by...
THE STORY ON RACIST RABBI YITZHAK SHAPIRA CONTINUES
I was immediately compelled by the Holy Spirit to reinforce the calls for peace made by an atheist on Facebook in her argument with a fellow atheist of her's. This may strike some who call themselves Christian as an anti-Christ activity, but I assure you that it is not. The female (Alex) is an Iranian. The other one is a male, Jew, Israeli-Zionist who I believe is a graduate student in the U.S.
That Yitshak Shapiro [aka Yitzhak Shapira; author of the 230-page book, "The King's Torah"] is reflecting the racism and ethnic bigotry endemic in the Babylonian Talmud is without doubt. His views most certainly do reflect Talmudic Judaism, which is the most prevalent strain by far and has direct impact upon the course of Israel in both foreign and domestic affairs.
An aside: Cleaning toilets is an honorable profession. Many fine people do it. I'm sure Alex doesn't look down on others who do so. Many people put themselves and their children through college by doing such work that someone needs to do or we'd have pretty gross toilets. I know I clean mine. The person who demeaned Alex by making such references the way he or she did may end up experiencing divine retribution, as it were. Some would call it poetic justice were that soul to be a beyond-gross toilet cleaner for eternity. I curse no one to such. That's the other spirit.
Coinciding with my reading this thread today for the first time, I had read the following earlier today: "I am for peace: but when I speak, they are for war." (Psalms 120:7)
Now the tables are turned. Who can be at home with fascist, racist Zionists?
The truth of the matter is that those Talmudic Zionists who subscribe to Yitshak Shapiro's interpretations are spewing evil. It doesn't help to deny it or to accuse those who say it of being perhaps crypto-racists themselves.
I am a bigot. I am bigoted against war-mongers and those who excuse themselves by reason of the Babylonian Talmud. There is nothing wrong with that bigotry of mine. I'm right to be bigoted in that sense. Am I bigoted against Yitshak Shapiro? I absolutely am bigoted against his current, unrepentant position. I am likewise bigoted against anyone calling himself or herself Muslim or Hindu or Christian or Atheist or what have you where that one tells anyone that it's okay and even right to murder innocents of any ethnic background. I say of anyone who disagrees with me on this that he is a liar or stupid or both. He is a fool, and I say it with cause and bearing no false witness, for it is self-evident to the softer-hearted.
H1471
גּי גּוי
gôy gôy
go'ee, go'-ee
Apparently from the same root as H1465 (in the sense of massing); a foreign nation; hence a Gentile; also (figuratively) a troop of animals, or a flight of locusts: - Gentile, heathen, nation, people.Let's not limit the label "goy" merely to being other. It is akin to how the Athenians used the term barbarian – certainly inferior. Of course, there are inferior behaviors; however, they are not attributable to human DNA nearly as much as exposure and reinforcement. This is the nature/nurture debate. Racists lean way over on the so-called nature-side of the equation. While I find that many people who hold themselves out to be refined and sophisticated, etc., to be nearly and sometimes completely intractably "uncivilized." I find Benjamin Netanyahu to be against what is best for civil society for instance. He is the relative barbarian, depending upon one's connotation in play.
Racism is not peculiar to Israelis; however, right now, they are manifesting it in highly violent ways more so than are the other nations. This is the point. Denying it is obfuscation.
The same false arguments could have been made in support of Apartheid South Africa where one could have said that certain Afrikaners were no worst than KKK members in the U.S. and that to stand up against them might be dangerous as one might be taken as anti-Afrikaner regardless of the Afrikaner's racists views.
Banafshe? What's it mean? Is the same as Alex...?
As for Jews in Iran, which came first a) Zionist-Project terrorism to bring about the theft of Palestinian lands and property and the other crimes or b) the slightest, negative discrimination by Iran against Jews in Iran? Are the two linked? This is assuming that we should not defer to Alex on this since she seems to seek truth no matter who might look bad. I for one will defer. I am confident that I would find peaceful coexistence in Iran because Alex has said so. I am not suggesting here that she is denying any discrimination on the part of any Iranian. The exception can prove the rule. There is vastly worse discrimination going on in Israel and the other occupied areas by Israelis than there is in Iran generally and probably even in its worst locales for wrongful discrimination.
I say that relations have suffered more in the world at large due to the Zionist Project, which does equal racism in spite of the denials. The Zionists' literature shows it clearly. I still denounce the racism of the Deep South in the U.S. Why would I do something different just because Jews are involved? The holocaust is irrelevant for instance, as huge groups of people have suffered huge holocausts, even proportional to their populations. Whole nations have been exterminated, as the Jew's own Bible attests. As an example, there is no nation of Sodom. It was a city, but it was a nation if we believe that nations were extended families or tribes, etc. I hold that they were, and are, with the qualification now that there is the nation-state that is more diverse, such as is the case in the U.S. and many other political "nations" not based upon a lineage other than Human in general and not based upon religious sect.
I have no problem with voluntary, non-violent, honest separation. Families do, and should continue to be allowed to, live together without non-family members forced into their houses. What the Zionist Project is though is a separation that is violently cleansing stolen lands. That's a fact, and no amount of tap dancing or running away from it will alter it.
That Egypt makes mistakes does not excuse the illegal land-grabbing -- and it was and is illegal no matter what is said about the U.N. or what comes out from the Empire.
Who cares about who is or is not a racist in terms of his own ethnicity when it comes to standing up against it all? One denounces it all or one excuses some of it. An Israeli either stands up to denounce the racism of all other Israelis for cause and denounces all racism everywhere also for cause or that one is part of the problem, not the solution.
It is right to hate evil, and the Zionist Project is evil. It may state partial-truths, but underlying it all is nothing short of land theft and worse, obviously.
- Technorati Tags: Afrikaners, anti-Afrikaner, anti-Christ, Apartheid South Africa, atheist, Athenians, Babylonian, Babylonian Talmud, Banafshe, barbarian, Benjamin Netanyahu, Bible, bigot, bigoted, bigotry, Christian, civil society, cleaning toilets, compelled, connotation, crypto-racist, curse, Deep South, denounce, discrimination, divine retribution, DNA, domestic affairs, Egypt, ethnic, ethnic bigotry, ethnicity, evil, exterminated, Facebook, false arguments, false witness, families, fascist, flight of locusts, fool, foreign affairs, foreign nation, Gentile, H1465, H1471, hate evil, heathen, Hindu, holocaust, Holy Spirit, honest, illegal, inferior, Iran, Iranian, Israel, Israeli, Israelis, Jew, Jews, Jews in Iran, KKK, land grabbing, land theft, liar, lineage, manifesting, massing, murder innocents, Muslim, nation of Sodom, nature/nurture, non-family members, non-violent, obfuscation, Palestinian land, partial-truths, peace, peaceful coexistence, poetic justice, problem, Psalms 120:7, racism, racist, racists, refined, reinforce, religious sect, separation, Sodom, solution, sophisticated, spirit, stolen land, stupid, Talmud, Talmudic Judaism, Talmudic Zionists, terrorism, the Empire, theft, troop of animals, U.N., U.S., uncivilized, unrepentant, violent, voluntary, war-mongers, with cause, Yitshak Shapiro, Zionist, Zionists, The King's Torah, Yitzhak Shapira, Yitzhak, Shapira
Tom Usher
Standing Comment, all posts and pages:
To all homosexuals and their supporters, condoners, promoters, accepters, confirmers, and the like:
Unless you have something completely new that hasn't already been refuted, don't bother. It won't show up.
Rehashing what has already been refuted is a waste of everyone's time.
I'm not interested in casting pearls before swine, giving the children's bread to the dogs, or rebuking a forever scorner.
Learn or go away: There is zero wisdom in homosexuality. Homosexuality is wrong. Nothing any homosexual or anyone else can say or do will alter it. No one needs the Bible to know it either. It's prima facie. There's no such thing as an unrepentant-homosexual Christian. There never has been and never will be. That's the way of it. If you don't like it, change.
Do site searches on the various topics concerning homosexuality to determine if your "point" has already been handled. Currently, I provide three different search methods. The "WordPress" search is still the most thorough.
The same can be done regarding militarism, capitalism, coercion, and many other main issues and themes.
TREATMENT, RUDENESS, POLITENESS, OFFENSE, TRUTH
Many times over the course of this website's existence, I've had commentators complain about how I've treated them and/or others. Much less frequently has anyone taken exception to those commentator's comments. I assume that's because for one, I appear to be holding my own.
Often, I have raised the fact that Jesus called certain people "serpents." I've often also mentioned how he cleaned the temple with whip in hand, not that he used it on anyone. It certainly doesn't say that he did, and neither was he charged with it in the kangaroo court of the serpents who ended up murdering him by proxy just for, among other wonderful things, speaking out and speaking truth.
If I say that those who are engaged in serpentine behavior are the New Testament "serpents," then why take offense at my saying it rather than standing with Jesus and me about it?
If others don't like it that I treat others or them the way I have in this regard, why don't they take it up with the serpents and/or their own consciences and God?
If I wanted to catch flies, I'd use honey. I don't want flies on this level. Human beings aren't to be on the level of flies. If the truth is bitter as vinegar, then ask yourself why and learn to taste it as sweet but not sickeningly so. Why attack the message and messenger, as the serpents did, and become a serpent by so doing?
The issue is not "name calling" on some bratty, childish level. When Jesus said "serpents," he was not being as a brat. His level was completely adult to adults and children. He dared say that the children understood the clear and plain truth before the adults who, afterall, had been abused and socialized by the serpents. He still calls adults back. Those who hear him and know his voice (truth) turn around and do the other required things together as well.
What is it for a human being to be more serpentine or reptilian than what God initially gave? What was and remains Jesus's point? What is the reptilian brain versus the vastly higher human brain with its cerebral cortex and frontal and temporal lobes and specific areas of altruistic sentiments and abilities? What are those higher areas before they are damaged, before the communication pathways to them and between them are diminished by evil that is always some form of abuse? How are those pathways reestablished or created where they never were in this fleshly life?
The snake lays its eggs. The eggs hatch. The snake parent doesn't nurture or raise the offspring. It's every snake for itself. Human parents and family are not designed to be that way. Humans hand down the learning of nurturing. Many people get better training than do others, and many people have a greater aptitude for learning and predisposition for the higher and highest virtues. Many are less abused. People can change for the better and best though, no matter where the starting point. They only can't if they don't — if they reject it.
Snakes, of course, also come in venomous varieties and in strangling varieties, etc., such that they have been attackers and even devourers of humans for eons, guilty and innocent alike.
Now, Jesus knew that most people could relate to what were, and still are, largely considered "good" parenting skills and "good" "family" relations. He regularly used those concepts to get people to consider the wider implications for the whole of humanity. He did know that many would refuse. He let them go. He didn't demand secular or false-religion legislation to rein them in with threats of violence and imprisonment. He was not and is not coercive. Even his Church is a voluntary place to be.
What he still teaches (through the written words in the New Testament and as those connect with the Old and also teaches through the Holy Spirit he definitely sent as he said he would) is, among many other things, that "good" is vastly better than has been commonly accepted and that real "family" is everyone left after all the rest have rejected the higher and highest good. He raised the standards far above the Old Testament and far above the "modern" standard.
The American Empire and the American people in general aren't even touching the hem of his garment, let alone even attempting to stand upright and side-by-side with him.
I point out that Jesus was, and is, a Real Liberal Christian. He is the one who brought back this censored truth that is the light. After he had spoken it and lived it and was murdered for doing so, the censors set about to re-censor it and did. They couldn't put it out though — couldn't completely extinguish the truth. I wouldn't be saying it now again with all credit to God, just as Jesus, if they had been able to completely block it.
I point out that each of those terms ("real," "liberal," and "Christian," along with "Church") are actually redundant terms — synonyms that are so close that they become one. The term "liberal" here is not the common usage, which common usage is a deliberate corruption of the term. There is no harm in real liberalism. There is no vileness in it. There is only beneficence. "Real" may be understood as the opposite of false-hearted, dark side, and dead of the Holy Spirit. Christian is both real and liberal in those senses. To arrive at living, doing, being those full senses requires what Jesus lives, does, and is in the highest. Finally, the Church is the whole.
Who are they who want to drag it down, censor it, work against it, lessen it, ignore it, etc.? Well, who sides with Jesus and who sides against him? Did the serpents side with him then? Do they now?
We call war-mongers "hawks." We call "peacemakers" blessed and "doves." Why do the hawks not take offense at "hawks" but do take offense at "serpents"? "Hawks" is not yet as telling to the general public, but I must tell you that all hawks are serpents. Why do some say, "Greed is good" but take offense at "serpents"? I tell you there is no difference between the selfish and the serpents. Why do people take offense at serpents when they do not take offense at homosexuality? I tell you the homosexual spirit also comes out from the dark side. It is a choice. It is harmful. Many are abused with it. Many never overcome it. Their very brain matter is transformed by it. Then they claim it is good when it remains confusion and definitely wrong and harmful.
Many arguments were put forth in support of tolerance. I understood that Jesus "tolerated," as in he did not execute wrath but rather told the truth and let the blind follow the blind (blind to the truth) into the ditch of their own making. I have watched while the movement has been corrupted into condoning what was once only to be tolerated. I have watched further while it has moved from condoning to promoting even to the youngest children to get to them before the truth does. I have seen evil at work, and I sound the alarm. I face censorship and other negative reactions for it.
As the American Empire claims to be a light to the world, it murders innocent babies by Hellfire missiles fired from predator drones controlled by armchair, video-gaming serpents in uniform. It tortures those who are not even suspects. It spies on its own without even probable cause or reasonable suspicion. It lies its way into wars for spoils and control. It neglects its poor, whom it treads down for the sakes of the superrich — for the sake of the massive flow of mammon from the bottom up (no trickledown — trickledown is a farce and always has been). All is claimed to be okay in America though — that America is headed in the right direction — because soon, even "don't tell, don't ask" will be a thing of the quaint past and homosexuals may be able to sleep together and have sex in the barracks with the "blessing" of the Empire while they practice murdering the innocent for the sake of homosexual, greedy plutocrats who own them and who, in turn, are owned by the dark-side spirit named by God and Jesus as Satan.
Whose side are you on? I speak truth to warn. I don't tell the secular government what to do other than occasionally to say what at least would be less hypocritical within their fallen, unenlightened system. I do so for spiritual reasons. What I want is the Christian Commons.
Now, if you submit a comment:
What you write here against the Real Liberal Christian Church founded by Jesus Christ will mark you in the Biblical sense unless you show that you have turned and are repenting in time to escape the damnation of your own choosing. That's the way of it. Don't be tempted by the devil to stand opposed to the call of righteousness. Overcome such evil temptation. Help others to help yet others to come to righteous behavior through-and-through.
Check out how even after reading this, people will still take it out of context and twist it to an evil end.