Climate Change is man-made, just not by the masses. Food shortages are real – created by the Masters. Inflation is man-made, death is man-made, war is man-made – by The MASTERS. The Masters of evil who have provided us with their blueprints which we ignore. The Masters who have wiped out civilizations since the beginning of Life.
They claim that food shortages and climate change have caused the genocide of every extinct race. United on a front of pointing to these common threats, globally evolved, a common enemy to gather the sheeple into one large pen – like Netanyahu is doing to the Palestinians – herding them with threats of their children…. herding them for entertainment – to their death. While they dance. This is Reality.
For thousands of years, societies have been uprooted, murdered, enslaved, starved and prodded with sticks to move them to the next patch of dirt en masse. Easier to carpet bomb when they huddle together. We are facing the eradication of entire countries including America for the purpose of nothing more than entertainment in the form of gladiator colosseums we now call Urban Cities.
We watch on the news medium as cities erupt into gun fights, brawls, fires, theft, as though we are watching ‘entertainment’ – our faces glued to death. We listen as rights and lefts mesmerized and hypnotized outwardly call for torture and death. And think not of what they say or do.
We are told to stock our pantries with three months supplies before the Masters unleash the final stage of starvation – what happens after 3 months? Will food miraculously reappear at the super-dooper markets? Could Palestine have prepared? What good would it have done to horde when the intent is elimination – forever. People should not feel complacent and horde, they should be angry and fight for our lives!
We have man-made diseases, man-made Pandemics, man-made medicine to cure nothing but instead delivers as a side effect – death. And people accept that. Sheeple. Believing that Satan is God.
John MacArthur:
Blessing the seed of Abraham. Stand as Protectors of the Jews. Bless the seed of Abraham, your are blessed. Curse the seed of Abraham you are cursed. They are My chosen people.
So. Who are the seed(s)? MacArthur thinks only Jews are the seeds of Abraham.
Galatians 3:16 – “The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ.”
“Galatians 3:29 – “And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise. And now that you belong to Christ, you are the true children of Abraham.”
Jews are NOT with Christ. The Jews of Ashkenazi are not even with God. So why would this man of The Church make such a grievous mistake? His flock is now despoiled with a freakish view of The Bible and a vacant understanding of the Talmud and the 613 LAWS that make up the Torah. There is nothing resembling the Bible in MacArthur’s stilted chant.
As a teacher, MacArthur, like Pope Francis, is given greater responsibility to speak truth to his congregates. Should he not, Biblically his punishment shall be greater – for he has named himself shepherd and is leading the sheep astray.
As a teacher, MacArthur does not even address the distinction of Jew vs Hebrews or Semites. It is as though he is inside a tunnel and there is only one view to the end where there is Light. MacArthur wrote his own ‘translation’ of The Bible – with footnotes, as in man-made. While disassociating entire historical research. But then the Jews have their own Bibles, they are called the Law of the Torah and the Talmud. Both elaborate on the false premise that Ashkenazi Godless anti-Christ ‘Jews’ are somehow chosen over the seed of Christ.
This man-made Church is why the flock is falling off the proverbial cliff. Into the abyss.
The believers in Christ can be found in global nationalities and ethnicities. They are The Seed. The nonbelievers, the communists, the Marxists, the Jews – are by Biblical definition – NOT of Abraham. Whether you are a dispensationalist or of covenant theology, The Bible still is clear across every ‘translation’ via Galatians.
Jewish Christian:
What is a Jewish Christian? Can someone be a Jewish Atheist? Why would someone make that distinction? Does then the word Jew refer to religion or culture? Is Christian a culture that could refer to atheists? I have yet to hear someone claim they are a Catholic atheist. Early Hebrew religion was polytheistic, with Jews worshiping multiple gods such as El Elyon, El Shaddai, Beth-El, Baal, Asherah, and the Queen of Heaven. They were Canaanites.
In 1987 Eustace Mullins released his book, ‘The Curse of Canaan’. The Biblical curse in Genesis was a curse on Canaan that they shall dwell as the lowliest of servant of servants. Since this curse, this root of evil has spent eternity suppressing Truth in order to embrace and detract from the evil seed of Ham that live among us. Mullins called it ‘secular humanism’ or demonology.
We know what Galatians says. We read what Galatians says. We read Genesis. And yet, this demonology has infiltrated even the most revered of churches – John MacArthur included. It is the same propaganda spillage that is parlayed by the media – don’t believe what you see or know or hear, believe what we tell you to believe!
If the Bible is the singular inherent Word of God – then why does the church ignore the Torah and Talmud of the Jews? They are ‘deceived’. And they are afraid.
Peter proclaimed the one who sowed bad deed or ‘doctrine’ was of Satan. Which is why the importance of declaring oneself a Biblical Teacher is of tremendous import – to speak with the Word of Christ – not the Canaanites. The Vatican, included.
When looking up the Catholic view of Judaism – the internet is rife with explanations – the vast majority of which are from Jewish News sites, Jewish Doctrinal sites, Jewish NGO’s and even NIH. Zions have rigged every internet connection to ‘deceive’.
Carlo Maria Vigano:
Having been excommunicated for his traditionalist views and Truthisms, Vigano has devoted his life herein to the establishment of a traditional seminary to reaffirm the value of The Church, The Bible, and its doctrines. While his personal view is that of a more orthodox vision given the schisms within the Church – Evangelical Churches should take note – for they too have travailed greatly from Doctrine in favor of ‘interpretations’ – which is where John MacArthur fell off course in declaring his personal interpretation is the Real Word – and everyone else’s is false.
In the end, The Bible reveals that Canaanites are NOT followers of Christ. Jews are Secular Canaanites who don’t believe in anything but Jewish Choseness – including atheists and seculars and disbelievers. And The Churches – of ALL religions need to accept and follow The Word – instead of Their Ego.
Turning to the Reform/Karaite abomination which has its roots in the Tzeddukim/Sadducees assimilation to Greek culture and customs and its rejection of the Oral Torah revelation at Horev.
The mitzva of lighting the Hannukka Lights rededicates the dedication to only interpret the Written Torah with the Oral Torah logic system. Rabbi Akiva’s explanation of the Oral Torah logic system as פרדס/Pardes\ defines the P’rushim/Pharisees/rabbis absolute rejection of foreign cultures assimilation attempts to interpret the Written Torah by relying upon ancient Greek logic system formats. But the same equally applies to Hegel’s logic methodology developed in the 19th Century which so shaped and dominated the writings of Karl Marx and Communism/Socialism.
Monotheism rapes the 2nd Sinai commandment not to worship other Gods. Torah common law, in Torah Hebrew: משנה תורה, fundamentally rejects both the logic of Plato and Aristotle but the Statute Law practiced by both the Greek and Roman civilizations.
Assimilation & intermarriage with Goyim to reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, two negative Torah commandments …. they serve as common law precedents by which the Oral Torah interprets the k’vanna of the 2nd Sinai commandment – not to worship other Gods.
Its important that as a Torah observant Jew, consider myself as an “atheist praise G-d”. LOL Torah faith does not remotely compare to avoda zarah. The latter prioritizes theological beliefs in this or those Gods. Torah by stark contrast defines faith as the obligation to pursue righteous justice; based upon the oppression of the Court of Par’o who withheld straw but beat the Israelite slaves. After Israel left Egypt Yitro told Moshe that he along could not judge the nation with justice by himself alone. Justice defined as: a common law court which makes fair compensation of damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B. Definition of terms separate actual Torah common law from Greek religious rhetoric propaganda.
Religions of avoda zarah prioritize demands of how a person believes in God based upon theology, creeds, and dogmatism. The Torah views this as a tumah abomination! (An evil spirit). A judge to hears a trial having pre-determined beliefs, this the Torah refers to as acceptance of bribes. Shalom requires “intra-bnai brit” diplomacy. Peace shares nothing in common with shalom. Peace simply a noun word-salad rhetoric noise.
Why do Torts courts require 3 judges? Peace never asks this fundamental question. Shalom stands upon the precedent of Trust. No trust No shalom. Just that simple. Shabbot shalom built around the 3 meals. A person never invites an enemy whom he does not trust to his shabbat table to sup and break bread!
Rhetoric compares to a dog who chases after its own tail. It defines a abstract term using the same term! No word can define itself. Just as a Man buried up to his neck in sand, requires help to get out of that pit!
Nation states have strategic national interests. Impossible to understand WAR without consideration of the opposing national interests of competing nation states. This defines the whole of Human Warfare history of all Humanity for ever.
Peace sounds like such a sweet nice word. Alas peace not the same as shalom. Any more than brit means covenant or tefillah means prayer. Peace a noun NOT a verb. Shalom, as learned from mesechta Shabbat a verb NOT a noun.
Jews greet one another on shabbat with “shabbat shalom”. Why? The mitzva of shabbat requires making the most essential aspect of shabbat observance. Neither the avoda zarah religions of Xtianity nor Islam … neither JeZeus nor Muhammad ever grasped the mitzva of shabbat. The Talmud teaches that the mitzva of shabbat, if observed weighs as equal to all the other commandments of the Torah! What does the word “shabbat” mean? Goyim avoda zarah religious which worship other Gods never delved to understand the Torah definition of the word “shabbat” any more than did the New Testament Roman forgery or Arab/Muslim Koran ever once attempted to define, from the Torah, the fundamental distinction of shabbat as the 7th day of the week AND shabbat as inclusive of the entire week!
The religious rhetoric of both avoda zarah abominations likewise in the case of Xtianity failed to define from the Torah the word “LOVE” and “Prophet” in both the new testament Protocols of the Elders of Zion forgery and the fraud Koran. The Xtian church had to resort to Greek culture to derive a definition for “Love”, ie agape. Every 10 word or less in the Koran employs the word-salad “Prophet”. Yet neither this nor that fraud abomination ever defined these key terms from the Torah or NaCH sources, all of which pre-dated the existence of both the noise new testament or the noise koran.
Both T’NaCH and Talmudic common law interpret love as “ownership”. A man does not love that which he does not own. A thief sells stolen goods for pennies on the dollar. The Talmud teaches that stolen property steals a portion of a Man’s soul. How does the Torah define “SOUL”? Religious rhetoric directly compares to political rhetoric. Ancient Greek philosophy prioritized the wisdom of rhetoric as the chief tool by which the ruling elites managed the mob democracy in Athens Greece!
Space limits this discussion for me to define, from the Torah, the word shalom. Torah common law stands upon the foundation of precedents. As stated previously the mitzva of shabbat serves as the primary precedent by which the Torah defines the k’vanna of the tohor time-oriented mitzva (You most probably do not even know what this type of Torah commandment means; a key concept of Torah common law stands upon the foundation which separates and distinguishes between Av/toldoth time-oriented/positive:negative commandments! The precedent which interprets the k’vannah of tohor time-oriented commandments the NaCH story of D’vorah in the Book of Judges, and the Holy Writings story of HaDassah in the Book of Esther. Time does not mean, the time of day, but rather a life/death crisis. Like Yaacov facing down his brother Esau who came to greet him with an Army lead by 400 Officers! The opening blessing of the Siddur tefilla – kre’a sh’ma, refers to this time-oriented mitzva by the term: תמיד מעשה בראשית. Mesechta קידושין teaches that this mitzva which requires k’vanna a רשות for women to observe. But Rabban Gamliel lost his position as Nasi of the Great Sanhedrin when he asked Rabbi Yehoshua if he taught that the mitzva of tefillah erevet an “optional or obligatory” commandment. Rabbi Yehoshua said one answer to his student and the other answer to Rabban Gamliel! Defining key terms defines the mitzva known as הבדלה which defines shabbat observance. Rabban Gamliel held tefillah erevit an obligatory commandment. Rabbi Yehoshua understood it as both! A person could have k’vanna to attach tefillah erevit, if said at p’lag ha’mincha, to the tefillah of the Shemone Esrei said during the Mincha tefillah. With the k’vanna to attach the tefillah erevit to the kre’a shma ha’mita said after 3 stars seen in the heavens. Herein explains the Rashi/Rabbeinu Tam dispute on how to learn the k’vanna of the opening Mishna of mesechta ברכות).
Torah observance requires wisdom not a טיפש פשט literal understanding of complex abstract terms! What defines the הבדלה which separates מלאכה from עבודה? Both Torah verbs mean “WORK”. The latter refers to minimum wage ‘work’ whereas the former refers to ‘skilled labor’. Mesechta Shabbat addresses מלאכה whereas Mesechta Baba Kama addresses עבודה. Do not seek to bore you with this tohor midda the Torah defines as רב חסד revealed to Moshe after the sin of the Golden Calf at Horev. Those 13 Torah middot define the revelation of the Oral Torah which all avoda zarah religions, including Reform Judaism, deny. The 7th tohor attribute of the Oral Torah revelation at Horev understood as the required מאי נפקא מינא הבדלה which defines tohor time-oriented commandments! What defines middot? Answer: Spirits. The sin of the golden calf avodah zarah translated the רוח הקודש שם השם לשמה to words. Spirit does not equal or compare to words. Hence the sin of the Golden Calf משל\נמשל דיוק metaphor does not literally mean Golden Calf any more that the story of the Creation limited to a טיפש פשט of 6 days!
The משל\נמשל metaphor of the Mishkan which divides Most Holy from Holy, shabbat observance requires this הבדלה. Hence Jews say הבדלה erev shabbat and motzi shabbat! But tohor time-oriented commandments absolutely require k’vanna. Positive and Negative commandments do not require k’vanna. Hence the Av/toldoth relationship between בראשית which introduces tohor time-oriented commandment to שמות, ויקרא, במדבר which teaches positive and negative commandments. Both mesechta shabbat and baba kama ask the identical question: Do the toldoth commandment follow after the Avot commandments? This basic wisdom the religions of avoda zarah, which includes Reform Judaism, failed to make the required הבדלה.
Why do all the super commentaries written on the common law halachic codifications of the B’hag, Rif, Rosh, fail to learn these halachic codes as common law but rather pervert it, into a religious code which determines halachic ritual practices?
Profile photo for Moshe Kerr
The transformation in Jewish scholarship reflects a complex interplay of historical, cultural, and methodological factors. The shift from a common law perspective to a more dogmatic interpretation has had profound implications for how halacha is understood and applied today. A deeper engagement with the Talmud’s inherent common law characteristics could potentially restore the dynamism and adaptability that once defined Jewish legal thought.
This perspective underscores the need for renewed scholarship that appreciates the historical context and the original methodologies of earlier thinkers.
Rabbi Isaac ben Melchizedek of Siponto, author of his famous common law halachic codification, like the Rif, Rosh, and the Baali Tosafot all learned the Talmud as Common law. The Raavan, by stark contrast, focused primarily on Talmudic commentary. His expertise lay in dissecting and explaining the intricate legal discussions found in the Talmud.
Avignon, one of the key cities in Provence where the Raavan lived, a hub for scholarly discourse and legal thought. Avignon’s strategic location on the trade route between Italy and Spain contributed to its prosperity. The city benefited from heavy river traffic, and craftsmen’s guilds thrived. Enriched noblemen, knights, and ombudsmen gained prominence, and the city experienced a resurgence of Gallo-Roman dimensions.
During the 12th century, Scholasticism gained prominence. It was characterized by a systematic and rational approach to theology. Scholars engaged in rigorous debate, often using dialectical methods to explore theological questions.
The Raavan’s pilpul sh’itta of learning strove to elucidate Talmudic passages, often based upon subtle legal technicalities. The contrast with the sh’itta practiced by T’NaCH and Talmudic common law scholarship, simply day vs. night, from one another.
Rabbi Moses ben Nachman (Ramban): Born in 1194 and died in 1270. The Rosh born in 1250 in Cologne, Holy Roman Empire. He died in 1327 in Toledo. The Rosh a direct descendant of the Raavan and a student of the Maharam (Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg).
The MaHaRaM (Reb Meir) born in Worms Germany around the year 1220. Rabbi Meir an important Baali Tosafot scholar. He witnessed the burning of the Talmud in Paris in 1242. The Rosh a disciple of Rabbi Meir who died illegally imprisoned in a Xtian dungeon.
Rabbi Meir, known as “Maharam on the Sanhedrin”, weighed interpretations made by Rashi and the Tosafists.
Talmudic law was rooted in communal norms, legal reasoning, and interpretations of biblical texts. Halacha, serves as a precedent for interpreting the Mishnah. Some scholars have argued that halacha bridges the gap between the Mishna’s brevity and real-world application.
The Gemara’s dialectical method—question and answer, challenge and response—duplicates a Three man Torts court where one judge appointed as the prosecutor and an opposing judge appointed as the defense attorney. The opposing court justices both argue the case before the court based upon how they learn opposing judicial legal precedents.
Rabbi Meir’s methodology may have been more focused on the textual and Greek philosophical aspects of Talmudic law, emphasizing interpretations rather than the dynamic common law prophetic mussar framework. He might have been more inclined to engage with assimilated philosophical underpinnings of law rather than the pragmatic aspects of legal reasoning.
Rabbi Meir’s analysis involved weighing interpretations of previous authorities, which may have led him to prioritize established rulings instead of exploring the fluidity and adaptability typical of common law halachic משנה תורה. The historical context in which Rabbi Meir operated, including the socio-political environment and the pressures faced by Jewish communities, may have shaped his legal perspective, leading him to adopt a more rigid interpretation.
While Rabbi Meir engaged deeply with textual interpretation, the Rosh’s codification efforts exemplified a practical application of Talmudic common law, highlighting the evolving nature of halachic thought.
The Raavan, Rabbi Avraham ben Nathan, a medieval Jewish scholar. He lived in Provence (southern France) during the 12th century. His work primarily focused on Talmudic commentary. Jewish courts (beit din), prior to the mass expulsion of Jews from Judea by the Romans, applied Talmudic principles to resolve disputes, emphasizing judicial fairness and equity. Talmudic Sages engaged in legal reasoning, interpreting existing laws and adapting them to specific cases. Why didn’t Maharam approach the Talmud as a common law legal system?
The Ramban, his Torah commentary: renowned for weaving law, Greek philosophy, and mysticism as a esoteric understanding of how to read the Chumash. When it comes to the Talmud, the Ramban’s approach differs. Unlike Rashi, who meticulously elucidated individual words and phrases by means of comparing other Talmudic – Bavli or Yerushalmi source precedents, and also Midrashic source precedents to define his common law p’shat of the Chumash. Rashi p’shat on the Talmud more compares to a dictionary of definitions.
The Ramban, contrasts, he primarily focused on explaining entire biblical passages, their context, and general issues connected to the text. A addiction to p’shat explanation of Torah verses which makes his sh’itta methodology more akin to the literalist p’shat school of Ibn Ezra.
While he engaged with the commentaries of his predecessors (including Rashi, Ibn Ezra, and others), his Talmudic commentary doesn’t necessarily teach “common law” in the same way that the Piskei HaRosh does. Unlike Rashi, who often focused on linguistic details, the Ramban aimed to explain the broader meaning of verses. His commentary touches on law, philosophy, and mystical concepts.
His commentary delved into context, historical background, and broader themes. When it comes to the Talmud, he doesn’t meticulously dissect individual words like Rashi does. While Rashi draws from Talmudic and Midrashic precedents, the Ramban’s approach is more holistic, akin to the literalist p’shat school of Ibn Ezra.
In 1232, during the נידוי polemics about Rambam’s (Maimonides’) works, Ramban attempted a compromise. While Rambam’s writings wouldn’t be banned, there would be a minimum age for studying philosophy and science. His attempt didn’t succeed.
Unlike Rashi, who meticulously dissected individual words and phrases by comparing Talmudic and Midrashic precedents, the Ramban primarily focused on explaining entire biblical passages and their context. His Talmudic commentary doesn’t necessarily teach “common law” in the same way as the Rif codification.
The Ramban resembles the bi-polar p’shat which separated Rashi Common law p’shat on the Chumash from Rashi Talmudic dictionary of words. The Ramban Talmudic commentary so esoteric and terse, its virtually undecipherable.
The Ramban wrote his monumental commentary on the Chumash while living in Jerusalem. The bi-polar Talmudic commentary gap day and night different from one another. Unlike some other commentators who meticulously dissect individual words or phrases, Ramban takes a broader approach. His focus lies in explaining entire passages, their context, and overarching themes.
The Rashba (Rabbi Shlomo ben Aderet): Among the later Rishonim (medieval Jewish scholars), the Rashba engaged deeply with Ramban’s commentary. His own Talmudic works were heavily influenced by Ramban’s writings. The Rashba was known for his sharp intellect and legal acumen, and he sought to unravel the layers of Ramban’s mystical language.
The Burning of Talmudic Manuscripts: In 1242, King Louis IX of France ordered the burning of 24 cartloads, virtually all Talmudic manuscripts in France. This act, part of a broader pattern of anti-Jewish sentiment and persecution in medieval Europe. The Church viewed the Talmud as a threat. And its destruction in Paris 1242, was meant to suppress Jewish religious and legal teachings.
The loss of these manuscripts was devastating for Jewish scholarship. Many texts were lost forever, and surviving scholars faced challenges in reconstructing and preserving Jewish knowledge. Some scholars, including Ramban, had to rely on memory and oral transmission to continue their work.
Ramban’s esoteric language wasn’t unique to the Talmudic commentary alone. His commentary on the Torah (especially the Book of Exodus) also exhibits this style. He often began with Rashi’s explanation (a more straightforward approach) and then delved deeper into Kabbalah and Oral Tradition. His respectful criticism of other commentators, including Rashi, Ibn Ezra, and the Rambam, reflects his independent thinking.
Ramban’s esoteric commentary isn’t solely a reaction to persecution, but it’s undoubtedly intertwined with the tumultuous times he lived in. His mystical insights remain a testament to the resilience of Jewish scholarship even in the face of adversity.
Aristotle’s school of logic, his ideas on natural law, and ethical framework left an indelible mark on Rambam’s thought. Rambam’s exposure to Roman jurisprudence likely occurred during his time in Egypt, where Roman and Islamic legal systems coexisted. Roman law fascinated him, especially its systematic organization and clarity. The Roman legal tradition emphasized codification—arranging laws into comprehensive codes. Rambam admired this approach and sought to apply it to Jewish law.
The Mishneh Torah, Rambam’s magnum opus, embodies this Roman-inspired vision. He aimed to create a comprehensive legal code covering all aspects of Jewish life. Like Roman statutes, the Mishneh Torah is organized thematically, with clear divisions and subdivisions. The intent of his Mishna Torah, to provide a single authoritative source for Jewish law, akin to the Roman legal codes!
Rambam’s fusion of Aristotelian logic and Roman legal structure served a purpose: unity and accessibility. In his introduction to the Mishneh Torah, Rambam boldly claimed that if one studied the Scriptures and then read his work, they would grasp the entire oral law. His Mishneh Torah was meant to be a companion to the Written Torah, a second pillar of knowledge. This echoes the Roman legal tradition of codifications which provide a single reference for legal matters.
Rambam deeply engaged with Aristotelian philosophy. Aristotle’s logical framework captivated him, especially the Organon, which provided tools for systematic analysis and deduction. Rambam admired the rigor of Aristotelian reasoning. Rambam’s embrace of Aristotle’s logic and Roman legal principles a deliberate choice to create a coherent, accessible legal code.
Assimilated Rambam likewise embraced Aristotle’s concept of natural law. Aristotle believed that certain ethical principles were inherent in human nature—universal moral truths transcending cultural boundaries. He organized his statute law code, akin to Roman legal codes. He accepted the Islamic monotheistic premise of a Universal God.
Clearly the Reshonim scholars, specifically of Golden Age Spain, directly influenced by the rediscovery of the Hannukka Civil War, some 1000 years previous. That earlier Jewish Civil War pitted the assimilated Tzeddukim against the P’rushim/rabbis who favored the logic system taught by Rabbi Akiva. But Ramban did not “convert”, he rejected the Rambam’s avoda zara embrace the “Trinity” of Aristotle’s natural law/Universal one God monotheism.
Both men failed to learn the world view of the T’NaCH as prophetic mussar common law. Rashi’s focus on פשוטו של מקרא – the plain sense of Scripture – serves to conceal that fact that most of Rashi’s precedents on Torah p’sukim come from Talmudic and Midrashic sources!
Rashi like the Ramban and the Rosh witnessed the destruction of entire Jewish communities. Toward the end of his life, Rashi witnessed the horrors and massacres of the First Crusade (1096). His mentors and colleagues in Speyer, Worms, and Mainz were slaughtered. The great yeshiva of Rabbenu Gershom disappeared. This disaster directly compares to the burning of the Talmud in Paris 1242 which so impacted scholarship produced by the Ramban and Rosh.
All Jewish scholarship had to overcome the censorship of hostile Goyim among both Xtian and Muslim societies, which dominated Europe and the Middle East. The historical context of this time of political anarchy and turmoil —a context marked by upheaval, loss of life in Jewish communities across Europe and the Middle East, clearly caused all Reshonim scholars to conceal their scholarship through writing in esoteric methodologies.
During the medieval period, Xstian and Muslim societies often viewed Jews with suspicion, leading to censorship, persecution, blood libels, pogroms, and forced mass population transfers. This forced Reshonim scholars (950 to 1450 CE) to develop esoteric writing methods. There different techniques of esoteric writng, allowed them to convey deeper insights while navigating the violent and corrosive constraints of living as scattered Jewish refugee populations which had no political or social rights.
To shield ordinary people from radical ideas that challenged societal norms, scholars sometimes encoded their writings. This protective layer allowed them to communicate subtly without causing upheaval.
The Reshonim employed esoteric methodologies to circumvent hostile Goyim censorship. Much like as did the Russian revolutionaries during the late 19th Century, who employed cryptic language so as not arouse the wrath of the Czar’s secret police bureaucracy. All Reshonim scholars employed esoteric sh’ittot to by-pass the direct threat of arousing a pogrom or expulsion of Jews from a country.
Why do all the super commentaries written on the common law halachic codifications of the B’hag, Rif, Rosh, fail to learn these halachic codes as common law but rather pervert it, by treating courtroom precedent based law into a religious code which determines halachic ritual practices?
The distinction between viewing halachic codifications, such as those of the B’hag, Rif, and Rosh, and Baali Tosafot commentaries as “common law” versus “religious law” not simply rooted in differing interpretations and methodologies within Jewish legal scholarship.
The Talmud indeed functions as a common law system, where legal principles evolve through debate, precedent, and case law. This dynamic aspect allows for flexibility and adaptation over time. The rise of authoritative legal codes (e.g., the Shulchan Aruch) in the medieval period created a framework that emphasized fixed rules over the dynamic nature of common law reasoning\פרדס logic. The consolidation of rabbinic authority and the establishment of standardized practices led to a focus on uniformity and adherence to established rulings rather than the fluidity of debate found in the Talmud.
The traditional method of studying Talmud through chevruta (partner study) and dialectical reasoning diminished in some circles, replaced by a more didactic approach that prioritized rote learning of legal rulings. Coupled and compounded by the fact that the invention of the printing press allowed for widespread dissemination of texts, which sometimes led to a preference for the printed word as definitive, limiting interpretative engagement.
The influence of legal formalism in broader legal systems may have impacted Jewish scholarship, promoting a more rigid approach to law that mirrors statutory frameworks. The development of systematic theological frameworks within Judaism often emphasized adherence to doctrine over the interpretive flexibility inherent in common law.
These factors combined to create a significant shift in Jewish scholarship, leading to a more rigid, dogmatic interpretation of Talmudic texts. This transformation has had lasting implications for how halacha is understood and applied in contemporary Jewish life, moving away from the dynamic, common law characteristics that were once central to Talmudic study.
The distinction between viewing halachic codes as common law versus religious law highlights a critical misunderstanding in contemporary scholarship. The Talmud’s common law characteristics, including debate and precedent, are often overshadowed by rigid interpretations that treat these laws as static rituals. Assimilation to the formalism of Christian and Islamic legal traditions directly influenced Jewish scholarship. Promoting a more rigid approach that mirrors Creed-like statutory dogmatism frameworks rather than the fluidity inherent in Talmudic discourse.
The complex interplay of historical, cultural, and methodological factors that shaped Jewish legal thought. By demanding Jewish t’shuva back to the common law characteristics of Talmudic discourse, future scholars can potentially restore the dynamism that once defined halachic interpretation, fostering a more adaptable and relevant approach to Jewish law today. This perspective invites a deeper exploration of how the rich legacy of earlier scholars can inform contemporary understandings of halacha.
The transition from a common law approach, as exemplified by Rabbi Isaac ben Melchizedek of Siponto, the B’HaG, and the Baali Tosafot, to a focus on Talmudic commentary, as seen in the Raavan, reflects the complexity of Jewish legal thought. The socio-political context of Avignon, a hub for scholarly discourse and legal thought, and the emergence of Scholasticism during the 12th century, characterized by systematic and rational theological approaches, further influenced this shift.
Rabbi Moses ben Nachman (Ramban) and the Rosh, both descendants of the Raavan, adopted different methodologies in their scholarship. The Ramban, known for weaving law, Greek philosophy, and mysticism in his Torah commentary, contrasts with Rashi’s meticulous dissection of individual words and phrases. The Rosh, on the other hand, focused on practical applications of Talmudic common law, highlighting the evolving nature of halachic thought.
The MaHaRaM, Rabbi Meir, a prominent Baali Tosafot scholar, engaged with interpretations made by Rashi and the Tosafists, possibly emphasizing textual and philosophical aspects over the dynamic common law framework. The historical context, including the socio-political environment and pressures faced by Jewish communities, may have shaped his legal perspective, leading to a more rigid interpretation.
The loss of Talmudic manuscripts in the burning of 1242 in Paris and the challenges faced by Jewish scholars in preserving Jewish פרדס Oral Torah knowledge further influenced the development of esoteric and terse commentaries, such as those by the Ramban.
The rise of authoritative legal codes, like the Shulchan Aruch, and the influence of legal formalism in broader legal systems promoted a more rigid approach to law, emphasizing fixed rules over the dynamic nature of common law reasoning. The shift from dialectical reasoning in chevruta study to a more didactic approach also contributed to the transformation of Jewish legal thought.
With the rise of the Jewish state in 1948 Independence War, the cream has returned and floated to the top. Can the Jewish people restore the Written Torah as the Constitution of the Jewish Republic of Israel. Can the Jewish people restore the judicial pursuit of justice as the faith of Torah observant Jews? Can the Jewish people re-establish lateral common law Sanhedrin courts as the basis of Israeli jurisprudence?
Has Orthodox Judaism gone of the chosen Path/דרך?
Orthodox Judaism has gone off the path/דרך. In the video above, Rabbi David Bar-Hayim, the spokesman for Machon Shilo, fundamentally fails to discern the distinction between T’NaCH/Talmudic משנה תורה/common law with the rabbinic perversion of assimilation made by the Rambam’s vile assimilated Roman Statute law which has the “blood libel” name commonly known as the Mishneh Torah!
The 2nd Sinai commandment which forbids the worship of other Gods, rejects the theology of Monotheism. The Gemara of mesechta Avoda Zarah opens with the instruction that Goyim Universally rejected the revelation of the Torah.
Goy: Nacree employed in Baba Kama refers to illegal refugees living within the borders of Judea. These refugees have no legal rights. Just as illegal aliens who cross into the US illegally has no benefits to the Constitutional Bill of Rights. G’lut/Jewish exiles for 2000+ years had no or few legal rights, dependent upon the particular generation. Goyim nations across Europe imposed taxation without Representation upon Jewish communities across Britain and Germany. Once the Jewish refugee populations had no more money to tax, both Britain and German governments, expelled the Jews unilaterally from both countries.
The בנין אב/precedent from the Torah that the Goyim Universally rejected the revelation of the Torah at Sinai, the floods of Noach, the tower of Bavel, the story of Sodom etc. The 2nd term Ger Toshav, which this rabbi refers to Ben Noach. The Rambam attempted to write a Book of Universal commandments/halachot. Goyim never cut a brit with HaShem. The Bible and Koran of the Goyim worship the sin of the Golden Calf; Goyim translated the Holy Divine Presence Spirit Name revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment יהוה and translates this Spirit Name to words. For example: the Hebrew word אלוהים, as specifically occurred at the Sin of the Golden Calf.
The jurisdiction of all Capital Crimes Courts stops at the borders of Judea. If Israel conquers territory, Damascus as did king David, the king can establish a City of Refuge which has a Small Sanhedrin common law court. Rabbi Yechuda’s Mishna serves as the authoritative codification of Sanhedrin common law rulings. This Mishna bases its name upon the 5th Book of the Written Torah called דברים=\/=משנה תורה. Mishna Torah means “Common Law”. Hence Rabbi Yechuda’s Mishna, a Common Law codification of Sanhedrin judicial rulings!
G’lut Jews lose the wisdom, how to obey the Oath Brit alliance cut at Sinai לשמה. Therefore Jews in g’lut do not and can not observe Torah commandments/mitzvot לשמה. For example: the Jewish Siddur translates the Holy Divine Presence Name, which by the terms of the Avraham oath brit/alliance lives within the hearts of the Chosen Cohen People, as Adonai. To dedicate a blessing requires שם ומלכות just as does swearing a Torah oath whereby a Jews cuts a brit with HaShem as did the Avot. The first blessing of the Amidah אלהי אברהם אלהי יצחק ואלהי יעקב adjacent to the kre’a shama which swears a Torah oath, if a person places tefillen, השם אלהינו השם. What oaths did each of the Avot swear? The last word of the Shma: ONE does not profane the 2nd Sinai commandment and refer to the theology of Monotheism but rather that a person accepts within his heart the oaths sworn by the Avot as his Cohen eternal inheritance.
The pronunciation of the Name learns from the בנין אב/precedent of ta’keat Ha’Shofar. The 3 kollot blown through the shofar affix to the k’vanna dedication of the oaths sworn by the 3 Avot. The Holy Divine Name Spirit, not pronounced by means of the lips as a Golden Calf word. Rather its blown from within the heart, תפילה הדבר שבלבב, the משכן which houses the two Yatzirot.
Contrast the gospel Roman-like “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”, wherein the disciples of JeZeus asked their god/man how to pray. The famous gospel prayer: Our father who art in heaven (king james translation of avoda zarah). Goyim who never accepted the revelation of the Torah, according to the Talmud, never once include within their “holy” (a term like prophet, never defined from T’NaCH sources). The term “holy”, stands upon the בנין אב/precedent of korbanot. A bnai brit can swear a Torah oath (this requires שם ומלכות) by standing/Amidah before a Sefer Torah, as in a beit knesset, or standing before the altar while the korban burns thereon.
No Torah oath, a sacrifice perverts unto a Golden Calf — barbeque unto heaven. Tefillah, unlike prayer, a matter of the heart and NOT of the heavens. God simply not a Man. Prophets do not foretell the future as do snake charmers & witches. Prophets command mussar to all generations of bnai brit Israel.
Rabbi David Bar-Hayim in the video presented prioritize the heretic Rambam’s statute law Roman assimilation over the Talmud. He fails to address the fundamental הבדלה which forever separates T’NaCH\Talmudic common law from assimilated Roman statute law. He utterly fails to address the fundamental הבדלה which forever separates rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic format from Plato and Aristotle’s logic systems. The Rambam’s Universal God/monotheism profanes the Blessing/Curse Torah oath brit that G’lut Jewry cannot keep and obey Torah mitzvot לשמה. How much more so Goyim. The Torah only recognizes two types of Goyim listed above and not three as Bar-Hayim erroneously declares.
The Mishna and Gemara of Baba Kama teaches that the ger toshav, (the Goy temporary resident who embraces the 7 mitzvot while living within the borders of Judea), has the rights if a Jew damages his person or property to approach a beit din and demand fair compensation for damages inflicted. The Na’cree enjoys no such rights. Just as Jewish refugee populations across Asia and Europe endured damages inflicted by Goyim without the right to demand justice; a court judicial ruling which forces the damager guilty Goyim to make fair compensation of damages upon the afflicted Jews.
In other words, the legal rights and status granted to the “ger toshav” under Jewish law: strictly confined to those Gentiles living within the Land of Israel. Upon leaving that specific geographic space, these Goyim revert to their previous status of “Gentiles” (na’cree) who have no such legal standing before Jewish courts; absolutely no obligation what so ever to observe the 7 mitzvot “bnai Noach”.
This underscores the deeply oath/brit Torah alliance cut at Sinai. And land-based nature of the Noahide laws, as practiced by the Ger Toshav within the borders of Judea. As opposed to a more universalist conception of one God. It highlights how Jewish law sees the Land of Israel as central to the proper observance and legal framework for interactions between Jews and Gentiles.
I think that lots of the big pastors are funded/ran by corrupt elements, possibly intel/zionists. Following them is a sin. God expects people to not succumb to temptation. Such utter devotion to a people who despise Jesus is supposed to be a giveaway. I have no tolerance for people that fall for this. I also have big problems with most Catholics, but they do not fall for that worship of zionists.
I have to note that lots of these evangelicals also are reverent neocons, and praised people such as Bush for promotion of world wide wars. That is not Christian. I say, they enabled the RINOs.
The Qur’an alone is the final revelation and doctrine bestowed upon man. It clarifies the previous revelations and seals the fate of humanity. It gives us principles to live on and a based doctrine of a kinship that establishes God as our ruler. It is a Protocol used to destroy baseless doctrines that are man-made and evil. God’s Protocol. The Protocol of how we will be destroyed just as how countless civilizations, some of which were more advanced than us. The spared will be the believers, the doers of good. The monotheists. It is clear in the Qur’an that no distinction is made to a religion, but to a Deen, a way of life. The creed of Abraham, Moses, David, Jesus, Muhammad. They all followed the same creed. The creed of righteousness, of purity, of warning the elite.
“True piety does not consist in turning your faces towards the east or the west – but truly pious is he who believes in God, and the Last Day; and the angels, and revelation, and the prophets; and spends his substance – however much he himself may cherish – it – upon his near of kin, and the orphans, and the needy, and the wayfarer, and the beggars, and for the freeing of human beings from bondage; and is constant in prayer, and renders the purifying dues; and [truly pious are] they who keep their promises whenever they promise, and are patient in misfortune and hardship and in time of peril: it is they that have proved themselves true, and it is they, they who are conscious of God”. Surah 2:177, Al Qur’an.
The dominion of God is inevitable and his light will eradicate all evil and darkness when the time comes. Those who succeed in purifying the soul and their Nafts/Ruh will succeed, those who do not will be failures in the hereafter. The purgatory of Hell will be the dwelling place for those who follow the ways of Cain and of Al Satan. Our Creator fabricated this reality for reasons beyond our limited comprehension. The truth is that we are being programmed into total nihilism and humanism, to separate ourselves completely from our Creator. This herding is the exact mechanism for total destruction.
Thank you for sharing
It starts with the blessings God promised on Abraham and his posterity. So besides Isaac and Ishmael begotten by Sarah and Hagar, who else is Abraham’s posterity? After Sarah died, Abraham married Keturah and together they had children. Who else? Well, Abraham had concubines and who knows how many children they gave him. Who else, besides the tribe of Judah? Well, through Isaac’s son Jacob (renamed Israel) we have eleven other sons fondly known as the 12 tribes of Israel, amongst which was Joseph’s tribe (you know, the brother that Judah sold into Egypt and rose up to be in Pharaoh’s court). And Joseph’s sons, Ephraim and Manasseh were also adopted as Jacob’s (Israel’s) sons. Why isn’t anyone talking about all this and instead focusing on the tribe of Judah? And why wouldn’t anyone emphasize that the birthright was passed on from Reuben (the oldest son of Jacob who had defiled his father’s bed) to Ephraim (1 Chronicles 5:2)?
The fact of the matter is that the territory stretching from the Euphrates to the Mediterranean belongs to ALL of Abraham’s posterity. Yet, this Judah tribe thinks it has sole claim and never ever mentions the other tribes of “Israel”, let alone the children of Keturah fathered by Abraham. And that is why this cesspool known as modern day Israel is about to be sent back to the stone age, for the ANTICHRIST to repair and then destroy again.
It starts with Abraham, not the Jews.
The state of Israel has nothing to do with heavenly Israel. Israel was destroyed. We are living in the New Testament. Christ died on the cross. Animal sacrifices ended in the temples when Christ’s blood was shed for our sins.
The concoctions of men are not the Holy Spirit of God. Our hearts at circumcised by the Holy Spirit and not fleshly circumcision of the Old Testament.
We do not need to memorize or figure out the Old Testament. The Jews murdered Christ. The spiritual Israel of God is in heaven. Period. It is distinct from the earthly Israel created by Jews who hate Christ. Heaven is the real Jerusalem. Beware. Zionism ( Old Testament before Christ) has infiltrated Christianity. Stay away from Christian evangelical Zionists. Study the works of the founding theologians of our nation and the cPastor Chuck Baldwin. Study Galatians.
I don’t even try to pretend that I comprehend what the Bible is telling for me. I just hope I do the right thing…
I agree. I do my best to comprehend. I try.
Dude did you READ what this Lady posted here? Read the Galatians Sciptures. For pity sake. Your first sentence shows you were way off course. Context is everything when trying to understand scripture friend.
My… You have posted some fabulously researched insights and arguments based on your facts… Sir, you only reveal the nonhuman that lives inside your soul.
Content is everything when trying to refute a post, but you were unable to offer any.
The first sentence is fine.
Context is a game you folks play to distort.
I like this – doing some research.
Powerful. When you speak with truth nothing can come against it. Also when you speak in truth not to judge or condemn but to warn nothing can speak against that either. Scripture says everything is done by the Spirit
and the work of our hands of our flesh accomplishes nothing. You have spoken in truth here it is God’s word and Truth. It is not up to our human ability to cause these truths to change things or to do any specific thing but it is required of us to speak the truth, speak the truth from our hearts. That part of scripture directs us to follow Jesus commandments and to received
the truth. What you have written are powerful truths and I believe that anything that would be written against what you wrote will not use truths but would used man-made doctrines or logic to refute it and that will always fail. It all may sound good to those who read it but it will never refute the truth. I do believe, I read all your articles, that what you wrote here is one of your best because there’s power in these truths not power of your own. I hope people understand that you’re not condemning John mccarthur he does that on his own but you’re warning to him is to save his life and not to condemnm it for you are not the judge so we speak out of love in the warning to save a life.
Pastor Chuck Baldwin sent out an article this week concerning MacArthur’s ideology.
Here is another riveting sermon by the pastor that helped clear the cobwebs out of my brain.
https://youtu.be/FDyGyoZ5knM?si=cHBiniGZSYm9jxRr
Interesting and enlightening to read someone connecting E. Mullins “Curse of Canaan” with current events…correctly IMO.
thanks for your insights.
Thank you Helena, I could not have said it better. Twenty five years ago I esteemed John MacArther, but when I learned of his great error, I quit listening. Too many professing Christians are completely confused about this issue. Christ utterly destroyed the myth of ‘salvation through lineage’. Only those called by His name are his people. “I and the Father are one..”