Red Cow Apocalypse

Red Cow Apocalypse

Apparently the red cow was secretly sacrificed in Jerusalem and yet we have all survived.   Whether or not it has been sacrificed is moot because at some point in the future they do intend to sacrifice the red cow and they may have already done it.  According to the video below  the arrival of the red heifer is “prophesied in Christianity”.  That is untrue and many of the statements in the video are tendentious and decontextualized and will be debunked anon.

 


Red Heifers Secretly SACRIFICED in JERUSALEM TODAY! – Is This The Ultimate Warning? (23 min)

 

The arrival of the red heifer is not “prophesied in Christianity”. The Christian “temple” is not one made with hands (Acts 7:48). In fact the saints are living temple stones (1 Pet 2:5) and Jesus is both the temple (John 2:19) and the sacrifice (Heb 10:10). There is no more any need for sacrifice. Any Christians who tell you otherwise for whatever reason are perverting the gospel. Not only are we explicitly told in the Apocalypse that there is no temple in the New Jerusalem (Rev 21:22) but David was told by God that he did not want a temple (see my article here) and instead God would build a house (dynasty) for David and he was given the Messianic promise (2 Sam 7:12-14) nevertheless, God conceded and allowed David’s son Solomon to build a temple. As such Solomon became the initial fulfillment (placeholder) of the prophecy but he soon apostatized and as a consequence the kingdom was divided in the days of his son.

The video offers Matthew 24:14-16 and 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 as “proof” of an end time temple with scant effort to contextualize the quotes within the history of the period as the citations refer to the first and second Roman Wars. The First Jewish–Roman War was in 66–73 AD and resulted in the destruction of Herod’s Temple the Second Jewish-Roman war (132–136 AD) was the Bar Kokhba revolt. Both wars were nationalist rebellions, striving to restore an independent Judean state. In Matthew Jesus draws on the seventy weeks prophecy by Daniel, which among other things describes the defilement of the temple by Antiochus Epiphenes in the Hasmonean period. This is a complex prophecy poorly understood by Christians, moreover, the Rabbi’s deliberately omitted about 166 years from the Persian period in their Seder Olam Calendar to ensure a period of exactly 490 years between the first and second Temple destruction (586BC+70AD=656 years not 490 years) thus making it impossible of any application of the prophecy to Christ. The end of the temple and animal sacrifice occurred in 70 AD and before that happens the apostles and Paul had already preached the gospel to all the nations of the ancient world. The second Jewish-Roman war saw the chief Rabbi Akiva declare Bar Kochba as the Messiah which he said fulfilled Numbers 24:17. There can be no doubt that Kochba erected a place for sacrifice and worship (if only temporary) on the Temple Mount. Kochba was therefore the initial prototype of the “man of lawlessness” even though he saw himself as the embodiment of the law (cf. the law made flesh). On his coins he depicted himself as a star rising above the Torah Ark.

He persecuted Christians who refused to buy and sell with his coins and his soldiers took a test of loyalty by cutting of their little finger and wearing tefillin on the forehead (Rev 13:16-17). The destruction of the temple in 70 occurred after 3.5 years of desecration as did the Kochba rebellion (the Seleucid desecration under Antiochus also lasted 3.5 years) moreover the first temple and second temple fell on the 9th Ab and Kochba’s fortress of Betar fell on the same date. History does not repeat but it rhymes and the first and second century outworking of the prophesy form eschatological patterns (but not blueprints) of future events.

Therefore the two citations in this video speak of the destruction of the temple in AD 70 and the annihilation and dispersion of the nation in AD136 which both form a pattern of the final 3.5 year tribulation and witnessing in Rev 11: 1-3 which also speaks of a temple (though not literal).

Suffice to say that God told Abraham that He would provide the sacrifice (Gen 22:14) and He told David that He did not want a temple. Although the ashes of the heifer could make the priestly recipient ritually pure , the ashes could not purge the conscience of dead works (Heb 9:13-14). The Jews do not tell you that the reason behind the necessity of the red heifer ritual is because the priests had been struck down dead by God in the Tabernacle (Lev 10:1-2) thus making the tent ritually impure. The Aaronic priesthood had effectively blocked access to God by introducing rebellion and death into the sanctuary. It was from its very instigation a flawed and rotten priesthood with Aaron making the golden calf and his sons being struck dead for burning strange incense (getting high while drunk) in the sanctuary. It was therefore necessary to introduce another way (work around) outside the camp (law) to reconsecrate the defiled priesthood. Most of the Rabbis don’t understand their own Torah because they spend all their time debating and pilpulling ways to get around the commands and pontificating in the Talmud (which Jesus calls the traditions of men). The ritual of the red heifer is closely associated with the Day Of Atonement (DOA) Scapegoat ritual which is also connected with this incident.

The Scapegoat and the Jews

The video cites Amos (9:14-15) as a proof that they would return to the land and that they would never be uprooted, but again that vision is clearly utopian and eschatological as both the Old and New Testaments speak of further trouble and even exile (Ezek 21:27, Zech 14:2, Rev 17:16)

The indwelling of Yahweh among his people is not in the form of a building but in his son, who could say that whoever had seen him had seen the Father (John 14:9). The Jews understand the presence (Shakan Exod 25:8) of God as happening through the “Shekhinah” a word not found in the Bible. It appears in the Mishnah, the Talmud, and Midrash. Kabbalah associates the shekhinah with the divine feminine as Gnosticism does with Sophia (wisdom) with the roots of these unscriptural ideas tracing back to Canaanite gods having a female consort (Asherah). The practice of Jewish male worshipers rocking back and forth and thrusting the hips is thought to linked to engaging with the divine feminine. These ideas should be rejected by Christians because the tabernacling or indwelling (skenoo) presence of God is Jesus Christ (John 1:14).

All the references to Ezekiel’s visionary temple should be understood as allegorical and/or an attempt to stimulate the people to action by making them ashamed of their apathy (Ezek 43:10-11). The temple when it was built was nothing like the vision vouched safe to Ezekiel and was so disappointing that the old men who had known the glory of the former temple wept when they saw the foundation was laid (Ezra 3: 12). The temple vision of Ezekiel was never meant to be understood literally and any attempt to regard it as such creates many problems.

Finally, it is quite obvious that many Jews as well as many Christians do not understand Scripture and that Christian-Zionists are the result of subversion by the Synagogue of Satan forming an unholy alliance with the British Empire and its Commonwealth resulting in such strange phenomenon as British Israelitism and the demonizing of Russia (Gog) as the end time enemy. They are running a “controlled opposition” play against God himself by using the eschatology of the Apocalypse as a game plan. The Gnostics and Kabbalists are attempting to wrestle God to a halt and claim the victory for themselves. God will not be mocked. This will not end well as no one can force the hand of the Almighty.

 

Extra resources:

Anglo-Zionist Temple Mount Plot

Bless Israel

Amalek Propaganda

The Return of the Jews to Israel

 

My Commentary on the Apocalypse PRITA and on Daniel  GIJ

Amalek Propaganda

Amalek Propaganda

See the video below…

The irony is that Amalek propaganda is used by Zionists to justify their genocidal mania and it is used by their opponents to discredit the Old Testament (the Torah, not the Talmud which is Judaism) to portray God as homicidal and morally flawed. Both the Zionists and ther opponents are wrong and both demonstrate errors in thinking and  of understanding systematic theology. Firstly it should be obvious even to the theologically obtuse that the Amalekites are not Palestinians and that God has not commanded Jews to kill Palestinians (whether they are Palestinian Christians or Palestinian Muslims). Secondly it should be obvious to Christians that Jesus manifested the character of Yahweh and even bore the Yahweh name to such an extent that he could declare that whoever had seen him (in action) had seen the Father (John 14:9). His mission was one of healing and compassion and preaching the kingdom and the immanence of God not organizing genocide or revolution. When Jesus was confronted with a Canaanite woman crying for mercy (Matt 15:21-28) he did not command his disciples to kill her. He did not say….it says in Deut 7:2, ” …shew them no mercy”….therefore….kill her. No, instead he healed her daughter. In fact, contrary the command in Deuteronomy to kill every Canaanite and not to marry them (make a covenant) the first Canaanite woman that is encountered during Joshua’s (=Jesus) conquest is SAVED and she marries into the messianic line via the prince of Judah. A prostitute and a Canaanite woman becomes the ancestor of Jesus (Rahab m.Salmon Matt 1:5). People need to rethink their preconceptions. J.A. T Robinson refers to the origins of Christ as “the scandal of divine love”.  Canaanite is a word derived from acquiring or merchant and merchandise. They were merchants. Jesus condemned the Jews of his day for practicing money lending in the temple, “make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise’ (John 2:16 ). No merchants in the temple. No Canaanite in God’s house. The prophet Hosea called the Jews (Ephraim the Northern Tribes) merchants (Kenan cf. Canaan): He is a merchant, the balances of deceit are in his hand: he loveth to oppress (Hosea 12:7 ). They had turned God’s house into a den of thieves (Matt 2:13, Jer 7:11). So perhaps the antisemitic trope portraying Jews as the happy merchant (Canaanite) rubbing his hands in anticipation of all the shekels he stands to make is actually a biblical meme (lolz).

As for the injunction concerning Amalek. The name Amalek is etymologised in Rabbinic literature as “a people who lick blood” (am lak) but since when do the Rabbis get anything right (lolz). The linguists and etymologists regard the origins as unknown. Is Amalek (עֲמָלֵק) or Ămālēq a cognate from amal (עָמָל) and ḥê-leq (חֵ֖לֶק)? Ămālēq would then be the concatenated compound of the morphmes amal and [ḥê]-leq. The semantic range of amal covers; wearing effort or weariness (hence, worry, whether of body or mind — grievance(-vousness), iniquity, labour, mischief, miserable(-sery), pain(-ful), perverseness, sorrow, toil, travail, trouble, wearisome, wickedness). The morpheme ḥê-leq denotes a portion or part (as inheritance often with refrence to land). Note that the Deuteronmist (Deut 25:16-18) makes a point that Amalek attacked the stragglers and those that were feeble and weary during the wilderness wanderings. The ones who fell behind. The Israelites were admonished not to forget this when they recieved their ineritance (portion). Althought the Hebrew passage employs different words for weary and portion the meanining is similar. Amalek would have no portion or inheritance (be blotted out) because they preyed on the weary. Amalek becomes therefore a metaphore for sin as it targets human weakness and whose portion (wages) is death. Note the phrase in Joshua 22:27; “Ye have (lā-ḵem) no part (ḥê-leq) in the LORD” and the poetic assosciation (reversal and alliteration) of lā-ḵem ḥê-leq with amaleq. It certainly resonates phonetically.

The incident where Israel went to battle with Amalek is recorded in Exodus 17 and the war was won when Moses held his outsteched arms up to heaven in imitation of the crucifiction. There was therefore a supernatural element as with the lifting up of the serpent by Moses (Num 21:8-9) when everyone who looked upon it in faith (identified with it) was saved. The Hebrew Gematria for serpent has the same value as the word messiah hence Jesus reference to being lifted up (John 12:32-33). The serpent is archtypical for sin which demonstrates that the motif in Exodus and Numbers is similar, namely sin could only be defeated through crucifying the flesh.

Hence the idea of herem (חרם) from two similar semitic roots Ḥ-R-M meaning either to consecarte (dedicate) or destroy (annihilate). I would argue that there is little difference between the meanings as a sacrifice (cf. burnt offering) that was consecrated to God was completely annihilated or consumed (as in Jesus saying in John 2:17, “The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up”). The word is often used in the 6th and 7th chapters of the Book of Joshua, where Jericho came under herem. This meant it had to be completely destroyed, except for “the silver and gold and the articles of bronze and iron” which were to go into “YHWH’s treasury” (Joshua 6:19). However, we noted earlier that Rahab and her family were spared. In Deut 20 six races are subject to ḥērem and yet we find a faithful Hittite serving in David’s army and a Jebusite who is willing to transfer the ownership of the threshing floor to David. Paul Copan argues that the herem commands were hyperbolic since the passages contain merisms such as “man and woman”. [1] The war against Amalek was perpetual until the end of time, because Amalek was “the first of nations”:

"And when he looked on Amalek, he took up his parable, and said, Amalek was the first of the nations; but his latter end shall be that he perish for ever" (Numbers 24:20).

It clearly states that it is a “parable”(mashal) and Amalek and his king Agag (cf. 1 Sam 15:8) that was high and exalted (Num 24:7) whose descendant became the Agagite Haman (Esther 3:1) during the Persian period, who was hung on an exceeding high gallows (Esther 7:9). Gog is derivative from Agag (the king) which becomes the eschatological enemy deceiving “the nations”in Rev 20:8. Therefore Agag/Gog (not Russia) represents the first and the last or the Alpha and Omega of sin, the first nation and the last nations that rebel against God and attempt to destroy the camp of the saints (as Amalek attempted to destroy the camp in the wilderness). During the monarchy Saul failed to destroy Agag as he was commanded to do (1 Sam 15:11) , instead (later in his reign) Saul ended up destroying the priestly camp at Nob by sending an Edomite (progenitor of Amalek) to commit genocide (1 Sam 22:18) .

Finally, I have heard it stated that all the Jewish feasts celebrate genocides (lolz) for example the killing of the Egyptians and their armies at Passover and the death of Haman and 75,000 Persian subjects at Purim but both stories actually celebrate deliverance from genocide and a reversal of fortunes. The tables were turned on the enemy.

Much more can be said and I refer the reader to my articles. [2] How then do we understand these Old Testament narratives? Are they to be understood as history or mythology? Are the narratives to be allegorically or literally comprehended? The problem is that they refuse  neat categorization. The text employs literary conventions , paronomasia, mythopoetic devices, chiasmus, gematria, rhetoric, history and intertextuality in a rich and seamless kaleidoscope that defies systematization. The reader is forced to either look for deeper meaning or dismiss it all as fiction. Jesus himself always spoke in parables. Any approach must therefore of necessity be poly-valent. Anyone who rejects the God of the Old Testament must reject Jesus  and anyone who wants to use the conquest of Canaan as a template for genocide has neither the Father nor the Son.  The only one who has won the War is Jesus.

Notes

[1] Copan, Paul (2011). Is God a Moral Monster? Making Sense of the Old Testament God. Baker Books. pp. 175–176).

[2] Further reading on Agag/Gog etc An Intertextual Analysis of Ezekiel 38 (Part 1) Part 2:Russia in Ezekiel 38 (Part 2) Part 3: Ezekiel 38-39, Stylometric Analysis (Part 3)

 

SHOCKER! Guess Who Has Won The War? (19 min)

 

 

 

 

 

Red Cow Mad Cow

Red Cow Mad Cow

The Adam Green video has been taken down.  Censored? I will re-post if I find it elsewhere.  Refresh your browser.

Jewish pharma spread Mad Cow disease (prions) and now  the Jews are getting ready to sacrifice the Red Cow on April 22 and spread religious madness.  The Red Heifer means that they expect to dedicate a priesthood in order to rebuild the “third temple” so that they can begin animal sacrifice again.   A temple and blood sacrifice would be an abomination to God.   Christians who support this do not understand the sacrifice of Christ.  The Jews do not understand the Torah or the meaning of the red heifer.

 "He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations". (Isaiah 66:3)

See my article on the Ritual of the Red Heifer.

The constant comparison between Trump and Cyrus demonstrates that Christians don’t understand Isiah 45 either.  Cyrus did not rebuild the temple Darius did.  Isaiah 45 is about Hezekiah being a foreshadowing of Christ.  The anointed is initially Hezekiah and in the full manifestation it is Christ.  It is not initially Cyrus representing Trump.

See my commentary on the Cyrus Problem (and also the addendum)

Grave Wisdom Ep14 (Parah Adumah: Chapter 6 (Red Heifer laws) by Maimonides) by Dr. Paul Cottrell (11 min)

Trump the Messiah

Start at 8 minutes…

 

Listening to Adam Green Live.   Even though I disagree completely with his take on Christianity and his refusal to differentiate Christianity from Christian-Zionism his take on the third Temple and Trump are correct.  However, Adam Green has no understanding of theology when he quotes Peter about “hastening the Kingdom” Peter is talking about prayer not political action or taking the Kingdom through violence:

 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.(Matthew 11:12)

Adam Green simply does not understand nor do many Christians.  The Jews and Christian-Zionists are using eschatology as a play book. It is their template for world domination. They are running “controlled opposition” against God.  I wonder how that will work out?

And he overcometh by weeping, And he maketh supplication to Him. (Hos 12:14) -Young's Literal Translation

He “overcame” (his nature) not the angel

Wrestling with God

False prophets and false Christians

 

WW3, End Times Prophecy, & Antichrist | Know More News w/ Adam Green (Tonight – Sunday 7:30 pm EST)