Last Notes
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?’"
In the original Hebrew OT, ruach (usually translated “spirit”) often literally means a physical transport device — a flying vehicle of the Elohim.
It lifts prophets like Ezekiel and Elijah, makes noise, arrives from specific directions, and carries people through the air.
(Note: Not every use is a vehicle — context tells you when it’s the concrete machine vs. wind/breath.)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
Another one of the most misused “prophecies” about Jesus is Micah 5:2 (“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small… out of you will come a ruler over Israel”).
The reality is, in context, this is about a Davidic military leader who would arise during the Assyrian crisis to deliver Israel, defeat their enemies, and bring peace and security to the land (Micah 5:4-6).
Jesus never fulfilled this. He brought no national deliverance, no victory over Israel’s oppressors, and no peace.
The “from ancient days” phrase simply refers to the Davidic dynasty, not literal pre-existence.
Plain Hebrew context > Christian eisegesis.
When you truly understand that the Father Jesus revealed is not YHWH, but the unknown, wholly Good God, real freedom begins.
You are no longer chained to the creator’s Law, fear, guilt, or wrath.
You are liberated into the pure mercy, grace, and love of the Father who was hidden until Jesus made Him known.
This is the freedom of the Gospel: no longer slaves to the old system, but beloved children of the Good Father.
In the Ancient Near East, YHWH wasn’t the abstract, all-loving “God” of later theology.
The original Hebrew Bible presents him as a very physical, wrathful Elohim — one of a group of powerful beings who commands, fights, gets jealous, and walks among humans. He sits on a massive throne, descends in smoke and fire, and deploys hybrid monsters (seraphim = burning flying serpents) as his hitmen.
YHWH literally sends seraphim-snakes to massacre his own people in the desert for complaining (Numbers 21), then offers a bronze serpent for “protection”… if they kiss the ring.
This is not metaphor. The ANE saw YHWH as a real, territorial commander with a monstrous entourage — angry, physical, and extremely dangerous when disobeyed.
The “pretend it’s true” reading hits different.
Jesus, in the first NT, gives this beautiful promise of the Good Father:
“So I tell you: Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened to you. Is there any father among you who, if his son asks for a fish, would give him a snake instead?”
(Evangelion, cf. Luke 11:9, 11)
Yet the God of Israel did exactly that.
When the Israelites cried out for meat and remembered the fish they ate in Egypt, they complained against Yahweh. In response, he sent poisonous snakes among them, and many died (Numbers 11:4–5; 21:5–6).
Israel was repeatedly called Yahweh’s “son.”
So when Jesus contrasts the loving Father who gives good gifts with a father who would give serpents instead of fish, he is clearly distinguishing the Good Father from Yahweh, the God of Israel.
YHWH declares the Law and the Prophets to be permanent and unbreakable:
“You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it…” (Deuteronomy 4:2)
In the original Evangelion (the first NT), Jesus declares the opposite:
“The Law and the Prophets were until John. Since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone is pressing into it. But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of my words to fail.” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 16:16)
Note the difference: The later canonical Luke changes the ending to “than for one stroke of the Law to fail” — creating an obvious contradiction with the previous verse.
The first Gospel is consistent: the old system had a clear end date. The canonical version was edited to blur that break and force continuity with YHWH’s Law.
The Good Father brought something radically new.
Jesus warns of the unforgivable sin:
“Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven.”
(Luke 12:10)
This warning occurs right after the scribes and Pharisees accuse Jesus of casting out demons by the power of Beelzebul, the “prince of demons.” In other words, they are deliberately attributing the miraculous works of the Good Father — the healings, deliverances, and signs of the kingdom — to Satan.
The warning is especially serious because, in the Gospel, the “god of this world” (YHWH) is revealed as the adversarial power that rules the present age. Jesus came precisely to deliver humanity from this god’s domain. To call the clear works of the gracious Father “demonic” or “of Satan” is to blaspheme the Holy Spirit — and that sin, Jesus says, will not be forgiven.
This sharp distinction between the Good Father and the god of this world runs throughout the original Gospel. The unforgivable sin is not a vague spiritual offense — it is the refusal to recognize the Father’s mercy when it stands directly in front of you.
One of the most misused “prophecies” about Jesus is Isaiah 7:14 (“Behold, a virgin shall conceive”).
However, the Hebrew says “almah” (young woman), not virgin. It was a short-term sign to King Ahaz in 735 BCE — before the child was even a few years old, the two enemy kings would be gone.
Completely fulfilled in Isaiah’s time.
It's not about Jesus 700 years later.
What Jesus taught us about the Father’s Kingdom and how we are to live is clear and sufficient in the first NT.
He proclaimed the good news of the kingdom of God (Luke 4:43), sent His disciples to announce it (Luke 9:2), and declared that the kingdom had come upon people through His works (Luke 11:20). He taught that the kingdom does not come with visible signs or spectacle, but is already within you (Luke 17:20–21). It grows quietly like a mustard seed (Luke 13:18–19) and works silently like leaven (Luke 13:20–21).
Rather than worrying about the future, Jesus gave this direct command:
“Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat, or about your body, what you will wear.” (Luke 12:22)
He pointed to the Father’s care for the birds and the lilies, and urged us instead to seek His kingdom — trusting that all our material needs will be provided (Luke 12:24–31).
Above all, Jesus commanded us to live in radical love and mercy:
“Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, and pray for those who mistreat you.” (Luke 6:27–28)
He summarised it with the Golden Rule:
“Do to others as you would have them do to you.” (Luke 6:31)
And He set the highest standard:
“Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.” (Luke 6:36)
This is the simple, yet powerful, way of life Jesus revealed in the first NT — focus on the Father’s kingdom, trust instead of anxiety, and unconditional love and mercy toward all.
The Judaizers would have you believe the Law is eternal.
But in the first NT (Marcion’s Evangelion), Jesus says:
“The Law and the Prophets were until John. Since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone is pressing into it. But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of my words to fail.”
— Luke 16:16–17 (The Very First Bible p. 45 / Testamentum p. 89 / True Testament p. 54)
Compare that to the later canonical version, which changes the ending to:
“…than for one dot of the Law to become void.”
Jason BeDuhn points out the obvious contradiction: if the Law ended with John (v. 16), how can Jesus immediately say not one stroke of the Law will pass away (v. 17)?
The first NT makes perfect sense. The later “Judaized” version creates an internal contradiction.
Another one of the most misused “prophecies” about Jesus is Isaiah 53 (“Suffering Servant”).
Isaiah 53 is not about Jesus. In context (Isaiah 41–53), the “Suffering Servant” is explicitly Israel (see Isa 41:8, 44:1, 49:3, 49:5–6). The chapter describes Israel’s national suffering in exile, the nations’ later shock at Israel’s restoration, and Israel’s vindication — a collective suffering-and-redemption motif, not an individual dying Messiah who atones for the world’s sins.
The Christian reading is classic eisegesis that ignores the clear identification in the Hebrew text itself.
I’ve got huge respect for Mike Wingerii and his ongoing efforts to expose corruption and cover-up culture in the Church, and for holding people’s feet to the fire.
We may disagree on the identity of YHWH, but the work he’s doing matters. Light really is the best disinfectant.
“For no good tree bears bad fruit, nor again does a bad tree bear good fruit, for each tree is known by its own fruit. For figs are not gathered from thornbushes, nor are grapes picked from a bramble bush. The good person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure produces evil, for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 6:43–45)
Our words and actions reveal the true condition of our heart. May we cultivate a good heart that naturally bears the good fruit of the kingdom.
YHWH’s prophet Elijah calls down fire from heaven to consume two captains and their companies of soldiers (2 Kings 1:9–12).
In the Evangelion, when James and John want to call down fire on a Samaritan village that rejected them, Christ sharply rebukes them: “You do not know what spirit you are of” (Evangelion G 9:55; cf. Luke 9:55).
YHWH destroys with fire.
The Father forbids even the desire for destructive violence.
Why am I labeled a “hater of Jews” for simply noting that YHWH’s floods, plagues, jealousy and conquests in the OT clash with Jesus’ merciful Father who teaches “love your enemies”?
I critique only the character of YHWH — never Jews as a people.
Yet I’m never called a hater of Christians or Jesus.
The instant jump to “antisemite” is telling: even the accusers treat YHWH as the God of Israel, not Jesus’ Father.
I believe the recent surge in attacks on the concept of “other gods [Elohim]” in the Divine Council is designed to stop people realising that YHWH is not the only Elohim. This opens the door to the understanding that the Father of Jesus is not YHWH.
As Jesus taught, simply judge the fruit. Compare the character, actions, and words of YHWH with those of Jesus and His Father.
Without acknowledging other Elohim, you’re left having to defend the jealous, narcissistic, and wrathful behaviour of YHWH simply because “he has to be Jesus’ Father—he’s the only God!” #nevent1q…m9d7
This is the “god” who curses His people with cannibalism in siege and starves mothers into devouring their babies.
"See, Yahweh, and take note! With whom have you dealt thus? Should women eat their young children of tender care? Should priest and prophet be slain in the sanctuary of the Lord?" (Lam 2:20)
The Father of Jesus never does such horrors.
Two different gods.
This is the true face of YHWH: jealous, wrathful, destroyer of His own children.
"You have summoned my horror from all around, as if for a feast day; no one on the day of Yahweh’s anger is a fugitive and a survivor; whoever I have cared for and reared, my enemy has destroyed." (Lam 2:22)
The Father of Jesus is not this god.
Christians are losing their minds over the meaning of Elohim as God/gods—why is this happening all of a sudden en masse?
The word should never have been translated and just left alone.
I find it incredibly curious (and telling) that a demon was hanging out among YHWH's temple.
In the synagogue there was a man possessed by a demon, and he suddenly shouted out in a loud voice, “What do you want with us, Jesus? Did you come here to destroy us? I know who you are — the holy one of God!” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 4:33–34)
My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 8:21)
- JESUS
If you believe the phenomenon of aliens (UFOs, Greys, Reptilians, Insectilians) are all demons, what's your logical reasoning and evidence for this conclusion?
Your family, friends, co-workers, the stranger that you encounter - do they know about the good news of His Kingdom?
And when it was day, he departed and went into a desolate place. And the people sought him and came to him, and would have kept him from leaving them, but he said to them, “I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God to the other towns as well; for I was sent for this purpose.” (Evangelion, cf. Luke 4:42–43)
Go forth boldly with the same urgent mission—proclaim the kingdom wherever the Father sends you, for this is why Christ came.
Everyone knew YHWH — the loud, jealous, wrathful deity who would smite people with fire in a moment’s notice. No one knew Jesus’ Father until He revealed Him.
“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” (Col 1:15)
“All things have been handed over to me by my Father; and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, or who the Father is except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.” (Lk 10:22)
Jesus is the antithesis of YHWH.
“Lord, if you will, you can make me clean.” And Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him, saying, “I will; be clean.” And immediately the leprosy left him. (Evangelion, cf. Luke 5:12–13)
Come to Jesus with the leper’s humble faith—He is both willing and able.
Installed the Jumble macOS app, all things working great!