Judaism’s Strange Gods — Entry #1

“Illustrations and reasons of the law of Moses I never take from the Talmud. The oral traditions of the ignorant rabbis …(give) not the sense of the Mosaic writings. Many of the laws of the Pentateuch would make a strange figure indeed, if we were to interpret them as the Pharisees did, whose exposition, according to Christ’s declaration, in many cases served to inculcate doctrines and precepts directly the reverse of what Moses had taught and commanded… even with regard to Jewish antiquities, prior to the Babylon captivity, the Talmud is … an impure source of information … a book … which appeals only to oral tradition can tell us nothing worthy of credit …”

Johann David Michaelis
Professor of Old Testament and Semitic languages
University of Gottingen
Commentaries on the Laws of Moses

There seems to be no end of books that one can access in order to develop an apologetic against some heresy or mutated form of Christianity. Books revealing the flim-flam man and occult background of Joseph Smith and Mormonism. Books revealing the lunacy of the Millerites and Ellen G. White and Jehovah Witnesses. Books exposing Islam, Hinduism, and Armstrongism. You can purchase handy dandy fold out pamphlets that list the ways in which the false religions are heretical. You can find the testimonials of former adherents of false religions writing on how they were saved out this or that heresy or apostasy. However, despite all this glut of information there is comparatively little in the publishing world exposing Judaism for the false religion it is, and this despite that the Christian Scriptures refer to the Jewish faith as a “Synagogue of Satan.”

Part of the reason for this is that with the advent of Dispensationalism, Zionist interests have co-opted and blunted the Christian faith’s witness against the evil worldview and faith system that Judaism is. Indeed, so infected is certain quarters of the Christian Church in the West with Judaism that some ministers teach that those who call themselves “Jewish” don’t need to be saved like other people. (I say, “call themselves ‘Jewish'” because of the large question of whether or not those who insist that they are racially Jewish are indeed racially Jewish. Arthur Koestler’s book, “The 13th Tribe” calls the Jewishness of Jews into serious question.)

Also, there is the reality that the Money Interest which is largely controlled by the elite class who some call “Jews,” likewise controls much of the publishing industry.

Indeed, things are so badly on this score that the West is often referred to as having a “Judeo-Christian” faith when in point of fact no such creature exists. To talk about the “Judeo-Christian” faith is like talking about a chaste whore or a Vampire who is allergic to blood. In brief, the idea of “Judeo-Christian” is a severe contradiction.

However, the lacuna of books and literature dealing with the unseemliness of the Jewish Faith as it contributes to a Christ hating worldview has begun to be filled by Michael Hoffman in his book, “Judaism Discovered: A Study of the Anti-Biblical Religion of Racism, Self-Worship, Superstition and Deceit,” and it’s more accessible popular version, “Judaism’s Strange Gods.”

Hoffman’s books is dedicated to exposing Judaism for what it is, seeking to convince the reader that the Jewish faith is just another version of pagan humanism. Hoffman’s exposure of Judaism has him convinced that “this book may be banned, suppressed, and otherwise proscribed and forbidden because of the documentation it bring to light concerning the religion of Orthodox Judaism.”

Because of the unnatural fusion that has occurred between some expressions of Christianity and Judaism that was mentioned earlier Hoffman can only to hope his work can gain traction not only in the face of a hostile publishing industry but also in the face of a hostile Church. With the writing of this book Hoffman has armored up in the midst of those wielding hostile hammers. Understanding that with his book he has placed himself between the hammer of modern Judaism and the anvil of contemporary Christianity Hoffman laments, through the voice of Puritan William Prynne, about how contemporary Christianity is a obstacle to progress in evangelizing Judaics.

“Another reason that so-called Christian ministers, bishops and priests, assist the rabbis in keeping Judaic people in thrall is the ‘Money Engine’: ‘By this history we may perceive what a prevailing engine the Jew’s money is, both to serve into Christian kingdoms, though the most bitter, inveterate, professed enemies of Christ himself, Christians and Christianity, and how their money can induce even Christian princes to perpetrate most unchristian and antichristian actions; and enforce by threats and violence, even converted Christian Jews to renounce their Christianity, and apostasize to their former Jewish errors which they had quite renounced. And do not they still work by the self-same money engine? Preferred by too many Christians, before Christ himself and Christianity.'”

Hoffman’s concern in the book is evangelistic. He has sincere hopes that perhaps there may be those through the writing of this book who may be converted from Judaism to Biblical Christianity. Hoffman realizes that he will be pilloried for being a “hater” and a “anti-semite,” but he rightly asks how loving is it to not challenge a faith system that holds people in a terrible bondage. Hoffman insists that the love of Christ constrains him to rip the scab off the oozing wound that is Judaism with the hope that a healing salve can be placed upon it unto conversion.

“If we teach you nothing else, God grant you the grace to understand that it is the rabbis who are the world’s most flagrant and virulent Jew haters. This is a book of love, reflecting the love of God for all people, Judaic or Gentile, who are hostages to darkness. There are no hidden agendas or motives. All who say otherwise are liars and have for their patriarch, the Father of Lies.”

Shortly into his book Hoffman makes a key distinction that will be seen throughout his book. Hoffman distinguishes between Jews and Judaics. Hoffman labels Jews as those who are genetic descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but includes also in the definition of “Jew” all those who have placed their faith in Jesus Christ citing I Peter 2:9. However, one must keep in mind here that Hoffman is saying that there are those who are Physical Jews and those who are Spiritual Jews. Some Physical Jews may be Spiritual Jews (Christians) but not all Physical Jews are Spiritual Jews. Hoffman distinguishes Jews from Judaics who he denominates as followers of Judaism regardless of their ethnic heritage. (Doubtless here Hoffman has the Khazars especially in mind.)

Ironically enough, even though percentage wise, very few who claim to be Jews racially are actually racially Jews, the Judaics who inhabit Judaism along with their addlepated hyper Dispensational Christian minister allies insist that Judiacs are saved is by race alone — a race which they do not, in a large number of cases do not even belong.

Like all men, Judaics and Physical Jews alike must be saved by looking to God’s Christ alone in order to be delivered from their Synagogue of Satan. Hoffman’s book is written in hopes that Judaics and Jews might be saved.

Genesis to Revelation In Two Sentences

Like a symphony, Scripture is a unified whole that contains multiple diverse themes that are developed and incased in the narratival canonical plotline.

The OT is the story of God, who progressively reestablishes his new creational kingdom out of chaos over a sinful people by his word and Spirit through promise, covenant, and redemption, resulting in worldwide commission to the faithful to advance this kingdom and judgment (defeat or exile) for the unfaithful, unto his glory.

The NT heightens and develops the OT score and storyline by giving us Jesus whose life, trials, death for sinners, and especially resurrection by the Spirit have launched the fulfillment of the eschatological already — not yet new — creational reign, bestowed by grace alone through faith alone and resulting in worldwide commission to the faithful to advance this new-creational reign and resulting in judgment for the unbelieving unto the triune God’s Glory.

Paraphrase of G.K. Beale
A NT Biblical Theology — pg. 16

Now the question for Dr. Beale would be, “Is the worldwide commission to the faithful to advance this new-creational reign a commission that is exhaustive and totalistic touching every area of life?”

It is hard to imagine a new-creational reign that is limited, muted or stunted in what it re-orders.

American Federal Government As God

In the last week two happenings have transpired that render it perspicuous that the current American Federal Government sees itself as God walking on the earth.

The first happening was where our alleged President, B. Hussein Obama, performing at the “National Day of Prayer” Breakfast said,

““I think to myself, if I’m willing to give something up as somebody who’s been extraordinarily blessed, and give up some of the tax breaks that I enjoy, I actually think that’s going to make economic sense,” Obama told the audience. “But for me, as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’s teaching that ‘for unto whom much is given, much shall be required.’ ”

Here Obama is invoking the words of Jesus to support his economic plan to increase taxes so that wealth can continue to be redistributed. The problem here is that in the text the Obama cites from the Bible the idea that Jesus is communicating is that the person unto whom much is given is going to be required much from God. The fact that Obama has the State being the agent who is doing the requiring from those who have been much given reveals that Obama views the State, and himself as the incarnation of the State, as having the prerogative of God. Bar explicitly saying “The State is God,” I can think of no clearer way for the State to say, “I am God,” then saying that it is the being who will do the much requiring of those who have been given much.

The second happening is the recent B. Hussein Obama ruling that Christian Charities will have their 1st and 2nd amendment religious freedoms stripped from them by being required to violate their Christian scruples, as formed by their Christian God, by being forced to provide contraceptives in their health care programs as dictated by the God state. Clearly what is being communicated here is that the God state is God over the Christian God in the public square. The consequence of this ruling is that the realm for private morality is being constricted by the God state as it insists that once what was considered a private contractual matter between employee and employer (whether or not contraception would be part of a health care package) is now no longer a private contractual matter between employee and employer and will now be constrained by the dictates of the Federal State God. We must realize that as the State-God expands its sovereignty by gobbling up the sovereignty of other spheres the result is that the distinction between society and state begins to be eliminated so that all that is left is society that is but a cog in the machinery of the Federal State God. Individual identity will be eclipsed as all citizens live and move and have their being in the State.

Clearly, the Federal State, is setting itself up as God.

1965 Immigration Act

In 1965 America, in its debate on the Immigration Act, had a choice. It could either choose to be Switzerland, with a homogeneous, highly educated, somewhat numerically constrained population or it could become Brazil with a heterogeneous population that would become highly balkanized according to class, race, religion, and education. To choose the first path would have meant social order and ethnic stability, with high productivity. To choose the second path has meant the straining of our social order and the eventuality of the warfare of all against all with the consequence being a Mahat to down culture where a handful of elites (Banking interests) rule over the drone class.

Now, if one is Brazillian, I’m sure one likes Brazil. But the people of this country who have more of a Switzerland mindset shouldn’t be decried because they would have preferred and still prefer Switzerland. The Swiss obviously believe Switzerland is better than Brazil. (And can many cogent reasons to that end.)

The choice to choose the second path in 1965 was done with eyes wide open. Oh, doubtless, there were some useful idiots who voted for the 1965 immigration act not realizing the agenda behind it but that there was a self conscious agenda on the part of movers and shakers to simply dissolve the former American historical people and appoint another. This was largely accomplished through the 1965 immigration act.

The path of balkanization serves only the agenda of a people who have both managed to maintain their homogeneity while at the same time accrue wealth and influence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqS8uk77SSY&feature=related

George Washington … Deist or Christian?

“Washington’s own religious pronouncements as president were basically unitarian with deistic overtones and in keeping with civil religion beliefs. The Rev. Dr. James Abercrombie, rector of St. Peter’s Church in Philadelphia where Washington often worshipped when the seat of government was located there, went so far as to affirm that the chief executive was a deist and lax in his attention to the Eucharist. To be sure, Washington was not disrespectful toward the church, but according to testimony from both Abercrombie and Rev. William White, the first Episcopal bishop of Pennsylvania, Washington was not a zealous churchgoer nor was he in the habit of partaking of the sacrament. Moreover, he was notorious for not kneeling to pray in public worship. At the church in Philadelphia, he often attended the pulpit service but left before the observance of the Eucharist, usually leaving the more devout Mrs. Washington behind with the other communicants. When Dr. Abercrombie in a sermon scolded those in places of public trust who set bad examples by turning their backs on the sacrament, Washington was so irked that he never appeared at St. Peter’s on Communion Sunday again. This ambivalence towards orthodoxy characterized Washington’s church-going habits and this attitude toward organized religion in general during his years as president. He attended sporadically, listened courteously, but participated little in the life of the local church. He never spoke of any personal belief in Christ but rather reserved his affirmations of faith in the Supreme Ruler of the Nations for his personal letters or civil religion occasions of the government such as the presidential inaugural.”

Pierard & Linder
“Civil Religion & the Presidency”

Letter from R. J. Rushdoony to Cornelius Van Til,

Dear Dr. Van Til,

This is a hasty note in respect to George Washington. What the history books have to say about him and his biographers is no more trusted than what James Daane has to say about you.

George Washington grew up into the 18th century Rationalism. A basically conservative, land loving man, a part of his conservatism was to accept, without great question, the rationalism of his day. However, the events of the war, led to a somewhat altered perspective, and then the French Revolution, during his presidency, altered his outlook markedly. He strongly opposed the French Revolution. He emphatically affirmed infallibility as the bedrock of the Christian faith as against rationalism. Previously a Mason, he supported Rev. Jeddidiah Morse, leading orthodox Calvinist of the day, in his attack on free-masonry and wrote at least two letters to Morse to underscore with his own testimony the validity of Morse’ attack. It is in terms of this that his 1796 quote is to be understood.

I shared the lecture platform, in Houston Texas recently, with Gregg Singer, who rightfully called attention to the strongly Christian thought in the Constitutional convention by men such as Rutledge, Dickinson, John Jay and others. Certainly, Patrick Henry, nominally, like Washington a Anglican represented, as Singer stated the Reformed faith with intensity. Henry was in his day a “Traveling Monk” in the eyes of some, because of his habit of carrying Reformed literature in his saddle bags to distribute to other lawyers. Even on his death bed, Henry witnessed to the faith to his agnostic Doctor.

Such aspects of American history are anathema to our historians, who, from the early 1800’s, when the Unitarians began to write our history, to the present when relativists have taken over, have worked more systematically to re-make the history and the founding fathers after their own image. In those days, it was necessary to affirm infallibility and the trinity to vote, and what many people forget is that the deistic writings of Franklin and Jefferson were not published in their day but privately written. Jefferson’s unbelief was widely suspected, but he avoided public profession of it.

We are too little aware of how Christian the laws were in all the states. As late as 1912, on state constitution still required that one be a Christian to hold citizenship and vote. Only last Summer did the New Jersey Supreme court strike down an old statute, once universal in all the states, denying the right of atheists to be witnesses in a court of law because of their inability to take the oath honestly and because they lacked citizenship.

Cordially,

R. J. Rushdoony

Hat Tip — Mickey Bolwerk