THE VATICAN OF JUDAISM; JUDAISM/PHARISAISM & KHAZARS

 

Excerpt from the Phoenix Journals 99 & 100

 

CHAPTER 10

REC #3 HATONN

SUN., FEB. 17, 1991 11:58 A.M. YEAR 4 DAY 185

 

THE VATICAN OF JUDAISM

JUDAISM/PHARISAISM

Editor’s note: This is an excerpt from a letter to Dr. Goldstein LL.D., from Benjamin H. Freedman, Oct. 10, 1954, taken from Hatonn’s writing in journal #25, BITTER COMMUNION, ALTARS OF HEMLOCK “AND A NEW RELIGION SHALL SWEEP ACROSS THE LANDS AND THE PEOPLE WILL BE DECEIVED…”

The eminent Rabbi Louis Finkelstein, the head of the The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, often referred to as the “The Vatican of Judaism”, in his Forward to his First Edition of this world-famous classic “The Pharisees, The Sociological Background of Their Faith”, on page XXI states:

“. . .Judaism. . .Pharisaism became Talmudism, Talmudism became Midieval Rabbinism, and Midieval Rabbinism became Modern Rabbinism. But throughout these changes in name. . .the spirit of the ancient Pharisees survives, unaltered. . .From Palestine to Babylonia; from Babylonia to North Africa, Italy, Spain, France and Germany; from these to Poland, Russia, and eastern Europe generally, ancient Pharisaism has wandered. . .demonstrates the enduring importance which attaches to Pharisaism as a religious movement. . .”

The celebrated Rabbi Louis Finkelstein in his great classic quoted from above traces the origin of the form of religious worship practiced today under the present name “Judaism”, to its origin as “Pharisaism” in Judea in the time of Jesus. Rabbi Louis Finkelstein confirms what the eminent Rabbi Adolph Moses stated in his great classic “Yahvism, and Other Discourses”, in collaboration with the celebrated Rabbi H.G. Enelow, published in 1903 by the Louisville Section of the Council of Jewish Women, in which Rabbi Adolph Moses, on page 1 states:

“Among the inumerable misfortunes which have befallen. . .the most fatal in its consequences is the name Judaism. . .Worse still, the Jews themselves, who have gradually come to call their religion Judaism. . .Yet, neither in biblical nor post-biblical, neither in talmudic, nor in much later times, is the term Judaism ever heard. . .The Bible speaks of the religion. . .as ‘Torath Yahve’, the instruction, or the moral law revealed by Yahve. . .in other places. . .as ‘ Yirath Yahve’, the fear and reverence of Yahve. These and other appelations CONTINUED FOR MANY AGES TO STAND FOR THE RELIGION. . .To distinguish it from Christianity and Islam, the Jewish philosophers sometimes designate it as the faith or belief of the Jews. . .IT WAS FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS, WRITING FOR THE INSTRUCTION OF GREEKS AND ROMANS, WHO COINED THE TERM JUDAISM, in order to pit it against Hellenism. . .By Hellenism was understood the civilization, comprising language, poetry, religion, art, science, manners, customs, institutions, which. . .had spread from Greece, its original home, over vast regions of Europe, Asia and Africa. . .The Christians eagerly seized upon the name. . .The Jews themselves, who intensly detested the traitor Josephus, refrained from reading his works. . .HENCE THE TERM JUDAISM COINED BY JOSEPHUS REMAINED ABSOLUTELY UNKNOWN TO THEM. . .IT WAS ONLY IN COMPARATIVELY RECENT TIMES, AFTER THE JEWS BECAME FAMILIAR WITH MODERN CHRISTIAN LITERATURE, THAT THEY BEGAN TO NAME THEIR RELIGION JUDAISM.” (emphasis supplied)

This statement by the world’s two leading authorities on this subject clearly establishes beyond any question or any doubt that so-called “Judaism” was not the name of any form of religious worship practiced in Judea in the time of Jesus. The Flavius Josephus referred to in the above quotation lived in the 1st century. It was he who coined the word “Judaism” in the 1st century explicitly for the purpose recited clearly above. Religious worship known and practiced today under the name “Judaism” by so-called or self-styled “Jews” throughout the world was known and practiced in Judea in the time of Jesus under the name “Pharisaism” according to Rabbi Louis Finkelstein, head of The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, and all the other most competent and qualified recognized authorities on the subject.

The form of religious worship known as “Pharisaism” in Judea in the time of Jesus was a religious practice based exclusively upon the Talmud. The Talmud in the time of Jesus was the Magna Charta, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, all rolled into one, of those who practiced “Pharisaism”. The Talmud today occupies the same relative position with respect to those who profess “Judaism”. The Talmud today virtually exercises totalitarian dictatorship over the lives of so-called or self-styled “Jews” whether they are aware of that fact or not. Their spiritual leaders make no attempt to conceal the control they exercise over the lives of so-called or self-styled “Jews”. They extend their authority far beyond the legitimate limits of spiritual matters. Their authority has no equal outside religion.

The role the Talmud plays in “Judaism” as it is practiced today is officially stated by the eminent Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer, the Director of Interreligious Activities of the American Jewish Committee and the President of the Jewish Chaplains Association of the Armed Forces of the United States. In his present capacity as official spokesman for The American Jewish Committee, the self-styled “Vatican of Judaism”, Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer wrote a most revealing and comprehensive article with the title “What is a Jew” which was published as a feature article in Look Magazine in the June 17, 1952 issue. In that article Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer evaluated the significance of the Talmud to “Judaism” today. In that illuminating treatise on that important subject by the most qualified authority, at the time, Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer stated:

“The Talmud consists of 63 books of legal, ethical and historical writings of the ancient rabbis. It is a compendium of law and lore. IT IS THE LEGAL CODE WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF JEWISH RELIGIOUS LAW AND IT IS THE TEXTBOOK USED IN THE TRAINING OF RABBIS.” (Hatonn: Please obtain of copy of RAPE OF JUSTICE by Eustace Mullins–which can, I believe, be obtained through America West–to see just how far the judicial system is entangled and practices “law” by the rules of the “Talmud”).

In view of this official evaluation of the importance of the Talmud in the practice of “Judaism” today by the highest body of so-called or self-styled “Jews” in the world it is very necessary at this time, my dear Dr. Goldstein, to inquire a little further into the subject of the Talmud. In his lifetime the eminent Michael Rodkinson, the assumed name of a so-called or self-styled “Jew” who was one of the worlds great authorities on the Talmud, wrote “History of the Talmud”. This great classic on the subject was written by Michael Rodkinson in collaboration with the celebrated Rabbi Isaac M. Wise. In his “History of the Talmud” Michael Rodkinson, on page 70, states:

“Is the literature that Jesus was familiar with in his early years yet in existence in the world? Is it possible for us to get at it? Can we ourselves review the ideas, the statements, the modes of reasoning and thinking, ON MORAL AND RELIGIOUS SUBJECTS, which were current in his time, and MUST HAVE BEEN REVOLVED BY HIM DURING THOSE THIRTY SILENT YEARS WHEN HE WAS PONDERING HIS FUTURE MISSION? To such inquiries the learned class of Jewish rabbis ANSWER BY HOLDING UP THE TALMUD. Here, say they, is THE SOURCE FROM WHENCE JESUS OF NAZARETH DREW THE TEACHINGS WHICH ENABLE HIM TO REVOLUTIONIZE THE WORLD; and the question becomes, therefor, an interesting one TO EVERY CHRISTIAN. What is the Talmud? THE TALMUD, THEN IS THE WRITTEN FORM OF THAT WHICH, IN THE TIME OF JESUS WAS CALLED THE TRADITIONS OF THE ELDERS AND TO WHICH HE MAKES FREQUENT ALLUSIONS. What sort of book is it?”.

Stimulated by that invitation every Christian worth of the name should immediately take the trouble to seek the answer to that “interesting” question “to every Christian”. My dear Dr. Goldstein, your articles do not indicate whether you have taken the time and the trouble to personally investigate “what sort of book” the Talmud is either before or after your conversion to Catholicism. Have you ever done so? If you have done so what is the conclusion you have reached regarding “what sort of book” the Talmud is? What is your personal unbiased and unprejudiced opinion of the Talmud? Is it consistent with your present views as a devout Roman Catholic and a tried and true, Christian? Can you spare a few moments to drop me a few lines on your present views?

In case you have never had the opportunity to investigate the contents of the “63 books” of the Talmud so well summarized by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer in his illuminating article “What is a Jew”, previously quoted, may I here impose upon your precious time and quote a few passages for you until you find the time to conveniently investigate the Talmud’s contents personally. If I can be of any assistance to you in doing so please do not hesitate to let me know in what manner you can use my help.

From the Birth of Jesus until this day there have never been recorded more vicious and vile libelous blasphemies of Jesus, of Christians and the Christian faith by anyone, anywhere, or anytime than you will find between the covers of the infamous “63 books” which are “the legal code which forms the basis of Jewish religious law” as well as the “textbook used in the training of rabbis“. The explicit and implicit irreligious character and implications of the contents of the Talmud will open your eyes as they have never been opened before. The Talmud reviles Jesus, Christians and the Christian faith as the priceless spiritual and cultural heritage of Christians has never been reviled before or since the Talmud was completed in the 5th century. You will have to excuse the foul, obscene, indecent, lewd and vile language you will see here as verbatim quotations from the official unabridged translation of the Talmud into English. BE PREPARED FOR A SURPRISE.

In the year 1935 the international hierarchy of so-called or self-styled “Jews” for the first time in history published an official unabridged translation of the complete Talmud in the English language with complete footnotes. What possessed them to make this translation in English is one of the unsolved mysteries. It was probably done because so many so-called or self-styled “Jews” of the younger generation were unable to read the Talmud in the many ancient languages in which the original “63 books” of the Talmud were first composed by their authors in many lands between 200 B.C. and 500 A.D.

The international hierarchy of so-called or self-styled “Jews” selected the most learned scholars to make this official translation of the Talmud into English. These famous scholars also prepared official footnotes explaining passages of the Talmud where they were required. This official unabridged translation of the Talmud into English with the official footnotes was printed in London in 1935 by the Soncino Press. It has been always referred to as the Soncino Edition of the Talmud. A very limited number of the Soncino Edition were printed. They were not made available to any purchaser. The Soncino Edition of the Talmud is to be found in the Library of Congress and the New York Public Library. A set of the Soncino Edition of the Talmud has been available to me for many years. They have become rare “collector’s items” by now.

(Hatonn: Do you also see that it is up to you-the-people as to whether or not these Journals end up removed from the hands of the world population and fall among the “rare” publications accidentally missed in the mass destruction of the information? It is up to you, citizens of the world, as the world nears destruction at the hands of those who have stolen your very “Truth of God Creator”. How can you know Truth if all documentation thereof is destroyed by the would be KINGS AND CONTROLLERS OF THE PLANET?)

The Soncino Edition of the Talmud with its footnotes is like a double-edged sword. It teaches the Talmud to countless millions of the younger generation of so-called or self-styled “Jews” who are not able to read the Talmud in the many ancient languages in which the Talmud was written by its authors between 200 B.C. and 500 A.D. It also teaches Christians what the Talmud has to say about Jesus, about Christians and about the Christian faith. Someday this is bound to back-fire. Christians will some day challenge the assertion that the Talmud is the “sort of book” from which Jesus allegedly “drew the teachings which enabled him to revolutionize the world” on “moral and religious subjects”. The rumbling is already heard in places.

(Hatonn: As you read the quotations, I want (especially you ones who objected to Germain and Hatonn using Bull-shit to see if a scribe would edit it out) to have you REALLY PAY ATTENTION AS WE PUT THIS INFORMATION INTO YOUR HANDS AND SEE IF YOU STILL BELIEVE THE CHRIST FRAGMENT OF GOD/CREATOR/CREATION WOULD LIKELY UTILIZE THESE TERMS.)

The official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud published in 1935 was “Translated into English with Notes, Glossary and Indices” by such eminent Talmudic scholars as Rabbi Dr. I. Epstein, Rabbi Dr. Samuel Daiches, Rabbi Dr. Israel W. Slotki, M. A., Litt, D., The Reverend Dr. A. Cohen, M.A., Ph.D., M.Sc., Jacob Schater, A. Mishcon, A. Cohen, M.A., Ph.D., Maurice Simon M.A., and the Very Reverend The Chief Rabbi Dr., J. H. Hertz wrote the “Foreword” for the Soncino Edition of the Talmud. The Very Reverend Rabbi Hertz was at the time the Chief Rabbi of England.

The following are but a few of the many similar quotations with footnotes from the Soncino Edition of the Talmud, the “sort of book” form which Jesus allegedly “drew the teachings which enable him to revolutionize the world” on “moral and religious” subjects:

(Book) Sanhedrin, 54b-55a: “What is meant by this?–Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that (2). What is the basis of their dispute?–Rab maintains that only he who is able to engage in sexual intercourse, may, as the passive subject of pederasty throw guilt (upon the actual offender); whilst he who is unable to engage in sexual intercourse cannot be a passive subject of pederasty (in that respect) (3). But Samuel maintains: Scriptures writes, (And thou shalt not lie with mankind) as with the lyings of a woman (4). It has been taught in accordance with Rab: Pederasty at the age of nine years and a day; (55a) (he) who commits bestiality, whether naturally or unnaturally: or a woman who causes herself to be bestiality abused, whether naturally or unnaturally, is liable to punishment (5).”

(footnotes) “(1) The reference is to the passive subject of sodomy. As stated in supra 54a, guilt is incurred by the active participant even if the former be a minor, i.e. less than thirteen years old. Now, however, it is stated that within this age a distinction is drawn. (emphasis is in original, Ed.)

(2) Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred. Samuel makes three the minimum.

(3) At nine years a male attains sexual matureness.

(4) Lev. XVIII,22.

(5) Rashi reads (“xxx”) (Hebrew characters, Ed.) instead of (“zzz”) (Hebrew characters, Ed.) in our printed texts. A male, aged nine years and a day, who commits etc. There are thus three distinct clauses in this Baraitha. The first–a male aged nine years and a day–refers to the passive subject of pederasty, the punishment being incurred by the adult offender. This must be its meaning: because firstly, the active offender is never explicitly designated as a male, it being understood, just as the Bible states, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, where only the sex of the passive participant is mentioned; and secondly, if the age reference is to the active party, the guilt being incurred by the passive adult party, why single out pederasty: in all crimes of incest, the passive adult does not incur guilt unless the other party is at least nine years and a day? Hence the Baraitha supports Rab’s contention that nine years (and a day) is the minimum age of the passive partner for the adult to be liable.” (emphasis in original, Ed.)

Before giving any more verbatim quotations from the “sort of book” from which it is falsely alleged Jesus “drew the teachings which enable him to revolutionize the world” on “moral and religious subjects” I wish to here again recall to your attention the official statement by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer in Look Magazine for June 17, 1952. In that official statement made by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer on behalf of the American Jewish Committee, self-styled “The Vatican of Judaism”, informed the 20,000,000 readers of Look magazine that the Talmud “IS THE LEGAL CODE WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF JEWISH RELIGIOUS LAW AND IT IS THE TEXTBOOK USED IN THE TRAINING OF RABBIS“. Please bear this mind as your read further.

Before continuing I wish also to call your attention to another feature. Confirming the official view of Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer, the New York Times on May 20, 1954 ran a news item under the headline “Rabbis Plan a Fund to Endow Two Chairs”. The news item itself ran as follows: “Special to the New York Times, Uniontown, Pa. May 19–Plans for raising $500,000. for the creation of two endowed chairs at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America were announced today at the fifty-fourth annual convention of the Rabbinical Assembly of America. THE PROFESSORSHIPS WOULD BE KNOWN AS THE LOUIS GINSBERG CHAIR IN TALMUD. . .! This is further proof that the Talmud is not yet quite a dead-letter in the “TRAINING OF RABBIS“. Is further proof needed on that question?

The world’s leading authorities on the Talmud confirm that the official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud translated into English follows the original texts with great exactness. It is almost a word-for-word translation of the original texts. In his famous classic “The History of the Talmud” Michael Rodkinson, the leading authority on the Talmud, in collaboration with the celebrated Reverend Dr. Isaac Wise, states:

“With the conclusion of the first volume of this work at the beginning of the twentieth century, we would invite the reader to take a glance over the past of the Talmud, in which he will see. . .that not only was the Talmud not destroyed, but was so saved that NOT A SINGLE LETTER OF IT IS MISSING; and now IT IS FLOURISHING TO SUCH A DEGREE AS CANNOT BE FOUND IN ITS PAST HISTORY. . .THE TALMUD IS ONE OF THE WONDERS OF THE WORLD. During the twenty centuries of its existence. . .IT SURVIVED IN ITS ENTIRETY, and not only has the power of its foes FAILED TO DESTROY EVEN A SINGLE LINE, but it has not even been able materially to weaken its influence for any length of time. IT STILL DOMINATES THE MINDS OF A WHOLE PEOPLE, WHO VENERATE ITS CONTENTS AS DIVINE TRUTH. . .The colleges for the study of the Talmud are increasing almost in every place where Israel dwells, especially in this country where millions are gathered for the funds of the two colleges, the Hebrew Union College of Cincinnati and The Jewish Theological Seminary of America in New York, in which the chief study is the Talmud. . .There are also in our city houses of learning (Jeshibath) for the study of the Talmud in the lower East Side, where many young men are studying the Talmud every day.”

********Dharma, there is something wrong with your computer keyboard–write no more until it is checked and cleared. We will take a respite while this is taken care of, please.********

 

 

CHAPTER 11

REC #4 HATONN

SUN., FEB. 17, 1991 3:40 P.M. YEAR 4 DAY 185

QUOTATION CONTINUED:

This “divine truth” which “a whole people venerate” of which “not a single letter of it is missing” and today “is flourishing to such a degree as cannot be found in its history” is illustrated by the additional verbatim quotations which follow:

(Book) Sanhedrin, 55b: “A maiden three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; (if a niddah) she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon (a person affliected with gonorrhea).’ (emphasis in original text of Soncino Edition, Ed.)

(Book) Sanhedrin, 58b. “R. Eleazar said in R. Hanina’s name; If a heathen had an unnatural connection with his wife, he incurs guilt; for it is written, and he shall cleave, which excludes unnatural intercourse (2). Raba objected: Is there anything for which a Jew is not punishable and a heathen is? (3). But Raba said thus: A heathen who violates his neighbor’s wife is free from punishment. Why so?–(Scripture saith) To his wife, but not to his neighbor’s; and he shall cleave, which excludes unnatural intercourse (4).

(footnotes) “(2) His wife derives no pleasure from this, and hence there is no cleaving.

(3) A variant reading of this passage is: Is there anything permitted to a Jew which is forbidden to a heathen. Unnatural connection is permitted to a Jew.

(4) By taking the two in conjunction, the latter as illustrating the former, we learn that the guilt of violating the injunction ‘to his wife but not to his neighbor’s wife’ is incurred only for natural but not for unnatural intercourse.” (emphasis in original, Ed.)

(Book) Sanhedrin, 69a. “‘A man’: from this I know the law only with respect to a man: whence do I know it of one aged nine years and a day who is capable of intercourse? From the verse, And ‘if a man’? (2)–He replied: Such a minor can produce semen, but cannot beget therewith; for it is like the seed of cereals less than a third grown (3).”

(footnotes) “(2) ‘And” (‘) indicates an extension of the law, and is here interpreted to include a minor aged nine years and a day.

(3) Such cereals contain seed, which if sown, however, will not grow.

(Book) Sanhedrin, 69b. “Our rabbis taught: If a woman sported lewdly with her young son (a minor), and he committed the first stage of cohabitation with her,–Beth Shammai say, he thereby renders her unfit for the priesthood (1). Beth Hillel declare her fit. . .All agree that the connection of a boy nine years and a day is a real connection; whilst that of one less than eight years is not (2); their dispute refers only to one who is eight years old.

(footnotes “(1) i.e., she becomes a harlot whom a priest may not marry (Lev. XXL,7.).

(2) So that if he was nine years and a day or more, Beth Hillel agree that she is invalidated from the priesthood; whilst if he was less than eight, Beth Shammai agree that she is not.”

(Book) Kethuboth, 5b. “The question was asked: Is it allowed (15) to perform the first marital act on the Sabbath? (16). Is the blood (in the womb) stored up (17), or is it the result of a wound? (18).

(footnotes) “(15) Lit., ‘how is it’? (16) When the intercourse could not take place before the Sabbath (Tosaf).

(17) And the intercourse would be allowed, since the blood flows out of its own accord, no wound having been made.

(18) Lit., or is it wounded? And the intercourse would be forbidden.”

(Book) Kethuboth, 10a-10b. “Someone came before Rabban Gamaliel the son of Rabbi (and) said to him, ‘my master I have had intercourse (with my newly wedded wife) and I have not found any blood (7). She (the wife) said to him, ‘My master, I am still a virgin’. He (then) said to them: Bring me two handmaids, one (who is) a virgin and one who had intercourse with a man. They brought to him (two such handmaids), and he placed them on a cask of wine. (In the case of) the one who was no more a virgin its smell (1) went through (2), (in the case of) the virgin the smell did not go through (3). He (then) placed this one (the young wife) also (on a cask of wine), and its smell (4) did not go through. He (then) said to him: Go, be happy with thy bargain (7). But he should have examined her from the beginning (8).”

(footnotes) “(1) i.e., the smell of wine.

(2) One could smell the wine from the mouth (Rashi).

(3) One could not smell the wine from the mouth.

(4) i.e., the smell of wine.

(5) Rabban Gamaliel.

(6) To the husband.

(7) The test showed that the wife was a virgin.

(8) Why did he first have experiment with the two handmaids.”

(Book) Kethuboth, 11a-11b. “Raba said, It means (5) this: When a grown up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this (6), it is as if one puts the finger in the eye (7); but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown up woman, he makes her as ‘as a girl who is injured by a piece of wood'”.

(footnotes) “(5) Lit., ‘says’.

(6) Lit., ‘here’, that is, less than three years old.

(7) Tears come to the eyes again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years.”

(Book) Kethuboth, 11a-11b. “Rab Judah said that Rab said: A small boy who has intercourse with a grown up woman makes here (as though she were) injured by a piece of wood (1). Although the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act, nevertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood.”

(footnotes) “(1) Although the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act, nevertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood.”

(Book) Hayorath, 4a. “We learnt: (THE LAW CONCERNING THE) MENSTRUANT OCCURS IN THE TORAH BUT IF A MAN HAS INTERCOURSE WITH A WOMAN THAT AWAITS A DAY CORRESPONDING TO A DAY HE IS EXEMPT. But why? Surely (the law concerning) a woman that awaits a day corresponding to a day is mentioned in the Scriptures: He hath made naked her fountain. But, surely it is written, (1)–They might rule that in the natural way even the first stage of contact is forbidden; and in an unnatural way, however, consummation of coition only is forbidden but the first stage of contact is permitted. If so, (the same might apply) even (to the case of) a menstruant also! (2)–The fact, however, is (that the ruling might have been permitted) (3) even in the natural way (4) alleging (that the prohibition of) the first stage (5) has reference to a menstruant woman only (6). And if you prefer I might say: The ruling may have been that a woman is not regarded as a zabah (7) except during the daytime because it is written, all the days of her issue (8).” (emphasis appears in Soncino Edition original, Ed.)

(footnotes) “(13) Lev. XV,28.

(14) Cf. supra p.17,n.10. Since she is thus Biblically considered unclean how could a court rule that one having intercourse with her is exempt?

(15) Lev.XX,18.

(1) Ibid.13. The plural “xxxx” (Hebrew characters, Ed.) implies natural, and unnatural intercourse.

(2) Why then was the case of ‘a woman who awaits a day corresponding to a day’ given as an illustration when the case of a menstruant, already mentioned, would apply the same illustration.

(3) The first stage of contact.

(4) In the case of one ‘who awaits a day corresponding to a day’; only consummation of coition being forbidden in her case.

(5) Cf. Lev.XX,18.

(6) Thus permitting a forbidden act which the Sadducees do not admit.

(7) A woman who has an issue of blood not in the time of her menstruation, and is subject to certain laws of uncleaness and purification (Lev.XV,25ff).

(8) Lev.XV,26. Emphasis being laid on days.”

(Book) Abodah Zarah, 36b-37a. “R. Naham b.Isaac said: They decreed in connection with a heathen child that it would cause defilement by seminal emission (2) so that an Israelite child should not become accustomed to commit pederasty with it. . .From what age does a heathen child cause defilement by seminal emission? From the age of nine years and one day. (37a) for inasmuch as he is then capable of the sexual act he likewise defiles by emission. Rabina said: It is therefore to be concluded that a heathen girl (communicates defilement) from the age of three years and one day, for inasmuch as she is then capable of the sexual act she likewise defiles by a flux.

(footnotes) “(2). Even though he suffered from no issue.”

(Book) Sotah, 26b). “R. Papa said: It excludes an animal, because there is not adultery in connection with an animal (4). Raba of Parazika (5) asked R. Ashi, Whence is the statement which the Rabbis made that there is no adultery in connection with an animal?–Because it is written, Thou shalt not bring the hire of a harlot or the wages of a dog etc.; (6) and it has been taught: The hire of a dog (7) and the wages of a harlot (8) are permissable, as it is said, Even both of these (9)–the two (specified texts are abominations) but not four (10). . .As lying with mankind. (12) But, said Raba, it excludes the case where he warned her against contact of the bodies (13). Abaye said to him, That is merely an obscene act (and not adultery), and did the All-Merciful prohibit (a wife to her husband) for and obscene act?” (emphasis in original text, Ed.)

(footnotes) “(4) She would not be prohibited to her husband for such an act.

(5) Farausag near Baghdad v.BB.(Sonc.Ed.)p.15,n.4. He is thus distinguished from the earlier Rabbi of that name.

(6) Deut.XXIII, 19.

(7) Money given by a man to a harlot to associate with his dog. Such an association is not legal adultery.

(8) If a man had a female slave who was a harlot and he exchanged her for an animal, it could be offered.

(9) Are an abomination unto the Lord ibid).

(10) Viz., the other two mentioned by the Rabbi.

(11) In Num.V,13. since the law applies to a man who is incapable.

(12) Lev.XVIII,22. The word for ‘lying’ is in the plural and is explained as denoting also unnatural intercourse.

(13) With the other man, although there is no actual coition.” (emphasis appears in original Soncino Edition, Ed.)

(Book) Yebamoth, 55b. “Raba said; For what purpose did the All-Merciful write ‘carnally’ in connection with the designated bondmaid (9), a married woman (10), and a sotah (11)? This in connection with the designated bondmaid (is required) as has just been explained (12). That in connection with a married woman excludes intercourse with a relaxed membrum (13). This is a satisfactory interpretation in accordance with the view of him who maintains that if one cohabited with forbidden relatives with relaxed membrum he is exonerated (14); what, however, can be said, according to him who maintains (that for such an act one is) guilty?–The exclusion is rather that of intercourse with a dead woman (15). Since it might have been assumed that, as (a wife), even after her death, is described as his kin (16), one should be guilty for (intercourse with) her (as for that) with a married woman, hence we are taught (that one is exonerated).

(footnotes) (9)Lev.XIX,20.

(10) Ibid.XVIII,20.

(11) Num.V,13.

(12) Supra 55a.

(13) Since no fertilization can possibly occur.

(14) Shebu.,18a,Sanh.55a.

(15) Even though she dies as a married woman.

(16) In Lev.XXI,2. where the text enumerates the dead relatives for whom a priest may defile himself. As was explained, supra 22b, his kin refers to one’s wife.” (emphasis in Soncino Edition original, Ed.)

(Book) Yebamoth, 103a-103b. “When the serpent copulated with Eve (14) he infused her (15) with lust. The lust of the Israelites who stood at Mount Sinai (16) came to an end, the lust of idolators who did not stand at Mount Sinai did not come to an end.”

(footnotes) “(14) In the garden of Eden, according to tradition.

(15) i.e., the human species.

(16) And experienced the purifying influence of divine Revelation.”

(Book) Yebamoth, 63a. “R. Eleazar further stated: What is meant by the Scriptural text, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh (5)? This teaches that Adam had intercourse with every beast and animal but found no satisfaction until he cohabited with Eve.

(footnotes) “(5) Gen.II,23. emphasis on This is now.” (emphasis appears in original Soncino Edition, Ed.)

(Book) Yebamoth, 60b. “As R. Joshua b. Levi related: ‘There was a certain town in the Land of Israel the legitimacy of whose inhabitants was disputed, and Rabbi sent R. Ramanos who conducted an enquiry and found it in the daughter of a proselyte who was under the age of three years and one day (14), and Rabbi declared her eligible to live with a priest (15).”

(footnotes) “(13) A proselyte under the age of three years and one day may be married by a priest.

(14) And was married to a priest.

(15) i.e., permitted to continue to live with her husband.”

P(Book) Yebamoth, 59b. “R. Shimi b. Hiyya stated: A woman who had intercourse with a beast is eligible to marry a priest (4). Likewise it was taught: A woman who had intercourse with that which is no human being (5), though she is in consequence subject to the penalty of stoning (6), is nevertheless permitted to marry a priest (7).

(footnotes) “(4) Even a High Priest. The result of such intercourse being regarded as a mere wound, and the opinion that does not regard an accidently injured hymen as a disqualification does not so regard such an intercourse either.

(5) A beast.

(6) If the offense was committed in the presence of witnesses after due warning.

(7) In the absence of witnesses and warning.”

(Book) Yebamoth, 12b. “R. Bebai recited before R. Naham: Three (catagories of) women may (7) use an absorbent (8) in their marital intercourse (9), a minor, a pregnant woman and a nursing woman. The minor (10) because (otherwise) she might (11) become pregnant, and as a result (11) might die. . .And what is the age of such a minor? (14). From the age of eleven years and one day until the age of twelve years and one day. One who is under (15), or over this age (16) must carry on her marital intercourse in the usual manner.”

(footnotes “(7) (So Rashi.R.Tam: Should use, v.Tosaf s.v .)

(8) Hackled wool or flax.

(9) To prevent conception.

(10) May use an absorbent.

(11) Lit., ‘perhaps’.

(14) Who is capable of conception but exposed thereby to the danger of death.

(15) When no conception is possible.

(16) when pregnancy involves no fatal consequences.”

(Book) Yebamoth, 59b. “When R.Dimi came (8) he related; It once happened at Haitalu (9) that while a young woman was sweeping the floor (10) a village dog (11) covered her from the rear (12) and Rabbi permitted her to marry a priest. Samuel said: Even a High Priest.

(footnotes) “(8) From Palestine to Babylon.

(9) (Babylonian form for Aitulu, modern Airterun N.W. of Kadesh, v.S. Kelin, Beitrage,p.47).

(10) Lit., ‘house’.

(11) Or ‘big hunting dog’ (Rashi), ‘ferocious dog’ (Jast.), ‘small wild dog’ (Aruk).

(12) A case of unnatural intercourse.

(Hatonn: Is any of this beginning to be a bit outlandish to any of you? Dogs? “A village ‘dog’ covered her from the rear..”? Is this not the most confusing bunch of nonsense you have ever seen? Does it cross anyone’s mind that you might be dealing with rules set up by ones totally unfamiliar with much of anything suitable to behavior by Earth Human? Oh yes, you have bestiality but hardly anything so allowable as “trivial” in being covered from the rear by a dog–while sweeping the floor yet? Would you believe such a tale if anyone walked up to you and told you this–today? Does anyone begin to relate anything in these outlandish displays of obscenities with what you have heard of the activities of “little gray aliens”?) To continue:

(Book) Kethuboth, 6b. “Said he to him: Not like those Babylonians who are not skilled in moving aside (7), but there are some who are skilled in moving aside (8). If so, why (give the reason of) ‘anxious’?(10)–For one who is not skilled. (Then) let them say: One who is skilled is allowed (to perform the first intercourse on Sabbath), one who is not skilled is forbidden?–Most (people) are skilled (11). Said Raba the son of R. Hanan to Abaye: If this were so, then why (have) groomsmen (12) why (have) a sheet?(13)–He (Abaye) said to him: There (the groomsmen and the sheet are necessary) perhaps he will see and destroy (the tokens of her virginity) (14).

(footnotes) “(7) i.e., having intercourse with a virgin without causing a bleeding.

Thus no blood need come out, and ‘Let his head be cut off and let him not die!’ does not apply.

(9) If the bridegroom is skilled in “moving sideways’.

(10) He need not be anxious about the intercourse and should not be free from reading Shema’ on account of such anxiety.

(11) Therefor the principle regarding ‘Let his head be cut off and let him not die!’ does not, as a rule, apply.

(12) The groomsmen testify in case of need to the virginity of the bride. V. infra 12a. If the bridegroom will act in a manner that will cause no bleeding, the groomsmen will not be able to testify on the question of virginity.

(13) To provide evidence of the virginity of the bride. Cf.Deut.XXII,17.

(14) It may happen that he will act in the normal manner and cause bleeding but he will destroy the tokens and maintain that the bride was not a virgin; for this reason the above mentioned provisions are necessary. Where however he moved aside and made a false charge as to her virginity, the bride can plead that she is still a virgin (Rashi).”

After reading these verbatim quotations from the countless other similar quotations which you will find in the official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud in the English language are you of the opinion, my dear Dr. Goldstein, that the Talmud was the “sort of book” from which Jesus “drew the teachings which enable him to revolutionize the world” on “moral and religious subjects”? You have read here verbatim quotations and official footnotes on a few of the many other subjects covered by the “63 books” of the Talmud. When you read them you must be prepared for a shock. I am surprised that the United States Post Office does not bar the Talmud from the mails. I hesitated to quote them in this letter.

(Hatonn: I also hesitated to quote them herein because the next barrage of accusations and denouncing will pile upon my people–but truth is truth and if you ones will not take time to look it up for self then hope for your journey is slim indeed. I MOST CERTAINLY DO NOT EXPECT YOU TO FIND TRUTH BY SIMPLY ASKING A NICE RABBI OR CLERGYMAN. I would like, herein, to remind you of something regarding these Zionists; Your own Jerry Falwell stood forth as leader of your “Moral Majority” and stated before the world: “I am proud to say that I am a Zionist!” Does it mean that he KNEW all these things of heinous content? No, he is simply another of the ignorant and intentionally uninformed!)

In support of the contention by the top echelon among the outstanding authorities on this phase of the present status of the Talmud, further proof of the wide influence exerted by the Talmud upon the so-called or self-styled “Jews” is supplied by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer’s article “What is a Jew” in the June 17, 1952 issue of Look Magazine. Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer’s article contains a lovely picture of a smiling man seated in a chair with a large opened book upon his lap. Seated around him on the floor are about a dozen smiling men and women. They are paying close attention to the smiling man in the chair with the opened book upon his lap. He is reading to the persons on the floor. He emphasizes what he is reading by gestures with one of his hands. Beneath this photograph of the group is the following explanation:

“ADULTS STUDY ANCIENT WRITINGS, TOO. RABBI IN THIS PICTURE, SEATED IN CHAIR, LEADS GROUP DISCUSSION OF TALMUD BEFORE EVENING PRAYER.” (emphasis supplied)

This picture and explanation indicate the extent the Talmud is the daily diet of so-called or self-styled “Jews” in this day and age. The Talmud is first taught to children of so-called or self-styled “Jews” as soon as they are able to read. Just as the Talmud is the “textbook by which rabbis are trained” so is the Talmud also the textbook by which the rank-and-file of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” are “trained” to think from their earliest age. In the translation of the Talmud with its texts edited, corrected and formulated by the eminent Michael Rodkinson, Reverend Dr. Isaac M. Wise, on page XI, it states:

“THE MODERN JEW IS THE PRODUCT OF THE TALMUD”. (emphasis supplied)

 

To the average Christian the word “Talmud” is just another word associated by them with the form of religious worship practised in their synagogues by so-called or self-styled “Jews”. Many Christians have never heard of the Talmud. Very few Christians are informed on the contents of the Talmud. Some may believe the Talmud to be an integral part of the religious worship known to them as “Judaism”. It suggests a sort of bible or religious text book. It is classed as a spiritual manual. But otherwise few if any Christian has an understanding of the contents of the Talmud and what it means in the daily lives of so-called or self-styled “Jews”. As an illustration, my dear Dr. Goldstein, how many Christians have any conception of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer recited in synagogues on the Day of Atonement?

(Hatonn: For you readers of AND THEY CALLED HIS NAME IMMANUEL, allow me to point out that the original release of this information was titled TALMUD JMMANUEL. I think it is now evident as to WHY Sananda chose to relabel it. There is now a new copy of the book translated by Billy Meier–again called the TALMUD IMMANUEL. I suggest you be most careful in the reading thereof for it is printed solely for the monetary value and these ones who are reproducing the work have done everything they could do to STOP our publishing of the truth. “Talmud” is a perfectly good word but as is always the case with the great deceiver, you do not get goodness and light–but lies and deceit. Therefore, God will refrain from utilizing terms which will mislead you who are efforting to find Truth. A word placed so blatantly upon the cover indicates misuse of the intent if it is there to connote TRUTH!)

In Volume VIII of the Jewish Encyclopedia on page 539 found in the Library of Congress, the New York Public Library and libraries of all leading cities, will be found the official translation into English of the prayer known as the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer. It is the prologue of the Day of Atonement services in the synagogues. It is recited three times by the standing congregation in concert with chanting rabbis at the altar. After the recital of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer the Day of Atonement religious ceremonies follow immediately. The Day of Atonement religious observances are the highest holy days of so-called or self-styled “Jews” and are celebrated as such throughout the world. The official translation into English of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer follows:

“ALL VOWS, OBLIGATIONS, OATHS, ANATHEMAS, whether called ‘konam’, ‘konas’, or by any other name, WHICH WE MAY VOW, OR SWEAR, OR PLEDGE, OR WHEREBY WE MAY BE BOUND, FROM THIS DAY OF ATONEMENT UNTO THE NEXT, (whose happy coming we await), we do repent. MAY THEY BE DEEMED ABSOLVED, FORGIVEN, ANNULLED, AND VOID AND MADE OF NO EFFECT; THEY SHALL NOT BIND US NOR HAVE POWER OVER US. THE VOWS SHALL NOT BE RECKONED VOWS; THE OBLIGATIONS SHALL NOT BE OBLIGATORY; NOR THE OATHS BE OATHS.” (emphasis supplied).

(Hatonn: Go right back now and REALLY READ THAT PRAYER FOR YOU DID NOT PICK UP THE POINT THE FIRST TIME!)

The implications, inferences and innuendoes of the “Kol Nidre (All Vows) prayer are referred to in the Talmud in the Book of Nedarim, 23a-23b as follows:

(Book) “And he who desires that NONE OF HIS VOWS MADE DURING THE YEAR SHALL BE VALID, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, ‘EVERY VOW WHICH I MAY MAKE IN THE FUTURE SHALL BE NULL (1). (HIS VOWS ARE THEN INVALID,) PROVIDING THAT HE REMEMBERS THIS AT THE TIME OF THE VOW.” (emphasis in original and supplied, Ed.)

(footnotes) “(1) This may have provided a support for the custom of reciting Kol Nidre (a formula for dispensation of vows) prior to the Evening Service of the Day of Atonement (Ran). . .Though the beginning of the year (New Year) is mentioned here, the Day of Atonement was probably chosen on account of its great solemnity. But Kol Nidre as part of the ritual IS LATER THAN THE TALMUD, and, as seen from the following statement of R. Huna b. Hinene, THE LAW OF REVOCATION IN ADVANCE WAS NOT MADE PUBLIC. (emphasis supplied and in original text,Ed.)

The greatest study of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer was made by the eminent psycho-analyst Professor Theodor Reik, the celebrated pupil of the famous Dr. Sigmund Freud. The analysis of the historic, religious and psychological background of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer by Professor Reik presents the Talmud in its true perspective. This important study is contained in Professor Reik’s “The Ritual, Psyco-Analytical Studies”. In the chapter on the Talmud, on page 168, Professor Reik states:

“THE TEXT WAS TO THE EFFECT THAT ALL OATHS WHICH BELIEVERS TAKE BETWEEN ONE DAY OF ATONEMENT AND THE NEXT DAY OF ATONEMENT ARE DECLARED INVALID.” (emphasis supplied)

Before explaining to you how the present wording of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer was introduced into the Day of Atonement synagogue ceremonies, my dear Dr. Goldstein, I would like to quote a passage to you from the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia. The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia confirms the fact that the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer has no spiritual value as might be believed because it is recited in synagogues on the Day of Atonement as the prologue of the religious ceremonies which follow it. The secular significance of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer is indicated forcefully by the analysis in the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia. In Volume VI, on page 441, it states:

“The Kol Nidre HAS NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL IDEA OF THE DAY OF ATONEMENT. . .it attained to extraordinary solemnity and popularity by reason of the fact that it was THE FIRST PRAYER RECITED ON THIS HOLIEST OF DAYS.”

My dear Dr. Goldstein, prepare for the shock of your life. Compelled by what you have now read here about the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer you must be shocked to learn that many Christian churches actually “pealed their bells” on the Day of Atonement in celebration of that holy day for so-called or self-styled “Jews”. How stupid can the Christian clergy get? From what I have learned after a cursory inquiry I am unable to say whether it was a case of stupidity or cupidity. With what you already know, together with what you will additionally know before you finish this letter, you will be able to judge for yourself whether it was stupidity or cupidity. There is not one single fact in this entire letter which every graduate of a theological seminary did not have the opportunity to learn.

The following news item was featured in the New York World Telegram on October 7th only a few days ago. Under a prominent headline “JEWISH HOLIDAYS TO END AT SUNDOWN” the New York World Telegram gave great prominence to the following story:

“Synagogues and temples throughout the city were crowded yesterday as the 24 hour fast began. Dr. Norman Salit, head of the Synagogue Council of America, representing the three major Jewish bodies, had called on other faiths TO JOIN THE FAST…Cutting across religious lines, MANY PROTESTANT CHURCHES IN THE CITY PEALED THEIR BELLS LAST NIGHT TO SOUND THE KOL NIDRE, TRADITIONAL MELODY USED AT THE START OF YOM KIPPUR. THE GESTURE OF GOOD-WILL WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE MANHATTAN OFFICE OF THE PROTESTANT COUNCIL.” (emphasis supplied)

That just about “tops” anything I have ever had come to my attention revealing the ignorance and indifference of the Christian clergy to the hazards today facing the Christian faith. From my personal contacts with the Manhattan Office of the Protestant Council in the recent past I hold out very little hope for any constructive contribution they can make to the common defense of the Christian faith against its dedicated enemies. In each instance they buckled under the “pressure” exerted upon them by the “contacts” for so-called or self-styled “Jews”. If it was not so tragic it would be comic. It was a joke indeed but the joke was on the Christian clergy. Ye Gods! “Many” Christian churches “pealed their bells”, as the Protestant Council reports the event, “TO SOUND THE KOL NIDRE, TRADITIONAL MELODY USED AT THE START OF YOM KIPPUR”. Just where does betrayal of a trust and breach of faith begin?

The present wording of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer dates from the 11th century. A political reversal in eastern Europe compelled the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe to adopt the present wording of the “Kol Nidre” (All Vows) prayer. That story involves the history of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” in eastern Europe. Before relating here as briefly as possible the history of the so-called or self-styled “Jews” of eastern Europe I would like to quote here another short passage from the Jewish Encyclopedia in Volume VII, on page 540, states:

“AN IMPORTANT ALTERATION IN THE WORDING of the ‘Kol Nidre’ was made by Rashi’s son-in-law, Meir ben Samuel, WHO CHANGED THE ORIGINAL PHRASE ‘FROM THE LAST DAY OF ATONEMENT TO THIS ONE’ to ‘FROM THIS DAY OF ATONEMENT UNTIL THE NEXT'”. (emphasis supplied)

* * * * * * * *

We will herein stop quoting and for that matter, stop the writing at this point for this sitting. Thank you for the long hours of service, Dharma. I ask you to be particularly attuned to my call for you are in danger and hence is why we had to disengage your prior computer. We will simply have to work our way through the next few days of bringing forth this information for as you might well note–THE EVIL BROTHERHOOD DOES NOT WANT IT BROUGHT FORTH! When human realizes how he has been duped he shall rise up and stop this madness. Ah, and may it be “in time”.

Hatonn to stand-by. I shall keep the shielding in place but I must ask that you remain within my commands lest you be damaged. The Truth is going to come forth now and it has confirmation and credentials of proof–just as you were told at onset by “The Command”–“that you would be given credentials and credibility from that which is the Silver Clouds and would be forthcoming from Earth-place.” And so it shall be put to print that Man may see how sadly he has been made the dupe.

Good evening. God grants his protection of his servants. Salu.

 

 

 

CHAPTER 4

REC #1 HATONN

WED., JUN. 29, 1994 8:29 A.M. YEAR 7, DAY 317

 

WHO IN THE WORLD ARE THE KHAZARS? HISTORY SERIOUSLY LACKING

I am not going back into all the research and “do it again”. I will offer some short input for you who are new to our ranks and reading audience–but I am NOT GOING TO REPEAT A HUNDRED, OVER 200-PAGE, JOURNALS!

I will offer this summarized version of explanation as written in 1977 and frequently reprinted since that time. I further ask that Nora’s writings on this subject be run as well. (See next chapter) Thank you.

There are so many new readers who are lumping US in with some type of anti-Jewish (anti-Semitic) movement that we need to explain a few historical FACTS. We are NOT “anti-Semitic”–WE ARE THE SEMITES (FROM TRIBAL “SHEM”) AND WE CERTAINLY ARE NOT AGAINST OURSELVES! Staff, I guess we need to run this on a rather regular basis to keep from being stoned out of the nation. Go to the Jewish Encyclopedia, the Talmud–whatever you want–if you can be allowed to get your hands on them–and research. I can offer you references, resources and other data but you will have to do your own homework, readers. I can chew your food and put it in your mouth–I cannot either swallow it FOR you or glean the reward from what YOU SWALLOW!

This particular source is: America’s Promise Broadcaster, Lord’s Covenant Church (Even Cmdr. Gritz should be able to relate to this “title”), Box 30000, Phoenix, AZ (See, Mr.Green and Mr. Fort, there TRULY ARE churches in Phoenix, Arizona and Ekkers DON’T HAVE A THING TO DO WITH THEM–JUST LIKE THE PHOENIX CHURCH OF CHRIST THAT PURCHASED THE PROPERTY FROM THE RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION. IS THAT CHURCH A CORPORATION? YES, AND SO IS THE RTC! TO CONTINUE TO SAY THAT EKKERS OWN THE PHOENIX CHURCH OF CHRIST AND THEREFORE OWN THE PROPERTY–IS WRONG!)

JEWS ARE NOT ISRAELITES!
ABSOLUTE HISTORICAL PROOF

DATELINE U.S.A.–

In 1976 Random House published a book that should have hit the Christian Churches like a blockbuster, but instead they chose totally to ignore it. It dealt with the racial origin of the people in Communist and Christian countries who “call themselves” “Jews”, and whom the Churches (and the Jews themselves) generally insist are “God’s Chosen People”, the Israelite descendants of Abraham.

Since the late 1800s a small number of Bible Scholars, who were also students of History and Racial origins, have insisted the Church denominations were wrong; that instead of being Israelites, these Jews from Eastern Europe and Western Asia were descended from Mongolians and other Asiatic peoples who had adopted Judaism as their “religion” over a 1,000 years ago and had become KNOWN AS “Jews”.

These Bible scholars were ignored or condemned, and often called “cultists” or “anti-Semites” [H: BOTH terms are THE favorites of the B’nai B’rith ADL (ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE), A BRANCH OF WHAT ORIGINATED THROUGH BRITISH INTELLIGENCE.]

Now, after many years of research, A WELL-KNOWN JEWISH AUTHOR, Arthur Koestler has published a 255-page book titled THE THIRTEENTH TRIBE in which he PROVES THE SAME POINT; I.E., THAT THESE EASTERN EUROPEAN “JEWS” ARE NEITHER ISRAELITES NOR “SEMITES”, BUT ARE, INSTEAD, KHAZARS, MONGOLS AND HUNS!

“Mr. Koestler’s excellent book…is as readable as it is thought-provoking. Nothing could be more stimulating than the skill, elegance and erudition with which he marshals his facts and develops his theories…” Fitzroy Maclean, New York Times Book Review.

“You do not have to be Jewish to be interested…Are to-day’s Western Jews really ethnic, Semitic, Biblical Jews, or are most of them descendants of converted Khazars?…This compact, interesting book…examines tragic-ironic implications in [this question] for modern history…It should fascinate.”–Edmund Fuller, Wall Street Journal.

“Koestler marshals the evidence in a clear and convincing way. He tells a good story, pulling together materials from medieval Muslim and Jewish travelers, scholarly controversy and the mysterious lore of the Khazars.”–Raymond Sokolov, Newsweek.

[H: Want to know another way you can tell this is TRUTH? Because WE wrote several journals on the subject, including this and discussions about the Holocaust–and all of them are now confiscated at the Canadian border as “hate-literature”! Some of them (books) have been taken in Europe and several places in the United States and BURNED! There has been a massive assault by the ADL and other organizations to destroy us–along with Green’s help–our work and anything we touch! This is aided and abetted constantly by people who don’t have the slightest idea what is in the material OR give a damn! So be it–for it has ever been thus.]

Robert Kirsch of the Los Angeles Times stated in his lengthy review that Arthur Koestler publicizes with his customary skills a daring hypothesis: that THE KHAZAR JEWS MIGRATED TO POLAND AND BECAME THE FOREBEARS OF EASTERN EUROPEAN JEWRY Then Kirsch quoted Prof. A. N. Poliak of Tel Aviv University, who stated that “the large majority of world Jewry” is descended from the Jews of Khazaria. Then he again quoted Koestler in THE THIRTEENTH TRIBE, “If so, this would mean that their ancestors came NOT FROM the Jordan but FROM THE VOLGA; not from Canaan but from the Caucasus, once believed to be the cradle of the Aryan race; and that GENETICALLY THEY ARE MORE RELATED TO THE HUN, UIGUR, AND MAGYAR TRIBES THAN TO THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, ISAAC, AND JACOB.” [emphasis added]

We cannot stress enough how absolutely imperative it is for all Christian [H: Or everyone else, inclusive.] Americans to consider the startling proof in Arthur Koestler’s book that today’s Jews are NOT Israelites. The Jewish influence on American life has reached such a stage that no student of contemporary history can ignore it. Not only the news media are Jewish monopolies, but top positions in the U.S. Government are largely filled by Eastern European “Jews”. The magazine and book publishing houses are in Jewish hands; and movies, television, and the other entertainment industries are dominated by Jews in all phases. America’s government and most of her people’s sources of information are controlled and directed by Jews. If these people were really “God’s Chosen People”, perhaps Americans would have little cause for concern–BUT WHAT IF THEY ARE REALLY THE “HUNS” AND THEREFORE THE ANCIENT ENEMIES OF CHRISTENDOM?

Since many Americans may not have an opportunity to read Koestler’s book, we shall herewith submit our own index-type review.

 

THE THIRTEENTH TRIBE
by Arthur Koestler
(Random House, $8.95)

Reviewed by Pastor Sheldon Emry

 

 

“JEWS ARE NOT ISRAELITES”

Page: Information

15 Khazars adopt Judaism as their religion in A.D. 740.

16 Majority of Eastern European Jews are Khazar and Japhetic in origin, not Semitic. Refers to 1973 Jewish Encyclopedia and A.N. Poliak, Professor, Medieval Jewish History, Tel Aviv University.

17 Jews more closely related to the Hun, Uigur and Magyrs than to the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

18 Khazars exacted tribute from subject peoples.

20 Identified them with the hosts of Gog and Magog.

22 German word Ketzer is our word for Khazar and means heretic or Jew.

23 Khazars were with Attila the Hun in 4th century.

37-39 Some were phallic worshipers, killed anyone thought to be extra intelligent and called it an offering to god.

46 Quotes 1,000-year-old Arab historian, “The Khazars and their King are all Jews… some are of the opinion that Gog and Magog are the Khazars.”

47-50 Khazars were re-exporters of foreign goods, middlemen, inspectors of trade, goldsmiths, and silversmiths; and they exacted 10% tax on all trade.

59-63 Jews fled Rome and Greece to Khazaria to avoid forced conversion to Christianity. They adopted Islam when forced but repudiated it when safe.

72 Khazar King, in a letter, traced his people to Togarma and Japheth, the ancestors of all the Turkish tribes.

81 In A.D. 864 a monk wrote “there exists a people under the sky in regions where no Christians can be found, whose name is Gog and Magog, and who are Huns; among them is one called Gazari [Khazari?], who are circumcized and observe Judaism in its entirety.” Koestler quoted another source that Christians were prisoners of these Jews. (Comment by reviewer: Compare with Communist Russia today. Jews are in high positions throughout Russia, but few Christians are left alive in the whole land! The leopard has NOT changed his spots.)

93 Russian Communists tried to hide Khazar-Jewish connection!

95-132 History of breaking up of Khazar Empire and integration of these Jews into Russia, Poland, etc.

135 Khazar kingdom known as a kingdom of “Red” Jews.

141 Khazars joined Ghengis Khan and retained their Judaism.

145 Interchangeable names–Khazar, Zhid (or Yid), and Jew. 151 Majority of Jews in Middle Ages were Khazars.

152-154 Jews were mintmasters, royal treasurers, tax collectors, and money lenders. Principle source of income was foreign trade and the levying of customs dues and they practiced communal life.

159-161 They lost the name of Khazars and became known as JEWS. During Dark Ages commerce was largely in Jewish hands, including slave trade.

163-167 During Crusades whole families and towns of Jews committed suicide rather than accept Christianity.

167-171 Proves only a handful of Sephardim Jews were in Europe so the vast majority of Jews today are Khazar in origin. [H: Does it begin to make more and more sense– HOW IT IS THAT THE “HOLOCAUST” CANNOT BE AS TOLD HISTORICALLY BY THE JEWS?]

172-174 Gives origin of Yiddish language. It is NOT HEBREW!

178 “THE JEWISH DARK AGES MAY BE SAID TO BEGIN WITH THE RENAISSANCE.” (Reviewer’s comment: This remark by the Jew Cecil Roth, coupled with other information, is a sorrowful admission that the Jews were supreme in the Dark Ages but lost their dominion over Europe when the Light of God’s Word brought about the Renaissance in Europe!) [H: I wonder if there will be another Renaissance?]

180-199 Quotes from many sources to prove Jews NOT descended from Biblical Israelites, ending with this, …evidence from anthropology concurs with history in refuting the popular belief in a Jewish race descended from the biblical tribe.

200-222 Refers to others who have written on the same subject.

223 Israel’s right to exist…not based on…the mythological covenant of Abraham with God; it is based on international law–i. e. , on the United Nations’ decision in 1947.

224-226 Koestler ends his book by saying he believes many Jews have learned of their Khazar ancestry and now reject the Chosen-Race doctrine. (Reviewer’s comment: This section of Koestler’s book is practically a rejection of any relationship between GOD and the JEWS. It is a cry of We have no king but Caesar heard 19 centuries ago from the Edomite Jews in Palestine!)

THE THIRTEENTH TRIBE proves beyond doubt that modern Jews are NOT Biblical Israelites. Every church [and synagogue] member in America [the world] should insist that his Pastor investigate these claims. Are our Jewish politicians, publishers, moviemakers, and opinion molders God’s “Chosen People”? Or are they Mongol and Hun infiltrators of Christendom [H: And other goodly GOD-CHRIST-TYPE TEACHINGS people.]?

 

THE “EDOMITE CONNECTION”

Arthur Koestler traces most Jews back to a people called Khazars in western Asia and southern Russia and links the Khazars with Gomer and Magog, grandsons of Noah through Japheth. We believe he is right; and he does prove that most Jews cannot be Israelites, who descended from Shem (Semites).

But there is another racial mixture in the modern Jews, which Koestler does not touch upon but which should be considered for it gives us a reason WHY modern Jews insist that they are Abraham’s seed.

This racial mixture is covered in great detail in AN OPEN LETTER TO ANY MINISTER WHO TEACHES “THE JEWS ARE ISRAEL”:

[H: We offer here exactly what is written on this document and I do not have input. Nora may well agree or disagree but I have no interest in these opinions and details from this particular reviewer and less trust in the historical lineage as offered in your modern translations of the book you call Bible for it often does not reflect history in accuracy. I would also highly recommend you get Eustace Mullins’ book CURSE OF CANAAN. I ask that Nora’s research on this material be given as reference material so that readers can further do diligence.]

1. Abraham’s grandson Esau, the twin brother of Jacob, sold his Abrahamic birthright to Jacob for a mess of red pottage, at which time his name was changed to Edom, which means “red” (Genesis 25).
2. This same Esau married into the Canaanites (Genesis 26 & 36), who were descended from Ham (Genesis 10).
3. These Edomite descendants of Esau continually tried to regain Esau’s birthright by fighting Israel. Later they infiltrated true Israel to become its rulers and religious leaders (scribes and Pharisees) in Jerusalem. It was they to whom Jesus said, I know that ye are Abraham’s seed; but ye seek to kill Me, because my word hath no place in you. He said to them, Ye are of your father the devil… Ye are not of God. (John 8:33-56; 10:6-27)

4, After Jesus’ redemption of Israel, the true Israelites were renamed Christian (Acts 11:26), as prophesied in Numbers 6:26, Isa. 62:2, 65:15, and Rev. 3:12, and were driven from Palestine by their Christ-rejecting Edomite enemies who remained in Jerusalem and retained the name “Judean” or “Jew”.

5. These Edomite-Canaanite Jews were then driven from Jerusalem in A.D. 70 by the Romans and later mixed with the Japhetic Khazars and converted them to Judaism (Phariseeism), whereupon they ALL had since been known as “Jews”.
6. Communism, the revolutionary, anti-Christian arm of the Pharisees (Jews), calls its followers “Reds” after their Abrahamic ancestor Esau-Edom (Gen. 25 and Obadiah).

And on and on. These Edomite and Japhetic “Jews” are NOT Israelites but are instead the ancient and malevolent enemies of true Christian-Israel. They are those which say they are Jews, AND ARE NOT, but they are the synagogue of Satan (Rev. 2:9). Insist that your ministers read this information.

 

IS THE JEWS’ “CHOSEN PEOPLE” MASQUERADE FINALLY OVER?

Shortly after World War I, Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company, assembled a staff of experts in Detroit to conduct research on the European Jews who had been entering America in large numbers since the 1880s. Ford provided the staff with several million dollars for this research, and in 1923 he published the results in a four-volume work titled THE INTERNATIONAL JEW.

It was Henry Ford’s conclusion that very few of these people who called themselves “Jews” were descendants of the Bible Israelites. Ford further proved that these Jews, using all sorts of crimes while under cloak of being the Chosen People of the Bible, were rapidly taking economic and political control of America.

In the religious field, Ford claimed THE JEWS HAD SECRETLY GAINED CONTROL OF MOST PROTESTANT SEMINARIES AND CHRISTIAN BOOK-PUBLISHING HOUSES and had been able to remove almost all criticism of Jews from Christian literature.

In summing up his findings, Henry Ford stated, The Jews are not the Chosen People, though practically the entire Church has succumbed to the propaganda which declares them to be so.

Ford’s book caused a furor for a few years but soon disappeared from colleges, universities, and public libraries and became unobtainable at any price. The Churches continued to teach “the Jews are God’s Chosen People, Israel,” and (by then) Jewish-dominated news media began to refer to Jews always as Israelites. [H: If you say something often enough it does NOT make it true–it only causes people to blindly believe the LIE! One of the grossest and most miserably deceiving terms conjured by your joint-venture with the deceivers is “JUDEO-CHRISTIAN” heritage and/or religion! This simply CANNOT be a valid term–it is an oxymoronic term to surpass them all: The JEWS denied “Christ” in the one Christians chose to represent their messenger of Truth. You have, in this term–total OPPOSITES claiming somehow to be ONE IN BELIEF–there can be no such thing!]

Anyone opposing the increasing Jewish control of the nation was immediately branded “anti-Semitic”; [H: Our original friends, i.e., Col. Gritz, T. Binder, George Green–on national radio–labeled Ekkers and OUR work as “anti-Semitic”!! Where does that PUT THEM?? While with us, George touted JUST THE OPPOSITE–AS HE SET FORTH TO MAKE A BILLION DOLLARS OFF OF GOOD OLD “E.T.s”–OR SOMETHING. WHERE DID WE LOSE GEORGE? WITH THE GOLD HE TOOK AND BURIED–RIGHT WHERE GOD USUALLY LOSES HIS CLAIMED FOLLOWERS!!] and Jewish dominated Seminaries taught new ministers to quote Genesis 12:1-3 and sternly warn their flocks that anyone speaking unfavorably of the Jews would be “cursed by God”. Jewish control of American society, politics, and religions continued to increase.

In 1951 retired U.S. Military Intelligence Officer, Col. John Beaty, published a scholarly 265-page book IRON CURTAIN OVER AMERICA. [H: I know, I know–and we will eventually get back to that book in the writings. Meanwhile if you don’t have it for self–please get it.] Col. Beaty gave overwhelming evidence this strange Race of Eastern European “Jews” were actually Khazar and Mongol Asiatics and had no racial ancestry in Israel at all. He then proved that by 1951 these “Jews” had a stranglehold on American politics, on Banking and Credit, on all sources of news, on the entertainment industry, on America’s educational system, and that they were the predominant race as judges, lawyers, doctors, and in organized crime.

The Jewish news media refused to review the book, Jewish book dealers refused to handle it, Christian book stores ignored it, and only a few thousand copies were distributed. Most Americans never heard of IRON CURTAIN OVER AMERICA. [H: You can get it from: OMNI PUBLICATIONS, P.O. Box 900566, Palmdale, CA 93590.]

Now, because of renewed interest, both THE INTERNATIONAL JEW and IRON CURTAIN OVER AMERICA have been reprinted.

The latest, and perhaps the most succinct book on this subject is, ISRAEL’S 5 TRILLION DOLLAR SECRET by Col. Curtis B. Dall, former son-in-law of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and personal acquaintance of many high officials in the U.S. Government since the 1930s. [H: I would bet that he was not very long popular!] Col. Dalt lives and works in the Washington, DC area, and his book, published in 1977, is absolutely up-to-date. Col. Dall proves again, from reliable sources, that the Jews are NOT Israelites. In fact, Col. Dall calls their masquerade as “Israel” the greatest “hoax” of the last centuries! It should be read by every non-Jew in America. [H: But more importantly, by everyone calling themselves a “Jew” for you probably ARE NOT! I cannot comment on this volume since we have not seen it.]

“Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed: and hid, that shall not be known. ‘What I tell you in darkness, that speak ye in light: and what ye hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the housetops.” (Jesus, in Matthew 10:26, 27).

* * *