Issued: 11/28/22

PLEASE NOTE:  All bracketed material may be authorial comments, attempts at proper syntax, or minimal rewordings of Scripture for the sake of clarity and continuity.  These emendations will not be italicized.  The “/” will be used to signify “and/or.”

   In differentiating between Yahweh of hosts [later Jesus] and Yahweh the Most High God, lower case letters have been used when discussing the former; upper case letters are reserved for the One and Only Highest God.  Since Jesus was at pains to differentiate himself from God the Father, we have followed his lead here.

   The term neo-Christians will be used to differentiate between false Christians and Jesus’ true followers.

   If we were to take the previous article and replace “Jews” with “Christians,” the arguments would still apply.  The only difference is that whereas in the Old Testament the name “Yahweh” identified Yahweh the Most High God, King of Israel, and His proxy God, Yahweh of hosts, His Redeemer (Exodus 23:20-21; Isaiah 44:6),¹ identification in the New Testament was made easier by calling the former “Father” and the latter “Son.”  But in terms of sovereignty and reverence, Old Testament hierarchies still applied:  Yahweh of hosts/Jesus would rule over creation (Matthew 28:18; Revelation 1:18) until the restoration of the Kingdom of Heaven, at which time he would abdicate his Godship to submit himself to the Father (1Corinthians 15:24-28).

   Like his early symbol Joseph, Jesus would not sit on the Most High’s throne but become God’s proverbial “right hand” (Genesis 41:40,44; 1Peter 3:22); having been made All-Powerful (Revelation 1:8) yet not All-Knowing (Mark 13:24; Acts 1:7; Revelation 1:1), and decidedly lower in terms of sovereignty (John 14:28) and reverence (Matthew 12:31-32; John 4:23; Philippians 3:3; Revelation 21:9).  In this way the Holy Spirit, the reputed Ghost-writer of Scripture (2Peter 1:20-21), kept Old Testament protocols in place; an authorship which adhered to the dictum that the testimony of two or three witnesses was required to establish truth (Deuteronomy 19:15; Matthew 18:16; 2Corinthians 13:1)—in this case He, the Holy Spirit present in Creation, bearing witness to the Father calling His Son into being and putting him in control of temporal matters (Genesis 1:1-3; Colossians 1:15; Revelation 3:14).

   Jesus’ ministry reaffirmed those protocols.  The Father was higher than him (John 14:28).  He preached the Father’s doctrine (John 12:29).  He wielded the Father’s power (John 14:10).  Jesus was the gatekeeper to the Father’s “secret wisdom” (Deuteronomy 29:29; Jeremiah 33:3↔Luke 11:13↔James 1:5; 1Corinthians 2:10-15), directing the Holy Spirit [so-called “anointment”↔1Samuel 16:13; 1John 2:27] to the deserving faithful.   Even the Holy Spirit, privy to the depths of the Most High (1Corinthians 2:11), was told what to reveal (John 16:13), Himself not being the source of said wisdom but its conveyor.  Colloquially put, the Most High God called the shots; His Holy Spirit fielded them to men; and Jesus would arbitrate who was to keep the ball rolling (Zechariah 7:12; Mark 4:11-12; John 15:26; 1Corinthians 2:10-13).

   In all of this human help was not needed, a warning that had been floated about in Psalms 146:3:  “Do not put your trust in princes, nor in a son of man, in whom there is no help.”  In Biblical parlance, “princes” referred to secular leaders and priests (Acts 23:5), and since they were all sons of men, not to be trusted.  Which left who?  Jesus, who was of divine origin (Luke 1:30-35) and no son of mortal man:  The endorsement behind his virgin birth.  Thus he would be the only Teacher given to men (Matthew 23:8); everybody else was on equal footing; and pastoral wannabes were sent packing (Luke 16:16).  Salvation had become an individual race to the finish with each runner having the potential to “win” his soul (Luke 4:2; 1Corinthians 9:24; Philippians 3:14; 2Timothy 2:5, 4:7-8).

   Have Christians done better than Jews?  Heck, no:  We have replicated their transgressions and then some!  Thus the importance of the Old Testament, for although satanic influencers of all ages have tried to dismiss or abrogate it, it is there that God offered Judeo-Christians a window into future events, since Israel’s apostasy foreshadowed Christianity’s (Ecclesiastes 1:9-11; Matthew 24:11-12,24; Acts: 20:29-30; 2Thessalonians 2:3; Revelation 9:20-21).  By eliminating ten Jewish tribes [so-called “lost”] from the record, the focus shifted exclusively onto Judah, Jesus’ tribe (Genesis 49:9↔Revelation 5:5; Genesis 49:10↔Ezekiel 21:10; Psalms 22:7, 102:22; Zechariah 14:16; Revelation 21:2-3,9; Genesis 49:11↔Zechariah 9:9; Matthew 21:1-11; Revelation 14:14-20; Hebrews 7:14); and Jerusalem, Yahweh’s symbolic abode, for He dwelled in the mystical Church of His Son’s body (Colossians 2:9; Ephesians 5:23).

   All recriminations hurled against Judah/Jerusalem are specific to post-Jesus/Apostolic Christianity:  With Jesus crucifixion, the times allotted to the Jews to make good had expired—times, by the way, of ignorance (Acts 17:30); and those allotted to the Gentiles had begun (Luke 21:24)—times not of righteousness but of entrenched, victorious evil until Jesus’ second coming.  But before that final event, payback:  For Judaism, the loss one more time of earthly Jerusalem, the heart and soul of their religion (Luke 21:20); and for the Gentile world at large, the Great Tribulation with its final plagues (Matthew 24:21-22).

  Should the whole blame lie with false leaders rather than with people choosing to be misled by them?  No:  They were enabled and abetted by those whose worst instincts were in sync with those in power, the dynamic Jesus exposed (John 8:44) and to this day pandemic in national/international politics.  Better serve accommodating rulers leeching off the people (1Samuel 8:1-20; Ezekiel 34:2-10) than a God Who does not budge (Malachi 3:6); better live “la vida loca” than fasting in sackcloth by way of true repentance (Isaiah 22:12-13).  Free-for-all amorality suits everyone (Isaiah 30:10; Jeremiah 5:31; Lamentations 2:6,14, 3:37-38, 4:13; Ezekiel 22:25-29; Zephaniah 3:3-4; Malachi 2:7); after all, are not the hearts of men given fully to do evil the whole of their lives (Genesis 6:5; Ecclesiastes 7:29, 9:3)?

The “Unknown” Yahweh of Hosts in Christianity

   Which is all water under the bridge but still flowing from past to future.  Now, we all know Jesus to be the Messiah; so in what way does he remain “unknown” to Christians?  And as we found regarding the Most High in Hosea 11:7, is there a similar recrimination hurled at us by the pre-existent Jesus?  Yes, Hosea 7:3:  “Woe to them—because they have run away from me.  Ruin to them—because they have sinned against me.  Even though I redeemed them, they spread lies against me.”

   What lies?  Let us consider a handful.

1) Trinitarianism

   Although there were three Beings implementing the plan of redemption, they were neither co-substantial² nor co-equal:  The Divinity is Dyadic, not Triune.  By his own admissions, Jesus served a higher God (Deuteronomy 32:39; Isaiah 45:5; 1Corinthians 15:24-28; Revelations 3:12); had been created by Him (Genesis 1:3; John 3:19, 8:12; Revelation 3:14↔Psalms 2:7; Colossians 1:15);³ and ranked lower than Divinity and Holy Spirit in vital respects:

a)  Having been dead for three days [technically, parts thereof], Jesus could not be the God enjoying uninterrupted immortality (Acts 2:24; 1Timothy 6:15-16);

b)  Unlike the Holy Spirit, Jesus was not privy to the depths of God (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7; 1Corinthians 2:10; Revelation 1:1)—thus unequal in wisdom;

c)  Jesus did not rank the reverence due Father (John 14:28) and Holy Spirit (Luke 12:10); and,

d)  It was the Father, not Jesus,Who people ought to fear, for He had sworn to dispose of angelic and human transgressors at Armageddon (Deuteronomy 32:35; Matthew 10:28; Revelation 20:9-10).

   Despite Scripture lying down all these pointers, men not content with remaining under Jesus’ shadow first reestablished the kind of priestly class that had failed God in the past [Malachi 2:7-8↔note that the speaker is Yahweh of hosts] and which Jesus himself had done away with (Luke 16:16).  Their congregations fell in step:  Not for them the responsibilities inherent in the freedom Jesus had given them (John 8:32); rather the solace of pious bromides (Isaiah 30:10) and regurgitated Christian snippets devoid of spiritual “meat”:  The diet of milk vs. solid food Paul talked about in Hebrews 5:11-14.  No matter the double-standards, lies, inculcated idolatry, downright abuse, and bankrupt assurances that God had their backs, people cleaved to Trinitarian cheerleaders like barnacles to a rotted hull—especially, but not limited to, those beholden to the mother of all the abominations on earth:  Babylon Rome (1Peter 5:13; Revelation 17:9).  No wonder John’s insight into that mindset boggled his mind (Revelation 17:6-8↔Revelation 13:8).

   Because Satan failed to oust Yahweh of hosts from the position the Most High entrusted to His Son (Isaiah 14:13-14; Ezekiel 21:10,13), he used his church (Revelation 2:13, 13:2, 18:2) to divert all worship from Father to Son, thus rendering the Most High irrelevant to men.  For that Satan relied on the notion of triune gods, which had proven productive in antiquity where they were a dime a dozen.  Neo-Christian theologians sought to establish a line of succession directly back to Jesus, who indeed was God’s embodiment on earth (John 14:10; Colossians 2:9) but not God Himself (John 14:28).  The objective in this ploy was to elevate Jesus from divine spokesperson to Big Kahuna; so that by extension his “vicars” could claim authority to lay down laws [see Ecclesiastes 3:14], beatify people [see Matthew 5:36], excommunicate dissidents [see John 5:22], and lord it over everyone else [see Matthew 20:25-28].  It was a ploy that paid handsomely in terms of amassing power but at the expense of bloodshed and widespread destruction (Daniel 8:23-25; Revelation 17:6).

   Thus Trinitarian dogma became one of the “lies” leveled against Jesus, legitimized and enshrined with the complicity of secular powers in early Christian history.  Trinitarian dogma is rooted on John 10:30, misconstrued to mean One Person instead of One Mind/Will at work, so that as God is cause, Jesus is effect (Matthew 26:53-54; John 18:11, 19:11); whereas God directs, Jesus enforces (John 5:19); whereas God devised a Gospel, Jesus taught it (Matthew 23:8; John 12:49); all with one sole objective:  To re-integrate what Satan had rent asunder back into the Oneness of God (John 17:21-23; Ephesians 1:10, 4:3-6).  Given later religious shenanigans to validate power grabs, as for example claims that Peter was the first pope to legitimize a line of succession, it may have seemed good PR to neo-Christian theologians to blur distinctions and roll Son and Father into one person, so that by extension popes could be regarded as channeling a hybrid God on earth.

   Has not Jesus given Peter the keys to the kingdom?  In a way, yes, but not because Peter ranked higher than his apostolic cohorts, the sort of hierarchy Jesus was dead set against (Matthew 20:25-27).  Jesus’ symbolic pronouncement marked the historical point when Peter became the first Christian to receive God’s “hidden wisdom” through the Holy Spirit (1Corinthians 2:7-10).  And that wisdom, the fact that Jesus was the Messiah, did not originate with the Spirit, as Jesus himself attested (Matthew 16:17), but with the Most High God Who had instructed His Spirit to impart that wisdom to Peter (John 16:13).

   Jesus then reinforced the significance of that event by changing the name Simon [Hebrew Shim’on, “he has heard”] to Cephas [“rock” or “stone”], declaring that next to Jesus, the foundation stone thrown away by the builders [Jews], Cephas/Peter had become the second stone laid in the construction of God’s human-bricked Church, the mystical body of Christ (Ephesians 2:20-22; Hebrews 3:6; 1Peter 2:5).  The Most High is not to be found at St. Peter’s, Salt Lake Temple, or in any and all buildings where professed Christians meet to worship, for He does not inhabit temples made with human hands (Acts 7:49, 17:24).  He never inhabited the Holy of Holies either of the Desert Tabernacle or the Jerusalem Temple:  His proxy God, Yahweh of hosts, did.  And we can surmise this from the “face to face” exchanges Moses enjoyed with Yahweh of hosts over the Ark of the Covenant (Exodus 33:11; Numbers 7:39, 12:6-8).⁴  It does not take rocket science to conclude that this Yahweh could not have been the God no man ever has seen or heard (John 1:18; 5:37; 1Timothy 1:17, 6:16; 1John 4:12).

2) The True Sabbath—or a Day by any Other Name Will Spell a Cheat

   Jesus was at pains to declare himself Lord of the Sabbath (Matthew 12:8), the Seventh Day of the Commandment (Exodus 20:8-11), not the first day of his resurrection (John 20:1) which Roman Catholicism substituted to keep pagan Sunday worshippers happy when it became the state religion.  Sundays worshipped the sun god, as did December 25 which commemorated his birth, sun gods in general being non-existent constructs Satan created to divert worship from the Yahwehs.  Protestantism, which should have known better, ostensibly broke away from Catholic hegemony during the Reformation, yet kept itself yoked to some of the former’s liturgical chains.  Not for them Daniel 7:25’s flare signals, which is perhaps why Scripture terms it “the false prophet” (Revelation 20:10) spouting deceptions (Revelations 16:13-14).

  Once more, no rocket science required.  The Sabbath Jesus observed was not the neo-Christian Sunday instituted in 4 CE:   Jesus was entombed in a hurry because he had died late Friday afternoon as the day of rest was to begin (Luke 23:54-56; John 19:42)—following the evening-to-morning pattern of Creation (Genesis 1:5; Leviticus 23:31-32).⁵  Like the Jews before them, Christian theologians deconstructed the God demanding strict obedience (1Samuel 15:22-23) into a milksop straight-jacketed by love for His creatures Who did not mind humans switching His Sabbath; so that the salutary fear Scripture enjoined His followers to cultivate in terms of obedience was downgraded to a man-made notion (1Samuel 15:23; Isaiah 29:13, 66:2).  And this irrespective of the many dire consequences prophesied to befall Sabbath violators (Nehemiah 13:15-21; Ezekiel 20:12-20,24, 23:38).

   To this day most Christians rush to Sunday services believing that God is attuned to their prayers, though we have been told the opposite is true:  He only listens to those who fear and obey Him (Proverbs 28:9; John 9:31).  We must therefore conclude that all Sunday hymns, prayers and professions of faith do not rise beyond the rafters overhead.  And because Jesus is the reputed Lord of the Sabbath-cum-Sunday, yet again Hosea 11:7 holds true:  No one exalts the Most High God on the day the sun god is exalted.

3) The Usurper Mediatrix

   Another, more damning lie is Jesus’ conscription into Marian dogma, where “Mary” co-rules with him as queen and mediatrix of graces over the nations.  Contradicting Marian dogma as well as interfaith assumptions that all creeds lead to the same God, Scripture identifies Jesus as the exclusive mediator between God and men (1Timothy 2:5) and only pathway to Him (Matthew 11:27; John 14:6).  This “Mary” is the latest avatar of pagan goddesses, specifically the heavenly queen reviled in Jeremiah 45:16-25.  Through her worship Jesus is maligned as an endorser of the idolatry his Father condemns (Jeremiah 45:26-27; Ezekiel 5:11-13)—which essentially renders Jesus a destroyer rather than saver of souls, since the idol-worshipping “Mary” encourages and dotes on constitute grounds for burning at Armageddon (Revelation 21:8). 

   Marian worship, patterned after the Great Mother cults of antiquity, plus the cult of patron saints, have been winners for Satan in terms of souls lost or in danger of being so; thus nothing much has changed between Athenian piety and modern idolatry “varnished” with Christian trappings.   If Jeremiah 44:15-25↔ Revelation 9:20-21 is any indication, idolatry will flourish until the bitter end.

4) The Re-Invented Jesus

   By and far, human beings cannot let things be as conceived without corrupting them—be it politics, arts, through genetic manipulation, environmental contamination, climate change and of course religion.  It is the latter that concerns us here:  The re-invention of the revealed Jesus to gratify every human conceit.  It is because of this that the real Jesus has become “unknown” to us:  Men—be them of Jewish or Christian persuasions—have shape-shifted him to suit their religious biases.

   To Jews Jesus was no Messiah:  They are still a-waiting him even though Daniel 9:24-25 prophesied his coming according to a timetable now accomplished and past.  But what would the Archangel Gabriel know about that, right (Daniel 9:21)?

   To scholars Jesus was an ignorant, itinerant preacher, not Paul’s proxy God “who though he existed in the form of God [as appointed ruler] did not regard equality with [the Most High] God as something to be grasped…but of his own free will he gave up all he had…becoming a man like other men” (Philippians 2:6-7)—a promise he had made in Ezekiel 34:11.  As previously discussed, there is a greater nuance to Luke 1:35 in that Mary’s implanted “embryo” encapsulated the totality of being Yahweh of hosts had exhibited in the Old Testament, including Scriptural knowledge; which is the reason why at age 12 Jesus could debate learned priests (Luke 2:41-47).

   Judge for yourselves if this is evidence of “illiteracy,” let alone that contrary to the hordes of itinerant, self-professed Yahweh-preachers roaming Jewish territories, Jesus’ miraculous deeds were further proof of God’s endorsement (John 5:31-32,37, 14:10, 17-18)—as Paul would later claim with respect to his own ministry (1Corinthians 2:4-5).  Of course God blinds unbelieving scholars to His truths (Isaiah 29:10-14; 1Corinthians 1:19-21), denouncing those twisting His words into lies (Jeremiah 8:8; Ezekiel 13:10-14), and condemning inconstant believers amongst them (Mark 8:38; James 1:7-8; Revelation 3:15-16, 21:8).

   Christians in general have created a more agreeable composite of Jesus than the radical taskmaster he is.  We call him “meek and mild” yet he is anything but (Revelation 2:27).  We ascribe to him the importance of family values he did not observe and pointedly preempted (Matthew 10:35-38, 12:46-50↔Psalms 45:10-11).  We prioritize kinfolk though Jesus found no merit in that (Luke 6:32).  We thank him for life’s enjoyments while he expected us to forfeit them (Luke 12:15,20-21,23, 14:33↔Isaiah 22:12-14).  We dismiss his socialist agenda to keep assets in earthly rather than heavenly vaults (Matthew 6:19-20, 25:35-40; Acts 4:32-35; 2Corinthians 8:14).  Though he found no logic in men’s single-minded focus to stake claims in a world slated for destruction (Matthew 16:26, 24:35; James 4:3-4; 2Peter 3:10-14), we are committed to putting down roots in it (Luke 17:26-28).  Even in terms of physical beauty, which he lacked (Isaiah 53:2), we depict him—in disobedience to the Second Commandment (Exodus 20:4-5)—as we prefer him to be.⁶

5) The Activist Jesus

   A millenary con is trying to validate human agendas by arguing they serve some divine purpose.  This is de rigueur in politics, which we will discuss in Part II(b).  Others involve conscripting Jesus to validate controversial causes, of which only three will be briefly touched upon here.

   Jesus’ take on social causes was pithy and to the point:  Do not become mired in them.  “Let your answer be either ‘yes’ or ‘no’:  Anything more than that comes from the evil one” (Matthew 5:37).  Why?  Because every person’s opinions are tainted by his biases and intellectual limitations; and differences of opinion lead to divisions, Satan’s winning card.  A house divided against itself will not stand (Mark 3:25).  Anybody who divides is condemned by that behavior (Titus 3:10-11).  Since Jesus is God’s “integrator” (Colossians 1:19-20), any “divider” will inherit the wind (Proverbs l11:29).  It is therefore not surprising—and should be blatantly obvious to everyone—that Christians taking sides on controversial and unsolvable issues will do more harm than good to Jesus’ objectives, let alone unleashing tsunamis of unforeseen yet dire consequences on others.

   On the face of it, some social causes may seem “Christian-minded.”  The Fifth Commandment, “You shall not kill” (Exodus 20:13), makes it clear that to God every life He created is precious; and not only this but that no one is entitled to do away with what is rightfully His as Creator.  This prerogative extends to His enemies:  Christians are forbidden to counter their violence with violence, their hatred with hatred, their bloodshed with bloodshed.  But when it comes to God, His stated position is clear:  “Vengeance is Mine; I shall repay” (Deuteronomy 32:35↔Romans 12:19-21); He will make [Jesus’] enemies a footstool for his feet (Psalm 110:1) ⁷ and burn them at Armageddon (Matthew 10:28; Hebrews 10:27; Revelation 20:9).  Not Jesus, not the angels he commands, not the followers he leads:  The Most High God Himself! ⁸

    “Stand your ground” laws score brownie points with anti-Christian elements, but God’s “saints” are enjoined to think and act otherwise (Isaiah 51:23; Luke 6:29-30↔1Peter 2:20-23; Romans 12:19; James 5:6; 1Peter 2:20-23).  When the Apostles wanted to rain down fire from heaven on people disrespecting Jesus, Jesus rebuked them (Luke 9:52-55).  When Peter tried to defend him, Jesus told him to sheathe his sword (Matthew 26:52).  And when Jesus, on grounds that prospective wheat might be uprooted, put a damper on the very sensible suggestion to weed the field, he was allegorizing the reason behind God’s perceived slowness in fulfilling His promise (2Peter 3:9).

   “Black Lives Matter” is meaningless in a Christian context.  If the argument is that whites devalue blacks, we should take into account that blacks kill their own—and members of other races/ethnicities—with the self-same egregious gusto their white counterparts blow them away.  Which proves Solomon’s contention that evil resides in human hearts (Ecclesiastes 9:3); and since all hearts share the same color, so that in this respect all human beings are equal, race is totally irrelevant in matters of Christian morality (1Samuel 16:7; Acts 10:34-35).

   Furthermore the cause itself opens proverbial cans of worms.  African Americans wannabe leaders exploit it to further their self-serving and divisive agendas.  Racists fixate on it as proof that white supremacy is at risk, arming themselves for the conflict they are itching to begin.  Politicians use it to appeal to hate-mongers to garner their votes.  In this free-for-all, Christian objectives are not being served but Satan’s are:  Divide and conquer.⁹

   Abortion is another example of Christians missing the forest for the trees.  Is it wrong?  Decidedly so:  It is the taking of life initiated by God—period!

   But abortion is rife with ancillary and convoluted ramifications—always a sign that the Devil is in the derails.  The powers that be need new generations to prop themselves up through taxation and wage their wars; so failing to procreate led to stigmatization, whereas the opposite was exalted:  The more babies were born, the greater breeders’ fealty to their patriotic duty.  Let the people die.  Long live rulers.

   Early Roman Catholicism added its dogmatic imprimaturs by forbidding contraception and masturbation; the former on grounds of contravening divine will (Genesis 1:28); the latter on wasting the seed intended for procreation (Genesis 38:6-10).  With respect to the first, “be fruitful and multiply,” has been interpreted as copulation in keeping with the natural order; yet we must remember not only that Genesis is a symbolic timetable vis-à-vis the unfolding of human history,¹⁰ but that everything in it foreshadowed higher spiritual truths—let alone that sex did not take place until after Adam and Eve had been evicted from Eden (Genesis 3:23-24, 4:1-2).  Genesis’ call to procreate was shadow to the substance of Jesus—the firstborn, departed brother—raising a spiritual progeny by interacting with members of his Church (Galatians 4:19; Philemon 1:10).

   Another word for masturbation—or the more correct coitus interruptus—is “onanism,” after Judah’s son, Onan (Genesis 38:8).  Though later codified in Mosaic Law (Deuteronomy 25:5-6), it was incumbent upon the surviving brother to copulate with his sister-in-law in order to raise issue for the departed sibling.  The purpose for this was clearly stated:  So that the name of the deceased brother might not be erased from Israel.  The flare signals here are the name Judah, the progenitor of Jesus’ tribe (Hebrews 7:14), the dead firstborn killed by Yahweh (Genesis 38:7), and the wife without mortal issue.  All of which prefigure what?  Jesus, firstborn of the Most High God (Colossians 1:15; Revelation 3:14), whose death was required by God (Isaiah 53:4,6; John 18:11, 19:11), so that from Heaven he could raise issue for childless Jerusalem, Heavenly Bride and Mother of all the redeemed (Galatians 4:26-27; Revelation 21:2,9-10).

   Whether these teachings were properly understood is not the issue:  Failing to procreate was; for which reason raising big families and prohibiting contraception became institutionalized, Roman Catholic dogma.  The human inventory of nations beholden to Roman rule had to be replenished (Revelation 18:13); and Rome had to deliver if it wanted to keep its ascendancy over its unholy empire.  The tolls exacted in human suffering and lost lives were staggering, whether deaths in multiple childbirths; unwanted children exploited and abused in a variety of settings; starving babies; malnourished and developmentally handicapped ones; and millions of corpses littering Satan’s battlefields.

   Jesus had put a damper on all of this:  He had not married nor exhorted anyone to do so.  It was a matter of individual—meaning not externally imposed—choice between a sexless and challenging way of life (Matthew 19:12), or chaining oneself to one partner until death did them part (Matthew 19:8-9).  Keeping fingers crossed one chose the right spouse; otherwise remarriage was out of the question as long as the original partner lived (Malachi 2:14-15; Romans 7:2-3; 1Corinthians 7:10-11).  And Paul, ever mindful of Satan’s traps (Ephesians 6:16) stated his opinion with respect to marriage:  Choices to copulate or put up with/separate from difficult spouses were personal rather than divinely mandated (1Corinthians 7:5,12-15).  As far as the Lord was concerned, divorce and remarriage were off the table (1Corinthians 7:10-11).

   In the way that abortion negates procreation, it is equally berated, though in here the transgression is far more egregious:  One chooses to destroy the embryo God has infused with a soul, so that the affront is not against mere flesh but against God Himself.  But this rejection falls within the divine parameters that every person is entitled to make decisions redeeming/condemning his/her soul (Deuteronomy 30:19; Jeremiah 21:8; Ezekiel 3:17-21; Romans 14:4).  And it is that individual prerogative that anti-abortionists deny and have no business interfering with; let alone the misguided notion that protecting the unborn overrides the precedent by which Jesus will effectively judge both the aborting personnel and the abortee.

   Can anyone cite chapter and verse where God instructed him/her to ram personal beliefs down anybody’s throat?  No.  Where each Christian is concerned, mind your own business (Ezekiel 18:20; Galatians 6:5); but let the deciding to others and their guidance to God (Romans 14:4).  Anti-abortionists may be tickled pink at the reversal of Roe vs. Wade engineered by Roman Catholic stalwarts.  But if endangering the lives of those seeking abortion or exposing them to long-term, medical complications; enabling the dumping of unwanted fetuses in toilets and garbage cans; condemning newborns to foster homes where they may be brutalized maybe regarded as “victories for God,” we need to remember that His ways and ours do not jibe (Isaiah 55:8-9).  Christians have absolutely no business interfering in matters of such complexities that only God is equipped to deal with.

   If the argument is that taxpayers’ money should not be used for killing fetuses, let us remember that such contributions fund many efforts where human life is taken, if not by aborting fetuses, then by depriving fully realized ones of their inalienable right to live.  If the crux of the controversy is the preciousness of life God gifts us with, no Christian should endorse the death sentence, police brutality resulting in unwarranted deaths, or theaters of war where innocents are collateral damage in the elimination of targeted parties—yet many Christians are OK with these.

   If Christian anti-abortionists are so gung-ho about the right of the unborn to live, let them advertise their willingness to assume the responsibilities those seeking abortions are trying to avoid.  Would the world were full of people, many of them not necessarily Christians, who being a law to themselves (Romans 2:14-16) give unwanted children a chance to thrive rather than rant against the evils of abortion.  In imitation of such godly luminaries, let Christian anti-abortionists them put their faith where their mouth is; have we not been told that a faith without works of true repentance is dead (Matthew 3:8; James 2:17)?

   While many anti-abortionists grin in self-satisfaction as they burden others with insurmountable ordeals, one wonders how many will be found wanting and end up among those Jesus will reject on Judgment Day (Matthew 7:22-24).

¹ Go to biblehub.com and check out how some Trinitarian-minded translators fudge the true meaning of Scripture by rolling both Yahwehs into one.

² Even now he is immortal flesh, first born of all partakers of the first resurrection (Daniel 12:2; Colossians 1:18; Revelation 20:6).  The Most High is Spirit (John 4:24), as by definition, His Holy Spirit.

³ Nothing to do with the embryo implanted in Mary’s womb (Luke 1:31-35); for even the resurrected Jesus in charge of Creation reaffirmed being superseded by a higher God than him (Revelation 3:14), as the Holy Spirit confirmed through Paul (Colossians 1:15).

   Jesus’ body may have been mortal, but his soul had pre-existed.  However his miraculous conception was managed, Mary’s embryo contained the fullness of everything Yahweh of hosts had been in the past; as attested to in Isaiah 52:6; Ezekiel 34:11-17↔Matthew 25:31-33; John 8:58, John 17:5.

   Needless to say, the embryo contained no chromosomal contributions from either Mary or Joseph.  Though it is always bad policy to engage in scientific arguments (1Timothy 6:20-21), genetics tells us that Mary could not have contributed the Y-chromosome needed to determine Jesus’ gender.  And Joseph had not copulated with her (Matthew 1:18).

⁴ After all Moses prefigured Jesus as Lawgiver and Judge of God’s nation (Deuteronomy 18:15); and Moses’ face to face exchanges with Yahweh of hosts were patterned after Yahweh of hosts/Jesus exchanges with the Most High God (John 1:18, 5:19, 12:49).

⁵ An artificial timetable whose significance is continuously overlooked.  Men measure evenings and mornings by the setting and rising of the Sun; yet as our Sun was created on the Fourth Day (Genesis 1:14-19), what do the terms “evening” and “morning” of the First Day really foreshadow?  The time span governing Yahweh’s specific holy days in perpetuity (Leviticus 23:31-32).

   Up to 4 CE early Christians had observed the Biblical Sabbath.  And the fact that this Sabbath is the seventh day whereas Sunday is the first day of the week is corroborated by the calendars we use.

⁶ Thus, images of Jesus showcasing a variety of skin colors, a gimmick that endears multi-ethnic “Mary” to her worshippers worldwide—and we know who “she” is channeling.

   This practice undermines Jesus’ transcendent message that to him and to His God there are no distinctions of any kind among men (Acts 10:34-35; Galatians 3:28-29).  Since to men a picture tells a thousand words, imagine how a detailed description of Jesus would have been exploited by hate-mongers worldwide to disparage other ethnicities.

   We should also consider that in order to render Jesus meaningful to the whole of mankind, there are no physical descriptions of him in Scripture except that he lacked beauty so “that we should desire him” (Isaiah 53:2)—meaning in anticipation of the time when transformed into his immortal likeness, we shall see him as he really is (1John 3:2).

⁷ Jesus makes a crucial distinction in Matthew 22:43-44.  He is identifying himself as King David’s Lord at the same time as David is differentiating between Jesus and Jesus’ own Lord, the Most High God.  This is yet another example of the divine hierarchy which ranks Jesus lower than the Dyadic Divinity.

⁸ Why?  Because what is being destroyed along with mortal flesh is God’s DNA:  the soul, the giver of life (John 6:63) and part of His immortal essence.  As Jesus implied, men can kill the body but never the soul:  Only the Most High has the power to obliterate it from existence; hence His necessary role at Armageddon. 

⁹ The technique scored successes amongst genocidal leaders like Philip II of Macedon, Julius Caesar, and Napoleon. In matters of politics, Machiavelli recommended it to leaders aiming for control over factions opposing their rule.  In religion charges of heresy or danger to national interests were leveled to eliminate the opposition and consolidate power (Daniel 8:23-25; John 11:50-52).  And in the modern workplace corporate “psychopaths” use it to climb up the corporate hierarchy.

¹⁰ See our series on Genesis: The Myth that Never Was.