BISHOPS ? What are they, where they came from?

it is time to rethink the way faithful treat these species as kings & gods. This is very strongly prevalent among Catholics more than any other denominations. The reason for the oligarchy can be traced back to you the faithful. You want to limit the powers of the bishops- you have to treat them like humans not like incarnates. Some of you are the first ones to run to the bishop and kiss his feet or what ever. Reformation has to come from you. Then educate the rest that these men are only community leaders; above all they are humans just like you.

The apostolic tradition and the claim that the bishops got priesthood from Moses and Jesus is a fabricated false story. Even if the story is true/ history- then the bishops are simply priests- nothing more. They are not kings. Vol-3 of A BIBLE FOR THE MILLENNIUM [in print] explains this in detail. Here are few high- lights.
The claim that god gave priestly powers to Moses and Aaron has no credibility. It is only a belief. God won't select a small group of people as his chosen ones.[ same style & practices were forced on Indians by Brahmins] Most of the books of the old testament was written by a group of scribes. They were the Babylonian returns. Babylonians took the Jerusalem priests as captives. They were forced to do hard labor, mostly making bricks for the Babylonian temple. Jerusalem priests were not Israelite. They were the rulers of 'Salom' and royal priests of 'Zadok god'- the present Jerusalem area. Israelites worshiped different gods and never accepted the god Zadok. The Jerusalem priests has no lineage to Moses or Aaron. They kicked Mosaic priests out by political plots and claimed to be decedents of Aaron to claim authority on the Isralites. But it was never successful. The Zealots fought against them. The majority of Isralites belonged to a radical group known as ' Essenes'. They are not mentioned in any bible. Because the bible was written by anti- essenes -the Jerusalem priests. From this itself we can see how untruthful is bible. The Eessenes hated the Jerusalem priests and they moved out to desert regions. The Dead sea scrolls bible is their product. Prophet Isaiah, John the baptist and Jesus for some time belonged to this group. Isaiah 40: narrates about preparing a way of the lord in the wilderness- it is about the Essenes settling in the desert. Mark Ch:1, in New testament played good with the story and fabricated it as a prophecy about the coming of Jesus or John. Again this is one of many many examples how New testament authors fabricated the life and teachings of Jesus to fit their needs. The O. Testament itself is a fabrication and N. testament is another fabrication from the old testament fabrication. How much truth and history in both ?
John the Baptist was not an ordained priest and he never came near the temple. He was far in the wilderness. John never ordained Jesus and Jesus and John never sacrificed in the temple. And Jesus; never, never ordained disciples. Take this story for granted ? If John's father sacrificed in Jerusalem temple- he must be a Zadock priest. They have nothing to do with Moses. Now where did this apostolic throne, ordination, continuity, red royal clothes come from. Definitely not from Jesus because Jesus had none of these. Some claim that it is the tradition of the church. Then ok. Where did tradition originate- definitely from those who make a living out of it. Some claim it is written in the 'acts of the apostles. And H. spirit came down and gave power to the apostles. But in the same book it is written: there was a large crowd and people from all the known world was there. Many places in the global map is not mentioned in the list of people gathered there. This shows the limited knowledge of the author. There is no reason for people from all those places to gather in Jerusalem on a Jewish festival. Jerusalem was under Roman rule and Judaism was prohibited. Jews were not allowed to gather, their laws were prohibited too. These are facts and history. The book- acts of apostles was written around 200 CE. The incidents happened 30CE. How much accuracy there can be after 170 years? It is a fabricated book to fit the need of the time. This was a time- there were many 'Jesus movements' like the political parties of India. Every one claimed independence and supremacy. 'Acts' was written to bring all these mushroom parties under the control of the elder of Rome. The mission was not successful. They were all snakes, they all wanted to swallow the other. The towns with more political power claimed power over the 'gatherings' of neighboring regions. They all fought like cats and dogs. Even Constantine's empire was in danger due to the fight between the churches and leaders of Jesus. Finally he summoned the synod of Nieccea to bring them to peace. Emperor, a pagan himself chaired the synod. Those who opposed, even though they were saying the truth, had to flee.
The fight was there even from the time of the apostles. Paul's letters, even though was rewritten & corrected several times to fit the need of the political agenda; states that, Paul was in constant fight with the rest of the apostles especially with peter.- [see Galatians] But Acts. States Paul and Peter were friends. The rest of all narration in Acts is false and fabricated. Now where did this bishops got the power, the power they claim they have? Now think ! Remember the Priests of the most high god Zadock: they were the kings of the land of Jerusalem. They made alliance with rulers of Judea and later with Romans and retained priestly rights until the destruction of Jerusalem temple in CE 70. The temple is gone and there is no sacrifice. Where did these unemployed priests end up? They sneaked in to the fighting Jesus groups and transformed them into 'churchanity'. The episode is enacted in different casts and stages even now- claiming themselves as priests, kings and prophets. Who is the subject- the poor, idiotic faithful. As long as there are simpletons, slaves and devotees, their kingdom will go on !
andrewsmillnneiumbible@gmail.com