To begin, let us make it clear that our intent is not to offend any of our brothers and sisters of the Christian faith, or those who may incorporate Christianity and/or the New Testament into their spiritual teachings. As an organization dedicated to the restoration of God's chosen people, we are responsible for telling the truth as is.
We worship the Creator only, and we are responsible for adhering to His word and His word alone.
IS THE NEW TESTAMENT VALID?
Many people are surprised at the level of contradictory statements that exist between the Old and New Testaments. It is extremely difficult to understand the vast amount of inconsistencies between the Old and New Testament if both are the word of God. Anyone that truly studies these contradictions can plainly see the New Testament (the Gospel) has nothing to do with the Old Testament (The Holy Scriptures).
THE PAGAN ORIGINS OF CHRIST
As we all know the Christian concept of "immaculate conception" (the supposed birth of Jesus) was adopted from ancient pagan religions. Virgin births of gods were a common if not standard theme in ancient pagan mythologies.
Mithraism, the religion followed by those who worshipped the sun god Mithra, originated in Persia about 400 BC, and was to spread its Pagan ideas as far west as the British Isles. In the early centuries of the Christian era, Mithraism was the most wide-spread religion in the Western World, and its remains are to be found in monuments scattered around the countries of Europe. Mithra was regarded as created by, yet co-equal with, the Supreme Deity. Mithraists were Trinitarian, kept Sunday as their day of worship, and their chief festivals were what we know of as Christmas and Easter. Long before the advent of Jesus, Mithra was said to have been born of a virgin mother, in a cave, at the time of Christmas, and died on a cross at Easter. Baptism was practised, and the sign of the cross was made on the foreheads of all newly-baptised converts. Mithra was considered to be the saviour of the world, conferring on his followers an eternal life in Heaven, and, similar to the story of Jesus, he died to save all others, provided that they were his followers.
The Egyptian deity Horus was also birthed from an immaculate comception. Horus was the son of Isis and Osiris. He was conceived magically after the death of Osiris and brought up by Isis on a floating island in the marshes of Buto. The Hindu god Krishna, The Babylonian god Tammuz, and Greek god Adonis were other earlier forms of Jesus.
DID JESUS REALLY EXIST?
We have already clearly established some of the apparent conflicts and contradictions between the word of God found in the Holy Scriptures and the words of Christ, his disciples and followers in the New Testament. The following shows some of the major discrepancies in Jesus' genealogy according to Matthew 1:6-16, and according to Luke 3:23-31.
· In Matthew, Joseph was the son of Jacob; in Luke, Joseph was the son of Heli.
· In Matthew, Salatheil was the son of Jechonias; in Luke, Salatheil was the son of Neri.
· In Matthew, Abiud was the son of Zorobabel; in Luke, Rhesa was the son of Zorobabel.
· In Matthew, Jesus descended from Solomon son of David; in Luke, Jesus descended from Nathan son of David.
· In Matthew, 27 names are mentioned between David and Jesus; in Luke, 42 names are mentioned between David and Jesus.
Genealogy has always been important in validating the existence of ancient people. In the books of Nehemiah and Ezra, Levites who were descendants of the priests were deemed polluted to the Levitical priesthood because they could not provide documented evidence of their genealogy. Some differences and discrepancies may be understandable due to natural human error, but the severe contradictions of Matthew and Luke's genealogy of "Christ", and the contraction of both of his genealogies with the genealogy of the descendents of the Judah invalidates any true recorded proof of his existence. Another point must be made clear on the issue of Christ's genealogy. If he is the "son of God" and/or "God in the flesh", what would be the significance of mentioning his genealogy anyway?
Although Christians have listed a number of ancient historians who allegedly were witnesses to the existence of Jesus, the only two that consistently are cited are Josephus, a Pharisee, and Tacitus, a pagan. Since Josephus was born in the year 37 CE, and Tacitus was born in 55, neither could have been an eye-witness of Jesus, who supposedly was crucified in 30 CE.
According to John E. Remsburg, in his classic book The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidence of His Existence (The Truth Seeker Company, NY, no date, pp. 24-25), lists The following writers who lived during the time, or within a century after the time, that Jesus is supposed have lived:
Josephus, Philo-Judæus, Seneca, Pliny Elder, Arrian, Petronius, Dion Pruseus, Paterculus, Suetonius, Juvenal, Martial, Persius, Plutarch, Pliny Younger, Tacitus, Justus of Tiberius, Apollonius, Quintilian, Lucanus, Epictetus, Hermogones, Silius, Italicus, Statius, Ptolemy, Appian, Phlegon, Phædrus, Valerius Maximus, Lucian, Pausanias, Florus Lucius, Quintius Curtius, Aulus Gellius, Dio Chrysostom, Columella,
Valerius Flaccus, Damis, Favorinus, Lysias, Pomponius Mela, Appion of Alexandria and Theon of Smyrna.
The writings of the authors named in the foregoing list remains to form a library. With all of this historical literature, aside from two forged passages in the works of a Jewish author, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there is to be found no mention of Jesus Christ. Nor, do any of these authors make note of the Disciples or Apostles.
CHRISTIANITY AND THE MENTAL ENSLAVEMENT OF GOD'S CHOSEN PEOPLE?
In his book "Christianity, Islam and the Negro Race", Edward W. Blyden states: "The Negro in Christian lands however learned in books, cannot be said to have such a thing as self-education. His knowledge, when brought to the test, often fails him. And why? Because he is taught from the beginning to the end of his book-training ? from the illustrated primer to the illustrated scientific treatise ? not to be himself, but somebody else."
"From the lessons he every day receives, the Negro unconsciously imbibes the conviction that to be a great man he must be like the white man. He is not brought up ? however he may desire it ? to be the companion, the equal, the comrade of the white man, but his imitator, his ape, his parasite. To be himself in a country where everything ridicules him, is to be nothing ? less, worse than nothing. To be as like the white man as much as possible ? to copy his outward appearance, his peculiarities, his manners, the arrangement of his toilet, that is the aim of the Christian Negro ? this is his aspiration."
Our current lifestyles, religions and customs are a clear reflection of our European indoctrination and our lack of knowledge. This is why the majority of so-called black people are Christians, without any regard of why of how they converted to the religion of their oppressors. This is why we praise a god that looks no different than the people that brought us to this side of the Atlantic Ocean.
It is a well-known historical fact that Christianity was used by White slave owners as a form of mental control over slaves. "From Plantation to Ghetto" by A. Meier and E. Rudwick states: "Finally, masters employed religion as a form of control over the slaves. After it was understood that baptism did not confer freedom and that the Southern wings of the Methodists and Baptist Churches had no intention of applying their egalitarian religion to the temporal status of the status of the slaves, many planters saw advantages in having slaves attend religious services. Some owners even built chapels on their plantations. Of course, such planter-sponsored religious observances emphasized the other wordly aspects of Christianity, rather than the impulse toward social justice in the Judaic-Christian tradition, promised salvation to those who obeyed their masters. From the masters' perspective, therefore, Christianity functioned as an anodyne to help slaves accept their lot in this world." Also, Blyden again states: "Generations descending from Huguenot and Puritan ancestry were trained to believe that God had endowed them with the right to enslave the African forever. And upon those Africans who became members of the Christian Church, the idea was impressed that it was their duty to submit, in everything, to their masters. Christian divines of all shades of opinion, in the South, taught this doctrine, and embodied it in the books prepared specially for the instruction of the slaves? their 'oral instruction,' for they were not allowed to learn to read."
Christianity was never given to so-called Black people for their spiritual benefit. Christianity served only as a vice to enslave the minds of The God's chosen people for generations.
The Creator of Heaven and Earth is a jealous God (Exodus 20). For us to give praise, exaltation or reverence to any other besides Him is in direct violation of His commandments. We must begin to praise God and God alone and discard all of the added mythologies we were brainwashed into accepting.
"I, even I, am YHWH; and beside me there is no savior." -Isaiah 43:11