False Teachers - Tumblr Posts

Those who guide this people are leading them astray; and those who are guided by them are brought to confusion." --(Isaiah 9:16). "Surely our fathers have inherited lies." --(Jeremiah 16:19). "Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

(Matthew 15:14).

Was Jesus Born Again?

By Goodreads Author Eli Kittim

Jesus’ Baptism in the Holy Spirit

In discussing Jesus’ baptism in the Holy Spirit, I’m not referring to John the Baptist’s water baptism. Rather, I’m referring to a Spirit baptism or a conversion experience where Jesus had a personal encounter with the power of God. Many Christian denominations emphasize that without such a “born-again” experience no one can enter the kingdom of God (Jn 3.5). From the outset, scripture emphasizes the need for a baptism of the Spirit (Mt. 3.11 NRSV):

‘He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and

fire.’

In Mk. 16.16-17, it’s not merely by faith alone but by spirit “baptism” that salvation is accomplished! Given that the born-again Christians “will speak with new tongues,” it’s clear that the text isn’t referring to a symbolic immersion in water but rather to a baptism of the Holy Spirit! And although Baptism is defined as a rite of admission into Christianity——by immersing in water——this ritual is *symbolic* of being cleansed from sin (1 Jn 1.7) by the death of the self. First Peter 3.21 (NIV) reads:

and this water symbolizes baptism that now

saves you also—not the removal of dirt from

the body but the pledge of a clear

conscience toward God.

In Rom. 6.3-4, Paul talks of a baptism Into Jesus’ death! It’s a believer’s participation in the death of Christ to allow them to “walk in newness of life.” It’s part of the same regeneration process which comprises the death of the old self & the rebirth of the new one (Eph. 4.22-24). The best example of Spirit baptism is in Acts 2.1-4! Colossians 2.12 (NIV) similarly says:

having been buried with him in baptism, in

which you were also raised with him through

your faith in the working of God.

Keep in mind that, in the gospel story, Jesus didn’t start his ministry prior to his regeneration. Nor was Jesus revealed prior to his rebirth. Mt. 3.16-17 (NRSV) suggests that Jesus’ regeneration began with John’s baptism and was followed thereafter by his encounter with the devil in the wilderness:

And when Jesus had been baptized, just as

he came up from the water, suddenly the

heavens were opened to him and he saw

the Spirit of God descending like a dove and

alighting on him. And a voice from heaven

said, ‘This is my Son, the Beloved, with

whom I am well pleased.’

This is a symbolic account of his rebirth. Notice that it was Jesus *alone* who saw (εἶδεν), presumably for the first time, the Spirit of God (cf. Jn. 3.3) who would later indwell him. If Jesus already had the Holy Spirit, there would have been no need for a temptation in the desert. Jesus already had the fullness of the Deity within him in bodily form (Col. 2.9) but, being innocent, he still had to receive the Holy Spirit in order to energize it and be transformed. The next verse says (Mt. 4.1 NRSV):

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the

wilderness to be tempted by the devil.

This is a continuation of the earlier baptism motif in the previous chapter. If “ ‘John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance’ “ (Acts 19.4 NIV), as “Paul said,” then Jesus would have had to necessarily confront his sin nature at some point. For those who object to the notion that Jesus had a sin nature, how could he have been “like His brothers in every way” (Heb. 2.17), fully human, if he were unable to be tempted? Not to mention that it would also render the temptation pericope ipso facto meaningless because how could the devil tempt someone who is unable to be tempted by sin? That’s why scripture says that “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us” (2 Cor. 5.21 NIV)!

So, as part of his rebirth experience, Jesus had to confront the devil. That’s why the text emphasizes that he didn’t do it on his own. Rather, “he was led up [ἀνήχθη] by the Spirit.” Jesus then confronts the devil head on. He is persistently tempted in order that he may prove his loyalty to God. He faces various temptations and is put to the test. He experiences what the German Protestant theologian Rudolf Otto (1869–1937) calls the “mysterium tremendum”:

A great or profound mystery, especially the

mystery of God or of existence; the

overwhelming awe felt by a person

contemplating such a mystery (Oxford

English Dictionary).

The text shows that, by the end of his temptation experience, Jesus had been reborn in God by following the same principle as the one found in James 4.7 (NRSV):

Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist

the devil, and he will flee from you.

Jesus does precisely that. Notice that the spirit of God and the angels did not minister to him prior to his rejection of Satan (Mt. 4.10-11 NIV):

Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan!

For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God,

and serve him only.’ “Then the devil left him,

and angels came and attended him.

This is a clear demonstration that even Jesus himself had to be reborn in order to both see & enter the kingdom of God (Jn. 3.3, 5). Given that he’s fully human (Heb. 2.17), he’s not exempt from the regeneration process, which is the necessary means by which a human being can become united with God.

This concept creates an obvious oxymoron. For example, if Christ was purportedly born-again, does this mean that Jesus got saved? Or that Jesus became a Christian? This is the kind of paradox that such an experience can suggest. In a certain sense, the answer is yes. Think about it. Being fully human, even Christ has to undergo a dangerous temptation in order to encounter God. But if that’s the case, then it means that there was a time when Jesus didn’t know God; a time when he didn’t have a personal and intimate relationship with him. Lk. 2.52 (NRSV) says:

Jesus increased in wisdom and in years,

and in divine and human favor.

If “Jesus increased in wisdom,” then this means that there was a time when he didn’t have much wisdom. The above verse also suggests that the divine favor towards him increased as Jesus got older. All these passages clearly show that Jesus grew up as a normal human being who underwent all of the spiritual experiences for regeneration and rebirth that we all encounter. He was not exempt from any of them, including that of regeneration & rebirth!

Conclusion

Scripture, then, shows that in being fully human, Jesus had to go through everything that we also face, including suffering, pain, depression, rejection, and so forth. Yet there are some pastors who teach that Jesus didn’t have a sin nature, never sinned, could not be tempted, was not reborn, and the like. Remember Isa. 53.3 (NLT)?:

He was despised and rejected— a

man of sorrows, acquainted with deepest

grief.

Yet in response to a Christian talk-show host, a famous preacher who heads a megachurch in Redding, California argued that Christ “wasn’t born again the way we’re born again.” Specifically, the Christian talk-show host posed the following question: So, “he [Christ] wasn’t born again the way we’re born again”? To which Christian minister and evangelist, Bill Johnson, replied: “No, goodness no, no. I have to be born again; he’s already God, so, absolutely not.” So much for pastoral care!

How Should Christian Scholars Respond to Attacks and Insults?

By Bible Researcher and Author Eli Kittim 🎓

Now these people were more noble-minded

than those in Thessalonica, for they

received the word with great eagerness,

examining the Scriptures daily to see

whether these things were so.

——- Acts 17:11 NASB

Should We Believe What Others Say Or Should We Investigate the Scriptures for Ourselves?

People believe in historical Christianity. They believe that if Christianity is not historical then nothing else about the Bible is true. They cannot interpret it in any other way. They can only see it backwards; never forwards. But what ever happened to Bible prophecy? Take, for example, the idea of questioning the historicity of a Biblical event, wondering whether it happened in the past or if it will happen in the future. Isn’t that ultimately a question of faith?

People believe in a historical Jesus and in the so-called “historical” gospel narratives. Believers think that if Jesus didn’t exist——or if he didn’t die and wasn’t resurrected in the past——then everything else in the New Testament is complete and utter fiction, fabricated out of whole cloth, and therefore false. For them, it’s all about past history. But future history (aka Bible prophecy) is just as valid! The notion that Jesus came in the flesh *at some point in human history* somehow seems to escape their hermeneutical purview. It never really occurred to them that if these incidents in the life of Jesus are prophesied to take place in the future, then the Bible is just as valid and just as reliable as if these events had happened in the past. Why? Because the Bible is ultimately not a historical chronicle but a Book on Faith!

People believe what they hear. But sometimes that’s just fake news or long-held assumptions that are based on *wrong interpretations* of the facts. The story of Jesus’ past death and resurrection is a story that has been told millions of times at the dinner table, on television, during Christmas, Easter, in all churches and denominations, it’s heard from preachers in the pulpit, it’s repeated by missionaries, taught in seminaries, and has generally been reiterated by pastors and teachers throughout the culture for thousands of years. So, it’s as if it is written in stone. It’s a foregone conclusion. It’s considered to be an undeniable fact. But what if a thorough Biblical investigation challenged any of these points? What then? Mind you, this type of inquiry would only be challenging *the man-made interpretations,* not the actual words of the Bible per se!

——-

A Biblical Consensus Is Always Evolving

In science, the role of agreement is paramount in establishing empirical facts, and it’s only through verifiable evidence that an epistemic agreement can be reached. However, the body of empirical knowledge is constantly changing. New information is constantly assessed and prior conclusions are always re-examined. What appeared to be a fact yesterday may not be so today. And the methodology is constantly improving and evolving. Today, we have better criteria and more knowledge at our disposal to understand the Bible than ever before. Therefore, our biblical findings can certainly change our previous assumptions and presuppositions. The Biblical consensus has changed considerably over time. With new interdisciplinary evidence at our disposal, our conclusions about Biblical authorship and composition have gradually changed. New evidence in lower and high criticism has prompted new questions that require a new set of criteria and more advanced methodologies to address them. So, as a rule, new findings replace older “facts,” thereby changing the previous consensus!

For example, advances in textual criticism have shown that Moses was not the author of the Pentateuch. The date of the Pentateuch’s composition is also not as early as once believed. In fact, the scholarly consensus is that Moses probably never existed and that the Exodus never happened: it is a foundation myth. As it happens, no archaeological remains have ever been found in the Sinai Peninsula regarding the exodus or the Israelites.

But try telling that to Orthodox Jews who hold these “truths” to be self-evident, sacred, and non-negotiable. For them, history, archaeology, textual criticism, and Biblical studies are a “demonic” attempt to undermine their faith. But is that true? Of course not! On the contrary, many who are involved in these scientific and Biblical disciplines are themselves faithful Jews and Christians.

Then there was the emergence of other academic disciplines and methods that investigated the historical precursors of the biblical texts. Some of these were “source criticism” and “form criticism,” from which “redaction criticism” was derived. Finally, literary criticism added a new way of looking at the authorial intent via such methods as narrative criticism, rhetorical criticism, and canonical criticism. These emerging methods of biblical criticism, which did not previously exist, ultimately changed how we view and understand the Bible.

For example, the idea that the New Testament authors quoted predominantly from the Greek Old Testament rather than from the Jewish Bible must have certain important textual ramifications. Also, without the understanding of “intertextuality”——the literary dependence of the New Testament on the Old Testament——we would not know what literary material was borrowed from the Hebrew Bible. All you have to do is pick up a chain-reference Bible and you’ll see how much of the Old Testament is found in the New Testament, and how many words, speeches, and events that are attributed to Jesus are actually modelled on these earlier stories. These academic disciplines pave the way for a deeper understanding on various levels that heretofore were untraversed and unknown.

But how, then, can one explain to a believer that Jesus didn’t really say or do that? That it was just a literary narrative in which the evangelist put Jesus in a certain theological context in order to show that he is the prophesied Messiah of Hebrew Scripture. So, it seems that one must put away their emotional component when involved in this type of inquiry. One must leave their ego at the door. That is to say, one must temporarily suspend faith and atheism in dealing with Biblical studies. That’s because, just as in science, pure objectivity is strictly required. Once a person has gathered all the necessary evidence, they can then try to ascertain how it might fit with or be relevant to his/her faith, or how it may further inform it.

There are also many cross-reference and concordance studies that reveal Biblical *meanings* by focusing on certain repetitive linguistic idiomatic expressions, as they’re found throughout scripture. Parallel passages and verbal agreements help to further identify certain *meanings* that are consistently found across the text. Then there are the Biblical languages. Studying the original Biblical languages in Paleo-Hebrew and Koine Greek help us to create faithful and competent translations, which involve a more accurate knowledge and understanding of scripture’s details about timing, location, and authorial intention. Moreover, parsing (or syntax analysis) helps us to further understand the grammar and morphology of the Biblical languages! These methodologies are invaluable in providing a solid foundation that may not always be consistent with previous assumptions. Discoveries in these areas are obviously worthy of serious consideration.

But how do you explain these facts to a simple layperson who may think otherwise? In their eyes, you are seen either as a traitor to the faith, at best, or guided by the deceiver, at worst. To a believer——who is not engaged in these types of studies but reads the Bible literally and superficially——writing about these findings and complex issues may be interpreted as preaching godless heresies. In his/her mind you are simply a false teacher. . . And despite Jesus’ appeal for unity in the church (John 17:21), there have always been fights and quarrels among Christians (James 4:1). It has also become a fashion lately to slander Bible teachers. Many are quick to point fingers at each other and accuse other Christians of wrongdoing. This is antithetical to scripture!

In this case, the only thing a Bible scholar can do is to remind the reader that objectivity rather than fanaticism is more fruitful in biblical interpretation, and that name-calling is not biblical evidence. In fact, scholars welcome the opportunity for peer-review and academic criticism!

Modern Christianity is a Joke

Eli Kittim

On their podcasts and platforms, Christians are constantly talking about God, Christ, and the Bible, explaining the gospel, debating about theology and prophecy, while assuming to know what scripture teaches, right down to the last detail. And yet none of them know what they’re talking about or what’s really going on (Rom. 3:11). Yet they all have millions of followers flocking to their social media platforms to hear them speak, and they’re deceiving all of them (intentionally or unintentionally) with lies and misinformation. But this has already been prophesied. In fact, Matthew 24 and 1 Timothy 4:1 clearly state that the end-times will be characterized by global deception, as many false prophets and teachers will arise and mislead many. Paul himself knew that after his departure Christianity would eventually decline and become a church of heretics (Acts 20:29). All that has happened. Most teachings today are about the Nephilim, aliens, and ancient civilizations.

All the biblical doctrines that are being taught today——whether at the university, the seminary, or in social media platforms——are false. Why? Because they have nothing to do with the Holy Spirit. None of these so-called pundits have received any revelations from God in the manner that Paul describes (see Gal. 1:11-12). To preach things based on personal guesswork or mere speculation is not the same as teaching according to the Holy Spirit. John 14:26 says that “the Holy Spirit … will teach you all things.”

It’s gotten so bad that even the Pope is now teaching that it’s a dangerous heresy to have a personal relationship with Jesus outside the church. A Facebook friend of mine——a Christian apologist by the name of Marcia Montenegro——has gone so far as to condemn any attempt to open your mind and spirit to God through the prayer of stillness (which btw is still used in both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches), denouncing it as a so-called satanic practice that opens your spirit to demonic influences, even though that is precisely what the Bible requires in order for rebirth and salvation to take place. How else can God transform your carnal nature unless he recreates your identity? (Eph. 4:22-24). How can God live within you and create a new operating system unless the old one is deleted? How else can you receive the Holy Spirit, who changes your personality, turning a sinner to a saint, as it did with Paul? Romans 8:9 says categorically and unequivocally:

“if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ,

they do not belong to Christ.”

Then there are the nominal Christians. These are Christians in name only. They pretend to be Christ-like but act like demons. I know a few well-known Christian writers and bible prophecy teachers who have privately sent me viruses because I criticized their views. People would be surprised to know that Richard H. Perry did such a thing when i criticized his view that George Bush represents the white horseman of Revelation. I obviously had to block him. Another famous lawyer turned author by the name of Mark L. Hitchcock took me by surprise when he reported me to YouTube, which resulted in google permanently shutting down my platform. And he did this just because I complained that his YouTube channel was deleting all my comments and articles. As a result, I ended up losing all my videos and all my content that had been running on the web for the past 12 years. I was aghast that someone of his stature would resort to this. That was so mean. It completely took me by surprise. I didn’t see that one coming. This type of spitefulness is uncharacteristic of Christian believers. Their fruits bear no love. I seriously doubt whether such a person is in-dwelt by the Holy Spirit. Needless to say, I have lost all respect for him. I obviously blocked him, too. Good riddance!

Christianity has gotten so bad that Christian pastors are preying on crippled children, promising to heal them if they sow a financial seed to the ministry. People like Kenneth Copeland, Benny Hinn, and more recently, Kathryn Krick, all falsely claim to heal people suffering of serious disorders. Then you have YouTubers who are openly deceiving people, claiming that God speaks to them. Troy Black is a case in point. He has half a million victims, I mean subscribers, who are being lied to on a daily basis.

Not to mention the multiple scandals involving priests and pastors who are texting pornographic materials to their congregants and have inappropriate relations with them. Some pastors are even teaching that you don’t even need to believe in Jesus in order to be saved, while others, like Steven Anderson, are claiming that you don’t need to stop sinning, but only to believe in Jesus. Some Christian writers are teaching that you don’t even need God or Jesus, and you certainly don’t need to hear from them or even experience them personally. All you need is to read the Bible. There are some well-known pastors, like Justin Peters, who teach this doctrine. Not to mention those scholars, like David Bentley Hart, who claim that all people will eventually be saved, whether they believe in Jesus or not. But how exactly are we saved? Does anyone know? A well-known pastor, named Ken Raggio, recently posted on Instagram that “God changes us from sinner to saint … by … divine discipline. As we OBEY the Word.” This is totally and completely wrong! We cannot save our selves by ourselves. That’s why we need a savior. Jesus criticized the Pharisees for washing their hands but not cleansing their heart, showing that their legalism and discipline was totally ineffective in changing them from within. That’s why he said to Nicodemus the Pharisee: you must be “born again” (Jn 3:3). Only God can recreate us (2 Cor. 5:17). We are not saved by works or through personal efforts and behaviors.

And the core doctrines of modern Christianity are all wrong. The modern Christian faith centers on certain core beliefs regarding the historical birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. But these events haven’t happened yet. According to the Bible, they will take place in the endtimes (see Isa. 2:19; Dan. 12:1-2; Zeph. 1:7; Lk 17:30; Acts 3:19:21; 1 Cor. 15:22-24; Gal. 4:4; Eph. 1:9-10; Heb. 1:1-2; 9:26b; 1 Pet. 1:10-11; 1:20; Rev 12:5; 19:10d). My chief objection is that the TIMING of these events is totally wrong. This is all based on a misunderstanding of Greek and a misreading of genre.

The internal evidence supports my view. It’s in both the Old and New Testaments! Zephaniah 1:7 declares that the Lord’s sacrifice will occur during “the day of the Lord” (not in antiquity). Isaiah 2:19 says that people will hide in caves when “the Lord … arises to terrify the earth.” Similarly, Daniel 12:1 puts the resurrection of the anointed prince just prior to the great tribulation. I can prove it with detailed exegesis from the Greek text. The LXX (Dan 12:1) says παρελεύσεται, which means to “pass away,” & the Theodotion has ἀναστήσεται, meaning a bodily resurrection in the end-times. In the following verse (12:2), the plural form of the exact same word (ἀναστήσονται) is used to describe the general resurrection of the dead! In other words, if the exact same word means resurrection in Daniel 12:2, then it must also necessarily mean resurrection in Daniel 12:1! Acts 3:20-21 similarly says that Christ will not be sent to earth until the consummation of the ages. First Corinthians 15:22-24 also tells us that Christ will be the first to be resurrected in the end-times! Revelation 12:5 tells us that the messiah is born in the end times, and the next verse talks about the great tribulation. Galatians 4:4 says that Jesus will be born during the consummation of the ages, expressed by the apocalyptic phrase τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου, which is defined in Ephesians 1:10 as the end of the world! First Peter 1:20 says that although Christ was foreknown before the creation of the world, he was initially revealed “at the final point of time.” It’s supported by Hebrews 1:2 which says that Jesus speaks to mankind in the “last days,” not in antiquity. And Hebrews 9:26 says EXPLICITLY that Jesus will die for the sins of mankind “once in the end of the world” (ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων)! Revelation 19:10 also informs us that the TESTIMONY to Jesus is prophetic (not historical). Read Acts 10:40-41 where we are told that Jesus’ resurrection was based on visions because it was only visible “to witnesses who were chosen beforehand by God.” Similarly, 1 Peter 1:10-11 says that the New Testament prophets “predicted the sufferings of the Messiah” in advance (cf. Isa 46:10).

This short video will clarify everything I’ve said so far:

A Biblical Greek translation of the New Testament that changes everything we thought we knew about Jesus