Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old March 13th, 2006 #21
Aryan Lord
Senior Member
 
Aryan Lord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietus
I have been reading Temple of Wotan by Ron McVan, which in the beginning, covers the origins of jesus christ, namely by applying the feats of men like Apollonius, to the jesus character.

I had theorized that the crucifiction of jesus was stolen from Wotan hanging and spearing himself to gain knowledge of the runic futhark, which is also covered(and confirmed) in Temple of Wotan.
Quietus my comrade, get yourself a copy of "Aryan Sun Myths.The Origin of Religion" by the great Aryanist Charles Morris. Easily obtainable via Amazon as is his "Aryan Race". I recommend them both.
Morris provides substantial evidence to prove that the xrist myth was just a concoction of much earlier Aryan sun hero myths.
 
Old March 13th, 2006 #22
Aryan Lord
Senior Member
 
Aryan Lord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,719
Default

Quote:
QUOTE=Durban]I am not a Christian, but I do know that Yeshua (Jesus) was in no way a "Jew".
Where is your evidence?

Quote:
The word "Jew" was coined by Far-Eastern European's who called their kingdom "Khazar" after their conversion to Judaism. They seduced gullable Western European people into believing they were kin of their Christian religion's founder.
What is the point that you are trying to make?
If you are saying that the khazars were European and hence unrelated to the Hebrew jesus then surely you are saying that jesus was a jew/judaean/kike/hebrew[cross out the terms you which offend you].

Quote:
"Jesus" was a Judean, a middle eastern desert dweller who preached mono-theism for whatever reason.
Therefore a kike and not an Aryan.
Quote:
He was not a "Jew".
There were no "Jews" in Roman times. Do some research.
You are playing with words.Lets drop the semantic games and focus on debating the issues! Evidence would be a good starting point!
 
Old March 13th, 2006 #23
Mcintosh
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
The word "Jew" never appeared until the 18th century.
And? I do not give a fuck what you call the people, what does the word jew have to do with the jews as a race and religion.
 
Old March 14th, 2006 #24
Quietus
Berserker for Wotan
 
Quietus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Midgard
Posts: 830
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryan Lord
Quietus my comrade, get yourself a copy of "Aryan Sun Myths.The Origin of Religion" by the great Aryanist Charles Morris. Easily obtainable via Amazon as is his "Aryan Race". I recommend them both.
Morris provides substantial evidence to prove that the xrist myth was just a concoction of much earlier Aryan sun hero myths.
Thank you for the suggestion, Aryan Lord. I will look into these titles!

I think that it would be beneficial for all xtians to study where their "savior" really comes from.
__________________
"At every door-way,
ere one enters,
one should spy round,
one should pry round
for uncertain is the witting
that there be no foeman sitting,
within, before one on the floor." -Odin, from the Hávamál (Olive Bray's translation)
 
Old March 14th, 2006 #25
Abzug Hoffman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,483
Default

Please note the Khazar story was started by the Jews back in the day when they were looking to have a homeland in Europe and were trying to convince everybody that they were Europeans. There is no evidence the Khazar people ever converted to Judaism - maybe one or more of their royal family did - and there is no evidence that modern Jews were ever Khazars.

After oil was discovered in the Middle East, the Jews suddenly wanted Israel and no other spot, which they got. But, they may now want another homeland in Europe, it would be handy and the Middle East is fairly crummy, so they keep the Khazar story going, hoping someday to get some Europeans to "give" them another homeland in Europe. It's only fair, you know, because the Europeans haven't suffered enough to be forgiven for the Holocaust, yet.
 
Old March 14th, 2006 #26
Abzug Hoffman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,483
Default

If you want to know about Jesus read the Gospel of Mark.
 
Old March 14th, 2006 #27
winky
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryan Lord
"Anglo-Saxon"? From the Levant? Methinks that you have got both your geography and history a trifle confused!
Nah, I was being sarcastic.

I take it you haven't run into that very peculiar American school of "thought" known as Christian Identity?
 
Old March 15th, 2006 #28
Aryan Lord
Senior Member
 
Aryan Lord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abzug Hoffman
If you want to know about Jesus read the Gospel of Mark.
A gospel that was aimed specifically at a jewish readership?
 
Old March 15th, 2006 #29
Aryan Lord
Senior Member
 
Aryan Lord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by winky
Nah, I was being sarcastic.

I take it you haven't run into that very peculiar American school of "thought" known as Christian Identity?
I have indeed and its English variant, British Israelism.
There are many on this forum who would seek to convince us that not only did jewsus exist[despite lack of independant evidence] but that he was a full blooded Nordic Aryan!
There is nothing more pitiful than for a grown man to cling to his childhood nursery tales! Rather than discard the lie of jesus they distort that which is already a lie.
 
Old March 15th, 2006 #30
grep14w
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 283
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietus
Thank you for the suggestion, Aryan Lord. I will look into these titles!

I think that it would be beneficial for all xtians to study where their "savior" really comes from.
If you have not done so already, take a look at http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/. A well put together website covering the topic of the non-historical nature of the Jesus myth; also debunks the Jewish myths of the Old Testament. A good introduction to the topic from a non-racialist (AFAIK) writer.
 
Old March 16th, 2006 #31
Aryan Lord
Senior Member
 
Aryan Lord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grep14w
If you have not done so already, take a look at http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/. A well put together website covering the topic of the non-historical nature of the Jesus myth; also debunks the Jewish myths of the Old Testament. A good introduction to the topic from a non-racialist (AFAIK) writer.
Indeed. You may recall the thread I initiated on the subject some time ago.

http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=16840
 
Old March 16th, 2006 #32
PatrickMc
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 103
Default

.....Our Christ was neither "jewish", nor were the antiChrist "jews" ever the Israelites of Scripture; those are the "jewish" lies, and it appears the accusers are the ones buying the lies they blame others of swallowing...
 
Old March 16th, 2006 #33
Aryan Lord
Senior Member
 
Aryan Lord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PatrickMc
.....Our Christ was neither "jewish", nor were the antiChrist "jews" ever the Israelites of Scripture; those are the "jewish" lies, and it appears the accusers are the ones buying the lies they blame others of swallowing...
Oh dear is that you yahweh777?
Apart from your own deranged rantings do you actually have any evidence to support your `views`?
 
Old March 16th, 2006 #34
PatrickMc
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 103
Default

Search_Willie_Martin_Studies All WordsAny WordsExact Phrase

The Virgin Birth, Jesus Was Not A Jew

All across the world, everyday, in nominal Judeo-Christianity, there is a so‑called minister who teaches the blasphemous doctrine that Jesus Christ was a Jew. If you ask the average deceived blasphemer who calls himself a Christian who Jesus was, he will tell you that Jesus was a Jew.

NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH. JESUS WAS NOT A JEW RACIALLY, JESUS WAS NOT A JEW POLITICALLY, AND JESUS WAS NOT A JEW RELIGIOUSLY Anyone who disagrees with the expressed teachings in the New Covenant of Jesus Christ is guilty of blaspheming the doctrines of Christ.

To call Jesus Christ an antichrist Jew is to call God an antichrist Jew, because the simple truth is for those who will read their Bibles that there are a number of reasons why Jesus Christ could not have been a Jew. First of all, he could not have been a Jew because he was God in the flesh. For those of you who do not believe this, you need to read John 1:18 (AST):

"No one has seen God at any time. The Only‑Begotten God, Who is in the bosom of the Father, He explains."

Now you may say, "Well, that is not in my King James." That is true. This is not in your King James Bible. But it is in the original Greek autographs of the New Testament. The original Greek reads monogenhj qeoj(monogenes theos) instead of monogenhj uioj(monogenes uios), which is what the King James translators had in the limited texts they used. The fact of the matter is, however, that nearly every Greek text before 400 AD and most every early quotation of this passage read Only‑Begotten God.

Antichrist Jews do not believe in the God of the Bible; instead their political and religious philosophy is the philosophy of Babylon and it is stated clearly in their Babylonian Talmud. To say that Jesus Christ was a Jew or of the Jews is nothing less than willful Bible ignorance. The antichrist Jews and the atheistic philosophies that they have spawned and bred across this world have always attacked true Christianity by attacking the deity, that is, godship, of Jesus Christ.

It is the Talmud that says that Jesus should have been boiled in his own excrement and it is the Talmud that says that Mary was raped by a Roman soldier. It was the Jews who murdered the Only‑Begotten God, Jesus Christ, as clearly recorded in your Christian Scriptures. In fact, when the Jews murdered Jesus, they cried out for His blood to be on their hands and the hands of their children, even though they try today to blame His death and place the guilt of His blood on the Romans. (Notice in the following passage that Pontius Pilate washed his hands of the guilt of the blood of the Only‑Begotten God.)

"Pilate said to them, 'What then may I do to Jesus called the Anointed?' They all (the mongrel Jews) said to him, 'Let Him be crucified.' But he said, 'For what bad thing did He do?' But they the more cried out, saying, 'Let Him be crucified!' And Pilate, seeing that nothing is gained, but rather an uproar happened, taking water he washed the hands before the crowd, saying, 'I am innocent from this blood; you will see.' And answering, all the people said, 'His blood is on us and on our children.'" (Matthew 27:22‑25 AST)

From this passage, it should also be noticed that when the mongrel atheistic Jews were asked what bad thing Jesus had done, they gave no answer. This is the same Jewish tactic that they employ today. Anyone who speaks out against the Jew and openly displays the Jews to be the enemies of God that they are, as did Jesus Anointed many times, is usually exploited, lied against, and destroyed by the Jews and those who help them, even though he or she committed no crime.

It is very obvious that those we know as Jews today, those descendants of the murderers of Jesus Anointed, are just as guilty of His blood as their ancestors. They are indeed Christ‑killers, and anyone who associates with Jews and helps the Jews is also guilty of their murderous crimes; they are guilty of the blood of Jesus Christ, and will be for all eternity. It is clear that the Jews hate Jesus Christ. And Jesus Christ hates the Jews. Jesus told the Jews in John 8:21‑47 (AST):

"...I go away, and you will seek Me. And you will die in your failures. Where I go, you are not able to come...You are from below; I am from above. You are from this world, I am not from this world...If you were the children of Abraham, you would do the works of Abraham. But now you seek to kill Me...Abraham did not do this. YOU DO THE WORKS OF YOUR FATHER...IF GOD WERE YOUR FATHER, YOU WOULD LOVE ME...you are not able to hear My Word. You are of your father the Diabolical One, and the lusts of your father you wish to do. That one was a murderer from the beginning, and he has not stood in the truth because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own, because he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I speak the truth you are not persuaded by Me...for this reason you do not hear, because you are not of God."

Now I know what you are thinking. Did Jesus not forgive the Jews on the cross? Did He not say, "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do."

Absolutely not! To say this is to blaspheme the blood of Christ and the Mentality of Separation. To say this is to believe a lie and be damned!

Once again, all honest scholars agree that this verse was not in the original autographs of the New Testament. All honest translations omit this passage. All honest preachers teach that Jesus never said this. Everyone else is simply making and helping make a lie, for even if translators accept this spurious passage, then they should translate it Father forgive them not, for they know what they are doing . (See footnote at Luke 23:34 in the AST). Instead, these dishonest, Jewish, and Jew‑influenced traitors to the White race (if they are white at all) fall into the category we have already stated, namely,

"...outside [the gates], the dogs and pharmakeia promoters and the whores and the murderers and the idolaters and everyone loving and making a lie" (Rev. 22:15 AST).

Christ prayed about His enemies the Jews:

“ ...THEY THAT HATE ME WITHOUT A CAUSE ARE MORE THAN THE HAIRS OF MINE HEAD: THEY THAT WOULD DESTROY ME, BEING MINE ENEMIES WRONGFULLY, ARE MIGHTY...Let not them that wait on thee, O Lord GOD of hosts, be ashamed for my sake: let not those that seek thee be confounded for my sake, O God of Israel. Because for thy sake I have borne reproach; shame hath covered my face. I AM BECOME A STRANGER UNTO MY BRETHREN, AND AN ALIEN UNTO MY MOTHER ’ S CHILDREN . For the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me...LET NOT THE PIT (grave) SHUT HER MOUTH UPON ME...DELIVER ME BECAUSE OF MINE ENEMIES (The jews)...MINE ADVERSARIES (The jews) ARE ALL BEFORE THEE...THEY (The jews) GAVE ME ALSO GALL FOR MY MEAT; AND IN MY THIRST THEY (The jews) GAVE ME VINEGAR TO DRINK. (By this we know it is speaking of Christ) LET THEIR (the Jews) TABLE BECOME A SNARE BEFORE THEM: and that which should have been for their (the Jews) welfare, LET IT BECOME A TRAP. LET THEIR (The Jews) EYES BE DARKENED, THAT THEY (The Jews) SEE NOT...POUR OUT THINE INDIGNATION UPON THEM (The Jews), AND LET THY WRATHFUL ANGER TAKE HOLD OF THEM (The Jews). LET THEIR (The Jews) HABITATION BE DESOLATE...ADD INIQUITY UNTO THEIR (The Jews) INIQUITY: AND LET THEM (The Jews) NOT COME INTO THY RIGHTEOUSNESS. LET THEM (The Jews) BE BLOTTED OUT OF THE BOOK OF THE LIVING, AND NOT BE WRITTEN WITH THE RIGHTEOUS ...The seed also of his servants shall inherit it: and they that love his name shall dwell therein. ” (Psalm 69)

These people are guilty of the sin or failure described in that same chapter in Revelation, verse 18 (AST):

"For I testify together with everyone hearing the words of the prophecy of this Scroll: If anyone adds to these things, God will add upon him the plagues having been written in this Scroll. And if anyone takes away from the words of the Scroll of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the Book of Life, and out of the Separated city, and of the things having been written in this Scroll."

ANOTHER JEWISH LIE IS THE CLAIM JESUS WAS NOT BORN OF A VIRGIN . If the Jews are going to destroy the Christian faith and eradicate it from American institutions, including the schools and churches, it is very important for them to convince people that Jesus Christ was not born of a virgin, as our Christian Scriptures explicitly tell us He was, and they must convince people that Jesus Christ's birth was not miraculous.

Whenever a person denies the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, he blasphemes the doctrines of Christ and he blasphemes the Word of the Living God and he is, therefore, antichrist. The World Counsel of Churches and the National Counsel of Churches are nothing more than Jew‑orchestrated, Jew‑inspired front groups created for the purpose of destroying Christianity; and I want you to know that they have been extremely successful in the last fifty years in institutionalizing their antichrist humanistic philosophies in America and in white Christian nations. It is a blatant lie and gross act of intellectual dishonesty to deny that the Scripture does not say that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin. We read in Matthew 1:23 (AST):

"'Behold, the virgin will conceive in womb and will bear a Son, and they will call His name ‘ Emmanuel,' which is translated, 'God with us.'"

The word virgin is translated for parq[!]noj(parthenos), and as Liddle and Scott and every other Greek scholar agrees, this word means "a virgin, an unmarried youth, pure, chaste." This word was translated into the Latin virgo from which we get virgin. Thus, anyone who says that Jesus Christ was not born of a virgin is an antichrist Jew liar. Antichrist Jews do not like this verse anyway because once again it shows that Jesus was God with us or God in the flesh.

Those groups who deny these things and others like them were infiltrated and created by Communist Jews and antichrists. They were evil in their conception and creation. Such groups sponsor the perversion of the Word of God, and they set themselves up as phony‑teachers who are willing to lie about the Greek language. These people fit the profile of those described in the Bible as having itching ears and ever learning but never able to come to a saving knowledge of truth.

"For these are those creeping into houses and leading silly women captive, having been heaped with failures, being led by various lusts, always learning and never being able to come to a full knowledge of truth" (II Timothy 3:6‑7 AST).

These antichrist, mutual admiration societies have invaded every denomination that they could infiltrate in the last fifty years, all for the express purpose of corrupting that which, in many cases, was already corrupt. What we are talking about here is Jew strategy. I want to explain to you why it is important for the antichrist to deny the virgin birth of the Lord Jesus Christ.

It is really very simple, for if Jesus was not born of a virgin as the ungodly try tell us, then that means that He was just another religious figure or just a prophet. Some of the humanist antichrists usually admit that He was a "good man," and in much of their literature, that is the approach that they use. However, they use this strategy so that they may deny the truth while they appear to be at least credible.

The problem with this evil thinking, however, is that it calls God Almighty a liar, because God's Word expressly teaches that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin. Those of you who think that the Jews believe the Old Testament need to wake up to the truth. If they believed the Old Testament, they would believe in Jesus Christ, because all of the prophecies of the Old Testament were fulfilled with His first coming, and all the prophecies of the New Testament were fulfilled in His second coming, which began on the Day of Pentecost and culminated in the destruction of the Jewish economy in 70 AD.

The only thing that Jews and ungodly white men believe in is their appetites, passions, and money. So it is important for these ungodly antichrists to deny the truth of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, because if you believe that lie, then you will be believing in another Jesus. You will not be believing in the Jesus of the Bible. If you believe that lie, you will be believing another gospel and not the gospel taught in the New Covenant of Jesus Christ. Paul said that such people who believe in a phony Jesus, a mythical Jesus that has no reality in the Holy Writings of the New Covenant, they were accursed, and I believe him. And they are believing in another Jesus if they believe that Jesus was a Jew as well.

Now for those of you who will take the time and go back and study the so‑called early Christian Church fathers, you will find that the antichrist Jews have not changed their tactic in attacking the deity of Jesus Christ since the first century. The Jews were always trying to get the Christian Church to compromise the essential principles of the Christian faith, and top on their list was to deny the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

As I said before, if a person refuses to believe the teachings of the New Covenant about the virgin birth of Jesus, they are not a Christian. That does not mean that they are not religious, because we know that they are. But they would be a lot better off to have no religion at all than to have the wrong religion not based on the Word of God. A person with the wrong religion, the wrong belief system is just as damned as the atheist, but of course even the atheist is religious in an irreligious way. So when we look at the early records, we find that the Jews were busy making bad translations of the Bible and even of the Septuagint. We find that there were Jews who wanted to call themselves Christians but reject the belief of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. We find that there were Jews seeking to infiltrate the Christian Church right from the very beginning of Christianity.

So there have always been people who were willing to admit that Jesus Christ was a religious prophet or that He was a good man and they try to make Jesus to conform to their perverted religious philosophy. But I am here to tell you today that that is an impossibility. You do not conform Jesus to your subjective and perverted philosophies, you either conform to Jesus or you suffer the second death, period. All of these people, off in never‑never land, practicing perverted religions that have no reality in the Word of God, are lying to themselves, and most of them enjoy lying to themselves.

That is why they do not study their Bibles, why they do not read in total context; they get their religion out of pamphlets and from antichrists behind the pulpits. They go to their churches out of guilt or for social advantage, some to make money, some to pick up women, some because they like music.

Christ is not a reality to them. Christianity is just a form and a fashion. It is as meaningless as the lies that they tell themselves. They soothe their conscious with a hot iron. They play religious games and they are willingly deceived, and so it should not surprise us that they go into deeper deception, into more extravagant speculations and speculative philosophies.

Why? Because they have turned their back on the Son of God. They have refused to bend the knee and enter the communion of God's Appointed Savior. So it is a case of the blind leading the blind into a ditch of destruction. No, Jesus Christ could not have been a Jew, because His Father was Almighty God. More than this, the Bible tells us that Jesus Christ was God Almighty in the flesh, Emmanuel.

He was not just a good man, not just a religious figure on the same par and equality of Mohammed and Buddha and Confucius. This is what the antichrist Jews want to teach people. They want people to believe that Jesus Christ was no better than Buddha or Mohammed and that the Christian religion is just another world religion, possibly no better or no worse than Judaism or Buddhism or any of the other ‑isms of this ungodly world. If you believe that goddamned lie, then you are a goddamned person, and my friends, I am not cussing, I am not cursing, I am telling you the Bible truth.

"The one persuaded in Him is not judged, but the one not persuaded has already been judged; for he has not been persuaded in the presence of the authority of the only‑begotten Son of God. And this is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved darkness more than the Light, for their works were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the Light and does not come to the light, that his works may not be exposed" (John 3:18‑20 AST).

Anybody, and I do not care who they are, who is willing to place the Christian faith of the New Covenant on the same equal basis with other world religions is an antichrist, and has never known or met the real Jesus. This includes all of the Masons, all of the Rosacrucians, all of the Humanists, all of the deists, and all of the antichrist Jews.

The Lake of Fire is going to be filled with all of those liars and all those who help make lies, even though it was created for the Devil and his messengers. You see, that is the point, if you are helping the liars of this world, then you are helping them make a lie. If you call yourself a Christian and you do not accept and believe in the virgin birth of the Lord Jesus Christ, then you are a liar, because you are not a Christian.
 
Old March 16th, 2006 #35
PatrickMc
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 103
Default

If you are a sexual pervert, homosexual, voyeur, lesbian, and you lie and call yourself a Christian, you have sealed your doom. You see, men may lie to one another, but they cannot lie to God's true preachers, and they cannot lie to anybody that has ever really read the Bible and cares what it says, and if you cannot lie to God's true servants, then you sure as the Lake of Fire and as sure as the second death cannot lie to God.

Someone may say, Pastor Herrell, what right do you have condemning all of these people to everlasting punishment?, and my answer is that I have no right, but God has all rights, for God is Just and all that I am doing is repeating the Just Judgments of the Just God.

Because God's Word exists, all men are judged now, today, all men are pre‑judged in the Word of God and especially those evil liars and ungodly scumbags who call themselves Christians and deny the virgin birth of the Lord Jesus Christ, or deny the deity, the godship, of the Lord Jesus Christ. No, there is no compromising the essential truths of the Word of God; compromise is the opening of the door to the antichrist Jew. Why is the Methodist Church so corrupt? Why are the Baptist Churches so corrupt? Why are the Lutheran Churches so corrupt? It is because they let the leaven in. It does not take much. In the beginning, it may have been just one little precept or principle that they compromised, one little thing, but in the end we know, as did Paul, that,

“ Your boast is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens all the lump?" (I Corinthians 5:6 AST).

At the turn of the century, Jews and half‑breed Jews had infiltrated the Christian colleges and seminaries. The Jew money power had gained control of the publishing companies, and from that time forward, they began promoting their antichrist philosophy of Humanism.

In the late 1800s, they promoted the Masonic lodge which they had gained control of through the B'nai B'rith, and through the efforts of Albert Pike, the Jew who wrote Morals and Dogma . And so in the absence of real Bible preaching, the Devil filled the vacuum with his perversion of truth.

What you see in America today, the lawlessness, the tyranny in government, the break‑down of moral order and decency, the Plutocratic philosophy of modern America, is all a result of orchestrated planning, wherein a corrupted, God‑hating, minority of people were determined to corrupt the majority of decent, God‑fearing white people. They did not just begin in the 1880s, the antichrist Jew has been around for two‑thousand years, documented by your New Testament, but the World Zionists set in motion a plan, even before the Civil War in America, and by the 1880s they began the big push for the destruction of white, Christian America.

Everything that I am telling you is easily documented. If you do not believe that the nominal Christian seminaries and colleges in this country are utterly corrupt and void of the presence of Almighty God, then you need to read the Anointed Standard Translation of the New Testament and then ask yourself if the professors are teaching what It says. You need to go ask the professors why they are not teaching what the Word of God really says.

I do not care what denomination you care to cite, they are all corrupt and the vast majority are utterly blasphemous and make God sick to His stomach. You may still believe that you can be a member of some church because they are just a little wrong here or a little wrong there. But God said you are either with Him or against Him (Luke 11:23 AST). Yes, these people do in fact make God sick to His stomach, and we know what happens when someone get sick to his stomach, as we read in Revelations,

"So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I am about to vomit you out of My mouth" (Revelation 3:16 AST).

So you see, it was important for the Jews to spread the lie that Jesus was not born of a virgin. It was important for them to change the word virgin to young woman in their corrupt versions of the Scriptures, because if they can destroy the truth of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, they know that they can destroy American Christianity and world Christianity, because if Jesus was not born of a virgin, then He was not God in the flesh and He was not the Christ, and God was not His Father, and you have no Savior today, and you have no hope of eternal life. That is the truth.

But thanks be to God that Jesus Christ was God in the flesh and that He paid the blood debt of honor on Calvary that you might be saved, if you will only believe Him. You see, that is what it really means to believe in Jesus, to believe what His Word tells you, and to act on it and stand on it and live on it. And when I say salvation, as a Separatist minister, I am speaking both spiritually and racially, and if you do not know that, you had better get some Separatist literature and find the real Jesus. A lot of these Judeo types that I have run into, and that you will run into, can only be described as grossly ignorant and disturbed people and a lot of them can also only be described as demented or demon‑filled people. You can know this by some of the excuses that they come up with to defend their antichrist pastor and some of the lies that he has told them while he pick‑pockets their life savings and helps the Jews damn them and their children.

I have far more regard for a deceived believer who is simply an occasional so‑called church‑goer than I will ever have for the antichrists in the pulpits, because to call yourself a pastor or a preacher is to claim to be a religious authority on Christianity. More than this, it is to claim to be appointed by Almighty God as a teacher in your generation. That is a very solemn and holy appointment, and all of the perverts in the pulpits who aid and abet the antichrists on a weekly basis are without excuse, because they have a Bible, and most of them pretend to preach from the Bible.

But we of course know that they do not and that they actually preach what they are told by their superiors. You see, the Jews have to control the pulpits, because if the preachers were to start actually studying and preaching what the Bible really says, some of them might find the real Separated Jesus and become wild‑eyed Christian fanatics, like the Separatist ministers, and that thought scares the living hell out of the goddamned antichrist Jews.

All right, maybe I miss‑spoke, how can you scare the hell out of Hell? The antichrist Jews are the Kingdom of Hell. Anyway, that it is what the Jews fear, they fear the truth of the Word of God. They fear real Separatist Bible study. So, invariably, when you run into some of these deceived and damned Holy Spirit haters called Judeos, who speak the blasphemy that Jesus was a Jew, they always try to rationalize their ignorance by ignorance.

They say, Does it not say in the Bible that Jesus was a Jew? And the correct answer to this is, NO, THAT IS NOT WHAT IT SAYS, IT ACTUALLY SAYS THAT HE WAS A JUDEAN. Some others say, Does it not say that Jesus was King of the Jews? No, Jesus never said that about Himself, that sign was merely placed over His suffering body as mockery, and what the sign actually said was that He was King of the Judeans.

Some try to make Jesus a Jew because He kept the law of Moses. But the Jew's religion has never been in the keeping with the laws of Moses, but only in the perverting of the teachings of Moses, because the law of Moses taught racial purity. The Jews who live today are not of pure Israelite stock. This is a point of some confusion for many people. They do not realize that the Jews today are not the Hebrews or the Israelites of the Old Testament, and they do not realize that at the time of the writing of the New Testament the term 'Jew' did not mean the same thing as the term 'Jew' does today.

This leads us to the question, what was meant by 'Jew' at the time of the King James translation? The answer is the word 'Jew' was in reference to the seedy money lenders and foreign traders who were well known in Europe and England as Jews. They were for the most part a dark swarthy people, either Hasidic or Ashkenazi. They were well known to be an anti‑Christian race of infidels.

So at the time the word Jew was put into the King James Version, it was in reference to people who were thought to have come from Palestine or the so‑called "Holy Land." We say put in because the original King James translation did not contain the word 'Jew,' just as the AST does not contain the word 'Jew.' The Ashkenazi and Russian and Polish Jews were a people who never had any kinship to the Israelite or Judean peoples. That is to say, by racial heritage. They were a people who had become Jewish by a decree of a king, who, according to tradition and legend, had called to the kingdom of Khazar or Kazaria representatives of the three major prevailing religions, that of Christianity, Muhammadanism, and Judaism. After hearing each of the three make their cases about their religions, he chose materialistic atheistic Judaism as the official religion under threat of death for all the people under the Khazars.

It is the Khazar peoples of Russia on the southern Russian plains who became the well‑known Ashkenazi Jews. So, we see that it becomes very important to define what is meant by the term "Jew." Thus, at the time of the paraphrasing of the King James or the periphrastic King James Version, the term Jew was not defined clearly in the public mind. To the clergyman, it was translated for the term Ioudeas . To the average person it was in reference to the immoral money‑lender or local pimp. To the educated bishop and clergyman who had studied the Latin and the Greek, they understood that the Greek word translated Jew in reality was primarily a word used in reference to a geographical location or a people living in a geographical location. They knew that the Judeans were composed of children of the tribes of Israel, and that therefore the term Judean stood for any and all Israelites who had come to live and be governed in the kingdom of Judea.

They also understood that the geographical term encompassed any people that had come to live in Judea such as Canaanites and the Edomites. These were very specific racial terms that were also geographical terms, as was true of most racial and national designations early in the history of the Middle East. At the time of Christ for example, the term Galilean was primarily used in reference to a Celtic people who had settled in that region a hundred years or so before the birth of Christ, having its origin in the word Gaul .

Thus, while Christ was indeed of the tribe of Judah, and while He was indeed a Judean Israelite, He was not a Jew. He was of the tribe of Judah through His mother Mariam as recorded in her genealogy in Luke 3:23, and He was of the tribe of Judah through His mother's husband Joseph as recorded in Matthew 1:1. But He was not a mongrel Jew.

From the time of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, the Edomite and mongrel Canaanite population of Palestine became clearly manifested as enemies of the Living God by practicing an unsanctified and an unapproved, illegal, and illicit religion that from that day forward became know as Judaism.

As we have said before, Jesus may have practiced the laws of the Old Testament Israelites, but that did not make Him a Jew by religion. Contrary to misinformation and propaganda, the Jews do not accept or believe in the Old Testament as their rule of faith and practice. They do not even accept as their rule of faith the first five books of the Old Testament or the Pentateuch, supposedly the Torah, as they like to call it. Judaism is clearly predicated upon the atheistic philosophy of Talmudism.

They may go around spouting off Old Testament Scripture but what they are really quoting is their own Jewish Masoretic text, the so‑called Hebrew of the Old Testament that was prepared by a bunch of mongrel Talmudic Jews in the last 1100 years. They do not quote and practice the Old Testament as recorded in the Septuagint, the only Scriptures that Jesus Christ and His Apostles read, quoted, and believed. Like the Roman Catholics, the Jews claim that their traditions, and especially those oral traditions that became written down in the Talmud, supersede and carry far more authority than anything written in the Old Testament or Mosaic writings. In fact, the Jews claim that Moses cannot even be understood without the explanations of the Talmud.

Thus, Judaism, or Satanism, is simply a carrying forward of the syncretic, mystical, materialistic philosophy of Babylon. They claim that the ignorant man studies the Bible, the learned man studies the Talmud, and those of the highest calling study the Kabbalah, which is the insanity of the Sephiroth and Quiphiroth tree, what they call the tree of good and evil. This has nothing to do with the Bible, nor is its foundation to be found therein.

Moreover, history clearly proves that the atheistic philosophy known as Judaism was first adopted by race‑ mixing Jews who had been captured and were taken to Babylon and who capitulated to their God‑hating captors. Judaism is not Israelitism or Hebraism. The indisputable facts of history prove beyond dispute and denial that the atheistic philosophy know as Judaism, and in modern terms known as Zionism, is completely atheistic and God‑hating, according to the Christian New Testament. It is a religion built by non‑believing mongrels who have sought to counterfeit the true Israelites and the true Judeans.

You may say that they cannot be atheists because they do believe in God and I will tell you that you have been deceived by these atheistic scumbags and that you have not read II John:

"Everyone transgressing and not abiding in the teaching of the Anointed does not have God. The one abiding in the teaching, this one has the Father and the Son"(2 John 9 AST).

That is the truth, clear and simple. If they do not have Jesus, and we already know that they don't, then they cannot have God. If they do not have God, then they are by definition atheists. No amount of semantics can get them out of the grave of death they were born to die in.

Many people find it difficult to understand why it was in the beginning Jews who financed the Communist Bolshevik revolution in Russia. They find it difficult to understand why it was the "American Jews" who stole and conveyed the secrets of the atomic bomb to the Russian. How could Jews be so loyal to Stalin, who had murdered and imprisoned so many of them? The answer is very simple, godless Communism is atheistic in theory and in practice. Judaism is atheistic in theory and in practice.

Jews can no more pray to the God of the Bible than Communists can pray to Stalin. It is all a matter of their perverse and insane imaginations. Nevertheless, humanistic, atheistic materialism predicated upon an insane philosophy is the same deceptive animal, whether it calls itself Judaism, Communism, or Zionism.

The declared goal of the Jewish, Zionist God‑hating antichrists was to bring about a Jewish state in Palestine. In order to do this, they have been more than willing to destroy any and all other nations and any and all persons who might stand in the way of the achievement of their goal of the world‑state of so‑called Israel. Jewish philosophy is fundamentally insane philosophy predicated upon un‑provable and insane speculations. This does not mean, however, that the Jews are not diabolically a clever and deceitful people. For even the Christian Bible recognizes them to be diabolically deceitful.

On the one hand, the Zionistic Jew promotes atheistic world Communism in order to create divisions between the white Russians, the British and the Americans. At the same time, the Jew works internally in his target nations to demoralize the national will or any resistance toward Jewish thought, through relentless Jewish misinformation and propaganda. Case in point, the world Zionists have from the earliest times used the British‑Israel perversion of misinformation to influence and build thereupon a humanistic, syncretic, and materialistic philosophy of Masonry.

Masonic philosophy is fundamentally religious Humanism. Humanism, as a philosophy, is the creation of the Jewish mind, as is gnosticism and the Thelemites of the OTO. World Masonry was but a revival of paganism wrapped in humanistic philosophy.

Masonry is the exhortation of man at the expense of God under the old lie of the fatherhood of god and the brotherhood of man. Each of the basic principles of Masonic Humanism was predicated upon a cleverly conceived system of lies. Masonry became and has always been fundamentally all things to all men presented in such a way as to be pleasing to all. However, the fundamental principles of Masonic romantic philosophy may be summed up in the tenets of Humanism.

It is agreement upon the beliefs and notions of modern Humanism that has become the prevailing materialistic religion of the twentieth century. It is through the preaching of Humanism that the Jews have subdued the Protestants and the Catholics, and neutralized any opposition from these denominations.

You ask how they have subdued the Catholics, Protestants, and other godless denominations. They have done so through the propagation of little lies that grow into big ones. The little lies pretty soon have everybody believing that Jesus was a Jew, that the Jews are God's chosen people, that the Masoretic text is somehow God's Word, that Mary was not a virgin and that she was raped by a Roman soldier, that Jesus was not really God in the flesh but only a nice guy with long hair, that Jesus forgave the poor, persecuted Jews on the cross for killing Him, that Jesus is coming back to rapture everyone up into Heaven, that the Jews are going to get a second chance, that all races can be saved, that white people are equal to niggers, that you have to be dunked in water to be saved, that you cannot eat pork and go to Heaven, that it is just as right to be one religion as it is another, that Jews believe in the same God as Christians, that faggot sodomites can go to Heaven, that we should hate the sin but love the sinner, etc.

We would do well to remember what the Apostle Paul said in Titus 1:13‑14 (AST):

"This witness is true, for which cause convict them severely, that they may be sound in the persuasion, not listening to Judaizing myths and commandments of men, having perverted the truth."

All of the Jewish lies that I have just listed above are exactly what the Apostle Paul is talking about when he says "Judaizing myths." If you believe any one of these, you are going to be damned and you are going to go to Hell with all of the rest of the Jewish scumbags in the world. If you believe any of these lies, you need to understand that you are deceived and you need to get your Bible, specifically you need to get an AST, and you need to read it and you need to believe it.

If your eternal salvation means anything to you, if the Blood of Jesus Christ means anything at all to you, then you need to get some Separatist literature and you need to read it and you need to get your Bible and do as you are commanded and see if these things are so.

"But test all things, hold fast to the good"(I Thessalonians 5:21 AST).

You need to stop believing men, and start believing God, for the Bible clearly states: "But let God be true and every man a liar" (Romans 3:4 AST). (The Virgin Birth, Jesus Was Not A Jew, And Other Things Jews Deny, by Pastor V.S. Herrell)
 
Old March 16th, 2006 #36
PatrickMc
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 103
Default

Let the reader be informed hereby that we venture upon our theme as an Israelite or non-Jew, addressing other Israelites including Christians. The theologian may find nothing new with respect to Christ as the Son of Man unless it may be the writer’s point of view, and especially the nationalistic implications arising therefrom.

Concerning the latter we beg the reader’s indulgence with respect to the unity of the theme; for we find that such unity is justified by the attitude of Judaism toward the modern political state as well as its historical attitude toward the Christian religion, both of which may be described in a word as disintegrating.

This is by no means the first defense of the postulate that Christ was not a Jew. Ebionitism, “THE EARLIEST OF THE HERESIES,” rested upon the same false assumption that is herein called into question. That heresy denounced Paul and the other apostles who carried Christianity to the Israelites without first converting them to Judaism.

The Ebionites were Judeo-Christians; more Jewish than Christian. Hence, this is but a new answer to an old fallacy in the light of the present. In a book of this limited size and well-nigh boundless scope, much must remain unsaid. I have aimed to state the case for the affirmative of my postulate, cover the main points as outlined, and give my conclusions backed by ancient and modern sources.

Timeless is given to this theme by the recent growth in assertiveness of the Jews throughout Christendom. Such growths have been shown by history to have recurred repeatedly, and to have ended invariably in a catastrophe cor the Jews.

The present tendency in that direction is aggrieved by the tacit assent; not to call it timidity, of certain occupants of Christian pulpits, who by their acquiescence in the Jewish boast that they have given us Christ and our religion, put themselves at an enormous disadvantage before the Israelite world, if not in their own consciences. Their place is in the synagogue.

What then? Must the Israelite world come to the rescue of Christianity from the clutches of modern Ebionitism as did the Greek Christians before and after the Apostle Paul? We Israelites have been accused of cowardice for tolerating this situation. A Jewish writer (Marcus Eli Ravage, A Real Case Against the Jews, Century Magazine, January 1928) has accused us of cowardice because we have refrained from speaking our minds in all frankness about Judaism and the Jews. Courtesy on the critic’s part might have discovered reasons more compatible with good manners, assuming that he was able to do so.

However, this volume accepts the challenge of the critic above mentioned, and I shall leave nothing unsaid that I think needs to be said concerning Judaism and the Jews as the accidental background of Christ and Christianity. Since plain speaking is demanded by our critics and their spokesman, they shall have it, and they have themselves to thank for it.

I must advert also to another challenge; one that more nearly concerns the churches if they wish to escape modern Ebionitism; it is that of a blunt, outspoken old Israelite who said to us, “If God is a Jew, what have we Israelites to do with your religion?” What indeed? Does Christianity meet that challenge today?

We must emphasize the fact that Judaism and the Jews is primarily a collective problem. We are obliged to “indite a whole people,” since it is a concrete challenge that is before us. Individual exceptions are of secondary concern, and must wait till the larger issue is disposed of.

If any hold otherwise the burden of proof rests upon themselves, that much can be shown without going outside of the Old Testament; and backed up by historical analysis and the revelations of archeology and anthropology, there is logically no room for doubt that Galileans and Judeans were no more than neighbors to each others from the time of Rehoboam, son of Solomon, with Judaism as a common cult or “religion” between them, down tot he time of Christ.

Individuals are moreover a matter of individual and personal relationships, and the adjustments thereof require much time and attention. Organized society is also an individual, collectively speaking, and its demands are immediate, especially whenever a coup d’etat is threatened. We can not stop to ask if there are any well disposed persons among those who challenge us and put us to our proofs, especially when they maintain an alien attitude toward our social, political and religious ideals.

A race or people is not to be judged by its best nor its worst, nor by a chance neighbor or acquaintance whom one may like or dislike. Hence, in this case we must rule out the Hebrew prophets just as we do the Jewish criminals of the present day, and likewise the Jews whom we happen to know as individuals; a few among the millions.

In a word, Judaism and Jews must be judged by religious ideals, and adherence to those ideas in mass. As Israelites, as Americans, we ask no more for ourselves, and within our own domain it is our right and our duty to resist whatever is hostile thereto.

In treating this subject as a collective problem it is not intended to exculpate the individual Jews, if indeed that were possible. But it is intended to stress the mighty power of the group over its component parts. That mighty power may be best observed in sub-human animals, as in the herd, drove, pack, flock, swarm and gang.

Among humans, strengthened by the powers of speech and superior organization, by ancient traditions and psychology, a common purpose to prey upon one’s environment may eventuate in a tribe with a parasitic organization and objective.

We invite the attention and the serious study of those interested in the social sciences, and particularly the Jews themselves, to this aspect of their history, and especially to the formative influence of the Talmud upon them for this very purpose. Nobody loves a parasite, or at least nobody should. If our criticisms of the Jews may seem harsh, I rely for their justification on the facts herein presented, on the evidence to be found in the Talmud and other ancient sources, and on present-day criticisms by a thin scattering of Jews against their race and its leader.

In confronting the Christian world one must allow for a wide divergence of views in scriptural exegesis. It would be too much to expect unanimous accord with the views herein expressed, but it is not too much to hope that in the midst of disagreement there may be no disharmony. I have done my utmost to avoid doctrinal differences among Christians.

And Christians of all degree must remember that Israelites outside of the churches have a stake in the purity and perpetuity of Christianity, if on nothing more than social and political grounds.

For CHRISTIANITY IS NOT A HIDE-BOUND RACIAL CULT, BUT A TOLERANT WORLD RELIGION. In America, at least, it is a nation declared by the courts to be a Christian nation that guarantees liberty of religious belief to all, as well as disbelief; but let Judaism gain the upper hand as it has done in Soviet Russia, and its creed of atheism is proclaimed for all, while the Jewish cult remains untouched.

Let not Christian theology, therefore, be offended at the attempt of undrained minds and hands to draw a line of demarcation between that which is sacred and inviolable, and on the other hand its accidental background, the Judaism of antiquity, too primitive and changeless to command respect, to say nothing of reverence and adoration.

Such minds and hands are at least free from the influence of Jewish traditionalism, and for that reason may the more clearly grasp the fact that CHRISTIANITY BELONGS TO THE PRESENT AND THE FUTURE, NOT TO TRADITION, NO, NOR EVEN TO THE CHURCH ALONE, BUT TO THE ENTIRE ISRAELITE WORLD, BECAUSE IT IS ESSENTIALLY AN ISRAELITISH RELIGION, NOT BASED ON JUDAISM; ITS FOUNDER NOT A JEW AND THEREFORE AN ISRAELITE AS THE “SON OF MAN.”

JUDEO-CHRISTIAN HERITAGE A HOAX: It appears there is no need to belabor the absurdity and fallacy of the "Judeo-Christian heritage" fiction, which certainly is clear to all honest theologians. That "Judeo-Christian dialogue" in this context is also absurd was well stated in the author-initiative religious journal, Judaism, Winter 1966, by Rabbi Eliezar Berkowitz, chairman of the department of Jewish philosophy, at the Hebrew Theological College when he wrote: "As to dialogue in the purely theological sense, nothing could be more fruitless or pointless. JUDAISM IS JUDAISM BECAUSE IT REJECTS CHRISTIANITY; AND CHRISTIANITY IS CHRISTIANITY BECAUSE IT REJECTS JUDAISM. What is usually referred to as the JEWISH-CHRISTIAN TRADITIONS EXISTS ONLY IN CHRISTIAN OR SECULARIST FANTASY." There is no doubt this is true! And the fantasy exists in Christian and Secularist minds only because it was implanted there by the persistent propaganda of the masters of intrigue of the ADL-AJC Network. Nevertheless, there can be no doubt that knowledgeable theologians, Jewish and Christians who constantly allude to "our Judeo-Christian heritage" are for their own specious purposes perpetuate a grotesque and fantastic hoax.

Thanks and appreciation are due to my many friends, the value of whose counsel and constructive criticism is beyond estimate. Jacob Elon Conner, New York City, 1936. (The title of this book is “Christ Was Not A Jew,” an Epistle to the Gentiles (Israelites), by Jacob Elon Conner, A.B., Ph.D., and was published in 1936). While reading this remember that whenever he mentions Gentiles, that in most cases he is saying Israelite or Israelites, but there are a few cases in which the word Jew would be better used. And whenever he uses the word Jew, in most cases, it should be Israelite. But I suspect that the author did not know the Israel Truth and so made these errors because of it.

Why should Christianity, since it is a world religion, be tied back to the locale of its origin? This little planet on which we live is such a tiny speck in the wide expanse of the universe to deserve so much attention from the Creator of all things visible and invisible. And can anyone but a Jew, in these modern times, persuade himself that his people alone is the “chosen people” of the Almighty? Such colossal egotism is as pitiful as it is contemptible. Christ’s message is universal; it need not be restricted to the narrow confines of this little world, to say nothing of a mere handful of its people, overburdened with conceit.

And why should Christianity be held to the belittling postulate; let theologians take notice, that it is the heir of traditions not its own, filthy, absurd traditions sometimes, and that, too of an unfriendly people, for which it has been wont to apologize needlessly? What part has a world religion with a mere ethnic cult with which it is logically irreconcilable? Christianity has learned to be tolerant; but it must not learn to compromise. Judaism is forever intolerant and forever compromising as a cult must ever be. It is time for Christianity to scrap Judaism and its demoralizing influence, lest it lose altogether the confidence and respect of the world. In preparation therefore a careful distinction must be made between what Judaism is and what it has borrowed or stolen from sources older than itself.

In whatever part of the world Christ appeared He must needs be detached from its localizing influence in order to belong to all mankind. The early Christians, naturally, with their Judaistic background failed to detach Him completely. Save for the Greek Christians of Antioch and elsewhere along the Mediterranean coast, Christ’s message, humanly speaking, bid fair to be smothered or absorbed into its background of Judaism. Had He appeared in Greece, Persia or elsewhere, the same obstacle would have been presented; the difficulty of getting free from the influence of the background, as conveyed by those who delivered His message to mankind. That message must be cleansed from the defiling contact with the primitive cult of Judaism with which it has no necessary connection. It did not derive from “the law, the writings and the prophets,” nor from the Israelite racial deity Jahweh, but direct from a higher contact than man ever knew. He tolerated what belonged of necessity to His background, but all the while pointing out “a more excellent way.” It is absurd to say that He and His message derived from the crass materialism of His Judaistic surroundings.

The transcendent wisdom of Christ is nowhere seen to better advantage than in His attitude toward law and order, though His message to the world was spiritual and therefore directed toward the individual rather than toward organized states. He even counseled obedience to the conquering Romans, which was wormwood to the sullen and resentful Jews.

Likewise His doctrines today are in support of “the powers that be,” law and order under duly constituted authority, whereas Anti-Christ is forever anti-national. The world is still echoing with the attack of Jewish bolshevism upon Christian Russia, while the latter was embarrassed along with ourselves in the greatest of all wars. And now the scope of its devastation is widening and reaching to our shores, and again Anti-Christ is gloating over the prospect of another victim while it preaches non-resistance and “internationalism,” though its own name is Judaism. Its program is as follows: First defile, then destroy.

You may read its purpose in the Jewish Talmud, you may find its program (no matter who wrote them), in the Protocols. Its blight may be read in the press, seen on the screen (and today on the television) and on the stage, heard in the radio, and felt in business and government everywhere. It has even attacked the last stronghold of free speech, namely, the pulpit, both through its demoralizing traditionalism and its paid apologists. It works under the disguises of nihilism, bolshevism, communism, socialism, pacifism and internationalism, discarding any label as soon as it become odious and taking refuge under a new one. But its one unchanging and secreted name is JUDAISM.

It keeps in the dark as long as it can find dupes to obey its orders. It works its sinuous way toward an open defiance of both state and church, just as it did in Russia. Beginning with small insolences, too slight to be resented openly, this Jewish attack upon state and church stealthily crawls toward a higher objective when it can dominate the scene. For more than two thousand years, as anyone may read in ancient history, the morals and methods of Judaism have been the same. For verification, “search the Scriptures,” but don’t forget also to search the historians who are not Jews, such as Tacitus, Pliny, Suetonius, Strabo, besides such moderns as Gibbon, Renan, Lanciani and many more. In view of the past and the present of Judaism, to remain uninformed is to court disaster.

There are many devout Christians who say that it makes no difference to them from what race Christ came from. This is but expressive of an attitude of personal loyalty to Christ, commendable in itself, but treasonable in effect to His mission. It is an equivocation of position arising from intellectual indolence of incapacity to think, and it yields the whole question as to the divinity of His source.

It ignores the patent fact that the Founder of Christianity, had He been a Jew, could never have been a Savior of the Israelites. Hence, even at the risk of brushing aside certain Christian traditions, such as “the Son of David,” which Christ Himself came through David’s son Nathan, and other traditions hallowed in art and son, sooner or later the stark truth stands out before us demanding recognition, and woe be to those who persistently ignore it. The truth demanding recognition is that Christ, as the Son of Man, was a Galilean, and the Galileans were NOT JEWS, in race, though in part Judaised in religion and nationality. IT IS RACE THAT COUNTS, for “A stream must rise from a source higher than itself,” and Judaism was no such source for Christianity. “Men do not gather grapes of thorns nor figs of thistles” (Matthew 7:16) so said Christ.

Inasmuch as we have no trustworthy genealogical data we may dismiss all evidence of that character. The purpose of those genealogies was to establish a claim to “the throne of David” a throne which did not exist, which did not interest humanity in the least, and a claim that Christ repudiated with ridicule. This claim was a dream of the Judeo-Christians; and the Jewish Talmud made irreverent, and even salacious sport of it.

Fortunately, there remains the historical-racial approach which broadens and ennobles the theme into worthy proportions, thus eliminating the faulty genealogies. It is through history and its adjuncts, anthropology and archaeology, that it is possible to establish the difference between any modern race and the Jews. Neither the Galileans nor ourselves need to prove hat we are not Jews; the line of demarcation has been drawn by nature as well as by history with its adjuncts. THE HISTORICAL-RACIAL PROOF, AND THAT ALONE, IS VALID AND SUFFICIENT.

“Galilee of the Nations” (Gentiles)—that is what the prophet Isaiah(Isaiah 9:1) called it, and such indeed it was, all of it, east and west of the Jordan, Gentile in race though partially Judaised in the cult of the Jews, and from time to time also in nationality.

It was Gentile long before Joshua led his tribes across the Jordan, claiming their territory and finally settling among them, but not exterminating them as their Jahweh had commanded.

Nearly six hundred years later it was left Gentile again when Sargon overwhelmed the Israelites, scattered the ten tribes aborad, and replaced them with other Gentiles.

Finally it was left wholly Gentile in 164 B.C., when Simon Maccabee removed the Jewish infiltration out of Galilee back to Judea. Thereafter it was kept strictly Galilean beyond the time of Christ by the well-known antipathy between the Judeans of the south and the Galileans of the north.

Fifty years after Christ, the governor of Galilee, Josephus, the Jewish historian, describes the Galileans as a people wholly unlike the Jews in temperament and ideals; so different indeed that they could not have been of the same race.

There was a taboo against intermarriage between them as recorded in the Jewish Talmud. In a word, Christ as the Son of Man was a Galilean, and the Galileans were not Jews. This is the verdict of history. (Houston Stewart Chamberlain, “Foundations of the Nineteenth Century,” Vol. I, p. 206, “There is, accordingly, as we see, not the slightest foundation for the supposition that Christ’s parents were of Jewish descent.”) It is also the verdict of nature which she stamped upon the characteristics of Galilean and Jew. If any hold otherwise the burden of proof is upon themselves.

THE CANAANITES: Palestine, the western arm of the “fertile crescent,” had been inhabited by Gentiles for more than a thousand years when Joshua appeared with his Hebrew tribes bout 1300 B.C. These Gentiles or non-Jews were not even Semitic, but were Aryan like ourselves; members of the Caucasian or White Race, known tot he Jews or Hebrews as Canaanites. The history of the Aryans in all that part of the world goes back some centuries beyond the year 4000 B.C. Hence, the Hebrew tribes came as raiders or invaders, just as the Midianites or Arabs came on many a subsequent occasion. They succeeded in establishing themselves in the homeland of the Canaanites as most unwelcome guests.

In fact, they claimed all this excellent territory as their own by prior right, saying that it had been given to a legendary ancestor named Abraham centuries before they arrived to lay claim to it; an argument that failed to appeal to the Canaanites with any show of justice. It did not strengthen the argument of the raiders when they insisted that their own tribal deity, Jahweh, had so ordered it, because they were his “chosen people.”

The long and bitter struggle that followed for possession was much like the Semitic raids that followed later when the Midianites continued to push northward into the delectable lands of the fertile crescent, reaching down through Palestine.

It was a struggle that was disgraced by many deeds of treachery and savage warfare, which are duly set down in the annals of the invaders as acts of valor and heroism on their part. After 225 years of more or less desultory fighting under leaders called “judges,” Saul of the tribe of Benjamin was chosen king about the year 1075 B.C., and they continued the fighting, sometimes among themselves and again with their neighbors. Saul was succeeded by David of the tribe of Judah, the southernmost of all except that of Simeon, a vassal tribe. David about 1030 B.C., established his frontiers farther to the south with his capital at Jerusalem, the Hebrews being still a united people, though with a strong admixture of neighboring races.

Judea is a barren, hilly country of meager natural resources but well adapted for defense, a good stronghold for an outlaw chief as David was in his younger days. As a home for a prosperous and peace-loving people it was far less desirable than Galilee; a fact grudgingly admitted in the Jewish proverbs.

David was followed by his son Solomon about the year 1000 B.C., who reigned 30 years, thus completing a period for the three kings of a little over 100 years, the only brilliant and fairly stable epoch in the history of the Hebrew people.

It was a costly season of lavish display of kingly power in the erection of buildings by hired labor in Jerusalem. Moreover, it was at the expense of the people of fruitful Galilee and Samaria, who profited little by the up building of Jerusalem though they had to pay the bills. Consequently it left a discontented and debt-ridden people for Solomon’s successor to deal with.

DISUNION AND ITS CONSEQUENCES: Thus it was the ten tribes of the north who had the most to pay and the least gain by this royal extravagance, and they brought their grievances before Solomon’s successor.
 
Old March 16th, 2006 #37
PatrickMc
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 103
Default

Rehoboam, son of Solomon, as if to counter-balance the reputed wisdom of his father, showed his ineptness to rule by adopting a course that was grasping, short-sighted, typical Jewish therein, and had its logical result in the division of his realm into the two petty kingdoms of Judah and Israel, the former with its capital at Jerusalem and its people known as Jews (HERE WE CAN SEE THE CONFUSION OF THE AUTHOR, IN THAT HE CANNOT DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE TRIBE OF JUDAH AND THE USURPERS KNOWN AS THE JEWS).

Judea being without natural resources found it profitable to attract worshipers to that city. Hence, they resisted all attempts to set up places of worship elsewhere. This chapter has but little to do with the fortunes of the Kingdom of Judea.

In fact, had it not been for the tragedy of the Crucifixion of Christ about 1000 years after Solomon, Jerusalem would figure only incidentally in the whole scheme of Christ’s life and message. For His mission, His labors, His teachings, His disciples, His surroundings were Galilean, except on rare occasions. Jerusalem as the national capital and metropolis in His time has drawn an undeserved attention to itself, away from the principal theater of His mission.

THE LAY OF THE LAND IN GALILEE: Neither Israel of the ten tribes nor the smaller nation of Judah (and Benjamin) was able to withstand a first-class power; and though Israel had by far the greater numerical strength, the strategy of her position was particularly unfortunate from a military point of view.

For Israel lay directly in the path between the two strongest nations of the times, Egypt and Assyria, and these two were perpetual enemies. It was a well-beaten warpath, consisting in part of a valley that stretched across the southern part of Galilee. The valley itself was a most desirable asset from every point of view, except that the circumstances noted converted it into a disastrous liability.

It is the Valley of Esdraelon, containing the Plain of Jezreel, the Field of Armageddon, and it is probably the most famous battle-ground in history. The central part of it is distended like a pouch, with mountain spurs sticking into it like so many needles from different sides and angles.

The eastern end leads into the deep trough of the Jordan and to the fords thereof, whence a feasible route northeastward leads toward Damascus and Assyria. The western end narrows to a pass as it approaches the Mediterranean Sea, and then circles around the base of Mount Carmel, standing like a sentinel with his foot in the water, guarding the entrance into Galilee.

Then bending sharply southward goes this ancient war-path all the way to Egypt, through a long coastal valley known as the Vale of Sharon, with a low range of foothills guarding this eastern flank known as the Shephelah.

But the pass around Mount Carmel is rough and rocky, and therefore unsuited to the needs of large armies. Besides, a better avenue to Esdraelon is offered by three other routs leading thereto from the Vale of Sharon, and one of these, the Valley of Dothan, gives swift and easy access to the eastern end of the Valley of Esdraelon.

This it was that was used by both Egyptians and Assyrians for attack or defense, according to need. Naturally, both Egypt and Assyria endeavored to retain the Kingdom of Israel as an ally, and this kept the Israelites guessing as to which was the stronger at the moment, and their foreign policy was shaped accordingly. But this makeshift policy was certain to prove fatal in the end, for the stronger power was sure to remember how undependable the Israelites were likely to be in an emergency when they were most needed.

DEPORTATION OF THE TEN TRIBES: Sargon, (Tiglath Pileser III, who assumed the ancient title of Sargon) King of Assyria, remembered. Besides he was too good a strategist to overlook the necessity of shutting out the Egyptians completely from the Plain of Esdraelon, which was a veritable cross-roads in all directions. His own necessity and the fickle support of the Israelites forced him to crush the Kingdom of Israel. And he crushed it. This was in the year 722 (or 721) B.C.

And he did more than that; for he removed the shattered remnants of the tribes of Israel and scattered them throughout his wide domain. And it is important to remember that they never came back; they were the “ten lost tribes of Israel.” As many as 27200 (Encyclopedia Britannica, see “Galilee,”“Samaria,” etc.) were removed, and we are told (2 Kings 17:18) that “THERE WAS NONE LEFT BUT THE TRIBE OF JUDAH ONLY” IN JUDEA. It must have amounted to a “clean sweep” in Galilee, including the Valley of Esdraelon, for this was the key position in all that territory. It was harsh treatment for the Israelites, to be sure, but not so harsh as total extermination, which the Israelites had been commanded by their Jahweh to mete out to the Canaanites in the first place.

SARGON BRINGS BACK THE GENTILES: There was something like poetic justice in the fact that Sargon went farther afield than the Semite world for a population to replace the Israelites he had removed from Galilee.

He now brought in from various parts of his wide dominions “men from Babylon (2 Kings 17:24) and Cutha, and from Ava and from Havath and from Sepharvaim,” regions of both Aryan and Semitic stock, but none of “the chosen race.” Well might Isaiah down in Jerusalem, speaking of these events, call the land “Galilee of the Gentiles,” for Sargon wanted no more of the undependable people whom he removed.

THE NORDICS IN GALILEE: Over the long route to his ancient enemy in Egypt; a route which Sargon now controlled throughout, he led among his cavalry forces some strange wild troopers form the north, each of whom rode his horse as if he were a part of the animal itself.

These were Scythians, otherwise known to Old Testament writers as “Gog and Magog.” Certain it is that they struck terror into the hearts of the people of Judea by their formidable appearance and their skill in horsemanship. They rode withthersoever they would outside of the walled cities, while the Hebrews could only rave at them.

It was these warriors, no doubt, that on returning from Egypt made at least one settlement in Galilee known as Scythopolis, later as Beth Shean, and now as Beisan. It is the most commanding point in Galilee; and it is significant that Scythopolis commands the fords of the Jordan, and by virtue of that fact it is the gateway into what was Assyria from the direction of danger.

THE SCYTHIANS: And who were these terrifying Scythians, or whence came they? The came from that northern region we now know as Russia, the ancestral home of the people of the white skin, the Indo-Europeans or Caucasians. Anthropologists are now telling us that those broad steppes from the Volga eastward saw the origin and nurture among his domesticated animals, not only of the Russians, but also of the Celts, Teutons, Gauls, Greeks, or predominantly the racial strain known as the Nordics.

It was the people of this region, following the southward course of the Volga and the Caspian Sea to the frontiers of Asia Minor, that had ventured in the remote prehistoric past toward warmer climes and easier conquests, down through Iran into India and Mesopotamia.

It is these northen whites whom we have recently learned to have been the predecessors of the Semites in the Land of Sumer and throughout Asia Minor, and who have been called “The Makers of Civilization.” (I.A. Waddell, L.L.D., C.B., E.E.I., “The Makers of Civilization,” (1929). Same, “Indo-Sumerian Seals Deciphered.”)

There is a long-standing tradition among the Russian Orthodox, descendants of the ancient Scythians, that the Virgin Mary was of their race. As a tradition it is far more believable than that of a Jewish origin, the Jews have been twice ejected from Galilee and kept separate by racial antipathies.

THE GAULS INVADE ASIA MINOR: At a much later date another European element was added to the population of Asia Minor within easy striking distance of Palestine. These were the far-wandering Gauls who split off from the army of Brennus in 278-77 B.C., roamed over northern and southern Asia Minor, and finally settled in what became Galatia, named for their race, a name enshrined in the epistles of the Apostle Paul. (Acts 16:6; 18:23; 1 Co. 16:1; Gal. 1:2; 2 Ti. 4:10 and 1 Pe. 1:1)

And we must not overlook the possibility of their name having been given to Galilee itself, as well as the sea of Galilee, and especially the region of Gaulani’ is on the eastern shore of that sea. Both Scythians and Gauls were noteworthy warriors, kindred in spirit if not in blood with those of Galilee who held back the Roman legions, and whose fearless devotion to the cause of freedom and independence won the admiration of their enemies. Moreover, like the Galileans, they fought with system rather than with Semitic passion and guile.

GRECIAN GALILEE: Of all the Gentile influences within and around Galilee the Greek was by far the most pervasive and important. One might read of the Decapolis in the New Testament without dreaming of its extent and its thoroughly Greek character. It lay just east of the Jordan from Samaria and western Galilee and was about the same in area as the two combined.

Its commerce and contacts with the world outside was by way of the Valley of Esdraelon, thus affording for over three hundred years before Christ an intermingling of the populations that made all Galilee cosmopolitan. In the time of Christ the extent of this intermingling, backed by the Roman power which was exercised through the medium of the Greek language, had not only kept back the marauding Arabs but had pretty thoroughly Grecianized all Galilee.

From Nazareth as a center there was Scythopolis only twenty miles away, Tiberias and Tarichaeae five miles nearer, while less than ten miles to the north were Roma and Sepphoris; all Greek cities. The coastal cities of what had been Phoenicia and Philistia were now all Greek in language and culture.

Even in their court proceedings and legal documents the Romans ruled the country through the Greek language because it was already well known throughout Palestine when the Romans came.

Greek names and words were slipping into local Aramaic, as witness most of the names of Christ’s disciples. “It is impossible to believe that our Lord and His disciples did not know Greek,” {George Adam Smith, “Historical Geography of the Holy Land,” p. 608. Same, pages 599 and 608, the Decapolis (ten cities) consisted at first of Scythopolis (west of Jordan), Pella, Dion, Philadelphia, Gerass, Gadars, Raphans, Kanatha, Hippos (and by courtesy) Damascus, each with its cluster of villages. At least ten more cities were added later} and whenever they crossed to the east side of Jordan or the sea of Galilee they were in Greek territory and were surrounded by Greek civilization.

Even the non-Greeks, the Jews and Syrians throughout Juda, as well as in Samaria and Galilee, had to learn Greek if they had any dealings with the Romans. The Hebrew was a dead language in the time of Christ, as already stated, and the Old Testament was therefore translated into Greek for the benefit of the Jews themselves.

ORIGIN OF THE GREEK INFLUENCE: The beginning of the Greek influence in this region dates from 322 B.C., when the soldiers of Alexander the Great found the region east of the Jordan to be highly desirable but sparsely occupied.

They proceeded to occupy it at once, for they were yet to learn that the reason it was available was because of its exposure to attack by the Arabs. But they were soldiers, the world conquerors, and they were soon joined by colonists from the Greek world. These had only to cross the sea to Mount Carmel, whence it was a journey of forty miles across Galilee to the fords of the Jordan.

Each of the ten cities that they founded had a considerable extent of surrounding territory, sprinkled over with a loose scattering of villages; all of which were organized into a confederacy to resist the Arabs. And there was much need of it, for at one time the Arabs had the Greeks badly worsted, and would have driven them out had it not been for the timely assistance of Pompey and his Roman legions. Thus the Roman power, an oppressor in Greece, was welcome as a liberator in the Decapolis.

THE DECAPOLIS UNDER THE ROMANS: Under the Romans the Decapolis, or eastern Galilee, reached a high degree of development, “colonnaded streets, the arch, the forum, the temple, the bath, the mausoleum in florid Doric and Corinthian.” Some had an amphitheater or two, some of them, as at Gadars and Kanatha, had temples that were very beautiful in classic Greek style, and their religion was throughly Greek.

There were paved roads and other public works, such as the aqueduct at Gadara which brought water from a point thirty miles away. Omitting Damascus, which was included in the Decapolis by courtesy, the Decapolis embraced most of the territory southeast of the sea of Galilee, extending eastward to the desert and southward as far as Philadelphia. Four of these cities, Pella, Scythopolis, Gadara and Hippos, possessed contiguous territory, making a solid belt of Greek control along and across the Jordan, so that for a considerable distance a very important stretch of that river was a Greek stream.

“The Decapolis (George Adam Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land, pp. 602 and 607) was flourishing in the time of Christ’s ministry. Gadara with her temples and her amphitheaters, with her arts, her games and her literature, overhung the Lake of Galilee and the voyages of her fishermen. A leading Epicurean of the previous generation, the founder of the Greek anthology, some of the famous wits of the day, the reigning emperor’s tutor, had all been bred within sight of the homes of the writers of the New Testament. Philodemus, Meleager, Menippus, Theodorus, were names of which the one end of the Lake of Galilee was proud, when Matthew, Peter, James and John were working at the other end. We can not believe that the two worlds which this one landscape embraced did not break into each other...We have ample proof that the Kingdom of God came forth in no obscure corner, but in the very face of the kingdom of this world.”

THE PLAIN OF ESDRAELON:“What a plain it is,” says one, “with it are associated the names of Deborah, Barak, Sisera and his murderer, Jael, the Midianits or Arabs, Saul and the Philistines, Gideon, David and Jonathan, King Josiah and his defeat and death at the hands of the Egyptians at Megiddo, Elijah and the mound of Tel-el-Kassis where he is said to have slain the prophets of Baal, Jehu and his ride from Beth Shean, the camp of Holofernes, the elephants and engines of Antiochus, Cleopatra and her ladies, Pompey, Anotony, Vespasian and Titus, Greek colonists on the way to Decapolis, Christian pilgrims, later the Moslems, then the Crusaders, Napoleon in his time, and the conquest of the Turk in the latest world war. All this and much more has passed in review within sight of the hill on which stands the village of Nazareth.”

NAZARETH: A broken range of foothills, rising sometimes into considerable elevations, bounds the northern limits of the Plain of Esdraelon, and near the middle of the distance between the Mediterranean and the Sea of Galilee is Nazareth, the boyhood home of Christ. Nazareth is so centrally located with reference to the routes of traffic that it could not escape being a cross-roads of travel in many directions. “It was no obscure village in the backwoods as some have imagined, for the caravan route from Damascus to the seaports of the Mediterranean, and southward to Egypt, rounded the hill whereon stood this village. It is ‘a lovely spot, worthy of the encomiums of Antoninus the Martyr who likened it to Paradise.

Nazareth is usually represented as a secluded and an obscure village...You can see from Nazareth the surrounding country, for Nazareth rests in a basin among hills; but the moment you climb to the edge of the basin, which is everywhere within the limit of the village boys’ playground, what a view you have! Esdraelon lies before you with its twenty battle fields. There is Naboth’s vineyard, and the place of Jehu’s revenge upon Jezebel; there Shunem and the house of Elijah: you see thirty miles in three directions. It is a map of Old Testament history.”

Toward the north one could see another road, “between Acre and the Decapolis, along which legions marched, and princes swept with their retinues, and all sorts of travelers from all countries went to and fro...All the rumor of the empire entered Palestine close to Nazareth, the news from Rome about the emperor’s health, the changing influence of the great statesmen; about Caesar’s last order concerning the tribute, or whether the policy of the procurator would be sustained; all this would furnish endless talk in Nazareth, both among men and boys.”

Naturally, the temperament of the Galilean was by no means as austere as was that of the Judeans, for he had far wider contacts with the world; and it was a pleasant world, with no savage deserts near at hand encroaching on his view as it was in Judea. It was a happier, gayer, freer, saner life than surrounded him.

A point so centrally situated, though there may not have been a village of Nazareth in Sargon’s time, was too important strategically to allow any Israelite to be left there. It would have been a splendid post for reconnaissance over military movements throughout the whole Plain of Esdraelon, and therefore no place in which to permit an enemy to live.

It is a long, long time from the days of Sargon to those of Christ, but its Gentile character is attested by the Jews themselves in their cynical remark, “Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?” Also, “Look and see; for out of Galilee cometh no prophet” ignoring Elisha, the field of Elijah’s labors, as well as Deborah, Jonah, Hosea and possibly Amos and Nahum, according to some authorities.

OTHER DEPORTATIONS: The fortunes and misfortunes of the Kingdom of Judah must claim our attention at this point for the sake of clarity. After the deportation of the ten tribes by Sargon in 722 B.C., the magnificent realm of Solomon had shrunk to a miserable remnant consisting in the main of the tribe of Judah.

These Judeans, could point the finger of scorn at Jeroboam, “who made Israel to sin” that is to say, he was so wicked in their eyes as to lead a rebellion of the ten tribes against the unbearable taxes imposed by the Judeans for up building of Jerusalem. And he followed this up by establishing places of worship in the territory which had revolted; outside of Jerusalem, which the Jews considered unorthodox; it is easy to see why, it cut off the revenues of Jerusalem to a sad degree.

BUT JUDEA’S TURN CAME LATER, WHEN THE NATIVES THEREOF WERE ALSO OVERWHELMED AND CARRIED OFF INTO BABYLONIAN CAPTIVITY.

THE BULK OF THE TRIBES OF JUDAH, BENJAMIN AND THE ½ TRIBE OF LEVI HAD BEEN CARRIED AWAY INTO ASSYRIAN CAPTIVITY ABOUT 100 YEARS BEFORE, TO BE PLACED WITH THE OTHER TRIBES OF ISRAEL.

Assyria had been overthrown by the rising power of Babylon in 606 B.C., and it was the King of Babylon who despoiled the treasures of Jerusalem and laid waste the land. Then was there lamentation in Jerusalem indeed, and the people of Samaria and Galilee are said to have enjoyed a delightful season of tranquility while the Jews were shut up in Babylon.

About half a century later Babylon fell to Cyrus, the Persian, who permitted the Jews to return to Jerusalem, and many, but by no means all of them, did so. Those who remained found that they could make money in Babylon even in captivity.

Meanwhile some of them had found the northern nations a pleasant place of refuge, and in 164 B.C., Simon Maccabee returned them all to Judea, leaving Galilee strictly non-Jewish again. This was the second purging of the Jews from Galilee before the Christian era.

THE RACIAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE JEWS AND THE GALILEANS WERE TOO MARKED FOR THE COMFORT OF THE LATTER, AS ONE MAY SEE FROM THE WRITINGS OF JOSEPHUS, THE JEWISH HISTORIAN, who about seventy years after the birth of Christ was the Roman governor of Galilee.

That difference was remarkably well demonstrated after the fall of Jerusalem to Titus, when the Galileans, though defeated, clung to their homes. The Jews on the contrary agreed among themselves to scatter over the world, banded together as a predatory tribe, as one may read in their Talmud, thus contenting themselves with the role of an anti-national parasite. The Galileans were not parasitic stock.

THE GALILEANS AS PROSELYTES: We go back again to the year 722 B.C., and the deportation of the ten tribes by Sargon. We do this to understand how and why and to what extent these strangers brought in by Sargon accepted the religion, and eventually the nationality of Judaism, though they were all Gentiles and predominantly Aryan in race.

The seven and half centuries that elapsed from that date to the birth of Christ is a very long period and many changes might occur in such an interim, even the conversion of an entire race to a new religion. Such things have happened in our own generation. In European history the same lapse of time would take us back beyond the days of Magna Charta in England, and two centuries before the fall of Constantinople to the Turk.

Hence, it is by no means surprising that in a period of equal length these strangers imported into Galilee and Samaria; it was all Samaria at that time, became Judaised in religion and nationality, proselytes of the people whose homes they were forced to occupy, and whose empty synagogues stood open before them. Some measure of sympathy for the vanquished and dispossessed Race may be imagined, for this was a beautiful land from which they had been evicted, and the fact that the dispossessed had seized it by violence some five hundred years earlier would scarcely be remembered against them.
 
Old March 16th, 2006 #38
Quietus
Berserker for Wotan
 
Quietus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Midgard
Posts: 830
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grep14w
If you have not done so already, take a look at http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/. A well put together website covering the topic of the non-historical nature of the Jesus myth; also debunks the Jewish myths of the Old Testament. A good introduction to the topic from a non-racialist (AFAIK) writer.
A very interesting site. Thank you for the link!
__________________
"At every door-way,
ere one enters,
one should spy round,
one should pry round
for uncertain is the witting
that there be no foeman sitting,
within, before one on the floor." -Odin, from the Hávamál (Olive Bray's translation)
 
Old March 16th, 2006 #39
Franco
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 5,018
Blog Entries: 4
Default

Perhaps a better way to frame it would be: "Jesus was not a modern Jew."

Most Jews today are Ashkenazic. And Ashkenazic Jews did not exist in large numbers until around 900 AD, which was long after Jesus' era.






----------------------
 
Old March 17th, 2006 #40
PatrickMc
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 103
Default

”Perhaps a better way to frame it would be: “Jesus was not a modern Jew.””

.....I don’t know why this is so hard for folks to understand, (particularly white nationalists), but the fact of the matter is that the “jews” and the Scriptural Israelites are two entirely different entities; to whit:

.....Who are the Esau-Edomite Jews and where is the proof of their existence today? The Jewish Encyclopedia. 1925 edition, Vol. 5, p. 41, says: “EDOM IS IN MODERN JEWRY.” In addition, under the heading of “A brief History of the Terms for Jew” in the 1980 Jewish Almanac is the following: “STRICTLY SPEAKING IT IS INCORRECT TO CALL AN ANCIENT ISRAELITE A ‘JEW’ OR TO CALL A CONTEMPORARY JEW AN ISRAEL*ITE OR A HEBREW.” (1980 Jewish Almanac, p. 3),,,

.....No one can deny that the Jews are a most unique and unusual people. That uniqueness exists because of their Edomite heritage. {“You cannot be English Jews. We are a race, and only as a race can we perpetuate. OUR [Jewish] MENTALITY IS OF EDOMITISH CHARACTER, AND DIFFERS FROM THAT OF AN ENGLISHMAN. Enough subterfuges! Let us assert openly that we are International Jews.” (From the manifesto of the “World Jewish Federation,” January 1, 1935, through its spokesperson, Gerald Soman)} No other people fit the characteristics and follow the role of Esau-Edom so completely as do the Jewish people. The Jews follow the role that their ancestors the Edomites had followed...

.....Do you understand what this means? It means the antiChrist “jews” were not enslaved in Egypt, nor led out by Moses, nor wandered forty years in the wilderness or any other Scriptural story concerning the Israelites; they, being sons of cain and sons of esau, have sought to supplant the Israelites and their identity and “steal the birthright” as per the story of Jacob and esau through lies, lies and more lies... they’ve bastardized our Scripture to make it read as a “jewish fable”, (as was prophesied), and today claim the status of the chosen of God, when, in reality, they are His worst enemies, whom He hates as much as they hate Him, (and you); you’d do well to research this further...

.....So if they aren’t the Israelites of Scripture, who is? Simple; those who have fulfilled the prophecies of the “marks” of Israel, which were to identify them in these latter days... who do those marks fit? White nationalists...

.....For the record, we were not taught to “love our enemies”, as so many falsely believe; in context, that applies only to brethren to brethren, particularly when discussing Doctrine, but not Our Father’s enemies... Here is what Scripture says of such:

2Chronicles, 19:2 ... Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD? therefore [is] wrath upon thee from before the LORD.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:11 PM.
Page generated in 0.19201 seconds.