Thursday, 31 January 2013

Is Passover the REAL Easter?

Today's topic pertains to whether Passover is the "real" Easter or not. This issue was addressed to me by a Tweeter that I presume to be a Zionist Christian of some variety or another who goes by the name - Youxia88. Her claim is that "Passover" is the "real" Easter! 

Here is her Twitter quote:

Not condescending! Passover is true Easter. Easter was based in paganism.
The only part of her statement that I can partially agree upon is the fact that Easter (like Christmas) has been infected with aspects of paganism. In a world diametrically opposed to Jesus Christ and all that He stands for, the aspect of paganism should be no surprise. However, when anyone (like Youxia88) says that "Passover is the real Easter," I cannot help but disagree with such an absurd statement. I suspect that she is not the only one believing such nonsense. 

First of all, what is "Passover?" I suspect that many Christians associate this Jewish feast with Jesus' "Last Supper" right? The premise is that Jesus had His final "Passover" supper with His disciples and then was betrayed, sentenced in a Roman court, and then crucified on the cross only to be resurrected on the third day. Hence, I assume many Christians associate Passover with an appropriate Christian observance, which most Christians will acknowledge as "Easter." The purpose of this blog entry is to debunk the myth that Passover is the "real" Easter. Such a concept could not be further from the truth!

Since Youxia88 referenced Wikipedia in her tweets to me (see above), I thought it might be appropriate for me to then use it for the basic definition of the terms - "Passover" & "Easter." 

Wikipedia defines "Passover" as follows:
Passover (Hebrew, Yiddish: פֶּסַח Pesach, Tiberian: [pɛsaħ] ( listen), Modern Hebrew: /ˈpesaχ/ Pesah, Pesakh, Yiddish: Peysekh, Paysakh, Paysokh) is a Jewish festival. It commemorates the story of the Exodus, in which the ancient Israelites were freed from slavery in Egypt. (Source link: Wikipedia;
And, Wikipedia defines "Easter" as follows:
Easter (Old English: Ēostre) or the Pasch[1][2] or (among Eastern Orthodox) Pascha (Latin: Pascha; Greek: Πάσχα, Paskha; Aramaic: פַּסחאPasḥa; from Hebrew: פֶּסַח Pesaḥ)[3] is a Christian festival and holiday celebrating the resurrection of Jesus Christ on the third day after his crucifixion at Calvary as described in the New Testament.[4][5] (Source link: Wikipedia; )
Therefore, the definitions of each of these terms is pretty concrete and straight forward. Yet, I strongly suspect that many Christians understand the definition of "Easter" a bit better than they understand the term - "Passover!" Passover celebration existed long before Jesus came into this world to offer His gift of redemption. It was merely a Jews' traditional celebration of God's gracious act to free the Jews from their captivity in Egypt many years earlier. Many Christians will say: "Jesus celebrated Passover while living among the Jews! What was good for Him, must be good for me!" Jesus lived as a Jew and was subject to Old Covenant Jewish Mosaic law, much of which He fulfilled with His sacrifice. More about that will be reiterated below.

Today, Jews continue to observe Passover, because in their warped view, there is no New Covenant and no new dispensation. To them, their Messiah has not yet arrived, and so for more than 3,500 years, it has been "business as usual" or so they think. 

Now that I have made a solid distinction between the terms "Passover" and "Easter" and have proven a clear and separate distinction between each, I will now contend with the issue where Jesus comes into the equation. As Jesus said, He came not to make peace, but to create division (Ref: Matt 10:34-36). And, among Christians, the debate of the significance of Passover, and the timing of its role in Christ's crucifixion are still heavily debated to this very day. 

If there is a clear distinction between "Passover" and "Easter", why then do so many Christians associate a marriage between the two? 

Consider a few points from an essay called "Was Jesus' Last Supper a Seder?" by Jonathan Klawans. I will not bother to do an analysis of this essay as it is long, complex, but worth a full read by you, the reader. In short, the claim is that while 3 of the 4 gospels indicate that the Last Supper occurred during Passover, there are a fair number of discrepancies where some believe Scripture is not clear enough to even conclusively state that the Last Supper was even a "Passover Seder." A "seder" is a rabbinic refinement for a festival observance inaugurated in Exodus according to Rev. Wil Gafney, Ph.D. 

Dr. Gafney responded to Klawans' essay (linked above) with her response to some of his points, and is entitled - "Was the Last Supper a Passover Seder?" Her belief is that the Passover was possibly a "seder" and this is her concluding statement:

"So then, was Jesus' last supper a Passover seder? I don't know. Maybe. I actually think so. But either the evangelists didn't know or didn't care or the fact of the matter was subordinate to the ultimate truth they saw themselves communicating. The Gospels vote 3-to-1 in favor of the pre-rabbinic seder." (Source: Was the Last Supper a Passover Seder?; Rev. Wil Gafney, Ph.D.; )
From most of the rational sources that I have been able to find, most theologians are not willing to make a 100% conclusive statement that the Last Supper was merely a Passover seder, let alone the "real" Easter! 

Now let's consider the timing of Jewish Passover to the Last Supper and determine if any discrepancies exist. Leave it to a reformed Christian like Wayne Jackson to make this point regarding John 18:28:

“Did Jesus eat the Passover supper on the night before he was crucified? If so, was he eating it at the right time? If he was, how do you explain the fact that, on the following day, the Jewish leaders were fearful of defiling themselves, which circumstance would have cancelled their right “to eat the Passover” (John 18:28)? This seems to suggest that the Passover occurred the day after Jesus ate with the disciples....
There were several “feasts” during this period (see 2 Chron. 30:22); the one mentioned in John 18:28 may have been on the day following the main Passover supper. It was called the Chagigah (sacrificial meal). This view is defended by many respectable scholars, e.g., Lenski and Edersheim. Edward Robinson has a clear and detailed explanation of this position that is worthy of serious consideration, and, in this writer’s judgment, this argument carries the greatest weight of evidence8.
In conclusion we must say that we may not be able to determine the precise situation alluded to in John 18:28. Nonetheless, there are sufficient possibilities to establish the fact that no insuperable difficulty exists to challenge our confidence in the sacred text.
" (Source: Wayne Jackson; Did Jesus Eat the Passover Supper?; )
Anyone reading Wayne Jackson's source link above, will see that there are serious discrepancies as to whether the Last Supper was even an official Passover meal in the first place. The evidence that he suggests, is that it probably was not given the biblical evidence.

What about the lamb? Did Jesus and His disciples eat a sacrificed lamb as is customary in the Jewish Passover tradition during the Last Supper? Consider a few points by Ted Montgomery:

"As to whether or not Jesus and His disciples ate lamb that night, I lean toward thinking that they did not. One of the main reasons I feel this way is that most, if not all, of the Passover lambs would be sacrificed several hours later, at mid-afternoon on 14 Nisan, which is the time specified as beyn ha’arbayim or "twilight" (Exodus 12:6). It would seem to me that the disciples, in making preparations for the Passover meal, would have been breaking a more significant regulation by slaughtering a lamb almost a day early than by eating the Passover meal a night earlier than most Jews did....At any rate, I do not see the necessity for there to have been a lamb at the Last Supper, even though it was a Passover meal. In fact, figuratively speaking, the disciples consumed the "body" and "blood" of the ultimate Passover Lamb, Jesus, when they ate the unleavened bread and drank the red wine. If anything, a roasted lamb on the table would have been an unnecessary distraction from this process, since their supreme Lamb was reclining at the table with them." (Source link: Ted Montgomery; )
Montgomery's point that lamb was likely not on the menu, because that would have defeated Jesus' purpose, as He was the sacrificial lamb to fulfill the need for any future animal sacrifices! Also, a diet of bread and wine alone would have deviated from the norm of any previous Jewish Passover tradition.

Regardless of whether the Last Supper was or was not a Passover seder, it only seems appropriate to say that Jesus' sacrifice fulfilled Passover relegating it into the shadows where it belongs. Consider this statement:
"Jesus Christ died at the Jewish feast of Passover. Jesus was a Jew. Jesus observed the Passover meal with His disciples before He was crucified. Jesus death was a fulfillment of the types and shadows in the Passover meal. God had been pointing to the sacrifice for sin that would be made by the Messiah. Jesus was that Messiah and the Passover proved that.... The Bible says that the Law was ‘only a shadow of the good things that were to come’ (Hebrews 10:1). The Old Testament has many types and shadows that pointed to the Messiah. The Feast of Passover was one of the ceremonial requirements of the Law." (Source link: Passover - The Feast Fulfilled; )
In summary, I maintain that given the critical points that I have addressed, there is no evidence to support Youxia88's assessment that Passover is the "real" Easter! Many conservative theologians are not willing to put their reputation on the line to even definitively state that the Last Supper occurred right on Passover. Most say it likely occurred a little before or a little after that. This year, Passover will be observed (by Jews) on the Monday after Easter!

Yet, even from the more liberal interpretations which assume a marriage between the Last Supper and the Passover, would it not be an insult to Jesus Christ if we were to assume that He did not "fulfill" the Passover feast with His own blood sacrifice? Jesus did just that - He fulfilled Passover and a number of other feasts (and celebrations) tied to the shadowy Old Covenant past! Today, we have Easter to celebrate for all of His sacrifice, which will allow all believers who accept Christ to be saved (Jew and/or Gentile alike)! How "antisemetic" can I be for making such a statement?

Tuesday, 29 January 2013

Walter Veith discusses SDA Eschatology

Description of the above video clip:

Part 2 is a study of the king of the south that pushes against Catholicism at the time of the end, but it also investigates the intrigues of setting up the conditions for the final victory of the king of the north. The secret intrigues of Napoleon, the setting up of a false system of worship, and a counterfeit theology regarding the antichrist, the dispensationalist view, and the creation of the Jewish state and Zionism are all discussed. Viewers will be surprised to discover the origin of the Jews and the state of Israel. This DVD concludes the study of Daniel 11 and prepares the way for the modern fulfillment of these prophecies.


One of my gracious Twitter followers ("CassTete") passed this video clip (via this link) to me for my review. A little online searching reveals that Walter Veith is a Seventh Day Adventist (SDA). I grew up in that church in my earlier years and moved well away from it, because I did not agree with it's mainline doctrine. But, Veith makes so many truthful points in this clip, that I could not resist posting it onto my blog.

Most SDAs hold to the belief that the final "antichrist" is the Pope, and they believe it is the Vatican that secretly runs the world. From my experience and knowledge, such beliefs run contrary to what I have seen and witnessed in my own life. Rome does not run the world, global Jewry runs the world, and such a concept flies well over the heads of most SDAs. Veith does a nice job of explaining the Jewish masonic elite, the true nature of the Talmud, the "Israel of God," the issues surrounding the destruction of the Jewish Temple, and much more! This is a nice presentation.

I can't fully endorse everything that he proclaims, but I can say that many of the issues addressed in this video clip are truthful to that of my understanding. 

The video clip is 1 hour and 38 minutes, and it is well worth the time to view it! 


"CassTete" provided me with this youtube clip of Walter Veith where he discusses SDA law with his reasons for the beliefs that he holds to. Much of it appears more along the lines of mainline SDA doctrine, some, if not much of which I disagree with. If I agreed with a fair amount of Veith's points in the video clip above, then I will say the inverse of that is the case in the video clip below.

In this 1 hour video clip, one can learn much about what mainline SDA's believe. He gets into a number of issues, including the issue of the "Sabbath" and observance of days. He's heard the accusation that SDA's are viewed as legalists, and to that criticism, he prefers to say that he is a "loyalist." By that, he means that he (as an SDA) is more "loyal" to Scripture than to people like me who would refer to SDAs as liberal "legalists." To be fair, SDA's do take aspects of Scripture, and interpret it in a literalistic form. Those doing this with Old Testament (in particular) Scripture are bound to ignore historical context. In ignoring historical context, misinterpretation of Scripture is a foregone reality.

Jesus chastised the Pharisees and violated "Sabbath" observance when He would heal people and perform other miracles (on the Sabbath day)! Jesus was sick and tired of legalism among the Pharisees, and today, the same Pharisitical attitudes are among Jews and Judaizing Christians of today! 

Since Jesus' ushering in of the New Covenant, Sabbath-observance, like many other feasts & customs have been relegated to their proper place -- the types and shadows of the past (i.e., the Old Covenant before Christ). 

Veith contends that Jesus has not fully fulfilled the "Sabbath" because there is still sin in the world today! For sure, there is still sin in the world. Yet, full redemption (as referenced in Revelation 20 - 22) is not a requirement "for the people of God" (ref to Hebrews 4:9) to obtain Sabbath "rest." Yet, the "rest" that SDA's (and Judaic Jews) observe is merely the legalistic observance of days, and ceasing to do "work" (however that term may be defined). There is a spiritual aspect to this concept of "rest" and it is described in Hebrews 4:

So there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God. 10 For the one who has entered His rest has himself also rested from his works, as God did from His. (Hebrews 4:9-10 NASB)
The Sabbath rest is more than just taking one day (Saturday) off and working all other days of the week. True Sabbath rest actually means "rest" from the sinful and wicked ways of the world everyday of the week, and month after month, and year after year. When we accept Jesus' sacrifice on for our sins, and when we live according to His Word, that my friends is the true "rest" that we get. That "rest" is what it means to "live free in Christ"... a foreign concept to MOST Christians of today! Yes, sin still exist around us (as Veith truthfully indicates), but we are at "rest" even when the world has not yet seen full redemption, which is yet future (ref: Revelation 20 - 22). 

Judaic Jews never found the "rest" that I am referring to in the previous paragraph. Most of them have been "mammon-worshipers" (i.e., worshipers of money) throughout the ages and up until today. Even if they "rest" on Saturday, many of them don't even find "true" rest on that day, because their minds are so wrapped up with their over-complicated lives, and just how they're going to ramp up the "money-changing" scams on Monday morning and the remaining days of that week! There is no "rest" in money-changing! There is no "rest" for the wicked (to express this concept more broadly)! They may make alot of money, but these people NEVER find "rest!" So to the SDA out there, the Bible advocates that you NOT emulate the Jews...i.e., do not be a "Judaizer" as the Book of Titus explicitly indicates.

Another critical verse is Colossians 2:16-17. 
16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day— 17 things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.
(Colossians 2:16-17 NASB)
As believers in Christ, we are not to pass judgment on other "believers" for what they eat or whether (or not) they observe festivals or days (like the "Sabbath day"). 

Also, Veith may have never considered why it is that the New Testament (NT) reiterates 9 of the 10 Commandments in the Old Testament (OT). And can you guess which of the "10 Commandments" for which there is no mention of to observe in the NT? It is the issue of Sabbath observance! I have challenged several SDA preachers with this question, and none have been able to even provide an answer to my question. 

Why then is Veith implying that those who don't observe days (like the Sabbath) are still living in "Babylon?" The above verse states that the Sabbath, and Mosaic-backed legalistic dietary laws that Adventists like to impose upon themselves (and others) are shadowy aspects of the past. When SDAs behave in such a manner, they are in total violation of Colossians 2:16.

Certainly, vegetarianism has many wonderful health benefits, and I advocate it within proper limits. I don't advocate strict veganism. But, I do advocate eating fish, cheese, milk, etc. As believers in Christ, we are not to judge others by what they eat, or by whether (or not) they observe shadowy Mosaic customs of the past that were for the Jews of the day.

Indeed, Jews were wicked throughout the Old Covenant, and God (via Moses) needed to discipline them. He did so by giving Jews (not Gentiles) the "10 Commandments" to follow. Today, people are just as wicked, and so Jesus gave all of us "The Commandments." Notice that I did NOT say the "10 Commandments." The NT gives us 9 of the 10 Commandments of the OT plus a new commandment to "love one another as yourself." 
34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. (John 13:34 NASB)
The "remnant ones" that the SDA consider themselves to be have added to the NT, all sorts of shadowy things of the past that Jesus long since fulfilled with the blood that He shed on the Cross! Would it not seem that Jesus would take a dim view of such practices for that which He fulfilled?  

There's really not much more I need to say about "Sabbath-observance." Jesus violated the legalistic aspects of it by doing legitimate "work" on that day, and He proved that what really matters is "righteousness," not liberal "legalism!"

UPDATE - May 11, 2013:

To the readers out there, I felt a need to copy/paste a blog entry that gives a basic explanation of why Sabbath observance (or observance of days) is no longer a Biblical requirement. 

Why don't we observe the original Sabbath?

Thanks for asking!
This issue has been a sticking point between sabbatarians and the rest of the Body of Christ for some time...but it shouldn't be. The Bible is very clear on this subject. Let's forget for a moment about Constantine, or that the Sabbath was a sign between God and the Israelites of their covenant (and so completely out of date) and focus on God's purpose for the Sabbath.
Let's start in Genesis...
The word "sabbath" means "rest". This isn't the kind of rest we need after a good workout. The word literally means 'the ending of activity'. God didn't rest on the seventh day because He was tired. God had finished creating the world, and so He stopped. He didn't pick up where He left off when the weekend was over...He was done.
Let's move to Exodus...
God's covenant with the children of Israel included a lot of religious activity, including the creation of a tabernacle, sacrifices of animals, and so on. This activity only stopped on the Sabbath. Now, remember: the Sabbath isn't about being's about being finished with your work. The priests couldn't stop working the way that God did in Genesis. They took a day off and went right back to it the next day. Why? Because the work wasn't finished. They did the same things day after day, year after year. They were even forbidden to have chairs in the tabernacle because sitting down would suggest that their work was done!
Let's keep going to the New Testament...
The Exodus Sabbath was a symbol of God's rest in Genesis. It told the children of Israel that they would someday be able to stop stop sacrificing for their own sins. When Jesus died and rose again, that day had finally come. In Hebrews 10:11-12 we see the comparison between the Jewish priests and Jesus:
Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when this priest [Jesus] had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God.
Jesus finished His work and rested, just as we see God doing in Genesis.
What about us?
How then should we view the Sabbath? God rested when His work was done, and Jesus rested when His work was done. The ancient Jews never enjoyed that rest, but it's available to us today, as Hebrews 4:9-10 tell us:
There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from his own work, just as God did from his.
Let's look at Colossians 2:16-17, which should erase any doubt about the nature of the Sabbath:
Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.
From all of these verses we can see that the Sabbath clearly isn't a day of the week. It's neither Saturday nor Sunday! We enter into the Sabbath rest when we stop working, and that only happens when we accept that Jesus' sacrifice was for each of us. His work is done, and He invites us to join Him.
Posted: Sun, Feb 10 2008 - 22:24 PM (Source link: )

Also, for a more in-depth analysis, read a book by Dr. Jay Adams called Keeping the Sabbath Today? This book is the best I have seen on this topic. 

What is the significance of the Jewish Temple remains?

What is the significance of the Jewish Temple remains?

There is only an old stone wall with numerous prayer leaflets stuffed between the cracks of it. Does God hear these prayers? I'm sure He does, and how He receives them remains a mystery. Where is the roof? Where are the sacrifices? Such a state creates a serious dilemma that present-day Judaism fails to address!

As of 2013, its been 1,943 years since Rome sacked this Temple in 70 AD, thereby leaving it in its current condition. Forty years after Christ's death on the cross, this Jewish Temple was little more than a symbol of "abominations" piled high into the heavens! So much so, that God carried out Jesus' prophetic statement in Matthew 24:1-2 to make "all these things" (pointing to the Temple buildings) desolate - i.e., the "Abomination of Desolation!" 

No Temple, no sacrifices, and no means for Jews to atone for nearly 2,000 years worth of sins! Judaism has some serious issues to confront from this point forward! 

The good news is this: acceptance of Jesus the Christ and repentance of your sins through His blood sacrifice are the only way out! 

Monday, 28 January 2013

Jews proclaiming Christians as being "insecure"

I was doing some research today on Jewish perception of Christians, and I ran across an essay in a Jewish publication (The Times of Israel) called "Christian Insecurity: The Jewish Problem." In this essay, I ran across points that the author - David Turner made which he accused Christians of being, but for which I thought were actually more applicable to the Jews on a broad scale. Below, I will quote a couple of Turner's points (in "purple" ink) then post my response to each of those points.
"As the Jewish people are in a downward population spiral, Christianity in its multiplicity has not just grown, but multiplied more than three-fold in, “the last 100 years, from about 600 million in 1910 to more than 2 billion in 2010.” Jews today number approximately 13.4 million. Yet over the ages Christianity has viewed Jews and Judaism as threat, the elephant fearing the mouse. Why would Christianity fear the Jews?"
Turner cites numbers above depicting how Christians far outnumber that of Jews in today's world, and while these numbers may be correct, his implication that Jews are not a threat to Christians (and Christianity) is false, at least on some levels! Numbers alone mean nothing in terms of power & influence. Anyone accepting this logic is indeed being taken for a fool. 

In fact, I would reverse Turner's argument, stating the fact that in America alone, Jews (however small their numbers may be) have co-opted a huge number of Christians to be Zionists (i.e., supporters of all things "Jewish" and in full support of the Israel of 1948). 1 in 4 people consider themselves to be Zionist Christians. That is, 70 Million+ Americans fall into this category. The Rev. Jerry Falwell lays it out concisely and explicitly here:
"It is my belief that the Bible Belt in America is Israel's only safety belt right now," says Rev. Jerry Falwell, one of the leaders of the Christian Right. That's the bulk of Evangelical Christians; Falwell claims to speak for all of them.

"There are 70 million of us," he says. "And if there's one thing that brings us together quickly it's whenever we begin to detect our government becoming a little anti-Israel." (Source: Zion's Christian Soldier; February 11, 2009; )
With 70 Million brainwashed Christians in staunch support of Jewish Zionist objectives, it actually boggles my mind that Turner would even make broad/sweeping statements to indicate that Christians are fearful (and "insecure") towards Jews when in fact a majority of Christians are in support of Jews and Israel! For this very reason, I contend that Jews are critically dangerous to Christians, even when a mass majority of Christians do not even realize it! Numbers mean nothing if a smaller group of Jews can manipulate and control the minds, hearts, and souls of people, include a very high percentage of Christians! The concern that Jews should have (if they must have any at all) is with a much smaller contingent of "reformed" Christians that do see through and beyond the Zionist hype. These type of Christians are a "threat" to Jews due to the fact that they represent the one contingent that do not stand with the Jews' Zionist objectives. A good reason for Jewish "insecurity?" Perhaps in the sense that such types will not be parroting "I Stand With Israel" slogans!

And to Turner and those who deny Jewish global power & influence, click "here" for a laundry list (or clearing house) of examples in which Jews run nearly every institution that matters. I've written about this at length in previous blog entries, and so I will cease further discussion on this point for this blog entry. 

Now, consider another point made by Turner:
"The very foundation Christianity, its scriptures contain whether read literally or not, the charge contained in Matthew 27:25 that “the Jews” killed Jesus, even demanded that guilt and punishment follow us forever! Christian exegesis over the millennia expanded on this charge inciting centuries of persecution as just punishment. During the Middle Ages the fear generated by that theology, those teachings, morphed into a sort of perceptual shorthand, antisemitic stereotypes that are current even today. Those same stereotypes can be seen in Nazi propaganda from the 1930′s, appear also today in antisemitic publications in the US and Europe (also in Arab publications, but my topic is Christian antisemitism)."
This is Turner's blatant statement of denial that the Jews have been (and are currently) suffering from the curse that was Jewry's rejection of Jesus as the Messiah. He even goes so far as to dismiss the Christian exegesis of Matthew 27 as 1930's Nazi propaganda. Matthew 27:25 is very clear:
25 And all the people said, “His blood shall be on us and on our children!” (Matthew 27:25 NASB)
When Rome sacked Jerusalem in 70 AD, that indeed was the "Abomination of Desolation" that Jesus was referring to. Many Zionist Christians believe that Matthew 24:1-2 is in reference to some future event yet to occur in Bible prophecy, wherein a future "antichrist" commits "abominations" in a newly rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem! Such a view is a gross misinterpretation of Scripture. There was a very different reality to what Jesus was saying, and the Jews (of that time) did not even understand it!

24 Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him. And He said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down.” (Matthew 24:1-2 NASB)
How many Jews today read these verses in Matthew and realize that what Jesus said would happen, would indeed happen only forty-some years later in 70AD, and not 2000+ years later than that as some Zionist Christians would believe? Further to that, how many Zionist Christians realize that the true significance of God's destruction (via of the Romans) of Jerusalem, and the Temple? 

The removal of the Temple also meant the removal of the Jewish sacrificial system, which in the Old Covenant, was the only means that God allowed for Jews to atone for their sins! In the New Covenant, Jesus was/is the blood sacrifice for sinful humanity. God no longer wanted the sacrificial system as a means to atone for sins. Jesus met that criteria through His sacrifice, and now to be one of God's chosen, we must all accept Jesus in order to have God's gift of grace and forgiveness. With the acceptance of Jesus can we come to God the Father (ref: John 14:6). 

It is literally true that Jews have chosen the kingdom of this world, as that is what they wanted! Jews would have accepted Jesus had He come to make Israel a mighty and powerful nation! But, He did not offer this, and so Jews rejected Him. 

Rather, Jesus had this to say:
36 Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.” (John 18:36 NASB)
That's right! Jesus' Kingdom was one that Jews could not touch even if the Jews could kill His earthly body, which indicated full rejection of His Kingdom (not of this world). And thus, God gave the Jews what they truly wanted. He gave Jews this world! And for 2000 years, the evidence backing this fact is so numerous, there is no need for me to even elaborate. We live in an earthly world of the Jews, by the Jews, and for the Jews! They control finance, politics, international affairs, political correctness, fashion, media, entertainment, trends, and nearly every other aspect of life in this world! The corrupt decadence and wickedness of all that flows from the very top down is right before our eyes, and such fact is what serves as the fruits produced by a Jewish-run Kingdom of this world! As the common saying goes...the schumer roles down the hill! 

Given the Jews' power & influence in this world, are we (reformed) Christians to feel "insecure" given the power that Jews have? The answer is both "yes" and "no." Yes, because Jews have the power to dominate and destroy all physical and mental elements of Christianity in this world. Let's face it, Jews (at a fundamental level) hate all that is Jesus the Christ. Today, they do all they can to push Jesus under the carpet. Indeed Jews do pose a threat to Christians, even if a majority of Christians fail to see it. Covert threats are indeed more dangerous than overt ones! Those who deny my point should read my blog entry on "Jewish Mockery of Jesus Christ."

Yet, to the contrary, I also would answer "no" (to my own rhetorical question underlined above), because as Jesus said per John 18:36 (quoted above), His Kingdom is not of this world. It is a Kingdom that is safe and protected against today's powerful Jewish Kingdom of this world. Those who accept Jesus can be free of the Kingdom of this world run by evil and corrupt Jews! 

Those who accept Jesus as the Christ (Jew or Gentile) are the true seed of Abraham, and are a citizen of Jesus' Kingdom (not of this world) - aka the "Israel of God." Those who have this understanding are indeed not "insecure" about anything! These people are saved! Such a realization offers a "peace of mind" like nothing else in this world! Yet, Turner would accuse Christians (particularly "reformed" ones like myself) of being "insecure" or phobic of Jews! I'm here to explain to people like Turner that I am free of the Jews of this world at a "spiritual" level. At worst, this world (run by Jews) may destroy my body at the very most, but it can never destroy my soul, which I have handed over to Jesus. And, it is through Him that I am saved! 

Insecurity? Only mammon-worshiping Jews that live for this world, can be truly "insecure" and neurotic! That is why top psychologists & psychiatrists are most often Jews. As Brother Nathanael says here

JEWS ARE THE MOST NEUROTIC people walking the face of the earth.
That’s why the psychiatric profession is flooded with Jews — they’re hoping to get their own heads screwed on right!

Those who follow the true teachings of Christ, and live in full accordance to the Bible, do not often have the issues that Jews have. Our focus as Christians is to live in accordance to what God has given to us in His Word - the Holy Bible. Our focus is not money (mammon) or this world! Our focus is in His Word, and in doing His will. Such a focus is indeed therapeutic on all levels (spiritual, mental, and even physical). True believers in Christ may not be the richest people in the world with $6 Million houses in Beverly Hills or NYC, but those of us living by His word, no doubt still have a full head of hair (and youthfulness) even in our older age! Those belonging to the real "Israel of God" have nothing to fear in this world! 

Thus, who are those that are truly "insecure?" It is not a true believer in Christ for sure!

Thursday, 17 January 2013

Are Jews the cause of global Islamic terrorism?

One of my thoughtful Twitter followers challenged me on a statement that I had made, and so I felt the need to write a blog entry on the topic of global Islamic terrorism. I had said that "Zionism" is a root cause for Islamic suicide terrorism. And, he indicated that Zionism was in no way connected to terrorism in places like Bali, Indonesia. For those who do not remember, there was a massive complex suicide bombing attack at a Kuta Beach nightclub (i.e., the Sari Club) in Bali, which occurred on October 12, 2002. Over 200 people were killed! Having been to both Bali and Jakarta, and having been in that nightclub myself, I have to say that when this bombing occurred, it struck my interest far more than that of most Americans, who are pretty well removed from places like Indonesia. A decade ago, there were very few Americans even visiting places like Indonesia. Most of the "foreigners" that I remember there were Dutch, Germans, Swedes, Brits, and other Europeans. (I digress.)

Back to my point, I can understand why many people would think that there is no way "Jews" could be involved in the manipulation or staging of terrorist acts in lands that are far removed from places like the nation of Israel. As we all know, "suicide attacks" carried out by fundamentalist Islamists occur in many other areas of the world other than Israel/Palestine (or the Middle East) alone. For certain, motives vary for each individual attack with some things being the same, and other things being different. 

However, when I make statements that "Jews" and "Zionists" are behind the phenomenon of Islamic suicide terrorism on a global scale, I am not necessary implying that every single attack is a "staged" "false-flag" type of event, I am saying that motives (on a broad scale) are a response to the globalized "New World Order" (NWO) system that has been in increased development over the years! And as many people who have read my writings, you know pretty well about the statement that I commonly make - "Jews control the world." Stated in similar terms - "Jews control 'globalization!'" I will further state that Zionists use "globalization" to obtain their desired end of global world domination and control.

First off, I will provide a concise snapshot of just what I mean when I say Jews control "globalization." For that, consider Brother Nathanael Kapner's concise definition in under 3 minutes. 

And here are a few written points from this script which are written below, and can be found here:

"The battle for our planet has now begun.
The battle cry for those who wish to rule over us is their watchword, “Globalization.”
Globalization is fueled by the Jewish Oligarchs of finance capital who dictate to corporations a borderless labor force wherever its sweat is cheapest and its intellect offers itself at 50% off.
Textile weavers, engineers, computer programmers, are pouring out of the crevices of China and in India.
That’s why Jewish finance, investment banks like NM Rothschild & Sons, Wolfensohn Group, Oppenheimer Funds, Goldman Sachs, and Sanford Weil’s Citigroup, are building their ivory towers in Shanghai, Mumbai, and in Bangalore.
But, if any shade of yellow or brown should offer its sweat and its intellect at wholesale prices, that’s where their ivory towers will go.
You see, people, presidents, prime ministers, whether their names are Singh, Wan, or Ying, are just pawns in the game of the Jewish Oligarchs of Globalization.
“Governance” not “Governors” is what makes for global rule."

Kapner's quote above serves as a nice concise definition of what the term "globalization" means, and who runs it! There are winners in globalization and there are losers in this game. The winners for sure are wealthy Jews all over the world, and others of means and resources. The losers are those in Palestinian territories, and in poorer countries like Pakistan, Indonesia, and a slew of others. 

Dr. T. O'Connor has written an essay called "Terrorism as Antiglobalization." And in this essay, there is some insight that backs up my point that Islamic "terrorists" are lashing out because they are getting the short end of the schtick so to speak! 

"The twelve most important seam states (remembering that these are fluid) are: Algeria, Brazil, Egypt, Greece, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Pakistan, the Philippines, South Africa, Thailand, and Turkey.  If properly supported in their homeland security efforts, these seam states could form an effective barrier or buffer against terrorist networks.  However, terrorists have already established strong havens in at least four of these states (Pakistan, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Brazil).  While failed states do indeed create fertile breeding grounds for crime, human rights abuses, disease, and starvation, it is possible that terrorists do not see them as all that attractive because the typically uncontrolled security forces there may be unable to distinguish between a terrorist base of operations and an indigenous base of operations. ...
There is no proof that "poverty causes terror" (Mousseau 2003).  However, there might be something to Shelley's (2006) failed states argument and "unholy trinity" whereby losers in the market globalization process can be expected to fight back anyway they can to preserve their little fiefdoms of criminal enterprise characterized by the presence of easily bribable officials."
(Source: O'Connor, T.  (2011). "Terrorism as Antiglobalization," MegaLinks in Criminal Justice. Retrieved from accessed on Oct. 19, 2011.)
Whether what Dr. O'Connor says is fact or not, I agree with his assessment given my own experience in the Middle East and Southeast Asia. It is not "poverty" that is inspiring Islamic militants (in places like Indonesia) to conduct suicide attacks, it is market "globalization" and it's aspects which run counter to the values of people in places like Indonesia.

So far, my point is this: Jews run and control "globalization" designed to oppress other parts of the world - a Zionist objective (per N. Kapner) and the aspects of Jewish-run "globalization" are a root cause and inspiration to certain elements of people in places (like Indonesia) who will conduct suicide attacks in response to the forces of Jewish-run "globalization." 

In addition, I'll add one more point, which pertains to a "truther" that I hold in high regard - Wayne Madsen. This guy has done many interesting things in his life and has experienced the world on many fronts. He is no Alex Jones. He didn't come out of his parent's nest and launch into the "truther" movement outright. He fought his way through the trenches before doing what he does today. After digging on the internet, I was surprised to find his report called "US/Israeli Connection to Bali Bombing" by Wayne Madsen 3-27-07." In this report, Madsen asserts the following:

Our Indonesian and American sources report that there was a significant U.S. and Israeli military-intelligence connection to the October 12, 2002 bombings of the Sari Club in Bali, Indonesia....After the bombing and the plane's departure, the tower logs were altered at Denpasar Airport to indicate the Dash 7 had not landed there. However, in a major oversight, the apron logs were not tampered with. Our sources have revealed the Dash 8 was Israeli-owned....Our sources also indicate that the then-U.S. ambassador to Indonesia, Ralph Boyce, who is now posted as ambassador to Thailand, was fully aware of U.S. intelligence pre-knowledge of the terrorist bombing in Bali. (Source: US/Israeli Connection to Bali Bombing by Wayne Madsen 3-27-7)
The above report was Madsen's original report in 2007. Then on August 28, 2011, Madsen posted some updated information which indicates that this Bali bombing could have in fact been a Mossad "false flag" operation. It is disturbing to say the least. And why would Israel (and International Jews) have desired to stage the Bali Bombing? Possibly because they wanted to draw Australia into the US/British-led War in Iraq! That would be a perfect motive, would it not?

"In light of WMR's previous report on Mossad playing a substantial role in the devastating bombing of downtown Oslo, we have obtained an exclusive photograph of a suspected Israeli intelligence operative laughing it up with an Indonesian police officer on October 13, 2002, the morning after the deadly bombings of the night club district of Kuta in Bali at 11:05 pm on October 12. At least 202 and maybe as many as 400 people died in the twin explosions. Most of the dead were Australians on holiday. The attack spurred Australian Prime Minister John Howard into joining the U.S.-British war in Afghanistan and, later, in Iraq." (Source: Jakarta: Mossad presence laughing it up after Bali Bombing; Wayne Madsen, Aug 28, 2011.)
And for full effect, have a glimpse at a the photo (below) of the only Westerner and Madsen's description of this photo. Apparently, it is believed that he was an Israeli Jew. It is revealing. 
"The western man pictured, the only westerner seen in the immediate vicinity of Bali's "Ground Zero," is standing at the police lines and looking toward the bombed and burned out debris of the Paddy Pub and the Sari Club, located across the street. While the civilian Balinese and Indonesian Marines, Army, police, and Special Forces were traumatized by what happened the night before, the suspected Israeli was noticeably happy at the somber scene of destruction. He was so happy, a journalist immediately dispatched to the scene from Jakarta decided to snap the man's photograph. The man's joviality at a scene where there were human intestines and other body parts strewn across exposed re-bar stripped of concrete and hideously burned bodies made him the subject of immediate suspicion."  (Source: Jakarta: Mossad presence laughing it up after Bali Bombing; Wayne Madsen, Aug 28, 2011.)

Need I say more? We have evidence that points in the direction that not only International Jews were possibly involved in the Bali bombing, but rather, the possibility that Israeli Jews (of the Mossad) could have been involved in this devastating attack in Bali! Certainly there was a motive - to involve the increased support of Australia in the Iraq War!

However, even if the Israeli Mossad had no connection to this attack, my point that Jewish-run and controlled "globalization" is in fact a key instigator of Islamic suicide terrorism. The Jews imposing their NWO upon others around the world can certainly expect backlash as a result. The situation in Palestine is not all that different from Indonesia. Jews imposing their agenda in Gaza face backlash, just as when Jews impose their global agenda in places like Indonesia. Certain things are different, but the overarching aspects remain the same.

Tuesday, 15 January 2013

One can be "gay" & Jewish, but not "gay" & Christian

A Twitter conversation with "Non-Meta Stephen" (Note: I will refer to him as "Stephen" from this point forward) was partial inspiration for me to write this blog entry on homosexuals and his proclamation that one can be gay and a Christian simultaneously. I should further mention that Stephen has not confirmed (with me personally) whether he is gay or not. And if he is not "gay," then what I can at least confirm is that he is in fact a supporter and advocate for "gay" or "homosexual" Christianity. His Twitter statements and responses seem "typical" at least to the degree and experience that I have had living both in and around Jewish and gay communities in various large cities in the US.

As I have seen in gay communities as well as on Twitter (via of Stephen and a number of others), there are some homosexuals who claim that one can be "homosexual" and a "Christian" at the same time! Unfortunately to the gays who are reading this, I can think of no verses in the Holy Bible (Old or New Testaments) that condones the homosexual lifestyle by any means. There are plenty of verses that condone heterosexuality, as that form of sexuality is the type that God created for the purposes of procreation. 

As for verses that condemn acts of homosexuality, there are a fair number of verses in both the Old Testament (OT) and New Testament (NT). In the OT, there is Genesis 19 describing the sin of Sodom, as well as a fair number of other verses.

And in the NT, Romans 1:26-28, 32 serves as key verses that are critical to the understanding the nature of homosexuality and how it violates God's intent for the natural order.
26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,
32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.  (Romans 1:26-28, 32 NASB)
Dr. Jay Adams, a biblical counselor with a laundry list of counseling periodicals had this to say regarding the Romans 1 verses here:

In discussing Romans 1:26-28, 32, Jay Adams states it clearly: "In verse 26 Paul speaks of homosexuality as a "degrading passion," in verse 27 as an "indecent act" and "an error," in verse 28 the improper activity of a "depraved mind," and verse 32 declares it is "worthy of death." One is not a homosexual constitutionally any more than one is an adulterer constitutionally. Homosexuality is not considered to be a condition, but an act. It is viewed as a sinful practice which can become a way of life. The homosexual act, like the act of adultery, is the reason for calling one a homosexual (of course, one may commit homosexual sins of the heart, just as one can commit heterosexual sins of the heart. He may lust after a man in his heart as another may lust after a woman). But precisely because homosexuality, like adultery, is learned behavior into which men with sinful natures are prone to wander, homosexuality can be forgiven in Christ, and the pattern can be abandoned and in its place proper patterns can be reestablished by the Holy Spirit."9 (Jay Adams, The Christian Counselors Manual, p. 406.)
The NT is clear about the fact that homosexuality is not of the Lord, and will not lead us down a proper spiritual path. Stephen criticized my reference to Romans 1:26-28, 32 as being "too vague" as if Paul was making little or no reference to homosexuality. He further stated that my interpretation was over fifty (50) years old, and therefore no longer valid. I would have to respectfully disagree and to state that while the specific details may be omitted in these verses, it is obvious that Paul was definitely referring to acts of homosexuality (i.e. "men with men committing indecent acts...", women with women, etc.). Only a homosexual wanting to deny the validity of these verses would go so far as to say, Paul was not referring to acts of homosexuality. 

Then add 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 into the mix. These verses add some additional information condemning acts of homosexuality. 
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-10 NASB)
In the above verses, it is very clear that God will hold the homosexual no more guilty of sexual sin than He will the fornicator or adulterer. In my study of the Holy Bible, I have not been able to find anything that condones homosexuality. Everything I have studied in the Bible shows God's clear condemnation of this type of sexual lifestyle. 

Therefore, for the above reasons, I conclude that it is not possible to be a "homosexual" and a "Christian" at the same time. However, it is possible to be a "Jew" and a "homosexual" at the same time. 

39% of reformed American Jews (under Judaism) are now in total endorsement of sodomy: 
"We hold that homosexuality is no longer {an abomination}; it is not a mental illness or social deviancy; it is not a perversion of the natural order. Homosexuality is not a choice or a preference; it is not something that one decides to do or abstain from doing. It is, like, heterosexuality, the way one is. As such it makes no sense on religious or moral grounds to differentiate between people on the basis of sexual orientation." (Judaism & Homosexuality by Ted Pike 9-22-06).
And among more "conservative" Jews (under Judaism), the Talmud allows homosexuality between grown men and young boys (under age 9). Sanhedrin 69b & 55a provide the following endorsement here:
Sanhedrin 69b summarizes: "All agree that the connection of a boy age nine years and a day is a real connection; while that of one less than eight years is not." 4
The majority opinion in Sanh. 55a states: "Rab. said: pederasty with a child below 9 years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that" "Rab. maintains that only he who is able to engage in sexual intercourse, may, as the passive subject of pederasty, throw guilt [upon the active offender]; while he who is unable to engage in sexual intercourse cannot" 5 (Judaism & Homosexuality by Ted Pike 9-22-06).
So for all of you unrepentant homosexuals or pedophiles, you too can continue your sexually sinful lifestyles and proclaim faith in God at the same time! That is exactly what Jews do who proclaim Judaism as their religion. What most Jews do not understand is that they cannot know or come to God without Jesus (ref. John 14:6). 

Thus, just who are the most influential and powerful people pushing the pro-homosexual movement? Pastor Rick Rogers asserts the following:

The pro-homosexual movement is very aggressive and "in your face", and is often backed and supported by leading 1 politicians and Hollywood types.2
[1] Then President Bill Clinton met with members of the Democratic National Committee of Gays and Lesbians, and stated that I think weve got a much better chance to pass (pro-gay and lesbian legislation) in 2000, and I hope you will help me with that I have said many times, I wish we could have done more [to promote the homosexual agenda] but Im glad we did what we did.  Marc Lacey, Clinton tells Gays He Will Seek to Change Way Dont Tell Policy is Used, New York Times, 17 December 1999, p. A28.  Concerned Women for America states, President Clinton is telling you and the American people that its time you were forced to accept homosexuality as a normal and acceptable lifestyle.  The president is saying that its time to give same-sex love civil rights protection.  How is the homosexuality community doing this?  Through public schools, media, celebrity endorsement, gay militants, literature, television,
[2] Those who have endorsed homosexuality directly or indirectly include Elton John, Ellen Degeneres, Tom Hanks, Roseanne, Kelsey Grammer, Boy George,
R. K. Harrison, Encyclopedia of Biblical and Christian Ethics, pp. 182, 393-394
. (Homosexuality by Pastor Rick Rogers.)
Therefore, if it is politicians and "Hollywood" that are pushing the pro-homosexual movement, why aren't people asking just who the rats are behind these prevailing institutions? Well, even those who are tuned into alternative news sources like Alex Jones' Infowars dot com website, are also on the receiving end of false information! If "truthers" are to believe Alex Jones, they will likely believe that "Arabs run Hollywood!" Wrong! It is Jews that run Hollywood. If you do not believe what I am saying, then you need to read and view my previous blog entry by clicking HERE!

Now, that you the reader have read this blog entry, can you now begin to understand why "gay Christian" supporters (like Stephen) not only twist Scripture to meet their desired sinful sexual preferences, but that they also ardently support Jews, Israel & their mainline "establishment" machine? In fact, as unrepentant as many gays are, and as proud as they are about their homosexuality, they would find more acceptance in a Jewish synagogue (i.e. a "Synagogue of Satan" ref: Revelation 2:9, 3:9)! In my experience, gay communities love the Jewish-controlled "big banks!" Wells Fargo and Bank of America are major supporters of extravagant "gay pride" parades and other major events. In most gay communities, there tend to be fewer small businesses (focused upon high quality), and a larger number or corporate retail chains...e.g., Starbucks, etc. I contend that most gays are drinking the deadly "establishment Kool Aid" and they don't even know it! 

My message to homosexuals, and particularly those desiring to follow Christ, you will need God's grace to break your pattern. But know this much: You cannot continue down the path of homosexuality and be one of God's chosen at the same time. You must choose the One or the other! One leads to life, the other to death, pain, and suffering! And don't play semantics with me! I don't need to be any more explicit in my statements than I have been in this blog entry!

Monday, 14 January 2013

Why the discussion of Zionism is so important?

With all my comments and commentary regarding the fraud of Zionism, how it came about, and how it effects the world today, I thought I would now issue a statement regarding its importance. There are some, if not many, Christians who read my blog entries or my tweets (on Twitter) and think something to the effect of -- why is this "Jason" always harping on the topic of "Zionism," Jews, Israel, International Jewry, etc.? No doubt, some of my Christian followers even believe that the discussion of Zionism & International Jewry is a "trivial" topic not even worth the time or energy to discuss. Still further, there are many who have succumbed to the (Jewish-run) "establishment" brainwashing and immediately label me as a "antisemite" for even daring to mention the "Z" word (for "Zionism") or the "J" word (for "Jew") and thereby ignore me entirely. The responses that I receive vary widely, but the fact remains is that I have received a fair amount of resistance to the statements that I make regarding the topic of Zionism.

What I write is unpopular and is in fact a strong indicator (perhaps even a testament) that what I am saying is indeed the "truth." And, not only do people hate my message, they also hate me (the messenger) for the message that I put forth. John 15:18-19 provides insight into this universal phenomenon here:
18 “If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. 19 If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you. (John 15:18-19 NASB)
Truth, and particularly God's truth, is hated as a natural phenomenon in a world heavily laden with sin. Thus, the first reason to pay strict attention to the topic of Zionism is the very fact this sin-laden world hates any real discussion or exposure of it! That is, "the world" hates any and all discussion of "truth" and that is the very reason for those (that love "truth") to discuss Zionism at length and to delve deeply into its widely held premises! As the Bible indicates, there are many who will label me as an "evil" "antisemite" for exposing Zionism, rather than recognizing the "good" of obtaining a proper understanding and perspective of Scripture and the world's relation to it. Isaiah 5:20 sheds light on this point.

20 Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;
Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness;
Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! (Isaiah 5:20 NASB)

The other point that many Christians hold to is that the topic of Zionism is "trivial" and not worth any focus or discussion at all. For a Zionist Christian, the discussion begins and ends with their statement that God's Chosen are "bloodline" Jews and that the strip of land in Palestine belongs to Jews period. End of discussion! In most cases, these Christians believe the Premillennialist Dispensationalist perspective and that it is "of God's will" for Jews to oppress "evil" gentile "Arabs" and to forcefully seize "the land" Jews lost in 70 AD! And the Jews did this in 1948 without any just compensation. Christians were also booted out of their homes and left in the outskirts of Nazareth. However, none of this seems to phase the ardent Zionist Christian in most cases. 25% of ALL Americans proclaim themselves to be a Zionist Christian, that is 70 Million+ Americans alone! I made this point in a previous blog entry here.

I even know one reformist Christian (who holds similar eschatological beliefs to mine) who believes that it makes no difference what a Christian believes regarding the Jews (and Israel) in prophecy. To him it is a trivial and insignificant issue for which he believes we "reformists" should not allow to divide us from other Christian believers who are Zionists. In other words, we should ignore what Jews do and continue to support all of their corruption from the very top of the pyramid on downward! I disagree with this thinking even among one who proclaims himself to be a Christian reformist. Those of you who are reading my blog for the first time will want to read and understand why it is that Christians should not support pro-Zionist policies. This blog entry explains the real nature of what "the land" really is and "who" it is that God has really chosen to occupy this "land" which by the way, is not of this world! The "land" is not what most Zionists think, and neither is the "chosen" to whom most Zionists would make reference to! 

At the very core, the topic of Zionism is of critical importance to better understanding the nature of "evil" in this current dispensation and covenant. To the Christians that do not know, we have been in a New Covenant since the Fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Out with the old, and in with the new! While God did give Jews a forty (40) year grace period after Christ's crucifixion to repent, they did not, and hence He put an end to their sacrificial system and destroyed their temple (via of the Romans). He further scattered Jews unto the ends of the earth, and today, that scattering is all but too evident. By the way, if Jews have no "sacrificial system" and if they do not accept the only appropriate sacrificial lamb (i.e., the blood of "Jesus Christ"), then by default, the Jews have no means of atoning for their sins! That is a critical point to ponder. No means to atone for sins, also means no way to obtain forgiveness for their sins from the God they proclaim to believe in! How then can a Jew be saved? The only thing I can see is a group of people scattered throughout the world that proclaim faith in God, but cannot know Him, because they rejected the very One who could have led them in the right direction (ref. John 14:6). Therefore, with no way to atone for sins and with no One to show them the way, the only way of the International Jew is one of "this" world, where their sins pile higher and higher into the heavens!

Jesus *said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me. (John 14:6 NASB)

The fact that Jews rejected Jesus as the Christ and the fact that they crucified Him already exposes them as the premier Christ-rejectors that they truly are. For those who do not believe that Jews are Christ-haters (and rejectors), you may want to check out my previous blog entry - Jewish Mockery of Jesus Christ - A tacit mechanism for societal control. Those who read the gospels will understand that Jesus essentially gave the Jews (i.e., the "chosen" bloodline of the Old Dispensation and Covenant) a choice between His Kingdom (not of this world) or "this" world! The Jews chose "this" world, and the evidence of that could not be more apparent in today's world! The Jews run everything from the very top of the pyramid downward! Also read what I stated in a previous blog entry here:

"So, why would God allow Jews to run the world? A short, quick, and down 'n dirty answer might be this: Jews crucified Jesus thereby not allowing Jews to enter God's Kingdom. Remember this...His Kingdom is NOT of this world! But, the Jews wanted a kingdom that Jesus would NOT provide for them...i.e., a kingdom of THIS world! And what does a Jewish kingdom of this world look like? It is one that gives the Jews dominion of THIS that gives them the material riches of this, power, influence! Thus, Jesus gave the Jews EXACTLY what they wanted -- He gave them THIS world!"
Jews were indeed on the world stage during the time of Jesus. It was either Jews accept Jesus and become one with Him & His Kingdom, or reject Jesus and be against Him. There would be no middle ground with Jesus and His Father! Jews rejected Jesus and thus were against Him. 
"He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me, scatters." (Luke 11:23 NASB)
As it appears in today's world, Jews who rejected Jesus' Kingdom (not of "this" world) were, by default, granted the one that they really wanted Jesus to give them - the Kingdom of this earthly world! And, prior to His 2nd Coming, I could just imagine Jesus allowing His most powerful worldly enemies (many of whom will be Jews) arising to the very top! It is at His final judgment when these most powerful (and arrogant) people will be brought very low! Who could imagine this process working any differently?

To the naysayers, I must ask what is "antisemitic" about understanding the significance of the Jews and how they gain(ed) control of this world? I can see no evidence of hatred unless I am expressing hatred of Jewish people in particular. After Jesus' resurrection and after the Fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD, the world changed dramatically like never before in history. No longer does God communicate with His people in the same manner that he did in the Old Covenant. He no longer speaks to us through "burning bushes," visions, signs & wonders, or other similar means. Today, God communicates to us through Scripture and through Jesus' example set in the gospels. That is the only reliable communication in contrast to some Christians who proclaim that they have "special access" to prophetic visions given to them via God! I'm suspicious of any and all who proclaim that God gives them any special treatment.

As a final point, some Premillennialist Dispensationalists have said to me in the past, Jews played a huge role during the "time of Jesus" and in the Old Testament, why then would Jews not play any role today? To their credit, they are actually correct! However, my understanding differs in that Jews are not the "light of the world" that God intended them to be in the Old Dispensation. Rather, "bloodline" Jews under Judaism (in today's world) are the opposite of what God originally intended. They are the shining example of sin, darkness, and "evil" in the world, which is now being fully demonstrated, and will be fully exposed once the "light" of the final judgment occurs. Only then, will many of the Zionists (and Zionist Christians) understand what I have been teaching and preaching all along! However, my best hope is that many of them will see the light prior to God's judgment or risk being wedded or 'spiritually bound' to the "evil" and "corrupt" ways of the Christ-hating Jews!

Hopefully, this blog entry has done its job to proclaim the importance of discussing Zionism and putting this critical topic at the top of the agenda for further examination among believers and nonbelievers alike!

Friday, 4 January 2013

DynCorp Contractors in Oct 2003 Motorcade Attack in Gaza

Nearly a decade ago on October 15, 2003, a small team of "Security Contractors" were running a motorcade from the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv to Gaza, and were ferrying an unnamed U.S. Diplomat into this area no doubt for a meeting of some sorts. After obtaining clearance to proceed through the Gaza checkpoint (on the north end - the Erez crossing), an armored vehicle with three (3) DynCorp private contractors and one (1) American diplomat were suddenly hit by a powerful roadside IED (Improvised Explosive Device) apparently triggered by a cellphone. The three contractors were killed instantly and the one American diplomat was critically wounded. 

To access a news clipping of this incident, check out the New York Times posting - "3 Americans Slain in Blast In Gaza Strip." 

Historically, Security Contractors were used by the U.S. State Department in the 1990s in Bosnia, and then again in Israel in the early part of the 2000s. However, Security Contractors did not gain their public notoriety until March 2004 when Blackwater Security Contractors were slain in Fallujah, Iraq. It was from that point forward when the controversy over there use became front page news and a talking point for mainstream media (MSM).

Most people probably do not even recall the incident where 3 contractors were killed near the Gaza Checkpoint as this 2003 incident occurred prior to the Blackwater Fallujah 2004 incident. This incident occurred at a time when I was involved in security in Middle East region, and given my personal experiences in Israel, Gaza, as well as in Iraq, I can say that this PARTICULAR incident in Gaza seems to have all the hallmarks of what many in the "truth movement" refer to as a "false flag" attack. Further to that, it appears that the nation of Israel could have been behind it. Now do I have 100% concrete evidence of this statement of possibility. No! But, are there existing sign posts that point in the direction that this could have been a Israeli-run "false flag" attack. I would say that this possibility should not be ruled out any more than if 9/11 was an "inside job" staged by the Jewish global elites. 

What are some of the indicators that this attack on the DynCorp motorcade might have been an "inside job" arranged by high level Israeli operatives? Here are some points to consider.

1. The nature of this particular attack cannot be ignored. Take a close look at the photo of the Chevrolet Suburban SUV above. The roadside bomb or IED that hit this vehicle was enormous! This vehicle was a heavily armored vehicle which no doubt met the U.S. State Department standard of what would have been rated as a "Level 6" armored vehicle, and the IED literally ripped this vehicle in half! Most IEDs that detonate under or near a vehicle of this level of heavy armor do NOT look like the one you are now seeing in the photo above. Further, in all the time that I spent in Iraq (and Middle East), I never saw a Level 6 armored vehicle that was hit by an IED looking like the one in the photo (above). And, I should stipulate that the quantity of bombed out vehicles in Iraq have been numerous particularly in the years ranging from 2003 to 2007, and somewhat beyond that time period as well. My point simply is this: I have seen many armored vehicles hit by IEDs and have seen the level of damage that each can inflict. But, the one in Gaza is indeed special. It left a crater 15 feet wide and 5 feet deep! Even the New York Times article (above) admitted the level of planning and sophistication required to carry out such an attack.

2.  As usual, the initial blame for the attack was aimed at the Palestinian "extremist" groups in Gaza, as well as at Palestinian security forces who were said to "turn a blind eye" to the act of laying the roadside IED. In fact, a lawsuit was filed by a family of one of the slain contractors in 2007, and the case was approved in August 2011. Check out this press release here. However, I question the capabilities of the Gaza-based "militant extremist" groups to carry out such a sophisticated attack of this nature. Gaza is such a heavily locked-down territory that I have a hard time believing that they would have had either the "know-how" or the materials to build and develop such a highly technical device. Further, I have my doubts that they would have been able to plant it only within a short distance of the Gaza checkpoint, which has a very high level of security around it. Likewise, I can say the Israelis would likely have the capability of building such a complex device. Israelis often brag about their tech savvy capabilities. Certainly the Mossad would be capable of building such a device. 

3. This incident made world news, but then was quickly pushed under the carpet and rarely ever talked about again! 

4. The Gaza bombing incident occurred at a time (2003) when the "Road map to Peace" was being pushed by U.S. Diplomats, the UN and others, and while Israel publicly made a commitment to this "road map," they found it to be cumbersome, as their actions against Gaza would be highly scrutinized and limited. While "peace" was the stated goal, the reality is that Israel wanted to take direct actions against Palestinian militants, as they believed the Palestinian Authority was falling short of their stated promises to "crack down" on their own militant groups. 
"One Palestinian official said Israel should have allowed the Palestinian Authority to follow through on its plans to crack down on the groups before launching the missile strike against the Hamas leader.
But Israel says Tuesday's bombing shows that the Palestinians are not cracking down on militant groups." (Source: CNN, Israeli attack kills four Hamas members, August 24, 2003.)
The essence of this time period can be characterized by the fact that Israel was growing desperate to use it's military force against Gaza and to do so with the support and backing of the world (i.e., the United States, the United Nations, etc.). What Israel wanted and needed was a high profile attack that would allow them to gain additional acceptance from the United States. An attack (perhaps a "staged" one) against American private contractors in support of U.S. diplomacy in Gaza could not be a better target and means to gain the acceptance of U.S. and Western politicians of Israel's use of military force against Gaza!  No doubt about it, the Israelis gained (politically) from the Gaza motorcade bombing, whether they perpetrated it or not! Let that point not be forgotten!

5. It should be duly noted that there have not been any such highly coordinated attacks of this nature in Gaza prior to October 15, 2003, and there have not been any like it since! This one indeed was very special. I liken this attack to a small version of 9/11, wherein it was a "one-off" type of event. 

Given my experience in the Middle East, and given my knowledge of the nature in which IED attacks are carried out, this one stands out like a sore thumb! The militants in Gaza have no where near the means or the resources to carry out these type of attacks as did the ones in Iraq (circa 2004 to 2007)! In Iraq, militants had a myriad of ways to get in and launch well planned attacks, and they had enormous space in which to do so. In Gaza, those people are so crammed into a very small space of land highly regulated and monitored by the Israelis. Gaza militants would only dream of the freedom and resources that militants in Iraq would have had access to. Most American Soldiers that have served in Iraq would probably say something similar to what I am saying. 

After this Gaza bombing incident, the Israeli Army did in fact carry out a series of incursions into Gaza and they did so without much if any American or UN dissent. Could this incident have been a "false flag" staged by the nation of Israel? There are indeed indicators that it could have been. After all, the concept of "the end justifies the means" does not violate any Talmudic principles that I am aware of!