Home (Netzarim Logo)

3824 (64 C.E.)

(Continued)

"" -,
Traveled To Or Executed In Ρωμη?

Next (Πραχεις Αποστολων 11.2), no surprise, "" - is found in not Ρωμη!

The claim by some that the "Ascension of Isaiah" [a] predates the death of Παυλος (and, therefore, cannot refer to Παυλος) and [b] documents "Πετρος' " death in Ρωμη is blatant misrepresentation, "spinning the text" on both counts.

M.A. Knibb, in James H. Charlesworth "The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha," the best source and that usually cited, dates the "Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah," according to its various composite parts, which vary considerably in their dating. Knibb writes of the oft-cited verse, 4.2: "A [Χριστιανοι] addition to the Martyrdom of Isaiah, sometimes given the title the Testament of Hezekiah (3.13–4.22)… There are a number of indications which point to the view that 3.13–4.22 was composed at about the end of the first century [C.E.]" (emphasis added).

Though hearsay (via Ευσεβιος—not until the 4th century C.E., and certainly no less redacted than the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT)), the "Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah" represents one of the earliest Χριστιανοι claims, even though it brings us back (yet again) to Ευσεβιος. So what does Martyrdom 4.1-2 really say?

Now, therefore, Hezekiah and Josab my son, [these are the days of the completion of the world]. And after it has been brought to completion, Beliar will descend, the great angel, the king of this world, which he has ruled ever since it existed. He will descend from his firmament in the form of a man, a king of iniquity, a murderer of his mother—this is the king of this world—and will persecute the plant which the twelve apostles of the Beloved will have planted; of the twelve will be given into his hand" (M.A. Knibb in James H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, "Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah," p. 161).

There are so many flaws in this one wonders where to start. First, this is a prophecy from a Pseudepigraphal source. Do Χριστιανοι represent that the writer of Martyrdom is a serious prophet? It isn't . Certainly, don't recognize it as authoritative. The prophecy is dismissed outright. While it does appear to refer to Nero, who killed his mother, "[someone] of/from the twelve" can refer to anyone who had ever been a —including Παυλος. Further, there is no credible evidence that Παυλος was executed later. That's yet another item that Χριστιανοι cannot agree on. Whether they were executed together, in the same persecution, etc. are all argued among the various εκκλησια sources.

Σιμων "St. Πετρος" ο υιος Ιωνας in Ρωμη: Evidence For
Pre-135 C.E. ManuscriptsPre-135 C.E. Hard Evidence
NoneNone
Σιμων "St. Πετρος" ο υιος Ιωνας in Ρωμη: Evidence Against
Pre-135 C.E. ManuscriptsPre-135 C.E. Hard Evidence
All of the earliest extant references to "" - locate him in Ossuary of "" -—in (see ossuary photos in the "Mashiakh" section!)

The string of Χριστιανοι claims subsequent to 135 C.E., with no earlier evidence whatsoever, is clearly a theological necessity in the Χριστιανοι εκκλησια tradition of ἐποιησάμην (click "Fabrication of Popes" in menu above).

That there was an apostasy and counterfeit even the earliest εκκλησια historians have recorded and is undisputed. It's the central theme of Αποκαλυψις. Denying the apostasy of Στεφανος and Παυλος has always been, and remains, essential to any Χριστιανοι claim of legitimacy.

Rival Successions

Nᵊtzâr•im Jews' Succession of Pᵊqid•im vs Χριστιανοι Gentiles' Succession of Ἐπίσκοπος

Clearly, the original pro- ‭ ‬ under "" -, under his successor, , "" -, and the next 13 successor (until were displaced in 135 C.E. by gentile Roman Hellenist "bishop-popes") represent the authentic original teachings of historical . This dictates that the plethora of Hellenist (antinomian = anti- = misojudaic) non- groups, centered upon the theme of assimilation into Hellenism, and rivaling the , comprised the apostasy.

Virtually all of Judaic prophecy designates evil incarnate first as Babylon, later—by the 1st century C.E.—Ρωμη! And still, Χριστιανοι maintain that this evil incarnate, Ρωμη = is the Seat of their God!!! How do Χριστιανοι—and Jews, for that matter—not see the blasphemy of so insidiously cloaking a in these ?

It's disturbing that anyone could be so blind as to ignore how blasphemously fitting the Χριστιανοι εκκλησια's intractable position is: having made Ρωμη = the "See" of their man-god, Jesus.

While Protestants would like to imagine how different they are from Catholics and that they've restored the "real deal" of Χριστιανοι, they don't realize that merely rejecting Ηγησιππος' ἐποιησάμην of papal authority (which inextricably also exposes the lie of arrogating authority from the Jewish , claiming to transfer the Holy City of the from the capital of to the idolatrous City of Ζεύς (Ρωμη) and from the of -- to the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT), at the most, can't possibly do more than restore the original Χριστιανοι—which is the 135 C.E. apostasy = 666!!!

The displacing of the original pro- ‭ ‬ by the misojudaic counterfeit, by infusing antinomian Χριστιανοι claims of supersessionist Displacement Theology, is an unparalleled millennia deception of the entire world that boggles the mind, dwarfing all of the other conspiracy theories ever conceived combined. And no one notices??? Or is everyone too frightened by the implications to speak up???

The only solution for Χριστιανοι, Protestant and Catholic alike, is to reject Χριστιανοι apostasy and begin living according to —non-selectively.

Tracking The Split

Before 135 C.E., the were located almost exclusively in , visited by from the Diaspora.

30 C.E.

In 30 C.E., the reason that Hellenist Romans perceived the to be an existential threat was a distortion—reported to them by the Hellenist Σαδδουκαιοι who were the liaison between Ρωμη and the —purporting that - was a threat to the rule of Ρωμη; as a result of which Ρωμη crucified , drove the - leaders of the underground and destroyed all of the of -. (Inadvertently, that made the last possible candidate who could ever satisfy the Biblical requirements to be !!!)

Events Leading Up To 70 C.E.

Four decades later, however, and only 2 years after Nero's persecution (which lasted until 68 C.E.), Tacitus documented his reasons for destroying the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâsh—but this was in , in the faraway province (from Ρωμη) of , where the had not yet been usurped by Χριστιανοι.

was unlike Ρωμη, where Hellenist anti-Καισαρας Εβιωναιοι or fetal-Χριστιανοι had sprouted among the Hellenist Tzᵊdoq•im in Ρωμη and the Hellenist Roman gentiles and was already being cultivated by "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate.

The Roman Senator and historian Tacitus who, unlike Nero's wife, couldn't distinguish between Hellenist Εβιωναιοι or fetal-Χριστιανοι and, lᵊ-hav•dil, the , states in his Annals (ca. 106 c.e.) describing the war of 70 c.e. in Tacitus Fragment 2: "…the anti-Roman movement of the Christiani and the Nazoreans…"

Eric Laupot of the University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa observed that "There is little consensus as to the historical nature of the sect identified by Tacitus in Annales 15.44 as the Χριστιανοι… widely suspected of being later Χριστιανοι interpolations… The metaphor stirps [is] used to describe the Χριστιανοι in Fragment 2."

This Latin term corresponds to the Hebrew . As Laupot noted, Ιερωνυμος (Jerome) translated as stirps in the Latin Vulgate—as far as 5th century C.E. gentile Hellenist Roman Catholic Christian Jerome knew it.

"The branch metaphor in frag. 2, stirps, is one of relatively few Latin words with a Hebrew equivalent ([]) that can be transliterated into “Ναζωραîος ("Matt." 2.23, 26.71, Luke 18.37, John 18.5, 7, 19.19, "Acts" 2.22, 3.6, 4.10, 6.14, 22.8, 24.5, 26.9) and “Ναζαρηνóς (Mark 1.24, 10.47, 14.67, 16.6, Luke 4.34, 24.19) – two words describing the sect that is associated also with the [Διαθηκη Καινη (NT)]‘s “Χριστιανοι”: Πραχεις Αποστολων ‭ ‬ 11.26)." There is simply no serious scholarly doubt that stirps refers to the as far as Hellenist Roman gentile Tacitus "understood" it.

In the minds and understanding of the Hellenist Roman gentiles, stirps was merely a Roman gentile (Latin) term for Christian. It is extremely unlikely that any gentile Hellenist Roman like Tacitus distinguished followers of "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate in Ρωμη from the original Pᵊrush•im Nᵊtzâr•im of Ribi Yᵊho•shua in the far-away, strange and alien, province of . By the late 4th through the late mid-5th century C.E. time of Ιερωνυμος, the distinction was entirely lost until I restored the clarity beginning in the 1970s.

Why the Romans Destroyed The Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâsh

While we concur with many other scholars who have effectively rebutted Laupot's argument attempting to deny later Χριστιανοι redactions (i.e., thousands of later Χριστιανοι redactions are incontestably documented), the fact remains that "For our purposes here, the last half of frag. 2 (= Severus‘ Chronica 2.30.7) is the most relevant because it specifically mentions redacted by Χριστιανοι of the 2nd-3rd century to project Χριστιανοι instead, thereby displacing the with the εκκλησια":

(2.30.6) It is reported that Titus [general at the time (b. 39 C.E., reigned 7981 C.E.)] first deliberated, by summoning a council of war, as to whether to destroy a Temple of such workmanship. For it seemed proper to some that a consecrated Temple, distinguished above all that is human, should not be destroyed, as it would serve as a witness to Roman moderation; whereas its destruction would represent a perpetual brand of cruelty.

(2.30.7) But others, on the contrary, disagreed – including Titus himself. They argued that the destruction of the Temple was a number one priority in order to destroy completely the religion [per Severus. Tacitus or another classical author would have used the word superstitio (alien religious belief). Compare Hist. 5.8 and Ann. 15.44 (exitiabilis superstitio)] of the and the : For although these religions [i.e., superstitiones] are conflicting, they nevertheless developed from the same origins. The arose from the : With the root [i.e. Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâsh] removed, the [- Royal Succession stirps of the leadership] is easily killed."

While Nᵊtzâr•im Pâ•qid Remained in Yᵊru•shâ•layim Until Usurped in 135 C.E.,
By 70 C.E. "Apostle St. Paul" the Apostate's Christians Already Fled To Πελλα

At this point, 2 years before the destruction of 70 C.E., the primarily gentile Hellenist fetal-Χριστιανοι εκκλησια of the late Παυλος—in Πελλα!—exerted no influence in , even among —who, Ευσεβιος documented, had, decades earlier, excised him as an apostate. What small influence Παυλος, himself, enjoyed as a Roman citizen, was limited to his own lifetime, the Diaspora and among the Romans. It is well documented that Χριστιανοι didn't usurp the until 135 C.E. Thus, in 68-70 C.E., Χριστιανοι in presented no presence noticeable to Ρωμη that could have concerned Titus. Rather, in , Titus was concerned, instead, about the , among whom there remained, even in this period of 68-70 C.E., of - with the lingering perceived threat to Καισαρας of the Royal Jewish Family of -—for which the Romans had earlier crucified and stoned Στεφανος.

In the years leading up to 70 C.E., it is apparent that Ρωμη considered the Royal Jewish Family, -, such a threat to Καισαρας that Ιωσηπος wasn't even permitted to name the (obviously most significant party to Ρωμη) - sect: the —cited by General Titus as the reason the Romans decided to destroy the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâsh.

For conspicuously clear religious reasons, the historians—themselves being Roman Χριστιανοι—have virtually erased the political aspect of the as a movement for - to recover control of the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâsh from the Roman-collaborating Σαδδουκαιοι " ." Representing a serious threat to the Hellenist Σαδδουκαιοι as well, they, in turn, amplified the threat to their Roman patrons as a serious threat to Καισαρας. The rest, as they say, is history.

History otherwise finds it inexplicable, and accordingly has always glossed over, why Ρωμη systematically searched out and destroyed the of -, slaughtered every offspring—of -, not all Jews—that they could find, many of whom were , and expunged the name of - and its principle party, the , from the historical record. Ιωσηπος was only permitted to refer to them indirectly as a nameless, unidentified—mysterious—"third sect."

64 C.E. Great Fire In Rome, Nero

The first documented instance of Roman persecution occurred in 64 C.E. under Nero. When a great fire broke out in Ρωμη destroying great portions of the city and killing many Romans, Nero—who was suspected of setting the fire himself for political and economic reasons—blamed the fire on—we can now conclude—anti-Καισαρας Hellenist Εβιωναιοι or fetal-Χριστιανοι, supposedly living in the Jewish neighborhood. However, the anti-Καισαρας Hellenists were demonstrably distinct; other Jews were not targeted and no Χριστιανοι group ever accepted, or would have been accepted, to live in a Jewish neighborhood. Nero "inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called [perhaps later, in retrospect] Chrestians" (Tacitus, Annals XV).

In Ρωμη, the predominant Jewish presence was Hellenist; Greek speaking and "Reformed" of its day. It would not be surprising to find Hellenist Εβιωναιοι or fetal-Χριστιανοι among Hellenist Jews in (Hellenist neighborhoods of) Ρωμη, even as early as 64-70 C.E. As we have seen earlier, however, Tacitus' Annals—concerning , not Ρωμη—was redacted by Χριστιανοι, changing stirps () to displace by inserting themselves—"Chrestians" (sic), instead. This is exactly the same kind of redaction by the early Χριστιανοι "historians" that is well documented in their redactions of Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) as well.

3826 (66 C.E.)

1st-century Beit K'nesset on Masada
Click to enlargeKaren in 1st-century Beit ha-Kᵊnësët on

"[A]t the beginning of the Revolt of the against the Romans in 66 C.E., a contingent of overpowered the Roman garrison of [], " immediately establishing this - on top of the mountain. "After the fall of [] and the destruction of the [Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâsh] (70 C.E.) they were joined by other and their families who had fled from []. With [] as their base, they raided and harassed the Romans for two years. Then, in 73 C.E., the Roman governor Flavius Silva marched against [] with the Tenth Legion, auxiliary units and thousands of Jewish prisoners-of-war. The Romans established camps at the base of [], laid siege to it and built a circumvallation wall. They then constructed a rampart of thousands of tons of stones and beaten earth against the western approaches of the fortress and, in the spring of the year 74 C.E., moved a battering ram up the ramp and breached the wall of the fortress" (jewishvirtuallibrary.org).

3830 (70 C.E.)

Fall of & Destruction of "Temple"

The story of the destruction of the "Temple" in 70 C.E. is well documented. Upon the capture of in 70 C.E., Vespasian (emperor 69-79 C.E.) attempted to extirpate -. This decimated the leadership, thus weakening them more than any other group of .

In 70 C.E., the Romans conquered , our Holy Capital and destroyed our Σαδδουκαιοι "Wicked Priest" desecrated "Temple". Numismatic evidence has proven that, by 130 C.E. (two years before the outbreak of the Bar-Kokh Revolt; ergo, 5 years before usurping the ), the Romans had already Hellenized , building upon its ruins their new idolatrous city dedicated to Jupiter (= Zeus) (the Roman-syncretized version of the Greek Zeus): Aelia Capitolina.

All that remained in 135 C.E. was to expel the , especially the and -, and install, in their place, their first gentile Roman, Χριστιανοι, επισκοπος: Markos.

3831 (71 C.E.)

Build - on
1st-century Netzarim Synagogue: Re-used stones probably from ruins of Second Temple
Click to enlargeArcheologists:
Original 1st-century
Nᵊtzâr•im
Beit ha-Kᵊnësët

Re-used stones probably from Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâsh ha-Shein•i

The Church Father historians date their theorized "return" of the Hellenist Εβιωναιοι or fetal-Χριστιανοι from Πελλα to 3833 (73 C.E.). Therefore, at this time, 3831-32 (71-72 C.E.), even the earliest extant historians agree that the Hellenist Εβιωναιοι or fetal-Χριστιανοι are still in Πελλα. A priori, [a] only the authentic could have been in to build the - on ca. 70 C.E. and [b] this is proof that the did not go to Πελλα but remained in !!! (See also Catholic priest Bargil Pixner, "Church of the Apostles Found on Mt. Zion," Biblical Archaeology Review, 90.05-06, XVI.3, p. 16.).

Although there were many - in while the "Temple" still stood, this first - of the contains stones salvaged from the destroyed Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâsh in its lower wall and foundation (red arrow).

It wasn't until the 10th century C.E. that Χριστιανοι fabricated a claim to have built this -. Archeology has demonstrated that the architecture reflects a 1st century -, not an early εκκλησια. Interestingly, after exchanging hands during the Crusades, it remains Jewish today.

3833 (73 C.E.)

Return From Πελλα?

vs Παυλος' Χριστιανοι

According to Ευτυχιος (10th century!), the "μαθητες" of the , who (he alleges) fled to Πελλα to escape the Roman destruction of in 70 C.E. "returned to in the fourth year of the emperor Vespasian, and built [on ] their εκκλησια."

The historical record shows that , "" - was appointed by the and kindred of in . The , kindred of , and their authentic followers—all —had never left (review). Moreover, the traditional synagogal architecture clearly proves it was a -, as contrasted against the Hellenist Χριστιανοι (Octagonal or Basilica architecture) εκκλησια. Χριστιανοι didn't even begin building churches until Χριστιανοι was decriminalized in 313 C.E.! Before that, Χριστιανοι met in homes. There is no evidence that pre-Χριστιανοι Hellenists (Jews) ever built a synagogue. Indeed, Even the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) documents the riotings of the —which included the —against the antinomian Hellenist, Roman-collaborating "Jews" during this period. A priori, Εβιωναιοι were fleeing, not building synagogues during this period!!! It is self-evident, to anyone not grinding a Χριστιανοι axe, that the - on was built by —namely, not by Χριστιανοι.

It is, therefore, also clear that the authentic , who had remained in (not Παυλος' Χριστιανοι who had fled to Πελλα), who built their -centered (as the architecture demonstrates) - on .

It's crystal clear that only the antinomian (=anti-, misojudaic) Hellenists—like the Εβιωναιοι of Στεφανος and the Χριστιανοι of Παυλος—had reason to fear persecution and flee to Πελλα. The emigration to Πελλα, a priori, comprised the expelled heretical followers of the apostasyΠαυλος' Χριστιανοι, including the Εβιωναιοι and 'Nazoraeans' (whatever that referred to), who evolved into the εκκλησια (something that neither Ηγησιππος, nor Ευσεβιος nor any other Χριστιανοι historian could ever acknowledge). It is most likely, therefore, that Ευτυχιος' statement, attributing the building of the - on to the (probably Παυλος' Hellenist) returnees from Πελλα, was yet another of the Christianizing redactions displacing the with the Χριστιανοι of Παυλος—consistent with all of the other Χριστιανοι redactions.

It isn't even clear that the apostates who fled to Πελλα really returned from Πελλα at all before 135 C.E., or whether their supposed return was merely an assertion doctrinally forced on the early εκκλησια historians in order to fabricate their phony "continuity." Thus, while it is correct to state that Παυλος' Χριστιανοι / Nazoraeans / Εβιωναιοι—of the apostasy of —fled to Πελλα, perhaps they returned in 73 C.E., but far more likely the return reported solely by Ευτυχιος—but absent from the accounts of other historians—was yet another redacted ἐποιησάμην. In any case, the weight of evidence most certainly contradicts the assertion that the original fled to Πελλα.

Furthermore, Ευτυχιος' inability—in the 10th century C.E.—to distinguish between and the followers of the (certainly based entirely on, and impossible to be more accurate than, Ευσεβιος and the earlier Church historians upon whom he depended, none of whom could distinguish reliably between these sects) cannot be taken as evidence concerning which group built the - on .

Since the succession of remained in authority until 135 C.E. it is, therefore, a certainty that the not the Χριστιανοι of Παυλος or the Εβιωναιοι of Στεφανος,—built the -, the foundations of which still stand on (see photo).

In 135 C.E. a fledgling group of Hellenist Roman gentile Χριστιανοι—who were small, scattered (predominantly in what is today Turkey) and prohibited by the Roman pagans from building an εκκλησια (proof they couldn't have built the - on ‭ ‬ 65 years earlier)—displaced the exiled and converted the vacated - to their idolatrous, Hellenist Χριστιανοι worship: "From 135 it was forbidden to the to enter under pain of death, and it is even more probable that they could not have had a synagogue after that date; while, on the contrary, this appears to have been in use" (Catholic priest Bellarmino Bagatti, "The Church from the Circumcision," p. 121).

Certainly, the , who were , couldn't even enter , much less continue after 135 C.E. in the same building: which Παυλος' Hellenist-Roman Χριστιανοι had corrupted into an εκκλησια. As , ‭ ‬ would not enter a Hellenist temple (that Hellenists called it an εκκλησια made no difference). In any case, , being , were no longer even allowed in the city—which the idolatrous Hellenist Roman gentile occupiers dedicated to Zeus and renamed Aelia Capitolina"—in the country that the same Hellenist Roman occupiers, in 135 C.E., renamed "Palestine," a Hellenist Greek adaptation named after the population of immigrant Mycenaean-Greek "Sea Peoples," originally from the (Mycenaean) Greek city of Pilos—Pilos-tiniansGreeks, not Arabs!!!

Χριστιανοι were exclusively Hellenist-Roman (by the 4th century C.E. almost entirely) gentiles who, with the help of the Hellenizing "Reform" Jew, Παυλος the , syncretized all of their native Hellenist polytheistic idolatry into an oxymoronic 'mono-tri-theist' man-god—known today as Ιησους! (See "Iesous Name" section in menu at top.)

3841–3856 (81–96 C.E.)

Domitian's Persecution of -

Domitian continued the campaign to extirpate -. Domitian was "known primarily for his conflict with the Senate and the Roman aristocracy" ("Domitian," Microsoft (R) Encarta '95). "Especially in the last three years of his reign, Domitian terrorized the aristocracy, executing many of them for supposed acts of treason and confiscating their property to help pay for his increasing expenses" (ibid.). Just as the Χριστιανοι had expropriated the Judaic idea of the , these by now mostly Hellenist gentiles also expropriated this persecution of "men distinguished at Rome by family and career" because it included the Hellenist Σαδδουκαιοι aristocracy, falsely representing it to be a persecution of Παυλος' Hellenist Roman Χριστιανοι "Christian Jews."

3856 (96 C.E.)

Nerva (96-98 C.E.)

Nerva was named emperor on the same day that Domitian was assassinated in 96 C.E. A sexagenarian having no children, "Nerva is credited with beginning the practice of adopting his heir rather than selecting a blood relative" (roman-emperors.org). His short reign reflected a moderate focus on public welfare issues with no significant effect on religion other than, perhaps, to deemphasize and remove it from the agenda. His major accomplishment seems to have been adopting Trajan as his successor.

3858–3877 (98–117 C.E.)

Trajan (98-117 C.E.)

During the final years of the first century, Trajan focused his attention on border threats on the German frontier.

Summary

Ca. 60 C.E., the excised Παυλος. Soon thereafter, it became clear that Παυλος' gentile Hellenist Χριστιανοι were on a path that conflicted unavoidably with Pharisaic Judaism (which included the ). With this separation from (=Judaism), the first gentile Hellenist Χριστιανοι, as a consequence of their inflammatory misojudaic antagonism, alienated themselves from the Pharisee community (which included the ). This traces back to their very inception with Στεφανος, the Εβιωναιοι, the excision of Παυλος and their consequent flight to Πελλα.

In the 2nd-4th centuries, the having been exhausted (as prophesied), gentile Hellenist Χριστιανοι first emerged in 135 C.E. as an independent, anti-Καισαρας idolatrous Hellenist religion at enmity with their rival, Καισαρας-worshiping, Hellenist idolaters of the mainstream Roman populace—a conflict that led to persecutions (partly based on roman-empire.net).

The elimination of the "Temple", the of - and any future Davidic succession (thereby ending any possibility of any future candidate satisfying the genealogical requirement; i.e., there can be no future of -!!!) marked the end of Ρωμη's persecution of the . With the "threat" of the Davidic Monarchy crushed, there were no subsequent persecutions of the by Ρωμη.

In fact, there were not even any similar religious persecutions until the late 2nd century (177 C.E.) when, it will be seen, for entirely different and unrelated reasons—refusing to worship (sacrifice to) Καισαρας, Ρωμη, indeed, thereafter targeted the Hellenist gentile Χριστιανοι conceived by Παυλος and his resulting fledgling εκκλησια, born in 135 C.E.

30-99 C.E. – Go To Page
 Previous   1   2   3   4   Next 


Rainbow Rule © 1996-present by Paqid Yirmeyahu Ben-David,
Rainbow Rule
Go Top Home (Netzarim Logo) Go Back

Nᵊtzâr•im… Authentic