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

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.)

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

“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’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.

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!” View quoted note →