US Annexes Palestine For Future Middle East w/o Israel

67 thoughts on “US Annexes Palestine For Future Middle East w/o Israel”

1. Indian foreign policy together with its NAM allies, systematically deny the legitimacy of Jewish self-determination by cloaking antisemitic narratives in the rhetoric of postcolonial solidarity. This not only distorts the historical context of the Holocaust and the Jewish refugee crisis but also perpetuates double standards that undermine claims to a just multipolar world order.

   India has prioritized foreign policy independence, which is a well-documented aspect of its diplomatic history. A trilateral relationship involving the U.S., India, and Tibet reflects a historical perspective on how these nations have interacted, particularly in the context of geopolitical concerns regarding China.

   Growth in U.S.-India relations, particularly in trade and defense, which is supported by data showing increased bilateral trade and cooperation in various sectors. India’s nonalignment and strategic autonomy is a recognized principle in its foreign policy, as articulated by leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru and more recently by Prime Minister Modi. India maintains relationships with multiple countries, including those that may be at odds with U.S. interests (like Russia and Iran), reflects India’s diplomatic strategy of “multi-alignment.”

   The metaphor “strange bed fellows” indicates the opinion that describes an unusual alliance, the emotional weight of the phrase implies a negative connotation about the partnership, suggesting an inherently unstable or insincere, without delving into a balanced view of the strategic rationale behind such alliances, as outside the scope of this paper. The Kashmir conflict the direct result of Britain’s Two State Solution failure. The US perhaps follows this British policy, something like a dog on a leash. Based upon the British White Paper and later the decision made by the FDR Administration to close all US ports to European Jews attempting to flee from the Nazi Shoah.

   The theft of British imperialism that robbed India of its wealth and natural resources has nothing to do with the US, which existed as a pre-WWII minor power. The emotional propaganda “utter waste of time” and “strange bedfellows” raises red flags of “warning propaganda ahead”, which this address seeks to avoid.

   The increase in trade and defense cooperation between the U.S. and India, well-documented. This growth signifies a shift in both countries’ approaches to mutual interests, particularly in the context of regional security and economic collaboration. Obviously Western propaganda plays up and toots the horn of “Two-State Solutions”, this fits their hostile imperialist strategic interests as “Great Powers”.

   The U.S. has its own strategic interests and policies that have evolved independently since World War II. The 1956 Suez Crisis serves as a direct proof that post WWII that Britain has transformed unto a lower status power in the Middle East … a barking poodle. But the post WWII US Super-power status highly influenced by the 19th Century British empire “First among equals” Great Power status.

   India exists as a founding member of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), which emerged during the Cold War. This alliance of countries sought to remain independent from the major power blocs led by the Cold War U.S. and the Soviet Union. This movement included many African nations. Their foreign policy emphasized solidarity among developing countries. India has often aligned itself with the voting patterns of non-aligned and developing countries in the UNGA, particularly on issues related to Israel and its dhimmi Arab refugee populations. This alignment reflects India’s historical support for the Arab promoted propaganda: the Palestinian cause. This post ’64 Arafat led propaganda promotes advocacy for the rights of dhimmi Arab refugee populations, specifically located in Israeli territory while conveniently ignoring these “oppressed peoples” suffering in refugee camps in Arab and Muslim countries. The ’64 PLO Charter makes no reference to Jordan’s West Bank or Egypt’s Gaza. It condemns ’48 Israel.

   The broader sentiment among many non-aligned and African nations tend to skew their perspective of Israel, seen through the distorted lens of colonialism and oppression. As if the Shoah never really happened! India’s alignment with African non-aligned countries in the UNGA can also be seen as part of its broader strategy to strengthen ties with the Global South and assert its leadership role in international forums. This approach clearly aimed at promoting a multipolar world order and countering the Cold War Western vs. Soviet bi-polar hegemony.

   Indian propaganda superficially promotes a foreign policy directed toward Arab and Muslim countries in the Middle East which denounces Israel as a part of European colonialism and India expresses solidarity with “oppressed Dhimmi Arab refugee” populations within the domain of Israel while totally ignoring the oppression endured by Palestinians shoved into refugee camps in Arab countries and denied citizenship and repatriation.

   The African Nam countries skew their perspective of Israel, perhaps best described as an expression of Holocaust Denial. This Arab and Muslim nations perspective, often emphasizes historical injustices and frames the Israeli-Palestinian conflict within a broader context of colonialism and oppression. Critics argue that this focus overshadows the plight of Palestinians in refugee camps in Arab countries, where they often face significant challenges, including lack of citizenship and rights.

   Palestinians in refugee camps in Arab countries face difficult living conditions and limited rights, and this reality – totally overlooked to support their hostile propaganda anti-Israel narratives that focus solely on the condemnation of Israel. This propaganda ignores Arab refusal to recognize Jews equal rights to self determination in the Middle East. Rather than outright overt denial of the Shoah war crimes by both the Germans and Allies, post Israeli Independence focuses upon the pathetic plight of Arab refugees consequent to Arab military defeats before the arms of the IDF.

   India and Nam allies basically ignore the slaughter of the Jews by Nazis, together with the great power approval, expressed through the White Paper and FDR’s decision to close all US ports to Jews attempting to flee from the Nazi slaughter. And the Allied collective decision to not bomb the Nazi rail-lines leading to the death camps. India and Nam allies tend to buy into the Protocols of the Elders of Zion propaganda that Jews control governments and economies.

   Yes it would be absurd for India and NAM countries to deny the Holocaust. Yet the propaganda which declares that Israel exist as Western colonialism, in point of fact denies the Shoah. It ignores the Israeli military victory in its 1948 and 1967 Wars of Independence!

   During British colonial rule, Jews often portrayed as greedy and manipulative, echoing broader European antisemitic stereotypes. This included the idea that Jews were responsible for economic exploitation. In some Indian literature and folklore, Jews were depicted as outsiders or as having sinister motives, which contributed to a perception of Jews as untrustworthy. In the post-independence era, certain political figures have used antisemitic tropes to criticize Israel, often conflating Jewish identity with Western imperialism. This rhetoric sometimes includes references to Jews controlling global finance or media.

   Some leaders within the NAM alliance have made statements that downplay or deny the Holocaust, often as a means to delegitimize Israel. This includes claims that the Holocaust was exaggerated or fabricated to justify the establishment of Israel. This utterly gross conspiracy theory has occasionally resurfaced in NAM discourse, suggesting that Jews secretly control world events or manipulate political outcomes. This trope repeatedly used to frame Israel’s actions as part of a larger, nefarious agenda. While criticism of Israel is not inherently antisemitic, some NAM leaders have crossed the line by employing language that echoes historical antisemitic tropes, such as portraying Israel as a global puppet master or suggesting that Jewish people collectively bear responsibility for the actions of the Israeli state.

   India and NAM countries often employ language and imagery comparable to blood libels, Jews control the world antisemitism. The hypocrisy of their “double standards” concerning the gross Arab refusal to repatriate dhimmi Arab refugee populations post the First and Second Israeli Independence Wars fought in 1948 and again in 1967. India and NAM hostile propaganda collectively blames all Jews held responsible for the actions of the Israeli government – a clear antisemitic trope.

   Framing Israel solely as a colonial outpost of the West conveniently ignores the Shoah, which exists as a major catalyst for post-war Jewish immigration and international recognition of Israel. This narrative erases the continuity of Jewish historical presence and trauma, reducing Zionism to a foreign implantation rather than a national revival movement to achieve Jewish self determination in the Middle East based upon the Balfour Agreement and the League of Nations Palestine Mandate. By labeling Jewish return their ancestral lands as “colonialism,” this rhetoric denies Jews the same rights to self-determination afforded to other postcolonial peoples, including India.

   UNGA Resolution 3379 (1975): This resolution declared that “Zionism as racism, and racial discrimination.” That disgusting resolution framed the establishment of Israel as a colonial endeavor, equating it with other forms of colonialism and imperialism. This perspective defines NAM discourse during the 1970s, which reflects a broader anti-colonial hostility. In his address to the UN General Assembly, Arafat referred to the Palestinian struggle as a fight against colonialism. He characterized Israel’s establishment as a colonial project, which resonated with many NAM countries that were themselves emerging from great power colonial abuse.

   In a speech at the UN, Castro described Israel as a “colonial entity” and criticized Western nations for supporting it. He framed the Palestinian struggle as part of the broader anti-colonial movement, a classic common theme in NAM rhetoric. UNGA Resolution 194 (1948): While not explicitly using the term “colonial,” this resolution called for the return of Palestinian refugees and the right of return, framing the situation in a way that implied a colonial context to the establishment of Israel.

   The “colonial” framing used in NAM speeches and UNGA resolutions often overlooks the historical context of Jewish suffering and the motivations for statehood. While the establishment of Israel involved complex geopolitical factors, including the end of British colonial rule in Palestine, the framing tends to simplify the narrative to one of colonial oppression without acknowledging the historical injustices experienced and endured by Jews minority populations. The UN has never condemned the 3 Century Catholic church imposed ghetto gulag imposed upon the Jewish people.

   During British colonial rule, European antisemitic tropes (e.g., Jews as greedy or manipulative) imported into Indian literature and discourse. India with its NAM allies, post Israeli independence, employed hostile political rhetoric which conflated Jewish identity with Western imperialism, portraying Israel as a nefarious global actor.

   The speech at the 2003 OIC Summit: Mahathir Mohamad, then Prime Minister of Malaysia, made a controversial declaration where he stated, “The Jews rule the world by proxy.” He suggested that Jews control global institutions and economies. This reflects classic antisemitic trope about Jewish power and influence, never condemned by India or its NAM allies. The 2001 speech at the World Islamic Economic Forum: Mahathir claimed that Jews had a “stranglehold” on the world and accused them of manipulating global events for their benefit. Such disgusting rhetoric consistently defines his political career.

   Speech at the UN General Assembly (2006): Chávez referred to the United States as an “imperialist” power and implied that Jewish influence secretly behind U.S. foreign policy, particularly regarding Israel. He used a conspiracy language which involved Jewish domination of global politics. Venezuelan state media has often echoed Chávez’s sentiments, portraying Israel in a negative light and suggesting that Jewish interests drive Western imperialism.

   At his UN General Assembly Speech (1974), Arafat characterized the Palestinian struggle as a fight against colonialism and imperialism, framing Israel’s establishment as a colonial project. His rhetoric often included references to the “Zionist” movement as a form of colonial oppression. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (Former President of Iran) made numerous speeches that included Holocaust denial and references to a supposed Jewish conspiracy. For example, in a speech at the UN in 2005, he questioned the historical accuracy of the Holocaust and suggested that it was used as a pretext for the establishment of Israel. Iranian state-sponsored media frequently disseminate content that promotes antisemitic tropes, including claims of Jewish control over global finance and media.

   Textbooks in Various NAM Countries, educational materials have included content that perpetuates antisemitic stereotypes. For example, UNWRA textbooks which depict Jews as greedy or manipulative; or frame the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a way that portrays Jews as colonial oppressors. UNGA Resolution 3379 (1975): This resolution, which equated Zionism with racism, was supported by many NAM countries and reflects a broader narrative that frames Israel’s actions as colonial and oppressive. These examples illustrate how antisemitic tropes, particularly those related to Jewish control and colonial framing, have been utilized by various NAM leaders and state-sponsored media. Such rhetoric often serves to delegitimize Israel and perpetuate harmful stereotypes about Jewish people, contributing to a broader culture of antisemitism in political discourse.

   The issue of refugee rights and citizenship policies in Arab host states, particularly concerning Palestinian refugees, contrasts sharply with Israel’s absorption of Jewish refugees expelled from Arab countries after 1948. Approximately 2 million Palestinian refugees in Jordan have been granted citizenship, but many still face legal and social discrimination. Palestinian refugees in Lebanon do not have citizenship rights and are restricted from many professions and property ownership. They are often marginalized and live in overcrowded camps. Palestinian refugees in Syria had access to citizenship and social services before the civil war, but the ongoing conflict has severely affected their status and rights. Palestinian refugees in Egypt have limited rights and are not granted citizenship, facing restrictions on employment and movement.

   Many Arab states have openly refused to sign the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol, which affects the legal status and rights of refugees, including the right to work, education, and social services. Following the establishment of Israel in 1948, approximately 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries due to rising antisemitism and violence. This included significant populations from countries such as Iraq, Egypt, Yemen, and Libya. Israel absorbed these refugees, providing them with citizenship and integrating them into society. By the early 1950s, most of these refugees had settled in Israel, contributing to the country’s demographic and cultural landscape.

   While Israel absorbed a large number of Jewish refugees from Arab countries, and provided them with citizenship and support, Arab host states have maintained restrictive policies toward dhimmi Palestinian refugees, often limiting their rights and opportunities. This aspect of history, totally ignored and overlooked in NAM discourse, which tends to focus primarily on the Palestinian one sided propaganda narrative, without acknowledging the complexities of Jewish refugee experiences from Arab countries.

   The expulsion of Palestinian from Kuwait following the Gulf War in 1991, indeed a significant and often overlooked event in discussions about refugee rights and the treatment of minority populations inside Arab states. Following the liberation of Kuwait, the Kuwaiti government expelled a significant number of Palestinians. Estimates suggest that around 400,000 Palestinians, forced to leave the country. Largely due to the fact that many Palestinians overtly and publicly supported Saddam Hussein’s invasion and occupation of Kuwait. Similar to how the post WWII French treated Vichy supporters.

   This violent expulsion, characterized by a lack of due process, many individuals forcibly removed from their homes and denied the right to return. Yet India together with its NAM allies totally support Arafat’s demand for the right of return. This hypocrisy has raised serious concerns regarding human rights violations and the treatment of minority populations in Kuwait.

   The expulsion did not receive significant international condemnation, especially compared to post ’48 and ’67 dhimmi refugee crises or the 1970 black September Jordanian expulsion of dhimmi Palestinians. The expulsion of Palestinians from Kuwait or Jordan, often overlooked in the narratives promoted by NAM countries, including India. While these nations frequently criticize Israel for its treatment of Palestinians, they totally ignore the complexities of Palestinian experiences in Arab states, including the expulsion from Kuwait, Jordan and the Lebanese Civil War.

   The term “dhimmi” classicly refers to non-Muslims living in an Islamic state with legal protection. The expulsion of Palestinians and other Arab residents from Kuwait raises questions about the treatment of minority Arab populations, and the responsibilities of Arab states towards those dhimmi Arabs who have historically lived within their borders. The expulsion of Palestinians and other Arab residents from Kuwait following the Gulf War, a significant event that highlights the complexities of Arab state policies towards dhimmi Arab minority populations.

   It underscores the need for a more nuanced understanding of the refugee experience in the Arab world, particularly in the context of the local Israeli-Palestinian dhimmi refugee status. This aspect of history totally overshadowed by the focus on the illegality of Israel as a nation within the Middle East community of Nations. This one-dimensional narrative utterly fails to account for the experiences of Palestinians in various Arab states, the racist Item 7 of the UN Human Rights committee and the rejection of Israel as part of the Middle East voting block of nations.

   The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism provides a framework for identifying when criticism of Israel crosses unto antisemitism. Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination (e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor). Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation, like the current Gaza war-crimes propaganda. Using symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., accusing Jews of being greedy or controlling the world).

   Denying the Right to Self-Determination…various NAM leaders have referred to Israel as a “colonial” or “settler” state, implying that the existence of Israel is illegitimate. For instance, Yasser Arafat, in his speeches, often framed the Palestinian struggle as a fight against colonialism, suggesting that Jews have no historical or legitimate claim to the land. This rhetoric denies the Jewish people’s right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland. UN Resolution 2334 promotes this colonial state slander propaganda.

   Many NAM countries have criticized Israel for its military victories while remaining silent on the actions of other nations with similar or worse human rights records. For instance, during conflicts in Gaza, leaders from NAM countries have condemned Israel’s military responses without addressing the actions of Hamas or other groups that target Israeli civilians. Jordan’s use of Jewish grave stones as building material during its West Bank occupation never internationally condemned. This selective criticism exemplifies the application of double standards, as similar criminal behavior totally ignored by the India/NAM alliance in the UN General Assembly.

   The IHRA definition of antisemitism provides a useful framework for analyzing India/NAM rhetoric regarding Israel and the Jewish people. By identifying instances where criticism of Israel crosses into antisemitism, it becomes clear that certain narratives perpetuated by India/NAM leaders and their supporters contribute to a broader culture of antisemitism guilt. Recognizing these ever repeated patterns, essential for fostering a more nuanced and responsible discourse around the Israeli-dhimmi Arab conflict and the rights of all peoples involved.

   Loading...

   Reply

   • mudsucker, i prefer your profanity to these long-winded whitewash and distortions of historical events. One question: when did the holocaust, WW2 where around 80 million people perished become exclusively jewish? The World Almanac shows there was an increase in the jewish population after WW2 compared to the jewish population before the war.

     Loading...

     Reply

     • trout for brains you stupidity Wow! USSR (Soviet Union): Approximately 24 million people, Japan: Around 3 million people. Germany: Approximately 7 million people. England (United Kingdom): About 450,000 people. France: Approximately 600,000 people.

       Loading...

       Reply

     • False. The Jewish population significantly decreased as a result of World War II due to the Holocaust, where approximately six million Jews were murdered. Before the war, the global Jewish population was estimated to be around 16.5 million, and after the war, it was approximately 11 million. Therefore, there was a substantial decline in the Jewish population following World War II.

       Loading...

       Reply

       • Mudsucker, your bold assertion (lie) about the six million clashes with the World Almanac, a recognized source. It also clashes with the records that were released by Gorbachev that shows the deaths in the work camps were caused by disease and old age. The records also show more Roman Catholics than jews died in the work camps.

         Loading...

         Reply

         • Idiot. Look in the mirror. Wake up what you read all depends upon the source. In computer programming this “reputation” known as: “Trash-in…Trash-out”.

           Loading...

           Reply

         • The World Almanac, as a reference work, typically presents established historical facts and figures. The figure of approximately six million Jews murdered during the Holocaust is widely accepted by historians and is based on extensive research and documentation from various sources, including Nazi records, survivor testimonies, and post-war investigations.

           While there may be some trout Holocaust deniers who dispute this figure, the consensus among credible historians and scholars is that the six million figure is accurate. The World Almanac itself does not dispute this figure, as it aligns with the established historical understanding of the Holocaust.

           Loading...

           Reply

     • A bit of Arab & Muslim History for a trout brained dumb ass.

       This essay argues that the Arab prophetic identity rooted in the Koran covenant was undermined by imperial expansion, especially during the Abbasid Caliphate, which assimilated foreign legal, philosophical, and cultural traditions at the cost of prophetic justice.

       The Rashidun Caliphate represents the apex of Arab prophetic sovereignty, where territorial expansion was inseparable from fidelity to Koranic revelation and Meccan-Medinan prophetic law. The conquest of Iraq by Arab forces, which included both Sunni and Shiite Arabs, occurred during the early Islamic expansion following the death of the Prophet Muhammad in 632 CE. The Rashidun Caliphate (632-661 CE) rose after Muhammad’s death. The Rashidun Caliphate, led by the first four caliphs (Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Ali), initiated a series of military campaigns to expand the Islamic state beyond the Arabian Peninsula.

       The conquest of Iraq began during the caliphate of Umar ibn al-Khattab (634-644 CE). The Battle of the Bridge (634 CE) marked the initial confrontation between Saudi Arabs and the Sassanian Empire of Persia. The Battle of Qadisiyyah (636 CE) Arabs achieved a decisive victory against the Sassanian Army. This victory opened the way for early Arab armies, their conquest of the Sassanian Capital, Ctesiphon, and much of Iraq, which fell a year thereafter.

       After the assassination of Ali ibn Abi Talib in 661 CE, the Umayyad Caliphate arose to power. The Umayyads continued to consolidate control over Iraq and other regions, promoting a pseudo-Arab identity and culture. While the Umayyads maintained Arab supremacy, their departure from Meccan-Medinan prophetic legitimacy and their adoption of dynastic kingship marked the beginning of Arab disempowerment through imperial logic.

       Iraq’s identity as an Arab country with a significant Shiite Arab population has historic cultural, and religious Arab roots. The legacy of the early Arab period, the radically degenerate ideologies that separated the Umayyad and Abbasid regimes; coupled with the ongoing political dynamics, all contributed to the prominence of Shiite Arabs in Iraq. This complex interplay of history and identity continues to shape the social and political landscape of the country today.

       Iraq, particularly the region of Mesopotamia, a historically strong center of Arabic civilization. It served as home to early Arabic developments and significant events, including the rise of Arabic Umayyad, contrasted by the assimilated Islamic Abbasid Caliphate(s). A substantial portion of Iraq’s population identifies as Shiite Arab. This demographic, primarily concentrated in southern Iraq, including cities like Najaf and Karbala, which remain important religious centers for Shiite Islam unto the present day.

       The presence of Shiite Arabs in Iraq, traced back to the early Arabic Koran covenant, conjoined with the historical significance of Ali and his descendants. Key events, such as the martyrdom of Imam Hussein (the grandson of Muhammad and son of Ali) at the Battle of Karbala in 680 CE, have deeply influenced Shiite identity and annually commemorated during Ashura. This Battle, it represents a pivotal moment in the early Arabic Koran covenant based history together with its profound implications for the development of Shiite Arab identity.

       This disaster, central to Shiite beliefs, has solidified the cultural and religious identity of Shiite Arabs. The battle occurred against the backdrop of a political and religious struggle over the rightful leadership of the Arab community following the death of the Prophet Muhammad. After the assassination of Ali ibn Abi Talib, the fourth caliph and the Prophet’s cousin and son-in-law, the Umayyad Caliphate seized power under Yazid ibn Muawiya.  Imam Hussein, the grandson of Muhammad and son of Ali, refused to pledge allegiance to Yazid, whom he viewed as an illegitimate ruler both corrupt and unjust. Hussein believed that Yazid’s rule, simply contrary to the principles of the Koran covenant. Hence Hussein violently opposed Yazid’s illegal seizure of power; he sought to uphold the true teachings of the Prophet’s Koran covenant.

       Imam Hussein received messages from the people of Kufa, a city in present-day Iraq, urging him to come and lead them against Yazid’s rule. Believing he had the support of the people, Hussein set out for Kufa with his family and a small group of followers. As Hussein and his caravan approached Kufa, they were intercepted by Yazid’s forces, led by Umar ibn Sa’ad. Hussein and his followers were encircled at Karbala, where they were denied access to water and faced overwhelming odds.

       The battle which ensued took place on the 10th of Muharram, known as Ashura. Despite being vastly outnumbered, Hussein and his companions, according to tradition, fought valiantly. The battle, marked by intense fighting, and many of Hussein’s family members and supporters – brutally killed. Imam Hussein himself martyred in that tragic battle, along with most of his male companions. His martyrdom, symbolizes the Shiite struggle against tyranny-injustice, and utterly rejects the Umayyad betrayal of the Koran covenant.

       The Battle of Karbala its profound disastrous consequences on the development of Shiite-Sunni Arab split identity. Hussein’s martyrdom, commemorated annually every Ashura, a day of mourning and reflection for Shiite Muslims. The event serves as a powerful symbol of resistance against oppression and injustice represented through the Umayyad dictatorship. The battle permanently divided Sunni and Shiite Arabs. Shiites mourn Hussein as a martyr and their symbol of Koran covenant righteousness. The events at Karbala have inspired countless works of literature, art, and religious observance within the Shiite Arab communities. The Battle of Karbala represents the struggle for justice, the importance of moral integrity, and the consequences of political power struggles within the early Arabic Koran covenant communities.

       The distinction between the pseudo Koran covenant Umayyad and utterly assimilated Abbasid regimes, the differences between Sunni and Shiite Muslims all deeply interconnected to the Koran covenant. The split between Sunni and Shiite Arabism originated over the rightful successor to the Prophet Muhammad after his death in 632 CE. The Prophet Muhammad commanded the Koran covenant to Arab believers of Allah. The Sunnis branched away from the Koran covenant, they believed that the community should select the leader (Caliph), while Shiites believed that leadership should remain inherited within the Prophet’s family, specifically through his cousin and son-in-law, Ali ibn Abi Talib. The Sunnis belief that the community should select the leader (Caliph) defines the pseudo-Umayyad Caliphate. The latter transferred its Capital away from Mecca or Median to Damascus, despite it being part of the eastern Roman empire.

       The pseudo-Umayyad Caliphate dictatorship, established after the assassination of Ali ibn Abi Talib, the fourth caliph and the last of the “Rightly Guided” caliphs. The Umayyads, a powerful clan within the Quraysh tribe, a prominent Arab tribe that played a significant role in the history of the Arabian Peninsula, particularly in Mecca. Muawiya I seized the caliphate, and became the first pseudo-Umayyad caliph. The Umayyads promoted the idea that the leader of the Arab nation (Ummah) chosen based on consensus or election. Herein defines a key Sunni principle of governance. This idea replaced the priority of “governance”, and devalued the prime importance of the Koran covenant – to rule the nation with justice.

       Their dictatorship likewise marked a shift towards hereditary succession, a departure from the earlier caliphate model. This foundation set the stage for Arabs to denounce the Umayyad Caliphate as unjust. Under the Umayyads, leadership became hereditary, primarily passing through the family of the ruling caliph, which established a dynastic rule. This shift led to a more centralized and bureaucratic form of governance, as the Umayyads sought to consolidate power and maintain control over their vast empire.

       Many Arabs began to view the Umayyad Caliphate as unjust, particularly due to perceived corruption, favoritism, and the concentration of power within the Umayyad family. The Shiite branch of the Koran covenant prioritizes the importance of leadership being derived from the Prophet Muhammad’s family, specifically through Ali, the Prophet’s cousin and son-in-law. They advocate for a direct line of succession, the divine right of kings. This opinion openly clashed with the pseudo-Umayyad usurpation of power. For Shiites, the legitimacy of a caliph\leader – rooted in their connection to the Prophet’s lineage, which they believe the pseudo-Umayyads lacked. This belief, it defines a fundamental aspect of Shiite identity and has tremendously influenced their historical and political narratives.

       Moving the Capital of the Arab Caliphate to Damascus, then part of the Byzantine Empire, in 661, further estranged and undermined Arab support. Establishing the capital in Damascus allowed the Umayyads to exert greater control over the vast territories they governed, which extended from Spain in the west to India in the east. The move to Damascus also symbolized a shift towards a more cosmopolitan and administrative approach to governance, integrating various cultures and traditions within the empire. It exposed the true colors of the pseudo-Umayyad dictatorship, in reality no different than the Abbasid assimilated Muslim revolution.

       Arab armies brought with them not only Koran monotheism theology, but also the Arabic language and cultural practices. Over time, the adoption of Arabic became a significant marker of identity. In Egypt and Syria, for example, the local populations gradually adopted Arabic as their primary language, this greatly facilitated deeper cultural integration into the Koran covenant. The process of Arabization essentially involved assimilation of alien foreign cultures and customs, traditions, and languages homogenized into the Arab cultural framework. This embracement of an ערב רב/mixed multitude cultural heterogeneous societies into the Koran covenant identity, where slowly the local populations began to identify more closely with Arab culture, something akin to the Samaritans to Judean society.

       The Umayyad Caliphate (661-750 CE), decision to establish Damascus as their Capital, and built the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, this planted the seeds of assimilation and rebellion to honor the Koran covenant. This pseudo-Caliphate introduced the marginalization of Shiite communities, leading to resentment and hatred among Arab Koran covenant nationals. Umayyad rule actively promoted strong incentives for the local populations to adopt Arab Sunni identity, as a means to gain access to political power and social mobility. The Umayyads conquered Egypt in the 7th century. The presence of Arab tribes in these regions prior to their conquests created a foundation for cultural integration into the Koran covenant national identity.

       The transformation of alien conquered nations in Egypt and Syria unto Arabs, rather than lower class Muslim – non Arabs, primarily attributed to a combination of cultural integration, political incentives, and historical context. The policies of the pseudo-Umayyad Caliphate, its prioritization that conquered nations adopt the Arabic language, combined with the historical ties to Arab identity, all these factors played significant roles in the homogeneous conversion process, leading to a distinct Arab identity, closely intertwined with the Arab covenant identity. In contrast, the experiences of Persians and Turks involved a more complex interplay of heterogeneous local identities resulting in a different religious faith outcome. Gone, the Arabic Koran covenant faith which defined the nation lead by Muhammad prophetic vision.

       While the administrative structures established by the pseudo-Umayyads often required local leaders to align themselves with Arab identity to maintain their positions and influence within the new Islamic state. Confronted by growing crisis of dissatisfaction among various groups due to perceived injustices, favoritism, and the concentration of power among the Umayyad Arab feudal aristocracy. Many non-Arab Muslims (mawali) felt marginalized and discriminated against. The pseudo-Umayyads superficial lip service favored Arab over peasant-Muslims in political and economic matters. Much as did the Turkish land laws, in their turn, rejected Arab ownership of Turkish lands.

       While Islam proclaimed itself as a unifying religion, the process of conversion did not necessarily lead to a complete cultural transformation. In regions like Persia or the Turks – Islam – often adopted alongside the retention of local languages and cultural practices, leading to a distinct Muslim identity that did not equate to the Arab Koran covenant national identity. In Persia and among Turkic peoples, the conversion to Islam often occurred through different means, such as trade, Sufism, and the influence of local leaders, which allowed for the preservation of local identities alongside Islamic faith. Much like the Catholic church converted radically divergent European countries to embrace belief in their form of Monotheism. Religious beliefs do not exchange, supplant, or reform national identities of different peoples.

       The Umayyad regime condemned for its unjust favoritism of Arab national identity aroused the indignation of other ethnicities within the Islamic empire. This led to resentment among non-Arab Muslim peasant populations, including Persians, Berbers, and others, who sought greater representation and rights within the feudal Koran covenant society. Many supporters of the Abbasids sought reforms in governance, administration, and social justice. They aimed to create a more equitable and just Mawali-non Arab society, addressing the grievances that had accumulated under the pseudo-Umayyad dictatorship.

       Consequently, the biased injustice of the Umayyad regime set the stage for the Abbasid revolt. The most significant of these was the Abbasid Revolution, which culminated in the Battle of the Zab in 750 CE, where the Umayyad forces suffered decisive defeat. The Abbasids rhetoric propaganda framed their revolt as a “religious movement”, emphasizing their lineage from the Prophet Muhammad. They sought to present themselves as the rightful leaders of the Mawali-non Arab Muslim community. They argued that the Umayyads had betrayed the “true” Islamic principles.

       The Umayyad Caliphate, centered in Damascus, while characterized by a strong Arab identity and governance which favored Arabs over Muslims. The Abbasids, by stark contrast, sought to create a more inclusive empire that represented the diverse populations within the Islamic world, including non-Arab Muslims, viewed as aristocratic equals.

       The Abbasid revolution marked a significant shift in the character of the Koran covenant empire. The vision of the prophet Muhammad switched from an Arab-centric rule under the Umayyads to a more inclusive and diverse governance that included non-Arab Muslims, now views as aristocratic inheritors of the Koran covenant which preaches strict monotheism and Muhammad as the final prophet as the central tenants of Islamic belief.

       The Abbasid Caliphate represented a significant shift from the Arab-dominated empire to a more inclusive and diverse Islamic multi-state, which allowed for the participation and influence of non-Arab Muslims in both governance and culture. Herein explains why the Abbasid Caliphate moved their Capital to Baghdad. This transformation played a crucial role in shaping the identity of the Islamic world, which by definition included the collapse of the Arab Koran covenant – during the Abbasid period.

       The Abbasids built a broad coalition of support among various discontented groups, including non-Arab Muslims, Shiites, and other factions opposed to the pseudo-Umayyad rule. This coalition utterly crucial in mobilizing support for their cause. This new Caliphate significantly shaped non Arab Islamic history through the revival and integration of ancient Greek philosophical thought into Islamic scholarship. The Abbasids, while their rhetoric claimed their descent from the Prophet Muhammad’s uncle Abbas, they positioned themselves as champions of the far larger non Arab Islamic community. The Koran covenant Arab identity, Islam – like a snake – swallowed its prey completely whole.

       The Abbasid Caliphate replaced the judicially unjust Umayyad Caliphate in 750 CE after a successful revolution. The Abbasids validation of non Arab Muslims set the stage for publication and research in the newly discovered ancient Greek writings, particularly during the 8th through 10th centuries, known for the Islamic Golden Age. Scholars in the Abbasid Caliphate translated and preserved many works of ancient Greek philosophers, such as Aristotle, Plato, and Galen. This intellectual revival played a crucial role in the development of philosophy, science, and medicine in the Islamic world and later influenced the European Renaissance.

       The Abbasid Caliphate expanded the Muslim empire through a combination of military conquests, political alliances, and cultural integration. They successfully conquered Persia (modern-day Iran) after the fall of the pseudo-Umayyad Caliphate. The Persian territories became integrated, but not homogenized into the Abbasid Caliphate. Persian culture and administrative practices significantly influenced the Abbasid governance and culture. The Abbasids continued military engagements with the Byzantine Empire, similar to their predecessors. These conflicts, part of the ongoing struggle for control over territories in the eastern Mediterranean. The theology of Islam changed the Koran covenant of Arab nationalism unto the belief that Allah lives as the Universal God of all Humanity. Rather than the God which Muhammad’s Arab tribes embraced as their Deity.

       The Abbasids focused on trade, culture, and scholarship, which helped to unify the diverse regions of their huge expansive empire. They established Baghdad as their cultural and intellectual center, attracting scholars, scientists, and philosophers from various backgrounds. The Abbasid Caliphate, known for its cultural and intellectual flourishing, which included the translation and study of ancient Greek texts. This assimilation of Greek culture represents a key part of a broader effort to create a cosmopolitan society that included diverse ethnicities and cultures, not just local Arab feudal peasants.

       The Abbasids essentially diminished the Arab-centric focus of the pseudo-Umayyad Caliphate, which claimed to have favored Arab identity and interests. By promoting a more inclusive approach, they aimed to unify the diverse populations within the empire, including non-Arab Muslim aristocrats. Such a divergent shift away from the Tribal Arab Koran as “the revelation” of the Prophet; the definition of Arab identity within the Tribal Arab Koran covenant republic/empire. This new cultural synthesis, which openly embraced Greek, Persian, and Indian influences integrated into into the heart and soul of non Arab Muslim “Islamic thought”. This new, vastly expanded cultural legacy, contributed to the decline of Arabia as the center of the non Arab Muslim world. The Abbasid impact on Europe, its service as the Prime Cause of the Renaissance revival; the resurrection of dead European culture and customs – marked by the Dark Ages. It undermined the revelation of Muhammad as the final prophet, of Tribal Koran covenant feudalism.

       Assimilation to ancient Greek writers directly compares to the Hanukkah Civil War which pitted the P’rushim/pseudo-Umayyads against the Tzeddukim/assimilated Abbasid revolution. This Jewish Civil War pitted Torah purists, only committed to interpret the intent of the Torah through reliance upon the Oral Torah logic system, codified through the kabbalah of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס four part inductive reasoning. The assimilated Tzeddukim/assimilated Abbasid sought to abandon Oral Torah logic in favor of turning Jerusalem into a Greek polis City State. Much like the assimilated Abbasids moved their Capital distant from Mecca and Medina. Just as the Tzeddukim sought to remake Jerusalem unto the image of Athens; so too did the assimilated-Abbasids turn Baghdad into a cosmopolitan empire hostile to the Arab covenantal identity expressed in the Koran. Both rejected their respective “oral Torah/Hadith” interpretive revelation central to their respective national yet Tribal traditions.

       Muslim universalism rejects the Torah revelation at Sinai which only Israel accepted, much the same way as the assimilated Abbasid ‘Golden Calf’ imposed a Muslim replacement theology which competed foreign alien Greek thinkers as equals to Muhammad the final prophet. Abbasid law schools (madhabs) no longer based solely upon prophetic or tribal adjudication, but systematized like Justinian’s Corpus Juris Civilis—foreign in form and hostile to Arab oral precedent. The Abbasid revolution, like the ‘Golden Calf’, did not openly reject Muhammad—it honored him in rhetoric while replacing the foundations of his Koran covenant with foreign structures.

       The assimilated Tzeddukim likewise wanted Jews to forget the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev. The ‘Golden Calf’ represents the idea of “replacement theology”. This defines the theology expressed by both Xtianity, the Arab Koran, and the Muslim theological belief in a Universal Allah, God to all Humanity. Abbasid scholars chose to ignore the Talmud. They rejected the revelation of the Oral Torah/פרדס logic just as surely as did the Tzeddukim reject the Oral Torah. The Koran represents a national revelation to the Arab people through the prophet Muhammad. In effect the Abbasids replaced their Koran covenantal specificity with abstract universality, undermining the very revelation they claimed to protect.

       The Abbasid “revolution” utterly failed to establish righteous courts which could correct the pseudo-Umayyad judicial injustice. Unlike the American revolutionaries who rejected the vertical British Star courts with the lateral jury system, the Abbasid “revolution”, their corrupt vertical courts no different from the vertical British Star courts. The government bribed the Judges and prosecuting attorneys by paying their salaries.

       Abbasid religious rhetoric propaganda (half-truths) declared their “belief” in Muhammad as the final prophet. But in actual fact their cultural synthesis of non Arab, Greek and other foreign cultural influences directly compares to the ancient Israelite sin of the Golden Calf – replacement theology.

       The Abbasid period, which lasted from 750 to 1258 CE, represents a transformative era for Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) and the codification of Islamic law. Scholars began to organize and systematize the principles of Islamic law, moving beyond the earlier, more Hadith common law precedent interpretations; which required a rigorous analysis of the Quran and Hadith. Assimilated Abbasid legal scholars organized fiqh into codes, which closely resembled the style of Greek and Roman law. Like as codified by Pope Gregory IX (c. 1170–1241) or Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274). The latter best known for his works “Summa Theologica” and “Summa Contra Gentiles”, which synthesized Aristotelian philosophy with Xtian theology, addressing issues of ethics, law, and the nature of God.

       The four major Sunni schools: Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali, directly influenced by Greek and Roman legal traditions, particularly in their approach to legal reasoning and the structure of legal codes. This cross-pollination of ideas contributed to a break down which attempted to unify Arab and non Arab Muslims as feudal equal aristocrats. Effectively, this estranged the rule of Mecca and Medina as the Government authority of the Arab empire/republic.

       The Koran all together supplanted as the basis of Islamic law, in the sense that assimilated Abbasid law codes based their organization upon non Arab Muslim thinkers. The House of Wisdom in Baghdad, this institution promoted the translation and study of various texts, including those from Greek and Roman traditions. The failure of the assimilated Abbasid “revolution”, not merely political—but judicial, theological, and civilizational. By abandoning the Arab identity rooted in Meccan-Medinan Tribal justice, and replacing it with the foreign Hellenistic universalism together with Aristotle’s syllogism logic, the assimilated Abbasids traitors repeated the ancient sins of the Tzeddukim, together with the ערב רב builders of the Golden Calf. They all share a common foundation, they have no real fear of the אלהים. The task remains to recover the Arab prophetic covenant—as a national revelation with judicial integrity—restoring what was lost in the cosmopolitan mirage of Baghdad.

       The assimilated Abbasid Caliphate dramatically weakened Arab identity. The Arab pseudo-Umayyad Caliphate, inherently unstable. Herein explains the prime reason for its short rule. The expansion of Muhammad’s Tribal Koran covenant nation, came at the expense of sacrificing the Arab identity which originally accepted Muhammad as its prophet. The spread of Islam came at the expense of the diminishment of Arab identity subsumed by a Islamic cosmopolitanism domination; which introduces many and multiple foreign cultures and customs into the Catholic\Islamic Universal faith. Where Greek and Roman legal tradition served as the basis which established a systematic approach to Islamic jurisprudence. Alas neither Greece nor Rome civilization gendered a Good Name reputation concerning the achievement judicial justice rule of law. The Abbasid legal codes, while more organized than the Hadith, influenced by non-Arab traditions, which some argue diluted the original Tribal Arab Koran covenant principles.

       The Abbasid Caliphate rebelled against the Meccan-Medinan Koranic covenant. The assimilated Abbasids, despite their rhetorical white-wash allegiance to Muhammad and the Koran covenant, ultimately introduced a form of “replacement theology” akin to the biblical Golden Calf, which diluted the Arab prophetic foundation of the Koran covenant replaced by the charms of cosmopolitan inclusivity and Hellenistic legalism.

       The Koran itself functioned as replacement theology for the T’NaCH. “We have not sent you except as a mercy to all the worlds” (Koran 21:107). It too likewise failed to respect that only Israel accepted the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. Just as only Muhammad alone received the visions from an Angel within a cave. There in the Koran, Muhammad interpreted – by Islamic theology – as the Seal of the Prophets, for humanity, not just the Arabs.

       Islamic scholars to their credit sought to systematize Islamic law based on the Quran and Hadith, leading to the formation of distinct legal methodologies. The Quran and Hadith are the two primary sources of Islamic law. The Quran is considered the literal word of God, while Hadith comprises the sayings, actions, and approvals of the Prophet Muhammad. Scholars relied on these texts to derive legal rulings and principles. The Abbasid scholars emphasized that Islamic law should be grounded in divine revelation rather than solely relying on pre-Islamic customs or foreign legal systems.

       Al-Shafi’i is renowned for his work in systematizing the principles of Islamic jurisprudence. His seminal book, “Al-Risala,” laid out a comprehensive framework for understanding the sources and methods of deriving legal rulings. Al-Shafi’i identified four primary sources of Islamic law: the Quran, Hadith, consensus (ijma), and analogy (qiyas). He argued that these sources should be used in a systematic manner to ensure that legal rulings are consistent with Islamic teachings. Al-Shafi’i placed a strong emphasis on the importance of Hadith as a source of law, advocating for the rigorous authentication of Hadith to ensure their reliability in legal reasoning.

       In the early years of Islam, particularly during the time of the Prophet Muhammad, there were instances of coexistence and cooperation between Muslims and Jewish communities. The Constitution of Medina, for example, established a framework for mutual rights and responsibilities among Muslims and Jews in Medina. Yet the Almohad dynasty in the 12th century, when Jews were forced to convert to Islam or face expulsion definitively proved the shallow realities of justice achieved through Muslim courts.

       Loading...

       Reply

       • More long winded bullshit from mudsucker. As a Western man I am neither Christian, Muslim nor jew and I find all Eastern religions incomprehensible. The talmudists celebrate mass murder, the Muslims fight to the death for things that are basically inconsequential, Christians have some good philosophy but like the others they rely on fake philosophys.

         Loading...

         Reply

         • Poor trout brain, challenged to even read. The only bull shit, your proud complete ignorance. Sucks being you.

           Loading...

           Reply

         • Recently the UN Security Council attempted to decree a Chapter VII ultimatum which dictated that Israel surrender to Hamas in Gaza.

           Italy did not support the recent UN Security Council resolution that called for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, which was vetoed by the United States. The resolution received 14 votes in favor, with the U.S. casting the only vote against it. The draft resolution was co-sponsored by several countries, but Italy was not listed among those actively supporting the resolution in the context of the recent vote.

           These 14 countries Russia, China, France, United Kingdom, Algeria (co-sponsor), Denmark (co-sponsor), Greece (co-sponsor), Guyana (co-sponsor), Pakistan (co-sponsor), Panama (co-sponsor), South Korea (co-sponsor), Sierra Leone (co-sponsor), Slovenia (co-sponsor), and Somalia (co-sponsor) voted to impose a UN Chapter VII dictate upon Israel. Of these countries Algeria and other scamps countries do not even have diplomatic relations with Israel.

           Neither Iran nor Sudan have diplomatic relations with Israel. No different than Algeria. Algeria and Turkey have developed a military partnership and cooperation over the years, particularly in the areas of defense and security. This relationship has been strengthened through various agreements and joint military exercises. The relationship is part of a broader strategic partnership that includes economic and political cooperation, with both countries sharing interests in regional stability and security.

           Those 14 countries have already repeatedly called for international condemnation of Israel, rabidly support Palestinian terrorism relabeled as “Palestinian rights”. They already engage in public relations propaganda campaigns hostile to Israel. They already support and initiate legal actions against Israel in international courts such as the ICC. These countries have escalated their rhetoric propaganda against Israel. Hamas could never have dug its complex tunnel system without international support. They already promote cultural and academic boycotts of Israel.

           These countries throw their support for the Palestinian cause, like whores on street corners sell their wares. They often use stinky rhetoric, to condemn Israeli actions, framing them as oppressive or colonial. Such putrid rhetoric seeks to poison public opinion and mobilize support for Palestinian groups. Numerous solidarity movements around the world that advocate for Palestinian rights; they often align with groups like Hamas, viewing them as legitimate representatives of Palestinian resistance.

           Countries without diplomatic relations with Israel compare to corrupt judges that accepts bribes. This objection, seeks to raise critically important questions about the legitimacy and fairness of the recent Chapter VII UN ultimatum which demanded that Israel surrender to Hamas in Gaza. While the analogy of a corrupt judge highlights concerns about bias and fairness, the international system, in point of fact, operates on principles of representation and sovereignty.

           The International system operates, so it appears, as something akin to a beauty contest. What defines beauty — not a rational logical concept. Israel demands a change to the International system. It could express its rebuke of the UN, by leaving the UN. The analogy of a corrupt judge suggests that countries without diplomatic relations with Israel, that they lack objective credibility to fairly judge the case heard before the court of international opinion.

           This perception of bias, Israel argues, undermines the legitimacy of all UN resolutions or demands made against Israel. Particularly since nations who do not have diplomatic relations with Israel obvious their anti-Israel hostility – politically motivated – rather than based on objective criteria. Chapter VII of the UN Charter allows the Security Council to take action to maintain or restore international peace and security. However, the application of this chapter, like as in the Korean war, especially when it appears to favor one side over another in a conflict, historically expands the local conflict into a far larger international war. The call for Israel to surrender to Hamas, obviously viewed by both the US and Israel as an ultimatum that lacks balance and fairness. Just as China despised the UN Chapter VII ultimatum decreed against North Korea.

           The international UN system, indeed based on principles of state sovereignty and representation. However, the effectiveness and fairness of this system both the US and Israel have repeatedly warned and challenged. Especially when certain countries dominate decision-making processes or when resolutions reflect geopolitical interests rather than universal principles of justice.

           The idea that Israel should demand changes to the international UN system, this demand reflects the Israeli requirements for a more equitable and fair approach to international relations expressed through public UN diplomacy organs. Leaving the UN perhaps a radical step. But it raises questions about the effectiveness of the international UN system of public diplomacy among nation states in the world community of nations.

           The concerns about bias and fairness in the international UN system, particularly regarding Israel, absolutely valid and reflect broader issues of representation and legitimacy. Whether through reforming the UN or reconsidering its participation, Israel’s approach to these challenges will significantly impact its international standing and relationships. The debate over the effectiveness and fairness of the current international system remains a fixed constant, critical issue in global politics.

           Loading...

           Reply

     • The number was created by Hollywood.

       Loading...

       Reply

2. I don’t think having the Palestinians leave while the USA builds a Riviera is a viable plan. The jews would never allow the Palestinians to return, instead Gaza would be a Miami beach or an Adelson gambling mecca.
   Gaza can be rebuilt while the Palestinians remain. The German cities that were destroyed by Bomber Harris were rebuilt with the remaining citizens present as was Tokyo.
   As for funds the Gazans are rich. They have gas and oil off their coast, it is presently being stolen by the jews but it belongs to Gaza. having the Palestinians leave would give a semblance of legality to the theft.
   The jew occupiers must leave Palestine, they have shown themselves to be murderers and thieves as they have shown throughout the ages. Hitler called it right: they want Palestine as a center removed from national laws so they can continue their pillaging. A university for swindlers and thieves.

   Loading...

   Reply

3. Why the Jews Reject the Christian and Muslim Worship of Avoda Zarah Gods.

   Translating abstract Hebrew concepts, such as שם ומלכות, into literal translations is highly problematic. Neither the Koran nor the New Testament ever once brings the שם השם revealed in the First Sinai commandment. This commandment instructs to perform the Torah commandments לשמה (for their own sake).

   The New Testament heavily relies upon the metaphor of “father” throughout the Gospel narratives. One reference in Deuteronomy 32:6: “Is this the way you repay the Lord, you foolish and unwise people? Is he not your Father, your Creator, who made you and formed you?”

   This strong mussar rebuke merits a common law search for a precedent within the language of the first four Books of the Written Torah. Paul’s critique: “You’re not under the Law” fails to discern between Torah common law/משנה תורה\ from Greek and Roman statute law legal formats.

   The Torah never refers to the First commandment revelation of the Spirit Name with any reference to the foreign name Allah. Hence Jews reject this foreign substitution to replace the revelation of the Torah at Sinai with Muhammad’s revelation of Allah in a cave.

   The Jewish people utterly amazed that Goyim have no concept of the distinction between tohor vs tumah spirits. This fundamental distinction required for the chosen Cohen people to do “avodat HaShem”; roughly interpreted as the service or worship of HaShem.

   The term מלכות refers to the spiritual direction of dedicating defined tohor spirits first revealed to Moshe after the Sin of the Gold Calf at Horev: ה’ ה’ אל רחום וחנון etc. The revelation of this “Oral Torah” the church fathers absolutely deny the existence of the revelation of the Oral Torah.

   The only other verse in the whole of the T’NaCH which employs 3 Divine Names in succession, kre’a Shma. Contrast the mitzva of saying kre’a shma with tefillen; with how Goyim scholars interpret Hear Israel the Lord God the Lord is One. The Talmud understands the 3 Divine Names, to the 3 oaths each separately sworn by the Avot.

   The term ONE, the last word of the kre’a shma, the person who accepts the yoke of the kingdom of heaven, he accepts the oaths separately sworn by Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov as ONE upon his heart.

   The purpose of tefillen: to swear a Torah oath. Goyim theologies never ask: what oaths did the Avot swear to cut a brit with HaShem concerning the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen seed of Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov. Islam in particular give a blow-job to the honor of the circumcised Avot. Christians see the Shema as a declaration of the oneness of God, which aligns with their belief in the Trinity—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—as one God in three persons. Muslim commentaries on the Shema recognize its importance in affirming the oneness of God, which is a central tenet of Islam.

   The Quran makes intertextual connections with the Shema, emphasizing that prayer and devotion to God are not about physical direction but about loving God with all one’s heart. This latter idea fails to address Rabbi Yechuda’s interpretation of לבבך as Yatzir Ha’Tov vs. Yatzir Ha’Rah.

   The concept of ‘resurrection from the dead’ shares nothing with life after death as both religions of avoda zarah preach. Rather the Yazir Ha’Tov breaths the spirits which did breath the spirits of the Avot! ONE, this concluding word of the Shma raises the Avot from the dead within the Yatzir Ha’Tov of each and every Jew in all generations, based upon the power to Create from nothing, by swearing a Torah oath!

   Hence when a Cohen didicated a korban upon the altar in Jerusalem, the portion of Israel in the korbonot avodat HaShem service, they read the Creation story in the beit knesset.

   Rabbi Akiva’s kabbalah known as פרדס defines how to logically understand how to employ the 13 tohor middot, as the critical means to make a precedent search comparison; the substance of Oral Torah common law scholarship upon the Written Torah. A quick examination of Deuteronomy 32:6 learns through the wisdom of Torah common law precedents.

   This mussar rebuke begins at 32:1 – 32:43. Mussar defines all prophecies, as codified by Moshe Rabbeinu and all other NaCH prophets. Goyim do not know this basic fundamental of Torah faith/pursuit of courtroom justice.

   Their Gospel forgery attempts to pervert tohor prophets to Av tumah witchcraft and sorcerers – who predict the future. This one Torah reference to “Father” merits a look at the previous verse for context. Both Trinity or strict monotheism qualifies as strange worship of foreign Gods.

   These alien Gods have no connection with the plagues in Egypt, the splitting of the Sea of Reeds, nor the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. They directly compare to the Av tumah Golden Calf.

   This revelation, that all Goyim to this day reject the Torah Sinai revelation. This prophetic mussar directly refers to the tuma worship of foreign alien Gods imported to Judaism by Av tuma Xtianity and Islam.

   This tremendous mussar rebuke, Deut. 32:1 – 32:43, compares to the vow which HaShem made to Moshe following the sin of the Golden Calf! Hence the rebuke of Moshe at the end of his life serves to amplify the prophetic mussar taught through the Aggadic story of Noach and the floods. Genesis 6:5 to 8:20: the exile of Noach in his Ark, story of Aggadic mussar – a depth analysis of prophetic mussar of Deut. 32:1 – 32:43.

   How could post Shoah Jewry defeat 5 Arab Armies and win our National Independence as a Nation after 2000+ years of oppressive exile? No Goyim courts of law ever once forced any church priest or pastor or any Sheik, to stand before the Bar and receive judgment for their evil war crimes committed repeatedly against the Jewish people and all Humanity in General.

   A simple precedent by which to grasp this prophetic mussar of g’lut. A fundamental Torah theme which the Apostle Paul’s “original sin” substitute theology totally uprooted in Goyim minds.

   The 1st Sinai commandment functions as the greatest commandment of the entire Torah. And it has no hint or reference to the Xtian Trinity Creed nor the Muslim Monotheism substitute theology Tawhid Creeds.

   The abstract term מלכות refers to the korban-like dedication of living blood thrown upon the altar; to the dedication of one or more of the 13 tohor middot Spirits revealed to Moshe at Horev, 40 days after the Sin of the Golden Calf, where a portion of Israel attempted to translate the Spirit Name of the 1st Sinai revelation into the word אלהים.

   Tefillah qualifies as the oath dedication of specific defined tohor middot as מלכות. The Order of the Shemone Esrei 3 + 13 + 3 Blessings. Contained within this Order the רמז of 613. Furthermore the order of this standing prayer holds a רמז to the 6 Yom Tov + Shabbat menorah!

   Herein understands the Torah concept of מלכות required to swear a Torah oath. The dedication of tohor middot directly compare to the Cohen throwing living blood upon the altar. Hence tefillah stands in the stead of korbanot!

   Why? Because both korbanot & tefillah both swear a Torah oath which dedicates tohor middot לשמה.

   The Torah openly states that nothing in the Heavens, Seas, or Earth compares to the revelation of the Spirit Name of HaShem. How much more so for imbecile word translations that attempt to convert the Divine Presence Spirit revelation of the Name into words that the lips of man can easily pronounce!

   The substitute religions of Av tuma avoda zarah attempt to foist belief in JeZeus or Allah as some “new covenant” Torah faith. These abominations fail to grasp that Torah defines faith as the righteous pursuit of judicial common law justice rather than belief in theological Gods which the mind of Man cannot possibly grasp nor understand.

   T’shuva does not correctly translate as repentance. T’shuva learns from HaShem annulling His vow to make the chosen Cohen nation from the seed of Moshe rather than the seed of Avraham, Yitzak, and Yaacov. Chag Yom Kippur commemorates this t’shuva made by HaShem. The Torah specifically employs the term t’shuva wherein HaShem annulled His vow to make the chosen Cohen nation from the seed of Moshe rabbeinu rather than from the oaths sworn to the Avot to this effect.

   When the Romans renamed Judea unto the “Palestine”, herein represents a historical example of t’shuva. The Romans sought to physically wipe out the existence and memory of the Jewish people, just as did Hitler’s Nazis!

   That the new testament and koran have no awareness of the oath brit faith, how tefillah differs from prayer because tefillah absolutely requires swearing a Torah oath as its time oriented commandment “k’vanna”; whereas prayer has nothing to do with swearing a Torah oath, nor with tohor time oriented commandments! These religious forgeries know nothing about the Torah faith which prioritized the obligation placed upon Torah Sanhedrin courts to pursue righteous compensation of damages inflicted by the guilty upon the innocent.

   This concept of annulling a vow derived from Torah common law precedent commandments concerning a father and his daughter or a husband and his wife, where both could annul the vow made by either a girl or a woman. The Roman attempt to expunge the memory of the Jewish state of Judea likewise serves as an example of the intent of annulling a vow. As does UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/19, adopted on December 21, 2017. This resolution declared the status of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital as “null and void” and called on all states to refrain from establishing diplomatic missions in Jerusalem.

   The Xtian and Muslim concepts – concerning worship of their Gods – fundamentally contradict the 2nd Sinai commandment. T’NaCH and Talmudic traditions define the k’vanna of the 2nd Sinai commandment through the Torah precedents which forbid pursuing the ways of the Goyim which reject the revelation of the Torah at Sinai and Horev; and the specific commandment not to intermarry foreign wives. King Shlomo worshipped avoda zarah; when he copied the Goyim practices of building grand Temples and married foreign wives.

   The mitzva of building the Beit HaMikdash centers upon establishment of Sanhedrin Common law courts across the land, rather than bankrupting the country build some grand palatial cathedral. Hence the Sages placed the Great Sanhedrin within the Temple itself; they made a tiqqun on king Shlomo’s assimilated avoda zara! Jews do not worship wood and stone idols, how much more so ornate extravagant buildings! The oppressive slavery where Par’o withheld straw, yet beat Israeli slaves, upon this basic Torah precedent – stands Torah faith to pursue judicial justice.

   Neither Xtianity nor Islam ever attempted to return the Jewish people to our homeland as, by stark contrast, did the great king of Persia. The Persian king Cyrus, referred to as a “messiah” or “anointed one.” This reference found in Isaiah 45:1, which states: “Thus says the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have grasped, to subdue nations before him and strip kings of their robes, to open doors before him— and the gates shall not be closed.” In this context, the term “anointed” (מָשִׁיחַ, mashiach), used to describe Cyrus, indicating that he was chosen by God to achieve a specific purpose, namely, to facilitate the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem. The Torah mitzva of Moshiach: anoints a Jewish king to police the land, working in close conjunction with judicial common law Sanhedrin lateral courts of justice.

   The Persian king learned from the successful conquest of the Assyrian empire by the Babylonians. The Assyrian barbarians uprooted entire populations of conquered nations and replaced those refugee populations with foreign aliens who had no connection to that land. This reality permitted the Babylonian Armies to conquer the Assyrian empire much like water goes through a sieve.

   Roman new testament propaganda stands in stark contrast with the great king of Persia. The Romans sought to ignite social anarchy and Civil War among the Jewish people. In this effort they succeeded as well as they did destroying Herod assimilated Temple abomination. The British government duplicated the policies of the hated Romans. During its Palestine mandate period, London foisted a divide and rule policy between Arabs and Jews.

   Both the Syrian Greeks and the Romans based their society social order upon the ideas of ancient Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle and others. Aristotle served as a key advisor to Alexander the Great. Aristotle’s 3 part syllogism does not compare to rabbi Akiva’s 4 part פרדס logic system. All logic requires order: the letter order which distinguishes “God vs Dog”, radically changes how a person perceives the idea communicated! In equal manner Order defines the Jewish Prayer Book known as the Siddur. The Siddur contains the root word סדר – Order.

   Why do Jews view Xtianity and Islam as Av Tuma avoda zarah? Goyim never accepted the revelation of the Torah at Sinai. JeZeus did not observe the mitzva of shabbat. This mitzva requires that Jews make the הבדלה/distinction that discerns like from like; מלאכה from עבודה. Failure to understand the subtle distinction which separates these two verbs, both of which translate as “work”; an Am Ha’aretz never keeps the mitzva of shabbat observance – ever in his or her life.

   Mesechta Shabbat learns מלאכה whereas mesechta Baba Kama learns עבודה. The question do the toldot follow the Avot asked by both mesechtot; this question based upon the Av time oriented commandments in בראשית, compared to the toldot positive and negative commandments in the Books שמות, ויקרא, ובמדבר. Torah scholarship always strives to make the essential understanding which makes the מאי נפקא מינא הבדלה between like from like “understandings”. The Talmud defines this attribute as the interpretation of the tohor midda of רב חסד. Baba Kama distinguishes between tam and muad damagers. The latter applies to Man because it requires intent, as do all time oriented Av commandments. Four Avot Muad damagers: Oppression, theft, ערוה, and judicial bribery, learned by means of a דיוק logical inference made upon the four tam damagers explicitly stated in the Av Mishna of Baba Kama.

   Shabbat observance dedicates not doing forbidden מלאכה on the day of shabbat; דיוק, likewise to not do forbidden עבודה during the 6 days of the ‘week of shabbat’. The Goyim religions of Av tuma avoda zarah never grasped this fundamental distinction of shabbat observance as a mitzva inclusive of every day of the week. Proof that the polecat “daughter religions” never learned the Torah לשמה.

   Both Xtianity and Islam superficially claim to respect shabbat, but their religious rhetoric, as empty as Arabs eating camel flesh but abhorring pork! These religions of avoda zarah have no awareness of the chosen Cohen people and the Divine oath inheritance to the oath sworn brit lands, or the spiritual awareness which discerns between tohor vs. tumah spirits which breath within the Yatzir Ha’Tov vs. the Yatzir Ha’Rah within the bnai brit hearts.

   Repentance, a totally empty Xtian idea of personal regret; it shares no common ground with t’shuva, that bases itself upon annulling vows. Neither the father nor the husband “regrets” annulling a vow made by his daughter or wife. Therefore, t’shuva shares no common ground with the Xtian void concept of repentance.

   Similarly, the translation of “covenant” shares no common ground with the Hebrew concept ברית. The latter – an oath alliance sworn לשמה. To swear an oath alliance requires שם ומלכות. The new testament and koran forgeries never bring the שם השם as revealed in the first Sinai commandment. Therefore, both books of Av tuma foreign religions – worship other gods; both Av tuma religions profane the 2nd Sinai commandment. Both know nothing that a Torah brit requires swearing a Torah oath לשמה, with the intent to cut an eternal alliance touching the chosen Cohen people.

   All T’NaCH prophets command mussar strictly to the chosen Cohen people. Herein defines the intent or k’vanna of all T’NaCH prophecy. The new testament Roman forgery does not comprehend these subtle distinctions. It together with Islam believes in some type of Universal God. The Xtian forgery seeks to promote civil war within Jewish society, by perverting prophecy into an Av tuma witchcraft, which makes predictions concerning the future. Throughout the gospel narrative this type of silly narishkeit spews from the new testament like farts.

   Chaos and anarchy defined the Jewish revolt attempt(s) against the Romans. Multiple and many Jewish sects dominated the 66 rebellion. Bar Kokhba’s revolt failed to unite Jews of Judea with a well-timed & coordinated Jewish revolt together and united with the Jews of Alexandria Egypt. Furthermore, that general failed to drive the Roman legions out of Damascus, Syria, a critical error.

   Bar Kokhba’s critical errors of judgment doomed this second Jewish revolt at Betar. Jewish social anarchy and civil war greatly contributed to the Roman victory over the Jewish revolts in both 66 and 135. The key concept of Torah faith revolves around the righteous pursuit of judicial justice within the borders of the oath-sworn brit lands – the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen nation, Bar Kokhba as a military messiah failed to achieve.

   The Av tuma avoda zara religions, worship other gods; they pervert the Torah vision of faith – forcibly converted into some theological creed-based personal belief system. These substitute theologies attempts to subvert the Torah faith that spins around the central axis: the righteous pursuit of judicial justice obligations; which makes a fair compensation of damages inflicted by party A upon party B. Av tuma avoda zara religions seek to substitute the pursuit of righteous justice with a personal belief in JeZeus or Allah.

   Av tuma Avoda zara substitute theologies attempt to supplant their creed based personal belief in theologically defined belief systems, that define their gods as either a 3-part One God mystery or a simple One God monotheism. Despite the simple fact that monotheism violates the 2nd Sinai commandment. Because if only one God then no need to command not to worship other Gods. Moshe travelled to Egypt, and the 10 plagues judged the gods of Egypt. Just as did HaShem judge the Gods worshipped by the Canaanite kings. Avoda zara plagues all generations of Israel; all generations struggle with assimilation and intermarriage.

   The sworn oath brit cut at GilGal, as expressed through the Rashi tefillen recalls the fact that Goyim worship other Gods. No such reality as a Universal God. The lights of Hanukkah, for example, reject Greek philosophy. Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס four basis logic system radically differs from Aristotle’s 3 part syllogisms. Attempts made by assimilated rabbis to interpret the T’NaCH and Talmud based upon Greek logic formats – an utter abomination on the order of Xtianity and Islam.

   Greek philosophy qualifies as a foreign substitute theology; an Av tuma on par with the Christian and Muslim avoda zara repeated attempts to convert Jews with their replacement theologies. Hence Jews who study ancient Greek philosophy, they err in Av tuma avoda zara as much as do Jews who convert to Xtianity and Islam; as much as did Moshiach Bar Kachba failure to coordinate the revolt together with the Jews of Alexandria Egypt and to carry the war into Syria with the objective of conquering both Damascus together with all its major naval ports.

   The Jewish concept of Moshiach a פרט to the כלל function of the Torah and the Oral Torah in interpreting key aspects of Jewish common law and prophecy; Moshiach: an Oral Torah commandment. Indeed, the Jewish approach to the concept of the Messiah, as found in both the T’NaCH and the Oral Torah Talmud codification, quite different & distinct from how the gospel counterfeit portrays Jesus within Christian theology. The following discussion reflects the different views on this matter, particularly in relation to how Jewish scholars might interpret the failure of the Gospel narrative to align with both the Torah’s precedence based common law legalism, and the traditional understanding of the Moshiach as understood through T’NaCH prophetic mussar.

   The Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach, deeply rooted in how the Oral Torah interprets the k’vanna of the Written Torah; just as the time oriented commandment of tefillah requires שם ומלכות as its oath k’vanna. Particularly through the common law precedents set by Moshe’s anointing of the House of Aaron, as well as the later anointing of King Shaul by the prophet Shmuel.

   The notion that the Moshiach must come from the lineage of David, himself a descendant of Judah, a latter tiqqun added to the mitzva of Moshiach. This latter tiqqun sought to ensure that the line of the House of David, completely rejects the Xtian theological “Father God” of JeZeus mythology. This latter revisionist history attempt directly compares to the mythology of how Zeus fathered Hercules! Adultery an Av tumah Capital Crime. JeZeus the offspring of Zeus as the father of the Gods, represents a Torah abomination.

   The Talmud’s emphasis on the Torah sage being held in greater regard than a king of Israel, a critical piece Talmudic understanding concerning the priority of spiritual leadership. The Torah Talmid Chacham, perceived by the sages of the Talmud as the one who understands and interprets the Torah common law; possessing the wisdom to guide the nation in matters of our destiny path of truth-faith, which commits the chosen Cohen people to pursue righteous judicial justice. The role of the Moshiach in Oral Torah logic, not just a political or religious leader. Nor some military figure comparable to Bar Kachba; rather, Moshiach represents the Oral Torah interpretation of someone who restores the Torah as the Written Constitution of the Republic; the Oral Torah as the basic model of lateral common law courtrooms. As such, the Moshiach’s anointing, deeply tied to the oath brit relationship established by Avram at the brit cut between the pieces and the tradition Oral Torah learning.

   Just as “swearing” an oath blessing requires שם ומלכות, so too the Order established by the Framers of the Talmud affixed a warp/weft loom like relationship between the Aggada narratives opposed by the Halachic portions of the Gemara common law precedent based commentary to the Mishna. Stripping a garment of either its warp or weft threads destroys the fabric of that garment. The statute law halachic codifications of the Middle Ages made this precise abomination. To correct the Rambam halachic perversion requires affixing any and all Rambam posok halacha in his statute law perversion to the identical halacha within the B’HaG, Rif, or Rosh common law halachic codifications. These kosher halachic common law codes always affix their Halachic Gemara rulings to a Primary Source Mishna.

   Torah scholarship requires a sharp critical eye which can discern Like from Like. The Talmud refers to this skill as the definition of understanding. Just as swearing a oath blessing requires the warp/weft of שם ומלכות, so too and how much more so ritual halachic observance requires its Aggadic דרוש\פשט learning to T’NaCH Primary sources which makes a common law precedent comparison search that explores the depths or facets of prophetic mussar which defines the פשט of the Talmudic aggada warp. Oral Torah: just as the Gemara makes a multiply faceted משנה תורה\legislative review (re-interpretation) of the diamond like faces of Mishnaic language, so too and how much more so precedent based research gleans prophetic mussar tohor middot comparisons from sugyot of NaCH compared to the identical sets of tohor middot located in other sugyot of NaCH. This depth analysis of prophetic mussar determines the k’vanna of Torah mitzvot and Talmudic halachot observances.

   The concept of anointing with oil in the context of sacrifices (korbanot) in the Temple, also fundamental to understanding the Jewish approach to Moshiach. This oil, used in the service of the Temple, symbolized the sanctification of Israel’s offerings and the anointing of its leaders. The Messiah, in Jewish thought, will be anointed in a similar manner to those figures who came before him—especially the kings and priests of Israel, in accordance with the Torah’s stipulations. A concrete act of divine selection and empowerment.

   The Xstian claim that JeZeus fulfills the role of Moshiach simply at odds with the traditional Jewish understanding of the term. From the Jewish perspective, Jesus’ life and actions do not align with the Oral Torah’s requirements for Moshiach. The Gospels narrative fail to engage with the Oral Torah’s teachings about the Moshiach, and they do not acknowledge the precedent established in common law, the anointing of the House of Aaron or the priests and kings of Israel. In Jewish tradition, the Moshiach must be a descendant of King David (through his father, not his mother), a precondition which the so called ‘virgin birth’ failed to achieve. Furthermore, the bogus Xtian narrative specifically failed to “fulfill” the specific roles, re-establishment of the Federal Sanhedrin common law system of Torts and Capital Sanhedrin courtrooms which achieved judicial justice in the oath sworn lands of the chosen Cohen nation. None of these pre-conditions did JeZeus accomplish in any the historical context.

   The failure of the Gospel narrative to align with the Torah’s precedent for the anointing of the Moshiach another of the many points of contention. In Jewish tradition, anointing with oil – an essential part of the mitzva of Moshiach. As exemplified in the Torah’s precedents of Moshe & Aaron, and of course kings Shaul & David. JeZeus never depicted as being anointed, except by a prostitute. Such a narrative compares to the judicial injustice and brutal torture which the gospel narrative portrays the JeZeus “sacrifice” upon the Roman altar of death. For Jewish scholars, this vile depiction makes only a fictional story. The gospel narrative does satisfy the Torah’s vision of Moshiach, which requires restoration of the Torah Constitutional Republic and the Sanhedrin lateral common law Federal court system. A prostitute anointing the feet of a man hardly qualifies as holy korban.

   The Talmudic teachings on the Moshiach, make clear that the Messiah not only restores the Torah as the constitution of the Republic, but just as significant, the Moshiach re-establish Torah Sanhedrin lateral common law courts. The gospel narrative of a spiritual Moshiach, while not entirely foreign to Judaism, based upon the false messiah movements lead by Sabbatai Zevi and Yaacov Frank; based upon these latter false messiah examples the gospel fictional narrative hardly stands as authentic. Talmudic common law rejects such ‘spiritual messiahs as utterly false.

   The Oral Torah\Talmud give a specific definition of a prophet as someone who guides the people of Israel toward t’shuva and adherence to the mitzvot (commandments) expressed through Av tohor time oriented commandments. Prophets, employ the 13 tohor middot as the basis of T’NaCH mussar common law sugya comparisons to other T’NaCH sugyot. Prophetic mussar, functions as the warp/weft loom like opposing threads of Talmudic halacha. T’NaCH prophetic mussar, based on a comparison of similar middot configurations within NaCH sugyot, defines the wisdom of learn the NaCH kabbalah לשמה. Time oriented commandments require prophetic mussar as the basis of k’vanna within the heart.

   The concept of prophecy in Judaism, not about foretelling the future, a trait known to tuma false prophets, who according to the gospel narrative “fulfil” the words of the prophets. Utterly absurd. Time oriented Av Torah commandments, which require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna of tohor Oral Torah middot, apply equally to all generations of the chosen Cohen people. The gospel narative did not grasp the essence of Torah observance of Av tohor time oriented commandments. Time oriented commandments require prophetic mussar for the generations to observe this unique type of Av commandments לשמה. The idea that JeZeus fulfilled the words of the prophets as absurd as a prostitute pouring oil onto his feet transforms this work of fiction into both Moshiach and the son of God.

   The Xtian tradition, judged upon the scales of Oral Torah Av time oriented commandments, clear as the Sun on a cloudless day a false messiah depiction on the order of Harry Potter fiction. Allah Voldemort – dead. JeZeus particularly not only specifically ignorant of the mitzva of Shabbat & the כלל of Av time oriented commandments which require prophetic mussar which define the k’vanna of Oral Torah middot. JeZeus, as a specific example taught “prayer” as “Our father who lives in Heaven” rather that tefillah a matter of the heart. Prophetic mussar k’vanna – a matter of the heart. Tefillah entails swearing a Torah oath לשמה to dedicate a specific defined tohor midda in order to make a tiqqun how a man interacts in the future with his wife, children, family, neighbours and people. The k’vanna of tefillah dedicates tohor defined prophetic mussar middot לשמה.

   Xtian theology places JeZeus in a perverse position where the gospel narrative declares that he “fulfilled the Law”, oblivious that the gospels have not the least bit of a clue what Torah common law means nor how it functions. JeZeus’s departure from Torah common law, particularly in matters like Shabbat observance, cited as but one obvious example of how this imaginary man cannot and does not ‘fulfil’ the prophets.

   The Jewish rejection of Jesus as Moshiach, or even as the koran narrative as a Torah prophet rests squarely upon the failure of the gospels to address Av tohor time oriented commandments. Besides the failure to align with the Torah’s specific precondition which learns the mitzva of Moshiach from korbanot anointed with oil together with the restoration of the Sanhedrin lateral common law court Federal court system. The Roman fraud gospel framers did not understand Constitutional Torah law.

   This fundamental blatant error concerning the nature of prophetic mussar as the definition through precedent comparison which define the k’vanna of tohor middot, as the definition and purpose the Oral Torah Horev revelation. Implications of strange Xtian doctrines, such as salvation through grace, or Jesus’ fulfilment of the Law, judged as Av tuma avoda zarah; the forerunner of Sabbatai Zevi’s antinomian doctrine. The absolute ignorance of the gospel narrative to Av tohor time oriented commandments which require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna within the heart definitively proves that JeZeus failed the “one in 10,000” may attain the level of Torah scholarship and prophetic merit.

   The Gospel narratives simply understood as a perversion of T’NaCH and Talmudic Moshiach mussar prophecies. Xtian theology and creeds ignores the foundational principles of achieving Av time oriented commandments, wherein the bnai brit Cohen people breath the tohor spirits of the Creator of the Universe from within the Yatzir Tov of our hearts; the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev.

   Muslim theologians approach the issue of JeZeus and Muhammad being referred to as Old Testament prophets, based upon the false assumption that the gospel narrative merit respect. Latter day Islam which declares the Torah as corrupt compares to the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith. Many Xtian theologians draw a line of comparison between Muhammad and Smith. Both “prophets” introduced their own new order of scriptures.

   Both Islam and Mormonism highly revers the treif gospel narratives. Goyim have a deep infatuation with T’NaCH prophets, despite their total ignorance of tohor middot and Av time oriented commandments. Muhammad’s message of monotheism, likewise declares that JeZeus predicted the coming of Muhammad. JeZeus in the Quran has absolutely no concept of the mitzva of Moshiach as interpreted by the Oral Torah פרדס logic system and tohor middot.

   The koran regards Muhammad as the Seal of the Prophets (Khatam an-Nabiyyin), despite not having the least bit of a clue how the T’NaCH understands the function and role of prophets. Clearly Islamic thought resembles the prophet Adam Smith far more than any T’NaCH prophet. The koran does not position Muhammad as a continuation of the Jewish prophetic line in a direct, historical sense. Muhammad according to the koran narrative lived as the final prophet who brought the ultimate revelation from God. Both the koran and Mormon holy books supersede all the scriptures which preceded them.

   Neither the gospels, koran nor book of Mormon brings the שם השם revealed in the first Sinai commandment. These latter day Goyim “prophets” confuse the Hebrew “oath alliance”/ברית as one in the same with the sophomoric translated term covenant. Lacking the שם השם no man can cut a Torah ברית. Hence, covenant cannot mean brit. A difference of apples and oranges. Which these Goyim prophets remained completely oblivious in their bliss & ignorance. In many ways these spiritual reformers compare to Martin Luther, Huldrych Zwingli, John Calvin, William Tyndale, John Knox, John Wesley, and Mary Baker Eddy. While not all these individuals directly hated or despised one another, certainly significant theological disagreements and conflicts erupted among them.

   Luther believed in the doctrine of consubstantiation. Zwingli, on the other hand, viewed the Eucharist as purely symbolic. John Calvin’s theology was influenced by both Luther and Zwingli, but he developed his own distinct doctrines, particularly on predestination and the sovereignty of God.

   William Tyndale focused on translating the Bible into English, and his fugitive status continually forced him to hide from English authorities. John Wesley, came much later and had different theological focuses. He disagreed with Calvin’s predestination doctrine, emphasizing free will and personal holiness. Wesley’s Arminian views such as: Free Will, Prevenient Grace that precedes and prepares the soul for salvation; Conditional Election upon faith, Universal Atonement: that salvation is available to everyone, but only those who accept it will be saved. These “prophesies” put him at odds with Calvinist traditions.

   Mary Baker Eddy, her teachings were often seen as unorthodox or heretical by mainstream Xtian denominations. The debates and tensions among them highlight the diversity and complexity of the Reformation and subsequent religious movements. Comparatively speaking, Muhammad fits right into the crowd of these religious reformers and prophets.

   Bottom line: Justice: fair judicial compensation for damages inflicted. Not forgiveness for sin. The Pauline substitute theology of original sin perverted the key Torah theme of g’lut\exile. Starting with the exile of Adam from the garden, Noach’s exile in the Ark, and the exile of Israel in Egypt. And concluding with the 40 year exile in the Wilderness. The Holy Writings Book of Job likewise teaches the mussar of g’lut/exile.

   Share this:

   Loading...

   Reply

   • ACTS 7: 51 `Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and in ears! ye do always the Holy Spirit resist; as your fathers

     Loading...

     Reply

     • Noise. You have added nothing. Only exposed your pretension that you see yourself as God. LOL

       Loading...

       Reply

     • How do you judge and weigh post sealing of the Talmud secondary commentators like Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, and the Rambam as famous luminaries among Geonim and Reshonim Talmudic scholarship?

       The lights of Hanukkah, as a mitzva דאורייתא, separates substance from shadows. Gaonim and Reshonim scholarship which embraces Greek and Roman statute law and ancient Greek philosophies of logic, best represents the perverted tuma middot interests of the resurrected from the dead – Tzeddukim.

       Before their defeat during the Hanukkah Civil War, these רשעים encouraged Israel to abandon & forget the Oral Torah revelation at Horev, forty days after the sin of the Golden Calf; a portion of Israel attempted to translate the רוח הקודש שם השם to the word אלהים. The revelation of the Oral Torah 13 tohor middot spirits, as explained through the much later kabbala chiddush of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, the Tzeddukim, Karaites, and Goyim Xtian churches to this very day absolutely and categorically denies the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev. Similar the Arabs states which abhor the idea that Jews have equal rights to achieve self determination in the Middle East; hence Arab enemies refer to Israel as the Zionist Entity.

       The disgraceful history of Xtian substitutional theology, long antedated by the ancient Tzeddukim equal abomination, their attempts to cause Israel to forget the Oral Torah. Hence all post Talmudic scholarship which relies heavily, or primarily upon the structure and organization of Jewish religious Law “converted” into frumkeit religious legalism categories. Turned to the re-discovered ancient Greek philosophers, which organizational logical thought, as their primary tools to interpret and understand the Torah.

       Such post Talmudic commentaries qualify as self-hating Jews within the “camp” of the Tzeddukim counter-revolutionaries, in the days of the Hashmonaim. Saadia Gaon, despite his authorship of “The Book of Beliefs and Opinions,” his repeated attempts to address the challenges from pre-נידוי Karaite Jews likewise floated. He blended Torah topics together with Greek philosophy, but failed to teach the Torah as a common law judicial legal system. Herein serves as key evidence to the contention that g’lut Jewry even by the tail end of the Gaonim scholarship had lost the wisdom to obey and observe the Torah commandments לשמה.

       Ibn Ezra throughout his Chumash commentary introduced Greek philosophical ideas. The Rambam relied upon Aristotelian logic as his main tool by which he organized halacha into Greek and Roman codes of statute law. The obtuse assimilation of the “Golden Age” Spanish rabbis, who uprooted T’NaCH & Talmudic common law, based upon the kabbala of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, in their rush to express their glee approval of the rediscovered ancient Greek philosophical works. As such these assimilated rabbis undermined Jewish legal traditions of common law, which their scholarship replaced with Greek philosophies and box thinking, rigid statute law models.

       Absurd, the notion that embracing hostile foreign cultures and customs as a key strategy to reinforce Jewish identity and intellectual resilience. These assimilated Jewish heretics served as the forerunners of the Reform abomination of the early 19th Century. The contributions of Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, and Rambam, while viewed critically in this context, without any doubt part of broader context of Jewish attempts to address the challenges faced by g’lut Jewish communities, such as the collapse of the Roman road network.

       This assimilation took Orthodox Jews off the path, just as did secularism did and does to post American and French revolution Jewry today. Saadia Gaon addressed the sudden rediscovery of the four Centuries concealed, ancient Greek writings, entombed by Xtian church fathers.

       Rambam, like his Tzeddukim forefathers, sought to impose a sort of Greek polis city state(s) upon Jews through his statute law “ghetto halachic walls”. Through systematic order & classification of Talmudic subjects into easily assessable standardized religious judicial common law courts.,

       The Rambam caused Jews to forget the Oral Torah revelation at Horev of משנה תורה common law. The revelation of the Torah at Sinai, contained amazingly within the first two Sinai commandments. Only after the revelation of Oral Torah common law did Israel receive the rest of the Torah. The famous 10 Commandments serves as a precedent to remember the 10 plagues of Egypt wherein HaShem judged the Gods of Par’o, according to Moshe’s Torah common law.

       Ibn Ezra’s son converted to Islam. His Chumash commentary proves that he too, just like his fellow Spanish peer, made a deep assimilated study of ancient Greek philosophical thought. Torah common law, a judicial system by which the courts make fair compensations for damages inflicted; this judicial common law shares nothing, has absolutely no common ground, with theological religious belief systems, imported from non-Jewish cultures and alien sources.

       The Torah, fundamentally a legal and ethical guide whose faith seeks judicial righteous justice within the borders of the Torah oath sworn lands, the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen people. Goyim reject the revelation of the Written and Oral Torah at Sinai and Horev. Hence their counterfeit wisdom lack the power to transform Goyim into the chosen Cohen people.

       Torah common law serves as the basis for a comprehensive judicial system that emphasizes justice, fairness, and compensatory lateral sanhedrin judicial rulings, as the definition of faith. The Torah’s Talmudic focus, stands solely upon precedents which shape and determine Mishnaic common law. This legal system, simply distinct from any philosophical or theological systems imported from non-Jewish cultures. Like Cohonim separated from Goyim, something like the difference between t’rumah vs. chol first fruits.

       The importance of maintaining the tohor purity of Torah-based common law, (rooted in the Oral Torah and the kabbala of Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system), functions as the basis of Mishnaic and Gemara common law. This approach emphasizes the unique and self-contained nature of the Jewish legal tradition – without reliance on external philosophies, or religious false messiah beliefs.

       Hence the k’vanna of lighting the Hanukkah lights contains the dedication to never rely upon foreign cultures, customs, philosophies, or cathedral grand structures to serve as any kind replacement basis to interpret the k’vanna Will of the Written Torah Constitution of the Torah Cohen Republic.

       The k’vanna (מלך tohor middot dedications) of lighting the Hanukkah lights serves as a powerful reminder of the dedication to preserve Jewish tradition and identity. The lights symbolize the triumph of the P’rushim over the assimilated Tzeddukim רשעים who embraced Greek culture and customs. The k’vanna of lighting the Hanukkah lights serves as a powerful reminder of the dedication to preserve Jewish tradition and identity through the dedication of tohor middot as instructed through prophetic mussar (Aggada). The lights symbolize the triumph of the P’rushim over the assimilated Tzeddukim רשעים who embraced Greek culture and customs.

       The challenge of the new testament notions of Messiah represents a similar assimilationist trend that compares to the plagues in the days of Paró and Moshe. Goyim declare themselves ‘not under the Law’, yet Goyim assume they possess the lock and keys to the Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach.

       Torah common law stands upon the foundation by which prophetic mussar defines the k’vanna of mitzvot time oriented Av commandments. Never once does the new testament forgery ever attempt to learn the prophets through Common Law precedents. Why? Statute law does not depend upon, nor does it require precedents.

       For 2000+ years g’lut Jewry has felt the cursed whip and wincing pain of Jewish assimilation and inter-marriage. Goyim cultures and customs which do not accept the revelation of the chosen Cohen people consequent to our acceptance of the Torah at Sinai and Horev. These alien cultures and logic formats have dominated the Jewish people, just as similarly have Goyim barbarians. Jews survived the furnaces of the Shoah based upon the אלהינו Name within the קריא שמע tefillah דאורייתא, which remembers the oath sworn by Yitzak at the Akadah; as the chosen Cohen son of Avraham, save my future born seed, my Olam Ha’Ba, from Shoah and I dedicate to walk in justice before you, as did my father. Hence HaShem replaced Yitzak as a korban with a ram dedication to have this k’vanna.

       Loading...

       Reply

   • Mosckerr. You provide no links to texts for the “copy/ paste” paragraphs you provided.

     Loading...

     Reply

     • No links b/c introduced original scholarship.

       Loading...

       Reply

       • No one is going to read that. Why are you unable to make your points as part of a real discussion? Speaking of noise, you just made a really big noise.

         Loading...

         Reply

         • Tough being illiterate and can’t read.

           Loading...

           Reply

         • How do you judge and weigh post sealing of the Talmud secondary commentators like Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, and the Rambam as famous luminaries among Geonim and Reshonim Talmudic scholarship?

           The lights of Hanukkah, as a mitzva דאורייתא, separates substance from shadows. Gaonim and Reshonim scholarship which embraces Greek and Roman statute law and ancient Greek philosophies of logic, best represents the perverted tuma middot interests of the resurrected from the dead – Tzeddukim.

           Before their defeat during the Hanukkah Civil War, these רשעים encouraged Israel to abandon & forget the Oral Torah revelation at Horev, forty days after the sin of the Golden Calf; a portion of Israel attempted to translate the רוח הקודש שם השם to the word אלהים. The revelation of the Oral Torah 13 tohor middot spirits, as explained through the much later kabbala chiddush of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, the Tzeddukim, Karaites, and Goyim Xtian churches to this very day absolutely and categorically denies the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev. Similar the Arabs states which abhor the idea that Jews have equal rights to achieve self determination in the Middle East; hence Arab enemies refer to Israel as the Zionist Entity.

           The disgraceful history of Xtian substitutional theology, long antedated by the ancient Tzeddukim equal abomination, their attempts to cause Israel to forget the Oral Torah. Hence all post Talmudic scholarship which relies heavily, or primarily upon the structure and organization of Jewish religious Law “converted” into frumkeit religious legalism categories. Turned to the re-discovered ancient Greek philosophers, which organizational logical thought, as their primary tools to interpret and understand the Torah.

           Such post Talmudic commentaries qualify as self-hating Jews within the “camp” of the Tzeddukim counter-revolutionaries, in the days of the Hashmonaim. Saadia Gaon, despite his authorship of “The Book of Beliefs and Opinions,” his repeated attempts to address the challenges from pre-נידוי Karaite Jews likewise floated. He blended Torah topics together with Greek philosophy, but failed to teach the Torah as a common law judicial legal system. Herein serves as key evidence to the contention that g’lut Jewry even by the tail end of the Gaonim scholarship had lost the wisdom to obey and observe the Torah commandments לשמה.

           Ibn Ezra throughout his Chumash commentary introduced Greek philosophical ideas. The Rambam relied upon Aristotelian logic as his main tool by which he organized halacha into Greek and Roman codes of statute law. The obtuse assimilation of the “Golden Age” Spanish rabbis, who uprooted T’NaCH & Talmudic common law, based upon the kabbala of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, in their rush to express their glee approval of the rediscovered ancient Greek philosophical works. As such these assimilated rabbis undermined Jewish legal traditions of common law, which their scholarship replaced with Greek philosophies and box thinking, rigid statute law models.

           Absurd, the notion that embracing hostile foreign cultures and customs as a key strategy to reinforce Jewish identity and intellectual resilience. These assimilated Jewish heretics served as the forerunners of the Reform abomination of the early 19th Century. The contributions of Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, and Rambam, while viewed critically in this context, without any doubt part of broader context of Jewish attempts to address the challenges faced by g’lut Jewish communities, such as the collapse of the Roman road network.

           This assimilation took Orthodox Jews off the path, just as did secularism did and does to post American and French revolution Jewry today. Saadia Gaon addressed the sudden rediscovery of the four Centuries concealed, ancient Greek writings, entombed by Xtian church fathers.

           Rambam, like his Tzeddukim forefathers, sought to impose a sort of Greek polis city state(s) upon Jews through his statute law “ghetto halachic walls”. Through systematic order & classification of Talmudic subjects into easily assessable standardized religious judicial common law courts.,

           The Rambam caused Jews to forget the Oral Torah revelation at Horev of משנה תורה common law. The revelation of the Torah at Sinai, contained amazingly within the first two Sinai commandments. Only after the revelation of Oral Torah common law did Israel receive the rest of the Torah. The famous 10 Commandments serves as a precedent to remember the 10 plagues of Egypt wherein HaShem judged the Gods of Par’o, according to Moshe’s Torah common law.

           Ibn Ezra’s son converted to Islam. His Chumash commentary proves that he too, just like his fellow Spanish peer, made a deep assimilated study of ancient Greek philosophical thought. Torah common law, a judicial system by which the courts make fair compensations for damages inflicted; this judicial common law shares nothing, has absolutely no common ground, with theological religious belief systems, imported from non-Jewish cultures and alien sources.

           The Torah, fundamentally a legal and ethical guide whose faith seeks judicial righteous justice within the borders of the Torah oath sworn lands, the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen people. Goyim reject the revelation of the Written and Oral Torah at Sinai and Horev. Hence their counterfeit wisdom lack the power to transform Goyim into the chosen Cohen people.

           Torah common law serves as the basis for a comprehensive judicial system that emphasizes justice, fairness, and compensatory lateral sanhedrin judicial rulings, as the definition of faith. The Torah’s Talmudic focus, stands solely upon precedents which shape and determine Mishnaic common law. This legal system, simply distinct from any philosophical or theological systems imported from non-Jewish cultures. Like Cohonim separated from Goyim, something like the difference between t’rumah vs. chol first fruits.

           The importance of maintaining the tohor purity of Torah-based common law, (rooted in the Oral Torah and the kabbala of Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system), functions as the basis of Mishnaic and Gemara common law. This approach emphasizes the unique and self-contained nature of the Jewish legal tradition – without reliance on external philosophies, or religious false messiah beliefs.

           Hence the k’vanna of lighting the Hanukkah lights contains the dedication to never rely upon foreign cultures, customs, philosophies, or cathedral grand structures to serve as any kind replacement basis to interpret the k’vanna Will of the Written Torah Constitution of the Torah Cohen Republic.

           The k’vanna (מלך tohor middot dedications) of lighting the Hanukkah lights serves as a powerful reminder of the dedication to preserve Jewish tradition and identity. The lights symbolize the triumph of the P’rushim over the assimilated Tzeddukim רשעים who embraced Greek culture and customs. The k’vanna of lighting the Hanukkah lights serves as a powerful reminder of the dedication to preserve Jewish tradition and identity through the dedication of tohor middot as instructed through prophetic mussar (Aggada). The lights symbolize the triumph of the P’rushim over the assimilated Tzeddukim רשעים who embraced Greek culture and customs.

           The challenge of the new testament notions of Messiah represents a similar assimilationist trend that compares to the plagues in the days of Paró and Moshe. Goyim declare themselves ‘not under the Law’, yet Goyim assume they possess the lock and keys to the Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach.

           Torah common law stands upon the foundation by which prophetic mussar defines the k’vanna of mitzvot time oriented Av commandments. Never once does the new testament forgery ever attempt to learn the prophets through Common Law precedents. Why? Statute law does not depend upon, nor does it require precedents.

           For 2000+ years g’lut Jewry has felt the cursed whip and wincing pain of Jewish assimilation and inter-marriage. Goyim cultures and customs which do not accept the revelation of the chosen Cohen people consequent to our acceptance of the Torah at Sinai and Horev. These alien cultures and logic formats have dominated the Jewish people, just as similarly have Goyim barbarians. Jews survived the furnaces of the Shoah based upon the אלהינו Name within the קריא שמע tefillah דאורייתא, which remembers the oath sworn by Yitzak at the Akadah; as the chosen Cohen son of Avraham, save my future born seed, my Olam Ha’Ba, from Shoah and I dedicate to walk in justice before you, as did my father. Hence HaShem replaced Yitzak as a korban with a ram dedication to have this k’vanna.

           Loading...

           Reply

     • How do you judge and weigh post sealing of the Talmud secondary commentators like Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, and the Rambam as famous luminaries among Geonim and Reshonim Talmudic scholarship?

       The lights of Hanukkah, as a mitzva דאורייתא, separates substance from shadows. Gaonim and Reshonim scholarship which embraces Greek and Roman statute law and ancient Greek philosophies of logic, best represents the perverted tuma middot interests of the resurrected from the dead – Tzeddukim.

       Before their defeat during the Hanukkah Civil War, these רשעים encouraged Israel to abandon & forget the Oral Torah revelation at Horev, forty days after the sin of the Golden Calf; a portion of Israel attempted to translate the רוח הקודש שם השם to the word אלהים. The revelation of the Oral Torah 13 tohor middot spirits, as explained through the much later kabbala chiddush of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, the Tzeddukim, Karaites, and Goyim Xtian churches to this very day absolutely and categorically denies the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev. Similar the Arabs states which abhor the idea that Jews have equal rights to achieve self determination in the Middle East; hence Arab enemies refer to Israel as the Zionist Entity.

       The disgraceful history of Xtian substitutional theology, long antedated by the ancient Tzeddukim equal abomination, their attempts to cause Israel to forget the Oral Torah. Hence all post Talmudic scholarship which relies heavily, or primarily upon the structure and organization of Jewish religious Law “converted” into frumkeit religious legalism categories. Turned to the re-discovered ancient Greek philosophers, which organizational logical thought, as their primary tools to interpret and understand the Torah.

       Such post Talmudic commentaries qualify as self-hating Jews within the “camp” of the Tzeddukim counter-revolutionaries, in the days of the Hashmonaim. Saadia Gaon, despite his authorship of “The Book of Beliefs and Opinions,” his repeated attempts to address the challenges from pre-נידוי Karaite Jews likewise floated. He blended Torah topics together with Greek philosophy, but failed to teach the Torah as a common law judicial legal system. Herein serves as key evidence to the contention that g’lut Jewry even by the tail end of the Gaonim scholarship had lost the wisdom to obey and observe the Torah commandments לשמה.

       Ibn Ezra throughout his Chumash commentary introduced Greek philosophical ideas. The Rambam relied upon Aristotelian logic as his main tool by which he organized halacha into Greek and Roman codes of statute law. The obtuse assimilation of the “Golden Age” Spanish rabbis, who uprooted T’NaCH & Talmudic common law, based upon the kabbala of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, in their rush to express their glee approval of the rediscovered ancient Greek philosophical works. As such these assimilated rabbis undermined Jewish legal traditions of common law, which their scholarship replaced with Greek philosophies and box thinking, rigid statute law models.

       Absurd, the notion that embracing hostile foreign cultures and customs as a key strategy to reinforce Jewish identity and intellectual resilience. These assimilated Jewish heretics served as the forerunners of the Reform abomination of the early 19th Century. The contributions of Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, and Rambam, while viewed critically in this context, without any doubt part of broader context of Jewish attempts to address the challenges faced by g’lut Jewish communities, such as the collapse of the Roman road network.

       This assimilation took Orthodox Jews off the path, just as did secularism did and does to post American and French revolution Jewry today. Saadia Gaon addressed the sudden rediscovery of the four Centuries concealed, ancient Greek writings, entombed by Xtian church fathers.

       Rambam, like his Tzeddukim forefathers, sought to impose a sort of Greek polis city state(s) upon Jews through his statute law “ghetto halachic walls”. Through systematic order & classification of Talmudic subjects into easily assessable standardized religious judicial common law courts.,

       The Rambam caused Jews to forget the Oral Torah revelation at Horev of משנה תורה common law. The revelation of the Torah at Sinai, contained amazingly within the first two Sinai commandments. Only after the revelation of Oral Torah common law did Israel receive the rest of the Torah. The famous 10 Commandments serves as a precedent to remember the 10 plagues of Egypt wherein HaShem judged the Gods of Par’o, according to Moshe’s Torah common law.

       Ibn Ezra’s son converted to Islam. His Chumash commentary proves that he too, just like his fellow Spanish peer, made a deep assimilated study of ancient Greek philosophical thought. Torah common law, a judicial system by which the courts make fair compensations for damages inflicted; this judicial common law shares nothing, has absolutely no common ground, with theological religious belief systems, imported from non-Jewish cultures and alien sources.

       The Torah, fundamentally a legal and ethical guide whose faith seeks judicial righteous justice within the borders of the Torah oath sworn lands, the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen people. Goyim reject the revelation of the Written and Oral Torah at Sinai and Horev. Hence their counterfeit wisdom lack the power to transform Goyim into the chosen Cohen people.

       Torah common law serves as the basis for a comprehensive judicial system that emphasizes justice, fairness, and compensatory lateral sanhedrin judicial rulings, as the definition of faith. The Torah’s Talmudic focus, stands solely upon precedents which shape and determine Mishnaic common law. This legal system, simply distinct from any philosophical or theological systems imported from non-Jewish cultures. Like Cohonim separated from Goyim, something like the difference between t’rumah vs. chol first fruits.

       The importance of maintaining the tohor purity of Torah-based common law, (rooted in the Oral Torah and the kabbala of Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system), functions as the basis of Mishnaic and Gemara common law. This approach emphasizes the unique and self-contained nature of the Jewish legal tradition – without reliance on external philosophies, or religious false messiah beliefs.

       Hence the k’vanna of lighting the Hanukkah lights contains the dedication to never rely upon foreign cultures, customs, philosophies, or cathedral grand structures to serve as any kind replacement basis to interpret the k’vanna Will of the Written Torah Constitution of the Torah Cohen Republic.

       The k’vanna (מלך tohor middot dedications) of lighting the Hanukkah lights serves as a powerful reminder of the dedication to preserve Jewish tradition and identity. The lights symbolize the triumph of the P’rushim over the assimilated Tzeddukim רשעים who embraced Greek culture and customs. The k’vanna of lighting the Hanukkah lights serves as a powerful reminder of the dedication to preserve Jewish tradition and identity through the dedication of tohor middot as instructed through prophetic mussar (Aggada). The lights symbolize the triumph of the P’rushim over the assimilated Tzeddukim רשעים who embraced Greek culture and customs.

       The challenge of the new testament notions of Messiah represents a similar assimilationist trend that compares to the plagues in the days of Paró and Moshe. Goyim declare themselves ‘not under the Law’, yet Goyim assume they possess the lock and keys to the Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach.

       Torah common law stands upon the foundation by which prophetic mussar defines the k’vanna of mitzvot time oriented Av commandments. Never once does the new testament forgery ever attempt to learn the prophets through Common Law precedents. Why? Statute law does not depend upon, nor does it require precedents.

       For 2000+ years g’lut Jewry has felt the cursed whip and wincing pain of Jewish assimilation and inter-marriage. Goyim cultures and customs which do not accept the revelation of the chosen Cohen people consequent to our acceptance of the Torah at Sinai and Horev. These alien cultures and logic formats have dominated the Jewish people, just as similarly have Goyim barbarians. Jews survived the furnaces of the Shoah based upon the אלהינו Name within the קריא שמע tefillah דאורייתא, which remembers the oath sworn by Yitzak at the Akadah; as the chosen Cohen son of Avraham, save my future born seed, my Olam Ha’Ba, from Shoah and I dedicate to walk in justice before you, as did my father. Hence HaShem replaced Yitzak as a korban with a ram dedication to have this k’vanna.

       Loading...

       Reply

   • What a bandwidth load of garbage! Almighty God Himself finished off the chosen people of the Old covenant in 70AD. He gave you stiffnecks 40 yrs to repent after the Lord Jesus Christ ascended. But now under the New covenant there is no difference between Judahites and Gentiles. It was the Amighty’s plan from the beginning to unite the two. The Old testament confirms this.

     Loading...

     Reply

     • Noise

       Loading...

       Reply

       • The only noise you are gonna hear for an eternity is the wailing of souls that has rejected the one time sacrifice of the blood of Christ. Thanks for confirming Gods’ plan is now and always has been about faith.

         Loading...

         Reply

         • Noise. You do not have a clue how the T’NaCH defines the word “soul”. LOL Sucks being as ignorant as a stick.

           Loading...

           Reply

           • You poor pitiful soul, I feel sorry for you. My Lord says to be careful casting pearls before swine so let me give you some more noise for your pig-headed ears.
             “Remember, dear brothers and sisters, that few of you were wise in the world’s eyes or powerful or wealthy when God called you. Instead, God chose things the world considers foolish in order to shame those who think they are wise….” 1st COR 1:26-27a

             I will gladly be dumb as a stick for the cross of Messiah Yeshua

             Loading...

             Reply

             • Cannot define soul as soul. LOL By their fruits you shall know them… guilty of the Shoah.

               Loading...

               Reply

               • Mudsucker, there’s no business like shoah business. The jews have made fortunes off that fraud. And they used it as a cover for their atrocities in occupied Palestine.

                 Loading...

                 Reply

                 • Not just the Shoah dickhead. 2000+ years of blood libels host desecration libels ghettoes and pogroms that culminated in the Shoah.

                   Loading...

                   Reply

                   • Two points mudsucker, if the jews hadn’t been such assholes over the centuries and joined the human race they would not have been isolated. The isolation was imposed by your sanhedrin to keep you under control. The harvesting of adrenochrome has well been exposed as the bustling organ harvesting. Lay off the self-pity and join the human race.

                     Loading...

                   • Cowards attempt to blame the victims to justify their crimes.. You know nothing about the sanhedrin.

                     Loading...

                   • I know the sanhedrin is like any religious administration, it’s all about power and control. The sanhedrin live well off your fat all the while keeping you fearful of the rest of the world. Join the human race.

                     Loading...

                   • Go For IT! Get this guy OFF my SITE

                     Loading...

             • How do you judge and weigh post sealing of the Talmud secondary commentators like Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, and the Rambam as famous luminaries among Geonim and Reshonim Talmudic scholarship?

               The lights of Hanukkah, as a mitzva דאורייתא, separates substance from shadows. Gaonim and Reshonim scholarship which embraces Greek and Roman statute law and ancient Greek philosophies of logic, best represents the perverted tuma middot interests of the resurrected from the dead – Tzeddukim.

               Before their defeat during the Hanukkah Civil War, these רשעים encouraged Israel to abandon & forget the Oral Torah revelation at Horev, forty days after the sin of the Golden Calf; a portion of Israel attempted to translate the רוח הקודש שם השם to the word אלהים. The revelation of the Oral Torah 13 tohor middot spirits, as explained through the much later kabbala chiddush of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, the Tzeddukim, Karaites, and Goyim Xtian churches to this very day absolutely and categorically denies the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev. Similar the Arabs states which abhor the idea that Jews have equal rights to achieve self determination in the Middle East; hence Arab enemies refer to Israel as the Zionist Entity.

               The disgraceful history of Xtian substitutional theology, long antedated by the ancient Tzeddukim equal abomination, their attempts to cause Israel to forget the Oral Torah. Hence all post Talmudic scholarship which relies heavily, or primarily upon the structure and organization of Jewish religious Law “converted” into frumkeit religious legalism categories. Turned to the re-discovered ancient Greek philosophers, which organizational logical thought, as their primary tools to interpret and understand the Torah.

               Such post Talmudic commentaries qualify as self-hating Jews within the “camp” of the Tzeddukim counter-revolutionaries, in the days of the Hashmonaim. Saadia Gaon, despite his authorship of “The Book of Beliefs and Opinions,” his repeated attempts to address the challenges from pre-נידוי Karaite Jews likewise floated. He blended Torah topics together with Greek philosophy, but failed to teach the Torah as a common law judicial legal system. Herein serves as key evidence to the contention that g’lut Jewry even by the tail end of the Gaonim scholarship had lost the wisdom to obey and observe the Torah commandments לשמה.

               Ibn Ezra throughout his Chumash commentary introduced Greek philosophical ideas. The Rambam relied upon Aristotelian logic as his main tool by which he organized halacha into Greek and Roman codes of statute law. The obtuse assimilation of the “Golden Age” Spanish rabbis, who uprooted T’NaCH & Talmudic common law, based upon the kabbala of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, in their rush to express their glee approval of the rediscovered ancient Greek philosophical works. As such these assimilated rabbis undermined Jewish legal traditions of common law, which their scholarship replaced with Greek philosophies and box thinking, rigid statute law models.

               Absurd, the notion that embracing hostile foreign cultures and customs as a key strategy to reinforce Jewish identity and intellectual resilience. These assimilated Jewish heretics served as the forerunners of the Reform abomination of the early 19th Century. The contributions of Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, and Rambam, while viewed critically in this context, without any doubt part of broader context of Jewish attempts to address the challenges faced by g’lut Jewish communities, such as the collapse of the Roman road network.

               This assimilation took Orthodox Jews off the path, just as did secularism did and does to post American and French revolution Jewry today. Saadia Gaon addressed the sudden rediscovery of the four Centuries concealed, ancient Greek writings, entombed by Xtian church fathers.

               Rambam, like his Tzeddukim forefathers, sought to impose a sort of Greek polis city state(s) upon Jews through his statute law “ghetto halachic walls”. Through systematic order & classification of Talmudic subjects into easily assessable standardized religious judicial common law courts.,

               The Rambam caused Jews to forget the Oral Torah revelation at Horev of משנה תורה common law. The revelation of the Torah at Sinai, contained amazingly within the first two Sinai commandments. Only after the revelation of Oral Torah common law did Israel receive the rest of the Torah. The famous 10 Commandments serves as a precedent to remember the 10 plagues of Egypt wherein HaShem judged the Gods of Par’o, according to Moshe’s Torah common law.

               Ibn Ezra’s son converted to Islam. His Chumash commentary proves that he too, just like his fellow Spanish peer, made a deep assimilated study of ancient Greek philosophical thought. Torah common law, a judicial system by which the courts make fair compensations for damages inflicted; this judicial common law shares nothing, has absolutely no common ground, with theological religious belief systems, imported from non-Jewish cultures and alien sources.

               The Torah, fundamentally a legal and ethical guide whose faith seeks judicial righteous justice within the borders of the Torah oath sworn lands, the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen people. Goyim reject the revelation of the Written and Oral Torah at Sinai and Horev. Hence their counterfeit wisdom lack the power to transform Goyim into the chosen Cohen people.

               Torah common law serves as the basis for a comprehensive judicial system that emphasizes justice, fairness, and compensatory lateral sanhedrin judicial rulings, as the definition of faith. The Torah’s Talmudic focus, stands solely upon precedents which shape and determine Mishnaic common law. This legal system, simply distinct from any philosophical or theological systems imported from non-Jewish cultures. Like Cohonim separated from Goyim, something like the difference between t’rumah vs. chol first fruits.

               The importance of maintaining the tohor purity of Torah-based common law, (rooted in the Oral Torah and the kabbala of Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system), functions as the basis of Mishnaic and Gemara common law. This approach emphasizes the unique and self-contained nature of the Jewish legal tradition – without reliance on external philosophies, or religious false messiah beliefs.

               Hence the k’vanna of lighting the Hanukkah lights contains the dedication to never rely upon foreign cultures, customs, philosophies, or cathedral grand structures to serve as any kind replacement basis to interpret the k’vanna Will of the Written Torah Constitution of the Torah Cohen Republic.

               The k’vanna (מלך tohor middot dedications) of lighting the Hanukkah lights serves as a powerful reminder of the dedication to preserve Jewish tradition and identity. The lights symbolize the triumph of the P’rushim over the assimilated Tzeddukim רשעים who embraced Greek culture and customs. The k’vanna of lighting the Hanukkah lights serves as a powerful reminder of the dedication to preserve Jewish tradition and identity through the dedication of tohor middot as instructed through prophetic mussar (Aggada). The lights symbolize the triumph of the P’rushim over the assimilated Tzeddukim רשעים who embraced Greek culture and customs.

               The challenge of the new testament notions of Messiah represents a similar assimilationist trend that compares to the plagues in the days of Paró and Moshe. Goyim declare themselves ‘not under the Law’, yet Goyim assume they possess the lock and keys to the Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach.

               Torah common law stands upon the foundation by which prophetic mussar defines the k’vanna of mitzvot time oriented Av commandments. Never once does the new testament forgery ever attempt to learn the prophets through Common Law precedents. Why? Statute law does not depend upon, nor does it require precedents.

               For 2000+ years g’lut Jewry has felt the cursed whip and wincing pain of Jewish assimilation and inter-marriage. Goyim cultures and customs which do not accept the revelation of the chosen Cohen people consequent to our acceptance of the Torah at Sinai and Horev. These alien cultures and logic formats have dominated the Jewish people, just as similarly have Goyim barbarians. Jews survived the furnaces of the Shoah based upon the אלהינו Name within the קריא שמע tefillah דאורייתא, which remembers the oath sworn by Yitzak at the Akadah; as the chosen Cohen son of Avraham, save my future born seed, my Olam Ha’Ba, from Shoah and I dedicate to walk in justice before you, as did my father. Hence HaShem replaced Yitzak as a korban with a ram dedication to have this k’vanna.

               Loading...

               Reply

       • An ultimate noisemaker calling some else a noisemaker. No sale.

         Loading...

         Reply

         • Breaking … Allah Voldemort – DEAD. Find some other book of fiction to base your religion upon.

           Loading...

           Reply

         • How do you judge and weigh post sealing of the Talmud secondary commentators like Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, and the Rambam as famous luminaries among Geonim and Reshonim Talmudic scholarship?

           The lights of Hanukkah, as a mitzva דאורייתא, separates substance from shadows. Gaonim and Reshonim scholarship which embraces Greek and Roman statute law and ancient Greek philosophies of logic, best represents the perverted tuma middot interests of the resurrected from the dead – Tzeddukim.

           Before their defeat during the Hanukkah Civil War, these רשעים encouraged Israel to abandon & forget the Oral Torah revelation at Horev, forty days after the sin of the Golden Calf; a portion of Israel attempted to translate the רוח הקודש שם השם to the word אלהים. The revelation of the Oral Torah 13 tohor middot spirits, as explained through the much later kabbala chiddush of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, the Tzeddukim, Karaites, and Goyim Xtian churches to this very day absolutely and categorically denies the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev. Similar the Arabs states which abhor the idea that Jews have equal rights to achieve self determination in the Middle East; hence Arab enemies refer to Israel as the Zionist Entity.

           The disgraceful history of Xtian substitutional theology, long antedated by the ancient Tzeddukim equal abomination, their attempts to cause Israel to forget the Oral Torah. Hence all post Talmudic scholarship which relies heavily, or primarily upon the structure and organization of Jewish religious Law “converted” into frumkeit religious legalism categories. Turned to the re-discovered ancient Greek philosophers, which organizational logical thought, as their primary tools to interpret and understand the Torah.

           Such post Talmudic commentaries qualify as self-hating Jews within the “camp” of the Tzeddukim counter-revolutionaries, in the days of the Hashmonaim. Saadia Gaon, despite his authorship of “The Book of Beliefs and Opinions,” his repeated attempts to address the challenges from pre-נידוי Karaite Jews likewise floated. He blended Torah topics together with Greek philosophy, but failed to teach the Torah as a common law judicial legal system. Herein serves as key evidence to the contention that g’lut Jewry even by the tail end of the Gaonim scholarship had lost the wisdom to obey and observe the Torah commandments לשמה.

           Ibn Ezra throughout his Chumash commentary introduced Greek philosophical ideas. The Rambam relied upon Aristotelian logic as his main tool by which he organized halacha into Greek and Roman codes of statute law. The obtuse assimilation of the “Golden Age” Spanish rabbis, who uprooted T’NaCH & Talmudic common law, based upon the kabbala of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, in their rush to express their glee approval of the rediscovered ancient Greek philosophical works. As such these assimilated rabbis undermined Jewish legal traditions of common law, which their scholarship replaced with Greek philosophies and box thinking, rigid statute law models.

           Absurd, the notion that embracing hostile foreign cultures and customs as a key strategy to reinforce Jewish identity and intellectual resilience. These assimilated Jewish heretics served as the forerunners of the Reform abomination of the early 19th Century. The contributions of Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, and Rambam, while viewed critically in this context, without any doubt part of broader context of Jewish attempts to address the challenges faced by g’lut Jewish communities, such as the collapse of the Roman road network.

           This assimilation took Orthodox Jews off the path, just as did secularism did and does to post American and French revolution Jewry today. Saadia Gaon addressed the sudden rediscovery of the four Centuries concealed, ancient Greek writings, entombed by Xtian church fathers.

           Rambam, like his Tzeddukim forefathers, sought to impose a sort of Greek polis city state(s) upon Jews through his statute law “ghetto halachic walls”. Through systematic order & classification of Talmudic subjects into easily assessable standardized religious judicial common law courts.,

           The Rambam caused Jews to forget the Oral Torah revelation at Horev of משנה תורה common law. The revelation of the Torah at Sinai, contained amazingly within the first two Sinai commandments. Only after the revelation of Oral Torah common law did Israel receive the rest of the Torah. The famous 10 Commandments serves as a precedent to remember the 10 plagues of Egypt wherein HaShem judged the Gods of Par’o, according to Moshe’s Torah common law.

           Ibn Ezra’s son converted to Islam. His Chumash commentary proves that he too, just like his fellow Spanish peer, made a deep assimilated study of ancient Greek philosophical thought. Torah common law, a judicial system by which the courts make fair compensations for damages inflicted; this judicial common law shares nothing, has absolutely no common ground, with theological religious belief systems, imported from non-Jewish cultures and alien sources.

           The Torah, fundamentally a legal and ethical guide whose faith seeks judicial righteous justice within the borders of the Torah oath sworn lands, the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen people. Goyim reject the revelation of the Written and Oral Torah at Sinai and Horev. Hence their counterfeit wisdom lack the power to transform Goyim into the chosen Cohen people.

           Torah common law serves as the basis for a comprehensive judicial system that emphasizes justice, fairness, and compensatory lateral sanhedrin judicial rulings, as the definition of faith. The Torah’s Talmudic focus, stands solely upon precedents which shape and determine Mishnaic common law. This legal system, simply distinct from any philosophical or theological systems imported from non-Jewish cultures. Like Cohonim separated from Goyim, something like the difference between t’rumah vs. chol first fruits.

           The importance of maintaining the tohor purity of Torah-based common law, (rooted in the Oral Torah and the kabbala of Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system), functions as the basis of Mishnaic and Gemara common law. This approach emphasizes the unique and self-contained nature of the Jewish legal tradition – without reliance on external philosophies, or religious false messiah beliefs.

           Hence the k’vanna of lighting the Hanukkah lights contains the dedication to never rely upon foreign cultures, customs, philosophies, or cathedral grand structures to serve as any kind replacement basis to interpret the k’vanna Will of the Written Torah Constitution of the Torah Cohen Republic.

           The k’vanna (מלך tohor middot dedications) of lighting the Hanukkah lights serves as a powerful reminder of the dedication to preserve Jewish tradition and identity. The lights symbolize the triumph of the P’rushim over the assimilated Tzeddukim רשעים who embraced Greek culture and customs. The k’vanna of lighting the Hanukkah lights serves as a powerful reminder of the dedication to preserve Jewish tradition and identity through the dedication of tohor middot as instructed through prophetic mussar (Aggada). The lights symbolize the triumph of the P’rushim over the assimilated Tzeddukim רשעים who embraced Greek culture and customs.

           The challenge of the new testament notions of Messiah represents a similar assimilationist trend that compares to the plagues in the days of Paró and Moshe. Goyim declare themselves ‘not under the Law’, yet Goyim assume they possess the lock and keys to the Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach.

           Torah common law stands upon the foundation by which prophetic mussar defines the k’vanna of mitzvot time oriented Av commandments. Never once does the new testament forgery ever attempt to learn the prophets through Common Law precedents. Why? Statute law does not depend upon, nor does it require precedents.

           For 2000+ years g’lut Jewry has felt the cursed whip and wincing pain of Jewish assimilation and inter-marriage. Goyim cultures and customs which do not accept the revelation of the chosen Cohen people consequent to our acceptance of the Torah at Sinai and Horev. These alien cultures and logic formats have dominated the Jewish people, just as similarly have Goyim barbarians. Jews survived the furnaces of the Shoah based upon the אלהינו Name within the קריא שמע tefillah דאורייתא, which remembers the oath sworn by Yitzak at the Akadah; as the chosen Cohen son of Avraham, save my future born seed, my Olam Ha’Ba, from Shoah and I dedicate to walk in justice before you, as did my father. Hence HaShem replaced Yitzak as a korban with a ram dedication to have this k’vanna.

           Loading...

           Reply

   • Mosucker, To the Western man what the jews believe is all hocus pocus. The only thing that stands out is they pray for the deaths of the Gentiles every morning and their Kol Nidre that allows them to go against their word.

     Loading...

     Reply

     • Silly Jews like myself: atheists praise G-d.

       Loading...

       Reply

   • Mudsucker, Take your talmudic pilpul and shove off. We are normal people here and we are not brainwashed with the talmudic hate from birth as you have been.

     Loading...

     Reply

     • Bull shit. You can not read two words of the Talmud. You cannot distinguish between statute halachic codes from common law halachic codes. Simply as ignorant as a stick.

       Loading...

       Reply

       • Halachic codes? Get it through your talmud head, its all hocus pocus. shove off!

         Loading...

         Reply

         • You know nothing of the Talmud. Stop your arrogant bull shit.

           Loading...

           Reply

           • Mudsucker, I know the talmud is all about hate for your fellow man, It preaches world domination and enslavement of all.

             Take your talmud, it’s all hocus pocus full of fear and hate and SHOVE OFF!

             Loading...

             Reply

             • You can’t read 2 words of the Talmud. But your an expert on the Talmud. Utter bull shit.

               Loading...

               Reply

   • Mudsucker share this: your thesis is built on myths showing the Jewish propensity to believe their own bullshit. Adam and Eve–myth. Noah and his arc–purloined from ancient Sumerian myths. Jews escaping slavery in Egypt–bullshit story, there is no archeological evidence, real or evidently destroyed, of the jews being in Egypt. A million jews with their sheep and camels (according to them) wandering the desert for forty years–bullshit, no archeological evidence at all.

     Loading...

     Reply

     • Mudsucker is constantly deleted. I have tried and tried to get his comments delivered straight to spam and cannot figure out why WordPress won’t let me. I apologize for his idiocy.

       Loading...

       Reply

     • How do you judge and weigh post sealing of the Talmud secondary commentators like Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, and the Rambam as famous luminaries among Geonim and Reshonim Talmudic scholarship?

       The lights of Hanukkah, as a mitzva דאורייתא, separates substance from shadows. Gaonim and Reshonim scholarship which embraces Greek and Roman statute law and ancient Greek philosophies of logic, best represents the perverted tuma middot interests of the resurrected from the dead – Tzeddukim.

       Before their defeat during the Hanukkah Civil War, these רשעים encouraged Israel to abandon & forget the Oral Torah revelation at Horev, forty days after the sin of the Golden Calf; a portion of Israel attempted to translate the רוח הקודש שם השם to the word אלהים. The revelation of the Oral Torah 13 tohor middot spirits, as explained through the much later kabbala chiddush of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, the Tzeddukim, Karaites, and Goyim Xtian churches to this very day absolutely and categorically denies the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev. Similar the Arabs states which abhor the idea that Jews have equal rights to achieve self determination in the Middle East; hence Arab enemies refer to Israel as the Zionist Entity.

       The disgraceful history of Xtian substitutional theology, long antedated by the ancient Tzeddukim equal abomination, their attempts to cause Israel to forget the Oral Torah. Hence all post Talmudic scholarship which relies heavily, or primarily upon the structure and organization of Jewish religious Law “converted” into frumkeit religious legalism categories. Turned to the re-discovered ancient Greek philosophers, which organizational logical thought, as their primary tools to interpret and understand the Torah.

       Such post Talmudic commentaries qualify as self-hating Jews within the “camp” of the Tzeddukim counter-revolutionaries, in the days of the Hashmonaim. Saadia Gaon, despite his authorship of “The Book of Beliefs and Opinions,” his repeated attempts to address the challenges from pre-נידוי Karaite Jews likewise floated. He blended Torah topics together with Greek philosophy, but failed to teach the Torah as a common law judicial legal system. Herein serves as key evidence to the contention that g’lut Jewry even by the tail end of the Gaonim scholarship had lost the wisdom to obey and observe the Torah commandments לשמה.

       Ibn Ezra throughout his Chumash commentary introduced Greek philosophical ideas. The Rambam relied upon Aristotelian logic as his main tool by which he organized halacha into Greek and Roman codes of statute law. The obtuse assimilation of the “Golden Age” Spanish rabbis, who uprooted T’NaCH & Talmudic common law, based upon the kabbala of rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system, in their rush to express their glee approval of the rediscovered ancient Greek philosophical works. As such these assimilated rabbis undermined Jewish legal traditions of common law, which their scholarship replaced with Greek philosophies and box thinking, rigid statute law models.

       Absurd, the notion that embracing hostile foreign cultures and customs as a key strategy to reinforce Jewish identity and intellectual resilience. These assimilated Jewish heretics served as the forerunners of the Reform abomination of the early 19th Century. The contributions of Saadia Gaon, Ibn Ezra, and Rambam, while viewed critically in this context, without any doubt part of broader context of Jewish attempts to address the challenges faced by g’lut Jewish communities, such as the collapse of the Roman road network.

       This assimilation took Orthodox Jews off the path, just as did secularism did and does to post American and French revolution Jewry today. Saadia Gaon addressed the sudden rediscovery of the four Centuries concealed, ancient Greek writings, entombed by Xtian church fathers.

       Rambam, like his Tzeddukim forefathers, sought to impose a sort of Greek polis city state(s) upon Jews through his statute law “ghetto halachic walls”. Through systematic order & classification of Talmudic subjects into easily assessable standardized religious judicial common law courts.,

       The Rambam caused Jews to forget the Oral Torah revelation at Horev of משנה תורה common law. The revelation of the Torah at Sinai, contained amazingly within the first two Sinai commandments. Only after the revelation of Oral Torah common law did Israel receive the rest of the Torah. The famous 10 Commandments serves as a precedent to remember the 10 plagues of Egypt wherein HaShem judged the Gods of Par’o, according to Moshe’s Torah common law.

       Ibn Ezra’s son converted to Islam. His Chumash commentary proves that he too, just like his fellow Spanish peer, made a deep assimilated study of ancient Greek philosophical thought. Torah common law, a judicial system by which the courts make fair compensations for damages inflicted; this judicial common law shares nothing, has absolutely no common ground, with theological religious belief systems, imported from non-Jewish cultures and alien sources.

       The Torah, fundamentally a legal and ethical guide whose faith seeks judicial righteous justice within the borders of the Torah oath sworn lands, the eternal inheritance of the chosen Cohen people. Goyim reject the revelation of the Written and Oral Torah at Sinai and Horev. Hence their counterfeit wisdom lack the power to transform Goyim into the chosen Cohen people.

       Torah common law serves as the basis for a comprehensive judicial system that emphasizes justice, fairness, and compensatory lateral sanhedrin judicial rulings, as the definition of faith. The Torah’s Talmudic focus, stands solely upon precedents which shape and determine Mishnaic common law. This legal system, simply distinct from any philosophical or theological systems imported from non-Jewish cultures. Like Cohonim separated from Goyim, something like the difference between t’rumah vs. chol first fruits.

       The importance of maintaining the tohor purity of Torah-based common law, (rooted in the Oral Torah and the kabbala of Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic system), functions as the basis of Mishnaic and Gemara common law. This approach emphasizes the unique and self-contained nature of the Jewish legal tradition – without reliance on external philosophies, or religious false messiah beliefs.

       Hence the k’vanna of lighting the Hanukkah lights contains the dedication to never rely upon foreign cultures, customs, philosophies, or cathedral grand structures to serve as any kind replacement basis to interpret the k’vanna Will of the Written Torah Constitution of the Torah Cohen Republic.

       The k’vanna (מלך tohor middot dedications) of lighting the Hanukkah lights serves as a powerful reminder of the dedication to preserve Jewish tradition and identity. The lights symbolize the triumph of the P’rushim over the assimilated Tzeddukim רשעים who embraced Greek culture and customs. The k’vanna of lighting the Hanukkah lights serves as a powerful reminder of the dedication to preserve Jewish tradition and identity through the dedication of tohor middot as instructed through prophetic mussar (Aggada). The lights symbolize the triumph of the P’rushim over the assimilated Tzeddukim רשעים who embraced Greek culture and customs.

       The challenge of the new testament notions of Messiah represents a similar assimilationist trend that compares to the plagues in the days of Paró and Moshe. Goyim declare themselves ‘not under the Law’, yet Goyim assume they possess the lock and keys to the Oral Torah mitzva of Moshiach.

       Torah common law stands upon the foundation by which prophetic mussar defines the k’vanna of mitzvot time oriented Av commandments. Never once does the new testament forgery ever attempt to learn the prophets through Common Law precedents. Why? Statute law does not depend upon, nor does it require precedents.

       For 2000+ years g’lut Jewry has felt the cursed whip and wincing pain of Jewish assimilation and inter-marriage. Goyim cultures and customs which do not accept the revelation of the chosen Cohen people consequent to our acceptance of the Torah at Sinai and Horev. These alien cultures and logic formats have dominated the Jewish people, just as similarly have Goyim barbarians. Jews survived the furnaces of the Shoah based upon the אלהינו Name within the קריא שמע tefillah דאורייתא, which remembers the oath sworn by Yitzak at the Akadah; as the chosen Cohen son of Avraham, save my future born seed, my Olam Ha’Ba, from Shoah and I dedicate to walk in justice before you, as did my father. Hence HaShem replaced Yitzak as a korban with a ram dedication to have this k’vanna.

       Loading...

       Reply

4. Interesting take – thanks for that. Do not forget that there are massive natural gas deposits off of Palestine. Whoever controls the Gaza portion of them gets control of those. Given the genocide against the Palestinian people caused by U.S. funding and Israeli military, Palestine should be immediately rebuilt now for the Palestinians, and paid for by the U.S. and Israel. The land is theirs. It does not belong to Israel. It does not belong to the U.S. Forcibly removing the Palestinian people from their land is akin to Germany forcibly removing Jews from there 85 years ago, is it not? Akin to genocide. Genocide Joe, succeeded by Genocide Donald.

   Loading...

   Reply

5. Someone has mistaken a brain fart for a revelation.
   There is zero validity to this mental diarrhea/Satanism and it does not reflect reality.
   This was never a Fakestinian and Trump and Bibi want them to go home to where they actually came from, essentially Egypt and Jordan.
   Trump just said they refused. His response was I say they will.
   It’s been the most blatant example of your delusional Jew Hate that you ignore that Trump and Bibi are buds, Israel loves Trump and Trump loves Israel and knows your silly baseless Khazar
   Crap for what it is.

   Loading...

   Reply

6. Bueno, Elena, Trump dijo que Gaza sería propiedad de EEUU. Fue entretenido ver la cara de idiota que puso Netanyahu ante las palabras inesperadas de Trump. Brillante y a la vez sencilla perspectiva la que expones. Quizá.

   Loading...

   Reply

7. I think this article is a more realistic picture of what is going on. Firstly, we know that Trump does not like Netanyahu, after he was the first to support Biden’s stealing of the 2020 election. Trump said “f*** him”. Before that, Netanyahu had reneged on his promise to help get terrorists. Trump said so. Trump never forgets when someone breaks a deal with him. After that, Trump wondered how the Israeli military could delay responding to 10/7 for over 7 hours. Trump is no fool, he knows 10.7 is fishy.

   The USA getting involved in how Gaza is handled directly is not what the zionists want. They only want lots of our money and our approval for whatever they do.

   Lots of people see Trump and Netanyahu on stage, and jump to the wrong conclusions, because Israel always gets their way. My strong hunch is that the zionists are agitated over Trump’s “interference”, but they cannot say a word about it.

   Loading...

   Reply

   • Good theory.

     Loading...

     Reply

8. We must hope. So far, Trump is fighting hard to save our sinking ship. In two week, he has done a stupendous job. Musk is revealing deep corruption.

   Loading...

   Reply

   • agree

     Loading...

     Reply

9. Take a look at “About Protocols.”
   https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/

   Loading...

   Reply

   • I see Trump as being helpful knowing Bibi’s recent prostrate surgery

     Loading...

     Reply

10. I sure hope you are right, and I hope Trump reads this in case he has not thought of it.

    Loading...

    Reply

    • General Flynn seems to have also come aboard the anti-Netanyahu train

      Loading...

      Reply

      • The great leverage the zionists have in DC cause most people to hold back on criticism.

        Flynn does not support someone who is causing trouble and endangering US interests. Israel is trying to drag us into a bigger war to support their awful goals. Trump and Vance addressed that weeks ago, saying that the US has no interest in attacking Iran.

        Loading...

        Reply

        • Is it time for Trump to deport all Israeli citizens in the U.S., including dual U.S. – Israel citizens now serving in the U.S. Congress?

          Loading...

          Reply

11. My “like” is only an acknowledgement Helena. The US could stop the bombing of Gaza by simply stopping supplying bombs.
    The Jews quest for greater isreal is a greater isreal sans Arabs. The Netanyahu felator is granting the Jews wish for the Gaza Strip sans Palestinians by moving them into the desert as the strip is developed into a new Riveira, they would never be allowed to return if they left.

    Loading...

    Reply

    • Israel has nearly 1000 nukes. Israel is run by a psychotic. Trump out-gamed him. Using Qatar and Saudi Arabia as stakeholders will keep Israel permanently contained.

      Loading...

      Reply

12. Very interesting theory. But why “relocate” the Palestinians (after they were bombed out of their homes with american bombs) and not provide rebuilding equipment and resources and “use” the Palestinian manpower to help them rebuild their country? Trump’s son in law has been eyeing building resorts on the Gaza coastline since before 10/7.

    Loading...

    Reply

    • 1. Israel will continue to bomb until they are gone. 2. there is no water. no food. no plantlife. no animals. The ocean is toxic. The soil is toxic. The air is toxic. And you want to use the Palestinians to go out and cleanup Bibi’s mess?

      Loading...

      Reply