A CHRISTIAN IDENTITY PASTOR AND HIS COLORFUL FRIENDS

[Kentucky]

Daniel Johns has joined the ranks of the Paul bashers in a recent Talkshoe broadcast. He said, "Nobody ever quoted Paul; Christ never quoted Paul did He? There is no second witness in the Bible... saying that Paul's writings should even be in the Bible... The only historical evidence we have is that he was at odds with most of the other Disciples, particularly Peter. Peter walked with Christ, Paul didn't... I'm not saying rip the writings of Paul out of your Bibles just yet, but why would you take something Paul wrote and give it more weight than something Christ Himself said?... Why do the Baal priests do that? Go read II Timothy sometime... we are in complete rebellion."

I edited some of the extraneous comments, which were irrelevant to his opinion of Paul. His comments can be heard on the 4-21-13 broadcast, starting at 57:20 for confirmation. http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/ta ... 929&cmd=tc


Mark

[Staropramen]

I'll bet if this "pastor" Dan guy became the Pope of the Stormfront CI forum Don Black would stop hiding it from public view, Lol!

[wmfinck]

He partners with women of dubious, or at least ambiguous, ethnic heritage. He cavorts with aliens and race-mixers. Now he bashes Paul. Any day now we will see him in a yarmulke, or perhaps horns will sprout from his skull..

[Fenwick]

It's odd that Paul bashing an universalism go so hand in hand. The only justification most CI give for their Paul bashing is that he supposedly tried to spread the gospel to racial aliens, but then these same people go on about how much they love aliens. It seems like they'd have an easier time just parroting the catholic line on Paul.



Of course, there is the other problem, that if Paul is taken seriously, you have to analyse his words properly, and the truth of his message shows through. Perhaps this is another bait and switch tactic, posing as the enemy of purported universalism, in order to create discord and throw nascent CI off the racial message?

[NicoChristian]

On the subject of Paul bashing, I noticed that those who reject Paul don't usually stop there. After eliminating Paul's writings (about 50% of the New Testament) they go on to even eliminate the Gospels and the entire New Testament. My friend who died apparently had taken that path. They ended up believing that it was enough to simply follow the Law to be saved. As I was told he repented before he died and died in the Messiah, but it shows that once you start eliminating books from the Bible it doesn't stop with one or two. Next thing you know you've got a Bible that is one or two pages thick. The Bible canon was decided by men who were closer to Christ than any of us and probably by men who had sound judgement. I don't think we should be so quick to get rid of biblical books, Esther excluded of course.

[SwordBrethren]

Daniel Johns has joined the ranks of the Paul bashers in a recent Talkshoe broadcast. He said, "Nobody ever quoted Paul; Christ never quoted Paul did He? There is no second witness in the Bible... saying that Paul's writings should even be in the Bible... The only historical evidence we have is that he was at odds with most of the other Disciples, particularly Peter. Peter walked with Christ, Paul didn't... I'm not saying rip the writings of Paul out of your Bibles just yet, but why would you take something Paul wrote and give it more weight than something Christ Himself said?... Why do the Baal priests do that? Go read II Timothy sometime... we are in complete rebellion."

I edited some of the extraneous comments, which were irrelevant to his opinion of Paul. His comments can be heard on the 4-21-13 broadcast, starting at 57:20 for confirmation. http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/ta ... 929&cmd=tc


Mark

I haven't heard the broadcast but based on the above quote I think people are being a bit extreme...


I've worked with Dan since January 2007, I know him to be a decent and solid guy.

Stating that Christ never quoted Paul could just be an off-hand remark made out of ignorance of the subject, it doesn't sound malicious... Also, strictly speaking, we wouldn't expect Christ to have ever quoted Paul because Christ never met Paul, He never knew Paul, and He died before Paul became an evangelist for Christ/Yahweh. It makes sense that Christ never quoted Paul so strictly speaking, Dan is right with that remark.


It also appears that Dan is not saying something such as "Paul contradicts Christ" but rather, "if there appears to be a contradiction, you have to go with Christ."

He didn't say there was a contradiction or that we have to toss Paul out. I think the best thing to do would be to direct Dan to the Paul Basher's series that Bill and I have been doing over the last year. Bill has done a great service for the Israelite community putting together the Paul Bashers series and I believe we should be trying to clear up misconceptions that some of our brethren might hold to or regard as valid doctrine, not bashing them for their mistakes.


Some people want to beat up on Dan and I don't understand why. He's not a vindictive or malicious person. If anything he's too forgiving, he forgave Joe November [aka Eli James] even though Mr. November led the charge to get the entire Israelite community to unite in refusal to recognize Dan as a Pastor and to excommunicate Dan from the faith community over that whole business with his ex-wife a few years ago.

Dan is an approachable man and if you have an issue with something he said, may have said, or you want him to clarify or explain, you can ask him or you can get on his program and discuss it with him.

[brucebohn]

I have no interest in "beating up on Dan", I intend to simply ignore him!
He has lost any credibility he might have had at one time....
As to him being malicious or vindictive, you must have also missed
his broadcast the week of the release of his Facebook photos, in
which he basically condemned William, Vandal & others as reprobates
and that he would not save them from drowning! He said he would
prefer the company of his "Mamzer" friends in his spiritual foxhole!
I have no problem with his first wife, it is the second that is disturbing.....
He preaches CI & racial hygeine, then spits in our fathers face, ALA Esau!
Yes, he is approachable allright, including the beast's of the field.
I do not beleive Paul contradicted Christ, but "Pastor" Dan certainly has...
All do respect Sword Brethren

[SwordBrethren]

I have no interest in "beating up on Dan", I intend to simply ignore him!
He has lost any credibility he might have had at one time....
As to him being malicious or vindictive, you must have also missed
his broadcast the week of the release of his Facebook photos, in
which he basically condemned William, Vandal & others as reprobates
and that he would not save them from drowning! He said he would
prefer the company of his "Mamzer" friends in his spiritual foxhole!
I have no problem with his first wife, it is the second that is disturbing.....
He preaches CI & racial hygeine, then spits in our fathers face, ALA Esau!
Yes, he is approachable allright, including the beast's of the field.
I do not beleive Paul contradicted Christ, but "Pastor" Dan certainly has...
All do respect Sword Brethren

I barely have time to handle my own stuff, I haven't listened to a broadcast of Dan's in a while [years].

[Staropramen]

The Bible canon was decided by men who were closer to Christ than any of us and probably by men who had sound judgement.

Wesley Swift said many times that they were often times drunk by 10:00am. Anyone know of any proof of this claim?

[NicoChristian]

Never heard that before, but the Biblical Canon was decided by early Christians, not at the Council of Nicaea as many people believe. Not all early Christians were perfect or living correctly, the Bible even gives some examples of early Christians who were very sinful and hypocrites. All in all a Biblical book was admitted into the Canon only if it had Apostolic origin and could be verified so. Many books were written about Christ, but not all were authentic and some were outright frauds. I simply believe that a lot of early Christians had better judgement and experience because they were closer to Christ, closer to the Apostales and also may have had access to writings that have been destroyed or have since been lost. The problem we have nowadays is that a lot of sound tradition was lost after the fall of Rome and we've had to rely solely on Scripture and archeology since. Another problem is that the racial demographics of the Middle East were destroyed by the Arab invasions and thus the whole area seems racially diverse compared to its original demographics.