logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Yada  
#1 Posted : Wednesday, August 29, 2007 9:08:45 PM(UTC)
Yada
Joined: 6/28/2007(UTC)
Posts: 3,537

This is a recent exchange with Yada:

Quote:
Hi Yada,

I am one of life's oddities - an English Catholic, albeit a convert of fourteen years.

I have read virtually all of 'Prophet of Doom' on the internet. Thanks for exposing Islam for what it is.

Pre 9/11 and later 7/7 in London, I, like many I'm sure, viewed Islam (if indeed, we had any particular views) as an essentially Arab religion with a different path to the same god as Yahweh. My own view was that these people were Muslims first, Arabs second and say, Egyptians a distant third. They were about 500 years behind Europe which had become a series of nation states and not divided on religious lines in the aftermath of the Thirty Years War. Indeed, as far as I recollect, religious conflict between Christian denominations was banned in the Treaty of Westphalia which concluded that war.

Europeans do not have the concept of 'umma' (a case of 'you prick me in Morocco and I bleed in Afghanistan'). If this was the case, the IRA would have been swelled by 'fighters' from predominately Catholic countries and, when Britain and Argentina went to war over the Falkland Islands, Spain and the other Spanish speaking nations of South America would have been arrayed against us. During two world wars, Catholic killed Catholic and Protestant killed Protestant because it was Britons fighting Germans - religion did not come into it.

There were issues about Islam that I could not put my finger on e. g. why should Gabriel turn up 600 years after the Annunciation to Mary and reveal a complete contradiction to Muhammad? Why was 'wild donkey man' Ishmael featured as an Islamic prophet when he is but a footnote in the Torah?

Of course, but for modern technology, few of us would have had the chance of reading the Koran and hadiths and the deconstruction of same in 'Prophet of Doom'. We would have been soothed by 'moderate' scholars who would say just enough after every atrocity to quench our anger and convince us that a few extremists were sullying the image of Islam. Such men would of course be applying the concept of Al Taqqiya to deceive us as part of their continuous jihad.

Unfortunately, the genie was let out of the bottle (excuse the pun) and we cannot avoid the fact that one fifth of the world's population follows Satan's religion, unwittingly or otherwise. As a Catholic, I agree with you that Pope John Paul II should not have kissed the Koran as it sent out the wrong message - a real Chamberlain in Munich moment, I'm afraid. I'm sure that Muslims view conciliation between faiths as a sign of weakness on our part.

To come to the main point of my email, I note that from comments in 'Prophet of Doom' and from the little I've read in 'Yada Yahweh' that although you fervently believe in Yahweh you do not believe in religion per se, particularly that of the organised variety.

Based upon Yahweh’s Word, I have formed a personal relationship with God and I am opposed to all forms of religion.

Your resume states that you were brought up as a Presbyterian so I can understand that you have a downer on Catholics, however misguided. I haven't had the opportunity of investigating your statement that most Catholic rituals are rooted in Babylonian history. Perhaps you can explain the link between the two and how it missed out Judaism. I would be particularly interested as to whom was sufficiently conversant with Babylonian culture in the early years of the Church to do a similar plagiarising job as Muhammad did on the Torah and Gospels.


Being a Presbyterian during my youth had no influence whatsoever on my disdain, and rightly so, for Catholicism (not Catholics). I despise the religion because most of its edicts, teaching, and rituals are either corruptions of, or are opposed to, Yahweh’s teaching. It’s that simple. The Church has piled its deceptions in the place they do the most harm—right on top of the truth, hiding it from view. But that is not to say that I am an advocate of Presbyterianism or Protestantism. I am opposed to them as well—as is God.

I cover the subject of Catholicism, and its Babylonian roots, throughout Yada Yahweh. While the RCC is the central topic of many of the God Damn Religion chapters, by turning to the end of the book and reading Yah’s presentation out of order and out of context, you won’t have the foundation of knowledge required to understand why Yahushua called the Catholic Church the seat of Satan, saying that they were married to Ba’al, and that they were dead.

All of your questions are explained in the book as Yahweh brings up the subjects in His Word, including the direct link between Catholicism and the Babylonian religion. I don’t however, understand your point on “how it missed out Judaism.” From Yah’s perspective, Judaism is also Babylonian, something He confirms regularly in Scripture.

What you don’t know is how Satan established his counterfeit of Yahweh’s teaching and plan in Babylon and how that same corruption was manifest in Assyria, Egypt, Persia, Greece, and Rome. Apart from the names, Constantine’s religion (Mithraism) was indistinguishable from the Babylonian sun god religion. Rather than converting, and changing his religion of conquest upon seeing the pagan sign of the cross superimposed on the pagan symbol for god (the sun), Constantine simply superimposed “Christian” names and symbols on Mithraism.

Quote:
I understand and accept your quotations from Jesus (sorry about the corruption, but that's the name that the modern world knows Him by) concerning the scribes' and pharisees' preoccupation with observing the law rather than offering a way to salvation and their hypocrisy ('they have had their reward'). However, this shouldn't be used as a stick with which to beat Catholic priests. Remember, Yahweh Himself specifically chose those from the tribe of Levi to be priests to serve in His tabernacle, so the principle was set then.

One of the reasons the RCC prevailed with its corruption is manifest in this paragraph. Continuing to use “Jesus” even though you now know that that name is errant and meaningless, and not using Yahushua, even though you now know that that name is correct and meaningful, demonstrates how deeply seated corruptions become. The same is true with Sunday worship, Easter, Christmas, the Mass, and prayers to Mary, Mother of God and Queen of Heaven. Over time, lies become “how the world knows Him.” But sadly, the “Him” is no longer God.

There is no way to equate the tribe of Levi, and their responsibilities, to Catholic priests. Their message was the antithesis of Catholicism. And they were designated by race, not ordination. They were called to serve in Yisra’el, not Rome, in Yahweh’s Tabernacle and Temple, not in a Roman Catholic Church. As a Catholic, you have been indoctrinated into believing that they were about the same business and that they were following the same path, but that isn’t even remotely accurate.

Quote:
I can see that you consider the purest form of Christianity to have been the early communities led by the Apostles themselves and that scripture was first corrupted at Niceae after the conversion of the Roman Empire by Constantine. Am I right?


Christian is an epithet. It means “drugged and whitewashed.” I despise the religion and thus do not seek to understand its purest form. Yahweh wants a personal relationship with us individually—nothing more, nothing less.

The Apostles knew and followed Yahweh’s Old Covenant teachings. They observed the Sabbath. They observed Passover, Unleavened Bread, FirstFruits, Sevens, Taruw’ah, Reconciliations, and Shelters. They knew that the Renewed Covenant was nothing more than the fulfillment and confirmation of the Old, not a religion, new or otherwise.

It is true however, that Scripture was corrupted at Niceae, and many times thereafter by the RCC. The evidence for this is overwhelming. I cover this topic throughout Yada Yahweh.

Quote:
As a Catholic, I believe that only we continue to follow the Apostolic tradition through the sacraments and scripture.


You have been beguiled. Catholic traditions are diametrically opposed to those followed by the Apostles. Your sacraments are Babylonian with “Christian” names. Your religion consistently contradicts Scripture.

Quote:
Scripture alone cannot be relied on as a guide. This is the trap that the reformed church has fallen into, leading to DIY Christianity and the cherry-picking of liturgy to suit themselves. Remember the old saying that if you ask a question to 100 lawyers, you will get 100 answers.


That is man’s position, not God’s. His position is the opposite of this, as is His stance on most all of Catholicism’s teachings. Further, the biggest problem with Catholicism’s additions is that they are contradictory to Yah’s message, not supplemental or consistent. This alone destroys your position.

You would benefit from reading Yada Yahweh. It will destroy the myths to which you cling, but it will leave you with truths which are vastly superior.

Quote:
We believe that our sacraments directly follow Christ's teaching and cite the following examples.

1. Even prior to the Last Supper, in response to a question from the pharisees, Jesus said that we would have to literally eat His body and drink His blood ('I am the bread of life') i.e. Holy Communion. This, to me, actually carries more weight than the words He said to his disciples, which are seized upon by Protestants to deny transubstantiation and promulgate symbolism only.


There was no last supper. Yahushua was observing Passover. While breaking bread and drinking wine at Passover, we are to remember that He fulfilled the promise contained in the Miqra. It’s about understanding the importance of Passover, and its message, and the promise and message of the other six Miqra with follow. This is the foundation upon which the Covenant is built.

Unfortunately for you and so many others, the RCC replaced Yah’s significant annual observance of Passover with the pagan, sun god festival of Easter Sunday. They replaced the significant date and message of Shelters with the pagan sun god myth of Christmas. They replaced Unleavened Bread with the Babylonian observance of Lent. FirstFruits was replaced by the Catholic Feast of the Assumption of Mary. And they simply ignored the others, celebrating other pagan rites in their stead. But Yahweh says that those who do not answer these summons will die separated from Him. So, either Yahweh is lying or the Roman Catholic Church is lying.

Communion is a pagan concept as the Mass and transubstantiation. A series of lies have been place right on top of a profound truth, doing the most damage possible.

Quote:
2. Jesus said to His disciples that whose sins they forgave or retained, the same would happen in heaven. This is the basis of reconciliation with priests becoming a mouthpiece to Yahweh.


Sorry. Priests have no authorization to forgive sins. Never have, never will. This is Yah’s exclusive domain. He alone paid the price to redeem.

Quote:
3. The priesthood continues the teaching of the Apostles. I don't know what you've got against organisation per se. Wouldn't our daily lives be reduced to chaos by a lack of form and rules?


It’s not the organization, it’s the teaching. You have been beguiled into believing a counterfeit, half-truths, and outright lies. It’s as if you were one of Muhammad’s stooges, believing that a litany of contradictory statements confirm earlier testimony. While you are smarter than any Muslim, the deception is identical.

There is only one way out of Babylon: knowledge and judgment. You need to discover what Yahweh actually taught and then use reason to form a valid verdict. The position you hold now is ignorant (lacking in knowledge) and irrational (not reasonable). Your soul deserves better.

Yahweh’s Word serves as an Owner’s Manual, prescriptions for better living. Man’s rules almost always lead to chaos, war, poverty, slavery, oppression, and manipulation. The history of the RCC in this regard is very, very dark.

Quote:
To me, Catholicism is synonymous with Christianity and it is frankly an insult to claim that the Church is guilty of apostasy (leave that to Protestant heretics).

Best regards.

S


Catholicism is synonymous with the religion of Christianity, and that’s a bad thing. As such, the RCC is guilty of apostasy and of insulting Yahweh. But that does not excuse Protestants. They are 85% as corrupt, misled, and errant as Catholics.

This isn’t about Catholics vs. Protestants. It’s about what Yahweh revealed and how that differs from the teaching and traditions of men. God repeatedly tells us that we have a choice: we can trust Him or trust men.

I pray that you read Yada Yahweh—all 1500 pages. If you do, your mind will be expanded, your life will be transformed, and your soul will come to be eternal. And that is not because of anything I’ve done, but what Yahweh has done for you.

Yada

Edited by user Saturday, September 1, 2007 2:01:31 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

If you'd like to join the YY Study Group room on Paltalk - just click here. The lockword is: yadayahweh
You can download the free software here.
Hope to see everyone on Paltalk!
WARNING: Do not give out personal information (name, address, etc.) to anyone on Paltalk - ever!
Offline Yada  
#2 Posted : Saturday, September 1, 2007 1:43:10 PM(UTC)
Yada
Joined: 6/28/2007(UTC)
Posts: 3,537



Hi Yada,

Thanks very much for such a prompt an detailed reply.

"S," your soul is worth the investment.

As I am currently on annual leave, I took the opportunity of reading 'God damn religion' this afternoon before considering my response. I skipped through the Greek lessons (sorry if this sounds flippant) and concentrated on your interpretation, which I found illuminating and depressing in equal measure.

I’m pleased to see that you took the time to read some more of Yada Yahweh. However, without having read the first five volumes you don’t have the foundation required to fully appreciate what Yahushua was saying, why He was so angry, or why I was so judgmental of the religion of Christianity in the presentation of Revelation’s seven prophetic letters. An understanding of the big picture Yahweh has drawn is required to appreciate how it differs from those others have composed.

I’m sorry that you skipped through the “Greek lessons” because understanding language is central to understanding the Word. To know Yahweh, you must concentrate on what He said, and how he said it, rather than focusing on a man’s interpretation.

My “interpretation” as you call it, is the product of the Word, the Spirit, the best research tools, and countless hours of study. I’m often motivated to invest several hours in the quest to understand the meaning of one word, or a day trying to properly translate a single sentence. While that may seem excessive, the reward is always worth the price. Suspicions are confirmed and conflicts are resolved, ultimately revealing a single unified masterpiece which is by many magnitudes more profoundly brilliant and magnificent than any human scheme. The word picture is so impressive, so informative and consistent, questions are resolved and interpretations become realizations. No collection of human minds would be capable of such wisdom. Faith becomes trust, and belief is transformed into reliance.

Every nuance of every word God uses to compose His picture paints the same scene, giving us countless perspectives into a simple, unique, universal, and unequivocal truth. When one views the original picture from every perspective Scripture has provided, scrutinizing the details while connecting them to other strokes, the image which emerges is that of Yahweh. You discover that His character is consistent, and so are His words and plans.

Make no mistake, God loves every aspect, every miniscule detail, of this word-picture He has made for us. So when a religion goes about changing things, interpreting them differently, counterfeiting and corrupting His character, plan, and purpose, He is not pleased.

Let me share an example. The Church, both Catholic and Protestant, has painted a divergent picture of life after death by preaching that those who choose not to love God (or become baptized in the Church, attending Mass) will be tormented eternally in the fires of hell. If this were true, such a god would be sadistic and unlovable. Rational people recognize this, which is why so many former Catholics, like our webmaster, have become atheists.

But this is not the picture Yahweh has painted. While there is a place of eternal separation, only religious, political, academic, media, and societal spokespeople will end up there. It takes much more than choosing not to love God to be separated eternally from Him—it requires whitewashing His picture and scribbling one’s own interpretations on it. According to Scripture, most people will simply find death to be the end of life. Only a few will come to yada/know Yahweh as He really is, come to trust His Word as He composed it, and rely on His plan as He revealed it. They will get to campout with God in paradise for all eternity.

When our webmaster was confronted by this realization, he was instantly drawn to learn more. He came to understand how choice, not rituals, relationship, not religion, stood at the center of God’s picture and plan. As a result of learning more, he not only knows Yahweh, he has been adopted into God’s family.


I admire the deep and extensive research that has gone into your books. You have obviously been on a very long journey of faith and discovery. I am intrigued to know how these revelations have changed you as a person. Did you feel that your early years as a 'Christian' had been wasted or did you feel relief that you had discovered your truth of Yahweh's word before it was too late? Do your views cause conflict with your family, friends and associates? I can see that they do with the Muslim community. What an inarticulate lot they are!! Muslimbeciles indeed.

I have a little over 20,000 hours invested in TWT, POD, and YY, so it has been a long journey of discovery. During this process, I’ve moved from faith to trust, from believing to knowing as I’ve shared.

Had I not been very involved in the church during my youth, I wouldn’t understand how different the religion of Christianity is from Yah’s teachings, and thus wouldn’t have been prepared to engage in this mission. Traveling in nearly 150 countries and starting three businesses from scratch and taking them all public was part of the education too—as was being crucified in the media from time to time. Yahweh likes to use seasoned veterans, especially passionate rascals who come to recognize that they are useless without Him. Moses had 80 years of preparation before he was called to duty. And if you analyze whom He selects for His most important work, God almost never uses a religious leader.

I try to avoid having my own views. But since Yahweh’s views are in conflict with most everyone’s opinions, there are plenty of conflicts. Fortunately, my sons are very smart, well read, rational, and moral. They know Yahweh as He is and as such, their perspective and conclusions coincide with Scripture.

Exposing and condemning Islam was the perfect preparation for Yada Yahweh. I learned who Satan was and how he operated. And I learned that most people cling to opinions which are neither informed nor rational. A single logical challenge destroys Islam as well as Catholicism. But yet, people seem incapable of dealing with evidence which contradicts their religious and political beliefs. And due to political correctness, most have been rendered incapable of being judgmental, and thus discerning and discrimination. So, while exposing and condemning religion is a worthy mission, one sponsored by Yah, doing so requires one to have thick skin and low expectations.


If I take your views as 'gospel' (again, excuse the pun), then the whole of mankind is damned. If I read 'God damn religion' correctly, then the end times will occur between 2026 and 2033 i. e. in both our lifetimes (I am 52). Like turning round a tanker, it would be almost impossible to deconstruct systems that have evolved over 2000 years (longer in the case of Hinduism and Buddhism) within twenty years and as far as Christians are concerned, their personal relationships with Yahweh and Yahushua are bound within their faith.

The “gospel” pun would be funny if Gospel was a godly term—but it’s not. There is no Scriptural basis for it.

The overwhelming preponderance of Yada Yahweh consists to reveal what Yahweh’s Word actually says. My commentary on Scripture is then equal parts an etymological study of what the words God selected mean and a review of how the passage relates to other verses, history, science, religion, organizational behavior, human nature, global affairs or current events—all designed to encourage people to think by drawing connections. The purpose is not to present “my views,” but instead to present Yahweh’s Words in a thoughtful context. But, having not read the first five volumes, I understand that it may be difficult for you to appreciate the fact that my judgmental comments are based upon the 1200 pages of revelation which precede God Damn Religion. And as I say in the Prologue, Beriyth – Beginnings, you are free to read the Scripture portions and ignore my commentary. But to do that, you must not only start at the beginning, you’ll have to do a considerable amount of preparation.

Either you haven’t read Ekklesia, Yahuwdy, and Laodicea, and/or you didn’t comprehend what Yahushua was saying. Scripture consistently reveals that most men and women are damned in the sense that they are separated from Yahweh (but not in the sense of suffering in hell). But the whole of mankind is not and never has been damned. There have always been, and will always be, those who yada/know Yahweh. Today, they are described in Yahushua’s open letter to the Philadelphians.

By having only read portions of God Damn Religion, and even that out of context, you lack the basis needed to understand how I was able to determine when Yahushua would return. While I think it’s obvious, to trust this conclusion, you will have to be as immersed in the Word as I am. You will have to abandon Catholicism and adopt Yahweh’s view, starting at the beginning with Genesis One.

Yet, even without an understanding of Genesis One, Yahweh’s six plus one plan, the Miqra, and Daniel’s timeline, the Olivet Discourse leaves no doubt that Yahushua will return within the lifetime of those who witnessed the world war, the outbreak of global terrorism, a dramatic increase in earthquakes and storms, and the return of Israel to the land. Just add 75 to 100 years to 1940-1948 and then subtract seven, and you’re in the ballpark for the beginning of the Tribulation.

I am also 52, and I recognize that I only have 16 to 19 years left to expose lies and witness to the truth. If you trust the RCC with your salvation or rely upon its teachings, you may live to be 78. At which time, if you haven’t changed and come to trust and rely exclusively upon Yahweh, you will be instantly annihilated. No pain. No suffering, no eternal torment, and no purgatory. It will all be over in a flash—literally.

Your tanker metaphor is accurate. That is why God hates religion. The damage it does is deep and wide, and very stubborn to change. Millions are deluded and damned as a result. That is why Yahushua says that the way is wide which leads to death and many there are who find it and the way is narrow which leads to life and few there are who find it. As a result, the vast majority of people will find death to be the end of life.

However, the tanker metaphor is also errant. Yahweh—seeing our past, present, and future all at once—has simply revealed the consequence of our choices. We are not predestined to sink man’s ship. And we are not all on the same boat. Individuals will be rescued all along the way. That is why I’m responding to you.


I think that the difference between 'Prophet of Doom' and 'Yada Yahweh' is that the Koran makes no pretence of its message of hate, submission, violence, corruption and perversity and its distortion of the Torah and the Gospels is laughable if it wasn't so dangerous. For those of us whose previously neutral view of Islam has been darkened by recent events, the deconstruction of Islam through the examination of the Koran, sura by sura and hadith by hadith, is what we wanted, even needed to hear.

I don’t think POD is what most people “wanted to hear,” but the rest of your conclusions are accurate.

However, when it comes to things that we hold dear, for which we feel that we hold the moral high ground (OK I accept that the RCC was at fault during the Middle Ages - Pope Urban's edict and the suppression of Wycliffe's translation of the Bible as examples) then Yada Yahweh makes uncomfortable reading. We know that the Bible (for want of a better word) clearly gives the opposite message to the Koran but it makes me wonder if you and I are reading the same book. How exactly did you come to your conclusions? Was it purely research or were you guided by the Holy Spirit? I was fascinated by your critique of the letters that St John was charged by Yahushua to write to the seven 'churches'. The Jehovah's Witnesses base their belief on a literal interpretation of Revelation. Are you doing the same in your own way?

Progress. The RCC was at fault for a very long period of time. And you are using Yahushua’s and Yahweh’s names. If nothing else, this exchange has been productive because you are now closer to the truth.

Yes, Yada Yahweh is “uncomfortable reading.” The truth is unpopular with Catholics, Protestants, Evangelicals, Secular Humanists, Socialists, Atheists, political conservatives and liberals. Yada Yahweh has no base of support other than God and His Word. But this has always been the case.

Since you brought it up, “Scripture” and “Yahweh’s Word” are both better terms than “bible.”

If you really want to know how I came to know what I know you’ll have to read Yada Yahweh from the beginning. But between now and then, the answer is: prioritizing the search for truth and investing the time. Yahweh is the biggest priority in my life.

One day, Yahweh wanted something done that no one else seemed willing to do: expose and condemn Islam so as to leave Muslims and non-Muslims without excuse. Based upon my willingness to engage, we began to work together. I purchased a room full of research tools (actually, some of them literally appeared on my doorstep) and He led me through them, providing the insights I would need to write and speak on the subject. For three years I journeyed each day into the hell of Islam with God holding my hand. Then one day, after finishing the book, website, and 1500 hours of live talk radio interviews, He didn’t show up. So my participation in the mission was over. I had completed the job he wanted done. Today, millions of people visit the POD site and read the best documented, most comprehensive, contextual, and chronological presentation of the Islamic scriptures ever written. And it is ten-times more popular in the Islamic world than it is in America—twenty-times more popular than in GB, so Muslims are getting the message.

After that mission was complete, God asked me to begin another. I wasn’t the most qualified person to do what He wanted done, but I was willing and reliant, and that was good enough. The Boss likes working with flawed and passionate rascals, as we are entertaining and willing to engage. And the less qualified the partner, the more obvious it becomes that he is receiving help.

To begin, I purchased 5,000 dollars worth of etymological and manuscript tomes. Yahweh directed me to the passages He wanted explored and I systematically studied each word He had chosen, determining its meaning. Slowly, word by word, I compiled the amplified translation in YY. As I did this, the Spirit filled me with understanding, so I shared what I had received by way of commentary.

But more than that, to be completely transparent, I did bring some experiences and gifts to the mission which were useful. I’ve seen more of the world than most people. I have studied religion and politics in great depth. I love science and history. I have good recall of what I’ve learned. And my mind makes connections that most people are unable to see.

Now, that does not make my scripture commentary inerrant. I am learning as I go, always coming to understand the details better and to see the big picture more clearly. And it does not make my amplified translations perfect either, but they are much, much, much closer to what Yahweh revealed than what you will find in any English bible.

It would serve no purpose for me to compare my understanding of Revelation with any denomination. What I know is that Revelation is essentially dictation from Yahushua and His messengers, of them telling John what to write. That said, understanding the message takes some doing.

I see Revelation’s presentation of the Tribulation as a set of keys and as an onion. The keys unlock the Old Covenant prophecies, making their meaning clear. And the three sets of seven woes fold over one another, telescoping down in time and detail. Viewed from the perspective of the Old Covenant, one can reasonably present what is on our horizon. And Revelation concludes the Covenant where it began. Yahweh’s first words to Abraham were to leave Babylon. Revelation concludes by asking the same thing of us: “Come out of her My people.” It is what He is calling you to do.


If I may for a moment play devil's advocate (sorry), I often spend my lunch hour at work browsing in book shops. If I were to pick up a copy of 'Yada Yahweh', why should I not treat it with the same disdain as I would, say, 'The God Delusion' (insulting to all those of faith) or 'The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail (RC bashing). On first glance both books seem to be well-written and plausible. Professor Richard Dawkins is a respected academic (therefore one for Satan's abode). There are many similar tomes on offer with widely conflicting opinions of the early church, covering subjects like Gnostics, Essenes and the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Progress again. You should never trust the wisdom of men. And hopefully you’ll make the next step in this reasoning and reject the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.

As for Yada Yahweh, you don’t need to trust what I’ve written. Do what I’ve done. Buy the research and etymological tools and invest the time to study each word Yahweh revealed, using the oldest manuscripts wherever possible. Baring that, at least buy some of the tools and periodically test the YY translations.

Yada Yahweh is unlike any book in that its basis is a word-by-word amplified translation of prophetic Scripture. So long as the words are rendered correctly, your argument on whether or not to trust and rely upon them isn’t with me, but with God.


To cite an example, I'm sure you are aware that the Essenes believe that Yahushua did not die on the cross (or pole - which is another JW belief) but that the vinegar offered to quench His thirst, as referred to in one of the Gospels (yes, I know He refused it), contained a drug which slowed His metabolism and gave the impression of death. He was then cut down alive and went on to live well into His seventies. To a Christian, this is an outrageous slander, but on paper seems plausible if written in an authoritative manner. Similarly, a secular humanist would probably find comfort and justification in Professor Dawkins' words. Why should your book be any different?

What the Essenes thought or wrote isn’t important. I care about what Yahweh had to say. If you read the Salvation volume, you’ll discover precisely what happened on Passover, Unleavened Bread, and FirstFruits in 33CE from the perspective of the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. It’s amazing stuff. Life and mind-altering stuff.

Moreover, the Essenes don’t exist today so they aren’t worth exposing and condemning. And while some of their errant beliefs may have been incorporated into JW belief systems, there aren’t enough JWs around to address them specifically in a book dedicated to a bigger mission.

The reason I expose and condemn Catholicism and Protestantism is because, along with the Orthodox, they represent the religion of Christianity—a religion which is badly corrupted and substantially divergent from Yah’s teaching. While Constantine was the father of the Christian religion and the RCC the mother, Protestantism is a corrupt stepchild, living in the same polluted swamp.



If I could briefly return to your answers to my previous questions:-

1. You stated that only Yahweh can forgive sins. I presume that when Yahushua said that 'your sins are forgiven you', this was on behalf of the Father. Also, when Yahushua sent his disciples out into the country, he gave them authority to heal the sick, cast out devils and forgive sins. If they could forgive sins, why not RC priests?

Yahushua is the human manifestation of the Father. Yahushua means “YahSaves.” And healing the sick and casting out demons isn’t the same as forgiving sins.

Unfortunately, you have mistranslated and misunderstood the “forgive sins” portion of a cobbled together passage, especially in the context of Yahushua’s instructions. Over the course of the last three years, I’ve dealt with scores of similar individual charges. Each time I translated the errantly rendered passage in context (although you haven’t actually cited one here), often investing two days in the process. Every time I’ve done it, Yahweh’s teaching was consistent, and the church’s teaching regarding the passage was wrong. But it never mattered.

While Yah may ultimately direct me to do this for you, should you actually cite a passage, it shouldn’t be necessary. First, you have no Scriptural support for your connection between the Apostles and Catholic priests—none. Second, by ignoring all of the big issues which destroy the myth of Catholicism and by focusing on what you may consider to be my weakest argument, you may score a debate point, but you’d lose your soul in the process.

I am certain that you will be able to find flaw with some minor point of what I’ve said, but if you cannot refute the whole of the message, you and the RCC would still be wrong. And being wrong is costly.

The commission which you should seek to understand and undertake is in Matthew 28:19-20 (properly translated). In Mark 16, the passage you have errantly paraphrased regarding the casting out of demons and healing the sick, there is no mention of the Apostles forgiving sin. Here, salvation is based upon knowing and relying on Yahweh and His message, followed by immersion in the Set Apart Spirit, just as it is with Matthew 28.

Luke ends with the same instruction YY conveys: “These are my words which I spoke to you while I was still with you that all things which are written about Me in the Torah of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled. Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures” All of which were the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms.

The passage goes on to say that the “forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in His name to all the nations beginning in Jerusalem. You are witness of these things.” They were then clothed in the Set Apart Spirit’s Garment of Light which gave them the power to do great things.

In this regard, Matthew 9:5-6 is compelling, as is Mark 2. In James 5, it is again Yah who is doing the forgiving, even though there are elders involved. In Yahshua’s prayer in Matthew 6, it is Yah who is asked to forgive our sins. There, man’s forgiveness of his fellow man’s sins have no bearing on the other party’s salvation.


2. As to your response to my observation on Holy Communion, you did not address Yahushua's reply to the pharisees ('I am the bread of life'). This is the basis (corrupt or otherwise) that Catholics reconcile themselves to Yahushua and is absolutely central to our faith.

You have sidestepped the Passover message I brought to your attention in our last exchange because the foundation of Yahweh’s plan of salvation proves that Catholicism is at best a distortion and at worst an outright lie.

In this example, however, Yahshua’s line to the Pharisees has nothing to do with the Passover celebration, but instead confirms the metaphor of Unleavened Bread. This is actually the most important day among the seven Miqra, because it designates the time the actual ransom was paid to redeem us. Yahushua’s soul went to the place of separation to separate sin from our mortal bodies, so that we wouldn’t be separated from God. Since this is all foreign to you as a Catholic, I suggest reading the Called Out Assembly volume of Yada Yahweh.

Moving on, Catholics can believe all they want, that eating bread during Mass reconciles them to Yahushua but it doesn’t make it so. In fact, eating bread has nothing to do with reconciliation. It’s like you telling me that Catholics believe that Mary is “the Mother of God and the Queen of Heaven and that standing before her graven image while praying bestows blessings and shortens one’s stay in purgatory.” It’s not only untrue, every aspect of the practice is Babylonian. Doing so is an abomination, and that’s not good. God doesn’t like His picture and story tampered with.

The fact is, neither you nor the RCC understands Yahweh’s plan as it is presented in the Miqra. Until you do, all of His symbols will be lost on you. And while we are on the subject of the Babylonian concept of “Holy Communion” and of Yahweh’s symbols being lost on religious Christians, in this email you switched metaphors, moving from the fable of transubstantiation of wine into blood to bread. I suppose that’s because every informed and rational person on the planet recognizes that the Roman Catholic claim is a boldfaced lie. Your mind, conscience, and taste buds all confirm a truth your heart is wont to deny.

The reason priests make such a ridiculous claim is that they are trying to fool the masses, impressing them so that they can control and fleece them. “Only we can perform this miracle and without it you’ll be excluded from the Church and destined to burn in hell.”

Anyone familiar with the Torah knows that Yahweh strictly prohibits drinking blood. Those familiar with the Torah also recognize that Yahweh repeatedly uses wine as the symbol for blood, and blood as a metaphor for atonement. Breaking bread and drinking wine on Passover is to remind us of Yahushua fulfilling the Miqra, of His body being broken for us and of His blood being shed for us in accordance with the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms. By taking this profound message out of the context of the Covenant and Miqra, and by setting it into the context of the Babylonian Mass, the RCC has produced a corrupted counterfeit which continues to beguile—separating men and women from Yahweh. This is why Yahushua called the universal church “the seat of Satan,” saying that it was “married to Ba’al,” and that it was “dead.”


3. When I made my comment on the Levites, I must confess that I wasn't entirely sure where I was going with the comparison between them and RC priests. Reference to the Levite priesthood occurred in a reading a couple of Sundays ago. Nevertheless, I threw it in to see what response I got and you took the bait. I was putting you to the test, so apologies for that.

You made an errant comparison and I did what I’m called to do: expose and condemn lies while witnessing to the truth. While I don’t understand your motivations, or subsequent comment, we’ll move on to other topics.

Some additional observations on 'GDR':-

1. I disagree that the terms 'Christ' and 'church' do not appear in the Gospels. Firstly, when Yahushua asked the disciples 'who do you say I am?', Simon Peter replied 'you are the Christ, the Son of the living God'. Yahushua then said that Simon Peter would be 'the rock on which I will build my church'. Secondly, St John was told to write to 'the angel of the church of Ephesus'. The same instruction was repeated for the other six assemblies. Do you agree or is this another mistranslation? Also, without reference to the letters of St Paul, I'm sure he referred to Christ being the head of the church.

Your opinion doesn’t matter. You can disagree all you want. The facts are the facts. The basis of “Christ” doesn’t appear on a single page of any of the six-hundred pages we possess of the 70 first-, second-, and third-century Renewed Covenant manuscripts—at least as it relates to Yahushua. And there is no justification for it. If the word had been written out (which it was only once and then in reference to Protestants being drugged), as a word it would have had to have been translated “anointed implement of Yah.” And if it were meant as confirmation of a title, it should have been transliterated Messiyah. Period.

There is no basis whatsoever for “church.” The Greek term is ekklesia. If it is just a word, it must be translated “out calling.” If it is a name or a title, it must be transliterated “Ekklesia.” Those are the only two rational options.

As for your second point, I’m bewildered. You are an articulate person who should be better informed than this. The dialog did not take place in English, so the answer to the question was not as you have cited.

Surprising to most, the dialog did not take place in Greek, either. The dialog took place in a mix of Aramaic and Hebrew. What you have written is an errant translation of an errant translation at best, and has actually gone through four filters as it relates to the Scriptural titles and names—form Hebrew to Aramaic to Greek, filtered through Latin, and then to English. In the oldest Greek texts, not only are the names different, Son, God, and Christ are not written out—nor is there any basis for church. You have been beguiled into believing things which are not consistent with Yahweh’s Word.

I’ve dealt with this passage in YY, so if it is interesting to you, you’ll find it there.


2. I note what you say about Simon Peter being the pastor of the brethren in Jerusalem, which is not included as one of the seven churches. I suppose that his presence in Rome, where he was crucified, indicated that he had replaced St Paul in the role of evangelist there after the latter's execution. Hence his link to Rome and acknowledgment among Catholics as the first pope. This is pure supposition on my part, though.

First, there are no saints. The Greek and Hebrew terms mean “set-apart.” The notion of Catholic saints is an abomination to Yahweh.

Second, the only references to Rome in Scripture are to condemn the place. The seven out-callings were chosen to represent prophetic ages, so that is why Jerusalem wasn’t among them.

Third, Paul was simply imprisoned in Rome. He was not “pastor” there. And there is no evidence whatsoever that Peter took over the job Paul did not have.

Forth, Peter was never “Pope,” and the title pope is a purely pagan term (as is father, nun, monk, and cardinal in a religious context). Moreover, there is no credible evidence that Peter ever left Judea, much less traveled all the way to Rome.

Fifth, there is no link between Peter and Constantine. Constantine was the first pope. He did what Muhammad did; he claimed that he was part of a long line of God’s appointed messengers to garner credibility. It’s just not true.


3. As I said before, this chapter is both illuminating and depressing. I'm not saying that I agree, though.

For those mothers who have lost young children, the view that their souls will simply cease to exist is hurtful to say the least. I can see why this would happen to secular humanists as their refusal to believe in God and an afterlife meant that they didn't expect anything less. Why should they worry anyway? I was also interested to see that Yahusha's words (used in a hymn) 'whatever you do to the least of my brothers, you do unto me' refers to the treatment of the Jews during the end times. If that is the case, then the game's up for humanity. Seeing as how the Jews were dispersed as a result of their breaking of the Covenant and their refusal to accept Yahushua as Messiah, and their punishment has continued to the present day in the form of anti-Semitism culminating in the Holocaust, it is likely that the Jehovah's Witness estimate of a limit of 144,000 Elect and the 70,000 Muslims to be saved as per the Koran are generous estimates.

I look forward to your response.

With best regards.

"S"

[color=red]God Damn Religion is actually a volume of chapters, not just one chapter. And collectively, they are only depressing for those who do not know Yahweh.

There are clues as to what happens to children’s souls should they die young, prior to choosing to accept God, to ignore Him, to believe myths about Him, or openly rebel, leading others away from Him. Their fate appears to be connected to that of their parents. And that seems reasonable, considering the fact that it is highly unlikely that the product of a devoutly religious or secular family would reject all of their family’s and community’s traditions and accept Yahweh’s plan. If anything, this should compel us to be better parents. But since we are not responsible for determining the fate of individual souls, there is no value in our knowing the criterion Yahweh will use to deal with those who were too young to choose.

But for adults like you and me, the answer is clear....
If you'd like to join the YY Study Group room on Paltalk - just click here. The lockword is: yadayahweh
You can download the free software here.
Hope to see everyone on Paltalk!
WARNING: Do not give out personal information (name, address, etc.) to anyone on Paltalk - ever!
Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.