Pharisee that he was - EVEN WHILE PRETENDING TO BE A SHEEP (Acts23:6 ~ But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question).7) ⁷⁰And if Christ warned us not to believe anyone who says they saw him in the wilderness (Matt24:26 ~ Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not), and Paul happens to confess that after his conversion (on seeing Christ on his way to Damascus), he proceeded to Arabia (which is inclusive of Damascus and the surrounding desert) and lived secludedly for 3 years before showing himself to the Israelites (Gal1:17 ~ Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus).8) ⁷¹And if Christ said in pain - that he wasn't received, even if he came in his Father's name (was sent AND BEGOTTEN by the Father), yet the people will accept the one that comes of his own accord (John5:43 ~ I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive), and Paul happens to fulfil this prophecy by exposing his ego to be the authority by which he spoke: personalising the Gospel to himself, and calling it "HIS Gospel" (Rom2:16, 16:25; 2Tim2:8), saying the Gospel was committed to "HIS trust" (1Tim1:11), and also speaking too highly of himself as if he was Christ (Gal6:14 ~ But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world). And also saying ''that God made him the role-model (rather than Christ) to all that may believe (1Tim1:16).9) ⁷²And if Christ says in (Rev2:2) that the Ephesians have tested apostle and found them to be liars, and we know Paul to be the one to start the Church in Ephesus (Acts18:19-20:16-18, Eph1:1).10) ⁷³And if Christ rebuked a woman from Thyatira called Jezebel who taught false doctrines causing the people to commit adultery by eating foods sacrificed to idols (Rev2:18-24), and Paul (who wrongly teaches that eating foods sacrificed to idols is okay on some conditions (1Cor8:1-13, 10:19 & 25-33) happens to baptise a rich woman from Thyatira (Acts16:14-15).11) ⁷⁴And if Peter openly revealed that God had appointed him (rather than Paul) - to be the mouth through which the Gentiles would hear the Gospel: a revelation that would inevitably annul Paul's apostleship by destroying the claim that there is space for a 13th apostle (Acts15:7 ~ And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe).12) ⁷⁵And if the law of God includes the dietary law (Lev11), the 7 feast-holydays (Lev23), and the 10 commandments (Exo20) amongst other commandments, and Christ said he hadn't come to abolish the law (Matt5:17 ~ Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.), yet Paul goes ahead to abolish God's law by directly attacking the dietary law, the 7 feast-holydays, and the 4th commandment of God (Col2:16 ~ Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days:).13) ⁷⁶And if Christ demotes all those who demote his laws (Matt5:19 ~ Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.), and Paul's name in Latin (Paulus) not only happens to mean ''least'', but Paul ''the least'' yet goes ahead to abolish the entire concept of doing the work of keeping the commandments to prove your love for God (Rom3:28:19 ~ Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.).CONCLUSION: If the above 13 points - all point to Paul to be a false 13th apostle, why then do we need Christ to physically appear and bang us on the head with a club branded with the words "PAUL IS FALSE" - before we choose to wake up? If Christ who never taught: except in parables, revealed it to us that he has indeed foretold us (PROPHESIED to us) all things: of course in parables (Mark13:23 ~ But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things), ⁷⁷why then are believers waiting for a word that double-confirms the fact that something is definitely wrong with Paul - as if they do not already see all the hints?Scripture proves that the first believers - who Paul happened to persecute - were not called Christians but were rather called Natsarim. And these Natsarim-minded people all kept the fulfilled law (the old law but devoid of temple sacrifices and oblations). ⁷⁸So if Paul's conversion to the Faith was actually true and genuine, why then didn't he live LAWFULLY like all Natsarim do? John said: He that saith he abideth in Christ ought himself also so to walk, even as Christ walked (1John2:6). So how is Paul's conversion a true and genuine one - if he did not live or walk like those he converted to?To those who have eyes to see and ears to ear, it is indeed crystal clear that Paul is the fulfilment of Jacob's and Christ's prophecy, and is also the disguised blindfold of Christianity: who was however purposely ordained and planted by God, why? TO TEST THE GENUINENESS OF OUR FAITHFULNESS UNTO HIM JUST LIKE HE TESTED THE FAITHFULNESS OF ADAM AND EVE WITH THE FORBIDDEN TREE.

• Chevron Up

Level 3of7In 41 irrefutable ways -
Paul contradicts God in the Bible

Proof today's Christianity has nothing to do with Christ:
but is rather solely founded on the words of Paul

15 cases - most Christians have never heard of -
where Paul directly contradicts God

1) Why Roman Christians find it difficult to identify fake believers and wolves in sheep clothing
If Yahushua revealed that the nature and character of people is confirmed by the things they do (Matt7:15-19), ⁷⁹why would Paul say people are rather identified by their mental belief alone (Gal2:16) without needing to do any righteous and principled work of the law (Rom4:5)? And if Jesus himself asks us to be wise as serpents (to not be spiritually naive) but gentle as doves (Matt10:16), ⁸⁰why would Paul say he would rather have us be wise unto that which is good, and simple (naive) concerning evil (Rom16:19)? ⁸¹And why would Paul say ''no one can say Jesus is Lord if not by the power of the Holyspirit (1Cor12:3) if the fake disciples spoken of in (Matt7:21-23) went even farther than saying ''Jesus is Lord'' to performing great miracles, signs and wonders? Only to have themselves yet rejected by the Father - who classed them as lawless and said he doesn't know them.2) Why Christian women believe Christianity is covertly oppressive to woman, and why Christian-women leaders have a notion that God frowns at their spiritual leadership
If Yahushua had many women around him in ministry (Luke8:1-3; 23:49, 55, 24:10; John19:25, 20:1), and if the scriptures make mention of 4 sisters in the New Testament who prophesied (Acts21:8-9), and if Christ found gladness in Mary for being more spiritual than Martha, and for choosing to sit with the word - over serving tables like her sister Martha preferred (Luke10:38-42), ⁸²why then does Paul command women to keep shut in Church, and by implication - restrict women from being spiritual teachers (1Tim2:11-12, 1Cor14:34-35)? ⁸³And why does he belittle women so much that he said women find their value and salvation in childbearing (1Tim2:15)?3) Why Roman Christians have a notion that marriage hinders holiness - so much so that the Roman-Catholic-Church requires their ministers not to marry
If God said it is not good for man to be alone (hence the genders PRIMARILY need themselves for companionship) (Gen2:18), ⁸⁴why then would Paul say marriage is only good to avoid fornication (1Cor7:1-2). And if the scriptures said ''he who finds a wife - has found a good thing (Prov18:22)'', and if even the head apostle himself - had a wife (Matt8:14-15), ⁸⁵why then would Paul wish for people to be single (like himself) rather than be married (1Cor7:6-8, 27-29, 33-34, 38)?4) Why Roman Christians tend to follow Paul more than they follow Christ
If Yahushua said his sheep follow him (John10:27), ⁸⁶why would Paul call believers to rather follow his own self (Phil3:17, 2Thes3:7, 9, 1Cor4:16, 11:1)?5) Why Roman Christians are known for praying loudly, repetitively, gibberishly and chaotically
If Yahushua urged us to pray quietly, behind locked doors, away from the sight of people, and non-repetitively (Matt6:5-8), ⁸⁷why would Paul command believers to pray everywhere (1Tim2:8) ⁸⁸and in gibberish tongues which no one can understand (1Cor14:18)?6) Why Roman Christians have the notion that they are called to preach the Gospel, but yet must acquire a special anointing to baptise new converts
If Yahushua mandated us to teach and baptise people of all nations (Matt28:19), ⁸⁹why would Paul say Christ sent him not to baptise people (1Cor1:17)? Bearing it in mind that baptism is itself the very sign of the Messianic covenant.7) Why Roman Christians could fall flat for the doctrine of the Trinity after it was fabricated in 325AD
If Yahushua said his Father (Yahuah) is greater than himself (John14:28), ⁹⁰why would Paul say Christ is equal to the Father (Phil2:5-6)? ⁹¹Why would he proceed to speak of God as a Godhead (1Cor2:9) even after professing that God is one (Eph4:6)? Why yet speak of a Godhead if God is indeed one?8) Why Roman Christians find it easy to throw God's eternal law away
If Yahushua said we shouldn't even think it - that he has come to do away with the law (Matt5:17) and if scripture refers to the law as perfect, and as the light unto our path (Psm19:7, 119:105), ⁹²why would Paul refer to the law of God as "the law of sin and death" (Rom8:2), ⁹³why would he contradict Jesus himself by saying Christ has abolished the law (Eph2:15), ⁹⁴and why would he personally pronounce it null and void (Eph2:13-16)?9) Why Roman Christians find it so easy to neglect the poor
If Yahushua himself ate with commoners and sinners because he intended to influence them (Matt9:10-13), ⁹⁵why would Paul condemn believers from keeping company with commoners and sinners even for good reason (1Cor5:9-13)?10) Why Catholics and Mormons could fall flat for the doctrine of praying for the dead, and why Mormons do baptisms for the dead
If the angel of the Lord said Father is the God of the living and not of the dead (Luke20:38), ⁹⁶why would Paul say Christ is the God of both the living and the dead (Rom14:9)? And if Christ revealed that only the living can do wise works of salvation (John9:4; Ecc9:10), ⁹⁷why then would Paul give his support and endorsement for the baptism of the dead (1Cor15:29)?11) Why Roman Christians could fall flat for the Rapture doctrine
If the risen Christ said that the earth shall become new by the descending of the new city of Jerusalem from heaven to earth, and that God shall begin to dwell with man on this new earth (Rev21:1-3), ⁹⁸why then did Paul say otherwise - that believers would rather be raptured to heaven to live up there with the Lord (1Thes4:16-17)?12) Why Roman Christians think divorce is abominable in all circumstances
If Yahushua permitted divorce: on the ground of adultery - so that both parties become free again on this basis to justifiably remarry (Matt5:32; 19:9), ⁹⁹why would Paul ask divorcees (separated for whatever reason) not to ever remarry (1Cor7:10-11)?13) Why Roman Christians believe it is okay to have earthly men as their spiritual fathers
If Yahushua asked us not to call any man our spiritual father because that position belongs only to God the Father (1Pet1:3, 1John2:13) who is spirit (John4:24), and if even Peter - the head apostle - referred to his followers as "children of the father" (1Pet1:13-25), ¹⁰⁰why would Paul go on to take himself as the spiritual father of his converts (1Cor4:15-16, 2Cor2:10)?14) Why Roman Christians found it easy to replace God's Saturday Sabbath with Constantine's Sunday in 321AD when Rome made Sunday the new Saturday
If Father commanded us not to forget to keep holy the Saturday Sabbath day (by resting from working for money) (Exo20:8), and if the early-church did keep the Saturday Sabbath by fellowshipping on Saturdays instead of on Sundays (Acts13:42, 44), ¹⁰¹why then would Paul say the keeping of the Saturday Sabbath day does not really matter (Col2:16)?15) Why Roman Christians believe they need money (tithes and offerings) from the brethren to run a Church or a fellowship
If Jesus commanded us to FREELY GIVE because we have FREELY RECEIVED (Matt10:7-8), ¹⁰²why would Paul say God did not command that but rather said ''those who preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel (1Cor9:14)''? ¹⁰³And why would he say Church preachers deserve physical gifts (payment) for the spiritual gifts they give (1Cor9:12)?

11 cases - most Christians have never heard of -
where Paul contradicts the servants of God
(Isaiah, David, James, the Apostles, John, and Peter)

1) Why Roman Christians find it difficult to rebel against wicked governments like that of Rome
If Peter proved that obeying God is different from, and is more of a big deal than obeying the government (Acts4:13-20) even as Christ taught us (Matt10:28), ¹⁰⁴why would Paul teach that obeying the government is the very same thing as obeying God (Rom13:1-6)? ¹⁰⁵Why would he say governments are generally good, and that they only trouble those who are wicked (Rom13:3)? ¹⁰⁶And why would he call for the holding up and support of all people in government (1Tim2:1-2)?2) Why Roman Christians tend to shy away from spiritual investigation
If John cautioned us to test the spirits of people before believing them (1John4:1), ¹⁰⁷why would Paul ask us to wait till Jesus comes before we begin making character judgements (1Cor4:5)?3) Why Roman Christians tend to think Paul is the greatest apostle
If Isaiah said God himself laid the foundation of salvation (Isa28:16), ¹⁰⁸why would Paul say such a thing: that as a wise masterbuilder, he has laid the foundation of people's salvation (1Cor3:10), ¹⁰⁹why would he say Christ was crucified unto himself (Paul) and himself (Paul) was crucified unto the world (Gal6:14), ¹¹⁰ why would he proceed to say that it was he himself (Paul) that rather personally laid the foundation for people's salvation (1Cor3:10)? ¹¹¹And why would he say he put in the most work than that of all the 12 Apostles combined (1Cor15:10, 2Cor11:21-33)?4) Why Roman Christians who fervently follow Paul (as his Pastors do) tend to be boastful
If David, Isaiah and James confirmed that boasting was evil since it is the evil and wicked that do boast in their exploits (Psm10:3; 94:4, James4:16), ¹¹²why would Paul confess that he loves to boast, and that people should foolishly allow him to do just that (2Cor11:16-17)? ¹¹³Why would Paul say he is not ashamed of his boastings (2Cor7:14)? ¹¹⁴Why would he admit that he would even boast more about his achievements (2Cor10:8)? ¹¹⁵And why would he say no-man shall stop him of his boasting (2Cor11:10)? ¹¹⁶Why would he say all these boastful things even after he personally admitted that boasting is indeed bad (Rom1:29-31, 2Tim3:1-2, Eph2:8-9)?5) Why Roman Christians tend to be infatuated with the blood of Christ than be more bothered about walking with him (doing the law) in the life of his resurrection
If Peter - the head apostle - professed that the hope of a Christian lies not in the death of Christ but solely in his resurrection from death (1Pet1:3), ¹¹⁷why then would Paul be more glad that Christ died rather than being most glad that he resurrected (Gal6:14, Heb2:14, 1Cor2:2)?6) Why Roman Christians feel they can eat just anything
If the Apostles taught us not to eat the food we know are sacrificed to idols (Acts15:28-29), ¹¹⁸why would Paul say only weak people feel there is something wrong with eating foods they know is sacrificed to idols (1Cor8:1-11)? And if Paul wants us to present our bodies as holy living sacrifices to God (Rom12:1), ¹¹⁹how then do we advance this course by being indifferent to what we eat?7) Another reason why Roman Christians find it easy to throw God's eternal law away
If James said faith without the works of the law is dead (James2:20-26), ¹²⁰why would Paul say man can be saved without backing his belief with the righteous works of the law (Rom3:28)?8) Here's Paul lying in Galatians about what happened in Acts
If the Apostles agreed (in the Jerusalem council) that Peter was the apostle to the Gentiles (Acts15:7), and that the Gentile converts should not be burdened initially with much, but are to desist from idolatry, fornication, from eating meat strangled and meat sacrificed to idols, and from eating blood (Acts15:19-20; 27-31), ¹²¹why then did Paul report to the Gentile Galatians that the Jerusalem council assigned him the apostle to the Gentiles (Gal2:7-9) ¹²²and that the only decision reached at the meeting was that the Gentiles should remember the poor (Gal2:10)?9) Here's Paul also being a hypocrite after accusing Peter of hypocrisy
If Paul accused Peter of hypocrisy simply because he ate with sinners (something Yahushua had no problem with (Matt9:10-13)) (Gal2:11-13), and if he further cautioned Peter to not try to please all men and to not be two-faced, but that he should rather live as a Jew that he claimed he was (Gal2:14), ¹²³why then did Paul yet confess that he tries to please all men by becoming whatever his environment compels him to become (1Cor9:19-22; 10:33) ¹²⁴and how could Paul preach that circumcision was nothing (Gal5:6) and yet turn around to commit the same crime he accused Peter of - by going ahead to be two-faced too, by circumcising Timotheus: simply for fear of the Jews (Acts16:1-5)? And if Paul says those who judge people for evil, and they themselves do those same evil - shall not escape the judgement of God (Rom2:3), ¹²⁵is it then safe (in this case) to say Paul shall not escape the judgement of God?10) Here's Paul bending and misquoting scripture - just to make it say what he wants it to say: to defend his claim to be an apostle
If David says in the Psalms that ''GOD RECEIVED GIFTS FOR PEOPLE (Psm68:18 ~ Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them.)'', ¹²⁶why would Paul in an attempt to quote Psalm 68:18 - say ''GOD GAVE GIFTS TO PEOPLE (Eph4:8 ~ Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.)''?11) Here's Paul bending and misquoting scripture again - just to defend his doctrine of lawless-grace
If Moses said in Deuteronomy that ''GOD WANTS US TO DO HIS WORD (Psm68:18 ~ But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.)'', ¹²⁷why would Paul make his quote erase the verse's concept of ''DOING WORK''? Why would he replace the admonition to ''DO WORK'' with the admonition to PREACH THE WORD (Rom10:8 ~ But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;)''?

9 cases - most Christians have never heard of -
where Paul contradicts his own self

1) Should we prove all things now or should we wait till Jesus comes?
If Paul preaches God's word, and rightly admonishes us to prove all things and only hold fast to that which is good (1Thes5:21), and if Paul spoke highly of the Bereans who searched the scriptures daily to test the words they were hearing being preached to them - before they would believe them (Acts17:11), ¹²⁸why then would Paul turn around in Corinthians to ask us to judge nothing until Jesus comes (1Cor4:5)?2) Are women spiritually equal with men or are they not?
If Paul rightly speaks in accordance with the word of God - that there is neither male nor female after one has come to Christ but that all are equal heirs to the kingdom (Gal3:28), ¹²⁹why then would Paul say it is a shame for a woman to speak in Church, ¹³⁰and why did he command them to be silent in Church till they get home and can ask their husbands for understanding, ¹³¹and why did he relegate their value to childbearing (1Cor14:34-35; 1Tim2:11-15)? So which is it? Is Paul saying women are spiritually equal with men in the Kingdom or is he saying women are spiritually slaves to men?3) Does Paul live to please only God or does he live to please all men?
If Paul rightly speaks in accordance with the word of God - that as a believer, he cannot live to please men but must only please God, and that he should not be taken as a servant of Christ if he sought to please men (Gal1:10), ¹³²why then would he turn around in Corinthians to say "he pleases all men in all things (1Cor10:33)"? ¹³³Was this the reason why Paul who was reported to have condemned Peter for being a hypocrite (after he refrained from fellowshipping with sinners (Gal2:11-12) just because he saw the Jews from James whom he feared) - yet turned around to also be a hypocrite by going ahead to circumcise Timotheus because of his own fear of the Jews (Acts16:1-3) even after openly rejecting circumcision (Gal5:6)? So which is it? Does Paul live to please only God or does Paul live to please all men (so that if true - we must reject him to be a servant of Christ)?4) Should we curse our enemies or should we not?
If Paul rightly speaks in accordance with the word of God - and rightly admonishes believers to "curse not" (Rom12:14), ¹³⁴why then would he (on 2 occasions) curse everyone who preaches against his own words like the Apostles were doing (Gal1:8-9)? ¹³⁵And why would he equally curse those who do not love and believe in Jesus (1Cor16:22)?5) Should we eat food sacrificed to idols or should we not?
If Paul rightly speaks in accordance with the word of God — and he himself did second the word of God and said Gentiles who worship idols do make their sacrifices to devils and not to God, and that he would not advise us to fellowship with devils or eat at the table of the Lord and of the Devil at the same time (1Cor10:20-22), and that - what agreement has the temple of God (our bodies) with idols (2Cor7:16-18)? ¹³⁶Why then would Paul turn around to say: it is in some occasions okay to eat food sacrificed to idols (1Cor8:1-13, 10:19 & 25-33)?6) Does grace abolish the law or does it not?
If Paul teaches that men do not need to keep the law because we are justified by faith without the deeds of the law (Rom3:28), ¹³⁷why then did would he contradict his own self by saying "faith alone nevertheless does not abolish the law but establishes it" (Rom3:31). So which is it? Is Paul saying since faith alone justifies a man - men should therefore ignore the law or is he saying since faith establishes the law - men should therefore keep the law?7) Does The Spirit cause us to follow The Law or does it not?
If Paul teaches that men are to walk by, and be led by the spirit rather than follow the law (Rom8:14, Gal5:25, Eph2:15, Rom6:14, Gal3:19-26), ¹³⁸why then did he contradict his own self by saying the law is spiritual (Rom7:14)?8) Will men be justified by the deeds of the law or will they not?
If Paul is known to clearly teach the abolition of the law, calling it an usher of a curse (Gal3:10, 13), calling it a law of sin and death (Rom8:2) and saying no man shall be justified by the deed of the law (Rom3:20), ¹³⁹why then would he contradict his own self in the same book of Romans saying "not the hearers but the doers of the law shall be justified (Rom2:13)? So which is it? Is Paul saying men will be justified by the deeds of the law or is Paul saying they will not?9) Is Paul a changed man or is he still a sinner?
If Paul says he used to be a sinner but God showed him mercy because he did his wickedness in ignorance and in unbelief (1Tim1:13), ¹⁴⁰why then would he turn around to contradict himself two verses later by saying "...Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief (1Tim1:15)? Why still speak in the present: his confession to be a sinner, as if he hadn't truly been converted? ¹⁴¹And after his self-acclaimed conversion, why would he yet call himself (in the present also): a Pharisee (Acts23:6) if Christ had already told us that ''we cannot possibly enter the kingdom of God except our righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees (Matt5:20)? So which is it? Is Paul saying he is a changed man or is he saying he is still a sinner? And did he ever really repent from being a Pharisee or is he still one?

6 cases - most Christians have never heard of -
where Paul made his most shocking confessions

1) Paul the liar
If Father said thou shall not lie (Exo20:16), ¹⁴²why would Paul confessed that he was a liar (Rom3:7 ~ For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?).2) Paul the thief
If God said thou shall not covet your neighbour's property (Exo20:17), ¹⁴³why would Paul confess that he was a thief (2Cor11:82 ~ I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service.).3) Paul the fallen-angel-idol-worshipper
If God said worship no idols (Exo20:3), ¹⁴⁴why would Paul confess that he serves and worships angels (Acts27:23 ~ For there stood by me this night the angel of God, whose I am, and whom I serve.) Also (Col2:18 ~ Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind). ¹⁴⁵And why does Paul seem to include angels in the Godhead (1Tim5:21 ~ I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Elect angels, that thou observe these things...)?4) Paul on the law - as given by angels
If God calls the law ''My Law'' (Exo16:4), ¹⁴⁶why would Paul teach that the law was rather given and ordained by angels (Gal3:19 ~ Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.)?5) Paul the tormented
If God never motivates his messengers using fallen-angel-assistances (surely not with the 12 Apostles, the Prophets, Samson, Job, or The Christ), ¹⁴⁷why would Paul say he was being tormented by a messenger (angel) of satan (2Cor12:7 ~ And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.).6) Paul the divider
If Christ takes the multitude of believers as HIS ONE BRIDE (Rev21:9), ¹⁴⁸why would Paul command denominationalism in the Church of Christ (1Cor11:19 ~ There must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized).

CONCLUSION: Paul being a divider is why - while Jewish Christianity is just one single way (The Natsarim Way of Life), Roman Christianity (Paulainity) is today divided into a faction of over 3,000 denominations: which strangely all still believe they serve the same one God. Christ set up the pillars of the foundation of the Church to be the 12 Apostles, but Paul does not see the body of Christ as ONE - founded on the 12 Apostles, he confessed to build not - on the foundation of the 12 Apostles (Rom15:20) (neither does he respect them as the foundation of the Church (Gal2:6,9)), but to have rather built his own foundation (1Cor3:10) even as he encouraged ministers to build on their own individual foundations (Rom15:20). Hence, by Paul's own admission, he does not preach the same message as the 12.

________________¹⁴⁹No one has a personal vendetta against anyone, but if there is truly nothing wrong with Paul, why is he the only one in the entire Bible who contradicts God - not just once but as much as 41 different times? And we're not even done yet. How could 41 different contradictions be simply a coincidence?.

The hidden meaning behind the 41 questions:

The 13 books of Paul are not to be used to find God or establish doctrine
They are to help us understand the finest expression of hypocrisy
So we don't have to throw Paul's books out
We only need to understand them

• Chevron Up

Level 4of7What Paul really preaches but yet can't plainly say lest we unmask him

The one major reason why most fall for Paul is: he speaks truth and lies side-by-side. Thereby gaslighting anyone not paying attention into subconsciously overlaying the lies he speaks with the truth they desperately want to hear

1) Paul begins with a shocker: saying the law was never even given and ordained by God but by Angels
Paul starts off by avoiding self-accountability, by putting the blame for sin on the law itself. Paul says the law is good, but that it however gives power to sin (Rom7:8-11, 3:20, 13-25, 5:13, 1Cor15:56). Paul preaches that God never really intended for us to be eternally under law. Contrary to what God said in (Exo16:4) calling The Law ''My Law'', Paul said The Law was rather given and ordained by angels and not by God, he said the angels gave us the law so that it could stand to justify righteousness for a while - that is, until Jesus comes to do away with it (Gal3:19).Paul says since where there is no law, there is no sin (Rom4:15), and since sin cannot be imputed when there is no law (Rom5:13), and since the law was never even given by God in the first place but by angels to help justify righteousness for a time, then it is better to take the law away so that sin cannot find anything to take advantage of to destroy us. Paul then further proves that he doesn't understand the law when he said the purpose of the law was to evoke in us sin (Rom5:20), even if God has long said his law is to make us holy and righteous (Deut6:25, Mat5:17-20). Paul rather concludes that the law is the problem, because if it were not for the law being alive, sin would be dead (Rom7:8). Even if the scripture says God has sent his son to fulfil the law (Matt5:17) and to magnify it (Isa42:21), Paul concludes that Father has rather sent the Son to kick out the law, and to be the end of the law (Rom10:4).2) Paul then shifts the blame to sin - consequently teaching us to not be accountable for our wrongs
Paul eventually shifts from blaming the law, and begins to blame sin. Paul uses the entire 7th chapter of Romans to shift the blame away from the law, and unto sin. He said sin is even as much a problem as the law is. He said sin takes advantage of the law to bring death upon us, so the sin that we commit - is really not our fault, but that of sin itself (Rom7). Paul is faced with a dilemma. What is to be done with sin so that it doesn't use the law against us? Just after Paul preached that we should be not overcome with evil but instead - overcome evil with good (Rom12:21), Paul decides that the solution to the problem was to proceed to do away with the law so that he might via that - starve sin of the privilege to destroy us. Hence, by succumbing to evil, and by surrendering, and allowing sin to overcome us: we overcome sin. This is how Paul eventually solves the problem of sin.3) By abolishing the law, Paul consequently gave endorsement to the classic satanic and Freemasonic doctrine: Do What Thou Will
Paul says the law is good, but that it however gives power to sin (Rom7:8-11, 3:20, 13-25, 5:13, 1Cor15:56). He said he discovered that he cannot control his body over sin, so he concludes that the flesh of all men cannot possibly be disciplined, so that one can only possibly then find purity in the mind alone. So instead of working on our hearts by keeping the law, Paul proposes that the law itself be taken away. So that the one who therefore THINKS he is a good person - that same one becomes a good person (1Cor6:12). Paul teaches us to lead with our heart and not with the heart of God. He goes on to admonish us to judge no one but instead, we should let people do whatever they want (Rom14:13). He says happy is the one that doesn't let his conscience condemn him for his choices (whether good or bad) (Rom14:22). Paul is creating an entirely new and different law here, in this law, guiding principles like ''The law of clean and unclean food'' no longer matter, whatever someone believes is clean or unclean: to him, it is clean or unclean respectively, he infers that in this law, what a man does not know, the same cannot kill him. Hence, he should eat whatever is put before him without asking questions (1Cor10:25-33).If you untangle all the convoluted words of Paul, his message in simple words becomes: DO WHAT THOU WILL. Jesus said if you love me, keep my commandments (John14:15), but Paul said the commandment is done away with (2Cor3:10, 1Cor13:10-11, Eph2:15): so DO WHAT THOU WILL. Our mind and feelings have become the new law: this is Paul's simple message - which he however cannot openly say except through codes.4) Paul introduces his own personal law: to be our mind and feelings - he calls it: the law of faith
Paul teaches that our mind and feelings now rule as the new law - hence the law is done away with (2Cor3:10, 1Cor13:10-11, Eph2:15). He preaches that salvation is not in our works as well but solely in our heart (Rom2:29). Follow Paul's train of thought here (Rom3:1-4) and the same message is resounded: The law is whatever you say it is. He then dedicates the entire chapter 14 of Romans to nullify God's law of clean and unclean food specifically. He has to start from there because James (the brother of Jesus) had long revealed that the one who can control his mouth - can possibly control his whole body (James3:2). But Paul is inferring that the body itself cannot be controlled, so why bother about what you eat. Paul himself in Hebrews said ''the Father is the same yesterday, today and forever (Heb13:8)'', yet the same Paul later says the Father's law was never meant to be everlasting because it was given by angels. He preaches that the law was instituted so that it can be later replaced by our thought of mind and faith of heart (Gal3:22-25), and that one now attains goodness and righteousness by simply thinking and believing that they are good and righteous.Paul takes the power to control our being and life - away from the law and transfers it to our mind and feelings because he claimed ''the flesh of man cannot possibly be disciplined (Rom7:14-25)'', he forgot that God had long condemned the heart of man to be desperately wicked (Jer17:9). When Paul claimed that the flesh cannot be disciplined: he forgot that he himself had once confessed that Jesus came in the flesh and was tempted as we are and yet was able to come out sinless (Heb4:15). ¹⁵⁰If not for the law of God which Christ kept fervently, how would he have been able to possibly come out sinless? Yet Paul claims the law is rather existent to give power to sin.Paul's law of faith is one that says DO WHAT THOU WILL. And if you have wondered why Paul seems to be very boastful, it is because in his self-introduced law of faith, boasting is actually permitted as he confessed with his own mouth (Rom3:27).5) Paul says while his law of faith - is the law without works, the law of God is the law of sin and death
Paul therefore proposes that we should be dead to sin (Rom6:11), not by working on our heart by the keeping of the law but by being dead to the law (Rom7:5), he concludes that ''we are not under the law (Rom6:14)''. Since Paul believes that the law gives life to sin, he therefore exchanges the law for sin, and uses those 2 words interchangeably. Hence, anytime Paul says SIN or FLESH or CARNALITY, he actually means THE LAW. This is why Paul can make the statement saying ''sin shall not have dominion over us, because we're not under the law but under grace (Rom6:14): that verse proves that Paul really takes THE LAW to be SIN. Paul sees the law and sin as one single thing: so much so that he did not only call the doers of the law: ''cursed (Gal3:10, 13)'', he actually directly attacked the law and identified the very LAW OF GOD to be ''the law of sin and death (Rom8:2)''. He claims that keeping the law today amounts to nothing because what matters today is what we THINK IN OUR MIND (Rom14:22-23). Hence, Paul is often caught requiring us more to renew our minds (Rom12:2, Eph4:23) even if Father rather wants us to renew our hearts (Ezek36:26; Psm51:10; Jer24:7, 31:33; Isa57:15). Paul makes it known that Christianity is a business of the mind - not the heart. Paul infers that the real reason why we are to show love to our enemies - is so as to heap more punishment on their heads (Rom12:20), but the Natsarim want to rather pray that the wicked changes his ways because they know that even The Father does not wish that anyone should be lost (2Pet3:9).6) Why Paul ALONE is known to double-speak - endorsing the law and at the same time - thrashing it
For those who argue that Paul couldn't possibly infer that the law is sin and death just because he seemed to say otherwise in (Rom7:7,13), fact-check that quickly by simply asking the simple question: ¹⁵¹if Paul does not see the law as something negative AT LEAST (like a curse, like sin, and like death for example), why then does he want us to be dead to it (Rom7:5)? Can one eat their cake and yet have it? If the law is indeed good and not negative AT LEAST, then keep it. But if Paul insists we must live above the law, it is because he doesn't see it as good, this we can very safely conclude. But Paul is very cunny as he himself confessed with his own mouth (2Cor12:16). Paul CLEARLY dreads God's law (as well as anything Jewish (Tit1:14)), but he knows he cannot plainly say this, so he plays with our intelligence and tries to gaslight us into subconsciously accepting his lie. The last thing Paul wants his followers to see - is the fact that ''he actually fears the law of God, and this is why he double-speaks: speaking in favour of the law in one place (Rom3:31) and trashing the same law in another place (Rom3:20, 8:2). And Paul is exceptionally good at what he does so don't take him for a fool. ¹⁵²If even Paul himself preaches against being double-tongued (1Tim3:8), why then does he double-speak? It is for deception. Through double-speaking, he releases venoms that work subconsciously to steal salvation away from the hearts of men. If you don't pay close attention, you cannot catch when he does this, so we're going to slow him down a bit, just so it becomes easy for everyone to finally see who the man called Paul: really is.7) How to checkmate Paul at his own game
¹⁵³If Yahushua mandated the Apostles to teach and baptise people of all nations (Matt28:19), but Paul told us that Christ did not send him to baptise people (1Cor1:17), ¹⁵⁴and if Paul also went ahead to build his GRACE-ALONE Church on a different foundation from that of the 12 Apostles (1Cor3:10), how then is Paul preaching the same message with the 12 Apostles or the same message as Christ? It is obvious that Paul is preaching a different Gospel of his own: one which by its inherent LAWLESSNESS - is crafted to tempt the believers to fall into sin. If the above rhetorical case-question is not revealing enough, there is yet even a clearer way to show that Paul is trying to trap believers into sin.Notice that just after Paul says we are not under the law but under grace (Rom6:14), he (in the next verse) proceeds to also say ''we should not sin (Rom6:15)''. But saying ''we are not under the law (Rom6:14), and saying ''we should not sin (Rom6:15)'' are 2 completely disconnected things that cannot possibly come together: it is like asking someone to step into a fire and yet commanding them not to get burnt. Why is this a senseless instruction? Because you cannot successfully obey the 2 instructions without disobeying 1 of the 2 instructions. To say it plainly: you can either do one and leave the other, or you must do none at all. You obviously cannot stay above the law and not end up a sinner at the end of the day because John has already told us that SIN IS ITSELF THE TRANSGRESSION OF THE LAW (1John3:4). So if we know that SIN IS THE TRANSGRESSION OF THE LAW, yet Paul insists that we are not to stay under the law, ¹⁵⁵what then is Paul really saying? Take a moment to think about it.The wise can already see the big picture, but not everyone will see it - only until they are ready to. This is why all of the old friends Paul made in Asia eventually left him (2Tim1:15), barely saving Timothy and Luke (2Tim4:11). Apparently, they all eventually figured him out.

• Chevron Up

Level 5of7Paul is the author of the half-holiness that keeps us from being saved till the end

Holiness is about being both born again (a business of the spirit) and being set apart (a business of the flesh). Hence, to be holy - is to be different: both in spirit and in flesh. This means ''holy people are not those who only confess the Messiah in their hearts'', holy people also carry the flesh along by setting themselves apart from the environmental culture, norm, and traditions that prove to oppose their holiness. And this is why holy people keep the law, because therein is where the instructions to become set-apart to God - are found.The law is not about blood sacrifices or oblations anymore because Christ had come to fulfil that by replacing the blood sacrifices with his own life once and for all, and by replacing the ritual water washings with the Holyspirit that is now available to indwell the hearts of men. THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS TO FULFIL THE LAW. We were never meant to forget that there are however other instructions of the law like The Big 3: the 10 commandments, the dietary law, and the Feast laws (the Holy days). These are still required to be kept. The law is only in a fulfilled state: not in an abolished one.Only dishonest people work to abolish God's law. However, it is not solely our fault that we have found ourselves to be Christians and lawless today, it is our parents that deceived us into it. But don't be so hard on your parents either because they were themselves deceived by the Church herself. But don't also take it too personal with the Church because she was herself deceived by Paul. Paul is the author of the confusion in the Bible which many are fast waking up to. Paul is the author of Half-Holiness. Only he taught faith without works even when Christ clearly said ''if ye love me, keep my commandments (John14:15)''. Of course we are free to believe whatever we choose to, but let us not forget that receiving the full package is never guaranteed - if one only paid half the price.

• Chevron Up

Level 6of7
The early-church documents that exposed Paul: as excavated in the 19th century

The document that exposed the fact that
the Natsarim of Jerusalem rejected & excommunicated Paul
The Damascus Document (part-1)

Before the rise of Roman Catholicism (as officially endorsed by Roman Emperor Constantine in 313AD), the Natsarim hid their writings in various strategic places, and we would begin to find these writings on a large scale beginning from 1947. One document that speaks the most about John the Baptist, James and Paul - is the writing called The Damascus Document.It was in 1947 that a large body of the Natsarim-hidden scrolls was found in the caves of Qumran near the Dead Sea. This is how the scrolls began to be called ''The Dead Sea Scrolls''. Fragments of the Damascus document was found in the Qumran caves in 1947, but the main fragment had already been discovered in Cairo - 50 years back in 1897, and had already been published in 1910. The document is one that exposes how the Natsarim and the early-church really perceived Paul: as opposed to how the Roman-Catholic-Church-fathers painted him to be - after they were paid by pagan Emperor Constantine to canonised the Bible: for his selfish reasons. The Dead Sea Scrolls features John the Baptist as ''the teacher of righteousness'', James as ''the Just one'' or ''Jacob'' (James is essentially the English version of the Hebrew name ''Jacob''), and Paul as ''the spouter of lies'', ''the man of scoffing'' or ''the enemy''. Kindly note that the Dead Sea Scrolls is not written in English but in Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek.Because fragments of the Damascus document was also found in the Qumran caves, the Dead Sea scrolls became a body of work that also includes the Damascus document. Besides the 114 prophecies (the father of all secrets) which I have been helped to already document in the sister website whose link would be unveiled in Part 7, all great theologians know that the Dead Sea scrolls is the one library that gives veracity to the 66 books of the Bible from a historical point of view: and stamps the book as authentic beyond reasonable doubt. Below is a good video presentation of the Damascus document by a Natsari.

The Damascus Document (part-2)

Bringing to light: the well-hidden war between Peter and Paul and the fraud in The Book of Acts

Roman Christians are kept in the dark about the events that actually occurred in the time in-between the ascension of Christ and the forming of the Roman-Catholic-Church, but we are demystifying that in the simplest manner possible.It is sad that most believers do not know that back in the day - Peter and Paul were actually at war with each other and that it unfortunately cost Peter his life: it equally cost James his too. But before Peter was murdered, he transferred his evangelic office to a certain devote man named Clement. And Clement exposed it all in his writings which has survived today as 2 recessions; The Clementine Homilies and The Clementine Recognition. The word ''homilies'' simply means ''sermons'' and The Clementine Homilies are actually the sermons of Peter which Clement happened to record, it is the true Acts of the Apostles because after Chapter 8, the book of Acts ceased being about the 12 Apostles and indeed became all about ''the Acts of Paul''.Besides the fact that the entire book of James was actually written to rebuke Paul (for those who can read between the lines), the 4 most important writings to read in other to CLEARLY understand what really happened after the resurrection of Christ and before the rise of the Roman-Catholic-Church are below listed:1) The Dead Sea Scrolls
paying close attention to ''The Damascus document''
2) The Clementine Recognition, AKA the Nazarene acts of the Apostles
paying close attention to 2 letters:
''The Letter of Peter to James'' and
''The Letter of Clement to James''
3) The Clementine Homilies and
4) The works of Jewish historian - Titus Flavius Josephus (36-100AD)
paying close attention to 2 books:
''Antiquities of the Jews'' and
''The Jewish War''Thankfully, the 2 recessions by which the writings of the head apostle has survived (The Clementine Homilies and The Clementine Recognition) have been married together as one single book. This book has not only been made to read better than its constituent books, but more importantly, it has tried to also collate into the same book - the missing gospels of Christ according to the ancient Natsarim (Matthew and John). This book was arranged by the Natsari: David H’Notsari, a man whose videos alone - I feature in this website because he does well to restore the buried early Church writings. David named this book: The Rock of a Sure Foundation, and this book truly stands as the true New Testament Gospel canon that not only birthed the Biblical New Testament canon: but also actually better explains the Biblical New Testament canon. I do not agree with everything David doctrinally stands for, but as far as ''restoring the early Church writings'' go, this book is perfect. And as long as you read it through the refining eye of the 12 apostasies of the Church, you will be safe - extracting all of the gold buried within it.Jesus in (Matt24:16-20) did warn the believers that Jerusalem would be besieged, so before 70AD when the Romans destroyed the temple and put an end to Natsarim occupation, the Natsarim fled Jerusalem to the city of Pella in Peraea: and they also went with their writings. The writers of these records did not mention Paul by name (in their records) because they were being persecuted by both Rome and the Pharisees and they needed to make sure to carefully preserve the knowledge of the time for the benefit of the future Church.CAUTION: The author of the video happens to be a religious-vegetarian because he has not yet come to terms with the truth about the dietary law. Not all Natsarim (specifically those who today go by the name ''Ebionites'') understand what it truly means to be Natsarim like Christ, neither do most of them understand that - the fact that devote believers like Peter and James were vegetarians does not necessarily condemn the GENERAL eating of meat. They forget that Christ gave bread and FISH to a multitude (Matt14:14-21). Devote men like Peter and James only chose to keep the vegan lifestyle for spiritual and personal reasons. dtrueacademy however stands behind the rest of the truth the author speaks in the below video. So enjoy it.

• Chevron Up

Level 7of7
Today's Christianity is Paulainity: since Paul alone commands 11of12 Apostasies

To test the loyalty of the first man and woman to our maker (Yahuah), God PURPOSELY planted a forbidden tree right in the center of the good Garden. But to test the loyalty of all mankind - this time to our redeemer (Yahushua), God PURPOSELY allowed 14 antichristly books of the 13th false apostle to be planted right in the center of the good Bible. These test-books are: Romans, 1st Corinthians, 2nd Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1st Thessalonians, 2nd Thessalonians, 1st Timothy, 2nd Timothy, Titus, Philemon and Hebrews.Out of the 12 apostasies of the Church, Paul is responsible for 11 of them, he is responsible for the apostasies surrounding (The Gospel, The Virgin Birth, Apostleship, The Holyday-Calendar, Speaking in Tongues, Baptism, The Trinity, The nature of Man, Rapture, Tithe, and of course the False Apostleship). So though Paul is responsible for the blindfold of Christianity (the doctrine of lawless grace), Paul is however not the only problem of a Christian, our hearts also contribute as our PRIMARY problem: BECAUSE WE WENT AHEAD OF PAUL - and personally added 1 more apostasy to the foundational 11 Paul taught us, as if to say ''Paul did not quite give us enough''. Hence, we're part the problem (Jer17:9 ~ The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?).CONCLUSION: Paul is responsible for 11 of the 12 Apostasies of the Church, this is why:1) There are 2 kinds of Gospels spoken about in the Bible: that of God with law (Matt5:17), and that of Paul which is lawless (Eph2:15).2) There are 2 biblical narratives that can be drawn concerning the birth of the Christ: that which has him born of God (Matt16:16), and that which has him born of man (Rom2:16, 16-25, 2Tim2:8, 1Tim1:11, 1Tim1:16) and (Gal6:14).3) There are 2 kinds of apostleship spoken about in the Bible: that of Christ which stops at 12 (Acts1:26), and that of Paul which is limitless (Gal2:7-9).4) The Holyday-Calendar: There are 2 kinds of Calendar systems spoken about in the Bible: the sacred kind of God used to keep His compulsory Feast-holidays (Exo12:2), and the secular kind of Paul that only tracks day and night without giving regard to God's holidays (Col2:16).5) There are 2 kinds of Tongues spoken about in the Bible: that of the 12 which is of real languages (Acts2:8-11), and that of Paul which is gibberish - needing interpretation (1Cor14:13, 27-28).6) There are 2 kinds of Baptism spoken about in the Bible: that of Christ which is of water and which ushers the indwelling Holyspirit and is signed by no necessary tongue-speaking (Acts8:36-40), and that of Paul which requires the laying on of hands ''after water baptism'' - to impact the indwelling Holyspirit, and which is signed by compulsory gibberish tongue-speaking (Acts19:2-6).7) There are 2 descriptions of the nature of God spoken about in the Bible: that of Peter which has the Father as greater than the Son but working perfectly through him (UNEQUAL 2 AS PERFECT 1) (Matt16:16, 1Pet1:3), and that of Paul which has Jesus equal with the Father (EQUAL 2 IN 1) (Phil2:5-7).8) There are 2 descriptions of the nature of man spoken about in the Bible: the ''UNEQUAL 2 AS PERFECT 1-TYPE'' of Peter which speaks of the more powerful spiritual and mental soul (a type of the Father) working perfectly through the less powerful body (a type of the Son) (Matt16:16, 1Pet1:3), and the ''EQUAL MANY IN 1-TYPE'' of Paul (spirit with soul living in a body) (Phil2:5-7), which though should indicate that the innerman and the bodyman are equal (following Paul's reasoning to its logical conclusion) - is yet not a rational concession, seeing that our bodyman is kept alive by our innerman (exactly how the Father keeps the Son alive) so that - the body consequently cannot possibly be equal to our innerman.9) There are 2 descriptions of the Rapture spoken about in the Bible: that of Christ which only involves 2 groups of 144 thousand people (Rev 7&14), and that of Paul which involves the whole Church (1Thes4:16-17).10) There are 2 kinds of Tithes spoken about in the Bible: that of God which is basically food (Lev27:30, 32; Deut14:22; 2Chron31:5-6; Neh13:12) to help take care of the needy (Deut14:28-29, 16:12-15, Amos4:4, Tobith1:7-8), and that of Paul which is basically money to help take care of Pastors (1Cor9:12-14).11) There are 2 descriptions of the person of ''Paul'' spoken about in the Bible: that known by the 12 and the by the Natsarim to be a liar and an antichrist (James2:14-26, the Damascus document, the Letter of Peter to James), and that known by the Gentiles and Christians of today to be the greatest apostle (1Cor15:10, 2Cor11:21-33).

The words of the Messiah:
...Behold, I have foretold you all things.
~ Mark 13:23 ~

How this apostasy keeps us far away from salvation:

Accepting the words of Paul above those of Christ - is rejecting the Messiah: who happens to be the one who died to save us, and who alone is capable of giving us the eternal life we claim we so seek.

Take your time to meditate on this:
unlock all related posts below and leave comments
by subscribing to the private members-group on Substack.

• Chevron Up

• Chevron Down

The 4 ways out
of the 12 Apostasies of the Church:

into the Natsarim Way of Life

1. Save your Spiritual Soul

First get your spiritual Soul saved - by
a. getting to know the Saviour, accepting him as Yahushua (not as Jesus - who in actuality is the counterfeit redeemer), and renouncing sin
b. then get baptised (Mark16:16): and let the Holyspirit begin to lead you instead of merely following your feelings, heart, head, spiritual teachers, personality and astrological sign (Ezek36:27, Jer17:9)
Note that you do not need a Church (whether Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant) to be saved, you only need to accept Yahushua and get baptised.

2. Save your Mind

Keep your mind in tune with your saved spirit
by frequently studying and meditating on the scriptures (which indeed transcends the Bible since not all scripture was canonised as the Bible) (Josh1:8, John21:25)
Note that you do not need a Church (whether Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant) to save your mind, you only need to study and meditate on The Word of God (alone or with brethren who believe as you believe).

3. Save your Body

Keep your body in tune with your saved mind and spirit
by keeping the dietary laws (because not everything is food) (Lev11)
Note that you do not need a Church to save your body, you only need to eat clean - as directed by the dietary law.

4. Stay saved till the end

Lastly, appreciate the Father's love and mercy:
Show Him that you love Him too, and preserve your entire being till the end so you can finally hold the crown of eternal life, this you can do:
a. by renouncing belief in the 12 apostasies of the Church
b. by keeping the 10 commandments (well interpreted)
c. by keeping the 7 feast-holydays of God (Matt24:13, John14:15-24, Deut4:13, Lev23) even as you denounce the pagan ones of Christianity (Christmas, Easter, Valentine, Halloween and Sunday worship)
Note that you do not need a Church (whether Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant) to maintain your salvation, you only need to keep the fulfilled law (the old law of the Mosaic Covenant: but devoid of its temple sacrifices and oblations).

The 7 Churches of Revelation
aka: the 7 kinds of believers today

He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches

The 7 churches of Revelation 1 to 3 (Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea) did not only identify the 7 areas in Asia Minor (modern day Turkey) where the church was thriving in the old days, it also prophetically identifies the 7 categories into which all present-day followers of Christ can be classed: as would be proven in points 4 and 6. And only 2 kinds of Natsarim minds are judged to be perfect and to be without blame: Smyrna and Philadelphia. Note that it is possible to have presence in more than one class.

1) The Church of Ephesus: Rev2:1-7
Near-perfect - The Backsliding Natsarim
Ephesus was one of the most important cities in the Roman province of Asia, famous for its temple to Artemis (one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World).
The believers of Ephesus were applauded for unmasking false apostles like Paul and rejecting the apostate Nicolaitans (the first Catholics). They were however admonished to do better by returning fully to their first love: the Natsarim way of life.2) The Church of Smyrna: Rev2:8-11
Perfect - The Martyrs (as were the 12 Apostles (except John) who detest evil)
Smyrna was a wealthy city, famous for its production of myrrh (‘Smyrna’ means ‘myrrh’).
The believers of Smyrna are the saints of the day and also of the end time. They are identified to have strong ties to their Jewish roots (as typical of all Natsarim) and to be against the satanic political and religious system even unto death.3) The Church of Pergamos: Rev2:12-17
Half perfect - The Nicolaitans (dressed today as the Roman Catholic Church)
Pergamos was a center of learning and culture in the ancient world and boasted a magnificent library, second only to the one in Alexandria. Pergamos was also known as a center of pagan worship, with temples dedicated to gods such as Zeus, Athena, Asclepius, Dionysus, and more. For this reason, Jesus says to the church in Pergamos, “I know where you dwell, where Satan’s throne is…” (Rev2:13)
The believers of Pergamos were admonished to attain perfection by rejecting the doctrine of Balaam and the Nicolaitans. The prevailing early Christian tradition (Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius and Tertullian) identifies Nicolas (a proselyte of Antioch and one of the seven deacons appointed by the Apostles (Acts6:5) as the founder of this sect. (Acts6:5) tells us that this Nicolas was “a proselyte of Antioch”, this means that he was not born a Jew but had converted from paganism to Judaism. He came from paganism and had deep pagan roots, very much unlike the other six deacons who came from a pure Hebrew line. Nicolas would later defect from the purity of the Natsarim way to planting the seed of lawlessness in the church, and the Natsarim of old called this lawless way the Nicolaitan way.Who were the Nicolaitans? They were the Catholic Church before it became Roman Catholic in 313AD
The Nicolaitans were the abusers of the grace of God and today, they hide under another name. They were the proponents of the popular but false 'once saved - always saved doctrine'. The doctrine of the Nicolaitans teaches that the knowledge of God and Christ was sufficient for salvation, and that, being justified by faith - they were free from the restraints of the law, and might indulge in sin with impunity. They are antinomian in thinking, this simply means that they believe faith alone - and not obedience to the moral law - is necessary for salvation. It is clear that the doctrine of the Nicolaitans are nothing but that of Paul: only repackaged. These lawless believers are the people God spoke about in (Matt7:22-23): Many will say to Me in that day, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?" And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!"What is the connection between the Nicolaitan way and the Pauline doctrine? The answer is: the art of being a blindfold or a stumbling block
What are foods sacrificed to idols?
Unknown to the present-day Church, idolatry and adultery/fornication are spiritually linked (Exo34:14-16, Lev17:7, 20:5-6, Num15:39, Jer3:9, Rev20:20, 17:1-5). And also, food (meal covenants) is often used to seal covenants (Exo34:15, Num25:1–2). The meal covenant symbolizes a relationship between people (Gen14:18–20, Exo24:9–11, Gen31:51–54) and between man and God e.g. The Passover (Exo12) which unbelievers are not supposed to eat of (Exo12:43, 48, Lev22:10) because it is clearly not an ordinary meal. Salt: as a preservative and seasoning — symbolizes purity, permanence and commitment, making it a fitting choice for sealing covenants (Lev2:13). The use of salt in offerings and the requirement to season grain offerings with salt highlight its significance in the context of covenant making. Food sacrificed to idols is nothing but meal covenants to idols where the food is taken as a physical token of the oath. If the covenant was broken by the parties who ate of it, there would be a curse attached to the party who broke it. Generally speaking, any food repaired for the reverence of pagan celebrations is considered a food sacrificed to idols and these includes foods eaten in present-day celebrations like Christmas, Easter, Sallah (including Halal foods) etc.What is the doctrine of Balaam?
The spirit of the doctrine of the Nicolaitans is one that casts a stumbling block on the way of the believers of Christ by causing them to sin through the gates of idolatry and fornication, hence it is called the doctrine of Balaam: for when Balaam could not successfully curse the people of God, he followed another route to destroy them. He seduced them into sensual living by dangling the prostitutes of Moab before the men of Israel. (Numbers 25:1-3) says, “And Israel abode in Shittim, and the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab. And they [the daughters of Moab] called the people [the men of Israel] unto the sacrifices of their gods: and the people [the men of Israel] did eat [foods sacrificed to idols], and bowed down to their gods. And Israel joined himself unto Baal-peor….” This is why all doctrines that seek to confuse the believers into condemnation are collectively termed the doctrine of Balaam. Inside the confines of this seductive doctrine of Balaam - lives the 11 doctrines of Paul: together with the doctrines of his followers (Nicolas and Jezebel) who also teach the people idolatry and fornication.The art of being a blindfold or a stumbling block
Nicolas and Jezebel are both said to be guilty of enticing God’s people “to eat things sacrificed to idols” and “to commit acts of immorality” (Rev2:14-15,20): all of which Paul endorses even as perfectly captured in numerous verses (1Cor8:1-11, 10:19, 25-33) of which this is the best (1Cor6:12): All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.Still doubting the false apostleship of Paul?
Just in case some still doubt the clear false apostleship of Paul, here is one last question for us to think about: if Christ condemned the church of Pergamos because they held the doctrine of Balaam that taught Balak to cast a stumbling block before the Israelites: to eat things sacrificed to idols and to fornicate exactly as the Nicolaitans - who Christ hates - do (Rev2:14-15), ¹⁵⁶why then did Paul teach the people that eating foods sacrificed to idols is okay in some conditions (1Cor8:1-11, 10:19, 25-33)?Just as the men of Israel compromised themselves with the world and with false religions through the seductive tactics of Balaam, the believers of today are being tempted to compromise their pure faith with the doctrine of the Pauline-Nicolaitans. As a reward, the believers who claim to be Natsarim but who yet fail to reject Paul and his Nicolaitan teachings would be open to suffering in the great tribulation (the time when the mark of the beast would be enforced on the earth).The Pauline-Nicolaitans had strong presence in 3 of the most wicked cities in Asia: the cities of Pergamos, Thyatira, and Ephesus (where Paul taught and was exposed as a fraud). But while the Ephesian-believers rejected Paul and his Nicolaitans, the people of Pergamos and Thyatira welcomed them with open arms. The Nicolaitan way would later evolve to become the Roman Catholic Church. The Nicolaitans were the creators of the clergy system employed today by the Roman Catholic Church which controls the appointments of their Bishops, Archbishops, Cardinals and Popes.4) The Church of Thyatira: Rev2:18-29
Half perfect - The Christian Church (the sincere Christians who will yet suffer in the great tribulation because they mix the profane with the Holy)
Thyatira was a thriving commercial city, known for its trade guilds and the production of purple dye and her main god was Apollo.
The believers of Thyatira are said to be sincere with their faith but yet practice the doctrines of Jezebel, who like a Pauline and a Nicolaitan: endorse fornication (or adultery) and idolatry (or the eating of foods sacrificed to idols). Christ asked those who reject Jezebel to hold fast till he comes, this is how we know that the 7 churches of Revelation also refers to 7 categories into which all present-day followers of Christ can be classed.5) The Church of Sardis: Rev3:1-6
Half perfect - The Christian Church (The proud pastorly-kind believers)
Sardis was a wealthy city, famous for its militarily strategic location, its nearby gold deposits, and a signature method of refining gold and silver that allowed Sardis to mint the highest grade coins in the ancient world. By the time of the early church, much of Sardis’ glory lay in the past.
The believers of Sardis are said to be far from perfect in the Natsarim walk, Christ admonished them to get saved quick because the last of them is ready to die.6) The Church of Philadelphia: Rev3:7-13
Perfect - The Complete Natsarim (the Smyrna-type believers who would be kept safe in the Great Tribulation)
Philadelphia had a history of earthquakes, meaning strong buildings were crucial to its residents’ survival.
The believers of Philadelphia are said to walk perfectly in the Natsarim way, as a reward, they would be preserved through the great tribulation: this is the time when the mark of the beast would be enforced on the earth. The fact that Christ spoke about the great tribulation and the fact that he asked the church of Philadelphia to hold fast to the Natsarim way till he comes: proves that the 7 churches of Revelation also refers to 7 categories into which all present-day followers of Christ can be classed.7) The Church of Laodicea: Rev3:14-22
Half perfect - The Christian Church (the lukewarm and confused benchwarmer-kind believers)
10 miles to the east of Laodicia was Colossae, had a good supply of cold, mountain water. Hierapolis, a mere 6 miles to the north, was famous for its therapeutic hot springs. However, Laodicea had to import water via aqueduct from a source 6 miles to the south, resulting in mineral-ridden, tepid, lukewarm water that was neither cold and refreshing nor hot and therapeutic.
The believers of Laodicea are said to profess the faith even though they are truly indifferent about the Natsarim walk because they are not truly believers and they actually could care less. Christ admonished them to pick a side and be zealous also about their spirituality.

All believers are not promised the same Reward

Out of the 7 kinds of believers there are, only two (Smyrna and Philadelphia) are judged to be perfect. But despite the fact that Thyatira is not perfect, she would yet be granted salvation — not necessarily because she is upholding the law, but because she is sincerely doing her best. So she would be judged worthy: in accordance with the good and sincere works of her heart which she genuinely does. This goes to prove that though all saints would see eternal life, not all saints would however attract the same reward in the kingdom of heaven. Smyrna and Philadelphia (who are basically one as the Natsarim) are the believers who will be worthy of a higher glory because they proved to follow the Messiah more closely than the Christians do. In this light should the destinies of the 7 kinds of believers present today: be understood.All saints will basically be given the tree of life (Rev2:7), the crown of life (Rev2:10), the hidden manna (Rev2:17), the morning star (Rev2:28), a clothing of white raiment (Rev3:5), the blessing of having their names not blotted out of the book of life (Rev3:5), the grant to not see the second death (as all saints will be given — and not only Smyrna) (Rev2:11).But while only Philadelphia shall be kept from the persecution of the great tribulation when the mark of the beast would be enforced on the earth (Rev3:10), and while only Philadelphia shall be granted the privilege and power to sit with Christ in his throne of authority (Rev3:21) as rulers over the nations (in the millennial reign of Christ) (Rev2:26–27) plus granted the glory to have the nations come worship before their feet (in the millennial reign of Christ) (Rev3:9), only Smyrna and Philadelphia (who are basically one as the Natsarim) will have the name of God and of his holy city written upon them (Rev3:12) even as others will have a name written on a white stone instead (Rev2:17), and only Smyrna and Philadelphia will be made a pillar in the temple of God in the kingdom of heaven so that they are never again sent out for new missions (whatever this means) because they have already proven themselves indeed to be fervent (Rev3:12).

Summary of the 7 kinds of Believers Today

_______________________________
THE NATSARIM: Guardians of the Law
_______________________________

1) Smyrna (Rev2:8-11) refers to the Martyrs who sincerely detest evil and are dedicated enough to die for their faith, hence, they would be given the crown of life because of their heart.2) Philadelphia (Rev3:7–13) refers to the Smyrna-type believers who are complete Natsarim — seeing that they carry their head along with their heart. They not only reject Paul, but also reject the pagan ways of the world and of the Church. For this much diligence, they will be kept from the coming tribulation.3) Ephesus (Rev2:1–7) refers to the backsliding Natsarim who hate the Pauline doctrine like Philadelphia but nevertheless are slowly drifting away from keeping the law. They have been admonished to repent and to keep going.

_______________________________
THE CHRISTIANS: Abolishers of the Law
_______________________________

4) Thyatira (Rev2:18–29) refers to the sincere Christians who are weak in spirit and so are deceived by Paul: so that they mix the holy with the profane and eat foods sacrificed to idols even if they don’t intend to worship idols. They would therefore be judged worthy according to their good “Christian” works: as long as they denounce the Pauline doctrine of Jezebel (aka the doctrine of Balaam) for God will put on them no other burden than this. This means: believers of Thyatira who intend to find salvation — should listen to what Peter says in (Acts15:19–20, 27–31).5) Laodicea (Rev3:14–22) refers to the lukewarm Christians who are actually indifferent to the subject of faith, God and salvation. They have been admonished to repent and be zealous so they can overcome.6) Sardis (Rev3:1–6) refers to the church leaders who seem to be the pillars on which the bride places her confidence, unknown to her that most of these leaders are not only full of deception, but indeed are actually awaiting judgement. The genuine leaders will be saved but most of Sardis will be destroyed.7) Pergamos (Rev2:12–17) refers to the mother harlot herself known as the Roman Catholic Church. She is the foundation of idolatry in the world as well as the seat of the Devil on earth. And in her bosom — lies custody of the doctrines of Paul which she uses as a blindfold to confuse the bride and to deter souls off the narrow path of life: unto the wide road of eternal damnation.

Staying saved till the end: as a Complete Natsari

Keep the dietary laws and stay away from pork, seafood & vaccines etc.
Keep the 10 commandments as guided by the Old Testament
Employ Enoch's calendar to keep the 7 Holydays of God
Get baptised by immersion

Take your time to meditate on this:
unlock all related posts below and leave comments
by subscribing to the private members-group on Substack.

The words of the Messiah:
...Behold, I have foretold you all things.
~ Mark 13:23 ~

Conclusion

The Bible is the second Garden of Eden
beware of Paul: the evil tree!

Those who choose to follow Paul don't even follow him because they like him, they just go with the flow because it's easy to, if they really liked Paul:1) they wouldn't keep baptizing people even if Paul says not to (1Cor1:17)
2) they wouldn't keep circumcising their boys even if Paul says not to (Gal5:6)
3) and they wouldn't have women preachers running Churches even if Paul says women should keep shut in the Church (1Tim2:11-12, 1Cor14:34-35)This is proof that even Roman Christians themselves do not like or respect Paul, so why can't they completely break away from him and begin to totally keep God's law? They can't do this because Roman Christians don't really serve anyone but themselves, hence, they can justifiably pick and choose the parts of the law they find self-serving: at the end of the day however, Paul's poison still works despite the fact that his followers do not stick with him a hundred percent, he doesn't care because at least, they're yet still following his word "do what thou will" rather than following God and keeping his own words instead.It's a win-win situation for Paul, because Roman Christians rather worship themselves than worship God. Paul only started the fire, but we are the ones keeping it alive because deep down in our hearts, we also do despise God's law. Apparently, the problem is not really Paul, the problem is rather our hearts: it turns out that God only uses Paul as an instrument to reveal where exactly our hearts truly lie.

To test the loyalty of the first man and woman to our maker (Yahuah), God PURPOSELY planted a forbidden tree right in the center of the good Garden. To test the loyalty of all mankind - this time to our redeemer (Yahushua), God PURPOSELY allowed 14 anti-christly books of the 13th and false apostle to be planted right in the center of the good Bible. These test-books are: Romans, 1st Corinthians, 2nd Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1st Thessalonians, 2nd Thessalonians, 1st Timothy, 2nd Timothy, Titus, Philemon and Hebrews.Contrary to popular opinion, Paul also wrote Hebrews, and to make it clear to those who haven't figured it out already: the Catholic-Church-fathers partly forged 1st and 2nd Peter just to make Peter look like he endorsed Paul (2Pet3:15) when the fact is that James - the brother of Christ who headed the Church in Jerusalem - actually excommunicated Paul from the Jerusalem Church as recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls which the Vatican works hard to keep hidden. The point is not to throw away the 16 compromised books of the New Testament, the point is to understand the secret they are COVERTLY exposing. Behold: It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter - Prov25:2 ~ He who has ears should hear what the spirit is saying.

Not many can perceive it - that the Bible is the only alive book on earth. And not many can also perceive it - that the Bible is the second Garden of Eden, neither can they also perceive it - that God remains in control of the book, and of the narrative of the Gospel. Only insightful readers of the Bible can see what God is doing with the book. Behold: It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter - Prov25:2 ~ He who has ears should hear what the spirit is saying.Christ said he judges no man, but the works that we do are themselves our judges. So let everyman be his own judge here-on. I only sincerely wish that the insightful conclusions we arrive at by the careful cross-examination of the above 12 apostasies of today's Christianity - would be convicting enough to inspire in us repentance, so that we return back to our first love, and become NATSARIM again, just like the first followers of Christ were, before Roman Catholicism unfortunately rose as the mother-harlot-church to confuse, divide, scatter, and destroy the saints and the NATSARIM way of eternal life. It is hopeful however to know that her judgement is coming.

Revelation 18:4
And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

Truly speaking -
we're all brothers and sisters - bound together on the same journey to make eternal life after our deaths. Hence, we're actually on the same team. So do not be angered or put away by my seemingly harsh words: I am just a messenger. The duty of the messenger is to speak the word, the hearer decides what they do with the message.
And I pray Yah blesses and helps us all.

Of course: change takes time. So one would need to read Parts 1 to 6 over and over again before they can begin to easily see the Gospel of the kingdom: IN FULL CLARITY as has been herein simply revealed. One may be able to skim through the entire content in under 24 hours but the recommended time it would take to master Parts 1 to 6 and become convicted by the information - is one whole year. The one who is genuine about finding the truth - will see it: even before the year elapses, but the one who cares less: will never get to see it: even if they are given an entire lifetime.

Revelation 18:4
...strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and FEW there be that find it.

Many were indeed called as Christians, but only a FEW have been chosen as Natsarim. And dtrueacademy is the home of truth: ordained in these last days - to house the FEW that happen to see and understand this message.
And the message is simple:

The words of the Messiah:
If ye love me, keep my commandments.
~ John 14:15 ~

He who has ears should hear what the spirit is saying.
Yah bless
🙏

• Chevron Up

The Bonus Part

The Seal of Parts 1 to 6

The Message of the Bible is doubled-layered. First we must understand the doctrine (as Natsarim who keep the law) just like king David mastered. Then we must mature and begin to ALSO see the philosophy as (Etherics who understand how life works) just like king Solomon mastered.
This is the Mission of a true believer and I have been raised by the Father to guard it!Mastering these 2 aspects of life endows a man with a kind of wisdom the world can neither understand nor defeat: however, the law must come first before philosophy because the law is the light of the way of life that allows every other worthy activity to be possible (Psalm119:105).To put philosophy before the law of God is to create apostasy. To put philosophy before the doctrine of life is to create confusion and eventually fall just like Solomon unfortunately eventually did (1Kgs11:1-13).Part-7 is only open to those who believe parts 1 to 6
Part-7 is a bonus part that seals our knowledge. While Parts 1 to 6 reveal the spiritual side of the global deception, Part 7 is that which not only shows us the physical side of the deception, but also shows us how to escape the matrix for good, and still live a rich and successful life:
just like a believer of the Church of Philadelphia.

I work daily - trying to reach more people
but I could use some support

Spiritual knowledge is free,
but your kind donations are very much welcome as Yah leads. I have a-lot-more under construction (working to reach more people through YouTube videos & my next series of books), and with your support (no matter how little), I can keep going,
Yah bless.

Kindly support me

by getting 3 for the price of 2

The giftable hardcover version of this site (bundled with the first 2 books in our book series) is available on Amazon

• Launching - 21stMar26

or

---

by offering a kind donation

I'd do it all without troubling you if I could. Kindly support the mission via my support page - secured on Gumroad, thank you.

• Kindly support me

by getting 3 for the price of 2

The giftable hardcover version of this site (bundled with the first 2 books in our book series) is available on Amazon

• Launching - 21stMar2026

or

by offering a kind donation

I'd do it all without troubling you if I could. Kindly support the mission via my support page - secured on Gumroad, thank you.

• Kindly support me

If you happen to agree with the 12 apostasies, then you qualify to join our Substack family. The Complete Natsarim is the home for all the followers of Christ who the Father has given discernment. Join if you're one of the few called - and unlock all 7 hidden benefits below:

1. Connect with like-minds
2. Unlock all 102 featured posts
3. Discover all my published books
4. View sister website: to see the 114 messianic prophecies
5. Uncover Amazon link to the giftable hardcover version of this website. As a bonus: it comes - bundled with the first 2 books of our official book series titled - The Manual of Life
6. Get personal: keep the feast-holidays with a family and get to also listen and not just read
7. Unlock the final Part-7 and get to receive email notifications when I publish something new

🙏
Pls be patient:
The Complete Natsarim MembersGroup launches
on the 21st of March, 2026

• Join The Complete Natsarim

• ↑