Saturday, November 17, 2007

Israel, 4

And now I conclude the series. Suffice it to say while I have not found evidence that Zionism is not inherently based on the Talmud or Kabbalah--Zionism is, basically, a movement to found a Jewish homeland, and defend it--it is what Zionists practice, not what they preach, that concerns this post. As with most Jews, I suspect most Zionists are secular, anyway.

So how did the descendants of the Pharisees come up with the Talmud, anyway? Fro the Freedom in Christ website (link below):

This is from a book by Rabbi Roy Rosenberg, "The Concise Guide to Judaism: History, Practice, Faith":

"...The early tradition of the Pharisees had held that, while the written Torah was meant to be transmitted in written form, the oral Torah was not to be put in writing. The teachings of the sages were to be memorized, rather, and transmitted by word of mouth from scholar to scholar. It did not take long, of course, for the number of interpretations and decisions that constituted the oral Torah to become so vast that even the most brilliant scholars would have trouble recalling all of them (they also had to remember the names of the various sages who had originated or transmitted a decision). For this reason the head of the academy in the early years of the third century, Rabbi Judah the Nasi (“prince,” or “patriarch”), resolved to reduce the oral Torah to writing. . . . Then in about 220 A. D., he introduced the first authoritative summary of the rabbinic tradition to that date. This was the Mishna (“repetition”). The Mishna, based upon the laws of the Hebrew Bible, is the source of all subsequent Jewish law to the present day and is an object of study in the academies of all the forms of Judaism."

Josephus wrote in his "Antiquities of the Jews": "What I would now explain is this, that the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by succession from their fathers, which are not written in the law of Moses; and for that reason it is that the Sadducees reject them and say that we are to esteem those observances to be obligatory which are in the written word, but are not to observe what are derived from the tradition of our forefathers....What the Pharisees had most against Christ was that Christ and His disciples refused to accord with the oral traditions of the elders. Christ told them, "Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you: '"These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.'"

So the "letter of the Law" is the Pharisee/human interpretation of the Mosaic Torah written down, while the "spirit of the Law" is the actual Mosaic Law Torah. When the "Torah" was codified in 200 AD, the Pharisees had already perverted the Torah beyond all recognition, passed through courts and academies. This is why Jesus refers to what Pharisees have in oral tradition, "You have heard it said:" and why Christ tells the disciples the real Torah, "But I say unto you:"

If anyone questions the hatred the Pharisees had for Christ and his followers, who, shortly after Christ's death, came to be called Christians, one only need think of Saul and his persecutions until Christ converted him into Paul. Paul, in Acts and elsewhere, considered himself to be perfect before Pharisaic law, oral traditions.
Paul, a Pharisee, sets an example of the hatred of the Pharisees against Christians. In the Philippian letter, he describes his ancestry and earlier behavior toward the church: “If anyone else thinks he has reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for legalistic righteousness, faultless” (Philippians 3:4-6) (See also Acts 8:1...Acts was written by Luke).

Why is Paul's statement important today? Because, for one thing, Yeshiva staudents in Israel, today, spit on Christians! I have already stated what some IDF Jews do to Palestinian Christians. Further, I have already stated what the Talmud and the Kabbalah proscribes for Jews to do to Christians.

From the Freedom in Christ website: "After the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 Ad the Pharisees established a school in Galilee (Jamnia). Basically the names of the various groupings of Pharisees went under one name, rabbi, at that time. These rabbis led in the constant study of the Torah and especially the oral traditions the Pharisees taught and the legalism handed down because of the oral traditions. While the Mishna is the coded form of law BASED on the Torah, the Talmud (Gemara) is the oral interpretation and written down discussions of these interpretations. [See Adin Steinsaltz, The Essential Talmud, translated from the Hebrew by Chaya Galai (USA: Basic Books, 1976)], where he explains the Talmud:

"The formal definition of the Talmud is the summary of oral law that evolved after centuries of scholarly effort by sages who lived in Palestine and Babylonia until the beginning of the Middle Ages. It has two main components: the Mishnah, a book of halakhah (law) written in Hebrew; and the commentary on the Mishnah, known as the Talmud (or Gemarah), in the limited sense of the word, a summary of discussion and elucidation of the Mishnah written in Aramaic-Hebrew jargon....This explanation, however, though formally correct, is misleading and imprecise. The Talmud is the repository of thousands of years of Jewish wisdom, and the oral law, which is as ancient and significant as the written law (the Torah), finds expression therein."

And the combination of the Mishna and the Talmud is the Babylonian Talmud.

Thanks to the website Freedom in Christ for much of the above information.

At some point between the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD and the Pharisees in Jamnia and the rise of the Zionist movement in the 19th century, I have determined from research some still rather general knowledge of what happened to the Jews. Many of them wound up in Spain when the Islamic Moors came and were later driven out under Charles Martel after 800 AD. The Jews based in Spain, the Sepharidic Jews (sometimes called Black Jews, though dark skinned were not "black" as with Africans), were led philosophically by Maimonodies, who is affiliated with the Jerusalem Talmud, who was driven out of Spain by a group of Muslims and educated in Morocco. While the Jerusalem Talmud is less popular than the Babylonian Talmud, from this Maimonodies laid out the precepts that the Seven Noahide Laws (again, these are from oral man-made tradition and are loosely based on the Ten Commandments) must be followed by Gentiles in order to be acceptable to Jews. The Talmud and the Noahide Laws complement each other. From Wikipedia: 'The Talmud also states: "Righteous people of all nations have a share in the world to come" (Sanhedrin 105a). Any non-Jew who lives according to these laws is regarded as one of "the righteous among the gentiles". Maimonides writes that this refers to those who have acquired knowledge of God and act in accordance with the Noahide laws out of obedience to Him. According to what scholars consider to be the most accurate texts of the Mishneh Torah, Maimonides continues on to say that anyone who upholds the Noahide laws only because they appear logical is not one of the "righteous among the nations," but rather he is one of the wise among them. The more prolific versions of the Mishneh Torah say of such a person: "..nor is he one of the wise among them.' But here is where I have a problem with these laws: the Noahide Laws only apply to Gentiles! It is as if the Jews set up laws for those they considered inferior, but don't have to subscribe to themselves because they follow the Torah and are not permitted to teach the Torah to the Gentiles! Must be a good excuse for spitting on us!

But I am not going to deal any longer with Maimonodies and the Sepharidic Jews because I want to get back to the Babylonian Talmud which most Jews follow if they follow the Talmud at all. Sometime after Jamnia, the Jews and their Pharisees moved on into the various parts of the Middle East and, apparently, settled in a place called Khazaria, which is close to present-day southern Russia. They were called Khazars. According to my research on Google, the Khazars were either Ottoman Islamics who converted to Judaism or were wandering remnant Jews left over from when they were dispersed while under the rule of the Assyrians after 721 BC or so. Some say one thing and some say another. The point is, it is the Khazars who came up with the Babylonian Talmud. Okay, imagine if the Khazars had been Islamic, but then converted to Judaism: this would mean that they had no clue as to what Judaism really was in either oral or written tradition ("Like, what's the Torah?"), and just who the heck converted them to Judaism in the first place? Obviously, Jews who had come out of Assyria or even remnant Jews in Babylon-Chaldea-Persia who did not return to Jerusalem-Israel with Ezra and Nehemiah and their group, but stayed in Babylon. And if they were not Islamic converts, but diasporah Jews or Babylonian Jews, don't you think that maybe they lost the meaning of the Torah anyway? It is this group, the Ashkenazi Jews, that came to Europe over the centuries of the Middle Ages, primarily to Eastern but also to northwestern Europe, especially Germany. Further, it is this set of Jews who, in the 19th century, came up with Zionism.

There is no direct connection of the Pharisees to the Zionists, but there is probably an indirect connection by virtue of the fact that rabbis used the Babylonian Talmud and possibly even the Kabbalah (which, I have shown previously, is anti-Christian), and I must say there is deinitely a spiritual connection, what with Israeli Jews spitting on Christians and all.

Finally, I get back to where I started with Christian Zionism. This group, based on a misreading of the Bible which says Jews do not have to accept Christ to be saved (and I hope I debunked it thoroughly enough in Part 1 of this series), plays into the hands of the so-called Israel lobby which drives US foreign policy in the Middle East and drives us to further death and destruction in wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and (they hope) Iran and Syria. This group claims to honor Israel but refuses to let the Israeli people live in peace with their Palestinian and Arab neighbors; thus, they refuse to let the Jews in Israel live their lives in peace and safety just going about their business. I think I can honestly say that the Christian Zionists SO NOT BLESS ISRAEL BUT CURSE ISRAEL! Further, and even more importantly, Christian Zionists say nothing about Jews spitting on Christians in Israel or about IDF soldiers beating up Palestinian Christians. Not only that, but when in the company of Jews, Christian Zionists don't even mention Christ for fear of offending the Jews! Christians who o to Israel to see holy sites are admonished NOT to prosletize or mention Christ! Just how long will it be before the Christian Zionists become just Zionists, and forget about the Christ part?

And how long before, as we come perhaps to the "time of trouble" or what some call the Great Tribulation and the time of the so-called "Anti-Christ", these Christian Zionists, who refuse to witness on Christ to Jews, refuse to witness on Christ to anyone, who FEAR to mention Christ, who FEAR being called "Christian" because they might be persecuted or tortured or killed for Christ's sake, and "take the mark of the Beast" which is a spiritual sign of rejection of Christ given by God to those who reject Christ? Bcause, if you FEAR to mention Christ is your Savior to a Jew or an Islamic, how long will it be before you forget that Christ is your Savior?

It says in Revelation 21:8-- "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."

I forthwith tell all you Christian Zionists out there, and you too Pastor Hagee: REPENT!

Deborah Lagarde

Thursday, November 08, 2007

Israel, 3

As promised, today I will discuss what Christ said about the Pharisees, and next time I will close this series up with proof that today's Zionists are spiritually and in some cases physically/historically descended from the Pharisees, using the Zionists' own theological and philosophical works.

To discuss what Christ said about the Pharisees, I will mostly use the Gospel of Mark. Matthew and Luke say much the same, but Mark is a shorter Gospel.

In Mark 2, four men drop a paralytic on a bed through the roof of the house where Jesus was staying, and Jesus forgives the paralytic's sins. Scribes were there (in using "Pharisees," scribes and priests and others connected to the religious establishment, as well as the Saducees, are implied as well.) The scribes reasoned in their hearts that Christ blasphemed because only God can forgive sins. Christ read their thoughts and said to them, paraphrasing, why should they think it is so difficult to forgive sins verbally than to say get up and walk, which would be a much more difficult thing to make happen verbally; and just to prove He really had that power, he told the partalytic to get up and walk, which he did. Later (verses 15-22), Jesus and the disciples were eating with sinners in the house of a "publican". So the Pharisees and scribes saw this and said to Jesus' disciples how can this be that Jesus could eat with sinners? Jesus answered that He came not to save the righteous but the sinners, calling them to repentance. The Pharisees questioned how is it that they and the disciples of John the Baptist fast for sin, but not Jesus and His disciples? Jesus told them that since "the bridegroom" (HIM) was with "the children of the bridechamber" (which could be construed as the bride), there was no need to fast, but that when the groom is taken away, then they shall fast. Now clearly a Christian can discern this, but not the Pharisees, who, not discerning the meaning of putting new wine only into new wineskins, completely missed the point. It is amazing to me, who grew up believing the Jews were the chosen people, that this statement in Mark 22 about the wineskins clearly states that the Mosaic Law believing Jews (let along the Talmud and Kabbalah believing Jews, Zionist or not) WERE NOT going to be the chosen people, but the Jews of that time who threw aside the rule of the Pharisees and were called to accept Christ would be the new wineskins for the new wine of Christ's Covenant. Then, in verses 23-28, the Pharisees rebuke Christ and the disciples for gathering corn on the Sabbath, which to them was unlawful. Christ said, again I paraphrase, that what King David did in eating the sacred bread of the priests in the Tabernacle of God when he was hiding from his enemies would have bene considered unlawful as well, and that the Sabbath was made for man and not the other way around.

So then in Mark 3, verses 1-6, Jesus cured a withered hand of a man on the Sabbath in a synagogue as the Pharisees watched and as He read their hard hearts. After Christ cured the hand, the Pharisees began to plot to kill Christ, in conspiracy with the Herodians who called themselves Jews but worshiped the Roman Emperor. In verse 21, friends of Christ believed that Christ was perturbed (that is, "beside himself") over not being able to eat the food laid out since multitudes kept on pressing Him for teachings. When the Pharisees heard about this Christ being "beside himself" they conjured up the notion that Christ "hath Beelzebub" within Him and by that Christ "cast out demons". Christ called in the Pharisees and said to them, "How can Satan cast out Satan?" It is in this section, verse 29, where Christ makes His famous "he that shall blaspheme the Holy Spirit" shall (as most Christians falsely believe) be "eternally damned." (As I explain elsewhere, the notion of "eternity" was unknown at that time and the Greeks had no word for "eternity": the word "anion" used here actually means "age-long".) So what does "blaspheming" the Holy Spirit mean? Here it means that the Pharisees, in claiming that Christ (Who had the Holy Spirit within Him as per Mark 1:10) was possessed by demons, meant that the Pharisees were claiming the Holy Spirit within Him as being demons instead. to call the Holy Spirit an agent of Satan is to "blaspheme the Holy Spirit," a sin which is NOT unpardonable, only unpardonable in a certain time frame!

IN Mark 4, where the Sermon on the Mount is given, Jesus tells the disciples that when it comes to speaking to those Jews He has not called and chosen, He will ONLY speak in parables, so that they will NOT discern His words and teachings. The only thing that could possibly mean is that Christ has NO INTENTIONS of truly reaching the average Jew on the street, but only those He calls. He is NOT about to call the typical Pharisee! A few such as Nicodemus and Joseph of Aramathea are called and become His disciples, but only a very few (just as throughout history only a remnant of Jews have become Messianic "Jews for Jesus").

Coming to chapter 5 we have the story is Jesus bringing the daughter of a "ruler of the synagogue" back to life. This could onl have happened because Jairus, the ruler, believed that Christ could do this (see verse 36). Now the rest of the household did not believe, so Christ told them to leave. But Jairus and the mother did believe so were allowed in to see Christ bring her back to life.

In Chapter 6, Christ commissioned the disciples to be able to heal and drive out demons, sending them off (verses7-8 and 12-13...I discussed this issue in my denunciation of Part 1 of the "Zeitgeist" movie wwhich claimed Christ was/is a myth).

Then in Chapter 7 Christ tells the Pharisees that just because the disciples did not wash their hands it didn't mean the disciples were defiled: it is what comes from the heart and from the person that defiles or not. But a very amazing set of verses comes later in Chapter 7, when Jesus cures the daughter of a Gentile (a Syrio-Phonecian of Tyre and Sidon). The woman asks Christ to cure her daughter or demons. Christ replies that (verse 27), "Let the children be filled first: for it is not right to take the children's bread and give it to the dogs" (note, just as Israelis today consider the Palestinians "dogs" [and just as Palestinians consider Jews "dogs"!], so in those days the Jews considered Gentiles no better than dogs, and the same went for Samaritans). But the woman, who obviously had faith, replied that even the dogs go under the table and eat the crumbs (of the Word of Christ). Because of her faith, Jesus healed her daughter (verse 29).

IN Chapter 8, Jesus fed four thousand on seven loaves of bread and a few small fish. When they left and arrived in Dalmanutha, the Pharisees asked Christ to provide them a "sign from heaven." Christ answered there will be no sign given unto "this generation." When Christ and the followers left, the disciples "forgot to take bread." Christ dissed this by saying, "Beware of the bread of the Pharisees and of Herod."

After the Transfiguration of Christ (Chapter 9) in the desert before Peter, James and John, they return to the rest of the disciples, and the multitude and scribes were there as well. A man brought his son who had a "dumb spirit" within him to Christ to be healed because the disciples couldn't do it. Later Christ told the disciples they couldn't cast out the demon because that type of demon only gets expelled through prayer and fasting. They then went through Galilee incognito, where Christ told the disciples that Jesus would soon be "delivered into the hands of men to be killed, and rise on the third day."

Chapter 10 brings another scathing rebuke from Christ to the Pharisees. The Pharisees tried to trap Christ into saying that what Mosaic Law commanded regarding a man "putting away" his wife with a "bill of divorcement" was righteous and pleasing to God. But Christ ripped their logic to shreds by saying even that was wrong, that once God joined man and wife NO ONE should render this null and void EXCEPT for unfaithfulness, and, further, if the divorced man married someone else that was "adultery" against the former wife (and the same for divorcing females). So basically what Jesus was doing was overthrowing the old Mosaic law (by fulfilling the Law in
Spirit if not in letter).

Chapter 11 begins the climactic scenario of Christ being greatly received by the people in Jerusalem, the betrayal of the Pharisees, Herodians (and Judas, who couldn't help it because Satan had, by the Will of God, entered him for this purpose so that Christ could save all mankind...still, Judas, who tended to feel in his heart that Christ was an opportunity for personal enrichment, was the perfect candidate to betray Christ), His death and resurrection. When He overturned the tables of the moneychangers in the Temple, the "scribes and priests" plotted to destroy Him. It gets interesting in verses 27-33. They question as to who gave Christ the authority to perform miracles, cast out demons and speak as sent by God. But again Christ turned the tables on them. Christ responded to their question with a question: He asked them was the baptism of John (the Baptist) given from heaven or from men, and if they could respond He would tell them by what authority He did those things. So, being the hypocrites they were, they plotted which course they would take and, like Hillary Clinton, "triangulated" their response instead to saying what position they took openly. Since they couldn't decide if John's baptizing was from God or from men, they replied, "We cannot tell." So Jesus answered, "Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things."

But instead of just walking away, in Chapter 12 Jesus gets to the heart of the matter with the Pharisees. In this chapter is the parable of the planter, who, having planted a vineyard, sends a servant out to the husbandmen (the Jews) who rented the land. A servant was sent to collect the fruit that was due to the planter, but the husbandmen beat up the servant and sent him away. More servants were sent (by now you know the servants as the Old Testament prophets such as Elijah, Isaiah, and the others), until at last the planter (God) sent His son (Christ) because the husbandmen "would reverence him." Remember Christ is saying this to the Pharisees and scribes and priests. Christ says that "But the husbandmen said among themselves, 'This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance shall be ours.' And they took him, and killed him, and cast him out of the vineyard. What shall therefore the Lord of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard to others." This is in Mark 12:1-9. I am going to stop here with the rebuking by Christ of the Pharisees and their ilk, because this is the parable that gets to the heat of the matter of whom will be considered the chosen people: note, it is clearly not the Pharisees in particular and the Mosaic Law following Jews in general. Here Christ expounds on the fact that the Pharisees (and,ultimately, all the Jews who call for the release of Barabbas and call for the Romans to "crucify" Christ, and their heirs (see Matthew 27:25) will be disinherited from their "chosen people" status, which will fall to all believing Jews and all believing Gentiles (through the discipleship of Paul, who had previously, grievously, persecuted Christ's Jewish followers, the first Christians).

Deborah Lagarde

Saturday, November 03, 2007

Israel, 2

We will now move from discussing the Christian Zionists to the Zionists themselves. I am not here to make a claim that the Jews have no right to a homeland. IMHO every single ethnic group on Earth has a right to a homeland. Yes, that also includes the Palestinians. Sorry, but there is no getting around that truth; further, had Israel decided originally to let the Palestinians (and any Arab now living in either Israel proper or the Occupied Territories is a Palestinian, for the sake of this post) have their own homeland back in 1948-49, the Israeli people wouldn't have the issues they have today to deal with. How they deal with the Palestinian people issue is not going to go away, no matter how the Israeli government (with, it seems, a high percentage of support from the Israeli people) tries to collectively punish the Palestinians for the actions of the terrorists and suicide bombers who, truth be known, if they are Hamas terrorists, Israel, by creating Hamas, definitely has a blowback issue!

And here is the other reason why I rail this way against Israeli treatment of the Palestinians: I don't know the percentage, but I've seen figures as low as 2% and as high as 20%, of the Palestinian population is Christian! It is possible that some of these Palestinian Christians are descended from apostles such as Peter, John, James and the others who were called to stay behind in what was then called Palestine (while Paul went off on his evangelizing missions to the Gentiles). I am again NOT saying the Jews cannot have Israel to be their homeland, I am not denying the "Holocaust" and I am not denying that Jews have throughout history been persecuted as they persecute the Palestinians today. Still, when folks like John Hagee (and I cannot stress this enough!) laud Israel to the skies and say Israel must not let the Palestinians have a homeland and must be as brutal to the Palestinians as they want to be to teach those godless Muslims as lesson, taking into no account that there is a fairly large minority of Palestinian Christians who are being treated just as harshly as the Muslims are being treated (and I do not advocate being hard on Muslims while being soft on Christians there, okay? Because Muslims, moreso than Jews, are capable of converting--at least Muslims revere Christ while Jews completely deny Him!), they are guilty of NOT "doing to the least of My brothers what you would do for Me." But, again, this is not about Christian Zionists, but Zionists.

So, okay, now I bring up the question: why are the Zionists doing these bad things to the Palestinians? It is simply too easy to say, "well, the Palestinians started it under Arafat." Actually, in what is now Israel there has always been a Jew-Arab struggle over the land. But my claim is that after hostilities ceased, Israel was formed, and borders were made, peace could have been at hand; however, the leaders on both sides would rather have fought it out. I am NOT saying the Palestinian leadership is guiltless...they are as guilty as the Israeli leadership; the Palestinian leaders are just as guilty of screwing their people as the Israeli leadership is in screwing their people. But that was then, and, now, Israel is doing everything possible to as I claimed collectively punish all Palestinians to the point where a claim of genocide might be a valid claim. (Okay, now you can say it: if the shoe was on the other foot, wouldn't the Palestinians be doing the same to the Israelis? Perhaps, but hopefully we'll never know. The Jews I feel have suffered enough.) Again, why are the Zionists doing these things?

Now, hold onto your hats, because it turns out (according to Barry Chamish, the Israeli who wrote , "Who Killed Yitzak Rabin?" and has investigated this issue) the Zionist leadership has performed similar treatments on their own! (see here and here and here). Not that Chamish is some kind of Uri Avnery who wants the Palestinians to have a homeland--he doesn't. Chamish believes that the Palestinians ought to be Jordan's problem. So, for Chamish to claim what he does about the Israeli government, for him to make the anti-Zionist claims he does is not out of love for Palestinians, who he says do not exist as a separate people. NO, Chamish's beef is against the Zionists, period, and their leadership of Israel. Actually, to get to the heart of the matter, his beef is with the Zionists because his beef is with the movement that begat Zionism: a movement, funded by the Rothschilds (who he believes founded the "Illuminati" and continues to call the new world order elite by that name), began by Zvi Sabbatai (the Sabbateans), who used the Kabbalah and the Zohar, a perversion of the philosophy of the Talmud, which was a perversion in and of itself of the Torah. The Talmud, based on the oral law of the Torah, is the written law of the Pharisees left from the sacking of Jerusalem (as opposed to the Torah, the Law of Moses given by God), codified around 300-400 AD in the areas around what was left of Jerusalem and Israel. And then, there is also the Babylonian Talmud, as the members of the ten tribes taken to Assyria plus many from Judah taken to Babylon who never returned created their own written law even more loosely based on the Torah. It is the Babylonian version that gained prominence. A perversion (Kabbalah/Zohar) based on a perversion (Talmud) of an original perversion, the corruption of God's Law by the Pharisees (Christ called the Pharisees "you are of your father the devil," NOT because they are actually descended from Satan! Because they are spiritually in line with Satan, not physically). Chamish says it is the Sabbateans in Labor Zionism (which founded Israel, by the way), allied with the Illuminati, which are the problem (and, he claims, I believe with some veracity, THEY are using the Arabs as well to destroy true Judaism and Israel with it).

Reverend Ted Pike, who made this video would agree. Funny, a so-called "anti-Semite" (Pike) and someone who obviously cannot be an "anti-Semite" (Chamish) agree! And who do they agree on? That the Zionists running Israel are NOT the Jews of the Torah but the "Jews" of the Kabbalah and Talmud (in other words, the spiritual and perhaps even the physical descendants of the Pharisees who killed Christ). That the Zionists running Israel are out to destroy Israel. That the Zionists running Israel are in the pay of the Illuminati/oligarchy/new world order elites who care not a fig that as THEY kill off Palestinians THEY will ultimately try to kill off the Jews as well.

So, after all this, we come to the conclusion that because the Zionists follow a secular Judaism that actually follows more in line with the Kabbalah and the Talmud, the same Kabbalah that claims that Christ is the bastard some of the whore Mary, that Christ is in Hell boiling in excrement, and that Christians as well as Muslims, as through the Talmud, are cattle only to serve the Jews (especially its "Book of Sanhedrin"), that it follows from this that the Zionists care not a fig for the lives of a few billion people except as slaves. Sorry, I didn't make this up. Sorry, but a few of the Jews I grew up with in school (NOT the fact I can rightfully claim that "some of my best friends were Jewish") actually did hate us Gentiles...and now I know why. Sorry, but if you are going to pin the lable "anti-Semite" on me you are just going to piss me off, nothing more. You are NOT going to stop me from defending Christ, and you are only going to make me work harder to prove that the Talmudic-Kabbalahist "Illuminati" "Jews" are the spiritual if not the literal sons of the Pharisees who murdered Christ. In the next post I will go into further detail about what Christ thought of the Pharisees and their law body the Sanhedrin. It is interesting (see Mark chapter 7) that while Christ cut much more slack to Syro-Phonecians (the ancestors of today's Lebanon and Syria) and Samaritans (Jews who had mixed blood with Gentiles, who were shunned by Jews) as to His teachings, he cut absolutely none with the Pharisees.

I will leave you with the following quotes by Israeli leaders, if you still are not convinced:

" Our race is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves." -- Menachem Begin - Israeli Prime Minister 1977–1983 (an example of what is in the Talmud)

‘Well, I think it is good…it will generate immediate sympathy for Israel.’
Benjamine Netanyahu on 9-11

"When Jewish women come out of a bath they must take care to meet a friend first, and not something unclean or a Christian. For if so, a woman, if she wants to keep holy, should go back and bathe again."--Talmud

And here are more links.

As far as I know this person is Jewish

Zionism vs. Jesus

Now go ahead and call me an "anti-Semite", knowing as you do that Christ was born a Jew!

Deborah Lagarde