Yossi Gurvitz: Eliminationism On The Rise In Israel

From Mondoweiss in 2012, more from former yeshiva student Yossi Gurvitz on why he became radicalized:

Meantime, in Israel we are seeing the Jehovahiztion of the Israeli public. Ignorant, radical Jews are turning more to symbols of Jewish superiority than actual Jewish values. It’s getting harder to be a liberal except in Tel Aviv. Everyone is thinking about a second passport.

This is a spiral that will leave Israel more fanatic, more religious, less able to communicate with the western world– and ironically more part of the extremism of the Middle East. I’ve been writing about the Jewish Brotherhood. Unlike the Muslim Brotherhood, our extremists have never had to face reality and soften. Because even when they wield power they claim that the real power is the hands of the liberal elites.

Unlike the US, we have no constitution. No Basic Law grants equality. The Israeli religious right has blocked that. The only reason we have freedom of the press is because of the Supreme Court decisions. The right is already using this as a way of attacking the Supreme Court, which is becoming more fearful, less willing to use its power.

Unless something drastic changes, and it could happen– I’m betting on the J14 movement– liberal Israel is dying, and it won’t be in existence in 5, or 10 years. Some elements will be kept as a figleaf, for the Zionist Jehovahist regime. The liberals will leave, those who can.

When that happens, the liberal part of the US will no longer be so willing to defend Israel and its policies. Then without the US, Israel will be hanging by its threat to use nuclear weapons. It will become a second North Korea.

There’s a history here. In 2004 a Maariv columnist demanded that the government nuke France. Because France is an enemy of Israel, and about to collapse into a Muslim Republic, a supporter of Iran– so we should nuke them first. The editor was fired for publishing it after the French ambassador made an official protest. The Foreign Minister [Avigdor Lieberman] suggested when he was in the opposition, that Israel nuke the Aswan dam. So there’s a reason the Egyptians won’t meet him.

[Mondoweiss: Gurvitz also suggests Israel could lose the American right.]

Four days ago a church was desecrated in Jerusalem. As part of a pricetag attack. This happens all the time. When the pricetag people run out of Muslim targets, they will concentrate more on Christian targets. When that happens, the American Christian right will realize that the Israeli right is hostile to Christianity.

Why is all this inevitable?

Zionism as a force is dead. The people who are actually speaking in the name of Zionism are speaking in religious and metaphysical and mystical truths. They are not speaking in the secular Zionist tradition. A poll two weeks ago—about 70 percent consider themselves to be the chosen people. American Jews think we as Jews are chosen to carry out tikkun olam [social justice]. Israeli Jews think something different—we are the chosen people of God, we are chosen to do anything we damn well please. To take people’s land. Take peoples lives. There is actually no mainstream force standing against the Jewish brotherhood.

This is not just the religious people, it’s a large part of the secular people buying into it. Israel’s Jews refuse to accept the legitimacy of the marriage of Jews and non-Jews. You American Jews really don’t understand us. They think we’re gutsier… American Jews… think of Zionist liberals. They’re older, they’re still thinking about the late 70s, early 80s, the golden age of Israel’s liberalism.

You have to understand what the religious right means when they say of leftists, the multitude, they are the erav rav. This means the ones who left Egypt, the mixed multitude. It is a concept in Kabbalah– the Amalekite Jew. A Jew who isn’t really a Jew. He looks like a Jew, thinks he’s a Jew, but he’s an enemy of God. It’s been used in the Knesset, the word erav rav.

If you think this Judaism is the wisdom of Israel, it’s not. This is the Judaism forced underground by the Christian regimes, censored time and again. It’s coming to the surface. Just about everyone knows this code here. What may change the picture is the J14 movement. It’s alive. It will be coming back after Passover. J14 has its faults, but it is the only movement that has put Israeli Arabs speakers out front. Many Palestinian Israelis are not quite happy with the result, but…. once Israelis realize that inequality harms everyone in Israel aside from the 1 percent, then they will begin to see the Palestinian as a partner in struggle. We’ve seen it in the north, if the movement isn’t crushed.

Liberals are dead, socialists are coming up. Most socialists are poised toward equality.

[Mondoweiss:  Tell us your story, Yossi.]

I was born in January 1970 in Petah Tikva. My parents are National Orthodox. My father is an electrical contractor who is in real estate. My mother is a housewife. I studied in the Yeshiva till I had a personal crisis and left the Yeshiva for the army in 1989. It looked like a liberation, strangely enough.

I started to do my bit for leftist ideology and got transferred to the Gaza Strip so I could stop the atrocities. That didn’t work very well. They hid them from me. I did manage to get my commander tried for slapping a Palestinian child. And one day they tried to abandon me in a refugee camp. [An officer] drove me to a refugee camp and told me to step out of the car, “your brother’s over there, go join him.” I cocked the gun, putting a bullet in the chamber. I didn’t point it at him, but he got the message, and he told me to drive back.

Everything I did was supportive of the occupation in every waking moment. I’m still doing penance. That’s the liberal trap. They say to you, You want to change the world, go there, be there. But it’s always compromising. It’s much bigger than you. You will go to prison if you don’t order the bulldozers to demolish the house.

I’m in the Meretz party. Meretz used to embody this liberal thinking. If you want to prevent atrocities, join the fighting units, serve in the territories where you can see atrocities, prevent them. That simply doesn’t happen.

I went to the university and got a degree in history. I had a personal crisis about not getting a master’s degree. I spent several years working in a chemical factory [in a clerical position]. I started blogging in 2002. I was writing on various forums in the 90s. Even before. In 2006 I stared my own blog. Friends of George. It is mainly a Hebrew blog. It quickly gathered steam. During the Second Lebanon war I started writing critically in ways that were not common. That attracted a lot of readers, also including a few death threats.

Recently I had my run in with the law. I was investigated for incitement two months ago.

Tell us about the radicalization of the left.

We see a radicalization on both sides. The leftists are becoming more radical and the right wingers, too. When I radicalized—and I did—I attracted more radicals. I’m going to the demonstrations; that’s the definition of a radical around here. Bil’in is basically a reenactment of the first intifada. Everyone is playing a part. No Palestinian is trying to throw a grenade, and generally in Bilin the soldiers don’t use lethal force….

I have really high hopes for what will happen in the next few months. I’m doing what I’m doing because I think it’s the right thing to do, but the Israeli government is using us to legitimize itself. ‘You see, we’re a democracy.’ The protests have very little influence on the general public. But they’re important because solidarity is important and it gets international coverage, which is always important.

[Mondoweiss: You say we American Jews don’t understand this Judaism. Elaborate.]

Rambam [Maimonides in the 12th century] writes, If a Jew has intercourse with a gentile child three years old and a day, the child should be executed for misleading the Jew, making him sin. Those texts are still valid. We don’t understand them, but they are valid.

These Jews …  took the elements of the religion that were nationalistic and have been slumbering for 100s of years and awakened it. They took the hatred of mankind which had persisted in Judaism for millennia and gave it voice and force. [In the former rabbinical tradition] the rabbis tried to housetrain Jewish messianism. The old way of thinking was, the messiah will lead Jews to victory. The rabbis made the messiah a supernatural being capable of talking to birds and animals. This mystical being was a dam against Jewish messianism in Ashkenazi Judaism, and the eliminationist elements against Christianity were held down by this teaching.

But once Israel was created, many Jews saw it as the end of the three oaths, the Shloshet Ha’Shvuot. Two of these oaths enjoin the Jews not to mass-emigrate to Eretz Yisrael and not to provoke the gentiles. The third orders the gentiles not to treat the Jews too badly.

Now Israel has the right to use force, and every demon that was pushed into the basement is up and has an M16.

– See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2012/03/the-radicalization-of-yossi-gurvitz#sthash.BPCHaub9.dpuf

Pope Calls Chilean Protesters “Dumb”

The NY Times on more peculiar conduct from the Pope:

Many watched in disbelief: There he was, Pope Francis, calling people in Osorno, a city in southern Chile, “dumb” for protesting against a bishop accused of being complicit in clerical sexual abuse.

“The Osorno community is suffering because it’s dumb,” Pope Francis told a group of tourists on St. Peter’s Square, because it “has let its head be filled with what politicians say, judging a bishop without any proof.”

“Don’t be led by the nose by the leftists who orchestrated all of this,” the pope said.”

When Israel Is Mighty

Transcript of a revealing interview with Israeli writer, Yossi Gurvitz, translated by Dena Shunra. He describes how Talmudic Jews view the non- Jewish world and what Christians should expect in a world where “Israel is mighty.”

[Bolding, paragraphs, and headers are mine. Note that I use the more appropriate word Judaist, rather than Jew.]

THE TALMUD IS NOT IN A CONTINUOUS LINE OF DESCENT FROM THE TORAH
Now, we all know what the rabbis say is the origin of Judaism: Moshe passed the torah down to the elders, the elders passed the torah down to the prophets, etc…all the way down to the Talmud, and there were no changes. The central motif of the Jewish understanding of history is that there were no changes (in the religion). In other words, what the rabbis are saying now are merely minor refinements of what the rabbis had said during the time of the ‘Elders’ – the time of the Mishnah and the Talmud.
FOR JUDAISTS, THE TALMUD TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER THE TORAH
Now, first of all, the problem with this version of history is that it is completely baseless.
And second of all, that it has a few historical problems and these historical problems continue to this day, due to the fact that Judaism, as a religion, has been frozen in time for the last 1800 years.
Generally speaking, Rabbinical Judaism, as it appears in the Talmud – unlike what is generally taught in secular schools – the source of Judaism is not the Bible.
The source of Judaism is the Talmud.
HISTORY BETWEEN THE TWO TESTAMENTS WAS PRESERVED BY THE CHRISTIANS, NOT BY THE JUDAISTS
The people who wrote the Talmud are the ones who decided what books would be included in the Biblical canon. What they decided wouldn’t go in – didn’t go in.
So, for example, while the Catholic Church included the Books of the Maccabees in its version of the canon, Judaism did not preserve them, and in fact only the Greek version of them was preserved.
Whether there were Hebrew or Aramaic versions of them is an interesting question, but only Christianity preserved them. The Book of Judith. The Book of Tobias. Many other books, mostly dealing with the Jews of the Diaspora didn’t make it into the Jewish Biblical canon, and were only preserved by Christianity.
JUDAIST HISTORY BEFORE RABBINICAL JUDAISM – TALMUDISM – HAS BEEN ERASED
Now, the Judaism that preceded Rabbinical Judaism was pretty much erased from history. In other words, there’s not enough information to know what happened then. We know there were Sadducees, there were Pharisees – the Pharisees are the rabbinical Jews – there were Essenes – we don’t know anything about them for certain, and the reason we don’t know anything about them for certain is, that when their enemies were victorious, the Pharisees established more than 10 religious holidays to celebrate their victories over the Sadducees, they simply erased them from history. So you have to eke out a fragment [of information] out of a fragment [of information], so you can say, “Maybe it was like this” or “Maybe it was like that” – its impossible to know what really happened.
TALMUDISM IS FILLED WITH CONTEMPT FOR NON-JEWISH PEOPLE
What we do know is this: from very early on, Rabbinical Judaism is a Judaism that hates humans. It defines only Jews as humans – only Jews who believe in the religion as humans. Okay, lets get this exactly right: it defines only Jews who believe in the religion and are men – as full humans. And everyone else is some level of ‘other’, that must be pushed aside, or, in extreme cases, destroyed. Rabbinical Jewish law does not prohibit – okay, that’s not accurate. Rabbinical Jewish law prohibits the killing of a non-Jew, but it does not punish a person for doing so. In other words, if you kill a Jew, even a Jewish woman, even the slave of a Jew – and here it’s important to note that Orthodox Judaism has never abolished slavery – then there’s a penalty you have to pay. It could come to execution or it could be a fine. They didn’t have jails. But if you kill a non-Jew then you’re guilty, but there is no penalty. God will punish you. And that is – how shall I put it? – a bit problematic. When you say something is a crime, but there’s no punishment for committing it, then it’s not really a crime. That’s the Talmud.
A NON-JEW CAN BE KILLED WITH IMPUNITY
When you come to the writers of later exegesis, especially the Shulhan Aruch, by that point, he is already saying that there are situations where you can kill a non-Jew with impunity. Of course, it’s written in the 16th century, after the expulsion [of all Jews] from Spain [in 1492 C.E.] so he has to write what he wants to say in coded language. So he calls them “idolaters”. But just so you know, there weren’t any [pagans] left in that part of the world [by that point] – not in Europe, and not in the Muslim world. So he calls them “idolaters” or other such terms, but everyone knows who he’s talking about [non-Jews].
MAIMONIDES  PERMITS ADULT INTERCOURSE WITH THREE-YEAR-OLD GIRLS
The worst case, in my opinion, is the case of Maimonides, who decrees – first of all, he decrees that it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a 3-year-old girl. That age of consent is – problematic [?!].
MAIMONIDES DECREES THAT NON-JEWISH THREE-YEAR-OLD FEMALE VICTIMS OF RAPE BY ADULT JEWS SHOULD BE EXECUTED
And second of all, he decrees that if a Jew rapes a three-year-old non-Jewish girl, then she must be executed. Her, not him – because she tempted him to sin. [See this.] And for this reason, you have to treat her like an animal that puts obstacles in a person’s way, and he quotes some verse about a bull or something like that.
THE WAYS OF PEACE
And the Rabbis know that the parts of the religion that are misanthropic, that are discriminatory to non-Jews – pose a problem for them. Because if they try to implement them – there are some rules that are very unpleasant, like that 3 year-old girl we were talking about. If they try to implement them, there will be a pogrom. So to avoid that situation, the Talmud defines two different states of reality. There is one called “Darkei Shalom” (Peaceful Ways). In other words, “This is the actual religious law, this is how you are supposed to act.” “However, because it would cause a huge mess, and people will die, so due to ‘Peaceful Ways’, you don’t act that way. ”
WHEN ISRAEL IS MIGHTY
Now, until what point does the “Peaceful Ways” rule still apply? Just as long as the other situation does not exist, which is “When Israel is Mighty.” That’s when there is a Jewish regime. It is independent, and it is merciless, it can do what it likes. Under those circumstances – its all over, you go back to the letter of the law. No more “Peaceful Ways”, no more nothing. Now, when you think of Jewish history, lots of people talked about the Hasmonean Wars, which is pretty much the only time that Jews wielded weapons, and they think about what the Hasmoneans did to the Hellenized Jews (who assimilated Greek culture) – which was to make them extinct, to destroy them. A small genocide. And I remind people of this frequently, every time Hanukah rolls around. But they didn’t stop there. They embarked on campaign of looting and conquest, and at the beginning, during their first 20 years, wherever they arrived, they would destroy the local temples. It was prohibited for a place that was under Jewish rule to have a Pagan temple. That’s what we’re talking about. They also forced the Edomites to convert to Judaism on pain of death. It was a forced conversion. Something we learn the [Spanish] Inquisition did later on. They took people and told them: ” Either you’re dead, or you’re converting to Judaism”. And things only got worse from there.
A MESSIAH IS WHOEVER CAN GET ISRAEL WHAT IT WANTS
Now, when religious Zionists look at reality, they say: “We’ve got a state. We’ve got weapons. We’ve got a Jewish army. This hasn’t happened for 2000 years”. “What this means is that God wants us to bring about the Messiah, that God wants us to build the temple”. They skip over all the conditions that are imposed by the Talmud on what a Messiah must be, and they go back to Maimonides. And they go back to Maimonides. And Maimonides says, “There is no difference between our time and the time of the Messiah, other than the subordination to kingdoms.” In other words, the only difference between the time of Maimonides – he died in 1204 – and the time of the Messiah, is who is subordinate to whom. Are the Jews subordinate to “kingdoms”, to other nations? Or can they subordinate other nations? And that is how Maimonides begins his Book of Kings. He explains what the rules are for a king, what a king can do. It emerges from the belief that, yes, there can be a king. You don’t have to first have a temple. You don’t need God to come down from the sky and point at someone and say, “That’s the Messiah”. You can have a king, and if he is victorious, then he’ll also be the Messiah. And then you look at what religious Zionists are doing about this. They want a Messiah. They want him now. There must be cleansings. Religious law prohibits contact with non-Jews. Of course, the Kosher laws prohibit you from eating with them. Other laws prohibit you from treating them fairly. You are forbidden to return a lost item to a non-Jew – except in order to “keep the peace.” There is no prohibition from stealing from a non-Jew – except in order to “keep the peace.” You can’t say “hello” to them – unless there is no alternative. And so on and so forth.
PSYCHOTIC EXCEPTIONALISM & BIGOTRY
There are all kinds of prohibitions that are entirely psychotic, that are based on a religion of vengeance. Religious Zionists have a serious problem with the fact that there are non-Jews here. The Land of Israel is supposed to be only for Jews. So, ironically, they would manage to get along with the Muslims, more or less, if we weren’t involved in a military conflict with them. Because according to Judaism, Muslims are not idolaters. Muslims believe in one God. They don’t have idols, they don’t have statues, they don’t have anything like that. So ironically, during the Medieval Era, Jews got along better with Muslims than with Christians. But what can you do? We conquered a territory populated mainly by Muslims, and the Muslims are fighting us – so those defenses fall away. And look, now they are starting to talk about genocide. You have the (book) Torat Hamelech (King’s Torah), which tells you that you can kill children if there is a reason to believe that one day they could cause harm. Now, if you killed someone’s entire family and left only him alive, he will indeed have a reason to cause harm. If you stole his lands, turned him into a refugee, tossed him to Jordan or Lebanon – he will indeed have a reason to cause harm. Many people have said that the book’s arguments are not sound according to religious law, and so on and so forth – but no one really tackled it head-on. And it’s no wonder that it became a best-seller. Because in general, what religious Zionists want is for the Land of Israel to be for Jews only.
JUDAISTS SEE CHRISTIANS AS ARCH-ENEMIES
Now the situation for the Christians, on the other hand, will be really bad, (according to Judaism) they are idolaters, and you will have to kill them, even if they do not resist Jewish rule. In Jerusalem, religious seminary students have a despicable habit: they urinate and defecate on Churches. If you go and talk to the Church staff, you will hear it from every Church. Spitting on clergymen in the street is something that happens every day. If the Priest has the gall to hit the person back, to slap him or something similar, then he is deported, quietly. They cancel his residence permit in the country. If you want to justify a pogrom, all you have to do is say the words “Missionary Threat”. And from that perspective, Christianity, which is the historical arch-enemy of Judaism, is going to get a serious beating once the religious Zionists are in power. The Christian Fundamentalists who send them money apparently don’t understand what they are dealing with. But you know, it’s really a case of “a pox on both your houses”.

Suckers For Israel: The Pentecostal Bonanza

Blogger Charles Sullivan describes how Israel is reaping financial support from the massive growth of the world-wide (and, in Orthodox Christianity’s eye, heretical) Pentecostal movement:

Many people do not realize that Pentecostalism is the fastest growing Christian religion in the world with an estimated 497 million followers world-wide and expected to top 1 billion by 2025(1) This is a sharp contrast to the 13 million people who call themselves fundamentalists.

It hasn’t gone unnoticed in Israel, who have wanted their share of this Pentecostal growth in their country. They see it as a serious economic contributor and a powerful political alliance.

Pentecostalists have inherited and modernized the fundamentalist end-time system that believes the end of the world will come with the establishment of Israel as a geographical entity, with borders very similar to what was outlined in the Bible, the return of the Jews from exile, and Armageddon — a final war between Israel and all its enemies.

Persons of Jewish heritage that support the formation and expansion of Israel on religious grounds are standardly called Zionists. Most media outlets define Christians who align with the Zionist movement as Christian Zionists. The greater Evangelical community, Pentecostals in particular, do not use the term themselves. The majority, if asked directly if they are Christian Zionists, would not even know what the speaker is talking about and would categorically say no, though the overwhelming majority do fit within the definition. Some Pentecostals may even feel insulted with them being identified this way. Most would simply think they are following what the Bible tells them to do.

Pentecostalism has a major doctrinal difference over fundamentalism that is important to understand: it promotes personal involvement rather than being a third party observer.

This may seem trivial, but it has serious ramifications.

The Fundamentalists who previously monopolized the Evangelical perspective on Israel do not believe Christians can personally intervene in the events and circumstances that will ultimately unfold into the end of the world. Their support is done en-masse with visible spokespersons such as Hal Lindsey, Bob Jones or John Walvoord.

Pentecostals understand the future events from a prophetic perspective. Prophetic can mean God speaking directly to a person to complete an objective. The cause does not necessarily need to be rational, predictable or major.

This could be a financial commitment, planting trees, political involvement, volunteering, helping in immigration, all night prayer vigils, fasting, raising specialized cattle, evangelism, etc.

For example, some have heard God call them to help Jews return to the Holy Land. One of the better known Christian organizations, Ebenezer Emergency Fund’s Operation Exodus, was started by a prophetic vision to the South African Steve Lightle.(2)

Dreams facilitate some to unusual acts. Like Bruce Balfour, a Canadian affiliated with the pentecostal based Maranatha Evangelistic Association. He believed he was called of God in dreams to plant trees in Lebanon.(3)

Others feel called to expedite God’s plan for the end. Clyde Lott, a cattle rancher and an ordained National Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ Minister in the United States, had an epiphany from God to raise red heifers according to Old Testament requirements for the new Temple.(4)

It can be financial giving. Maoz Israel Ministries — a messianic Jewish ministry in Israel relates on their website about a 9 year old boy, Christian, who believed God had called him to send his $10.00 of birthday money for Israel.(5) This may not seem like much, but this is a grassroots event that Christians are doing all over the world. One Jewish fundraiser, Yechiel Eckstein, has raised over $250 million dollars from roughly 400,000 Christian donors(6) alone. This market is seen as a veritable gold mine by the Israeli Government.

Some may feel inspired to accelerate armageddon. In 1969, Dennis Michael Rohan, an Australian sheep shearer and Pentecostalist, “acting upon divine instructions”(7) attempted to and almost succeeded in burning down the Al-Aksa Mosque situated on the Temple Mount.(8)

The call to prayer for Israel is big with Pentecostals. Robert Stearns, who grew up in an Assemblies of God Church, the world’s largest pentecostal denomination, helped organize the annual Day of Prayer for the Peace of Jerusalem, “instituted with the endorsement of hundreds of Christian leaders from around the world, representing tens of millions of Christians”.(9) It is arguably the biggest annual protestant rite held in the world.”

Now all we need to know is how these Pentecostal groups were actually conceived and if Zionists were instrumental in their birthing, just as they were with the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

 

“Conservative” Catholic Papers Fire Pope Critics

First Things,” a conservative Catholic paper, has fired Maureen Mullarkey for criticizing Pope Francis, going to the extent of publicly ridiculing her conservative views.

Other supposedly conservative Catholic papers have also fired Pope Francis detractors:

Adam Shaw, a Fox news website editor, was fired from a Catholic News Service gig.

The National Catholic Register has fired Patrick Archbold, using liberal talking-points to make its case.

Why are all these “conservative” Catholics suddenly so eager to echo the Liberal party-line?

Were they ever real conservatives?

Are they under pressure from bigger bosses?

Are we only now finding out the extent of the subversion and infiltration of conservative Catholic circles at the behest of the ruling cabal?

As a non-Catholic, I can only feel intensely sorry for traditionalists of that faith.

And more than ever I am thankful that I have never  put all my faith “in princes nor in the son of man,” no, not even (or, maybe, especially) when they claim to speak infallibly.

Note:

I really do not have a major problem with the content of most of what Pope Francis has said publicly (from urging people to care about the poor, to supporting refugees, to asking us to care about the environment).

What I don’t like is the overwhelming priority he has given to these social issues over reaffirming the Church’s teachings on the family and on sexuality….a reaffirmation that is much more needed than the repetition of concerns voiced often enough by political groups.

Even Francis’ social teaching is marred by his ignorance of economic science and his partisanship on man-made global warming.

And all of his exhortations ring hollow when you realize how closely they follow the globalist agenda that is pushed by the intelligence agencies.

 

Orthodox View Of Catholic Dogmas

A list of the main doctrinal differences between the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic are given in a piece cautioning against unwise one-world ecumenism:

1. The Eastern Orthodox reject the Roman Catholic notion of purgatory (Ware, T. The Orthodox Church. Penguin Books, London, 1997, p.p. 255 and Aghiorgoussis, Maximos. The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church. Copyright:  © 1990-1996. http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8038.asp 08/18/07).

2. The Eastern Orthodox number the ten commandments as they originally were (Mastrantonis, G. The Ten Commandments. Copyright:  © 1990-1996 Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7115.asp 05/14/07) and not as the Roman Catholics number them.  Those of Rome combine the first two, even though that is not what those such as Clement of Alexander (2nd century) did (Clement of Alexandria. Stromata, Book VI).

3. The Eastern Orthodox believe in baptism by immersion (Ware, p. 278). The Roman Catholics usually employ sprinkling.

4. Most of the Eastern Orthodox (presuming no abortive devices are used), as do most others, believe in “the responsible use of contraception within marriage” (Ware, p.296 and Harakis S. The Stand of the Orthodox Church on Controversial Issues. http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7101.asp 8/20/05). The Roman Catholic position seems to be much more limited.

5. The Eastern Orthodox reject “the dogma of the immaculate conception of the Virgin” (Clendenin D.B. ed. Eastern Orthodox Theology, 2nd ed. Baker Academic, 2003, p.67).  That is a Roman Catholic dogma (Ott L.  Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma.  Translated into English by James Bastible. Nihil Obstat: Jeremiah J. O’Sullivan.  Imprimatur + Cornelius, 7 October 1954.  Reprint TAN Books, Rockford (IL), 1974, pp. 199-202).

6. The Eastern Orthodox teach that presbyters (which they call “priests,” but we in the Church of God) tend to call “ministers” or “elders”) can be married (Damaskinos Papandreou, Orthodox Metropolitan of Switzerland. The Orthodox Churches and Priestly Celibacy. http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/misc/damaskinos_celibacy.htm viewed 02/04/08). The Roman Church requires celibacy for all presbyters, even though that was not its original position (Fortesque A. Transcribed by Marie Jutras. Eastern Monasticism. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume X. Copyright © 1911 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

7. The Eastern Orthodox, similar to the Church of God, teach that, “Christians must always be ‘People of the Book’ “ (Ware, p.199). Yet, throughout history, the Church of Rome has tended to place more emphasis on the Living Magisterium and non-biblical sources for much of its doctrines.

8. The Eastern Orthodox do not observe Ash Wednesday.  The Church of Rome admits that it added this observance in the Middle Ages (Thurston, Herbert. “Ash Wednesday.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 1. Nihil Obstat. March 1, 1907. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1907. 4 May 2009 ).

9. The Orthodox do not believe in the concept of “papal infallibility.” That concept became a dogma for the Church of Rome in the 19th century (at Vatican I) (McBrien, Richard P. Lives of the Popes: The Pontiffs from St. Peter to Benedict XVI. Harper, San Francisco, 2005 updated ed., pp. 20-22).

10. Many (though not all) of the Eastern Orthodox, like the Church of God, believe that God has a plan of salvation that can occur at the time of the final judgment. (Ware, p.255).  The Roman Church rejects the idea that salvation can be available after the first death and this has been clearly stated by Pope Benedict (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1021. Imprimi Potest + Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger. Doubleday, New York, 1994, p. 153).

11. The Roman Catholic view of eternal torment is rejected by the The Eastern Orthodox (Ware, p. 262).

12. Neither the Orthodox nor Protestants believe that the jurisdiction of Rome has any real bearing on apostolic succession.

It perhaps should be pointed out that the Orthodox, who generally make less pronouncements than the Vatican tends to, condemned the papacy as a major heresy in 1848:

” 2. Hence have arisen manifold and monstrous heresies which the Catholic Church, even from her infancy, has been forced to combat with the panoply of God, and ‘ the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God,’ and has triumphed over all unto this day, and will triumph to the end, ever shining forth brighter and stronger after the struggle.

” 3. Of these heresies some have altogether perished, some are in their decline, but others nourish more or less, until the time of their overthrow, when, being struck with the lightning of the anathema of of the seven (Ecumenical Synods, they become extinct, even though they last for a thousand years; for the orthodoxy of the Catholic Apostolic Church, as inspired by the living Word of God, alone endures for ever, according to the infallible promise of our Lord…—Matt, xviii. 18.

” 4. Of these heresies widely-diffused was formerly Arianism, and now is the Papacy, which, though still flourishing, shall, like the former, pass away and be cast down, and a great voice from Heaven shall cry, ‘ It is cast down.’—Rev. xii. 10…

” 10. Every one of our brethren and children in Christ clearly perceives that the words of the present Bishop of Rome, like those of his anti-synodical predecessors, are not words of peace and compassion, as he says, but of deceit and quibbling, tending to self-aggrandisement; but the orthodox will not be beguiled therewith, for the Word of the Lord is sure—’ A stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him, for they know not the voice of strangers.’

(Encyclical Letter of the Eastern Orthodox, 1848. As cited in The Benares magazine, No. 31, 1851. W.H. Haycock, 1851. Original from Oxford University Digitized, Nov 24, 2006, pp. 370-371,373)

Perhaps it should be mentioned that “Rev. xii. 10” teaches about the “accuser of the brethren” (a reference to Satan in verse 9) being cast down. Thus the Orthodox officially seem to have condemned the papacy as Satan the devil.

Not only does the Orthodox Church consider the institution of the Papacy and the doctrine of Papal infallibility heretical, it considers many – not all – of the instances of stigmata and visions exhibited by Catholic saints to be evidence not of sanctity but of  delusion and vainglory, especially when they are sought out deliberately.

Although I wouldn’t go so far as to call such displays Satanic, I agree that more than a few are the results of a misguided effort of will, very similar to the efforts of some yogis and ascetics in Hinduism and similarly lacking in moral content, while sometimes providing grave opportunities for moral depravity.

Asceticism (what is called tapas in India) and mental focus can lead to psychosomatic symptoms (markings on the skin, sensations) as well as psychic abilities – siddhis -(levitation, bilocation) of all kinds, but whether this is always a saintly thing, or even good, is the question.

In many cases (not all), the Orthodox answer, “no,” is the correct one.

The heart, as the Bible points out, is endlessly self-deceiving.

 

 

Is Pope Francis Practicing Talmudism Covertly?

Why did Pope Francis mention Moses and not Jesus in his addresses to the White House and the UN?

Is it because he wanted to cite a figure that would not “offend”?

But Muslims venerate Jesus, even if they do not regard him as the Son of God. They would not be offended.

It follows that Francis avoided Jesus, to avoid giving offense to religious Jews.

Historically, many – but not all – Jews have regarded Jesus as a blasphemer and apostate.

But, if interfaith peace is the goal, why not mention Abraham, who is the fountain-head of all three faiths?

Why Moses?

The answer lies in looking at Jewish texts.

Moses is held up as the greatest of the prophets by Maimonides, one of the most authoritative of Jewish rabbis and the codifier of the Shloshah Asar Ikkarim (“Thirteen Fundamental Principles”), a distillation of the Taryag mitzvoth (613 regulations) binding on orthodox Jews.

From Chabad.org:

1. Belief in the existence of the Creator, who is perfect in every manner of existence and is the Primary Cause of all that exists.

2. The belief in G-d‘s absolute and unparalleled unity.

This would conflict with the doctrine of the Trinity in orthodox Christianity – that is why Francis praises Chagall’s White Crucifixion – because it effaces the divine Jesus and substitutes the human Jewish rabbi, thereby erasing the core of Christianity.]

3. The belief in G-d’s non-corporeality, nor that He will be affected by any physical occurrences, such as movement, or rest, or dwelling.

[Again, this conflicts with the doctrine of the Incarnation most fundamentally.]

4. The belief in G-d’s eternity.

5. The imperative to worship G-d exclusively and no foreign false gods.

[Maimonides and many great Rabbis saw Jesus as a heretic, sorcerer, and blasphemer.]

6. The belief that G-d communicates with man through prophecy.

The belief in the primacy of the prophecy of Moses our teacher

[This diminishes Jesus, who is superior to all the prophets, according to Christian teaching.]

8. The belief in the divine origin of the Torah.

9. The belief in the immutability of the Torah.

[Jesus taught that the Mosaic law was given because of the degradation of the people and that it did not fully reflect God’s law, as his perfection of it did.]

10. The belief in G-d’s omniscience and providence.

11. The belief in divine reward and retribution.

12. The belief in the arrival of the Messiah and the messianic era.

[Christians believe that the Messiah has already arrived. As for the Messianic era, some Christians regard this as heresy and others as true.]

13. The belief in the resurrection of the dead.

 

Is This Blog Anti-Semitic?

By the standards of the ADL (the Anti-Defamation League), yes, of course.

I think I subscribe to at least half of the beliefs they state qualify one as anti-Semitic:

I think that Jews are disproportionately represented in the media and government; that they wield too much unaccountable power for their numbers and that this fact is dangerous for the rest of society….

[…But I also believe that Jews are generally a productive and capable people.]

I believe – from the evidence – that Jews tend to be loyal before anything else to the Jewish ethno-state, even when they might not be pro-Israel.

[However, I also understand why that is so – trauma-conditioning orchestrated by the powers-that-be.]

As a Christian, I try not to hate any group of people.

But “loving your enemies” is not an instruction to acquire certain sentiments against your will.

It has nothing to do with superficial sentiment.

It is an instruction to treat others mercifully and not merely justly, as you would wish to be treated..

It is an instruction not to be vengeful and descend to the level of your enemies.

In that spirit, I do not denigrate nor regard as demonic or Satanic, Jewish religious faith, even if Jews do not return the favor.

[I do abhor certain practices and beliefs in Judaism, as I also do certain practices in other religions, including certain Christian heresies.]

However, I don’t see any instruction in the Gospel to laugh away behaviors that are detestable or to call one’s open enemies “one’s friends” or to claim that black is white and up is down.

If a Jew were accused unjustly, I would stand up for him, even though I knew the favor might not be returned.

If a Jew were being attacked physically, I would help him, even though I might not be able to count on the same help in return.

On this blog I have defended several neoconservative Jews like Donald Sterling, whose beliefs are anathema to me.

That is how I interpret “love your enemies.”

Would I go out of my way to befriend Jews personally?

Honestly, no.

I don’t know many Jews as friends and those I’ve known and liked were singularly unlike the majority of their co-ethnics, being artists or otherwise exceptional individuals.

Even so, there was a silent area of potential conflict that prevented me from getting too close.

That area was Christianity..or, rather, Jesus Christ.

The Psalms asks us not to sit in the seat of the scornful.

The Gospel repeats that message.

What about conservative Jews who are not disrespectful of Christianity?

Certainly, there are many of those. But they are respectful only of Zionist Christianity – that is, of Christianity that puts ethnic Jews and their tribalism at the center of the faith.

In the case of liberal Jews, their lack of  exceptional hostility to Christianity is only part of their general disbelief in all religion.

Of real Christianity, they are just as uncomprehending as the openly hostile Kabbalists, and, worse, by their incomprehension, they allow themselves to be used as tools by the powerful Kabbalists.

In fact, in my view, the hostile religious Jews, are to be preferred.

They have at least understood that man as he is, natural man, doesn’t cut it.

Blow hot or blow cold, says the Gospel.

There is no hope for the luke-warm.

My problem with Jews [as they are called today, a Euro-Turco-Mongolic people] is that they are not enough Jews [in the sense of Torah followers or Yahwists].

 

Pope Francis Praises Blasphemous Painting

Update:

Added: I want to correct the last paragraph of this post.

I now read that Chagall grew up in a religious Hasidic family, so he must have understood exactly what he was doing.

As for Francis, I should add that there is the possibility that he is being manipulated by more powerful people behind him….the crony-capitalist Jewish elites that use redistributionist rhetoric to con the gullible public. The support for the “climate-control” agenda suggests that Francis is not so much a leftist as an opportunistic “liberal” of the sort that has the backing of George Soros and the CIA.

That would account for the enormous media coverage that he gets.

ORIGINAL POST

The essence of Christianity is but the negation of the right of Judaism to exist…. The figure of Jesus is the figure of the universal enemy of Judaism, the eliminator and destructor of Jewish law [torat yisrael]. Thus, this figure was abhorred and despised in the eyes of many Jews with Jewish consciousness throughout the generations, and I share this despise and abomination”

—  Yeshayahu Leibowitz

[Lila: Of course, I do not accept that Christianity is the negation of Judaism…by which I mean Biblical Yahwism.

The Gospel, said Jesus, was the fulfillment of the Law (of Yahweh).

Yahweh of the Old Testament is the same merciful but righteous God as the one in the New Testament, although the OT scriptures have many misinterpretations, additions, alterations and corruptions that obscure that fact.]

Pope Francis’s fondness for the paintings of Marc Chagall has caught the attention of the media.

Forward.com:

In interviews with Francesca Ambrogetti and Sergio Rubin for the 2010 biography “ El Jesuita ,” Pope Francis identified “White Crucifixion,” which depicts a Jewish Jesus, wearing a tallit instead of a loincloth, as his favorite work of art. “He likes us, he really does,” Tweeted Miriam Shaviv , a columnist for Britain’s Jewish Chronicle, about the pope.

But there’s more to the painting than “owning” Jesus as a Jew.

[Lila: Jesus was an Israelite, but not a Jew in the modern sense, obviously.

In the classical sense, there is no “Jew,” as such. That is a propagandist coinage invented to conflate the post-Temple (Talmudic) beliefs of a contemporary mixed-race people of Middle-Eastern and European descent with the Torah faith (Yahwism) of a Semitic people of thousands of years ago.

In Biblical times, there was only the Judean (a resident of Judea) and the Judahite (descendant of Judah).

Now, Jesus was not a descendant of Judah on his mother’s side (despite the genealogies in Matthew and Luke) and since he was only grafted on to Joseph, he could not have descended genetically from him either.

Finally, he was a resident of Galilee, not Judea, although he did teach in Judea. He was an Israelite, a Galilean, and, most likely, a Levite, descended from Aaron.

Israelite is not the same thing as Israeli. The latter word is often inserted into modern Bibles to conflate the two in the minds of unsuspecting readers, in order to further Zionist goals.]

Surrounding Jesus, we see a synagogue, a Torah scroll and a shtetl burning, as armed men march carrying red flags. And in the bottom-right corner, the Wandering Jew, donning a blue cap and a green coat, lugs a sack as he trudges past the smoking Torah.

That the chief executive of the Catholic Church has an affinity for a painting that was created by a Russian Jewish artist and also includes the symbol of the eternal wanderer, who was punished for abusing Jesus and became the pretext for centuries of anti-Semitism, is drawing a range of reactions.”

Forward is a Jewish paper.
The creator of White Crucifixion is the famous Russian Jewish painter, Marc Chagall.
For insight into what is really going on in Francis’ public admiration of  White Crucifixion, take a closer look at the painting.
It is not problematic that Jesus’s suffering on the cross is identified with the suffering of Jews.
[Lila: I want to reiterate this. Innocent suffering can be rightfully identified with the suffering of Jesus.  There is nothing inherently blasphemous about that.]
It is problematic for Christians that Jesus’ atonement is displaced by collective Jewish suffering.
The displacement is pure Kabbalistic teaching:
Determined to obscure the aptness of the prophesies of the Messiah in the Old Testament to the life of Jesus, the medieval Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki (Rashi) came up with the notion that the “suffering servant” the Scriptures describe in Isaiah 53 was not a man at all.
The suffering servant was the Jewish people as a nation.
This Kabbalistic notion has become a mainstream Jewish notion.
Now look at the Chagall  painting close up:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3HyKqo3jDlE/U3Kd-hmHJcI/AAAAAAAABdQ/V2lovO5wD_w/s1600/2094732310089814684UlOOJR_fs.jpg
The inscription above Jesus is the word, Yeshu, a variant of  Jesus’ name, used in the Jewish scriptures, the Talmud.
In the Babylonian Talmud (the more authoritative Talmud), Yeshu is mentioned as the one who led Israel into apostasy and was rightfully hanged on the Passover.
He is said to have had five disciples and to have performed sorceries.
Contemporary scholars claim that this and other references to Yeshu are descriptions of someone else, but there is ample historical and other testimony that Yeshu is none other than Jesus.
The name expresses the hostility of post-Temple (post 70 AD) rabbinate to Jesus.
Yeshu is an acronym for Yima  (YE) + Shemo (SH) +  Wezikhro (W)  meaning, May his name and memory be stricken out.
How to reconcile this curse with the depiction of Jesus with tallit and with the turban, characteristic of ancient Jewish rabbis?
The Polish Hasidic tradition, for instance, embraced the notion of a tzaddik (compare with Sanskrit sadhaka) or holy man,  whose being in this world was so close to the divine as to resemble that of incarnate deity.
And it is this rabid anti-Christian, incarnational Hasidism that permeates the painting.
Whether Chagall fully knew what he was doing is debatable, but Francis surely does.

Francis’ public embrace of  this anti- Christian art cannot be accidental.

He is too well-educated and, as we can see from his wildly popular sound-bytes, too well-versed in public relations.