This is not my video — but it clearly shows the ERROR of false teachers who presume to know much, but prove by their words how foolish they are.
This one in particular, I have to say, is perfectly typifying whom John referred to as,
[Rev 2:9 KJV] 9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and [I know] the blasphemy of *them which say they are Jews* , and *are not* , but [are] the synagogue of Satan.
[Rev 3:9 KJV] 9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which *say they are Jews* , and *are not* , but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.
This teacher boasts himself as a Rabbi, a jew, proclaims he is a believer in Yeshua (Jesus), but only recently decided that the Scriptures have been corrupted by the “lying pen of the scribes,” and that the REAL TRUTH has been HIDDEN all these years! Nevermind that thousands upon thousands have given their LIVES as MARTYRS so that he can have the very Scriptures in his hands that he now REJECTS. No, instead, He proclaims that YHVH never required animal sacrifices and that actually, the gospel is one where you can be saved if only you quit eating MEAT. In other words, it is a VEGETARIAN GOSPEL.
The moment this former brother stepped off the foundation, is the moment he cut HIMSELF off from the covenant. As such, he is no longer a “jew” in the eyes of God:
[Rom 2:28-29 KJV] 28 For he is *not a Jew* , which is one outwardly; neither [is that] circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 29 But he [is] a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision [is that] of the heart, in the spirit, [and] not in the letter; whose praise [is] not of men, but of God.
Circumcision of the heart is FAITH in the blood of the Lamb. Thus, a rejection of the blood sacrifices that first originated in the garden when God slew a (likely lamb) animal to make coats of skins for them, and which set in place (foundationally) the levitical sacrifices that followed, is to reject THE Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. His sacrifice is predicated upon the sacrifice “from the foundation of the world” as seen in that very first sacrifice in the garden, and every levitical sacrifice thereafter until the final sacrifice 2000 years ago.
What is he basing his denial of the veracity of the Scriptures upon? Upon other things, this:
[Jer 8:8-9 KJV] 8 How do ye say, We [are] wise, and the law of the LORD [is] with us? Lo, certainly in vain made he [it]; the pen of the scribes [is] in vain. 9 The wise [men] are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken: lo, they have rejected the word of the LORD; and what wisdom [is] in them?
His claim is that the “lying pen of the scribes” changed the Scriptures. No, the “lying pen of the scribes” Jeremiah refers to are the lying pens of those (like such false teachers as these) who write and teach their OWN interpretations that make VOID the Word of God. Scribes is the hebrew word caphar and as most understand, it refers to their “writing” or “narrating” something. But what they do not seem to understand is that also means “to TELL, TALK, RECOUNT, DECLARE”. Some false teachers apply this verse to the scribes (transcribers, writers) of the Torah, instead of understanding that these were scribes who were teachers of the ORAL LAW….which later became the Talmud. The Talmud is the “traditions of men” that Jesus rebuked for doing the very same thing that Jeremiah stated — making void the law of God (the Torah):
[Mat 23:13, 16-17, 24 KJV] 13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in [yourselves], neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in. … 16 Woe unto you, [ye] blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor! 17 [Ye] fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? … 24 [Ye] blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
Where is it, pray tell, in the Torah of God that declares “whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor” — ? Because this is the very DIRECT example Jesus gives of what the “scribes”, pharisees — blind guides — were teaching that was shutting up the kingdom of heaven by making void the law of God. Show me WHERE that is in Torah. One can’t, because it is not there. This commentary explains it this way:
Our Lord, here and in some following verses, condemns the subtle distinctions they made as to the sanctity of oaths—distinctions invented only to promote their own avaricious purposes.
which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing—He has incurred no debt. [sin]
but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple—meaning not the gold that adorned the temple itself, but the Corban, set apart for sacred uses (see Mt 15:5) he is a debtor!—that is, it is no longer his own, even though the necessities of the parent might require it. We know who the successors of these men are.
but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty—It should have been rendered, “he is a debtor,” as in Mt 23:16.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary, Matthew 23:16.
The SCRIBES in Jesus’ day are the very same brood of VIPERS in our day. They make VOID the law of God by their TRADITIONS…Their DOCTRINE…Their TEACHINGS. At no time did Jesus suggest the law (Torah) of God should not be obeyed. In fact, He told them to DO as the scribes and pharisees SAY, but NOT do as they do:
[Mat 23:2-3 KJV] 2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, [that] observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
In other words, every Shabbat, the scribes and Pharisees would sit in Moses’ seat and simply READ from the TORAH…the law of God. THIS, Jesus says, observe and do. But do not do as they do (their traditions), because it is their traditions that they practice that make void the law of God.
Let’s face it. These were LAWYERS. As a lawyer myself, I know probably better than most how lawyers support an argument by looking for ‘technicalities” and “loopholes” in the law. These lawyers then wrote their OWN LAWS that they then elevated above God’s law. In a sense, it is a book of “technicalities” that we know today as the Talmud. And today we have the same. Many today look for loopholes, for technicalities, to avoid having to deal with the law of God, the Torah. They prefer to strain every gnat that pretenses to absolve them of having to deal with it — and thereby swallow a CAMEL of lies in the process.
Yet the worst of these false teachers will use Jeremiah 8:8 to justify rejecting the veracity of the Scriptures altogether. Their claim now, is that the “scribes” who changed the Scriptures is the Catholic Church itself. Supposedly (as their faulty logic goes), the Catholic Church changed the “truth” of a vegetarian gospel into one based on blood sacrifice.
Notwithstanding the fact that had this been true, — the Catholic Church would have had little of any problem allowing their “new gospel” to go forth, don’t you think? There would be no Protestant Reformation, because after all, their “false” gospel of blood sacrifice is what they want people to believe, right?
One even considering this VEGETARIAN GOSPEL needs to understand the significance of what they are believing. It is not a problem to practice vegetarianism for purely personal or health reasons. However it IS a problem to try and push this agenda as a new “gospel” that can ONLY be believed, if one can be convinced (deceived) into believing the Scriptures have been corrupted. This “new gospel” is simply a BURDEN they place upon the unwary:
[Mat 23:4 KJV] 4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay [them] on men’s shoulders; but they [themselves] will not move them with one of their fingers.
This was never more apparent than the experience of a sister in Christ who was almost deceived by this false teacher. You can hear her testimony of coming out from that deception in the first video at the conclusion of this article.
To believe this false gospel, necessarily follows with a rejection of Paul as an apostle of Christ. See: http://www.essene.org/Ancient_Essenes.htm ), and thus a rejection of the New Testament. To believe this false gospel, necessarily follows with a rejection of the requirement of animal sacrifices, and thus a rejection of the Old Testament. See Part III of Essene Humane Gospel that they so quickly lift up as “THE” Truth, while continually saying that the Bible is corrupted and cannot be trusted. See the section in “Essene Humane Gospel” titled *BLOOD AND SACRIFICES are VAIN and DO NOT TAKE AWAY SIN* (yes, you read that correctly) here: http://www.essene.com/TheEsseneHumaneGospel/The_Essene_Humane_Gospel_Of_Christ_Part_3.html
When will they ever understand that to say Jesus never ate meat is to say HE SINNED. Yes, you heard me, right. To say Jesus never ate meat is to say that Jesus is a sinner. How? For sin is the transgression of the law, the Torah, and Jesus walked in Torah PERFECTLY. This same Scriptures that they claim the “lying pen of the scribes” corrupted, is the same Scriptures that prophesied of HIM, INCLUDING the animal sacrifices. And before He laid down His life, HE ALSO kept the feasts, particularly, the Passover.
In Exodus 12:5-8, we read that all the Jews were to take a Passover lamb, kill it on the 14th day of the first month and **“eat the flesh** on that night; roasted in fire, with unleavened bread and with bitter herbs.” In the New Testament, we see Jesus arranging this *very procedure* with His apostles. Luke 22:7-8 states, “Then came the Day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover must be killed. And He [Jesus] sent Peter and John, saying, ‘Go and prepare the Passover for us, *that we may eat* .’” This was just one of the many animal sacrifices that they ate on a regular basis as prescribed by His law.
The New Testament makes it clear that killing and eating animals designated as clean (i.e., “food”) is perfectly acceptable to God. Yet in 1 Timothy 4:1-4 the Holy Spirit foretold that some were going to depart from teaching the truth and were going to command people to,
“abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.”
Notice that in this passage, the sense in which God calls animals “good” is the fact that they are good for *food* .
For the listeners of false teachers proclaiming this false gospel, please be careful that you be not swayed by what “seems” right and pleasing to the ears, but leads to falling away from the faith once delivered (it need not be “delivered” again via a “new” gospel) and which puts you in BONDAGE to DOCTRINES OF MEN, notably, the false teacher bringing you this “new gospel” because now instead of the Scriptures being your plumbline, you must go to THEM to know the Truth. This is a lie. Do not believe it.
So where exactly did this “Essene Humane Gospel” come from? I hope you are sitting down for this. For you will not believe how easily one will step off the sure foundation to sink in quicksand.
First, let’s establish where THEY claim the “Essene Humane Gospel” originated from:
“…Richard Ouseley and Frank J. Mucci, who is the founder of the Edenite Society, the publisher of the Humane Gospel of Jesus — which is an English translation of the Gospel of the Holy Twelve, translated by Ouseley of what purports to be the original Gospels, preserved by the Essenes, a religious sect whose members lived in the Dead Sea area.”
The Spiritual and Ethical Dimension of Vegetarianism, p. 48., quoting Vegetarianism and the World Religions, p. 36. Note that this author is obviously NOT a Christian, but rather, is involved in Hinduism and the associate editor of the magazine for the Hare Krishna movement.
At any rate, what is related here is a direct connection between the “Essene Humane Gospel” and the “Gospel of the Holy Twelve”, and in fact, claiming them to be one and the same. So now let us look at where this “Gospel of the Holy Twelve” came from. First, let’s look at what their own proponents have to say about this “Gospel of the Holy Twelve”. This is a quote from vegetarian Keith Akers, concerning the surfacing of this “Strange New Gospel”:
In the late nineteenth century, G. J. R. Ouseley published “The Gospel of the Holy Twelve.” It has been reprinted at various times since then, sometimes without Ouseley’s name, and sometimes without his “Explanatory Preface.” I first came across it in the 1980’s in a book titled “The Humane Gospel of Jesus.” It is said to have been “preserved in one of the Monasteries of the Buddhist monks in Tibet, where it was hidden by some of the Essene community.” It condemns meat-eating, alcohol, animal sacrifice, and recommends vegetarianism, “daily ablutions,” and community of goods.
We have here some of the same themes raised in Notovitch’s book — mostly, the hiding of the manuscript in Tibet, which at least in imagination seems to be a favorite place for ancient writers to hide manuscripts. Moreover, there apparently really was an ancient gospel called “The Gospel of the Twelve” which was mentioned by Origen. This is briefly mentioned in The Apocryphal New Testament (London: Oxford University Press, 1924) on page 10.
But is it really derived from an Aramaic text, found in a monastery in Tibet? After encountering Notovitch’s fraud, we should certainly be suspicious of any works claiming to have been found in Tibet. First of all, there are numerous problems with the work. It quotes from all four of the gospels and from the letters of Paul; it contains references to rituals from the later church, and to the “trinity” (a word that never occurs in the New Testament); it also contains references to such non-Biblical species as cats, rabbits, and an ape. And in fact, the real origin of the work is not hidden very far. In an early twentieth century edition published in London, an “Explanatory Preface” precedes the text. Ouseley’s name has been removed, and the Preface is signed “The Editors of the Gospel of the Holy Twelve” (though evidently a similar explanation appeared in earlier English-language versions of the book, with Ouseley’s name at the bottom). Here is part of what this Preface says:
Their “Gospel of the Holy Twelve” was communicated to the Editors, in numerous fragments at different times, by Emmanuel Swedenborg, Anna Kingsford, Edward Maitland, and a priest of the former century, giving his name as Placidus, of the Franciscan Order, afterwards a Carmelite. By them it was translated from the original, and given to the Editors in the flesh, to be supplemented in their proper places, where indicated, from the “Four Gospels” (A. V.) revised where necessary by the same.
To this explanation, the Editors cannot add, nor from it take away. By the Divine Spirit was the Gospel communicated to the four above mentioned, and by them translated, and given to the writers; not in seance rooms (where too often resort the idle, the frivolous and the curious, attracting spirits similar to themselves, rather than the good), but “in dreams and visions of the night,” and by direct guidance, has God instructed them by chosen instruments; and now they give it to the world, that some may be wiser unto Salvation, while those who reject it, remain in their blindness, till they will to see.
From this passage, it is clear that no manuscript in Aramaic has ever been seen, or is claimed to have been seen, by Rev. Ouseley. Rather, it is Swedenborg, Maitland, Kingsford, and Placidus (all having died, some very recently, by the time Ouseley received this work) who received the gospel, and who simultaneously translated it into English, and then communicated this to Ouseley and his associates in some miraculous manner. So whenever and however Ouseley received it, it was already in English. Presumably, although this information is not spelled out, the fact that the manuscript is in Tibet in some monastery was also communicated to them by Swedenborg, Maitland, Kingsford, and Placidus. No one has every discovered any such manuscript, in Aramaic or any other language, in any Tibetan monastery.
However, to make things more interesting, there are several versions of this gospel which are circulating without Ouseley’s “Explanatory Preface.” This has left some people are under the impression that this is a text which really was originally found in Tibet and translated from the Aramaic. In fact, in Europe there are German and Swedish editions of this work which leave the impression that Ouseley actually did discover the manuscript during a trip to Tibet in 1881. Never mind that Ouseley himself never claimed to have gone to Tibet, and in fact was fairly open about the process by which he received it, making it clear that this is in fact a “channeled” work. Annie Besant, one of the leaders of the Theosophical movement, understood the situation quite well and gave the book a rather negative review, describing its spiritualist sources and calling it “a strange book.”
So even they, proponents of vegetarianism, understand that this “Gospel of the Holy Twelve”, the “Essene Humane Gospel” is a fraud — that it is a channeled work of demonic origin.
Let’s look at another critical review:
On “The Gospel of the Holy Twelve”A reader requested that I take a look at a document entitled The Gospel of the Holy Twelve, which is being promulgated on various websites as a viable alternative view of Jesus. The name associated with this document is Gideon Jasper Ouseley, although curiously, his name appears nowhere on the book copy I received via interlibrary loan.
The book begins with some rather audacious claims. It tells us that a picture of Jesus found in the prefatory material was “copied from the portrait carved on an emerald by order of Tiberius Caesar” which was passed down via the Turks to Pope Innocent VIII. It also tells us of a letter that is “now in the possession of Lord Kelly and in his library,” which was written by a Roman official and goes into extensive detail describing Jesus’ physical appearance.
Would any Roman official had time for such things? No, not really.
Of course by now you should be suspicious. We don’t hear about that emerald, for example, on the National Geographic specials, or in Biblical Archaeology Review. What about the text of this Gospel itself?
The text of this “Gospel” is what appears to be a mix of episodes from the four canonical Gospels, in some places completely unchanged, or changed in ways of little significance. In other places, there are significant changes — the virgin conception is replaced with Jesus as physical son of Joseph; Jesus is said to have learned magical arts in Egypt and traveled to India and Persia, where he also performed healing miracles; God is called our “Parent in Heaven,” and a fourth temptation is added in the desert: Jesus is presented with a beautiful woman, whose affections he refuses.
But the biggest difference overall is a thematic one:
- Elizabeth is told that John the Baptist “shall neither eat flesh meats, nor drink strong drink.”
- Mary is told not to eat meat during her pregnancy.
- The magi are in such a hurry to find Jesus that they neglect to attend to their thirsty camels. The star of Bethlehem disappears from their sight until they give their camels rest and water.
- Jesus rebukes a man who beats his horse, and later rebukes a crowd of men who torment a cat. When one of the men gets defiant about it, Jesus causes his arm to wither. The next day the man returns admitting his sin, and is healed.
- In another instance Jesus rebukes a man for beating his camel, asking, “Wherefore beatest thou thy brother?” At this, “the camel knew Jesus, having felt the love of God in him.”
- Jesus proclaims that he has come to end the temple sacrifices, and after his resurrection, goes to the temple and puts an end to the sacrifices with a replay of the temple cleansing episode.
- There is no Passover lamb at the Last Supper; Judas Iscariot asks why there isn’t any meat to eat.
That’s the thematic difference: Jesus now supports vegetarianism and has an agenda against animal cruelty.
Now let me make this much clear: I have little doubt that animal cruelty falls in line on the list of sins for which men will be judged. The pledge of dominion over the earth given in Genesis assumes our responsible stewardship. In addition, as one who has adopted a rescue animal (a very sweet poodle) I put my money where my mouth is on these issues.
But it is also clear that this “Gospel” is inauthentic. The evidence for authenticity is extremely poor: We are told that it is derived from “one of the most ancient and complete of early Christian fragments, preserved by one of the monasteries of the Buddhist monks in Thibet, where it was hidden by some of the Essene community for safety from the hands of corrupters…”
But don’t plan that trip to Tibet just yet for a look, or for the purpose of verification such as carbon dating: The editors (among them, Emmanuel Swedenborg) didn’t actually see this document — it was given to them “By the Divine Spirit of the Gospel” as a revelation of “a higher Christianity.”
By next week sixty different groups could make a claim just as verifiable, promulgating a Jesus supporting the political venture of your choice. But it is clear from comments about this “Gospel” on the Internet that some have accepted it as a genuine record.
But the chief of all his writings was, “The Gospel of the Holy Twelve”, which teaches Christian Pantheism: “By involution and evolution shall the salvation of all the world be accomplished; by the descent of Spirit into matter, and the Ascent of matter into Spirit, through the ages”. It was first published by instalments in the columns of The Lindsey & Lincolnshire Star. These were concluded in the early part of 1900, and at the close of the following year, the First Edition was published, and further Editions followed. In 1903 a “revised and enlarged” Edition appears to have been published, and in 1904 a “New and Complete Edition” was published, the last during Rev. Ouseley’s lifetime. (4)
This Gospel Rev. Ouseley referred to variously as “The Gospel of the Hebrews”, “The Nazarene Gospel”, “The Gospel of the Nazarites”, “The Essene Gospel”, “The Gospel of the Twelve”, “The Gospel of the Holy Twelve” (as in title), “The Gospel of the Perfect Life” (as in sub-title): “The Original and Complete Gospel of the Holy Christ”, and by other descriptions. It was received by him under inspiration “In dreams and visions of the night”, and in “Communications”. It was a translation of an original Aramaic document purporting to be a reconstruction and revision of the Gospel narrative. Some portions of it were included in Palingenesia, wherein they were described as “Fragments from the Gospel of the Perfect Life”, which had been presented to him (Rev. Ouseley) (5), “in dreams and visions of the night”, when “a lectern seemed to appear before him with certain manuscripts thereon, and as it revolved he read the papers then presented to him. In the morning he noted what he had read, whether it came to his memory all at once or gradually, but generally within the day. ….He said he received the translation of the Gospel from the Spirit, that is, by inspiration.
In his Preface thereto, Rev. Ouseley claims that The Gospel of the Holy Twelve as received by him was a translation of “one of the most ancient and complete of early Christian fragments”, written in Aramaic, and “used in the first Christian Church in Jerusalem”, and that this was “the original Gospel from which the four were more or less copied, with numerous variations and important omissions”. The translation, he says, was communicated to him ” in numerous fragments at different times, by Emmanuel Swedenborg, Anna Kingsford, Edward Maitland, and a priest of a former century giving his name as Placidus, of the Franciscan Order, afterwards a Carmelite”, who were the translators thereof (8)
It (the translation) was given in the main by Edward Maitland and Anna Kingsford, and Swedenborg in part, and a priest named Placidus (Franciscan), and from communications: and I wish to state this simply; and that it was not given in seance rooms, but in dreams and visions of the night”. In another: “That Swedenborg, and Maitland, and Anna Kingsford, and also a monk Placidus O.S.F., all combined to give it to me,..
Rev. Undy without questioning the mode of reception by Rev. Ouseley of the Gospel, questions whether the four persons named as the communicators thereof to him were the translators thereof into English, because of their ignorance of the Aramaic language. Such reasoning may, I think, be falacious. In the case of Anna Kingsford and Edward Maitland although neither of them as such knew Aramaic they both claimed to have been living at the time of and knew Jesus, in which case they both in that life must have known Aramaic.
Okay, that is well enough. The writer of this “gospel” was both deceived himself and if nothing else, outright lied about where he got this “gospel”. Simply claiming it was discovered and translated by him and these others — none of which knew Aramaic in the first place (later claiming to have known it by having reincarnated from that era and known Aramaic then) — and claiming it was found in Tibet when no one who has actually gone there to see it has found it, and claiming elsewhere to others that he ‘received’ it by channeling (obviously demons), — This is deception of the highest order.
It’s just a shame that one has to put all of this together just to show such followers of this false gospel that it is NOT TRUE. It’s a shame that you cannot simply say, THIS IS THE WAY — WALK YE IN IT, and rest in the Truth of the Scriptures we have, and that saints have died to get. It’s a shame that they go seeking after and actually take the time to READ such garbage, when they have the Word NEAR to them right now. Yet will they pick it up and read it? Will they study IT with as much faith as they seem to have in these false gospels written by the lying scribes?
If there remains any doubt, please see others who have something to say about the false gospel being promoted by one who says he is a jew, and proves by his words, he is not:
“Jesus was Not a Vegan” —
And for further understanding of why these blood denying doctrines are doctrines of devils, see the video, “Rebuke, Mark, and Avoid Blood Deniers” — ,
“The Blood Sacrifice IS the Issue..” —
And to calm your mind about his ERRONEOUS claim that the (protestant) KJV bible was corrupted by the Catholic Church, the Vatican, please see the Truth about that false statement here:
And see this:
(Note: I do not necessarily support the channels producing the above videos — these are shared for content and research only).
Stand on the foundation once delivered. Stay on the straight and narrow path. Do not wander off to the left or the right, seeking after these false gospels and false teachers. They will lead you to destruction.