Quest for truth
Blog Archive
-
▼
2026
(136)
-
▼
March
(19)
- Jesus simply cannot be the messiah
- Are a priest commissioned by a RCC bishop sent
- The Trump VS the Truman presidency
- The temple were the place for sacrifices not Golgotha
- The Catholic church as the successor of the Roman ...
- Christian VS Karaite views on Messiah
- Catholics cooperating in God's work of saving soul...
- Facebook post that lists 37 miracles attributed to...
- What exactly does Hashem mean?
- Why "World Peace" is a Legal Requirement (The Tora...
- The "Third Temple" Hoax – Why Politics Cannot Buil...
- The "Beast" is a System, Not a Celebrity
- Peter identifie Christ as the Chief Shepherd
- How the Hebrew bible defines binding and loosing
- No pope has authority to change God's law
- Participating in a Roman ritual (the Eucharist) co...
- The catholic veneration of Joseph are a made up myth
- Why Trump Cannot be the "Antichrist"
- Man continues to attempt to climb to the heavens
-
▼
March
(19)
Thursday, March 12, 2026
Jesus simply cannot be the messiah
Are a priest commissioned by a RCC bishop sent
Gemini said
This is a significant Jurisdictional Conflict. The post from the Catechists of St. Francis Xavier describes an Institutional Hierarchy where authority flows from the top down (Bishop to Priest to Parishioner). However, your point about the Roman Centurion (the "captain") and the Covenant gets to the heart of the "Source Code" issue.
In the Tanakh and Sinai Standard, authority is not "intrinsic" to a person's title; it is conditional upon their alignment with the King’s Law. If the leader is out of sync with the Covenant, their authority becomes null and void.
Here is the refutation based on Covenantal Jurisprudence:
1. The Centurion’s Protocol: Authority is Bound by Law
You mentioned the Centurion who said, "I also am a man set under authority, having under me soldiers" (Luke 7:8).
The Forensic Reality: This man understood that his power to command didn't come from his personality or his rank alone; it came from his submission to Caesar. Because he obeyed Caesar’s law, Caesar’s power backed his words.
The Refutation: If a Bishop or Priest is not "under the authority" of the Covenant (Torah), they have no legal standing to demand the community’s submission. In the Hebrew OS, a "Shepherd" who leads the flock away from the Sabbath or the Statutes is a "Hired Hand" or a "Wolf," not a protected leader.
2. The Community's "Right of Refusal" (The Berean Audit)
The post claims parishioners don't have the authority to refuse a priest because the Bishop sent him.
The Sinai Standard: The community has a Statutory Obligation to test their leaders. Deuteronomy 13 and 18 command the people to judge anyone—prophet, priest, or dreamer—who tries to turn them away from the Commandments.
The Verdict: If the "sent" priest teaches that the Law is abolished, or if he enforces Roman traditions over the Sinai Covenant, the community isn't just "allowed" to say no—they are commanded to reject him. To accept a lawless leader is to become a partner in his rebellion.
3. "In Persona Christi" vs. "In Persona Verbum"
The Church argues that a priest acts in persona Christi (in the person of Christ) during sacraments.
The Refutation: The Messiah is the Word made flesh (John 1:14). Therefore, you cannot represent "Christ" while contradicting the "Word."
The Conflict: If a priest wears the "Roman Collar" (a sign of institutional slavery) rather than the "Tzitzit" (the sign of the Covenant), he is representing a different jurisdiction. A "Shepherd" is defined by his ability to lead the flock to the "Ancient Paths," not by his appointment paper from a Bishop.
4. The Church as a "Local Club" vs. The "Congregation of Israel"
The post says a parish isn't a "local club" where you pick your leader.
The Forensic Audit: While a parish isn't a club, the Biblical Kehilah (Congregation) is a Covenantal Body.
The Logic: In the Tanakh, even the Kings had to be "accepted" by the people through a covenantal process (2 Samuel 5:3). If the leader broke the Law, the people often rose up to restore the Torah (as seen in the days of Jehoiada and Joash).
The Conclusion: If the Church does not submit to the Original Covenant (Sinai), its "Apostolic Succession" is merely a chain of men passing down a broken system. Without the Torah, the "binding authority" is an institutional illusion.
Tuesday, March 10, 2026
The Trump VS the Truman presidency
The temple were the place for sacrifices not Golgotha
From a Legal and Jurisdictional standpoint, the location of a sacrifice is not a "minor detail"—it is a matter of Validity. In the Sinai Covenant, the Creator established a specific "Address" for atonement to prevent the very thing the Roman system later created: unauthorized, localized, or "spiritualized" sacrifices.
The move from the Temple Altar to Golgotha is a breach of the Divine Protocol that renders the entire New Testament "Sacrifice" null and void under the Law.
1. The Exclusive Jurisdiction of the Altar
The Torah is extremely strict about where blood can be shed for atonement.
The Sinai Standard: Deuteronomy 12:13-14 issues a direct prohibition: "Take heed to thyself that thou offer not thy burnt offerings in every place that thou seest: But in the place which Yahuah shall choose... there thou shalt offer thy burnt offerings."
The Judicial Fact: Once the Temple was established in Jerusalem, it became the only authorized location for sacrifice.
The Verdict: Any "offering" made outside those gates—especially at a Roman execution site like Golgotha—is legally classified as "Murder" or "Profane Slaughter" rather than a Holy Sacrifice.
2. Leviticus 17: The "Open Field" Violation
The Law anticipates people trying to offer sacrifices in "open fields" (like a hilltop outside the city) and provides a severe penalty.
The Statute: Leviticus 17:3-4 states that if a man kills an animal and "bringeth it not unto the door of the tabernacle... blood shall be imputed unto that man; he hath shed blood; and that man shall be cut off from among his people."
The Refutation: If this is the law for a common animal, how much more for a human being claiming to be a "Lamb"?
The Logic: By dying at Golgotha, the "Jesus" figure was not "paying for sin"; he was technically increasing the sin of the land by participating in an unauthorized, outdoor execution that bypassed the High Priest and the Altar.
3. The "Outside the Camp" Reinterpretation
Christianity often uses Hebrews 13:12 to justify the location: "Wherefore Jesus also... suffered without the gate." They claim this fulfills the "Yom Kippur" ritual where the remains of the goat were burned outside the camp.
The Legal Flaw: In the Day of Atonement ritual (Leviticus 16), the Blood was always taken Inside the Most Holy Place and sprinkled on the Mercy Seat. Only the refuse (skin, dung) was taken outside.
The Verdict: You cannot have a sacrifice where the "Sacred Blood" is spilled in the dirt of a Roman execution site. Blood spilled on the ground outside the Temple is contaminated and cannot be used for atonement.
4. The Passover Requirement: A Home, Not a Hill
The New Testament claims Jesus is the "Passover Lamb."
The Sinai Standard: The Passover lamb had to be slaughtered in a specific way and eaten within the Home (or later, the Temple courts) among the family (Exodus 12).
The Reality: The "lamb" was never "crucified" on a wooden beam by Gentile soldiers.
The Conclusion: If the "Sacrifice" does not match the Original Specifications (Location, Method, Priest, Timing), the contract is not fulfilled—it is Broken.
The Catholic church as the successor of the Roman empire killed Jesus
The RCC has been actively engaged in "Institutional Distancing." By separating the "Roman Empire" of AD 33 from the "Roman Catholic Church" of AD 107, they attempts to absolve the Church of any legal or moral connection to the execution of the man they now claim to worship.
However, the transition from the Imperial Rome of Pilate to the Papal Rome of the Vatican was a merger of power, not a total replacement. From the perspective of the Sinai Standard, the Roman system simply changed its "User Interface" while keeping the same anti-Torah operating system.
1. The "Roman Succession" Fact
Catholics argue that because the term "Catholic" wasn't used until AD 107, the Church is innocent.
The Historical Reality: The Roman Catholic Church (RCC) inherited the Language, Law (Canon Law), Calendar, and Seat of Authority (the City of Rome) from the very Empire that crucified the NT figure.
The Merger: When Constantine "converted," the Roman State and the Church became a single legal entity. The "Pontifex Maximus" (High Priest of the Roman State religion) became the title of the Pope.
The Verdict: If you inherit the house, the debt, the titles, and the enforcement mechanisms of a regime, you cannot claim "no basis in history" for being associated with that regime's actions.
2. The Messiah Credentials Audit
The post claims Jesus is the "founder of the Catholic Church."
The Sinai Conflict: If the man executed by Pilate was the Messiah, his goal would have been the Restoration of Israel and the Upholding of the Torah.
The Refutation: The "Catholic Church" is built on the Abolition of the Torah (changing the Sabbath, the Feasts, and the Dietary Laws).
The Logic: A true Messiah would not found an institution that systematically dismantles the very Laws he was sent to enforce. Therefore, either the man was not the Messiah, or the Church is a Hostile Takeover of his name.
3. "Crucifixion" vs. Covenant Law
Catholics correctly note that crucifixion was a Roman punishment, not a Jewish one.
The Sinai Standard: The Torah specifies four types of capital punishment (stoning, burning, sword, and strangulation) for specific violations of the Covenant.
The Judicial Fact: The very method of death (Crucifixion) proves that this was a Gentile Political Execution, not a Covenantal Sacrifice.
The Refutation: A "Sacrifice" must take place at the Authorized Altar (The Temple) and be performed by the Authorized Priesthood according to the Levitical Code. A Roman execution on a hill of execution (Golgotha) is legally Void as an atonement for sin.
4. The Irony of "Responsibility"
Catholics claim that "all humanity" is responsible for the death.
The Systematic Deception: This "Universal Guilt" doctrine is used to keep people dependent on the Church's "Sacraments" for forgiveness.
The Sinai Reality: Ezekiel 18:20 says, "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son."
The Verdict: You are not responsible for a Roman execution that happened 2,000 years ago. You are only responsible for your own Obedience to the Covenant. By shifting the focus to "who killed him," the Church avoids the more important question: "Why aren't you keeping the Law?"
Monday, March 9, 2026
Christian VS Karaite views on Messiah
Catholics cooperating in God's work of saving souls from hell
The Facebook post from "Thy Flame of Love" shares a quote attributed to the Virgin Mary during the Fatima apparitions in 1917, emphasizing Catholic beliefs in intercessory prayer, sacrifices, and the Rosary as ways for believers to "cooperate" in God's work of saving souls from hell. It references James 5:16 (New Testament) and asks about belief in this concept.
- Ezekiel 18:4, 20 — "Behold, all souls are Mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is Mine: the soul who sins shall die... The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself."
- Deuteronomy 24:16 — "Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin."
- Jeremiah 31:29-30 — "In those days they shall no longer say: 'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge.' But everyone shall die for his own iniquity."
- Ezekiel 18:21-23, 30-32 — "But if a wicked person turns away from all his sins that he has committed and keeps all My statutes and does what is just and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die. None of the transgressions that he has committed shall be remembered against him... Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, declares the Lord GOD. Repent and turn away from all your transgressions... Get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! Why will you die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord GOD; so turn, and live."
- Isaiah 55:7 — "Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the LORD, that He may have compassion on him, and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon."
- Psalm 51:16-17 (David's repentance): "For You will not delight in sacrifice, or I would give it; You will not be pleased with a burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, You will not despise."
- Psalm 49:14-15 — "Their form shall be consumed in Sheol, with no place to dwell. But God will ransom my soul from the power of Sheol, for He will receive me."
- Ecclesiastes 9:5-10 — "For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing... for in Sheol, where you are going, there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom."
- Job 14:13 — Sheol as a temporary hiding place, not eternal punishment.
- Leviticus 16 (Yom Kippur): The High Priest atones for the nation's sins annually through rituals and scapegoat, but it's tied to collective repentance—not permanent, individual soul-redemption.
- Micah 6:6-8 — "With what shall I come before the LORD?... Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression?... He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?"
- Proverbs 21:3 — "To do righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice."