App
Carl Franklin—12/21/96
- PDF | Audio | [Up]
As we fellowship together we're worshipping Christ, and not only worshipping Christ, we're glorifying the Father. In fact, the only way that we can ever make it into the Kingdom and continue to grow in the Spirit is to help each other.
The way that Christ set it up. You can't just go to God on our knees or sit on a stump or climb a mountain and shave our head. To renounce the world in that sense and grow spiritually, we have to interact with each other.
Sometimes that interaction can be abrasive. We're learning. We don't know how to organize ourselves or how to resolve some problems sometimes. Sometimes we get in a wrong attitude, but working together and helping each other work off those rough edges we can grow in grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ. And one day stand on the Sea of Glass with Christ as spirit beings.
The struggle that we're going through now, we can look back on and say that it was all worth it. We know it's worth it, but sometimes we become impatient with ourselves or discouraged. I'll be the first to tell you that there are times when I get very discouraged. That's just part and parcel of the human experience, especially if we're scattered and we don't have someone close by. Even if there those who are close by, but many times we're busy with our lives and we need to get together on special occasions likes this, especially at this time of the year to reinforce each other.
Paul said that we need to comfort the feeble-minded. That doesn't mean that we're imbeciles; what it means that we become faint-hearted at times and we need to strengthen each other by getting together and taking away the faint-heartedness and reassure each other.
I'd like to start off by reading Jude 17 and then I'll launch into Darrell Conder's new book, because he's a modern-day antichrist! He needs to be branded as such. As we will see in Rom. 16, Paul said that those who are to note those causing doctrinal division. In this case it's more than doctrinal division, he's trying lead us away from Christ and eternity!
Jude prophesied of such a time. I think that this fits in. The first part is a bit negative, but the last part is very positive.
Jude 17: "But you, beloved, remember the words that were spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; because they said to you that in the last time there would be mockers, who would be selfishly walking according to their own ungodly lusts. These are the ones who cause division; they are psychic, not having the Spirit of God. But you, beloved, be building up yourselves on your most Holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit, so that you keep yourselves in the love of God while you are personally awaiting the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life" (vs 17-21).
Then Jude said that we need to be discerning in our walk with each other and our walk with Christ.
Verse 22: "Now on the one hand, show mercy to those individuals who are doubting; but on the other hand, save others with fear, snatching them out of the fire, hating even the garment that has been defiled by the flesh" (vs 22-23).
So, there are some that we need to grab by the hair and jerk back and just shake them back to reality. There are those who we need to throw our arms around and cry with them, laugh with them, be with, comfort and support them in a different way.
Verse 24: "Now, to Him Who is able to keep them from falling, and to bring them into the presence of His own glory, blameless in exceeding joy, to the only wise God our Savior, be the glory and greatness, the might and authority, even now, and into all the ages of eternity. Amen" (vs 24-25).
You will notice that this is really part of the Lord's prayer in Matt. 6. Paul begins many of his epistles this way, and so do the other apostles. I thought that was very fitting for the perilous times that we live in and the great struggle that we go through and are going through, and will get worse in the near future.
I want to talk about Darrell Conder and I thought his new book was about the identifying the tribes of Israel in the end-times. But I was misled! The title is very misleading! It turns out be the second in a series of three books. He says that the third book will identify Israel of today, if he ever gets to that book.
His life was interrupted years ago and he began a research that led him away from Christ. He's now denouncing Christ as his Savior! He's calling for all of us to denounce Christ as our Savior, as well.
So, the title is very misleading. He is in essence turning back to Baalism, thinking that he's turning away from Baalism, for the purpose of saving physical Israel. He teaches:
In order to save physical Israel, we must denounce Jesus Christ. Christ is a false messiah. Once we denounce Christ and get rid of the false Babylonian retaliation and the false messiah called Jesus Christ, then Israel will repent. When Israel repents the tribes will be reunited and the true Messiah will come and lead them into a glorious kingdom ruling the entire world under Israel.
This is basically what the book is all about! He's saying, in essence, that Christ isn't real. He doesn't deny that He was crucified. These words deny that Christ rose from the dead. But this is what he's saying: that Christ never rose from the dead!
As Paul told us in 1-Cor. 15, 'If Christ did not rise from the dead, then we have no hope.' If we have no hope we might as well just go out and be like everybody else. Life suffers.
I'm speaking on this today to combat this heresy. It's not only a heresy in the old sense, the is the heresy of an antichrist who is asking us to go away from Christ, thinking then he will have the God of the Old Testament.
Although the Jews think they have God, that they have a relationship with God—the God of the Old Testament—that they know Him. Because they rejected Jesus Christ, they don't have the God of the Old Testament; they don't have God the Father or God the Son.
1-John 2:18: "Little children, it is the last time; and just as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have risen up, by which we know that it is the last time. They went out from among us, but they were not of us because if they were of us, they would have remained with us; nevertheless, they left that they might be exposed to show that they all were not of us. But you have the anointing from the Holy One, and you have knowledge of all things pertaining to salvation. I did not write to you because you do not know the Truth, but because you know it, and you understand that not one lie comes from the Truth. Who is the liar if it is not the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ?…. [this is what Conder is doing in his books] …He is the antichrist—the one who denies the Father and the Son. Anyone who denies the Son does not have the Father either" (vs 18-23).
But he that acknowledges the Son, has the Father also! (added in italic in the KJV)!
Verse 24: "Therefore, let what you have heard from the beginning dwell in you; if what you have heard from the beginning is dwelling in you, then you will be dwelling in the Son and in the Father. And this is the promise that He has promised us: eternal life" (vs 24-25).
So, what is at stake is eternal life for all of us! This is why I'm branding Conder as an antichrist. In accord with Paul's writings to the Romans:
Romans 16:17: "Now I exhort you, brethren… [notice that the brethren are the mark] …to take note of those who are causing divisions… [doctrinal divisions] …and offenses contrary to the doctrine…"—of Jesus Christ, because it's not just of any doctrine that's being taught; it's the teaching of Jesus Christ.
"…which you have learned, and shun them; because these are the sort who are not serving our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own bellies, and are deceiving the hearts of the innocent by smooth talking and flattery. For the report of your obedience has reached to all. Therefore, I rejoice over you. However, I desire that you be wise indeed concerning good, but innocent concerning evil. But the God of peace will bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen" (vs 17-20).
Breaking the word mark [take note of] down a little further, it literally means to spy out—not just to watch them, but to be well aware of what they're saying and teaching for the purpose of being able to defend ourselves and the brethren. Therefore, encourage them when these doctrines come to their attention and they panic, flee and are fainthearted.
Alan Ruth was telling me that there's a small fellowship that at least five of that fellowship found out about the material and were just devastated. So, there are brethren who are tempted to turn from Christ and stumble in their fellowship; so it's quite serious.
The word in the Greek for 'mark' is 'skopeo' and it means to spy out by taking careful notice of those who cause divisions and upset people's faith contrary to the teaching of Jesus Christ.
It also has a deeper meaning of being predominately mentally away by paying close attention to these false teaching in order to be prepared to respond appropriately.
It's not pleasant to go through the machinations of someone's mind who has left Jesus Christ. But these are antichrists, seducers and their words sound good and very convincing. If we're not prepared to appropriately respond to these—not only to defend ourselves, but our brethren—then many of the brethren could stumble.
We need to be there for them, to help them, to be strong for them, to respond appropriately. To do that, I'd like to take a brief look at Conder's theology, and by that I mean his view of God the Father and Jesus Christ so we know where he's coming from. It's only fair if we're marking someone and attacking them from this standpoint to objectively try to understand where they're coming from. It's really the only fair thing to do.
If I were to sit here and rant and rave and call him all kinds of names, antichrist is the worst that you could call him. But if I would call him all kinds of various names and not get to his doctrine, that wouldn't be right at all. That's happens to me a lot. The last few months I've been called every dirty name in the book, but almost no one has tackled me on doctrine. But I'm a 'scurrilous, scumbag, fleabag…'
It angers you, humbles you, scares you—and everything else—all at once. But take a brief look at how his view of how the New Testament was formulated. It's critical to his denial of Jesus Christ. Once he denied Christ, then he had to set about to destroy the very document that teaches about Jesus Christ, the words that we study and read from.
Then we want to take a brief look at the basic assumptions, because underpinning Conder's denial of Christ and underpinning his view of the New Testament Scriptures, and why it's not valid, are basic assumptions.
If you can get to those assumptions, then you're like Jack and the Beanstalk! You find those you can chop down the whole vine and the giant comes tumbling down and all his beans and everything goes away. Find out how those basic, foundational assumptions work with them and denounce them—properly so—then you can be secure that you can appropriately respond to individuals like this.
Then I want to take a look at the truth about the formation of the New Testament text and the preservation of the text. I have enough here for a semester's class.
Conder writes in his book about his challenged a few years ago about his basic beliefs concerning Jesus Christ. He admits that these doubts got the best of him.
from Mystery Babylon the Great: The Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth by Darrell W. Conder
The first fact that I had to admit was that my denouncement of Christianized pagan customs was based solely on my own religious background and not on anything that I had proven to myself.
After being in the Church for 40 years he hadn't proven these things to himself? That's terrible! What an indictment!
This admission took me into an intensive three-year study to either prove or disprove the convictions of a lifetime and the results published in MB…
That's his first book, Mystery Babylon and the Lost Ten Tribes in the End Time, his first book.
…speak for themselves. At the beginning of this chapter, I mentioned some serious doubts even while MB was at the printers. Essentially, what I meant was that when the research for MB was complete, I had only one real question before me. That was: Was Jesus another of the world's crucified savior gods?
This is the initial doubt the got into his mind and began to work on him! It worked and worked and three years later this book comes out saying that He's not the Christ, He's just another phony messiah and we should deny Him, because we're denying physical Israel their right to rule the world.
HERE IT WAS…
He writes in all caps:
THE QUESTION THAT EVERYING IN MY CONSCIENCE TOLD ME WAS A FORBIDDEN THOUGHT:
How could I, or any born Christian, ever allow such a doubt to enter my mind?
At the end of the book, he writes under the heading:
Just Another Messiah
A few miles away while Simon Magus was busy in Samaria, another preacher arose. Just one more of a long line of men who came along during this time to claim the title of Israel's Messiah. His name was Jesus of Nazareth.
Believe me, when I read this I was stunned, angry and my heart was palpitating! I was ready to burn the book. You can't do that; you just have to face it. Don't spend your money on it; it's not worth it. But we must know where this man's coming from and how to defend ourselves.
Although, after his death, Jesus would be used to form the nucleus to form a new religion. While he lived he was completely unknown by any (???).
Not so! Not true!
Perhaps this was because, if we follow the account in the book of Acts, Jesus had only 120 converts to his preaching efforts at the end of his life.
So, Conder belittles Christ's ministry and says, 'Look, He preached for three and half years and look what He has, He has nobody.'
Well, three days later He was resurrected. And forty days later there were 3,000 converted in one day. It spread like wildfire throughout the Roman Empire. There's no mention of that in the book! No mention of the resurrection! Positive or negative! Now, I didn't read word for word everything in the book, so I should say that, but I went through to see his argument, and I honestly tried to find out where he was coming from. I did not find that! It might be there but I didn't see it!
Then there was Jesus himself, he not only failed to accomplish much in his life, but he was boring to boot.
That's purely blasphemous! This is mythology according to Darrell Conder! The machinations of man whose mind has wandered off the deep end and fallen into the trap of Judaism.
That is, his life was certainly not the stuff of which legends are made. First of all, Jesus was born in Nazareth, and worst of all birthplaces for a respectable Jewish messiah.
Jesus wasn't born in Nazareth!
His parentage was nothing to brag about, either. Jesus was simply a boring man with an obscure past.
So, Conder writes of Satan's mission to deny physical Israel her inheritance by spreading a false religion around a false messiah. A lot of Christianity is false! But we can't 'throw the baby out with the water.'
Jesus Christ is true, even though there's so much that is false in Christianity. Conder also says that Satan intervened through Simon Magus and formed the nucleus of the legend about a false messiah, and that this messiah was formed around the experiences of Simon Magus.
The whole purpose of the material is basically to get us to deny Christ so that we can be part and parcel of bringing in the Kingdom of God. Not return of Christ from the Throne of God, but so that Israel can be truly identified, repent and the Elijah work will come and the true messiah will come and the work of the rabbis will not be in vain.
He writes, giving a quote from a rabbi who wrote in 1849 concerning the Hebrew people:
Rabbi Schlessinger wrote: "The world will [ultimately] be converted to our doctrines and to the law in the manner the Lord will clearly reveal it for the gentiles, in which the glorious prophecies of the 54th of Isaiah will be accomplished; and it will be by a spirit of inquiry gradually awakened and carried forward through the doubts and misgivings of the force of ancient and preconceived prejudices, that the truth will triumph
Well, Darrell is a part of that rabbinic work now, and he's asking us to become a part of it. Of course, we'll deny that effort.
I close this study with the hope that we can all as brother's and sisters as Israelites return the faith of our physical fathers: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob so that the glorious kingdom can be established at the coming of Israel's true messiah.
I brought with me a few sets of tapes:
- What Jews Should know about Missionaries
- How to Answer a Christian Missionary
This is about 'Christian' Missionaries. This gives us more insight into the tack that the rabbis are taking—not just through Darrell Conder, but many others—to infiltrate the Churches of God and begin to defeat everything that's called 'Christian' to erase the name of Christ if they can from the face of the earth.
Someone gave to me a copy of the movie Independence Day. Toward the end and through the middle I began to realize that the fellow who was a physicist was a Jew—an MIT physicist—and he couldn't find work as a physicist and his friend was now the president of the U.S. The woman that this physicist still loved was the president's speaker, and the father of this physicist was a rabbi, but you don't find out he was a rabbi to the end of the movie.
Here we have a Jewish American president, his secretary or chief of staff is Jewish, the physicist is Jewish and here we have a Jewish messiah, the US president, who saves the world from aliens coming in the clouds. It's movies like this that is preparing people that when Christ does return and the cities will be destroyed, as is prophesied in Revelation, that they will resist Him thinking that that alien should be destroyed, fought and resisted. That the true messiah is already here on earth.
Take a look at the move if you haven't seen it, and especially in that light; I think you will find it interesting. There's a lot that they're doing in that sense to prepare us.
But to continue with Darrell's work: To destroy the Christ of the New Testament, he has to destroy the Gospel, so he says:
At that time I strongly believed that the Gospel account were written by the apostles of Jesus; the very men who knew him and who were personally present at the events they describe. How could I believe anything else?
I was taught from early childhood not to every question these infallible truths of God. But my former faith aside, I can now see that historical and other scientific evidence simply does not support these Christian assertions.
This brings us back to the Gospels and the question of authorship, which I previously raised in the case of Luke.
So, he's teaching in writing this book that not only the entire Greek New Testament is a fabrication of Gentile Catholic monks or others, it was not written by the original apostles, and that it's not infallible. It's not the Word of God, Conder is saying.
So, to get rid of this Christ that he now hates, this 'false messiah' in his mind, he has to destroy the New Testament. So, he begins to attack the Gospel Message in particular! That's the heart and core of his argument; he has to destroy the first person Gospel accounts or throw a discouraging light upon them to cause people to stumble and turn away from Christ. He no longer believes that God's Word is infallible!
This is just a small summary of how he thinks this whole thing progressed, that is the development of his 'fabrication.'
We know and we can prove and spend the next month of two, if we had the time and were close enough together, rent the hall and prepare the lessons and go into it in great detail to prove our point, far beyond what I can give you. But I can give you the essence of the argument.
The Gospels, indeed, are valid! There's no question of that! The original Greek—it wasn't written in Hebrew or Aramaic or anything else—written by the original apostles. It was preserved in Greek by Greeks for the simple reason they knew Greek. It doesn't take a 'rocket scientist' or physicist working at the White House to figure that out.
The same with the Hebrew. Conder's argument that the Hebrew Old Testament was stolen from the Jews, and it needs to be taken away from the Christians and given back to the Jews is wrong on both counts. It wasn't stolen from the Jews. The Levites within the Jewish community within Judaism preserve the Hebrew Old Testament.
The rabbis of Judaism had no interest in the Old Testament. In the Talmud they write that their sayings—the writings of the sages in the Talmud—are superior to Scripture. I've got this is summary form in this little booklet The Talmud Unmasked, which was written in 1896 or so. It goes through the Talmud and pulls out certain quotes concerning Jesus Christ and their view of the Old Testament.
They hated the Old Testament. They didn't care about the Old Testament. That's why Christ had to say to the Pharisees when He was here: Have you never read…? That's was a 'broken record' in Christ's ministry! Well, they didn't! They did not read; they felt their sayings of their rabbis was far superior to Scripture.
So, Conder basically says this, and I won't belabor this. He says it begins with Simon Magus. Somehow Simon Magus knew that this failed Jesus Christ would be stuff of which legends could be made. How Conder could make that connection, I don't know.
He denounces Jesus as being boring and having no good parentage, of being a loser. If He was all of that, why would Simon Magus pick up on this Man who was crucified in 30A.D. and run off to Rome and build a false religion around it? It doesn't make any sense at all!
So, like most people, the material hasn't been well edited. A good editor would throw out everything that's in this book except a few paragraphs. So, we challenge him! It truly should have been done before this went to press. But we can take care that for him now and do it ourselves!
A summary of what Conder was saying:
Simon goes to Jerusalem shortly after the crucifixion—this is in the mythology here—and he got his information, but he has to leave Jerusalem because it's a dangerous time. So, he flees Jerusalem with his small band and heads to Rome.
In Rome Simon begins to write the Gnostic gospel and attributes almost all of them to Simon Magus. Mind you this 31-35A.D. Simon preaches for more than 30 years and is killed about the same time the Apostle Paul was killed in 67-68A.D.
I'm not convinced Paul was killed then, but this is what tradition says.
Simon preached and he wrote and he got most of his material from a false Jewish messiah who lived 100 years before Christ, who was born in Nazareth a hundred years before Christ who shacked up with Mary Magdalene and had a kid who became very famous. It was this false messiah that takes the legends and begins to wrap everything up and invents this story that eventually comes out as the sayings and life of Jesus Christ that we know of as the Gospel.
Conder says that the apostle didn't write and Christ didn't really these things, it's all a fabrication. This is what Conder is trying to say.
Simon out-foxed himself. It is true that Simon Magus was there, and it's true that he became a court magician to Nero in about 66A.D.; just about the time that the Jewish wars started.
According to Conder's mythology, Simon had to prove not only to his followers, but to Nero that he truly was a magician, truly was in contact with the spirit world. So, he was going to fake his own crucifixion. But Nero got impatient and actually crucified him' took his head off!
So, here the followers are in Nero's court and elsewhere in Rome with all of this body of Gnostic literature with a dead messiah. He waited for three days with no resurrection and waited for three weeks with no resurrection and waited for three months and no resurrection. He sort of gave up the ghost for a while, because he didn't come back from the dead. Here again was another false messiah!
So, tying in with this experience of Simon writing all this literature, these false gospels, Conder has to fit in somehow the work of the Apostle Paul, and he does so in this way:
This is after the death of both Paul and Simon Magus—the two great apostles of Christianity—the followers of Paul who were pagan Gentiles began to spread oral tradition. It was picked up a few generations down the way and became the basis for the book of Mark.
So, they took the Gnostic writings of Simon, took their oral traditions and put them together and here you have the sayings of this 'false christ' purported to be written by Christ's disciples and you have this created legend that came from all these false messiahs and imaginations of Paul's followers all mixed together in this great swirl. They were finally brought down to what we call the Gospel of Mark that is in our Bible.
From Mark, Conder feels, that Matthew and Luke were written. He quotes Christian scholars and Catholic scholars to prove his point.
If you do get the book and try to read this and piece this together, it's not as simple as I've just explained it to you.
It took me a week of trying to piece this together, because it's all screwed up! In other words, it dead-ends and he contradicts himself. I think this is what he wanted to write and didn't get to it. This is what I think he was trying to say, because trying to piece it together, how do we get from Simon Magus to the Gospel of Mark? When was the Gospel of Mark supposedly written, if it wasn't written by Mark himself? It's not in here.
All of a sudden we go from Simon and Paul and here's the Gospel of Mark that was written who knows when, and Luke comes along and it was written by a Catholic in 141-50A.D. in Rome. That's the western text and that's a trail he lead on several hundred years. It was the supposed canonization of the New Testament by the Catholics under Constantine the Great. Conder says this is why there's Greek. That it wasn't written by anybody from Palestine, these were pagan Greeks who wrote this. These were pagan men who messed with this story and finally put it together and wrote it up and here we have it in Scripture, in the writings of Paul, as well.
Let me read this one thing and make a comment before moving on. I think this is significant in light of some trouble we're having with sacred-nameism. Conder says:
Simon presented his theology which in fact was Gnosticism, which is a combination of different religious thoughts including (???) philosophy.
That's true! Although, Simon didn't write all of that.
Simon produced volumes of writings…
Conder's imagination!
…incorporating this theological approach in explaining the book Joshua the Messiah.
Joshua is the English word for the Hebrew pronounced Yeshua!
In fact, so much theology was produced that it literally took centuries for the latter church fathers to totally expunge the obvious influence of his writings.
It was at this time that Simon used the more acceptable Greek name Jesus instead of the Hebrew Joshua. And the thoroughly pagan terms of 'logos' and 'Christos.'
The Apostle John tells us, writing in Greek, in 70A.D. in 1-John 2:18 that if we deny Jesus Christ, we also lose the Father and we lose eternity. So, there are high stakes!
What Conder is alluding to here is that it ties in with sacred names from this standpoint. Conder is now working with Jerusalem's Levitical sources. I don't know who they are. One or more from what I've heard. If I'm wrong, well the, Darrell can write me and set me straight. But this is taken from this book The Talmud Unmasked concerning the name of Jesus.
In all of Conder's writings he says don't use the name Jesus; keep away from this false messiah and don't use any of this: Logos, Christos or anything like this. This little book summarizes and takes quotes from the Talmud.
The Talmud Unmasked THE SECRET RABBINICAL TEACHINGS CONCERNING CHRISTIANS
by Rev. I. B. Pranaitis
(Roman Catholic Priest)
{http://www.talmudunmasked.com/chapter4.htm}
Since the word Jeschua means "Savior," the name Jesus rarely occurs in Jewish books.(1) It is almost always abbreviated to Jeschu, which is maliciously taken as if it were composed of the initial letters of the three words Immach SCHemo Vezikro—"May his name and memory be blotted out."
So, when a rabbi who has read the Talmud and is an expert in the Talmud, here is a 'Christian'—Sabbath-keeper or otherwise—saying Jeschu, he hears, 'May his name be blotted out forever.'
What they're trying to do is get Christians to curse the very God that they worship. I'm convinced that the spirit that is moving our people to 'Jeschu,' to the sacred names is part of the spirit that is trying to get us to deny Jesus, using that name as a valid name, and using the name Jesus Christ as the anointed one, the Messiah, our Savior.
They want to bring in the Kingdom of God through rabbinic teaching. They want a world in their view. They've always taught that and felt that. They are very angry at Catholic Christians, and rightly so, because Christians stole their idea. Now they have set about to establish their kingdom, and this is what a lot of the effort is about toward the one-world government.
I think that ties in with this whole idea of denying Christ as Savior.
I gave that to you in summary form, and believe me that is all we should go into now at this point, because it's so convoluted. But I think you get the drift of what I'm saying.
Not only is Conder saying the Greek New Testament is phony, but was written not by the apostles of Christ—who were native born Hebrews—but by pagan Gnostic priests of Baal. It's a story that's fabricated and therefore we should reject it totally as the true story of Jesus Christ.
Let's look at some of the assumptions that Darrell Conder has made; this is one of the major assumptions he builds all this on. Remember, if he can destroy the New Testament Greek, then our faith and Jesus can be underminded and destroyed. If we don't have His Word and can count on that Word, what do we have? Nothing! This is what Conder is attempting to do, and this is one of his assertions:
Continuing in Darrell Conder's book: Mystery Babylon the Great
It was not only unacceptable, but it was written in a foreign language.
It was Greek
What Jesus made was on the spot translations from Greek into Aramaic.
Yes, if He had to! As we will see later, the Galileans were tri-lingual; they knew Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. That's a proven fact, indisputable. But you can see how he raises questions, sets you up. The answer the Conder is looking for is embedded in the question and it's not apparent. You're setup emotionally and causes a doubt to be raised in your mind and then goes ahead and makes assertions with no foundation or support at all.
Why would his apostles have used such a text? This is especially important when we again consider that the first century Jews of Judea didn't speak the Greek language, and the common everyday working man who made up the apostles surely lacked the education to use and speak Greek.
An assertion! No foundation! No proof! And indeed it is false! They were not ordinary men, they were chosen by God the Father Himself. They were revealed to Jesus when He prayed all night asking God. This was up at Caesarea Philippi, which was a Greek-speaking community solely. This was a city state founded by the Romans. There were five or six other within Galilee.
So, it was that very site that the apostles were chosen and they spoke Greek, their mother tongue was Aramaic, but they spoke Greek because they were middle class fishermen, business people. Matthew was a Levite, and not only that he was a tax collector. He was in the administration of the Judean government under Herod collecting taxes. He could read and write, spell and do all those things. He was an upper-class literate man.
God the Father chose men who could write, read, record from the very beginning the words of Jesus Christ from the very time He sat on the Mount of Olives. That's not where the Sermon on the Mount was given, but in Capernaum.
When Christ began to preach and reveal the New Testament Covenant, the disciples were there writing from that very second. We have that in the New Testament. I can prove that to you in the (???) Greek.
So, they weren't everyday working mucks, whatever word you want to use. Yes, Greek was spoken all over Judea, Egypt, and in fact, Greek was spoken a thousand miles to the east all through the Parthian Empire, from India to Britain. It was the language that everybody used as English is used today. Your mother tongue might be French, Hindi, Swahili, but if you want to fly and airplane, you have to learn English.
So, if you were a fisherman in a Greek area with the best Greek schools right down the road from you, and you didn't know Greek, there was truly something wrong with you. You wouldn't be able to function as a fisherman. You wouldn't be able to sell your goods on the world market. You would be totally lost. You may be out fishing hoping to catch something and nobody would buy them because you couldn't talk to them.
We have an example of Jesus quoting from the Septuagint and the Gospels is clear evidence of tampering with and piecing together of various stories and saying in later manuscripts by Greek-speaking, Septuagint reading, Gentile men.
So, Conder is saying that the Greek New Testament is written by Satan. I wouldn't want to be in his shoes or boots! It would be like trying to play golf on a knoll, and you're trying to get the golf ball in and a horrendous storm comes through and you jump up and down and hold the golf club up in the air just tempting the lightning to strike you and take you off the golf course.
This is far worse what this man is saying, but I mean as stupid as that is, I wouldn't want to be around that person! This is far worse what they're trying to do with the Bible. Conder also writes:
How were the original apostles able to write in Greek given their background? We are asked to believe, because the oldest surviving New Testament manuscripts were written in Greek.
The first century Judean Christian men and other such tradesmen could read, write and speak Greek. In fact, in the case of specific New Testament books, the Greek used is that of someone who is extremely learned in the language. Indeed!
In the case of Luke, it was Luke's mother language. In the case of Peter, it wasn't his mother language, but Peter was so good that it might as well have been written in the Greek as his mother tongue.
If you would undertake the exercise to go back into the New Testament and threw away the term Jew was used, it is evident that the nature of the narrative is anti-Semitic. This clearly tells us that the books were written by Gentiles and not the original 12 apostles.
Moreover, if these Gentiles were actually one and the same with the Greek and Roman church fathers it becomes obvious.
These facts will be borne out in numerous examples as this book progresses.
In a note about Zacharias writing on a tablet in Luke…
{Go to Track #2}
So, he had to write on a tablet. What does it mean?
Conder quotes from: What the Bible Really Says by Manfred Barthel:
…wax tablets, which could be written on with a pointed stylus and erased by scraping off the top layer of wax would have been a common enough household object in Greece. It would have been a rare and expensive luxury in Palestine.
Both assertions, that's all! Not only did they have the mind, not only could they write, but they used membrane, parchment. In fact it was early Christians who invented the book, the codex. The Scroll of the Book under the inspiration of Jesus Christ. Christ probably talked to His disciples about it while He was still on earth.
This was totally different. Early Christians invented the book. They wrote on animal skins, parchment which could be erased if you wanted to. I often wondered when Paul was sitting in prison and writing that he was inspired to write everything everywhere perfectly the first time, or did he have to go back and erase something and make some edits? We don't know!
I'm assuming under the inspiration of God's Spirit it could be done perfectly the first time, but I don't know that was necessarily what happened. Paul could have erased some things under the inspiration—it was all inspired—and gone back and rewritten it till we get to the final inspired text. I don't know, but they had that option.
History tells us that the first known canon of the Christian church was put together by the great "heretic" Marcion in 150A.D.
That is a false assertion! False assumption!
The Codex that we call the New Testament was brought together by Paul while Peter was still living and was handed over to Timothy who protected it, nourished as long as he lived in Ephesus. Then the Christian division---protected it and took care of it for the next 300 years until it was brought into the Greek Orthodox Church. Rome had nothing to do with it!
First of all, it wasn't codified in 150A.D., it was codified in the 60sA.D. while Paul was still living.
Quite naturally this research and realization led me to face another fact. It was the Roman Catholic Church that had obtained possession of the New Testament Scriptures for the first 300 years of the common era.
I've already addressed that, that's not true! Now we'll go to Timothy and show you where it was codified.
Because of it's age, because it was almost identical to the book that is now known, the discovery of the book of Isaiah was hailed as a great find.
This is the book of Isaiah in the Qumrans, the Essene community of the Dead Sea Scrolls. They were sacred-namers, by the way. The Levites and many of their doctrines and pattern of organization is almost the same as the Global [Living] Church of God, especially the ministry and how they treated the brethren.
The older book proves the authenticity of the present day copies.
What he's saying is that the older the physical manuscript it, the more authentic the text is. That's not true! Just because it's old doesn't mean that it's good. It's not the age, it's the tradition of the text, how the text was handled, how the text was used, how it was preserved and passed on.
What he's doing is trying to go back to the Gnostic texts that are now being dug up and God buried, buried them for almost 2,000 years. In the 1950s they were dug up in Southern Egypt, the Nag Hammadi texts, buried, by the way, where Isis and Cyrus had their major temples at that time in Egypt; very close to that area of the Nile.
The Dead Sea Scrolls are from that area and other parts of Egypt. The manuscripts that are there are physically older than the Byzantine manuscripts that only date back to the 7-800s. The assertion is, therefore, that the older texts take precedence and we should judge Scripture by the older text and begin to rewrite the Scripture or Scroll (???).
The true Gospels are really the Gnostic gospels is what Conder is saying if you're going to believe in Jesus Christ. Anyway, he doesn't believe that Scripture is inspired because of that basis.
After the break we will get into the positive part of this, the proof.
I can honestly say that probably 75% of what I've written here is beyond question.
Don't write books like that! Don't make statements like that! That really just encouraged me to get the 'spurs' out and go at it.
These percentages spell doom for the teachings of Christianity.
A little puffed up ego here!
Then the editors, in a cover page or letter, a member of the Board of Directors of the publishers writes this:
I found first hand that Mr. Conder's research and conclusions are irreputable.
No they're not! The reason that I'm going through this with you now is help to try to nip this in the bud early on before too many of our brethren become infected. Hopefully, the material can get around. This will be written up and brethren can diligently study to prepare themselves for the dark times and the battles get worse.
They're going to throw everything in the book at us! They're going to try and discourage us, get off the track, take us down the {???} path and dump us off into the waste heap of eternity. IF Satan can get us away from the Truth of these Scriptures and make us doubt ourselves and our Messiah—especially in the context of all the trouble that we've had over the last few years with Worldwide, the Worldwide ministry, United, Global/Living, and fellowships that we've started in between all of these… the swirl of Christianity!
Of course, there's our own human nature, our own temptations, problems and weaknesses. In my case there are things that I knew I had overcome years and years ago, and all of a sudden the 'old man' just jumps back up again and knocks the tar out of you. Or the 'old woman,' I shouldn't leave the women out!
We're being tested! We're being tested to see if we will stand for Christ and love Him and God the Father and defend His name! Defend our brothers and sisters in Christ.
If you've seen the movie Brave Heart where the heavy cavalry is charging, and Wallis gives one of the greatest speeches I ever heard in my life on horseback. He's willing the commodores and the troops to stay the battlefield and not run. In 200 years no army has beaten the charge of heavy cavalry. These are horses that are the Percheron Clydesdales coming at you with heavy armor. Heavy duty stuff!
We only have a few horses in back of us, but when they run with the wind back to the barn the ground shakes, just from three horses.
Imagine hundreds of them, huge horses, charging across a small battlefield. The earth would just shake like an earthquake.
So, Wallis is encouraging them to stay the battlefield and not run. So, as the heavy cavalry is charging, he's saying, 'hold, hold, hold, hold; and he throws his arm down and they raise these 20 foot pine trees sharpened to a point and turn the whole front line to a fallax and impaled the charge of the heavy cavalry.
- we have to have a strategy
- as Christians we need to hold on the battlefield and survive
- we have to stay together in Christ
- we have to be armed
- we have to have the sword of Jesus Christ
- we have to have the help of God the Father
- we have to encourage each other
- we have to resist Satan by claiming the promise that we're given
Part of the ammunition that I want to give you…
They began to write the New Testament from the first time that Christ began to teach them on the Sermon on the Mount.
Scriptures from The Holy Bible in Its Original Order, A Faithful Version (except where noted)
Scriptural References:
- Jude 17-25
- 1 John 2:18-25
- Romans 16:17-20
Scriptures referenced, not quoted:
- Matthew 6
- 1 Corinthians 15
- 1 John 2:18
Also referenced:
Books:
- Mystery Babylon and the Lost Ten Tribes in the End Time by Darrell W. Conder
- Mystery Babylon the Great: The Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth by Darrell W. Conder
- The Talmud Unmasked THE SECRET RABBINICAL TEACHINGS CONCERNING CHRISTIANS by
Rev. I. B. Pranaitis (Roman Catholic Priest)
{http://www.talmudunmasked.com/chapter4.htm}
- What the Bible Really Says by Manfred Barthel
CF:bo
Transcribed: 7/4/21
