REJECT CHRIST... AND BE SAVED!


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Click here for more interesting info

Posted by Lou on November 04, 1997 at 10:29:33:

Re-POSTED...

: REJECT CHRIST... AND BE SAVED!

: When I was a Christian, I took it for granted that the name ‘Christ’ was a proper name to designate the ‘Divine’ nature of the human ‘Jesus.’ Soon after I learned the true name of our Creator, I started to wonder about ‘Christ.’

: I was taught, and until very recently I believed that "Christian" was an insult hurled at the earliest followers of Yahushua. If this is true, I wish to see the documentation.

: What I'm learning lately is that none of the above is true. Christianity was concocted in Antioch, Syria, by Greek philosophers who adapted the teaching of Yahushua to their pagan persuasion. It is all documented in the writings of the early church fathers most of whom Paul probably knew by name. Some of them may have been converted by Paul at the Areopagus.

: The evidence is that the Greek 'converts' at Antioch voluntarily became known as Christians. Actually, they felt offended, if not insulted, IF ANYONE WOULD MISPRONOUNCE "Christian!"

: --- Tertullian, Apology, Chapter 3 * Well now, if there is this dislike of the name, what blame can you attach to names? What accusation can you bring against mere designations, save that something in the word sounds either barbarous, or unlucky, or scurrilous, or unchaste? But Christian, so far as the meaning of the word is concerned, is derived from anointing. Yes, and even when it is wrongly pronounced by you "Chrestianus" (FOR YOU DO NOT EVEN KNOW ACCURATELY THE NAME YOU HATE), it comes from sweetness and benignity. You hate, therefore, in the guiltless, even a guiltless name. But the special ground of dislike to the [Christian] sect is, THAT IT BEARS THE NAME OF ITS FOUNDER. Is there anything new in a religious sect getting for its followers a designation from its master? ARE NOT THE PHILOSOPHERS CALLED FROM THE FOUNDERS OF THEIR SYSTEMS--PLATONISTS, EPICUREANS, PYTHAGOREANS?

: Tertullian makes it very obvious that the name "Christian" was an inside job. He also gives the reason why. Most philosophers belonged to "systems" or "schools" named after their founders and because the church fathers were mostly Greeks, they had no use for the Hebrew name of Yahushua, so they converted HaMaschiach (The Christ) into "CHRIST" (Messiah or Anointed). In the Greek culture 'christ' doesn't have the same significance as 'messiah' does among the Hebrews, so it was very easy for the Greeks to accept "Christ" as a proper name in addition to "Iesous."

: --- The epistle of St. Ignatius to the Antiochians * Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church sojourning in Syria, which has obtained mercy from [God,] and been elected by Christ, and WHICH FIRST RECEIVED THE NAME CHRIST...

: Saint Ignatius was the third pastor of the Christian assembly at Antioch. In the opening words of his letter to them he admits that they were the first converts to receive the name "CHRIST." Where did this name come from? The earliest Christian church fathers (Greek philosophers) spent their time calling each other heretics, and writing lengthy books exposing each other's erroneous Christian philosophies, but in a greater or lesser degree they all seemed to agree about a dual personality for Yahushua whom they called "Iesous, " or at least a duality of names to identify him. Some of the earliest Christians got to the point of believing that Yahushua (whom they called "Iesous") and "Christ" were two distinct persons.

: The church fathers claimed that the new or second name for Yahushua came about in a ritual that is still known today in Christianity as "christ-ening" were one is supposed to receive a new name after you are sprinkled or immersed in holy water. And this is how Yahushua is supposed to have received the second Greek name of "Christ" to become known as "Jesus Christ" even to this day. There is no evidence that Paul was involved in all this. Although in the worst case, and most likely his letters were tampered with to reflect the philosophy of the early church fathers.

: ---Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, Book I, Chapter 26 * Moreover, after his baptism, Christ descended upon him in the form of a dove from the Supreme Ruler, and that then he proclaimed the unknown Father, and performed miracles. BUT AT LAST CHRIST DEPARTED FROM JESUS, AND THAT THEN JESUS SUFFERED AND ROSE AGAIN, WHILE CHRIST REMAINED IMPASSIBLE, INASMUCH AS HE WAS A SPIRITUAL BEING...

: --- Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 17 * It certainly was in the power of the apostles to declare that Christ descended upon Jesus, or that the so-called superior Savior came down upon the dispensational one, or he who is from the invisible places upon him from the Demiurge...

: ---Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 18 * And again: "And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died;" indicating that the impassible Christ did not descend upon Jesus, but that He Himself, because He was Jesus Christ, suffered for us...

: --- Tertullian, Against Praxeas, Chapter 28 * And so, most foolish heretic, you make Christ to be the Father, without once considering the actual force of this name, IF INDEED CHRIST IS A NAME, AND NOT RATHER A SURNAME, OR DESIGNATION; for it signifies "Anointed." BUT ANOINTED IS NO MORE A PROPER NAME THAN CLOTHED OR SHOD; IT IS ONLY AN ACCESSORY TO A NAME. Suppose now that by some means Jesus were also called Vestitus (Clothed), as HE IS ACTUALLY CALLED CHRIST FROM THE MYSTERY OF HIS ANOINTING, would you in like manner say that Jesus was the Son of God, and at the same time suppose that Vestitus was the Father? Now then, concerning Christ, if Christ is the Father, the Father is an Anointed One, and receives the unction of course from another. Else if it is from Himself that He receives it, then you must prove it to us.

: ---Tertullian, The Five Books Against Marcion, Book III, Chapter 15 * Concerning His other names, however, and especially that of Christ, what has the other side to say in reply? If the name of Christ is as common with you as is the name of God (Theos)--so that as the Son of both Gods may be fitly called Christ, so each of the Fathers may be called Lord--reason will certainly be opposed to this argument. FOR THE NAME OF GOD, AS BEING THE NATURAL DESIGNATION OF DEITY, MAY BE ASCRIBED TO ALL THOSE BEINGS FOR WHOM A DIVINE NATURE IS CLAIMED,--AS, FOR INSTANCE, EVEN TO IDOLS. The apostle says: "For there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth." THE NAME OF CHRIST, HOWEVER, DOES NOT ARISE FROM NATURE, BUT FROM DISPENSATION; AND SO BECOMES THE PROPER NAME OF HIM TO WHOM IT ACCRUES IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE DISPENSATION.

: In the above arguments from the early church fathers we learn the most horrifying truth about Christianity. I don't claim to be an expert in demonology, but when you hear the early Christian church fathers getting into serious arguments about a spirit being called "CHRIST" coming down on a human being called "JESUS"... I'm sure that they were not talking about Yahushua HaMaschiach, but about some bizarre entities of the occult.

: From all this it is easy to conclude that Christianity is not only deeply rooted in paganism, but also in the occult. The early church fathers knew that Christ was a concocted, but essential name needed to call themselves Christians. They made their case before the early Gentile converts at Antioch, Syria, and won their acceptance. This is the reason why Saint Ignatius writes to them... "WHICH FIRST RECEIVED THE NAME CHRIST..." They had to accept "CHRIST" as a name (not a title) first before calling themselves Christians.

: By the end of the first century the Christians became a very significant social/religious force to deal with. This religion was based on strong moral teaching borrowed from the Torah. It was morally commendable to be a Christian. No other pagan religion was like it. By the end of the second century they were in position to rule the world. The same world offered to Yahushua HaMaschiach by HaSatan, if Yahushua would only worship him at his feet. Yahushua refused the offer, but apparently the Christians didn't hesitate to grab it.

: Nothing has changed today. Christianity rules most of the world. Many political parties around the world are known as Christian. In several of my posts I urge the readers to stop calling Yahushua HaMaschiach "Christ," or the more fashionable "Messiah" which is a variant of "Christ" but the effect is the same.

: "Messiah" also became a proper name and formed a "school" or "system," as the Greek philosophers call it. That is how the relatively new word "Messianic" came about. It gathers together a school of followers of "Messiah" of both, Jewish and Christian persuasions. From this practice of purely Greek pagan origin one is tempted to call oneself a "Yahwist," too. I find it hard to believe that Yahweh wants his followers to be patterned after pagan "school" systems. The term "Yahwist" first came about to explain a theory about the authorship of the Torah, but now it is applied to followers of Yahweh, also. Are we applying Greek philosophy in HaDerek Yahweh? Any comments...???

: By all means we should endeavor to make sure that we got the name of our Heavenly Father Yahweh right. We may be led by the same spirit that inspired the Christian church fathers, to disfigure the simple pronunciation of the tetragrammaton, beyond recognition.

: I don't claim infallibility in anything that I say. I can be wrong. I depend on public documents to make my statements. In this post I'm only using the earliest documents available from around the year 100 of the common era.

: To keep quiet at this final hour on this issue is to help and strengthen the enemy who deceives the whole world in the name of "CHRIST."

: By the way, there is nothing wrong using "Christ" or "Messiah" with a definite article like "The Christ" or "The Messiah," but never use Christ, or Messiah, or Maschiach by itself as a nickname, or as a second proper name. Such practice was born in paganism and in the occult. In the Hebrew or Greek "Messiah" and "Christ" never implied a proper name like the Greek philosophers made it to be even to this day, but a title... and this is very important to bear in mind. We are in danger of displacing the sacred name for another name like "Christ" or "Messiah", without realizing.

: ---Jeremyah 16:19 * O Yahweh, my strength, and my stronghold, and my refuge in the day of affliction (tribulation), unto thee shall the nations come from the ends of the earth, and shall say, OUR FATHERS HAVE INHERITED NOUGHT BUT LIES, vanity and things wherein there is no profit.

: Ahhh, but Christianity is such a good business...

: May Yahweh be merciful to us all!

: Shalom aleichem...
: Lou



Click here for more interesting info

Follow Ups:


Click here for more interesting info

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]