The Real Issue being obscured by Jewish/chr*stian clashes

Self | 12/19/'05 | Zionist Conspirator

[Zionist Conspirator]

I have observed recently that at the very time when Israel and Jews seem in more danger than ever before and only chr*stian conservatives stand up for them, Jewish liberals seem to be pulling out all the stops in trying to destroy the alliance and build ill-will. I said I would try to comment at length on what is going on here and wil now try to do so.

As most of you know, I am neither Jewish nor chr*stian (though I used to be the latter). I am an observant Noachide (Halakhically, all non-Jews are Noachides; an observant Noachide is someone who consciously gives up other religions to live by the Seven Noachide Laws). Therefore I am sort of the "turd in the punchbowl" around here. What I am going to say is something that no chr*stian can say and no Jew will say, and I am probably going to offend plenty of people in both categories. Nevertheless here I go.

Since I am a Noachide, I do not believe that chr*stianity in and of itself is under attack in America, though it certainly appears to be. If I thought chr*stianity were G-d's Truth and therefore the Universal Target of All the Forces of Evil, I would be a chr*stian. Instead I believe in the finality of an earlier Revelation, which superficially seems to be the uber-beneficiary of liberal "tolerance" doctrine.

I believe what is under attack here is the very notion of objective religious truth. Indeed, it is not only among liberals that this concept is in danger. Even many very religious people have bought into the notion that religious truth is a "different sort of truth" from the ordinary, everyday sort of truth that is objectively, factually true and that denies all contradictory claims. Instead "religious truth" has become (even among orthodox believers) ever more abstract and philosophical, while the imputation of facticity to religious truth is deemed "recent," "modern," "the influence of 19th century positivism," and such like.

Now, what is the most objective religious revelation in all of history? The answer is, the Revelation at Sinai, in which an entire nation (which, when factoring in women, children, and the "great mixed multitude" probably numbered some three million people) had an objective, direct, unmediated experience of the unincarnated G-d. There is no other religion in history that can claim such a foundation--absolutely none. It follows then that the champions of religious objectivism should be the Jewish People, the very People who experienced this universally-acknowledged, indisputable, and unique event. Yet we note the supreme irony of this very people being in fact the one in whose name attacks on religious objectivism are most often made. How can this be?

Since the forces of G-dlessness cannot attack the Revelation at Sinai it has been basically removed from the equation altogether. It has vanished into an Orwellian memory hole. In its place a new foundational event has been substituted: the Holocaust. It is the Holocaust, we are told, that makes the very notion of an objective religious truth absolutely impossible. In effect the Jewish People have been transformed from the witnesses of the most objective Divine Revelation in history into a "christ"-people whose death, burial, and resurrection in the 1940's redeemed the world from religion. In this new word initated by Auschwitz there is a "new covenant" based on total religious subjectivism, and no sin is greater than to try to go back to the former age. Anytime anyone says "I believe my religion is the true one," he is crucifying the Jewish People anew, we are told. How could anyone be so heartless?

Please note the fact that by removing Judaism and the Jewish People from the number of competing groups claiming objective Truth and changing them into a flag to be waved in the name of secularism the anti-religious forces have spared themselves the very embarrassing spectacle of having to confront and disprove Jewish religious claims. Now every element of Judaism has been reinterpreted so that it is no longer a threat. The blast of the Shofar no longer proclaims HaShem as King of the Universe but merely demonstrates how tolerant and non-judgmental is the society that permits it. The Holy Torah Scroll, the holiest material object in existence, is now no longer a threat to sin but an expression of how tolerant (including even of sin) the surrounding culture is. In fact, an entire Jewish festival (the upcoming Chanukkah) has been reinterpreted into a celebration of the non-objectivity of religious truth (ie, "religious freedom")!

Now it is only natural that the Jewish People should have been seized upon as the central figures in this new worldview. It is an objective fact that there is a connection between the Jews and the purpose of existence, so how better to assert a new purpose ("tolerance") than by drafting the Jewish People to serve as its avatars? And incidentally (as I have observed before), the criminalization of Holocaust denial is a dictionary-illustration example of how "heresy" is treated. Denial of Auschwitz is exempted from the "freedoms" of the modern secular world precisely because the "passion" enacted there is the very basis on which those freedoms rest.

However, the concept of the objectivity of religious truth is still out there, even if it has been separated from its greatest proof (the Revelation to Israel). What to do with it? Here another classic religious motif, the "scapegoat," makes its appearance. Chr*stianity is made the great example of the "intolerant" notion that religious truth is factual and objective and it is attacked relentlessly for that reason. It matters not that the faith which chr*stianity demands and rewards is a precursor of the "faith" which existentialists and religious liberals so love. Chr*stianity represents the very idea that there can be a true religion; Judaism represents what happens when people believe this. Thus a great "armageddon" is acted out in which chr*stianity (representing the old, pre-Auschwitz world when it was okay to believe this) is defeated by "Judaism," the religion which consists chiefly in dying at the hands of religious objectivists during the Holocaust, thus teaching the world (at such a great price) of precisely how vile, evil, and dangerous a fundamentalist notion of religious truth is.

I mentioned in the above paragraph "faith" as something touted and admired by liberals and existentialists. This is faith without an object, purely subjective faith as an end in itself. This is the type of "faith" Eric Yoffie meant when he said that the Jewish People are a "people of faith" just before launching into chr*stians who believe that they possess objective religious truth. The ironic thing here is that Judaism is not based on this type of hyper-subjective faith but on an indisputable, objective historical event. It is chr*stianity that says "blessed are they who have not seen and yet have believed," and which rewards subjective conviction divorced from objective fact.

In short, it is not really chr*stianity that is under attack in America and the world but rather the notion that there is such a thing as an objectively, factually true religion that is true in the same way as two plus two equals four. The objective event upon which this rests the Revelation at Sinai, the true foundation of Judaism. However, the enemies of G-liness (since they cannot defeat the Torah in an open challenge or remove the Jewish People from their central role in world history) have opted to alter the meaning of Jewish world-purpose and exorcise religious objectivism into chr*stianity, so identifying the two (and so identifying Judaism with the notion that no one can possess "the truth") that religious truth is discredited and the Jewish witness to the world is reinterpreted to mean something it has never meant before. For this reason any time Jewish leaders are asked their opinions on something it is never to evaluate it theologically but to speculate on the effect it will have on religious pluralism(!).

Ultimately what it comes down to is this: there is no absolute right or freedom to worship a false "gxd" or practice a false religion (and I'll bet the readers' first reaction on reading this is "then what's going to happen to the Jews?"). There is an objective religious truth, and religion is statutory, not salvational. For this reason I cannot in good conscience defend chr*stianity, the "new testament," or chr*stian holidays in and of themselves, though I do deplore the hypocrisy at work here (for that matter, chr*stians often sound little different from Jews when attacking moslems for very reasonably wanting to subject the entire world to the law of what they believe to be the true religion). Instead I ask everyone to think beyond recent stereotypes and go "back to the sources." If chr*stianity (or any other religion) does not have the objective authorization of the Creator of the Universe behind it it doesn't how much "under attack" it is. And if Judaism was once an absolutely intolerant truth claim made by a tribe of rustic shepherds then in essence it still is. I resent the hypocrisy in the attacks on chr*stianity, yes; but I resent even more the identification of objective religious truth with a false religion and the transformation of G-d's Priestly People from the vessel of Objective Divine Truth into poster children for the relegation of all religious truth to subjective mythology.

Let me confess something to my fellow FReepers. I believe the days when any number of religions could co-exist in basic agreement are over. Despite the beliefs of the atheist/evolutionist contingent here, history is not open-ended. It has a pre-determined end, and just as that end will bring an end to sexual sin, so it will bring an end to idolatry. Indeed, is not idolatry the greater sin of the two? I believe we have entered the "footsteps of Mashiach," and when sanity finally does return it will be with the One G-d trimphant in the Kingdom of G-d on earth--in other words, total sanity, not a multitude of religions agreeing to coexist based on a common sexual morality. And please don't respond by quoting the First Amendment, which will not exist at that time--and the sooner, the better!

Please forgive me if my words are confusing. I pray that the gist of what I am trying to say comes through to the reader, whether he agrees with me or not.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Well, this'll probably result in nothing but a spate of responses quoting the "new testament" and the Bill of Rights, but I hope someone out there will get what I'm trying to say.

This was composed at the keyboard. Please forgive any typing mistakes.

[Zionist Conspirator]

You asked for it.

[SouthernFreebird]

Why is Christianity not spelled out. Looks like your trying to hide a bad word.

[muawiyah]

What you are sayng is pretty basic ~ namely, that people who hate Christianity and Judaism also hate you guys.

Some of them pretend to be Jewish.

They don't much like Islam, nor Hinduism, nor Buddhism either.

[msf92497]

Thanks for sharing your convictions. I hope folks will show you some respect, and honor your courage, but there are a few rather silly people milling about on FR.

I hope you find Maschiah. Or, He finds you.

[Fenris6]

I agree. Deliberately mangling the text "chr*stian" is distracting, so much so that I stopped reading your article.

Whats up with that?

[familyop]

"In fact, an entire Jewish festival (the upcoming Chanukkah) has been reinterpreted into a celebration of the non-objectivity of religious truth (ie, 'religious freedom')!"

Of course, the above statement does not apply to Orthodox rabbis who are teaching us. I couldn't have written a better piece in so little time, though. ...well done!

And IMO, Europe's laws against Holocaust denial are for the same purpose as they were about 60 years ago: to prevent it from happening again through continuing attempts by the old European culture that brought it on.

I agree with your piece, in that others are using Judaism by various implications as the fall guy in the "war on Christmas" ruse. Subjective, New Age pagans do attack objective truth any way they can--especially by methods designed to put the blame for their campaigns on others.

[familyop]

"Why is Christianity not spelled out. Looks like your trying to hide a bad word."

I've been wondering about that, too, if you don't mind. ...avoidance of taking the name of the Anointed One (Messiah) in vain? Admittedly, I avoid fully writing any common version of The Name (even the Germanic version: G-d) for fear that someone will print it out and mess with it. ...but the Greek version of the name for Moshiach? It's also noticable that many use the Greek (and more respecting) version of Christian: "Xian." I'm really in the dark on this and have been a little shy to ask anyone in the Chabbad, yet.

[familyop]

Would it be avoidance of mentioning an idolatrous name having to do more with the evolution of the Egyptian "Karast" (introspective allegory) into a worshipped deity?

[GOPPachyderm]

If I'm understanding you correctly, you're a preterist. You believe that the prophecies of Daniel and Revelations took place 70 AD with the fall of Rome.

If, however, there is an antichrist yet to arise who wants to be worshiped as God, then I could see what you're describing as the rise of a one-world religion described in prophecy. However, I don't see how that fits within the preterist viewpoint, does it?

One of the problem I have with the preterist philosophy is the tendency of adherents to appropriate of the promises made to Israel.

[familyop]

Alaric sacked Rome in 410. The Vandals ran over it in about 450-455. However, Rome did destroy Jerusalem and defile the Temple in 70.

Here's a fascinating read on Daniel. If you read it, you'll probably see as to why Daniel is in "Writings" rather than "Prophets" (besides the fact that he became physically ill and run-down during and after his prophetic dreams--things that didn't happen while Moses received prophecies).

DANIEL, BOOK OF
By : Emil G. Hirsch Eduard König
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=34&letter=D
[Although I think the reference to Maccabees is rather strange, Maccabees not being in the Jewish Tanakh.]

Here are a few answers from the Judaic point of view.

Daniel
http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/web/faq/faq-da.html

Try this translation, as it is different in some ways from later Christian translations from the Septuagint (translated into Greek by Hellenized Jews for the Macedonian-Egyptian king Ptolemy in Alexandria).

Daniel
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Bible/Danieltoc.html


As for "promises made to Israel," have a look at the following.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Bible/Prophetstoc.html

Ezekiel 36:19,24,35
Ezekiel 37:21-22
Ezekiel 44:5,9
Ezekiel 45 (all)
Ezekiel 47:21
Zechariah 12:3
Zechariah 14:12-16
Malachi 3:6,17-18

[bornacatholic]

* th*nk your spell*ng *s we*rd.

[siunevada]

I think you were clear. Idiosyncratic, yes. But understandable.

I think part of the equation is also our witnesses. We are not personal participants at Sinai so we have to trust that our witnesses have the authority and ability to maintain a statement of facts for us.

[Zionist Conspirator]

With regard to the way I spell out the English word for Natzrut, I have had to explain this so many times that I grow tired of it. Plus some of the complaints about it are so utterly childish (see "bornacatholic") that I don't want to even bother dignifying them with a response. For you, however, I will explain myself yet again.

I do not capitalize the names of false religions because I am compelled to deny them and to show that I do so, just as devout chr*stians feel compelled to witness to their own faith. And I put the asterisk in chr*stianity (and b*ddhism, and tu*sday, and w*dn*sday, and any number of other words) to avoid spelling out the names of false "gxds." Most very devout Jews will avoid spelling out chr*stianity but not the names of pagan "gxds" because those "gxds" are no longer worshipped. However, having been a chr*stian once myself, I see no reason to treat the names of pagan "gxds" any better. Besides . . . who is to say that these pagan "gxds" have not gained worshippers in these apostate times? At any rate, I do not type the "*" because it is "fun" to do so. In fact, it's a lot of trouble.

Now as you know, familyop, most devout Jews will simply write "X-ianity" or "X-mas" or "X-tians." So why don't I do this? I'll tell you. I believe that devout chr*stians who are taking notes in a class somewhere should have the right to abbreviate the name of their faith and their "messiah" with the X (which, after all, is not really a place-marker but the first letter of the word "christos" in Greek) without feeling like they are betraying their faith. For this reason I say let the chr*stians have the "X" and use it without guilt. In order to help them do this I refrain from using it and instead use a small letter and an asterisk. And for this policy which I have adopted out of my respect for devout chr*stians the boors and ignoramuses among them heap ridicule and scorn upon me.

I sincerely hope that this post will provide a satisfactory answer to you and to all who (having missed all my previous explanations) have been wondering about this. Unfortunately, there will always be people who have not read any of my explanations and will continue to ridicule me and ignore all the points I try to make.

[GOPPachyderm]

From the explanation provided later in the post, it appears that your assumption is correct.

[SouthernFreebird]

Yep, Christ a false God...sad.


The more I see in the world the more I come to see that Faith is a very precious gift that I've taken for granted.
I'm so blessed to have the Faith in Jesus that I know, that I know who he is.

Thru all life's ups and downs, times of anger at God and times of rebellion I've always had that lifeline of knowing who he is and where to find him. I just couldn't imagine a life without Jesus.

[familyop]

Thank you. Yes, that will help. It prompted recall of the biblical command to refrain from displaying the names of other deities. I'll ask within my own group about the finer points (names of religions, what members of those are called, and so forth).

There should be some effort to take some of the mystery out of what we are doing (while spreading no assumptions or revisions on our part) for those who ask. It would have the effect of helping many others who are already looking for information, but some freaks are already broadcasting new silliness from the neo-Nazi/Ancient Roman deep end. You know...the "Illuminati," "secret society," "new world order" and all of that. They say that we want to *behead* everyone! LOL!

They should have a side order of flying saucers and reptilian extraterrestrials with that.

At least a couple of men are pretending to be learning with us while propagandizing with some of that same kooky stuff (one who does so while touting his work for the justice system).

We got away from the recently intensified Marcion-ization of the religion of our youth, and a few more presumptuous nutburgers have crawled out of the woodwork to try to start a new reich!

So what will prevail overall: crazy lies based on assumptions or factual information and calm?

[GOPPachyderm]

I know the reason for the dash between G and D is to make sure that His name is not used in vain, but this sounds like the exact opposite - the desire not to show respect.

I know what you mean about faith. I discovered that following my own path led to death and destruction, while knowing Christ leads to life and peace and deep happiness. There is such a beauty, and peace and rightness about knowing Christ through the Bible and through a personal relationship.

[Campion]

I'm curious. Why do you render "Christ," from Greek "Christos" ("anointed") which translates Hebrew "Moshiach" ("anointed") as "chr*st", but you don't render "Moshiach" as "m*shi*ch," or anything like that.

They are the same word, and mean the same thing. "Christ" is a title. It is not a "proper name of another deity" any more than "Moshiach" is the "proper name of another deity."

[Zionist Conspirator]

There should be some effort to take some of the mystery out of what we are doing (while spreading no assumptions or revisions on our part) for those who ask. It would have the effect of helping many others who are already looking for information, but some freaks are already broadcasting new silliness from the neo-Nazi/Ancient Roman deep end. You know...the "Illuminati," "secret society," "new world order" and all of that. They say that we want to *behead* everyone! LOL!

Freaking Nazis. They can't make up their minds. First the Jews are too tolerant of decadence, then the nutjobs start bawling because they're afraid they're going to get their heads cut off while . . . ahem . . . "engulfed" in their "partners."

And btw, beheading is the only form of capital punishment permitted to non-Jews. And yes, if all the criteria are met it will be executed. Too bad these "conservatives" are so afraid of Theocracy!