Preface and Introduction
1 and 2 Timothy plus Titus form what are commonly known as “The Pastoral Epistles” or “The Pastoral Letters” of Paul. However, this creates a problem for all serious Truth seeking Bible scholars, in that these three letters constitute three forgeries or, letters, which are not of Paul’s authorship, yes, they have some Truth within them, with some verses being of Paul’s hand, but on the whole, in today’s modern terminology, they would constitute, or be classed as, disinformation or an ‘intel operation’ or a ‘psy-op’. Confused? Don’t worry, for all will be made known as I progress through them.
Moreover, the title: “The Pastoral Epistles” is a name that has been conjured up by someone, or some people, for three of Paul’s letters in the New Testament. Unofficially included in this grouping is 2 Peter which, allegedly, is also of spurious origin, and that is the issue with all four of these books of the New Testament – their questionable authorship, and in some cases very dubious context.
So where does this title come from? would be my first question regarding this tetchy subject? All the historical information I can find points to the commencement of the 19th century, when Bible scholars began to question their authenticity, but I have no idea who originally coined the term “The Pastoral Epistles”. Perhaps someone could shed some Light on it and leave a comment below.
From The Bible Hub: “History of the Christian Church, Volume I, Philip Schaff ”
“The three Pastoral Epistles, two to Timothy and one to Titus, form a group by themselves, and represent the last stage of the apostle’s life and labours, with his parting counsels to his beloved disciples and fellow-workers. They show us the transition of the apostolic church from primitive simplicity to a more definite system of doctrine and form of government. This is just what we might expect from the probable time of their composition after the first Roman captivity of Paul, and before the composition of the Apocalypse.”
Philip Schaff was a Calvinist preacher from that 19th century period, and we can immediately see that he was of that snobbish, elitist, self-righteous, religious mindset when he condescendingly referred to the first century Assemblies of Yah as having a primitive simplicity. Now pay attention dear people, for this arrogant puffed up spirit and attitude is crucial in understanding the same spirit that pervades throughout The Pastoral Epistles, hence Schaff was fully in tune with them.
And now for a Set Apart Scripture of Paul’s that proves my point:
2 Corinthians 11:3 (MCV) But I fear, lest by any means, as The Serpent Creature beguiled, and sexually seduced, Eve through his subtilty (his evil and diabolical craftiness; see link No. 1 below); so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in The Messiah – The Anointed.
Here we can plainly see that Mr Schaff, the Calvinist, had allowed his mind (via Satan’s subtilty) to be corrupted, and displayed by his vain disparaging opinion of the first century Assemblies of Yah, by calling them ‘primitively simple’. Rather him than me when he stands before Yashua Messiah in the First Resurrection.
Furthermore, he compounds his vanity by stating, and I quote: “to a more definite system of doctrine and form of government.” So this ignorant man thought, just like the author of the Pastoral Epistles, that the first century church and its TRUE SIMPLE BELIEFS in Yashua Messiah, and its simple egalitarian make up could be improved upon. Delusional vanity or what!?
Another point I will raise here is the issue of the artificial religious construct known as the ‘Apostolic Church’. This term, like so many others created by the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion (see link No. 2 below), cannot be found in the Set Apart Scriptures, anywhere, nor can the word ‘apostolic’, now there’s a surprise!
So here’s a pertinent question: Did Yashua Messiah come to this earth in order to plant and build HIS Ecclesia – The Assembly of Yah – The Elect, on Himself, that is, The Rock, or hand it over to His messengers, here called apostles from the Greek word ‘apostolos’ by the religious translators of the KJV,and rename it the Church of The Apostles? For I tell you straight folks, that is exactly what the term ‘Apostolic Church’ means, and The Assembly or Ecclesia of Yah it is not.
Are you beginning to see The Light dear readers? because I have not even started analysing 1 Timothy 1:1 yet, and one of those who would try and support these Epistles as genuine, has already been unceremoniously found out!
OK, now to the problems that are the so-called Pastoral Epistles. As already stated, the Pastoral Epistles constitute 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. Although not included, is 2 Peter, which also falls into the same questionable category re being authentic Set Apart Scripture and, as claimed, as being written by the named authors.
Now with regard to these three books, are they the genuine writings of Paul, or of a forger of a later date, as some Bible Scholars confidently declare, circa 150 AC? Taking that question further, if they are the writings of a forger and, I might add to some degree, a plagiariser, can we even challenge their right to be a part of what they call the ‘Biblical Canon’ or even the inspired Sayings of Yah? (see link No. 3 below)
Let’s face it, the ‘Biblical Canon’ was put together by religious people, with an evil Roman Cult agenda, who would be very happy with the Pastoral Epistles and their content as written, hence the reasons for their inclusion in that Canon, and their defence of them today as being the authentic writings of Paul.
We need to get this Truth firmly fixed in our minds, that the satanic religious spirit that pervaded the second, third and fourth centuries with its Hellenising philosophers, and religious frauds, still pervades today, in the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion of the 21st century – NOTHING has changed, and the same Spiritually dead mindset pervades.
Paul, too, gave us this timeless warning:
Colossians 2:8 (MCV) Beware therefore lest any man spoil you through religious theology, intellectualism, philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of hu-man beings and treacherous men, after the carnal base elements of the world, and not after The Messiah – The Anointed.
Again, let’s be clear, for the aim of second, third and fourth century Hellenising philosophers was ALWAYS the usurping, subverting and supplanting of the Ecclesia – the Assembly of Yah and putting in its place: “a more definite system of doctrine and form of government.” to quote our ‘friend’ Mr Schaff.
This, my friends, is the more definite system of the Nicolaitans, as mentioned by Yashua Messiah in Revelation TWICE!
Revelation 2:6 (MCV) But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.
Revelation 2:15 (MCV) So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.
Notice, that these evil people of the Hellenistic NICOLAITAN persuasion had deeds, and a DOCTRINE. Now what could those deeds and doctrine have been? The very same deeds and doctrine that Mr Schaff was rambling on about – things allegedly ‘superior’ to the primitive simplicity of the first century egalitarian Assemblies of Yah.
Nico = To rule; Laitan = The laity; = To rule over the laity; = Something that Yashua Messiah HATES!! = “A more definite system of doctrine and form of government.” = the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion in ALL its guises with its Popes, Archbishops, Cardinals, Bishops, Ministers, Vicars, and satanic Priests (black robed demons) called ‘Fathers’ etc. etc..
Matthew 23:9 (MCV) And call no man your (spiritual) father upon the earth: for only one is your Father, which is in heaven.
This is non-egalitarian pecking orders being described for us here, with men lording it over other men, who are supposed to be their brothers and equals in The Faith, and in Yah’s sight, and with no Yah given authority whatsoever to rule over anyone.
Fortunately, and as an aside, by the year 35 AC the Assembly of Yah had been planted in Britain, and was not contaminated by the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion until the arrivals of the Papist devils Augustine (not Augustine of Hippo) and Patrick the slave trader in circa 597 AC.
“The apostles passed beyond the ocean to the isles called the Britannic Isles.”
— Eusebius, Greek historian of Christianity, circa 260-340 AC ( Demonstratio Evangelica or Proof of the Gospel , book 3, chap. 7)
“After this, sometimes our countrymen, sometimes the enemy, won the field, to the end that our Lord might this land try after his accustomed manner these his Israelites, whether they loved him or not, until the year of the siege of Bath-hill, when took place also the last almost, though not the least slaughter of our cruel foes, which was (as I am sure) forty-four years and one month after the landing of the Saxons, and also the time of my own nativity.”
— Gildas The Wise, from his book On The Ruin of Britain
“We certainly know that Christ, the true Son, afforded His light, the knowledge of His precepts, to our Island in the last year of Tiberius Caesar” (Tiberius died in 37 AC)
— Gildas the Wise, circa 550 AC (De Excidio Britanniae or On the Ruin of Britain)
Plagiarising
OK, so straight in with more opinions from the ‘experts’ and, as one commentator (Leighton Pullan) from The Bible Hub, put it:
“Their genuineness is more frequently denied than that of any other of St. Paul’s Epistles, and this attack upon their genuineness has been mostly based upon the character of their teaching about the office-bearers of the Church. Attempts have sometimes been made to separate some fragments supposed to be genuine from the remaining portions. All such attempts have failed. These Epistles must either be rejected entirely or accepted entirely. Otherwise we become involved in a hopeless tangle of conjectures.”
Having quoted this opinion, which I agree with in part, the major question for me here, is this: Are these Epistles an integral part of the early beginnings of the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion (primarily Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy) through a Hellenising philosopher author making out that he was Paul, or not? If I can prove that there is much Hellenising philosophy and/or meaningless religious nonsense, in terms of early religious jargon terms and expressions, that is, “a more definite system of doctrine”,then the case for them being forgeries is a done deal, and, as he correctly put it: “These Epistles must either be rejected entirely or accepted entirely.”
However, I will add one caveat to that, regarding his comment: “to separate some fragments supposed to be genuine from the remaining portions.” The point he has obviously missed here is this: If someone sets out to deceive by making out they are someone else, then they MUST, at times, use thoughts, ideas and material that will attempt to make them look like the man they are trying to impersonate. This means that they will be playing the old half-truth telling trick. We need to realise, that without some plagiarised Truth and genuineness in the narrative, the scam will easily be rumbled.
Take note, for this game is not new, and it’s played in the mainstream fake news media today, who lie most of the time, and even more so in the controlled opposition internet alternative media, who lie less, but they still lie, and are definitely into half-truth telling.
So let’s analyse Mr Pullan’s comment a little further: “Their genuineness is more frequently denied than that of any other of St. Paul’s Epistles.” Now why would that be I wonder? Has he really done his homework in an open minded, unbiased way, to find out what the reasoning is behind this frequency of denial by these Bible scholars? I would suggest that he has not. I would also suggest that he, like Philip Schaff, is already blindly convinced of their alleged authenticity, and sets about defending his flawed position.
He then states: “this attack upon their genuineness has been mostly based upon the character of their teaching about the office-bearers of the Church.” Question: When did Yashua Messiah or Paul, for that matter, declare the need for ‘office bearers’? When did the need for corporate officials or officialdom become necessary in Yah’s egalitarian Assembly? Certainly not in the first century Assemblies, that’s for sure, so when did these satanic ideas creep in? Answer: As soon as, if not before, the Messengers had died. The second century AC was the time when most of these blasphemers crawled out of the woodwork, and asserted themselves as leaders and mouth pieces of this planned philosophised, Hellenised counterfeit church = the beginnings of The Roman Cult.
Here is a list of the counterfeiting scoundrels involved in founding the Hellenised Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion, and all from the “Catholic Fidelity” web page:
1) Clement I, 4th Bishop of Rome, circa end of the first century. This is not the Clement of Paul’s time.
2) Ignatius of Antioch, died 110 AC
3) Polycarp of Smyrna, places and dates 65 – 140 AC. Allegedly a stalwart of the early Assemblies of Yah.
4) The unknown Author of The Didache (The Teaching), Syria dates 70 – 110 AC. Author of what teaching?
5) Barnabus, circa 130 AC, so could not be the first century Barnabus as claimed on this site.
6) Papias of Hierapolis, Phrygia circa 130 AC
7) Justin Martyr, circa 100 – 165 AC, A philosopher and theologian.
8) Irenaeus, circa 140 – 202 AC
9) Clement of Alexandria, place and dates, Athens circa 150? – 215? AC
10) Tertullian, convert to the Christian Religion circa 190 – 195 AC. Sorcerer and conjurer of the pagan heathen Trinity doctrine circa 200 AC.
11) Origen, Alexandria circa 185? – 254? AC
If necessary, I will provide more details of what these villains got up to, but as this series of articles is not specifically about the devious shenanigans of the so-called ‘Church Fathers’ I will leave it here. However, for further information, I cover this subject elsewhere on my blog, (see link Nos. 4 and 5 below):
And now a revealing quote from the: “Early Christian Writings” web page.
“Vocabulary. While statistics are not always as meaningful as they may seem, of 848 words (excluding proper names) found in the Pastorals, 306 are not in the remainder of the Pauline corpus, even including the deutero-Pauline 2 Thessalonians, Colossians, and Ephesians. Of these 306 words, 175 do not occur elsewhere in the New Testament, while 211 are part of the general vocabulary of Christian writers of the second century. Indeed, the vocabulary of the Pastorals is closer to that of popular Hellenistic philosophy than it is to the vocabulary of Paul or the deutero-Pauline letters. Furthermore, the Pastorals use Pauline words in a non-Pauline sense: dikaios in Paul means “righteous” and here means “upright”; pistis, “faith,” has become “the body of Christian faith”; and so on.”
As this series progresses I will reveal several of these crucial words that prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that these three Epistles are not from the hand of Paul, and are most definitely from the hand of a Hellenising philosopher of the 2nd century and a founder of the satanic Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion (see link No. 2 below).
Right, with the lengthy introduction and explanatory preamble over, let’s start on these so-called Pastoral Epistles of Paul or, better, the alleged Pastoral Epistles of Paul.
In Yashua Messiah’s Set Apart name
Messenger Charles
1. Did Eve Have Sex With The Devil or Did She Just Eat Some Fruit?:
Roman Catholicism is NOT Christianity; Eastern (Russian & Greek) Orthodoxy is NOT Christianity; AngliCAINism is NOT Christianity; PROTESTantism is NOT Christianity.
2. The Counterfeit Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion:
3. The Truth of John 1:1-4 Revealed:
4. Do Born of Yah Christians Need Theology & Theologians or Bible Intellectualism and Bible Intellectuals – Parts 1, 2 & 3:
5. Do Born of Yah Christians Need Theology & Theologians or Bible Intellectualism and Bible Intellectuals – Part 4:
Please be aware that these books will contain lengthy notes between the verses, explaining the errors and hidden religious agenda written into them:
Chapter 1
1 (MCV) Paul, a Messenger of Yashua Messiah by the calling and arrangement of Yah The Father, and Yahavah Yashua Messiah, our Deliverer and Saviour, which is our Hope and Expectation (see John 6:44 and John 6:65 and see link No. 6 below);
1 Timothy 1 (KJV) Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope;
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:1 — I have changed this verse to include The Father in Paul’s calling, even though Paul only heard Yashua Messiah’s voice on the road to Damascus. However, we must be made aware that Paul’s calling would have been a joint decision on the part of the Yahhead of the Father and The Son (see John 6:44 and John 6:65 and link No. 4 below).
2 (MCV) unto Timothy, my own genuine son in The Faith: Grace, Mercy, and Peace, from Yah our Father and Yashua Messiah our Yahavah.
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:2 — (a) Take note that this greeting, as with all the genuine Epistles of Paul, is in the names of The Father and The Son only, and NOT in the names of a bogus trinity – this, too, is interesting as it looks like the forger was not a Trinitarian either, thereby proving that the trinity was unheard of in the mid 2nd century, until Tertullian conjured it up circa 200 AC.
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:2 — (b) This introduction is plagiarised from Paul’s earlier genuine Epistles, but with the addition of a greeting to Timothy which Paul probably did write, but the real Epistle was either lost or destroyed. We have to assume this because Timothy was a learner of Paul’s, and we can be fairly sure Paul did write to him, but not the religious nonsense that follows in verse 4 onwards:
3 (MCV) As I appealed to you, when I went into Macedonia, to remain at Ephesus, that thou should command some not to teach a different message.
1 Timothy 1:3 (KJV) 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.
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:3 — (a) Instructions from Paul to Timothy which again are probably a genuine part of the original Epistle, with instructions to: 1) remain in Ephesus, and 2) An admonishment to subversive elements to stop teaching a blasphemous message, which we will analyse later.
However, the Epistle now changes from the plagiarised part, that of the first half of this verse, to counterfeiting in the second half of this verse. How do I know this? Answer: through the use of one suspicious word – ‘charge’ and one suspicious term – ‘no other doctrine’ combined with what then follows in verse 4:
This issue in verse 3 is not a big issue, but the word ‘charge’ appears 8 times in 1 and 2 Timothy, but only 3 times in all of Paul’s other writings and, only 7 times in the rest of New Testament. So its overuse I deem as another little factor in making these epistles different from Paul’s genuine writings.
Moreover, the word ‘doctrine’ is one of those crucial words that I made reference to earlier. This is due to the fact that three Greek words are are involved here, and this Greek word in 1 Timothy 1:3 is partly the odd one out, it being: ‘heterodidaskaleō’ = to teach differently (Strong’s G2085). The other two words are these: ‘didachē’ (Strong’s G1322) and ‘didaskalia’ (Strong’sG1319)
Moreover, here is where it gets very interesting. The word ‘didachē’ (instruction)cannot be found anywhere in 1 & 2 Timothy or Titus, and yet it is found in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans and 1 Corinthians. In contrast, all that can be found in 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus is the word ‘didaskalia’ (instruction – teaching) – if we then take the word ‘heterodidaskaleō‘ we can see that it comes from ‘didaskalia’ and not ‘didachē’. So what!! I here you exclaim. Ah, but there is much more to this than meets the eye, as explained here:
From: “Is Doctrine a Dirty Word?” by Peter Ditzel
“”Doctrine/doctrines” appears fifty times in the King James Version New Testament. With the exception of one place (Hebrews 6:1 where it is translated from logos), it comes from either of two Greek words, didache and didaskalia. Didaskalia is derived from didaskalos, which means “teacher.” Didache comes from the verb didasko, “to teach.” Thus, strictly, didaskalia refers to the teaching of a teacher.”
So here we have that crucial difference explained and why ‘didache’ (Strong’s G1322) applies toYashua Messiah’s and Paul’s instruction or teaching and ‘didaskalia’ (Strong’s G1319) applies to the teaching of a teacher, which leads us to the knock on question – WHICH TEACHER and WHAT TEACHING!!?? Answer: the teaching of Hellenising philosophers and religious counterfeiters of which the forger of The Pastoral Epistles was one.
If we now move straight on into verse 4 we can see how it is a continuation of the second part of verse 3 and, notice, that from here on in (verse 4) we now enter a part fictional, part truthful section. This is a made up and fabricated la la land religious narrative. These are the religious writings by an unknown early Hellenising religious author, most likely circa 150 AC, and long after Paul’s death.
It’s possible that he, or they, would have been one of the alleged ‘Church Fathers’ of the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion, which was always a counterfeit, but not officially organised until the Council of Nicea in 325 AC.
However, in the meantime, this satanic religious edifice had been nearly 300 years in the making, commencing with the Serpent Seed Canaanite Jew Philo in Alexandria, Egypt. From Philo, in the first century, we get the word philosophy, along with Simon Magus the sorcerer in Rome – the lover of filthy lucre, who created the system called ‘Simony’. All the bogus teachings and elements from the above named creatures came together in Nicea in 325 AC under Constantine.
So here, using the KJV, I have put the second half of verse 3 together with verse 4 where it belongs:
1 Timothy 1:3 and 1 Timothy 1:4 (KJV) That thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine. 4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than Godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
4 (MCV) Neither give heed to legends and endless genealogies, which present questions, rather than a corporate administration which is in faith: so do.
Now what are these alleged ‘fables’ that this Hellenising author could be referring to? More on this later.
Furthermore, if there was to be no heeding of genealogies and the study of same, then what are Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38 if they are not genealogies? In turn, why would Yashua Messiah object to his brothers and sisters in The Faith studying up their own Israelite genealogies and heritage? And who determines what genealogies come under the umbrella of “endless genealogies”? And who would be opposed to such genealogies, and for what reason? Would Paul? Who was proud of his Israelite Benjaminite tribal origins:
I have therefore expunged this satanic verse from The MCV Bible.
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:4 — (a) “Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies.”
Romans 11:1 (MCV) I say then, Hath Yah cast away His people completely – The Twelve Tribes of Israel? Certainly not! and Yah forbid, (may it not be coming to that), for I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin.
Philippians 3:5 (MCV) Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of The Tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching The Law, a Pharisee, (but not a Jew);
Please take note, Paul was not a Serpent Seed Canaanite Jew.
Moreover, what information do genealogies provide us with? Why, the origins of different peoples, as listed in the Old Testament, and who hates the Old Testament? Why Rome hates the Old Testament, and so do the Canaanite Jews with their Babylonian Talmud, the mainstay of their satanic Judaic religion, and false claims of being Yah’s chosen people. Fakestream progressive Christians also hate the OT see link No. 10 below.
Take note, for this what they say about themselves:
“Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a ‘Jew’ or to call a contemporary Jew an ‘Israelite’ or a ‘Hebrew’. The first Hebrews may not have been Jews at all…”
— 1980 Jewish Almanac, p. 3. (I will firm this Truth up by stating that The Hebrews were never Jewish.)
So what does the first part of 1 Timothy 1:4 constitute? It was an early Hellenising Romish cult diktat to dissuade people from researching True Israelite history and 1) thereby from learning that the Serpent Seed Jews were NOT Israel and 2) the identity of the True intended recipients of the Gospel message as instructed by Yashua Messiah Himself were, first and foremost, The Israelites followed by the Adamic Nations (see link No. 7 below):
Matthew 15:24 (MCV) But He answered and said, I am not sent but unto The Lost Sheep of The House of Israel.
He also gave the twelve disciples explicit instructions:
Matthew 10:5-6 (MCV) These twelve Yashua sent forth, and instructed them, saying, Go not into the way of the Adamic Nations, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 6 But go rather to The Lost Sheep of The House of Israel.
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:4 — (b) “Which minister questions.” Yet more of the tyranny of Catholicism revealed re unquestioning obedience – no Bereans or questioning allowed in this church, just blind faith and obedience.
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:4 — (c) ‘Edifying’ – Strong’s G3622 = administration. Everywhere else (7 times) the word ‘edifying’ – means “building up” see Strong’s 3619.
This word ‘edifying’ from the Greek MSS ‘oikonomia’, which means ‘administration’, is telling us quite plainly what this Hellenising philosopher writer has in mind, that is, only one thing – a church corporation – a money making church corporation, and not the Spiritual Assemblies of Yah – The Ecclesia, that needed REAL edifying, that is, building up and/or encouraging and supporting.
5 (MCV) Now the goal of this commandment (mandate) is agape Love out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and a genuine Faith:
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:5 — (a) This verse is VERY DECEPTIVE, because it all sounds very trite and genuine doesn’t it? But all it amounts to is religious liberal luvvy duvvy nonsense, and is parroted like a mantra throughout fakestream Christianity today. So be vigilant, for what it is actually saying is this:
“No matter what errors, that is, religious lies and nonsense fill your mind re the genealogical origins of The Jews, as long as you blindly love as an ignorant uninformed lemming (a silly dove with no questions asked), but, with an alleged pure heart and an alleged good conscience, that’s fine! Not only that, but if you live like a simpleton in denial of any relevant knowledge, and of The Truth, and kid yourself, in a state of delusion, and with unfeigned faith, in that same delusion, that’s all that matters. This my friends is blind faith, delusional blind religious faith, with trust in these religious philosophers, and that leads to destruction (Spiritual ruin).”
Hosea 4:6 (MCV) My people are destroyed through lack of knowledge.
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:5 — (b) “the end of the commandment” This turn of phrase is found only once in the New Testament, and it’s here in 1 Tim 1:5 and in none of Paul’s genuine writings.
The same applies to the term “faith unfeigned.” However, this term ‘faith unfeigned’ is classic religious nonsense, for faith cannot be feigned or unfeigned, we are either gifted with His Faith or we’re not gifted with His Faith, so anyone feigning faith doesn’t possess faith at all.
Now what kind of people could or would come out with such a meaningless irrelevant expression? Answer – Hellenising religious counterfeiters who would naturally feign faith, for they do not have any faith, other than feigned faith, or self-generated faith in their worthless religion. We need to understand, folks, that feigned or unfeigned faith can only be found in religious circles, not in the Assemblies of Yah – The Ecclesias, where there can only be real Faith.
Ephesians 2:8 (MCV) For by Grace are ye saved through Faith; and that not of yourselves: for both Grace and Faith are gifts of Yah:
Furthermore, Faith within the Assemblies of Yah is either Faith alone, that is, our gifted faith from Yah, and then our exercised active Faith, which earns us rewards stored in heaven. If our gifted Faith remains unused (no works) it then becomes dead faith.
James 2:17 (MCV) Even so Faith, if it has not works, is dead, being alone.
Notice there’s no mention of ‘unfeigned’ or ‘feigned’ faith in the epistle of James or anywhere else in the NT for that matter – I wonder why? I’ll tell you, because only a counterfeit church would have those within its ranks who had feigned faith.
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:5 — (c) “Charity.” Now this deceptive ambiguous NT word has always bugged me, when it should really be translated as ‘Love’ or, better, ‘agape Love’.
Statistics re the word ‘Charity’: It is found 12 times in 1 Corinthians; 1 time in Colossians; 1 time in 1 Thessalonians; 1 time in 2 Thessalonians; 3 times in 1 Timothy; 2 times in 2 Timothy; 1 time in Titus; 3 times in 1 Peter; 1 time in 2 Peter; 1 time in 3 John; 1 time in Jude and 1 time in Revelation. 28 times in all and yet the word ‘Love’ which is translated from the same Greek words appears 180 times in the NT. Why were the Greek words ‘agapaō’, ‘agapē’ and ‘phileō’ all translated into the word ‘Love’, 180 times in all, in the NT, and yet someone then decided to translate the word ‘agapē’ into ‘charity’ 28 times? Does it make any sense? Oh yes, especially when your planning on building a money making corporation that will front as a church and financial gifts (their idea of charity) become the order of the day:
From the Online Etymology Dictionary:
Charity (n.)
“Mid-12c., “benevolence for the poor,” from Old French charité “(Christian) charity, mercy, compassion; alms; charitable foundation” (12c., Old North French carité), from Latin caritatem (nominative caritas) “costliness, esteem, affection” (in Vulgate often used as translation of Greek agape “love” — especially Christian love of fellow man — perhaps to avoid the sexual suggestion of Latin amor), from carus “dear, valued,” from PIE *karo-, from root *ka- “to like, desire” (see whore (n.)).”
So there we have it – that old love of the filthy lucre fronting as “benevolence for the poor” and all conveniently mistranslated by our old criminal ‘friend’ Jerome into his Latin Vulgate Bible, just to give the word agapē’ (the love of Yah) a nice lucrative flavour and, notice, how costly Love is – “costliness.” Say 10 hail Marys and £20 in the box!! Luvvly jubbly LOL.
Furthermore, when it came to translating the English Bibles, no one took it upon themselves to change Jerome’s satanic corruptions. Again, I wonder why?
6-8 (MCV) From which some, having missed the goal, have turned aside unto senseless talk and vain jangling; 7 Desiring to be teachers of The Law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm. 8 But we know that The Law is good, if a man use it Lawfully;
1 Timothy 1:6-8 (KJV) From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; 7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm. 8 But we know that The Law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:6-8 — (a) “Some having swerved have turned aside.” Swerved and turned aside from what? Well obviously some have turned and swerved aside from his Hellenised satanic religion and money grabbing cult. What we must take on board here is the reality that HE thinks he is in the right and those of the True Faith are in the wrong, so will paint that evil picture of Yah’s Assemblies – The Ecclesias.
Notice that it is only SOME that have swerved, not MANY, for he as the forger represents the MANY. Notice, too, how he also turns his satanic ideas onto those (the some or the FEW) of The Truth by accusing THEM of swerving and having turned aside when it is HE that has swerved and turned aside, and is the vain jangler, with his demonic philosophised Christian religion, that he is in the process of promulgating and building, that is, his Hellenising house of cards.
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:6-8 — (b) “Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.” Here he feigns attacking those who would aspire to be teachers of The Law, but does not fully rebuke them as Paul would have done, but instead states that they don’t know how to do teach The Law correctly or properly, that is, they don’t know what they are doing. However, have no fear for our philosopher Hellenising ‘friend’ does, and he clumsily reveals that here: “But we know that The Law is good, if a man use it lawfully;”
So now we see more plagiarising from Paul’s genuine epistles:
Romans 7:12 (MCV) Wherefore The Law is Set Apart, and The Commandment Set Apart, and just, and good.
Moreover, what does this verse in 1 Timothy 1:8 actually mean when we know that The Law was nailed to the stake (cross) with Yashua Messiah. The Law is no longer applicable to those who are born of Yah (born again) and saved (men like Timothy). So what use is The Law to those living under Yashua Messiah’s Grace? None! Of no use at all. Even more ludicrous, how would a man or woman living under His Grace use The Law, lawfully? How does that work? Does this Hellenising religious gobbledegook make any sense? Of course not, and it’s probably not meant to make any sense – confusion is the order of the day when it comes to the Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religion. Furthermore, is he speaking to the lost and unsaved? Answer: I don’t think so, for it is allegedly written to Timothy who was definitely not lost and unsaved. I do hope you’re beginning to see The Light here.
We then get a smattering of some Truth, but with some questions:
1 Timothy 1:9-10 (KJV) Knowing this, that The Law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
9-10 (MCV) Knowing this, that The Law is not made for a Justified righteous man, but for the Lawless, the backslidden and rebellious, for those disrespectful to Yah, and for sinners, for those not born of Yah and Set Apart with the Exclusive Spirit, for blaspheming Judaising Serpent Seed Jews, for the thrashers and physical abusers of fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10 for those who go whoring, for sodomites, pederasts, paedophiles and lesbians, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to the sound teaching of Yashua Messiah,
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:9-10 — (a) “Knowing this” – knowing what? Why, the previous verse: “But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;” Which I have already proven to be Judaising religious nonsense for The Law cannot be used lawfully IF we are born of Yah (born again) and are under Yashua Messiah’s Saving Grace, and the ‘Law’ of Faith, just as Timothy was.
This means that the the list of wicked sinful activities that follows are being taught or expounded within an Old Covenant LAW framework, not a New Covenant Grace framework. NOTICE, for in the KJV version nowhere does it say: For none of these people will enter into The Kingdom of Yah. All it says is that they are disobedient to sound doctrine, but whose sound doctrine, and just how sound is it? We’re not told!
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:9-10 — (b) we then get a VERY DODGY word: “unholy.” Why is it dodgy I hear you ask? Easy, it’s total religious humbug and not Scriptural at all. The word ‘unholy’ can only be found three times in the NT and that alone should sound alarm bells in your mind, especially when two of those citings are in questionable 1 and 2 Timothy. The third time it is used is in Hebrews 10:29, and is translated from a different Greek word, that is, ‘koinos’ which means ‘common’ ‘defiled’ or ‘unclean’.
From Thayer’s Greek Lexicon:
Unholy – ἀ νόσιος – anosios – an-os’-ee-os –unholy – impious – wicked
Right, now here we get to one of those dead giveaway meaningless, sanctimonious, religious words: ‘pious’, ‘piety’ and ‘impious’, which expose the so-called Pastoral Epistles for what they truly are – the work of a Hellenising religious forger. ‘Pious’, ‘piety’ and ‘impious’ are 100% Roman Cult, Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religious, words, and cannot be found anywhere in the NT, apart from the word ‘piety’ once, and guess where we find it? You got it – 1 Timothy 5:4.
You really need to get this deception into your heads, folks, for these slimy religious words would have been meaningless drivel to the first century Assemblies of Yah. And why would that be I wonder? Again, that’s easy, they are words that can only be relevant and applicable to Hellenised Cainite-Judeo-Christian Religious Christians = FAKESTREAM ‘CHRISTIANS’! These words apply only to people of RELIGION, NOT TO PEOPLE OF THE TRUTH and the True Faith, that is, not to people who follow Yashua Messiah – The Way!
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:9-10 — (c) Finally, the term “sound doctrine”, which once more uses the Greek word ‘didaskalia’ (the teaching of a teacher) and not ‘didache’ = THE teaching or THE instruction as used when referring to Yashua Messiah’s and Paul’s teaching and which I explained above.
1 Timothy 1:11-12 (KJV) According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust. 12 And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;
11 and 12 (MCV) that is, according to the Glorious Gospel of The Kingdom of Yah, which was committed to my trust. 12 And I thank Messiah Yashua our joyful Yahavah, who hath entrusted me, for that He counted me Faithful in making me a messenger of The Gospel of The Kingdom of Yah.
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:11-12 — (a) “The blessed God.” The blessed God!??? What’s that when it’s at home? This term cannot be found ANYWHERE ELSE in the whole KJV Bible, let alone the NT! So tell me, ANYONE, how Yah can be blessed, and by whom, and with what!? What does this insulting term actually mean, or what does it express? Answer: arrogant religious gobbledegook, and the HU-MAN VANITY of the author, and those behind him, thinking that we, as created beings, can bless Yah or be a blessing to Yah. Yes we can please Him, but only because we’re indwelled with His Set Apart Exclusive Spirit!
Romans 8:8 (KJV) So then they that are in the flesh cannot please Yah.
From the “Names for God” web page:
“Blessed God could also be written, “happy God.” The word is also used in the Beatitudes of Matthew 5 where Jesus says certain groups of people are blessed or happy because of what they have in God.”
Notice how this ‘genius’ turns The Truth on its head by stating that the blessings that we can and do receive from Yah can be reciprocated and we can bless Yah and make Him happy no less. How does that work? How does a pot bless the potter, other than being the pot that the potter created in the first place, which would in turn please Him? Is Yah blessed or, better, Glorified by anything other than by the work of His own hands? Within this term you can plainly see the arrogance of the Hellenised Romish religion sneaking through. This same arrogance is what feeds popery with popes sitting in the place of Yah in the Vatican and being a blessing to Yah. In your dreams!!
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:11-12 — (b) “putting me into the ministry.” I wonder if that included a satanic black robe and a dog collar? Much mirth here for Messenger Charles. Now what was Paul called by The Father and Yashua Messiah to be or called to do? Was he called to be a minister, a vicar or a papist priest or was he called to be an itinerant Messenger otherwise known in the Greek MSS as an ‘apostolos’ (apostle)?
Romans 1:1 (MCV) Paul, a servant of Yashua Messiah, called to be a Messenger, separated and/or Set Apart unto The Gospel of The Kingdom of Yah,
Notice and notice it well – called to be a messenger (apostle) not put into a mickey mouse religious ministry!
Pressing on, we now have one verse (verse 13) which contains a devious serious error and the following verse (verse 14) is then rendered meaningless because of the catastrophic error revealed in the previous verse (verse 13).
13 and 14 (MCV) Even I, who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious toward His Ecclesia – The Elect: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief. 14 And The Grace of our Yahavah was exceeding abundant with Faith and agape Love which is in Messiah Yashua.
1 Timothy 1:13-14 (KJV) Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief. 14 And the Grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. (Emphasis mine)
Now dear people, notice, for this verse is not only blasphemous, but it is VERY interesting due to its devious subtilty as well, because it completely contradicts what the Set Apart Scriptures teach elsewhere, including Paul’s genuine writings too:
Romans 1:20 (MCV) For the invisible attributes of The Yahavah from The Creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His Eternal Power and Yahhead; so that they are without excuse:
So here’s another question: If, according to Paul, the lost and unsaved are without excuse, how come this forger ‘Paul’ does have an excuse in that he did what he did, allegedly, in ignorance? Not only that, but he allegedly obtained mercy, because of that same ignorance (excuse), not because of Yashua Messiah’s all encompassing sacrifice and mercy that covered ALL his sins? Not convinced?
OK, so let’s put it another way. Does our salvation depend upon any ‘goodness’, ‘righteousness’ or ‘ ‘innocence’ on OUR PART, or what we may possess in attributes, or even our being in ignorance? In other words, are we entitled to salvation through anything we can claim as initiated goodness, or anything generated of ourselves, or what we have within ourselves that can be counted as worthy unto salvation? (much mirth here for Messenger Charles).
Furthermore, did this writer have any understanding of what Yashua Messiah had actually achieved for him and us on the stake (cross) and in His Resurrection? I don’t think so. Still not convinced, then read on?
John 3:9-10 (MCV) Nicodemus answered and said unto Him, How can these things be? 10 Yashua answered and said unto him, Art thou a Master of Israel, and knowest not these things?
If this author was Paul, and as a Pharisee like Nicodemus, was he a Master of Israel or not? Again, like Nicodemus, should he have not known the things that Nicodemus was supposed to have known? Did Nicodemus have an excuse!? Could Nicodemus or did Nicodemus make any claims that he did things as a Pharisee in ignorance? Once again, answers on the back of a postage stamp.
Notes on 1 Timothy 1:13-14 — (b) OK, so if we now look at verse 14 in this revealed Truthful Light, will it make any sense? 14 And the Grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.
Here’s a follow on question: Does His Grace cover satanic error? Does it cover the blasphemies of blind guides who preach another gospel which is not a Gospel at all and lead people astray? Definitely not.
Galatians 1:6-7 (MCV) I am therefore stunned that ye are so soon removed from The Father that called you into The Grace of The Messiah – The Anointed unto another gospel, 7 which is not another gospel at all; however, there are some (mongrel dogs) that trouble you, and would (if given the chance) pervert The Gospel of The Messiah – The Anointed.
Galatians 1:9 (MCV) As we said before, so say I now again, if any man declare any other gospel unto you than that which you have received from us, let him be thrown out of the Assembly of Yah.
1 Timothy 1:13-14 Notes — (c) Let him be ACCURSED!! Not have his satanic errors covered by Yashua Messiah’s Grace.
15 (MCV) This is a Faithful and trustworthy saying, and worthy of all acceptance, that Yahavah Messiah Yashua came into The System (the world) to save sinners; of whom I was chief (see link No. 9 below).
1 Timothy 1:15 Notes — “of whom I am chief” – present tense. I will leave a link at the end of this article explaining this corruption (see link No. 9 below).
Please note, that this article was written several years ago and comes from the perspective of a corruption by the English translators of the KJV which now must be taken from the new perspective of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus having been written and corrupted by an impostor and/or by the early Hellenising members of the counterfeit Romish Cult.
16 and 17 (MCV) Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me as the foremost of sinners Yashua Messiah might show forth all patience, for a pattern or type of them which should hereafter likewise believe in Him to Life Everlasting. Now unto The King Eternal, incorruptible, invisible, the only wise Yah, be Honour and Glory for ever and ever. Amen.
1 Timothy 1:16-17 (KJV) Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on Him to life everlasting. 17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise Yah, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen. (Emphasis mine)
1 Timothy 1:16-17 Notes — (a) “I obtained mercy.” Here in verse 16 we still have him rambling on about his having obtained mercy, when we now know that to be not true, for in his mind he only needed partial mercy, that is, mercy for those sins he didn’t do in ignorance!! I hope you’re getting this point, folks.
We then have yet more questionable words and phrases that follow in verse 17. “King eternal…the ONLY wise Yah?” Hello, excuse me, the what? I will repeat: “The King eternal…the ONLY wise Yah.” So here we have a reference to Yashua Messiah as the King eternal but is He the ONLY wise Yah? What happened to The Father Yah? Do we have satanic Judaic monotheism creeping in here or being taught here? Or is it just another touch of confusion added to the mix just for bad measure?
Where has the Duality Yahhead gone (see link below) that John teaches correctly in his epistle?
1 John 2:21-22 (KJV) I have not written unto you because ye know not The Truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of The Truth. 22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is The Christ? He is anti-Christ, that denieth The Father and The Son. (Emphasis mine)
So it looks like this impostor writer of 1 & 2 Timothy with his “ONLY wise Yah” is an anti-Christ as well, for he has blatantly denied The Father and The Son Yahhead.
1 John 2:24 (KJV) 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. (Emphasis mine)
“Ye also shall continue in The Son and in The Father,” NOT continue in “The ONLY wise Yah.”
2 Corinthians 4:4 (KJV) In whom the Yah of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest The Light of The Glorious Gospel of Christ, who is the image of Yah, should shine unto them. (Emphasis mine)
So who is this: “ONLY wise Yah” that he’s referring to? He’s the Yah who rules this world – the prince of the power of the air.
To confirm its questionable provenance, but from another angle, I will quote Adam Clarke’s Commentary:
“The only wise God – The word σοφῳ wise, is omitted by AC*FG, Syriac, Erpen’s Arabic, Coptic, Sahidic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Vulgate, and Itala. Some of the Greek fathers quote it sometimes, and omit it at others; which shows that it was an unsettled reACing, probably borrowed from Romans 16:27 (note). Griesbach leaves it out of the text.”
I have only posted this comment of Clarke’s in order to make yet another point against the silly idea that the KJV Bible is inerrant.
18-20 (MCV) This instruction I place alongside and with you, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare; 19 Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck: 20 Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.
1 Timothy 1:18-20 (KJV) This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare; 19 Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck: 20 Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.
1 Timothy 1:18-20 Notes — (a) Now these three verses look and sound genuine and could be from the real Paul or copied from a fragment of manuscript and introduced into this forged epistle to help to make it look genuine. However, there are some BIG QUESTIONS about The Truth of these verses!:
1) What are these prophesies that will aid Timothy to war a good warfare?
2) What kind of warfare is the forger alluding to, real violent warfare in the order of the fake Christian Constantine in 325 AC; the later Crusades, or peaceful Spiritual Christian warfare of the first century Assemblies of Yah?
3) Holding faith as with a good conscience? What’s that all about? Here’s another question: If this alleged Timothy and the author are born of Yah (born again) how can they NOT HAVE a good conscience? Do they not know the basics:
Romans 8:1 (MCV) There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Messiah Yashua.
If there is now no condemnation for those born of Yah (born again) and indwelled by the Set Apart Exclusive Spirit, how can there not be a good conscience for those blessed people!? If this is Paul, has he already forgotten what he said to the Assemblies of Yah in Rome? Does this individual not know how we are freed from guilt once born of Yah, and it therefore follows that a good conscience is a given!? It’s automatic, isn’t it!? So what’s all this religious drivel and waffle about exhorting Timothy to have a good conscience!? Answer: this bod is not born of Yah at all but, rather, he is born of the Hellenised counterfeit 2nd century Christian Religion, and Paul he is definitely NOT!
1 Timothy 1:18-20 Notes — (b) Finally for 1 Timothy chapter 1 we have these two characters Hymenaeus and Alexander, along with Philetus in 2 Timothy 2, who are falsely accused of saying that The Resurrection is past to give this fake epistle a ring of authenticity, but three fellas are saying no such thing. See 2 Timothy 2 for a surprising revelation!
In Yashua Messiah’s Set Apart name
Messenger Charles
6. The Duality Yahhead of The Father and The Son:
7. What Is The Word ‘GENTILE’ Doing in The Bible?:
8. Unravelling the So-Called Pastoral Epistles – 1 Timothy 1 & 2: https://isthefathercallingyoutohisson.wordpress.com/unravelling-the-pastoral-epistles-parts-1-2/
9. 1 Timothy 1:15 – That Christ Jesus Came into The World to Save Sinners; OF WHOM I AM CHIEF!:
10. Are You A Cultural Jew Marxist Or A Christian?…:
The MCV Set Apart Scriptures 
Well, that is so obvious, the name “Pastoral Epistles” isn’t it? I mean obviously Paul didn’t use such a term. He just wrote his letters. It definitely has a Bible School ring to it.
LikeLike
Yes it is obvious, but there’s always ONE!
Someone in the 18th or 19th centuries, I expect.
LikeLike