The Emergence Of The Anti-Christ Doctrine

The outlandish subversion and corruption of the pure Unitarian gospel of Jesus by Paul of Tarsus to trinitarian has opened the door to more anti-Christ doctrines which were not based on convictions but rather on Pauline church policy and apparent necessity to protect the church vested interests of their established religion which was originally and mainly intended for the Gentiles.

Paul’s obsession to be identified as the “Apostle of the Gentiles” did turn into reality when the famous council of Nicea in 325 AD has formally declared the doctrine of trinity as the official main doctrine of the Pauline church as it grew in size and power. The church association with the Roman emperors and its compromising stance in itself with those in authority was well known and it has helped strengthen the basic foundation of the church.

From the more than three hundred gospels existing at that time, four were handpicked by the church as canonical to their interest namely, Mark, Matthew, Luke and John. The rest were either ordered destroyed or labeled them as apocryphal with the likes of Gospel of Barnabas, through an edict by Emperor Constantine, to avoid any blatant contradictions that would be detrimental to the church made doctrines.

The effective abandoning of the teaching of Jesus was largely due to complete obscuring of his historical reality. Pauline Christianity was based on a belief in Christ after his supposed crucifixion, and the life and teaching of Jesus while he was still in this world was no longer important.

Paul justified his new doctrine with the use of an analogy as expressed by him in his epistle in Romans 7 :1-4. The analogy clearly indicates that Paul made a distinction between Jesus and “Christ”. According to his reasoning, the law which had bound Jesus and his followers was no longer necessary, since Jesus had died.

Now, they were no longer “married” to Jesus but to Christ who had brought another law. It was therefore, necessary to follow Christ and not Jesus. Thus, anyone who held to Jesus’ teachings had gone astray. It was the use of this reasoning that he assembled his doctrine of redemption and atonement, a theory which Jesus had certainly never taught.

It preached that a man could do what he wanted and not face the inevitable consequences of his actions, provided that at the end of the day, he said: “I believe in Christ”. However, the premise on which Paul reasoning was based is false, since Jesus was neither crucified nor resurrected.

The “arrest”, the “trial” and the “crucifixion” are hedged around with so many contradictions and misstatements that is extremely difficult to untangle and penetrate to them in order to arrive at what actually happened.

The part played by Pontius Pilate, the Roman Magistrate, is hard to determine. His indecisiveness as described in the bible, his partiality towards the Jewish leaders, together with his goodwill towards Jesus, make a story hard to believe.

This could be the result of an attempt to throw the responsibility of the “crucifixion” issue unto the whole Jewish nation and so to exonerate the Romans completely from their participation in Jesus’s supposed death.

The early classic Christians, which are the true followers of Jesus Christ, denied that Jesus was crucified but instead one of his followers who was closely resembled to him. In the account given by the Gospel of Barnabas, it has been told that at the time of the arrest of Jesus, Judas was transformed by God so that even Mary, his mother and his closest followers believed him to be Jesus.

It was not until Jesus appeared to them, after his supposed death, that they were informed of what had really happened. This would explain why there is such confusion surrounding the events which took place at that time, and why some accounts, written by people who were not present at those events, support the mistaken belief that it was Jesus who was crucified. Cerinthus, a contemporary of Peter, Paul and John, also denied the resurrection of Jesus.

Paul’s doctrines of redemption and atonement are fallacious. This has resulted to further changes being made to what Jesus had taught, but also prepare the way for completely changing of people ideas of who Jesus was. He was being transformed from mortal to a divine being.

This shift of emphasis from Jesus as a man to the new image of Christ who was divine was one of the innovation by Paul to legitimize his position as the “Apostle of Christ” and not of Jesus. The said innovation of Paul enabled the intellectuals in Greece and Rome to assimilate to their own philosophy what Paul and those who followed him were preaching.

Their view of existence was a tripartite one, and with the Pauline church’s talk of “God the Father” and the “Son of God”, it only needed the inclusion of the “Holy Ghost” to have a trinity to match theirs. With the passage of time, then the two pictures merge into one, thus the doctrine of trinity came into being.

It was in this doctrine, which lead to Mary, mother of Jesus being put not only to a difficult but an impossible position of being regarded as the “mother of God”. The theory of redemption was the child of Paul’s brain, a belief entirely unknown to Jesus and his disciples.

It was based on the belief of “original sin”, the “crucifixion” and the “resurrection”, none of which has any validity. Thus, a synthetic religion was produced: A brand of Christianity, mathematically absurd, historically false and yet psychologically impressive.

As a result, Pauline heresy became the very foundation of Christian orthodoxy and the legitimate church established by Jesus was disowned as heretical. In the magnificent temple of the religion which Paul help erect, he built doors on all sides, people who came across his brand of Christianity for the first time, when they entered its temple, were given the impression that they were paying homage to the same deity they had been worshiping all along, whether they were Jews or Gentiles.

As the basic misconception introduced by Paul evolved and became established, many a man who thought that he was following Jesus followed Paul without knowing it instead. Due to Paul innovation, the discontinuity between the historical Jesus and the Christ of the Pauline church became so great that any unity between them seemed irreconcilable.

To the followers of Jesus, the path of truth is like a straight line, had length but no breadth. They did not agree to change the teaching of Jesus which could be superseded by the alleged teachings of Christ as allegedly revealed to Paul.

They continue to affirm the true nature of Jesus being human and the divine unity of God which revered Him as the only Almighty Ruler of the universe, the Highest of all with no one equal to Him.

Comments

comments