[BretLudwig]

Theology and our Issues: The E. Michael Jones Problem

By

Robert E. Reis

"To paraphrase a famous novelist, when I use the word theology I mean
orthodox Christian theology, and when I say orthodox Christian theology I
mean Roman Catholic theology. I rely on E. Michael Jones, the editor of
Culture Wars magazine, to keep me informed about Catholic theology.

Dr. Jones discusses the fate of white ethnic Americans in recent decades
and the roles played by Jews and the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant elite in
deciding this fate.

Theology and our Issues: The E. Michael Jones Problem

By

Robert E. Reis

To paraphrase a famous novelist, when I use the word theology I mean
orthodox Christian theology, and when I say orthodox Christian theology I
mean Roman Catholic theology. I rely on E. Michael Jones, the editor of
Culture Wars magazine, to keep me informed about Catholic theology.

Dr. Jones discusses the fate of white ethnic Americans in recent decades
and the roles played by Jews and the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant elite in
deciding this fate.

The orthodox Catholic position on the Jews is that no one may harm Jews
for being Jews or disturb their worship, but that Christians have an
equally solemn duty to prevent Jewish subversion of faith or morals.

When Pope Pius XI condemned Nazi persecution of the Jews before World War
II, he also recognized €œthat everyone has the right to defend himself,
in other words to take the necessary precautions for his protection
against everything that threatens his legitimate interests.€�

Catholic theology has always insisted on that which Pope John Paul II
reiterated in his 1990 encyclical Redemptoris Missio. €œChrist is the one
Savior of all, the only one able to reveal God and lead to God€¦And there
is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given
among men by which we must be saved€�

The Vaticans Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith annoyed the
world Jewish community when it issued the formal statement Dominus Iesus
in 2000. The Congregation reiterated the Catholic doctrine that €œNo one,
therefore, can enter into communion with God except through Christ by the
working of the Holy Spirit.€� The author of this statement is the current
Pope Benedict XVI.

E. Michael Jones insists that Roman Catholic theology entails that €œno
Christian can in good conscience be an anti-Semite, but every Christian,
insofar as he is a Christian, must be anti-Jewish.€�

What does he mean?

For Dr. Jones Jews are a theological construct, a product of mental
invention, not a racial category.

A search for the word €œJews)€� in a literal translation of the Bible
will show that it is rarely used in the Old Testament, but it appears in
the New Testament with a specific meaning.

Dr. Jones explains that Annas and Caiphas represented all of those Jews
who insisted on a Messiah who would restore and increase worldly Jewish
power. They told Jesus they would accept him if he came down from the
cross. €œThose Jews who accepted Christ became known as Christians. Those
Jews who rejected Him became known as Jews.€�

Assuming as he does that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah, Dr. Jones infers
the Jews who rejected Jesus became €œrevolutionaries€�.

Judaism is in essence an ethnic revolutionary conspiracy masquerading as a
religion.

The Jews were looking for a military Messiah. In A.D. 136 all the rabbis
in Jerusalem recognized Simon bar Kokhbar as that Messiah. The Christian
Jews were expelled from the city for refusing to recognize bar Kokhbar as
the Messiah. Dr. Jones says that this proves that €œthe Jew was not a
racial but a theological construct.€�

For almost two thousand years the ultimate determinant of Jewishness has
been the rejection of Jesus Messiahship.

I suggest the most grievous failure of a typical Christian education,
Protestant or Catholic, is the failure to deliver accurate information
about the history of Judaism. It is as if most of the shepherds have
spent twenty centuries sheltering the wolves from their flocks.

I imagine that to most of the members of the flocks the issue of the Jews
and their Messiah ended with Jesus.

Rabbi Moshe Yoseph Koniuchowsky pointed out that over the past two
thousand years rabbinical authorities have made €œat least 68 official
declarations that Messiah had arrived.€� Wikipedia gives an extensive
list of the most important among these failed messiahs.

The recurrent acclamation of false messiahs ought to be an embarrassment
for Jews, but it is not for two reasons. Non-Jews have not been kept
informed by their shepherds and the Jewish notion of the messiah is not
what non-Jews think it is.

Wayne Simpson says that Jews regard the failed messiahs as would-be
deliverers of Israel who failed to achieve what they aspired to.

Jewish messiahs are closely akin to the mahdis of the Islamic world. The
Lawrence Olivier character in the movie Khartoum show us how a
Messiah/Mahdi is expected to act.

The Jewish originally understood their messiah to be a nationalist savior,
a great and literal king of the Israelite people. Over time they
reconfigured him as an expression of the one God of the Universe who would
lord €“ physically and spiritually €“ over the earth, not in an
after-life, but in the here-and-now.

Abraham Grossman concluded that linked themes of vengeance and redemption
for Israel can be found in the Bible, the Talmud, and in apocalyptic
literature.

Max Weber once noted: €œIn the mind of the pious Jew the moralism of the
law was inevitably combined with the aforementioned hope for revenge,
which suffused practically all the exile and postexilic sacred scriptures.
Moreover, through two and a half millennium this hope appeared in virtually
every divine service of the Jewish people€¦one finds that in Judaism the
doctrine of religious resentment has an idiosyncratic quality and plays a
unique role not found among the disprivileged classes of any other
religion.€�

Maimonides explained the laws the Jews must follow should their return to
the land of Israel coincide with the arrival of the messiah. (Mishneh
Torah) He taught that €˜any Gentile not upholding the Noachic
commandments is to be killed if under our rule. He even taught that all
living beings must uphold the Noachic commandments or be put to death.

Noah Feldman, Harvard Law School professor and graduate of twelve years of
instruction in the Maimonides School of Brookline, Mass., recently wrote
about his heritage in the New York Times.

He relates that a local doctor addressed a school assembly and told the
students that he would never distinguish Jewish from non-Jewish patients
on the Sabbath: a human being was a human being. One of the teachers rose
to challenge him. €œIn violating the Sabbath to treat a non-Jew,
intention was absolutely crucial. If you intended to save the patients
life so as to facilitate good relations between Jews and non-Jews, your
actions were permissible. But if, to the contrary, you intended to save
the patient out of universal morality, then you were in fact guilty of
violating the Sabbath, because the motive for acting was not the motive on
the basis of which the rabbis allowed the Sabbath violation to occur.€�
This teacher apologized to the students for €œnot keeping the secret of
why non-Jewish lives might be saved.€� A few non-Jews had attended the
assembly!

Feldman confirms the observations of Abraham Grossman and Max Weber and
when he recalls Dr. Baruch Goldsteins massacre of 29 worshipers in the
mosque atop the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron in 1994. €œGoldstein
committed his terrorist act on Purim, the holiday commemorating the
victory of the Jews over Haman, traditionally said to be a descendent of
the Amalekites. The previous Sabbath, he sat in synagogue and heard the
special additional Torah portion for the day, which includes the famous
injunction in the Book of Deuteronomy to remember what the Amalekites did
to the Israelites on their way out of Egypt and to erase the memory of
Amalek from beneath the heavens. This commandment was followed by a
further reading from the Book of Samuel. It details the first intentional
and explicit genocide depicted in the Western canon: Gods directive to
King Saul to kill every living Amalekite €” man, woman and child, and
even the sheep and cattle.€�

Feldman notes that Goldmans murders were not universally condemned by
Jews. Goldmans gravestone describes him as a saint and a martyr of the
Jewish people with clean hands and pure heart.

Yom Kippur is the central day of the Jewish calendar. Rabbi Meir Y.
Soloveichik describes how the service ends. €œWe ask God for mercy and
for forgiveness, attributes of God that Judaism holds dear. But then our
thoughts turn to the utterly evil and unrepentant. Towards the end of this
prayer, one anguished, pain-filled sentence stands out: €œOur Father, our
King, avenge, before our eyes, the spilled blood of your servants.€�
After a day devoted to prayer, synagogues everywhere are filled with the
cry of fasting, weary, exhausted Jews. They have spent the past
twenty-five hours meditating upon their sins and asking for forgiveness.
Now, they suddenly turn their attention to those who gave no thought to
forgiveness, no thought to God, no thought to the dignity of the Jewish
people. After focusing on their own actions, Jews turn to those of others,
and their parched throats mouth this message: €œFather, do not forgive
them, for they know well what they do.€� [Italics added.]

Perhaps Rabbi Soloveichik is unaware of how this terminal curse echoes and
reverses Jesus words from the cross. However, I would not be surprised
that the insertion of this sentence into the Yom Kippur ritual took place
after the crucifixion of Jesus and was intended to mock Jesus.

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, the Talmud is €œthe supreme
authority in religion . . . for the majority of Jews.€� It would have
been nice if at any point in my twelve years of religious indoctrination
some priest or nun or brother had taken a few minutes to point this out.
Even better, some time spent describing; analyzing and discussing the
Talmud would have been useful. There must have been reasons why the
shepherds upheld a strict policy of insuring that their flocks were kept
in the dark about Jewish beliefs, laws, rituals, attitudes, hopes and
intentions.

Dr. Jones does not answer my question, but he does make it clear that the
Catholic Church was not unaware of the Talmud and its contents. He reports
that many Popes have condemned the Talmud not only for denying the divinity
of Christ but also for being a direct assault on morality itself. How else
can you describe a document that expressly forbids a Jew to save a non-Jew
from death, or to restore to a non-Jew his lost possessions, or to take
pity on a non-Jew?

But the Talmud did not go away. Instead, the Papal condemnations were
filed and forgotten. At least no priest, nun or brother mentioned them at
my Catholic schools and universities.

Late in life, after reading Israel Shahak, I learned what happened if you
asked a supposedly liberal, tolerant, enlightened Jew a question about the
Talmud. The supposedly liberal, tolerant, enlightened Jew immediately
severs social relations.

Non-Jews are not supposed to know anything more about the Talmud than the
lie a leading Israeli Talmudic expert told to a gullible reporter in
Chicago. He told her that the Talmud was a collection of Jewish folktales.
She bought it. The Jewish owned newspaper printed it.

As Noah Feldmans anecdote about his teachers apology witnesses: Jews
feel obligated to keep their beliefs secret from non-Jews.

Dr. Jones asserts the Talmud is an anti-Christian ideology confected by
Jewish leaders to keep their people in bondage.

There is no doubt about the first half of his interpretation. St. Justin
Martyr stated in 116 A. D.: €œThe Jews were behind all the persecutions
of the Christians. They wandered through the country everywhere hating and
undermining the Christian faith.€� I am confident the good priests at St.
Justin Martyr Church in Chicago do not recall this remark from the
pulpit.

E. Michael Jones dates the creation of the Talmud to the six centuries
following the destruction of the Jewish Temple. But Annas and Caiphas
rejected Jesus forty years before the destruction of the Temple. They
rejected Jesus on the basis of their understanding of their religion
before the Talmud was composed.

I suggest the authors of the Talmud simply built on and extrapolated from
the existing Jewish scriptures and standards of ethical behavior. After
all, did not Jesus have a point in the parable of the Good Samaritan? Did
not genocide by Jews get its license in Deuteronomy?

Before Jesus was born Cicero remarked that €œThe Jews belong to a dark
and repulsive force.€� The first century Greek historian Diodorus Siculus
observed that Jews treated other people as enemies and inferiors.

While the compilation of the Talmud had hardly been begun, Tacitus (56-120
A.D.) observed that €œthe Jews are extremely loyal toward one another, and
are always ready to show compassion, but toward other people they feel only
hate and enmity.€�

Relying on the Gospel of St. John, Dr. Jones insists that the only
identity Jews have is negative. €œThe minute they rejected Logos, which
means reason, order, speech, and word, they became revolutionaries,
determined enemies not only of Christ and the Christian social order, but
any order in any society not of their own revolutionary making.€�

In my experience the good priests and nuns and brothers in the parishes
and on the faculties of history in Catholic universities have
systematically suppressed the history of the massacres perpetrated by
Jews.

I suspect the Protestant clergy follows the same policy. Perhaps one of my
readers can tell us if any of their ministers cited the second century
Roman historian Dio Cassius description of the Jewish massacres of
Greeks and Romans in Africa and in Cyprus. €œThey ate the flesh of their
victims, made belts for themselves out of their entrails, and daubed
themselves with their blood€¦ In all, 220,000 men perished in Cyrene and
240,000 in Cyprus, and for this reason no Jew may set foot in Cyprus
today.€�

Did any man of the cloth tell his congregation about the massacre of the
Arabian Christians of Najran by a Jewish army from Yemen? Mohammed
referred to it in the Koran; Jewish web sites describe its perpetrators as
heroes.

How about the fact that Jews bought Christian prisoners of war from the
Persians purely for the pleasure of torturing and killing them; has anyone
heard this mentioned in his Christian church?

Dr. Jones assessment of the revolutionary Jew cannot be gainsaid.
€œWhat do Jerusalem under Simon bar Kokhbar, the Soviet Union under
Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamanev, and Radek, the short lived Soviet Republics of
Bavaria under Kurt Eisner and Eugene Levine and Hungary under Bela Kun, the
racial Apartheid state known as Israel under terrorists like Menachem Begin
or Itzhak Shamir, or the neocon never-never land known as a free and
democratic Iraq have in common? Death is what they have in common. Lots
of people have to die to bring about the revolutionary Jews version of
heaven on earth.€�

Dr. Jones has commented upon the manipulation of the American civil rights
movement by leading Jewish organization. He knows that their goal was the
destruction of the mainly Roman Catholic white ethnic communities in the
United States Their goal was not uplifting the people of color.

As a devout Roman Catholic he sees the massive immigration of Latin
Americans both as the result of hostile Jewish manipulation of the
immigration laws and as a possible boon to the moral reform of America.

Dr. Jones is not one of those extremists who sees the solution to the
Jewish problem in silver bullets and wooden stakes."

Posted by Robert Reis on Tuesday, August 14, 2007
at 08:14 AM in Jewish Diaspora


http://majorityrights.com/index.php/...nes_proble m/

--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html