Welcome to my blog!   My name is TJ Smith and I created this to share my interpretations of various topics pertaining to the Bible and the American Church culture.  Most of it is positive as I like to encourage fellow believers to realize what Yeshua fully accomplished during the time He walked on earth.  The mainstream Church has missed a large portion of this wonderful victory by looking for future fulfillment of blessings they already possess.

I have studied Eschatology (end times theology) for more than 30 years and that is typically my focus.  I have written numerous papers on subjects pertaining to the Second Coming and the book of Revelation, which I have posted on this blog.  I was honored to write commentaries for seven books of a new Bible Translation in 2012, entitled “The Kingdom Bible” available here: The Kingdom Bible

I have written a book titled “Kingdom Come: Messiah’s Methodical Manifesto Hidden In the Parables”.plus 5 books on how to interpret the Bible.  My wife and I have served as Worship Leaders (writing our own worship songs) and Home Group facilitators, as well as developing and teaching a Bible Interpretation Class.  We currently reside in Texas and my wife (Maria) has just completed her 5th Christian Album as part of her duo Grace Compass a women’s music ministry that incorporates original music into worship.  We have four grown children, three rowdy grandsons and one darling granddaughter.

My goal is to unveil the entire truth of Christ’s gift, Gospel and Victory and help others live a more stress-free life.  I also enjoy taking commonly misinterpreted Biblical passages (and there are plenty) and unraveling them for people to understand.  We love grilling thick steaks, eating BBQ, walking our neighborhood for exercise, recording in our studio, studying Scripture, watching Rockumentaries, Fulfilled Covenant Theology, shooting hogs for the fun of it, the NFL and our grandkids!   So, feel free to click on some links below and see if anything piques your interests.

Symbolism in the Bible

“Symbolism is symbolic of the symbol it symbolizes”

                                                                      TJ Smith

Man, that was deep!  I don’t even know what that means.  But it is true that what something is meant to identify or express is far for important than the object itself.

Use the wedding ring as an example: it can be cheap or expensive. Ornate or simple. It can be of white or yellow gold, or a cigar band.  The ring itself has little value alone, but its significance is far greater. How about a gold crown?  That should speak for itself, right?  Maybe not.  I saw the fry cook at the local hamburger joint wearing a gold-colored paper crown.  Does that mean I should bow to him when he hands me my order?  Maybe he was a descendent of royal peanut-oil?  The point is the symbolism of a crown was being marketed by the fast food restaurant to induce the image of royalty wanting to eat a burger at this place. We all understand the imagery of a crown. The entire world understands. But the symbolism is what is always more influential that the actual object. 

The Wedding dress: though Mary Queen of Scots wore a white wedding gown in 1559 when she married her first husband, Francis Dauphin of France, the tradition of a white wedding dress is commonly credited to Queen Victoria’s choice to wear a white court dress at her wedding to Prince Albert in 1840. Around the world, brides use all colors and fabrics to celebrate their wedding.  Yet they all pale when compared to the symbol the dress represents.  Ironically, the Western church believes the bride mentioned in the book of the Revelation wore a white dress, though the color was never mentioned.

Even the ensigns the children of Israel carried in the desert, as well as the ensigns the Roman guards carried, were not as important as what they represented. Just as the Police Officers badge is just a piece of metal shaped into a star, it represents something far more powerful: Law and Order. 

One mistake we make when reading the Bible, and especially books like the Revelation, Daniel, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Isaiah and others, is to not look beyond the physical item to understand the symbolism behind it.  Let’s face it, Revelation 21 is not about a real dragon being tied to a real chain and thrown into some bottomless pit.  First, there is no such thing as a bottomless pit.  Eventually you would fall out the other side of the earth   if you didn’t burn up in earth’s magma 1800 miles down.  The chain in Rev. 20 represented God’s power and authority to restrain wickedness, and the bottomless pit represented the darkest doom and gloom with no control over the circumstances, at the mercy of the one who placed you there. Finally, I think we can agree that the dragon symbolized Satan.  The Greek word is “drakon”.  In this usage, a dragon was not fire breathing nor did it have wings. In fact, just the opposite: Revelation 12:16 “And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.”(ERRB)  The word “flood” has definitions all related to water.  This particular dragon did not breath fire, but water.  Nor do we find any reference to it flying.  It would be best to ignore Hollywood and medieval western European folklore of what a dragon looked like.  The Greek word came first, then over the centuries the physical representation has morphed into what we understand today: a gigantic flying-fire-breathing, mythical creature living in a cave, who might be able to speak english, with a Sean Connery accent.  Probably just heartbroken from some past dragon-love gone awry. 

The symbol John saw in his vision was only to help the reader (or listener) get an idea of what this vision  represented.  If a woman calls a man a snake, we can probably assume he is a womanizer. 

Remember this principle when you are trying to understand the symbolism in the book of the Revelation.  It was not intended to paint a physical picture of actual scorpions stinging men for 4 months, nor to have us understand that someday, stars will “fall” out of the sky.  Since there is no gravity in space, and since even the smallest of stars are many times larger than our Sun, and since there is no direction in space and therefore a star cannot “fall”, this phrase is ‘symbolic’ of earthly rulers and powers being displaced.  We learn this from the dream that Joseph tried to explain to his father in Genesis 37:9-10:

9And he dreamed another dream, and related it to his father, and to his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed another dream: as it were the sun, and the moon, and the eleven stars did me reverence. 10And his father rebuked him, and said to him,‘What is this dream which thou hast dreamed? Shall indeed both I and thy mother and thy brethren come and bow before thee to the earth?’”  (Brenton)

Be a Berean and study for yourself. Begin to filter your understanding according to the type of Biblical genre you are reading. Is the passage apocalyptic, poetic, historical, Epistolic, Prophetic? Learn this first, then proceed.

Here is a quote from Pastor Mel Lorenz[1]

“Later today I will go to my mailbox, remove its contents, go into the kitchen, and sort the mail. I will be able to tell from the size, packaging, and addresses on the mail which pieces are advertising, bills, and personal mail. This sorting into types helps me discern the value of the different pieces.

There is a large bookstore I frequently visit. I know just where to find histories and biographies, novels and picture books, technical manuals and reference works. Knowing the different genres and where to find them helps me gain what I am looking for.

And when I open the Bible, I know from having studied it for decades whether I am reading a gospel passage, a prophecy, a Psalm, or an epistle. I do not expect Isaiah to lay out the details of the history of Israel as do the books of Kings and Chronicles. I know when I’m studying a Psalm that the forms of a poem or song will help me understand the meaning. And when I read 1 Corinthians I know I’m listening to one side of a two-sided conversation.”


The Last Semite

Unless I preface this with a disclaimer, you might misinterpret my intentions. So, please remember that I do not hate the people of the Old Testament. I don’t hate those that Moses led out of Egypt, those Jesus chose for His ministry nor even the jewish leadership that killed Him. What I do hate are groups posing as descendants of that Old Testament people. I really disdain anyone alleging to be in line to receive any promises made to that group of ancients. I would hope you could agree that there is no place for that type of “claim jumping”.

We should understand the nuances that have developed over the centuries. The first being the definition of “Semite” If we can’t determine that then we won’t be able to discern the rest. It’s like when Jesus told the disciples “if you can’t understand this parable, how will you understand all of them?”[1] Mark 4:13

Noah got off the ark with his family: Shem, Ham and Japheth. Shem had descendants. They were called Shemites. Neither Ham nor Japheth’s children were called Shemites. Got it? Good. “Shemite” evolved into “Semite”.

If a person cannot prove his lineage is from Shem, they are not a Semite. Muslims, Ethiopians, Ashkenazis (Ashkenaz-grandson of Japheth), Khazarians, and Sephardic “Jews” are not Semites.

“Semite”, “Semitism”, and “anti-Semitism” are words that have been kidnapped by the Zionist movement and weaponized by that political party to attack anyone who says anything unsupportive of Zionism. Yet, since none of our present-day Judaic adherents are descendants of Shem, they cannot be Semites. Unfortunately, the word had its meaning changed for political reasons. Are there any blood-related, scientifically proven people on earth carrying the DNA of Shem? If there are, they have remained suspiciously quiet. So I’m going with “no”.

Remember, you can’t accuse me of being anti-Semitic, if no Semites exist.

Zionists learned early on that calling out people as “anti-Semitic” brought the results they were looking for: support from the American government and military, and Protestant churches.

The church is so ignorant about the Bible that they have bought into a false doctrine that presents itself as supporting “God’s chosen people”. The Problem is: Christians are God’s chosen people. But that “American Christian guilt” has pushed the church into a corner of accepting something that doesn’t exist; descendants of Shem.

So for now, let’s leave that discussion here and move on to our 2nd definition: “What is an Israelite?”

Ok, again let’s go back to Noah and run through the lineage: Noah begat Shem, Shem to Arphaxad to Canaan who fathered a daughter who married Salah. They gave birth to Peleg. Then Peleg to Reu to Serug to Nahor to Terah, and finally Terah fathered Abraham.

Abraham and Sarah had Isaac. Isaac and Rebecca had Jacob. Jacob wrestled with an angel, and had his name changed to “Israel”. Genesis 32:28

One can only claim to be an “Israelite” if they can prove their lineage came from Jacob. Again, No Ashkenazi, Sephardic, Mizrahim, Indian, African, or even a ‘completed’ Jew from Muleshoe, Texas can provide one shred of Israelite DNA. Another sad commentary is that none of these groups have ever wanted to claim descendancy from Shem. More on that later.

These DNA tests that people buy to trace their heritage, are only as accurate as the information DNA companies can access. Therefore, there has been no establishment of “Shemite” bloodline. Meaning, if a DNA test claims you are 100% Jew, it means you are 100% Khazarian. That bloodline has been established. That DNA is traceable, but a disputable point, as it cannot trace the DNA to Shem. It only establishes that they could trace back to a group of people with a common DNA from a Khazarian descent.

Paul even stressed in Galatians 3:29 “And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.”

I could argue that Christians are the rightful owners of the terra firma of Israel. These people claiming to be the rightful heirs are not. These people are imposters and always have been. Some proclaim to descend from Japheth’s grandson Ashkenaz, yet one must have descended from Israel, not Ashkenaz, to inherit the promise.

Every Prime Minister of Israel has been an Ashkenazi “Jew”. Not one of them has ever claimed to be a “Shemite Jew”. Also, a “Jew” was from the tribe of Jacob. Refresher: Abraham had Isaac (Israel), Isaac had Jacob, Jacob had Judah. No Ashkenazi can claim a bloodline tie to Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob.

Note that the Biblical genealogies in the Gospels end at the feet of Jesus. Not even his brother James was included. The only people who could claim that physical piece of dirt on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea would have been children of Yeshua.

Paul explained that the promise was spiritual, the land was spiritual, and the children were spiritual. Paul did not say “promises” plural, so that these Khazarian imposters could claim some and allow Christians to claim others. No, Paul said “promise”, in the singular. These imposters have never been in Christ, they are not Abrahams’ offspring, and Ashkenaz, Japheth’s grandson was never promised that inheritance.

If you understand the concept of “natural then spiritual”, then this will make sense. There was once a mighty nation of people God chose to inherit a physical land. But God divorced that people, married a spiritual bride, moved her into a spiritual land and she inherited the spiritual promise. But what was this “promise” so many have sought to attain? If it was not a piece of dirt, what was it?

Titus 3:7 “so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.”

So, all this time, the ‘Holy Grail’ of God’s people has been eternal life. It is clear the “promise” has always been spiritual. This promise was made to the descendants of Abraham. Who was the original inheritor? Jesus. That was the last person who could claim to ownership to that inheritance. He would be the only person who could claim the land of Israel, yet He seemed to have no interest in it as His kingdom is spiritual.

Most modern-day ‘jews’, Ashkenazi and Khazarian, claim their heritage from the line of Ishmael, even though they may honour Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

There is a good reason Askenazian adherents accept Ishmael as their tie to Abraham: to claim Isaac (Israel) would mean Yeshua was their Savior, and the last and only true inheritor of the promise.

Quick Summary of the Khazarian Nation: Back in the 8th century King Bulan chose Judaism as his country’s religion, not Christianity. Not Islam. He and his kingdom were merely cultural converts.

Today, roughly 97% of all Jews descend from Khazarian converts, with the remaining 3% being converted Spanish Sephardic jews. So far, not one pure blood descendant of Shem has been found.

To Christians, the Ashkenazi-Sephardic-Khazarian Jew should not be considered the same religious adherents as the people contained in Scripture. None of these three aforementioned groups ever had ancestors who lived in Judea or Jerusalem. These are not descendants of Isaac and were not the people who were to ever inherit the promise. These groups of modern day “jews” are either descendants of the Ishmael, (even that is improbably and unprovable) that God rejected, or just outright converts. These converts have taken for themselves the name of the original people who were descendants of Isaac. Let’s make it even more confusing with still another twist:

These Khazarian Jews were no more “Jewish” than pop singer Madonna, or Sammy Davis Jr. To review, the Khazarian King weighed out the 3 options available and chose Judaism as it felt the most like his culture at the time. That’s it. That was his well thought out basis for converting his entire empire to Judaism. No mention of praying about it and waiting upon Yahweh. No burning of incense, no building an altar, no sacrificing a bull, no laying out of a fleece. Nope. He listened to their sales pitches and picked the one he felt best furthered his cause and provided the socio-economic protection he needed. Even the “Jew” that showed up to pitch Judaism to the King, was Ashkenazi.

How Zionism infiltrated the western Church.

There was nothing organic or spiritual about the sudden spread of Zionism in the mid-late 1800s. Someone had to be pushed, coerced, blackmailed, bribed, paid off, or deceived into spreading this anti-Christ doctrine. If the Wizard of Oz taught us anything, it was that there is always someone behind the curtain.

Unfortunately, fundamentalism was itself infiltrated and hijacked, consistent with the Rothschild strategy of funding both sides of every war since Napoleon. Fundamentalist churches were targeted to enlist their support for the Zionist agenda. The two principal agents in this scheme were John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) and Cyrus Scofield (1843-1921). What Darby planted, Scofield watered and disseminated. The theology they developed served the Rothschild Agenda by making several claims:

•God wanted the Jews to return to, and take over, Palestine.
•God had two plans of salvation—one through Jesus Christ, the other a guarantee reserved for Jews,His“Chosen people.”
• Christians should not involve themselves in politics, education, business, or the arts, as these are “worldly” matters that should be left in the hands of “worldly” people. (The consequences of this doctrine are very visible in American culture today.)
• God deals with mankind differently during different historical time frames or “dispensations,” of which there are seven. The current one, “Grace” under Jesus Christ, is merely the sixth of the seven dispensations.
• The Christian Church is doomed to inevitable failure, which will bring the Dispensation of Grace to a close.
• The end of this dispensational age will be marked by the Tribulation—worldwide persecution under the Antichrist for a period of seven years; however, Christians need not concern themselves with this, since Jesus will “rapture” believers off the Earth and they won’t be around to experience it.
• Earth will then experience a Jewish era; Jewish ritualistic animal sacrifices will be reinstituted; Jesus will reign for a thousand years from Solomon’s rebuilt temple in Jerusalem.

These doctrines, whose main outcome was “Christian Zionism,” might seem boring to atheists and agnostics, but they are relevant to the state of the world. They were, and are, espoused by celebrity-status puppets like Hal Lindsey, Pat Robertson, and John Hagee, in the best-selling Tim LaHaye Left Behind book series, Obama, Bush, Biden, Trump in the prevailing views of many conservative evangelical churches. Without these ideas being spread like a virus, there might have been no Israeli state created in 1948, no 9/11, and no Middle East wars.

Before proceeding, I’m aware that some readers may be encountering this worldview for the first time, so I’ll take a moment to “begin at the beginning.” The United States, and much of the world itself, is run by an incalculably wealthy oligarchy known as, among other names, the Globalist/Deep State/Khazarian Mafia/WEF. The trappings of “democracy” are an illusion; the oligarchy operates behind the scenes, choosing presidents and prime ministers long before the public goes to the polls. It owns and controls the Central Bank, most of the “Fortune 500” corporations, Vanguard and Black Rock investments, and the mainstream media (CNN, Fox, BBC, etc.), the latter being crucial to keeping the agenda, and the oligarchy itself, concealed from public awareness. It assassinates leaders who refuse to accept the petrol dollar. It coordinates its global policies through international organizations such as the Bilderbergers, Trilateral Commission, and an upper, exclusive level of Freemasonry. The cabal’s highest identifiable human center is the Rothschild banking dynasty. In 2023, they will be rolling out their digital crypto currency to control us once and for all. Hopefully this was defeated if you read this after 2023. But the oligarchy is not only about materialistic matters such as money and power; like the universe itself, it possesses a spiritual dimension: its outlook is satanic, which largely accounts for Western culture’s rapid moral descent. By the way, you don’t need an active Lucifer to have people acting as if he exists. All you need is people following the wicked paths of satanism, therefore “keeping the faith” of hatred and evil.

The ultimate goal of the New World Order-Klaus Schwab-Gates-Rothschild-Rockefeller-Great Reset gameplan is a world government. This strategy was the reason:

• the Rothschilds committed their fortune to the Zionism agenda, beginning no later than 1829

• Theodor Herzl began hosting the World Zionist congresses in Basle, Switzerland in 1897

• the British government was persuaded to issue the Balfour Declaration to Lord Walter Rothschild in 1917, promising the Zionists “establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people” in exchange for the Zionists bringing America into World War I on Britain’s side.

However, Zionist seizure of Palestine could not have occurred without the consent and cooperation of the world’s Christian community. Given the centuries-old conflict between Jews and Christians, it was necessary to remold Christian theology to accommodate the Rothschild plan. Cyrus Scofield and his reference Bible came on the scene for this express purpose.

I will give you three of the many resources I am drawing from in the event you wish to do your own research: The Invention of the Jewish People by Shlomo Sand and Yael Lotan, The Thirteenth Tribe by Arthur Koestler, and DNA Science and the Jewish Bloodline by Texe Marrs.

Why is this story important for the believer? Because regarding the nation of Israel, Zionism is the polar opposite of what we understand about fulfilled prophecy. This Zionist view has derailed, stunted, perverted, and impeded the spread of the “fulfilled gospel” and hindered the Church in its mission. Zionism teaches a future coming of Christ and earthly kingdom.

This is what Rothschild, Scofield, Dallas Baptists Seminary, Pat Robertson, John Hagee, Tim Lahaye, Billy Graham, and countless others have created; a perverted religion where ignorant segments of the body can’t discern Scripture. Zionism is an ‘antichrist’ spirit. Had Rothschild never engaged the services of Scofield, the Church might have continued on its path of understanding the complete work of Yeshua. We have a huge task in front of us, but don’t you feel the tide turning? I’m sensing it in the social media comments and posts. Even non-believers are coming to an understanding of how corrupt and wicked the Rothschild family was/is, and how ‘un-Jewish’ Jews truly are. So, hang in there, keep studying history. Dig. Research. Pray. God has lifted the blinders and we need to share all we can. Especially about the loving, forgiving kindness of the Father. Yes, He can and has gotten ‘mighty riled up’ with kinfolk in the past and has every right to do so in the future. But we are His kids, and He loves us, even when He disciplines us!

Darby Plants the Seeds

Before examining Scofield’s life, we need to understand John Nelson Darby, the principle figure from whom Scofield borrowed his biblical analysis. Darby was a Satanist, Freemason, and agent of the Rothschild-owned British East India Company. Darby’s family owned Leap Castle, renowned as the most sinister and occultic castle in Ireland’s history. Darby became a leader of a Christian sect called the Plymouth Brethren. He is generally credited with originating the “Secret Rapture” doctrine and made several trips to America to spread his vaccine of heresies.

Darby used many terms in common with occult Theosophists: he referred to Jesus as “the coming one” (the term New Agers use for the Antichrist); referred to God as the “architect” (same phrase employed by Freemasons, meaning “God” for the uninitiated, but “Lucifer” to true adeptsinitiates); and many other occult phrases. Darby even penned his own satanic version of the Bible. The Illuminati always knew they could not perform a wholesale transformation of the Bible, because it would be recognized and rejected. Therefore, the approach through the centuries has been to whittle it away: a word here, a phrase there—the universal strategy of boiling the frog.

Darby slyly introduced satanic wording into the biblical text. For example, in the King James rendering of John 6:69, Peter told Jesus: “And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.” Darby rendered this: “And we have believed and known that thou art the holy one of God.” In the King James, “Holy one of God” is a title for Jesus used only by demons.

Scofield Spreads Darby Like a Virus
In 1897, Theodore Herzl began hosting the Rothschild-backed Zionist congresses in Switzerland, developing the plan for a Zionist takeover of Palestine. On August 29, 1897, Herzl predicted that within fifty years there would be a Jewish state. And that would have been . . . 1947. Coincidence? Knowing this scheme would require Christian approval, Herzl approached Pope Pius X in 1904, who very politely told him where he could stick his plan. After being rejected by the Catholics, the Rothschilds knew Protestant support would be essential. But this could only be achieved by tampering with the Bible to make it appear God himself had ordained Jews to retake Palestine. Such a Bible needed to come from a non-Jew, someone with credentials as a theologian. And thus emerged Cyrus Scofield and his reference Bible.

Scofield started out as a crooked Kansas lawyer and politician. In 1881, the Atchison Globe reported: “C. I. Schofield [sic], who was appointed United States District Attorney for Kansas in 1873, and who turned out worse than any other Kansas official, is now a Campbellite preacher in Missouri. His wife and two children live in Atchison. He contributes nothing to their support except good advice.”

That same year, the Topeka Daily Capital published this:

“Cyrus I. Schofield, formerly of Kansas, late lawyer, politician and shyster generally, has come to the surface again, and promises once more to gather around himself that halo of notoriety that has made him so prominent in the past. The last personal knowledge that Kansans have had of this peer among scalawags, was when about four years ago, after a series of forgeries and confidence games, he left the state and a destitute family and took refuge in Canada. For a time he kept undercover, nothing being heard of him until within the past two years when he turned up in St. Louis, where he had a wealthy widowed sister living who has generally come to the front and squared up Cyrus’ little follies and foibles by paying good round sums of money. Within the past year, however, Cyrus committed a series of St. Louis forgeries that could not be settled so easily, and the erratic young gentleman was compelled to linger in the St. Louis jail for a period of six months.”

However, court cases against Scofield were inexplicably dropped. As Joseph M. Canfield, who is probably Scofield’s most thorough biographer, noted: “The very sudden dropping of the criminal charges without proper adjudication suggests that Scofield’s career was in the hands of someone who had clout . . .”

Scofield immersed himself in Darby’s teachings and made rapid ecclesiastical progress: by 1881 he was already pastoring in St. Louis, despite having no seminary training or religious education.

In 1882, Scofield moved to Dallas and began an extended term as pastor of the First Congregational Church. Possibly this move was necessitated because his criminal past and familial irresponsibility were too well known in the Kansas-Missouri region. As Rev. John S. Torell wrote:

“There were a number of wealthy and political power brokers in the membership of the First Congregational Church in Dallas . . . I do know that most churches in the United States are heavily infested with Freemasons. George Bannerman Dealey was a member of the Westminster Presbyterian Church in the later part of his life. But he was also heavily involved in the occult, majoring in the Scottish Rite of Masonry with a 33rd degree and active as a Shriner, and was also a member of the Red Cross of Constantine. Most likely he had a hand in getting Cyrus into Masonic circles and particularly the Lotos Club in New York.”

Post-Conversion Issues
Meanwhile, back in Kansas . . . in 1883, Scofield’s wife Leontine, and her children, were granted a divorce on the grounds of abandonment. Within six months of the divorce, Scofield married a new wife, Hettie.

The apostle Paul wrote to Timothy, “But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel” (1 Tim 5:8). Scofield’s fans gave him a free pass on this teaching and, big surprise, the Scofield Reference Bible makes no commentary on this verse.

Although Scofield became quite wealthy from his reference Bible, there is no evidence that he ever shared his riches with his abandoned family, or ever made restitution to the people whom he had defrauded in Kansas and Missouri.

By 1892 Cyrus began using the title “Dr. Scofield.” However, there is no evidence Scofield ever received a doctorate. He never attended a college or seminary. Again, this deceit was performed to erase any “red flags” from those doubting his new version of the Scriptures.

“It is essential that the sufferings of Jews….become worse….this will assist in realization of our plans….I have an excellent idea….I shall induce anti-Semites to liquidate Jewish wealth….The anti-Semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-Semites shall be our best friends.” (From the diaries of Theodor Herzl, between 1895 and 1904 — Part I, pp. 16)

Hopefully, you are familiar with Jewish-born Theodor Herzl. He was Victor Rothschild’s Right Hand Man (RHM) who carried out the Zionist agenda. A mere 20 years later they installed Hitler, and there you go. In the same manner that the 1st century Jewish rebels set their own Jerusalem grain supply on fire and blamed it on Rome, the Cabal, deep state, Zionists, sacrificed their own people (not real Jews though) to gain sympathy from the world, using another Rothschild puppet: Adolph Hitler.

My 2022 articles focused on the Ashkenaz/Khazarian people, birthed out of King Bulan’s Khazarian Empire. That led to the Rothschild’s, Scofield, Darby, and other rabbit trails. Going that far down the rabbit hole was not my intent, so I am going to wrap this up today and move on to other articles of interests, like my upcoming interviews with Tony Denton, David Curtis, William Bell, Don Preston, Mike Sullivan, Ed Stevens, Riley O’Brien Powell, Glenn Hill, Michael Miano, Brian Martin and who knows what other Motley Crew members I can find!

This entire “Non-Jew” study came from my desire to explain why the end of the “biblical jew” was God’s plan. All this and more in my upcoming book “The Last Semite”.

First, we can start with this: So complete was God’s judgment against 1st century Israel that never again could any race claim to be His chosen people. His Kingdom is spiritual and so are His people. They worship in spirit and truth. Yahweh made it clear that the “old” had indeed passed away. He will never go back to the old earthly representation of His kingdom. He will never forsake those who follow Him, for the skanky ex-wife that committed adultery against Him. (can I say “skanky”?) Yahweh ended that dispensation on that part of His-tory .

When Paul wrote there would no longer be Jew nor Gentile, he was proven right. Yet, Zionism opposes this and has set itself against the inspired words from God. Zionism promotes division within the body of Christ. Zionism will not allow unity of spirit. Zionism has so bewitched the American Military Complex, that America has gleefully helped commit genocide in an attempt to be on the “right side of God and Prophetic fulfillment”.

Without Zionism, we can finally destroy this “Crossing Israel Means Crossing God” mentality. If anyone is crossing God it is these imposters, when they cannot prove they are descendants of Shem. Remember, 90% of the worlds “Jews” proudly claim to descend from Shem’s great-nephew Ashkenaz. Prime Minister Netanyahu, and all of Israel’s P.M.’s are not Israelites (descending from Jacob/Israel) but rather Ashkenazim.

What are the benefits of obliterating Zionism?

Christians can understand that we are God’s chosen people as Paul described Galatians 4:5.

We can realize God’s work and salvific history was made complete in the first century.

We can realize we are the spiritual inheritors of the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

We can live, and move, and have our being, understanding that God moved us into the Eternal Kingdom of Grace.

We can move beyond the false notion that Jesus is coming back to re-establish a relationship with his ex-wife, earthly Israel.

We can now understand Yeshua was the last Shemite. There is no pure blood left.

Their name was surely forgotten as a people. Now it is just the New Jerusalem. God was 100% victorious.

No sacrifices will ever be instituted, as these aren’t Shemites with a true Levite to stand in a priestly office.

Galatians 3:28 “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

Galatians 3:29 “And if you are in Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.”

Jesus broke down that dividing wall of separation between Jew and Gentile.

“for He is our peace, who made both one, and broke down the middle wall of the partition of hostility” Ephesians 2:14 (LSV)

If Jesus made Jew and Gentile one, why do we still recognize Jews as separate from non-Jews? If Jesus broke down the wall of hostility, why has there been so much hostility against Jews? I can answer both with one statement: they aren’t Jews. Jesus was successful in bringing both factions together and He did not fail in His mission to destroy that wall of hostility between Jews and Christians. Any past hostilities are a consequence of imposters. These Khazarian-Ashkenazi frauds brought a judgment upon themselves.

Paul told Gentiles that the wall Jesus destroyed made them equal:

Eph 2:15 “by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace”

Eph 2:16 “and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility”.

If Yeshua failed to kill the hostility, maybe He also failed to reconcile us into one body? There is another possibility: This biblical “hostility” has nothing to do with the persecutions of these imposters masquerading as the descendants of Shem. Yahweh never intended for the Jewish race to continue running parallel to Christianity, which would have nullified His purpose to make us one. Judaism was cursed by Christ that week of Passover as the fig tree and is no longer an influential religion or as a source of life and relationship with Yahweh.

”The majority of Ashkenazi Jews are descended from prehistoric European women,[2] …DNA which is passed on from mother to child, suggests that female ancestors of Ashkenazi Jews converted to Judaism…”[1]

In a study performed by Israeli Geneticist and researcher Eran Elhaik, in his research paper: “The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry:”[3] Elhaik claimed to prove that Ashkenazi Jews’ roots lie in the border of Europe and Asia. They are descendants, he argues, of the Khazars…”.[4]

This quote is from author Texe Marrs’ book “DNA Science and the Jewish Bloodline”: [5]

“When you see a “Jew,” what you are actually encountering is a Khazar who practices Judaism. The Khazar has no Israelite blood. His ancestors were not the Israelites of the Bible. They are not the seed of Abraham. They have no promise from God.”

If they were real Jews (Shemites) and God’s hand was really on them, it sure looks like He didn’t care much for them. Maybe the reason the fake Jews have suffered so much over the centuries is because they brought judgment upon themselves for impersonating God’s ex-wife. That would mean Hitler did not kill 6 million Jews, but 6 million imposters. (Still unthinkable, but then so are 65 million abortions.)

The bloodline of ALL Jews ended at Yeshua, Christ, Jesus, Son of Man, Son of God, Redeemer, Lamb of God.

Thanks for the emails I have received from some of you and your interest in this. More people are awakening to this scam. “It’s about time” as they say.

[1] Mark 4:13

[2] Prehistoric-not meaning caveman but before history was documented

[3] “The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses,”


[5] DNA Science and the Jewish Bloodline

The God of this world

This article comes from my book “Messiah’s Methodical Manifesto Hidden in the Parables”, which explains how to interpret the parables of the Savior. Here is that chapter.

Let’s discuss another matter related to this topic by addressing a commonly misinterpreted verse used to ‘prove’ satan was not bound as Jesus said he was.

Well-meaning Christians will assert that satan is still ‘the god of this world’, but they have misinterpreted that passage.  Here it is:

2Cor. 4:3 “and if also our good news is veiled, in those perishing it is veiled, (unbelieving Jews of 1st century)

2Cor. 4:4 in whom (unbelieving 1st century Jews) the god of this age (supposedly satan) did blind the minds of the unbelieving (Jews), that there doth not shine forth to them (Jews)[1]the enlightening of the good news of the glory of the Christ, who is the image of God.”

Let’s focus on verse 4 to see if there is another possible interpretation. Our first word is theos, which is Greek for ‘deity’, or divine being.  Nave’s Topical Bible, Strong’s Dictionary, Young’s Literal Concordance, Thayer’s Greek Definitions, Torrey’s New Topical Textbook, Smith’s Bible Dictionary, Hitchcock’s Bible Names, Easton’s Bible Dictionary, Baker’s Evangelistic Dictionary all define ‘theos’ as Yahweh/Jehovah/the Supreme BeingNot once do they allow for the definition of devil or satan. This alone should alert false teachers of their errors. 

Of the 1,196 verses found in the New Testament containing ‘theos’, only four of those DO NOT describe Yahweh.  Here are those verses:

Acts 7:42 ‘theos’ is used in Stephen’s defense speech when speaking of the Children of Israel wandering in the desert worshipping the ‘god’ Moloch; not God. [2]

Acts 12:22, Herod is killed by Yahweh for accepting the praise of the people calling him a ‘god’; not God.

Acts 28:6 We read the account of Paul getting bit by the viper and shaking it off with no harm done. The Islanders then claimed that Paul was a ‘god’; not God.

Lastly, we are left with 2 Cor. 4:4. The modern church interprets and teaches that Paul referred to satan as the one who blinds the minds of unbelieving Jews. Does this interpretation and teaching hold up when examining context, and is it consistent with other usages?  Survey says: undeniably “No”.

To gain a clear understanding, we need to apply the principle of ‘the analogy of faith’. Meaning, we need to let Scripture interpret Scripture. We’ve already seen that Jesus explained exactly Who closed the minds of the unbelieving Jews and it wasn’t the ‘devil’. Isaiah 6:10 and Jeremiah 5:21 set the precedence of just ‘Who’ blinds eyes and hardens hearts.

Jesus used His audience’s understanding of Scripture when he makes the statement; “ever seeing, ever hearing.” Now we can understand why God closed their minds; so that gentiles might share a relationship with Yahweh.    

When commenting on 2 Cor.4:4, Albert Barnes wrote this: “There can be no doubt… that Satan is here designated by this appellation; though some of the fathers supposed that it means the true God, and Adam Clarke inclines to this opinion.”[3]  Barnes was pointing out that most ‘experts’ thought it was satan but that Adam Clark believed it to be Yahweh.

Barnes was Adam Clark’s contemporary and was very aware of Clark’s views.  Here is Adam Clark’s opinion of this verse:

I must own I feel considerable reluctance to assign the epithet ὁ Θεος, ‘The God’, to Satan; and were there not a rooted prejudice in favor of the common opinion, the contrary might be well vindicated, viz. that by the “God of this world” the Supreme Being is meant, who in His judgment gave over the minds of the unbelieving Jews to spiritual darkness, so that destruction came upon them to the uttermost.  Satan, it is true, has said that the kingdoms of the world and their glory are his, and that he gives them to whomsoever he will; but has God ever said so?  Are we to take this assertion of the boasting devil and father of lies for truth? Certainly not. We are not willing to attribute the blinding of men’s minds to God, because we sometimes forget that he is the God of justice, and may in judgment remove mercies from those that abuse them; but this is repeatedly attributed to him in the Bible. On these very grounds, it is exceedingly likely that the apostle means the true God by the words the “god of this world”.

This is a perfect example of the ‘Calf Path’ mentality; men continually regurgitating the same errors until it is taught as truth. 

I did some studying on this passage and here’s what I found: it is accepted that 2 Corinthians was written around early 56 a.d., with 1st and 2nd Thessalonians, 1 Corinthians., and 1st Timothy. written before 56 a.d. This leaves Galatians, Titus, Philippians, Romans, 2nd Timothy, Philemon, Colossians, and Ephesians written after 56 A.D.[4] 

In writing his 13 Epistles, Paul used the word ‘theos’ a total of 569 times.  In 2 Corinthians, he used it 75 times! He also used ‘theos’ to describe God 187 times before writing 2 Corinthians 4:4, and 307 more times after writing 2 Corinthians 4:4. Guess how many times Paul used the word ‘theos’ to describe the defeated enemy? NONE!  ZERO!  NADA!  NIL!  ZILCH!

Maybe I’m missing something here with context, continuity, consistency of grammar, word usage and etymology? Paul writes four epistles using the word ‘theos’ 187 times to describe Yahweh, then out of the blue, in one verse, in the 5th epistle, uses ‘theos’ one time to describe satan, then goes right back to assigning ‘theos’ as Yahweh 365 more times? In 2nd Corinthians alone he used it 18 times in the first four chapters, then proceeds to use it 56 more times as ‘Yahweh’ just in that one letter!

Paul was either: 1) a poor communicator, or 2) the translator misunderstood this verse because of a “Rooted Prejudice”[5] a.k.a. ‘doctrinal presupposition’. It wasn’t an uncommon occurrence for those early translators to struggle with confusing passages or words through their own preconceived ideas resulting in a wrong translation.  It is vital to study Scripture yourself to find out what it says. Don’t let the ‘experts’ spoon-feed you crumbs they found along the Calf Path.

Recap: One of the main principals of Biblical interpretation is discovering word usage and the context in which it appears.  Paul had already defined ‘theos’ as meaning “Yahweh” 187 times before verse 4, then another 365 times after. Unless Paul has a momentary lapse of memory, he never used it for ‘the devil’. This interpretive mistake belongs to the translator and sadly is taught today as ‘truth’.

In writing about this passage, John MacArthur was half-right when he stated[6]  “although Paul uses the same Greek word theos here to describe the devil,[7] the truth is that…satan, of course, is not a god but a created being.”  This is about the only time I would agree with John, but he is left with a perilous choice to make about Paul’s theology:

 #1. Paul’s doctrine was inconsistent

 #2. Paul elevated satan to co-redemptor

 #3. Paul was a poor communicator

 #4. The translator got this wrong and so did John     

MacArthur. (I’ll take Door #4 for $200.)

William Barclay wrote this about 2nd Corinthians 4:4, “In their case, the god of this world has blinded the minds of those who refuse to believe, in order that upon them there may not dawn the light of the good news which tells of the glory of Christ in whom we can see God.” [8]

Barkley’s assertion is wrong on two levels; First, their minds weren’t blinded ‘because’ they refused to believe; they refused to believe because their minds were blinded by Yahweh.  Secondly, this logic makes the devil a co-redemptive partner working in tandem with God.

John Eleazer, a.k.a. Lazarus, explained the process of God hardening the Jewish heart; [9]

John 12:40 “He has blinded their eyes and has hardened their heart, that they might not see with the eyes and understand with the heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.” (ESV)

Do you see the connection? In our study verse, it is wrongly taught the devil blinds the eyes, yet here it is God performing the blinding. I never realized how well these two guys worked together…

The word “hardened” is in the Greek active voice which speaks of action performed by the subject (Yahweh) on the recipient (heart) that was unable to comprehend the true purpose of the Old Covenant.  The ‘hardening’ caused them to reject the Messiah. Yahweh hardened their hearts and the result was unbelief. William Barkley got it backwards.

Saul (a.k.a. Paul) had a heart hardened by sin and consequently arrested disciples and was breathing murderous threats before his conversion (Acts 9). Paul’s heart was so hardened that Jesus appeared in person to convince Saul Yeshua was the true Messiah. In 1st Timothy 1:13-16, Paul admitted his previous actions stemmed from an unbelief so powerful that the Savior had to ‘undo’ the hardening, healing him from his unbelief.

Hermeneutics provides the framework and guidance for interpretation, but often this essential ‘truth-finding’ is not applied, resulting in bogus logic and wrong interpretation. The following chart is an example I found where hermeneutics was not applied and resulted in a heretical interpretation assigning to satan that which has always been God’s role.

            2 Cor. 4:4             2 Cor. 4:6
satan blinds God creates
the lightthe light
of the Gospelof the knowledge
of the gloryof the glory
of Christof God
Who is the image of GodIn the face of Christ

Just like the Sesame Street song “One of these things is not like the other”, the author of the chart wrongly assigns to satan, that which was God’s. Had the translator replaced satan’s name with God’s then we would have a perfect example of the type of Jewish poetry that is contained in Scripture. This chart does not reflect the Hebrew writers ‘X=Y’ style of writing. As translated, we see that satan shares the exact same power as Yahweh. Performing identical works. Yet, Jesus said ALL power was given to him. (Matt. 28:18) Which is it?  Was Jesus lying and satan somehow held on to his power, or did the translator get this wrong?

Here is further Pauline proof that God was the executor of the Jewish blindness:

Romans.11:7 “What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.”

Romans.11:8 “According as it is written, ‘God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear; unto this day.’

Romans.11:9 ‘And David said, let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling block, and a recompense unto them.’

Romans.11:10 ‘Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back always.’”

You may think you have solid arguments certain to correct my logic, so let’s have a quick mock debate:

Argument #1: “TJ, in 2nd Corinthians 4:4 ‘god’ is written in lower case letters indicating Paul was not referring to Yahweh”.

My response: ‘theos’ does not have a capital letter. The translator chose to use upper or lower-case letters determined by context and usage.  Paul did not write ‘theos’ 567 times with a Capital ‘T’ then only once with a lower case ‘t’.  Paul only wrote the word ‘theos’. NEXT!!!!

Argument #2: “TJ, 2nd Corinthians 4:4 ἐν ος ὁ Θεος τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου ἐτύφλωσε τα νοήματα τῶν ἀπίστων εἰς το μη αὐγάσαι αὐτοῖς… (yeah, doesn’t it intimidate you when authors write entire sentences as if you read Greek?) See TJ, notice how the definite article ‘the’ is used. (Greek letter ‘O’ is the word ‘the’) That proves Paul was not referring to ‘God’ but a god, or a false god.” 

My answer:  First, ‘a’ is not an option. (as in ‘a god’). The letter ‘a’ as a single object is not used as a definite article.  But if you are trying to prove the definite article (‘the’) in v.4 somehow means Paul was not referring to the Father, then let’s see how that argument holds up in light of Scripture.  If what you say is true, we should not be able to find Paul ever using ‘the’ to refer to any of the names of the Trinity: Fair enough?

Romans1:4 “declared to be the Son of God with power, Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.”

Romans 1:17 “for therein is the righteousness of God.”

Romans 1:25 “…and served the creature more than the Creator.”

Romans 3:29 “is he the God of the Jews only? In our hearts by the Holy Ghost.”

Romans 8:9 “But ye are not in the flesh, but inthe Spirit.”

Romans 8:16 “The Spirit itself bears witness.”

Romans 10:9 “confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus.”

Other examples; the will of God, the church of God, the right hand of God, the voice of God, the Spirit of God, etc.

We find this in 2nd Corinthians 1:3- “blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of compassions.”

2 Corinthians 3:3 “you are demonstrating that you are the Messiah’s letter.”

There is a problem with this verse! Paul did not supply the definite article in that verse. The translator added it!

Let’s continue:

2nd Corinthians 4:4 “in their case, the god of this world has blinded the minds of those who do not believe to keep them from seeing the light of the glorious gospel of the Messiah, who is the image of God.”

2nd Corinthians 6:16 “…the temple of the living God,

Have I proven that adding the Greek definite article ‘the’ in front of ‘theos’ does not mean it is satan? Now you understand it was the decision of the early translators to convert ‘theos’ into either God or god; which they got wrong in this instance.

What would it mean if Paul HAD supplied ‘the’ as a definite article in front of ‘theos’ and the translator chose to remove it? Would it be considered irresponsible of the translator? Would we call it heresy?  Would it mean the translator was trying to hide something or eschew Paul’s writings to make the text fit into the translator’s understanding? For this next point I will make, let me be a little more preposterous: would it mean the opposite of what Paul was writing?  

Here’s my example: Look at 2nd Corinthians 4:6, which comes two verses after our study verse. 

“For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ”.

Seems normal, right? Here’s the problem: The Greek manuscripts commonly used, meaning the Textus Receptus, the Apostolic Bible Polyglot… (don’t ask), the Greek NT, and the Westcott Hort, clearly carried the definite article ‘the’ in front of the word ‘theos’.  So, it should read like this: “For the God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of the God in the face of Jesus Christ”.

See my point?  Here’s a perfect example of Paul writing ‘the God’ but the translators choosing to leave it out.  Gee, in our culture, isn’t that the same as a jot or tittle?  Isn’t that the same as taking away or adding to Scripture?

“Maybe it’s the devil Paul was writing of since people think it is the devil two verses earlier?”

I’m being sarcastic here, but in both verses, separated by less than 50 words, Paul really did write ‘the god’, yet in one verse we are told it was the devil and two verses later told it was Yahweh?

You can’t assume the ‘devil’ in verse 4 and God in verse 6.  If Paul wrote ‘the’ in verse 6, why wasn’t it inserted in the Bible? Because the translator erred again. Why would a translator make this mistake? Because they interpreted manuscripts based on their presuppositions and flawed doctrines.

You need to understand that men from all centuries have translated Scripture based on their own concept of doctrine. It’s unavoidable. To a degree, they must rely on their understanding of doctrine or 90% of the manuscripts would make no sense.  But it’s the 10% that continues to cause trouble.  

Another example: 2nd Corinthians 9:13 “By their approval of this service, they will glorify God because of your submission flowing from your confession of the gospel of Christ.”

The manuscripts mentioned earlier all recorded that Paul wrote “the God because of your submission” but the translators omitted it. Does that mean Paul was writing about satan? Paul intentionally wrote “the god.” It’s the exact phrase used in 4:4 and we have been told by the experts that 4:4 referred to satan, because it has a little “g” (which really doesn’t even exist).  Clear as mud, right?   

Here is one last example of liberties taken by translators:

Matthew 2:22: “But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in Judaea in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither: notwithstanding, being warned ‘of God’ in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee”

KJV, ASV, Geneva, Kingdom Bible, and several others added “of God” to this verse.  The ESV, LITV, YLT, The New Greek Testament, The Aramaic English NT, The NET Bible, The New English Bible, The Life Application Bible and others did not add these two words to the text. Why? Because they were not supplied by the original author. The translators thought they were helping us understand who was doing the warning by sending the dream. 

Just because the definite article is or is not translated, and is or is not capitalized, does not mean that a verse speaks of the devil. Clearly Paul used the phrase for Yahweh and translators ignored it. 

What’s my point? Be a Berean and study it for yourself. Don’t depend on the translation. Understand New Covenant theology and you will sense when you are reading something that isn’t consistent with established doctrine. Understand the nature of how Yahweh moved through the Old and New Covenants and you will understand Who the only person is Who can truly blind the minds of those who did not believe.

You probably forgot we are in the middle of a mock debate, so let’s resume.

Argument #3: “TJ, have you forgotten about this verse? Matthew 4:8 “Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory and he said to him, ‘All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me’.”  See TJ! satan was in control of the world, even if only back then. Because he said he was!

My response:……Well, you got me there. Yeah.  I guess you are right. But wait! I’m thinking of a verse in…umm…

John 8:44 Yeshua said, “You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.”    

Let’s think logically here, Ok?  The only time satan decided to tell the truth was when he told Jesus he had the authority to give Jesus the kingdoms of the world?  This same satan, Jesus describes as having nothing to do with the truth? If satan said he controlled the world and kingdoms and Jesus said satan was the father of lies, then satan lied about that too.  The reason satan was unable to give the Kingdoms to Jesus was because he was not the ruler of this world. If you want to continue believing that satan was telling the truth to Jesus that day, then go right ahead. 

Remember Matthew 28:18? “And Jesus came and said to them, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me’”.

Consider this: If Paul believed satan was still god of that world 25 years after Jesus said that HE alone possessed all authority in heaven and on earth, then either Paul was; 1. a heretic, 2. a servant of satan, 3. horribly confused. 

OR! (Drum-roll please) 4.Jesus did possess all authority and Paul knew that and never believed nor wrote that satan was the god of this world!

At no time in the entire New Testament did Jesus, James, Luke, the writer of Hebrews, Jude, Matthew, Mark, Peter, John, Paul, or any other writer EVER refer to satan as “a god”. 

Who really closes the minds, blinds the eyes, and shut’s the hearts of people?

Therefore, we can believe that God was the “god” of that age. It was not a statement of disgust from Paul. He was saying something he had said many times before. Every judgment brought upon the Jews in their 1500-year history was imposed by Yahweh, not satan. There is no other valid interpretation of this verse. 

I have been saving this last ‘treat’ just to exemplify how easily translators make mistakes. Here is the verse from the Aramaic Peshitta Bible;

2nd Corinthians 4:4 “To those in this world whose minds have been blinded by God, because they did not believe, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the likeness of God, should shine on them.”

The Peshitta Bible and the Exegesis Ready Study Bible are two versions I found that correctly interpreted the word. You can rest assured I am not bringing some new teaching and that some translators did get it right!

[1] My emphasis in parenthesis

[2] At least not mentioned as effective or active in the NT. He was a graven image they did worship but no mention of interaction or communication.

[3] Albert Barnes’: Notes on the New Testament 1870

[4] AT Robinson’s book “Re-dating the New Testament”

[5] As mentioned in Adam Clark’s opinion


[7] Wrong on this part as I will prove


[9] New discoveries and Scriptural evidence have brought questions of whether John the Apostle or John Eliezer wrote the Gospel of John.  I gravitate to John Eleazer as he was the only man referred to as “the one whom Jesus loved”. Since Scripture only mentions Lazarus as the one Jesus loved, then he also wrote John.  Study for yourself, then decide.