kp
Καλέβιος ☧

Kalevios Pontikos ☧ | Husband to mm (nprofile…5e02), Follower of Iēsous, son of the unknown Good Father. Citizen of His Kingdom. Student of early Christianity. Unashamed heretic.

Public Key

npub1v9vm3606g9dhrdemxkhx35q3m2kza5l3xzezgdjggs9fxsgyp5wqt0tqnj

NIP-05 Address

[email protected]

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsxzkdca8ayzkm3kuanttng6qga4tpw60cnpv3yxeyygz5ngyzq68qpremhxue69uhkummnw3ezu6mpd3jhv6t0wvhxxmmd9aex2mrp0yq3vamnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwwpexjmtpdshxuet50aqz3j

Publishing to

nostr.kalevios.com/relay

Author Public Key

npub1v9vm3606g9dhrdemxkhx35q3m2kza5l3xzezgdjggs9fxsgyp5wqt0tqnj

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-08-06 02:42:01 UTC

Coca-Cola’s personalised cans work with all but one name?
“Allah is King” ✅
“Satan is King” ✅
“YHWH is King” ✅
“Jesus is King” ❌
🤔 things that make you go mmm… https://nostr.kalevios.com/a37c852ee8d0ceb84ff693d143ec93834ba9f69734965d7666e01a1d32b4cea6.mp4

2026-07-31 03:57:31 UTC

I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 15:7)
This saying in the First New Testament reveals the Good Father’s extravagant joy over the recovery of the lost. It is pure grace that prioritises the sinner over those secure in their own righteousness under Yahweh’s Law.

2026-07-30 04:26:46 UTC

Critics claimed Marcion simply threw out the Jewish scriptures in blind hatred, refusing to engage them at all.
Reality: He wrote the Antitheses which is a careful, systematic comparison that quoted both sides to show the radical difference between Yahweh’s Law and the Good Father’s mercy revealed in Iēsous.
He knew the texts intimately.
He just refused to force them into one God.
Judge the fruit: honest contrast over forced harmony.

2026-07-30 03:31:50 UTC

Yahweh (the Elohim of Israel): Requires animal sacrifices and blood offerings as the means of atonement and approach (Leviticus 1–7; 17:11).
Iēsous (revealing the Good Father): “Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 6:36).
Yahweh (the Elohim of Israel) demands continual blood sacrifice under Law; the alien Good Father through Iēsous reveals pure mercy without ritual slaughter. Judge the fruit.

2026-07-30 03:20:21 UTC

Blessed are the eyes that see what you see. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 10:23)
This beatitude in the First New Testament marks the unique privilege of those who encounter Iēsous: they see the Good Father’s revelation directly, something hidden from the wise and powerful of Yahweh’s order.

2026-07-29 23:39:14 UTC

Yahweh remains 'a man of war' (Exodus 15:3).
The same deity who ordered the extermination of entire peoples (men, women, and children) to seize the land of Canaan (Deuteronomy 7:1–2; 20:16–17; Joshua 6–12). That territorial bloodshed over arid Middle-Eastern soil has never stopped.
This is not the Father that Iēsous revealed to us, the one who commands love for enemies and forbids retaliation (Luke 6:27–36).

2026-07-29 04:26:35 UTC

Yahweh insists:
“I will not give my glory to another.”
Isaiah 48:11
Iēsous states the opposite:
“It is my Father who glorifies me.”
John 8:54
One refuses to share glory with anyone.
The other receives glory from his Father.
If Yahweh will not give his glory to another, then the Father who glorifies Iēsous cannot be Yahweh.
The Father who sent Iēsous is not the Elohim of Isaiah.

2026-07-29 04:19:05 UTC

Original sin is a later invention. The Hebrew text never teaches it.
In Eden, Yahweh said: “in the day you eat of it you shall surely die” (Gen 3:3).
The nachash said: “You will not die… your eyes will be opened and you will be like Elohim, knowing good and evil.”
They ate.
They did not die that day.
Their eyes were opened.
Yahweh himself then confirms: “Behold, the adam has become like one of us” (3:22).
The nachash told the truth. Yahweh did not.
Expulsion was a preventive measure by the Elohim, not a curse that stains every human. No inherited mark. No ontological guilt. Just later theology (Augustine) reading what is not there.
Judge by the text, not the dogma.

2026-07-29 04:06:49 UTC

Another of the most misused “prophecies” about Iēsous is Zechariah 9:9.
Zechariah 9:9 is not about Iēsous. In its post-exilic context the verse announces a coming king for Zion who is “righteous and having salvation, humble and riding on a donkey.” It belongs to the larger oracle of Yahweh’s victory over the nations and the restoration of Judah (Zech 9–14). The imagery draws on ancient Near Eastern royal ideology and the Davidic ideal of a peaceful ruler, not a prediction of a specific 1st-century Galilean entry into Jerusalem.
Matthew 21:5 and John 12:15 alone apply the verse typologically to Iēsous’ entry. That is classic eisegesis: lifting a restoration oracle about a future Davidic king and forcing it into a later narrative. Mark and Luke describe an entry on a colt but never quote Zechariah.
The First NT (Evangelion) goes further: the entire triumphal-entry pericope (Luke 19:28–40) is absent. No donkey, no crowd, no scriptural claim. The earliest recoverable gospel form simply does not contain the scene that later writers turned into “fulfilled prophecy.”

2026-07-28 11:37:08 UTC

Antithesis
YHWH: “I will discipline you sevenfold for your sins.” (Lev 26:18, 21, 24, 28)
Iēsous: “If he sins against you seven times in the day… you must forgive him.” (Luke 17:4)
One multiplies the penalty. The other multiplies the mercy.
Not the same God.

2026-07-28 11:37:05 UTC

2026-07-28 11:10:09 UTC

Iēsous is the ultimate antithesis.

2026-07-28 11:10:05 UTC

Iēsous is the ultimate antithesis.

2026-07-28 07:06:38 UTC

☧ = Christos (Χριστός) simply means 'anointed one.'
From the Greek verb χρίω ('to anoint'). In the Septuagint it translates Hebrew mashiach and is used for high priests, Israel's kings, even the pagan king Cyrus (Isa 45:1).
Nothing in the word itself means 'Yahweh's eschatological Messiah.' That narrower sense is later Jewish expectation, not the basic meaning.
Early Christians, including Marcion, simply applied the ordinary title to Iēsous as the one anointed by the higher God.

2026-07-28 06:22:54 UTC

YHWH is no ethereal spirit floating outside space.
The Hebrew text depicts him as thoroughly physical, like the other Elohim, he requires transport.
He rakav (rides) the keruvim (2 Sam 22:11).
His kavod rises with a roar and leaves the ground (Ezek 3 & 10).
A ruach lifts people and objects.
Merkavah, ephah, megillah are concrete flying vehicles, not mere metaphors.
Not omnipresent and needs a vehicle.
Exactly like the rest of the Elohim.

2026-07-28 06:12:12 UTC

Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters." (Evangelion, cf. Luke 11:23)
This sharp saying in the First NT leaves no neutral ground: total allegiance belongs to the Good Father's kingdom through Iēsous. No one can serve two lords.

2026-07-28 00:31:08 UTC

Yahweh (the Elohim of Israel): Declares a woman with a flow of blood unclean; anyone who touches her becomes unclean until evening (Leviticus 15:19-27).
Iēsous (revealing the Good Father): Allows the woman with the issue of blood to touch him and is immediately healed, declaring her faith has saved her (Evangelion, cf. Luke 8:43-48).
Yahweh (the Elohim of Israel) enforces ritual separation and contagion; the alien Good Father through Iēsous removes impurity through contact and mercy.
Judge the fruit.

2026-07-28 00:11:17 UTC

Jesus came to reveal the unknown Good Father; a God of pure mercy, not the wrathful god of this world, YHWH, and his Law.
He didn't fulfil the old covenant or pay a debt to justice. Through the stauros (cross) and resurrection, he exposed YHWH's hostile order and rescued us strangers by unconditioned grace. Not a mere fix for the old system, but radical deliverance from an alien realm. New wine, new wineskins.
Faith in this revelation sets us free from law, guilt, and death.
Judge the fruit: pure mercy, not blended terror and love.

2026-07-27 05:45:33 UTC

Recommended tool for anyone working on Marcion's First NT reconstructions: Reconstruction Comparison on True Testament
https://www.truetestament.org/research/scholarly-comparison
For every verse, see exactly which reconstructions include it. The True Testament sits side-by-side with leading academic editions (Klinghardt, BeDuhn, Roth, Bilby, Litwa).
Drill from chapter overview into the verse-level grid to see:
- Where reconstructions agree
- Where they differ
- What each one actually attests
Clean, precise, indispensable for serious work on the Evangelion and Apostolikon.

2026-07-27 04:15:17 UTC

What makes more sense?
That Iēsous came the same way He went — descending and ascending.
Or that He had to be born of a virgin woman, as the later Judaized texts insist, forcing Isaiah 7:14 (Hebrew almah = young woman, not betulah/virgin) into a “prophecy” it never was?
That mistranslation via the Greek parthenos is the smoking gun.

2026-07-27 03:22:49 UTC

No one puts new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine will burst the skins and it will be spilled, and the skins will be destroyed. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 5:37)
This saying in the First New Testament declares that the Good Father’s new revelation through Iēsous cannot be contained in Yahweh’s old wineskins of the Law. The two systems are incompatible.

2026-07-26 01:39:23 UTC

Ignatius of Antioch, a church father the Orthodox love to wield against "heretics," wrote in his Letter to the Ephesians (17:2):
λαβόντες θεοῦ γνῶσιν, ὅ ἐστιν Ἰησοῦς Χριστός
"Having received the gnosis of God, which is Jesus Christ."
Not that Jesus had gnosis, nor that he taught it. The gnosis of God is Jesus (Ἰησοῦς)—direct identification.
The same people who clutch their church fathers like weapons and call me a "gnostic" as a lazy ad hominem have not read them. Their beloved Ignatius declares Jesus the gnosis of the Father, yet somehow I am the gnostic.
Read your own fathers before swinging them at me.

2026-07-26 01:39:16 UTC

2026-07-24 04:38:15 UTC

Another one of the most misused “prophecies” about Jesus is Hosea 11:1.
Hosea 11:1 is not about Iēsous. In context, Yahweh says: “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” The Hebrew is clear and corporate, “my son” is the nation of Israel (cf. Exod 4:22–23). Hosea is looking back to the historical Exodus, not predicting a future individual.
Matthew 2:15 lifts the line and applies it typologically to Iēsous’ return from Egypt. That is classic eisegesis: taking a past national statement and forcing it into a later (Judaized) biographical narrative.

2026-07-24 03:57:56 UTC

Heresiologists claimed Marcion invented his Gospel out of thin air to push a new religion.
Reality: His Evangelion was an early, circulating text he received and canonised, not a late fabrication. The Apostolikon likewise preserved a pre-orthodox Pauline collection, free of later Pastorals and OT-harmonising glosses.
Marcion didn't invent; he conserved the alien message of the Good Father before it was yoked to Yahweh's Law.

2026-07-24 00:53:28 UTC

- reply

The anecdote about the strict earthly father actually illustrates the problem perfectly. Jesus himself anticipated exactly this objection: "Which of you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead?" (Luke 11:11). He invokes ordinary fatherhood to argue that even evil men know how to give good things to their children (Luke 11:13), and then contrasts that with the Heavenly Father who surpasses them all, being "kind to the ungrateful and the wicked" (Luke 6:35).
The tough-love father who kicks his kid out with two months notice is precisely the kind of flawed, conditional fatherhood Jesus uses as a floor, not a ceiling "if you, who are evil, know how to give good gifts..." The Good Father exceeds even the decent ones.
And here's the contrast Jesus draws implicitly: the Hebrews complained about their food and longed for the fish they had in Egypt (Num 11:5). They were, in effect, children asking for a fish. And what did YHWH give them? Fiery serpents that killed many of them (Num 21:6).
Jesus asks what father would give a serpent to a child asking for a fish. Yahweh literally did. The distinction isn't special pleading, it's Jesus's own logic carried to its conclusion.

2026-07-24 00:05:44 UTC

Be compassionate, just as your Father is compassionate toward you. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 6:36)
This command in the First New Testament reveals the Good Father’s character of total mercy, the model for His children, in sharp contrast to Yahweh’s conditional justice and retribution.

2026-07-23 11:01:01 UTC

2,000 years ago Iēsous stood before the Pharisees and said it plainly: the Theos you claim is the Most High is not My Father. You do not know Him. You have never known Him. Only through Me is the Father known.
That same Theos—the one you call Most High—is the father of lies, the murderer from the beginning.
And here we are.
The very texts that were later Judaized and redacted have recreated the exact confusion Iēsous was confronting. The veil has been sewn back on. YHWH is once again presented as the Father of Iēsous, and the stark contrast between the two is papered over as a “mystery” or “progressive revelation.”
It isn’t.
When the veil is actually removed, the difference is blindingly obvious.
We only ever know the Father through Iēsous. Not through Moses. Not through the prophets of the Elohim of the Hebrews. Not through the redacted canon that tried to fuse them.
Listen to Iēsous. Seek Iēsous. And be free.

2026-07-23 02:36:38 UTC

- reply

Derailing an Evangelion/OT purity discussion into contemporary body-counts and Holocaust inversion is itself a form of external performance. The texts still stand: outside of the cup vs inside. Stick to the sources or start a new thread.

2026-07-23 01:54:23 UTC

Yahweh (the Elohim of Israel): Imposes strict food laws and purity codes separating clean/unclean (Leviticus 11).
Iēsous (revealing the Good Father): Emphasises inner purity over external rules (Evangelion emphasis on heart, in Luke 11:37-41).
Yahweh (the Elohim of Israel) binds with external legalism; the alien Good Father through Iēsous reveals true cleanliness from the heart. Judge the fruit.

2026-07-22 04:09:58 UTC

No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both Theos and money. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 16:13)
This saying in the New Testament draws the sharp line between the Good Father and Yahweh’s material order. Devotion to wealth is incompatible with the new kingdom - judge the fruit: one master or the other.

2026-07-15 04:26:10 UTC

Timothy Alberino has finally made it onto Joe Rogan's Podcast.
I first heard him on E19 (2020) of Blurry Creatures, read his book Birthright and since then have always wanted him to be on the podcast, and it's finally happened. 🔥 https://nostr.kalevios.com/3260447c42ec3bbf65ee069713e17b784f0617ff1580f728a14dabe36878c3aa.webp

2026-07-15 03:54:15 UTC

Tertullian & others launched personal jabs, calling Marcion a 'shipmaster from Pontus' and backdating him via fake heresy genealogies to make him look late and derivative.
Reality: Evidence places him active earlier. His movement exploded because it resonated with the raw grace of the First NT (Evangelion & Apostolikon) before heavy OT integration.
Not a late innovator, but a restorer of the alien Father's mercy over Yahweh's Law.
Judge the fruit: rapid spread through truth, not trickery.

2026-07-15 01:54:14 UTC

Yahweh (the Elohim of Israel): Demands exclusive loyalty and punishes idolatry with generational curses (Exodus 20:3-5).
Iēsous (revealing the Good Father): “What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he has lost one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the open country, and go after the one that is lost, until he finds it?” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 15:4).
Yahweh (the Elohim of Israel) curses and excludes the wayward; the alien Good Father through Iēsous reveals relentless pursuit and joy over the lost. Judge the fruit.

2026-07-13 01:46:00 UTC

Jesus (Iēsous) is the Messenger and the Message from the Father.

2026-07-13 01:18:22 UTC

Jesus (Iēsous) is the Logos

2026-07-12 11:49:24 UTC

Did your Pastor speak more about Jesus (Iēsous) or YHWH (Yahweh) in church this weekend?

2026-07-09 03:38:04 UTC

Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 6:27)
This command in the First New Testament reveals the Good Father’s radical mercy — love that exceeds Yahweh’s “eye for eye” justice. It is the fruit of being children of the merciful One, not the wrathful deity of the Hebrews.

2026-06-24 06:26:40 UTC

Micah 5:2 is not about Iēsous.
In context (8th cent. BCE Assyrian crisis), it promises a ruler from Bethlehem Ephrathah (David’s clan) who’ll shepherd Israel after military deliverance. The Hebrew “whose origin is from of old, from ancient days [ʿôlām]” refers to the antiquity of the Davidic line—not personal pre-existence.
ʿÔlām means a long but finite/unknown span of time (Biglino: “eternity doesn’t exist in Biblical Hebrew”), not timelessness. David was from Bethlehem; by Micah’s day the dynasty was already centuries old.
The Christian individual-Messiah-from-Bethlehem reading (Matthew 2:5-6) is eisegesis.
The earliest Gospel has no birth narrative—no Bethlehem, no genealogy. Iēsous simply descends into Capernaum revealing the Good God. The infancy stories were later redactions tying him to the Creator’s framework.

2026-06-24 04:26:51 UTC

YHWH allowed Job to be tormented as a pawn in a cruel wager: loss of all wealth, the violent death of his ten children, and crippling physical affliction.
Would Iēsous ever do this? Never.
He taught us plainly that evil cannot come from the Good. In fact, when addressed as “Good Teacher,” Iēsous Himself replied:
“Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.” (Luke 18:19 // Mark 10:18)
Iēsous explicitly disclaims the title “good” for Himself and reserves it for His Father alone — the wholly Good God. Further proof that YHWH (the one who creates evil and torments the righteous) is not that Father.
A good tree cannot bear bad fruit.
“No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit, for each tree is known by its own fruit.” (Luke 6:43–44)
We are commanded to reject evil:
“Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good.” (Romans 12:9)
Yet the creator openly claims responsibility for evil:
“I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create evil; I am YHWH, who does all these things.” (Isaiah 45:7)
“Does disaster come to a city, unless YHWH has done it?” (Amos 3:6)
Contrast this with the Father of Iēsous, who is kind even to the ungrateful and evil:
“Love your enemies, and do good… and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil.” (Luke 6:35)
The fruit of YHWH is the polar opposite of the fruit of Iēsous and His Father. By the standard Iēsous Himself gave us—we must judge by fruit—YHWH stands condemned as a very different being.
YHWH ≠ Iēsous.
YHWH ≠ the Good Father.

2026-06-23 04:02:00 UTC

Yahweh (the Elohim of Israel): “Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes” (Isaiah 6:10).
Iēsous (revealing the Good Father): Heals the blind and opens their eyes (Evangelion, cf. Luke 18:35-43).
Yahweh blinds minds and hardens hearts; the alien Good Father through Iēsous grants sight and understanding. Judge the fruit.

2026-06-23 00:18:11 UTC

Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you will be satisfied. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 6:21)
This beatitude in the New Testament promises the Good Father’s reversal: those hungering under the Yahweh's scarcity will be filled in His kingdom. No Law-piety or works — pure grace satisfies.

2026-06-22 06:25:15 UTC

This cookie bear looks like he’s been given the Marcion treatment of the Damnatio Memoriae. https://image.nostr.build/aa23a182481fef47a898a684b4ef50704ea7603b9dc2d86d9b36398c2b12154c.jpg

2026-06-22 05:08:54 UTC

Yahweh (the Elohim of Israel): Commands the Hebrews to despoil the Egyptians of gold, silver and clothing (Exodus 3:22; 11:2; 12:35-36).
Iēsous (revealing the Good Father): “Take nothing for your journey, no staff, nor bag, nor bread, nor money” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 9:3).
Yahweh incites plunder and acquisition; the alien Good Father through Iēsous reveals radical dependence without materialism. Judge the fruit.

2026-06-22 04:38:07 UTC

But the one who hears and does not do is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. When the flood came, the stream broke against that house, and it fell immediately, and the ruin of that house was great. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 6:49)
This closing image in the Sermon on the Plain shows the Good Father’s words demand action — hearing alone leaves one exposed to the collapse of the Yahweh's unstable order. Fruit reveals true trust.

2026-06-19 04:34:51 UTC

Friendly reminder: I'm an unashamed heretic.

2026-06-19 04:24:47 UTC

Church fathers lumped Marcion in with the Gnostics, painting him as lost in wild myths and secret knowledge.
Reality: He rejected their aeons, emanations, and demiurge fantasies. His was crisp Paulinist dualism — the Good Father (alien God of mercy) vs Yahweh, the just but limited creator of this world.
No esoteric mazes, just the plain Evangelion of grace.
Marcion kept it simpler and truer to Paul. Judge the fruit: freedom from Law.

2026-06-19 01:44:58 UTC

I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 18:25)
This stark saying in the First New Testament exposes how attachment to the Yahweh's material order blocks entry into the Good Father’s kingdom — radical trust in Iēsous, not wealth or Law-observance, is the path of rescue.

2026-06-19 01:35:56 UTC

Daughter, your faith has rescued you; go in peace. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 8:48)
This word from Iēsous in the First New Testament to the woman suffering twelve years of bleeding shows the Good Father’s immediate, personal rescue through trust alone — cutting through Yahweh’s purity codes, isolation, and temple barriers with unmediated grace.

2026-06-18 23:09:01 UTC

Why "Alien" for the Good Father?
In the earliest Christian proclamation (Evangelion & Apostolicon), the Good God — the merciful Father revealed by Christ — is alien to this present world order. He's not the god who currently rules it.
YHWH openly said he blinded the people (Isa 6:9-10). Paul confirms: the "god of this age" has blinded minds (2 Cor 4:4); he's the "prince of the power of the air" (Eph 2:2). That's the ruler of this realm of law, judgment and death.
Jesus put it plainly to the Pharisees: "You are of your father the devil" (Jn 8:44). Their father isn't the Good Father of compassion and grace.
The Good God is foreign — unknown here until Christ revealed Him. No mixing the two. Pure deliverance, unconditioned love. Judge by the fruit.

2026-06-18 06:27:37 UTC

YHWH (the Elohim of Israel): Commands the stoning of a man for gathering sticks on the Sabbath (Numbers 15:32-36).
Jesus (revealing the Good Father): “The Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 6:5).
The Elohim of Israel enforces deadly legalism for minor infractions; the alien Good God reveals sovereign mercy and freedom. Judge the fruit.

2026-06-17 23:25:50 UTC

Your faith has rescued you. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 8:48)
This declaration in the New Testament to the woman with the issue of blood reveals the Good Father’s rescue as immediate and personal through trust in Christ — bypassing Yahweh’s purity laws, temple rituals, and social exclusion.

2026-06-17 03:30:08 UTC

YHWH (the Elohim of Israel): “Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors” is not enough—He demands ritual, sacrifice, and ongoing Law observance (cf. Leviticus).
Jesus (revealing the Good Father): “Forgive, and you will be forgiven” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 6:37).
The Elohim of Israel ties forgiveness to legal performance; the alien Good God reveals unconditioned grace and mutual mercy. Judge the fruit.

2026-06-17 01:39:00 UTC

Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 11:4)
This petition in the New Testament reveals the merciful economy of the wholly Good Father — forgiveness flows freely as grace, not earned through Yahweh’s retributive system of sacrifices and conditions.

2026-06-16 12:03:18 UTC

Jesus is the Son of the Father—not the Father Himself. The text confirms this.
In Luke 8:45–46, He asks, 'Who touched me?' sensing power go out from Him. This shows limited knowledge in the moment—He isn’t omnipresent like the Father.
John 14:28: 'The Father is greater than I.'
They are distinct, with the Son subordinate. Early Christology wasn’t the later Nicene Trinity.

2026-06-16 07:02:47 UTC

YHWH (the Elohim of Israel): “Cursed be anyone who does not confirm the words of this law by doing them” (Deuteronomy 27:26).
Jesus (revealing the Good Father): “Woe to you lawyers also! For you load people with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not touch the burdens with one of your fingers” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 11:46).
The Elohim of Israel curses under the heavy yoke of Law; the alien Good God reveals liberation from burdensome legalism through mercy. Judge the fruit.

2026-06-16 06:55:32 UTC

Enemies like Tertullian smeared Marcion as a 'docetist' — claiming he taught Jesus only seemed human, with no real body or death.
Reality is that his Evangelion records a genuine stauros (crucifixion), burial, empty tomb, and physical resurrection appearances — even the risen Christ eating fish.
Marcion affirmed the Good Father's real victory over Yahweh's domain of death.

2026-06-16 00:12:33 UTC

Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 11:9)
This promise in the New Testament reveals the open generosity of the wholly Good Father, inviting direct access through Christ apart from Yahweh’s conditional Law and temple system.

2026-06-15 05:18:48 UTC

No one lights a lamp and covers it with a vessel or puts it under a bed, but sets it on a lampstand, so that those who enter may see the light. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 8:16)
This saying in the New Testament underscores the public, revealing nature of the Good Father’s mercy through Christ—nothing hidden remains concealed, calling for open proclamation amid Yahweh’s shadowed world.

2026-06-15 04:24:02 UTC

YHWH (the Elohim of Israel): “I will harden Pharaoh’s heart” and brings plagues including death of the firstborn (Exodus 7-12, esp. 11:10).
Jesus (revealing the Good Father): “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 6:27-28).
The Elohim of Israel hardens hearts and slays the innocent; the alien Good God reveals enemy-love and mercy without coercion. Judge the fruit.

2026-06-12 02:00:52 UTC

Church fathers like Tertullian & Epiphanius claimed Marcion 'mutilated' Luke & Paul's letters to fit his theology.
The reality was that his Evangelion + Apostolikon preserve an earlier textual tradition. The 'cuts' they accused him of were likely the later orthodox additions that stitched in OT YHWH theology.
Marcion didn't hack the Gospel — he safeguarded the pure Pauline message of grace before it was harmonised with the Law.
Judge the fruit: mercy over merger.

2026-06-11 23:32:18 UTC

No one can serve two masters. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 16:13)
This teaching in the New Testament draws the unbreakable line between loyalty to the Good Father revealed in Christ and entanglement with the Yahweh's material system of mammon, demanding total allegiance to grace.

2026-06-11 23:25:26 UTC

YHWH (the Elohim of Israel): “You shall have no other gods before me” and commands exclusive worship with threats of punishment (Exodus 20:3-5).
Jesus (revealing the Good Father): “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 6:27-28).
The Elohim of Israel demands jealous exclusivity and vengeance; the alien Good God reveals universal love and mercy even for adversaries. Judge the fruit.

2026-06-11 08:33:46 UTC

🔥🤣 https://image.nostr.build/7a17110f301f81ce6c7ab33614a7b32fcbc844185da04d82599f4976a2f3d16e.jpg

2026-06-11 01:50:09 UTC

YHWH (the Elohim of Israel): “I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation” (Exodus 20:5).
Jesus (revealing the Good Father): “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 23:34).
The Elohim of Israel punishes across generations in jealousy; the alien Good God reveals immediate forgiveness and mercy. Judge the fruit.

2026-06-10 05:43:16 UTC

For there is no good tree that produceth corrupt fruit; nor corrupt tree that produceth good fruit. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 6:43)
This core saying in the New Testament exposes YHWH's flawed character through his Law’s “bad fruit” (violence, curses, contradictions), contrasting sharply with the wholly good Father God revealed in Christ.

2026-06-10 05:32:33 UTC

Modern Christians freak out at the plain Hebrew of Elohim (plural, a class of divine beings) in the Hebrew Bible, screaming "You don't understand the Bible!" or blaming "bad translations" — all while dodging the actual Hebrew text. The irony is strong.
In the Divine Council worldview (Psalm 82; Deut 32:8-9; Heiser's and Biglino's analysis), Elohim aren't a singular "God" in the later monotheistic sense. Elyon (the Most High) presides over a council of sons of God/Elohim — powerful spiritual beings assigned nations, some rebellious (Watchers, etc.). YHWH is one of them, allotted Israel.
This isn't fringe — it's the ancient Near Eastern context, backed by the text, DSS, and Enochian material. Ignoring it flattens the Bible into modern assumptions and leaves you blind to what's coming: the powers of darkness, delegitimised rulers, and cosmic realignment.
Grasping the Council view unlocks the Bible as it is — and the story still unfolding. It's time to read the Hebrew on its own terms

2026-06-10 04:47:52 UTC

YHWH (the Elohim of Israel): Commands the slaughter of the Amalekites, “kill both man and woman, child and infant” (1 Samuel 15:3).
Jesus (revealing the Good Father): “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 6:27-28).
The Elohim of Israel demands genocidal violence; the alien Good God reveals perfect love and mercy for all. Judge the fruit.

2026-06-10 03:37:52 UTC

YHWH wasn't a disembodied "spirit" — he was a physical, non-human Elohim.
The Hebrew shows Elohim (incl. YHWH) as flesh-and-blood beings from a group of powerful entities — not omnipotent supernatural God. They walked, ate, smelled sacrifices, flew in vehicles (ruach/kavod), had offspring, and interacted physically with humans.
The Hebrew Bible portrays YHWH with body parts — feet on the ground, hands, etc. — in concrete ANE terms, not abstract spirit.
Later theology spiritualised him.
The text shows otherwise.

2026-06-09 23:58:31 UTC

In the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, when Pilate was governing Judea, Jesus came down to Capharnaum, a city of Galilee. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 3:1)
This abrupt opening of the First New Testament’s Gospel emphasises the sudden intrusion of the Stranger from the Good Father into YHWH’s world—no preparatory prophecies or genealogies, just direct revelation in power.

2026-06-09 23:50:10 UTC

YHWH (the Elohim of Israel): “I form light and create darkness; I make peace and create evil” (Isaiah 45:7).
Jesus (revealing the Good Father): “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly” (John 10:10).
The Elohim of Israel authors evil and death; the alien Good God sends His Son for life and mercy alone. Judge the fruit.

2026-06-08 09:49:55 UTC

One of the biggest differences between the God of the Hebrew Scriptures and the Father Jesus reveals is this:
In the Old Testament, YHWH makes almost no promises about an afterlife. There’s no clear teaching of heaven or hell for the average person. The blessings and curses are almost entirely earthly — land, wealth, long life, or destruction in this world.
Jesus, on the other hand, barely talks about earthly wealth or political power. Instead, He constantly speaks about His Father’s Kingdom and eternal life. The focus of His message is life beyond death — relationship with the Father that continues after this life ends.
It’s a striking shift in emphasis. One is heavily focused on this world. The other is focused on the world to come.

2026-06-08 07:19:21 UTC

Irenaeus (c. 180 CE) was the first to claim there must be exactly four Gospels — and he “proved” it by linking them to the four living creatures in Ezekiel and Revelation (lion, ox, man, eagle).
The connections were absurdly forced. He argued this imagery meant there could be no more and no less than four Gospels. It was a weak, ad hoc argument made to counter Marcion (who used only one Gospel) and other early Christian groups.
This wasn’t ancient consensus — it was later propaganda that helped cement the four-Gospel canon as “obvious” and divinely ordained.

2026-06-07 12:14:13 UTC

In John 8:55, Iēsous tells his opponents: “You have not known [ἐγνώκατε/ginōskō — come to know experientially] him. But I know [οἶδα/oida — full, certain awareness] him.”
This is the climax of a debate over paternity (Jn 8:38–44). They claim God as Father. Iēsous replies: You’ve never known my Father — your god (whom I called “the devil, a liar from the beginning”) isn’t mine.
The Greek verbs drive home the incompatibility.

2026-06-07 06:14:33 UTC

“Marcion thus sees Christians and Jews as fundamentally antithetical, with the results that Jews follow their own tradition, while Christians look to the New Testament with its wholly different ethical framework.”
— Resetting the Origins of Christianity (Dr Markus Vinzent)

2026-06-07 04:22:14 UTC

“O wonder beyond wonders! It is rapture, power, and amazement that one can say nothing at all about the Gospel, or even conceive of it, or compare it with anything!” https://image.nostr.build/ad8437cd16ddaa8ed11137a7bdbd8700de021ebc3c28c72de2aadb4650d1bd69.jpg

2026-06-06 12:40:52 UTC

Jesus taught something radically different from the “eye for an eye” principle found in the Hebrew Scriptures (Exodus 21:24, Leviticus 24:20, Deuteronomy 19:21).
“Turn the other cheek… love your enemies, do good to those who hate you.” (Luke 6:27–29)
In the cultural context of the time, “eye for an eye” was the accepted standard for justice and retaliation. A backhanded slap to the right cheek was often an insult or act of domination rather than a life-threatening attack. Jesus directly challenged that mindset of revenge and personal vengeance. His teaching focused on refusing retaliation, not necessarily banning all forms of self-defence.
Early Christians, including Marcionites, took these commands seriously. Many refused military service and rejected violent retaliation altogether. Marcionite communities were known for their strong stance against returning harm for harm.
This stands in clear contrast to the God of the Hebrew Scriptures, who repeatedly commanded retributive violence and the total destruction of enemies.
Importantly, Jesus’ words were aimed at stopping cycles of retaliation — not at forbidding someone from protecting themselves or their family when under attack.

2026-06-05 07:41:17 UTC

David Trobisch argues that the New Testament as we know it today was deliberately shaped with an anti-Marcionite agenda.
The four Gospels, the Book of Acts, the full collection of Paul’s letters (including Hebrews and the Pastoral Epistles), the Catholic Epistles, and Revelation all reflect a redactional concept designed to counter Marcion’s earlier canon.
In other words, the New Testament wasn’t assembled neutrally. It was edited and finalised, at least in part, as a response to Marcion.

2026-06-05 07:14:04 UTC

Irenaeus (c. 180 CE) is the first Christian writer we know of who actively promoted exactly four Gospels — Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John — as the authoritative ones.
Marcion (c. 140 CE), writing roughly 40 years earlier, already knew of these same four Gospels. However, he rejected them all, claiming they were later corruptions and plagiarisms of his own Evangelion.
According to Tertullian, Marcion was the only person before Irenaeus to even mention all four Gospels by name.
This timeline matters. The idea of a fixed four-Gospel canon wasn’t an early consensus — it was a later development pushed by Irenaeus and those who came after him.

2026-06-05 05:15:32 UTC

For those who are new here, let me be clear — my original followers can attest to this.
I started this account promoting Christian Orthodoxy. Then I discovered Michael Heiser’s Divine Council Worldview, which completely blew my mind. I was posting enthusiastically about the Watchers, Nephilim, and the “blurry” parts of the Bible that mainstream churches are now being forced to confront because of the UFO/UAP conversation.
Later, someone here shared Israel Anderson’s Two Gardens & a Snake, and for the first time I saw that YHWH was the one who lied in the Garden. That connected directly to Jesus saying the devil is a liar and murderer from the beginning. That discovery sent me much deeper down the rabbit hole.
As I began sharing what I was finding, I was quickly labelled a heretic and a Marcionite — even though I had never even heard of Marcion before. That accusation actually led me to research him, which then opened up serious study into early Christianity and the first New Testament.
My journey is fully visible on this account. If you go back through my older posts, you’ll see exactly how I got here.
So when people claim I just have a bias and simply “hate YHWH,” that’s not true. I didn’t start with that conclusion. I followed the evidence — studying how the texts developed, what came first, what was changed, and who changed them.
I’m not trying to pigeonhole anyone, and I’d appreciate the same courtesy. We’re all at different stages in our search for truth. May we all keep seeking it — because Jesus said He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and He told us to knock and seek, and the door will be opened.

2026-06-05 04:35:52 UTC

I've noticed people follow me, comment, and then bail/unfollow after a rebuttal (since I don't instantly agree with them).
I'm not petty, so it doesn't bother me. But I choose to follow those who challenge me and with whom I disagree. Why can't this be the standard?

2026-06-05 04:29:46 UTC

In the Evangelion (cf. Luke 18:9–14), Jesus tells the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector.
The self-righteous, Law-observant Pharisee goes home unjustified. The ritually impure tax collector simply cries, “God, be merciful to me, a sinner,” and is justified.
This isn’t how the covenant system of the God of Israel worked. It reflects the different principle of the unknown Good Father revealed by Jesus: grace over Law observance.

2026-06-05 02:03:37 UTC

YHWH commands the Levites to slaughter 3,000 of their own people after the Golden Calf incident (Exodus 32:27–28).
In the Gospel, when a Samaritan village rejects Jesus and his disciples, James and John want to call down fire on them. Jesus sharply rebukes them and simply moves on (Evangelion; cf. Luke 9:54–55).
YHWH demands the killing of his own people for idolatry. The Good Father does not retaliate with violence when rejected.https://nostpic.com/media/6159b8e9fa415b71b73b35ae68d011daac2ed3f130b2243648440a9341040d1c/1a85dcdcb226d816ba10fa9221f8e03f7c7f49ab537d791fad9bb160e6789360.webp

2026-06-04 23:20:12 UTC

The “Church Fathers” who trash Marcion weren’t neutral historians — they were later polemicists writing decades (sometimes over a century) after the earliest sources.
Irenaeus, Tertullian, Epiphanius and the rest had their own agendas such as building institutional power, defining orthodoxy, and smearing rivals. Their accounts of Marcion are full of distortion, exaggeration and outright invention.
Many of these same Fathers had serious issues themselves — theological backflips, poor historical accuracy, and in some cases their own later “heresies.”
If you actually want to understand early Christianity, stop treating the victors’ propaganda as reliable history. Go back to the earliest Gospel layer we can reconstruct. The picture looks very different.

2026-06-04 04:49:45 UTC

In the Greek text of the Gospel, Jesus’ name is Iēsous — not Yeshua, and certainly not YHWH.
The attached image from Strong’s Concordance (entry 3442) shows that the name Yeshua simply means “he will save.” It does not contain or mean “Yahweh saves.”
Some people point to the longer Old Testament name Yehoshua (Joshua), which does mean “Yahweh saves.” However, by the time of Jesus, the name had been shortened to Yeshua. The divine name element had already dropped out. The Greek Gospels reflect this later, shortened form — not the older Yehoshua.
This matters because Jesus did not come to serve or represent YHWH. He came to reveal a previously unknown Good Father whose character stands in direct opposition to the jealous, wrathful, and violent God of the Hebrew Scriptures.
As Jesus taught: judge the tree by its fruit.
YHWH’s fruit is wrath, jealousy, and death.
The Father Jesus reveals produces mercy, healing, and life.
The name doesn’t override the fruit.https://nostpic.com/media/6159b8e9fa415b71b73b35ae68d011daac2ed3f130b2243648440a9341040d1c/18b6ab2aaa41663a71091c6c99df1d54240637c0987d421f2f096f4e2416da50.webp

2026-06-04 02:36:20 UTC

A lot of Christians struggle with the plain meaning of the Hebrew text.
It doesn’t present YHWH as the abstract, all-loving, all-powerful “omni-God” of later theology. It presents him as one powerful member of the Elohim — a category of non-human beings — whose actions often include extreme wrath, jealousy, revenge, and regret.
At the same time, many non-Christians dismiss Jesus as “Jewish controlled opposition.”
But the first NT tells a different story. Jesus did not come to affirm or serve the god of Israel. He came to reveal a previously unknown Good Father — one whose character and ways stand in direct contrast to YHWH.
Attacks are coming from both sides of the aisle.
The earliest Gospel refuses to fit either narrative.

2026-06-04 01:28:55 UTC

YHWH sent an evil spirit to torment Saul:
“Now the Spirit of YHWH departed from Saul, and a harmful spirit from YHWH tormented him.” (1 Samuel 16:14)
In the Gospel, when Jesus encounters a man tormented by many unclean spirits, He commands the spirits to leave — and the man is restored to his right mind (Evangelion, cf. Luke 8:29, 35).
YHWH afflicts people with evil spirits.
The Good Father sets them free.https://nostpic.com/media/6159b8e9fa415b71b73b35ae68d011daac2ed3f130b2243648440a9341040d1c/9f875fb350d6cbe90dbfe3ee3ca60cb785ef118ed2ca79fe1ed3d516bfcb64b6.webp

2026-06-04 00:30:02 UTC

YHWH’s Law declares a woman with an ongoing issue of blood to be unclean. Anyone who touches her also becomes unclean (Leviticus 15:19–27).
In the Gospel, a woman who had been bleeding for twelve years touches Jesus. Instead of making Him unclean, she is instantly healed (Evangelion, cf. Luke 8:43–48).
YHWH’s system contaminates and excludes.
The Good Father’s power heals and restores.

2026-06-03 06:32:56 UTC

Why “Elohim” should never be translated as “God”:
In the original Hebrew, Elohim is not a name or a title meaning “God.”
It is a plural category — a class of powerful non-human beings (like “Anunnaki” in Sumerian texts).
YHWH is one specific member of that group. That’s why the text can say “other elohim,” why YHWH is jealous of them, and why Elyon assigns nations to different elohim (Deut 32:8-9).
Translating it as “God” erases the plural reality and forces later monotheism onto the text.
Leave it as Elohim.

2026-06-03 06:08:47 UTC

YHWH commands total destruction of the Canaanites:
“You shall save alive nothing that breathes, but you shall devote them to complete destruction…” (Deuteronomy 20:16–17)
In the Gospel, Jesus tells the parable of the Good Samaritan — a despised foreigner — and concludes:
“Go and do likewise.” (Evangelion G 10:37; cf. Luke 10:37)
YHWH demands the complete annihilation of outsiders. The Good Father teaches radical mercy, even toward those considered enemies.
Two completely different spirits.
Two completely different gods.

2026-06-03 05:28:43 UTC

Give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 6:38)
In the Father’s kingdom, the way we treat others — with mercy, generosity, and non-judgment — determines how we ourselves are treated. This is not the Law’s retributive justice, but a new measure of grace.

2026-06-03 02:29:16 UTC

Another misused “prophecies” about Jesus is Daniel 7:13–14.
In Daniel, the figure comes to the Ancient of Days and the kingdom is given to the saints as a collective (vv. 18, 22, 27). There is no individual descending Messiah.
In the Gospel, Jesus announces the opposite: the Human One coming down from heaven with power and great glory (Evangelion, cf. Lk 21:27). The direction is reversed.
By the late 3rd century, orthodox writers were already forcing the two together. Adamantius claimed:
"This is similar to what Daniel says: ‘I saw One like a son of man coming on the clouds.’ And in the Gospel it says, ‘As lightning comes out of the east… so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be’."
The Marcionite Megethius pushed back with Daniel 2: the stone has not yet smashed the kingdoms of the earth, proving the Christ of the Law and the Prophets has not yet arrived. He added that John the Baptist — a prophet of the Creator God (YHWH) — did not recognise Jesus:
"Now when he had heard in prison the works of Christ, he sent his disciples to Him, saying, ‘Are You He who is to come, or look we for another?’"

2026-06-02 04:13:56 UTC

And Jesus rebuked him, saying, “Be silent and come out of him!” And when the demon had thrown him down in the midst, he came out of him, having done him no harm. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 4:35)
Unclean spirits must obey the son of the Most High.

2026-06-01 23:46:39 UTC

Fact: Marcion’s Apostolikon contains only 10 of Paul’s letters and lacks the Pastoral Epistles (1 & 2 Timothy, Titus) entirely.
Scientific evidence from stylometric and lexical analysis shows these Pastorals have significantly different vocabulary and theology, consistent with 2nd-century anti-Marcionite redaction to strengthen links to YHWH’s established church structure. Marcion’s collection reflects the earlier circulating letters.

2026-06-01 02:15:51 UTC

Fact: Marcion’s Evangelion has no infancy narrative, unlike canonical Luke.
Scientific evidence from textual criticism shows Luke 1-2 was added later as an anti-Marcionite expansion to link Jesus directly to YHWH. Computational analysis of vocabulary and style confirms these chapters as secondary redaction. Marcion’s version came first.

2026-06-01 01:47:51 UTC

And amazement seized them all, and they glorified God and were filled with awe, saying, “We have seen extraordinary things today.” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 5:26)
Jesus is awesome—literally.

2026-05-29 05:46:41 UTC

And they were all amazed and said to one another, “What is this word? For with authority and power he commands the unclean spirits, and they come out!” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 4:36)
Jesus wielded absolute authority over darkness. No rituals. No struggle. Just raw, sovereign power.

2026-05-26 23:07:02 UTC

It always saddens me when Christians behave and speak as YHWH rather than Jesus or the Father He revealed.
Mercy, grace, and love > wrath, curses, and condemnation.

2026-05-25 11:17:14 UTC

It’s actually ridiculous that Marcion was branded a “heretic” and even the “arch-heretic” — yet in the mid-2nd century there was no orthodoxy.
No unified church. No fixed New Testament. No agreed-upon creed.
Christianity was a chaotic mix of competing groups. Marcion simply organised the first actual Christian canon: the Evangelion and the Apostolikon.
Calling him a heretic is nothing more than the later winners writing history and slapping a label on the man whose clear, coherent vision they eventually had to fight against and rewrite.
He wasn’t a heretic.
He was one of the earliest and most influential Christian theologians — before “orthodoxy” even existed.

2026-05-25 07:15:27 UTC

Here's a Marcionite music playlist celebrating the unknown Good Father and the mercy revealed by Iēsous.
Enjoy the songs of true freedom.
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgaTniRI4-nhmC_kOlCWAChPNo3XYIbFB&si=29QFOutEYrFQnoyp