10 Comments

1. Why Torah views the new testament and koran as avoda zara. The definition of abomination!

   Israel only accepted two commandments at Sinai before we feared that we would surely die and therefore demanded that Moshe receive the rest of the Torah. What’s the “rest of the Torah”, not just the 611 commandments within the language of the Written Torah but all the halachot capable of rising to the sanctity of time oriented tohor commandments from the Torah itself! Herein defines the intent of the 1st Sinai commandment … to obey the revelation of HaShem לשמה.

   LORD not the Name revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment and therefore LORD comes under the 2nd Sinai commandment. The same apples to God, Yahweh, Jesus or Allah etc.

   The day of Shabbat approaches, but this tohor time oriented commandment does not rest at one day of not doing מלאכה/work but all the rest of the six days of not doing forbidden עבודה on the 6 days of “shabbat”. Raising positive and negative commandments – which do not require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna to tohor time oriented commandments which do require prophetic mussar as their k’vanna – as learned in the first Book of the Written Torah – בראשית. This first word of the Torah בראשית, it contains both a רמז, meaning words
   within words of ראש בית, ברית אש, and ב’ ראשית but more it contains a סוד: the idea of tohor time oriented commandments which includes all the halachot contained within the Talmud! Hence the Gra taught the kabbalah that בראשית contains all the commandments of the Torah. Torah, by definition includes all the Halachot of the Talmud, according to the B’HaG’s Hilchot Gadolot, a commentary that Pre-Adamites the Creation of Adam and the Garden.

   The next three Books of the Written Torah contain תולדות commandments; positive and negative commandments do not require k’vanna as do tohor time oriented commandments. What distinguishes a tohor time oriented commandment from תולדות commandments and halachot contained within the Talmud? A tohor time oriented commandment requires the dedication of the Yatzir Ha’Tov which breathes tohor spirits from within the heart. The בנין אב/precedent by which Torah common law\משנה תורה/ learns בכל לבבך\כם within the kre’a shma as publicly taught by Rabbi Yechuda Ha’Nasi in one of his Mishnaot within the mesechta of ברכות, the concept of עבודת השם – the key יסוד (which contains סוד) of doing mitzvot לשמה, a person must dedicate tohor middot (( The revelation of the 13 tohor middot revealed to Moshe at Horev 40 days after the substitute theology known as the sin of the Golden Calf )), by sanctifying a tohor spirit which breathes within the Yatzir Ha’Tov within the heart. JeZeus when asked by his disciples did not understand this fundamental and basic kabbalah/סוד. He taught his disciples: “Our Father who lives in Heaven …” Wrong. Tefillah a matter of the Yatzir Ha’Tov within the Heart. Dedicating a spirit does not compare to blowing air from the lungs as expressed through the precedent of blowing the Shofar. Its not the blowing of the shofar that elevates this mitzva unto a time oriented tohor commandment! But rather the affixation of t’keah, tru’ah, and sh’varim to the positive, negative commandments all as tohor time oriented commandments which remember the oaths the Avot Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov swore the oath ( ONE in the opening p’suk of kre’a shma. ), to serve HaShem לשמה through time oriented commandments.

   Because both the gospels and new testament never teach this fundamental סוד\יסוד Jews recognize JeZeus as a false messiah. M0-0-Ham-Madd referred to JeZeus as a prophet. Despite the heretic Rambam’s validation of Islam, neither it nor Xtianity bases their judicial courts strictly upon the revelation of Torah common law. Its this fundamental and most basic of errors which exposes both JeZeus and Moo-Ham-Madd as Av tumah false prophets.

   The gospel narrative very much resembles the style of rabbi Natan’s validation of Sabbatai Zevi – the Ottoman mystic. The Pauline replacement theology famously known for its “Original Sin & expulsion of Adam from the Garden” false paradigm, served to subvert the core oath alliance acceptance of Torah curses. Specifically, that the worship of avoda zarah results in g’lut/exile of the chosen Cohen people. Both Xtianity and Islam ignore the chosen Cohen People – the central them of Torah blessings of the oath brit alliance.

   Raising Torah commandments from static positive & negative commandments to dynamic Oral Torah time oriented commandments – this latter type of Torah commandment requires employment of either the toldot positive and negative commandments or prophetic mussar found within the language of T’NaCH mussar common law – raises static statute law fixed ritual Greek/Roman fossilized commandments to dynamic Oral Torah living commandments – which requires k’vanna. Neither the imaginary man Roman fiction – JeZeus, nor the false prophet M0-0 – Ham – Madd, did not gasp the k’vanna of tohor time oriented commandment such as expressed through the mitzva of Shabbat and tefillah.

   Both of these counterfeit religions introduce a perversion of the tefillah דאורייתא known as קריא שמע. This tefillah from the Torah requires tefillen which permits a chosen Cohen Jew to swear a Torah oath which specifically remembers the 3 oaths sworn by Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov wherein they cut an oath brit which creates the chosen Cohen people, in all generations – throughout time – through the sanctification of tohor time-oriented commandments. Therefore the last word ONE, does not testify to belief in Monotheism – an Av tumah avoda zarah belief system – but rather that a Jew, in any generation wherein he lives accepts the 3 oaths sworn by the Avot as ONE within his Yatzir Ha’Tov. The theology of monotheism, it defines Avoda Zarah far more clearly than does the worship of wood or stone idols.

   LikeLike

   Reply

   1. these are not comments but a blog post unto itself. You should make your comments pithy and relevant to the post you are commenting on, you’ll get more engagement that way.

      LikeLiked by 1 person

      Reply

   2. C.S. Lewis’s “God in the Dock” does not specifically address the Holocaust (often referred to as the Shoah) or the guilt associated with it in the context of Xtianity. This omission can be seen as a significant gap, especially given the profound moral and theological implications of the Holocaust for both Jewish and Xtian communities. “By their fruits you shall know them” forever condemns Xtianity as a dead religion.

      Philosophical and theological arguments for the existence of God, the nature of faith, and moral reasoning which ignore “By their fruits your shall know them” exposes Xtian religious propaganda rhetoric. “Nature of faith” which ignores צדק צדק תרדוף likewise exposes empty Xtian religious rhetoric propaganda. “Moral reasoning” pales in the “Final Solution”/White Paper\Allied refusal to bomb the rail-lines which transported Jews to death camps. Lewis’s contributions to Xtian apologetics, compares to tits on a boar hog.

      The historical context of the Shoah, by itself alone, challenges the credibility of Xtian teachings such as Luther’s council to gather Jews into their synagogues and burn the buildings upon them. Or the pre-Reformation decision to impose ghetto gulags upon all Jews living in Western Europe. The biblical phrase “צדק צדק תרדוף” (Justice, justice shall you pursue), underscores the expectation that faith should manifest in actions that promote justice and protect the vulnerable. The failure to uphold these principles in the face of systemic evil raises critical questions about the authenticity of faith.

      LikeLike

      Reply

      1. comments from various reformers never negate the doctrine or message of truth. How many Jewish Rabbis in history have said horrible things? This does not reflect of Judaism. Your point is not logically effective.

         LikeLike

      2. Don’t know, try name a Jewish rabbi without spewing slander. Like the Xtian bull shit directed against the Talmud. Nazi superior race, KKK propaganda concerning sub-human black apes. That the great apes share a 98.7% genetic genome cross-over with Man etc etc etc. All bull shit attempts to arouse and entice emotional over-reactions. Like the Climate Change hysteria bull shit. Or genocide in Gaza bull shit.

         LikeLiked by 1 person

      3. Wow. None of what you said represents anything I write about.

         LikeLike

      4. OK still you have yet to bring any example of a rabbinic opinion that supports your totally unsubstantiated declarations.

         LikeLike

      5. Samson still waiting to you to produce evidence concerning any specific specified rabbi which promotes your slander.

         LikeLike

      6. “”How many Jewish Rabbis in history have said horrible things? “” Still waiting for you to bring even one example of your slander question.

         LikeLike

   3. Marco Rubio Sanctions ICC Judges After They Target U.S. and Israel in Explosive Rulings

      In a sweeping move, Senator Marco Rubio announced sanctions against four International Criminal Court justices.
      ________________________________________
      ________________________________________

      Marco Rubio’s sanctions on ICC judges—in response to politically driven rulings targeting the U.S. and Israel—represent the first serious American pushback against the expanding overreach of international legal institutions. But these sanctions merely scratch the surface. If Israel were to bomb the International Criminal Court in The Hague for the crime of judicial overreach, it would unleash a shockwave through the foundations of the post-WWII European imperial legal order.

      Such an act would shatter the illusion that the Rome Statute and its court represent binding global authority. In truth, the ICC is a political weapon wielded disproportionately against Western democracies and their allies, while shielding rogue regimes. Its authority rests on consensus, not enforcement. The Rome Treaty would be exposed as not worth the paper it’s written on.

      Europe forfeited its moral right to judge the Jewish people the moment it orchestrated the Shoah. Any European claim to universal justice—especially when applied selectively against the Jewish state—is hypocrisy cloaked in humanitarianism. The ICC’s rulings against Israel are not about war crimes; they are ritual acts of expiation for Europe’s own genocidal guilt. But that guilt is not Israel’s burden to carry. To bomb the ICC would be to formally reject Europe’s post-Nazi pretensions to legal supremacy and declare: “You have no right to judge us.”

      Bombing the ICC would have the same historical effect as the 1956 Suez Crisis: the end of European claims to independent geopolitical authority. Just as France and the UK’s failed bid to reclaim the Suez Canal revealed their imperial impotence, an Israeli destruction of the ICC would reveal the EU’s inability to project legal-moral power beyond its own borders.

      What the EU has is not law, but a narrative infrastructure—paper treaties, postmodern guilt, and international NGOs wielding legal language as a substitute for lost religious and imperial confidence.

      A targeted Israeli strike on the ICC would not trigger war. It would trigger disbelief, followed by narrative collapse, and finally a global reckoning with Western legal hypocrisy. The EU would be faced with the question: do we escalate to save face—or submit to an Israeli dictate which radically limits the EU authority in the balance of power in the Middle East and in Europe.

      If Israel bombed the Court of the Hague for the crime of judicial over-reach. This would set a precedent that the establishment of the ICC through the Rome Treaty – not worth the paper the Rome Treaty written upon. Widespread EU condemnations Big Deal. England and France have already broken off diplomatic relations with Israel.

      The Trump Government in Washington most likely would support Israel if Israel bombed the Court of the Hague for judicial over-reach. The Rome Treaty established Court would most likely dissolve. It would most definitely challenge the judicial jurisdiction of a European Court over Israel!

      Post Shoah Europe lost its rights to judge Jews. The destruction of the Pie in the Sky Rome Treaty would establish a major political precedent that European imperialism stops at the borders of the EU member states alone.

      The assertion that bombing the ICC in The Hague would lead to a collapse of the EU’s prestige is a strong viewpoint that reflects significant concerns about the authority and effectiveness of international institutions.

      If a member state or a country with significant geopolitical influence, like Israel, were to attack an international institution such as the ICC, it could be perceived as a direct challenge to the authority of not only the ICC but also the broader framework of international law that the EU supports.

      In short: bombing the Court of the Hague would radically change the balance of power in Europe. For the first time since the Muslim invasion of Western Europe a major disruption of European political autonomy would result.

      The EU would either put up or shut up: either they would declare War against Israel or not. The Nato alliance, if the US backed Israel would unquestionably collapse. The EU’s credibility as a defender of international law would cease to exist – gone like a puff of smoke. Israel would have called the bluff of the EU, like as if bombing the ICC compares to a hand of stud poker! This could lead to a more fragmented international order, challenging the EU’s role as a global actor.

      An attack on the ICC could set a precedent that undermines the enforcement of international law, leading to a situation where states feel empowered to act unilaterally without regard for international institutions.

      The incident could complicate diplomatic relations not only between Israel and the EU but also between other countries and international organizations. It could lead to a reevaluation of how states engage with international legal frameworks.

      The UN itself would most likely collapse like as did the League of Nations. If nothing else, the historical relationship between Europe and Israel, particularly in the context of the Shoah and post-war UN attempt to compare Israel to the European Nazi crimes against humanity, adds layers of complexity to this European projectionism of its own Nazi guilt and the moral bankruptcy of both Western and Eastern Roman church moral authority over European civilizations.

      The implications of such an act would resonate deeply within the historical narrative of European-Jewish relations and radically shift the narrative reversing the role of Jews as dominant and the church as dhimmi slaves – utterly rejected and despised.

      The entire European security architecture is underwritten by the United States, both financially and militarily. Without U.S. backing, NATO becomes functionally hollow. France and the UK retain nuclear capability, but their conventional power is insufficient to act independently against a U.S.-aligned state like Israel.

      No EU state would risk confrontation with the U.S., their most vital ally, over a non-NATO event like an Israeli action against the ICC. EU states are deeply post-military in culture. Their battlefield is law, narrative, and diplomacy—not armed force.

      Even in the face of Russian invasion (Ukraine), EU states have limited direct engagement, preferring economic sanctions, legal resolutions, and humanitarian aid. Against Israel, the EU’s instinct would be: denounce, sanction, isolate—not mobilize or fight.

      Much of EU condemnation of Israel is a projection of its own unresolved guilt over colonialism and the Holocaust. This moral outrage stops at the threshold of real cost. That’s why you see relentless UN resolutions, ICC motions, and media warfare—but not realpolitik confrontation. Israel calling their bluff—if the U.S. holds firm—exposes their impotence. If Israel bombed the ICC in the Hague – No War. No boots. No tanks. NO Article 5 Nato involvement. The collapse of Nato as an alliance.

      Symbolic institutions (like the ICC) to claim moral authority—but has no spine when force or geopolitical will counters that narrative. If Israel, backed by a U.S. administration, were to shatter a legal myth like the ICC’s authority … No war, but rather most likely the total collapse of EU imperialist Post WWII illusion of legal hegemony on par with England and France failure to capture and seize the Suez canal in the 1956 War. It would clearly reset the terms of European involvement in global legal power.

      LikeLike

      Reply