The Infamous Council – By Their Fruits Episode 24 (1:02)
My Comment under the video:
The Johannine Comma is the text (with the Comma in square brackets) in the King James Bible reads in 1 John 5: 7-8 (modern spelling):
7 For there are three that bear record [in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.] 8[And there are three that bear witness in earth], the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood, and these three agree in one. — King James Version (1611)
Was this a gloss? Most textual critics would answer that it was not in the original. However, even if we allow it to stand is it a creedal statement about the nature of God? Not really all it proves is that "these three" are in agreement. It means that they bear record i.e. they witness. Context is EVERYTHING, the next verse says; "If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son". Does this verse tell us anything about the "nature" of water, blood and Spirit? Are they the same substance? No. They are in agreement in their witnessing as in John 19: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the SPIRIT (v.30).....Jesus' side was pierced and poured out WATER and BLOOD and (v.35): "And he that saw it BARE RECORD (witness)." So on earth the water, blood and spirit are united in their witness to the redemptive work and similarly in heaven the Father, Word and Spirit bear testimony. Indeed, the Greek is not masculine (to denote three co-eternal, co-equal persons in the Godhead) but the Greek for "one" (these three are one) is neuter as it is in John 17 ("that they [the disciples] may be one even as we are one). So, this is not some slam dunk textual proof. Shall we stick with the Bible where Jesus describes himself as the Son of Man and God as his Father. I could say a lot more, but why do we need to add more? Someone has yet to describe to me how atonement works if Jesus is just another form (substance) of God? Surely that would disallow the very possibility of temptation and failure and therefore make any victory a hollow pretense. The primitive Christian church was penetrated by Judaizers early on (false brethren) who tried to turn believers back to the law. The one thing that Orthodox Judaism will not tolerate is any dilution of the monotheistic principle. I would say their subversion has been successful because even their proxy religion which was set up in competition with Christianity (Islam which is a Jewish invention) is strictly monotheistic. In fact Islam will not even countenance that God could have a son and in this is similar to Judaism.
Here is our next video in the series Pattern Recognition In The Apocalypse (PRITA).
Although the last 2,000 years is referred to as the “Times of the Gentiles” that does not mean that the Apocalypse is a continuous account of Christianity or Gentile history. The Kingdom of God could have been established in the first or second centuries if the nation had repented. Instead the Jews were cast off until the times of the Gentiles were fulfilled. The Apocalypse does not tell us about the intervening period. After all, the Gentiles are a branch that has been grafted into the Jewish tree of covenant hope. The focus of the Apocalypse is on events immediately proceeding the second advent and those events were interrupted by stubborn disobedience. As we approach the end we have a repeat of the patterns that occurred in the first and second centuries.
What can we then say about the long intervening period? The intermission or parenthesis was an opportunity for the gospel to be preached to the Gentiles but it also provoked the Jews to jealousy (Rom 11:11). If God had abandoned them then they would achieve their own deliverance and greatness. Remember that Satan promised Jesus the kingdoms of the world if only Jesus would bow down and worship him? Of, course we know that Jesus refused to worship his own fleshly desires. Jesus refused to snatch at power and glory but the Jews feel like God has betrayed them because they were the chosen race. It is their world and the Gentiles (especially white Christians) are usurpers. So, the Apocalypse tells us nothing about the intermission because the Apocalypse is not a history book.
However, it is important to understand the parenthesis from the Jewish perspective. They came to the conclusion that they needed to repossess their homeland. The Jewish nation had collectivized the messianic attributes as they had (in their view) been offered up (holocaust) for the sins of the Gentiles (Isaiah 53). Of course, they expected a messianic leader to emerge once they possessed the land at which point they would rule the world and heal it (Tikkun Olam). So far their obsession has brought nothing but bloodshed and ideologies like communism on the one side and mercantilism and super charged capitalism on the other.
Even though the times of the Gentiles is an interlude that does not feature per se in the symbolism of the Apocalypse it is nevertheless important to understand the period from a historical perspective because the times of the Gentiles was the period where the Jews came to the conclusion that they had to take matters into their own hands. Ironically the times of the Gentiles was shaped by the Jews. The prophetic clock could only start ticking again once the Jews took possession of their homeland. The following video relates to this interim period….
Babylon was the place where the nation was exiled and the place where their law schools were established.
The Babylonian Talmud (7 min)
The mother of Harlots
It should come as no shock that the Rabbis prefer Islam because it is an offshoot of Rabbinical Judaism. [i] Jewish Law (halakha) means “the way of walking” and Islamic Law (sharia) in Arabic means “the way.” The Islamic obsession with “Law” comes from the Jewish obsession with Law as Parthia (Babylonia or Shinar) was the centre of Jewish Law Schools and the place (Zech 5.11) where the Babylonian Talmud was written for centuries before Muḥammad appeared. Moreover many Jewish tribes lived in the Arabian Peninsula where Muḥammad (an illiterate but well travelled merchant) received his visions. Muslims believe that the Quran was orally revealed by God to the final Prophet, Muḥammad, through the archangel Gabriel (Jibril), incrementally over a period of some 23 years concluding in 632, the year of his death.
According to tradition, several of Muḥammad’s companions served as scribes and recorded the revelations. In 1896 Rabbi Abraham Geiger highlighted the similarities between Rabbinic Judaism and Islam. [ii] Jews are allowed to pray in a mosque and Muslims in a synagogue but neither will pray in a church. Christians are considered “idolaters” [iii] by Jews and Muslims but as we have seen even when Christians reject the Trinity and vicarious atonement it makes little difference to the rabbis as Islam is preferred above the monotheistic “version” of Christianity. There is therefore no version of Christianity that is palatable to the Rabbis. So Jews and Muslims eat the same clean food, practice male circumcision (which is also widespread in Islam and accepted as established practice by all Islamic schools of jurisprudence) and we must not forget ostentatious prayers etc and the giving of alms and the pilgrimage to Mecca (based on the historical pilgrimage to the Jewish temple cf. the Wailing Wall). In 1976 the historians Patricia Crone and Michael Cook wrote the book Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World is a 1977 book about the early history of Islam. According to the authors, 7th century Syriac, Armenian and Hebrew sources depict the formation of Islam as a Jewish messianic movement known as Hagarism,[iv] which migrated into the Fertile Crescent. It drew considerable influences from the Samaritans and Babylonian Judaism. Around 690 AD the movement shed its Judaic identity to develop into what would later become Arab Islam.[v] Although the theory was subsequently universally rejected for its methodology [vi] it did open up new avenues of research. Hagarism built on the work of Joseph Schacht (d. 1969), a towering figure in the history and study of Islamic law; and before Schacht, to Ignaz Goldziher (d. 1921), a man who in many way stands as the godfather of modern Islamic studies in the West. Both Goldziher and Schacht showed that many of the oral traditions which had been attributed to Muḥammad and regarded with canonical authority by Muslims were actually late fabrications which reflected the cultural and political situation in the Middle East long after the Prophet had died. [vii] Apart from casual allusions in the Qur’an, most of what is reported about Muḥammad’s life is based on oral traditions of his followers later collected and written down in biographical works of the A.D. 8th and 9th centuries. Suffice to say that the truth lays somewhere in-between full blown Hagarism and a conservative Islamic view as it is quite obvious that Islam owes much to Rabbinic Judaism but probably not to the extent that Hagarism suggests. One might say that Judaism is the mother religion (rather t
[iii] For Maimonides, Christianity and Islam are related to Judaism. Maimonides’s practical view of Christianity was usually assumed to be negative, and he regarded Christianity as a form of proscribed polytheism, even for gentiles. In his code of Jewish law, Mishneh Torah, Maimonides basically restated his judgment about the idolatrous status of Christianity without repeating the reasons he gave in his earlier works. As a theologian, he took regularly strong exemption to Christian Trinitarianism. Maimonides ranked Islam superior than Christianity on theological grounds. For him, Christianity is the prime example of the error of such anthropomorphism in its original doctrine of the Incarnation and in its associated doctrine of the Trinity. See,Oxford Scholarship
[iv] Named Hagarism after Hagar, the Egyptian wife of Abraham
[vi] Stephen Humphreys observes, “Unsurprisingly, the Crone-Cook interpretation has failed to win general acceptance among Western Orientalists, let alone Muslim scholars … The rhetoric of these authors may be an obstacle for many readers, for their argument is conveyed through a dizzying and unrelenting array of allusions, metaphors, and analogies. More substantively, their use (or abuse) of the Greek and Syriac sources has been sharply criticised. In the end, perhaps we ought to use Hagarism more as a ‘what-if’ exercise than as a research monograph.” Stephen Humphreys, Islamic History, (Princeton, 1991) pp. 84–85.
The Middle East really is a quagmire that will eventually drag in all nations to war. Jerusalem is a stumbling-block. The controversy of Zion will not go away. All the countries around the Middle East have been Balkanized. American politics has been degraded and they have been used as a neo-con tool. There will be a backlash and a price to pay. The old Jerusalem and everything it represents will pass away. We look to the new heavens and the new earth and the new Jerusalem coming down out of heaven like a bride. For we have a city whose builder and maker is God. Only the righteous will enter the gates of the city. Jesus has made us righteous. If God is for us, who can be against us?
The following article is an example of propaganda. That does not mean that the article is not true. In this case the article reports the facts but with a hidden agenda. Here follows the article:
France: More Death to Free Speech by Guy Millière October 13, 2019 at 5:00 am
This is a very perceptive comment from an anonymous contributor from another website:
Once again this article from the very (((Zionist))) Gatestone institute is very partial and only mentions those exclusively criticizing islam, who actually didn’t go to jail, but not the intellectuals critical of the influence and strong grip of Judaism, and Jewish lobby, who actually were condemned to go to jail (only for political expression) :
– Boris Le Lay, maybe the most accurate of them all, has been vocal against Judaism, Islam, immigration, Marxism, etc etc had to flee to Japan, following his condemnation of 6 years in jail, for an opinion, when at the same time, Arab rapists don’t even do half of that sentence,- Hervé Ryssen, has also been condemned to jail, has been mainly against Judaism, with a few books (I higly recommend), and documentaries (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-oNSJZjpps ) but lately he has criticized Islam and immigration as well, still in France waiting for police to catch him,
– Alain Soral, the most famous of them all, even though he is a Marxist, anti-Zionist, philo-semite, who doesn’t criticize Islam much, has been spot on about Israel and the influence of the french ADL (Crijf) in France,
– Vincent Reynouard, went to jail for his pro-nazi opinion,- etc etc and the list grows longer by the day, now that the Bolshevik regime of France, even goes after comments on YouTube, Facebook, etc etc. That doesn’t mean that those mentioned in the article are wrong, to the contrary, but the reason they haven’t faced jail time yet is because they are Jews who haven’t criticized their own community actually being the main cause of massive immigration and rapid Islamisation.
And the fact that they have been cut down from their own Jewish community proves only one thing : the Jews in control of Europe wants to make peace with Islam to destroy and replace the white goyims, when at the same time they tell the white goyim that they are their best allies to kick out Islam from Europe. This same triangulation we have been accustomed to, and the same kind of strategy they used during the previous invasion of Islam in Europe (Grenada). Quite the scam artists, and Gatestone is actually controlled opposition, never going too far so that people never connect the dots.
Summary
Islam is being used as a Trojan horse to stir up nationalism and anti-Semitic feelings. This can then be used to introduce more legislation against “hate speech” and Antisemitism etc. It is just a coincidence that all the Muslim refugees entering Europe are the consequence of Anglo-Zionist wars. It is also a coincidence that the open borders policy is supported by the NGO’s controlled by Soros.
Gatestone
This analysis may seem like another “conspiracy theory” until you do some research into Gatestone.
We are being played. A number of websites that are “right-wing” are actually Anglo-Zionist. A good Example of this is Alex Jones. That does not mean that what he conveys is wrong but that an agenda is in play. It is for this reason that he has been banned for “hate speech” by the likes of Facebook (another Jewish platform) controlled by Globo-Bolsheviks. It is called divide and rule…or more precisely the Hegelian dialectic. All very clever but it is ripping the West apart (that is the intention).
