Is the Yahweh of the Old Testament Satan?
The Difference Between The Old Covenant vs. The New Covenant
American Christians are Biblically Illiterate Not Understanding the Difference Between The Old Covenant vs. The New Covenant
by Brian Shilhavy
It is becoming more and more clear to me that today’s American Christians are biblically illiterate, choosing instead to follow their favorite Christian leaders and what they teach about the Bible, rather than reading the Bible for themselves.
Now, I know that the phrase “biblically illiterate” or something similar such as “they don’t know what the Bible says,” is often a charge made by one group of Christians who believe differently from other groups of Christians, such as the divisions between Catholic and Protestant Christians, and actually refers to “doctrine”, or some written form of something that describes what a particular Christian group “believes” that separates them from other Christian groups.
I am not dealing with different doctrinal beliefs at all in this article.
I am talking about what the Bible actually says, which anyone can determine for themselves by picking it up and reading it.
To give a non-religious example, take the Constitution and the Bill of Rights of the United States, the political documents that are supposed to define the legal code of the United States.
There is great debate as to how these documents are applied today in a court of law, but there is no debate about what is actually written in them, because anyone can look them up and see what they say.
So for example, while there is great debate today as to the meaning of “freedom of speech” as is written in the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, nobody is claiming that the First Amendment does not protect free speech at all, or that only the Government can determine which speech is allowed in the public space, and what speech is not.
That would be absurd, and make the First Amendment meaningless.
And yet, after I published the article on the founding of Israel in 1948 last week, stating that this political-military action was not a fulfillment of prophecy, but a massacre and ethnic cleansing, I had several people email me and tell me that massacring whole nations and participating in ethnic cleansing most certainly can be a fulfillment of prophecy, because God has done it several times throughout history.
If they gave any examples in the Bible to support their claim, of course they were ALL examples from the Old Testament, none from the New Testament.
This is clearly an example of being biblically illiterate, and not understanding the clear division in the Bible between the Old Covenant instituted by Moses with the giving of the Law (Torah), and the New Covenant which was instituted by Jesus by his execution on the Roman cross, and his subsequent rising from the dead and ascension to Heaven.
Which covenant with God are we currently living under? The New Covenant, which was fulfilled and has now superseded the Old Covenant.
If anyone makes a claim that God continues to deal with groups of people under this New Covenant period as he did under the Old Covenant, it would be the same as someone standing up in a court of law in the U.S. and claiming that the First Amendment was never actually written, and that there is no freedom of speech.
We can conclusively state that this is NOT true, based solely on the textual evidence.
Now what if the person in a court of law in the U.S. makes the claim to a judge sitting on a bench in a court of law that the Constitution has been changed today, a couple hundred of years after it was allegedly written, and that the First Amendment is a forgery, and that it was not in the original text of the Constitution?
Can we prove in a court of law that this is not true?
Of course we can, because the Constitution of the U.S. and the Bill of Rights were copied and even translated into many languages over the past couple of hundred years, so that if someone ever tried to change the original document, we would still have all the thousands of copies of the original Constitution and Bill of Rights for the past 250 years or so.
The same principle is true of the Bible.
I realize that there are differences of opinion about which books should have been included in the Bible, a debate I am not going to cover in this article, but if we just stick to the ones that ALL of the canons accept (scholars who met to decide which books were inspired and which ones were not to be included in the Bible) which are the ones that most non-Catholic English Bibles today contain (the Catholic Church includes 7 additional books written during the period from the end of the Old Testament to the beginning of the New Testament), then we can definitively read what they actually say, either in the original language if one takes the time to learn it, or in the multitude of English translations.
And while people can criticize some of the differences in the English translations (as I do often!), none of them would state that God deals with mankind the same way today during the New Covenant, as he did during the period of human history under the Old Covenant.
This is about as basic as it gets, and yet I continue to get emails from Christians who desperately want to use the Old Testament writings to justify the actions of the Zionist Jews today towards the Palestinians.
So here are the most basic of facts as written in the Bible, which is clear to anyone who actually reads it for themselves.
The Old Covenant = The Law through Moses
The Old Covenant was the Law given to Moses for the Hebrew slaves that were brought out of Egypt by Moses miraculously.
It was a contract between the Hebrew people, descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who was renamed “Israel”, who were led out of Egypt to occupy the land that became known as “Israel.”
To please God and become his people, one had to follow the Law given to Moses. From the beginning, there were those who believed in God and followed the Law, and those among the Hebrews who did not, but were wicked.
Even under the Old Covenant, one did not become a part of God’s people just by ethnicity – one had to have faith and follow the Law.
Provisions in the Law allowed non-ethnic Israelites to participate in the Law and be part of the covenant people, either as full converts through circumcision, or as “God fearers” who followed the Law without being circumcised. (See the Roman Soldier Cornelius in Acts 10 as an example of one who was “a devout man who feared God,” but not a Jew.)
The New Covenant = The Gospel
The New Covenant was instituted by Jesus, which is referred to as “the Gospel”, where Gospel means “Good News.”
This “Good News” was that Jesus was the prophesied “Messiah”, the “anointed one,” who became the perfect blood sacrifice to redeem (buy back the souls of men enslaved to Satan to become free and belong to God) mankind.
Different from the Old Covenant, one now enters into the community of the people of God through faith, not by obeying the Law, because by obeying the Law everyone comes up short and is found guilty before God for not keeping the whole law.
Jesus kept and fulfilled the whole law, and therefore died as an innocent man, serving justice before God for the sins (breaking the law) of the entire human race.
The apostle Paul, one of the main writers of the New Testament, further defined the “Gospel” by explaining that under the New Covenant, we are all now “One in Christ” if we are among his followers, and that there is no distinction anymore between Jews and non-Jews (Gentiles).
Jesus made it very clear that Jewish nationalism was now over, and his last command to his followers was:
“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:18-19)
“Making disciples” of course was exactly what Jesus had been doing for three and half years before he was executed, so his followers knew exactly what he meant, and he sure did not mean “Go out and commit genocide and kill anyone who does not support Jewish nationalism“!
No, Jesus was the rightful Jewish King, but instead of defeating the Roman occupiers as he could have easily done, he laid down his life to serve God and redeem mankind – The NEW Covenant.
His followers were ready to fight for him when they came to arrest them, but Jesus made it very clear that the age of “living by the sword” was over.
While he was still speaking, Judas came, one of the twelve, and with him a great crowd with swords and clubs, from the chief priests and the elders of the people.
Now the betrayer had given them a sign, saying, “The one I will kiss is the man; seize him.”
And he came up to Jesus at once and said, “Greetings, Rabbi!” And he kissed him.
Jesus said to him, “Friend, do what you came to do.”
Then they came up and laid hands on Jesus and seized him.
And behold, one of those who were with Jesus stretched out his hand and drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest and cut off his ear.
Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword. Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must be so?” (Matthew 26:47-54)
If you read the gospel accounts of the life of Jesus in the New Testament, you will read many other things that Jesus said and did that completely contradict the Zionist belief today in Jewish Nationalism, and the belief that the nation of Israel and the Temple in Jerusalem would continue to have relevance during the New Covenant period.
Here are some examples:
Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” (Matthew 24:1-2)
In the temple he found those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons, and the money-changers sitting there. And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables.
And he told those who sold the pigeons, “Take these things away; do not make my Father’s house a house of trade.”
So the Jews said to him, “What sign do you show us for doing these things?”
Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”
The Jews then said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?”
But he was speaking about the temple of his body. When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken. (John 2:14-22)
Now among those who went up to worship at the feast were some Greeks. So these came to Philip, who was from Bethsaida in Galilee, and asked him, “Sir, we wish to see Jesus.”
Philip went and told Andrew; Andrew and Philip went and told Jesus.
And Jesus answered them, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.
Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life.
If anyone serves me, he must follow me; and where I am, there will my servant be also. If anyone serves me, the Father will honor him. (John 12:20-26)
The rest of the New Testament portion of the Bible is the record of the actions and writings of the followers of Jesus teaching about the New Covenant, and how both Jews and Gentiles can now know God.
But they met opposition from the Satanic Jews, the same ones who murdered Jesus.
In Acts 6 we have the story of Stephen, who was stoned to death for daring to state that the Temple of Jerusalem was no longer needed under the New Covenant.
The writings of the Apostle Paul also clearly teach that all the fulfillments of the Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in Jesus Christ, and that there is no longer any divisions between Jews and non-Jews.
The New Testament book of Hebrews was clearly written to ethnic Jews, teaching them how all of the Old Covenant laws and promises were now fulfilled and replaced by the New Covenant, doing away with the Law and Temple worship, and how even the promise of the land of Israel was fulfilled, and that there is a Heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews chapter 11 and 12).
There is NO Prophecy in the New Testament to Restore the Nation of Israel
Quoting Old Testament Bible passages to try and justify the atrocities of the Satanic Jews today, the Zionists, is to completely ignore the entire New Testament which defines the New Covenant.
American Christians who promote Zionism are clearly illiterate when it comes to what the Bible actually says.
I was trained in Zionism by one of the top Zionist schools in America back in the 1980s, as Christian Zionism was beginning to gain great political power through people like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.
I rejected it then, and I will continue to publish the truth and encourage people to read the Bible for themselves.
There is no prophecy in the New Testament that states Jews will return to Israel. The Zionists like to twist some scriptures in the middle chapters of Romans (chapters 9 through 11), but if you read the first 8 chapters of Romans first, and put those middle chapters in context, you will clearly see what Paul is writing.
And the leaders of the Zionist movement who have the same theological training as I do, know full well that modern day Jews, or any other ethnic group, cannot be saved without faith in Jesus Christ.
Their entire argument hinges on the interpretation of end time prophecies from Daniel and the Book of Revelation, where they believe in those end times when Jesus comes back a second time, that there will be a conversion of ethnic Jews who will believe that Jesus is the Messiah in those last days, and that therefore, they have to continue supporting Jewish Nationalism.
But that is an interpretation, not a fact stated in Scripture, and ANYTHING written about the future cannot be proven true until those future events happen.
The founding of the modern day Israel in 1948 is an event in THE PAST, and did not fulfill any prophecies at all, because a massive conversion of Satanic Jews to Jews who believe in Jesus as the Messiah did NOT happen.
What happened was a MASSACRE and ethnic cleansing.
The TRUE conversion of Satanic Jews into Jews who believed in Jesus as the Messiah happened during the First Century, after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and just before the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 AD.
Like the previous destruction of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. by the Babylonians, there were a remnant of Jews who stayed behind in the land after the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD.
Those inhabitants who remained in the land of Israel after 70 AD became mostly “Christians” in the fourth Century after the Roman Emperor declared Christianity as the State Religion, and then many of them became “Muslims” during the 7th Century with the rise of Islam.
Today, they are the “Palestinians”, most of whom are Muslims, but many still remaining as Christians. They are the original inhabitants of the land.
The Jews who came and massacred them in 1948 came mainly from Europe, escaping the Holocaust, and are mostly not even true ethnic Jews.
So pick up a copy of the Bible and read it for yourself, or you are going to end up on the wrong side of history if you support Zionism, with eternal consequences.
But it is not as though the word of God has failed.
For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.”
This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. (Romans 9:6-8)
For Moses writes about the righteousness that is based on the law, that the person who does the commandments shall live by them.
But the righteousness based on faith says, “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’” (that is, to bring Christ down) “or ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).
But what does it say?
“The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.
For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.”
For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him.
For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” (Romans 10:5-13)
From a non-Christian, crypto- viewpoint
The Devil's Trick: Unmasking the God of Israel
LAURENT GUYÉNOT
MAY 17, 2020
“The finest trick of the devil is to persuade you that he does not exist,” wrote Charles Baudelaire (Paris Spleen). He was wrong: the devil’s finest trick is to persuade you that he is God.
Do I believe in the existence of the devil? It depends on the definition. I believe that humans are under the influence of the ideas that they have collectively engendered over the ages, for ideas are spiritual forces. And from that standpoint, I regard Yahweh’s impersonation of the Divine Creator as the most devastating deception ever played on the human race, a crime against divinity.
Am I a Gnostic? Not in the strict sense. If we are to believe their detractors, the early Gnostics taught that the God of the Old Testament was the evil demiurge who created the world from which Christ came to free us. I do not take Yahweh that seriously. On the contrary, I lament that he has been taken seriously by billions of people, Jews, Christians and Muslims. Yahweh is a character of fiction, but one that has gained tremendous influence over a huge portion of mankind, either directly or indirectly.
What I wish to demonstrate here is that Yahweh has the character of the devil as most people imagine it. That goes a long way towards explaining the satanic quality of Jewish Power that is becoming more and more apparent every day—a quality that Alain Soral is exposing in his most recent videos (now avalaible with English subtitles on the new ERTV International YouTube channel). If I were a Christian, I would quote John 8:44. But I am not arguing from a Christian viewpoint, for although I accept the principle that the Gospel story was designed as a cure for the Jews’ mental enslavement by the Torah, I also consider that, unless it could vomit the Old Testament, Christianity will remain forever infected by the virus it was intended to combat.
The Mosaic covenant as Faustian pact
The core of the Hebrew Bible is the Mosaic covenant. The deal is simple: in exchange for exclusive worship and obedience to his laws stressing strict separateness from other peoples, Yahweh will make the Israelites rule over humankind: “follow his ways, keep his statutes, his commandments, his customs, and listen to his voice,” and Yahweh “will raise you higher than every other nation he has made”; “You will make many nations your subjects, yet you will be subject to none” (Deuteronomy 26:17-19 and 28:12).
Christians have never come to the realization that the Mosaic covenant is nothing but a program for world domination by the Jewish nation. That is because it is written right under their nose, in a book whose malice they cannot recognize because they have been told it is the Word of God. It takes a free-thinker like H. G. Wells to see the biblical idea of the Chosen People for what it is: “a conspiracy against the rest of the world.” In the books of the Bible, “you have the conspiracy plain and clear, […] an aggressive and vindictive conspiracy. […] It is not tolerance but stupidity to shut our eyes to their quality.”[1]
Christians have always failed to see the biblical god’s utter contempt for their own nations, although it is repeated again and again: “All the nations are as nothing before him, for him they count as nothingness and emptiness” (Isaiah 40:17). “Devour all the nations whom Yahweh your god puts at your mercy, show them no pity” (Deuteronomy 7:16). The vulnerability of Christian nations to Israel’s collective sociopathy is directly related to the their self-inflicted blindness. For their own misfortune, Christians worship a deity who hates them (as one commenter to an earlier article put it).
Christian exegetes never seem to have noticed either that Yahweh’s covenant—domination over the nations in exchange for exclusive worship—is basically identical to the pact that the devil tried to lure Jesus into:
“the devil showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. And he said to him, ‘I will give you all these, if you fall at my feet and do me homage.’ Then Jesus replied, ‘Away with you, Satan!’” (Matthew 4:8-10)
As a matter of fact, Satan is hardly distinguished from Yahweh in the Tanakh. He is called an “angel of Yahweh” in Numbers 22 and 32. In 2Samuel 24, Yahweh incites David to do evil, while the role is given to Satan in the same episode told in 1Chronicles 21, where Yahweh, “the angel of Yahweh”, and Satan are used interchangeably. There is also no trace in the Tanakh of a cosmic struggle between Good and Evil, as in Persian monotheism. Happiness and misfortune, peace and war, health and sickness, abundance and famine, fertility and infertility, all have their unique and direct source in the capricious will of Yahweh. In his own words, “I form the light and I create the darkness, I make well-being, and I create disaster, I, Yahweh, do all these things” (Isaiah 45:7).
Christ’s teaching to “store up treasures in heaven” (Matthew 6:20) is alien to Yahweh. He is the Greedy One, who wants “the treasures of all the nations” amassed into his Jerusalem residence: “Mine is the silver, mine the gold!” (Haggai 2:8). “The wealth of all the surrounding nations will be heaped together: gold, silver, clothing, in vast quantity” (Zechariah 14:14). Interestingly, according to 1Kings 10:14, the amount of gold hoarded each year into Salomon’s temple was “666 talents of gold”—the “number of the Beast” in Revelation 13:18! Make of it what you want. Or ask Jared Kushner to explain it.
The Mosaic covenant functions like a classic pact with the devil: Israel will get wealth and power in exchange for becoming Yahweh’s “personal possession” (Exodus 19:5). The notion of a pact with the devil is especially relevant since Yahweh denies his worshippers an individual immortal soul, which is tantamount to claiming their souls for himself. As Voltaire once noted, Yahweh forbade the Jews to screw their goats (Exodus 22:18), he instructed them on how to defecate in a hole (Deuteronomy 23:14), but he didn’t give them “that most useful creed in a future life.”[2] That is because the Torah is essentially a tool of mental programming meant to lock the Jews into a watertight collective soul (see my article “Israel as One Man”).
Metaphysical materialism is the most fundamental aspect of Biblical anthropology, and, although it has been superficially amended in later Judaic developments, its sap runs very deep in Jewishness. According to the Jewish Virtual Library, the afterlife “is rarely discussed in Jewish life, be it among Reform, Conservative, or Orthodox Jews, […] in marked contrast to the religious traditions of the people among whom the Jews have lived. […] The Torah, the most important Jewish text, has no clear reference to afterlife at all.”
The relationship between Yahweh and his people is not moral, but strictly contractual and legalistic. According to Jewish scholar Yeshayahu Leibowitz, “The Torah does not recognize moral imperatives stemming from knowledge of natural reality or from awareness of man’s duty to his fellow man. All it recognizes are Mitzvot, divine imperatives.”[3] The hundreds of mitzvot (“commandments”) are ends in themselves, not ways to a higher moral consciousness. Such Jewish legalism stifles moral consciousness, as Gilad Atzmon pointed out.
Naturally, there are moral precepts here and there in the Bible. But on the whole, it is a misunderstanding to believe that Yahweh expects from his people a moral superiority. The only criterion for approval by Yahweh is obedience to his arbitrary laws and to his antisocial or genocidal commands. To slaughter treacherously hundreds of prophets of Baal is good, because it is the will of Yahweh (1Kings 18). To show mercy to the king of the Amalekites is bad, because when Yahweh says, “kill everyone,” he means “everyone” (1Samuel 15). How can we expect from a people whose mentality has been shaped by these narratives and their layers of Talmudic commentaries, that they share the sense of good and evil that most other peoples regard as inherent to humanity? It is totally consistent for a future Israeli Prime Minister like Yitzhak Shamir (1986-1992) to declare (in 1943):
“Neither Jewish ethics nor Jewish tradition can disqualify terrorism as a means of combat. We are very far from having any moral qualms as far as our national war goes. We have before us the command of the Torah, whose morality surpasses that of any other body of laws in the world: ‘Ye shall blot them out to the last man.’[4
The jealous and murderous god
Yahweh is “the Jealous One” (Exodus 34:14). Although he is supposed to be the father of all national gods (Deuteronomy 32:8-9), he feels for them a murderous hatred, manifested in this command:
“You must completely destroy all the places where the nations you dispossess have served their gods, on high mountains, on hills, under any spreading tree; you must tear down their altars, smash their sacred stones, burn their sacred poles, hack to bits the statues of their gods and obliterate their name from that place.” (Deuteronomy 12:2-3)
Yahweh’s jealousy reached pathological proportions during his struggle with Assur, the national god of Assyria. In the oldest strata of the book of Isaiah, composed soon after the destruction of Israel by Assyria, Yahweh appears unable to cope with the frustration and humiliation, and consumed with the lust for revenge:
“Yahweh Sabaoth has sworn it, ‘Yes, what I have planned will take place, what I have decided will be so: I shall break Assyria [Assur] in my country, I shall trample on him on my mountains. Then his yoke will slip off them, his burden will slip from their shoulders. This is the decision taken in defiance of the whole world; this, the hand outstretched in defiance of all nations. Once Yahweh Sabaoth has decided, who will stop him? Once he stretches out his hand, who can withdraw it?’” (Isaiah 14:24-27)
Listen to Yahweh fuming after his defeat, and you hear a dangerous narcissistic megalomaniac: “By my own self I swear it; what comes from my mouth is saving justice, it is an irrevocable word: All shall bend the knee to me, by me every tongue shall swear.” (Isaiah 45:23)
Yahweh’s struggle with Baal is even more revealing. In ancient Syria, Baal (a term meaning simply “Lord”, as the Hebrew Adonai), also known as Baal Shamem (“the Lord of Heaven”), was understood as the Supreme God, encompassing all the manifestations of the divine.[5] And so it is ironic that Yahweh, a tribal god, should compete with the great Baal for the status of Supreme God. The cult of Baal received royal support in the powerful kingdom of Israel under the Omrid dynasty (9th century BC). We learn in the Cycle of Elijah (from 1Kings 17 to 2Kings 13) that the Yahwist prophet Elijah challenged 450 prophets of Baal to conjure lightning upon a sacrificial bull: “You must call on the name of your god, and I shall call on the name of Yahweh; the god who answers with fire, is God indeed”—an implausible situation since Baal, being the God of an agrarian society, never required holocausts. Elijah wins the contest, and people then fall on their faces and scream “Yahweh is God! Yahweh is God!” Then they seize all the prophets of Baal, and Elijah slaughters them (1Kings 18). Later on, after a coup against the Omrids, the Judean general Jehu summoned all the priests of Baal for “a great sacrifice to Baal,” which turned out to be their own slaughter. “Thus Jehu rid Israel of Baal” (2Kings 10:18-28). This is the perfect illustration of how Yahweh became the God instead of Baal: by the physical elimination of the priests of Baal. The process mirrors the way Jehu became king over Israel, by exterminating the family of the legitimate king, as well as “all his leading men, his close friends, his priests; he did not leave a single one alive” (2Kings 10:11).
For the Egyptians, wrote German Egyptologist Jan Assmann, “the gods are social beings, living and acting in ‘constellations’.”[6] The peaceful cooperation of the gods warrants the harmonious functioning of the universe. That is because the gods form the organic body of the world. Such a conception, which Assmann calls “cosmotheism”, fosters a form of inclusive or convergent monotheism: all gods are one, as the cosmos is one. By contrast, the Bible’s exclusive monotheism is the expression of Yahweh’s narcissistic sociopathy. That is why some Egyptians, according to Plutarch (Isis and Osiris, 31), believed the god of the Jews to be Seth, the donkey-head god of the desert, famine, disorder and war, expelled from the council of the gods for having murdered his elder brother Osiris out of jealousy. Identifying the Jewish god with Seth was their way to account for the aggressive exclusiveness of Jewish religion.
Since the polytheisms of all great civilizations were cosmotheisms, they were translatable into one another. This was of practical importance, because, Assmann writes, “contracts with other states had to be sealed by oath, and the gods to whom this oath was sworn had to be compatible. Tables of divine equivalences were thus drawn up that eventually correlated up to six different pantheons.” And so, from the third millennium BC, the translatability of various pantheons was crucial to international diplomacy as well as trade. But Yahweh cannot be matched with any other god; Yahwism “blocked intercultural translatability.”[7] And when Yahweh instructed his people, “You will make no pact with them or with their gods” (Exodus 23:32), or “Do not utter the names of their gods, do not swear by them, do not serve them and do not bow down to them” (Joshua 23:7), he was in effect preventing any relationship of trust with the neighboring peoples. The Jews must place their entire trust in Yahweh alone. Dietary laws are meant to prevent any socialization outside the tribe: “I shall set you apart from all these peoples, for you to be mine” (Leviticus 20:26).
What Israelites are asked, in fact, is to reproduce towards other nations Yahweh’s murderous sociopathy toward other gods. The war code of Deuteronomy 20 commands to exterminate “any living thing” in the conquered cities of Canaan. In practice, the rule is extended to all people who resist the Israelites in their conquest. It was applied by Moses to the Midianites, save their 32,000 young virgin girls, of whom 32 were burnt as holocausts to Yahweh (Numbers 31). It was applied by Joshua to the Canaanite city of Jericho, where the Israelites “enforced the curse of destruction on everyone in the city: men and women, young and old, including the oxen, the sheep and the donkeys, slaughtering them all” (Joshua 6:21). In the city of Ai, the inhabitants were all slaughtered, twelve thousand of them, “until not one was left alive and none to flee. […] When Israel had finished killing all the inhabitants of Ai in the open ground, and in the desert where they had pursued them, and when every single one had fallen to the sword, all Israel returned to Ai and slaughtered its remaining population.” Women were not spared. “For booty, Israel took only the cattle and the spoils of this town” (Joshua 8:22-27). Then came the turns of the cities of Makkedah, Libnah, Lachish, Eglon, Hebron, Debir, and Hazor. In the whole land, Joshua “left not one survivor and put every living thing under the curse of destruction, as Yahweh, god of Israel, had commanded” (10:40). A more cruel end was reserved by King David for the Ammonites, who were “cut with saws, and with harrows of iron, and with axes,” and “passed through the brick kiln” (2Samuel 12:31 and 1Chronicles 20:3).[8]
Yahweh’s genocidal code of war was applied by King Saul to the Amalekites. Yahweh ordered Saul to kill them all, “man and woman, babe and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and donkey,” and Saul was punished for sparing their king Agag, whom Samuel had to butcher himself (1Samuel 15). In the Jewish mind, such stories are not just half-forgotten tales of the past. Biblical history holds the keys to the present and to the future. Rabbinic exegetes have constantly referred to Israel’s perceived enemies in biblical terms. Amalek, in particular, came to be associated with Rome and, from the fourth century onward, with Christians, or with the Armenians in particular. Amalek is also associated to Iran, because the villain of the Book of Esther, Haman, is said to be a descendant of the Amalekite king Agag. The hanging of Haman and his ten sons and the massacre of 75,000 Persians are often conflated in Jewish tradition with the extermination of the Amalekites and the brutal execution of their king. The Torah reading on the morning of Purim is taken from the account of the battle against the Amalekites, which ends with the conclusion that “Yahweh will be at war with Amalek generation after generation” (Exodus 17:16).[9] “Tradition holds that the Amalekites are the undying enemy of the Jews,” explains Jeffrey Goldberg in a New York Times piece called “Israel’s Fears, Amalek’s Arsenal,” adding: “I recently asked one of his advisers to gauge for me the depth of Mr. Netanyahu’s anxiety about Iran. His answer: ‘Think Amalek.’”[10]
This is just one more illustration of the Israeli leadership’s biblical mind frame. Modern Israel is the son of Yahweh, and acts on the international scene in a biblical way, that is, with the same indifference and cruelty toward non-Jewish nations as Yahweh demanded of his people in the Bible.
Accusatory inversion
“The belief in a cruel god makes a cruel man,” wrote Thomas Paine (The Age of Reason, 1794). Countless biblical stories demonstrate that Yahweh is the spirit of murder and theft. We read in Samson’s legend in Judges 14:19, that when “the spirit of Yahweh seized on him,” he went on killing and robbing thirty men, “then burning with rage returned to his father’s house.”
Yahweh is the cruelest of gods, but he would have us believe that all other gods are abominations. Biblical history portrays all nations but Israel as repulsive idolaters. But they were not. The Egyptians had built the first great civilization; their goddess Isis had taught them how to grow wheat and bake bread, and the Greeks learned it from them—as everything else, according to Herodotus. They were a spiritual and peaceful people. The Assyrians were conquerors, and their god Assur was no angel, yet even the Bible recognizes that they did not slaughter the defeated Israelites, but deported and resettled them. The Babylonians dealt with the Judeans the same way, even allowing them to keep their tradition and their cohesion, and to prosper on the riverbanks of the Euphrates.
Assyrian soldier with prisoners of war
Reversed accusation of genocidal intention is typical of Israel, a country with nuclear warheads pointed at Iran, whose leaders have always denied having any nuclear arsenal at all, but who hysterically urges the world to stop Iran’s supposed nuclear military program and determination to erase Israel from the maps. It would be laughable if Israel were just paranoid. But Israel is the psychopath among nations, and that means a tremendous capacity to manipulate, intimidate, corrupt morally, and get what they want.
The psychopath projects his own cruelty and lust for power on others. And so he thinks that those who resist his domination are out to get him. Therefore he must destroy them first. From the biblical point of view, nations must either recognize Israel’s sovereignty, and their kings “fall prostrate before [Israel], faces to the ground” (Isaiah 49:23), or be destroyed. Yahweh told Israel that he has identified “seven nations greater and stronger than yourself,” that “you must put under the curse of destruction,” and not “show them any pity.” As for their kings, “you will blot out their names under heaven” (Deuteronomy 7:1-2, 24). And we recall that, according to phony whistleblower Wesley Clark, son of Benjamin Jacob Kanne, the neocons had plans for destroying precisely seven nations—another proof that they are possessed by Yahweh.
Yahweh offers only two possible paths to Israel: domination, if Israel keeps Yahweh’s Covenant of separateness, or annihilation, if Israel breaks the Covenant:
“if you make friends with the remnant of these nations still living beside you, if you intermarry with them, if you mix with them and they with you, then know for certain that Yahweh your god will stop dispossessing these nations before you, and for you they will be a snare, a pitfall, thorns in your sides and thistles in your eyes, until you vanish from this fine country given you by Yahweh your god.” (Joshua 23:12-14)
Dispossess others or be dispossessed, dominate or be exterminated: Israel cannot think beyond that alternative. A good illustration is David Ben-Gurion’s paradoxical thinking in the early 1960s. Discussing Kennedy’s determination to stop Dimona, Avner Cohen writes in Israel and the Bomb (1998): “Imbued with lessons of the Holocaust, Ben-Gurion was consumed by fears of security. […] Anxiety about the Holocaust reached beyond Ben-Gurion to infuse Israel’s military thinking.”[11] Yet in the very same period, Ben-Gurion seriously considered that, within 25 years, Israel will dominate the world, and Jerusalem “will be the seat of the Supreme Court of Mankind, to settle all controversies among the federated continents, as prophesied by Isaiah.”[12]
The prohibition of moral conscience
Accusatory inversion is the birth process of Yahwism, which presents a murderous demon as the supreme God while demonizing the supreme God worshipped by other peoples. This can clearly be seen in the Genesis story of the Garden of Eden, with a very simple historical critical analysis.
In the Garden of Eden allegory, Yahweh forbids man access to “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (Genesis 2:17). The Hebrew word for “knowledge”, daat, translates in Greek as gnosis, meaning inner awareness or insight rather than intellectual knowledge, so that “knowledge of good and evil” can be accurately translated as “moral conscience”, which is man’s capacity to distinguish good from evil, right from wrong, in any particular situation. So that the prohibition of the knowledge of good and evil simply means the inhibition of moral conscience.
To contextualize that Genesis story, we must recall that Egyptian and Persian religions taught that immortality is the reward for the blameless life. Since immortality was synonymous with divinity, being immortal could be expressed as “being among the gods”, or “being like the gods”. But in the Hebrew Bible, it is the serpent, a liar and deceiver, who tempts Adam and Eve into eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil with the guarantee that, “the day you eat it you will not die,” but “your eyes will open and you will be like gods, who know good and evil” (Genesis 3:5). The serpent speaks like the religious wisdom of great religions. The Hebrew scribes can present him as a liar because, for them, immortality (“not dying”) only makes sense physically: Yahweh, they claim, intended Adam and Eve to be physically immortal on earth, and provided no otherworld for their afterlife. From this materialistic standpoint, the scribes denounce the promise of immortality through knowledge of good and evil as deceptive, and implicitly portray the Babylonian, Persian and Egyptian gods as liars.
We have been educated for so many generations by this story, and are so used to assuming that the serpent of Genesis is the satanic deceiver, that it is hard to see the Torah’s message for what it really was: a direct attack against the higher religions and their moral teaching that knowledge and practice of good and evil is the way to the blessed afterlife. But, I ask, if trying to become like gods is a Luciferian impulse, why did the Greek Fathers of the Christian Church stress man’s potential for deification (theosis) under the logic that “God became man so that man might become God”?[13]
William Blake’s gnostic-romantic vision of the Serpent
Lucifer, by the way, is the Latin translation of the Greek Phosphoros (light-bearer), traditionally applied to the Morning Star, the planet Venus. In Isaiah 14:12-17, the prophet blames the Babylonian king Nabuchodonosor II (605-562) for having tried to “rival the Most High,” and sarcastically asks: “How did you come to fall from the heavens, Daystar, son of Dawn [Lucifer in the Latin Vulgate]?” Discarding the reference to the Babylonian king, Christian exegetes conflated “Lucifer” with the serpent of Genesis, and declared him the chief of the fallen angels, cast away from heaven because of his rebellious pride. Yet, if we look at Yahwism from the revisionist perspective I am advocating, Yahweh, the tribal god who usurped the majesty of the Supreme God, fits the Luciferian archetype. Yahweh is the infernal demon that wanted to be God instead of God.
Yahweh Molech
To understand Yahwism—and thereby Jewishness and Zionism—it is important to know the background of its infancy, which has nothing to do with the birth of universal monotheism.
There is a mounting scholarly assumption that Yahweh was originally the volcano god of a tribal people specialized in metallurgy (read here).[14] Hence his volcanic character. Any portrait of Yahweh would have to be based on Psalms 18:8: “Smoke rose from his nostrils, from his mouth devouring fire.” According to the “Kenite hypothesis”, the cult originated with the Kenites, who believed that, as a result of a curse upon their fratricidal ancestor Cain, they must live as restless wanderers, but inspire fear to the people among whom they dwell by their Yahweh-given law of sevenfold vengeance—revised as seventy-sevenfold by Cain’s descendant Lamek (Genesis 4:15-24).
We are often told that Yahweh is the god who abolished human sacrifice, when after ordering Abraham to tie his son Isaac, he held back his hand and contented himself with a ram (Genesis 22). Yet long after Abraham, some Israelite leaders seemed unaware of that great progress, and sacrificed their own children as burnt offering to Yahweh: Jephthah in Judges 11:29-40, Hiel in 1Kings 16:34, King Azaz in 2Kings 16:3, and King Manasseh in 2Kings 21:6. Not to mention the 32 holocausted Midianite virgins in Numbers 31 (read my article “A Holocaust of Biblical Proportions”).
For his alleged abolition of human sacrifice, Yahweh has been compared favorably with the Canaanite god Molech or Moloch, to whom firstborn infants were ritually sacrificed. But biblical scholars like Thomas Römer speculate that Molech was in fact none other than Yahweh himself. One of his arguments is that the noun mlk, vocalized as Molek in the Masoretic text (the ninth-century Tanakh that introduced vowels into the Hebrew script), but Melek in the Greek Septuagint, is identical to the Hebrew word for “king”, melek or melech (malik in Arabic), applied more than fifty times to Yahweh. The expression Yahweh melech, “Yahweh is king,” is found in Psalms 10 and still in use in Jewish religious songs.
The second argument for Molek’s ancient identity with Yahweh comes from the Leviticus prohibition of infant sacrifices: the prohibition proves the practice, and in this case, it proves that sacrifices were made in Yahweh’s name and in Yahweh’s sanctuary: “You will not allow any of your children to be sacrificed to Molech, thus profaning the name of your God” (18:21); “Anyone […] who gives any of his children to Molech, will be put to death, [for] he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name” (20:2-5). Jeremiah 7:30-31 confirms that “the people of Judah” continued “to burn their sons and daughters […] in the Temple that bears my name, to defile it.” Although Yahweh declares it to be “a thing I never ordered, that had never entered my thoughts,” the very fact that a scribe wrote this indicates that the people who sacrificed their children did claim that it was required by Yahweh. In fact, Yahweh is caught lying, since he admits to Ezekiel, around the same period:
“And for this reason I gave them laws that were not good and judgements by which they could never live; and I polluted them with their own offerings, making them sacrifice every first-born son in order to fill them with revulsion, so that they would know that I am Yahweh” (Ezekiel 20:25-26).
In Exodus we learn that every first-born male, human or animal, was originally sacrificed on the eighth day after birth:
“You will give me the first-born of your children; you will do the same with your flocks and herds. For the first seven days the first-born will stay with its mother; on the eighth day you will give it to me” (Exodus 22:28-29).
Since animals were offered to Yahweh as holocausts from time immemorial, the implication is that the first-born son of every Jewish family had once been sacrificed as a holocaust too.
According to biblical record, it is King Josiah (640-609 BC) who abolished the sacrifices of children, “so that no one could pass his son or daughter through the fire of sacrifice to Molech” (2Kings 23:10). But according to Römer, it is only in the Persian era that human sacrifices became taboo.[15] They were substituted by animal offerings, as we learn from Exodus and Leviticus:
“All that first issues from the womb belongs to me: every male, every first-born of flock or herd. But the first-born donkey you will redeem with an animal from the flock; if you do not redeem it, you must break its neck. All the first-born of your sons you will redeem, and no one will appear before me empty-handed” (Exodus 34:19-20; reproduced almost verbatim in 13:11-13 and in Leviticus 27:26).[16]
As in a palimpsest, we read here two things: in ancient Yahwism, the first-born male of humans and beasts were sacrificed to Yahweh, while in the reformed Judaism elaborated during the Exile, the first-born male of humans was “redeemed” by an animal offering.
The Lord of the foreskins
It was also in Babylon that the Levites introduced the Abrahamic covenant of circumcision: “As soon as he is eight days old, every one of your males, generation after generation, must be circumcised” (Genesis 17:12).
In religious reforms, innovations are presented as the restoration of ancient and lost practices. And so the Levites introduced their new rite as a pre-Mosaic commandment. For that purpose they used or invented Abraham: as a figure born in Mesopotamia and given the Promised Land in inheritance, he is the personification of the program of the priestly cast exiled in Babylon.
In pre-exilic Yahwism, every first-born male was to be offered to Yahweh on the eighth day of his life (Exodus 22:28-29), and in post-exilic Judaism, every newborn male was to be circumcised on the eighth day. That parallel is a strong clue that circumcision was introduced as another substitute for sacrifice.
Circumcision was not a novelty. It was unknown in Mesopotamia, but was practiced in ancient Egypt on fourteen-year-old boys. Circumcision of prepubescent or adolescent males was also practiced in Syria, but not uniformly: the Philistines, an Indo-European people from the Aegean world (they gave their name to Palestine), are called “the uncircumcised” in the Bible: David offered two hundred foreskins of slaughtered Philistines to Saul as bride token for his daughter (1Samuel 18).
Circumcision of adolescents in ancient Egypt
Circumcision rites practiced in ancient Judea before the Babylonian Exile were probably consistent with the practices of neighboring peoples, which would explain why it is not even mentioned in the Mosaic covenant. According to the Book of Joshua, it is only when the Hebrews had settled in the Promised Land of Canaan that “Joshua made flint knives and circumcised the Israelites on the Hill of Foreskins” (5:3).
The Yahwist priestly cast who legislated over the Judean community in Mesopotamia may have valued circumcision as a marker of ethnic identity, in a land where nobody else practiced it. But why would they introduce the radical novelty of circumcision on newborn babies? Continuity with the ancient rite of sacrificing the first-born on the eighth day is one explanation. But I suggest a more sinister one: by eighth-day circumcision, Yahweh’s covenant is not only “marked in [every Jew’s] flesh as a covenant in perpetuity” (Genesis 17:13), it is impressed into the deepest and unreachable layers of their subconscious, through symbolic castration and traumatic pain. Unlike the child or teenager, the newborn baby is incapable of elaborating any positive meaning to the violence done to him, and to integrate it consciously as part of his identity. Eight days after emerging from his mother’s womb—a trauma in itself, but a natural one—what he needs is to build an unshakable trust in the benevolence of those who welcomed him into this world. The trauma of circumcision alters his relationship to the world in a deep and permanent way.
Because infants cannot speak, rabbis who defend the tradition speak in their place to minimize their physical pain. But according to Professor Ronald Goldman, author of Circumcision, the Hidden Trauma, scientific studies prove the neurological impact of infant circumcision, for which no anesthesia is used. Behavioral changes observed after the operation, including sleep disorders and inhibition in mother-child bonding, are signs of a post-traumatic stress syndrome.[17] During the ceremony of brit milah, the mother is normally kept away from the scene, and the baby’s shrieks of agony are partly covered by the cheers of the men—a message in itself. But when mothers happen to hear them, they suffer enduring trauma themselves, as can be read on the Circumcision Resource Center web page “Mothers Who Observed Circumcision”: “The screams of my baby remain embedded in my bones and haunt my mind,” says Miriam Pollack. “His cry sounded like he was being butchered. I lost my milk.” Nancy Wainer Cohen: “I will go to my grave hearing that horrible wail, and feeling somewhat responsible.”
It is reasonable to assume, at least as a working hypothesis, that the trauma of circumcision at the age of eight days leaves a deep psychological scar. Abuse by adults is known to trigger in very young children’s minds a mechanism known as dissociation. The pain, the terror, the rage, and the memory of the experience, will be pushed out of ordinary consciousness, and form, so to speak, a separate personality, with a life of its own and a tendency to ooze into the normal personality. The idea of the wickedness of parental figures is so devastating that the repressed anger will be deviated away from them—in this case, away from the Jewish community as a collective parent. Is it farfetched to suppose a causal link between the trauma of eighth-day circumcision and the fact that Jews tend to be incapable of seeing the abuse perpetrated on them by their own community, and instead see the rest of the world as a constant threat?
Could it be that the trauma of eighth-day circumcision has created a special predisposition, a pre-programmed paranoia that impairs the Jews’ capacity to relate and react rationally to certain situations? Was brit milah (“covenant by circumcision”) invented some twenty-three centuries ago, as a kind of ritual trauma designed to enslave mentally millions of people, an unbreakable “covenant” carved into their heart in the form of an incurable subconscious terror that can at any time be triggered by code-words such as “Holocaust” or “anti-Semitism”?
It has been suggested that traumas can be transmitted “epigenetically”. According to a study conducted under the direction of Rachel Yehuda at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, “the trauma of the Holocaust is transmitted genetically” by “epigenetic heredity”;[18] May I suggest to Professor Yehuda that he now conduct a study on the epigenetics of eighth-day circumcision?
Baruch Spinoza said that, “circumcision alone will preserve the Jewish nation for ever.”[19] That explains the fierce resistance of Jewish authorities against every attempt to ban it, from Roman Emperor Hadrian (117-138) to the recent Icelandic bill, condemned by European Jewish organizations as “anti-Semitic”. It must be said that opposition against infant circumcision has often come from enlightened Jews. Abraham Geiger (1810-1874), one of the founders of Reformed Judaism in Germany, advocated giving up this “barbarian and bloody rite.” But, on this issue as on all others, it is always “the more ethnocentric elements—one might term them the radicals—who have determined the direction of the Jewish community and eventually won the day” (Kevin MacDonald).[20] To protect their bloody rite from criticism, Jewish activists have managed to normalize it in England and North America from the 1840s to the 1960s, under fraudulent medical reasons—an amazing demonstration of their power over Christian civilization.
Laurent Guyénot, Ph.D., has edited some of his Unz Review articles in book form, under the title “Our God is Your God Too, But He Has Chosen Us”: Essays on Jewish Power. He is also the author of From Yahweh to Zion: Jealous God, Chosen People, Promised Land … Clash of Civilizations, 2018, and JFK-9/11: 50 years of Deep State, 2014 (now banned from Amazon).
Notes
[1] Herbert George Wells, The Fate of Homo Sapiens (1939), p. 128, on archive.org.
[2] Read in Félix Niesche, Voltaire antisémite, KontreKulture, 2019.
[3] Yeshayahu Leibowitz, Judaism, Human Values and the Jewish State, Harvard University Press, 1995, p. 18.
[4] “Document: Shamir on Terrorism (1943),” Middle East Report 152 (May/June 1988), on https://merip.org/1988/05/shamir-on-terrorism-1943/
[5] Norman Habel, Yahweh Versus Baal: A Conflict of Religious Cultures, Bookman Associates, 1964, p. 41.
[6] Jan Assmann, Of God and Gods: Egypt, Israel, and the Rise of Monotheism, University of Wisconsin Press, 2008, p. 47.
[7] Jan Assmann, Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism, Harvard University Press, 1998, p. 3.
[8] I have conflated the two almost identical accounts of the same episode in 2Samuel 12:31 and 1Chronicles 20:3.
[9] Elliott Horowitz, Reckless Rites: Purim and the Legacy of Jewish Violence, Princeton University Press, 2006, pp. 122–125, 4.
[10] Jeffrey Goldberg, “Israel’s Fears, Amalek’s Arsenal,” New York Times, May 16, 2009.
[11] Seymour Hersh, The Samson Option: Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy, Random House, 1991, p. 141, quoted in Michael Collins Piper, Final Judgment: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy, American Free Press, 6th ed., ebook 2005, p.[56] 117.
[12] David Ben-Gurion and Amram Duchovny, David Ben-Gurion, In His Own Words, Fleet Press Corp., 1969, p. 116
[13] John Meyendorff, Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes, Fordham University Press, 1974.
[14] Ariel David, “Jewish God Yahweh Originated in Canaanite Vulcan, Says New Theory,” Haaretz, April 11, 2018, on haaretz.com
[15] Thomas Römer, The Invention of God, Harvard UP, 2015, pp. 137-138.
[16] Numbers 18:15-17 declares redeemable the “first-born of an unclean animal” (unfit for consumption), but forbids to redeem “the first-born of cow, sheep and goat,” which are destined for the consumption of the Levites.
[17] Ronald Goldman, Circumcision, the Hidden Trauma: How an American Cultural Practice Affects Infants and Ultimately Us All, Vanguard, 1997.
[18] Tori Rodrigues, “Descendants of Holocaust Survivors Have Altered Stress Hormones,” Scientific American, March 1, 2015, on www.scientificamerican.com.
[19] Benedict de Spinoza, Theological-political treatise, chapter 3, §12, Cambridge UP, 2007, p. 55.
[20] Kevin MacDonald, Cultural Insurrections: Essays on Western Civilizations, Jewish Influence, and Anti-Semitism, The Occidental Press, 2007, pp. 90-91.
You need to research Mauro Biglino and his accurate translation of the OT, and also Paul Wallis. Their credentials are impeccable and they both have published books on what they separetely discovered. They have discovered that the original OT accurately describes who and what yahweh and his mates were, and what they did. And you can bet your life savings that the zionists do too, AND the top level at the Vatican. AND it links to what has been and is happening to the children across the world. And plenty more besides.
Robin, thanks for posting this piece, rapid understanding of the abrahamic muddle is very much required NOW.
So, where do we start? in ancient times we celebrated, venerated and respected (often through fear) the entities and characters of dimensional beings whom we termed "gods" and "demons", this includes the vast array of displaced demiurge still wandering our world to this day, in the linked work Claude Le Cotuex explains these concepts in detail, and for sure where we worship now in "churches" is almost always where we worshipped before..
https://www.paralibrum.com/reviews/demons-and-spirits-of-the-land
after the ancient period of time we became aware of more personified deities, in human form, specifically "yahweh", what seems likely is that this character portrated, described as in human form was in fact a visitor with advanced technology, who "befriended" and assisted one particular group dwelling in the middle east, incidentally the same group now being bombed shitless by demon worshipping monsters who have been evicted from every country they ever occupied until they stole one of their own and even then just could not stop doing what they do, stealing, decieving and making sacrifice of children not of their own to a dark entity which we have various names for.
The entity in question provides spiritual protection to those who sacrifice the blood of the innocents to it.. needless to say other "factions" have jumped on this bandwaggon hence the total confusion re whos` doing what and for what outcome, this entity is currently awash with the spiritual energy being relased in multiple places around Our world, Gaza, Ukraine and continually at multiple sites as the cica 8 million per annum "missing" children die deaths we unworthy cannot begin to imagine... ponder on that, just for one moment. Then ponder on the intended feast to come...
The Circus media and hellywood now adorn every image they can with trans, paedo, torture, blood imagery, they say "sa-tan is everywhere but none can see him"....
Yeshua, use his true name, not the one given that weakens the tantric resonance of his true name (now why would they do that then???), Yeshua was the quirk sent from whatever good remains in/over this Realm, in the language of the syangogue of satan Yeshua represents the "messiah of the Gentiles", that means You and Me...
As has been professed we are living in "messianic times", millions of american and other Christians believe that what is going on leads to the return of the "messiah", what has been hidden is that those directing the stage theatre do not seek Yeshua, they seek instead "mossiach ben david" more commonly known to Us all as "anti-christ"
mossiach ben joseph= Yehusa = messiah of the Gentiles
mossiach ben david= anti-christ= messiah of the syangogue of satan
netanyahu was told by the toxic dwarf schneerson that he would pass the sceptre to this character, fuck schneerson, fuck netanyahu
What everyone needs to understand is that a group of parasitic spirits that can hold human form, can cheat Karma, can manipulate the reincarnation process, have the ability to astral travel and control facets of time, outcomes etc intend to wipe this magnificent Realm clean of Us.
And if You aint one of Us, then you are either by dint of action, or non action one of "them", ambiguity is simply not an option darling ;0)
This is not fairy tale, this is now, it is happening, humanity the true expression of "God" the Creator are being sytematically wiped off the Realm created for Us, but because of the Laws of Consent it is "permissible", note bene these Laws are now being broken, in case You hadnt noticed, this indicates the very late hour..
Concisely, this is not about "hate" it is about Survival in the face of erradication, not only do they seek Our physical deaths but also Our spiritual death, the "vax" has much yet to be revealed in respect of this. In short if You fall now, You fall forever (within our context of "for-ever") which is by any reckoning a very, very long time
Once fully versed one understands that "the great work of ages" as brought about by "free masons" is the self same as agenda 2030, IHR and most importantly "olam ha ba" the kabbalic "world to come", that being fyi a world devoid of all but a smattering of Gentile Humans..
Understand that "human form" is merely an avatar, most get this but dont truly t6ake it fully on board, this is why "they" are so comfortable with dismorphia, trans etc.. its just a "bio-experience suit" to them, for Us We are expressions in physical form of Creator, subtle, but huge diffence there
Its a huge wake up call getting ones head around such concepts, not withstanding that decades of "education" and indoctrination, social and media manipulation have convinced all of us living "developed nation lives" that certain facts are so when they are not they are LIES, "covid" amongst other things such as 9/11 exposed the cracks in the screen
Understand those we fight against will accept ownership of a "scorched earth" over that of Losing... let that sink in, they have factored this outcome with giant underground cities built at Our expense, you have to note the irony of this..
Note too that what lies beneath the scorched earth hell in "matrix" is called.... you got it "zion"
i feel like ive served up breakfast but missed out the mushrooms or toast, but hopefully you get the picture, its high time We All Did, God bless