Of all the terrible cultural marxist plagues inflicted on our people – arguably THE worst has been…..
Feminism.
Now one 16 year Canadian feminist infiltrator has managed to force our Boy Scouts to abandon over 100 years of solid, successful traditions and make the Boy Scouts go Co-Ed; the feminists are even making the Boy Scouts drop the word “Boy” from Scouts to promote D-I-V-E-R-S-T-Y and inclusion for womyn, gays, transgender something or other.
Ms. Sydney Ireland (not bad looking) is the daughter of a stereotypical conniving, shyster, thieving lawyer who lives on the upper West Side of Manhattan NYC (figures) but likes to vacation in Canada indoctrinating his children in the latest Canadian cult marxist fads and fashions. Here’s the press report:
“Sydney Ireland, 15, of Bridgehampton, had a dream: She’d like to be able to join the Boy Scouts of America and strive toward earning her Eagle Scout badge, scouting’s highest rank.
Sydney says at a time when a woman ran for the nation’s highest office as president of the United States, shattering the boundaries and allowing girls into Boy Scouts just shouldn’t be such a big deal.
To that end, she created a petition on change.org, “Tell the Boy Scouts to End Discrimination Against Young Women.” She needs 173 more individuals to sign before reaching 5,000, at which point she and her father, attorney Gary Ireland, plan to reach out to Boy Scouts of America.
“I cannot change my gender to fit the Boy Scouts’ standards, but the Boy Scouts can change their standards to include me. I am determined to be an Eagle Scout. It isn’t just a hobby, it’s access to some of the best leadership training there is,” Sydney wrote on change.org.”
Source: Southhampton Patch
Here’s hoping this Canadian Communist feminists #*$*# tries to do some multi cultural exchanges, feminist promoting BS with the Taliban, ISIS or the Islamic Brotherhood or ends up like Amy Biehl promoting Black African National Congress youth groups!
I’ve been hanging out with Latter Day Saints Mormons for the last 20 years. I can’t say the LDS Mormons have done much or anything good politically during this time, but I credit them for formally breaking all ties this week with the (Can’t Say the word “Boy”) Scouts – LDS Mormons will be starting their own scouting programs. Good for them! It’s long since time for us to start our own organizations that will teach our boys and girls to be strong, healthy, moral men and woman and work to break away from this corrupt Beast. The current government, media, society can not be reformed – it must be destroyed.
Remember to keep the Scout’s oath:
“On my honor, I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight”
The scouts have had female leaders for some time, at least the mormons have. What is the big change here?
My father was the first male Girl Scout leader in the state of Alabama in the 1980s. He did all the fun outdoorsy things with the girls, (in fact was called the Outdoors Leader) – some folks grumbled at first but the next year there were 5 more dads in the same troop who signed up.
The much BIGGER ISSUE besides parents wanting to scout with their kids when a need arises – is the Self ID that has been pushed for Girl Scouts and girl guides (UK) where the parents are not allowed to be told if a boy/man who feels like a girl that day will be camping in a tent and showering with girls ages 6-16.
In the U.K. they’ve actually done a huge petition against it by the parents bc as a parent you literally have no idea that a boy/man of 15/16 can be sharing tents and showers with girls 11-16. It’s sick and these TRANSGENDER MALE FREAK SHOWS have ruined everything from women’s Olympic sports, regular sport, bathrooms, changing rooms, hospitals, women’s refuges, and even Girl Scouts.
When will these men be put in their place?
“I cannot change my gender to fit the Boy Scouts’ standards … ” Huh?
Today, she sure can. Dr. Doolittle please sew a penis on this deranged crusader. Then ship her off the Barrow, Alaska, alone. On second thought, send her ambulance-chasing, sleazebag father with her.
When women are admitted to male institutions, they turn them into Maoist daycare centers.
And where the females’ ravenous hunger for validation and attention is concerned, they are absolutely heartless, caring not one whit about the damage they inflict on men and boys.
I always thought the Scouts were full of homos anyway.
You would know.
I’ve always thought the same about W/S.N’ist groups…
Yes the Scouts caved on queers a long time ago so who would let their kid in there?
GET OUT OF THE BOY SCOUTS; THE JUDAISTS ARE BEHIND FEMINISM.
Boys must not join the scouts any more, if there are girls. And neither should girls. It is not safe for either.
Feminism is truly the biggest cancer of mankind, destroying families and exterminating the white race and is the #1 Jewish racket. Most of the early feminist leaders were Jewish, and still are. Why?
Jewish women grow up reading the Torah, worshiping Sarah the prostitute and Lot’s daughters, who raped their own father. Many of these women are raped by Rabbis and relatives (apparently 90% per stats—see the “child rape assembly line” article on vice ) and became deranged and sexually depraved.
Incest is rampant among the Judaists, a fact confirmed online.
These Jewish women become deranged and start behaving like animals, and take out their anger from being raped on all men and become feminists.
But really isn’t the problem here not Feminist women but weak white males? Never once standing to fight but always capitulating. Would to God I had a Buchanan or a Duke in the White House instead of a Trump.
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Weak white males never turn on their beta brothers.
What does “Scouts BSA” stand for, anyway? “B” can’t be “Boy” — maybe it’s “Both Sexes Admitted”? No, that would exclude non-binary genders.
Mormons are so gosh-darn pious, patriotic, and nice. What other religion allows unbelievers to convert posthumously and go to Heaven? But being surrounded by other Mormons, they’ve been slow to realize what a cesspit the rest of the country has become.
“Feminism = Communism” also explains the ridiculous assertion that rape is not about sex. Because men need sex, and Communism says that people are entitled to take what they need by force, so feminists are trying to wheedle out of sharing their own assets while forcing men to share theirs.
Our Folk have been infected by the mind, body, and spirit viruses of the eternal jew.
Egalitarianism, politically correct Orwellian double speak, 24/7/365 brain washing from all alien/jewish controlled media outlets, and the loss of our best and brightest DNA fighting in wars against our race’s interests.
These abominations that are occurring at a quick gallop are the blowback from centuries of not ridding our lands of the pernicious influences of these vile Svengalis.
Hey is this Kurt Von Krupp from Chicago?
No way
Ja. The Dr. Is back.
Haven’t seen you in ages. I did talk to Jarl’s father awhile ago, he suggested we all get tother for lunch. You can reach me at: jackryanod@protonmail.com
I’ll do that. I mentioned Herr Carlsson that you were a contributing writer here.
These pitiful Marxists chase the white males around wherever they’re found, without respite.
In many nations around the world, our lovely other half have the girl guides or girl scouts….so what is the problem? In Britain, the girl guides is limited to girls only.
Why don’t these misfits, who thrive on being a nuisance, start demanding that mosques end separate seating for males and females, or that Muslims end genital mutilation for girls? They only target so-called ‘sexism’ in Western culture-where none really exists.
Until feminists and anti-racists (anti-whites) start tackling these issues where they really are, they deserve no credibility or attention.
You are LYING. Girl Guides now has to allow in MEN who feel like women that day.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/allowing-boys-to-be-guides-is-wrong-v0dngnvjp
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/gender-swap-boys-spark-guides-revolt-wtcv7xjk5
You are LYING. Girl Guides now has to allow in MEN who feel like women that day.
I tried to leave links but went to moderation. Search Girl Guides Transgender in the Times UK
Good job calling a 16 year old girl a whore. That must be keeping yourself morally straight, huh?
Where have you been living buddy? Take a look around. Good luck trying to find one today who is not a whore today. Many are good and worn before they turn 16.
The coprophiliac is a gay who has the AIDS.
lol
spahn, I am beginning to think that you don’t like me.
Peak of the victim hierarchy.
A gay, with Pozz and an adopted niglette, Staffer at ADL?
Spahn is a weak, insecure, underachieving peckerwood with anxiety…
…somebody get that girl a Xanax!
I obviously said something that set off El Puto. I shall have to review my recent comments to determine what it might have been, so that I can say it again. Careful not to let the spic/ nigger side of your ancestry get the better of you or you’re going straight back to Chico.
“You steenking greengo, I keel you!”
@Snowhitey
During my last year at school I saw first hand what 16yo girls can be like-sluttier than a Donna Summer song. Not to say the boys were innocent either, but the girls really get loose and wild by that phase.
I don’t see the issue. The Boy scouts have been getting more and more politically correct as time goes on anyway.
Also, Mormonism is a cult.
As my son discovered a while back, the Mormons are a nuisance when you want to leave. They phone and text you. They visit your work and knock on your door endlessly, effectively pestering you back to full church attendance. They don’t seem to get that if people aren’t attending church, its might be because they don’t want to. The missionaries smother you with fake and sickly kindness-but when they return home from their mission-you never hear from them again.
My son, like myself, is now an Anglican and a proud part of that community.
The Mormons do have admirable qualities such as good morality and a no drugs policy-and they breed! But in many ways its a difficult church to live and isn’t for everyone. Many unhappy people attend the church because they’re bullied back into it-they should just let these people go.
I always enjoy talking with Mormon elders who are not elderly at all. I never turn them away. These are, for the most part, very bright young men (haven’t encountered any female “elders” yet) who have the intelligence to listen and comprehend matters beyond their programming. When I begin telling them about Jesus, they listen – at least to a point. The fact is their mission is to get converts, not to rationally discuss their religion. Yet, more than once I have seen the light of question arise in their eyes as I tell them things about their “savior” they have never heard before.
When the “unbeliever” knows more about Jesus than the Christian true believer, curiosity is aroused in all but the most dogmatic and hidebound. The key lies in understanding Jewish religion, culture, beliefs and customs, not only those of first century Jews, but of present times as well. When one knows the Jew, one can accurately decipher, not only the meaning behind Jesus’ actions, but the entire Bible as well. Without that knowledge, these are but a confusing maze of puzzling stories that make little sense and can only be understood as religious “authorities” direct.
The first century of Judea consisted of true Israelites that returned from the Babylonian captivity and the edomites/canaanites the were conquered and blended into Judea. By the time of Christ the Edomites had taken over control of the priesthood and government of Judea., Herod was an edomite and the dragon of Revelation that tried to kill the Christ child. Christ and Israelites are NOT jews!
Your thoughts are those of “Christian Identity” that somehow have come to believe the story of Jesus can be separated from its overwhelmingly Jewish heritage. Jesus was most definitely a Jew. The entire Bible is a Jewish story, written by Jews, about Jews, for Jews. At best, gentiles play bit parts as supporting antagonists in Bible stories.
Jesus was not a Christian, as Christianity did not exist until after his death. “Christ” was a title assigned to Jesus by later Christians. Like the title “Messiah,” the “Christ” title of divinity was never claimed by the man named Jesus. In fact, when the kohein gadol, Caiaphas, demanded to know if Jesus claimed the title “son of god,” Jesus essentially replies, “if you say so.” By the way, the title “son of god” was a reference to members of the priesthood claiming to be the voice of god. The Jews’ idea of a “Messiah” was not one of a god, but a strong military leader, a man promising to deliver Jews from the “oppression” of outsiders. Jesus’ ministry was against the elite Temple insiders and not against Roman outsiders. Examination of others claiming the title, make it perfectly clear as to the type of man Jews might accept as their “Messiah.” To any first century Jew, a Messiah standing against their Temple would have been a complete absurdity.
Jesus had no quarrel with the Romans. This is clearly described in the story of the coin proffered by the “lawyer” with the question, “to whom do you pay tribute?” Jesus answer was to give Rome its due and give God his due. This statement obviously separated the Temple issue from that of Rome. What’s more, in the Gospel narrative Pilate said he found no fault with Jesus. Clearly, Jesus’ issue was with the Temple and the priesthood that convicted and sentenced him to death. It was said by first century Jews that a man “worked one day to pay his rent, one day to feed his family, one day to pay his taxes and all the rest went to the Temple. From a six-day workweek, this meant Temple priests were taking fifty percent of a Judean’s labor. This situation is perfectly analogous to the Jewish taxation system Americans presently labor under. What’s more, the onerous Para Aduma purification ceremony, required for coming into contact with a dead body, had resulted in Jews burying their loved ones alive in the sepulcher. This is why Jesus “raised people from the dead,” it was a political act refuting Temple law. Obviously, the Temple was the “evil” Jesus stood against. The present narrative of Rome being the problem with which Jesus took seditious issue, gained wide acceptance with Vatican II that bowed to the Jews’ interpretation of the Gospel narrative. It has since been parroted by Judaeo-Christian apologists like John Dominic Crosson and Bart Ehrman.
The Maccabees were ruling elite Jews that took over Judaism’s religious power during the so-called Babylonian captivity. Later, the Jewish Hasmonean priesthood elite took over the Temple, colluding with Herod the Great to make it the largest structure in first century Judea. Temple wealth was so vast, Romans borrowed money from its coffers to fund their construction projects. While it is true the Canaanites were one of the divisive elements in first century Judea (it is said that mother Mary was of Canaanite descent) they were in fact Jews that denied the Temple by refusing to submit to its sacrificial demands. The hated Samaritans were another such group. Interestingly, modern Samaritans still practice the blood sacrifice of their ancient ancestors in a ceremony that is a perfect mimic of first century Temple sacrifice. These groups refused to pay homage to the Temple priesthood, thus their rejection by the Temple “kohanim” or priests. Thus Jesus had no concern for these so-called “gentiles” that were no more than Jews who had already denied the Temple and its laws. This is why Jesus admonished his disciples to stay away from the gentiles and why he initially refused to even speak to the Canaanite woman who sought his help as described in the Gospel narrative of Matthew ten and fifteen.
Nowhere have I found historical reference to “Edomites” being among the later Hasmonean elite, who were instrumental in the rebuilding of the Temple. Jesus was initiated into the Temple priesthood by his cousin John, also a renegade member of the priesthood, during the mikveh ceremony at the “Jordan beyond the Jordan.” Had Jesus not been a priest, he would have never held the authority to question, argue and refute Temple law. Obviously, no Jew would have listened to an outsider attacking their Temple who lacked the authority of a Temple priest, just as no Catholic would give their confession to an outsider lacking the authority of a priest.
Nowhere in the Old Testament are any of the patriarchs from Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and his sons called jews in the bible. Idumea bordered Judea on the south and the Hasmonean, Hycranus, conquered the Edomites and brought them into Judea. Paul in Romans chapter 9 also tells us that the descendants of Esau were in Israel but not of Israel. Christ speaking to the chief priests John 8:44 tells them their father is the devil. Josephus in book 13 of antiquities and subsequent chapters tells us that indeed the edomites where in Judea. Jews have never fulfilled the promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to become many nations and a company of nations. The wandering jew never formed any civilization in their entire history. As Malachi prophesied the edomites would return to build the desolate places, the old holy land was cursed by Christ, and that happened in 1948. Jews have the Babylonian Talmud and white Christians have the bible which was never a jewish book.
Take that to the Rabbi and see if they agree. While Jews might deny the New Testament, see if they agree the Torah/Old Testament isn’t their book and their book alone. What’s more they provide a death sentence for any non-Jew (heathen in Jewish terms) that reads their Torah.
Note carefully the words “Torah” and “Moses” in the quote. The idea the Bible was anything but a book written by, for and about Jews is a patently absurd idea only demented Christians could embrace.
You of course state the obvious. However, referring to these (((mamzers))) by any other name than by what their descendants are called only leads to confusion that serves the Jews’ interest, and as we all know Jews thrive on obfuscation and confusion. Modern Jews are just as bloody and murderous as their ancient progenitors and you will note they change their names just as often as the Torah’s mythical figures.
I never denied the Edomites or their Judean existence. What I wrote was “Nowhere have I found historical reference to “Edomites” being among the earlier Hasmonean elite, who were instrumental in the rebuilding of the Temple.” Can you show me any link between the Edomites and the first century, Temple priesthood, or their earlier brethren the Maccabees and Hasmonean? Even if you could, would that change the nature of these murderously psychopathic, biblical priests?
Yah sure, the Jews do say so don’t they? Are we to actually believe what this race of pathological lairs tell us? What about the Holocaust? Should that lie be believed because a little Jew tells us it’s so?
What you are doing is typical of Jewish tactics, sow confusion by questioning details and splitting literary hairs irrelevant to the issue. This is what the Jew Arthur Koestler attempted to do with his book The Thirteenth Tribe that claims modern Jews are no relation to ancient Biblical Jews, but are instead converted Turkish “Khazars.” Of course, numerous gullible goyim jumped right in the fray to help cover for the Jew by calling (((them))) “Khazars.”
What purpose does it serve to use arcane terms like “Edomite” or “Maccabees” that few outside theological researchers recognize and only serve to hide the Jews’ racial identifying characteristics from the masses? Jews claim these mythical Biblical characters as their ancestors. (((They))) think and act like these characters, why help (((them))) hide behind confusing terms by arguing over how many different titles, terms and names can be changed on the head of a Jewish pin? What purpose does it serve other than helping the Jew parasite hide from their goyim hosts?
The fact is modern Jews walk, lie, murder, rape, subvert, deceive, pillage and destroy in the very same manner as their Torah ancestors. (((They))) have simply changed their present identity to mean “Jew” so why refer to them in any other manner? Call (((them))) by the name with which everyone today can identify – JEW!
Arch Stanton: My theology is covenant theology and Yahweh God never made any covenants to jews, nor did he marry jews but rather the 12 tribes at Mt.Sinai when he brought them out of the land of Egypt as stated in Jerermiah 3:14, Isaiah 54:5 ande Jeremiah 31:32. Why would I ask a rabbi anything? They don’t even believe in the first 5 books of the Old Testament, the rabbis have rewritten the entire bible in their own twisted minds. If Christ were a jew he would have been teaching international banking and commerce. The jews are a mixed race of everything on the planet while conducting their international trade. Edomites were not among the earlier Hasmonean elites that didn’t happen until about 150 BC. Herod the edomite bought his way into leadership of Judean and appointed his edomite cronies to the priesthood in Judea. Caiaphas was an edomite. Wow, you state that Mary was a Canaanite and you deny the divinity of Christ. You are a lying interloper. By the way Christ name is not Jesus, his Hebrew name is Yahshua and God’s name is Yahweh. Jesus has no meaning as all Hebrew names do. Yahshua means God saves. Since you are such a bible student or a rabbi, you should know that the word jew is no where to be found in any original manuscripts. Ezra and Nehemiah and 42,500 Israelites returned to Jerusalem from Babylon to fulfill Daniel’s 70 weeks prophecy about the coming Messiah. They built the second temple and Herod built the third temple.
You my friend, are a true believer.
Yes, I am a true believer. I can actually read and understand that the Holy Bible is not only the true word of the one true God but is also the history of the white Adamic race. I damn sure don’t attend any of the modern Judaized baal temples called churches today which are actually just another jewish formed corporation. There is no such thing as judeo-churchianity. Let’s look at it this way, when the 10 commandments are removed from a building, where is the outrage from the jews? I thought it was there book! Not a word from any of them. The bible was written in the white man’s language; Hebrew, Greek, Latin, English and the various European languages. We didn’t get the bible from jews, we received it from white Europeans. Where in scripture did Yashua deny being called Messiah or Christ? Answer: no where. The people in the New Testament are the 12 tribes scattered abroad just as the Old Testament says they would and they are also the lost sheep that Christ came for and no one else, Matthew 15. Obadiah is one of my favorite prophets and says in the last days all none Adamic peoples including the jews , house of Esau, will be as if they had not been. That is when our land will be cleansed of all these parasites!
Why would Jesus deny something he never was, nor claimed to be? How could he deny titles not assigned to him until after his death? Why didn’t Hitler deny being the Messiah or Christ? Since he didn’t, does that make him the Messiah or Christ?
Perhaps it’s because no one thought of these men in those terms while they were alive. (Actually, there was a rabbi who claimed Hitler was the Messiah and oddly enough, Hitler didn’t deny it) Note the Sanhedrin’s accusation was that “Yeshu” (Jewish ~ er ~ Edomite pronunciation) blasphemed against the Temple by claiming to be a “son of god,” a term that denoted members of the Temple priesthood. Therefore, the issue was whether Jesus claimed the legal authority of a priest to rebuke and rescind Temple law. In fact, the entire story of Jesus is one of legal matters, but then anyone that knows the Jews, or Edomites, knows this is invariably the case.
Funny you mention a Jewish ~ er ~ “Edomite” prophet, as the Talmud claims Obadiah was said to have converted to Judaism from Edom, making him an Edomite. So here we find an Edomite becoming a Jew. But of course your belief is that Jews aren’t ~ well ~ Jews. It is said Obadiah was chosen to prophesy against Edom because he was himself an Edomite that prophesied against Esau (Edom).
Lets review, Jews are actually Edomites, while some other unnamed race, the descendants of Esau, are actually Jews. So this race of non-Jews are the true Jews fighting the good fight against Jews who aren’t Jews. Sounds like a perfectly Christian argument to me.
According to the Torah, Jacob (“father of Israel” and Esau’s brother) was clearly a lying, thieving, duplicitous transvestite with smooth, womanly complexion, whose mother dressed in pretty robes. Jacob, father of Israel, stole Esau’s birthright* and inheritance. So far this sounds a lot more like modern Jews than those descended from the manly Esau.
While his manly “red” brother, favored by his father Isaac, was out doing manly things like hunting, Jacob stayed behind in the tent with his mama Rebecca, tending the fire, cooking and no doubt fetching water like woman of that day.
In order to steal Esau’s birthright, Jacob’s mother had to wrap his arms with goatskin and sinew so blind Isaac would think the weak, sissy-boy Jacob was his manly brother. (Was it the smell, texture or both she sought? Edomites want to know) Funny how the Torah description of Jacob seems in perfect keeping with modern Jews’ favorite perversions. Note the preponderance of transvestites and homosexuals among (((their))) race and how heavily (((they))) promote these perversions. Note also how modern Jews are lying, duplicitous, thieves that have stolen the modern white man’s inheritance and birthright. I take it you claim Jacob is the father of the modern race to which you claim membership? Really?
Actually I’m getting used to the term “Edomite” as it sounds much like an insect, like the termite, a perfect metaphor for the parasite gnawing away at civilizations’ foundations. Yep, sure looks like you have a bad infestation of Edomites, you better call the Kalki man.
*The ancient concept of the birthright was a title to rule. In Isaac’s day, this would have been the title to tribal leadership over his tribe. So Jacob stole Esau’s materiel wealth, or inheritance, along with his authority of leadership over his father’s tribe. Is it not odd this is very thing modern Jews have done to the formerly white nations? Have (((they))) not stolen the material wealth and resources of the white man’s nations, along with the right to rule over his own people?
Arch you are something else. You claim Yahshua denied being the Messiah. First of all Christ, (Christos in Greek) means anointed ie: the Messiah, look it up in the Greek/English dictionary. Those two names are interchangeable. Christ accepts the name Messiah in John 1:41 and John 4:25-29. There are other examples but that should suffice. Daniel ‘s 70 weeks prophesy (490 years) is a prophecy that the Messiah would come, and he did as the Christ.There is a feud between the Samaritans and the Judeans because the
Samaritans genealogy was destroyed by Herod, so they could not prove to be true Israelites. If you notice in Ezra when they found the law they kicked their strange wives and children out of their country since they had married outside of the covenant people. Inter-racial marriage is absolutely forbidden in the law as your offspring would be bastards (Deut 23) which is against the law. The Jacob/Esau contention is very simple. Jacob was renamed Israel, Genesis 32:28 & 35:10 while Esau was named Edom, Genesis 36:1-3 & 36:8. Esau lost his birthright by marrying Hittite and Ismael’s daughter, therefore he would have no legitimate heirs. Rebekah made sure that Jacob would not commit adultery as did Esau, so they insured that he would marry inside the covenant people, and he did. It is very simple, jews descended from Esau and the tribes of Israel would come from Jacob. God hates Esau/Edom as stated in Malachi 1:3 and Romans 9:13. In Hebrews 12:16-17 Paul called Esau a fornicator and profane man, so there you have it. Where in the world did you get the notion that Obadiah was an Edomite? That is ridiculous. Yahweh God is not going to speak through an Edomite, He hates them. Where in the OT does it say that? Also as far as I am aware there was no such thing as Judaism back then. If I remember correctly that term was coined by the Greeks. By the way Sanhedrin and synagogue are not Hebrew terms but are Greek terms. Why would Hitler pay any attention or even know some rabbi called him Messiah. You give out a lot of phrases but you don’t give any citations where you read those phrases or who made those statements. Hitler was well aware of the jewish/communist and jewish/capitalist threat to the European peoples. He did know that FDR was a jew but I don’t think he knew Churchill was as well. My advice to you is quit reading that despicable Talmud, a book which our European ancestors used to burn for centuries. It is full of sexual perversion and basically a bunch of legal briefs arguing against Yahweh and His laws. Arch are you speaking the Kol Nidre? I almost forgot; Jacob means to supplant which was necessary to preserve the pure blood line. Which verses in the Old Testament give that description of Jacob? I almost forgot this too; the sons of god pertains to Adam and his descendants, Luke Chp 3. All Adamic white people are made in Yahweh’s image and only they are assured eternal life.
For Jews, the term Messiah is a rather well defined concept. If Jesus was a Messiah, then it was not by any Jewish definition. Since it is a Jewish word with a Jewish definition, I cannot see how there could be any other meaning than what Jews intended. This is especially true for Jesus as there were no Christians during his life, only Hebrews/Israelites/Jews, so the idea of a Messiah had to be understood from a Hebrew/Israelite/Jewish standpoint. By Jewish standards, the Messiah would have never stood against the religious foundations of their Temple. Show me one other historical “Messiah” claiming the title that stood against the foundations of Judaism and we’ll talk more.
From a Jewish source – where else? If you want to continue arguing the Jews have no authority to make such claims, then it is useless to continue the discussion as there is no other valid authority. The Bible is a Jewish book. It is the story of Jews start to finish. These are (((their))) characters telling (((their))) story. Everyone but extreme fringe groups accepts this as fact. If you want to attempt to usurp the Jews’ book for your own use and maintain they have nothing to do with it, you may, but that will not change the facts behind these obviously Jewish matters.
Again, there is no argument that the term “Jew” is a more modern than those of the first century, but these are the same people and anyone reading their Torah can clearly see the modern Jewish linage derived from these ancient myths. So why “Jew” the issue by obscuring and confusing it with arcane terms and jargon only people like you understand? If one refuses to communicate using understandable terminology and concepts, are they communicating?
Discussing the Bible with fringe groups like the Christian Identity movement is like trying to trying to explain modern navigation technology to flat earth believers. I’m truly amazed at the nonsense I hear from various Christian believer. To wit, flat earth, geocentric orbits, races of giants that coexisted with Adam, Eve and their dinosaurs, all derived from totally absurd, ancient Jewish oral myths repeated over centuries by people with less scientific education than a modern nursery schooler. Did you ever play “telephone” in nursery school? There’s a clue as to the accuracy of an oral tradition. Hell, Jews had to rewrite the book to eliminate the obvious absurdities. As one rabbi said, “Torah stories are fit only for school children.”
I suppose it would be instructive to include a story of where the Jews’ bloody, murderous, psychopathy originated, a racial trait clearly and repeatedly evident in their Torah stories.
The Tabernacle
Blood – It’s all about blood, sacrificial blood, the blood of the lamb, the blood of racial purity, the Bible is steeped in blood. We will begin this study by examining the foundation of the system that produced the authors who wrote the Bible. A few may consider some of the points I cover to be controversial. For those finding themselves perturbed by such controversy I ask them to consider their reaction were these very same references made in relation to Christians or Muslims. The fact is there is no difference; such differences only exist in the minds of those choosing to make exception.
Long before the Temple, came the era of the Tabernacle where the sacrifice was ceremonial bloodlust. It was a place where priests butchered animals to atone for sins against their God, Yahweh. The system was based on continual atonement for the original sin from which one could never be fully absolved.
The Torah originally referred to the first five books of the Old Testament. The books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy are Levirate laws forming the basis for ancient Judaism’s sacrificial system. The foundational principal behind the system is found in Leviticus chapter seventeen verse eleven which states: “For the life of the flesh is in the blood and I have given it to you upon the alter to make a atonement for your soul, for it is the blood than maketh atonement for the soul.” This principal is again readily apparent in the description of the original ten commandments being smashed by Moses before being replaced by “god” in the form of the second Decalogue, a set of commandments pertaining to sacrificial minutiae. Like many primitive cultures, ancient Judaism was naturally founded on the sacrifice of blood offerings, in the form of specified animals, and non-blood offerings in the form of specified grains. It is notable that fish, while taxed, were outside the sacrificial system. In the earliest days before the Temple, the Tabernacle was a moving slaughterhouse, a place where priests butchered animals. It is telling that only the best animals, the least “blemished”, could be offered for sacrifice in this circus of slaughter.
The indication as to the true purpose of the sacrificial system lay in the fact that the priests took ten percent of the choicest cuts of meat for themselves while burning only the fat and viscera upon the altar as “sweet savor” to the lord. The remaining meat was then returned to the sinner. Think about this for a moment, God prefers the entrails to the prime cuts commanded by the priests.
Imagine for a moment, your priest as a butcher. Imagine going to church on Sunday and seeing your priest, pastor or reverend at the alter slitting the throat of various parishioners pets, catching their blood in a golden bowl and then splashing it around the alter as he dances around in a trance-like state chanting pleas to God for the forgiveness of sins while begging for salvation. After the service, you might say to your spouse, “Boy that certainly was a different sermon this week wasn’t it dear?” Your spouse replies, “Oh I don’t know, next week is communion, that’s when we eat the body of Christ and drink his blood.”
After making their sacrifice, the Hebrew sinner was marked with blood, mixed with other bodily fluids to assure adhesion, on either the forehead or the big toe. This mixture ensured longevity of the mark. The blood marking was visible proof that a tribesman had paid his “sin tax”. Later, this mark was washed off in a ritual purification bath called the Mikveh, at which time the sacrificial cycle began anew.
This marking system however had one obvious, glaring drawback. Blood is a commonly available substance produced by all the higher organisms. In their attempt to control the easily counterfeited blood marking, priests forbade their followers from butchering their own animals or even possessing the instruments for doing so. This was the primary reason for the kosher slaughter, a process where the living animal’s throat is slit to ensure the pumping heart drains the blood as completely as possible. This also led to the prohibition of various implements and practices used in the butchering process. Thus the priests defined knives and other implements used for butchering as “clean” or “unclean”, but think “legal” or “illegal”, as these are in fact legalistic dictates that have nothing to do with hygiene.
Any contact with blood was strictly prohibited, like that produced by menstruating women or “lepers”, which to these ancient people meant anyone with running sores. As a result, a byzantine legal structure arose to control the minutiae of everyday life. There is a forgettable tract in the Mishna that elaborates at length on the cleanliness of a bowl. The upshot of this legal commandment is that if a bowl in intact, then it is unclean; but if the bowl is smashed into pieces of which the largest piece is no larger than the tip of a man’s little finger, then it is clean. This makes absolutely no sense unless one understands the bowl in question can be used to hold and mix blood products.
Eventually the phylactery replaced the blood marking. The tefilln is a small box attached to the forehead or the back of the wrist holding a scroll with a passage from the Torah. The scroll changed in accordance with the sacrificial cycle; and, like tabs on a license plate, it could be checked as proof that Temple followers were current on their sacrificial tribute. Despite this modification, the laws concerning blood products remained in full force.
I want you to sit back and close your eyes. Imagine yourself as a very young child of a primitive, nomadic, tribesman. Having heard only stories, you are dimly aware of the importance of a much talked about, upcoming ritual. You are aware this ritual occurs on a regular basis and the anxiousness of your parents is palpable when discussing the subject.
On the prescribed day, preparation for the ritual begins. You follow your parents down to a running stream. A man richly attired in strange garb stands in the middle of the stream. One by one, your neighbors walk into the stream where the man mutters strange words as he immerses them in the water while rubbing their forehead with the palm of his hand. After your father has undergone the ritual immersion, you note the red mark he always wears on his forehead has disappeared. The ritual continues until every adult in the village has undergone immersion. You hear someone nearby whispering that the sacred cycle has ended.
The following day, your mother wakes you earlier than usual and your family spends the morning in careful preparation for the day’s activities. You want to play with your friends, but your mother insists you attend to her demands. Later that afternoon, you accompany your father as he goes out among his meager collection of animals. He spends quite a bit of time inspecting the herd until he finally chooses a prized sheep. This animal happens to be one of your favorites. You have often played with the sheep, chasing them around the meadows and finally catching one, you buried your face in its soft wool. Your nose takes delight in the earthy smell of the sheep. It is the smell of life and life seems to be everywhere among the hills where the herds roam.
The next morning, your father takes you by the hand and with animal in tow, you are dragged to the portable slaughterhouse your parents refer to as the “Tabernacle.” Here you are to witness the important ritual they have been discussing over the preceding weeks. You enter a large enclosure surrounded by a fence made of cloth. In the middle of the enclosure is an odd tent-like structure with rude wooden columns and entry doors. A number of well attired men await in the makeshift courtyard directly in front of the tent. Soon, other families begin arriving with their animals.
Finally, the ceremony begins. A priest blows a ram’s horn and calls out for sinners. A neighbor of yours steps forward and presents a prized calf to one of several strangely dressed men, like the men you saw at the stream the day before. Your parents refer to these men as “kohein”. One by one, the sinners step forward and present their animal to a priest who then wrestles it to the ground. Your neighbor drops to his knees in front of the priest, who closes his eyes and begins chanting something unintelligible. As you witness this strange act, your father grabs your hand and places it alongside his on his prized sheep. You feel its heart racing; the animal’s terror is clearly transmitted though the palm of your hand. The priest takes hold of the struggling animal and with quick, practiced motion, slits its throat with a razor sharp knife. The animal struggles, kicking and bellowing in protest, as geysers of blood erupts from its jugular vein. A froth of blood spews forth, splattering you and everyone present. You feel the spark of life draining through its hide as the stillness of death overcomes the animal. You look down at the viscous red fluid splattered on the front of your robe. You stare with revulsion at the red stains soaking into the fibers as the stench of death assaults your nostrils and addles your senses.
Even before the animal has ceased struggling, you look up from your bloodstained robe to see the head priest/butcher moving quickly to catch the animal’s blood in a golden bowl. With eyelids half closed and muttering some strange incantation, he seems to be in a trance. Shouting, he lifts the golden bowl skyward at arms length before splashing the rapidly congealing blood over and around the base of the flaming altar. The priest then comes out of his trance and begins eviscerating the animal. During this process, the animal’s bloody guts are thrown upon the altar, where they are incinerated as sweet savor to a god that evidently has an abiding taste for burnt fat and viscera.
In just a few strokes, the priest/butcher finishes his gory task. Working rapidly, he begins cutting the animal’s joints. As he separates the portions of meat, he carefully lays aside a large portion of the best cuts for himself. He then returns the remaining meat to the sinner, who by now has given the priest full admission of his sins.
With the sacrifice complete, the priest produces a golden bowl with a cupful of the animal’s blood swimming in the bottom. He mixes it with another bodily fluid that smells like semen. He uses his fingers to smear a large daub of the mixture on the forehead of the entranced, chanting sinner kneeling before him with closed eyes. Then, with a loud shout, the priest/butcher declares that by this act, all sins have been atoned. Your neighbor staggers to his feet and like a beatific drunk, lurches away from the gory remains of what had been a living, breathing creature moments before. Eviscerated animal remnants swim in a pool of blood that is rapidly absorbing into the dirt, even as the priest calls for the next sinner to step forward with his animal.
Suddenly you feel the full emotional horror of the fate awaiting the other animals brought to the ritual. All the while, these men called kohein, howl, chant and dance about, reciting their ritualistic incantations that beg god’s forgiveness; it was an extremely gruesome spectacle. The bloodlust continues well into evening. What you never witness is the secret ceremony that takes place inside the Tabernacle’s tent where the high priest, in a final act of crazed bloodlust, drinks the sacrificial blood before the mercy seat. This ceremony is later replicated during the last supper when Jesus, the sacrificial paschal lamb, tells his disciples: (movie clip audio) Whoever, eats my flesh and drinks my blood will have eternal life. Take this bread, this is my body, drink this wine this is my blood. Do this in remembrance of my ultimate sacrifice to the Temple.”
The Levirate injunction against consuming blood is a public admonishment to restrict the use of blood products. However, the kohanim exempted itself from its own laws and secretly do not observe such restrictions. Again, this covert act, along with the acceptable act of consuming sacrificial meat, will later be replayed by Jesus during the last supper. A few days later the priests fold their Tabernacle tent, their circus of horror, and move on. They will move to the next tribe where the sacrificial cycle will be played out once again.
Consider the effect of this gruesome spectacle on a young child. Blood spewing everywhere, chanting priests mesmerized in their crazed bloodlust, driven by the howling and grunting of animals bleeding out the last of their life on the ground. The restless bleating of animals, now aware of their terrible fate. Sinners raising their hands towards the heavens as they cry out for god’s mercy and forgiveness. Imagine your parents continually consumed with the thought of blood and the avoidance of the sticky substance, thoughts that translate into an unnatural obsession about the stuff. Extrapolate this horror out over the generational millennium and one finds a race founded on a culturally inbred, psychopathic, bloodlust that cannot be altered or escaped.
“A top Judaic Communist official named Zinoviev stated: “Without mercy, without sparing, we will kill our enemies in scores of hundreds. Let them be thousands; let them drown themselves in their own blood. For the blood of Lenin and Uritzky, Zinoviev and Vólodarsky, let there be floods of the blood of the bourgeoisie–more blood! As much as possible!” (Krasnaya Gazeta, Sept. 1, 1918).
Does Zinoviev sound Biblical? The millennia of practicing the blood sacrifice permeated the very core of Judaism until it became a genetic component of their race.
Maybe you’ve checked out the various religions and maybe you’ve dabbled in some, but perhaps you’re not satisfied with what you’ve found. Wonder why? It may be because most of them aren’t right for you. They don’t take into account your DNA Code. Most religions, and especially the major ones, aren’t the products of people like you, if you are White. They’re a bad fit for the way you are, and the way you are is largely determined by the DNA Code you were born with. – H. Millard
Isn’t about time humanity moves beyond religious death cults focused on blood and sacrifice?
Arch, since you are our resident expert please define who exactly the jews claim to be. If the bible were there book from beginning to end then they would accept the New Testament as well since the NT is a fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies. Please give us the verses that describe Obadiah as and edomite. You never give any verses or citations of any kind.
Okay now I see the problem If the bible were there book from beginning to end then they would accept the New Testament as well since the NT is a fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies. The NT does not support the Old Testament, it is a complete rejection of Old Testament law and custom.
Once again a definition is in order. Fulfilling a contract means the contract is ended, finished, kaput. Find me a lawyer, even a Jewish one, that says otherwise. When Jesus said he came to “fulfill the law” he was clearly saying he had come to end the law. Jesus’ message was the antidote to the Old Testament’s legal poison.
Note that as a priest, Jesus worked within the system. Matthew 21:1-11 refers to a passage from Book of Zechariah (9:9) and states:
Prophecy said the “king” would ride through the east gate on a donkey, how hard would that be to accomplish after the fact? Is there any mention of exactly who this “king” might be? Show me where the name of Jesus is mentioned in any ~ ANY Old Testament Prophecy. All I ever hear from Christians is how the Prophets were referring to Jesus, despite the fact his name is never once mentioned in any of these prophecies. Of course Christians attribute all sorts of nebulous prophecy to Jesus that have no direct reference to him. But then Christians have told me Jesus was literally every Jewish patriarch from Adam onward.
Yahshua the Christ was Yahweh come in the flesh. He rejected the temple because it had been taken over by edomites. They are not called edomites because after their so-called conversion they were then called Judeans. As I stated before the word jew is not in any original manuscript. Jew should be translated Judean and the plural should be Judeans. As Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 states, those who say they are Judeans but are not and are the synagogue of satan. As I stated previously we know edomites were in Israel but not of Israel in Romans chapter 9. Josephus and Strabo both attest to this very fact. Think of it this way, in todays political correct society , we call negroes and mestizos and any other non-white an American. When did any of these bastards create anything having to do with America? If I move to Mexico or Nigeria does that make me a mestizo or a negro? Of course not, I have nothing in common at all with them. The countries all of these non-whites come from are nothing but hell holes. If they could create a stable society they would have done it their own homeland. By the way, as all Hebrew names have a meaning, Obadiah means “servant of Yahweh” and your claim of him being an edomite is absurd. When Christ who is Yahweh died on the cross all rituals of the law were done away with. The new covenant is stated in Jeremiah 31:31-37 and Hebrews 8:1-13. Whose names are on the gates in Revelation 21:12? The 12 tribes of Israel of course none of whom were ever called jews. Why did Yahweh die on the cross? Because as the husband of the 12 tribes he had to die to release the Israelites from the penalty of death as the law required. Go back and read the marriage laws and you will see this is so. The marriage then divorce and promise of reconciliation and remarriage to Christ is the central story of the bible. The scattering and regathering of the 12 tribes culminating in the marriage supper in the Revelation are prophesied throughout the Old Testament. Additionally the Hebrew word Messiah means anointed one the same as in Greek. You still haven’t told us exactly who the jews are. Are they a specific tribe or what?
Arch, I don’t who you are exactly, but you keep confusing Hebrews and Israelites with jews. If you read all of the many inscriptions from Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, the Moabite stone and on and on. If you read the classical histories you can trace the dispersions of the 12 tribes. Then why don’t our pastors preach that? If you read the prophets it is clear that they were blinded to their identity and were to be called a new name, Christians after Christ of course. This blindness has been in effect for over 2700 years now. You can reject this if you want Arch, but all of this can be absolutely and without doubt proven historically. And the prophecies that have been fulfilled are actual events that happened throughout history. Be an atheist or a jew if you want the choice is yours.
Arch, I don’t who you are exactly, but you keep confusing Hebrews and Israelites with jews. It’s okay, I don’t really know who I am either. However, I’m not confusing anything – A Jew is a Jew, is a Jew. It doesn’t matter by what name you call them, just don’t call them “Jew.” Thank you very much.
I stopped short on the Matthew passage because I made my point of who’s a Jew by Biblical standards. The rest, as you quote, is later adapted Christian drivel. Christians never tire of remaking history in their chosen image, but then mother Jew never had much problem doing that either.
There is a simple test to separate Jesus the man from his Christian aggrandized image. Whenever Jesus is addressing Jews, the Temple or others, it’s probably close to his original thoughts. Whenever he is being aggrandized as Christ, lord, savior, son o’ god, the risen Christ, et al. this is Christian drivel meant to propagandize his later, church-assigned godhood.
Jesus was obviously an enlightened being. Like other legendary avatars, Jesus was spiritually far beyond the average human being. His life style clearly indicates he was a very humble man who might well be embarrassed to hear the monstrous myth Christians have made of him. Knowing the type of man he was, I have no doubt he would reject every title Christens have assigned to him. Jesus he would never have been so arrogant to claim such title or even allow such titles to be assigned to him.
What irritates me most about Christians is how they continually play the god recording while ignoring the monumental sacrifice Jesus made to deliver his own people from the predatory Jew elite. He gave his life in the most unbelievable manner to break the Temple law’s iron grip on its followers. After his sacrifice, there was no more need for Temple followers to pay tribute to the system. The maudlin thought “he died to save us from our sins” doesn’t begin to cover the reality.
Have you ever made a sacrifice? A real, live animal sacrifice? Have you ever taken your prized animal to the priest for butchering so they could take ten percent? Do you know what it is like to be a farmer with a small herd or a poor city dweller tormented by the loss of your god because you cannot pay him tribute? I think not. How bad does it get? It drove a man insane to the point where he bathed in what he believed was the vilest filth imaginable. To the first century Jew, nothing was more unclean than a tomb or pigs. From country of the Gadarenes, we hear a story about this man, driven insane by grief, to living in tombs among swine in total rejection of Temple law. We are not told what he did to merit his excommunication, but to a believer, losing god can be a terrible thing.
So here come Jesus, a recognized member of the Temple priesthood. Thinking a Temple priest has come to harass him once again, the man goes wild attacking Jesus. Jesus however comes not to chastise, but to deliver the good news, the man’s sins have been forgiven. The authority of a priest has forgiven them. Instantly, the man turns with grateful heart to the one delivering him from his hellish torment.
Typical Jewish hyperbole of the “six million” variety, says Jesus drove the demons out of the man into the swine; that would be the Temple’s religious demons. Oh yeah? The Gadarenes were swine herds. Someone’s living depended on that herd of swine that dove off the cliff. Really, would Jesus harm a fellow human in that manner? Would he deny a man his livelihood simply to make a trick show? I think not. The swine symbolized the “uncleanliness” imparted by the Temple’s religious law. The idea of driving this “uncleanliness” off a cliff is a physical description applied to a spiritual process.
Arch, I am done wasting my time with you. Go on believing your nonsense. Obviously the Gospel is not for you anyway and the Gospel is not intended for just anyone either. You deny Christ then you are an anti-Christ it is just that simple.
The problem is you believe, but lack factual evidence, while I don’t believe but rely on available facts and evidence. You live in an ancient world of magic and mysticism, a world of divine beings that depend on belief, simply because there is no other evidence available. I live in a world that has no such magic or mysticism.
There is evidence for the world functioning according to an intelligent design. What this design is and what is behind and beyond it, lies beyond mans’ comprehension. While I do not spend time trying to explain or worship it, I do recognize and respect it. Whatever it is, it is certainly far beyond the absurd magical beings described by the Judaic religions.
While many today believe Jesus did not exist, there is ample evidence for the fact that such a person did live in the first century and carry out at least a portion of the acts described in the Gospels. This individual was an enlightened ascetic that tread the spiritual path well beyond the ordinary man. Below one will find an example of what my research uncovered, versus what Christians believe.
Picture Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead. What do you see in your mind’s eye? A rotting corpse being magically brought back to life? For what reason? Because Jesus was a good guy? Why then did he not spend his time in the graveyards raising as many as people from the dead as possible? Why just a few curious examples? Christians never address such questions, instead believing that the son ‘o god simply took mercy on the dead and brought them back to life. This is the magical mystical world that religious Christians inhabit. Ya’ just gotta believe!
I don’t believe, I look for facts and answers like those I find in the present world. It is such questioning that got me kicked out of Catechism class at age thirteen. Consider the world we presently inhabit, where does one find rotting corpses being raised from the dead? There must then be one of two answers for the raising of Lazarus, to wit: either the ancient world operated on a different set of physical principals or the Gospel stories have been hyperbolized and misinterpreted. Applying Occam’s razor, which is the most likely answer?
So what facts did I discover about this curious act of raising the dead? First fact, Jews are a people, of the law. For Jews, law is sacred. Therefore, virtually everything they do is considered from a legal perspective. This serves to explain the preponderance of Jewish lawyers. What more natural profession might there be for Jewish boys growing up studying and arguing their religious law in the Yeshiva? In fact, Jews claim they have argued with God and won! Thus everything in the Torah and the Gospels pertains to legal matters.
Fact, the word “Torah” has a dual meaning for Jews. The word can be defined as either “instruction” and/or “law.” Therefore, by definition of its very title, the Torah is a (metaphorical) book of legal instruction. Nowhere is there any indication the Torah was intended as a book of historical fact.
Fact, the Temple and is religion were based on sacred law set forth in the stories of the Torah, these stories are compilations setting legal precedence. The story of Cain and Able set the legal precedence for the meat sacrifice over the grain sacrifice. The story of Abram’s sacrifice of Isaac set the legal precedence for substituting an animal sacrifice to redeem a child from priesthood bondage.
The ancient Jews/Hebrews/Israelites considered children god’s property, as this is what God set forth in his religious law. Since God is an absentee landlord, children belonged to YHVH’s representatives, the Temple priests. In the labor-intensive, agrarian age of the ancient Jew, a child meant an increase in one’s labor force. This is why a firstborn son held such importance to the ancient Jew and why it was so important to make their sacrificial redemption.
If one reads the book linked to my name, they will find Mariam as one of the weavers of the Temple veil. As a female, she did not carry the importance of a male and therefore in lieu of sacrificial redemption, she was given up to the Temple where the priests put her to work weaving the veil.
Thus the Torah, the first five books of Moses, are cookbooks ~ legal cook books ~ recipes setting precedence for the legal minutiae that allowed the priests’ control over their followers. The later Mishna and Talmud are extensions of Judaic law that had outgrown the simplistic laws set forth in the original Torah. The story of Lazarus was not one of “Christ’s” magic and mysticism, but a story about the rejection of onerous Temple law.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Raising Lazarus ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Confronting the issue of touching the dead
By the time of the Mikdash, the law had morphed into a byzantine legal structure argued endlessly over by the kohanim, rabbis, P’rushim and various other authorities. Life under Mikdash law had become an endless string of commandments, thou shalt and thou shalt not, governing almost every conceivable detail of a Jew’s life. One could never tell when they had sinned, for while one kohein or P’rushim would say they had, others would argue the counterpoint. The Essene sages had taught Yeshu to master such legal arguments and wrangling. As with the P’rushim who had challenged him with payment to Caesar, more than once he had rebuked them with brilliant counter point. Now he had begun to use his powers as a kohein to challenge Mikdash authority.
Originally, the law of coming into contact with a dead body, described as “the most unclean thing of all”, was developed to protect the blood marking of the ritual sacrifice. The idea was to eliminate contact with any blood source that might be used to counterfeit the sacrificial blood marking. However, by the time of the second Mikdash, the law had become little more than a scheme to fill its coffers. Even so, a special causeway had been constructed to connect the Mikdash mount to the Mount of Olives to prevent kohanim from coming into contact with a grave.
The result of this proscription was a “Chukat” or suprarational decree; a law without logical explanation. The Chukat Para Aduma, described in the book of Numbers, is the ritual purification of the individual who had contacted a dead body, a process involving the sacrifice of an unblemished red calf along with a piece of cedar wood, a bundle of hyssop and a scarlet thread. The ashes of these elements were mixed in water and sprinkled upon the defiled person or object. The kohein performing the ritual then becomes ritually unclean, and therefore had to bathe himself and his clothes in a ritual Mikveh and was deemed impure until evening. The laws concerning this sacrifice are notoriously difficult to comprehend. Sometimes the process rendered the individual pure while at other times rendered them impure.
A gentile idolater once said to a Rebbe, “These acts which you do appear like sorcery! You bring a heifer, burn it, crush it, and mix its ashes with sticks and thread and if one of you is impure from a corpse, you sprinkle two or three drops of the concoction upon him and tell him he is pure!”
The Rebbe explained this in the following manner, “While there are many commandments that appeal directly to our sense of logic, and still others that after having been commanded make sense to us, there are other laws that entirely defy human understanding. Such a law is this curious procedure for purification from contact with a corpse. To eliminate death we need to eliminate evil, which is accomplished through cutting off its original power supply. The spiritual origins of the red heifer is connected to the last stage of divine transmission before it descends into the realms of evil to give them life. Through this amazing process of burning the red heifer, we assure that the flow of YHVH’s energy remains channeled toward holiness. Evil’s power supply is then permanently halted and the evil itself is fully eliminated.”
The existence of a red heifer conforming to the rigid requirements imposed by halakha is a biological rarity. The law states the animal must be entirely of one color and stipulates a series of tests to ensure the animal’s status. For instance, the cow’s hair must be absolutely straight, this to ensure the animal had not been previously yoked.
According to Jewish tradition, only nine Red Heifers were slaughtered between the time of Moshe to the completion of the second Mikdash. A later Parah recounts eight of these. Moses prepared the first, Ezra the second, Simon the Just and Y’ochanan, the kohein gadol, prepared two each, and Elioenai ben HaQayaph and Hanameel the Egyptian prepared one each.
The absolute rarity of the animal, combined with the detailed ritual in which it is used, gave the red heifer special status among Hebrew traditions. It is cited as the prime example of a khok, or biblical law for which there is no apparent logic, and is therefore deemed of absolute divine origin.
According to tradition, the ceremony took place on the Mount of Olives. A ritually pure kohein slaughtered the heifer, and sprinkled its blood in the direction of the Mikdash seven times. The Red Heifer was then burnt on a pyre, together with crimson dyed wool, hyssop, and cedar wood.
Obtaining such an animal was impossible outside the Mikdash, for only a kohein could declare the animal ritually pure. Thus, one had to buy the ashes of the animal from the Mikdash. However, since only nine of these animals had been sanctified since the time of Moses, only the ashes from a previous sacrifice were available. When one purchased the ashes from a kohein, they simply had to trust that these were actually the ashes from one of these animals. Herein lay tremendous hypocritical chutzpa. While the original law of contacting a dead body was implemented to prevent the counterfeiting of the blood mark, the sacrificial ashes used to ritually purify one who broke the law could easily be counterfeited! This assured an endless supply of these sacred ashes to the Mikdash kohanim.
The rarity of the animal, combined with the complexity of the ceremony related to a proportional increase in expense, therefore one can only guess what this ceremony cost a first century Jew. Obviously, tight control over the system taxed the means of even wealthy Jews. It is telling that Yeshu’s first resurrection was the daughter of a wealthy Mikdash official who feared the cost of the purification ceremony. Thus, even the upper classes of Judean society were not exempt from the Para Aduma.
Because of this onerous penalty, people had resorted to burying their loved ones alive. The crux of the problem lay in a kohein’s authority to declare the state of quietus. Under the law, death was not a matter of the actual physical state of an individual, but a tricky legal issue. By law, one might be declared legally dead, although physically they were still among the living. The trick to avoiding the sacrificial penalty lay in the disposal of the body before invoking the penalty incurred by an official proclamation of death.
Special beds were developed with handles. These “death beds” allowed the transport of the body to the grave. The dying would be cleaned and wrapped in a burial shroud and then transported to the sepulcher were the individual would die of dehydration and/or starvation. The final stage of dehydration is shock. This is characterized by blue-gray skin that’s cold to the touch, a condition noted in both descriptions and depictions.
After three days, the body was inspected to verify an actual state of death, as it was exceptional for an individual to survive three days without water in Judea’s hot climate. After decomposition, the bones were collected and buried, opening up a space in the sepulcher for the next body. Needless to say, by the time of Yeshu, a very real fear of being buried alive had arisen among the Mikdash faithful.
There was however, another subtle twist in the complicated process. Over the centuries, the priests’ sacrificial bloodlust had developed a certain pathological state among the kohanim whereby members derived perverse pleasure from witnessing the suffering of others. Centuries of bloody butchering in the sacrifice of animals had created a breed of coldblooded psychopaths who felt no remorse or empathy towards those over whom they ruled. Thus, the official proclamation of death was often delivered with perverse pleasure to both rich and poor alike. For the kohanim it was, so to speak, a win/win situation. Either loved ones invoked and paid the excessive penalty imposed by the Para Aduma or the kohanim would be able to savor the sounds of misery and suffering that was sweet savor to their ears.
For this reason, death represented not only a legal issue, but a moral one as well. Yeshu had already “raised” several people from the dead by using his priestly power to reverse the decision of death. Tellingly, his first admonishment to the families was to feed the revived “corpse.” However, these acts of resurrection were simply to relieve the pain and suffering of family members. The raising of Lazarus was different. Lazarus would provide a public spectacle, bringing into question Temple law that governed the death process.
This is evidence my research uncovered as to why Jesus raised Lazarus “from the dead.” What evidence can you present for your beliefs?
I will finish Matthew 23 where you stopped short, I wonder why? verse 8-12 ‘But be NOT ye called Rabbi; for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren (members of the 12 tribes). And call no man your father upon the earth; for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters; for one is your Master, even Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.” Is it not amazing that you stopped short when Matthew was quoting Christ just before Christ’s name was mentioned. Most likely you are a crypto/converso/marrano or just a plain lying jew trying to destroy Christianity, just like the many before you such as Bernard Lazare who said we jews are engaged in destroying Christianity. Most likely you are pretending to be defending whites while at the same time destroy their faith. Same old pattern time after time.
Editing SNAFU. That should be “altar,” not “alter.” This was a rough draft from a Youtube video script
Arch if you follow jewish teachings then you will remain clueless. I am wasting my time on your nonsense. The Talmud only began to appear in written form around 400AD. They reject Christ and is not for them anyway. The true Israelites are the dispersed peoples in the New Testament, it is all over the New Testament and they fulfilled the promise to Abraham by becoming many nations and a company of nations. The Talmud is a complete fabrication and has absolutely no basis in scripture. The people of the Old Testament are Hebrews, white Adamic people. If you look up Ashkenzai in Judaism 101 they tell you jews are of Gomer which would make them Japethites, but of course that isn’t true either. If you look up Sephardic they say it is derived from Sepharad which means Spain. Sepharad is a city in Media, this city has nothing whatsoever to do with Spain which is Tarshish in the bible. So they can’t even get their own stories straight.
Classic religious nitpicking, how many angels dance on the head of a pin, reasoning. Of course Jews reject Jesus, he set out to destroy their Temple. If you check the latest news you can see how important that Temple is to this day. Jews maintain a fanatical hatred for Hitler and the National Socialist for the very same reason, they reject and hate Jesus, both men exposed and dismantled the Jews’ centralized financial system. The Temple was the Jews’ prototypical central bank, the first century version of the Federal Reserve. To whom do you say this Temple belongs? Jews? Hebrews? Israelites? Edomites? No matter what you say, The Gospels clearly indicate it belonged to what everyone but people such as yourself recognize as first century Jews.
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.
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.
5 But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
6 And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
Matthew 23
Who was Moses, if not a Jew? If not Jews then what are “scribes and pharisees”? What is a “rabbi” if not a Jew? Who uses the phylactery other than Jews? Who has synagogues other than Jews? Who is Matthew talking about if not the Jews? Hebrews? Israelites? Outside the bizzare Christian Identity movement, what do virtually all religions say about the Hebrews and Israelites other than they are the ancient Jew? What’s more, does not this description fit perfectly with the way modern Jews rule, i.e. do as we say, not as we do? How old is Christian Identity anyway? Are there any roots in C.I. past the last fifty years? Yet suddenly we are to all jump on the new religious bandwagon and reject what has been common knowledge or the last three thousand years? You need a lot more proof to convince.
If these Biblical passages were referring to Edomites, would they not say Edomites? After all, does not the Bible provide specific references to the Edomites? Why would that be avoided in the New Testament? It is the height of religious absurdity to claim that “white people” are the true “Israelites” and modern Jews are no relation to these ancient bloodthirsty people. If you want to be the new Jew and continue trying to claim this religious cult of bloody murder as your own, than do so by all means. However, I will continue to reject the sickening religious outrage the Judaic based religions have foisted off on the stupid, gullible goyim.
What’s more trying to usurp the Jews’ religious cult figures serves no one but Jews, Witness how Jews like Arthur Koestler have tried claiming modern Jews are no relation to their bloodthirsty kin. Why would Jews do that and why would any goyim help them promote yet another Jewish lie?
What you are in fact doing is validating the Jews’ claim these silly Biblical myths are true historical accounts. As I wrote earlier, isn’t about time humanity moves beyond the Jews’ religious death cult focused on blood and sacrifice? Why not look for truth instead of trying to invent absurd new religious dogma? Haven’t other Christian and Muslim cults invented enough fictitious religious bullshit already?
The ‘Scouts have been on some hard times for all their pandering and cucking even before this bone headed move, and now that they’ve done this, it’s katy bar the door.
No way out but Partition.
I agree that this is a lousy turn of events but calling a 16 year old a whore was way over the top. This is a minor who has probably had all of her political ideas fed to her by her progressive lawyer father. It’s been said that our brains don’t fully mature until we’re about 25 — I tend to cut people slack until that age (and tell them not to make any irreversible decisions before then).
“This is a minor who has probably had all of her political ideas fed to her by her progressive lawyer father.”
Her father like her is a mindless repeater. He had all his ideas fed to him by his TV and Mommy Professor who are also mindless repeaters. After people have been conditioned to that age, you can’t do much with them. Some can think their way out of it, but most can’t because most people can’t think.
That is why Cultural Marxists go after our children.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX3EZCVj2XA
They used to call themselves “progressives” in the Soviet Union as well.
If they control these kids minds from childhood to college they become eternal sophomores – one who has had a little education and believes they are worldly and wise.
There are alternatives…
Trail Life USA (TLUSA or commonly Trail Life) is a faith-based non-aligned Scouting organization that provides youth mentorship and character development to more than 26,000 boys in the United States. The organization was founded in 2013 in reaction to changes in the membership policy of the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) to allow the participation of openly gay youth. All charters of Trail Life USA must pledge to follow a “Statement of Faith”; the organization states that non-Christians and those who affirm homosexuality are not eligible to lead or charter in the group as these beliefs contradict their “Statement of Faith”. However, youths of all or no religious beliefs are allowed to join.
[semi off topic]
Some “free” network TV: ELEMENTARY, CBS series about Sherlock Holmes
https://www.cbs.com/shows/elementary/video/DWvFnbN3c6YdG_zwfy_3ajI76wTzGptz/elementary-once-you-ve-ruled-out-god/
One must turn off ad blocker for this to work. First aired 5/7- may not always be available, so look now. Watson is now Oriental female- of course. No credit given to Conan Doyle.
This episode [“you’ve ruled put God”] is heavily about White Nationalism and how rotten we are. We want to kill all non-Whites. Christian Identity is mentioned. We are terrorists. If above link fails, do your own search- CBS, ELEMENTARY. once you get to the site look for the May 7 episode.
Feminism, ‘gay’ rights, sex change operations, mass immigration of sub normal third world types, ‘civil’ rights, these are the major ills or western civilization. It’s all related to left wing craziness, communism, these crazoids resent western civilization and want rid of it. They are so incredibly stupid and out of touch, I don’t think they have any idea of what they would replace it with. To me they have never progressed beyond the level of bratty kids who resent their wealthy parents. Modern leftists in the west could not possibly be more irresponsible, they are destroying the basic qualities of the western world, some of which took hundreds of years or more to create.
Boy scouts was always anti white. I spent 2 years in that cult in the late 60s, and they were always calling us indians, trying to indoctrinate us into thinking we were indians. I knew I was not and I always hated that Marxist cult, and finally I just refused to go anymore. Good riddance boy scouts.