Do you remember when Q made numerous Biblical references and specifically mentioned to follow the bloodlines? The reason these are "Biblical Times" is because we are in the midst of an irregular, spiritual, psychological, information based, bloodline war where God wins in the end. The bloodlines engaged in this warfare are the interbred and intermarried fake Jewish Khazarian Mafia (Illuminati/Jesuit) bloodlines whom seek to exterminate the remaining Druze ethnic bloodlines (800,000 to 2,000,000 people) from Earth as they share the same scientifically proven DNA as Jesus Christ.
Speaking of Biblical times, this brings our attention to the intentionally lost book of Q (the Gospel of Q) which are the direct teachings of Jesus Christ believed to be one of the original gospels. The book Q consists of 6236 verses (6 + 2 + 3 + 6) = 17. This is very similar to the intentional exclusion of the Book of Enoch or the Gospel of Mary Magdalene from the Bible and the removal and reinstallation of the book of Revelation. The reason the Q gospel and many other books with hidden teachings were intentionally removed from the Bible is due to the constant Freemasonic Illuminati Jesuit (Vatican) editing, mistranslating, and restructuring of the Bible. This is to hide specific spiritual teachings relating to ascension, karmic debt, natural cures/remedies, reincarnation, the third eye (pineal gland), vibrational frequency, etc. where the Bible was censored from 777 (angel number) original books all the way down to 66 books (their favorite Luciferian number of course). Many people hid these sacred spiritual books to preserve for future generations since they were forbidden from the modern 1611 Edition King James Freemason Bible.
I like how you want to disprove but linked nothing. So your words are just here-say right now, just as you accused me, hypocrite. 😂😂
Disprove the Ge’ez Bible being the oldest Complete Bible on Earth. 800 years older than any other Bible. Only the Dead Sea Scrolls themselves come close. Constantine formulated the Bible to be put together and the 2 Council’s of Nicaea removed the apocryphal texts and edited the Bible. The Council of Hippo also edited as they saw fit for canon. That means editing and removing son!
You originally asked me who edited the Bible? You helped me prove your first question. That sure as sh1t it was edited away from thee original scriptures as INTENDED by God himself by man. Thank you for helping me prove I was correct in that.
Now you clearly failed to recognize how old the Book of Enoch is. Why is it found in both the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Ge’ez Bible if it is not original canon. And the people that decided it wasn’t original canon did so after AD 700?! When before it was F-ing included in the oldest Bibles known, besides what the Vatican currently hides?
Yeah you go figure that out genius. I’ll wait here for your next dance around the Awakening Truth of what is original and what isn’t. 😉 I suppose the Sumerian texts are also not true because you and some other 7th century man controlled council said so.
But the real point in any of this which you helped me prove I was correct again, was both biblical books and scriptures were factually edited and altered from their original context and scripture as they were originally written. And all due to linguistic changes and for power, religious narrative control! And God nor Christ EVER Intended for man to fall so low as to edit His Words.
So again thank you for assisting me in proving my original point back to you Anon. Let’s play again sometime. 😁
I already disproved your claims. Nowhere in either Council of Nicea were the cannons of scripture discussed. You can't prove that so you went on a histrionic rant. You're one of those people so far into their own delusion you can't even understand basic epistemology. Do you know what epistemology even means without looking it up? You should be embarrassed for how wilfully ignorant you are.
Again, where in either council of Nicea did they discuss the canon of scripture? What's your primary source for your claim? I linked you to sources discussing your fake claim, that it's an often repeated claim by fools who didn't actually do any research aside from watching YouTube. Da Vinci Code tier brainlets. Constantine has nothing to do with the canon of scripture. The texts were not edited since we have original manuscripts verifying this.
Since you're allergic to looking at the actual facts..
Here's the first council of Nicea:
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3801.htm
And here's the second council of Nicea:
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3819.htm
Show me where they removed books.
What do you mean oldest complete Bible? Who defines "complete"?
The Codex Sinaiticus is the oldest Bible which includes the New Testament.
The Church determines the canon because it is infallible, 1 Timothy 3:15. The canon was decided in 384 AD, Council of Hippo. You're wilfully ignorant, proclaiming the canon was formed in the 7th century when it was formed in the 4th. Only books which were verified or had strong indications of being written by Prophets/Apostles were included.
https://learningfromchrist.com/the-council-of-hippo/
Why wouldn't you use the Septuagint which Christ and the Apostles quotes from? The Book of Enoch isn't written by Enoch, that's why it's not included. Is it that hard for you to understand what a pseudo author is?
At the end of the day, you've been hoodwinked since your claims such as the Nicean councils determining the canon of scripture is easily disproven. You believe Enoch is written by Enoch and yet it references texts written thousands of years after Enoch existed. Lay off the drugs.
Not on drugs. Everything you’re attempting to lay out is debatable. Why? Because the info varies from scholar to scholar. And don’t start verbally attacking me like a Liberatard. We are better than that Anon. Let’s keep this civil please. I have not verbally assaulted you, I am just debating and disagreeing with you. That’s what debate is.
I see you finally laid out a source. Good. That means you did some research on your own instead of blindly asking again. That’s what I was hoping. Now your sources still don’t disprove what I said. It actually says nothing about the other apocryphal or non-canon texts at all. It just lays out who they were and where they were referenced by the church/s. So there is that.
Nor did you disprove the Bible or prior scriptures were not linguistically edited over time or had BOOKS REMOVED! I linked a full 4-hour video on the Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin linguistics and editing of the KJV leading to the NIV of Church’s Council’s and Pope’s in control of what would become The Vatican. And you have yet to disprove me, since the whole scholarly world knows It Was Clearly Done!
And how is it that Enoch is in all of the oldest Bibles, and Christ himself references Enoch? How does Enoch appear in the Sumerian Kings List/Text as a scribe? Why is Enoch listed as Noah’s great grandfather?
Please attempt to disprove how Enoch is not a true book of the Bible when it originally was per thee oldest Non-Church/Council controlled or edited scriptures of the Ge’ez Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls?!
https://www.bibleblender.com/2011/bible-stories/old-testament/genesis/from-adam-to-noah-genealogy-genesis-5-1-5-32
https://lovinglantern.com/jesus-quotes-book-enoch.html#Lessons_and_insights_from_the_Book_of_Enoch
https://cautivoestrella.org/en/jesus-quotes-book-of-enoch/
I commend you for trying Anon. But the Church certainly did more damage than you think to the Bible’s Originally Intended Format. Or else you and I, nor millions of other scholars would be having identical debates in their Awakening over ancient religious texts and beliefs. WWG1WGA