You have an IQ of 75. Just use your brain for a moment. Are you allowed to criticize jews? - no. Are you allowed to criticize women? - no. Are you allowed to criticize black people? - no. Are you allowed to criticize the lgbtq? - no. The same goes for all these other groups that I mentioned, not just jews. So are ALL these groups of people oppressing you?
NogGonnaMakeIt Same ole, same ole Still trying to understand why the trinity view was accepted even after the johannim coma drama, why the bloodline to David is anything b/c Jesus was borne into his creation through a woman & bloodlines follow human husbands so it's moot, that 'christ' is a greek medical term for pharmaka application/administration-has nothing to do with hebrew messiach. That יהוה isn't the same as 'allah'-not the same god. Plus isrealis [zionists/rabbinic jews]:call god 'hashem' primarily, they're not as enthralled w/ יהוה as christians are.
@@ikk_ikkAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH!!! Oh the end of your comment was the funniest part, truly the cherry on top. -allah- God bless your little heart!
There's literally almost nothing accurate in this video. So it begs the question: If a person intentionally misrepresents the Talmud and Judaism to advance anti-semitism, what does that make them? Some might say, "a liar and an anti-semite."
@@jeremykossen3728please point out all of the misinformation he’s has spoken here then. You didn’t give even ONE example of what you’re referring too?
@@to3ta64 I already addressed many examples in a separate rebuttal, but I'll repost it below: I just finished watching this video, and I wanted to share some thoughts because there are a lot of misunderstandings here about Judaism and the Talmud that I think are worth clarifying: 1. Misunderstanding the Talmud First off, the Talmud isn’t what this video makes it out to be. It’s not a single, monolithic document. It’s a massive collection of debates and discussions among rabbis over centuries. The beauty of the Talmud is that it doesn’t try to enforce a single viewpoint-it preserves disagreements and invites readers to wrestle with the complexities of life and faith. To say it’s “given greater authority than the Old Testament” misses the mark. The Torah (the first five books of the Bible) is the foundation of Judaism, while the Talmud helps us interpret and apply its teachings in real life. 2. Claims About Jesus and Gentiles The claims about the Talmud’s supposed views on Jesus and Gentiles are misleading. These often come from cherry-picking and mistranslations. Scholars have shown that some passages people think refer to Jesus actually don’t. When it comes to Gentiles, the Talmud is clear about the value of all human life. There’s even a universal moral framework called the Noahide Laws that Judaism teaches applies to everyone, regardless of faith. 3. Judaism Didn’t Reform Because of Christianity The video frames Judaism as a reaction to Christianity, but that’s not accurate. After the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, Jewish practice naturally evolved because the Temple-central to worship-was gone. Rabbinic Judaism grew from this, focusing on study, ethical living, and prayer. It wasn’t a rejection of “authentic” Judaism-it was a way to adapt and survive. 4. Judaism and Christianity Are Distinct Traditions It’s also important to recognize that Judaism and Christianity are two distinct traditions. Yes, they share roots, but they developed in different ways. Christianity sees Jesus as the fulfillment of prophecy; Judaism doesn’t. That’s a theological difference, not a rejection of one’s own scriptures. 5. Use This Opportunity as a Call for Dialogue and Understanding Videos like this one can unintentionally (or intentionally) fuel misunderstanding and division. If you’re genuinely curious about Judaism, I encourage you to look at sources that come from Jewish scholars or communities. Dialogue and learning are so much more constructive than misrepresenting another faith. Let’s aim for understanding and mutual respect-there’s so much more to gain that way.
@@paulbunion584 Well, there are really BIG differences between Judaism and Christianity. That is EXACTLY WHY it is an oxyMORON. Now, don't get me wrong, if Christians really FOLLOWED the lessons and teachings of Jesus - who was a Jew and taught Judaism - it would be a very different in the religion. BUT, Saul (Romanized paganized Paul) preached opposite of that and Church doctrine takes it even further. So, nope.
The same is with Islam. Arabo centric religion. Only arabic is holy language. Chanting Arabic words are most important than to understand what do they mean.
When speaking to the Pharisees, Christ says, “If you are Abraham’s children, do the deeds of Abraham. But as it is, you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God; this Abraham did not do." John 8:39-40. In many other verses, Christ expresses a similar sentiment: being descendants of holy men means nothing if you yourself do not commit to the same holiness. Because of their rejection of Christ (and their rejection of God in the days before the Babylonian exile), Jesus takes away the Jews' status as the chosen people and opens His covenant to any that believe in Him.
Hallelujah!! I’ve been saying these EXACT things for 20+ years only to be told I’m evil, wrong and hateful, even by my own parents! For simply showing them Scripture made me Auntie Semite to ALL that knew me. My pastor didn’t agree, my friends didn’t agree, my own family members didn’t agree and they all believed I was terrible for saying actual biblical things, Bible verses! Now let’s talk about the stranglehold they’ve got over literally every single country on earth, and how their plans are always the same - good for them, bad for anyone that isn’t them.
It should make you wonder why many Christians are so blind in support of them but quick to antagonize Muslims more. Could the "chosen" ones have set up an effective propaganda system to indoctrinate so many of them?
I’ve seen Shapiro address the part in the Talmud about Jesus boiling in excrement… all he said was that such an interpretation is “awful,” but he neglected to clarify. How convenient.
Don't you know - they may throw some vague defense out there but can NEVER expound upon their defense. Or they use diversion tactics - "we contribute heavily to scientific advancements" "people are very jealous of us". 🥱 ok sh!omo
They probably allowed it to stay because the video has half truths. The people in Israel today couldn’t be the descendants of the twelve tribes. In Deuteronomy 29:28, God said he would never allow them to return as a curse. God would make them cease to be a remembrance among men. God would make them forget their heritage. Noah had three son’s, one of them was Ham, the father of Africa. Ham had a son named Cush (a Black man). Cush had a son named Nimrod (a Black man) The Book of Jubilees mentions the name of "Nebrod" (the Greek form of Nimrod) only as being the father of Azurad, the wife of Eber and mother of Peleg (8:7). This account would thus make Nimrod an ancestor of Abraham, and hence of all Hebrews. The hieroglyphs in Misraim, It clearly depicts the Hebrew slaves with afros and beards.
Deuteronomy 29:28- 28 And the Lord rooted them out of their land in anger, and in wrath, and in great indignation, and cast them into another land, as it is this day. Deuteronomy 29:24-25- 24 Even all nations shall say, Wherefore hath the Lord done thus unto this land? what meaneth the heat of this great anger? 25 Then men shall say, Because they have forsaken the covenant of the Lord God of their fathers, which he made with them when he brought them forth out of the land of Egypt: Deuteronomy 32:26- 26 I said, I would scatter them into corners, I would make the remembrance of them to cease from among men: Cutoff or discontinued from their Israelite heritage. Zac 10:9, Jer 17:4-5, Lam 5:2, Jer 16:13, Jewish people claim to have never lost their heritage and claim to be able to trace themselves back to Ancient Israel. This self admission disqualifies them from being Israelites per the TORAH.
People keep saying, but it's never true. There are hundreds, maybe thousands, of videos on RUclips with this same premise. You can't have a growing movement on RUclips and social media, and also cry victim at the same time.
@@armeniussun2394 It never gets taken down. Some people desperately want to be victims. They squint real hard and ignore a lot of relevant data until it looks like that to them.
@Proud_Troll It does seem that this type of content is not a priority for RUclips of IG anymore. Makes me wonder why, there was a time that stuff like this was suppressed. Other types of content, are still suppressed though. I wouldn't say my comment exhibited victim mentality, just a prediction about the future of this video.
@@travissharon1536 A lot of people who see themselves as victims subconsciously want to be victims, so they constantly are trying to find instances where they are victimized. This happens on both sides of the political spectrum. On the right it usually materializes with comments like yours. I agree, this stuff used to be censored more, but I think censorship over all might have dropped a bit on RUclips. RUclips seems to have shifted its focus to moderate comments instead of videos.
I really don’t understand why it’s so hard for evangelicals. If they deny the divinity of Christ, they are your enemy, it doesn’t matter if their name is in the Bible a lot.
@@spicyshiba508read what Jews said about their own people in the Bible. They turn away from God and God judges them if they don’t change their ways(repent). What makes this generation of Jews any different they have turned their back on God. Anyone Jew or non Jew will be judged
@@TheHiddenWorldWithin yes that’s the story of the Jewish people; turning from God only to return. Not only does it show our name (Israel literally means struggles with God) but also shows God’s infinite mercy, and love for his people.
America being in so much debt and yet giving "aid" to a certain country every year who has a surplus of money and equipment and being it's body guard when we don't even really check who is coming across the borders should tell you everything you need to know regardless of politics or religion. Follow the money and influence.
Good video for those new to the Truth. We were all there once. It was only last year that I learned The Ukraine used to be called Khazaria. Big hmm face.
"Freemasonry is a *jewish* establishment, whose history, grades, official appointments, passwords and explanations are *jewish* , from begining, to end." -rabbi Isaac Mayer Wise✡️ "Most jews do not like to admit it, but, lucifer is our god, and, we are his chosen people." -rabbi Harold Wallace Rosenthal✡️ "Strictly speaking, it is INCORRECT to refer to an ancient Israelite or Hebrew as a jew, or, to call a contemporary jew a Hebrew or an Israelite." -The Jewish Almanac 1980 edition, page 3, chapter 1, line 1
Growing up in an evangelical church, support for jews and Israel always felt like a requirement for salvation. Nevermind that Jesus was opposed to them, rebuked them and even physically fought them until His crucifixion. Until they lobbied Pilate to get rid of Him. The same behavior has been exhibited throughout history since then. 🤔
It was made explicitly clear by my mother that I must pray for Israel and study their issues and religion or I'm not a good Christian and will go to hell. Preposterous...
Fr fr right-wing protestant evangelicals out there are a great part of the population and they worship them and the state of Israel as if they are God themselves, it's embarrassing.
England - in 1290 A.D. by Edward I. Re-entered 1655. France - 1306 by Philip the Fair. Until after 1682. Hungary - 1360 until after 1582. Belgium -1370-1700. Slovakia -1380 until after 1744. Austria - 1420 by Albrecht V. Netherlands -1444. Spain -1492. Lithuania - 1495 by Grand Duke Alexander. Portugal -1498. Prussia-1510. Italy-1540. Bavaria-1551. etc,. etc,.
@@CMW648 the deportation of Jews throughout history. It is a common antisemitic argument that goes "They were deported so many times throughout history- that means they must all be bad"
imagine the stupidity to call a human who got crucified a god or the son of god, or messiah, when he isn't even from the house of david, which is the most basic requirement to be messiah
As if Satan and Christ shared values. As if they have values, or know true value, and don't reject authentic spiritual value for imaginary forms of worth rendered physical
Surah Al-Imran Aya 49, of the Quran states that jesus was sent to the israelites, although written over 1,300 years ago in the 19th century (same century bible was only transtalted into Arabic in as well) they came to the same conclusion, He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either. Triune nonsense is straight out of the Roman Pantheon. Hercules, anyone? Cerberus? The trinity of Zeus, Athena Apollo, literally called the Triune. Greek goddess Hecate was portrayed in triplicate, a three-in-one. This was all done to make the creed more digestible, followed by mental gymnastics attempting to reconcile the onsensical with elaborate theories. Why doesn't a square peg fit into a round hole? Answer by saying it's a mystery instead of geometries not lining up. No such thing as the bible, the new testament is a concoction of several books that were deemed canonical, books written in Greek that were given the hellenized names of Apotsles who neither wrote, nor spoke greek to give it an illusion of antiquity, much like the calendar we have today, which was established in the year 535 CE by Dionysus Exegesis so too was the original message altered to that of the pauline credo, a digestible religion to the yet to be converted greeks who had no desire to follow the mosaic laws. Paul had neither met nor seen Jesus, his relation to the twelve apostles was one of decided independence and even of opposition. He acknowledged no subordination to them. He addressed no doctrinal epistle to them or their churches, and received none from them. He made no reports to them. He did not correspond with them regularly. They never invited him to preach to their congregations and he never invited them to address his converts. He declared that he did not owe his conversion, his baptism, or his doctrine to the twelve, and that he never spent any long time in Jerusalem or in Judea as a Christian missionary. He claimed to be an apostle by a secret divine commission, but the twelve never admitted the validity of his claim. They never gave him the title of apostle; they never said anything indicative of willingness to admit him into their councils. Vacancies occurred in their number, but they never chose him to a vacant place, rather we have statements of Peter with regards to Paul which show nothing but animosity: "And if our Jesus appeared to you also and became known in a vision and met you as angry with an enemy [recall: Paul had his vision while still persecuting the Christians: Acts 9], yet he has spoken only through visions and dreams or through external revelations. But can anyone be made competent to teach through a vision? And if your opinion is that that is possible, why then did our teacher spend a whole year with us who were awake? How can we believe you even if he has appeared to you?… But if you were visited by him for the space of an hour and were instructed by him and thereby have become an apostle, then proclaim his words, expound what he has taught, be a friend to his apostles and do not contend with me, who am his confidant; for you have in hostility withstood me, who am a firm rock, the foundation stone of the Church" -Homily 17 Section XIX On the pauline credo currently called trinitanity Peter said "For some from among the Gentiles have rejected my lawful preaching and have preferred a lawless and absurd doctrine to the man who is my enemy. And indeed some have attempted, while I am still alive, to distort my words by interpretations of many sorts, as if I taught the dissolution of the law… But that may God forbid ! For to do such a thing means to act contrary to the Law of God which was made to Moses and was confirmed by our Lord in its everlasting continuance. For he said, “The heaven and the earth will pass away, but not one jot or one tittle shall pass away from the Law.” -Letter of Peter to James, 2.3-5 None of the disciples spoke of trinity, ate pork or proclaimed it is allowable to do so, yet the miracle begotten paul, whom peter called him enemy, introduced his new creed according to his whims It proclaimed the abrogation of the Mosaic ceremonial law. It announced itself as a new and independent religion; calling its adherents Christians, and their doctrine Christianity. Trinitarians are inoculated from rationality, facts and logic. It is no surprise that basic reasoning is entirely lost on those that believe that the creator became one of those he created in order to save the created from his own self. Not to mention the incoherence in the scripture, never minding the creed itself. Matthew 4:1) Jesus was tempted [James 1:13) God cannot be tempted (John 1:29) Jesus was seen (1 John 4:12) No man has ever seen God (Acts 2:22) Jesus was and is a man, sent by God (Numbers 23:19, Hosea 11:9) God is not a man (Hebrews 5:8-9) Jesus had to grow and learn (Isaiah 40:28) God doesn't ever need to learn (1 Corinthians 15: 3-4) Jesus Died (1 Timothy 1:17) God cannot die (Hebrews 5:7) Jesus needed salvation (Luke 1:37) God doesn't need salvation (Mark 4:38) Jesus slept (Psalm 121: 2-4) God doesn't sleep (John 5:19) Jesus wasn't all powerful (Isaiah 45: 5-7) God is all powerful (Mark 13:32) Jesus wasn't all knowing (Isaiah 46:9) God is all knowing Older one is no different, Abijah was a wicked king, and had war with his rival (1. Kings 15:3). 2 Chronicles 13:3 says that Abjiah was pious ; that he took the field with 400,000 men against Jeroboam, who was at the head of 800,000 men ; and in a great battle the King of Israel was defeated, and 500,000 of his men slain. It seems that, 1,200,000 soldiers sent into the field at one time by two small tribes, and the destruction of 500,000 men in one battle, were beneath the notice of the author of Kings. How can one believe that the One that decrees that which is a 'sin' and that which is good "die for their sins" ? He is the One who decreed it thus, can decree it not so. To whom does the One with whom final authority resides in sacrifice for? a registrar? - No. None are greater than He. Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1 God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
@@ikk_ikk God did not bring down anything to a child rapist and murderer. Muslims were the ones causing Chaos in Christian lands and then forcing a retaliation by Christendom against the Islamic forces. You're nothing more than pawns to serve yourselves based on lies by a monster and not the God of Abraham -> Yeshua.
Nah and "Jesus" did not intend to establish a new religion. Soon after "Jesus" had selected his twelve apostles, according to Luke, he " gave them power and authority over all devils and to cure diseases. And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick. And he said unto them: 'Take nothing for your journey, neither staves nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece. And whatsoever house ye enter, there abide and thence depart. And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them." This is the entire charge of Jesus to his apostles when he sent them out to convert the world, as reported by Luke, who claims to give the address or a portion of it, and that presumably the most important portion, word for word. The language here attributed to Jesus conveys no idea that he had any purpose of founding a new church. Neither here nor anywhere else, in the language attributed to him in the New Testament, does he explain the phrase " the kingdom of God " to mean a new ecclesiastical organization. In several passages he does use it to signify the celestial dominion after the destruction of the world; and this is therefore presumably its meaning everywhere. The gospel of Matthew is much further than that of Luke in its report of the charge of Jesus to his apostles: "These twelve Jesus sent forth and commanded them, saying: 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.", "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I am come not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother... He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward." This charge, as reported by Matthew omitted nearly all the main ideas that would have been appropriate in an address instructing the twelve to preach the foundation of Christianity. It does not say whether Jesus wished to reform or to supersede Judaism; whether his principal purpose was ecclesiastical, moral, political, or sanitary. The remarks about healing the sick and casting out devils is the most explicit of all the instructions. Certainly no reader can learn from that charge that Jesus intended to establish a new religion; and much less can he learn any feature of the faith or discipline of a projected new church. And this address is that portion of the New Testament where such information should be given most clearly. He made no doctrinal definition and no ecclesiastical organization. He did not use the key words of the original doctrines necessary to Christianity or a new church, nor the keywords of ideas afterwards associated with Christianity, such as Incarnation, Trinity, Immaculate Conception, and Transubstantiation. The subjects to which the most space or most prominence is given in the sayings attributed, in the gospels, to Jesus, are, First, the Mosaic law; Second, judgment day; Third, faith; Fourth, the sins of the Pharisees; Fifth, ascetic morality; and Sixth, his divine commission. In the opening chapters of Acts we find two addresses by Peter, one delivered to the disciples when an apostle to succeed Judas Iscariot was to be chosen, and the other to the Jews on the day of Pentecost. On neither occasion did the speaker mention a new religion, or a church open to Gentiles as well as to Jews, or an abandonment of the Mosaic law. If these ideas had been in his mind at that time, he could not have omitted some reference to them. That the apostles and disciples in Jerusalem continue for at least eighteen years to comply with the requirements of the Mosaic law is proved by the epistle of Paul and also by Acts. In the latter book we read that at time not specified, probably not earlier than 40 C.E Peter went to Joppa and there ate with Gentiles-^that i he violated the Pharisaic interpretation of one of the Mosaic ceremonial rules-and after his return to Jesus; then, he was called to account by his fellow disciple He justified his conduct, not on the ground that Jesus had abrogated the ceremonial law of Moses, or any part of it, but that in a dream he had received a divine communication telling him that all manner of beasts, fowls, an creeping things were clean, and that it was lawful for him to keep company with Gentiles, who were " unclean under the law of Moses. This announcement was accepted as authoritative, but with much surprise, " becaus that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost."' This statement of the revelation to Peter, and of it acceptance by the disciples in Jerusalem, is doubtless a invention of the author of Acts. It cannot be brought into harmony with later passages of his own book, nor with the statements of Paul, who is our only trustworth; witness in these matters. According to Acts, about 51 C. E. a council was held in Jerusalem to put an end to the dissension which had arisen in the church on the questions of circumcision and unclean meats. This council decided in favor of Paul, who was in attendance and the decision as given in a letter addressed not to all Christians but only to " the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia"-where Paul had been making converts, informing them that they were not required to observe the Mosaic ceremonial law. It is quite clear that no such council would have been held if the matter had been decided ten years before, as Acts says it had been. But this account of the council of 51 C. E. is also a fiction. About eight years later Paul went to Jerusalem again, and his appearance there provoked a riot. The mob wanted to kill him because of his hostility to the Mosaic law, and this mob included Jewish Christians as well as Jews. All the Christians in Jerusalem were zealous adherents of the Mosaic law. Some of the leading brethren, presumably apostles, advised Paul to take a false oath that he did not teach his Jewish converts to neglect the law. And, if we can believe Acts, he took that oath. This, however, did not pacify the mob, which would have put him to death if the Roman soldiers had not protected him. They took him to prison and finally to Rome. This story in Acts implies that the apostolic church adopted one rule of discipline for the Gentile and another for the Jewish Christians; that the latter were, and that the former were not, required to comply with the Mosaic ceremonial law. This duplicity of discipline is not recorded elsewhere. It is not known to Paul ; and if it had existed, he could neither have been ignorant of it nor remained silent about it. He tells us that the twelve apostles in Jerusalem, or those of them known to him, favored strict adherence to Moses; and the only way in which he could get along harmoniously with them was by promising to do no missionary work in Judea. He was to labor among the Gentiles, The subjects to which the most space or most prominence is given in the sayings attributed, in the gospels, to Jesus, are, First, the Mosaic law; Second, judgment day; Third, faith; Fourth, the sins of the Pharisees; Fifth, ascetic morality; and Sixth, his divine commission. There never was such another epidemic of ecclesiastical forgery. The church was flooded with books attributed falsely to apostolic times and authors. Distinguished saints and learned fathers of the faith openly commended the invention and acceptance of false- hoods designed to aid the conversion of the world to what they believed to be truth. Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1 God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Wow. The systematic and calculated propaganda my whole family consumes leads them far into the Judea-Christian “alliance” snare. So that they disregard our ancestors and theological predecessors understanding of that evil ethno-religion and believe such obvious falsehoods as, “a Jewish state is necessary” “Men practicing Judaism go to heaven” and “The Jewish state must reach from the Nile to the Persian gulf”. It is a complete takeover of our holy beliefs.
I think they are Frankish or Khazarians. I think they have been trying to wipe out all the other types. I recently learned about the Yemenite concentration camps of 1950s Israel, and the disappearance of thousands of Mizrahi Jewish infants that were allegedly given to WW2 families who lost their kid in the war. They were able to adopt them in Israel, Europe and America, and didn't realize they technically were not orphaned. Many in Israel call these things anti semitic fairy tales, but survivors have been telling these stories for over half a century, and you can find many news articles covering them.
Well there's hope yet, as evidenced by the fact that you (and many of us) have broken out of that twisted mindset. Have children and teach them the truth and we'll see a brighter future. God will not forsake His true people.
The Talmud is literally just recorded debates over the Mishnah by rabbis in the Babylonian exhile and majority of the Jews you guys rail about are irreligious ones who wouldn’t even know how to read a single line of it. And the orthodox who do learn it do it as a practice in argument very little actual law is derived from it. Majority of even Orthodox Jews who spend their entire school life in orthodox yeshivahs which do learn Talmud only learn maybe a sixth of it because of the way they break topics down so much. They end up learning certain topics like kedushin (laws of marriage) and laws of Sukkot, laws of mikvah, things like this that hold practical use for orthodox life. You guys are really insane I live in the orthodox world as someone raised secular with no religious thought involved in my young life (like most Jews especially the wealthy ones, I come from super poor people but we have that much in common our families are completely irreligious) and Orthodox Jews literally want nothing to do with the outside world. You can not point to a single hugely influential religious Jew. All of those that are huge power brokers are irreligious who don’t know the first thing about any single Jewish text.
@@Stolas1777 You lying tiny hats love to omit the fact your noahide laws come from the talmud so stop acting like the talmud isn't your most revered holy texts.
@@Stolas1777 I wish you could see how crazy your message reads to someone else that is not you. Why doesn't god talk to people anymore? Why doesn't he throw fire from the sky anymore?
Jesus said end will start with their 3rd temple being built, when Antichrist- their messiah will come. It is not far. I am not apologetic at all for them going down, they had it coming, many of them worshipping lucifer-the morning star Jesus spoke in parables, to those who want to hear.
we jews notice how you are justifying your whole religion via hatred of us and we will treat you similarly to how you treat us, may god have mercy on your soul
@@Ryan-xq3kl We Christians notice how you are justifying your whole religion via hatred of us and we will treat you similarly to how you treat us, may god have mercy on your soul.
@Ryan-xq3kl Not all of us are antisemitic fools. May the God of Israel have mercy on their souls, for they know exactly what they are doing, and choose to hate the chosen people of the most high regardless. I choose to bless the nation of Israel, the Jewish people, and say, Am Yisrael Chai.
*God to Abraham Genesis 12:2* 2:And I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you, and I will aggrandize your name, and [you shall] be a blessing. 3: And I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse, and all the families of the earth shall be blessed in you."
I come from an evangelical upbringing and have always been taught the importance of this Judeo-Christian alliance of sorts at my Baptist church. But as I've grown up, I've come to the same conclusion as you have. I think we need to drive home the connection between the antichrist and Judaism a little more. My Baptist upbringing taught of a pre-tribulation rapture, but I no longer am convinced of this doctrine. It conveniently creates a blind spot for Christians if they believe they will never live to see the antichrist rise to power- so they will never recognize him. It perplexes me as a Christian today to think that we should ally ourselves with Judaism, when it's Judaism that will embrace the literal antichrist as their messiah, and install him on the throne in the rebuilt temple. It's their false messiah antichrist that will persecute us Christians one day. It is Judaism that will demand that we take the mark of the beast and worship him. It was Judaism that murdered their own Messiah. This is a demonic religion. It's the religion of the antichrist. We need to be wise and see it for what it is.
Well hang on, just because the Jews will accept the antichrist doesn't mean we should say theyre a demonic religion it's not that Judaism will accept him, it's that the Jews will, that's like saying Christianity will accept Satan when they won't. As Christians we are required to help the least of these to help the least fortunate, and if the Jews are in this regard as they have not accepted Christ, then we are required and responsible for showing them the Christ regardless of who or what they are, and in a world plunging itself into atheism, all people who believe in God should say otherwise whether it be the Jews or the Christians together, this doesn't mean shift people to either side and embrace an "alliance" this does mean that Christians should be responsible for helping those who do not know Jesus and that includes the Jews, Judaism isn't a "demonic" religion, it was created out of a covenant with God so how could a covenant with God be demonic? You could say the people are arrogant, ignorant and foolish, that can be anyone and anything because humans are humans we are imperfect, and that is why the Jews will sit a satanic figure on a throne and call him the Christ because they dont view Jesus to be the Christ because it did not fit their description when it was our duty to help them understand the descriptors for the first coming of the Christ, had that happened I don't think the anti Christ would come to power as Jesus states, so we fell short but in the end it still isn't the fault of Christians it's the fault of the ignorant arrogant and foolish Jews who did not accept Christ simply because he didn't do what they wanted to the Romans at the time.
Christianity was created to convert and control people to a religion that is not monotheistic. It is an idolatrous religion that looks to an image as God... that is the complete opposite of what monotheism is. Having a set image that doesn't ever change is the opposite of evolution which is the definition of expansion and knowledge which is what Judaism is about.. That is the misunderstanding of many Christians..is they think that the original followers of jesus the jew, were christians and they were not they were jews that followed him as a leader maybe even as a messiah or prophet but not God because that's not what the point of messiah is...
I'm gonna be honest with you all, God saved my life an hour ago, we are in las Vegas and were coming back from the mall, and left almost RIGHT after a shooting happened, right where we were passing! Truly God saved me and especially my father, I ask God every night to protect my Dad, and I'm so happy. And Please pray for the man who lost his life today in the shooting❤
I don't understand why you started the comment with "I'm gonna be honest with you all". Normally people say that before saying something a bit mean but in honesty.
Pray to the one to whom he prayed to; The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha" too sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name." jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah ) Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen. He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown. "protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate, Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Surah Al-Imran Aya 49, of the Quran states that jesus was sent to the israelites, although written over 1,300 years ago in the 19th century (same century bible was only transtalted into Arabic in as well) they came to the same conclusion, He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either. Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves. Triune nonsense is straight out of the Roman Pantheon. Hercules, anyone? Cerberus? The trinity of Zeus, Athena Apollo, literally called the Triune. Greek goddess Hecate was portrayed in triplicate, a three-in-one. This was all done to make the creed more digestible, followed by mental gymnastics attempting to reconcile the onsensical with elaborate theories. Why doesn't a square peg fit into a round hole? Answer by saying it's a mystery instead of geometries not lining up. No such thing as the bible, the new testament is a concoction of several books that were deemed canonical, books written in Greek that were given the hellenized names of Apotsles who neither wrote, nor spoke greek to give it an illusion of antiquity, much like the calendar we have today, which was established in the year 535 CE by Dionysus Exegesis so too was the original message altered to that of the pauline credo, a digestible religion to the yet to be converted greeks who had no desire to follow the mosaic laws. Paul had neither met nor seen Jesus, his relation to the twelve apostles was one of decided independence and even of opposition. He acknowledged no subordination to them. He addressed no doctrinal epistle to them or their churches, and received none from them. He made no reports to them. He did not correspond with them regularly. They never invited him to preach to their congregations and he never invited them to address his converts. He declared that he did not owe his conversion, his baptism, or his doctrine to the twelve, and that he never spent any long time in Jerusalem or in Judea as a Christian missionary. He claimed to be an apostle by a secret divine commission, but the twelve never admitted the validity of his claim. They never gave him the title of apostle; they never said anything indicative of willingness to admit him into their councils. Vacancies occurred in their number, but they never chose him to a vacant place, rather we have statements of Peter with regards to Paul which show nothing but animosity: "And if our Jesus appeared to you also and became known in a vision and met you as angry with an enemy [recall: Paul had his vision while still persecuting the Christians: Acts 9], yet he has spoken only through visions and dreams or through external revelations. But can anyone be made competent to teach through a vision? And if your opinion is that that is possible, why then did our teacher spend a whole year with us who were awake? How can we believe you even if he has appeared to you?… But if you were visited by him for the space of an hour and were instructed by him and thereby have become an apostle, then proclaim his words, expound what he has taught, be a friend to his apostles and do not contend with me, who am his confidant; for you have in hostility withstood me, who am a firm rock, the foundation stone of the Church" -Homily 17 Section XIX On the pauline credo currently called trinitanity Peter said "For some from among the Gentiles have rejected my lawful preaching and have preferred a lawless and absurd doctrine to the man who is my enemy. And indeed some have attempted, while I am still alive, to distort my words by interpretations of many sorts, as if I taught the dissolution of the law… But that may God forbid ! For to do such a thing means to act contrary to the Law of God which was made to Moses and was confirmed by our Lord in its everlasting continuance. For he said, “The heaven and the earth will pass away, but not one jot or one tittle shall pass away from the Law.” -Letter of Peter to James, 2.3-5 None of the disciples spoke of trinity, ate pork or proclaimed it is allowable to do so, yet the miracle begotten paul, whom peter called him enemy, introduced his new creed according to his whims It proclaimed the abrogation of the Mosaic ceremonial law. It announced itself as a new and independent religion; calling its adherents Christians, and their doctrine Christianity. How can one believe that the One that decrees that which is a 'sin' and that which is good "die for their sins" ? He is the One who decreed it thus, can decree it not so. To whom does the One with whom final authority resides in sacrifice for? a registrar? - No. None are greater than He. Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1 God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9 “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3 “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16 The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers: “in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.” Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as:: “seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.” Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed: "Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer". Evoking several of these verses in practice: - (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. - (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them... - (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary. This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished. This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah): "includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit."
This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship." It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children." بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة "To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause" -Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah: حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ» "Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries" حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ» سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ» "The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly" This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons. The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
"Jesus" did not intend to establish a new religion. Soon after "Jesus" had selected his twelve apostles, according to Luke, he " gave them power and authority over all devils and to cure diseases. And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick. And he said unto them: 'Take nothing for your journey, neither staves nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece. And whatsoever house ye enter, there abide and thence depart. And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them." This is the entire charge of Jesus to his apostles when he sent them out to convert the world, as reported by Luke, who claims to give the address or a portion of it, and that presumably the most important portion, word for word. The language here attributed to Jesus conveys no idea that he had any purpose of founding a new church. Neither here nor anywhere else, in the language attributed to him in the New Testament, does he explain the phrase " the kingdom of God " to mean a new ecclesiastical organization. In several passages he does use it to signify the celestial dominion after the destruction of the world; and this is therefore presumably its meaning everywhere. The gospel of Matthew is much further than that of Luke in its report of the charge of Jesus to his apostles: "These twelve Jesus sent forth and commanded them, saying: 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.", "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I am come not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother... He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward." This charge, as reported by Matthew omitted nearly all the main ideas that would have been appropriate in an address instructing the twelve to preach the foundation of Christianity. It does not say whether Jesus wished to reform or to supersede Judaism; whether his principal purpose was ecclesiastical, moral, political, or sanitary. The remarks about healing the sick and casting out devils is the most explicit of all the instructions. Certainly no reader can learn from that charge that Jesus intended to establish a new religion; and much less can he learn any feature of the faith or discipline of a projected new church. And this address is that portion of the New Testament where such information should be given most clearly. He made no doctrinal definition and no ecclesiastical organization. He did not use the key words of the original doctrines necessary to Christianity or a new church, nor the keywords of ideas afterwards associated with Christianity, such as Incarnation, Trinity, Immaculate Conception, and Transubstantiation. The subjects to which the most space or most prominence is given in the sayings attributed, in the gospels, to Jesus, are, First, the Mosaic law; Second, judgment day; Third, faith; Fourth, the sins of the Pharisees; Fifth, ascetic morality; and Sixth, his divine commission. In the opening chapters of Acts we find two addresses by Peter, one delivered to the disciples when an apostle to succeed Judas Iscariot was to be chosen, and the other to the Jews on the day of Pentecost. On neither occasion did the speaker mention a new religion, or a church open to Gentiles as well as to Jews, or an abandonment of the Mosaic law. If these ideas had been in his mind at that time, he could not have omitted some reference to them. That the apostles and disciples in Jerusalem continue for at least eighteen years to comply with the requirements of the Mosaic law is proved by the epistle of Paul and also by Acts. In the latter book we read that at time not specified, probably not earlier than 40 C.E Peter went to Joppa and there ate with Gentiles-^that i he violated the Pharisaic interpretation of one of the Mosaic ceremonial rules-and after his return to Jesus; then, he was called to account by his fellow disciple He justified his conduct, not on the ground that Jesus had abrogated the ceremonial law of Moses, or any part of it, but that in a dream he had received a divine communication telling him that all manner of beasts, fowls, an creeping things were clean, and that it was lawful for him to keep company with Gentiles, who were " unclean under the law of Moses. This announcement was accepted as authoritative, but with much surprise, " becaus that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost."' This statement of the revelation to Peter, and of it acceptance by the disciples in Jerusalem, is doubtless a invention of the author of Acts. It cannot be brought into harmony with later passages of his own book, nor with the statements of Paul, who is our only trustworth; witness in these matters. According to Acts, about 51 C. E. a council was held in Jerusalem to put an end to the dissension which had arisen in the church on the questions of circumcision and unclean meats. This council decided in favor of Paul, who was in attendance and the decision as given in a letter addressed not to all Christians but only to " the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia"-where Paul had been making converts, informing them that they were not required to observe the Mosaic ceremonial law. It is quite clear that no such council would have been held if the matter had been decided ten years before, as Acts says it had been. But this account of the council of 51 C. E. is also a fiction. About eight years later Paul went to Jerusalem again, and his appearance there provoked a riot. The mob wanted to kill him because of his hostility to the Mosaic law, and this mob included Jewish Christians as well as Jews. All the Christians in Jerusalem were zealous adherents of the Mosaic law. Some of the leading brethren, presumably apostles, advised Paul to take a false oath that he did not teach his Jewish converts to neglect the law. And, if we can believe Acts, he took that oath. This, however, did not pacify the mob, which would have put him to death if the Roman soldiers had not protected him. They took him to prison and finally to Rome. This story in Acts implies that the apostolic church adopted one rule of discipline for the Gentile and another for the Jewish Christians; that the latter were, and that the former were not, required to comply with the Mosaic ceremonial law. This duplicity of discipline is not recorded elsewhere. It is not known to Paul ; and if it had existed, he could neither have been ignorant of it nor remained silent about it. He tells us that the twelve apostles in Jerusalem, or those of them known to him, favored strict adherence to Moses; and the only way in which he could get along harmoniously with them was by promising to do no missionary work in Judea. He was to labor among the Gentiles, The subjects to which the most space or most prominence is given in the sayings attributed, in the gospels, to Jesus, are, First, the Mosaic law; Second, judgment day; Third, faith; Fourth, the sins of the Pharisees; Fifth, ascetic morality; and Sixth, his divine commission. Matthew 4:1) Jesus was tempted [James 1:13) God cannot be tempted (John 1:29) Jesus was seen (1 John 4:12) No man has ever seen God (Acts 2:22) Jesus was and is a man, sent by God (Numbers 23:19, Hosea 11:9) God is not a man (Hebrews 5:8-9) Jesus had to grow and learn (Isaiah 40:28) God doesn't ever need to learn (1 Corinthians 15: 3-4) Jesus Died (1 Timothy 1:17) God cannot die (Hebrews 5:7) Jesus needed salvation (Luke 1:37) God doesn't need salvation (Mark 4:38) Jesus slept (Psalm 121: 2-4) God doesn't sleep (John 5:19) Jesus wasn't all powerful (Isaiah 45: 5-7) God is all powerful (Mark 13:32) Jesus wasn't all knowing (Isaiah 46:9) God is all knowing Older one is no different, Abijah was a wicked king, and had war with his rival (1. Kings 15:3). 2 Chronicles 13:3 says that Abjiah was pious ; that he took the field with 400,000 men against Jeroboam, who was at the head of 800,000 men ; and in a great battle the King of Israel was defeated, and 500,000 of his men slain. It seems that, 1,200,000 soldiers sent into the field at one time by two small tribes, and the destruction of 500,000 men in one battle, were beneath the notice of the author of Kings. There never was such another epidemic of ecclesiastical forgery. The church was flooded with books attributed falsely to apostolic times and authors. Distinguished saints and learned fathers of the faith openly commended the invention and acceptance of false- hoods designed to aid the conversion of the world to what they believed to be truth. How can one believe that the One that decrees that which is a 'sin' and that which is good "die for their sins" ? He is the One who decreed it thus, can decree it not so. To whom does the One with whom final authority resides in sacrifice for? a registrar? - No. None are greater than He. Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1 God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Moooslims and Judans do not belong in OUR nations. We have awoken. If I were either of you, I would start packing bags and going home before it gets ugly. You dont want another crusade, just leave@@ikk_ikk
@@drago_6812don’t pretend like you know anything about the Talmud. It doesn’t “teach” anything. That fundamental misunderstanding shows you don’t know it.
As a catholic I love to hear my orthodox brothers call out the synagogue of Satan. I believe this realization is growing amoung many catholics and I know almost every pre Vatican 2 knows it.
Catholicism has no room to talk. It's literally a universal one world religion that's just a conglomeration of all the religious beliefs of all the people they concord. It was used to manipulate and control the masses. Hence all the paganism.
I'm a Jewish convert to Orthodoxy. I think one of the biggest mistakes most people make is that they call the religion of the Israelites "Judaism" as if what we call Judaism today has been going on since then and Christianity split from it. So much of what modern Jews practice today are inventions of the Sages, from their invented "oral torah" they made up so they can basically override the actual scripture and justify their rule over the Jews, we recieved the "oral torah" from Moses and so you have to obey us. I just want people to know that your average secular Jew or the one who just keeps the customs but haven't studied much isn't aware of all the weird stuff in the writings of the Sages, and I'm sure if you'd show them the obscenities and absurdities they'd be shocked, like I was. But slamming that against them is probably not the way to make them look into Christ, but actually showing the connections with the Old Testament - the Angel of the Lord, the prophecies, stuff from the Jewish sources that actually can be very close to Christian ideas, such as the two messiahs, Ben Yosef - who suffers and dies, Ben David - who is a conquering king (1st and 2nd Comings anyone?) Etc God bless
Surah Al-Imran Aya 49, of the Quran states that jesus was sent to the israelites, although written over 1,300 years ago in the 19th century (same century bible was only transtalted into Arabic in as well) they came to the same conclusion, He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either. Triune nonsense is straight out of the Roman Pantheon. Hercules, anyone? Cerberus? The trinity of Zeus, Athena Apollo, literally called the Triune. Greek goddess Hecate was portrayed in triplicate, a three-in-one. This was all done to make the creed more digestible, followed by mental gymnastics attempting to reconcile the onsensical with elaborate theories. Why doesn't a square peg fit into a round hole? Answer by saying it's a mystery instead of geometries not lining up. No such thing as the bible, the new testament is a concoction of several books that were deemed canonical, books written in Greek that were given the hellenized names of Apotsles who neither wrote, nor spoke greek to give it an illusion of antiquity, much like the calendar we have today, which was established in the year 535 CE by Dionysus Exegesis so too was the original message altered to that of the pauline credo, a digestible religion to the yet to be converted greeks who had no desire to follow the mosaic laws. Paul had neither met nor seen Jesus, his relation to the twelve apostles was one of decided independence and even of opposition. He acknowledged no subordination to them. He addressed no doctrinal epistle to them or their churches, and received none from them. He made no reports to them. He did not correspond with them regularly. They never invited him to preach to their congregations and he never invited them to address his converts. He declared that he did not owe his conversion, his baptism, or his doctrine to the twelve, and that he never spent any long time in Jerusalem or in Judea as a Christian missionary. He claimed to be an apostle by a secret divine commission, but the twelve never admitted the validity of his claim. They never gave him the title of apostle; they never said anything indicative of willingness to admit him into their councils. Vacancies occurred in their number, but they never chose him to a vacant place, rather we have statements of Peter with regards to Paul which show nothing but animosity: "And if our Jesus appeared to you also and became known in a vision and met you as angry with an enemy [recall: Paul had his vision while still persecuting the Christians: Acts 9], yet he has spoken only through visions and dreams or through external revelations. But can anyone be made competent to teach through a vision? And if your opinion is that that is possible, why then did our teacher spend a whole year with us who were awake? How can we believe you even if he has appeared to you?… But if you were visited by him for the space of an hour and were instructed by him and thereby have become an apostle, then proclaim his words, expound what he has taught, be a friend to his apostles and do not contend with me, who am his confidant; for you have in hostility withstood me, who am a firm rock, the foundation stone of the Church" -Homily 17 Section XIX On the pauline credo currently called trinitanity Peter said "For some from among the Gentiles have rejected my lawful preaching and have preferred a lawless and absurd doctrine to the man who is my enemy. And indeed some have attempted, while I am still alive, to distort my words by interpretations of many sorts, as if I taught the dissolution of the law… But that may God forbid ! For to do such a thing means to act contrary to the Law of God which was made to Moses and was confirmed by our Lord in its everlasting continuance. For he said, “The heaven and the earth will pass away, but not one jot or one tittle shall pass away from the Law.” -Letter of Peter to James, 2.3-5 None of the disciples spoke of trinity, ate pork or proclaimed it is allowable to do so, yet the miracle begotten paul, whom peter called him enemy, introduced his new creed according to his whims It proclaimed the abrogation of the Mosaic ceremonial law. It announced itself as a new and independent religion; calling its adherents Christians, and their doctrine Christianity. Trinitarians are inoculated from rationality, facts and logic. It is no surprise that basic reasoning is entirely lost on those that believe that the creator became one of those he created in order to save the created from his own self. Not to mention the incoherence in the scripture, never minding the creed itself. Matthew 4:1) Jesus was tempted [James 1:13) God cannot be tempted (John 1:29) Jesus was seen (1 John 4:12) No man has ever seen God (Acts 2:22) Jesus was and is a man, sent by God (Numbers 23:19, Hosea 11:9) God is not a man (Hebrews 5:8-9) Jesus had to grow and learn (Isaiah 40:28) God doesn't ever need to learn (1 Corinthians 15: 3-4) Jesus Died (1 Timothy 1:17) God cannot die (Hebrews 5:7) Jesus needed salvation (Luke 1:37) God doesn't need salvation (Mark 4:38) Jesus slept (Psalm 121: 2-4) God doesn't sleep (John 5:19) Jesus wasn't all powerful (Isaiah 45: 5-7) God is all powerful (Mark 13:32) Jesus wasn't all knowing (Isaiah 46:9) God is all knowing Older one is no different, Abijah was a wicked king, and had war with his rival (1. Kings 15:3). 2 Chronicles 13:3 says that Abjiah was pious ; that he took the field with 400,000 men against Jeroboam, who was at the head of 800,000 men ; and in a great battle the King of Israel was defeated, and 500,000 of his men slain. It seems that, 1,200,000 soldiers sent into the field at one time by two small tribes, and the destruction of 500,000 men in one battle, were beneath the notice of the author of Kings. How can one believe that the One that decrees that which is a 'sin' and that which is good "die for their sins" ? He is the One who decreed it thus, can decree it not so. To whom does the One with whom final authority resides in sacrifice for? a registrar? - No. None are greater than He. Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1 God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
The "Aramaic" word for God is "Alaha" too sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name." jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah ) Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen. He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown. "protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate, Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
I think all Abrahamic religions are essentially dysfunctional, not to mention false but I'm sympathetic to people who were just raised in this bullshit, since I was too. God is real and much bigger than religion.
Christendom is the empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves. The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9 “Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3 “Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16 The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers: “in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.” Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as:: “seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.” Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed: "Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer". Evoking several of these verses in practice: - (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. - (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them... - (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary. Not to mention - (Deut 20:16-17) , (Josh 6:21, 8:24-27, 10:, 11:11-14,21-22), (Judg 18:27) , (1 Sam 15:1-9), (1 Sam 27:9,11) , (Esther 8:11, 9:1-19). This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished. This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah): "includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit." This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship." It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children." بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة "To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause" -Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah: حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ» "Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries" حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ» سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ» "The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly" This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them. Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons. The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Wow... What a great discussion and catechism. Thank you Sir. May the Lord Bless you and your family with increased faith. Viva Cristo Rey, Viva La Reina Del Universo La Santa Maria ♥️✝️🤴🏻♥️🌹👸🏻♥️
I've been praying for someone to make this video as I struggle with my anger when I see ignorant protestants on social media going on and on about how we need to "stand with Israel." Their ignorance and hubris has real geopolitical and spiritual consequences that we need to try to mitigate. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for making this video!! Now I can just share it with those who make those maddening posts about "Israel". May God bless you. Keep up the GREAT word.
Melissa your religion is a mental prison cell my sister. If you value truth over religion study the historical origin of Christianity and the truth will free you from your religious prison.
The view of Israel is not Protestant. Luther for example was well aware of these matters. It came later, mainly via Scofield and Darby, both of whom were wicked men. It is sad that the Evangelical church in the USA and much of the Pentecostal and Baptist churches here in Australia have swallowed this evil doctrine whole.
racism comes from Jewish religion,that was my conclusion when i asked myself about roots of racism,of course maybe im wrong and as be very interested in Cabbala is hard to understand some Jewish religion concepts about superiority and of course about genocide of Palestine people..
“Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a ‘Jew’ or to call a contemporary Jew an Israelite or a Hebrew.” - Jewish Almanac, 1980, p. 3
The tribes were split into 2 separate houses, the House of Israel to the north , and the House of Judah in Judea. The northern tribes were not jews, it was those that resided in the land of Judea which were called jews.
@AllofJudea Lox..ism is real. scripturally speaking,there are 2 seed lines at emnity with each other, only 1 side is ignorant of who their true enemy is. Knowing who is who, it totally makes sense .
To be the illusionist to contrast the ones who seek truth. This world is a realm in which polarities exist. You cannot have good without evil.@@caroline7648
Daily reminder that evangelicals are protestants. Anything that isn't Orthodox is in schism with the church as founded by Christ. Prots n evangelicals are no better than Jews n Muslims. You all follow and teach heresy.
I never subscribe & rarely like. You earned them both today. Very professional/academic. You sound so young too. How did you learn all this so quick? Merry Christmas
I dated a Jewish girl for 4 years, I didn’t know too much about the religion. She was a very kind but Money Was Everything too her, friends and family. We mostly argued over me not wanting to convert over to Judaism. I didn’t realize until years later that some of the names her friends and family would refer to me as where Racist. Goym, Gentile etc.. I don’t hold it against them but it op-ed my eyes, it will always be about them (Jews) and Money, nothing else matters.
goyim and gentile aren't harsh terms (like Kaffir, or infidel, or heretic.) ALL it means is that you aren't Jewish. It is a word to describe that you belong to a different religion. It's a simple, non-judgement catch-all word. Just as you would describe someone who's not native to your place of birth as a 'forign (born)'. And now, jews aren't just 'money and nothing else matters', that is merely your slander because she probably broke up with you, for reasons that will become painfully obvious when you reply to this comment.
Had jewish bf,was very generous, didn't know much about his religion, but he never brought it up Well not all are like that,just unlucky relationships just you had disagreement with,
@@firstnamelastname9141 I’ve actually done a few channels in the past and one other podcast! This is the main active one. I did a podcast with a similar format called Facing The Gates with an atheist and agnostic friend for about a year and a half, but that was before I became Orthodox so I don’t necessarily endorse everything I said on there. It still exists though, for those interested.
Judaism is the religion of law, christianity is the truth of mercy, btw today judaism is far far different than original judaism. And the talmud is the blasphemy the holy spirit.
The "Jews" or the Pharisees and Sadducees that Jesus chastised were not of the bloodline of Jacob/Israel. They were Idumeans/Edomites who "converted" to Judaism but it was a corrupted form of 'Judaism" i.e. The Talmud is their main source of religion. I was a Christian Zionist for most of my life, until recently, after I did a study on the matter. It was difficult coming to terms with it, but I love the truth more than I love being right. Several sources were from Jewish historians themselves. I am not anti-Semitic, but I am anti-Zionism. I now understand the difference. Please do research prayerfully.
Correction the Jews and gentiles who followed Mashiach (Christ is a Greek title) were called Ha Derim because they followed Ha Derech “the way”. The name Christians came about around the year 70-80ad in Antioch from the Greek Χριστιανός
The Civil war in the time between testaments is key to the change. The Zadokite Priests (levites setup by Ezra after the Babylonian return) were no longer in charge of the Temple, and were usurped by the Pharisee and Sadducee groups. John the baptists father was a Zadokite Priest hence the name Zechariah and that is why the story of John's name "not being like any in Zechariah's family" was so important. Basically all Zadokite priests started their name with the 7th letter "Zayin" (Z) and to not give John the Baptist a name with Zayin (Z) was unlawful. But Zechariah's family rejoiced when he wrote John on his tablet. Now this story in Luke seems like a throw away story about John's naming and birth but Why is it there? Because they knew the messiah was coming as told in Daniel and for Zechariah to break the tradition and give him the name John is basically him saying the time of the law is ending and the redemption of the Messiah is upon us. Most likely Zechariah was an Essene in Qumran since the Essene's had left the temple and went to Qumran to put up an tabernacle and continue their job as the actual priesthood of Israel. Almost all of the Essene community in Qumran became believers in the messiah and when you know the factions within judaism in that time the new testament is full of other Essenes. Many left before the temple was destroyed in 70AD and went to Africa, or into Europe. But Modern Judaism is based on the Pharisee system brought about around 300 years before the New Testament after they won the Civil war. Don't believe me go and read the Dead Sea Scrolls, and read what Josephus says about the Essenes. Once you know how the Jewish Civil War changed everything you begin to see where Judaism began to radically change from the time of the Old Testament until the New Testament.
@@csj9619 I find this stuff interesting. Because at some point things changed because the Pharisee's in Jesus' time were very different to the priests of the old testament. The Dead sea scrolls are the key to the destruction of Rabbinical Judaism. The Essenes were not some radical group out in the desert, but in fact the rightful priesthood of the temple. Josephus the Jewish historian says this, and calls them Doctors and healers who lived far longer than other Jewish Priest sects by almost double the years living beyond 100 years. He also says the Essenes were known by the people to never be wrong about prophecy. He explains some of them broke away and went to Egypt (around the time of John the baptist imprisonment) and those Essenes in Egypt fell into mysticism and were condemned by their elders in Qumran. So I said all of that to explain why the Dead Sea Scrolls are the key to the destruction of modern day Judaism. The scrolls predate the Talmud, as well as the oldest copies of the Old Testament by almost 1000 years. But its not just the copies of the Bible that are interesting. Its the commentaries on history of judaism and the actual rules that applied God Worshipping Jews, as well as Gentiles and how the Pharisee's traditions stem from the "sages" that were family members survived the 40 year journey in the desert, and their line of Oral Traditions and belief can be traced all the way back to those who forced Aaron to make a golden calf for them to worship while Moses was on the Mountain receiving the commandments of God. Families that became bitter after God had them some of them swallowed into the ground during their time in the desert. The scroll is translated in english its call the war scroll where the Sons of Light will have to battle the Sons of Darkness for the soul of Israel and lose for the Messiah to come. But what proves the Essenes were the actual Priests is the scroll 11Q13 the Melchizedek document. Which says that Melchizedek is the leader of God's angels in a war in Heaven against the angels of darkness instead of the more familiar Archangel Michael. As we know from Abraham's meeting with him. Melchizedek (Melchi-zedek this is where the Zadokite name came from which is follower or believer in the returning king of Salem ie, Jerusalem) But the Dead Sea Scroll condemn Oral traditions that teach laws not given by God to Moses. (hence why Jesus makes the Pharisees look dumb when they ask why his Disciples don't wash their hands and calls their beliefs traditions of men). The dead Sea Scrolls are a look into what Judaism was before the Civil war destroyed it, and funny enough once you do look at it you find that the Essenes hold many of the same beliefs as we would come to learn about in the New Testament. So who should Jews believe this new Rabbinic Judaism who say the Messiah has not yet come or the Older more Torah based Priesthood that preached a Messiah was coming in the exact timeline given in Daniel? In a court of law with a jury with no preconceived ideas about Judaism the Pharisees' doctrine of Rabbinic Talmud Judaism loses EVERY time to the overwhelming historical proof the Dead Sea Scrolls point to the truth not the Talmud! Why because they are in 100% alignment with the teachings of Jesus who is Melchizedek!
Their names were Zkrya (Zakariyyah / زكريا | z = ز - Similar phonemes that were contracted to it in hebrew were ظ , ذ), and Yḥya (Yaḥya) PBUT, not Zechariah and john. The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha" too sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name." jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah ) Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language: "From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen. He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown. "protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j ḥ kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (ḥ, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate, Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
I pray that these lost souls find the love and peace that Christ provides, and that they transcend their transgressions. God will always find a way to our hearts in the end, and the truth will always trump the lie eventually. Truly, Christ is eternal. Amen, Amen.
In addition to the 47 prophecies you listed, there's also the passage in Wisdom of Solomon 2:12-20, which prophecies the pharisees' hatred for Jesus and plotting his execution.
@ no. They actually believe this. Pope Francis and the clergy teach this. It’s dogma. Catholic answer teaches Allah of the Quran is the true god. Most of the biggest Catholic apologist openly affirm worshiping false gods.
I don't know why I even commented on this one, of course Y/T yeeted my remarks! All I'll say now is, it was nice knowing your channel. See you on "Rumball"!
Ok so you do realize that while a separate religion, christianity is quite literally just a offshoot of whatever you wanna call the old testament religion just like Islam is to christianity and by extension everything back to before the first temple was built let alone destroyed. It's all right there in them testaments and I think the fact archeology and language and genetics all show its clearly a evolution from cannite polytheism to monotheism is worth mentioning. The same goes for christianity evolving to catholicism and the countless other offshoots old and new alike. You are doing the same damn thing the jews do in the Talmud and just perpetuating the same infighting between all abrahamic religion that's literally led to millions of deaths and some of the most brutal unimaginable shit ever done to people across any reality fictional or not. While often accurate on larger state matters its not literal history and none of the smaller situations involving magic or impossibilities happened literally. Mohammed didn't ride a flying donkey and jesus didn't come back from the dead just like Jericho didn't fall because of a box or horn and even a damn quantum iphone won't ring thru to god. Maybe its religion thats bad or maybe religion is inevitable and it's just people who are bad but it runs deep whatever it is. The thing is we can recognize the bad shit and change it even if we aren't sure how or why it happens.
Words can’t describe how much I loved this video, so much information so delicately put together, much appreciated, please keep up great work, our Lord Jesus Christ Bless You My Orthodox Christian Brother! Liked and definitely Subbed!❤☦️
No warnings, no strikes, youtube channel down. Videos with 'survivors', their survivors and their testimonies about what REALLY happened during ww2. You know the event you cannot write about here. It wasn't at all only about them, they didn't have it that bad also. Tv's in the room type of thing.
It's a very inconvenient truth for conservative Protestants to hear but has to be said. If the general American public was exposed to the views of the Popes on Judaism and Israel, Im sure it would cause a fit
Interesting but using the new testament to justify the new testament is a pointless argument. Also it wasn't just the Jews who said no, so did the other Israelites, the Samaritans, they rejected jesus as it does not meet the five books of the Samaritan Torah either. No ingathering of exiles, no end of war, no reign of peace, no two Messiah prophecy either. On top of this we have the book of Enoch, which was copied by jesus, yet taken out of the NT, apart from the Ethiopian church and is in the dead sea scrolls. Also conveniently ignore the two Messiah scripture from judean and Samaritan bibles, which say the Messiah will be a dual Messiah, Ben Joseph and Ben David. To reunite the tribes,prepare for the coming redemption. Then move to Ben David, which is the conquering king, not a divine being, but a man who will bring the redemption.
You should take a look at, “The Other Israel” documentary. It basically goes over all the points you brought up in the talmud and many more. It also goes into an in depth history of why the hebrews got so much flak from their actions which included practicing the talmud in medieval Europe and becoming very communist and revolutionary throughout the modern history of Europe. It also explains how the vast majority of hebrews aren’t of the seed of Abraham (the azkhenazis). Anyways it’s a very interesting film that predicted a lot of whats happening today relating to israel and it’s a great observation from an American Protestant Christian perspective. I highly recommend it.
Can’t wait to hear your take on this. I’ve upset quite a few people when I take the logic of why we shouldn’t be grouped with Islam and apply it to Judaism. Septuagint > Masoretic Text Late update: Agree with your video 100%.
The original is always better than a translation. In every context. The Septuagint misses out on all of the wordplay, rhythm, and deeper textual meaning of the original Hebrew.
Which is funny because in Islam they do believe in Jesus and apart from the part about being the son of God they believe everything he did and in the Koran it is mentioned that they should associate with Christians and these are religious collaborators, and they consider the New Testament a holy book. Which means that you will have to group yourself with another religion, one that at least respects what you believe in.
@@Nathan-zw7nq yes but it’s considered a more accurate reflection of the original work as it’s in its original language. Nothing translates perfectly and I’d rather have the Hebrew with its nuanced word definitions and poetry than the whitewashed Greek or English, even if they compiled it later. It’s like translating Shakespeare into Spanish, then from Spanish to Chinese, and trying to keep its original substance.
@@spicyshiba508 the masoretic text isn’t the original Hebrew. It was put together centuries after Christ’s life, death, and resurrection, and changed the text to obscure the prophecies that were fulfilled by His coming. In your example, the masoretic text would be the Chinese version as it doesn’t say what the original did and it’s based on the first translation.
I don't know about you, but as a catholic hearing about what the Talmud said about the non-jews disturbingly reminded about a political viewpoint of the 20th century and an Austrian painter... Weird sense of déjà vu. Did, beside me, felt like that?
Tell that to Trent Horn. And ... it's started earlier than written Talmud. There are also the magic texts (Sefer Yetzirah and Merkabah), which led to the Kabbalah.
Do you realize it takes the tanak, the Talmud, and zohar, to define Judaism and its traditions, you see it through a small lens whith out any knowledge of what it is, so to you it's spooky magic. When in fact. The talmud was written while they were in exile, and it's no different than bible school and bibke teachers. It's all the thoughts of rabbis throughout the years. You have to read it all together. It's literally no different than stuff we read in the bible. Rome created the stigma around jooish knowledge because the wanted thir own religion.
@@Swordoftruth289It wasn't the beliefs of the true Hebrews you call on the names of people like Abraham and Moses and call them Jews claiming them however they did not believe the things you do and they never called themselves Jews there were no Jews at that point its actually very ignorant to history to even claim so
This has nothing to do with the video but please bear with me. I’ve been feeling my relationship with Christ slipping. I don’t pray anymore. I don’t fast anymore. I don’t read scripture anymore. My whole soul yearns for Christ but I can’t bring myself to even pray. I ask humbly for you all to pray for me. God bless and thank you.
@@Floyd033 Hold fast! These phases of lethargy come and go, I understand what you’re experiencing. When you don’t feel like praying, try to pray anyway. God bless you!
It's simple. Judaism provides the legal doctrine for Western Civilization/laws. Christianity brought some moral code on top of it. Nazism pretended to be Christian but was a Pagan Occultism/Satanism. Islamism is a death cult created by a violent warrior.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
"To learn who rules over you, simply find who you are not allowed to criticize" - Voltaire
While the content and sentiment of the quote a true, Voltaire didn’t actually say that.
You have an IQ of 75. Just use your brain for a moment. Are you allowed to criticize jews? - no. Are you allowed to criticize women? - no. Are you allowed to criticize black people? - no. Are you allowed to criticize the lgbtq? - no. The same goes for all these other groups that I mentioned, not just jews. So are ALL these groups of people oppressing you?
Voltaire’s views on Christ would have been right at home in the Talmud. The Jews of today have much to thank him for.
my wife and her family
Seek help asap !
Rare algorithm gem
I’ll say dude
Same here. I guess we made it on one of the ADL’s naughty lists lol
Anthony, whatsup
Exactly 👍
NogGonnaMakeIt
Same ole, same ole
Still trying to understand why the trinity view was accepted even after the johannim coma drama, why the bloodline to David is anything b/c Jesus was borne into his creation through a woman & bloodlines follow human husbands so it's moot, that 'christ' is a greek medical term for pharmaka application/administration-has nothing to do with hebrew messiach. That יהוה isn't the same as 'allah'-not the same god. Plus isrealis [zionists/rabbinic jews]:call god 'hashem' primarily, they're not as enthralled w/ יהוה as christians are.
"judeaism is not what you think" proceeds to be exactly what I think
@@ikk_ikk
Lmao Islam 100% relies on imperial rule, dishonest Ottomon scum
@@ikk_ikkgo away Muslim. No one reads your garbage.
@@ikk_ikk sounds like you're doing some serious coping man. I hope Jesus reveals himself to you soon. You need it.
@@ikk_ikkAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH!!! Oh the end of your comment was the funniest part, truly the cherry on top. -allah- God bless your little heart!
@@ikk_ikkPS: don't like your own comments to make them seem valid, its a bad look around here.
They'll call you antisemitic but not a liar
Nothing Semitic about white Europeans. Now the Palestinians and the rest of the Arabs, those are semitic people.
he is uneducated
There's literally almost nothing accurate in this video. So it begs the question: If a person intentionally misrepresents the Talmud and Judaism to advance anti-semitism, what does that make them? Some might say, "a liar and an anti-semite."
@@jeremykossen3728please point out all of the misinformation he’s has spoken here then. You didn’t give even ONE example of what you’re referring too?
@@to3ta64 I already addressed many examples in a separate rebuttal, but I'll repost it below:
I just finished watching this video, and I wanted to share some thoughts because there are a lot of misunderstandings here about Judaism and the Talmud that I think are worth clarifying:
1. Misunderstanding the Talmud
First off, the Talmud isn’t what this video makes it out to be. It’s not a single, monolithic document. It’s a massive collection of debates and discussions among rabbis over centuries. The beauty of the Talmud is that it doesn’t try to enforce a single viewpoint-it preserves disagreements and invites readers to wrestle with the complexities of life and faith.
To say it’s “given greater authority than the Old Testament” misses the mark. The Torah (the first five books of the Bible) is the foundation of Judaism, while the Talmud helps us interpret and apply its teachings in real life.
2. Claims About Jesus and Gentiles
The claims about the Talmud’s supposed views on Jesus and Gentiles are misleading. These often come from cherry-picking and mistranslations. Scholars have shown that some passages people think refer to Jesus actually don’t.
When it comes to Gentiles, the Talmud is clear about the value of all human life. There’s even a universal moral framework called the Noahide Laws that Judaism teaches applies to everyone, regardless of faith.
3. Judaism Didn’t Reform Because of Christianity
The video frames Judaism as a reaction to Christianity, but that’s not accurate. After the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, Jewish practice naturally evolved because the Temple-central to worship-was gone. Rabbinic Judaism grew from this, focusing on study, ethical living, and prayer.
It wasn’t a rejection of “authentic” Judaism-it was a way to adapt and survive.
4. Judaism and Christianity Are Distinct Traditions
It’s also important to recognize that Judaism and Christianity are two distinct traditions. Yes, they share roots, but they developed in different ways. Christianity sees Jesus as the fulfillment of prophecy; Judaism doesn’t. That’s a theological difference, not a rejection of one’s own scriptures.
5. Use This Opportunity as a Call for Dialogue and Understanding
Videos like this one can unintentionally (or intentionally) fuel misunderstanding and division. If you’re genuinely curious about Judaism, I encourage you to look at sources that come from Jewish scholars or communities. Dialogue and learning are so much more constructive than misrepresenting another faith.
Let’s aim for understanding and mutual respect-there’s so much more to gain that way.
AIPAC ain’t gonna like this one 🗣️🔥🔥💯
or the ADL
Salam 🫡
AIPAC needs to be abolished
@@saltybits9954they will initiate a nuclear war before they let that happen.
Good
Judeo-Christian is an Oxymoron!
As is Zionist Christian
Yep, with a focus on the MORON part of it.
Well, better reread the bible a few times until you see the difference!
Yes.
@@paulbunion584 Well, there are really BIG differences between Judaism and Christianity. That is EXACTLY WHY it is an oxyMORON.
Now, don't get me wrong, if Christians really FOLLOWED the lessons and teachings of Jesus - who was a Jew and taught Judaism - it would be a very different in the religion. BUT, Saul (Romanized paganized Paul) preached opposite of that and Church doctrine takes it even further.
So, nope.
As you pointed out, they have an ethnoreligion. They who rejected Him made an idol of their race.
The same is with Islam. Arabo centric religion. Only arabic is holy language. Chanting Arabic words are most important than to understand what do they mean.
😂😂😂 and christians have never ethnically cleanesed anythig before 😂😂😂😂
Same with black Hebrew Israelites
When speaking to the Pharisees, Christ says, “If you are Abraham’s children, do the deeds of Abraham. But as it is, you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God; this Abraham did not do." John 8:39-40. In many other verses, Christ expresses a similar sentiment: being descendants of holy men means nothing if you yourself do not commit to the same holiness. Because of their rejection of Christ (and their rejection of God in the days before the Babylonian exile), Jesus takes away the Jews' status as the chosen people and opens His covenant to any that believe in Him.
They don’t worship their race, they worship the devil. Pride in one’s race is harmless unless used to harm others
One way.
Jesus Christ.
John 14:6❤️✝️🙏
We getting deported for liking this video…
By (((who)))?
Yay
Yes the evangelicals are going to hunt us down. Literally. We may actually be persecuted by the political "christians"
Isn't knowledge beautiful? Ha ha ha.😊
😂😊😅
“Synagogue of Satan” is pretty specific.
Yes.
Rev 3:9
yeah, now & then
@@Revolver1701 "Meeting place of Satan."
Could be anywhere. Masonic Lodges are just as likely.
i get a hateful conduct strike for saying this very thing. It goes to show whos in control. The foot soldiers of satan
Hallelujah!! I’ve been saying these EXACT things for 20+ years only to be told I’m evil, wrong and hateful, even by my own parents! For simply showing them Scripture made me Auntie Semite to ALL that knew me. My pastor didn’t agree, my friends didn’t agree, my own family members didn’t agree and they all believed I was terrible for saying actual biblical things, Bible verses! Now let’s talk about the stranglehold they’ve got over literally every single country on earth, and how their plans are always the same - good for them, bad for anyone that isn’t them.
(做為耶穌基督的選民，不該貪圖財色名利，要擔負起世界和平的使命，才能得到神佛的護佑主耶穌基督，請您趕快消滅偽裝上帝的猶太人吧<
(美國共和黨比較有人類道德觀，以人為本；民主黨比較沒有人類道德觀，不以人為本！)
"賀錦麗"只能說：背稿流利，辯論沒有邏輯，靠媒體撐場面！
(耶穌重新"安置"的戒律；是往生天國的關鍵，如果不能遵守，"聖經"等於沒有用處！)
(法利賽人~無法無天，放縱貪.瞋.痴，身行殺.盜.淫.妄."十惡業"，因果報應入地獄！)
不只是基督教的十誡，在佛教的經典也有說：往生天界的十種善業，除了要孝順父母.奉事師長.兼行布施.一切忍辱，然後修十種善業：不殺生.不偷盜.不邪淫.不妄語.不綺語.不兩舌.不惡口.不貪欲.不瞋恚.不愚痴，修這十種善業才能生天。不只身體造作犯戒，在"菩薩戒"起心動念都算犯戒，要靠不斷懺悔改過，才能不起心動念。
(這些假上帝之名，而造惡多端的國家，主耶穌基督都有看見，所有不遵守聖經戒律的國家，都將受到嚴懲！)
(美國賀錦麗執政更惨，已經成為無法控制的大怪獸了！
例如：同性婚，廢死刑，強暴墮胎，吸毒喪屍，搶劫商店，抹黑中國，干涉各國内政，製造更多仇恨。(美國一年大約一千名警察死於槍下！)
佛陀大覺者預言，人類會越來越沒有道德心，放縱私欲的結果，就是世界越沈淪！
中國人從古至今，受到聖賢的教導，保有一定的禮儀，善良。(只有少數個案，整體上還是好的。)
牆外那些叛國份子，如果以古代刑罰，是要罪誅九族的，不要做連結外國人打自己人的漢奸。
《金剛心陀羅尼經》
「文殊菩薩問佛：云何方便？世尊曰：方便二字，略說有一十五種~~
第一方便：不養不殺。
第二方便：不食酒肉。
第三方便：不造酒漿。
第四方便：不相侵害。
第五方便：莫錯指路。
第六方便：不可燒山。
第七方便：莫怨天地。
第八方便：急難相救。
第九方便：莫慢神明。
第十方便：莫出濁言。
十一方便：積仁布德。
十二方便：勤儉知足。
十三方便：敬老憐貧。
十四方便：修善因種福果。
十五方便：寃親平等，一體濟度。
若人行得十五方便，便得十五種清淨福報，常生人天，受諸快樂。」
@@許碧玥-j2xhey, remind me what happened on the Tiananmen square in 1989??
It should make you wonder why many Christians are so blind in support of them but quick to antagonize Muslims more. Could the "chosen" ones have set up an effective propaganda system to indoctrinate so many of them?
When you look at all the evil things had happened to the world, it all came from jews. For example: communism/socialism. 😂
J's propaganda is powerful on the minds of the stupid
I’ve seen Shapiro address the part in the Talmud about Jesus boiling in excrement… all he said was that such an interpretation is “awful,” but he neglected to clarify. How convenient.
He said the interpretation was "awful", but he didn't say it was a lie.
and then he shouted "over there!! muslims!! nazis!!! oy vey!! look at them, don't look at me!!"
He also donates to open borders foundations. He's exactly what you'd think he is. Blood thirsty murderous rat.
Interesting! Which interview did he say that in? Respect him however that’s straight up blasphemy if true!
Don't you know - they may throw some vague defense out there but can NEVER expound upon their defense. Or they use diversion tactics - "we contribute heavily to scientific advancements" "people are very jealous of us". 🥱 ok sh!omo
I can't believe this is on JewTube.
Yup I got a threat to be kicked off for putting a Palestinian flag on the comments section of a racist rabbi who said it was cyber bullying.
They have mastered playing the victim. And then turning around and doing basically the same thing
I can't believe your comment is still up 😂
They probably allowed it to stay because the video has half truths. The people in Israel today couldn’t be the descendants of the twelve tribes. In Deuteronomy 29:28, God said he would never allow them to return as a curse. God would make them cease to be a remembrance among men. God would make them forget their heritage.
Noah had three son’s, one of them was Ham, the father of Africa. Ham had a son named Cush (a Black man). Cush had a son named Nimrod (a Black man)
The Book of Jubilees mentions the name of "Nebrod" (the Greek form of Nimrod) only as being the father of Azurad, the wife of Eber and mother of Peleg (8:7). This account would thus make Nimrod an ancestor of Abraham, and hence of all Hebrews.
The hieroglyphs in Misraim, It clearly depicts the Hebrew slaves with afros and beards.
Deuteronomy 29:28-
28 And the Lord rooted them out of their land in anger, and in wrath, and in great indignation, and cast them into another land, as it is this day.
Deuteronomy 29:24-25-
24 Even all nations shall say, Wherefore hath the Lord done thus unto this land? what meaneth the heat of this great anger?
25 Then men shall say, Because they have forsaken the covenant of the Lord God of their fathers, which he made with them when he brought them forth out of the land of Egypt:
Deuteronomy 32:26-
26 I said, I would scatter them into corners, I would make the remembrance of them to cease from among men:
Cutoff or discontinued from their Israelite heritage. Zac 10:9, Jer 17:4-5, Lam 5:2, Jer 16:13, Jewish people claim to have never lost their heritage and claim to be able to trace themselves back to Ancient Israel. This self admission disqualifies them from being Israelites per the TORAH.
Oy vey...they're noticing
Shut it down 🥸
SHUT IT DOWN!🤣🤣
back to Turkish Kazaria (ukraine)
And we’re noticing them
@@BabylonPhonetics_11 International organized jewry has total control over Russia as well.
How long will this stay up?
People keep saying, but it's never true.
There are hundreds, maybe thousands, of videos on RUclips with this same premise.
You can't have a growing movement on RUclips and social media, and also cry victim at the same time.
Until the people it talking about take it down.
@@armeniussun2394 It never gets taken down.
Some people desperately want to be victims. They squint real hard and ignore a lot of relevant data until it looks like that to them.
@Proud_Troll It does seem that this type of content is not a priority for RUclips of IG anymore. Makes me wonder why, there was a time that stuff like this was suppressed. Other types of content, are still suppressed though.
I wouldn't say my comment exhibited victim mentality, just a prediction about the future of this video.
@@travissharon1536
A lot of people who see themselves as victims subconsciously want to be victims, so they constantly are trying to find instances where they are victimized.
This happens on both sides of the political spectrum.
On the right it usually materializes with comments like yours.
I agree, this stuff used to be censored more, but I think censorship over all might have dropped a bit on RUclips.
RUclips seems to have shifted its focus to moderate comments instead of videos.
As a born muslim, i am having a strong pull towards the kind christ since many months
Come home brother ☦️
Let’s convert into paganism and start praying to Dionysus. Jesus it’s an alter ego of Dionysus after all
@@FaustoRGno
@ Heresy and Blasphemy
Nothing wrong with questioning your beliefs. Search for truth and it will find you.
I really don’t understand why it’s so hard for evangelicals. If they deny the divinity of Christ, they are your enemy, it doesn’t matter if their name is in the Bible a lot.
St. Paul literally says they are the enemy of the Gospel in Romans. Evangelicals are all about sola scriptura but somehow they gloss over that one.
It does if they wrote the Bible.
Has a lot to do with Ezekiel but I’m not well versed on Ezekiel. I just know that most Jews today are secular and denying God will get them no where
@@spicyshiba508read what Jews said about their own people in the Bible. They turn away from God and God judges them if they don’t change their ways(repent). What makes this generation of Jews any different they have turned their back on God. Anyone Jew or non Jew will be judged
@@TheHiddenWorldWithin yes that’s the story of the Jewish people; turning from God only to return. Not only does it show our name (Israel literally means struggles with God) but also shows God’s infinite mercy, and love for his people.
America being in so much debt and yet giving "aid" to a certain country every year who has a surplus of money and equipment and being it's body guard when we don't even really check who is coming across the borders should tell you everything you need to know regardless of politics or religion. Follow the money and influence.
By that logic look at the Church for all of medieval history. Not good.
@@spicyshiba508 ????
@@shobudski6776 if we’re judging religions based off of what they did politically, the church is the worst offender
@@spicyshiba508we know a tree by its fruits.
It isn’t judgement, it’s recognition.
@spicyshiba508 so catholics
tHaT's aNtiSeMiTiC!!!
@@LibertyPotato I know 😔
the truth is often anti-semitc
@@untoages Still not wrong though, why are we ashamed of knowing the truth?
Good video for those new to the Truth. We were all there once. It was only last year that I learned The Ukraine used to be called Khazaria. Big hmm face.
The thing about them calling this stuff antisemitic is that like 90% of Jews are not even semitic lol
I’m a Jew. But now Orthodox Christian. Glory be to Christ.
yet still identify as a chew like any crypto
Praise G-D 🙏 🙏 welcome home family!!!😊
Christ is King! God bless you!
Converso?
Glory Forever!
It also laid the groundwork for Freemasonry.
Didn't rabbi with the last name Levi mention that it was Judaism lite for gentiles?
They both have a similar calendar that's around the year 6000 right now. Calenders based on the believed timeline of appearance of Adam & Eve on earth
"Freemasonry is a *jewish* establishment, whose history, grades, official appointments, passwords and explanations are *jewish* , from begining, to end." -rabbi Isaac Mayer Wise✡️
"Most jews do not like to admit it, but, lucifer is our god, and, we are his chosen people." -rabbi Harold Wallace Rosenthal✡️
"Strictly speaking, it is INCORRECT to refer to an ancient Israelite or Hebrew as a jew, or, to call a contemporary jew a Hebrew or an Israelite." -The Jewish Almanac 1980 edition, page 3, chapter 1, line 1
Freemasonry is a mixture of gnosticism and Kabbalah.
and the jesuits
Growing up in an evangelical church, support for jews and Israel always felt like a requirement for salvation. Nevermind that Jesus was opposed to them, rebuked them and even physically fought them until His crucifixion. Until they lobbied Pilate to get rid of Him. The same behavior has been exhibited throughout history since then. 🤔
It was made explicitly clear by my mother that I must pray for Israel and study their issues and religion or I'm not a good Christian and will go to hell. Preposterous...
Mostly cuz the covenant of the je3ws is still in effect. Least when it comes to israel.
It is a fun dive
Jesus wasn’t opposed to Jews lol. He just opposed certain Jewish leaders that were alive during his lifetime.
@JeffCaseyTV those certain jewish leaders were a part of a sect that became Judaism after Christ.
@@garyh5225So? What’s your point?
The Brazilians are going to hate this video
the Argentinians will love it🤣
All 6 of them. Lol
Fr fr right-wing protestant evangelicals out there are a great part of the population and they worship them and the state of Israel as if they are God themselves, it's embarrassing.
My brain automatically read Brazilians in the censor voice
I’m from Brazil and the boomers definitely gonna hate it
England - in 1290 A.D. by Edward I. Re-entered 1655.
France - 1306 by Philip the Fair. Until after 1682.
Hungary - 1360 until after 1582.
Belgium -1370-1700.
Slovakia -1380 until after 1744.
Austria - 1420 by Albrecht V.
Netherlands -1444.
Spain -1492.
Lithuania - 1495 by Grand Duke Alexander.
Portugal -1498.
Prussia-1510.
Italy-1540.
Bavaria-1551.
etc,. etc,.
109
What are you referencing. I would like to understand
@@CMW648 the deportation of Jews throughout history. It is a common antisemitic argument that goes "They were deported so many times throughout history- that means they must all be bad"
@CMW648 places where jews were banned around the world
@CMW648 it's a short bit of the 109 countries and around 1000 different places that the jews have been banned from
Imagine the arrogance it takes to call yourself God's chosen...
My thoughts exactly
Isn’t that what Christian’s essentially do ?
imagine the stupidity to call a human who got crucified a god or the son of god, or messiah, when he isn't even from the house of david, which is the most basic requirement to be messiah
jews don't call themselves god's chosen people, god himself did, go read the bible at least
@@TheWisestMysticaltree imagine the absurdity of taking any of this at all seriously
i stopped watching J.P videos because of this "judeo-Christian values" bs.
I can assure you that the left/right are the same things, same objective, 2 tools in the same persons shed ..
JP?
@@BritonAD Jordan Peterson, he is getting Ben Shapiro money now.
@@JeffKubel Ok, thanks.
As if Satan and Christ shared values. As if they have values, or know true value, and don't reject authentic spiritual value for imaginary forms of worth rendered physical
Oh this is about to be FIRE
UPDATE: It was. Highly recommend watching all the way through. The ending goes harder than diamonds.
Surah Al-Imran Aya 49, of the Quran states that jesus was sent to the israelites, although written over 1,300 years ago in the 19th century (same century bible was only transtalted into Arabic in as well) they came to the same conclusion, He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either.
Triune nonsense is straight out of the Roman Pantheon. Hercules, anyone? Cerberus? The trinity of Zeus, Athena Apollo, literally called the Triune. Greek goddess Hecate was portrayed in triplicate, a three-in-one. This was all done to make the creed more digestible, followed by mental gymnastics attempting to reconcile the onsensical with elaborate theories. Why doesn't a square peg fit into a round hole? Answer by saying it's a mystery instead of geometries not lining up. No such thing as the bible, the new testament is a concoction of several books that were deemed canonical, books written in Greek that were given the hellenized names of Apotsles who neither wrote, nor spoke greek to give it an illusion of antiquity, much like the calendar we have today, which was established in the year 535 CE by Dionysus Exegesis so too was the original message altered to that of the pauline credo, a digestible religion to the yet to be converted greeks who had no desire to follow the mosaic laws.
Paul had neither met nor seen Jesus, his relation to the twelve apostles was one of decided independence and even of opposition. He acknowledged no subordination to them. He addressed no doctrinal epistle to them or their churches, and received none from them. He made no reports to them. He did not correspond with them regularly. They never invited him to preach to their congregations and he never invited them to address his converts. He declared that he did not owe his conversion, his baptism, or his doctrine to the twelve, and that he never spent any long time in Jerusalem or in Judea as a Christian missionary. He claimed to be an apostle by a secret divine commission, but the twelve never admitted the validity of his claim. They never gave him the title of apostle; they never said anything indicative of willingness to admit him into their councils. Vacancies occurred in their number, but they never chose him to a vacant place, rather we have statements of Peter with regards to Paul which show nothing but animosity:
"And if our Jesus appeared to you also and became known in a vision and met you as angry with an enemy [recall: Paul had his vision while still persecuting the Christians: Acts 9], yet he has spoken only through visions and dreams or through external revelations. But can anyone be made competent to teach through a vision? And if your opinion is that that is possible, why then did our teacher spend a whole year with us who were awake? How can we believe you even if he has appeared to you?… But if you were visited by him for the space of an hour and were instructed by him and thereby have become an apostle, then proclaim his words, expound what he has taught, be a friend to his apostles and do not contend with me, who am his confidant; for you have in hostility withstood me, who am a firm rock, the foundation stone of the Church"
-Homily 17 Section XIX
On the pauline credo currently called trinitanity Peter said
"For some from among the Gentiles have rejected my lawful preaching and have preferred a lawless and absurd doctrine to the man who is my enemy. And indeed some have attempted, while I am still alive, to distort my words by interpretations of many sorts, as if I taught the dissolution of the law… But that may God forbid ! For to do such a thing means to act contrary to the Law of God which was made to Moses and was confirmed by our Lord in its everlasting continuance. For he said, “The heaven and the earth will pass away, but not one jot or one tittle shall pass away from the Law.”
-Letter of Peter to James, 2.3-5
None of the disciples spoke of trinity, ate pork or proclaimed it is allowable to do so, yet the miracle begotten paul, whom peter called him enemy, introduced his new creed according to his whims It proclaimed the abrogation of the Mosaic ceremonial law. It announced itself as a new and independent religion; calling its adherents Christians, and their doctrine Christianity.
Trinitarians are inoculated from rationality, facts and logic. It is no surprise that basic reasoning is entirely lost on those that believe that the creator became one of those he created in order to save the created from his own self. Not to mention the incoherence in the scripture, never minding the creed itself.
Matthew 4:1) Jesus was tempted
[James 1:13) God cannot be tempted
(John 1:29) Jesus was seen
(1 John 4:12) No man has ever seen God
(Acts 2:22) Jesus was and is a man, sent by God
(Numbers 23:19, Hosea 11:9) God is not a man
(Hebrews 5:8-9) Jesus had to grow and learn
(Isaiah 40:28) God doesn't ever need to learn
(1 Corinthians 15: 3-4) Jesus Died
(1 Timothy 1:17) God cannot die
(Hebrews 5:7) Jesus needed salvation
(Luke 1:37) God doesn't need salvation
(Mark 4:38) Jesus slept
(Psalm 121: 2-4) God doesn't sleep
(John 5:19) Jesus wasn't all powerful
(Isaiah 45: 5-7) God is all powerful
(Mark 13:32) Jesus wasn't all knowing
(Isaiah 46:9) God is all knowing
Older one is no different, Abijah was a wicked king, and had war with his rival (1. Kings 15:3).
2 Chronicles 13:3 says that Abjiah was pious ; that he took the field with 400,000 men against Jeroboam, who was at the head of 800,000 men ; and in a great battle the King of Israel was defeated, and 500,000 of his men slain.
It seems that, 1,200,000 soldiers sent into the field at one time by two small tribes, and the destruction of 500,000 men in one battle, were beneath the notice of the author of Kings.
How can one believe that the One that decrees that which is a 'sin' and that which is good "die for their sins" ? He is the One who decreed it thus, can decree it not so. To whom does the One with whom final authority resides in sacrifice for? a registrar? - No. None are greater than He.
Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
@@ikk_ikk God did not bring down anything to a child rapist and murderer. Muslims were the ones causing Chaos in Christian lands and then forcing a retaliation by Christendom against the Islamic forces. You're nothing more than pawns to serve yourselves based on lies by a monster and not the God of Abraham -> Yeshua.
@@ikk_ikk Bot that likes its own comments, SAD!
Nah and "Jesus" did not intend to establish a new religion. Soon after "Jesus" had selected his twelve apostles, according to Luke, he
" gave them power and authority over all devils and to cure diseases. And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick. And he said unto them: 'Take nothing for your journey, neither staves nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece. And whatsoever house ye enter, there abide and thence depart. And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them."
This is the entire charge of Jesus to his apostles when he sent them out to convert the world, as reported by Luke, who claims to give the address or a portion of it, and that presumably the most important portion, word for word. The language here attributed to Jesus conveys no idea that he had any purpose of founding a new church. Neither here nor anywhere else, in the language attributed to him in the New Testament, does he explain the phrase " the kingdom of God " to mean a new ecclesiastical organization. In several passages he does use it to signify the celestial dominion after the destruction of the world; and this is therefore presumably its meaning everywhere.
The gospel of Matthew is much further than that of Luke in its report of the charge of Jesus to his apostles: "These twelve Jesus sent forth and commanded them, saying: 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.", "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I am come not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother... He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward."
This charge, as reported by Matthew omitted nearly all the main ideas that would have been appropriate in an address instructing the twelve to preach the foundation of Christianity. It does not say whether Jesus wished to reform or to supersede Judaism; whether his principal purpose was ecclesiastical, moral, political, or sanitary. The remarks about healing the sick and casting out devils is the most explicit of all the instructions.
Certainly no reader can learn from that charge that Jesus intended to establish a new religion; and much less can he learn any feature of the faith or discipline of a projected new church. And this address is that portion of the New Testament where such information should be given most clearly. He made no doctrinal definition and no ecclesiastical organization. He did not use the key words of the original doctrines necessary to Christianity or a new church, nor the keywords of ideas afterwards associated with Christianity, such as Incarnation, Trinity, Immaculate Conception, and Transubstantiation.
The subjects to which the most space or most prominence is given in the sayings attributed, in the gospels, to Jesus, are, First, the Mosaic law; Second, judgment day; Third, faith; Fourth, the sins of the Pharisees; Fifth, ascetic morality; and Sixth, his divine commission.
In the opening chapters of Acts we find two addresses by Peter, one delivered to the disciples when an apostle to succeed Judas Iscariot was to be chosen, and the other to the Jews on the day of Pentecost. On neither occasion did the speaker mention a new religion, or a church open to Gentiles as well as to Jews, or an abandonment of the Mosaic law.
If these ideas had been in his mind at that time, he could not have omitted some reference to them. That the apostles and disciples in Jerusalem continue for at least eighteen years to comply with the requirements of the Mosaic law is proved by the epistle of Paul and also by Acts.
In the latter book we read that at time not specified, probably not earlier than 40 C.E Peter went to Joppa and there ate with Gentiles-^that i he violated the Pharisaic interpretation of one of the Mosaic ceremonial rules-and after his return to Jesus; then, he was called to account by his fellow disciple He justified his conduct, not on the ground that Jesus had abrogated the ceremonial law of Moses, or any part of it, but that in a dream he had received a divine communication telling him that all manner of beasts, fowls, an creeping things were clean, and that it was lawful for him to keep company with Gentiles, who were " unclean under the law of Moses. This announcement was accepted as authoritative, but with much surprise, " becaus that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost."'
This statement of the revelation to Peter, and of it acceptance by the disciples in Jerusalem, is doubtless a invention of the author of Acts. It cannot be brought into harmony with later passages of his own book, nor with the statements of Paul, who is our only trustworth; witness in these matters.
According to Acts, about 51 C. E. a council was held in Jerusalem to put an end to the dissension which had arisen in the church on the questions of circumcision and unclean meats. This council decided in favor of Paul, who was in attendance and the decision as given in a letter addressed not to all Christians but only to " the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia"-where Paul had been making converts, informing them that they were not required to observe the Mosaic ceremonial law. It is quite clear that no such council would have been held if the matter had been decided ten years before, as Acts says it had been.
But this account of the council of 51 C. E. is also a fiction.
About eight years later Paul went to Jerusalem again, and his appearance there provoked a riot. The mob wanted to kill him because of his hostility to the Mosaic law, and this mob included Jewish Christians as well as Jews. All the Christians in Jerusalem were zealous adherents of the Mosaic law. Some of the leading brethren, presumably apostles, advised Paul to take a false oath that he did not teach his Jewish converts to neglect the law. And, if we can believe Acts, he took that oath. This, however, did not pacify the mob, which would have put him to death if the Roman soldiers had not protected him. They took him to prison and finally to Rome. This story in Acts implies that the apostolic church adopted one rule of discipline for the Gentile and another for the Jewish Christians; that the latter were, and that the former were not, required to comply with the Mosaic ceremonial law. This duplicity of discipline is not recorded elsewhere. It is not known to Paul ; and if it had existed, he could neither have been ignorant of it nor remained silent about it. He tells us that the twelve apostles in Jerusalem, or those of them known to him, favored strict adherence to Moses; and the only way in which he could get along harmoniously with them was by promising to do no missionary work in Judea. He was to labor among the Gentiles,
The subjects to which the most space or most prominence is given in the sayings attributed, in the gospels, to Jesus, are, First, the Mosaic law; Second, judgment day; Third, faith; Fourth, the sins of the Pharisees; Fifth, ascetic morality; and Sixth, his divine commission.
There never was such another epidemic of ecclesiastical forgery. The church was flooded with books attributed falsely to apostolic times and authors. Distinguished saints and learned fathers of the faith openly commended the invention and acceptance of false- hoods designed to aid the conversion of the world to what they believed to be truth.
Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
@@ikk_ikk Muslim copy pasta, of course a Phony is gonna spread phony ideas.
Wow. The systematic and calculated propaganda my whole family consumes leads them far into the Judea-Christian “alliance” snare. So that they disregard our ancestors and theological predecessors understanding of that evil ethno-religion and believe such obvious falsehoods as, “a Jewish state is necessary” “Men practicing Judaism go to heaven” and “The Jewish state must reach from the Nile to the Persian gulf”. It is a complete takeover of our holy beliefs.
What's funnier is even if their claim on land was based on ancestry, the average Palestinian has more Israelite ancestry than they do
I think they are Frankish or Khazarians. I think they have been trying to wipe out all the other types. I recently learned about the Yemenite concentration camps of 1950s Israel, and the disappearance of thousands of Mizrahi Jewish infants that were allegedly given to WW2 families who lost their kid in the war. They were able to adopt them in Israel, Europe and America, and didn't realize they technically were not orphaned. Many in Israel call these things anti semitic fairy tales, but survivors have been telling these stories for over half a century, and you can find many news articles covering them.
Well there's hope yet, as evidenced by the fact that you (and many of us) have broken out of that twisted mindset. Have children and teach them the truth and we'll see a brighter future. God will not forsake His true people.
@ Be fruitful and multiply
The greater Israel thing is a lie. Stop spreading propagandist lies.
As a former Evangelical Pastor, I wrestled with my Darby programming in relation to the rapture and Zionism
What's so bad with Zionism?
THE JEWISH SUPREMACY AND THE EXTERMINATION OF THE PALESTINIANS@@User9681e
@@User9681eyour rage bait is so enticing… good troll
@@User9681e Temptation is strong with this one
@@User9681e EVERYTHING!!
You had to ask..
I am a Baptist minister, you are correct on what modern Israel Judaism and the Talmud is.
The Talmud is literally just recorded debates over the Mishnah by rabbis in the Babylonian exhile and majority of the Jews you guys rail about are irreligious ones who wouldn’t even know how to read a single line of it. And the orthodox who do learn it do it as a practice in argument very little actual law is derived from it. Majority of even Orthodox Jews who spend their entire school life in orthodox yeshivahs which do learn Talmud only learn maybe a sixth of it because of the way they break topics down so much. They end up learning certain topics like kedushin (laws of marriage) and laws of Sukkot, laws of mikvah, things like this that hold practical use for orthodox life. You guys are really insane I live in the orthodox world as someone raised secular with no religious thought involved in my young life (like most Jews especially the wealthy ones, I come from super poor people but we have that much in common our families are completely irreligious) and Orthodox Jews literally want nothing to do with the outside world. You can not point to a single hugely influential religious Jew. All of those that are huge power brokers are irreligious who don’t know the first thing about any single Jewish text.
@Stolas1777 neither do you
@@Stolas1777 You lying tiny hats love to omit the fact your noahide laws come from the talmud so stop acting like the talmud isn't your most revered holy texts.
@@Stolas1777 I wish you could see how crazy your message reads to someone else that is not you. Why doesn't god talk to people anymore? Why doesn't he throw fire from the sky anymore?
@@Ravum because he never did
I'm an Orthodox Priest and agree wholeheartedly.
By the sole moment they, jews, refused to become christians (followers of Christ), they're now idols of their own religion.
@@Aknayelth by default
Nah! Personality Cults just don't cut it with Jews!
Yes, 'the chosen people' have been cursed ever since they denied their Messiah.
Jesus said end will start with their 3rd temple being built, when Antichrist- their messiah will come. It is not far.
I am not apologetic at all for them going down, they had it coming, many of them worshipping lucifer-the morning star
Jesus spoke in parables, to those who want to hear.
Finally the definitive video I can direct people too about Jews
Right?
The only thing that would improve it is immediate citations throughout the video.
we jews notice how you are justifying your whole religion via hatred of us and we will treat you similarly to how you treat us, may god have mercy on your soul
@@jameskelly945 Don’t outsource all of your knowledge, memorize points and studies. It will make you more intellectual.
@@Ryan-xq3kl We Christians notice how you are justifying your whole religion via hatred of us and we will treat you similarly to how you treat us, may god have mercy on your soul.
@Ryan-xq3kl Not all of us are antisemitic fools.
May the God of Israel have mercy on their souls, for they know exactly what they are doing, and choose to hate the chosen people of the most high regardless.
I choose to bless the nation of Israel, the Jewish people, and say,
Am Yisrael Chai.
The answer isn't hate for hate, it's prayer that one day the Jewish people will accept the Messiah Jesus Christ.
though be very cautious
*God to Abraham Genesis 12:2*
2:And I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you, and I will aggrandize your name, and [you shall] be a blessing.
3: And I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse, and all the families of the earth shall be blessed in you."
That's right...God has not broken His promise.@alittlebitofeverything6547
@@alittlebitofeverything6547Schofield reference bible propaganda specifically designed to manipulate American Christian’s into becoming Zionists
But until that day be wary. Be wary anyway, they see nothing wrong with deceiving you.
Very, very brave post. God bless!
I come from an evangelical upbringing and have always been taught the importance of this Judeo-Christian alliance of sorts at my Baptist church. But as I've grown up, I've come to the same conclusion as you have. I think we need to drive home the connection between the antichrist and Judaism a little more. My Baptist upbringing taught of a pre-tribulation rapture, but I no longer am convinced of this doctrine. It conveniently creates a blind spot for Christians if they believe they will never live to see the antichrist rise to power- so they will never recognize him.
It perplexes me as a Christian today to think that we should ally ourselves with Judaism, when it's Judaism that will embrace the literal antichrist as their messiah, and install him on the throne in the rebuilt temple. It's their false messiah antichrist that will persecute us Christians one day. It is Judaism that will demand that we take the mark of the beast and worship him. It was Judaism that murdered their own Messiah.
This is a demonic religion. It's the religion of the antichrist. We need to be wise and see it for what it is.
Is that why your religion was murdering Jews for thousand of years?
Well hang on, just because the Jews will accept the antichrist doesn't mean we should say theyre a demonic religion it's not that Judaism will accept him, it's that the Jews will, that's like saying Christianity will accept Satan when they won't.
As Christians we are required to help the least of these to help the least fortunate, and if the Jews are in this regard as they have not accepted Christ, then we are required and responsible for showing them the Christ regardless of who or what they are, and in a world plunging itself into atheism, all people who believe in God should say otherwise whether it be the Jews or the Christians together, this doesn't mean shift people to either side and embrace an "alliance" this does mean that Christians should be responsible for helping those who do not know Jesus and that includes the Jews, Judaism isn't a "demonic" religion, it was created out of a covenant with God so how could a covenant with God be demonic?
You could say the people are arrogant, ignorant and foolish, that can be anyone and anything because humans are humans we are imperfect, and that is why the Jews will sit a satanic figure on a throne and call him the Christ because they dont view Jesus to be the Christ because it did not fit their description when it was our duty to help them understand the descriptors for the first coming of the Christ, had that happened I don't think the anti Christ would come to power as Jesus states, so we fell short but in the end it still isn't the fault of Christians it's the fault of the ignorant arrogant and foolish Jews who did not accept Christ simply because he didn't do what they wanted to the Romans at the time.
@@disclaimer4211Judaism today is not the Judaism from the Bible. It's straight against God, people and especially against christ and Christianity.
The judeo-Christian proponents love to say "Jesus was a jew". They never know how to respond when you reply, "the antichrist will be a jew too".
Christianity was created to convert and control people to a religion that is not monotheistic. It is an idolatrous religion that looks to an image as God... that is the complete opposite of what monotheism is. Having a set image that doesn't ever change is the opposite of evolution which is the definition of expansion and knowledge which is what Judaism is about.. That is the misunderstanding of many Christians..is they think that the original followers of jesus the jew, were christians and they were not they were jews that followed him as a leader maybe even as a messiah or prophet but not God because that's not what the point of messiah is...
I'm gonna be honest with you all, God saved my life an hour ago, we are in las Vegas and were coming back from the mall, and left almost RIGHT after a shooting happened, right where we were passing! Truly God saved me and especially my father, I ask God every night to protect my Dad, and I'm so happy. And Please pray for the man who lost his life today in the shooting❤
Christ is Risen!
I don't understand why you started the comment with "I'm gonna be honest with you all".
Normally people say that before saying something a bit mean but in honesty.
@@Vanpotheosis bot maybe?
Why did God cause a shooting
@@Vanpotheosishe is not even real
I prayed to Jesus about this question and he keeps giving me information about it. Thank you
Pray to the one to whom he prayed to; The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha" too sounds familiar?
Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization.
The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua.
infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name."
jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah )
Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language:
"From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen.
He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown.
"protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22)
𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼
ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي
A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y
א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת
Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic:
ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain
س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining
ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining
ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining
ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining
ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining
The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word.
As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries.
The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate,
Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE).
And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical.
Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken?
The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Surah Al-Imran Aya 49, of the Quran states that jesus was sent to the israelites, although written over 1,300 years ago in the 19th century (same century bible was only transtalted into Arabic in as well) they came to the same conclusion, He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either.
Christendom was always an empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer
Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves.
Triune nonsense is straight out of the Roman Pantheon. Hercules, anyone? Cerberus? The trinity of Zeus, Athena Apollo, literally called the Triune. Greek goddess Hecate was portrayed in triplicate, a three-in-one. This was all done to make the creed more digestible, followed by mental gymnastics attempting to reconcile the onsensical with elaborate theories. Why doesn't a square peg fit into a round hole? Answer by saying it's a mystery instead of geometries not lining up. No such thing as the bible, the new testament is a concoction of several books that were deemed canonical, books written in Greek that were given the hellenized names of Apotsles who neither wrote, nor spoke greek to give it an illusion of antiquity, much like the calendar we have today, which was established in the year 535 CE by Dionysus Exegesis so too was the original message altered to that of the pauline credo, a digestible religion to the yet to be converted greeks who had no desire to follow the mosaic laws.
Paul had neither met nor seen Jesus, his relation to the twelve apostles was one of decided independence and even of opposition. He acknowledged no subordination to them. He addressed no doctrinal epistle to them or their churches, and received none from them. He made no reports to them. He did not correspond with them regularly. They never invited him to preach to their congregations and he never invited them to address his converts. He declared that he did not owe his conversion, his baptism, or his doctrine to the twelve, and that he never spent any long time in Jerusalem or in Judea as a Christian missionary. He claimed to be an apostle by a secret divine commission, but the twelve never admitted the validity of his claim. They never gave him the title of apostle; they never said anything indicative of willingness to admit him into their councils. Vacancies occurred in their number, but they never chose him to a vacant place, rather we have statements of Peter with regards to Paul which show nothing but animosity:
"And if our Jesus appeared to you also and became known in a vision and met you as angry with an enemy [recall: Paul had his vision while still persecuting the Christians: Acts 9], yet he has spoken only through visions and dreams or through external revelations. But can anyone be made competent to teach through a vision? And if your opinion is that that is possible, why then did our teacher spend a whole year with us who were awake? How can we believe you even if he has appeared to you?… But if you were visited by him for the space of an hour and were instructed by him and thereby have become an apostle, then proclaim his words, expound what he has taught, be a friend to his apostles and do not contend with me, who am his confidant; for you have in hostility withstood me, who am a firm rock, the foundation stone of the Church"
-Homily 17 Section XIX
On the pauline credo currently called trinitanity Peter said
"For some from among the Gentiles have rejected my lawful preaching and have preferred a lawless and absurd doctrine to the man who is my enemy. And indeed some have attempted, while I am still alive, to distort my words by interpretations of many sorts, as if I taught the dissolution of the law… But that may God forbid ! For to do such a thing means to act contrary to the Law of God which was made to Moses and was confirmed by our Lord in its everlasting continuance. For he said, “The heaven and the earth will pass away, but not one jot or one tittle shall pass away from the Law.”
-Letter of Peter to James, 2.3-5
None of the disciples spoke of trinity, ate pork or proclaimed it is allowable to do so, yet the miracle begotten paul, whom peter called him enemy, introduced his new creed according to his whims It proclaimed the abrogation of the Mosaic ceremonial law. It announced itself as a new and independent religion; calling its adherents Christians, and their doctrine Christianity.
How can one believe that the One that decrees that which is a 'sin' and that which is good "die for their sins" ? He is the One who decreed it thus, can decree it not so. To whom does the One with whom final authority resides in sacrifice for? a registrar? - No. None are greater than He.
Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses:
“Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9
“Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3
“Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16
The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers:
“in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.”
Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as::
“seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.”
Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed:
"Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer".
Evoking several of these verses in practice:
- (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
- (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them...
- (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary.
This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished.
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah):
"includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit."
This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship."
It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children."
بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة
"To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause"
-Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya
More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah:
حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ»
"Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries"
حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ»
سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ»
"The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly"
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them.
Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons.
The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
"Jesus" did not intend to establish a new religion. Soon after "Jesus" had selected his twelve apostles, according to Luke, he
" gave them power and authority over all devils and to cure diseases. And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick. And he said unto them: 'Take nothing for your journey, neither staves nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece. And whatsoever house ye enter, there abide and thence depart. And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them."
This is the entire charge of Jesus to his apostles when he sent them out to convert the world, as reported by Luke, who claims to give the address or a portion of it, and that presumably the most important portion, word for word. The language here attributed to Jesus conveys no idea that he had any purpose of founding a new church. Neither here nor anywhere else, in the language attributed to him in the New Testament, does he explain the phrase " the kingdom of God " to mean a new ecclesiastical organization. In several passages he does use it to signify the celestial dominion after the destruction of the world; and this is therefore presumably its meaning everywhere.
The gospel of Matthew is much further than that of Luke in its report of the charge of Jesus to his apostles: "These twelve Jesus sent forth and commanded them, saying: 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.", "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I am come not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother... He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet, shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward."
This charge, as reported by Matthew omitted nearly all the main ideas that would have been appropriate in an address instructing the twelve to preach the foundation of Christianity. It does not say whether Jesus wished to reform or to supersede Judaism; whether his principal purpose was ecclesiastical, moral, political, or sanitary. The remarks about healing the sick and casting out devils is the most explicit of all the instructions.
Certainly no reader can learn from that charge that Jesus intended to establish a new religion; and much less can he learn any feature of the faith or discipline of a projected new church. And this address is that portion of the New Testament where such information should be given most clearly. He made no doctrinal definition and no ecclesiastical organization. He did not use the key words of the original doctrines necessary to Christianity or a new church, nor the keywords of ideas afterwards associated with Christianity, such as Incarnation, Trinity, Immaculate Conception, and Transubstantiation.
The subjects to which the most space or most prominence is given in the sayings attributed, in the gospels, to Jesus, are, First, the Mosaic law; Second, judgment day; Third, faith; Fourth, the sins of the Pharisees; Fifth, ascetic morality; and Sixth, his divine commission.
In the opening chapters of Acts we find two addresses by Peter, one delivered to the disciples when an apostle to succeed Judas Iscariot was to be chosen, and the other to the Jews on the day of Pentecost. On neither occasion did the speaker mention a new religion, or a church open to Gentiles as well as to Jews, or an abandonment of the Mosaic law.
If these ideas had been in his mind at that time, he could not have omitted some reference to them. That the apostles and disciples in Jerusalem continue for at least eighteen years to comply with the requirements of the Mosaic law is proved by the epistle of Paul and also by Acts.
In the latter book we read that at time not specified, probably not earlier than 40 C.E Peter went to Joppa and there ate with Gentiles-^that i he violated the Pharisaic interpretation of one of the Mosaic ceremonial rules-and after his return to Jesus; then, he was called to account by his fellow disciple He justified his conduct, not on the ground that Jesus had abrogated the ceremonial law of Moses, or any part of it, but that in a dream he had received a divine communication telling him that all manner of beasts, fowls, an creeping things were clean, and that it was lawful for him to keep company with Gentiles, who were " unclean under the law of Moses. This announcement was accepted as authoritative, but with much surprise, " becaus that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost."'
This statement of the revelation to Peter, and of it acceptance by the disciples in Jerusalem, is doubtless a invention of the author of Acts. It cannot be brought into harmony with later passages of his own book, nor with the statements of Paul, who is our only trustworth; witness in these matters.
According to Acts, about 51 C. E. a council was held in Jerusalem to put an end to the dissension which had arisen in the church on the questions of circumcision and unclean meats. This council decided in favor of Paul, who was in attendance and the decision as given in a letter addressed not to all Christians but only to " the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia"-where Paul had been making converts, informing them that they were not required to observe the Mosaic ceremonial law. It is quite clear that no such council would have been held if the matter had been decided ten years before, as Acts says it had been.
But this account of the council of 51 C. E. is also a fiction.
About eight years later Paul went to Jerusalem again, and his appearance there provoked a riot. The mob wanted to kill him because of his hostility to the Mosaic law, and this mob included Jewish Christians as well as Jews. All the Christians in Jerusalem were zealous adherents of the Mosaic law. Some of the leading brethren, presumably apostles, advised Paul to take a false oath that he did not teach his Jewish converts to neglect the law. And, if we can believe Acts, he took that oath. This, however, did not pacify the mob, which would have put him to death if the Roman soldiers had not protected him. They took him to prison and finally to Rome. This story in Acts implies that the apostolic church adopted one rule of discipline for the Gentile and another for the Jewish Christians; that the latter were, and that the former were not, required to comply with the Mosaic ceremonial law. This duplicity of discipline is not recorded elsewhere. It is not known to Paul ; and if it had existed, he could neither have been ignorant of it nor remained silent about it. He tells us that the twelve apostles in Jerusalem, or those of them known to him, favored strict adherence to Moses; and the only way in which he could get along harmoniously with them was by promising to do no missionary work in Judea. He was to labor among the Gentiles,
The subjects to which the most space or most prominence is given in the sayings attributed, in the gospels, to Jesus, are, First, the Mosaic law; Second, judgment day; Third, faith; Fourth, the sins of the Pharisees; Fifth, ascetic morality; and Sixth, his divine commission.
Matthew 4:1) Jesus was tempted
[James 1:13) God cannot be tempted
(John 1:29) Jesus was seen
(1 John 4:12) No man has ever seen God
(Acts 2:22) Jesus was and is a man, sent by God
(Numbers 23:19, Hosea 11:9) God is not a man
(Hebrews 5:8-9) Jesus had to grow and learn
(Isaiah 40:28) God doesn't ever need to learn
(1 Corinthians 15: 3-4) Jesus Died
(1 Timothy 1:17) God cannot die
(Hebrews 5:7) Jesus needed salvation
(Luke 1:37) God doesn't need salvation
(Mark 4:38) Jesus slept
(Psalm 121: 2-4) God doesn't sleep
(John 5:19) Jesus wasn't all powerful
(Isaiah 45: 5-7) God is all powerful
(Mark 13:32) Jesus wasn't all knowing
(Isaiah 46:9) God is all knowing
Older one is no different, Abijah was a wicked king, and had war with his rival (1. Kings 15:3).
2 Chronicles 13:3 says that Abjiah was pious ; that he took the field with 400,000 men against Jeroboam, who was at the head of 800,000 men ; and in a great battle the King of Israel was defeated, and 500,000 of his men slain.
It seems that, 1,200,000 soldiers sent into the field at one time by two small tribes, and the destruction of 500,000 men in one battle, were beneath the notice of the author of Kings.
There never was such another epidemic of ecclesiastical forgery. The church was flooded with books attributed falsely to apostolic times and authors. Distinguished saints and learned fathers of the faith openly commended the invention and acceptance of false- hoods designed to aid the conversion of the world to what they believed to be truth.
How can one believe that the One that decrees that which is a 'sin' and that which is good "die for their sins" ? He is the One who decreed it thus, can decree it not so. To whom does the One with whom final authority resides in sacrifice for? a registrar? - No. None are greater than He.
Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
Moooslims and Judans do not belong in OUR nations. We have awoken. If I were either of you, I would start packing bags and going home before it gets ugly. You dont want another crusade, just leave@@ikk_ikk
Thanks for this video. Christ is King! ✝️
If you continue down this rabbit hole you will find the Talmud to be of the least of your concerns regarding jews. There is much more to this.
Do they actually hold to the teaching of the Talmud or not? I thought it was just a series of communications between Rabbis?
@@S3raphima they do but often hide it because of how perverted the talmuds teachings are
@@drago_6812 Yes, that is what I assumed to be the case. Thanks :)
@@S3raphima im happy i helped you NOTICE :)
@@drago_6812don’t pretend like you know anything about the Talmud. It doesn’t “teach” anything. That fundamental misunderstanding shows you don’t know it.
As a catholic I love to hear my orthodox brothers call out the synagogue of Satan. I believe this realization is growing amoung many catholics and I know almost every pre Vatican 2 knows it.
Catholicism has no room to talk. It's literally a universal one world religion that's just a conglomeration of all the religious beliefs of all the people they concord. It was used to manipulate and control the masses.
Hence all the paganism.
Agree 👍
I'm a Jewish convert to Orthodoxy.
I think one of the biggest mistakes most people make is that they call the religion of the Israelites "Judaism" as if what we call Judaism today has been going on since then and Christianity split from it. So much of what modern Jews practice today are inventions of the Sages, from their invented "oral torah" they made up so they can basically override the actual scripture and justify their rule over the Jews, we recieved the "oral torah" from Moses and so you have to obey us.
I just want people to know that your average secular Jew or the one who just keeps the customs but haven't studied much isn't aware of all the weird stuff in the writings of the Sages, and I'm sure if you'd show them the obscenities and absurdities they'd be shocked, like I was. But slamming that against them is probably not the way to make them look into Christ, but actually showing the connections with the Old Testament - the Angel of the Lord, the prophecies, stuff from the Jewish sources that actually can be very close to Christian ideas, such as the two messiahs, Ben Yosef - who suffers and dies, Ben David - who is a conquering king (1st and 2nd Comings anyone?) Etc
God bless
Surah Al-Imran Aya 49, of the Quran states that jesus was sent to the israelites, although written over 1,300 years ago in the 19th century (same century bible was only transtalted into Arabic in as well) they came to the same conclusion, He never used or heard the words Christian or Christianity or any equivalent of either.
Triune nonsense is straight out of the Roman Pantheon. Hercules, anyone? Cerberus? The trinity of Zeus, Athena Apollo, literally called the Triune. Greek goddess Hecate was portrayed in triplicate, a three-in-one. This was all done to make the creed more digestible, followed by mental gymnastics attempting to reconcile the onsensical with elaborate theories. Why doesn't a square peg fit into a round hole? Answer by saying it's a mystery instead of geometries not lining up. No such thing as the bible, the new testament is a concoction of several books that were deemed canonical, books written in Greek that were given the hellenized names of Apotsles who neither wrote, nor spoke greek to give it an illusion of antiquity, much like the calendar we have today, which was established in the year 535 CE by Dionysus Exegesis so too was the original message altered to that of the pauline credo, a digestible religion to the yet to be converted greeks who had no desire to follow the mosaic laws.
Paul had neither met nor seen Jesus, his relation to the twelve apostles was one of decided independence and even of opposition. He acknowledged no subordination to them. He addressed no doctrinal epistle to them or their churches, and received none from them. He made no reports to them. He did not correspond with them regularly. They never invited him to preach to their congregations and he never invited them to address his converts. He declared that he did not owe his conversion, his baptism, or his doctrine to the twelve, and that he never spent any long time in Jerusalem or in Judea as a Christian missionary. He claimed to be an apostle by a secret divine commission, but the twelve never admitted the validity of his claim. They never gave him the title of apostle; they never said anything indicative of willingness to admit him into their councils. Vacancies occurred in their number, but they never chose him to a vacant place, rather we have statements of Peter with regards to Paul which show nothing but animosity:
"And if our Jesus appeared to you also and became known in a vision and met you as angry with an enemy [recall: Paul had his vision while still persecuting the Christians: Acts 9], yet he has spoken only through visions and dreams or through external revelations. But can anyone be made competent to teach through a vision? And if your opinion is that that is possible, why then did our teacher spend a whole year with us who were awake? How can we believe you even if he has appeared to you?… But if you were visited by him for the space of an hour and were instructed by him and thereby have become an apostle, then proclaim his words, expound what he has taught, be a friend to his apostles and do not contend with me, who am his confidant; for you have in hostility withstood me, who am a firm rock, the foundation stone of the Church"
-Homily 17 Section XIX
On the pauline credo currently called trinitanity Peter said
"For some from among the Gentiles have rejected my lawful preaching and have preferred a lawless and absurd doctrine to the man who is my enemy. And indeed some have attempted, while I am still alive, to distort my words by interpretations of many sorts, as if I taught the dissolution of the law… But that may God forbid ! For to do such a thing means to act contrary to the Law of God which was made to Moses and was confirmed by our Lord in its everlasting continuance. For he said, “The heaven and the earth will pass away, but not one jot or one tittle shall pass away from the Law.”
-Letter of Peter to James, 2.3-5
None of the disciples spoke of trinity, ate pork or proclaimed it is allowable to do so, yet the miracle begotten paul, whom peter called him enemy, introduced his new creed according to his whims It proclaimed the abrogation of the Mosaic ceremonial law. It announced itself as a new and independent religion; calling its adherents Christians, and their doctrine Christianity.
Trinitarians are inoculated from rationality, facts and logic. It is no surprise that basic reasoning is entirely lost on those that believe that the creator became one of those he created in order to save the created from his own self. Not to mention the incoherence in the scripture, never minding the creed itself.
Matthew 4:1) Jesus was tempted
[James 1:13) God cannot be tempted
(John 1:29) Jesus was seen
(1 John 4:12) No man has ever seen God
(Acts 2:22) Jesus was and is a man, sent by God
(Numbers 23:19, Hosea 11:9) God is not a man
(Hebrews 5:8-9) Jesus had to grow and learn
(Isaiah 40:28) God doesn't ever need to learn
(1 Corinthians 15: 3-4) Jesus Died
(1 Timothy 1:17) God cannot die
(Hebrews 5:7) Jesus needed salvation
(Luke 1:37) God doesn't need salvation
(Mark 4:38) Jesus slept
(Psalm 121: 2-4) God doesn't sleep
(John 5:19) Jesus wasn't all powerful
(Isaiah 45: 5-7) God is all powerful
(Mark 13:32) Jesus wasn't all knowing
(Isaiah 46:9) God is all knowing
Older one is no different, Abijah was a wicked king, and had war with his rival (1. Kings 15:3).
2 Chronicles 13:3 says that Abjiah was pious ; that he took the field with 400,000 men against Jeroboam, who was at the head of 800,000 men ; and in a great battle the King of Israel was defeated, and 500,000 of his men slain.
It seems that, 1,200,000 soldiers sent into the field at one time by two small tribes, and the destruction of 500,000 men in one battle, were beneath the notice of the author of Kings.
How can one believe that the One that decrees that which is a 'sin' and that which is good "die for their sins" ? He is the One who decreed it thus, can decree it not so. To whom does the One with whom final authority resides in sacrifice for? a registrar? - No. None are greater than He.
Rationality was only born with Islam, those who cannot count have nothing to say, at the end of the day 1+1+1 will never equal 1
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
The "Aramaic" word for God is "Alaha" too sounds familiar?
Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization.
The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua.
infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name."
jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah )
Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language:
"From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen.
He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown.
"protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22)
𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼
ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي
A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y
א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת
Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic:
ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain
س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining
ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining
ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining
ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining
ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining
The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word.
As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries.
The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate,
Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE).
And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical.
Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken?
The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
I think all Abrahamic religions are essentially dysfunctional, not to mention false but I'm sympathetic to people who were just raised in this bullshit, since I was too. God is real and much bigger than religion.
Christendom is the empirial religion, born under the auspices of constantine, the subjects were converted at the edge of the sword and rendered into slaves for his majesty, often referring to him as their lord. In Islam such slavery is unthinkable. The only lordship is that of the creator, no station into which man was brought into the lands of Islam was to any degree as bad as the repugnant chattel slavery brought by the primitive tribalism inherent in their texts. Constantine chose regularly to refer to himself as the “servant of God” (famulus dei/therapon tou theou) in official writings. By the fifth century, this metaphor of subordination had been redeployed from theological to political contexts as the subjects of the emperor came to refer to themselves as “slaves of the emperor.” And by the sixth, Justinian insisted all his officials swear an oath that they would demonstrate their service to the emperor “with genuine slavehood” (gnesia douleia).b Building on Paul’s revalorization of the vocabulary of slavery, and particularly the word doulos came to be applied to a variety of hierarchical relationships, even as it also continued to be used specifically of chattel slaves. By the middle Byzantine period, this expansion of the semantic range of the root doul- eventually gave the abstract nominal form douleia, meaning laborer
Insofar as everyone who partook in labor was considered to be a participant This epistemological world view is coherent with master-slave dynamic relationship between the head of the state and his subjects, or rather slaves.
The word עוֹלֵל, ʿôlēl which means 'Babe, infant, little one, a suckling' occurs 21 King James Bible Verses Of these verses:
“Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” -Psalm 137:9
“Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”-1 Samuel 15:3
“Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.”-Hosea 13:16
The other verses are not much different. Infact it is always in association with violence. Indeed these verses are the reason why in the Crusades the sense of pious rejoicing at massacre does not appear to be the product of later theologizing; it is also found, in the account of the eye-witness Raymond of Aguilers:
“in the Temple and porch of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, since it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.” In fact, Raymond continues, “This day, I say, will be famous in all future ages, for it turned our labours and sorrows into joy and exultation; this day, I say, marks the justification of all Christianity, the humiliation of paganism, and the renewal of our faith.”
Another account by a chronicler and eyewitness-priest, Albert of Aachen, describes the killing of fleeing women, and depicts crusaders as::
“seizing [infants who were still suckling] by the soles of their feet from their mothers’ laps or their cradles…and dashing them against the walls or lintels of the doors and breaking their necks […] they were sparing absolutely no gentile of any age or kind.”The incoherence inherent in a stranger to Abraham calling the children of Abraham gentiles notwithstanding, this account evokes the very same Psalm 137:9 imprecation against Babylon, in Latin, “beatus qui tenebit et adlidet parvulos tuos ad petram.”
Albert describes a massacre occurring, in cold blood, on the second day following the conquest, painting a scene that is as horrific as it is realistic and detailed:
"Girls, women, matrons, tormented by fear of imminent death and horror-struck by the violent murder wrapped themselves around the Christians’ bodies in the hope to save their lives, even as the Christians were raving and venting their rage in murder of both sexes. Some threw themselves at their feet, begging them with pitiable weeping and wailing for their lives and safety. When children five or three years old saw the cruel fate of their mothers and fathers, of one accord they stepped up the weeping and pitiable clamour. But they were making these signals for pity and mercy in vain. For the Christians gave over their whole hearts to murder, so that not a suckling little male-child or female, not even an infant of one year would escape the hand of the murderer".
Evoking several of these verses in practice:
- (Num 31:17-18) Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
- (Deut 7:2, 9:3, Num 21) thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them...
- (Ezek 9:6) Slay utterly old [and] young both maids and little children and women: but come not near any man upon whom [is] mark begin at my sanctuary.
Not to mention - (Deut 20:16-17) , (Josh 6:21, 8:24-27, 10:, 11:11-14,21-22), (Judg 18:27) , (1 Sam 15:1-9), (1 Sam 27:9,11) , (Esther 8:11, 9:1-19).
This is the polar opposite in the Quran in Surah Al-Tanwir, literally "The Englightenining" Surah, Aya 8-9, we have the death of a newborn is mentioned amongst the penultimate signs of the end of times, emphasizing the gravity of such an action. That child, now resurrected, is asked for what wrong doing was she murdered. This is to emphasize that she had done nothing wrong, for she had done nothing wrong and this is the day of retribution where those who omitted the evil are to be punished.
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190, which exhorts to fight unbelievers and not be "Aggressors", in the commentary of what it means to be aggressors, this was stated Al-Hasan Al-Basri stated that transgression (indicated by the Ayah):
"includes mutilating the dead, theft (from the captured goods), killing women, children and old people who do not participate in warfare, killing priests and residents of houses of worship, burning down trees and killing animals without real benefit."
This is also the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz, Muqatil bin Hayyan and others. Muslim recorded in his Sahih that Buraydah narrated that Allah's Messenger said: "Fight for the sake of Allah and fight those who disbelieve in Allah. Fight, but do not steal, commit treachery, mutilate, or kill a child, or those who reside in houses of worship."
It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Ibn `Umar said, "The Prophet forbade killing women and children."
بابتداء القتال أو بقتال من نهيتم عن قتاله من النساء والشيوخ والصبيان والذين بينكم وبينهم عهد أو بالمثلة أو بالمفاجأة من غير دعوة
"To kill those whom you were forbidden to from women, elderly, children and those whom betwixt you is a treaty or custom or by surprise or without cause"
-Tafsir Al-Zamakshari of the meaning of Aggressors in the Aya
More hadith from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah:
حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ شَيْخٍ، مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ مَوْلَى لِبَنِي عَبْدِ الْأَشْهَلِ، عَنْ دَاوُدَ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ إِذَا بَعَثَ جُيُوشَهُ قَالَ: «§لَا تَقْتُلُوا أَصْحَابَ الصَّوَامِعِ»
"Do not kill the dwellers of monasteries"
حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ فُضَيْلٍ، عَنْ جُوَيْبِرٍ، عَنِ الضَّحَّاكِ قَالَ: كَانَ «§يُنْهَى عَنْ قَتْلِ الْمَرْأَةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ»
سَعْدٍ قَالَ: «§نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَنْ قَتْلِ النِّسَاءِ وَالذُّرِّيَّةِ، وَالشَّيْخِ الْكَبِيرِ الَّذِي لَا حَرَاكَ بِهِ»
"The prophet forbids the killing of women, children, and the elderly"
This is the polar opposite in the Qur'an, Surah Al-Anfal Ayah 61 in which even oath breaking deniers/unbelievers are allowed to sue for peace states if the unbelievers they ask for peace, give it to them.
Stephen Langton, the writer of the Magna Carta (12th century, contemporary with the crusades for a reason) studied in the university of Paris which archives show had plenty of Arabic treatises in its procession, there can be no question about it being inspired by the "Sharia". both the renessiance and the european enlightenment were directly preceded by massive translation movements form Arabic (see the Republic of Letters by Alexander Bevilacqua, The House of Wisdom: How the Arabs Transformed Western Civilization By: Jonathan Lyons.
The modifiable testament testament commands indiscriminate killing, genocide, plunder, mutilation, enslavement, or torture of enemies, including women, on the other hand.Surah Al-Baqara Aya 190 limits war to those who fight against Muslims, prohibits transgression, and implies respect for human dignity and life Indeed it is what precedes the famous "sword verse", always cited out of context.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
@ranro7371 All Abrahamic cults are evil.
Wow... What a great discussion and catechism. Thank you Sir. May the Lord Bless you and your family with increased faith. Viva Cristo Rey, Viva La Reina Del Universo La Santa Maria ♥️✝️🤴🏻♥️🌹👸🏻♥️
I give your channel a coin flip chance of surviving until the weekend. The bravery of speaking the truth is commendable. Great content as always.
Why is this even problematic?
@@TrueRomance1993"It's AnTi SemItIc" 🫠
@@TrueRomance1993《they》 dont want you to know
I've been praying for someone to make this video as I struggle with my anger when I see ignorant protestants on social media going on and on about how we need to "stand with Israel." Their ignorance and hubris has real geopolitical and spiritual consequences that we need to try to mitigate. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for making this video!! Now I can just share it with those who make those maddening posts about "Israel". May God bless you. Keep up the GREAT word.
Melissa your religion is a mental prison cell my sister. If you value truth over religion study the historical origin of Christianity and the truth will free you from your religious prison.
@@mmoxam6963what??? The Truth has set me free, brother. Now I am no longer a prisoner of delusional thinking.
The view of Israel is not Protestant. Luther for example was well aware of these matters. It came later, mainly via Scofield and Darby, both of whom were wicked men. It is sad that the Evangelical church in the USA and much of the Pentecostal and Baptist churches here in Australia have swallowed this evil doctrine whole.
yeah anglo protestantism isn't great in general imo, but the american denominations are abysmal
Yes, my family is almost entirely Protestant and most do not believe in that, only a few who are evangelical and not all of them.
Scofield and Darby were funded by Z-ists too.
The Scofield Bible and it’s consquences have been a disaster for American religion
racism comes from Jewish religion,that was my conclusion when i asked myself about roots of racism,of course maybe im wrong and as be very interested in Cabbala is hard to understand some Jewish religion concepts about superiority and of course about genocide of Palestine people..
“Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a ‘Jew’ or to call a contemporary Jew an Israelite or a Hebrew.”
- Jewish Almanac, 1980, p. 3
Israel is simply another name God gave Jacob. The star of David is actually The star of REMPHAN. Which is in acts
The tribes were split into 2 separate houses, the House of Israel to the north , and the House of Judah in Judea. The northern tribes were not jews, it was those that resided in the land of Judea which were called jews.
@@MsChief65yes, and they have been at war with Europe since that time.
@AllofJudea Lox..ism is real.
scripturally speaking,there are 2 seed lines at emnity with each other, only 1 side is ignorant of who their true enemy is.
Knowing who is who, it totally makes sense .
@@AllofJudea
Nah jews were an ally of Ceasar
Really until christianity took off in the empire they had a good relationship
God is clever. They are certainly his chosen people. They, in their pride, never stopped to ask what they were chosen for.
😅 exactly 💯
what are they chosen for?
@@caroline7648I also want to know
To be the illusionist to contrast the ones who seek truth. This world is a realm in which polarities exist. You cannot have good without evil.@@caroline7648
@@caroline7648 The chosen nation to serve God, all the other nations serve their lifeless idols
This is one of the first videos on this topic that doesn’t come across as unhinged or just a mask for hatred. Great work!
@@retro-orthodox Yes! The Jews Hate Non-Jews. They are the hateful race of vipers.
I know that this is unrelated to the video's content, but big props to you for keeping me engaged for a whole half hour without any visuals
extremely based...subscribed. great work, thank you.
What is stated in the Talmud regarding Jesus simply confirms what I have thought for a long time, their accusations Are confessions.
Prots and evangelicals gonna seethe over this one hehe
Shut up I'm a Calvinist and I condone this and any video that rebukes Judaism.
... Ok @@noahtylerpritchett2682
Daily reminder that Calvinist theology is based on Christological heresy
Only evangelicals fag.
Daily reminder that evangelicals are protestants. Anything that isn't Orthodox is in schism with the church as founded by Christ. Prots n evangelicals are no better than Jews n Muslims. You all follow and teach heresy.
I never subscribe & rarely like. You earned them both today. Very professional/academic. You sound so young too. How did you learn all this so quick?
Merry Christmas
Finally someone who knows Jews on the Bible aren’t Jews of today
So that means that they didn't kill Jeezus and it also meant that Hitler got it wrong!
@@michaelsmullen9891thats too rational stop it, we need someone to blame for everything
@@michaelsmullen9891 He got it right.
@@michaelsmullen9891another lying Jew 😂
The synagogue of satan?
Revelation 2.9 and 3.9
Sin-AGOG 🤔🤔🤔🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️
Without a doubt.
My dad's favorite title when he talks about virtually everything on t.v.
@@SmoothCriminaltripleOGsin gog
I dated a Jewish girl for 4 years, I didn’t know too much about the religion. She was a very kind but Money Was Everything too her, friends and family. We mostly argued over me not wanting to convert over to Judaism. I didn’t realize until years later that some of the names her friends and family would refer to me as where Racist. Goym, Gentile etc.. I don’t hold it against them but it op-ed my eyes, it will always be about them (Jews) and Money, nothing else matters.
Hey atleast you get to screw her before a jewish guy end up marrying her. Used good is used good.
goyim and gentile aren't harsh terms (like Kaffir, or infidel, or heretic.) ALL it means is that you aren't Jewish. It is a word to describe that you belong to a different religion. It's a simple, non-judgement catch-all word. Just as you would describe someone who's not native to your place of birth as a 'forign (born)'. And now, jews aren't just 'money and nothing else matters', that is merely your slander because she probably broke up with you, for reasons that will become painfully obvious when you reply to this comment.
Had jewish bf,was very generous, didn't know much about his religion, but he never brought it up
Well not all are like that,just unlucky relationships just you had disagreement with,
There's this Swiss doctor guy George montandon calling them the whore ethnicity. Sorry. It just fits. Ass for cash.
Just finding this channel. I lean more towards these "podcast type" channels that I do the dazzling, flashy, picture filled ones. Is this your only?
@@firstnamelastname9141 I’ve actually done a few channels in the past and one other podcast! This is the main active one. I did a podcast with a similar format called Facing The Gates with an atheist and agnostic friend for about a year and a half, but that was before I became Orthodox so I don’t necessarily endorse everything I said on there. It still exists though, for those interested.
@@untoages i have no sound emmiting from the video. Is this on purpose or is it a fault of my device?
@@furrycircuitry2378 I think that’s an issue on your end
The tide is changing, a lot of people are waking up. Thanks for helping to make people aware
The world is finally waking up ✝️🙌
Don't hold your breath
😂 real
Judaism is the religion of law, christianity is the truth of mercy, btw today judaism is far far different than original judaism. And the talmud is the blasphemy the holy spirit.
Well said!!!
Quite literally what this presenter has just said
Oi vey, ya antoisemite. Whaddya mean ya don't support Israel with your mind and soul?
Shalom, ADL?! The Goyim know we did it! Shut it down!
If you dont support israel you support jihadists who would like you dead
ah yes the "im going to make fun of your people and what they go through" then expect me to convert 💀
@@catnamedmariaWhat do they go through? They ball
@@catnamedmariayou can do It to christians but we cant mock you? Happy merchant vives.
The true Jews became followers of Christ
Yeah, Talmudism is not what you think has nothing to do with Jesus or Christianity exact opposite
Cool, talmudism is not judaism, talmud is not the torah or the bible
The "Jews" or the Pharisees and Sadducees that Jesus chastised were not of the bloodline of Jacob/Israel. They were Idumeans/Edomites who "converted" to Judaism but it was a corrupted form of 'Judaism" i.e. The Talmud is their main source of religion.
I was a Christian Zionist for most of my life, until recently, after I did a study on the matter. It was difficult coming to terms with it, but I love the truth more than I love being right. Several sources were from Jewish historians themselves. I am not anti-Semitic, but I am anti-Zionism. I now understand the difference. Please do research prayerfully.
The Holy Spirit is strong with this one. Amazing work!
Correction the Jews and gentiles who followed Mashiach (Christ is a Greek title) were called Ha Derim because they followed Ha Derech “the way”. The name Christians came about around the year 70-80ad in Antioch from the Greek Χριστιανός
The Civil war in the time between testaments is key to the change. The Zadokite Priests (levites setup by Ezra after the Babylonian return) were no longer in charge of the Temple, and were usurped by the Pharisee and Sadducee groups. John the baptists father was a Zadokite Priest hence the name Zechariah and that is why the story of John's name "not being like any in Zechariah's family" was so important. Basically all Zadokite priests started their name with the 7th letter "Zayin" (Z) and to not give John the Baptist a name with Zayin (Z) was unlawful. But Zechariah's family rejoiced when he wrote John on his tablet. Now this story in Luke seems like a throw away story about John's naming and birth but Why is it there? Because they knew the messiah was coming as told in Daniel and for Zechariah to break the tradition and give him the name John is basically him saying the time of the law is ending and the redemption of the Messiah is upon us. Most likely Zechariah was an Essene in Qumran since the Essene's had left the temple and went to Qumran to put up an tabernacle and continue their job as the actual priesthood of Israel. Almost all of the Essene community in Qumran became believers in the messiah and when you know the factions within judaism in that time the new testament is full of other Essenes. Many left before the temple was destroyed in 70AD and went to Africa, or into Europe. But Modern Judaism is based on the Pharisee system brought about around 300 years before the New Testament after they won the Civil war. Don't believe me go and read the Dead Sea Scrolls, and read what Josephus says about the Essenes. Once you know how the Jewish Civil War changed everything you begin to see where Judaism began to radically change from the time of the Old Testament until the New Testament.
Fascinating!! well written, thanks for sharing this
Wow. That statement really makes it sound like you were there.
@@csj9619 I find this stuff interesting. Because at some point things changed because the Pharisee's in Jesus' time were very different to the priests of the old testament. The Dead sea scrolls are the key to the destruction of Rabbinical Judaism. The Essenes were not some radical group out in the desert, but in fact the rightful priesthood of the temple. Josephus the Jewish historian says this, and calls them Doctors and healers who lived far longer than other Jewish Priest sects by almost double the years living beyond 100 years. He also says the Essenes were known by the people to never be wrong about prophecy. He explains some of them broke away and went to Egypt (around the time of John the baptist imprisonment) and those Essenes in Egypt fell into mysticism and were condemned by their elders in Qumran. So I said all of that to explain why the Dead Sea Scrolls are the key to the destruction of modern day Judaism. The scrolls predate the Talmud, as well as the oldest copies of the Old Testament by almost 1000 years. But its not just the copies of the Bible that are interesting. Its the commentaries on history of judaism and the actual rules that applied God Worshipping Jews, as well as Gentiles and how the Pharisee's traditions stem from the "sages" that were family members survived the 40 year journey in the desert, and their line of Oral Traditions and belief can be traced all the way back to those who forced Aaron to make a golden calf for them to worship while Moses was on the Mountain receiving the commandments of God. Families that became bitter after God had them some of them swallowed into the ground during their time in the desert. The scroll is translated in english its call the war scroll where the Sons of Light will have to battle the Sons of Darkness for the soul of Israel and lose for the Messiah to come. But what proves the Essenes were the actual Priests is the scroll 11Q13 the Melchizedek document. Which says that Melchizedek is the leader of God's angels in a war in Heaven against the angels of darkness instead of the more familiar Archangel Michael. As we know from Abraham's meeting with him. Melchizedek (Melchi-zedek this is where the Zadokite name came from which is follower or believer in the returning king of Salem ie, Jerusalem) But the Dead Sea Scroll condemn Oral traditions that teach laws not given by God to Moses. (hence why Jesus makes the Pharisees look dumb when they ask why his Disciples don't wash their hands and calls their beliefs traditions of men). The dead Sea Scrolls are a look into what Judaism was before the Civil war destroyed it, and funny enough once you do look at it you find that the Essenes hold many of the same beliefs as we would come to learn about in the New Testament. So who should Jews believe this new Rabbinic Judaism who say the Messiah has not yet come or the Older more Torah based Priesthood that preached a Messiah was coming in the exact timeline given in Daniel? In a court of law with a jury with no preconceived ideas about Judaism the Pharisees' doctrine of Rabbinic Talmud Judaism loses EVERY time to the overwhelming historical proof the Dead Sea Scrolls point to the truth not the Talmud! Why because they are in 100% alignment with the teachings of Jesus who is Melchizedek!
Their names were Zkrya (Zakariyyah / زكريا | z = ز - Similar phonemes that were contracted to it in hebrew were ظ , ذ), and Yḥya (Yaḥya) PBUT, not Zechariah and john. The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha" too sounds familiar?
Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization.
The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua.
infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name."
jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah )
Schlözer in his preparation for the Arabia expedition in 1781 coined the term Semitic language:
"From the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, from Mesopotamia to Arabia ruled one language, as is well known. Thus Syrians, Babylonians, Hebrews, and Arabs were one people (ein Volk). Phoenicians (Hamites) also spoke this language, which I would like to call the Semitic (die Semitische)." -Before Boas: The Genesis of Ethnography and Ethnology in the German By Han F. Vermeulen.
He was only half right though, Arabic is the only corollary to "proto-semitic", infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical as will be shown.
"protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22)
𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼
ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي
A b t ṯ j ḥ kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y
א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת
Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic:
ح, خ (ḥ, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain
س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining
ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining
ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining
ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining
ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining
The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word.
As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries.
The entire region spoke basically the same language, with mumbled dialect continuums spread about, and Arabic is the oldest form from which all these dialects branched off. As time passed, the language gradually became more degenerate,
Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE).
And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical.
Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken?
The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study.
God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.
I pray that these lost souls find the love and peace that Christ provides, and that they transcend their transgressions. God will always find a way to our hearts in the end, and the truth will always trump the lie eventually. Truly, Christ is eternal. Amen, Amen.
@@silasspeaks3301 You get it. Thank God.
"Shut it down! Shut it down! I cant take this anymore!"
You must be born again.
Unless you received the gift of the holy holy holy spirit, you can not inheret the kingdom of God....
This video needs to go viral
I wonder how long until YT deletes this video.
The ultimate "I WROTE MYSELF AS A CHAD AND YOU AS THE SOYBOY" book.
Sounds kinda like Christianity and Jesus.
In addition to the 47 prophecies you listed, there's also the passage in Wisdom of Solomon 2:12-20, which prophecies the pharisees' hatred for Jesus and plotting his execution.
And the Catholic Church teaches modern Jews and Catholics worship the same god. Totally incorrect
Only on the surface. For diplomacy.
@ no. They actually believe this. Pope Francis and the clergy teach this. It’s dogma. Catholic answer teaches Allah of the Quran is the true god. Most of the biggest Catholic apologist openly affirm worshiping false gods.
Let's not also forget....... That little rascal Pope also said that he's going to bless aliens.
@ seriously? Lol
@kimberlyward5848 angels are extra terrestrial.
I don't know why I even commented on this one, of course Y/T yeeted my remarks! All I'll say now is, it was nice knowing your channel. See you on "Rumball"!
@@NMemone I actually should get things set up over there just in case tbh
Take a screenshot of the sources list before it disappears
@@untoagesoh yes you should 👍
@@untoagesodyssey is better, but both work as backups
Wonder how long this video will stay up on Zogtube...
I have been looking forward to this one since we discussed it. Well said and researched John.
“My spirit will rise from the grave and the world will know that I was right.” -A.H.
Based
...All Abrahamic religions are based in Judaism and objectively and spiritually bullshit.
Ok so you do realize that while a separate religion, christianity is quite literally just a offshoot of whatever you wanna call the old testament religion just like Islam is to christianity and by extension everything back to before the first temple was built let alone destroyed. It's all right there in them testaments and I think the fact archeology and language and genetics all show its clearly a evolution from cannite polytheism to monotheism is worth mentioning. The same goes for christianity evolving to catholicism and the countless other offshoots old and new alike. You are doing the same damn thing the jews do in the Talmud and just perpetuating the same infighting between all abrahamic religion that's literally led to millions of deaths and some of the most brutal unimaginable shit ever done to people across any reality fictional or not. While often accurate on larger state matters its not literal history and none of the smaller situations involving magic or impossibilities happened literally. Mohammed didn't ride a flying donkey and jesus didn't come back from the dead just like Jericho didn't fall because of a box or horn and even a damn quantum iphone won't ring thru to god. Maybe its religion thats bad or maybe religion is inevitable and it's just people who are bad but it runs deep whatever it is. The thing is we can recognize the bad shit and change it even if we aren't sure how or why it happens.
Words can’t describe how much I loved this video, so much information so delicately put together, much appreciated, please keep up great work, our Lord Jesus Christ Bless You My Orthodox Christian Brother!
Liked and definitely Subbed!❤☦️
So, you love lies?
@ Talmud is Demonic!
WELL SAID. Excellent analysis and summary of many key aspects. Thank God. Much needed for many to hear.
My account was banned for exposing them.
No warnings, no strikes, youtube channel down. Videos with 'survivors', their survivors and their testimonies about what REALLY happened during ww2. You know the event you cannot write about here. It wasn't at all only about them, they didn't have it that bad also. Tv's in the room type of thing.
“Exposing” 😂
I’m very shocked something like this is on RUclips but am pleased to see more people seeing truth
One of Paul’s essential decisions was not to require circumcision for membership. That is what “Circumcised of the heart” means.
It's a very inconvenient truth for conservative Protestants to hear but has to be said. If the general American public was exposed to the views of the Popes on Judaism and Israel, Im sure it would cause a fit
You do realize that Martin Luther and Adolf Hitler were Protestant right?
@@adamprice3466Hitler hated Jesus because he was, you guessed it, a Jew. Stop trying to lump Hitler in with us
Well the Pope now says that Judaism and Islam worship the same god as Rome.
@@adamprice3466Hitler wasnt much of a Christian, but anyways he was a catholic, he was bautized catholic.
Hitler was a Pagan Occultist/Satanist who pretended to be Christian - Christianity for him was mere deception to gain power
THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING THE TRUTH ABOUT JUDISM
Great episode..Praise the Lord Jesus Christ
Interesting but using the new testament to justify the new testament is a pointless argument.
Also it wasn't just the Jews who said no, so did the other Israelites, the Samaritans, they rejected jesus as it does not meet the five books of the Samaritan Torah either.
No ingathering of exiles, no end of war, no reign of peace, no two Messiah prophecy either.
On top of this we have the book of Enoch, which was copied by jesus, yet taken out of the NT, apart from the Ethiopian church and is in the dead sea scrolls.
Also conveniently ignore the two Messiah scripture from judean and Samaritan bibles, which say the Messiah will be a dual Messiah, Ben Joseph and Ben David. To reunite the tribes,prepare for the coming redemption. Then move to Ben David, which is the conquering king, not a divine being, but a man who will bring the redemption.
You should take a look at, “The Other Israel” documentary. It basically goes over all the points you brought up in the talmud and many more. It also goes into an in depth history of why the hebrews got so much flak from their actions which included practicing the talmud in medieval Europe and becoming very communist and revolutionary throughout the modern history of Europe. It also explains how the vast majority of hebrews aren’t of the seed of Abraham (the azkhenazis). Anyways it’s a very interesting film that predicted a lot of whats happening today relating to israel and it’s a great observation from an American Protestant Christian perspective. I highly recommend it.
Israel isn't doing anything anyone else hasn't done in war time.
Can’t wait to hear your take on this.
I’ve upset quite a few people when I take the logic of why we shouldn’t be grouped with Islam and apply it to Judaism.
Septuagint > Masoretic Text
Late update: Agree with your video 100%.
The original is always better than a translation. In every context.
The Septuagint misses out on all of the wordplay, rhythm, and deeper textual meaning of the original Hebrew.
@@spicyshiba508ye but the Masoretic text is not the original. It was developed centuries after the Septuagint even
Which is funny because in Islam they do believe in Jesus and apart from the part about being the son of God they believe everything he did and in the Koran it is mentioned that they should associate with Christians and these are religious collaborators, and they consider the New Testament a holy book. Which means that you will have to group yourself with another religion, one that at least respects what you believe in.
@@Nathan-zw7nq yes but it’s considered a more accurate reflection of the original work as it’s in its original language. Nothing translates perfectly and I’d rather have the Hebrew with its nuanced word definitions and poetry than the whitewashed Greek or English, even if they compiled it later.
It’s like translating Shakespeare into Spanish, then from Spanish to Chinese, and trying to keep its original substance.
@@spicyshiba508 the masoretic text isn’t the original Hebrew. It was put together centuries after Christ’s life, death, and resurrection, and changed the text to obscure the prophecies that were fulfilled by His coming.
In your example, the masoretic text would be the Chinese version as it doesn’t say what the original did and it’s based on the first translation.
I don't know about you, but as a catholic hearing about what the Talmud said about the non-jews disturbingly reminded about a political viewpoint of the 20th century and an Austrian painter...
Weird sense of déjà vu.
Did, beside me, felt like that?
Tell that to Trent Horn. And ... it's started earlier than written Talmud. There are also the magic texts (Sefer Yetzirah and Merkabah), which led to the Kabbalah.
Do you realize it takes the tanak, the Talmud, and zohar, to define Judaism and its traditions, you see it through a small lens whith out any knowledge of what it is, so to you it's spooky magic. When in fact. The talmud was written while they were in exile, and it's no different than bible school and bibke teachers. It's all the thoughts of rabbis throughout the years.
You have to read it all together.
It's literally no different than stuff we read in the bible.
Rome created the stigma around jooish knowledge because the wanted thir own religion.
@@Swordoftruth289 no thanks
Trent horn is literally a Jew, but putting the Jews under a microscope constantly is kinda cringe ngl
@@Swordoftruth289It wasn't the beliefs of the true Hebrews you call on the names of people like Abraham and Moses and call them Jews claiming them however they did not believe the things you do and they never called themselves Jews there were no Jews at that point its actually very ignorant to history to even claim so
@@Hipointranger"Any amount of investigation is a microscope" shalom rabbi
Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal, have mercy on us
This has nothing to do with the video but please bear with me.
I’ve been feeling my relationship with Christ slipping. I don’t pray anymore. I don’t fast anymore. I don’t read scripture anymore. My whole soul yearns for Christ but I can’t bring myself to even pray. I ask humbly for you all to pray for me.
God bless and thank you.
@@Floyd033 Hold fast! These phases of lethargy come and go, I understand what you’re experiencing. When you don’t feel like praying, try to pray anyway. God bless you!
Pray even if it feels dry it carries weight
This was really great, thank you for this video.
I wish Jordan Peterson would explain "Judeo-Christian"
Never. He support israhell and he is a shill
It's simple. Judaism provides the legal doctrine for Western Civilization/laws. Christianity brought some moral code on top of it. Nazism pretended to be Christian but was a Pagan Occultism/Satanism. Islamism is a death cult created by a violent warrior.